57
AGENDA NFPA Technical Committee on Building Construction NFPA 220/221/5000 Second Draft Meeting Monday, June 20, 2016 Hilton Fort Lauderdale Marina Fort Lauderdale, Florida 1. Call to order. Call meeting to order by Chair Renato Molina at 8:00 a.m. on June 20, 2016 at the Hilton Fort Lauderdale, Fort Lauderdale, FL. 2. Introduction of committee members and guests. For a current committee roster, see page 2. 3. Approval of July 28, 2015 first draft meeting minutes. See page 5. 4. The process – staff PowerPoint presentation. See page 8. 5. Task Group Reports. a. Green Roof b. Solar/PV Installation c. Tall Timber Structures 6. NFPA 220 Second Draft preparation a. For Public Comments, see page 25. b. For Committee Input, see page 27. 7. NFPA 221 Second Draft preparation. a. For Public Comments, see page 28. b. For Committee Input, see page 30. 8. NFPA 5000 Second Draft preparation. a. For Public Comments, see page 31. b. For Committee Input, see page 46. 9. Other business. 10. Future meetings. 11. Adjournment. Enclosures

AGENDA NFPA Technical Committee on Building …...NFPA Technical Committee on Building Construction NFPA 220/221/5000 First Draft Meeting Tuesday, July 28, 2015 InterContinental Milwaukee

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    10

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

 

AGENDA NFPA Technical Committee on

Building Construction NFPA 220/221/5000 Second Draft Meeting

Monday, June 20, 2016 Hilton Fort Lauderdale Marina

Fort Lauderdale, Florida

1. Call to order. Call meeting to order by Chair Renato Molina at 8:00 a.m. on June 20, 2016 at the Hilton Fort Lauderdale, Fort Lauderdale, FL.

2. Introduction of committee members and guests. For a current committee roster, see page 2.

3. Approval of July 28, 2015 first draft meeting minutes. See page 5.

4. The process – staff PowerPoint presentation. See page 8.

5. Task Group Reports.

a. Green Roof b. Solar/PV Installation c. Tall Timber Structures

6. NFPA 220 Second Draft preparation a. For Public Comments, see page 25. b. For Committee Input, see page 27.

7. NFPA 221 Second Draft preparation. a. For Public Comments, see page 28. b. For Committee Input, see page 30.  

8. NFPA 5000 Second Draft preparation. a. For Public Comments, see page 31. b. For Committee Input, see page 46.

9. Other business.

10. Future meetings.

11. Adjournment.

Enclosures

Address List No PhoneBuilding Construction BLD-BLC

Building Code

Robert E. Solomon06/06/2016

BLD-BLC

Renato R. Molina

ChairJENSEN HUGHES14502 Greenview Drive, Suite 500Laurel, MD 20708Alternate: Jesse J. Beitel

SE 4/3/2003BLD-BLC

Nasser Ahmed Al Zeyara

PrincipalQatar Civil Defense23 Alhilali St AlaziziaDoha, 10180 Qatar

E 10/28/2014

BLD-BLC

Farid Alfawakhiri

PrincipalAmerican Iron and Steel Institute380 Cottonwood LaneNaperville, IL 60540-5020Alternate: Jonathan Humble

M 7/23/2008BLD-BLC

Raymond J. Battalora

PrincipalAon Fire Protection Engineering Corporation1701 North Collins BoulevardSuite 235Richardson, TX 75080-3553Alternate: Edward R. LaPine

I 7/26/2007

BLD-BLC

David S. Collins

PrincipalThe Preview Group, Inc.632 Race StreetCincinnati, OH 45202American Institute of Architects

SE 7/16/2003BLD-BLC

Richard J. Davis

PrincipalFM Global1151 Boston-Providence TurnpikePO Box 9102Norwood, MA 02062-9102Alternate: Daniel Howell

I 4/3/2003

BLD-BLC

Richard L. Day

PrincipalMichigan State Fire Marshal's Office207 Jackson StreetAllegan, MI 49010-9156

E 08/17/2015BLD-BLC

Alan J. Dopart

PrincipalWillis of New Jersey150 John F. Kennedy ParkwayShort Hills, NJ 07078

I 4/3/2003

BLD-BLC

Victor L. Dubrowski

PrincipalCode Consultants, Inc.2043 Woodland ParkwaySt. Louis, MO 63146-4235

SE 7/16/2003BLD-BLC

Paul Ferro

PrincipalFire Department City of New York172 Hendrickson AvenueRockville Centre, NY 11570International Association of Fire FightersAlternate: James M. Dalton

L 07/29/2013

BLD-BLC

David W. Frable

PrincipalUS General Services AdministrationPublic Buildings Service665 Green Meadow LaneGeneva, IL 60134

U 4/3/2003BLD-BLC

Sam W. Francis

PrincipalAmerican Wood Council1 Dutton Farm LaneWest Grove, PA 19390Alternate: Paul D. Coats

M 4/3/2003

BLD-BLC

James W. Gaut

PrincipalMarriott11667 Acosta AvenueOrlando, FL 32836-8821

U 12/8/2015

1

Address List No PhoneBuilding Construction BLD-BLC

Building Code

Robert E. Solomon06/06/2016

BLD-BLC

Kurtis Grant

PrincipalUS Department of Health & Human ServicesCenters for Medicare & Medicaid ServicesDivision of Survey and Certification61 Forsyth Street SW, Suite 4T20Atlanta, GA 30303-8909

E 04/08/2015BLD-BLC

William J. Hall

PrincipalPortland Cement Association1040 Duprees Store RoadDrakes Branch, VA 23937-2516

M 12/08/2015

BLD-BLC

Robert E. Hanson

PrincipalSavannah River Nuclear Solutions739 Turning Leaf CircleAugusta, GA 30909-6063

U 12/08/2015BLD-BLC

Khaled Heiza

PrincipalMonofia University20 Salem StreetAgouzaGiza, Cairo, 11312 Egypt

SE 03/03/2014

BLD-BLC

Joseph T. Holland

PrincipalHoover Treated Wood Products1225 North Halifax AvenueDaytona Beach, FL 32118-3665Alternate: David G. Bueche

M 7/16/2003BLD-BLC

Jeffrey M. Hugo

PrincipalNational Fire Sprinkler Association, Inc.1088 West Borton RoadEssexville, MI 48732-1541

M 7/26/2007

BLD-BLC

Aaron Johnson

PrincipalRural/Metro CorporationSpecialty Fire Division @ Sikorsky Aircraft285 SW Ridgecrest DrivePort St. Lucie, FL 34953-8305

E 08/17/2015BLD-BLC

Dale Litton

PrincipalTexas Instruments, Inc.13020 TI Boulevard, MS 3619Dallas, TX 75243Semiconductor Industry AssociationAlternate: William E. Koffel

U 10/27/2009

BLD-BLC

Vickie J. Lovell

PrincipalInterCode Incorporated200 NE 2nd Avenue, Suite 309Delray Beach, FL 33444Fire Safe North America

M 08/09/2012BLD-BLC

Joe McElvaney

PrincipalCity of Phoenix Fire Department150 South 12th streetPhoenix, AZ 85034-2301

E 10/27/2005

BLD-BLC

Thomas W. McKeon

PrincipalEverest National Insurance18 Kalan Farm RoadHampton, NJ 08827-2559

I 04/08/2015BLD-BLC

Brad Schiffer

PrincipalBrad Schiffer/Taxis, Inc.520 Sugar Pine LaneNaples, FL 34108

SE 4/3/2003

BLD-BLC

Joseph H. Versteeg

PrincipalVersteeg Associates86 University DriveTorrington, CT 06790International Fire Marshals Association

E 10/27/2005BLD-BLC

Peter J. Willse

PrincipalGlobal Asset Protection Services100 Constitution Plaza, 12th FloorHartford, CT 06103

I 4/3/2003

2

Address List No PhoneBuilding Construction BLD-BLC

Building Code

Robert E. Solomon06/06/2016

BLD-BLC

Luke C. Woods

PrincipalUL LLC146 Nathaniel DriveWhitinsville, MA 01588-1070Alternate: Richard N. Walke

RT 03/07/2013BLD-BLC

Michael Schmeida

Voting AlternateGypsum Association3730 Sharon-Copley RoadMedina, OH 44256-9778

M 12/08/2015

BLD-BLC

Jesse J. Beitel

AlternateJENSEN HUGHES3610 Commerce Drive, Suite 817Baltimore, MD 21227-1652Principal: Renato R. Molina

SE 4/3/2003BLD-BLC

David G. Bueche

AlternateHoover Treated Wood Products13768 West Asbury CircleLakewood, CO 80228Principal: Joseph T. Holland

M 11/2/2006

BLD-BLC

Paul D. Coats

AlternateAmerican Wood Council4695 Hannah DriveRock Hill, SC 29732-9767Principal: Sam W. Francis

M 08/17/2015BLD-BLC

James M. Dalton

AlternateChicago Fire DepartmentR.J. Quinn Fire Academy558 West De Koven StreetChicago, IL 60607International Association of Fire FightersPrincipal: Paul Ferro

L 07/29/2013

BLD-BLC

Daniel Howell

AlternateFM Global1151 Boston Providence TurnpikePO Box 9102Norwood, MA 02062Principal: Richard J. Davis

I 08/11/2014BLD-BLC

Jonathan Humble

AlternateAmerican Iron and Steel Institute45 South Main Street, Suite 312West Hartford, CT 06107-2402Principal: Farid Alfawakhiri

M 7/23/2008

BLD-BLC

William E. Koffel

AlternateKoffel Associates, Inc.8815 Centre Park Drive, Suite 200Columbia, MD 21045-2107Semiconductor Industry AssociationPrincipal: Dale Litton

U 7/16/2003BLD-BLC

Edward R. LaPine

AlternateJENSEN HUGHES668 N. 44th StreetPhoenix, AZ 85008Principal: Raymond J. Battalora

I 10/29/2012

BLD-BLC

Richard N. Walke

AlternateUL LLC333 Pfingsten RoadNorthbrook, IL 60062-2096Principal: Luke C. Woods

RT 08/17/2015BLD-BLC

Robert E. Solomon

Staff LiaisonNational Fire Protection Association1 Batterymarch ParkQuincy, MA 02169-7471

02/03/2016

3

MINUTES

NFPA Technical Committee on

Building Construction

NFPA 220/221/5000 First Draft Meeting Tuesday, July 28, 2015

InterContinental Milwaukee

Milwaukee, WI

1. Call to order. The meeting was called to order by Chair Renato Molina at 8:00 a.m. on

July 28, 2015 at the InterContinental Milwaukee Hotel, Milwaukee, WI.

2. Self -introductions were made by Committee Members and Guests.

TECHNICAL COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT

NAME COMPANY

Renato Molino, Chair JENSEN HUGHES

Nasser Al Zeyara, Principal Qatar Civil Defense

Richard Davis, Principal FM Global

Alan Dopart, Principal Willis of New Jersey

Victor Dubrowski, Principal Code Consultants, Inc.

Sam Francis, Principal American Wood Council

Joseph Holland, Principal Hoover Treated Wood Products

Jeffrey Hugo, Principal National Fire Sprinkler Association

Robert Solomon, Staff Liaison National Fire Protection Association

Joseph Versteeg, Principal Versteeg Associates

Robert Wessel, Principal Gypsum Association

Peter Willse, Principal Global Asset Protection Services

Luke Woods, Principal UL LLC

David Bueche, Alt. to Joseph Holland Hoover Treated Wood Products

Jonathan Humble, Alt. to Farid

Alfawakhiri

American Iron and Steel Institute

Edward LaPine, Alt. to Raymond

Battalora

Aon

TECHNICAL COMMITTEE MEMBERS NOT PRESENT

NAME COMPANY

Jason Butler, Principal Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, LLC

David Collins, Principal The Preview Group, Inc.

Rep.: American Institute of Architects

Peter Cutrer, Principal Rochester Fire Department

Paul Ferro, Principal Fire Department City of New York

Rep.: International Association of Fire

Fighters

Dave Frable, Principal US General Services Administration

Kurtis Grant, Principal US Department of Health & Human

Services

Khaled Heiza, Principal Monofia University

Dale Litton, Principal Texas Instruments, Inc.

Rep.: Semiconductor Industry Association

Vicki Lovell, Principal InterCode Incorporated

Rep.: Fire Safe North America

Joe McElvaney, Principal Phoenix Fire Department

Thomas McKeon, Principal Everest National Insurance

Brad Schiffer, Principal Brad Schiffer/Taxis, Inc.

GUESTS

NAME COMPANY

Jon-Paul Cardin American Iron and Steel Institute

Paul Coats American Wood Council

Jim Gogolski Hoover Treated Wood

William Jay Hall Portland Cement Association

Andy Williams MCA

3. Approval of May 20, 2013 second draft meeting minutes. The minutes from the May

20, 2013 second draft meeting were reviewed and approved.

4. The process- staff PowerPoint presentation. R. Solomon reviewed a presentation on

the first draft meeting procedures. See the meeting agenda for the slide handouts.

5. Correlating Committee minutes with direction for 2018 editions. R. Solomon

reviewed the minutes from the CC, including the actions assigned to the BLC committee.

The committee reviewed reports on exterior wall assemblies, NFPA 13R, tall timber

buildings, and height and area.

6. Action on 2015 edition TIA. See Public Input 5000 PI-17. The committee reviewed the

TIA and developed an FR completing the change.

7. Task Groups. The PV/Green Roof task group reports were given by D. Davis. Topics

discussed included:

-Chapter 38 should consider what added provisions are necessary for PV and green roof

criteria. The cover load design for a green roof has structural implications as does the

additional weight from PV installations. Content in NFPA 1 (Chapter 11) can be

reviewed for additional requirements for roof mounted PV installations.

8. NFPA 220 First Draft preparation. The committee resolved all of the public input to

which it was assigned and developed first revisions and committee inputs. See the NFPA

220 First Draft Report for actions.

9. NFPA 221 First Draft preparation. The committee resolved all of the public input to

which it was assigned and developed first revisions and committee inputs. See the NFPA

221 First Draft Report for actions.

10. NFPA 5000 First Draft preparation. The committee resolved all of the public input to

which it was assigned and developed first revisions and committee inputs. See the NFPA

5000 First Draft Report for actions.

11. Other business. No other business was discussed.

12. Future meetings. The exact date is TBD but will be in the June-July, 2016 time frame.

13. Adjournment. The meeting adjourned at 4:35 PM.

NFPA 101 and NFPA 5000 Second Draft Meetings

1

© National Fire Protection Association. All rights reserved.

NFPA 101® & NFPA 5000 ®

Second Draft MeetingsCore Chapter Committees

June 20-23, 2016 - Fort Lauderdale, Florida

nfpa.org | © National Fire Protection Association. All rights reserved.

NFPA Second Draft Meeting

At this and all NFPA committee meetings we are concerned with your safety.

If the fire alarm sounds, please proceed to an exit.

2

NFPA 101 and NFPA 5000 Second Draft Meetings

2

nfpa.org | © National Fire Protection Association. All rights reserved.

NFPA Second Draft Meeting

3

Members, please verify/update your contact information.

Use of visual or audio recording devices capable of reproducing verbatim transcriptions of this or any NFPA meeting is not permitted.

nfpa.org | © National Fire Protection Association. All rights reserved.

NFPA Second Draft Meeting

Sign in and identify affiliations

Participation Requested 7 days prior to the meeting, or

At the discretion of the Chair

Guest chairs are located around the room

Equal opportunity granted to opposing views

4

Guests

NFPA 101 and NFPA 5000 Second Draft Meetings

3

nfpa.org | © National Fire Protection Association. All rights reserved.

NFPA Second Draft Meeting

Members categorized in ANY interest category who have been retained to represent the interests of ANOTHER interest category (with respect to a specific issue or issues that are to be addressed by a TC/CC) shall declare those interests to the committee and refrain from voting on any Public Input, Comment, or other matter relating to those issues throughout the process.

5

nfpa.org | © National Fire Protection Association. All rights reserved.

NFPA Second Draft Meeting

Follow Robert’s Rules of Order

Discussion requires a motion

6

General Procedures

NFPA 101 and NFPA 5000 Second Draft Meetings

4

nfpa.org | © National Fire Protection Association. All rights reserved.

NFPA Second Draft Meeting

Not in order when another has the floor

Requires a second

This motion is not debatable and DOES NOT automatically stop debate

A 2/3 affirmative vote immediately closes debate and returns to the original motion on the floor

Fewer then 2/3 allows debate to continue

7

Motions for Ending Debate, Previous Question, or “Call the Question”

nfpa.org | © National Fire Protection Association. All rights reserved.

NFPA Second Draft Meeting

Member addresses the chair

Receives recognition from the chair

Introduces the motion

Another member seconds the motion

8

Committee member actions

NFPA 101 and NFPA 5000 Second Draft Meetings

5

nfpa.org | © National Fire Protection Association. All rights reserved.

NFPA Second Draft MeetingTimeline: Annual 2017 Revision Cycle

Comment Stage (Second Draft):Public Comment Closing Date: May 16, 2016Second Draft Meetings: June 20-23 and July 18-22, 2016Posting of Second Draft for Balloting Date: September 5, 2016Posting of Second Draft for NITMAM: January 16, 2017

Tech Session Preparation:NITMAM Closing Date: February 20, 2017NITMAM /CAM Posting Date: April 17, 2017NFPA Annual Meeting: June 4-7, 2017

Standards Council Issuance:Issuance of Documents with CAM: August 10, 2017

9

nfpa.org | © National Fire Protection Association. All rights reserved.

NFPA Second Draft Meeting

Resolving Public Comments

Committee Action and Committee Statement

Creating Second Revisions

10

Technical Committee Actions

NFPA 101 and NFPA 5000 Second Draft Meetings

6

11

nfpa.org | © National Fire Protection Association. All rights reserved.

NFPA Second Draft Meeting

Committee develops a Committee Action Accept

Reject but see…

Reject

Reject but Hold

(See Regs §4.4.8.1)

12

Resolving Public Comments

NFPA 101 and NFPA 5000 Second Draft Meetings

7

nfpa.org | © National Fire Protection Association. All rights reserved.

NFPA Second Draft Meeting

Committee must clearly indicate reasons for not accepting the recommendation and/or point to a relevant Second Revision

All Public Comment actions must have a Committee Statement

Must include a valid technical reason

13

Committee Statements

nfpa.org | © National Fire Protection Association. All rights reserved.

NFPA Second Draft Meeting

No vague references to “intent”

Explain how the submitter’s substantiation is inadequate

Neither Public Comment actions nor Committee Statements get balloted

14

Committee Statements (continued)

NFPA 101 and NFPA 5000 Second Draft Meetings

8

nfpa.org | © National Fire Protection Association. All rights reserved.

NFPA Second Draft Meeting

No “new material” after the Public Input Stage since it is not subject to public review

What constitutes “new material” is decided by the TC or Correlating Committee

Adding “new material” at the Comments Stage could successfully be challenged through appeal to the NFPA Standards Council

15

New Material

nfpa.org | © National Fire Protection Association. All rights reserved.

NFPA Second Draft Meeting

Voting during meeting is used to establish a sense of agreement (simple majority)

Secured by letter ballot (≥2/3 agreement)

Only the results of the formal ballot determine the official position of the committee on the Second Draft

16

Formal Voting

NFPA 101 and NFPA 5000 Second Draft Meetings

9

nfpa.org | © National Fire Protection Association. All rights reserved.

NFPA Second Draft Meeting

Second Revisions (SRs) ONLY• Public Comment actions and Committee Statements not balloted

• Reference materials are available

Second Draft, Public Comments, First Draft Report

Allowed vote: • Affirmative on all SRs

• Affirmative on all SRs with exceptions specifically noted

Ballot form provides a column for affirmative with comment• Note: This box only needs to be checked if there is an accompanying comment

Reject or abstain requires a reason17

Ballots

nfpa.org | © National Fire Protection Association. All rights reserved.

NFPA Second Draft Meeting

Initial ballot

Circulation of negatives and comments

Members may change votes during circulation

Second Revision that fails letter ballot is designated as a Committee Comment in the Second Draft Report, marked as “Reject,” and not included in the Second Draft

18

Circulation

NFPA 101 and NFPA 5000 Second Draft Meetings

10

nfpa.org | © National Fire Protection Association. All rights reserved.

NFPA Second Draft Meeting

• If a Second Revision fails ballot and the subject text was a result of a First Draft change, a Supplementary Ballot is issued

• Supplementary Ballot asks TC if it still favors the First Revision change reported in the First Draft

• If yes, same change appears as a Second Revision and is included in the Second Draft

• If no, the change appears as a Committee Comment and the text reverts to previous edition

• See Regs §4.4.10.2.119

Failed Second Revisions

nfpa.org | © National Fire Protection Association. All rights reserved.

NFPA Second Draft Meeting

Ballots are issued and submitted online

Alternates are strongly encouraged to return ballots

Ballot session will time out after 90 minutes

Use “submit” button to save your work

20

Electronic Balloting

NFPA 101 and NFPA 5000 Second Draft Meetings

11

nfpa.org | © National Fire Protection Association. All rights reserved.

NFPA Second Draft Meeting

21

Click link on the ballot email

Sign in with NFPA.org Committee Login and Password

nfpa.org | © National Fire Protection Association. All rights reserved.

NFPA Second Draft Meeting

22

Select either ‘Affirmative All’ or ‘Affirmative with Exception(s)’

NFPA 101 and NFPA 5000 Second Draft Meetings

12

nfpa.org | © National Fire Protection Association. All rights reserved.

NFPA Second Draft Meeting

Use “See FR/SR - #” link to review all First/Second Revisions

Use “Edit election” to change individual votes or to modify vote after submitting ballot

23

nfpa.org | © National Fire Protection Association. All rights reserved.

NFPA Second Draft Meeting

24

To complete ballot click Participant Consent and Submit

Return and edit any votes before ballot due date.

NFPA 101 and NFPA 5000 Second Draft Meetings

13

nfpa.org | © National Fire Protection Association. All rights reserved.

Legal

25

Antitrust Matters

It is the policy of the NFPA to strictly comply with state and federal antitrust laws.

NFPA expects all participants in its standards development activities to conduct themselves in strict accordance with these laws.

It is the obligation of each participant to read and understand NFPA’s Antitrust Policy. (You can access this policy at nfpa.org/regs.)

nfpa.org | © National Fire Protection Association. All rights reserved.

Legal

26

Antitrust Matters (cont’d)

Participants must avoid any conduct, conversation or agreement that would constitute an unreasonable restraint of trade.Conversation topics that are off limits include:

•Profit, margin, or cost data;•Prices, rates, or fees;•Selection, division or allocation of sales territories, markets or customers;•Refusal to deal with a specific business entity.

NFPA 101 and NFPA 5000 Second Draft Meetings

14

nfpa.org | © National Fire Protection Association. All rights reserved.

Legal

27

Antitrust Matters (cont’d)NFPA’s standards development activities are based on openness, honesty, fairness and balance.Participants must adhere to the Regulations Governing the Development of NFPA Standards and the Guide for the Conduct of Participants in the NFPA Standards Development Process. (You can access the Regulations and Guideat nfpa.org/regs.)Follow guidance and direction from your employer or other organization you may represent.Be sure to ask questions if you have them.

nfpa.org | © National Fire Protection Association. All rights reserved.

Legal

28

Manner is which standards development activity is conducted can be important.The Guide requires standards development activity to be conducted with openness, honesty and in good faith.Participants are not entitled to speak on behalf of NFPA.Participants must take appropriate steps to ensure their statements whether written or oral and regardless of the setting, are portrayed as personal opinions, not the position of NFPA.Be sure to ask questions if you have them.

Antitrust Matters (cont’d)

NFPA 101 and NFPA 5000 Second Draft Meetings

15

nfpa.org | © National Fire Protection Association. All rights reserved.

Legal

29

Patents

Disclosures of essential patent claims should be made by the patent holder.Patent disclosures should be made early in the process.Others may also notify NFPA if they believe that a proposed or existing NFPA standard includes an essential patent claim.NFPA has adopted and follows ANSI’s Patent Policy. It is the obligation of each participant to read and understand NFPA’s Patent Policy. (You can access this policy at nfpa.org/regs.)

TC Struggles with an Issue

• TC needs data on a new technology or emerging issue

• Two opposing views on an issue with no real data

• Data presented is not trusted by committee

Code Fund Lends a Hand

• TC rep and/or staff liaison submits a Code Fund Request

• Requests are reviewed by a Panel and chosen based on need / feasibility

Research Project Carried Out

• Funding for project is provided by the Code Fund and/or industry sponsors

• Project is completed and data is available to TC

www.nfpa.org/codefund

NFPA 101 and NFPA 5000 Second Draft Meetings

16

About

• Document scope• Table of contents• Articles• Research and statistical

reports• Latest codes and

standards news on NFPA Today blog feed

• Free access

Current and Previous Editions

• Issued TIAs, FIs, Errata• Archived revision

information such as meeting and ballot information, First Draft Reports (previously ROPs), Second Draft Reports (previously ROCs), and Standards Council and NITMAM information

Next Edition

• Revision cycle schedule

• Posting & closing dates• Submit public

input/comments via electronic submission system.

• Meeting and ballot information

• First Draft Report and Second Draft Report

• NITMAM information• Standard Council

Decisions• Private TC info (*red

asterisk)• Ballot circulations,

informational ballots and other committee info

Technical Committee

• Committee name and staff liaison

• Committee scope and responsibility

• Committee list with private information

• Committee documents (codes & standards) in PDF format

• Committees seeking members

• Online committee membership application

Document Information Pages

nfpa.org | © National Fire Protection Association. All rights reserved.

Questions

NFPA 101 and NFPA 5000 Second Draft Meetings

17

nfpa.org | © National Fire Protection Association. All rights reserved.

Thank You

Public Comment No. 3-NFPA 220-2016 [ Section No. 2.3.2 ]

2.3.2 UL Publications.

Underwriters Laboratories Inc., 333 Pfingsten Road, Northbrook, IL 60062-2096.

ANSI/UL 263, Standard for Safety for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, 2003, Revised 2014 2015 .

ANSI/UL 723, Standard for Safety for Test for Surface Burning Characteristics of Building Materials, 2008, revised 2013.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

ANSI/UL 263 has been further update to 2015 Edition.

Related Item

First Revision No. 3-NFPA 220-2015 [Section No. 2.3]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Ronald Farr

Organization: UL LLC

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Tue May 10 15:07:21 EDT 2016

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

1 of 2 5/17/2016 9:28 AM

Public Comment No. 4-NFPA 220-2016 [ Section No. B.1.2.2 ]

B.1.2.2 UL Publications.

Underwriters Laboratories Inc., 333 Pfingsten Road, Northbrook, IL 60062-2096.

ANSI/UL 263, Standard for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials , 2003, Revised 2015.

ANSI/UL 723, Standard for Test for Surface Burning Characteristics of Building Materials, 2008, revised 2013.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

ANSI/UL 263 - 2015 Edition should be added with updated information.

Related Item

First Revision No. 2-NFPA 220-2015 [Section No. B.1.2]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Ronald Farr

Organization: UL LLC

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Tue May 10 15:09:54 EDT 2016

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

2 of 2 5/17/2016 9:28 AM

Committee Input No. 4-NFPA 220-2015 [ Global Input ]

Various Sections. Update extract sections taken from NFPA 5000.

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Robert Solomon

Organization: [ Not Specified ]

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu Jul 30 12:36:22 EDT 2015

Committee Statement and Meeting Notes

CommitteeStatement:

The committee is putting forth this CI to serve as a placeholder in the event that any FirstRevisions (FRs) or First Correlating Revisions (FCRs) to the extract provisions from NFPA5000 will require further updates at the second draft stage.

ResponseMessage:

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/FormLaunch?id=/TerraView/C...

1 of 1 9/10/2015 9:40 AM

Public Comment No. 2-NFPA 221-2016 [ Section No. 2.3.5 ]

2.3.5 UL Publications.

Underwriters Laboratories Inc., 333 Pfingsten Road, Northbrook, IL 60062-2096.

ANSI/UL 10C, Standard for Safety for Positive Pressure Fire Tests of Door Assemblies, 2009, revised 2015.

ANSI/UL 263, Standard for Safety for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, 2011, revised 2015.

ANSI/UL 555, Standard for Safety for Fire Dampers, 2006, revised 2014.

ANSI/UL 1479, Standard for Safety for Fire Tests of Through-Penetration Firestops, 2003, revised 2012 2015 .

ANSI/UL 2079, Standard for Safety for Tests for Fire Resistance of Building Joint Systems, 2004, revised 2014 2015 .

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

ANSI/UL 1479 and ANSI/UL 20179 have been updated to a more recent edition.

Related Item

First Revision No. 14-NFPA 221-2015 [Section No. 2.3]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Ronald Farr

Organization: UL LLC

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Tue May 10 15:52:54 EDT 2016

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

1 of 2 5/17/2016 9:34 AM

Public Comment No. 3-NFPA 221-2016 [ Section No. B.1.2.5 ]

B.1.2.5 UL Publications.

Underwriters Laboratories Inc., 333 Pfingsten Road, Northbrook, IL 60062-2096.

ANSI/UL 263, Standard for Safety for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials,2015.

ANSI/UL 1479, Standard for Safety for Fire Tests of Penetration Firestops, 2015.

ANSI/UL 1709, Standard for Rapid Rise Fire Tests of Protection Materials for Structural Steel, 2011

ANSI/UL 2079, Standard for Safety for Tests for Fire Resistance of Building Joint Systems, 2004, revised 2014 2015 .

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

ANSI/IL 2079 has been updated to a more recent edition.

Related Item

First Revision No. 7-NFPA 221-2015 [Section No. B.1.2.5]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Ronald Farr

Organization: UL LLC

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Tue May 10 15:56:39 EDT 2016

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

2 of 2 5/17/2016 9:34 AM

Committee Input No. 4-NFPA 220-2015 [ Global Input ]

Various Sections. Update extract sections taken from NFPA 5000.

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Robert Solomon

Organization: [ Not Specified ]

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu Jul 30 12:36:22 EDT 2015

Committee Statement and Meeting Notes

CommitteeStatement:

The committee is putting forth this CI to serve as a placeholder in the event that any FirstRevisions (FRs) or First Correlating Revisions (FCRs) to the extract provisions from NFPA5000 will require further updates at the second draft stage.

ResponseMessage:

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/FormLaunch?id=/TerraView/C...

1 of 1 9/10/2015 9:40 AM

Public Comment No. 60-NFPA 5000-2016 [ Section No. 7.1.4.2 ]

7.1.4.2* Limited-Combustible Material.

A material shall be considered a limited-combustible material where both of the following conditions of 7.1.4.2 (1), and 7.1.4.2 (2),and the conditions of either 7.1.4.2.1 or 7.1.4.2.2 are met:

(1) The material does not comply with the requirements for a noncombustible material in accordance with 7.1.4.1.

(2) The material, in the form in which it is used, exhibits a potential heat value not exceeding 3500 Btu/lb (8141 kJ/kg), when testedin accordance with NFPA 259.

7.1.4.2.1

The material shall have a structural base of noncombustible material with a surfacing not exceeding a thickness of 1⁄8 in. (3.2 mm)where the surfacing exhibits a flame spread index not greater than 50 when tested in accordance with ASTM E84, Standard TestMethod for Surface Burning Characteristics of Building Materials, or UL 723, Standard for Test for Surface Burning Characteristics ofBuilding Materials.

7.1.4.2.2

The material shall be composed of materials that in the form and thickness used, neither exhibit a flame spread index greater than 25nor evidence of continued progressive combustion when tested in accordance with ASTM E84 or UL 723 and are of such compositionthat all surfaces that would be exposed by cutting through the material on any plane would neither exhibit a flame spread indexgreater than 25 nor exhibit evidence of continued progressive combustion when tested in accordance with ASTM E84 or UL 723.

7.1.4.2.3

An alternate approach for a material to be considered a limited combustible material is where the material is tested in accordancewith ASTM E2965, Standard Test for Determination of Low Levels of Heat Release Rate for Materials and Products Using an

Oxygen Combustion Calorimeter at an incident heat flux of 75 kW/m 2 for a 20 minute exposure and: (a) the peak heat relase rate

does not exceed 150 kW/m 2 for longer than 10 seconds and (b) the total heat released does not exceed 8 MJ/m 2 .

7.1.4.2.4

Where the term limited-combustible is used in this Code, it shall also include the term noncombustible.

(Also, add ASTM E2965, Standard Test for Determination of Low Levels of Heat Release Rate for Materials and Products Using anOxygen Consumption Calorimeter, 2016, into chapter 2 on referenced ASTM standards)

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

Tables_showing_test_results.docx Test results from study by Urbas 2002

Tables_showing_test_results_Janssens.docx Test results from Carpenter and Janssens 2005

NFPA_500_PI_66_2016_on_limited_combustible_with_response.pdf Public input

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The technical committee has stated that it agreed in concept with the approach but that it would like to see more data and would consider a lower heat release rate threshold. I attach information on tests conducted on a variety of materials with the equipment (and with slight variations in testing which will not make a significant difference for limited combustible materials).

The proposed test (ASTM E2965) is a variation of the cone calorimeter (ASTM E1354) with a much larger test specimen (150 mm x 150 mm instead of 100 mm x 100 mm), a larger radiant heat source and a slower duct flow rate. This test has been developed specifically to identify materials that are of very low levels of heat release. If a material has very low levels of heat release it will have very low levels of combustibility. The scope of ASTM E2965 includes the following: "This test method differs from ASTM E1354 in that it prescribes a different specific test specimen size, specimen holder, test specimen orientation, and volumetric flow rate for analyses via oxygen consumption calorimetry. It is intended for use on materials and products that contain only small amounts of combustible ingredients or components e.g. test specimens that yield a total heat release of less than 15 MJ/m2." The significance and use states as follows: "This test method is used primarily to determine the heat evolved in, or contributed to, a fire involving materials or products that emit low levels of heat release. The recommended use for this test method is for materials with a total heat release rate measured of less than 10 MJ over the first 20 min test period, and which do not give peak heat release rates of more than 200kW/m2 for periods extending more than 10 seconds. Also included is a determination of the effective heat of combustion, mass loss rate, the time to sustained flaming, and (optionally) smoke production. These properties are determined on small size test specimens that are representative of those in the intended end use. "

In this public comment I also propose a lower threshold, of 150 kW/m2, as this would be the first cycle where the proposed approach would be used. I don't want to repeat all the information provided earlier, during the public input, as this information is clearly already available to the committee. Please note that this is not intended to replace the NFPA 259 test for the assessment of limited combustibility but is an alternate approach and will, thus, have no influence on any material or product assessed in the traditional way in the past.

Information in terms of the abstract from a study made with the cone calorimeter before developing ASTM E2965 by J. Urbas (2002) and from a follow-up study by M. Janssens and K. Carpenter (2005) follows.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

49 of 185 5/17/2016 1:23 PM

Attached tables from Urbas indicate that (out of 16 materials assessed) 1 material would qualify easily under the criteria shown, namely SPRF (sprayed fire resistant material on non-combustible backing), and that 5/8" Type X Gypsum Board would most likely qualify (in 3 out of 4 labs) while several other materials would fail primarily on total heat released (the most severe property). On the other hand paper-faced glass wool would fail on peak heat release rate and not on total heat released.

Attached tables from Carpenter & Janssens (one of the labs used by the Urbas study) indicates similar types of results as above.This shows that the criteria used are consistent with what would happen for limited combustible materials under the present criteria and that nothing unacceptable would "sneak" in. The data in the attached tables was taken at exposures to 75 kW/m2 for 20 min, just like the proposed new criteria.

BDMC interlaboratory cone calorimeter test programme by Joe Urbas (Fire Mater. 2002; 26: 29–35)

Abstract: In the spring of 1997, seven companies and industry associations from the USA and Canada decided to sponsor the cone calorimeter interlaboratory test programme. Reproducibility and repeatability were determined for the scalar variables measured in the cone calorimeter (ASTM E1354) according to the protocol developed by the Board for the Coordination of the Model Codes. The main requirement of the protocol was that the sample irradiance should be 75kW/m2. The purpose of the project was to assist the model building code organizations, NFPA and various other groups in the development of a system to determine degrees of combustibility of building materials. Three US and one Canadian laboratory agreed to conduct tests on 16 materials.The results of this round robin show that the cone calorimeter, following the Board for the Coordination of the Model Codes protocol, can provide precision similar to that cited in the current cone calorimeter standards. It is recommended that further improvements of the standards are pursued and provisions are made to improve the quality of operation of the cone calorimeter in commercial laboratories to maintain and possibly improve its repeatability and reproducibility.

Using Heat Release Rate to Assess Combustibility of Building Products in the Cone Calorimeter by Karen Carpenter and Marc Janssens (Fire Technology 41 – 79-92, 2005)

Abstract: Building codes generally permit unlimited use of materials that contribute negligible quantities of heat in the event of a fire. These materials are referred to as non-combustible. Whether a material qualifies as being non-combustible is generally based on performance in a small-scale furnace test, or on its potential heat content measured in an oxygen bomb calorimeter. However, furnace and oxygen bomb methods to assess combustibility have serious limitations. The most significant limitations are that materials cannot be evaluated in their end use configuration, that test conditions are not representative of real fire exposure conditions, and that the test results do not provide a realistic measure of the expected heat release rate.These limitations lead to the idea of exploring the use of small-scale heat release calorimeters to assess material combustibility. The Cone Calorimeter has emerged in recent years as the most widely used apparatus for this application.In this paper, an overview is presented of past efforts to assess combustibility based on heat release rate measurements. The main results of the most recent Cone Calorimeter round robin conducted in North America are discussed. It is concluded from the results of this round robin that the Cone Calorimeter is indeed suitable for measuring heat release rate from materials and products with low heat content. Limitations due to Cone Calorimeter specimen size can be alleviated by using a larger calorimeter, such as the Intermediate Scale Calorimeter or ICAL (ASTM E 1623.) However, more research is needed to extend the correlation between Cone Calorimeter and ICAL data to a wider range of materials. The biggest challenge is perhaps the implementation of a system to assess combustibility on the basis of heat release rate in the building codes. Implementation could consist of a classification system that is accepted as an alternative to the present prescriptive requirements and/or promoting the use of heat release rate data in performance-based design.

Related Item

Public Input No. 66-NFPA 5000-2015 [Section No. 7.1.4.2]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Marcelo Hirschler

Organization: GBH International

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon May 02 18:00:45 EDT 2016

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

50 of 185 5/17/2016 1:23 PM

Public Input No. 66-NFPA 5000-2015 [ Section No. 7.1.4.2 ]

7.1.4.2* Limited-Combustible Material.

A material shall be considered a limited-combustible material where both of the following conditions of 7.1.4.2(1), and 7.1.4.2 (2), and the conditions of either 7.1.4.2.1or 7.1.4.2.2 are met:

(1) The material does not comply with the requirements for a noncombustible material in accordance with7.1.4.1.

(2) The material, in the form in which it is used, exhibits a potential heat value not exceeding 3500 Btu/lb(8141 kJ/kg), when tested in accordance with NFPA 259, Standard Test Method for Potential Heat ofBuilding Materials.

7.1.4.2.1

The material shall have a structural base of noncombustible material with a surfacing not exceeding a thicknessof 1⁄8 in. (3.2 mm) where the surfacing exhibits a flame spread index not greater than 50 when tested inaccordance with ASTM E 84, Standard Test Method for Surface Burning Characteristics of Building Materials,or ANSI/UL 723, Standard for Test for Surface Burning Characteristics of Building Materials.

7.1.4.2.2

The material shall be composed of materials that in the form and thickness used, neither exhibit a flame spreadindex greater than 25 nor evidence of continued progressive combustion when tested in accordance with ASTME 84 or ANSI/UL 723 and are of such composition that all surfaces that would be exposed by cutting throughthe material on any plane would neither exhibit a flame spread index greater than 25 nor exhibit evidence ofcontinued progressive combustion when tested in accordance with ASTM E 84 or ANSI/UL 723.

7.1.4.2.3

An alternate approach for a material to be considered a limited combustible material is where the material istested in accordance with ASTM E2965, Standard Test Method for Determination of Low Levels of HeatRelease Rate for Materials and Products Using an Oxygen Consumption Calorimeter at an incident heat flux of

75 kW/m 2 for a 20 minute exposure and: (a) the peak heat release rate does not exceed 200 kW/m 2 for

longer than 10 seconds and (b) the total heat released does not exceed 8 MJ/m 2 .

7.1.4.2.4

Where the term limited-combustible is used in this Code, it shall also include the term noncombustible.

(also, add ASTM E2965, Standard Test Method for Determination of Low Levels of Heat Release Rate forMaterials and Products Using an Oxygen Consumption Calorimeter, 2015, into section 2.3.11 on ASTMpublications)

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

Large_cone_main_paper_Gregory_et_al_Interflam.pdf Description of research ✓

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Input

For many years there have been debates about using modern technology to assess whether a material provides very little added fire hazard compared to a non-combustible material. The technology used in NFPA 101 and in NFPA 5000 is based on NFPA 259 and ASTM E84, both venerable tests of 1950s vintage.

Task Group E05.23.01 first met in December of 1987 at the ASTM E05 meeting in Bar Harbor, FL. The Task Group was charged with the development of an ASTM standard test method to measure degrees of combustibility based on heat release rate. The history of the development of that work is presented below.

1. The idea to use small-scale heat release rate data as a measure of the combustibility of a product was first proposed by Prof. Ed Smith at Ohio State University. This effort later resulted in the development of the Ohio State

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/FormLaunch?id=/TerraView/C...

1 of 5 5/6/2016 3:39 PM

University (OSU) calorimeter (standardized as ASTM E906 and used by the FAA for regulatory purposes of large surfaces in aircraft).. 2. The first attempt at developing a standard describing a method to measure combustibility of products on the basis of heat release rate was made in Canada. Task Group No. 22 of the Underwriters’ Laboratories of Canada (ULC) Committee on Fire Tests was formed in 1980 to develop a test method to evaluate building products in terms of degrees of combustibility. Initially, the ULC Task Group considered modifying the standard test method for non- combustibility of building products (CAN/ULC-S114) to obtain quantitative measurements suitable for ranking products in terms of degrees of combustibility. Attempts were made to rank products on the basis of maximum temperature rise and the area under the temperature-time curves. After a series of round-robin tests, it was the consensus of the Task Group that the non-combustibility furnace was not suitable. This was consistent with the results of a study conducted in Finland which concluded that there is no consistency between the temperature rise measurements in the ISO 1182 non-combustibility furnace and heat release rate measured on the basis of oxygen consumption. In addition, the Task Group considered the CAN/ULC-S114 method to be somewhat limited for the following reasons: a. A quantitative measurement is preferable to a pass/fail type test; b. Heating of one surface of a specimen is preferable to heating of a block of material; and c. The CAN/ULC-S114 test is limited to elementary building materials, and a test method applicable to composite products is preferable.

3. Work was done at the National Research Council of Canada (NRCC) to explore the use of the OSU calorimeter for measuring degrees of combustibility. The OSU apparatus at NRCC was equipped with oxygen consumption instrumentation, and the airflow through the apparatus was reduced to half the flow prescribed in the ASTM E 906 and FAA versions of the test method to increase accuracy and sensitivity of the heat release rate measurements. Four products were tested with heat release rates ranging from 8 to 300 kW/m².

4. Around the same time, Forintek Canada Corporation explored the use of the Cone Calorimeter for measuring degrees of combustibility. Seventeen different products were tested in the horizontal and vertical orientation at 40 and 50 kW/m². The lower heat flux level was chosen to obtain results that could be compared to the modified OSU data from the NRCC study. The higher heat flux level was chosen to be comparable to the irradiance in the CAN/ULC-S114 test, since 50 kW/m² is equal to the radiative heat flux from a blackbody source at 700°C.

5. The work of the ULC Task Group resulted in a new standard test method CAN/ULC-S135, “Standard Method for Determination of Degrees of Combustibility of Building Materials Using an Oxygen Consumption Calorimeter (Cone Calorimeter).” The standard was published in 1992, and was largely based on the research conducted at Forintek. The method described in CAN/ULC-S135 is nearly identical to that in ASTM E 1354, except for the following important modifications: a. A different specimen holder is used so that the bottom and the sides of the specimen are insulated with ceramic fiber blanket; b. The test duration is fixed at 15 min; c. Mass loss measurements are optional; and d. Smoke obscuration measurements are not included. Products are tested in triplicate, in the horizontal orientation, at a heat flux of 50 kW/m², and with the spark igniter. Several proposals have been published for a classification system based on CAN/ULC-S135 test performance and its incorporation into the building codes. Chen et al., in Taiwan, evaluated 18 products in the Cone Calorimeter according to the test procedure in CAN/ULC S135, but with the horizontal specimen holder specified in ASTM E 1354. The results from this study were consistent with earlier work at Forintek, and qualitative agreement was found between CNS 6532 (equivalent to JIS 1321) and the classification system proposed by Richardson and Brooks.

6. In October 1992, the Board for the Coordination of the Model Codes (BCMC) formed a Task Group to work on new definitions for the terms “Non-Combustible”, “Limited Combustible”, and “Combustible”. Following general discussions of the issue over the first year after its formation, the BCMC Combustibility Task Group decided to pursue the ' development of a system of "degrees of combustibility" akin to a proposal under consideration in Canada based on results obtained from Cone Calorimeter tests performed according to CAN/ULC S135.

7. At the March 1994 BCMC Task Group meeting, it was decided to use the Cone Calorimeter as described in ASTM E 1354. A Subcommittee was formed to look at the details of the test procedure and formulate a proposal. The Subcommittee met in April 1994, and presented its report at the Task Group meeting in June 1994. The Subcommittee recommended the BCMC test protocol call for a. An irradiance level of 75 kW/m2; b. Testing in the horizontal orientation; c. Mandatory use of the retainer frame described in ASTM E 1354; d. Use of the spark plug ignition pilot;

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/FormLaunch?id=/TerraView/C...

2 of 5 5/6/2016 3:39 PM

e. Measurements every two seconds; f. A fixed test duration of 15 minutes; and g. Other test and reporting details as in ASTM E 1354.

The BCMC protocol is significantly different from that described in CAN/ULC 5135. Most of the deviations from the Canadian standard were motivated by NIST recommendations made a few years earlier. After lengthy discussion, the Task Group accepted the proposed protocol and disbanded the Subcommittee.

8. Subsequently, a new Subcommittee was formed to develop a database of Cone Calorimeter measurements obtained under test conditions comparable to those specified by the BCMC protocol. In addition, the Subcommittee was instructed to determine feasibility of the development of a classification system of four or five degrees of combustibility on the basis of the database. The Subcommittee collected Cone Calorimeter data obtained at 75 kW/m2 in the horizontal orientation for 111 products, and organized the data in tabular form and in bar charts. Most of the data were obtained at NIST. Strictly speaking, none of these tests were conducted according to the BCMC protocol, since all tests were run with a five second interval between measurements. However, the reduction from five to two seconds only results in better precision of the maximum heat release rate. The retainer frame was used for less than 10 percent of the tests in the database. Research has shown that the heat sink effect of the frame can be accounted for by reducing heat release rate data obtained without the frame by approximately 6 percent [10-11]. Therefore, it was agreed that the test conditions were close enough to those prescribed by the BCMC protocol so that valid conclusions could be reached concerning the feasibility question.

9. The Subcommittee analyzed the data in detail at a meeting in April 1995. It was concluded that there are sufficient Cone Calorimeter data so that a classification system for degrees of combustibility can be developed. Proposed class limits were based on two limiting values; total heat release, and the maximum of a one-minute sliding average heat release rate. Some Subcommittee members questioned whether the precision of the Cone Calorimeter is sufficient to justify regulatory use of the test method. The concern was based on poor reproducibility estimated from a recent Cone Calorimeter round robin conducted under the auspices of the ASTM Institute for Standards Research (ISR). In addition, significant discrepancies were found between two laboratories in the U.S. for identical gypsum board specimens tested under the same conditions. The Subcommittee also identified the need to quantify the effect of the retainer frame more precisely.

10. The Subcommittee presented its findings to the Task Group at a meeting in June, 1995. The Task Group instructed the Subcommittee to organize a Cone Calorimeter round robin with the purpose of determining the precision of the instrument specifically for the BCMC test protocol. The Subcommittee was asked to focus on the commercial testing laboratories in North America, and to present a detailed plan (products, participating laboratories, time schedule, etc.) at the next BCMC Task Group meeting in October, 1995. The Task Group formed a new Subcommittee to develop a strategy for implementation of a system for degrees of combustibility in the model codes. Unfortunately, BCMC was disbanded shortly after the October 1995 meeting, resulting in an unclear future for the test project. However, at the same time the Board for the Development of a Model Code (BDMC) was formed by the International Code Council (ICC) to pick up many of the activities of the Council of American Building Officials (CABO), including those of the BCMC. The BDMC decided to maintain the BCMC activities in the area of combustibility. In a memorandum to interested parties from the BDMC secretariat dated May 29, 1996 it was stated that “... The round robin tests are required to document test results and address the repeatability and reproducibility issue of the test method. Conducting the round robin tests in accordance with the BDMC protocol and analyzing the data is pertinent to this project. Until financial support or other means are obtained to proceed with the round robin tests in accordance with the BDMC protocol, no time frame for completion by the task group can be established and therefore, there can be no further activity on this BDMC agenda item.”

11 In April, 1996 the NFPA Fire Tests Committee discussed a proposal describing the use of the Cone Calorimeter for determining degrees of combustibility of products according to the protocol developed by the BCMC. After lengthy discussion, the Committee voted on a motion to support the proposal. The outcome was undecided, and a Task Group was formed to review the issue and to make a recommendation to the Committee at its next meeting in October 1996. Since no new information had been obtained since the BCMC was disbanded, the NFPA Task Group reached the same conclusion as the BCMC Combustibility Task Group did one year earlier, i.e., that there is a need for a series of interlaboratory tests to determine the precision of the test method for this application.

12. In the spring of 1997 the Pacific Fire Laboratory (PFL) took the initiative to prepare a proposal for the round robin to prospective sponsors. The following seven organizations joined the project: American Forest & Paper Association, Armstrong World Industries, Inc., Atlas Electric Devices Company, Canadian Wood Council, Cellulose Insulation Manufacturers Association, W.R. Grace & Company, and Wilsonart International Inc. Representatives of sponsors and four participating commercial laboratories together with Dr. Joe Urbas, the project coordinator, formed the “Cone

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/FormLaunch?id=/TerraView/C...

3 of 5 5/6/2016 3:39 PM

Calorimeter Round Robin Consortium” (Consortium) to organize the project. The Consortium defined the scope of the project, selected the products to be tested, confirmed the participating laboratories, defined the calibration procedure, and confirmed the test protocol. according to the protocol developed by the Board for the Coordination of the Model Codes (BCMC). All laboratories first performed extensive calibrations of their equipment, and conducted preliminary tests on two reference products (black PMMA with a relatively high heat release output and mineral ceiling board with a relatively low heat release output). The calibration and reference test data were used to correct minor discrepancies and inconsistencies prior to the round robin tests. Sixteen building products covering a wide range of heat release rates were tested in triplicate by each laboratory according to the BCMC protocol. All testing was completed by the summer of 1998, and it took approximately 18 months to analyze and review the data and to finalize the report. The sponsors finally released the report in the spring of 2000. The precision data presented in the report are comparable to those obtained in earlier round robins as reported in the ISO, ASTM, and other Cone Calorimeter standards, and are valid for a wider range of heat release rates.

13. Over the years since its inception the ASTM Task Group E05.23.01 continuously monitored activities pertinent to the use of the Cone Calorimeter for measuring degrees of combustibility of products. A first draft based on the BCMC protocol was distributed at the New Orleans Task Group meeting in December 1999.

14. Legislation was introduced into several countries, including Canada, Japan and Taiwan, to regulate "quasi non combustible materials" using the cone calorimeter (ASTM E1354 or ISO 5660). A concern that was expressed frequently was that the errors were similar in order of magnitude to the measurements needed.

15. Work was initiated in ISO TC92 SC1 to develop a variation of the cone calorimeter, ISO 5660-4, that could be used for such low heat release measurements.

16. It was later discovered that a larger cone heater and a larger test specimen were needed in order to get the variability of the measurement to become significantly smaller than the required measured values. Other concerns were related to drift of the signal and noise. Work was conducted in England by Sean Gregory et al. (manuscript attached) to solve these problems.This concept was first introduced into ASTM in 2011 and balloted at that time. Several subsequent ballots followed, refining the procedure, with special emphasis on issues such as flow rate and capturing the entirety of the smoke emitted, which required a larger hood.

17. A successful ballot was completed earlier this year and standard E2965, Standard Test Method for Determination of Low Levels of Heat Release Rate for Materials and Products Using an Oxygen Consumption Calorimeter, has been approved.

18. The criteria proposed are based on the Japanese criteria, with a higher incident heat flux (75 kW/m2 instead of 50 kW/m2) so that any materials that would meet the requirements would contain almost no combustible content.

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: MARCELO HIRSCHLER

Organization: GBH INTERNATIONAL

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Wed Jun 24 21:06:08 EDT 2015

Committee Statement

Resolution: The committee agrees (philosophically) with the allowance to use an alternative test. The committee didnot do an FR on this subject for the following reasons.1. Uncertain if the 200kW m2 value is theappropriate pass/fail mark or if 100 kW/m2 is better. 2. How does this new test correlate to the existingtest standards that are currently in use? In other words, is the performance level being revisedsubstantially by introduction of the new test? 3. Should the test include multiple incident heat fluxes sothat a heat release parameter can be determined. 4. The committee is not familiar with the Japanese/ISOtest procedures that are referenced.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/FormLaunch?id=/TerraView/C...

4 of 5 5/6/2016 3:39 PM

Copyright Assignment

I, MARCELO HIRSCHLER, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full rights in copyrightin this Public Input (including both the Proposed Change and the Statement of Problem and Substantiation). I understand and intend that Iacquire no rights, including rights as a joint author, in any publication of the NFPA in which this Public Input in this or another similar or derivativeform is used. I hereby warrant that I am the author of this Public Input and that I have full power and authority to enter into this copyrightassignment.

By checking this box I affirm that I am MARCELO HIRSCHLER, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright Assignment and theterms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by checking this box, I am creating an electronic signature that will, uponmy submission of this form, have the same legal force and effect as a handwritten signature

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/FormLaunch?id=/TerraView/C...

5 of 5 5/6/2016 3:39 PM

Public Comment No. 8-NFPA 5000-2016 [ Section No. 7.2.5.6.8 ]

7.2.5.6.8 Exterior Nonbearing Walls.

Exterior nonbearing walls shall be permitted when tested in accordance with, and meeting the conditions of acceptance of, either oneof the following:

(1) NFPA 285

(2) FM Approval 4880, Class 1 Fire Rating of Insulated Wall or Wall and Roof/Ceiling Panels, Interior Finish Materials or Coatingsand Exterior Wall Systems

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

5000_CCN_7.pdf 5000 CC Note #7

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

NOTE: This Public Comment appeared as CC Note No. 7 in the First Draft Report. The Correlating Committee directs the TC on Building Construction (BLC) to do the following:

1. Consider the affirmative with comment ballot of Davis and revise 7.2.5.6.8 as follows: (2) ANSI/FM Approval 4880…2. Consider the affirmative with comment ballot of Koffel relative to the application of the requirements to Type I, II, and IIIconstruction and to clarify the intent of the text with regards to its application to all nonbearing exterior walls.

3. Consider the negative votes of Molina, Alfawakiri, Dubrowski, and Woods relative to FM 4880 being an appropriate alternative to NFPA 285.

These action will be considered as a public comment.

Related Item

Correlating Committee Note No. 7-NFPA 5000-2016 [Section No. 7.2.5.6.8]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: CC on BLD_AAC

Organization: NFPA CC ON BUILDING CODE

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Mar 04 11:05:38 EST 2016

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

51 of 185 5/17/2016 1:23 PM

Correlating Committee Note No. 7-NFPA 5000-2016 [ Section No. 7.2.5.6.8 ]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: BLD-AAC

Organization: [ Not Specified ]

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Jan 08 13:59:01 EST 2016

Committee Statement and Meeting Notes

CommitteeStatement:

The Correlating Committee directs the TC on Building Construction (BLD) to do the following:

1. Consider the affirmative with comment ballot of Davis and revise 7.2.5.6.8 as follows:

(2) ANSI/FM Approval 4880…

2. Consider the affirmative with comment ballot of Koffel relative to the application of the requirements to Type I, II, and IIIconstruction and to clarify the intent of the text with regards to its application to all nonbearing exterior walls.

3. Consider the negative votes of Molina, Alfawakiri, Dubrowski, and Woods relative to FM 4880 being an appropriate alternativeto NFPA 285.

These action will be considered as a public comment.

Ballot Results

This item has passed ballot

18 Eligible Voters

2 Not Returned

15 Affirmative All

1 Affirmative with Comments

0 Negative with Comments

0 Abstention

Not Returned

Newman, Michael T.

Wooldridge, Jerry

Affirmative All

DiCristina, Salvatore

Frable, David W.

Francis, Sam W.

Hansen, Raymond N.

Harrington, John C.

Hopper, Howard

Hugo, Jeffrey M.

Humble, Jonathan

Jones, Gerald H.

Leavitt, Russell B.

Quiter, James R.

Roberts, Richard Jay

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/FormLaunch?id=/TerraView/C...

1 of 2 3/2/2016 1:51 PM

Shah, Faimeen

Vinci, Leon F.

Willse, Peter J.

Affirmative with Comment

Laramee, Scott T.

No comment, but no way to accept as "affirmative" without accepting all as "affirmative in the ballot portal.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/FormLaunch?id=/TerraView/C...

2 of 2 3/2/2016 1:51 PM

First Revision No. 1001-NFPA 5000-2015 [ Section No. 7.2.5.6.8 ]

Global FR-6108

7.2.5.6.8 Exterior Nonbearing Walls.

Exterior nonbearing walls tested shall be permitted when tested in accordance with, and meeting the conditions of acceptance of,either one of the following: NFPA 285 , Standard Fire Test Method for Evaluation of Fire Propagation Characteristics of ExteriorNon-Load-Bearing Wall Assemblies Containing Combustible Components , shall be permitted.

(1) NFPA 285

(2) FM Approval 4880, Class 1 Fire Rating of Insulated Wall or Wall and Roof/Ceiling Panels, Interior Finish Materials or Coatingsand Exterior Wall Systems

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: BLD-BLC

Organization: [ Not Specified ]

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Tue Jul 28 15:09:36 EDT 2015

Committee Statement and Meeting Notes

CommitteeStatement:

This proposed code change offers a nationally accepted fire test (ANSI/FM 4880) as an alternative to NFPA 285. As evidenced bya peer reviewed journal article (SFPE) and Phase 1 of an FPRF study, ANSI/FM 4880 is a more stringent test than NFPA 285 sothere is no reason to question the adequacy of ANSI/FM 4880. ANSI/FM 4880 is already referenced in H.1.2.11.

ResponseMessage:

Public Input No. 190-NFPA 5000-2015 [Section No. 7.2.5.6.8]

Ballot Results

This item has passed ballot

27 Eligible Voters

2 Not Returned

19 Affirmative All

2 Affirmative with Comments

4 Negative with Comments

0 Abstention

Not Returned

Cutrer, Peter S.

Heiza, Khaled

Affirmative All

Al Zeyara, Nasser Ahmed

Battalora, Raymond J.

Collins, David S.

Day, Richard L.

Dopart, Alan J.

Ferro, Paul

Frable, David W.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/FormLaunch?id=/TerraView/C...

1 of 2 5/26/2016 2:48 PM

Francis, Sam W.

Grant, Kurtis

Holland, Joseph T.

Hugo, Jeffrey M.

Johnson, Aaron

Lovell, Vickie J.

McElvaney, Joe

McKeon, Thomas W.

Schiffer, Brad

Versteeg, Joseph H.

Wessel, Robert A.

Willse, Peter J.

Affirmative with Comment

Davis, Richard J.

Reference should be to ANSI/FM 4880. Full title page will be sent to NFPA staff.

Koffel, William E.

It is not clear why this was only done for Type IV construction. It would seem that it should also be included in Type I, Type II, and Type IIIconstruction. Also, the verbiage should be improved in that it implies that all nonbearing exterior walls need to be tested to one of the standards.The verbiage in 7.2.3.2.12 seems to better state the intent (with the technical modification to add the FM standard).

Negative with Comment

Alfawakhiri, Farid

The proposal inappropriately dilutes and messes the acceptance criteria for exterior walls without providing field evidence to demonstrate anyshortcomings of current criteria. The committee statement is not entirely correct about the stringency of FM 4880 compared to NFPA 285. FM4880 is not "a more stringent test" in all of the relevant aspects, and no technical justification was provided for the increased and the reducedstringency in all aspects of the test. FM 4880 is by far not similar to NFPA 285, so it is inappropriate as an alternative to NFPA 285.

Dubrowski, Victor L.

Other committee members have raised valid questions about this proposal. It needs further study.

Molina, Renato R.

The FM standard has a different approach for fire exposure. Further study should be conducted.

Woods, Luke C.

This proposal lists FM 4880 as an alternate to NFPA 285, and for the purposes of this section, would present them as equivalent. There is nodata submitted with this proposal to demonstrate or suggest that all products and wall systems complying with FM4880 would also comply withNFPA 285 as currently referenced in the Code. While each of the test methods have their own merits, with some common overlap, the methodsare substantially different with different criteria and exposures. In addition, when an assembly is tested to these methods, there may be differentfailure modes that could occur. For example, FM 4880 strictly looks at the propagation of flame across the exterior face of the assembly, but itdoes not consider the internal performance of the wall assembly, as does NFPA 285. NFPA 285 evaluates the performance of the exterior wallassembly from a variety of perspectives beyond just the exterior facing surface, including but not limited to, the materials, components andgeometry within the concealed space of the wall assembly and window detail. For these reasons I do not believe it is justified to include this newlyadded test method in this section and therefore support a negative vote.

Editorial Comment

Click here

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/FormLaunch?id=/TerraView/C...

2 of 2 5/26/2016 2:48 PM

Public Comment No. 107-NFPA 5000-2016 [ Section No. 7.4.3.6.8 ]

7.4.3.6.8 Open Parking Structure Beneath Other Occupancies.

7.4.3.6.8.1 Limitations.

(A)

Open parking structures constructed under other occupancies shall not exceed the height and area limitations permitted under30.8.1.6.

(B)

The height of the portion of the building above the open parking structure shall not exceed the limitations in Section 7.4 for the upperoccupancy.

(C)

The height, in both feet and stories, of the portion of the building above the open parking structure shall be measured from gradeplane and shall include both the open parking structure and the portion of the building above the parking structure.

7.4.3.6.8.2 Fire Separation.

Fire separation assemblies between the parking occupancy and the upper occupancy shall correspond to the required fire resistancerating prescribed in Table 6.2.4.1.1(a) and Table 6.2.4.1.1(b) for the uses involved.

7.4.3.6.8.3 Type of Construction.

The type of construction used shall apply to each occupancy individually, except that structural members, including main bracingwithin the open parking structure, that are necessary to support the upper occupancy shall be provided with the more restrictive fireresistance ratings of the use groups involved, as shown in Table 7.2.1.1.

7.4.3.6.8.4 Means of Egress.

Means of egress for the upper occupancy shall conform to Chapter 11 and shall be separated from the parking occupancy by firebarriers having at least a 2-hour fire resistance rating, with self-closing doors in accordance with 8.7.2.

Delete the following section:

7.4.3.6.9 Height of New Hotels and New Apartment Buildings of Mass Timber

The height limitation for New Hotels and New Apartment Buildings of Type IV construction shall be permitted to be increased to ninestories and 100 feet (30 480 mm) where the building is separated by not less than 50 feet (15 240 mm) from any other building on thelot and from adjacent lot lines or lot lines on the opposite sides of public streets, provided all of the following are met:

1. All load bearing structural elements shall be heavy timber complying with Sections 7.2.5.1; and of two hour fire resistance rating inaccordance with Section 8.2.1.1.

2. The interior surfaces of all heavy timber walls and ceilings shall be covered by two layers of 5/8" Type X gypsum board, with alledges of the face layer offset 18" from those of the base layer. The base layer shall be attached with 1.75" #6 Type S drywall screwsat 12" o.c. in both directions and the face layer to be attached with 2.25" #6 Type S drywall screws at 12" o.c. in both directions offsetfrom the screws in the base layer by 6 inches in both directions. One layer of 5/8" Type X gypsum sheathing shall be attached to theoutside of the exterior heavy timber walls with minimum 1 ¾" galvanized roofing nails 12" on center each way and 6" on center at alljoints or ends. All panel edges shall be attached with drywall screws or roofing nails located at least 1.5 inches but no more than 2inches from the panel edge.

3. Fire-retardant treated wood , of light-frame construction, shall not be permitted as a bearing element in any walls.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

1. The proposed language does not include all occupancies and lacks justification for why the language was focused only on hotels and apartment occupancies and cannot be applied to other occupancies. 2. The proposed language does not require other fire engineering analyses/risk assessments, which are a common and accepted part of the practice in the industry when designing tall timber buildings. New material and new construction techniques should be justified through a detailed engineering analyses. Appropriate results cannot be accomplished with only the requirements contained in the proposed language of Section 7.4.3.6.9. 3. The proposed language is too prescriptive.4. The 50 ft building separation requirement in 7.4.3.6.8(1) is difficult to meet and too limiting.5. The authority having jurisdiction should be presented with a risk analysis to determine if the construction is feasible in their jurisdiction.

Related Item

Committee Input No. 8006-NFPA 5000-2015 [New Section after 7.4.3.6.8.4]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: James Quiter

Organization: Arup

Street Address:

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

52 of 185 5/17/2016 1:23 PM

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 13 16:27:52 EDT 2016

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

53 of 185 5/17/2016 1:23 PM

Public Comment No. 74-NFPA 5000-2016 [ New Section after 8.4.3.2 ]

8.4.3.3

Where impact protection is added to a fire-protected covering, the impact protection shall not reduce the fire resistance rating.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This comment changes the term degrade to reduce in order to eliminate a term that the TC felt was vague. Note that the term degrade is used eight times in NFPA 5000.

Related Item

Public Input No. 123-NFPA 5000-2015 [New Section after 8.4.3.2]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Jim Muir

Organization: Building Safety Division, Clark County, Washington

Affilliation: NFPA's Building Code Development Committee (BCDC)

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Tue May 10 17:54:47 EDT 2016

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

55 of 185 5/17/2016 1:23 PM

Committee Input No. 8008-NFPA 5000-2015 [ Global Input ]

Updated references to SEI/ASCE 7 to the 2016 edition once it is available.

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Tracy Vecchiarelli

Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Wed Aug 12 10:06:58 EDT 2015

Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

The committee is aware of the development of a revised edition of ASCE-7 that isexpected to be completed by October of 2016. The committee anticipates a need toreview and possibly revise some of the content in the new edition of NFPA 5000 as partof its second draft preparation work in the summer of 2016.

ResponseMessage:

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

1 of 12 10/26/2015 1:47 PM

Page 1 of 12

Committee Input No. 8005-NFPA 5000-2015 [ Section No. 7.1.5 ]

7.1.5 Fire Department Access.

[1:18.2]

7.1.5.1

Fire department access and fire department access roads shall be provided and maintained inaccordance with 7.1.5. [1:18.2.1]

7.1.5.2 Fire Department Access Roads.

[1:18.2.3]

7.1.5.2.1 Required Access.

7.1.5.2.1.1

Approved fire department access roads shall be provided in accordance with 7.1.5 for everyfacility, building, or portion of a building hereafter constructed or relocated. [1:18.2.3.1.1]

7.1.5.2.1.2

The provisions of 7.1.5.2.1 through 7.1.5.2.3.2 shall be permitted to be modified by the AHJwhere any of the following conditions exists:

(1) One- and two-family dwellings protected by an approved automatic sprinkler system inaccordance with Section 13.1 of NFPA 1

(2) Existing one- and two-family dwellings

(3) Private garages having an area not exceeding 400 ft2

(4) Carports having an area not exceeding 400 ft2

(5) Agricultural buildings having an area not exceeding 400 ft2

(6) Sheds and other detached buildings having an area not exceeding 400 ft2 [1:18.2.3.1.3]

7.1.5.2.1.3

When fire department access roads cannot be installed due to location on property,topography, waterways, nonnegotiable grades, or other similar conditions, the authority havingjurisdiction shall be authorized to require additional fire protection features. [1:18.2.3.1.4]

7.1.5.2.2 Access to Building.

7.1.5.2.2.1

A fire department access road shall extend to within 50 ft (15 m) of at least one exterior doorthat can be opened from the outside and that provides access to the interior of the building.[1:18.3.2.1]

7.1.5.2.2.2

Where a one- or two-family dwelling, or townhouse, is protected with an approved automaticsprinkler system that is installed in accordance with NFPA 13D or NFPA 13R, as applicable,the distance in 7.1.5.2.2.1 shall be permitted to be increased to 150 ft (46 m). [1: 18.2.3.2.1.1]

7.1.5.2.3 Additional Requirements.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

2 of 12 10/26/2015 1:47 PM

Page 2 of 12

7.1.5.2.3.1

Fire department access roads shall be provided such that any portion of the facility or anyportion of an exterior wall of the first story of the building is located not more than 150 ft (46 m)from fire department access roads as measured by an approved route around the exterior ofthe building or facility. [1:18.2.3.2.2]

7.1.5.2.3.2

When buildings are protected throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system that isinstalled in accordance with NFPA 13, Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler Systems; NFPA13D, Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler Systems in One- and Two-Family Dwellings andManufactured Homes; or NFPA 13R, Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler Systems inLow-Rise Residential Occupancies, the distance shall be permitted to be increased to 450 ft(137 m). [1:18.2.3.2.2.1]

7.1.5.2.4 Multiple Access Roads.

More than one fire department access road shall be provided when it is determined by theauthority having jurisdiction that access by a single road could be impaired by vehiclecongestion, condition of terrain, climatic conditions, or other factors that could limit access.[1:18.2.3.3]

7.1.5.2.5 Specifications.

[1:18.2.3.4]

7.1.5.2.5.1 Dimensions.

[1:18.2.3.4.1]

(A)

Fire department access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 ft (6100mm). [1:18.2.3.4.1.1]

(B)

Fire department access roads shall have an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13ft 6 in. (4.1 m). [1:18.2.3.4.1.2]

(C)

Vertical clearance shall be permitted to be reduced, provided such reduction does not impairaccess by fire apparatus, and approved signs are installed and maintained indicating theestablished vertical clearance when approved. [1:18.2.3.4.1.2.1]

(D)

Vertical clearances or widths shall be increased when vertical clearances or widths are notadequate to accommodate fire apparatus. [1:18.2.3.4.1.2.2]

7.1.5.2.5.2 Surface.

Fire department access roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed loadsof fire apparatus and shall be provided with an all-weather driving surface. [1:18.2.3.4.2]

7.1.5.2.5.3 Turning Radius.

(A)

The turning radius of a fire department access road shall be as approved by the authorityhaving jurisdiction. [1:18.2.3.4.3.1]

(B)

Turns in fire department access roads shall maintain the minimum road width.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

3 of 12 10/26/2015 1:47 PM

Page 3 of 12

7.1.5.2.5.4 Dead Ends.

Dead-end fire department access roads in excess of 150 ft (46 m) in length shall be providedwith approved provisions for the fire apparatus to turn around. [1:18.2.3.4.4]

7.1.5.2.5.5 Bridges.

[1:18.2.3.4.5]

(A)

When a bridge is required to be used as part of a fire department access road, it shall beconstructed and maintained in accordance with nationally recognized standards.[1:18.2.3.4.5.1]

(B)

The bridge shall be designed for a live load sufficient to carry the imposed loads of fireapparatus. [1:18.2.3.4.5.2]

(C)

Vehicle load limits shall be posted at both entrances to bridges where required by the authorityhaving jurisdiction. [1:18.2.3.4.5.3]

7.1.5.2.5.6 Grade.

[1:18.2.3.4.6]

(A)

The gradient for a fire department access road shall not exceed the maximum approved.[1:18.2.3.4.6.1]

(B)*

The angle of approach and departure for any means of fire department access shall notexceed 1 ft drop in 20 ft (305 mm drop in 6100 mm) or the design limitations of the fireapparatus of the fire department, and shall be subject to approval by the authority havingjurisdiction. [1:18.2.3.4.6.2]

7.1.5.2.5.7 Marking of Fire Department Access Road.

Where required by the authority having jurisdiction, approved signs or other approved noticesshall be provided and maintained to identify fire department access roads or to prohibit theobstruction thereof or both. [1:18.2.3.5.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Tracy Vecchiarelli

Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Wed Aug 12 09:39:36 EDT 2015

Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

This CI serves as a placeholder pending any revisions to the extracts fromNFPA 1.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

4 of 12 10/26/2015 1:47 PM

Page 4 of 12

Response Message:

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

5 of 12 10/26/2015 1:47 PM

Page 5 of 12

Committee Input No. 8007-NFPA 5000-2015 [ Section No. 7.2.5 ]

7.2.5 Type IV (2HH) Construction.

7.2.5.1 Type IV Construction.

Type IV (2HH) construction shall be that type in which fire walls, exterior walls, and interiorbearing walls and structural elements that are portions of such walls are of approvednoncombustible or limited-combustible materials, except as allowed for exterior walls in7.2.5.6.7. Other interior structural elements, arches, floors, and roofs shall be of solid orlaminated wood or cross-laminated timber without concealed spaces or with concealed spacesconforming to Section 7.2.5.6.7 and shall comply with the allowable dimensions of 7.2.5.5.

7.2.5.2 Exterior Wall Separation.

Exterior walls greater than 30 ft (9.1 m) from the property line shall be permitted to be of heavytimber construction, provided that the 2-hour rating as required by Table 7.2.1.1 is maintainedand such walls contain no combustible concealed spaces.

7.2.5.3 Interior Columns, Arches, Beams, Girders, and Trusses.

Interior columns, arches, beams, girders, and trusses of approved materials other than woodshall be permitted, provided that they are protected to provide a fire resistance rating of not lessthan 1 hour.

7.2.5.4 Concealed Space.

Certain concealed spaces shall be permitted in accordance with the following:

(1) Concealed spaces in accordance with 7.2.5.5.3.4.

(2) Concealed spaces within 1-hour fire resistance rated interior walls and partitions inaccordance with Section 7.2.5. 6.3 shall not require additional protection.

(3) Concealed spaces in floors, roofs or walls of Cross Laminated Timber construction inaccordance with one or more of the following and which do not contain combustibles other thanbuilding elements and electrical, mechanical, fire protection, or plumbing materials andequipment:

1. The building is sprinklered throughout and automatic sprinklers are also provided in theconcealed space.

2. The concealed space shall be filled completely with noncombustible insulation.

3. Surfaces within concealed spaces shall be fully sheathed with not less than 1/2 inch gypsumboard or non combustible materials.

7.2. 5.5 Type IV (2HH) Allowable Dimensions.

All dimensions in 7.2.5.5 for solid sawn members shall be considered nominal.

7.2.5.5.1

The net finished dimensions of glued-laminated members shall be equivalent to the nominaldimensions of solid sawn timbers.

7.2.5.5.2

Cross-laminated timber dimensions shall be actual dimensions.

7.2.5.5.3 Columns.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

6 of 12 10/26/2015 1:47 PM

Page 6 of 12

7.2.5.5.3.1

Wood columns supporting floor loads shall be not less than 8 in. (205 mm) in any dimension.

7.2.5.5.3.2

Wood columns supporting only roof loads shall be not less than 6 in. (150 mm) in width and notless than 8 in. (205 mm) in depth.

7.2.5.5.4 Beams.

7.2.5.5.4.1

Wood beams and girders supporting floor loads shall be not less than 6 in. (150 mm) in widthand not less than 10 in. (255 mm) in depth.

7.2.5.5.4.2

Wood beams and girders and other roof framing supporting roof loads only shall be not lessthan 4 in. (100 mm) in width and not less than 6 in. (150 mm) in depth.

7.2.5.5.5 Arches.

7.2.5.5.5.1

Framed or glued laminated arches that spring from the finished ground level or the floor line,and timber trusses that support floor loads, shall be not less than 8 in. (205 mm) in width ordepth.

7.2.5.5.5.2

Framed or glued laminated arches for roof construction that spring from the finished groundlevel or the floor line and do not support floor loads shall have members not less than 6 in. (150mm) in width and not less than 8 in. (205 mm) in depth for the lower half of the member height,and not less than 6 in. (150 mm) in depth for the upper half of the member height.

7.2.5.5.5.3

Framed or glued laminated arches for roof construction that spring from the top of walls or wallabutments, and timber trusses that do not support floor loads, shall have members not less than4 in. (100 mm) in width and not less than 6 in. (150 mm) in depth.

7.2.5.5.5.4

Spaced members shall be permitted to be composed of two or more pieces not less than 3 in.(75 mm) in thickness where blocked solidly throughout their intervening spaces or where suchspaces are tightly closed by a continuous wood cover plate not less than 2 in. (51 mm) inthickness that is secured to the underside of the members.

7.2.5.5.6 Splice Plates.

Splice plates shall be not less than 3 in. (75 mm) in thickness.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

7 of 12 10/26/2015 1:47 PM

Page 7 of 12

7.2.5.5.7 Floors.

Floors shall be constructed without concealed spaces except as provided in 7.2.5.5.7(2) andshall be permitted to be any of the following materials:

(1) Materials shall be spline or tongue-and-groove plank not less than 3 in. (75 mm) inthickness that is covered with 1 in. (25 mm) tongue-and-groove flooring, laid crosswise ordiagonally to the plank, or with 1⁄2 in. (13 mm) wood structural panel; or they shall beconstructed of laminated planks not less than 4 in. (100 mm) in width, set close togetheron edge, spiked at intervals of 18 in. (455 mm), and covered with 1 in. (25 mm) tongue-and-groove flooring, laid crosswise or diagonally to the plank, or with 1⁄2 in. (13 mm) woodstructural panel.

(2) Cross-laminated timber complying with 45.5.7 8 shall be not less than 4 in. (102 cm)thick and shall be continuous between supports. Individual timbers shall be fastened toone another. Cross-laminated timbers shall be permitted to be connected to walls withoutshrinkage gaps provided dimensional changes are considered in design. Concealedspaces shall be permitted in accordance with Section 7.2.5.4.

7.2.5.5.8 Roof Decks.

Roof decks shall be permitted to be constructed of any of the following materials:

(1) Spline or tongue-and-groove plank not less than 2 in. (51 mm) in thickness

(2) Laminated planks not less than 3 in. (75 mm) in width, set close together on edge, andlaid as required for floors

(3) 1 1⁄8 in. (29 mm) thick interior wood structural panel (exterior glue)

(4) Cross-laminated timber

(5) Approved noncombustible or limited-combustible materials of equivalent fire durability

7.2.5.6 Special Requirements — Type IV Construction.

The special requirements in 7.2.5.6.1 through 7.2.5.6.8 shall apply to Type IV construction.

7.2.5.6.1 Structural Elements.

Structural elements shall be of heavy timber members (sawn or glued-laminated), cross-laminated timber, or fire resistance–rated construction as set forth in Table 7.2.1.1 whenmaterials other than heavy timber or cross-laminated timber are used.

7.2.5.6.2 Columns, Arches, Beams, and Roof Decking.

Where horizontal separation of 20 ft (6100 mm) or more is provided, wood columns, arches,beams, and roof decking conforming to the requirements for heavy timber in 7.2.5.5 shall bepermitted to be used on the exterior of the building.

7.2.5.6.3 Partitions.

Permanent partitions shall be permitted to be of solid wood construction formed by not less thantwo layers of matched boards of 1 in. (25 mm) nominal thickness or of 1-hour fireresistance–rated construction as set forth in Table 7.2.1.1.

7.2.5.6.4 Floors.

Floors shall be permitted to be of heavy timber, masonry, concrete, wood, or steel and shall beconstructed as required in Chapter 8.

7.2.5.6.5 Roofs.

Roofs of 1-hour fire resistance–rated construction shall be permitted.

7.2.5.6.6 Stairways.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

8 of 12 10/26/2015 1:47 PM

Page 8 of 12

7.2.5.6.6.1

Stairways shall be permitted to be constructed with wood treads and risers of not less than 2 in.(51 mm) nominal thickness.

7.2.5.6.6.2

Where built-on, laminated, or plank inclines are required for floors, stairways shall be permittedto be 1 in. (25 mm) nominal thickness or shall be permitted to be constructed as required forbuildings of Type I or Type II construction.

7.2.5.6.7 Exterior Walls.

Exterior walls having a required fire resistance rating of 2 hours or less shall be permitted to beconstructed with any of the following materials:

(1) Noncombustible material shall be permitted.

(2) Limited-combustible material shall be permitted.

(3) Fire retardant–treated wood shall be permitted. Approved fire-retardant-treated woodframing shall be permitted within the assembly of exterior walls having a horizontalseparation of not less than 60 in. (1525 mm), provided that the fire resistance rating ismaintained and the exposed outer and inner faces of such walls are constructed of limited-combustible or noncombustible materials.

(4) Cross-laminated timber complying with 45.5.7 shall be permitted provided the exteriorsurface of the cross-laminated timber is protected by one of the following:

(5) Fire retardant–treated wood not less than 15 ⁄ 32 in. (12 mm) thick

(6) Gypsum board not less than 1 ⁄ 2 in. (12.7 mm) thick

(7) Noncombustible material.

7.2.5.6.8 Exterior Nonbearing Walls.

Exterior nonbearing walls tested in accordance with, and meeting the conditions of acceptanceof, NFPA 285, Standard Fire Test Method for Evaluation of Fire Propagation Characteristics ofExterior Non-Load-Bearing Wall Assemblies Containing Combustible Components, shall bepermitted.

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Tracy Vecchiarelli

Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Wed Aug 12 09:50:24 EDT 2015

Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

Recent construction techniques involving the use of heavy timber structural membershave been designed and built globally. Many of these designs have exceeded traditionalheight limits (four-five stories) and have been completed using performance based

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

9 of 12 10/26/2015 1:47 PM

Page 9 of 12

design or equivalency processes. The committee input is intended to introduce revisedheight limits for such structural members. In addition, FPRF released a Phase 1 study onfeasibility of tall timber structures in March 2014. This study captured the potentialbenefits, hazards, and concerns with this construction technique. Public comments onthis concept are encouraged.

ResponseMessage:

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

10 of 12 10/26/2015 1:47 PM

Page 10 of 12

Committee Input No. 8006-NFPA 5000-2015 [ New Section after 7.4.3.6.8.4 ]

7.4.3.6.9 Height of New Hotels and New Apartment Buildings of Mass Timber

The height limitation for New Hotels and New Apartment Buildings of Type IV construction shallbe permitted to be increased to nine stories and 100 feet (30 480 mm) where the building isseparated by not less than 50 feet (15 240 mm) from any other building on the lot and fromadjacent lot lines or lot lines on the opposite sides of public streets, provided all of thefollowing are met:

1. All load bearing structural elements shall be heavy timber complying with Sections7.2.5.1; and of two hour fire resistance rating in accordance with Section 8.2.1.1.

2. The interior surfaces of all heavy timber walls and ceilings shall be covered by twolayers of 5/8" Type X gypsum board, with all edges of the face layer offset 18" fromthose of the base layer. The base layer shall be attached with 1.75" #6 Type S drywallscrews at 12" o.c. in both directions and the face layer to be attached with 2.25" #6 TypeS drywall screws at 12" o.c. in both directions offset from the screws in the base layerby 6 inches in both directions. One layer of 5/8" Type X gypsum sheathing shall beattached to the outside of the exterior heavy timber walls with minimum 1 ¾" galvanizedroofing nails 12" on center each way and 6" on center at all joints or ends. All paneledges shall be attached with drywall screws or roofing nails located at least 1.5 inchesbut no more than 2 inches from the panel edge.

3. Fire-retardant treated wood , of light-frame construction, shall not be permittedas a bearing element in any walls.

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Tracy Vecchiarelli

Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Wed Aug 12 09:43:40 EDT 2015

Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

Recent construction techniques involving the use of heavy timber structural membershave been designed and built globally. Many of these designs have exceeded traditionalheight limits (four-five stories) and have been completed using performance baseddesign or equivalency processes. The committee input is intended to introduce revisedheight limits for such structural members. In addition, FPRF released a Phase 1 study onfeasibility of tall timber structures in March 2014. This study captured the potentialbenefits, hazards, and concerns with this construction technique. Public comments onthis concept are encouraged.

ResponseMessage:

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

11 of 12 10/26/2015 1:47 PM

Page 11 of 12

Committee Input No. 8003-NFPA 5000-2015 [ Section No. 7.5.2 ]

7.5.2 Residential Sprinkler Increase.

For buildings classified as residential occupancies provided with an approved, electricallysupervised automatic sprinkler system in accordance with NFPA 13R, the allowable height fornonsprinklered buildings shall be permitted to be increased by 20 ft (6100 mm), and theallowable number of stories for nonsprinklered buildings shall be permitted to be increased byone story, provided that the building height does not exceed 60 ft (18 m) and the number ofstories above grade plane does not exceed four.

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Tracy Vecchiarelli

Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Wed Aug 12 09:13:37 EDT 2015

Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

This revision is being suggested to receive public comment on the allowance to useNFPA 13R systems in what essentially are 5 story buildings (concrete pedestal design).NFPA has been looking at the issue of severe property damage, but no life loss, inbuildings protected with NFPA 13R sprinkler systems. While these fires are infrequent,they do occur on occasion. Concerns have been expressed about the appropriate use ofNFPA 13R in some of these circumstances. In preparation for the Second Draft meeting,the committee wants to look at this problem in a holistic manner and look at otherpotential contributing factors and solutions. These include, but are not limited to, limitingthe overall area of attics, limiting the overall area of the building square footage, developmore refined requirements for attic and combustible concealed space draft stopping andprovide a renewed emphasis on inspection of draft stops. Public comments areencouraged on this topic.

ResponseMessage:

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

12 of 12 10/26/2015 1:47 PM

Page 12 of 12