Council hears emergency‑rule petition from food‑truck industry over annual fuel‑gas inspections; decision set for later meeting

The Washington State Building Code Council on May 29 introduced Petition 26, filed by the Washington State Food Trucks Association, requesting emergency action on model code language that requires annual fuel‑gas inspections for mobile food‑preparation vehicles.

SBCC Managing Director Dustin Curb said the petition begins the Administrative Procedures Act process and requires a written Council response within 60 days. "Once an agency receives this form, they have 60 days to respond to the petition," he said, and the Council may only introduce the petition at this meeting, not take the final action to accept or deny it.

Supporters of expedited action cited access and hardship concerns. Council member Tom Young, speaking from the perspective of small‑business impacts, said inspectors’ availability can be limited and urged the Council to consider emergency measures. "If they can't get their inspections done just for a lack of inspectors, and they have to shut down for a period of time, ... these folks require the income on a daily basis," said Tom Young.

Several members and technical witnesses pushed back on the need for a statewide emergency rule. Council member Angela Haupt argued the SBCC does not perform code enforcement: "SBCC is not responsible for code enforcement. That responsibility lies with local jurisdictions," she said, and noted the current code identifies an "approved inspection agency" as acceptable if the local fire code official agrees. Ken Brouillette of the City of Seattle Fire Marshal's Office said local authorities already have statutory authority to grant modifications or alternatives, and "there is no reason to have to do an emergency rule statewide when a local AHJ already has the ability to do this."

Technical commenters also cautioned that proposed petition language could improperly allow waivers that exceed a fire code official’s authority; one speaker noted Section 102 (duties/powers of the fire code official) prevents waiving explicit code requirements while allowing alternative methods of compliance.

Staff and council members reviewed options the Council may take on the petition: deny it with reasons; accept the emergency statement and initiate emergency rulemaking (which requires a finding of emergency by a two‑thirds vote before approving emergency language); or deny the petition but address the issue during the regular code cycle. Dustin Curb explained that an emergency rule is effective for 120 days and maintaining a long‑term change would require embarking on permanent rulemaking and periodic filings.

The Council did not vote on the petition at the May 29 meeting; members asked staff to continue committee technical work and to bring the petition back to the full Council for a determination of whether an emergency basis exists. If the Council later finds an emergency basis, a two‑thirds vote will be required to begin emergency rulemaking.