I recommend you submit to the AHJ an alternate means & methods proposal in accordance Fire Code 104.9 and include the current NFPA standard. Your proposal would clearly explain why the requirements of the new standard are superior to the existing standard. I can’t imagine any AHJ denying your request on the basis of superior prescriptive standard. On the outside chance they do not approve your request, then simply appeal up the chain-of-command.
> On Apr 2, 2015, at 5:11 PM, [email protected] wrote: > > I'm sorry for my grammar and autocorrect as this is coming from my phone. > > How does the forum feel about ignoring the more stringent requirements of the > most current NFPA standards all because the AHJ hasn't adopted the latest > year? As the standards have evolved with each new addition, they typically > try to clarify murky wording of past standards, expand on topics, or > add/change requirements based on the latest and greatest tests. So should we > be purposely designing and installing and inferior product that more times > than not is less safe just because the AHJ hasn't adopted the latest design > guidelines. I've heard sometimes the AHJ doesn't adopt the new standard > simply due to the financial impact of republishing their amendments and not > merely because they don't agree. To me it seems morally/ethically wrong but > I may just be on my high horse today. > > Thoughts? > > > > Sent from my iPhone > _______________________________________________ > 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
