Aug 022016
 

Have you felt, there are rules, they are inconsistently applied or enforced?

Have you felt that your hands are tied, you are requested to follow rules, you obey, and yet no one adheres to the rules?

Have you felt that there are no consistent rules, a computer program becomes the appellant court, and questing the computer will not result in responses?

I have been lecturing new codes in multiple format (AIA, County of Orange, USC School of Architectural, IAPMO, ASPE) since 2010. There are many other outlets that are doing the same, yet, there are still contractors (in-state or out-of-state), inspectors, engineers, plan examiners, and architects that either partially of wholly ignore or do not enforce these laws.

 

In conversation with several plan examiners, the responses to the above questions were nearly the same. The level of work load to the staff level is overwhelming. The lack of increase in staff as well as in crease of laws and in responsibilities has taken a toll on the time allocated to all requirements.

 

The questions were raised: Can a boiler plate check lists published at the City Sites reveal the expectations of City from each plans. This can sample graphics in the web site provide a format that can be argued as a first step. The state has provided ample check lists, graphics, and narratives. Posting these on each City Web site provides a uniform base.  It is argued that, all cities do indicate their references to the applicable codes, i.e., the various parts of California Title-24. However, it is a wide gap from refereeing to a complete book to a simple graph or tabulations.

 

For example, the point of contention with for example lighting Title-24 is lighting controls, primary, secondary zones, the daylight harvesting sensors, motion sensors, Addressable Demand Response, the Controlled Receptacle (CR),  T24 triggering design changes,  … In an argument that the engineer has over designed the system will simply be removed by simple graphics. Of course there are some gray areas in the code, for example the CR is requested by plan checkers in the retail spaces, since cash register area, or the back office is considered “office”.

 

To this engineer now arguing the Green Code as well the Energy Compliance, education, education, and education, have been the three pillars. I believe the lack of education by all parties gives rise to the discussion above. Samples plan check lists and graphics and tabulations on each jurisdictions web sites, will alleviate some of the problems, if not all.

 

As everyone is aware, mandatory preparation to install solar panels, even if not installed. The interaction with Southern California Edison is through a computer program. The software clearly identifies the limits of your installation to the “nameplates” of the equipment. Ironically, the inverter nameplate limits the size of the system. Currently, system is only looking at the size of the total watts generated panels on the DC side versus the inverter controls the 10,000 watts on the AC side. This issue at hand is the Southern California Edison’s means of communication is limited, no scientific discussion can take place. The 800 number is packed with individuals that cannot or will not communicate on technical levels, and their web side questions and answers are simply boiler plate responses with no dialogue. Utility companies require to setup a “Plan Check” counter with real people.

 

Lastly, soon, it will me 30th years of engineering practice after ten years of academic life. Within this 40 year span, pragmatism has been foundation of the thinking process. If a device or a law has no pragmatic component, it must not exist. In other words, if one component nearly stops the natural migration of stores or offices from one place to another (called “tenant improvement”), then we must halt and review such laws.

The Public Utility Commission and profits of the utility companies possibly was the reasoning for existence of these laws. A shopping center or office complex with individual meters are continuously evolving. Either they are expanding due to growth or reducing due to  economic or efficiency. The original shell engineer attempts to create a very flexible engineering design for future tenants with many street addresses and future meter sockets. Each square feet of space is translated into a rentable space, therefore the electrical rooms are designed with highest efficiency. It is then nearly impossible to allocate additional room for additional meters, switchgears, years after original build-out. Generally speaking, each storefront bay (a uniquely designed to be isolated ~1500-2000 sqft) receives 200 amps of 208 v, 3 phase power.

 

What happens if a store occupies two or three stores. In nearly 29 years, adherence to the original shell engineers design was the answer. Unfortunately, from time to time, there are planners that will not permit and require one single meter for one tenant. They recite tariff laws and One meter- one tenant.

This where if a law is not pragmatic, it must not exist. In 29.7 years of practice, I have confronted this issue and fortunately, there were many pragmatic  planners and plan checkers that realize the history and facts. What happens, if you are confronted with individuals that simply will not listen.

 

This is where I need the assistance of the readers. Simply put: “Education, Education, Education.”

All of the above can be resolved in educating the players in the industry. Create a viable plan check section at Southern California Edison. Currently, you can only go through the office of the planners for an area. Communication with the Supervisors are not fruitful, since the supervisory is a rotating position among the planners, and seldom, they overturn, their future bosses’ position. SCE needs one central command to review and may be provide universal resolutions.

Readers must inquire the jurisdictions with a uniform plan check list that they expect the plan checkers will be looking. Currently all cities are purchasing plan check software with boiler plate questions.

The argument must be in conversations among BOCA, ICC, IAEI, IAPMO, Plan Checkers, SCE Planners, Building Officials, and Inspectors during coffee breaks, plan checkers during lunch hours, and every other venue.

Saum Nour

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.