WanderNorth Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 I make no claims to be the smartest guy in the world. I've read every post on ADI about this, and in talking to my architect, as well as the city inspectors, it appears that the exemption for quantities over MAQ in an F1 space have disappeared. I did some more digging around, and found this from 2013, on page 473 http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/codes/Documents/2012-2014Cycle/Proposed-B/05-IFC.pdf Has anyone else heard about this change? " There is confusion about the applicability of flammable liquid (Chapter 57) hazardous materials (Chapter 50) provisions to distilled spirits because of the exceptions for distilled spirits and wines stored in wooden barrels and casks in IFC Chapters 50 and 57 (and NFPA 30). The issue arises because of the growing popularity of “boutique” or “craft” distillers locating their operations in urban areas. The proposed language clarifies bulk storage provisions for distilled spirits but does not alter the intent. The proposed language does not affect provisions applicable to use, nor those applicable to liquor storage in retail or wholesale establishments. ICC COMMITTEE ACTION HEARINGS ::: April, 2013 F473First, note distilled spirits are Class 1C and Class 1B flammable liquids.... If a quantity of a Class 1B or Class 1C flammable liquid exceeding the MAQ, the room in which it is located is an H3 Occupancy. Please remember this applies to bulk storage (casks, barrels, metal containers, etc. exceeding 1.3 gallon capacities) and not to liquor stores and wholesale distributors for which there are several exceptions. H occupancies have to be sprinklered. This is the primary provision overlooked because of the confusion noted above. This is not because wood is inherently safer than metal, plastic or glass – it is not. It was probably inserted in the legacy code(s) back when casks were stored in liquid storage warehouses separated by hundreds of feet from one another and urban distilleries weren’t contemplated... applicable code requirements have not been changed. The UBC legacy code excepted distilled spirits stored in wooden barrels and casks from the secondary containment and ventilation requirements normally mandated for flammable liquids. The exception was often misinterpreted even then to extend to the entire range of code provisions. When flammable liquids requirements were brought into the IFC, the exception was moved to the scoping provisions which created the confusion recurring today. The deletion of the exception in Section 5001.1 removes the confusion associated with the applicable requirements. The modifications to Sections 5004.2.2 and 5004.3 reestablish the exceptions to secondary containment and ventilation contained in the legacy code. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!Register a new account
Already have an account? Sign in here.Sign In Now