Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: 3RD PARTY REVIEW-REVISION/OTHER
Permit Number - T03CM02796
Review Name: 3RD PARTY REVIEW-REVISION/OTHER
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 09/08/2003 | STANTEC | 3RD PARTY REVIEW-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | SCOPE OF REVIEW: The scope of this review covers electrical for Wings I and J only. All features were checked only to the extent allowed by the submittal provided. All portions of the project are assumed to meet or will meet other departmental requirements, conditions and concerns before permit approval. The project was reviewed under the City of Tucson's local amendments to UBC Chapter 11. All accessibility requirements must be identified and detailed on the plans according to those rules and guidelines. GENERAL: q The review of wings I and J was begun at the one line diagram and fault current calculations, as was done with the electrical reviews of all of the previous wings. The electrical review was suspended due to the quantity and magnitude of the errors and discrepancies found in just the first few feeder circuits of the one line diagram and corresponding fault current calculations. q The electrical review comments regarding panel schedule coordination and load calculations from the previous wings should be reviewed with respect to wings I and J. q This review counts as the first review of wings I and J. Please thoroughly review and quality check the drawings before making the second submittal. q Below are the issues that were found prior to the suspension of the review. ELECTRICAL: q On Sheet E3.1, two main circuit breakers are shown in series for SES-1; one labeled with "GFCI" and the other with "4000A - 3P". Please clarify. q On Sheet E3.1, circuits 603, 403, 804, 224, 224, and 225 are not defined in the feeder, conduit and conductor schedule. q On Sheet E3.1, circuit conductor feeding MCC-1 is not properly protected by the 600A feeder circuit breaker in SES-1, if 403 has a 400A capacity. q On Sheet E3.1, the conductor feeding MCC-2 is not properly protected by the 225A feeder circuit breaker in SES-1. q On Sheet E3.1, show the AIC rating of the chiller VFDs. q On Sheet E3.1, why is the normal feeder to ATS #2 a different circuit type than the feeder to DLHP from ATS #2? q On Sheet E3.2, the conductor sizes shown in the "Fault Calculations for Service Entrance Section 1" for fault points 28, 29, 30 and 45 do not match the conductor sizes shown on the one line diagram on Sheet E3.1. -End of Review- |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 09/08/2003 | ELAINE ROSE | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |