| Plan Review Notes For Permit 16031454 |
| Permit Number |
16031454 |
|
| Review Stop |
G |
| Sequence Number |
4 |
|
| Notes |
| Date |
Text |
| 2016-06-22 06:20:18 | 1) NOTHING HAS BEEN DONE TO ADDRESS THE PLAN REVIEW | | | COMMENTS FROM THE PREVIOUS REVIEW. YOU HAVE SUBMITTED | | | THE SAME INCORRECT DRAWING WITH NO CORRECTIONS MADE. | | | 2) THE CSST LINE TO FP #1 & # 2 IS UNDERSIZED.THIS LINE | | | SUPPLYING THE TWO FIREPLACES SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 1 | | | 1/4" WITH AN EHD OF 37 PER TABLE 402.4 (15) OF 2014 | | | FUEL GAS CODE. | | | 3) AN EHD OF 30 IS FOR A 1" CSST LINE, NOT 3/4" PER | | | TABLE 402.4 (15) OF THE 2014 FBC-FUEL GAS CODE. | | | 4) THE MAXIMUM BTU LOAD ON A 1/2" CSST LINE AT 80 FT. | | | IS 33,000 BTU'S. THE GAS DRAWING SHOWS A 1/2" CSST LINE | | | SUPPLYING FP #1 WHICH IS 70,000 BTU'S. THIS LINE IS | | | UNDERSIZED. THIS SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 1" CSST WITH AN | | | EHD OF 30. | | | 5) I AM TOTALLY CONFUSED WITH YOUR SUBMITTAL FOR THE | | | COMBUSTION AIR CALCULATIONS. YOU ARE COMBINING TWO | | | SEPARATE CODE SECTIONS TO COMPLY WITH COMBUSTION AIR | | | REQUIREMENTS AND IT DOES NOT APPEAR THERE IS COMPLIANCE | | | WITH EITHER METHOD.YOUR CALCULATIONS DO NOT MAKE ANY | | | SENSE TO ME.CLARIFY. | | | NOTE: THIS REVIEW IS SUBJECT TO PAYMENT OF 3 TIMES THE | | | PLAN REVIEW FEE DUE TO THE PLANS BEING REJECTED FOR THE | | | SAME COMMENTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH FL. STATUTE 553.80 | | | I SUGGEST THAT THE GAS CONTRACTOR CONTACT ME TO DISCUSS | | | THIS ISSUE. | | | | | | PLUMBING PLAN REVIEW | | | TIM LARGE | | | CHIEF PLUMBING INSPECTOR | | | 561-805-6692 | | | [email protected] | | | | | | |
|
