• Welcome to The Building Code Forum

    Your premier resource for building code knowledge.

    This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.

    Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.

    Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.

Temporary set-up?

  • Thread starter Thread starter SCBO1
  • Start date Start date
  • Featured
SCBO1

SCBO1

REGISTERED
Joined
Oct 28, 2009
Messages
4,610
Location
MID WEST
Is there anything in the code to allow experimental set-up of equipment under a temporary permit and then it's removal?

I have a plant that produces some Co2 and they want to reduce that CO2. There is experimental equipment to be installed and I was asked if a permit would be required. There's no GC involved and the equipment would be installed to see if it works and then it could be removed. I have seen bits an pieces of the proposed plans but nothing is stamped, no cost estimate provided and no MEP plans provided. There was no talk of third-party inspections.

Q. Is there something in the code that allows the Building Official to allow experimental construction?
Q. Have you issued permits for anything similar to this?
 
If it is equipment that is not really regulated by code, you just check the electrical or other utility connections.....
 
Last edited:
Is this experimental equipment free-standing, or does it interface with the building's HVAC system? If so, it's addressed by the mechanical code and would need a permit.
 
If there is a large apparatus there needs to be an assured support. There really is no reason to allow an installation that would be less than permanent in safety or stability.
 
Experimental application.

Right now I have a design for a 2-ft slab of concrete that with tanks and crap like you would see at an oil refinery
 
I had this situation on an apartment project in California. They installed a new heat pump HVAC + hot water system retrofit inside one apartment to confirm proof-of-concept and compare energy consumption vs. the old existing system on an adjacent apartment. It was a one year installation, after which they removed the equipment and abandoned the refrigerant lines.
The city required full plan check for the MEP additions/alterations, and they plan checked the shed that was installed on the patio to house the equipment. It did not matter that it was only going to be there for a year.
I think it was appropriate to plan check and permit it, given that affected basic code requirements for heating and hot water supply for the tenant.
 
Yikes said:
I had this situation on an apartment project in California. They installed a new heat pump HVAC + hot water system retrofit inside one apartment to confirm proof-of-concept and compare energy consumption vs. the old existing system on an adjacent apartment. It was a one year installation, after which they removed the equipment and abandoned the refrigerant lines.
The city required full plan check for the MEP additions/alterations, and they plan checked the shed that was installed on the patio to house the equipment. It did not matter that it was only going to be there for a year.
I think it was appropriate to plan check and permit it, given that affected basic code requirements for heating and hot water supply for the tenant.
Click to expand...
But that is HVAC for the building...This is more "process equipment" I think....
 
If it works are they gonna keep it? At which point it might become permanent? Then what are you going to do to get permit and inspection?

Can you just use 108 of the IBC to give them a temporary permit? Then, if they go past 180 days you can decide to extend the temporary permit 180 days or make them get a normal permit?
 
It has been over a year, and they removed it. I have not heard the results of the study. The abandoned the refrigerant line set, re-installed the old HVAC equipment, and since the shed was done under permit it was made a permanent improvement, and functions as a storage shed for the tenant.
 
steveray said:
You always bury the results when they don't support your argument...
Click to expand...
Huh? I wasn't arguing anything.
I said in post #9 the city required full plan check, as it is were a permanent installation, even though it was known to all that it would be removed after a year. That was my point, and I said I supported the city's approach.
 
ICE said:
2 ft how? square or thick?
Click to expand...
2-ft Thick concrete slab.
BN4537 said:
Can you just use 108 of the IBC to give them a temporary permit
Click to expand...
BN, Very helpful, I'll try this route section3103

Lots of electrical, tanks, piping, stairs and platforms with nothing called out as to what the tanks are for.
Asked for more more detail, there's nothing stamped!
I asked will there be connections to the public water supply requiring backflow devises?
I don't think a Third-party could inspect this, not enough information
 
SCBO1 said:
2-ft Thick concrete slab.
Click to expand...
Gotta wonder what they would do if it were a permanent installation. Sounds to me that engineers of several stripes are required and the fire dept. In LA County there is a separate division of Public Works that handles oil & gas. There is another group for tanks. Perhaps reaching out to the EPA is in order. The company that owns this stuff should know what agency regulates them. Clearly it is more than the average building dept. would take on alone.
 
Yikes said:
Huh? I wasn't arguing anything.
I said in post #9 the city required full plan check, as it is were a permanent installation, even though it was known to all that it would be removed after a year. That was my point, and I said I supported the city's approach.
Click to expand...
I was speaking about the assumed heat pump folks…not you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top