Both had to do with O-rings. One for 8M heads (Omega) and one for 33M (the original GB). The Omega recall was mandatory and in the sense that CPSC dictated to Central the how, what and where's of it (what heads, how they would go about it, how much time they had, etc.) whereas the GBs were voluntary in that Tyco controlled these issues per agreement with CPSC. It was always voluntary as to whether an oner wanted to do it or not unless an agency such as the jurisdiction made them do it, or as stated before, an insurance carrier coerced them. Remember that FM only uses a carrot and stick approach: If you comply with what we want you will get coverage and perhaps a better rate than if you don't. Cost/Benefit. If complying would be more expensive than the value of my property then who cares? I doubt in Grand Prix Ferraris are insured. The potential loss of race cars is a burden Ferrari bears against the advertising value perceived from risking them. back to the topic at hand "voluntary" in this context has nothing to do with volunteering by anyone except Tyco. They "volunteered" to run a recall rather than be compelled by a regulatory agency. They volunteered to do several things that cost them great sums of money but that would have been more of a burden if compelled to a quicker recall. As I understand it they ran it for six years because they had an existing infrastructure, ie.: manufacturing capacity, that allowed them to make about 5M heads per year without needing to build more capacity and without interfering with their ability to produce enough for sale (rather than free) heads to meet the then current demand. This was akin to Ford's decision to not recall Pintos after assessing the likely (statistical) costs of lawsuits versus the cost of correcting the projected, and declining, number of operational cars over a period of time. The numbers said cheaper to settle claims than ix the problem so.... Tyco decided it was cheaper to replace the heads (as well as being an advertising plus--we bought a company that made a questionable product, in the name of safety we will voluntarily replace the product with a new model that has the had the faulty design corrected because we care) if they could have greater control over the method by volunteering to a settled agreement with CPSC rather than being sued by CPSC to comply. And I want to reiterate that the recalled head was GB with the same cap/plug construction (presumably the problem) as the Omega, but the new GB has a belleville spring cap. You can tell the difference by the cap itself: old GBs have a flat cap and new GBs have a conical cap. Better yet talk to your Tyco rep. I'm sure they still have examples for comparison purposes. Or go to http://www.sprinklerreplacement.com/ to read about the entire program. And no I don't work for Tyco but I think they did a good thing, albeit not completely out of altruism, and make a good product, and I don't want to have in any way contributed to any concerns someone might have over the quality of the products. And if any Tyco guys are reading this you can send a check to the address below made out to my name ;-p
On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 7:59 AM, Todd Williams <[email protected]> wrote: > I believe there were 2 separate recalls; one for Omegas and one for > O-rings. Were they both voluntary? I was under the impression that one was > mandatory and one voluntary. > > > At 10:42 AM 2/17/2012, you wrote: > >Perfect - thanks > > > >On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 9:41 AM, Cahill, Christopher > ><[email protected]>wrote: > > > >> It is not voluntary any more: > >> IFC 901.10 Recall of fire protection components. > >> Any fire protection system component regulated by this code that is the > >> subject of a voluntary or mandatory recall under federal law shall be > >> replaced with approved, listed components in compliance with the > referenced > >> standards of this code. The fire code official shall be notified in > writing > >> by the building owner when the recalled component parts have been > replaced. > >> > >> Owner is liable as long as the inspection reported it. > >> > >> Insurance can't actually require anything. It's a contract. Best they > >> can do is say do something or find a different insurance company. > >> > >> Chris Cahill, PE* > >> Senior Fire Protection Engineer, Aviation & Facilities Group > >> Burns & McDonnell > >> 8201 Norman Center Drive > >> Bloomington, MN 55437 > >> Phone: 952.656.3652 > >> Fax: 952.229.2923 > >> [email protected] > >> www.burnsmcd.com > >> > >> Proud to be one of FORTUNE's 100 Best Companies to Work For > >> *Registered in: MN > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: [email protected] [mailto: > >> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Greg McGahan > >> Sent: Friday, February 17, 2012 9:30 AM > >> To: [email protected] > >> Subject: Central Head Recall > >> > >> Can anyone update me on the following questions (brought to me via a > >> concerned AHJ): > >> > >> 1) The Central Head recall is voluntary - still ? > >> 2) If the recalled heads are not replaced - who is liable in the event > of > >> an event? The AHJ for not requiring the change? > >> 3) Did a lot of insurance companies require head replacement? > >> > >> Thanks for the help...evidently there is a local competitor that has > found > >> some and is telling the owner that the Head Replacement is mandatory and > >> MUST be performed immediately. > >> > >> Greg > >> > >> -- > >> Greg McGahan > >> Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com> > >> 1160 McKenzie Road > >> Cantonment, FL 32533 > >> 850-937-1850 > >> fax 850-937-1852 > >> -------------- next part -------------- > >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > >> URL: < > >> > http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/private/sprinklerforum/attachments/20120217/f4946139/attachment.html > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Sprinklerforum mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Sprinklerforum mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > >> > > > > > > > >-- > >Greg McGahan > >Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com> > >1160 McKenzie Road > >Cantonment, FL 32533 > >850-937-1850 > >fax 850-937-1852 > >-------------- next part -------------- > >An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > >URL: < > http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/private/sprinklerforum/attachments/20120217/ac2f1fbf/attachment.html > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Sprinklerforum mailing list > >[email protected] > >http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > > Todd G. Williams, PE > Fire Protection Design/Consulting > Stonington, CT > 860.535.2080 > www.fpdc.com > > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > -- Ron Greenman Instructor Fire Protection Engineering Technology Bates Technical College 1101 So. Yakima Ave. Tacoma, WA 98405 [email protected] http://www.bates.ctc.edu/fireprotection/ 253.680.7346 253.576.9700 (cell) Member: ASEE, SFPE, ASCET, NFPA, AFSA, NFSA, AFAA, NIBS, WSAFM, WFC They are happy men whose natures sort with their vocations. -Francis Bacon, essayist, philosopher, and statesman (1561-1626) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/private/sprinklerforum/attachments/20120217/ada6086b/attachment.html> _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
