| Date |
Text |
| 2016-03-30 13:51:04 | ELECTRICAL REVIEW NOTES |
| | REVIEWED FOR COMPLIANCE WITH: |
| | 5TH EDITION FBC 2014, NFPA 70 2011 (NEC) |
| | |
| | CORRECTIONS REQUIRED: |
| | 1. ACCORDING TO THE SUBMITTED SITE PLAN, THE OVERHEAD |
| | SERVICE CONDUCTORS ARE CROSSING OVER THE POOL. SEE NEC |
| | TABLE 680.8 FOR MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS. |
| | 2. THERE SEEMS TO BE A CONFLICT BETWEEN THE SITE PLAN |
| | AND THE SITE SURVEY. THE SURVEY SHOWS THE O/H |
| | CONDUCTORS, YET THE SITE PLAN DOES NOT. COMPARING THE |
| | PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED SITE DRAWING TO THE CURRENT THERE |
| | CONTINUES TO BE A CONFLICT. THE OLD SITE PLAN SHOWS THE |
| | O/H CONDUCTORS WITH A NOTE INDICATING THAT THEY WILL BE |
| | REMOVED BY OWNER. THE CURRENT SITE PLAN NO LONGER HAS |
| | THE O/H SERVICE CONDUCTORS, BUT OUR SYSTEM DOES NOT |
| | REFLECT THAT AN ELECTRICAL PERMIT FOR THE CHANGE WAS |
| | EVER ISSUED. THIS MATTER NEEDS TO BE CLARIFIED PRIOR TO |
| | THE ISSUANCE OF THE PERMIT. |
| | 3. YOU MUST SHOW THE EQUI-POTENTIAL BONDING ON THE |
| | DRAWINGS AS INDICATED IN NEC 680.26. |
| | |
| | WHEN RESUBMITTING, FOR A QUICKER RETURN ON YOUR |
| | RE-SUBMITTAL, PLEASE PROVIDE A RESPONSE LETTER |
| | (NARRATIVE) ADDRESSING EACH ITEM AND THE PAGE NUMBER |
| | WHERE THE CORRECTIONS APPEAR ALONG WITH THE STANDARD |
| | CITY RE-SUBMITTAL FORM. ADDITIONALLY, PLEASE INSERT |
| | CORRECTED PAGES INTO THE SUBMITTAL PACKAGE. MARK VOID |
| | AND LEAVE THE PREVIOUSLY REVIEWED SHEETS FOR |
| | COMPARATIVE REVIEW. CLOUDING THE CHANGES WILL BE |
| | GREATLY APPRECIATED. |
| | |
| | IF YOU HAVE FURTHER QUESTIONS, PLEASE DON?T HESITATE TO |
| | CONTACT ME DIRECTLY. |
| | |
| | THANK YOU, |
| | MIKE ALBARRAN |
| | ELECTRICAL PLANS EXAMINER |
| | PH: 561-805-6746 |
| | EMAIL: [email protected] |
| | |
