Your Open-Source Fire Sprinkler Spec - Part I

One of the frustrating aspects of bidding a fire sprinkler job in North America is when you're reviewing a job and the specifications that accompany it are simply terrible - boilerplate, don't actually provide any useful information, are conflicting, include irrelevant content, or clearly haven't been updated in decades (list no longer manufactured products).

One of the ideas we kicked around a couple weeks ago was essentially an "open source" specification. One that we build and curate together and post for open use.

This is the first-stab at what "Part I" of an open, basic fire sprinkler specification might look like.

SECTION I OF THREE
Typical specifications include three parts:

1. Conditions: where the scope is described, applicable criteria is communicated, and the 'what is supposed to be done' is addressed.
2. Equipment: what equipment and products are permitted, and what are not.
3. Execution: in what ways must the work be performed.

OUR GOAL
From our collaborations, posts and discussions thus far, we're all really wanting something that is:

1. Helpful: actually provides information the contractor is needing to price a job.
2. Concise: as short as possible, so that it's easier to read and easier to edit. Don't duplicate requirements from other standards (such as NFPA 13), but simply defer back to them. We also want to limit the number of sections (again for simplicity, easy to navigate).
3. Clear: the specifications need to be easy to navigate and explicit in what is being required.
4. Timely: we don't want antiquated methods or products that aren't feasible or achievable.

There are other goals too, but those seem to be the reoccurring themes.

We explicitly do not intend for this specification to replace consultant's who already update and care for the industry. The beauty of consulting is providing unique value to your clients - this is absolutely not intended to be the only specification available. 

Rather, we would hope that it could help provide a baseline open-source template where specifications could at least be of this quality level.

YOUR INPUT
Where we could really use help here is reviewing this initial (very very first) attempt at Part I a basic open spec. 

I have highlighted GREEN and BLUE areas where a specific selection needs to be made (one or the other).

I have highlighted YELLOW additional alternatives which may be less common than a typical, mid-size commercial job.

​All portions of this specification would be editable, though the highlighted areas would be of particular concern to change and update job-to-job.

Take a look, and let us know your thoughts. If you've been long-frustrated about the prevalence of terrible specifications - then this just might be your opportunity to help us clean up the practice:

Part II, which comes next, identifies equipment and products that are allowed or not.

Part III speaks to the execution of the work - that is, any restrictions on what needs to be achieved.

THANK YOU
Just want to say a big thank you in advance for helping us really impact the industry in a positive way. I and many others very much appreciate it!

​- Joe