NFPA vs. CFC conflict for commodity classification reduction
NFPA vs. CFC conflict for commodity classification reduction
(OP)
Hi,
According to 2007 CFC Section 2306.3.2.2, mixing High Hazard Commodities with Class I-IV Commodities results in classifying the entire storage area as High Hazard. However, Section 5.6.1.2.3 of 2002 NFPA 13 states that we can use the protection requirements for the lower commodity class as long as there are (1) no more than 10 pallet loads of the higher hazard commodity, and (2) the higher hazard commodity must be randomly dispersed with no adjacent loads in any direction (including diagonally).
Does that mean loads of the lower class commodities as well, or that the higher hazard commodities can't be adjacent to each other?
Are there any other classification reductions under certain criteria?
The main question though is which code supersedes the other? This seems to be a direct conflict between CFC and NFPA.
Thanks!
According to 2007 CFC Section 2306.3.2.2, mixing High Hazard Commodities with Class I-IV Commodities results in classifying the entire storage area as High Hazard. However, Section 5.6.1.2.3 of 2002 NFPA 13 states that we can use the protection requirements for the lower commodity class as long as there are (1) no more than 10 pallet loads of the higher hazard commodity, and (2) the higher hazard commodity must be randomly dispersed with no adjacent loads in any direction (including diagonally).
Does that mean loads of the lower class commodities as well, or that the higher hazard commodities can't be adjacent to each other?
Are there any other classification reductions under certain criteria?
The main question though is which code supersedes the other? This seems to be a direct conflict between CFC and NFPA.
Thanks!





RE: NFPA vs. CFC conflict for commodity classification reduction
Plus you need to start with CDC since that is where the requirement comes from
Possibly look at 2304.2 should be titled designation based on engineering and 2306.3 separation of high piled. That may be the answer you are looking for
And do not forget 2306.2 extent and type of protection. The ten foot rule
RE: NFPA vs. CFC conflict for commodity classification reduction
CDA is right: when a difference exists between the IFC and NFPA standards, the IFC takes precedence. However, since you're in California, I have no idea of how the CFC addresses this.
RE: NFPA vs. CFC conflict for commodity classification reduction
thanks guys!