| Date |
Text |
| 2017-12-27 10:08:51 | CODES IN EFFECT: |
| | FBC = FLORIDA BUILDING CODE 2014 5TH EDITION |
| | FBC CE = FLORIDA BUILDING CODE ENERGY CONSERVATION 2014 |
| | 5TH EDITION |
| | FBC RE = FLORIDA RESIDENTIAL CODE 2014 5TH EDITION, |
| | PART VIII ELECTRICAL |
| | NEC = NFPA 70 2011 EDITION, NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE |
| | FS = FLORIDA STATUTES |
| | |
| | ELECTRICAL REVIEW STATUS: DENIED, SEE COMMENTS BELOW. |
| | |
| | PREVIOUS COMMENTS ADDRESSED SATISFACTORILY HAVE BEEN |
| | NOTED AS CORRECTED. COMMENTS REMAINING HAVE ADDITIONAL |
| | COMMENTS IN PARENTHESES. |
| | |
| | 1. PANEL M IS SHOWN AS A 600 AMP PANEL, BUT THE LOAD ON |
| | A PHASE IS 640.21 AMPS AND THE LOAD ON C PHASE IS 646 |
| | AMPS, WHICH EXCEEDS THE CAPACITY OF THE PANEL. PROVIDE |
| | CORRECTION. NEC 408.30 (A PHASE LOAD IS SHOWN AS 78.2 |
| | KVA, WHICH DIVIDED BY 120 EQUALS 651.67 AMPS. C PHASE |
| | LOAD IS SHOWN AS 77.4 KVA, WHICH DIVIDED BY 120 EQUALS |
| | 645 AMPS. THIS WILL EXCEED THE CAPACITY OF THE WIRE, |
| | THE PANEL, AND THE MAIN BREAKER. PROVIDE CORRECTION AS |
| | PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED.) NEC 310.15(B)(16) |
| | 2. CORRECTED. |
| | 3. PANEL C LOAD CALCULATION IS LABELED AS "PANEL A LOAD |
| | CALCS". ADDITIONALLY, THE MATH IS WRONG FOR THE TOTALS |
| | ON A PHASE. BY MY ADDITION OF THE LOADS STATED, THE |
| | TOTAL LOAD ON THIS PHASE WOULD BE 136 AMPS, WHICH |
| | EXCEEDS THE RATING OF THE WIRE AND THE VALUE OF THE |
| | CIRCUIT BREAKER FEEDING THE PANEL. PROVIDE CORRECTION. |
| | NEC 220, 310.15(B)(16), 408.30, 215.2; FBC 107.2.1 |
| | (THIS WAS PARTIALLY CORRECTED. LOAD CALCS ARE NOW |
| | LABELED CORRECTLY. HOWEVER, A PHASE LOAD IS SHOWN AS |
| | 15.6 KVA, WHICH DIVIDED BY 120 VOLTS EQUALS 130 AMPS. |
| | THIS WILL EXCEED THE CAPACITY OF THE PANEL AND BREAKER |
| | FEEDING THE PANEL. PROVIDE CORRECTION AS PREVIOUSLY |
| | REQUESTED.) |
| | 4. CORRECTED. |
| | 5. CORRECTED. |
| | 6. CORRECTED. |
| | |
| | NEW COMMENT: PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT THIS COMMENT HAS |
| | NOT BEEN ADDRESSED FOR TWO REVIEWS. IF UPON THE THIRD |
| | REVIEW, IF IT IS NECESSARY TO REJECT THE SUBMITTED PLAN |
| | A THIRD TIME FOR THE SAME REASONS, AN ADDITIONAL PLAN |
| | REVIEW IS REQUIRED. FLORIDA STATUTES STATE: ?WITH |
| | RESPECT TO EVALUATION OF DESIGN PROFESSIONALS? |
| | DOCUMENTS, IF A LOCAL GOVERNMENT FINDS IT NECESSARY, IN |
| | ORDER TO ENFORCE COMPLIANCE WITH THE FLORIDA BUILDING |
| | CODE AND ISSUE A PERMIT, TO REJECT DESIGN DOCUMENTS |
| | REQUIRED BY THE CODE THREE OR MORE TIMES FOR FAILURE TO |
| | CORRECT A CODE VIOLATION SPECIFICALLY AND CONTINUOUSLY |
| | NOTED IN EACH REJECTION, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, |
| | EGRESS, FIRE PROTECTION, STRUCTURAL STABILITY, ENERGY, |
| | ACCESSIBILITY, LIGHTING, VENTILATION, ELECTRICAL, |
| | MECHANICAL, PLUMBING, AND GAS SYSTEMS, OR OTHER |
| | REQUIREMENTS IDENTIFIED BY RULE OF THE FLORIDA BUILDING |
| | COMMISSION ADOPTED PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 120, THE LOCAL |
| | GOVERNMENT SHALL IMPOSE, EACH TIME AFTER THE THIRD SUCH |
| | REVIEW THE PLANS ARE REJECTED FOR THAT CODE VIOLATION, |
| | A FEE OF FOUR TIMES THE AMOUNT OF THE PROPORTION OF THE |
| | PERMIT FEE ATTRIBUTED TO PLANS REVIEW. FS 553.80(2)(B)? |
| | |
| | END OF COMMENTS |
| | |
| | PLEASE NOTE: SUBMITTAL OF ADDITIONAL AND/OR REVISED |
| | MATERIALS MAY RESULT IN NEW PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS. WHEN |
| | RESUBMITTING, IT IS HELPFUL TO PROVIDE A RESPONSE |
| | LETTER ADDRESSING EACH ITEM ALONG WITH THE CITY |
| | RESUBMITTAL FORM. ADDITIONALLY, INSERT CORRECTED PAGES |
| | INTO THE ORIGINAL SUBMITTAL AND REMOVE OR VOID THE |
| | PREVIOUSLY REVIEWED SHEETS. |
| | |
| | SINCERELY, |
| | |
| | JOHN PEARSON |
| | ELECTRICAL PLANS EXAMINER |
| | 561-805-6746 |
| | [email protected] |
| | |
