• Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

Large wood-fired commercial smokers – direct vent under porch roof – how is this up to code?

JKazo 76

Registered User
Joined
Apr 8, 2024
Messages
3
Location
Florida
I have learned a lot here and this is my first time posting.

My mother unfortunately lives downwind of a seafood market & smokehouse. She resides in Redington Shores FL which is a small Gulf beach town with about 1200 permanent residents. From a governance standpoint, many things in this town don’t work the way they should.

A few years back, the seafood market added a “smokehouse”. The smokehouse consists of a slab on grade screened-in porch attached to the side of the principal building. The principal building is a mixed-use residential/commercial building with a retail market on the 1st floor and dwelling units on the second floor.

The smokehouse houses five enormous gas and wood-fired rotisserie barbeque smokers. They are Southern Pride BBR-700 Series and the installation instructions can be found online. These smokers are primarily used to smoke fish which is further processed into a fish spread for wholesale distribution. When operating at capacity the smoke emissions are insane.

These smokers directly vent under the roof of the smokehouse. They emit large amounts of wood smoke and oily vapor which collects under the roof and against the wall of the primary structure. I am an attorney and years ago I was involved in some litigation that has allowed me to gain some familiarity with I-Codes and NFPA. That said, this is well outside my wheelhouse.

The installation instructions provide for two venting options: (1) type 1 hood, and (2) direct vent through the roof with an on-demand smoke evacuator.

My endgame is to shut the smoking operation down. If they have to vent through a stack, then it will cause them other issues (zoning & environmental performance).

Reading through FBCM and NFPA 96 I see multiple overlapping provisions that these types of appliances must be listed, labeled, and installed per the terms of their listing. I can’t find any exceptions that would apply. Is there any way that this could be code-compliant? I would be grateful if someone could “check my math”. How can something like this pass inspection?

Thanks.Untitled_1.1.2.jpgNachman Combined Photos_04Jan24-26.jpgNachman Combined Photos_04Jan24-02.jpg
 
Start verifying that the codes you cite are enforceable by the jurisdiction you are in, for example NFPA are standards not requirements, for the NFPA standard to be enforced it has to be adopted by the promulgating authority that have to be adopted authority having jurisdiction.
 
Start verifying that the codes you cite are enforceable by the jurisdiction you are in, for example NFPA are standards not requirements, for the NFPA standard to be enforced it has to be adopted by the promulgating authority that have to be adopted authority having jurisdiction.
The FL Fire Prevention Code is NFPA 1 and NFPA 101 + local amendments. The NFPA reference standards are incorporated into State law subject to local amendments. Even if it was not, it would not make any difference. FBC-M/IMC require these things to be installed per the manufacturer’s instruction (which also reference NFPA 96). FBC-M/IMC also have hood requirements applicable to this type of appliance.
 
Does the County or State requlate air quality?
Both. The state has a body of environmental law. State law sets minimum standards. Each county has a body of environmental law. Much of county law is coextensive with state law but you will usually find areas where county law is stricter. In terms of enforcement, a county can act as the state’s designee if the county operates under a state-approved “local pollution plan” so long as the local plan is as strict or stricter than state law. Under this arrangement, the county replaces the state in terms of enforcement (for the most part). If a county has such a local plan, then the State gives the county funds to perform the job the state would normally do. Not all counties operate a local plan. Unfortunately, Pinellas County operates a local plan, and it is a clown show. I had this place inspected by a county inspector. The Inspector showed up when the smokers were not smoking. The case was closed with no violations found. My complaint was supported with many photos and 100 hrs of time laps security video showing smoke billowing out of this place. The county will not do anything unless their inspector is there to smell the smoke (I am not joking). The whole situation is absurd. I am talking to Tallahassee to see if I can get the state to step back in.
 
These smokers directly vent under the roof of the smokehouse. They emit large amounts of wood smoke and oily vapor which collects under the roof and against the wall of the primary structure. I am an attorney and years ago I was involved in some litigation that has allowed me to gain some familiarity with I-Codes and NFPA. That said, this is well outside my wheelhouse.

The installation instructions provide for two venting options: (1) type 1 hood, and (2) direct vent through the roof with an on-demand smoke evacuator.
Absolutely not installed in accordance with the manufacturer's installation instructions. Really the only way this wouldn't be a code violation in any code I can think of is if there is no code in place that addresses this installation. Health department or Fire Marshall my be a good starting point. Very much a fire hazard going on there.
 
How can something like this pass inspection?
A legitimate inspection should have failed the installation on several counts.

The Inspector showed up when the smokers were not smoking. The case was closed with no violations found.
That is ridiculous. A new complaint is a new case. There's most certainly other impacted parties. You've already got a little old lady... find a toddler.

She resides in Redington Shores FL which is a small Gulf beach town with about 1200 permanent residents. From a governance standpoint, many things in this town don’t work the way they should.
The town is already getting negative attention.... take it up a notch. From the pictures, I assume that a video is dramatic... I am imagining fish smoke! Oh My Goodness that's awful!
 
A call to the local OSHA office might help too. I can't imagine employee working conditions are very good, particularly air quality in the space.
 
Top