INSP-Final Inspection | 3/3/2006 | 3/3/2006 | 3/3/2006 | P | PASS |
Troy Cobbley
|
|
|
Permit finaled
|
INSP-Final Inspection | 2/16/2006 | 2/16/2006 | 2/16/2006 | P | PART |
Forrest France
|
|
|
The following items remain for final, need to provide for requirements of note #24 on plan review comments regarding one hour riser room construction or PIV installation, perform the forward flow test for the backflow prevention device, provide and attatch hydraulic calc. sticker to the riser.
|
INSP-Sprinkler Rough-in/Hydro | 2/9/2006 | 2/10/2006 | 2/10/2006 | A | PART |
Forrest France
|
|
|
Hydrostatic test of the overhead fire sprinkler passed.
|
INSP-Sprinkler Rough-in | 12/2/2005 | 12/5/2005 | 12/5/2005 | A | PART |
Forrest France
|
|
|
Verified the unsprinklered cavity at the west dormer has been completely filled with noncombustible insulation per the exception of NFPA 13 8.14.1.2.7. Overhead rough-in is good for cover.
|
INSP-Sprinkler Rough-in/Hydro | 11/18/2005 | 11/18/2005 | 11/18/2005 | P | PART |
Forrest France
|
|
|
Overhead fire sprinkler rough-in is okay to cover pending verification of coverage for the dormer at the west roof that is not currrently protected, also will need to verify no obstructions develop after the insulation is installed at the roof.
|
Plan assigned to (Bill) | 9/2/2005 | | 11/9/2005 | | DONE |
|
|
|
|
Sprinkler Plan Check | 10/17/2005 | | 11/9/2005 | | PASS |
Bill Alexander
|
|
|
|
PLANS/APPL TAKEN TO FRONT DESK | | | 11/9/2005 | | DONE |
|
|
|
|
Permit Ready to Issue | | | 11/9/2005 | | DONE |
|
|
|
|
Inspection Record Card- Fire | 11/9/2005 | | 11/9/2005 | | DONE |
|
|
|
|
Telephone call | | | 11/9/2005 | | DONE |
|
|
|
Called Brad & told him permit ready & fees on 11-9-05 @ 2:18 by BAS
|
Issue and Print Permit | | | 11/9/2005 | | DONE |
|
|
|
|
Plan resubmittals received | | | 10/17/2005 | | DONE |
|
|
|
|
Telephone call | | | 10/13/2005 | | DONE |
|
|
|
called and left messge w/Crystal for Jeff Anderson that permit failed and can pick up
|
Telephone call | | | 10/13/2005 | | DONE |
|
|
|
customer for treasure valley fire protection picked up plans
|
Sprinkler Plan Check | 9/21/2005 | | 10/12/2005 | | FAIL |
Bill Alexander
|
|
|
1. "Reception Area" system calculations:
a. Test area/density head pressure is not for 225-ft/2 spacing as designed, but for a 7 psi minimum head pressure.
b. Calc Nodes 17 to 40 has a butterfly valve for fittings used.
Revise and resubmit a design that meets NFPA 13-14.4.
2. Plan provided have nodes, pipe lengths and dimensioning blended with lines throughout this plan, making it very difficult, if not impossible to interpret for verification of IFC fire protection installation code. Revise and submit plans that are clear and legible.
3. "N.T.S." for the only section view is unacceptable. Provide section view with a correct and identifiable scale.
4. All pendant sprinkler in this facility are using "401" Escutcheons? Provide clarification if there are some obstructions. Plans show "boxes," yet section provides nothing to clarify what they are? Provide plans that include information relating to fire sprinkler design requirements.
5. Correct sprinkler head legend, Reliable F3QR SIN number.
6. Reduction area used in calculations Area #2 is identified as "System #1, Area 1 (on plan FP-2).
7. Calc Area #3, does not meet the minimum remote area of operation required to be verified per 11.2.3.1.5 and does not qualify for the "Room Design Method" in 11.2.3.3. Plan lacks enough detail to determine appropriate separation requirements (addressed in Table 11.2.3.1.1 = 60 minutes) and would not be allowed with an "accordion slider," therefore area of operation must be extended to the area required in 11.2.3.1.5 (15oo-ft/2 with allowable allowance for ceiling reduction incorporating Q.R. sprinkler per 11.2.3.2.3.1). Please revise and resubmit.
8. Address seismic requirements per NFPA 13-14.1.3(39). Include locations and type.
9. Data submittal provided for backflow is identifying a 4" and metric flow?
|
Sprinkler Plan Check | 9/26/2005 | | 10/12/2005 | | FAIL |
Bill Alexander
|
|
|
1. "RECEPTION AREA", Test area/density head pressure is not for 225-ft/2 spacing as designed, but for a 7 psi minimum operating head pressure. .10/14.62 = 146-ft/2 maximum area per head verifying and designers head spacing exceed this.
2. "RECEPTION AREA" design is flawed. Ceiling slope exceeds 2 in 12, so area of operation must be increased by 30 percent without revising the density when quick-response sprinklers are used.
|
Miscellaneous action | | | 10/12/2005 | | DONE |
|
|
|
Taken the failed review documents to the permit desk for returning adn required desing corrections
|
Miscellaneous action | | | 10/5/2005 | | DONE |
|
|
|
Requested Early Start. 1st review failed, 9/21/2005. 2nd resubmittal received 9/23/2005, failed 10/12/2005. Early Start was approved per attached requirements.
|
Plan resubmittals received | | | 9/23/2005 | | DONE |
|
|
|
|
Miscellaneous action | | | 9/21/2005 | | DONE |
|
|
|
I have taken the failed review documents to the permit desk for returning
|
Telephone call | | | 9/21/2005 | | DONE |
|
|
|
Left message for Jeff that plans failed and need picked up///9/21/05 12:05pm BAS
|
Case Summary | | | 9/2/2005 | | DONE |
|
|
|
|
Application received | | | 9/2/2005 | | |
|
|
|
|