The News follows! (Scroll Down for Calendar Items.)
To get the "Rest of the Story," Subscribe Today!
Relmark Group — Risk Management Advocates for Fire Sprinkler Contractors
Source for Designers:
You’re invited to meet the exceptional graduates of Seneca College.
For job posting e-mail or fax job descriptions to Fax: 416-494-9178
* Counterfeit Sprinkler Warning *
UL Warns of Counterfeit Fire Sprinklers (Release 14PN-9)
The following is a notification from UL that the fire sprinklers identified bear counterfeit UL Certification Marks for the United States and Canada. The fire sprinklers have not been evaluated by UL to the appropriate Standards for Safety and it is unknown if the fire sprinklers comply with any safety requirements.
Although the fire sprinklers wrench boss is marked "TYCO" and the thermo bulbs are marked "JOB F5" the fire sprinklers were not manufactured or labeled by Tyco and the thermo bulbs were not manufactured or labeled by Job, GmbH., affiliates or agents.
Name of Product: Upright TY3151; Pendent TY3251; Horizontal Sidewall PS007.
Location: The sprinklers have been found in Vietnam and India. UL has not received reports of these counterfeit sprinklers in other locations.
Identification: On the product: The product bears counterfeit UL and TYCO Marks and the following information on the upright TY3151 sprinkler. (Location - Vietnam)
Counterfeit Fire Sprinkler Markings include: UL in a circle, 155°F/68°C, TY3151; "TYCO" cast into both sides of the wrench boss; Deflector material zinc plated steel (magnetic); 5mm glass bulb -Job F5.
Authentic Fire Sprinkler Markings include: cULus in a circle, 155°F/68°C, SU, TY3151; "TYCO" incised on one side and the year of manufacture on the opposite side of wrench boss; Defector material brass with chrome or painted white (non-magnetic); 5 mm Geissler glass bulb - "G" between two triangles on one side and lot number on the other side.
For more information and to see photographs go to www.ul.com.
UL Warns of Counterfeit Fire Sprinkler
The following is a notification from UL that the fire sprinkler identified below bears a counterfeit UL Certification Mark for the United States and Canada. The fire sprinkler has not been evaluated by UL to the appropriate Standards for Safety and it is unknown if the fire sprinkler complies with any safety requirements.
Although the fire sprinkler’s wrench boss is marked “TYCO”, the fire sprinkler was not manufactured by Tyco, its affiliates, or agents.
Name of Product: Pendent Type Fire Sprinkler
Identification: On the product: The counterfeit sprinkler has the UL Mark on the wrench boss. The UL Certified Tyco sprinkler is provided with the UL Mark on the deflector, other differences are:
Counterfeit Fire Sprinkler Markings: “TYCO” and “UL” marked on the sides of the wrench flat, no date code; cULus in a circle marked on the side of the frame. “68C” and “SSP” on the deflector without TY number; Deflector material zinc plated steel (magnetic); 5mm glass bulb no markings.
UL Certified Fire Sprinkler Markings: “TYCO” marked on one wrench flat, date code on the other wrench flat; cULus in a circle, “155°F/68°C”,”SP” and “ TY3251” marked on the deflector; Deflector material brass with chrome or painted white (non-magnetic); 5 mm Geissler glass bulb – “G” between two triangles on one side and lot number on the other side.
To see photographs visit: http://ul.com/newsroom/publicnotices/ul-warns-of-counterfeit-fire-sprinkler-release-no-14pn-18/.
Location: The sprinklers have been found in India. UL has not received reports of these counterfeit sprinklers in other locations.
(Scroll down for Calendar Items.)
Suit Alleges CPVC Failure with Condo Fire Sprinklers
An article by Catherine Kavanaugh posted December 15, 2015, on www.plasticnews.com said a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Miami says fire suppression sprinkler systems made with “incompatible” plastic and metal pipes are failing in condominiums across the country and an alleged national cover-up by some of the manufacturers, suppliers, and distributors has endangered lives and property.
Two condo associations in Miami are the lead plaintiffs in the class action lawsuit, which involves chlorinated PVC pipes made with a resin by Wickliffe, Ohio-based Lubrizol Corp. and steel pipes made by Allied Tube & Conduit Corp. that have an interior anti-microbial coating.
Allied was a division of Tyco International Ltd.’s electrical and metal products business segment until it was sold to Atkore International Inc. in 2010 and became a subsidiary of Harvey, Illinois-based Atkore.
The 56-count lawsuit says the Lubrizol resin, which is used by others to make CPVC pipe, develops pin-hole leaks, cracks, and blow-outs when exposed to basic construction materials, such as Allied’s ABF and ABF II steel pipe.
In addition to Lubrizol, Allied, Tyco, and Atkore, the list of defendants includes Tyco Fire Products, Lubrizol Advanced Materials Inc. (formerly known as Noveon Inc.), Viking Corp., Supply Network Inc., Victaulic Co., George Fischel Harvel LLC, Nibco Inc., Spears Manufacturing Co., HD Supply Waterworks Group Inc., and HD Supply Waterworks Ltd.
Julie Young, director of corporate communications for Lubrizol, denied the conspiracy claim and other allegations in a December 14 e-mail.
“Lubrizol has been made aware of a lawsuit wrongly alleging an industry-wide cover-up of defects in the piping systems in two condominium buildings in Florida,” Young said. “Lubrizol is one of many companies from the fire sprinkler industry that are named in the suit. It is the company’s policy to not comment on pending litigation. As the litigation process unfolds, Lubrizol will respond to the complaint.
“Lubrizol has not concealed information and denies the allegations in the lawsuit. There is no reason to believe the lawsuit contains any allegations about CPVC that have not been alleged elsewhere, tested, and addressed. The industry has always taken proper steps to ensure safe installation and use of fire sprinkler systems around the world. As a market leader, Lubrizol has always stood behind its products and will put the same attention to this matter.”
The lawsuit was filed by Colson Hicks Edison. The firm said that the problem is nationwide with buildings constructed from 2005-2009 primarily at risk from the hybrid systems of CPVC and metal pipes containing antimicrobial and anti-corrosion chemicals. They said monetary damages arising from the claims will exceed $1 billion.
Sprinkler Mandate Ends
An article by John Croman posted January 1, 2016, on www.KARE11.com, Minneapolis, Minnesota, said Minnesota’s sprinkler mandate for large new homes is no longer in the rule book, after home builders won a legal battle to block it.
The Minnesota Supreme Court decided not to review a lower court decision that voided the sprinkler rule, so automatic sprinklers will be a voluntary option in new homes for the foreseeable future.
“We’re very pleased at that ruling. We think the court got it right,” David Siegel, executive director of the Builders Association of the Twin Cities, told KARE. “We believe there’s virtually no safety value to sprinklers, and there’s extremely high costs.” [Editor’s note: Will someone remind him of what he said when there is a fire death?]
The Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry crafted the rule over several years through the administrative law process, and it went into the state building codes last February. The rule applied to new, single-family homes larger than 4,500 sq. ft.
The home builders group lobbied against it, asking legislators to bar the Department of Labor and Industry from imposing the requirement. But Governor Mark Dayton, who favored the sprinkler rule, threatened to veto any legislation that contained a moratorium against sprinklers.
The builders sued the State in an effort to undo the sprinkler mandate, and the Minnesota Court of Appeals agreed to block regulators from enforcing the new code. The appellate court didn’t weigh in on the merits of sprinklers, but found that the rule’s 4,500 sq. ft. threshold was an arbitrary standard.
“We believe the ruling reflects where the public stands on this issue,” Siegel remarked. “In statewide research, we found that vast majority of people do not want sprinklers in their private homes. It’s a different story on commercial buildings, it’s a different story on multi-family units.”
The Supreme Court’s decision wasn’t welcomed by the Association of Minnesota Fire Chiefs, which supports the sprinkler mandate.
“We have the solution to saving thousands of lives from tragic, painful deaths from fires,” Saint Paul Fire Marshal Steve Zaccard, speaking on behalf of the fire chiefs group, told KARE. “We have the solution. We just need to use it.”
Zaccard agreed that most fire deaths take place in older housing stock, because there are more older homes to begin with in Minnesota. But, he said it’s still important to install sprinklers in new homes, because they burn faster and reach the flashover point more quickly.
[And guess what? They get old.]
“Lightweight construction materials, coupled with the flammability of the furnishings we use today, give people inside less than four minutes to get out, once a fire starts,” Zaccard asserted. “If you’re an infant or an elderly person, or otherwise mobility impaired, you may not be able to get out in time.”
Home builders say hard-wired integrated smoke detectors now required in new single family homes are a more effective way to save lives than sprinklers.
But, the fire chiefs say warnings are no substitute for a system that will put out a fire where it originates.
The two factions disagree on the question of how affordable the systems are. The builders estimate sprinklers add at least $9,000 to the cost of a 4,500 sq. ft. home, and more if it’s in a rural area where a cistern would be needed.
The fire chiefs say they represent roughly one percent of the total price of a new home.
“People spend as much on carpeting or stone counters as they would on sprinklers,” Zaccard said.
Builder Says No To Sprinklers
Homeowner requests to have his new home sprinklered
A December 31, 2015, article on www.sprinkler.blog.nfpa.org said: The New Jersey Fire Sprinkler Coalition says: “Home fire sprinklers should be a matter of consumer choice.”
That’s a popular argument made by sprinkler opponents, who balk at code requirements for this life-saving feature. Instead, they say they’ll be glad to install the devices if a homeowner asks for them.
That’s not what happened in New Jersey.
A news report on www.NJ.com, partly titled “Bamboozled,” describes the rigmarole homeowner Ed Ondayko went through when he told his builder, Toll Brothers, he wanted fire sprinklers. “The safety and well-being of my family means everything to me,” Ondayko, who works in the fire protection industry, told NJ.com. “One can replace their personal possessions and valuables, but nothing can replace the loss or disfigurement of a loved one due to a fire.”
In an attempt to prevent these tragedies, Ondayko wanted Toll Brothers to install sprinklers in his new home in Monroe Township, New Jersey. The company wouldn’t accommodate his request. A Toll Brothers representative in charge of the Monroe housing development noted in a letter that “we do not have the subcontractors and qualified personnel in place ... to grant this request and undertake a project such as this.” He added, “we cannot commit to installing this particular feature in light of our current resources and expertise.”
A subcontractor came forward on Ondayko’s behalf and let Toll Brothers know he was qualified to perform the installation. Even though the contractor was already installing fire sprinklers at a Toll Brothers apartment complex in New Jersey, the company refused the offer, according to the NJ.com report.
After contacting the media, Toll Brothers met with Ondayko. According to the news report, Toll Brothers offered several options, including the option to have a Toll Brothers contractor install sprinklers. They refused to let Ondayko bring in his own contractor, even if that would cut installation costs. “It’s basically their guy or no guy,” Ondayko told NJ.com. Before making a decision, he’s weighing his options.
“The primary response from home builders is that fire sprinklers should be the consumer’s choice and not mandated,” David Kurasz, executive director of the New Jersey Fire Sprinkler Advisory Board and member of the New Jersey Fire Sprinkler Coalition, told NJ.com. “Unfortunately, as seen in the case with Mr. Ondayko, many home builders simply do not want to install sprinklers as it is not a primary, money-making option like carpets, granite countertops, or crown molding.”
For more information contact: www.sprinkler.blog.nfpa.org.
Grant for Businesses to Install Sprinklers
An article by Jessica Miller posted December 21, 2015, on www.enidnews.com, Enid, Oklahoma, said approximately 65 downtown Enid buildings are eligible for a grant program approved by the Enid City Commission.
Through the Downtown Sprinkler Tap and Riser Grant Program, building owners can be assisted with the costs of installing a tap and riser system in the installation of a fire sprinkler system.
According to the resolution, the program is intended to encourage development of “existing buildings with revenue-generating entities such as commercial, retail, restaurant, or residential facilities on the upper floors, and commercial, retail, and restaurant facilities on the first floors.”
Under the grant program, which has a budget of $100,000 for the 2015-16 fiscal year, the city of Enid will pay qualifying building owners up to $25,000 for the installation of the tap and riser, including pavement repair, the resolution states.
To be eligible for the grant program, the building most be located in the Enid Town Square Overlay District, the owner must submit a plan for the fire suppression system with a cost estimate, and service lines from the public water main to the property will be the responsibility of the property owner, according to the resolution.
Grant recipients will have no more than a year to complete the installation, with two three-month extensions possible. If the project is not completed within the timeline, the city may file a lien against the property in the amount of the grant.
All improvements made through the grant must be inspected and approved by the city’s director of engineering and the Fire Marshal.
The city commission unanimously approved a resolution to create the grant program during a meeting on December 15.
Death of 43 Racehorses in Stable Fire
An article by Ben Spurr posted on January 5, 2016, on www.thestar.com said the Ontario horse racing community is reeling after a fire that engulfed a barn at an elite stable facility near Guelph left dozens of horses dead.
The blaze at Classy Lane Stables Training Centre in Puslinch, which erupted shortly after 11 p.m., killed 43 animals, according to the stables’ owners.
“It’s pretty tough to be honest. This is a horse trainer’s nightmare,” said Ben Wallace, a veteran horse trainer.
Wallace said the fire also destroyed important mementos from his decades-long career, including Breeders’ Cup trophies.
Among the horses Wallace lost were Penji Hanover, which competed in last year’s North America Cup, and Apprentice Hanover, a five-year-old bay that was considered one of the finest active standardbred horses and topped $1 million in earnings.
The barn wasn’t fitted with fire sprinklers, and the only fire prevention equipment in the building was fire extinguishers.
According to a spokesman for the Ontario Fire Marshal’s office, under the Ontario Fire Code, barns aren’t required to have sprinkler systems or smoke detectors.
Dubai Hotel Fire
An item on VOA News, updated on January 1, 2016, said authorities are trying to determine what caused an inferno at a high-rise luxury hotel in downtown Dubai that burned on New Year’s Eve.
The fire at The Address Hotel provided dramatic scenes as hundreds of thousands of people watching the fireworks display looked on. The hotel is located near the Burj Khalifa, the tallest building in the world.
The Address Hotel was evacuated during the blaze, but 14 people suffered minor injuries, and one person experienced a heart attack.
On New Year’s Day, heavy, white smoke continued to billow from the 63-story hotel.
VOA’s Margaret Besheer, said: “Authorities here are saying that internal parts of the hotel were not gutted by the fire. I think it had a very advanced sprinkler system that kept the fire from spreading internally. But, the facade is really badly damaged on the north side of the building. I was looking at the building today, and there’s still smoke billowing off the building.”
Officials said the fire erupted on the 20th floor of the hotel, perhaps outside on a terrace, causing the flames to quickly climb up the length of the structure.
Historic Buildings Vulnerable To Fire
An article by Camilla Turner posted December 20, 2015, on www.telegraph.uk.co said heritage buildings across England are at risk of burning down because their owners are blocking attempts to install “unsightly” fire prevention methods, experts have warned.
A “misplaced” fear among conservationists and architects that such measures will ruin the character of the building has left hundreds of thousands of historic buildings across the country vulnerable.
Steve Emery, chair the Institute of Fire Engineers and fire adviser for Historic England, said that building owners will “very often” use the building’s listed status as a reason for not installing proper fire protection measures.
He said people are reluctant to install sprinklers because they are concerned it will increase the likelihood of the building flooding if it goes wrong.
“There aren’t many instances of sprinklers going wrong and spraying water everywhere, but people are reluctant to add another level of water,” he said.
“There is also the actual cost of installation - if there is a choice between fixing the roof and installing sprinklers, the first thing will be to fix the roof.
“We take fire safety and the protection of its historic places extremely seriously. We have a robust and rigorous fire safety strategy in place at all our places, which are tailored to each property’s individual requirements.”
Emery said that there are tens of thousands of fires every year in heritage buildings, but since the vast majority are privately owned, it is hard to keep track of all the damage.
Jim Glockling, technical director of the Fire Protection Association, said the lack of legislation to protect heritage buildings from fires is “staggering.”
“We have rafts of legislation to protect heritage buildings, if you want to do any building works you have to go through a big planning process, there are huge restrictions,” he said. “But when it comes to fire, there are no measures to stop fires in heritage buildings above and beyond normal homes - the heritage listing means nothing at all.”
He said that people think it is “unsightly” to fireproof doors or to install sprinklers, and worry that it would ruin the “character” of the building.
“We need to think of the greater good and the greater mission - this would improve the building’s likelihood of existing forever,” he said.
Given that many heritage buildings are in remote locations and may be far away from the nearest fire station, Glockling said that the only real option is for buildings to be self sufficient and install its own fire protection methods.
Earlier this year, an investigation was launched after Clandon Park, an 18th century stately home in Surrey, was devastated by a fire that destroyed irreplaceable artifacts. The inferno is believed to have started in the basement before ripping through the building and spreading through voids in the roof.
Stewart Kidd, secretary general of the British Automatic Fire Sprinkler Association, said it is a “total misconception” that sprinklers are “dangerous” and put buildings at risk of flooding.
He said it “tends to be the architects, the planners, the conservationist, and the archivists” who are the most reluctant to install sprinklers in heritage buildings.
Kidd added that the National Trust and English Heritage should have clearer guidelines on the use of sprinklers in historic buildings.
Standpipe Rack Hose Video
Supporting the association’s mission to save lives and protect property through fire safety education, the Fire Equipment Manufacturers’ Association released an educational video on the features and benefits of standpipe rack hoses. This educational video provides an overview of standpipe rack hose systems and highlights the importance of these systems as part of balanced fire protection plan for buildings.
“Incorporating a balanced fire protection design in commercial buildings helps to minimize safety risks by providing multiple channels for fire notification and protection,” says Duane Leonhardt, fire hose and interior equipment division chair. “Building owners, managers, and occupants play key roles in designing and executing fire protection plans, so we produced this video specifically with them in mind.”
Standpipe rack hose systems are just one element of a complete balanced protection plan; other elements may include portable fire extinguishers, automated suppression systems, smoke detectors, and fire alarms.
In addition to providing a summary of the components and operation of standpipe rack hose systems, the video also reviews the unique features of these systems, including: Quick suppression of fires; One-person operation; Minimal water damage; Pathway clearing for occupant rescue; Occupant protection during rescue.
The educational standpipe rack hose video is available for viewing and sharing on YouTube and SlideShare.
This standpipe rack hose video is the fourth educational video created and posted on the Fire Equipment Manufacturers’ Association’s YouTube and SlideShare accounts. Other educational videos include: How to Use a Portable Fire Extinguisher, Your First Defense When Disaster Strikes (NFPA 1126) and UL300 – Protecting Commercial Kitchens.
The Fire Equipment Manufacturers’ Association is a more than 60 year-old non-profit trade association dedicated to saving lives and protecting property by providing education of a balanced fire protection design.
For more information contact: Fire Equipment Manufacturers’ Association, 1300 Sumner Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44115; (216) 241-7333, www.femalifesafety.org.
Residential Fire Sprinklers Cost Report
The cost to install home fire sprinklers in 51 homes in 17 communities averaged $1.35 per sprinklered square foot, down from the $1.61 average in 2008, according to a report conducted by Newport Partners (Newport) and released by the Fire Protection Research Foundation (the Foundation), an affiliate of the National Fire Protection Association. (Sprinklered square feet is a measure of total area of spaces with sprinklers.) The new report, Home Fire Sprinkler Cost Assessment — 5 Year Update, provides a national perspective on the cost of installing home fire sprinklers.
The primary purpose of the 2013 study was to review current home fire sprinkler costs against a 2008 benchmark study, Home Fire Sprinkler Cost Assessment, also commissioned by the Foundation and conducted by Newport, to better understand the relationship between adoptions, various elements of cost such as installation and materials, how efficiency in design or installation may be introduced, and more.
For more information visit: www.nfpa.org
UL & LPCB Warn of Counterfeit Fire Sprinkler
The following is a notification from UL and the Loss Prevention Certification Board (LPCB) to distributors, contractors, fire departments, regulatory agencies, and authorities having jurisdiction that the fire sprinkler identified below bears a counterfeit UL Certification Mark for the United States and Canada, and a counterfeit LPCB Mark. The fire sprinkler has not been evaluated by UL or LPCB to the appropriate Standards for Safety and it is unknown if the fire sprinkler complies with any safety requirements.
For more information please see the following links:
February 20-23, 2016
FSSA Annual Forum
El Conquistador Resort, Puerto Rico
Jarrod A. Clabaugh, FSSA
(410) 931-8100, www.fssa.net
March 3-5, 2016
ASA’s Annual Convention
& 50th Anniversary
Hyatt Regency Miami, FL
American Subcontractors Association
March 8, 2016
UK Water Mist Seminar
BRE Innovation Park, Watford, UK
Bettina McDowell, Tel. + 49 (0) 40 35085-215, www.iwma.net
March 9-11, 2016
NEAFPSD 25th Anniversary
& Fire Protection Symposium
Attitash Grand Summit Hotel & Conference Center
Paul Taylor, firstname.lastname@example.org
March 16-18, 2016
Symposium on Tunnels
March 24, 2016
Seneca School of Fire Protection Career Fair and FPSA Networking Dinner
Seneca College, School of Fire Protection
Scott Pugsley SET, FPT
(416) 491-5050 ext. 22525
April 26-28, 2016
NFPA Mexico Fire Expo
Centro Banamex, México, D.F.
May 3-6, 2016
NFSA Annual Meeting
Laguna Cliffs Marriott, Dana Point, CA
May 29-31, 2016
CASA Annual Meeting
Banff, AB, Canada
June 9-12, 2016
NFPA Annual Meeting
Mandalay Bay, Las Vegas, NV
July 25, 2016
12th OFSC Burn Invitational
Glenmoor Country Club, Canton, OH
Julie Schade, Ohio Fire Safety Coalition
September 13-14, 2016
Fire Protection Int'l Forum
México 2016 Conference & Exposition
WTC, México, D.F.
September 14-17, 2016
AFSA Annual Meeting
Gaylord Opryland, Nashville, TN
September 21-22, 2016
Water Mist Conference
Arcotel Wimberger Wien
Bettina McDowell, M.A.
International Water Mist Association
Other Dates by Organization
American Subcontractors Association
Feb. 9, 2016: Negotiating Retainage” Webinar
Apr. 12, 2016: The Payment Dance...
May 10, 2016: Websites, Email, Social Media & Your Domain Name
Jun. 14, 2016: Damages for Lost Productivity
Fire Tech Productions, www.firetech.com
Jan. 28: Water-Based I&T, Level II, Webinar
Feb. 2: Water-Based Layout Level I, Webinar
Feb. 3: Water-Based I&T, Level I, Webinar
Feb. 9: Water-Based Level I, Webinar
Feb. 10: Water-Based I&T, Level I, Webinar
Feb. 16: A-Z Sprinkler hands On, Dayton
Feb. 17: A-Z Sprinkler hands On, Dayton
Feb. 18: A-Z Sprinkler hands On, Dayton
Feb. 19: A-Z Sprinkler hands On, Dayton
Feb. 24: Water-Based I&T, Level II, Webinar
Feb. 26: Success with NICET , Webinar
Feb. 26: Water-Based Level II, Webinar
National Fire Sprinkler Assoc., www.nfsa.org
Jan. 26, 2016: 2 Day Plan Review - Roseville, CA
Feb. 5: NFPA 13, +R, D, &14 - Concord, NH
Feb. 16: ITM - Elmira, NY
Feb. 16: Liability Minefield - Westbury, NY
Feb. 16: Pumps - Portland, OR
Feb. 17: Sprinklers - Portland, OR
Feb. 23: ITM - Pharr, TX
Feb. 24: Hydraulics - Stow, MA
Mar. 23: 2-Day Plan Review - Plainfield, IL
April 8: NFPA 13D - Concord, NH
April 13: Rough/Final Inspects - Mundelein, IL
National Fire Protection Assoc., www.nfpa.org
2013 NFPA 13: Installation of Sprinkler Systems 3-day Seminar with Optional
Certificate of Educational Achievement
Feb. 22-24, 2016: Houston, TX
Mar. 7-9, 2016: Baltimore, MD
Mar. 21-23, 2016: Las Vegas, NV
Apr. 11-16, 2016: Atlanta, GA
Apr. 18-20, 2016: Quincy, MA
Apr. 25-27, 2016: Chicago, IL
May 16-18, 2016: Nashville, TN
NFPA Classroom Training
Feb. 1-5: New Orleans. LA
Feb. 22-26: Houston, TX
Mar. 7-11: Baltimore, MD
Mar. 14-18: Quincy, MA
Mar. 21-23: Quincy, MA
Mar. 21-25: Las Vegas, NV
Other Future Meeting Dates:
September 14-17, 2016, Nashville, TN
Sept. 24-27, 2017, Las Vegas, NV
May 3-6, 2017, Red Rock, Las Vegas, NV
May 3-6, 2016, Laguna Cliffs Marriott Resort & Spa, Dana Point, CA
May 3-6, 2017, Red Rock, Las Vegas, NV
June 9-12, 2016, Mandalay Bay Convention Center, Las Vegas, NV
June 4-7, 2017, Boston Convention and Exhibition Center, Boston, MA
American Fire Sprinkler Association
National Fire Sprinkler Association
National Fire Protection Association
Fire Tech Productions
Oklahoma State University
Seneca College, School of Fire Protection