Tom, Here abouts we use IBC 2006 for the next couple of months and then move on to 2009. The edition of 25 changes with the code. Since 25 is a maintenance standard rather than a design standard I believe it to be a dynamic document that changes with changing data (a presumption of the perfect world where the driving force behind a change is always a real need to increase requirements for the sake of safety and is never influenced by a real need to increase profit) and so makes perfect sense to "upgrade" universally. In truth it would be better to upgrade engineering in some old buildings just because they're old and not up to current standards (EQ bracing comes to mind--think Northridge) but the resultant inability to forecast future major expenditures while pursuing business as usual would be too chaotic. There will be unpredictability, such as tax rates from year to year, and increased frequencies for NFPA 25 requirements might be amongst them. The alternative could be a 1990 building maintained in accordance with 1987 13A or a 1925 building maintained in accordance with nothing. Whether his is a problem or not is a different conversation.
On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:04 PM, Tom Duross <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello Campers, > I want to revisit this post and clarify. I want to learn from you folks on > this. > Q. What edition for testing and maintenance do you use? Do you use the same > as currently adopted by your State Building Code (assuming it is) for all > your inspections? As you know, older systems were installed under older > standards supported by older maintenance standards. As these standards get > revised, in addition to newer requirements, some tasks and frequencies > change. Here in MA we're on a modified ICC 2003. Have any of you gotten an > interpretation or formal direction on this? > Tom > > > In Ohio, the adopted code is the current edition of NFPA 25, so 13A is > not used. > We use forms from the NFSA. The AFSA also has forms available. > The NFSA and AFSA both offer classes on Inspections which I would > recommend because they explain responsibilities. The NFPA 25 Handbook > also has some commentary on responsibilities. > Go to the RelMark website, and they address the head spacing, etc > issue. > When we encounter a new closet missing a sprinkler, etc it is noted on > a seperate form and the owner is offered a quote. We also get a permit > for even the most minor things like adding a sprinkler to help protect > ourselves. > > Forest Wilson > > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > > For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [email protected] > > To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[email protected] > (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) > -- Ron Greenman Instructor Fire Protection Engineering Bates Technical College Tacoma, WA Member: SFPE, ASCET, NFPA, AFSA, NFSA AFAA, NIBS, WSAFM, WFC _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [email protected] To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[email protected] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
