From: "Secretary, ACS Division of Chemical Health and Safety" <secretary**At_Symbol_Here**DCHAS.ORG>
Subject: [DCHAS-L] Fire Code Research Laboratory Rule Proposal - CoP Comments
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2015 07:03:39 -0400
Reply-To: DCHAS-L <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**MED.CORNELL.EDU>
Message-ID: CA5A3289-D235-48A6-AD08-42753CA6E0BE**At_Symbol_Here**

Some DCHAS members may be interested in this opportunity.

- Ralph

The ICC FCAC COLLEGE LAB WORK GROUP is seeking comments from interested members of the CSHEMA Fire and Life Safety COP and Lab Safety COP to comment on their project. This workgroup is self tasked to review and recommend changes to those ICC code sections which are specific to the design, construction and operation of academic research/teaching laboratories. The workgroup is chaired by Morgana Yahnke of UC Davis, an ICC member. Early work by the group involved review of ventilation concerns related to air changes in laboratories. That effort is currently in a holding pattern while the group is focusing on some issues with the International Fire Code, including but not limited to the content of the hazardous materials tables that limit hazardous materials amounts in control areas in lieu of classification as a hazardous occupancy. The workgroup includes, among others, ICC members and experienced code consultants. Some early input from experienced code consultants with rega!
rd to changing code was to consider a separate section for laboratories, a successful approach used for semiconductor manufacturing facilities. The group has generated a "straw man" version of a lab section for the IFC and is considering other options such as multiple code proposals as well.

Here is a sample of some of the questions the group is addressing:

If your institution operates in a jurisdiction that uses the California Building Code and has buildings constructed in the ‰??L‰?? Use Group, how well has this use group met your needs? Does it provide sufficient flexibility to accommodate intensive research operations? Are there requirements associated with the L Use Group that you would change, and if so why?

If the code under which you operate for existing buildings does not have a similar Use Group L, would the California Use Group L requirements as written meet your institutions‰?? needs? Are there sections you would change, and if so what and why?

Would compliance with an NFPA 45-like standard in lieu of the current Fire Code requirements for hazardous materials provide sufficient flexibility to accommodate research in your existing buildings?

Are there specific hazardous materials that cause persistent issues with quantity limits in research in your existing buildings? If so, how would you propose modifying the existing code language to addresses these materials? How would you justify this proposed change?

Comments on the early draft lab section or items you feel need addressing via code change proposal language are welcome and should can be submitted to:

Ken Kretchman kkretchman**At_Symbol_Here**


Ken Kretchman, CIH, CSP Director, Environmental Health and Safety
Campus Box 8007 / 2620 Wolf Village Way / Raleigh North Carolina 27695-8007
Email: Ken_Kretchman**At_Symbol_Here** / Phone: (919).515.6860 / Fax: (919).515.6307

Previous post   |  Top of Page   |   Next post

The content of this page reflects the personal opinion(s) of the author(s) only, not the American Chemical Society, ILPI, Safety Emporium, or any other party. Use of any information on this page is at the reader's own risk. Unauthorized reproduction of these materials is prohibited. Send questions/comments about the archive to
The maintenance and hosting of the DCHAS-L archive is provided through the generous support of Safety Emporium.