Plan Review, Specifications, and Permits

With reference to the subject of:

Plan Review, Specifications, and Permits often required by local, city, or state electrical departments, I ask if they are considered as public record, and if they are to be kept on the job for review by city official's during the construction phase of a project?

The "As Built" drawings are not usually available until after the job, and are they also required to be made available to the AHJ and are also public records.

Keep in mind that the NEC says "if required" in:

Quote

215.5 Diagrams of Feeders.
If required by the authority having jurisdiction, a diagram showing feeder details shall be provided prior to the installation of the feeders. Such a diagram shall show the area in square feet of the building or other structure supplied by each feeder, the total computed load before applying demand factors, the demand factors used, the computed load after applying demand factors, and the size and type of conductors to be used.

How many AHJ's would not require this information and why would anyone have a problem with this?

If the plans and specifications show the installation to be inspected, and have undergone an electrical plan check, and the electrical permit was issued, I believe that they must be accessible for review at all times.

Any other opinions are welcomed.

Joe,
You're well aware that plan review and inspection has been my job for a long time, it is taking me a while to get used to not doing it. In VA, the stamped copies are supposed to be on the job available to the inspector during inspections. All agencies around here have the last big red stamp that says "All installations must comply with the current edition of the VAUSBC", kind of a catch all.

While working for private engineering firms, I did not always have to have them since I was the one who did the review, but I would feel uncomfortable doing this in a public inspection forum. That said, lots of inspections get made here without anyone checking, part of my rancor of "too many inspections, too little time" and the new combo system everyone has gone to.

The fire alarm stuff I sent the pic of has not undergone an inspection, nuff said, but the chillers I recently sent in had indeed undergone the entire process, no excuse there except either lack of knowledge, or time. I believe it shows a common problem in the process.

Thanks George for your comments, and they are so true!

The issues related to combination inspectors is a sore spot in my mind, because I have had to go out on the job during my career and explain why the "copper pipe" was not allowed for the fuses here!
[Linked Image from joetedesco.com]

Some will indicate that the "dummy not fuses" are are available, but using them would probably be a mistake (hazard) waiting to happen if someone decided to use them here ... "DUH! it are a dummy fuse like I are ?&^%$#$@%"

In my mind, to even think about installing them is a big mistake ...... now let's look and listen for the fireworks to begin from the bystanders here, and maybe even the from some of the long time LURKERS!!!

Heck Joe,
I'd let 'em use 'em........ the minute they could prove their fuse capacity and flame retard point........ and there is of course 110 where the fuse coordination study MIGHT be a bit touchy with the solid pipe [Linked Image]

Comment on Joe’s combination-starter insides picture: the “dummy” fuses look “field fabricated” from copper tubing. There’s one problem—tubing is mis-sized, for the ferrule diameter of 240V Class-RK5 is 9/16-inch, and 600V Class-J is 13/16-inch. Copper tubing OD is ½, 5/8, ¾ or 7/8. whick will distort, or require distorting, ‘NEC’ fuse clips to work. Believe it or not, Busmman (and maybe others) make true brass dummy fuses. They may not be listed, but they fill a specifc need, and are obviously marked for their intended purpose.

It’s come up at E-C.net before, but I can’t find it in a search.

See page 2 at http://www.prime-electronics.com.au...Accessories%20&%20Display%20Kits.pdf They’re kinda’ hidden for being online, but this link looks like page 184 of their catalog. Bussmann Class-R(!) “Dummy Fuses” [N.B.: catalog numbers NTN-R (30-400 amp) and NTS-R (30-600 amp) ] The point is, there is a product made to exactly fit the need—agreed under special circumstances where there is clearly properly-rated overcurrent protection upstream.

They will safely convert a fusible device to non-fused, the same as a non-fused combination starter, or (in some cases) where a fuse trailer block cannot be removed to reconnect the magnetic-starter "L" leads directly to the lower terminals of the disconnect switch—in place of the top fuse clips.

Joe:
Back to your original question...

Here in New Jersey:
Signed (approved) plans are to be located at the jobsite at all times, and be available to all AHJ's.
(NO PLANS, NO INSPECTIONS, and a red sticker)
The above applies to all permitted jobs that are checked "plans reviewed & approved" on the permit application.

Yes, feeder, service, and all other load calc's are required for plan review and approvals.

Enforcement of the above varies by locality, although it is part of the State UCC. Again, sometimes it is a case of to many inspections, and to little time, sad but unfortunatley true in the real world.

John

John:

Thanks for getting back on track, I appreciate your reply and support for the comments I made.

I just hope everyone will agree when it comes to the plans, specs, and permits.

Some do have, and other's don't have any formal plan check and some people get away with a sketch on a brown paper bag!

[This message has been edited by Joe Tedesco (edited 06-16-2003).]

There are a lot of areas where the permit is just a fee you pay to the city. No plan review, no inspection, no nothing, just a permit fee and the permit passed on to the county so that the real estate taxes can be collected. some of these areas have adopted the NEC, but there is no enforcement. It becomes a problem for the building owner who does not understand the electrical system. No one is making sure that it is installed to code.
As far as the "dummy" fuse, the most common application would be for the grounded phase of a corner grounded delta system. It would have to be designed and instended to be installed in place of a real fuse. As Bjarney pointed out there is a problem with using copper pipe or tubing as far as the size.
Don

Joe:
To delve in a little deeper...
Doing plan review, we receive a substantial number of "homeowner" permit applications, ranging from installing a receptacle, to pools, to service changes, and everything inbetween.
The homeowner is required/requested to submit a "sketch" with some basic pertinent info on what they propose to do. Some get it "right", some get a phone call requesting further info. Wiring methods, box sizes, circuit layout, etc. Talking to them on the phone can provide some input to their capability to do the work. If they appear to be totally "lost" we can reject the permit application, and have them obtain the services of a licensed EC. (This is within the boundries of the NJ Uniform Construction Code)

We rather they "mess-up" on paper, rather than have to rip out what they do/did wrong.

Talk about brown bag drawings????

John

Great idea guys.

Now would one of you please refer me to the electrical orginization that would back this, bring it to individual states legislature, and see it through?

Maybe HotLine1 could post the part about the plans, etc., here that are in the NJ Uniform Construction Code?

I didn't look at the new Article 80 in the NEC, but i'll bet there is something there for us to look at.

Sparky, How would a Bill be introduced in your State?

Quote

Sparky, How would a Bill be introduced in your State?

short of activism, how would it in any state?

i'd really like to read and/or hear about some of our trade associations taking a political position, otherwise how can one gian advocay?

Quote

Doing plan review, we receive a substantial number of "homeowner" permit applications, ranging from installing a receptacle, to pools, to service changes, and everything in between.
The homeowner is required/requested to submit a "sketch" with some basic pertinent info on what they propose to do. Some get it "right"

I'm just a homeowner, so:
A year or so ago, here in northern NJ, I visited town hall and saw the electrical inspector at his office. Showed him a sketch (not on a brown paper bag) of what I wanted to do and asked a few code related questions. He said that I didn't need to go as so far as to use AC (BX) cable, but it would be okay. Rough inspection only thing I missed was the green wire pigtails one should have to connect the metal boxes to the green ground screw on outlets. Went and bought some, put them in, and later that day I got passed.
Final inspection I passed, though he didn't like the Hubbell industrial grade outlets I used ("hard to insert plugs in"). I'm sure he inspected my work closer than that of an EC that he routinely sees the work of and knows what to expect.

This was a kitchen remodel, permits cost
$75 each for electrical and plumbing, and our taxes went up about $200 per year.

Gee wa2ise, sticky receptacles?? well i guess you missed mentioning those high end hubbels in your plan review [Linked Image]

, sound like that $75 went a ways there though....

If anything else this forum has shown me, it's the amazing disparity the electrical trade has in the USA.

The trade associations seem particularly moot on this (you fella's better connected feel free to correct me)

sooner or later, if a doctrine is not universally accepted and enforced as such it simply becomes another of those 'spittin' on the sidewalk' legal trivialities....

I've seriously considered dropping out of the IAEI over this, what's the use?

meanwhile my 02', usually sun bathing on my dashboard has the ordacity to claim itself 'international' [Linked Image]

the gall.

Joe,

I agree with John. As an AHJ, if a contractor comes in with a permit for a new kitchen, I wouldn't be too worried about plans. Most times I know the contractor and his work. They know the code and it is correct ( Maybe a small problem) on the rough inspection. If a homeowner walks in the door, I ask for a skecth, (Like John said.) So that I help the homeowner (HO)get it right on paper, so that when I go out on rough inspection, he has the job done correctly. I will try to help the HO get the work layed out correctly and ask him if he/she has any questions. As for big jobs, there is usually a set of prints in the GC's trailer. If there are any questions, I tell the electrical contractor (EC) to check the print. What does the print call for? Or what does the Arch/ or EE call for? If it meets NEC, then we follow the print.

HE

Harold,
Monday I rejected plans for a new house in Irvington. The arch's plans called for a 3/8" ground rod, had no outside lighting by doors, outlets missing in kitchen and bathrooms,and outlets in the garage marked (but GFI protected). Sometimes get better drawing on paperbags!

Grump & everyone else:
I didn't delve into the "pro" plans....
Oh yeah, there are good ones that the review goes thru smoothly, and there are bad ones. Then there are "nightmares", & "bad dreams". Had one architect come into the office at least 12 times, & they still can't do a load calc right. Never mind the panel schedules, & everything else for 20 offices.

And a note to the HO's, we will assist you, but by LAW we cannot design your jobs.

John

From original post... "The "As Built" drawings are not usually available until after the job, and are they also required to be made available to the AHJ and are also public records."

The public record phrase caught my eye...
If I want to rob my local bank, could I go to the city and examine the plans for the bank?; assuming of course they pulled a permit and had a plan review.

Let call them "construction Documents" instead and look at your States requirements here:

Quote

Minnesota Rules, Table of Chapters

Table of contents for Chapter 1300

1300.0130 CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS.

Subpart 1. Submittal documents. Construction documents,
special inspection and structural observation programs, and
other data shall be submitted in one or more sets with each
application for a permit.

Exception: The building official may waive the
submission of construction documents and other data if
the nature of the work applied for is such that
reviewing of construction documents is not necessary
to obtain compliance with the code.

The building officer may require plans or other data be
prepared according to the rules of the Board of Architecture,
Engineering, Land Surveying, Landscape Architecture, Geoscience
and Interior Design, chapter 1800, and Minnesota Statutes,
sections 326.02 to 326.15, and other state laws relating to plan
and specification preparation by occupational licenses. If
special conditions exist, the building official may require
additional construction documents to be prepared by a licensed
design professional.

Subp. 2. Information on construction documents.
Construction documents shall be dimensioned and drawn upon
suitable material. Electronic media documents are permitted to
be submitted when approved by the building official.
Construction documents shall be of sufficient clarity to
indicate the location, nature, and extent of the work proposed
and show in detail that it will conform to the code and relevant
laws, ordinances, rules, and regulations, as determined by the
building official.

Subp. 3. Manufacturer's installation instructions. When
required by the building official, manufacturer's installation
instructions for construction equipment and components regulated
by the code, shall be available on the job site at the time of
inspection.

Subp. 4. Site plan. The construction documents submitted
with the application for permit shall be accompanied by a site
plan drawn to scale, showing the size and location of new
construction and existing structures on the site, distances from
lot lines, the established street grades, and the proposed
finished grades, and it shall be drawn according to an accurate
boundary line survey. In the case of demolition, the site plan
shall show construction to be demolished and the location and
size of existing structures and construction that are to remain
on the site or plot. The building official may waive or modify
the requirement for a site plan if the application for permit is
for alteration or repair or when otherwise warranted.

Subp. 5. Examination of documents. The building official
shall examine or cause to be examined the accompanying
construction documents to ascertain whether the construction
indicated and described complies with the requirements of the
code and other pertinent laws and ordinances.

Subp. 6. Approval of construction documents. If the
building official issues a permit, the construction documents
shall be approved in writing or by stamp, as "Reviewed for Code
Compliance." One set of the construction documents that were
reviewed shall be retained by the building official. The other
set shall be returned to the applicant, kept at the site of the
work, and open to inspection by the building official or an
authorized representative.

Subp. 7. Previous approvals. The code in effect at the
time of application shall be applicable.

Subp. 8. Phased approval. The building official may issue
a permit for the construction of foundations or any other part
of a building or structure before the construction documents for
the whole building or structure have been submitted, provided
that adequate information and detailed statements have been
filed complying with pertinent requirements of the code. The
holder of the permit for the foundation or other parts of a
building or structure shall proceed at the holder's own risk
with the building operation and without assurance that a permit
for the entire structure will be granted.

Subp. 9. Design professional in responsible charge.

A. The building official may require the owner to
engage and designate on the building permit application a
licensed design professional who shall act as the licensed
design professional in responsible charge. If the circumstances
require, the owner shall designate a substitute licensed design
professional in responsible charge who shall perform the duties
required of the original licensed design professional in
responsible charge. The building official shall be notified in
writing by the owner if the licensed design professional in
responsible charge is changed or is unable to continue to
perform the duties.

The licensed design professional in responsible charge
shall be responsible for reviewing and coordinating submittal
documents prepared by others, including phased and deferred
submittal items, for compatibility with the design of the
building.

When structural observation is required by the code, the
inspection program shall name the individual or firms who are to
perform structural observation and describe the stages of
construction at which structural observation is to occur.

B. For the purposes of this part, deferred submittals
are defined as those portions of the design that are not
submitted at the time of the application and that are to be
submitted to the building official within a specified period.

Deferral of any submittal items shall have the prior
approval of the building official. The licensed design
professional in responsible charge shall list the deferred
submittals on the construction documents for review by the
building official.

Submittal documents for deferred submittal items shall be
submitted to the licensed design professional in responsible
charge who shall review them and forward them to the building
official with a notation indicating that the deferred submittal
documents have been reviewed and that they have been found to be
in general conformance with the design of the building. The
deferred submittal items shall not be installed until their
design and submittal documents have been approved by the
building official.

C. Work regulated by the code shall be installed
according to the reviewed construction documents, and any
changes made during construction that are not in compliance with
the approved construction documents shall be resubmitted for
approval as an amended set of construction documents.

STAT AUTH: MS s 16B.59; 16B.61; 16B.64

HIST: 27 SR 1471
Current as of 03/26/03

Who robs banks in Minnesota anyway!

The Younger Brothers,Sept. 7 1876, Northfield Minnosota. [Linked Image]