×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

NFPA's antifreeze ammendment

NFPA's antifreeze ammendment

NFPA's antifreeze ammendment

(OP)
I'm wondering how other forum members are approaching this issue. I've talked to quite a few people about it, some are receptive, some aren't.

Some engineer's have changed their specs to read "install dry system" after I've forwarded them the information, and building owners have stonewalled me, despite my cries of "safety first!".

Many assume it's a cash grab...we installed a system for them, signed the warranty, and now we're coming back telling them it has to be changed.

In Canada, design temperatures fall well below the 38% mixture allowed for propylene glycol, so it seems antifreeze is, for the time being, not an option.

What have some of you proposed as a replacement?  Dry systems? Dry Sprinklers?

 

RE: NFPA's antifreeze ammendment

The TIA that you are referring to affects the 2010 edition of NFPA 13 and the 2011 edition of NFPA 25.  I'm not sure what the adopted edition is in your jurisdiction, but if 2010 or 11 hasn't been adopted then it dosen't affect you...yet.  Our jurisdiction has not adopted the 2010/11 editions yet, so on my existing buildings I'm holding off and waiting to see what happens with the 2013 edition whether or not the TIA is adopted into the new editon.  On any new buildings I've started specifying dry systems and have for the time being abandon the use of antifreeze systems.  

As for the owners that are stonewalling you, forward them a copy of the TIAs which can be found on NFPA's website.  The TIAs include the date which it was adopted and the date it takes affect.  This will at least show them that it was a recent change in code.  Forward them a copy and keep a record of it.  Then it is their responsibility.

RE: NFPA's antifreeze ammendment

(OP)
gfire, that's exactly what I've been doing.  When owners e-mail me saying that they don't need or want the change, I always print and save it to cover myself.

2010 hasn't been adopted here, nowhere close.  That being said, I am aware that there is a safety concern, and can no longer plead ignorance if something happened.    

RE: NFPA's antifreeze ammendment

gfire

Legally just because a standard has not being adopted in your local jurisdiction does not mean that it is to be ignored nor does not apply.
As an expert opinion advisor in the inspection, testing and maintenance or water based systems here in NJ I have attended many, many, many depositions where the contractor claimed that just because a newer version of the standard has not being adopted he/she are forbidden for ignoring more strict requirements.

Code of ethics and good practice will prevail all day. How ever it is not something that can be legally enforced unless requested by such jurisdiction or insurance carrier.

I say you tell them of the new requirements/changes by the NFPA but stating that at this point it is more ethical on the owners behalf rather than a code requirement.  

RE: NFPA's antifreeze ammendment

(OP)
NJ1, I agree.

The big thing I can think of is annual inspections...specifically testing concentrations.  Up here in Canada, the design temp requires a 60% solution of prop glycol to water.  If it's below the 60%, do the inspectors recommend that it be topped up (to prevent freezing, but contrary to the now known safety issues), or do they recommend that the concentration be diluted to 38% (to comply with the safety issue, but with the knowledge that it will no longer provide the protection against freezing that it is supposed to)?

 

RE: NFPA's antifreeze ammendment

That is right.
skdesigner we where able to win a case two years ago during closing arguments once I approached the bench and said:
Your honor. The main reason why this codes and standards are revised every 3-4 years is because highly qualified individuals did extensive research and lab testing that proved such requirements needed immediate improvement.
You must ensure that your inspectors and designers are trained with the latest updates even if not adopted yet.
The best approached is to inform the owners of the current codes but also inform them of the latest changes on separate letters. This will ensure that they are aware of new requirements  that if ignored could jeopardize life safety.    

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources