The remainder of overhead rough-in at the hard lid areas are good for cover, one head does not meet 8.6.3.2.3 as discussed.

Plans failed for the third time. Review comments faxed to the sprinkler contractor and to the building contractor (per Jerry's request).

left mess that plan failed and needs picked up

Plan review failed. Comments faxed to contractor.

1. Room designations are not shown, such as the service area and the servicing area which are referenced in the Project Notes #4, #5 and #6. Show room designations.

2. The room hazard ratings are not shown such as Light or Ordinary Hazard which is referenced in the Project Review Note #4. Show hazard locations/areas.

3. Project Note #5 and #6 give maximum sq. ft. areas of 130sq. ft. but per the permit application 100 sq. ft. maximum was the original design. Per NFPA table 8.7.2.2.1 Ordinary Hazard, Combustible Finish, you are limited to 80 sq. ft.. With Limited Combustible Finish, you are limited to 100 sq. ft.. for the sidewall heads. Also the two pendant heads in the room with the slatted ceiling are spaced at 156 sq. ft.. Provide the correct coverage for the sidewall and pendant heads. If sprinkler spacing is to exceed the original calculations provide new hydraulic calculations for spacing verification.

4. The exposed duct appears to be blocking the existing sidewall sprinkler coverage. Provide verification that the sidewall heads spacing is taking into account this obstruction. See NFPA 13, 8.7.5.

5. No information has been provided on ceiling construction or ceiling heights for the corridor and room with the "slatted ceiling". This plan reviewer can not tell if the pendant sprinklers located on either side of this corridor are providing coverage or are blocked by soffits that appear to border the corridor. If the "slatted ceiling" is below the duct work shown is there adequate coverage for the "pockets" around the duct work? Provide verification of ceiling construction, heights and proper coverag.

6. If the ceiling is indeed "slatted" do the openings below the sprinkler heads meet NFPA, A.8.6.5.2.2.?

7. The pendant spray coverage in the room near the duct chase is blocked by a stub wall. Provide coverage for the entire space.

8. What appears to be a duct chase does not show sprinkler coverage. A door is shown for access. Chase must meet NFPA 13, 8.14.1.2.14.

9. Several sprinkler heads are located near heat ducts at the stairwell. rovide verification that the heads don't need to be intermediate degree rated as per NFPA 13, table 8.3.2.5(a). This will apply to the existing sidewalls near the exposed duct as well.

10. No hanger is shown for the dry pendant arm over.
Provide hanger per NFPA 13, 9.2.3.5.1.

11. The existing sidewall head, located in the upper left hand corner of the page, appears to be blocked by duct/hood. If this is a hood, is it mounted at the ceiling? If this is duct work does it penetrate the ceiling and block the spray of the ead? Provide verification of coverage and information as to what this obstruction is that is shown on the plans.

12. There is a concealed space shown between the room with the dry pendant and the surrounding walls. This will require protection per NFPA 13, 8.14.1.1 as well as any area above that is concealed. Provide verification of adequate coverage. Is the room a cooler?

13. The new upright sprinkler head located near the top of the page is 8'-9" off of the wall at the top of the page. There are dashed lines indicating a soffit or possibly some mechanical device on the plans. Provide verification that sprinkler coverage is not required in this area or provide the proper coverage.