National Fire Protection Association...4 Abstentions (K. Ferrari, A. Lowe, S. Schwartzkopf, J. Wagner) The attached report shows the number of affirmative, negative, and abstaining

National Fire Protection Association

1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02169-7471

Phone: 617-770-3000 • Fax: 617-770-0700 • www.nfpa.org

M E M O R A N D U M

To: NFPA Technical Committee on Piping Systems

From: Elena Carroll, Project Administrator

Date: December 2, 2015

Subject: NFPA 99 First Draft TC FINAL Ballot Results (A2017 Cycle)

According to the final ballot results, all ballot items received the necessary affirmative votes to pass ballot with

the exception of FRs 654, 655, 656, and 657, as noted on the attached report.

28 Members Eligible to Vote 1 Not Returned (D. McIlroy)

7 Affirmative on All Revisions (M. Allen, K. Ferrari, A. Lowe, J. McBride, D. Mohile, J. Wagner, J.

Willard, A. Volz, w/ comment) 16 Negative on one or more Revisions (M. Allen, C. Beebe, B. Brown, D. Colombo, S. Hamilton, A. Lowe,

J. Lucas, J. Maurer, J. McBride, D. Mohile, S. Schwartzkopf, R. Schwipps, R. Smidt, J. Wagner, J. Willard, A.

Volz)

4 Abstentions (K. Ferrari, A. Lowe, S. Schwartzkopf, J. Wagner)

The attached report shows the number of affirmative, negative, and abstaining votes as well as the explanation of

the vote for each first revision.

There are two criteria necessary for each first revision to pass ballot: (1) simple majority and (2) affirmative 2/3

vote. The mock examples below show how the calculations are determined.

(1) Example for Simple Majority: Assuming there are 20 vote eligible committee members, 11 affirmative votes

are required to pass ballot. (Sample calculation: 20 members eligible to vote ÷ 2 = 10 + 1 = 11)

(2) Example for Affirmative 2/3: Assuming there are 20 vote eligible committee members and 1 member did not

return their ballot and 2 members abstained, the number of affirmative votes required would be 12. (Sample

calculation: 20 members eligble to vote – 1 not returned – 2 abstentions = 17 x 0.66 = 11.22 = 12 )

As always please feel free to contact me if you have any questions.

NFPA 99 (HEA-PIP) First Draft Ballot A2017

Eligible to Vote: 28

Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy

Vote Selection Votes Comments

Affirmative 24

Affirmative with Comment 3

Anthony Lowe agree

Keith Ferrari okay

Jeffery F. McBride Agree

Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 23


Keith Ferrari okay

Jeffery F. McBride I agree

Negative 2

Anthony Lowe Category 1 includes other areas then Critical Care

J. Richard Wagner

If the term "critical care area" is changed to "Category 1 space", it will lose its identity. Every space in a

Category 1 facility is a "Category 1 space". Section 5.1.4.6.8 requires that zone valves be located

immediately outside of each vital life support area, critical care area, and anesthetizing location. These are

all "Category 1 spaces". Section 5.1.4.6.8 would be useless if all of its locations were called "Category 1

space". Zone valves are not required outside of every "Category 1 space". There is a similar situation in

5.1.9.4 for the required locations of area alarm panels. "Critical care area" is clearly defined in 3.3.28.

Abstain 0

TRUE

FR-604, Global Input, See FR-604

Results by Revision

TRUE

FR-601, Global Input, See FR-601

Page 1 of 44

http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/FormLaunch?id=/TerraView/Content/99-2015.ditamap/2/C1439212541335.xml&viewmode=nfpa/xslt/nfpaviewmode.xsl




Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 24


Anthony Lowe agree

Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 22


Keith Ferrari okay

Negative 4

Anthony Lowe

Not a code item no need for definition and the language is too vague. It can allow unknown methods of

unacceptable connections

J. Richard Wagner

The definition of "non-separable connection" does not clearly define a permanent pipe connection.

Soldered and brazed joints can be considered as "non-separable" but they can be disconnected with heat

and reconnected. Whether a particular connection is "non-separable" requires an analysis of the design of

the connection, installation tests, and its use in a particular piping system.

Jeffery F. McBride I do not agree.

Jonathan C. Willard Not in favor of allowing corrugated stainless steel tubing for medical gas systems.

Abstain 0

TRUE

FR-658, New Section after 3.3.116, See FR-658

TRUE


Page 2 of 44





Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 23


Anthony Lowe agree

Keith Ferrari okay

Jeffery F. McBride I agree.

Negative 1

J. Richard Wagner Is this definition necessary? "Producer" is a very general term. How is the term used in NFPA 99?

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 24


Anthony Lowe agree

Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 0

Abstain 0

TRUE

FR-606, Section No. 5.1.3.3.1.1, See FR-606

TRUE


Page 3 of 44





Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 23


Anthony Lowe agree

J. Richard Wagner In 5.1.3.3.1.2(4), 5.1.13.3.5.6 should be changed to 5.1.13.3.5.7.

Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 24


Anthony Lowe agree

Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 0

Abstain 0

TRUE


TRUE


Page 4 of 44





Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 24


Anthony Lowe agree

Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 24


Anthony Lowe agree

Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 0

Abstain 0

TRUE

FR-612, Section No. 5.1.3.5 [Excluding any Sub-Sections], See FR-612

TRUE


Page 5 of 44





Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 24



Negative 1

Anthony Lowe

Unnecessary risk to the medical gas system. Other stand alone of simulation gases can be utilized for this

purpose

Abstain 1

Keith Ferrari review required


Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 24


Anthony Lowe agree


Negative 0

Abstain 1


TRUE

FR-609, New Section after 5.1.3.5.10, See FR-609

TRUE

FR-613, Section No. 5.1.3.5.2, See FR-613

Page 6 of 44





Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 24


Anthony Lowe agree if table is correct

Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 24


Anthony Lowe agree

Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 0

Abstain 0

TRUE

FR-616, New Section after 5.1.3.5.11.2, See FR-616

TRUE


Page 7 of 44





Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 24


Anthony Lowe agree

Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 24


Anthony Lowe agree


Negative 0

Abstain 1


TRUE


TRUE


Page 8 of 44





Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 24


Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 1

Anthony Lowe Separation of the two system is more defined

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 24


Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 1

Anthony Lowe Separation of the two system is more defined

Abstain 0

TRUE


TRUE


Page 9 of 44





Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 23


Anthony Lowe agree

Mark W. Allen

The wording in D is not sufficiently precise to prevent misreading. Propose the following rewording D)

(1)Built-in disconnect means shall be included to allow appropriate operation of central supply systems

with multiple compressors and protect service personnel from exposure to live voltages.

Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 24


Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 1

Anthony Lowe

this is redundant to "Lag Alarm" already in code. The language provided does not provide more clear

language. Capacity is too difficult to measure... The VSD would exceed the existing language of the code

and doesnt require a change in langauge

Abstain 0

TRUE

FR-621, Section No. 5.1.3.6.3.12(F), See FR-621

TRUE


Page 10 of 44





Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 23


Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 2

Anthony Lowe

New studies show that the vacuum and copper will kill living cells and that risk to the work is simply not

present.

James L. Lucas

The corrugation would make removal of chips, debri and possible moisture impossible. Copper provides

antimicrobial benefits which stainless does not. I am OK with using this for exhaust and vent lines on source

equipment - but not on the compressor inlets or patient side pipelines.

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 22


J. Richard Wagner Has existing 5.1.3.7.4 - Piping Arrangements and Redundancies been changed to 5.1.3.7.5?

Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 2

Anthony Lowe

New studies show that the vacuum and copper will kill living cells and that risk to the work is simply not

present.

James L. Lucas

There is no evidence to support that this will provide additional protection or that germs reach the vacuum

pump. This adds expense without justification.

Abstain 0

TRUE


TRUE


Page 11 of 44





Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 22


Anthony Lowe agree

Mark W. Allen

The wording in D is not sufficiently precise to prevent misreading. Propose the following rewording (D)

(2)Controls shall be provided with built-in disconnect means to allow appropriate operation of central

supply systems with multiple pumps and protect service personnel from exposure to live voltages.

Keith Ferrari okay


J. Richard Wagner Has existing 5.1.3.7.5 - Electrical Power and Control been changed to 5.1.3.7.6?

Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 23


J. Richard Wagner

Has existing 5.1.3.7.6 - Medical-Surgical Vacuum Source Exhaust been changed to 5.1.3.7.7? Has existing

5.1.3.7.7 - Operating Alarms been changed to 5.1.3.7.8

Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 1

Anthony Lowe capacity is unable to be measured

Abstain 0

TRUE


TRUE


Page 12 of 44





Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 24


Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 1

Anthony Lowe capacity is unable to be measured

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 23


Anthony Lowe agree

Mark W. Allen

The wording in D is not sufficiently precise to prevent misreading. Propose the following rewording D)

(2)Controls shall be provided with built in disconnect means to allow appropriate operation of central

supply systems with multiple producers and protect service personnel from exposure to live voltages.

Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 0

Abstain 0

TRUE


TRUE


Page 13 of 44





Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 24


Anthony Lowe agree


Negative 0

Abstain 1



Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 23


Anthony Lowe agree

J. Richard Wagner The title of Table 5.1.4.1.6(b) includes (b) twice.

Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 0

Abstain 0

TRUE


TRUE


Page 14 of 44





Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 22


J. Richard Wagner What is the required time duration of the pressure tests?


Negative 2

Anthony Lowe the author is changing the requirements of testing that are unable to be tested by the installer.

James L. Lucas No time duration has been included in this test. I feel committee input 646 provides a better alternative.

Abstain 1



Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 23


Anthony Lowe agree

J. Richard Wagner Is 5.1.6.5 the correct section number for this addition? There are existing sections 5.1.6.1 though 5.1.6.9.

Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 0

Abstain 0

TRUE

FR-644, New Section after 5.1.6.4, See FR-644

TRUE

FR-642, Section No. 5.1.6.2, See FR-642

Page 15 of 44





Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 24


Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 0

Abstain 1

Anthony Lowe lack of knowledge of the UL listing


Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 24


Anthony Lowe agree


Negative 0

Abstain 1


TRUE


TRUE


Page 16 of 44





Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 23


Anthony Lowe agree

J. Richard Wagner Is 5.1.9.4.5 the correct section number for this item. There is an existing 5.1.9.4.5.

Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 24



Negative 1

Anthony Lowe capacity can not be measured in the method described

Abstain 1


TRUE


TRUE


Page 17 of 44





Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 14


David B. Mohile

I do not believe corrugated stainless steel tubing is appropriate for medical gas piping. Anti microbial effects

of copper

Negative 11

Allan D. Volz

I continue to have significant concerns with moisture in any system and how it will react. Copper has some

ability to limit microbiological growth that stainless steel does not. When utilized in a medical vacuum

system, the corrurgations will be a location where water accumulation will occur. In any system, cleaning of

a corrugated tube will be impossibile.

Dana A. Colombo

The reason for the use of copper in the installation of med-gas systems is the longevity of the tubing, that

has been proven for the past 100 years, the antimicrobial properties of copper, the fact that the joint once

brazed cannot be separated without damaging the system, the fact that the corrugated stainless-steel must

be joined by using a mechanical joint possibly placed in a closed in wall or pipe chase this has never been

allowed in this document. The fitting used to connect this system are a modified version of a flared

compression mechanical joint that would require the installer to another certification to do the installation,

more cost for the craftsperson.

Anthony Lowe there is not enough information regarding stainless steel with positive pressure gases

Scott Hamilton

Stainless Steel does not contain antimicrobial properties. The corrugated design is also a negative for pipe

cleanliness which is the most important factor in the system. It will also allow mechanical joints within walls

and there is no mention of an installer certification.

Sean Schwartzkopf More review required

FALSE


Page 18 of 44



J. Richard Wagner

There is presently only one CSMT manufacturer. There is no industry standard to which CSMT could be

"listed" as complying with. The submitted data for CSMT is not adequate, compared to ASTM B819 for

copper tube for medical gas systems. ASTM A240 for CSMT is simply stainless steel plate, sheet, and strip,

not corrugated stainless steel tubing for medical gas systems. There are no standard dimensions for

corrugated stainless steel tubing. They vary depending on pressure rating and method of fabrication. Tubing

and fittings by different manufacturers would not be interchangeable like copper tubing. Bending CSMT is

not adequate for making close-coupled connections. CSMT has a limited number of basic fittings. The

submitted data does not include specific requirements for support spacing for CSMT. Where is continuous

support required? The submitted opinion by Hoffman Engineering on the safety factor for CSMT is based on

it being concealed in walls and partitions and not exposed to contact by personnel. Can CSMT be used in

equipment rooms for connections to source equipment and regulators? Is CSMT rated for 300 psi? Is 300 a

typographical error? CSMT is fabricated from 300 series stainless steel. The installation requirements for

CSMT are different than copper tubing. Mixing the installation requirements for CSMT with the existing

NFPA 99 requirements for copper tubing in 5.1.10 will confuse the requirements for both. The proposed

changes for CSMT include no requirements for the fittings and joints. The joints should be equivalent to

brazed copper and subject to approval. CSMT does not appear to be an acceptable alternate to brazed

copper tubing in NFPA 99 for medical gas piping in health care facilities. There are no known existing CSMT

medical gas installations in health care facilities. There are no complete specifications for the installation of

CSMT. NFPA 99 should not be used for a pilot installation of CSMT.

Barry E. Brown

• Mechanical joints should not be allowed in sealed walls for installation and failure reasons. • Corrugations

can trap particulates. • Possible failure of the corrugations either due to installation damage, support

clamps, or over time. • Potential for nose or harmonic vibration due to improper sizing or flow rates.



Ronald J. Schwipps

Still concerns with cleaning of corrurgations / water accumulation. Also concerns with required use of

mechanical joints with this material.

James L. Lucas




Abstain 1


Page 19 of 44



Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 14


Negative 12

Allan D. Volz





Dana A. Colombo this would not be required with the use of copper tubing.

David B. Mohile See comments for FR-654, above


Scott Hamilton

Added smoke and flame in a fire is another negative for this product. Copper does not require these added

requirements and is a safer product in fire situations.

Sean Schwartzkopf More information needed

Barry E. Brown

Corrugated stainless tubing (CSMT) has the potential to create hazards due to mechanical failures other

than flame spread index or smoke index.



Ronald J. Schwipps Not in favor of use of corrugated stainless steel tubing for this application.

James L. Lucas




J. Richard Wagner

Is CSMT subject to pin-hole leaks by induced voltage from lightning? Does CSMT need to be electrically

grounded? CSST for fuel gas piping in NFPA 54 needs to be grounded. Is 5.1.10.1 the proper place for the

flame spread and smoke density index of CSMT? Is 5.1.10.1.6 the proper section number for CSMT? There

is an existing 5.1.10.1.6.

Abstain 1


FALSE


Page 20 of 44




Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 22


Anthony Lowe agree

Keith Ferrari okay

Negative 3

Mark W. Allen

I remain unpersuaded that these tubes should be permitted in positive pressure medical gas service. We are

not shown that they can be kept clean, that they are suited to oxygen service, and we are sacrificing the

clear benefit of copper as an antimicrobial agent.


James L. Lucas




Abstain 0

TRUE


Page 21 of 44




Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 14


Negative 11

Allan D. Volz





Dana A. Colombo

The use of corrugated stainless tubing would make it impossible to do the blow down test to remove any

debris left in the system. The amount of pressure that would be required to blow the system down and the

fact that if you were to run thousands of feet of tubing with millions of little groves manufactured in the

tubing that will collect any and all debris, this will take more time than it would to braze the copper joints.

The fact that it would require more hangers to keep the tubing level so as to not trap any contaminants in

the system would drive up the cost of the medical-gas system as well.

Mark W. Allen I am satisfied that such tubing could be used for support gases and for vacuum, but not for patient gases.

David B. Mohile

I do not agree with bending tubing. If we permit bending stainless steel tubing we will probably see

installers bending copper tubing which we do not permit.


Scott Hamilton

Bending of the corrugated material will lead to even tighter smaller pockets which will enable debris and/or

growth within the system. Blown down tests will be ineffective. The bending and use of this material will

also require proper hanging to ensure no sags in the system. No installer requirements have been stated.

Barry E. Brown

• Mechanical joints should not be allowed in sealed walls for installation and failure reasons. • Bending

should not be allowed. • Possible failure of the corrugations either due to installation damage, improper

bending.•



James L. Lucas




FALSE


Page 22 of 44



J. Richard Wagner

The bends in CSMT are too tight to make close-coupled connections. There are a limited number of basic

fittings for CSMT. Are CSMT fittings considered to comply with 5.1.10.9.1? Nothing has been submitted. In

5.1.10.10(4), non-removable push-fit fittings that employ a quick assembly push fit connector are

prohibited throughout medical gas distribution pipeline systems. Does this apply to CSMT?

Abstain 2




Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 15


Jeffery F. McBride I agree with the exception of corrugated Stainless Steel

Negative 9

Dana A. Colombo

Because of the flexible nature of corrugated stainless tubing, there is more of a risk that the system will

have more traps for debris to accumulate. the tubing is made of little corrugates (groves), there is no way

that you can blow this system clean.


David B. Mohile

Please see my comments on FR 654. If we allow corrugated tubing we will permit moisture and other

vacuumed material a place to rest and eventually occlude flow of vacuum.

Barry E. Brown

For positive gas systems: Mechanical joints should not be allowed in sealed walls for installation and failure

reasons. • Corrugations can trap particulates. • Possible failure of the corrugations either due to installation

damage, support clamps, or over time. • Potential for nose or harmonic vibration due to improper sizing or

flow rates.

Scott Hamilton

Bending of the corrugated material will lead to even tighter smaller pockets which will enable debris and/or

growth within the system. Blown down tests will be ineffective. The bending and use of this material will

also require proper hanging to ensure no sags in the system. No installer requirements have been stated.

FALSE


Total Voted : 27

For Simple majority and also two-third majority election; the simple affirmative votes needed are 15 and the two-third affirmative votes needed are 18

Page 23 of 44



J. Richard Wagner

CSMT is not proposed for vacuum systems and WAGD systems. FR-656 should be deleted if CSMT is not

approved for NFPA 99.



James L. Lucas




Abstain 2




Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 23


Anthony Lowe agree

J. Richard Wagner

The CDA Copper Tube Handbook recommends that copper fitting cups be cleaned with abrasive cloth,

abrasive pads, or a properly sized fitting brush. Most fitting brushes have high-carbon steel bristles.

Stainless steel and brass bristles are available from some manufacturers.

Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy

TRUE


TRUE


Page 24 of 44





Affirmative 24


Anthony Lowe agree

Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 24


Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 1

Anthony Lowe responsibility of ASSE 6000

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 23


Allan D. Volz

The identification of individual rooms, by specific reference, is preferable to lumping a number of rooms

togeather.

Keith Ferrari okay


TRUE


TRUE


Page 25 of 44




Negative 1

Anthony Lowe

The label is too restrictive for a minimum code and a burden on the installer to ensure the rooms numbers

are properly named

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 24


Anthony Lowe agree

Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 22


Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 3

Anthony Lowe field installers can not accurate measure

Ronald J. Schwipps Only disagree with 0.5% leak rate. Agree that it should be 1.0% from committee input 646

James L. Lucas

I only disagree with the 0.5% allowable leak rate. I feel it should be 1.0% to be consistent with committee

input 646

Abstain 0

TRUE


TRUE


Page 26 of 44





Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 23


Anthony Lowe agree

Keith Ferrari okay

Negative 2

J. Richard Wagner

There are AHJs for every aspect of a construction project. Who would the ASSE 6020 inspector or ASSE

6035 verifier work for? The installer who performs the installer-performed tests must provide forms

indicating that the 24-hour standing pressure tests on each positive pressure medical gas piping system

have been performed and witnessed before they can be verified. The installer must assure that every test is

witnessed or acceptable by the AHJ without witnessing before it can be submitted. What is Section

5.1.12.4? Where is it?

Jeffery F. McBride An ASSE 6030 should be the verifier of this section.

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 23


Anthony Lowe agree

Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 0

Abstain 1

TRUE


TRUE


Page 27 of 44




J. Richard Wagner

Is this 5.1.12.4.1.3 as indicated or should it be 5.1.12.3.1.3 for System Verification. What is Section

5.1.12.4? Where is 5.1.12.4.1.4?


Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 23


Anthony Lowe agree

Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 0

Abstain 1

J. Richard Wagner What is Section 5.1.12.4?


Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 23


Anthony Lowe agree

Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 0

Abstain 1


TRUE


TRUE


Page 28 of 44





Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 23


Anthony Lowe agree


Negative 0

Abstain 2




Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 23


Anthony Lowe agree


Negative 0

Abstain 2

J. Richard Wagner What is Section 5.1.12.4? What is 5.1.12.4.14?



Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy

TRUE

FR-662, Section No. 5.1.12.3.14.3(A), See FR-662

TRUE


TRUE


Page 29 of 44






Affirmative 23


Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 1

Anthony Lowe Do not want to remove Lag in lieu of Capacity. Capacity is not accurate and difficult to measure

Abstain 1

J. Richard Wagner Is this 5.1.12.3 or 5.1.12.4? What is Section 5.1.12.4?


Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 23


Anthony Lowe agree

Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 1

J. Richard Wagner

Support gases include nitrogen, which is not within the scope of Chapter 8 - Plumbing. There should be no

references to either Chapter 8 or 9. Neither deal with the application of medical support gases.

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 24

TRUE


TRUE


Page 30 of 44





Anthony Lowe agree

Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 24


Anthony Lowe agree

Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 23


Anthony Lowe agree

J. Richard Wagner

change "nedeeded" to "needed" ....intended line pressure "in accordance with" Table 5.1.11, and of ......

Where 5.1.13.3.5.5 was deleted, have existing 5.1.13.3.5.6 through 5.1.13.3.5.13 been reduced by "1"?

Keith Ferrari okay


TRUE


TRUE


Page 31 of 44




Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 23


Anthony Lowe agree

Mark W. Allen

The wording in D is not sufficiently precise to prevent misreading. Propose the following rewording (D)

(1)Built-in disconnect means to allow appropriate operation of central supply systems with multiple

compressor systems and protect service personnel from exposure to live voltages

Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 23


Anthony Lowe agree

J. Richard Wagner Line pressure control for instrument air should be added under 5.1.13.3.5, not as 5.1.13.8.

Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 0

Abstain 0

TRUE


TRUE


Page 32 of 44





Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 24


Anthony Lowe agree


Negative 0

Abstain 1



Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 23


Anthony Lowe agree

J. Richard Wagner

Where oxygen central supply "systems" using .... (add the "s") Should the section number be 5.1.14.4.10?

What is 5.1.14.5?


Negative 0

Abstain 1


TRUE


TRUE


TRUE


Page 33 of 44






Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 23


Anthony Lowe agree

J. Richard Wagner Oxygen "central" supply "systems" using ...... Is 5.2.3.6 the correct section number?


Negative 0

Abstain 1



Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 24


Anthony Lowe agree

Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 23


TRUE

FR-682, Section No. A.5.1.9.5, See FR-682

TRUE

FR-681, Section No. A.5.1.3.3, See FR-681

Page 34 of 44




J. Richard Wagner The existing section numbers in Table A.5.1.9.5 are not aligned with the revised alarm conditions.


Negative 1

Anthony Lowe DO not agree with Capacity in place of Lag

Abstain 1



Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 24


Anthony Lowe agree

Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 24


Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 1

Anthony Lowe do not agree with Bulk gases in one definition

Abstain 0

TRUE

FR-903, Sections 5.1.3.3.1.6, 5.1.3.3.1.7, 5.1.3.3.1.8, 5.1.3.3.1.9..., See FR-903

TRUE


Page 35 of 44





Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 20


Jonathan C. Willard

Add an (3) that states or as required by OSHA for confined space entry. A handheld monitor could be an

option as well.


Negative 4

Anthony Lowe

Having reconsidered, standards have been created for proper ventilation, the monitor would be an option

for a minimum or single fault code/standard

John Maurer

The proposed changes imply that central supply locations are permit-required confined spaces (29 CFR

1910.146) where oxygen deficient or oxygen enriched atmospheres may be present. There is no evidence

to suggest that central supply locations require the equivalent level of monitoring prior to entering the

room. This proposal should not pass.

Chad E. Beebe

There is no documented evidence that shows that an oxygen monitor is needed. There was no evidence

provided showing a rise of worker injuries or deaths that would suddenly require oxygen monitors. There

are literately thousands of existing installations in healthcare facilities around the country. Before a change

like this gets included there needs to be some justification to support this as a solution to a known safety

hazard. There is nothing in the code that prohibits the installation of oxygen monitors right now - so

facilities that are concerned can install monitors now.

Ronald J. Schwipps Further justifcation needed to warrant requirement.

Abstain 1



Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy

TRUE


TRUE


Page 36 of 44





Affirmative 23


Anthony Lowe agree

J. Richard Wagner

The change to A.5.1.3.3.2(8) should be A.5.1.3.3.2(9). There is no existing A.5.1.3.3.2(8). A.5.1.3.3.2(9) is all

new.

Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 24


Anthony Lowe

Pressure regulators are a known device to control line pressure. It appears the author wants to regulate line

pressure from the compressor controls and this is a horrible idea

Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 23


Anthony Lowe agree

TRUE


TRUE


Page 37 of 44




J. Richard Wagner

What is the reach of an average height individual? Why not require that zone valves be readily operable at

a maximum mounting height of 6 feet? (5'-6")? Specify one mounting height for everyone.

Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 23


Anthony Lowe agree

J. Richard Wagner

Should A.5.1.5 in Appendix A be changed to A.5.1.5.13? Section 5.1.5.13 is the only section of 5.1.5 that has

requirements for the protection of outlets/inlets from damage. In the proposed change to existing A.5.1.5,

are the minimum number of station outlets/inlets for each system NFPA 99 requirements? They are design

requirements for a health care facility but not a requirement for its construction contractors. The required

number of station outlets/inlets should be shown on the design plans. The number of station outlets/inlets

in a facility dictate the layout and sizing of the piping systems and the capacity of the source equipment,

which are all design requirements. FGI Guidelines for Design and Construction of Hospitals and Outpatient

Facilities are referenced in 2.3.11 under FGI Publications, but what are its specific requirements in NFPA 99?

Keith Ferrari yes


Negative 0

Abstain 0


TRUE


TRUE

FR-628, Section No. 5.1.5, See FR-628

Page 38 of 44




Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 23


Anthony Lowe agree


Negative 1

J. Richard Wagner

Having all manufactured assemblies tested for gas flow rates by the manufacturer would significantly

increase their production cost. Why do manufactured assemblies fail the operational pressure flow tests?

What are the problems? What has to be corrected? Do there need to be design changes for manufactured

assemblies? Section 5.1.6 should require that manufactured assemblies be designed to provide the flow

capacities required for the operational pressure tests in 5.1.12.3.10 for the outlets and inlets. If flow tests

by the manufacturer are required, why shouldn't the test gas be oil-free, dry nitrogen NF? The

manufacturer should have nitrogen for brazing. What is 5.1.12.4? What is 5.1.12.4.10? Where are they?

Abstain 1



Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 23


Anthony Lowe agree

J. Richard Wagner There is an existing 5.1.6.9.


Negative 0

Abstain 1


TRUE


Page 39 of 44




Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 19


Negative 6

Allan D. Volz

There should be no distinguishion between flexible connectors and flexible joints. Neither should be

allowed to be concealed in walls, floors, ceilings, or partitions.

Anthony Lowe

all flexible connectors should NOT be in walls or partitions. Those connectors should be in a place they can

be checked


Ronald J. Schwipps These type of connections should be in a location that allows them to be checked.

James L. Lucas




Ronald M. Smidt

I am changing my vote after reading the negative vote of Chad Beebe. There is no documented evidence

that shows that an oxygen monitor is needed. There was no evidence provided showing a rise of worker

injuries or deaths that would suddenly require oxygen monitors. There are literately thousands of existing

installations in healthcare facilities around the country. Before a change like this gets included there needs

to be some justification to support this as a solution to a known safety hazard. There is nothing in the code

that prohibits the installation of oxygen monitors right now - so facilities that are concerned can install

monitors now.

Abstain 2

J. Richard Wagner

What is the difference between metallic flexible joints, metallic hose, and flexible connectors? In

5.1.10.11.6.3, metallic flexible joints include expansion joints, seismic protection, thermal expansion, and

vibration control. What cannot be concealed? What if access for replacement is provided?



TRUE


TRUE


Page 40 of 44




Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 24


Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 1

Anthony Lowe The Term Medical removes Support gases from testing

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 24


Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 1

Anthony Lowe

The facility will not have the information required to make an accurate determination of the system to

authorize its use

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 23


Anthony Lowe agree

TRUE


TRUE


Page 41 of 44




Keith Ferrari okay

Negative 2

J. Richard Wagner

Existing 5.1.12.3 is System Verification. The purpose of the proposed section for system inspections is not

clear. It is not coordinated with the existing requirements of 5.1.12. The systems are inspected normally

during construction and for final acceptance. Work must be inspected and approved before it can be

concealed. Existing 5.1.12.1 calls for inspection and testing of all piped gas systems. System inspection is

done by the system installer to determine that the systems are ready for testing. System inspection is also

performed by the general contractor or the owner to determine that the system installation is complete for

acceptance and payment. Testing is done by the installer-performed tests (5.1.12.2) and system verification

(5.1.12.3). Are the inspections required by FR-631 in addition to the normal inspections done by the

contractors, the designers, and the owner? The requirements of proposed 5.1.12.3.1.5 are not clear.

Inspections are "permitted"? By what organization? Proposed 5.1.12.3.2.1 under Inspections only requires

that the initial pressure tests be witnessed. Existing 5.1.12.2.1.1 already requires that all installer-performed

tests be performed and documented. Proposed 5.1.12.3.2.2 requires that all labeling and valve tagging be

inspected. Isn't that already done, along with inspecting everything else? Is this an added cost to the

project?

Jeffery F. McBride I do not agree. An ASSE 6030 should be performing these tests.

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 23


Anthony Lowe Agree with ASSE 6035 but do not agree with the definition of Cryogenic Fluid System

Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 0

Abstain 1

TRUE


Page 42 of 44



J. Richard Wagner

What and where is Section 5.1.12.4? The title of CGA M-1 is not correct as stated. The title is Guide for

Medical Gas Supply Systems at Consumer Sites. The Techstreet Full Description of CGA M-1 says that it does

not apply to the piped distribution system. That's NFPA 99 - Chapter 5.


Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 23


Anthony Lowe agree

J. Richard Wagner 5.1.12.3.14.3(E) was 24 hours in 2005. It was changed to 12 hours in 2012.

Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 23


Anthony Lowe agree

J. Richard Wagner Should 5.1.13.3.5.10 be changed to 5.1.13.3.5.9?

Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 0

Abstain 0

TRUE


TRUE

FR-663, Section No. 5.1.12.3.14.3(H), See FR-663

Page 43 of 44





Not Returned : 1

Donald R. McIlroy


Affirmative 23


Anthony Lowe agree

J. Richard Wagner Change 5.1.14.4 to 5.1.14.5 Source Equipment Labeling. 5.1.14.4 is existing.

Keith Ferrari okay


Negative 0

Abstain 0

TRUE


Page 44 of 44


Committee Input No. 654-NFPA 99-2015 [ Section No. 5.1.10.1.4 ]

This was a First Revision that failed ballot.

5.1.10.1.4*

Tubes shall be one of the following:

(1) hard-drawn seamless copper in accordance with ASTM B 819, Standard Specification for SeamlessCopper Tube for Medical Gas Systems , medical gas tube, Type L, except Type K shall be usedwhere operating pressures are above a gauge pressure of 1275 kPa (185 psi) and the pipe sizes are

larger than DN80 [NPS 3 (3 1 ⁄ 8 in. O.D.)].

(2) Listed Corrugated Stainless Medical Tubing (CSMT) manufactured from ASTM A240 stainless steel with a maximum allowable working pressure at least 300 PSIG with a pressure safety factor of 3.5 forall medical gases except medical air compressed on site.

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: HEA-PIP

Organization: [ Not Specified ]

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Wed Aug 12 08:05:56 EDT 2015

Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

This revision permits an additional material for medical gas tubing. This will need a listing to be usedas written. There are several other revisions related to the use of this new material. It is understoodthat a listing for this purpose will include Leakage Test, Hydrostatic Strength, Impact, Axial Tension,Torsion, Elevated Temperature, Flame, Compression, Bending, Effectiveness of Striker Plates,Electrical Resistance, Resistance to Installation Damage, Jacket Burning Characteristics,Mechanical Fitting Performance, Mechanical Fittings Resistance to Removal or Re-Assembly.

This tubing is being limited to use in systems other than medical air systems which produce the airon site. There are concerns with how water accumulation will be affected by corrugations in thepiping and also with how the stainless steel will react where subject to water accumulation in thetubing.

ResponseMessage:

Public Input No. 268-NFPA 99-2015 [Section No. 5.1.10.1.4]


Ballot Results

This item has failed ballot

28 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

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

4 of 56 12/2/2015 8:09 AM

11 Negative with Comments

14 Affirmative All

1 Affirmative with Comments

1 Abstention

Not Returned

McIlroy, Donald R.

Negative with Comment

Brown, Barry E.

• Mechanical joints should not be allowed in sealed walls for installation and failure reasons. • Corrugations cantrap particulates. • Possible failure of the corrugations either due to installation damage, support clamps, or overtime. • Potential for nose or harmonic vibration due to improper sizing or flow rates.

Colombo, Dana A.

The reason for the use of copper in the installation of med-gas systems is the longevity of the tubing, that hasbeen proven for the past 100 years, the antimicrobial properties of copper, the fact that the joint once brazedcannot be separated without damaging the system, the fact that the corrugated stainless-steel must be joined byusing a mechanical joint possibly placed in a closed in wall or pipe chase this has never been allowed in thisdocument. The fitting used to connect this system are a modified version of a flared compression mechanical jointthat would require the installer to another certification to do the installation, more cost for the craftsperson.

Hamilton, Scott

Stainless Steel does not contain antimicrobial properties. The corrugated design is also a negative for pipecleanliness which is the most important factor in the system. It will also allow mechanical joints within walls andthere is no mention of an installer certification.

Lowe, Anthony

there is not enough information regarding stainless steel with positive pressure gases

Lucas, James L.

The corrugation would make removal of chips, debri and possible moisture impossible. Copper providesantimicrobial benefits which stainless does not. I am OK with using this for exhaust and vent lines on sourceequipment - but not on the compressor inlets or patient side pipelines.

McBride, Jeffery F.

I do not agree.

Schwartzkopf, Sean

More review required

Schwipps, Ronald J.

Still concerns with cleaning of corrurgations / water accumulation. Also concerns with required use of mechanicaljoints with this material.

Volz, Allan D.

I continue to have significant concerns with moisture in any system and how it will react. Copper has some abilityto limit microbiological growth that stainless steel does not. When utilized in a medical vacuum system, thecorrurgations will be a location where water accumulation will occur. In any system, cleaning of a corrugated tubewill be impossibile.

Wagner, J. Richard

There is presently only one CSMT manufacturer. There is no industry standard to which CSMT could be "listed"as complying with. The submitted data for CSMT is not adequate, compared to ASTM B819 for copper tube formedical gas systems. ASTM A240 for CSMT is simply stainless steel plate, sheet, and strip, not corrugatedstainless steel tubing for medical gas systems. There are no standard dimensions for corrugated stainless steeltubing. They vary depending on pressure rating and method of fabrication. Tubing and fittings by different


5 of 56 12/2/2015 8:09 AM

manufacturers would not be interchangeable like copper tubing. Bending CSMT is not adequate for making close-coupled connections. CSMT has a limited number of basic fittings. The submitted data does not include specificrequirements for support spacing for CSMT. Where is continuous support required? The submitted opinion byHoffman Engineering on the safety factor for CSMT is based on it being concealed in walls and partitions and notexposed to contact by personnel. Can CSMT be used in equipment rooms for connections to source equipmentand regulators? Is CSMT rated for 300 psi? Is 300 a typographical error? CSMT is fabricated from 300 seriesstainless steel. The installation requirements for CSMT are different than copper tubing. Mixing the installationrequirements for CSMT with the existing NFPA 99 requirements for copper tubing in 5.1.10 will confuse therequirements for both. The proposed changes for CSMT include no requirements for the fittings and joints. Thejoints should be equivalent to brazed copper and subject to approval. CSMT does not appear to be an acceptablealternate to brazed copper tubing in NFPA 99 for medical gas piping in health care facilities. There are no knownexisting CSMT medical gas installations in health care facilities. There are no complete specifications for theinstallation of CSMT. NFPA 99 should not be used for a pilot installation of CSMT.

Willard, Jonathan C.

Not in favor of allowing corrugated stainless steel tubing for medical gas systems.

Affirmative All

Allen, Mark W.

Anderson, Grant A.

Beebe, Chad E.

Frankel, Michael

Golla, Ed

Gregory, John C.

Kelly, Daniel Patrick

Lathrop, James K.

Loeb, Robert G.

Maurer, John

Megremis, Spiro

Mraulak, Thomas J.

Shoemaker, E. Daniel

Smidt, Ronald M.

Affirmative with Comment

Mohile, David B.

I do not believe corrugated stainless steel tubing is appropriate for medical gas piping. Anti microbial effects ofcopper

Abstention

Ferrari, Keith

review required


6 of 56 12/2/2015 8:09 AM

Committee Input No. 655-NFPA 99-2015 [ New Section after 5.1.10.1.5 ]


5.1.10.1.6

Corrugated stainless steel medical tubing jacket shall have a flame spread index of 25 or less, and smokedensity index of 50 or less as determined by the Test Method for Surface Burning Characteristics of BuildingMaterials, ASTM E84.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

This new section is added to provide a minimum flame spread index and smoke developed index forthe plastic jacket of the CSMT using ASTM E84, which is widely used for these measurements. Thevalues are identical to those used for Corrugated Stainless Steel Tubing used for fuel gas service.These values are compliant with the flame and smoke indices for Class A interior finishes in NFPA101, Life Safety Code®. Class A is the most stringent class of interior finish materials in the LifeSafety Code®

ResponseMessage:

Public Input No. 270-NFPA 99-2015 [New Section after 5.1.10.1.5]

Ballot Results


28 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned


14 Affirmative All


1 Abstention

Not Returned

McIlroy, Donald R.


Brown, Barry E.


7 of 56 12/2/2015 8:09 AM

Corrugated stainless tubing (CSMT) has the potential to create hazards due to mechanical failures other thanflame spread index or smoke index.

Colombo, Dana A.

this would not be required with the use of copper tubing.

Hamilton, Scott

Added smoke and flame in a fire is another negative for this product. Copper does not require these addedrequirements and is a safer product in fire situations.

Lowe, Anthony


Lucas, James L.


McBride, Jeffery F.

I do not agree.

Mohile, David B.

See comments for FR-654, above

Schwartzkopf, Sean

More information needed

Schwipps, Ronald J.

Not in favor of use of corrugated stainless steel tubing for this application.

Volz, Allan D.


Wagner, J. Richard

Is CSMT subject to pin-hole leaks by induced voltage from lightning? Does CSMT need to be electricallygrounded? CSST for fuel gas piping in NFPA 54 needs to be grounded. Is 5.1.10.1 the proper place for the flamespread and smoke density index of CSMT? Is 5.1.10.1.6 the proper section number for CSMT? There is anexisting 5.1.10.1.6.



Affirmative All

Allen, Mark W.

Anderson, Grant A.

Beebe, Chad E.

Frankel, Michael

Golla, Ed

Gregory, John C.


Lathrop, James K.

Loeb, Robert G.

Maurer, John


8 of 56 12/2/2015 8:09 AM

Megremis, Spiro

Mraulak, Thomas J.


Smidt, Ronald M.

Abstention

Ferrari, Keith

review required


9 of 56 12/2/2015 8:09 AM

Committee Input No. 657-NFPA 99-2015 [ New Section after 5.1.10.3.1 ]


5.1.10.3.2

Positive pressure patient gas systems and medical support gas systems fabricated from listed corrugatedstainless steel medical tubing shall have all turns, offsets, and other changes in direction made by bendingthe tubing up to its minimum bend radius or with listed Corrugated Stainless Steel Medical tubing fittings inaccordance with 5.1.10.9.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

A new paragraph 5.1.10.3.2 is proposed to recognize CSMT fitting and to reference theirinstallation requirements.

ResponseMessage:

Public Input No. 272-NFPA 99-2015 [New Section after 5.1.10.3.1]

Ballot Results


28 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned


14 Affirmative All


2 Abstention

Not Returned

McIlroy, Donald R.


Allen, Mark W.

I am satisfied that such tubing could be used for support gases and for vacuum, but not for patient gases.

Brown, Barry E.


10 of 56 12/2/2015 8:09 AM

• Mechanical joints should not be allowed in sealed walls for installation and failure reasons. • Bending should notbe allowed. • Possible failure of the corrugations either due to installation damage, improper bending.•

Colombo, Dana A.

The use of corrugated stainless tubing would make it impossible to do the blow down test to remove any debrisleft in the system. The amount of pressure that would be required to blow the system down and the fact that if youwere to run thousands of feet of tubing with millions of little groves manufactured in the tubing that will collect anyand all debris, this will take more time than it would to braze the copper joints. The fact that it would require morehangers to keep the tubing level so as to not trap any contaminants in the system would drive up the cost of themedical-gas system as well.

Hamilton, Scott

Bending of the corrugated material will lead to even tighter smaller pockets which will enable debris and/or growthwithin the system. Blown down tests will be ineffective. The bending and use of this material will also requireproper hanging to ensure no sags in the system. No installer requirements have been stated.

Lowe, Anthony


Lucas, James L.


McBride, Jeffery F.

I do not agree.

Mohile, David B.

I do not agree with bending tubing. If we permit bending stainless steel tubing we will probably see installersbending copper tubing which we do not permit.

Schwipps, Ronald J.


Volz, Allan D.


Wagner, J. Richard

The bends in CSMT are too tight to make close-coupled connections. There are a limited number of basic fittingsfor CSMT. Are CSMT fittings considered to comply with 5.1.10.9.1? Nothing has been submitted. In 5.1.10.10(4),non-removable push-fit fittings that employ a quick assembly push fit connector are prohibited throughout medicalgas distribution pipeline systems. Does this apply to CSMT?

Affirmative All

Anderson, Grant A.

Beebe, Chad E.

Frankel, Michael

Golla, Ed

Gregory, John C.


Lathrop, James K.

Loeb, Robert G.

Maurer, John


11 of 56 12/2/2015 8:09 AM

Megremis, Spiro

Mraulak, Thomas J.


Smidt, Ronald M.


Abstention

Ferrari, Keith

review required

Schwartzkopf, Sean



12 of 56 12/2/2015 8:09 AM

Committee Input No. 656-NFPA 99-2015 [ Section No. 5.1.10.3.1 ]


5.1.10.3.1*

Positive pressure patient gas systems, medical support gas systems, vacuum systems, and WAGDsystems fabricated from other than corrugated stainless steel medical tubing shall have all turns, offsets,and other changes in direction made using fittings or techniques appropriate to any of the followingacceptable joining methods:

(1) Brazing, as described in 5.1.10.4

(2) Welding, as described in 5.1.10.5

(3) Memory metal fittings, as described in 5.1.10.6

(4) Axially swaged, elastic preload fittings, as described in 5.1.10.7

(5) Threaded, as described under 5.1.10.8




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

This section has been revised to limit the current joining methods to piping materials other thanCSMT, as the joining methods are not appropriate for CSMT.


Ballot Results


28 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned


15 Affirmative All


2 Abstention

Not Returned

McIlroy, Donald R.


13 of 56 12/2/2015 8:09 AM


Brown, Barry E.

For positive gas systems: Mechanical joints should not be allowed in sealed walls for installation and failurereasons. • Corrugations can trap particulates. • Possible failure of the corrugations either due to installationdamage, support clamps, or over time. • Potential for nose or harmonic vibration due to improper sizing or flowrates.

Colombo, Dana A.

Because of the flexible nature of corrugated stainless tubing, there is more of a risk that the system will havemore traps for debris to accumulate. the tubing is made of little corrugates (groves), there is no way that you canblow this system clean.

Hamilton, Scott

Bending of the corrugated material will lead to even tighter smaller pockets which will enable debris and/or growthwithin the system. Blown down tests will be ineffective. The bending and use of this material will also requireproper hanging to ensure no sags in the system. No installer requirements have been stated.

Lowe, Anthony


Lucas, James L.


Mohile, David B.

Please see my comments on FR 654. If we allow corrugated tubing we will permit moisture and other vacuumedmaterial a place to rest and eventually occlude flow of vacuum.

Schwipps, Ronald J.


Wagner, J. Richard

CSMT is not proposed for vacuum systems and WAGD systems. FR-656 should be deleted if CSMT is notapproved for NFPA 99.



Affirmative All

Allen, Mark W.

Anderson, Grant A.

Beebe, Chad E.

Frankel, Michael

Golla, Ed

Gregory, John C.


Lathrop, James K.

Loeb, Robert G.

Maurer, John

Megremis, Spiro

Mraulak, Thomas J.



14 of 56 12/2/2015 8:09 AM

Smidt, Ronald M.

Volz, Allan D.

Affirmative with Comment

McBride, Jeffery F.

I agree with the exception of corrugated Stainless Steel

Abstention

Ferrari, Keith

review required

Schwartzkopf, Sean



15 of 56 12/2/2015 8:09 AM

Documents

National Fire Protection Association...4 Abstentions (K. Ferrari, A. Lowe, S. Schwartzkopf, J. Wagner) The attached report shows the number of affirmative, negative, and abstaining