| Date |
Text |
| 2008-05-14 13:23:43 | REVISED ENERGY CALCULATIONS DATED 5/7/08: |
| | |
| | 1. THE MAX TONNAGE SHOWN ON THE FRONT OF THE FORM IS |
| | SHOWN AS 80 TONS. THIS DOES NOT CORRESPOND WITH THE |
| | APPLIANCE SCHEDULE ON PG H0.02. THE SCHEDULE SHOWS |
| | PAC-3 AS 90 TONS. PLEASE COORDINATE ENERGY CALCULATIONS |
| | WITH BUILDING PLANS IN ACCORDANCE WITH FBCB 13-103.2. |
| | |
| | 2. THE COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATION PAGE HAS NOT BEEN |
| | COMPLETED. EXAMPLE: THIS PAGE INDICATES THE |
| | CALCULATIONS WERE PREPARED BY DENNIS J STROER. THE |
| | BUILDING OFFICIAL SHALL REQUIRE, SUBJECT TO THE |
| | EXCEPTIONS IN SECTION 481.229, FLORIDA STATUTES, AND |
| | SECTION 471.003, FLORIDA STATUTES, THAT PLANS AND |
| | SPECIFICATIONS, INCLUDING THE ENERGY CODE CALCULATIONS, |
| | BE PREPARED BY AN ENGINEER OR ARCHITECT LICENSED TO |
| | PRACTICE IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA IN ACCORDANCE WITH |
| | FBCB 13-103.2. THERE IS NO LICENSE INFORMATION OR |
| | SIGNATURE AND SEAL FROM THIS PERSON SHOWING THEM TO |
| | MEET THESE CRITERIA. THIS PERSON HAS NOT CERTIFIED |
| | THESE CALCULATIONS OR THIS BUILDING TO BE IN COMPLIANCE |
| | WITH THE FLORIDA ENERGY EFFICIENCY CODE AS REQUIRED ON |
| | THE COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATION FORM. PLEASE CORRECT AND |
| | RESUBMIT. |
| | |
| | 3. DESIGN PROFESSIONALS RESPONSIBLE UNDER FLORIDA LAW |
| | FOR THE DESIGN OF LIGHTING, ELECTRICAL, MECHANICAL, AND |
| | PLUMBING SYSTEMS AND THE BUILDING SHELL, SHALL CERTIFY |
| | COMPLIANCE OF THOSE BUILDING SYSTEMS WITH THE CODE BY |
| | SIGNING AND PROVIDING THEIR PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATION |
| | NUMBER ON THE ENERGY CODE FORM PROVIDED AS PART OF THE |
| | PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS TO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT. |
| | EXCEPTION: TYPED NAMES AND REGISTRATION NUMBERS MAY BE |
| | PROVIDED IN LIEU OF A SIGNATURE WHERE ALL RELEVANT |
| | INFORMATION HAS BEEN INCLUDED ON SIGNED AND SEALED |
| | PLANS. |
| | NEITHER OF THESE WAS PROVIDED AS REQUIRED IN ACCORDANCE |
| | WITH FBCB 13-103.1.1. PLEASE SEE ALL AREAS OF THE |
| | COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATION FORM WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN |
| | FILLED OUT. CORRECT AND RESUBMIT. |
| | |
| | 4. THERE ARE DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN THE INPUT DATA |
| | REPORT (IDR) AND THE PLANS REGARDING THE COOLING |
| | CAPACITIES OF THE MECHANICAL APPLIANCES. EXAMPLE: PAC |
| | 1-16 IN THE IDR, WHICH CORRESPONDS WITH PAC-3 ON THE |
| | APPLIANCE SCHEDULE ON PAGE H0.02, IS SHOWN TO HAVE A |
| | COOLING CAPACITY OF 960,000 BTU/H WHILE THE PLANS SHOW |
| | A CAPACITY OF 1,066,000 BTU/H. |
| | |
| | THIS IS ONLY ONE EXAMPLE. THERE ARE OTHER |
| | DISCREPANCIES. PLEASE VERIFY ALL VALUES ENTERED IN THE |
| | (IDR) CORRESPOND WITH THE MECHANICAL SYSTEMS ON THE |
| | PLANS, CORRECT AND RESUBMIT. |
| | |
| | IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS PLEASE CONTACT: |
| | RONALD J. REGUEIRO |
| | 561.805.6719 |
| | [email protected] |
