National Clothesline

California cleaners caught between a regulatory rock and a hard place gained a bit of wiggle room last month when the state fire marshal agreed to allow an exception to code requirements for sprinkler systems in drycleaning plants with hydrocarbon cleaning equipment.

The rock and hard place consists of two state mandates — state fire code provisions adopted in 2007 that call for automatic sprinklers systems in drycleaning plants using hydrocarbon or other high-flash-point solvents and California Air Resources Board regulations, also adopted in 2007, that set a phase-out schedule for use of perc in drycleaning operations.

Cleaners trying to comply with CARB rules by replacing perc machine with hydrocarbon could find themselves faced with the fire code’s sprinkler requirements, creating at best an extra expense and, in the worst case, an impossibility for a cleaner who doesn’t own the building and the landlord doesn’t want modifications made.

Over the past few months, the California Cleaners Association has worked with the state fire marshal’s office to change the sprinkler system requirement and last month the fire marshal agreed to an exception.

The clash of the two regulations created “an unintended consequence that may result in non-compliance” with either the fire code or CARB regulations, the fire marshal’s office said.

“The state fire marshal seeks to maintain safety and fire protection features while protecting the environment and not disrupting small business,” fire officials said.

To that end, the fire marshal agreed to alternate methods of fire prevention by allowing drycleaning facilities to comply instead with provisions of the National Fire Protections Association’s standard.

NFPA revised its code ten years ago to take into account modern drycleaning equipment that uses newer high-flash-point solvents such as DF2000, GreenEarth, Rynex and others. Under NFPA, automatic sprinkler systems are not required if the total amount of solvent both in the machine and stored in the plant is less than 330 gallons and the machine itself has internal fire and explosion prevention systems.

The changes in California would give state and local fire officials an alternative to requiring drycleaners to install sprinkler systems. The CARB requirements are not affected and the perc phase-out is proceeding as scheduled.

The sprinkler system issue is not unique to California. Any jurisdiction that has adopted the International Fire Code will have the same requirements. An effort to revise the IFC has been underway and was advanced last fall when the Textile Care Allied Trades Association and Drycleaning & Laundry Institute received a positive response in a presentation to an International Code Council hearing in Baltimore.

The committee agreed to recommending that portions of the NFPA code relevant to high-flash drycleaning solvents be incorporated in the next code revision. That recommendation will be presented at a final hearing this May of next year.

If approved, the revised code would take effect next year. Ultimately, state and local jurisdictions have to adopt the code and can make modifications as they see fit.



		National Clothesline


California eases up on sprinkler rule



	California cleaners caught between a regulatory rock and a hard place gained a bit of wiggle room last month when the state fire marshal agreed to allow an exception to code requirements for sprinkler systems in drycleaning plants with hydrocarbon cleaning equipment. The rock and hard place consists of two state mandates — state fire code provisions adopted in 2007 that call for automatic sprinklers systems in drycleaning plants using hydrocarbon or other high-flash-point solvents and California Air Resources Board regulations, also adopted in 2007, that set a phase-out schedule for use of perc in drycleaning operations. Cleaners trying to comply with CARB rules by replacing perc machine with hydrocarbon could find themselves faced with the fire code’s sprinkler requirements, creating at best an extra expense and, in the worst case, an impossibility for a cleaner who doesn’t own the building and the landlord doesn’t want modifications made. Over the past few months, the California Cleaners Association has worked with the state fire marshal’s office to change the sprinkler system requirement and last month the fire marshal agreed to an exception. The clash of the two regulations created “an unintended consequence that may result in non-compliance” with either the fire code or CARB regulations, the fire marshal’s office said. “The state fire marshal seeks to maintain safety and fire protection features while protecting the environment and not disrupting small business,” fire officials said. To that end, the fire marshal agreed to alternate methods of fire prevention by allowing drycleaning facilities to comply instead with provisions of the National Fire Protections Association’s standard. NFPA revised its code ten years ago to take into account modern drycleaning equipment that uses newer high-flash-point solvents such as DF2000, GreenEarth, Rynex and others. Under NFPA, automatic sprinkler systems are not required if the total amount of solvent both in the machine and stored in the plant is less than 330 gallons and the machine itself has internal fire and explosion prevention systems. The changes in California would give state and local fire officials an alternative to requiring drycleaners to install sprinkler systems. The CARB requirements are not affected and the perc phase-out is proceeding as scheduled. The sprinkler system issue is not unique to California. Any jurisdiction that has adopted the International Fire Code will have the same requirements. An effort to revise the IFC has been underway and was advanced last fall when the Textile Care Allied Trades Association and Drycleaning & Laundry Institute received a positive response in a presentation to an International Code Council hearing in Baltimore. The committee agreed to recommending that portions of the NFPA code relevant to high-flash drycleaning solvents be incorporated in the next code revision. That recommendation will be presented at a final hearing this May of next year. If approved, the revised code would take effect next year. Ultimately, state and local jurisdictions have to adopt the code and can make modifications as they see fit.