Utility NOC application processing that checks every drawing against every asset buffer before a no-objection certificate is signed
Every NOC checked against every asset buffer, issued inside 2 working days.
See one case, screen by screen ↓Every building, excavation or road permit near cables, pipes and substations needs the utility's no-objection certificate, and in a growing city they arrive by the hundred every working day. For each one the NOC officer finds the plot on the GIS, opens the PDF site plan in another window, lines the two up on the plot corners and measures to each cable and main. On a 1:500 drawing, 2 mm misread is a metre on the ground — the difference between outside and inside a cable's buffer.
Under the clock, only the site plan gets checked. The basement, shoring and logistics drawings are where the clashes are — a secant pile wall beside an 11 kV cable, a dewatering well near a trunk main, a crane jib over a substation — and they are the sheets that get skipped. Conditions are copied from the last similar letter, so a water-main clause lands in an electricity-only letter and the trial-pit condition is missing where it matters. Applications go back for clarification, decisions slip past the standard, and some sites that hold a valid NOC still strike a cable.
Estimated split of one application's working days, by hand and with the solution. The totals are the demo utility's medians: 4.6 working days to a decision before, 0.9 since the agents went live; the split between steps is our estimate.
Six agents read the drawings, find every clash and draft the conditions; engineers concur and the NOC officer signs.
Halden Pryce Developments wants to build Jumana Creek Residences — two basements, ground and 14 floors — on Plot 417-0263 in Jumana Creek. Its consultant, Orrin & Varga Engineering Consultants, submitted NOC-26-041873 on the portal on Mon 12 Oct at 09:14. The 2-working-day clock runs to Wed 14 Oct, 09:14. Here is what happens, screen by screen, in the working solution.
Samira's queue shows 14 applications; the team has 165. Each is a bar from receipt to its 2-working-day deadline, with the agents' recommendation beside it: 9 no objection, 3 with conditions, 1 clarification, 1 objection. Two have under 5 hours left — the Marsa Pump House upgrade, with an objection proposed, and Sidra Villas, waiting for the water network engineer.
“Bar = received → due · line = now · dot = agents finished”
She opens Jumana Creek Residences. The applicant's site plan A-101 rev C is the screen, with Lumina's 132 kV, 11 kV and LV cables, the trunk and distribution mains and substation SS-2207 drawn over it, each with its buffer. Five numbered clashes are hatched in red. On the right, the no-objection letter is already drafted, and 22 h 34 m are left on the clock.
“Aligned to the affection plan · 4 corners · fit 0.12 m”
The six agents ran two minutes after the application arrived. The intake checker found all 6 files in 3.1 s. The plan aligner placed A-101 on plot 417-0263 from the affection plan's four corners. The clash finder measured 8 assets within 30 m and found 5 clashes, while the letter waited for it. Samira can replay the run step by step.
Clash finder: “11 kV F-214 at 0.8 m from the north wall (buffer 2.0 m) · TM-07 under the plant crossing · SS-2207 access and oversail · LV under storage”
The drawing reader read 4 drawings and 23 elements. On shoring plan S-110 rev A: the north wall, secant piles Ø750 at 650 mm centres on the boundary for 46 m; the pile toe at −14.0 m; four dewatering wells, W-1 to W-4, with drawdown to −9.5 m. Each reading cites its sheet and grid, with a confidence.
Not in the submission: “Rig type and expected vibration not stated” — the letter sets a vibration limit (C1) instead of asking for it.
The north basement wall runs inside the cable's 2.0 m excavation buffer under rule R-HV-02. Lumina's as-built record puts F-214 at 1.0 m deep; the wall goes down to −14.0 m. The clash carries its drawing, S-110 rev A at grid A–E/1, and links straight to the condition it creates.
“Letter: C1 · Trial pits required · needs Khalid Naseer”
The section along Marsa Street shows the cable 1.0 m deep, its 2.0 m buffer on each side, the secant piles down to −14.0 m and the dewatering drawdown to −9.5 m. The clash finder lists what it measured: 0.8 m from the cable to the wall face, 46 m of wall inside the buffer, and 5 trial pits at 10 m centres.
“If the basement is inside the buffer, I want trial pits before a single pile.” — Khalid Naseer
Six conditions and three standard ones. C1: trial pits at 10 m centres along F-214, hand dig within 0.5 m, a Lumina standby while piling within 3 m, vibration at the cable no more than 10 mm/s. C2: a crossing slab designed for 45 t over the 600 mm trunk main TM-07, with vibration and settlement monitoring. C3 to C6 keep SS-2207 open, stop loads slewing over it, protect the LV cables and disconnect the water service. Each margin note names the clash, the rule, the drawing and the library clause.
For information: “132 kV circuit Jumana–Marsa 2 runs 24 m north, outside its 10 m buffer; no work within 10 m of it without a new NOC.”
Samira drags the wall set-back to 1.2 m. F-214 now sits 2.0 m from the wall, outside its buffer, and the cable shows as cleared by the set-back. The basement would lose about 55 m² per level. Asked, the assistant adds this to the letter as advice to Orrin & Varga; the drafted conditions stay until they resubmit.
“Tell me exactly what to change, once, not three returns in three weeks.” — Daniel Achterberg
The clock keeper had asked both engineers on Monday. Khalid Naseer concurs on C1 and C4 at 11:18, Ilse van Dijk on C2 at 11:24. Samira signs as NOC officer, and the certificate is issued to Orrin & Varga with its conditions, for the drawings listed, valid for 12 months.
“Issued to Orrin & Varga · 21 h 42 m inside the 2-working-day standard”
Corniche Gate Offices: shoring plan S-201 is on a local site grid — best fit 6.8 m against a 0.5 m limit — and gives no pile toe level, so the agents stopped and drafted a notice; the clock pauses when it is sent. Marsa Pump House: the new foundation is 0.3 m from joint bay JB-14 of a 132 kV circuit, where rule R-TX-02 keeps 3.0 m clear. No condition can make that safe.
“3 h 25 m left on the 2-working-day standard · only Hana Rostami may object”
The same application, seen by the five people it passes through — what their day looked like, and what it looks like now.
Six agents read the drawings, find every clash and draft the conditions; engineers concur and the NOC officer signs.
Checks each application is complete and on the right coordinates before anyone reads it: the form, the affection plan and the site, basement, shoring and logistics drawings. If anything is missing, it drafts a clarification notice that says exactly what to add.
Reads every sheet: the plot boundary, basement extent and formation level, piling type and toe, ramps and entrances, the hoarding line, crane position and jib, dewatering wells and storage areas.
Matches the plot corners on the drawing to the affection plan coordinates, places the drawing on the asset map and reports the fit in metres.
Draws the buffer of every asset within 30 m of the plot by Lumina's rules, intersects it with each proposed work, measures the closest distance and compares depths. Grades each as hard, access, oversail, soft, clear or action.
Drafts the no-objection letter: for each clash, the approved clause for that asset and work, filled in with the asset, grid and measurement and citing the rule and sheet, plus the standard conditions.
Counts working hours from receipt, asks the named engineer to concur on any hard clash with an HV cable or a main of 450 mm or more, and warns the officer at 4 hours left with an offer to reassign.
Engineers concur on hard clashes; the officer signs. The agents propose; a named person decides.
Ask in plain words — or say what to change. Every answer points to the drawing, the section or the rule behind it.
Why does Jumana Creek need trial pits?
The north basement wall sits 0.8 m from 11 kV cable F-214, inside its 2.0 m excavation buffer. The shoring plan puts secant piles Ø750 on the boundary for 46 m, down to −14.0 m, and the cable is 1.0 m deep on Lumina's as-built. Rule R-HV-02 asks for trial pits before any piling inside the buffer, so condition C1 asks for them at 10 m centres.
Which of my applications could miss the 2-day standard?
Two have less than 5 hours left: NOC-26-041860 Marsa Pump House — objection proposed, with Hana Rostami, 3 h 25 m left; and NOC-26-041829 Sidra Villas — waiting for Ilse van Dijk on a 450 mm main, 4 h 32 m left.
Advise Orrin & Varga how to clear the cable clash
If the north wall moves 1.2 m south, F-214 sits 2.0 m from the wall face, outside its buffer, and condition C1 is no longer needed. The basement loses 1.2 m along 46 m, about 55 m² per level. The advice is added to the letter; the conditions stay as drafted until they resubmit.
Use a 3 m buffer for 11 kV cables beside basements deeper than 6 m
Done. New rule: “11 kV cable beside a basement deeper than 6 m → 3.0 m buffer.” Your 14 open applications were re-checked: Jumana Creek is already a clash, and none of the others changes. It applies to new applications from now on; you can change it in Settings.
13 screens from the working solution, on its sample data. Pick one to see it large.
The buffer around each asset class, who must agree, the clock and the checks are settings chosen by Third-Party Works.
| Setting | Default | Choose from |
|---|---|---|
| Buffers by asset | 11 kV cables 2.0 m, no structure within 0.5 m | 132 kV 10.0 m · 33 kV 3.0 m · 11 kV 2.0 m · LV 1.0 m · trunk mains ≥ 450 mm 5.0 m · distribution mains 3.0 m · substation access 3.0 m — each tied to its rule |
| A hard clash with an HV cable (11 kV and above) | Khalid Naseer | Khalid Naseer · Any network protection engineer — concurrence before the NOC can be signed |
| A clash with a main of 450 mm or more | Ilse van Dijk | Ilse van Dijk · Any water network engineer — concurrence before the NOC can be signed |
| Decision standard | 2 working days | 2 working days · 3 working days · 5 working days, counted from receipt on the portal |
| Warn the officer | 4 hours left | 4 hours left · 8 hours left — the clock keeper warns and offers to reassign |
| Search zone around the plot | 30 m | 20 m · 30 m · 50 m — assets inside it are measured |
| Stop when the drawing does not fit the plot | 0.5 m | 0.3 m · 0.5 m · 1.0 m — a worse fit goes to a GIS analyst |
| Read and check every application on arrival | On | On · Off — when off, the officer starts the agents from the plan |
Every figure is labelled: a target the solution is built to, an estimate, a typical published result, or a proven one.
“demo” = seen in the working solution, on its sample data · “target” = the design goal, measured in the live solution · “estimated” = our arithmetic on the demo utility's figures: 64 cable and main strikes a year on sites holding a NOC, 24 traced to a clash not caught or a condition not written, × $42K average cost (repair, outage response, lost water and claims handling); the split of working days is also our estimate · “typical” = published figures: CGA DIRT report for 2024 (196,977 damages); HSE HSG47, Avoiding danger from underground services, case study 1 (£210,000 in fines and costs); University of Birmingham study of 3,348 strikes on buried utility assets (indirect and social costs about 29 times the direct cost). Context: HSG47 advises against power tools within 500 mm of a service's indicated line. Lumina Utilities and the people, developers, consultants, plots and records named on this page are fictional — characters and sample data in the working solution.
It is the review a utility does before it says it has no objection to a building, excavation or road works near its cables, mains and substations — and on what conditions. Utility NOC Application Processing does that review on the drawing itself: agents lay the applicant's drawings over the asset map, find each clash with an asset buffer and draft the letter. Engineers concur on hard clashes and the NOC officer signs.
The drawing reader reads the site, basement, shoring and logistics drawings — walls, piles, depths, ramps, hoarding, cranes and dewatering wells — citing sheet and grid. The plan aligner places the drawing on the asset map from the affection plan's corners and reports the fit. The clash finder draws each asset's buffer by your rules and measures every proposed work against it, in plan and in depth.
Every application is checked against every buffer within the search zone, including the basement, shoring and crane drawings that get skipped under the clock. A clash becomes a specific condition — trial pits, hand digging, a standby, a vibration limit, a crossing slab — and an asset whose depth is unknown is never cleared. On the demo utility's figures, the estimate is about $1.0M a year in strikes avoided (24 strikes traced to a missed clash or condition, at an average $42K).
The conditions writer drafts one condition per clash, using only approved clauses from your conditions library, filled in with the asset, grid and measurement and citing the rule and drawing. It adds the standard conditions and keeps the letter a draft. It never writes a clause that is not in the library, and it never signs or issues.
The intake checker drafts a clarification notice that says exactly what to add. If a drawing does not fit the plot within the fit limit — 0.5 m by default — the check stops and goes to a GIS analyst. The clock pauses only when the officer sends the notice; the agents never reject an application.
Yes. A named NOC officer signs every certificate. A hard clash with an HV cable needs a network protection engineer's concurrence, and a clash with a main of 450 mm or more needs a water network engineer's. Only the head of Third-Party Works may object. The clock keeper cannot extend a clock or issue a letter.
Yes. Buffers and no-structure zones by asset class, who must concur, the decision standard (2, 3 or 5 working days), when to warn the officer, the search zone around the plot, the fit limit, whether every application is checked on arrival and the unknown-depth rule are all settings.
The Agentic Solution Engine builds and deploys it from your requirements and documents — your buffer rules, standard conditions, letter template, asset layers and a sample of past applications — and it goes live once every quality gate has passed. We will walk you through it on your own applications first.
We'll run Utility NOC Application Processing on a sample of your own NOC applications and asset layers.