Shovel and a bag of lime... and have a nice day! Thank you!
Chris Ice Fire Protection & Industrial Sales Hajoca Corporation 1418 Fruitville Pike Lancaster, Pa. 17601 717-770-9211 mobile 717-299-3611 office "Great people, providing quality products that help save lives" -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Steve Leyton Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2012 12:57 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: advice I'm familiar with both the agency and plans reviewer here in San Diego County that Ken is referring to. This agency is a private company that for many years has been the "go to" 3rd party plan review consultant for structural, non-structural and FLS on public projects for the county and some municipalities. The issue here is that they are, by contractual extension, functioning as a public agency in this scenario and the subjective comments in question are completely and totally out of line, ESPECIALLY if they are off base. Even a completely moron who walks up to the counter with his or her hair on fire is entitled (usually by law) to a fair and impartial review. If someone has so egregiously breached the professional code of conduct that is imposed by engineering or contracting licensure, there are means and methods to file a complaint or comment with the issuing agency. Otherwise, to impugn the character or credentials of a submitter is not only unprofessional, it might well be a statutory violation of the plan reviewer's conduct as articulated by the procedures or scope of work in the contract his company has with the governmental agency who hired them. If you're the submitter, and are convinced (rightly or wrongly) that this comment is inappropriate, you first have to ask, "Do I want to try and solve this with the plans reviewer to preserve the relationship." If so, contact them directly to discuss and plead your case both for your character and to defend the basis of design. If you don't care what they might think going forward, or if you try that and it doesn't resolve the situation, you contact their direct-report supervisor with a 3-point letter: 1) I disagree with the comment(s) made by Plan Reviewer X, based on (substantiate your design here). I have attempted to discuss this with X, but we have reached a point in the process where conversation does not appear to be productive. 2) I am offended by the comments made by X, because he/she has unprofessionally made this issue personal and groundlessly attacked my character and qualifications. 3) I request an immediate in-person meeting with yourself and X, so that we can resolve both the technical and personal issues that have arisen and complete this review in the most expeditious manner possible. This way you call them out and can still claim to be "living in the solution". Steve Leyton -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ron Greenman Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2012 8:31 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: advice I question the credentials of a lot of third party reviewers, Burton. Especially those that would make such a comment. And in this case the designer's ability to design isn't in question, it's his ability to run a computer program. I had a reviewer that refused to accept hand calcs with the excuse that there were always too many mistakes. I used to send him computer calcs in which I purposely entered erroneous data and which he always approved. He trusted the Great and All Knowing Computer Oz because "confusers can't make mistakes" but not those pesky hand calcs that are easy to review for accuracy. Why? Because he couldn't do or read calcs. I don't know the issues with Ken's friend, the reviewer, etc., but the comment was unprofessional and so I doubt the reviewers competency. On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 8:13 AM, Ford, Charles <[email protected]> wrote: > Uh. Any chance that there is some truth to the statement? The least > he could do is point out some of the most obvious errors ( assuming > there are > some) Your friend could revise or defend. > I have a friend who is a 3rd party reviewer. His stories of lousy, > wrong, inadequate, even potentially dangerous designs will curl your hair. > Just sayin. > > C. Burton Ford > NICET Certified IV > NFPA Certified Fire Protection Specialist Cintas Fire Protection Inc > 1038 Conshohocken Rd > Conshohocken, PA 19428 > Tel 610-233-1400 > Fax 610-233-1401 > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Matsuda, Richard > Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2012 11:02 AM > To: [email protected]; [email protected] > Subject: RE: advice > > Don't know what do tell you about this...it's really not a proper comment > to reject a submittal. > I guess the best thing to do is make the corrections and check it twice > before resubmitting. > > The best (worst) comment that I've heard of was: "Seek professional > assistance; do not resubmit." > rick matsuda > city of dallas > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > ParsleyConsulting > Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2012 9:57 AM > To: SprinklerFORUM > Subject: advice > > I have to admit I'm completely at a loss for how to respond to a written > > review comment a friend of mine received yesterday. It read as follows: > > "The person that ran the hydraulic calculations has obviously not been > trained to use the program and is not knowledgeable in sprinkler system > design." > > As you might well imagine he's quite upset. Anyone have advice on how to > proceed? > -- > > PARSLEY CONSULTING > > Ken Wagoner, SET > > 760.745.6181 voice > > 760.745.0537 fax > > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>e-mail > > www.ParsleyConsulting.com <http://www.ParsleyConsulting.com>website > > > > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > > This e-mail transmission contains information that is intended to be > confidential and privileged. If you receive this e-mail and you are not a > named addressee you are hereby notified that you are not authorized to > read, print, retain, copy or disseminate this communication without the > consent of the sender and that doing so is prohibited and may be unlawful. > Please reply to the message immediately by informing the sender that the > message was misdirected. After replying, please delete and otherwise erase > it and any attachments from your computer system. Your assistance in > correcting this error is appreciated. > > > _______________________________________________ > 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, WFSC 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/attach ments/20121213/28050089/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 Confidentiality Notice: Information in this message, including any attachments, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) above named. The information contained in this message may be privileged and confidential, may constitute a trade secret, may be subject to the attorney-client privilege and may otherwise be protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or an agent responsible for delivering it to an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this message in error, and that any review, dissemination, disclosure, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately, delete this message and destroy any hard copy print-outs. We have taken precautions to minimize the risk of transmitting software viruses, but we advise you to carry your own virus checks on any attachment to this message. We ca nnot accept liability for any loss or damage caused by software viruses. _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
