CALIFORNIA POSITIONS TO THE
2000 Submittals for the Proposed Revisions to
THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE

Palm Springs, Ca – May 31-June 2, 2000

A-Approval as Submitted D-Disapproval
AR-Approval as Revised S-Support
O-Oppose AA-Assembly Action
PC-Public Comment GJWI-Get Jiggy With It
 

ITEM
CR
AA
PC
No.
So.
COMMENT
1    
O
O
 Off site transportation of hazardous materials. 7904.5-01-01 will give exempt amounts to S-3 which we can not accept. 8001.14.3.7 is okay in wholesale storage and ales to wholesale, but not retail. This could impact home amounts and amounts in B settings. 8003.6 not willing to drop class 4 oxidizer to class 3 later. Leave class 1 for clarification of other classes.
2    
S
SA
 So. Says awkward wording but good definition. Move to first sentence?
3    
S
   Gives more flexibility. Maybe should read other "nationally recognized approved means"?
4    
W
O
 So. Says why is this even being submitted?
5    
S
S
  
6    
S
SA
 So. Says Delete parenthetical statement – why only electric vehicles. No. Says to So., "Don’t use words like ‘parenthetical’ which has so many syllables!!!"
7    
S
S
  
8    
S
O
 May have to put explanation of UL 2035 into code. Line personnel do not have copies of UL codes. This will make it difficult for them to enforce. So. Says This hasn’t been a problem and this may eliminate the multi-hazard tanks.
9    
W
SWA
 So. Says see IFC justification.
10    
W
S
 Check further for Code placement. 
11    
O
S
 Leave as-is
12    
O
S
 Leave - Need data for argument
13    
O
S
 Already Ca State law
14    
W
S
 Wait - Need better argument & 10,000 sq ft
15    
O
O
 Not Practical
16    
O
S
 See 18. So. Says proprietary exemption and not justified.
17    
O
W
  
18    
S
S!!!
 See 16
19    
S
W
 Don’t sprinklers work?
20    
O 
W
 Should be referred
21    
S
O
 So. Says too much.
22    
S
SWA
 What does it say? Does it require recall in other than high rise (relocate to another section)? Is there something more generic (CA has something different).
23    
W
S
 This or 24
24    
O
S
 This or 23
25    
SWA
O
 Needed language
26    
W
O
 More Info/Track Record?
27    
W
S
 Questions from Stockton for past history
28    
S
O
  
29    
O
O
 As is unless the fix in place; don’t redirect to another code.
30    
O
O
 There is another way to direct the material to a dilution unit with the pressure problems of a diffuser. Will explain what Stockton did.
31    
S
S
 Editorial
32    
O
S
 Support from Haz Mat. Is it the same as NFPA 99?
33    
S
O
 If UL 2085 is put into the appendix. Explain the removal of Secondary containment.
34    
O
O
 Support from Haz Mat
35    
S
O
  
36    
O
O
 Support from Haz Mat, they feel they need tables in the UFC for the line personnel to reference. Put in NFPA tables in the body or appendix. Copy Right issues.
37    
O
S
 To be consistent, H&S 6.95 states, "…must immediately report any release or threatened release." The OES and EHS agencies in CA use this code. We need to be consistent with them. Keep the word immediately. This will push a state amendment as is for consistency.
38    
O
O
 Threaded has a history of leaks. There is not a plastic solvent on the market that will keep threaded from leaking. Define highly volatile corrosive material!
39    
S
O
 Insert the word in 2 statement to read highly toxic and Toxic gases…
40    
SWA
O
 Will support if the word "approved" construction or "approved" other means are inserted.
41    
S
O
 These materials come in non-combustible containers.
42    
S
O
  
43    
S
O
  
44    
O
O
  
45      
O
 No. UFC/Haz-Mat No position
46      
O
 No. UFC/Haz-Mat No position
47    
S
S
  
48    
S
O
  
49    
SWA
S
 If they add caveats
50    
S
S
  
51    
O
S
 Is this enforceable? Belongs in UWI…
52    
O
S
 Needs work.
53    
W
W
 Covered by State law, No Position.
54    
O
SWA
 Needs clean up.
55    
S
SWA
 We support the concept. Good idea but overkill for all buildings… add "when required by the Chief".
56    
O
O
 Haz Mat wants more discussion for some areas of this.
57    
S
O
  
58    
S
S
  
59    
SWA
O
 Need to ensure we retain intent of current amendments or justify elimination.