InspectMind AI logo InspectMind
Electrical

Wastewater Lift Station: 372 Issues Flagged

Reconcile available fault current, equipment ratings, and motor voltages across electrical diagrams before equipment release.

372
Potential findings
1
Disciplines
3
Published examples
Start with $100 creditSee the findings

Enterprise & volume pricing

Anonymized review · Published 2026-09-16

What this review documents

Reconcile available fault current, equipment ratings, and motor voltages across electrical diagrams before equipment release.

The documented result is a set of review findings. This case study does not establish that corrections were completed or that savings were realized. The examples below were marked useful in the source review record; they have been paraphrased to remove identifying details.

Open the sample report →See pricing →Read our measurement definitions →

Key findings

Service interrupting rating is below listed fault current

Electrical

Critical

A meter/main is labeled 10 kAIC while the listed available fault current is 22,506 amperes.

Next step: Have the electrical engineer verify the fault-current study and applicable equipment or system rating.

Pump supply voltage changes between diagrams

Electrical

Critical

The one-line describes a 120/208-volt switchboard and 240-volt pump loads, while the drive control diagram shows a 480-volt supply from that switchboard.

Next step: Reconcile the utility supply, switchboard, drives, and motor utilization voltage.

Main switchboard rating needs reconciliation

Electrical

Critical

A second equipment callout lists 22 kAIC against the same 22,506-ampere available fault current.

Next step: Check the complete protective arrangement and revise the rating or fault-current value as appropriate.

Issue categories

Electrical
Electrical findings in the selected review excerpts.

Review details and suggested questions

Service interrupting rating is below listed fault current
Electrical
Critical

Summary: A meter/main is labeled 10 kAIC while the listed available fault current is 22,506 amperes.

Why it matters: This discrepancy leaves the design team or contractor with conflicting instructions. Resolve the governing requirement before relying on the affected documents.

Suggested next step: Have the electrical engineer verify the fault-current study and applicable equipment or system rating.

RFI draft: Have the electrical engineer verify the fault-current study and applicable equipment or system rating.

Pump supply voltage changes between diagrams
Electrical
Critical

Summary: The one-line describes a 120/208-volt switchboard and 240-volt pump loads, while the drive control diagram shows a 480-volt supply from that switchboard.

Why it matters: This discrepancy leaves the design team or contractor with conflicting instructions. Resolve the governing requirement before relying on the affected documents.

Suggested next step: Reconcile the utility supply, switchboard, drives, and motor utilization voltage.

RFI draft: Reconcile the utility supply, switchboard, drives, and motor utilization voltage.

Main switchboard rating needs reconciliation
Electrical
Critical

Summary: A second equipment callout lists 22 kAIC against the same 22,506-ampere available fault current.

Why it matters: This discrepancy leaves the design team or contractor with conflicting instructions. Resolve the governing requirement before relying on the affected documents.

Suggested next step: Check the complete protective arrangement and revise the rating or fault-current value as appropriate.

RFI draft: Check the complete protective arrangement and revise the rating or fault-current value as appropriate.

Anonymized, paraphrased excerpts from a completed project review. These three examples were marked “good catch” in the source review record; that label is feedback, not independent validation. The project total excludes duplicate-group members, dismissed findings, wrong finds, and insufficient-reference findings. Only selected excerpts are published. Customer identity, project address, source identifiers, and private drawings are omitted. Corrections, permit outcomes, and financial savings have not been independently verified. A qualified professional should assess each finding against the complete project documents.

Related case studies

Similar AI plan review results by project type and discipline. Browse all case studies

First $100 covered

Want this on your next set?

Start with the first $100 covered. See cited issues in hours, no call required.

  • Evidence-linked findings
  • 5+ issues or full refund
  • Results in hours

5+ issues or full refund · No demo required

View all case studies|See pricing