Loading...
10100 SW NIMBUS AVENUE I� i i LY LY r. i a RnNRA`d snewiN MS OOTOT 57 FIRE MARSHALS OFFICE 7�/A� U xv Washington County Fire District No. 1 City of Beaverton Fire Department Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District •�"�`� 4755 S.W. Griffith (give P.O. Pix 4755 Beaverton,Oregon 97076 • Phene (503)526.2469 February 13, 1989 Gary Rommel Rommel Architectural Partnership 1020 S.W. Taylor Street - Suite 360 Portland, Oregon 97205 RE: Speed City 10100 S.W. Nimbus - Suite B-1 Boll Business Center Dear Gary: A fire and life safety plan review was conducted on the above captioned project for compliance with the 1985 Editions of the Uniform Building Code (UBC) , Uniform Mechanical Code (UMC), and the Uniform Fire Code (UFC) , as amended by Washington County Fire District No. 1's Ordinance 86-1. Plans are conditionally approved subject to the following items: 1. Firestopping: In all wood framed walls and partitions, firestopping consisting of 2-inch nominally-sized lumber or other approved materials must be installed at all floor and ceiling levels. Penetr-tions in this prescribed firestopping to accommodate wiring, plumbing, and other similar utility runs must be packed with noncombustible materials in an approved manner so as to prevent the passage of flame. (UBC Sec, 2516) 2. Approved Plans on Job Site: One set of approved plans bearing the stamp, of the Tigard Building Department and this office must be maintained on the project site throughout all phases of construction and must be made available to building and fire inspectors for reference during required construction inspections. (UBC Sec. 303) 3. Inspections Required: Ins)ectic;n and approval of construction by a representative of this office is required: (a) prior to the cover of any new framing elements fo ll.owi-vg the installation of all utility runs which will be concealer', within wall and partition cavities; (b) upon completion of construction and prior to necL.pancy of the tenant space. (LBC Sec, 305) Gary Rommel February 13, 1989 Page 2 4. Certificate of Occupant:y Required: Prior to the use and occupancy of the project (space) , a certificate of occupancy or other written ir.rtrument of approval must be obtained from the City of Tigard Building Department. (UBC Sec. 307) OPECIAL NOTICE: DEVIATIONS FROM THE SUBMITTED AND HEREBY CONDITIONALLY APPROVED PLANS DURING THE COURSE OF CONSTRUCTION, EXCLUSIVE OF THOSE NECESSARY TO COMPLY WITH FIRE SAFETY REQUIREMENTS AS LISTED HEREIN, ARE PROHIBITED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION OF THE WASHINGTON COUNTY BUILDING DEPARTMENT AND THIS OFFICE. APPROVAL OF SUBMITTED PLANS IS NOT AN APPROVAL OF OMISSIONS OR OVERSIGHTS BY THIS OFFICE OR OF NON-COMPLIANCE WITH ANY APPLICABLE REGULATIONS OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT. 1f I can be of any further assistance to you, please feel free to contact me at 526-2502. Sincerely, Gene Bi.rchill Deputy Fire Marshal GB:kw / cc: Tigard Building Department ✓ t FIRE PREVENT(ON BUREAU OFFICE OF FIRE MARSHAL. INSPECTION NOTICE r OWNER_ DATE OCCUPANT.__-- OCCUPANCY' LOCATION ICUR AT TriNT10N cT CALLED TO THE MOLLOWINA FIRE SAFETY DEFICIE)JCIESI ...]. 4;e i4a FAILURE TO CORRECT THE ABOVE CONDITIONS WIYHIN _DAYS WILL MAKE'Y OU I IAy9�4-E rP R03ECUTIP N. SHOULO FIRE RESULT FRGM SUCH CONDITIONS YOU MAY BE LIABLE FOR DAMAGES TO rInt ONB9Qe7{P TY UNq PROV181'ITNS O' ORS 479 190 By ! / WASHINGTON COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT M1FIRE MARSHAL 20665 S.W. BLANTON STREET P.O. BOX Y f PRESliNTEp 1'O ALOHA,OREGON 97006 049.8577 ------- FORM JOO 40 FIRE PRFVE NTION BUREAU CFFICE OF FIRE MARSHAL INSPECTION NOTICE OWNER ------------ � --- DA T - - OCCUPANT _J_� .� OCCUPANCY;'`, ` L.)CATION __--- -1A ------- YOUR AFI EN FtON 15 CA'.LF!D TCG THE FOLLOWING FIRE SAFETY DEF'ICIENCIFSI '\ � - i � f ; FAILURF TO CORRECT THE ABOVE CONDITIONS WITHIN DAYS WILL MAKE "dU�Ll��-1�''O PROS%t .TION SHOULD FIRE RESULT FROM SUCrI CONDITIONS YOU MAY RE LIABLE FOFIOAMAGE3 TO PEp rJft C1YR PROIVS/1SIO -�NS OF ORS 479 190 EY I WASHINGTON COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT#1 F Z MARSHAL 20885 S.W. BLANTON STREET P.O. BOX Y ALOHA,OREGON 97008 649-8577 PRESFNTED TQ — FOnM oon 40 r FIRE PRE'`✓ENTION BUREAU OFFICE OF FIRE MARSHAL_ INSPEC1ION NOTICE OWNER_ A0 ("c) H t-) ' - - --DATE DCCUPANT� o' ' OCCUPANCY" LOCAT ION �o /`� ( / -- vOU:I AT TL1`1I ON 1s CALLED TO E FOLLOWING FIR, SAFETY DEFICIENCIfRSI .. r1 r" FAILURE TO CORRECT THE A801•4 CONDITIOIJS WITHIN' DAYS WILL MANE VOd LIAI3LIE f,TgOSECUT1014 SHOULD FIRE. RESULT FROM SUCH CONDITIONS �'lU MAY dE LIAISL FOR DAMAO ~rt0 P61990k(� OR P.Ab F.RTY UT1�Q�{ PROVISIONS 1-1 ORS 470 100 �. / � •,p j 4 - BY WASHINGTON COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT#1 FIRE MARSHAL 20665 S.W. BLANTON STREET P.O. BOX Y ALOHA,OREGON 91000 649'•6577 PRESENTED -TO-- FORM 0 _FORM 1100 - AO 20665 S.W. Blanton St. P O. Box Y e� a Aloha,Oregon 97006 503/649-8577 IST. October 6, 1982 Mr'. Greg Zander Koll Company 10110 S. W. Nimbus Avenue Portland, Oregon 97223 Dear Mr. Lander: Re: C. T. A. of Oregon Building B - Space 8 This letter will confirm that we have examined the plans for the development of this tenant space and have found the general layout to be acceptable inso- far as fire safety regulations apply. We understand that all new interior walls and partitions will be constructed of metal studs with gypsum wallboard cover. New ceilings will be suspended, noncombustible acoustical tile on a t-bar grid. Listed as follows are certain requirements which must be observed during the course of development and for which we found no provisions in the submitted documents. 1 . All doors shown on the drawings must be openable from the inside at all Limes for immediate exit without the use of a key, special knowledge or effort. 2. Inspection and approval of construction by this office is required: a prior to gypsum wallboard cover of any new framing. b upon completion of construction and prior to the occupancy of the project space. 3. One set of approved plans must be maintained on the project site throughout all phases of construction and must be made available to building and fire inspectors for reference during required construction inspections. Fire prevention does not cost. it pays Mr. Greg Zander Or ober 6, 1982 Page 2 4. Prior to the occupancy of any portion of this tenant space a Certificate of Occupancy or other written instrument of acceptance must be obtained from the Tigard Building Department. Subject to the foregoing stipulations the plans for this project are hereby approved. We trust this letter will assist in clearing the way for its further development. Please let us know if we can be of service in any of ay. Very •u y yours , LL W k ETON 0 JY FIRE 0 .TR CT N 1 0 Wilburn Dodge Fire Prevention Officer jcc cc: ✓i'igard Building Department �`NGTgN C� 20665 S.W. Blanton St. PO. Box Y Aloha,Oregon 97006 503/649-8577 O• July 30, 1981 Mr. Ray Lange Project Manager The Koll Company 10110 S. W. Nimbus Avenue Portland, Oregon 97223 b Dear Mr. Lange: Please accept my apology for the delay in forwarding to you a copy of the minutes of your• appeal hearing before the Fire Code Board of Appeals cerning the kraft paper faced insulation blankets within your buildings. As you know, the fire Code Board of Appeals approved the variance. In any case, we are herewith enclosing a copy of the minutes for• your records. Please l ?t us know if you should have any questions or if we can be of service in any other way. Very truly yours, WASIiINGTON COU N Y FIRE DISTRICT NO. 1 Richard D. Butts Fire Marshal jcc Enclosure Fire prevention does not cost it pays 4201.4203 I fart VII! FIRE-RESISTIVE STANDARDS FOr` FIRE PROTECTION Chapter 42 INTERIOR WALL AND CEILING FINISH } General Sec. 4201. Interior wall and ceiling finish shall mean interior wainscoting, paneling,or other finish applied structurally or for decora- tion, acoustical correction, surface insulation, or similar purposes. Re- quirements for finishes in this Chapter shall-not apply to trim, defined as picture molds, chair rails, baseboards, and handrails; to doors and win- dows or thbr frames, nor to materials which are less than '/,, inch in i I thickness cemented-to the surface of wafts or ceilings, if these materials have flame-spread characteristics no greater than paper of this thickness cemented to a noncombustible backing. Foam plastics Shall not be used as interior finish except as pro•,;ded in Section 1717.For roam plastic trim see Section 1705(e). 1 Testing and Classification of Materials See.4202. (a)Testing. 'Tests shall t made by an approved tesving agen- cy to establish flame-spread characteristics and to show that materials when cemented or otherwise fastened in place will not readily become detached when subjected to room temperatures of 300°F. for 25 minutes. Flame-spread characteristics shall be determined by one of the following methods: 1. The"Tunnel Test"as set forth in U.B.C.Standard No.42-1. 2. Any other recognized method of test procedure for determining the flame-spread characteristics of finish materials that will give comparable results to those specified in Method No. I above. Combustible interior finish materials and combwgtible acoustical materials in exec*"of.96 thousandths of an inch in thickness shall be installed with rneW fasteners, screws,clips, nails, staples or similar holders or with an adhesive which will hold the materials in place when subjected to rtrotn temperat�jrm of not less than 1000 degrees F. for a period of not leas than 30 minutes. (b)Classification. The classes of materials based upon their flame- spread characteristics under the Tunnel Test shall be as set forth in Table No. 42-A. The smoke density shall be no greater than 450 when tested in accordance with U.B.C. Standard No. 42-t in the way intended for use. The products of combustion shal'd be no more toxic than the burning of un- 548 4203-4205 backing unless the qualifying tests were made with the material suspended from the noncombustih!e backing. Finishes Based on Occupancy See. 4204.The minimum flame-spread classification of interior finish, as determined by tests, shall be bawd on use or occupancy as set forth in Table No.42-B. EXCEPTIONS: I. Except in Group I Occupancy and in enclosed vertical exitways,Class III may he used in other exitways and rooms as wainscoting extending not more than 48 inches above the Moor and for tack and bulletin boards covering not more than S percent of the gross wall arca of the room. `{ 2. Where approved full fir"xiinguishing system protection is provided, j the flame-spread classification rating may be reduced one classification,but to no case shall materials having a classification greater than Class III be used, 3.The exposed faces of Type IV-H.T.,structural members and Type IV- H.T.,decking and planking,where otherwise permissible under this Code are excluded from flame-spread requirements. Sec. 4206. In Groupe A, E, and I Occupancies, all curtains, ; draperies, drops, tapestries, and similar furniaNngs and decnatiorw will be compt*wd of noncombustible materials or shall be rendered and maintained flameproof in a manner nev ptable to the State Fire Marshal. t i No .ter-_ .._..w �-�_.... .. .. •- -....._ _. _ ._ _ ... . i 1 E t I I 1975 EDITION 4202.4203 ^ treated wood under similar conditions. Application of Controlled Interior Finish Sec.4203. Interior finish materials applied to walls and ceilings shall be tested as specified in Section 4202 and regulated for purposes of limiting flame spread by the following previsions: 1. When walls and ceilings are required by any provision in this Code to be of fire-resistive or noncombustible construction, the finish material of any class shall be applied directly against such fire-resistive construction or to furring strips not exceeding 11/4 inches applied directly against such sur- faces. The intervening spaces between such furring strips shall be filled with inorganic or Class 1 material or shall be firestopped not to exceed 8 feet in any direction. 2. Where walls and ceilings are required to be of fire-resistive or non- combustible construction and walls are set out or ceilings are dropped distances greater than specified in paragraph I of this Section, Class I - finish materials shall bL used except where the finish materials are pro- lected on both sides by automatic fire-extinguishing systems or are attach- ed to a noncombustible backing or to furring strips installed as specified in paragraph 1.The hangers and assembly members o4'such dropped ceil- ings that are below the main ceiling line shall be of noncombustible materials except that in Type III and V construction fire-retardant treated wood may be used. The construction of each set-out wall shall be of fire- resistive construction as required elsewhere in this Code.See Section 2517 (f)for fire and draft stops. 3. Wall and ceiling finish materials of all classes as permitted in this Chaptcl may he installed directly against the wood decking or planking of Type IV Heavy-Timber Construction or to wood furring strips applied directly to the wood decking or planking installed and firestopped as specified in paragraph 1. TABLE NO.42-A—FLAME-SPREAD CLASSIFICATION MATERIAL GUALtrito /Ts - Cllnf - - -- —Tunnel Test T i 0- 25 II 20- 75 111 76-200 t a 4. All interior wall or ceiling finish other than Class I material which is less than 1/4 inch thick shall be applied directly against a noncombustible 549 w1! jL 1976 ED17ION 42.8 TABLE NO.42.13—MINIMUM INTERIOR FINISH CLASSIFICATIONS OCCUPANCY INCLOSED OTHER I ROOMS OR GROUP I VERTICAL— EXITWAYS AREAS EXITWAYS /, 1 II I11 f; 1 II III I II II' II 1 II ISI 11 I I I 111 h I I I: III' !t 3 lil III III' NO RESTRICTIONS 'In norms in which personal liber ties of inmates are forcibly restrained,Class material only may be used. 'Over two stories shall be or Class 11. 'Flame-spread provisions are not applicable to kitchens and bathrooms of Group 1 Occupancies. 'Foam plastics shall comply with the requirements specified in Section 1717. 551 a` ��ZGTUIy c 20665 S.W. Blanton St. P.O. Box Y Aloha, Oregon 97006 � �REBOM � 503/649-8577 i May 6, 1981 Mr. Ray Lange Project Manager Koll Company 10110 S. W. Nimbus Avenue Por` land, Oregon 97223 Dear Mr. Lange: Regarding our letter to you of March 12, 1981 (copy enclosed) , and particularly the third paragraph concerning the exposed insulation which forms the interior finish of the major portion of the buildings which compose the Tigard Koll Business Center, we have received nothing from you with respect to the disposition of this issue. As previously mentioned, we must pursue the matter with prudent vigor and iti` we do not receive a commitment from you within the near future, it will be necessary for us to initiate litigation either by way of citing you into Tigard Municipal Court or through a civil action in the Circuit Court or both. Although we do not wish to pursue such a course, we have no alternate and practicable option. Accordingly, may we please hear from you regarding this issue in the very near future so that we may possibly forego initiating action ayai6st you. Very tr yours, WA�S,Ni GTON C TY FIRE DI TRIC , NO. O i Wilburn Dodge Plans G..aminer jcc cc: ESI Walden Enclosure (1 ) Fire prevention does not cost it pays 01V 20665 S.W. Blanton St. P.O. Box Y Aloha,Oregor 97006 �. 5031649.8577 �Fn►sT. �' TO: FIRE CODE BOARD OF APPEALS FROM: WILBURN DODGE SUBJECT: THE KOLL BUSINESS CENTER 10100 S. W. SCHOLLS FERRY ROAD DATE: JUNE 23, 1981 On or about December 29, 1980, it came to the writer's attention that the Owens-Corning Fiberglas Company had issued a letter of warning concerning the flammability of their kraft faced and foil faced insulation blankets . Actually, the letter was directed to the code officials of the State of Oregon and was, in fact, an admonishment upbraiding them for having failed to enforce the flame-spread rating requirements, among other things, where fiberglas blanket insulation was employed in an exposed manner and thus ')ecame the interior finish of a building (as is the case coming before you). The building official of the City of Tigard, Mr. Ed Walden, called it to our attention that apparently The Koll Business Center was in apparent violation of the interi,,r finish requirements of Chapter 42 and as a result the writer immediately contacted Mr. Del Zander (then project manager for the Koll Company) to inform him of the apparent deficiency with respect to that property. This telepho►:. .11 was followed by a letter of confirmation dated December 30, 1980 (copy e­- ,osed). Subsequently, means of providing an acceptable finish fur the kraft faced fiberglas insulating blanket was discussed both with the appellant firm and the representatives of Owens-Corning. Although there are methods of treating the kraft paper to achieve the prescribed flame-spread rating (200 or less) , due to the size of the complex and extensive area of exposed insulation, a rather large cash outlay would be and is involved. For our further information regarding this issue, we are herewith enclosing coyrespondence relating to the same subject matter and a copy of the app regulations. Re ully submitted, , I Fire prevention does not cost it Pays Q k--- 20665 S.W. Blanton St. 3' .t P.O. Box Y Aloha,Oregon 97006 / 5031649-8577 The Washington County Fire District No. i Fire Code Board of Appeals Hearing was called to order by Chairman Allan Beard on Wednesday, July 1 , 1981 , at 10:15 a.m. in the Conference Room of the Administration Center, 20665 S. W. Blanton Street, Aloha, Oregon. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Messrs. Adams, Alexander, Beard and Frost, constituting a quorum. Also present: Richard Butts, Fire Marshal ; Wilburn Dodge, Plans Examiner/ Construction Inspector, WCFD#1 ; Ed Walden, Tigard Building Department. APPELLANTS PRESENT: Ray Lange, Project Manager, Koll Business Center; Rick Saito, Technical Counsel , Mackenzie Engineering. Appeal by the Koll Company regarding insulation in their buildings. DISTRICT'S CASE PkESENTED BY WILBURN DODGE: Mr. Dodge advised the Board that the issue of appeal involves Section 4204 of the Uniform Building Code which establishes requirements for maximum flame-spread rating for interior wall surfaces and ceiling surfaces within buildings. In the case under• discussion, the reference code is the 1976 edition of the Uniform Building Code which was the applicable code at the time the building permits were issued for the Koll Complex. Never- theless, the requirements of the 1976 edition of the Code and the current edition are substantially the same. Mr. Dodge explained that the maximum permitted flame spread rating, under the terms of the Section cited, is 200 as measured on the scale referred to in Uniform Building Code's Standard No. 42-1 , the standard method of testing surface- Fire prevention does not cost, .it pays ...+.:.:�auLa. sy"'�.. ........waw........u..u,.:r....v.. .w.....wns,.._w,.....-.w....._,w _....... ...... .......... Fire Code Board of Appeal_; Nearing July 1 , 1981 - Kol1 Business Center Nage 2 bur,iing characteristics of build-ng materials, and otherwise known as the Steiner Tunnel Test Scale. Concerning the buildings in ques+.ion, Mr. Dodge advised the Board that the Koll complex is a rather large (,roup of one-story buildings housing warehouse and light industrial operations with adjuvant office spaces. It is located at 10100 S. W. Scholls Ferry Road between the Greenway Town Center and Washington Square. The plans were examined by hind and conditionally approved on May 8, 1980, and it was noted at that time that the plans prescribed the installation of blanket insulation immediately under the roof deck but did not spe-ify the type or brand. Mr. Dodge informed the Board that regardless of this factor he was aware that the insulation installed within the buildings was Owens-Corning kraft paper-faced fiberglas blankets due to the continuous monitoring or construction throughout the development phase of each building within the complex. Ile advised the Board that he was unaware that the insulation might be in violation of Code requirements and remained so until December 29, 1980, after the buildings had been approved for occupancy, at which time the buildi► g official for the City of Tigard became aware of and called to his attention a letter from the Owens- Corning Fiberglas Company dated Dezember 5, 1980. wherein said firm admonished Code Officials concerning flame spread properties Of insulation with respect to Section 1718 and Section 4204 of the Uniform Building Code. Mr. Dodge testified that he immediately contacted the project manager for the Koll Company at that Lime (a Mr. Del Zander) to advise him that the Koll complex wish the exposed insulation as interior finish was probably in violation of Section 4204 of the Uniform Building Code and that th,a issue must be addressed and resolved. This was subsequently confirmed in a letter dated December 30, 1980. Fire Code Board of Appeals Hearing July 1 , 1981 - Koll Business Center Page 3 Mr. Dodge further testified that he had contacted a Torn Ca npbel l of the Owens-Corning Fiberglas Company in Santa Clara, California, whf informed him that the foil-faced insulation has a flame- spread rating of 2500 and the kraft-faced insulation has a flame spread rating of 3000. However, he stipulated that he has no written documentation of this alleged rating to enter as evidence. DISCUSSION: Mr . Frost asked if there is a vinyl-faced insulation that has a flame-spread rating of less than 2500 and if there is now also a foil-faced insulation which has a flame- spread rating within the limits prescribed by code. He was advised by Mr. Dodge in the affirmative ir both cases. Mr. Adams asked if it is the paper or the bonding agent in the case of the kraft- faced insulation which causes the problem. Mr. Dodge responded by advising that it was his understanding that the bituminous mastic employed to cement the paper to the fiberglas was the major factor in causing the high flame-spread rating. Mr. Frost asked if the State Fire Marshal 's Office has been informed or if it had offered any suggestions. Mr. Dodge responded that while the State Fire Marshal had been consulted, since Washington County Fire District No. 1 is an exempt area under the terms of the State Statutes, it must rnsolve its own problems in r--,Ies such as the cine under discussion. A discussion ensued concerning the relationship between current U.B.C. Section 1718 and Loth current and previous editions of Section 4204 of the U.B.C. Fire Marshal Butts commented that his office has no record of insulation in void and noninhabited areas as being a contributing factor in fire spread. Fire Code Board of Appeals W'.,a ri ng July 1 , 1981 - Koll Business Center - Page 4 APPELLANT'S CASE PRESENTED BY Mr. Saito identified himself and his RICK SAITO: firm and introduced the current Project Manager for the Koll Company, Mr. Ray Lange. Mr. Saito thcn testified that while his firm had not been retained to design the buildings originally, they had now been retained to help resolve the issue. Mr. Saito went on to advise that the issue and the regulations had caused considerable confusion with a large number of building departments with which his firm deals regularly. Mr. Saito advised that his clients had no knowledge of the properties of the insul- ation before or during the construction process and suggested that the insulation under discussion has perhaps never been tested by a bonified testing agency. Mr. Saito described the buildings as having the kraft-faced blanket insulation serving as ceilings in perhaps 50 to 60 percent of all of the buildings within the complex. The complex is made up of li buildings covering approximately 180,000 square feet. The buildings are not sprinkler protected but are subdivided into sections by 2-hour fire walls. Some of the buildings house light manufacturing operations. Most of them house predominently storage areas while some spaces within the buildings are neither connected with storage or manufactur- ing and are employed totally as office apace. Sixteen thousand square feet would be the max- imum size of any building without a fire separation wall and most buildings are sub- divided into smaller spaces due to restrictions imposed for lack of sufficient yards or open spaces surrounding the buildings. Mr. Saito testified that the areas which are not in compliance insofar as interior flame-spread rating is concerned are predominately those areas which are employed as warehouses with little or no human oc- cupancy. Mr. Saito then testified that research conducted by his firm revealed no problems with respect to the insulation under discussion, that the facing paper is very thin and the fiberglass is noncombustible. In addition to the fire separation walls, the buildings are further subdivided by tenant Fire Code Board of Appeals Hearing - July 1 , 1981 - Koll Business Center Page 5 demising walls so that no individual space is excessive in area. Mr. Frost expressed concern about fire extending from one tenant space into the next tenant space by horizontal propagation. Mr. Saito responded that each tenant separation wall or demising wall was composed of 5/8-inch thick gypsum plasterboard which extends to the roof structure. DISCUSSION: A discussion ensued concerning the method of construction of the roof structure which is a glue-lam solid purlin and solid joist system. The roof structure was diagramed on the blackboard by Mr. Dodge. Mr. Adams commented that the other Koll complexes with which he is familiar has a myriad or occupancies ranging from mini -warehouses to auto detail shops (where as many as four or five older cars are accommodated) tj showrooms for carpet sales, meeting rooms having a heavy occupant load and so on. Mr. Saito responded that the restrictions in the lease contracts in the complex under discussion would preclude the employ- ment of any tenant space for purposes other than those which would qualify for a Group B, Division 2 occupancy rating. A discussion ensued regarding the policing of the tenant's acitivites. A question arose regarding tenant improvement plans. Mr. Dodge testified that tenant improvement plans are received and reviewed prior to construction and that actual con- struci;ion is inspected during the developmerit process. While it is possible that someone could suripticiously do some remodeling with- in a building, -it is not probable that it would be done without coming to the attention of the fire marshal 's office due to the continuous inspection program pursued within the jurisdiction. Fire Code Board of Appeals He �•ing July 1 , 1981 - Koll Business Center Page 6 Mr. Beard inquired about like situations in buildings owned by other firms. Mr. Dodge responded that he was not aware of any other buildings within the jurisdiction wherein the same material had been installed in the same manner as in the one render discussion. DISCUSSION: A discussion ensued regarding other buildings and other complexes in which like conditions prevailed, the establishment of a precedent as a result of this hearing, what to do if the issue surfaces again in the case of a different class of occupancy, etc. Mr. Lange presented testimony in which he advised the Board that his firm will not be changing the buildings, the nature of the occupancy of the buildings or adding onto the buildings. If new buildings are built on the site, his firm will abide by all new rules and ordinances. Mr. Lange then explored, for the Board, various options which the Koll Company had investigated to determine what could be done to reduce the flame spread rating of the kraft-faced paper insulation to an acceptable level . Mr. Saito commented that there are no materials available which may be applied to the in>ulation which would reduce its flame spread rating to 200. That is, he advised, the only ,materials available to reduce the flame spread rating of the material far exceeds the code requirements. The options were itemized as: a) painting the paper facing with an intumescent paint b) spray the paper facing with a fire- retardant salt solution. c) covering the entire underside of the roof area with a vinyl fabric (which could result in a condensation problem) . It is not known if any of the options could prove Fire Code Board of Appeals Hearing _ July 1 , 1981 - Koll Business Center Pag? 7 beneficial and actually accomplish the desired result. The least expensive option would cost: the Koll Company approximately $30,000. TESTIMONY OF ED WALDEN CITY OF TIGARD BUILDING Mr. Walden stated that the testimony OFFICIAL_ that he had heard so far indicated that both sides of the issue had been fairly well stated. He stated th;it the City of Tigard has many buildings , not within this complex, with the same problem. As of this date, he has found no simple solution and they are still in the process of investigating means of providing adequate sire protection within the frame- work of the Code. He suggested that some type of program be initiated where the owner of these problem buildings could, over- a period of time, work on the buildings to the effect: that they will eventually be brought up to meet Code requirements. A lengthy discussion followed in which the burning characteristics of paper faced and kraft faced fiberglas was discussed and in which the general phenomenon of flame propagation was explored. MOTION Following this discussion, Mr. Frost moved, seconded by Mr. Alexander, that the kraft faced fiberglas insulation he permitted to remain as installed provided the character and use of the buildings remained Group B, Division 2 Occupancies. Motion carried 3-1 with Mr. Adams dissenting. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned by Mr. Beard at 11 :30 a.m. Approved thi s _ day of ___,_ ._____T__, 1981 zzt7 Signed Richard D. Butts, Secretary Fire Code Board of Appeals 20665 S.W. Blanton St. P.O. Box Y Aloha,Oregon 97006 �gtsuM ti 5031649.8577 �9FDist June 22, 1981 Mr. Greg Zander Koll Business Center 10110 S. W. Nimbus Avenue Portland, Oregon 97223 Dear Mr. Zander: Re: Southern Dental Industries Koll Business Center - Building L 10240 S. W. Nimbus Avenue For the record, the plans for this tenant space, which we approved for drywall cover on June 19, 1981 , are hereby approved insofar as fire (1z are concerned. yours, Y FIRE DISI ,Ci NO. ge Plans Examiner jcc cc: c--td Walden Fire prevention does not cost it pays 111111111111 11 1111 I I F 11 1 20665 S.W. Blanton St. P.O. Box Y eREBa� Aloha, Oregon 97006 503/649-8577 O• FIST. June 22, 1981 Mr. Ray Lange Project Manager The Koll Company 10110 S. W. Nimbus Avenue Portland, Oregon 97223 Dear Mr. Lange: In response to your letter of June 17, 1981 , the Fire Code Board of Appeals will meet on Wednesday, July 1 , 1981 , at 10:00 a.m. in the Public Meeting Room of the Administration Center for Washington County Fire District No. 1 located at 20665 S. W. Blanton Street in Aloha, for the purpose of conducting a hearing into the matter of your appeal for, relief from the -equirements contained in Chapter 42 of the Uniform Building Code (1976 edition) . Please arrange to be present at that time or have your authorized repren- tative present with material , testimony, information, eLc. which you wish the Board to consider in behalf of the position which your firm has assumed on the issue. To provide you with prior disclosure of all information which is being for- warded to the Board for their perusal prior to the hearing, we are herewith enclosing a copy of the correspondence file relating to the matter of the kraft faced insulation interior finish, a copy of Chapter 42 of the appli- cable code and a stat"nent of facts concerning the issue as prepared by Mr. Dodge, our Plans Examiner . Please let us know if there "s any way we can be of additional service to your prior to the hearing. Very truly yours , WA �IIIGTON COUNTY �L SfRICT NO. 1 Richard D. Bucts Fire Marshal jcc cc: Board of Appeals cam-£-d- Wa 1 den Rick Saito Fire prevention does not gust it pays "RwIfFil\1i a '� �q.dGMilCE1Y511GYJlht.Y4ra'ilk\WSidiil:MY:.11i��lY1MJYFWYIWIWI..e.. .w.nrw.�.. r r. Ln `11 KOLL ;11VV?; CI CONTRACTOR FO June 17, 1981 Fire Code Board of Appeals Washington County Fire Protection Dist. #1 P.O. Box Y Aloha, OR 97006 RE: Appeal of 1976 Uniform Building Code Chapter #42 Flame Spread Requirements Dear Sirs: The Koll Company hereby reques s that consideration be given to relieve the flame spread requirement for exposed ceiling areas for the Koll Business Center Project in Tigard, Oregon. The specific requirement is described in Chapter #42 in the 1976 Uniform Building Code and in Table #42-B, "Minimum Interior Finish Classifications". These requirements call for a maximum flamr� spread rating of 200 for exposed ceiling materials. The principal ceiling materials for this particular project is Kraft faced R-11 fiberglass batt insulation. It appears that this material has a flame spread rating in excess of the 200 required. The subject buildings were constructed under the 1976 Uniform Building Code as amended by the Department of Commerce as was in effect in this jurisdiction through June 30, 1960. The buildings are of Type 5 construction ranging in size from 14000 to 21000 sq.ft. Approximately 50-60$ of the exposed exterior wall surfaces of these buildings consist of concrete wall panels. The roofs of these ::tingle level buildings are constructed of glu lam beams and wood fiaming'. All the roof areas of the buildings are insulated with R• 11 Kraft faced fiberglas batt insulation. The actual flame spread rating of the insulation was discovered in December of 1980 or. January of. 1981 by which time all the buildings had been completed. The actual investigation of the flame spread for this insulation material stemmed from a charge in the 1.979 Uniform Building Code which became effective on July 1, 1980. This particular change had not :,een well known or enforced until December of 1980 or January of 1931. The Koll Company requests relief from the Code requirement so that the existing insulation be allowed to remain "as is" for the following reasons: 10110 S. W. Nimbus Avenue • 8.11 • Portland • Oregon 97223 • (503) 584.0510 s � Page 2 Fire Code Board of Appeals ,Tune 17, 1981 1. Tile office portions of the tenant's space, and in some cases all of the spaces, are covered with suspended acoustical ceiling which limits exposure to the "hazard" to the relatively unoccupied warehouse area. 2. The problem was only recently discovered implying that most warehouse buildings built since the early 1970's with exposed roof insulation do not comply with U.B.C. 3. During the actual construction of the buildings care was taken by The Koll Company to coordinate the installation with representatives of the Fire DiLtrict and the Building Department. (Again, the flame spread problem of this material was not known by any of the parties at this time) . 4. These multi-tenant buildings are designed to have relatively low occupancy levels in each space. The warehouse areas where the exposed ceilings exist will generally not have any permanent occupants being mainly used for stora;e. 5. No known problems relating to fire with this materia]. are known to this company or to the Architects and Engineers who have aided The Koll Company in investigating this problem. The actual flammable material is very thin and the entire insulation batt is made up principally of non-combustible material. The Koll Company does not feel that allowinci this insulation material to remain "as is" is a detriment to the safE!ty of any of the in- habitants within the buildings. The ceilings are relatively high, the spaces are open and more than adequate exiting has and will be provided. For these reasons, coupled with the extenuating circum- i stances of prior construction and lack of specific_ knowledge of this wide spread materia]., The Koll Company asks for relief of the I requirements of Chapter #42 the 1976 Uniform Building Code. Very truly yours, THE KOLL COMPANY I Ray Lange Project Manager RL/nt c c: Sonna Durdel 20665 S,W. Blanlon St. P.O. Box Y � w Aloha,Oregon 97006 5031649.8577 March 12, 11381 \ , Mr. Ray Lange Project Manager Kol l Company 10110 S. W. Nimbus Avenue Beaverton, Oregon 9 723 Dear Mr. Lange: In confirmation of our conversation at your office on March 11 , 1981 , concerning the modification to the plans for the development cf the tenant space for Graphic Arts, we find the arrangement as shown on the submitted drawings to be acceptable insofar as fire safety regulations apply. We trust this letter will assist in clearing the way for the development of the project. Please let us know if we can be of service in any other way in this regard. Turning now to another matter, we need some sort of indication from your firm as to the method you have decided upon to reduce the flame spread rating of the insulation which forms the interior finish of the warehouse spaces. In addition, we need to have some sort of time frame for com- pleting this required work. Although we do not wish to press you with respect to this issue, we are obliged both legally and morally to pursue the matter with a certain amount of prudent vigor. That is, we must have some sort of commitment from you or we will be obliged to order and direct thatimmediate action be 'Laken and to establish a deadline for the com- pletion of the remedial process. I trust you can appreciate and empathize with the position that we are in. We have been placed on notice, by Owens-Corning Fiberglas, that a violation of the fire safety regulations exists s matters now stand, we are legally liable for any loss which could be ed to the violati . We are hopeful that this issue can be resolv in the very near re. Ve •. , ) uly yours, IL 1�G-1 )UNTY FIP = (iI` E'1 J0. 1 Wilburn Dodge Plans Examiner icc ;.c: Ed Walden Inspector Jeffries Fire prevent un does nut cost rt pays 20665 S.W. Blanton St, P.U. Box Y Aloha,Uregon 97006 � �RE6�M i►�, 503l649-8577 February 9, 1981 Clay pF jIGARQ Mr. Ray Lange Project Manager Koll Company 82.53 S. W. Cirrus Drive Beaverton, Oregon 97005 Dear 11,^. Lange : Re: Building B -- Koll Business Center 10100 S. W. Scholls Ferry Road The plans for the construction of a demising wall along gri,' line 3 between grid lines 13 and D, reference being made to the original archi- tectural drawing sheet A-2, to accommodate tenant improvements for the Graphic Arts Project Incorporated, have been examined with reference to currently applicable fire safety regulations. The general layout is found to he acceptable. Assuming that the demising wall will he constructed of steel studs and gypsum plasterboard, the plans under discussion are hereby approved. We are returning the submitted drawings to the Tigard Building Department. ary t y yours, WA V ON C l TY FIRF DIST C1 0. to Wilburn Dodge Plans Examiner jcc cc: LTigard Building Department Inspector Jeffries Fire prevention does not cost it !gays LS FERRY ROAD �Y" •• n `'9''04' 22' _ lbo'1&2!V :� .,s..��. k_'r�F�/(•�esIOIK-g�� 5N7. AI7 r 1 F¢ UM1�Df 105�'AG-- sZ i cn L ♦ 101 1 - � g _r IrTS j f •i - cr -� •- Yry. � rl CONG,fte,1AaNjNG • �i/4LL I pe i J 1 I 4 rY� NCD t- fte- c� '.,ofd��/�•� ��¢ � L♦ ��, �; v Off I-H Gok'�t N�T1oN- +/a'.C+`(r,-41 V I t� �0l�1r4�vLl(� �„trr� a tG'o.c, F•1L. - - _ r vs _ � d p• s _ IP ;BEQ ry pS' �V � � _ 77.r 4 = PLAI: z II 7rh , scmc — r-=- e Lc `'� - \a p �z Z, ` o� I ' 0.1 I J I TGA Lin - �=�a -r.c �,rC Seo r c _ � 71- ,/ �J Are55--� �o� �o Sc.<J lVn��us o�vdk4e f /`t . d . ON 3Q t--- �EGE►v t:.0 20665 S.W. Blanton Sl. P.O. Box Y a�EaoM Aloha,Oregon 97006 O� 1►(iAfZU 5031649-8577 CITY Div. �o February 4, 1981 Mr. Ray Lange KolI Company 8253 S. W. Cirrus Drive Beaverton, Oregon 97005 Dear Mr. Lange: Re: Building B - Koll Business Center 10100 S. W. Scholls Ferry Road Regarding our discussion of February 2, 1981 , concerning the modification plans for Bays 10 and 11 for the purpose of developing office space for occupancy by your firm, it is understood that the proposal contained in our letter dated January 23, 1981 , and directed to Dennis Woods of Mackenzie/ Saito and Associates, is not acceptable from the owner's point of view. As we understand it, you propose as an alternate to eliminate the access doorway between Room 106 and Room 107 and instead provide an access door leading from Room 107 into the warehouse space. From reviewing this in conjunction with currentcode requirements, and by exercising a degree of tolerance, we are somewhat reluctantly forced into stipulating that the proposal does substantially coincide with the letter of the code if not the spirit and intent. Accordingly, we are left with little alternative but to approve the prescribed revision. From our aforecited conversation, we are of the impression that the actual construction of the facilities under discussion has proceeded prior to the approval of the plans therefore by this office. This is in conflict with Section IV of the Fire Prevention Ordinance of this District and although we do not intend to make an issue of it in this case, we are obliged to adivse you that in the future we will not be hesitant about proceeding with prosecution of such violations nor in requiring that razing of any o nding construction. fn ►y case, we trust this letter will serve to cle • the record. V .y ruly o rs, 0 IjT i TY FI R F Ff i t 1 Wilburn Dodge Plans Examiner jcc cc: /Tigard Building Department Fire prevention does not cost it pays ���GTOIN c�G 20665 S.W. Blanton St. � 1 P.O. Box Y Aloha, Oregon 97006 ngyp. 5031649-8577 DIST. January 13, 1981 Mr. Del Zander Koll Company 82.53 S. W. Cirrus Drive Beaverton, Oregon 91005 Dear Mr. Zander: Re: Koll Business Center 10100 S. W. Scholls Ferry Road Enclosed herewith is a copy of a letter which I just received from Mr. Tom Campbell of the Fiberglas Corporation which lists certain products which qualify to produce an acceptable interior finish flame spread rating under the kraft faced insulation installed in this project. At least these are Borne materials which you might want to consider. When you have decided on what course to pursue with respect to this issue, we would appreciate being consulted and advised. It is a matter which must be a_ddr) sed within the near future. We trust we will be hearing from you . r- Very trul,, yours, _ l / 14ASIII1V ON COU�TI'/FIP,F DISTRI N0. 1 Wi lhu,,n k,dye Plans Fx,3miner � J jcc cc: Dave Merman Ed Walden Clyde Centers Inspector Keys Fire prevention does riot cost it pays OWI NS/CORNING OWENS-CORNING FIBERGLAS CORPORATION P.O. SOX 59, SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA 95052 (AIN) 727.2526 January 6, 1981 Washington County Fire District No. 1 P. 0. Box Y Aloha, Oregon 97006 Subject: Exposed Insulation Vapor Barriers Dear Will : To confirm our conversation of this morning, there are several materials available which can be used to cover the exposed kraft facing on the insulation installed in the roof systems of the warehouses in Aloha. We generally recommend a foil-reinforced kraft (FRK) but there are also reinforced vinyls and plain unreinforced vinyl films, all of which have flame spread ratings of less than 25 and are UL labeled. The FRK facing is used in the metal building trade as well as for a vapor barrier on duct insulation. The vinyl films are primarily used on metal building insulation. I believe that you will find they are available in widths of 48 to 52 inches and should be in stock in the Owens-Corning Fiberglas Supply Center in Tigard. Mr. Mark Cameron is manager of the Supply Center and can give you additional information. We would appreciate it if you would discuss this problem at the next meeting of your Fire Marshals Association. Ver' truly yours, T. C. Campbell , Manager Codes and Standards for Public Safety TCC/cl cc: Doug Vezina - Portland Branch Mark Cameron - Portland Supply 20665 S.W. Blanton St, P.O. Box Y Aloha,Oregon 97006 AA �RE6�� � 503/649-8577 DIST. January 5, 1981 Mr. Del Zander Project Manager Koll Company 82.53 S. W. Cirrus Drive Beaverton, Oregon 97005 near Mr. 7ander: Re: Koll Business Center 10100 S. W. Scholls Ferry Road In reference to my letter to you of December 30, 1980, this morning I received a call from Mr. Tom Campbell of the Santa Clara offices of Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corporation. lie discussed to some length the problem with which we are faced with respect to the Kraft Faced Insu- lation blankets. As a result, Mr. Campbell advised that they have a material which he referred to as foil re-enforced Kraft or F-R-K which, among other things, is employed as a wrapping for fiberclas HVAC duct work and does have a flame spread rating of 25 or less. This material comes in 50-inch-wide rolls , as I understand. He suggested, as another option, the stapling of this material to the roof joists immediately below the Kraft Faced insulating blankets. Although the application of this material will , no doubt, entail a considerable expense, it appears at this juncture to be the least expensive method o' meeting Code requirements which I have heard of so far. Fire prevernlon does not cost . it pays Mr. Del lander January 5, 1981 Page 2 Again, we must remember that it is only necessary to achieve a flame spread rating of 20(1 or less. Mr. Campbell advises that the F-R--K material far exceeds the performance criteria. In any case, and as I advised ou previously, I will continue to attempt to be apprehensive �__-ft any ther options that mi ht present themselves. Veryel ily yours, WAS GiON OUNTY FIRE DIS PRI C,` N 1 Wilburn Dodge Plans Examiner jcc cc: Ed Walden Clyde Centers Tom Campbell Douglas Vezina Dave Herman Inspector Keys i Sh �' Gym 20665 S.W. Blanton St. P.O. Dox Y Aloha,Oregon 97006 ,� ��t�oo •�, 503/649-8577 December 30, 1980 M.r. Del Zander Project Manager Koll Company 8253 S. W. Cirrus Drive Beaverton, Oregon 9700E Dear Mr. Zander: Re: Koll Business Center 10100 S. W. Scholls Ferry Road Regarding our telephone conve-sation of December 29, 1980, concerning the Owens-Corning Fiberglas Kra Ft Paper-faced Insulating Blankets which have been installed beneath the roof of the buildings which com- pose tt:is complex, needless to say, the news contained in Mr. Vezina' s letter of December 5 (copy enclosed) which I received on December 29, came as quite a shock. Until that time I had no idea that the paper and foil-faced Owens-Corning Fiberglas Blankets had a flame spread rating of over 200. I have since been in contact with the Owens-Corning people and they advise that the flame spread rating is significantly greater than 200 in both instances. Apparently, this is due to the bituminous base mastic which they use to adhere the facing to the blanket. The reference to Section 1718 in the Owens-Corning letter, incidentally, has no bearing on the Koll Business Center on Scholls Ferry Road since the project was started considerably before the effective date of the Section as it currently reads. That is, our records show that we approved the plans in the forepart of May prior to the effective date of the 1979 edition of the Uniform Building Code as amended and adopted by the State of Oregon. Fire prevention does 1101 cost...it nays Mr. Del Zander December 30, 1980 Page 2 On the other hand, the provisions of Chapter 42 of the Code have not chailged substantially in many years. Therefore, the flame spread ratinn limitations for interior finishes of wall and ceiling surfaces as contained in the 1976 edition of the Code were in effect at the time the permits were issued for the construction of these buildings. Section 4204 and Tables 42-A and 42-B, in conjunction one with the other, require that the interior finish of rooms or areas not exceed a Class III rating which, on the Tunnel Test Scale, is a flame spread rating of not greater than 200. However, Section 4201 states in part of . . . requirements for finishes in this chapter shall not apply to trim, . . . nor to materials which are less than 1/28-inch in thickness cemented to surfaces of walls or ceilings, if these materials have a flame spread characteristic no greater tha�aper_of_this thickne_s_s cemented to a noncombustible backing . " �emphes�s supplied�.� While I think the spirit and intent of the Code would preclude the Kraft faced insulation blankets being employed as an interior finish without cover, there does appear to be the possibility of a conflict in requirements particularly when one considers the quoted section in conjunction with the current reading of Section 1718. With reference to our discussion concerning investigation of the material in question prior to its application, it is not only possible but highly probable that either Mr. Lange or Mr. Calhoun checked with me beforehand and I would have had no reason not to consider the product acceptable. That is, both Mr. Lange and Mr. Calhoun have been except- ionally careful and cooperative in not proceeding without getting prior clearance. While I do not recall having discussed specifically in- sulation in the context of interior finish, if either one of them recall having discussed the issue with me I am sure that they did. I am equally sure that I would not have considered the roof insulation a significant factor with reference to fire safety requirements. The Owens-Corning letter has, of course, served to drastically change that point of view. Except for placing circumstances in perspective, rehashing r,r what trans- pired does little to solve the problem at hand. I will personally continue to pursue the issue in the hope of discovering some solution which will be relatively simple to implement. But, as matters now stand, it would appear that there are very few options open. Probably the most. effective means of' resolving the issue would be to install a ceiling nailed directly to the joists in each warehouse space. This could, however, create a separate problem; i .e. ventilation of the dead air space between the ceiling and the roof deck. The second option which comes to mind is application o` a fire retaru, .; finish to the Kraft paper facing. Whether or not this could be an effec- tive remedy would be something I would need to pursue in greater depth with people having a more technical background than I have in this field. Mr. Del Zander December- 30, 1980 Page 3 A third and least desirable option, from my frame of reference, vlauld be to appeal the issue to the appropriate Board of Appeals ( in our instance, this would be the Fire Code Board of Appeals) in the hope of obtaining a variance based upon mitigating circumstances which you would havr to convince the Appeal Board prevail in this case; e.g. negligible and intermittent human occupancy. As previously stated, I will continue to pursue this matter in the hope that we may resolve the issue with the least amount of discomfort for all persons involved. If, in the meantime, any possible solutions present themselves to you or if we can explore possible courses of action together, I would appreciate it if you would contact me. Very t y yours, 'w ; IGTON COUNTY FIRE DI1 R r NO 1 _C) ilburn Dodge Pians Examiner jcc cc: Ed Walden Clyde Centers Douglas Vezina Oave Herman Inspector Keys Enclosure - � V Ail OWENS-CORNING FIBERGLAS CORPORATION (MAILING) P. O. BOX 2718, PORTLAND, OREGON 97208, PHONE: (503)820-10 December 5, 1980 (STREET) 14101 S. W. 72ND AVE., TIGARD, OREGON 97223, PHONE: (503)820-10 Dear Mr . Code Official , Enclosed is a copy of Code Change 17-78-1 approved by membership of I .C.B.O. at their annual business meeting in Anchorage, Alaska, in September 1979. This change will appear in the 1282edition of the Unjfgrm3uildjng Code and is in the 19 u'�up-plemem . Currently, you as the Building Official, have authority under Chapter 42 of the Uniform Building Code, "Interi.or Wall and Ceiling Finish", to regulate the f amt a read of insulating materials which are exposed in ro_m re d oiher a itu fi._.oc�u a areas. This inciu es materials in-t})e roofs of warehouses T there is n a_cP covering i't •.__�,...... _ Owens/Corning Fiberglas has been trying to create an awareness with Fire Marshalls and 'Code Officials that our standard Kraft. Faced and Foil Faced Insulation blankets have flame spread ratings of over 200 and therefore. douult neet the code requirements for interior finishes when left The State of Oregon, when they adopted the 1979 Uniform Building Code, included the provisions of Section 1718. You, therefore, have the authority and the resp,^.nsi.bil_tty to regulate the flame spread .requirements on insulations in all locations . Ovens/Corning Fiberglas is vitally interested In the proper appli.caiton of all of its materials and urges the enforcement of these provisions. Furthermore, Oviens/Corning does manufacture a product to meet this new code for facing to have flame spreads of 25 or less . Attached is a product information sheet on our FS-25 product which is available to our insulation contractors in Oregon. Should you desire a further explanation of Owens/Corni.Ilg's feelings on this matter, please feel free to contact me at 503-620-1014, or Mr. Torn Campbell at 408-296.-2525 in our Santa Clart:. manufacturing plant. irlcr-re, 31 fjoiig„l,ru; �A . V(','!,i nF1 Pet;lden:. i ] Conntruct.ion Specialist PORTLAND BRANCH OFFICE I