| Date |
Text |
| 2008-02-05 17:19:37 | REVIEW #: 2ND |
| | ACTION: DENIED |
| | |
| | FBC 2004 CODE FAMILY W/ 2007 SUPPLEMENTS |
| | FBC CH.1 AS AMENDED BY THE CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH |
| | |
| | THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS ARE NUMBERED TO CORRESPOND WITH |
| | PREVIOUS REVIEW COMMENTS AS WELL AS DESIGNER'S WRITTEN |
| | RESPONSES FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONTINUITY. |
| | |
| | 1 THROUGH 5: OK |
| | |
| | 6. ACCESS PANELS MUST BE LARGE ENOUGH TO ALLOW SERVICE |
| | OR REPLACEMENT OF THE APPLIANCE WITHOUT REMOVING |
| | ELEMENTS OF PERMANENT CONSTRUCTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH |
| | FBC, M 306.1. ARE ACCESS PANELS LARGE ENOUGH TO ALLOW |
| | APPLIANCE TO BE REPLACED? THIS ITEM MAY BE COORDINATED |
| | WITH FIELD INSPECTOR. |
| | |
| | 7 THROUGH 9: OK |
| | |
| | 10. OK. NOTE: GREASE DUCT MANUFACTURER?S INSTALLATION |
| | INSTRUCTIONS ARE REQUIRED TO BE ON SITE FOR INSPECTION. |
| | ALSO, PROVIDE INFORMATION ON HOW THIS LISTED PRODUCT IS |
| | TO BE CONNECTED TO THE EXISTING GREASE DUCT IN A MANNER |
| | WHICH WILL MAINTAIN ITS LISTING. IS THERE A PRODUCT |
| | FROM THE MANUFACTURER WHICH FACILITATES THIS |
| | TRANSITION/CONNECTION? BASED ON A CONVERSATION WITH |
| | METAL-FAB, THEY MAKE SUCH A TRANSITION FOR THEIR G4 |
| | DUCT BUT NOT FOR THE SPECIFIED G2 DUCT. A SITE-SPECIFIC |
| | DETAIL IN CONJUNCTION WITH AN ENGINEERING JUDGMENT FROM |
| | THE MANUFACTURER MAY BE ABLE TO RESOLVE THIS ISSUE. |
| | THIS COULD BE A PROVISO ITEM TO BE ADDRESSED PRIOR TO |
| | INSPECTION IF NECESSARY. |
| | |
| | 11. OK. THROUGH PENETRATION FIRESTOP SYSTEM UL |
| | INSTALLATION DETAIL MAY BE SHOWN ON PLANS OR PROVIDED |
| | IN FIELD FOR INSPECTION. |
| | |
| | 12. GREASE DUCT SUPPORT DETAIL #7 ON M3.1 IS NOT IN |
| | CONFORMANCE WITH SUPPORT DETAIL FROM MANUFACTURER?S |
| | INSTALLATION INSTRUCTIONS. SUPPORTS SHALL BE IN |
| | ACCORDANCE WITH MANUFACTURER?S INSTALLATION |
| | INSTRUCTIONS AND LISTING PER FBC, M 304.1. SEE |
| | EXCEPTION TO FBC, M 506.3.1.1. |
| | |
| | 13 AND 14: OK |
| | |
| | 15. PRODUCT APPROVAL WITH APPROVED INSTALLATION |
| | INSTRUCTIONS SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH PERMIT |
| | DOCUMENTATION. PRODUCT APPROVALS SHALL BE REVIEWED AND |
| | APPROVED IN WRITING BY THE DESIGNER OF RECORD PRIOR TO |
| | SUBMITTAL FOR JURISDICTIONAL APPROVAL IN ACCORDANCE |
| | WITH FBC 106.3.3 (LOCAL AMENDMENT). |
| | |
| | 16. OK |
| | |
| | 17. THIS COMMENT WAS NOT ADDRESSED. AHU #1 STILL SHOWS |
| | A 3 HP MOTOR WHILE THE MODEL NUMBER OF THE APPLIANCE |
| | INDICATES A 5 HP MOTOR. ALSO, THE MOTOR RATINGS ON AHU4 |
| | AND AHU 5 ARE STILL IN EXCESS OF THE HP ALLOWED IN |
| | TABLE 13-410.1.1.1. THE MAXIMUM HP ALLOWED FOR THIS |
| | EQUIPMENT IS 1.2 HP PER 1000 CFM. THEREFORE THE MAXIMUM |
| | MOTOR NAMEPLATE RATING ALLOWED FOR THESE UNITS BASED ON |
| | THE CFM SHOWN ON THE EQUIPMENT SCHEDULE WOULD BE 4.62 |
| | HP. PLEASE ADDRESS THIS COMMENT AND RESUBMIT. |
| | |
| | 18. METHOD B CALCULATIONS ARE NOT AN OPTION TO |
| | DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE FOR THIS PROJECT IN ACCORDANCE |
| | WITH FBC 13-400.0.C.4. HOWEVER, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF |
| | COMMENT #17 ABOVE, THE MATERIALS AND SYSTEMS SHOWN MEET |
| | THE MINIMUM PRESCRIPTIVE EFFICIENCIES REQUIRED BY THIS |
| | SECTION. ONCE COMMENT #17 IS ADDRESSED, CODE COMPLIANCE |
| | WILL HAVE BEEN DEMONSTRATED ON THE PLANS. THEREFORE, |
| | THE METHOD B CALCULATIONS PROVIDED WILL NOT BE REVIEWED |
| | IN RELATION TO MECHANICAL SYSTEMS. |
| | |
| | 19. OK. NOTE: THIS COMMENT NO LONGER APPLICABLE, SEE |
| | COMMENT #18 ABOVE. |
| | |
| | 20 AND 21: OK |
| | |
| | IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS PLEASE CONTACT: |
| | RONALD J. REGUEIRO |
| | 561.805.6719 |
| | [email protected] |
