There's a saying; "less is more". Unfortunately some of our codes folks have lost sight of that. Ever notice the size of the 2012 IBC versus 1996 BOCA, NFPA 13, 72, etc etc. As for sprinkler we keep trying to reach the finality of pi, good luck, put the water on the fire.
John Drucker - Mobile Email [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Cell/Text 732-904-6823 Forest Wilson <[email protected]> wrote: My great uncle, Allen Mull owned the largest sprinkler company in Arizona in the 60's. In those days, the AHJ relied on the contractor to be the experts. Today, it is very dangerous to be in business because the AHJ now plays the role of a "wet nurse" and like my local Lawnmower Cop, dictates every detail of the project. The fact is 2 bad jobs can ruin a contractor but the Chief that is holding up your plans doesnt care; he is probably making 70-90k a year, plus government benefits..he doesn't need to worry about filing liens or lawsuits to get his paycheck. In some ways, we have created your problem every time we ask for more regulation... I sympathize with your situation Ron. On 7/18/2014 10:35 PM, [email protected] wrote: > Okay you explain the $40-50k hit to the bottom line > > Ron fletcher Sent from my iPhone > >> On Jul 18, 2014, at 7:32 PM, "Brad Casterline" <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> Best not to dwell on any one project too much >> >>> On Jul 18, 2014, at 9:28 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Can't say how much this pisses me off. >>> >>> Ron fletcher Sent from my iPhone >>> >>>> On Jul 18, 2014, at 7:19 PM, "Brad Casterline" <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> You're alright like most of us the psychology part of sprinkler work just >>>> makes you want to throw up in your mouth a little bit , right? >>>> >>>>> On Jul 18, 2014, at 9:09 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> How about everything is per code except we have two pumps rather than >>>>> one.and we have 4000 GM at 160 psi instead of.4000 gpm at 165 psi. Most >>>>> ignorant thing I have ever seen. Just found out the chief told plan >>>>> reviewer no more written correspondence. I guess because they don't want >>>>> a written orecord of their stupidity. Please forgive my frustration but I >>>>> just don't know where to go from here.. >>>>> >>>>> Ron fletcher Sent from my iPhone >>>>> >>>>>> On Jul 18, 2014, at 4:24 PM, "John Drucker - Home" >>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Ron, et.al. >>>>>> >>>>>> I don't know the particulars of your situation but we have a saying; >>>>>> there's >>>>>> your side, their side and the truth. Perhaps there's an issue with the >>>>>> code >>>>>> itself, a local amendment or interpretation. There's got to be something >>>>>> driving this. >>>>>> >>>>>> Case in point about a reference standard, NFPA-72 speaks of wall mounted >>>>>> smoke detectors/alarms and calls out a distance yet the illustration in >>>>>> the >>>>>> annex is worded differently than the code. >>>>>> >>>>>> 29.8.3.3 Wall Mounting. Smoke alarms or smoke detectors mounted on walls >>>>>> shall be located NOT FARTHER than 12 in. (300 mm) from the adjoining >>>>>> ceiling >>>>>> surface. >>>>>> >>>>>> Yet the annex A.29.8.3 notes; "Measurements shown are to the closest >>>>>> edge >>>>>> of the detector". >>>>>> >>>>>> According to the annex this would place part or most of the alarm or >>>>>> detector FARTHER than 12 in. from the adjoining ceiling surface. >>>>>> >>>>>> It's important to note that Annex A opens with the following statement; >>>>>> >>>>>> "Annex A is not a part of the requirements of this NFPA document but is >>>>>> included for informational purposes only. This annex contains explanatory >>>>>> material, numbered to correspond with the applicable text paragraphs" >>>>>> >>>>>> Yet when brought to NFPA's attention the answer from the NFPA >>>>>> representative >>>>>> was interpreted from the Annex material. This is clearly incorrect, the >>>>>> annex and the illustration are not part of the code. In either case fix >>>>>> the >>>>>> code language or the annex. The same happens in I Code Commentaries and >>>>>> various subject matter books that often interpret, amend or supplement >>>>>> the >>>>>> actual code language. In a nutshell our codes and standards have become >>>>>> a >>>>>> maze of requirements, exceptions and interpretations. This should be a >>>>>> warning flag to the code community. Perhaps the code official has just >>>>>> reached his limit and is instead relying on empirical experience in the >>>>>> face >>>>>> of confusion. >>>>>> >>>>>> I have situation at this very moment on two different projects that >>>>>> impose >>>>>> an operational issue for the fire department, one that the code is not >>>>>> considering. However my approach is to get everyone around the table do >>>>>> some brainstorming and come up with an equitable technical solution. >>>>>> Perhaps by finding the root cause of your situation the stakeholders will >>>>>> put down their swords and solve the problem. Food for thought. >>>>>> >>>>>> Best wishes, always available should the need arise. >>>>>> >>>>>> Sincerely, >>>>>> >>>>>> John >>>>>> >>>>>> John Drucker, CET >>>>>> Assistant Construction Official >>>>>> Fire Protection Subcode Official >>>>>> Building/Fire/Electrical Inspector >>>>>> Borough of Red Bank >>>>>> Red Bank, New Jersey >>>>>> Email: [email protected] >>>>>> Cell/Text: 732-904-6823 >>>>>> >>>>>> Safe Buildings Save Lives ! >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: Sprinklerforum >>>>>> [mailto:[email protected]] >>>>>> On Behalf Of [email protected] >>>>>> Sent: Friday, July 18, 2014 1:04 PM >>>>>> To: [email protected] >>>>>> Subject: Segue to AHJ's from CPVC Underground >>>>>> >>>>>> It's Friday so I figured I'd whine on the forum. To set the stage, >>>>>> prior to >>>>>> the letter I am referring to we had approved permitted drawings from the >>>>>> AHJ. The following is a quote from a letter we received from that same >>>>>> AHJ. >>>>>> >>>>>> "At this time , Blah Blah Blah Fire Protection District is denying said >>>>>> plans and is requesting a re-submittal of new plans that exceed IFC, UFC, >>>>>> and NFPA standards." Nowhere in the body of the letter does he say >>>>>> exactly >>>>>> how we are to "EXCEED" IFC, UFC and NFPA. In the letter they basically >>>>>> outline that what was submitted meets the all of the codes. I was told by >>>>>> the author of the letter at a meeting the day before that he didn't care >>>>>> what the code said because he is the AHJ and per Section 104 of the IFC >>>>>> he >>>>>> can make us do whatever he wants. Then he said "do it my way or there >>>>>> will >>>>>> be no Certificate of Occupancy." We are 4-5 weeks away from a CofO and >>>>>> the >>>>>> change involves increasing the size of two new diesel pumps that are >>>>>> being >>>>>> installed. The fire chief told us to go to the State Fire Marshal if we >>>>>> wanted to appeal. I'm a bit frustrated with AHJ's right now. >>>>>> >>>>>> Ron F >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list >>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list >>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Sprinklerforum mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org >> _______________________________________________ >> Sprinklerforum mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org -- Forest Wilson Project Manager 193 California St Xenia OH 45385 Ph: 937-736-0425 ///WHO IS JOHN GALT?/// ******This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.*** _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
