NFPA 13D vs 13R - and AHJ variances that put an installer at risk..
NFPA 13D vs 13R - and AHJ variances that put an installer at risk..
(OP)
Scenario:
A residential structure is designed as a 3 family dwelling that is basically 3 prefabbed and pre-sprinklered structures that are assembled on site one on top of the other. The local bylaws state "All two family dwellings and multiple family dwellings shall be sprinklered". (That's all it says). NFPA would require this to be a 13R installation. The city bylaw department has decided to relax the bylaw and permit a 13D installation.
Plausible future scenario:
The building burns down and lives are lost. Though the sprinkler contractor has documentation that a 13D installation was permissible by the cities bylaw enforcement division, it can be argued that they are not the experts in the matter, and that if a sprinkler system was installed, it should have been installed to 13R.
This is happening.
Thoughts?
A residential structure is designed as a 3 family dwelling that is basically 3 prefabbed and pre-sprinklered structures that are assembled on site one on top of the other. The local bylaws state "All two family dwellings and multiple family dwellings shall be sprinklered". (That's all it says). NFPA would require this to be a 13R installation. The city bylaw department has decided to relax the bylaw and permit a 13D installation.
Plausible future scenario:
The building burns down and lives are lost. Though the sprinkler contractor has documentation that a 13D installation was permissible by the cities bylaw enforcement division, it can be argued that they are not the experts in the matter, and that if a sprinkler system was installed, it should have been installed to 13R.
This is happening.
Thoughts?





RE: NFPA 13D vs 13R - and AHJ variances that put an installer at risk..
What are we looking at, $100?
I would install a 13R system.
RE: NFPA 13D vs 13R - and AHJ variances that put an installer at risk..
My apologies but it's a little more complicated: the building is located in an area where there is no municipal supply. The OFM then says "13R so fire pump" and all that entails.
The matter has become political and I just want to look at it strictly from a code perspective. With the world gone litigation insane I can choose to wash my hands of this, but it has done me good in the past to ask questions here and get different points of view.
Regards
D
RE: NFPA 13D vs 13R - and AHJ variances that put an installer at risk..
The inspector or building official only enforces what they perceive to be minimum compliance..
Last week I witnessed a fire pump test with a uniformed fire inspector at a DoD installation.
I asked if he had checked the calibration date on the pitot gauges. He laughed at me and speaking to the installations contracted maintenance personnel yelled "hey Jim when's the last time you checked those gauges?". He looked on the back, and having no sticker on it, he shrugged his shoulders and they both laughed.
Ultimately you are responsible not the AHJ. They can of course be liable also, both the government entity and the person. For the person to be liable I believe that would require gross negligence on their part.
Alot of contract language requires "highest standard of care". The legal definition of that effectively means that if you asked 100 of your peers if you met every possible requirement to the letter, that all 100 would say yes.. Stay away from that wording btw. Use reasonable standard of care.,
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.
RE: NFPA 13D vs 13R - and AHJ variances that put an installer at risk..
If you end up in court using the defense the AHJ said it would be all right is going to make you look pretty silly in front of a lot of people.
It took me a lot of years to learn sometimes it is better just to walk away. I'd do it right or walk away on this one.
RE: NFPA 13D vs 13R - and AHJ variances that put an installer at risk..
If a fire is made worse by some aspect of the design, then all kinds of people can be sued. The tenant can sue the landlord, or the architect of record, or the sprinkler contracto or the develper who sold the property. Who gets sued usually depends on who has the most money and the best liability insurance.
The designer can argue that they are not the experts (not in the field of risk management). Designers know how to design a system that complies with a building code, but they don't know how to write a building code that meets certain risk management objectives. For example, there's nothing in NICET required knowledge that tells you how to estimate the number of deaths per 100,000 years you can expect in a building and how this number will be affected if you install a sprinkler system.
You also don't know what the fire brigade response time is. Without this knowledge, you can't be expected to know whether a building requires a sprinkler system to meet certain safety objectives.
If you followed the requirements of the AHJ, then it would be very difficult for an occupant to prove you were neglegent.
While it's theoritically possible to sue a sprinkler designer, you can only be held responsible a small portion of the loss, the plantif will find it easier to sue someone else (ie the person they leased the building from or bought the building from) and you just because you can design a sprinkler systems, doesn't mean that you can be expected to know whether the local building regulations are adequate or not.
RE: NFPA 13D vs 13R - and AHJ variances that put an installer at risk..
RE: NFPA 13D vs 13R - and AHJ variances that put an installer at risk..
You your communication with the general contractor shouldn't imply that you are experts in fire safty and risk management - you just know how to fit pipe so that it meets code.
RE: NFPA 13D vs 13R - and AHJ variances that put an installer at risk..
What is this other stuff you are all talking about?
RE: NFPA 13D vs 13R - and AHJ variances that put an installer at risk..
lightecho, maybe it is just a Yank thing. There is often such language in design/construction contracts, in the form of the boilerplate legalese attached to request for quotations or purchase order.
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.
RE: NFPA 13D vs 13R - and AHJ variances that put an installer at risk..
RE: NFPA 13D vs 13R - and AHJ variances that put an installer at risk..
To many get confused with what the AHJ can legally do. Sometimes they mistakenly claim to have the power to waive certain requirements, such as accept 250 gpm for hose stream instead of 500, when any lawyer will tell you they don't.
They have no more power to accept a lower standard than a state trooper would telling you it is ok to drive 115 mph on a certain section of interstate highways. You're ok until you're caught.
I worked in a couple of states that had "Boards of Standards and Appeals" that had constitutional authority to grant waivers in case of financial or other hardship. These boards were made up of people appointed by the governor and usually included one or two architects, couple engineers, three attorney's along with a few others.
I used it a couple times with success. Once was 500 gpm hose, drew the job up and when I turned it in I told the plan reviewer he would have to reject the reason being I couldn't provide 500 hose but 250. As soon as he rejected I could appeal with the board of standards, pay a small fee and be heard in a few weeks. They would hear what you had to say, take input from the plan reviewer who rejected the drawings, vote and then issue a ruling which you got in writing on state letterhead. In my opinion this is how all these issues should be handled.
RE: NFPA 13D vs 13R - and AHJ variances that put an installer at risk..
My whole point with this was that the contractor will finally be responsible for any actions even if the Town official approves something that is wrong. The contractor will always be consider the expert/professional no matter what.
For example the latest law suit I just came across by research was the one from SimplexGrinnell in PA.
The town official approved the design but the PE and contractor did not performed the task as required. Even when the design was not adequate the contractor still installed it as. Building burned due to fire and SimplexGrinnell was sued for 65 Mill.
Ouch
RE: NFPA 13D vs 13R - and AHJ variances that put an installer at risk..
Do you have a link to the SimplexGrinnell lawsuit you speak of? I am in the process of developing an argument as to why, not only should I not proceed with this installation, but why no one should.
Thx
D
RE: NFPA 13D vs 13R - and AHJ variances that put an installer at risk..
No wonder I don't sleep well.
RE: NFPA 13D vs 13R - and AHJ variances that put an installer at risk..
I would be interested in finding out what happened in this case.
RE: NFPA 13D vs 13R - and AHJ variances that put an installer at risk..
RE: NFPA 13D vs 13R - and AHJ variances that put an installer at risk..
RE: NFPA 13D vs 13R - and AHJ variances that put an installer at risk..
RE: NFPA 13D vs 13R - and AHJ variances that put an installer at risk..
htt
RE: NFPA 13D vs 13R - and AHJ variances that put an installer at risk..
Anyway, I was in a presentation with Tyco trying to sell a high pressure water mist system for commercial buildings as an alternative to sprinklers. This system looked to be pretty darn expensive (because the pipework is all stainless steel and rated for about 2000psi) and I doubt it could compete with sprinklers on cost so he was talking up the environmental advantages because you use less water. Later he mentioned to me that Tyco is a very ethical company and they had just produced a publication on how ethical they are to help decision makers from prospective customers justify buying Tyco products.
Unfortunately I was just so surprised to hear 'Tyco' and 'Ethical' in the same sentence that I was unable to come up with a witty reply.
RE: NFPA 13D vs 13R - and AHJ variances that put an installer at risk..
Their Human Resources Dpt is garbage. College will never replace experience but experience and education goes far beyond life itself.
They Just suck. Most part of the time their CEO's, CFO's, O.M's, are golfing at someone else expenses. That is the truth
RE: NFPA 13D vs 13R - and AHJ variances that put an installer at risk..
I love Tyco/Simplex Grinnell and I hope they continue operating exactly as they have been.
Six months ago I was bidding on a rather large job where the customer had it narrowed down to two customers; Tyco and your truly and when I heard that news I just smiled.
I just wish more of my competition were like Tyco.
I got the project, my competition made me look good and it's a fantastic project.
RE: NFPA 13D vs 13R - and AHJ variances that put an installer at risk..
RE: NFPA 13D vs 13R - and AHJ variances that put an installer at risk..
RE: NFPA 13D vs 13R - and AHJ variances that put an installer at risk..