On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 10:48 AM, King, Richard G - (kingr) <
[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Funny but not HA HA funny.  Hugh and I and others just finished a tune-up
> For the national Fire Protection Association's 232 fire code for records
> storage facilities.  Had this devastating fire occurred a month ago we
> might have taken the opportunity to add some language to the code.  One
> thing I immediately thought of is that the operator should have an on-site
> presence until the sprinkler head is replaced or capped.  Ok well, timing
> is everything.  Dick King - Records Officer, University of Arizona
>

Yeah, this is definitely the "ironic not funny" kind of ha ha.

We cast out votes and the ballot went through, but I think if enough of us
URGED NFPA to consider delaying the update of the Standard and to re-open
discussions for the Technical Committee in light of this incident... they
MIGHT be encouraged to consider the request.

Don't forget, there's a Task Force meeting on a side issue they are hoping
to have completed in time prior to the revision of the Standard....AND at
their own discretion, NFPA can delay a revision... THAT's happened to 232
before.

However, the Standard is for the "Protection of Records"... it doesn't
address the fighting of fires when a service provider has failed to
adequately protect records from fire....  so I don't know where we would
add language to that effect.

-- 
Larry
[log in to unmask]



*----Lawrence J. MedinaDanville, CARIM Professional since 1972*

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]