INSP-Final Inspection | 7/25/2006 | 7/26/2006 | 7/26/2006 | P | PASS |
Troy Cobbley
|
|
|
Permit finaled
|
INSP-Final Inspection | 7/7/2006 | 7/7/2006 | 7/7/2006 | P | FAIL |
Troy Cobbley
|
|
|
Provide smoke detection for the Liebert unit and test the remaining two induct smoke detectors.
|
INSP-Final Inspection | 7/5/2006 | 7/5/2006 | 7/6/2006 | P | CANC |
Troy Cobbley
|
|
|
earl ; Phone #: ###-#### Internet Inspection Request from: Marsha Smylie
|
FIR-Aging Inspection | 7/3/2006 | 7/3/2006 | 7/5/2006 | | NR |
Troy Cobbley
|
|
|
work is in progress
|
Inspection Record Card- Fire | 4/3/2006 | | 4/3/2006 | | DONE |
|
|
|
|
Permit Ready to Issue | | | 4/3/2006 | | DONE |
|
|
|
|
Telephone call | | | 4/3/2006 | | DONE |
|
|
|
called ###-#### and told John that permit is ready and fee
|
Issue and Print Permit | | | 4/3/2006 | | DONE |
|
|
|
|
Plan assigned to (Mary) | 2/2/2006 | | 3/31/2006 | | DONE |
|
|
|
|
Alarm Plan Check | | | 3/31/2006 | | PASS |
|
|
|
Approved pending field inspection of fire alarm permit comments.
|
PLANS/APPL TAKEN TO FRONT DESK | | | 3/31/2006 | | DONE |
|
|
|
|
Alarm Plan Check | | | 3/29/2006 | | FAIL |
|
|
|
FACP battery calculations are incorrect. Verification is required for the duct smoke detector power (24VDC as the battery calcs show, or 120 VAC as stated by John). If the duct detectors are powered by the panel, the batteries will need to be upgraded and a compatibility listing for the smoke to the FACP is required. If the duct smoke detetors are 120VAC powered, a revised battery calculation is required.
|
Telephone call | | | 3/24/2006 | | DONE |
|
|
|
Called John Lopez, he was out of the office for the day, I said I would call back on Monday.
|
Telephone call | | | 3/23/2006 | | DONE |
|
|
|
Request to John Lopez for smoke detector cut sheets and compatibility listing for the RP1000 panel. He said he would fax them to Boise City.
|
Telephone call | | | 3/23/2006 | | DONE |
|
|
|
Left a message that the battery calculations for the main FACP indicated an upgrade of the batteries if the in-duct dtectors are to be powered by the panel. A compatibility listing would be requried.
|
Plan resubmittals received | | | 3/10/2006 | | DONE |
|
|
|
|
Meeting | | | 3/9/2006 | | DONE |
|
|
|
Don from Russell brought plans to clear up the issues. See the comments under "fire alarm permit", dated 3/9
|
Alarm Plan Check | | | 3/9/2006 | | FAIL |
|
|
|
COMPLETE RESUBMITTAL IS REQUIRED (2 sets and all documentation). No written comments. The following needs to be addressed:
1) Define the entire space of the existing double interlock pre-action system.
2) Re-define the initiating devices to report to the appropriate panel. (unless the initiating device is in the pre-action space, it should NOT report to the pre-action releasing panel.)
3) Ensure there is a smoke detector over the RP1001 panel.
4) Evaluate the type of detectors being installed in specific spaces.
These comments have been faxed to Jon Van Stone (E2) and John Lopez (Fire Sentry)
|
Case Summary | | | 3/9/2006 | | |
|
|
|
|
Telephone call | | | 3/7/2006 | | DONE |
|
|
|
Called John Lopez. Asked why heats were installed as opposed to smokes, (Earl stated it was probably because of the magnet.) then why would you install a smoke detector in the space?
Is there a barrier between the two rooms under the floor?
|
Telephone call | | | 3/3/2006 | | DONE |
|
|
|
Shawn Meador called, the smoke detector is to be placed under the floor. Does not know if there is a barrier, does not know why there are heat detectors existing.
|
Telephone call | | | 3/1/2006 | | DONE |
|
|
|
Phone message from Shawn Meador E2, I called him back and left a message.
|
Telephone call | | | 2/17/2006 | | DONE |
|
|
|
Left a message for Jon Van Stone to call me regarding the design of the system.
|
Application received | | | 2/2/2006 | | |
|
|
|
|