What do you think of this proposed rule change in Georgia?

[SprinklerDesigner2]

In Georgia they are about to change the rules. It is a final draft and this is going to happen.

Found on the updated draft of:

The Rules and Regulations of the Safety Fire Commissioner are hereby amended by repealing Chapter 120-3-19 entitled, "Fire Protection Sprinkler Contractors" in its entirety and substituting in lieu thereof a new Chapter 120-3-19 entitled, "Rules and Regulations for Enforcement of the Georgia Fire Sprinkler Act," to read as follows:
CHAPTER 120-3-19
RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR ENFORCEMENT OF THE "GEORGIA FIRE SPRINKLER ACT"

On page 11:

(3) Non-code compliance dictated by bid documents shall be reported in the following manner: Non-code compliant shop drawings dictated by bid documents plans and or specifications shall list deficiencies printed or typed, item by item, along with codes and/or standards violated on a departmental form. In addition, the following information shall be provided as set forth in the following order:
(a) The name of the facility and project;
(b) The complete physical address of the project including the city and county;
(c) The owner's name;
(d) The responsible architect's or engineer's name responsible for producing the non-code compliant bid documents including their Georgia registration number, business name, business address and business telephone number; and,
(e)The Sprinkler Contractor's name, Certificate of Competency holder's name, and Certificate of Competency number and signature. The foregoing items shall be provided and outlined on a departmental form by the Certificate of Competency holder, as stated above and shall be submitted with the shop drawings.

It appears the layout technician is to follow the specifications while alerting the state fire marshal to specifications that may be non-compliant.

For example both the Georgia Fire Marshal and the Georgia EPA (Water Quality Board) requires a minimum suction pressure of 20 psi, at the pump suction flange and throughout the public water system, when fire pumps are operating at 150%.

I am looking at a job where there will be a negative suction pressure of minus 15 psi with the pump operating at 150%. What do I do, bid it to get it seeing a change order in my future? Who pays the $300k for the water storage tank?

What about the classic mercantile where a design density of .15/1,500 was specified? Yeah, ran into this three weeks ago and I bid it to a .20/1,500.

If I am reading this correctly it is the design professional of record who gets to explain all this to his licensing board. Imagine trying to explain why the mistaken design criteria specified should be the problem of the layout technician? I can't see how arguing with his licensing board would be a good experience especially if it's the layout technician who was charged with alerting to the problem.

Reading the entire document makes clear the Georgia Fire Marshal is out to make sure things are done the right way. For those that don't know, or don't care, sloppy work can put one in line for some real brutal treatment.

 

[TravisMack]

I like the concept of doing it that way, provided the sprinkler contractor remains anonymous throughout the process.

I think there is going to be a lot of "design-build" work in GA for fire sprinkler contractors. That way, there won't be an EOR in the bid documents to be hung out to dry.

Or, I can see a bid drawing that shows the building with a note:

"Provide a working fire protection system in accordance with all local codes / standards. Installing contractor to verify all information in all drawings and site conditions and include in his bid all necessary engineering, permits, materials and labor for such system."

Travis Mack
MFP Design, LLC

http://www.mfpdesign.com

 

[gfire]

You ask if you should bid it to get it knowing there will be a change order, or if the density is specified wrong what you should do. You should be submitting pre-bid RFI's on these issues. This will not only allow you to submit a correct number, but makes sure that the other contractors are aware of the problem and makes them include it in their bid.

 

[chillylulu]

I would submit a bid per plans and specs, the provide an alternate price adder to meet code. That way they will at least look at my number and possibly give me a call. I have found that GC's don't like suprises, and that they expect us to be their fire protection experts.

Many jobs have agreements worked out with the code official and the design team up front, and unfortunately the details aren't included in the bid documents for us to review.

I think that the Fire Safety Commissioner is trying to address the biggest problem with fire sprinkler specs. Most are canned specs, from engineers that don't know or don't care.

Design-build is a rare process. I have had many people try to tell me that our work is design-build based on the erroneous assumption that because we design and install a system, it must be design build. True design build means that we are part of a design team, and that we have input on the design of other building systems and their affect on fire sprinkler systems. Generally we design to spec, and we come into the process way to late to be part of a building design/build team. Design build only applies to a job where the builder, the architect, or a combination of builder / architect, direct the design and build portion of a job. So either the architect works under the builder, the builder is contracted under the architect, or as a partnership they are contracted with the owner. It term "design build" does not generally apply to subs.

If we had to work under this rule, I would try to be the engineer's best friend. I would call them as soon as I notice an issue, it may even encourage a more trusting relationship between contractors and engineers.

Overall, I think that I kind of like the idea.

Something else, sprinkler designer. If your system has a demand of 1500 gpm, use a 1000 gpm pump. You can use the whole pump curve, up to 150%. It might save everyones tail and save the owner the cost of a day tank. The suction pipe and test header would also be smaller, generally.

New in NFPA 20, 2010 is the following:

"4.6.2.3.1 Where the maximum flow available from the water
supply cannot provide a flow of 150 percent of the rated flow
of the pump, but the water supply can provide the greater of
100 percent of rated flow or the maximum flow demand of the
fire protection system(s), the water supply shall be deemed to
be adequate. In this case, the maximum flow shall be considered
the highest flow that the water supply can achieve."

Maybe the AHJ's will change their requirement to align with the new code?

As for submitting pre-bid RFI's. Do you mean that I will actually have to look at the job I am estimating before the day I am bidding it? Sounds like we will have to re-think how we do things.

 

[pipesnpumps]

Chillylulu basically wrote my thoughts on the issue.

GA Architects will have to hire FPEs as part of the design team. More than likely though, the only thing this will do is force mechanical engineers to shape up or face losing their license. The "I cant report a PE for doing a bad job" fear no longer applies. Now the law requires you to snitch on them..

I see a 400% increase in attendance to SFPE Atlanta meetings and the need for several seminars in Georgia to help out the HVAC or plumbing guys playing FPE.

Real world knowledge doesn't fall out of the sky on a parachute, but rather is gained in small increments during moments of panic or curiosity.

 

[SprinklerDesigner2]

If we had to work under this rule, I would try to be the engineer's best friend. I would call them as soon as I notice an issue, it may even encourage a more trusting relationship between contractors and engineers.

I can't see myself using this as a setup. I'm the professional and the customer hires me to solve problems not to be one.

I've never pointed out a previous contractors mistake because we all live in glass houses. We can layout the most perfect system but the installation might leave 1 sprinkler out of 1,200 on a 45 degree angle because the backup wrench slipped and wasn't noticed. When I went to review the installation (required in Georgia) I didn't see it either. Happens to the best of us.

We've been fortunate in this recession not having to bid a lot of work. Most of what we do is negotiated because they trust me. I would want to keep that trust.

 

[chillylulu]

I would think that calling the engineer and pointing out an obvious problem would be better than designing something wrong, just because it was shown that way on bid documents. It would be better for the customer, because if you knowingly design something wrong and report it as wrong, you are the cause of the problem. Basically, you went to the AHJ and told on someone without giving them a chance to explain or correct the problem.

By "try to be the engineer's best friend" I was saying that it is common courtesy to let them know if something got by them, I think you mis-understood my intent. I know that specifying engineers aren't perfect, but we aren't either. (I claim 85% accuracy to the PM's, designers, and estimators who ask me questions. We almost always look it up in the code book, and verify what we think we know.) I would appreciate it if someone calls me as a courtesy to help cover my butt.

We aren't perfect either, we may mis-understand what the specifying engineer meant. I would not want to report a "non-code complying" bid document, only to find out later that I just mis-understood the direction of the engineer. This might seem unusual, but it is not. How many times has an engineer listed "recessed" heads. Do they want semi-recessed or concealors? It is wrong, in my opinion, to bid semi-recessed and then try for a change order later for concealed heads. It is right to clarify what you assumed, and provide the cost for the other option.

The other reason to call the engineer who prepared the bid documents that are not code compliant is that many jobs, especially retrofit type projects, have job specific agreements between the design team and the ahj(s). These are not always communicated well to the rest of the team. If something looks wrong, write an RFI, make a phone call, send an e-mail, or do something to notify all parties involved. If it doesn't work, then do what you are required to do. At least you tried to solve the problem up front.

I rely on business from customers who like our work better than our competition. They expect that we are the "experts." (I do a lot of business - more in this industry than all but a few.) I work side by side with, and am proud to have designing some of my jobs, designers that are on several NFPA committees (including NFPA 13.)

Most bid documents don't have any sprinkler information on the bid set, except perhaps the location of the underground lead-in and a typical riser detail. Most specifications are "canned" and they are not job specific. The architect and engineer are part of the owner’s team, and the owner needs to trust them. We should support them, not beat them up. Last fall I helped an owner re-write part of their specification. In the first 4 months of this year, I had over $2.5 million in work with them.

Bottom line is: I stand by my statement. The principle hasn't changed in millenia "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."