Good morning Gentlemen (and Ron):

Okay - I'll stick my neck out...Sight unseen, my thought would be to 
consider abandoning the dry-pipe system and leaving it in place and going with 
wet 
13'R' in soffits/retrofit with CPVC piping. I would consider this only 
after consulting with the Client and the AHJ (in that order). My gut says this 
dry-pipe system is just starting to present numerous problems/headaches. My 
other concern is the traditional "lowering the level of protection" by 
de-commissioning the attic dry system (Fire Marshal) and the resultant impact 
on 
insurance rates - "partial" protection?

I'm looking at two issues - the safety of occupants and staff (first and 
foremost) and the costs to Client. It would appear the Client is going to 
invest heavily in maintenance and repairs of the dry system. Depending on 
continued degradation, I would start to be concerned about the integrity of the 
system - current problems leading to additional problems.

I believe our local Fire Marshal made a prudent decision recently regarding 
a new Hyatt Place Hotel here in Santa Fe that had a fourth floor area 
(non-attic space/top floor maybe 4,000 sq. ft.), unoccupied/accessible only by 
ladder, unheated with exposed 2 by 4 wood framing. Rather than require 
sprinkler coverage with a dry-pipe system, smoke detectors were installed based 
on 
"unocupied, non-storage and no heat sources". Fire and Building Dept.s 
signed off on it.

I would 'pitch' the 13'R' not as a Code 'change', but as an 
upgrade/improvement (positive 'spin'?) to the Client and AHJ - and put some 
smokes up in 
the attic space, just in case. It always comes back to 'liability' - In the 
event of a 'problem', if you proceed demonstrating due diligence and have all 
of the "shareholders" on board, the wet-pipe scenario would be the approach 
we would most likely pursue (as an engineering firm). I didn't catch if 
system currently has old/SR sprinklers or newer QR/Rez sprinklers - if old 
type, 
the newer technology sprinklers would be a great selling point, just for 
starters. And do not forget input from insurance underwriter "AHJ"...The 
Client would be well advised to retain a licensed, FPE to address the Code and 
legal issues that will arise during negotiations.

Regards to All/Happiest of Holidays!!

Jerry
[email protected]

Jerry D. Watts, SFPE
President
ACCENT FIRE ENGINEERING INT'L. Ltd.*
Santa Fe/Albuquerque/Silver City/Roswell/Artesia  New Mexico
Seattle, WA  San Diego, CA  Phoenix, AZ
(800) 503.1961

*Licensed Fire Protection Engineers/Inspectors/Fire Investigators:  AZ  CA  
CO  NM  NV  NY  TX  UT  KS  MD  MS
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/private/sprinklerforum/attachments/20111213/79ef5019/attachment.html>
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

Reply via email to