Received a plan modification by fax 6/25/2005 from Matt Kahns. Approved. Returned PDF file by email 5/26/2005 and attached copy to file plans and permit.

The pendants in the soffit do not match the actual layout. Need to resubmit

Temp. occupancy given per bill alexander pending re-submittal of plans. Piping ok per re-submitted shop drawings.

hydro test passed 3/24/2005 3:57:02 PM

1. Calculations do not correlate with the plans for correct verification of meeting minimum code:
a. C-factor for Ductile Iron and C-900 is incorrect.
b. Calcs missing repair gate off the tee at point of connection from node 1 to (missing) node 2.
c. Node 10 is shown in two places.
d. Existing calcs (FP4 of 4) does not have piping sized or dimensioned (that can be verified and correlate with the calcs).
e. Gridded lines are connected on the 3" tees and not top of risers on 21, 22 and 23?
f. Nodes 90 to 210 and 200 to 201 are short on piping, etc.
g. Show the elevation drop dimensioning at nodes 90 to 210 and 200 to 201 on plan FP2 of 4. Note: Calculation dimensioning is wrong here and in the 1¼" riser nipples in the existing.
h. Node 203 is missing on the plans.

2. This new addition area appears to be trapped? Plans and calculation indicate a 6" drop, yet the main in the existing is shown as 15'-10 and 17'-0" and the new are both 13'-10" (plan FP2 of 4). Something is array in the information provided.

3. An auxiliary drain is shown (but lacks a location). Provide and show a required drain for this section of trapped piping in relation to where it will be piped out of this facility.

4. This facility had two separate fire sprinkler systems with two separate addressed fire alarms, connected. Each system will address notification and protection to a required 1 hour occupancy separation between the new addition and tenant address 8071. Riser rooms, Knox Boxes and control valves shall address the building location each is controlling. IFC Fire/Life Safety Inspector shall verify.

5. Plan FP2 of 4 trapeze hanger shows connection to a steel truss system? "General Note" plan FP2 and FP3 of 4 indicate the use of TJL's? Clarify and coordinate the correct hanger system incorporating in this permit and resubmit. Note: "Open Web Truss Sprinkler Details" for "TJL's" have top and bottom chords which are 1.5" x 3.5" machine stress rated lumber or Microllam® LVL, and require certain locations, size and predrilled pilot hole requirements for the top cord and specific attachment devices approved for the bottom chord. Sammy screw attachments devises were also shown on FP2 and 3, which each have specific manufacturers listing requirements for attaching lines and mains into certain types of material. Earthquake connection are also addressed by the truss manufacturer and shall be implemented on the plans meeting the minimum listing requirements. Trapeze hanger does not address correct principles for slippage or hanger size requirements for the single support hangers. None of these items addressed above have been sufficiently or correctly clarified to allow a cart-blanc approval as provided.

6. The designer incorporated an 8.0 K-factor orifice head in the calculations and addresses 5.6 K-factor heads on the plans? Sprinkler manufacturers data submittals were not addressing any specific sprinkler of 8 available! Designer shall clarify the heads using which also must correlate with the calculations. System as shown shall incorporate 8.0 K-factor for upright and pendants in this addition or resubmittals will be required.