NFPA Technical Committee on Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting€¦ · The Chair discussed the merits of having task group work being submitted as public comments The Chair explained

NFPA

Technical Committee on Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting

Second Draft Meeting NFPA 402, 403, 424

Atlantic City, New Jersey

September 27-28, 2016

Meeting Agenda

I. Welcome and call to order by Chairman Mathis

II. Introductions- members and guests

III. Review and accept minutes from the July 27-30, 2015 meeting (Attachment A)

IV. NFPA update – Curt Floyd, NFPA Staff

V. Public comment/second revision development for NFPA 402, 403, 424 (Attachment B)

VI. Old Business

VII. New Business

VIII. Next Meeting

IX. Adjourn

NFPA 402, 403 and 424 Second Draft Technical Committee Meeting Agenda September 27 - 28, 2016 - Atlantic City, NJ

Page 1 of 31

Attachment A


Page 2 of 31

MEETING MINUTES

Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting AIR-AAA

27-30 July 2015

DoubleTree Downtown

Salt Lake City, UT

1

27 July

The full committee meeting was opened by Chair Duane Kann at 08:00 on 27 July with the introduction of members and guests followed by opening remarks by the Chair.

Members Present:

Duane Kann-Chair, John McDonald-Secretary, Curt Floyd-NFPA, Keith Bagot, Ralph Colet, Ted Costa, Ross Davidson, Hanh Deniston, John Huffman, Douglas Mangels, Robert Mathis, Kevin Petit, Pam Phillips, James Podolske, Joseph Scheffey, Jason Shively, Marc Tonnacliff, Christopher Toten, Bradford Colton, Danny Pierce, Paul Powell, Ronald Jones, Tim Vanfleet, Graydon Matheson, Ron Krusleski, Nick Subbotin, Bill Major.

Guests Present: Rita Herron-Embry Riddle University, Elizabeth Hendel-Phoenix Fire, Jonathon Torres-FAA, John Cudahy-ICAS, Tim Butters-FAA.

The chair reminded everyone that all members need an alternate.

The minutes of the 28 October meeting were approved.

Curt Floyd, staff liaison, reviewed the general procedures for the meeting

vision and mission was reviewed

The use of Doc Info Pages was reviewed

The cycle for NFPA 414 was reviewed.

The Chair discussed the merits of having task group work being submitted as public comments

The Chair explained that Curt is the staff liaison for ARFF documents. He is partnered with Ken


Page 3 of 31

MEETING MINUTES


27-30 July 2015

DoubleTree Downtown

Salt Lake City, UT

2

.

At 08:40, the committee began processing public comments for NFPA 414.

After a break, the committee resumed work on 414, Chapter 5.

After a lunch break, work resumed with the committee continuing work on Chapter 5.

Committee review of public comments on NFPA 414 concluded with Second Revisions created.

After a break and a review of the method for processing public inputs, the committee began work on the Public Inputs for 402.

The meeting adjourned for the day at 16:45

28 July

The Chair called the meeting to order at 08:00.

The Chair held a brief discussion on the US National Grid proposals.

Work on Public Inputs for 402 continued.

The committee broke for lunch.

After break, the committee resumed work on Public Inputs for 402.

Committee work on 402 Public Input review was completed with First Revisions being created.

Work on Public Inputs for 403 commenced.

The meeting was adjourned for the day at 16:15.


Page 4 of 31

MEETING MINUTES


27-30 July 2015

DoubleTree Downtown

Salt Lake City, UT

3

29 July


There will be call in participation by the FAA, and ICAS on air show crash protection tomorrow at 10:00.

Joe Scheffey gave a presentation on response times.

Discussion was held on the presentation and response times.

The Chair summarized the discussions, reinforcing the fact that our minimum standards must create a safe environment for everyone involved in a response.

Work on Public Input for 403 continued at 09:48.

The committee broke for lunch.

After lunch, work on Public Inputs for 403 continued.

Initial work on 403 Public Inputs completed with First Revisions developed by the committee.

Work on Public Inputs for 424 began.

The meeting was adjourned for the day at 16:35.

30 July


Work on Public Inputs for 424 continued.

The initial work on the 424 Public Inputs and First Revisions was completed.


Page 5 of 31

MEETING MINUTES


27-30 July 2015

DoubleTree Downtown

Salt Lake City, UT

4

After a break, The Chair held discussion on Public Input-13, for 403 concerning air shows.

The committee began work on PI 13, with the assistance of the FAA air show rep Tim Butters and ICAS Public Input submitter John Cudahy.

Discussion on the proposal with input from the Technical Committee along with review of the proposal and drafting of First Revisions.

The Chair thanked the Technical Committee for all the work done on the documents in preparation for the meeting.

The Committee reviewed and discussed proposal for scope change to be sent back to the Standards Council.

Briefly discussed response time letter.

Discussion on Air Show Proposal that is before the Standards Council.

Discussion on next Technical Committee meeting to be held either the last week in August or last week in September preferably in Charleston, SC or Atlantic City, NJ.

Meeting adjourned 1530


Page 6 of 31

Attachment B


Page 7 of 31

No Public Comments

Received for NFPA 402


Page 8 of 31

Committee Input for

NFPA 402


Page 9 of 31

Committee Input No. 120-NFPA 402-2016 [ Section No. 8.1.1 ]

8.1.1

It is fundamental that ARFF personnel have a working knowledge of named parts and construction of anaircraft to ensure commonality in terms used and recognition of potential difficulties and hazards whengaining access or extricating casualties. Aircraft are manufactured in many sizes. However, the terms usedin respect to identification of structural features are common to most sizes of aircraft. These are identified inFigure 8.1.1.

Figure 8.1.1 Nomenclature for Aircraft Structural Features.

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Curt Floyd

Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Jan 29 09:55:23 EST 2016

Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

The Technical Committee recognizes that this photo is dated and will need to be updated withperhaps a side view also added. Changes will be made at Second Draft.

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

1 of 4 8/2/2016 8:40 PM


Page 10 of 31

ResponseMessage:

Ballot Results

This item has not been balloted


2 of 4 8/2/2016 8:40 PM


Page 11 of 31

Committee Input No. 121-NFPA 402-2016 [ Section No. 9.3.1 ]

9.3.1

Evacuation slides are provided to expedite occupant egress from aircraft that have normal door sill heightsabove 1.5 m (5 ft). Because passengers are not trained in proper evacuation slide use, as shown in Figure9.3.1, there is a degree of personal injury risk (approximately 6 percent) when slides are used. ARFFpersonnel should expect the occurrence of sprains, bruises, friction burns, and other minor injurieswhenever evacuation slides are used.

Figure 9.3.1 Deployed Evacuation Slide.


Submitter Full Name: Curt Floyd

Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Jan 29 09:57:55 EST 2016

Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

The Technical Committee recognizes that this photo is dated and needs to be replace with anupdated version. Changes will be made at second draft.

ResponseMessage:


3 of 4 8/2/2016 8:40 PM


Page 12 of 31

Ballot Results

This item has not been balloted


4 of 4 8/2/2016 8:40 PM


Page 13 of 31

Public Comment Report

NFPA 403


Page 14 of 31

Public Comment No. 4-NFPA 403-2016 [ Section No. 5.3.1 ]


1 of 13 7/28/2016 2:23 PM


Page 15 of 31

5.3.1


2 of 13 7/28/2016 2:23 PM


Page 16 of 31

The minimum amounts of water for foam production and the minimum amounts of complementary agentsnecessary shall be as specified in Table 5.3.1(a) or Table 5.3.1(b) , based on the system of categorizingairports listed in Table 4.3.1.

Table 5.3.1(a) Extinguishing Agents, Discharge, and Response Capability in U.S. Customary Units

Airport

Category

Response

Phases

Response

Capa-

bility

(sec)

AFFF

Fluorine-FreeSynthetic Foam,Fluoroprotein, or

FFFP

Protein Foam

Required

Water

(U.S. gal)

Discharge

Capability

(gpm)

Required

Water

(U.S. gal)

Discharge

Capability

(gpm)

Required

Water

(U.S. gal)

Discharge

Capability

(gpm)

Q

Q1b 180b 120 120 160 160 180 180 1

1 Q2c 0 0 0

Q3d 0 0 0

TOTAL 120 160 180

Q1b 180b 157 157 213 213 236 236 2

2 Q2c 210c 43 57 64

Q3d 0 0 0

TOTAL 200 270 300

Q1b 180b 285 285 392 392 438 438 3

3 Q2c 210c 85 118 132

Q3d 240d,e 300 60 300 60 300 60

TOTAL 670 810 870

Q1b 180b 468 468 646 646 715 715 3

4 Q2c 210c 272 374 415

Q3d 240d,e 600 60 600 60 600 60

TOTAL 1,340 1,620 1,730

Q1b 180b 863 863 1,194 1,194 1,331 1,331 4

5 Q2c 210c 647 896 999

Q3d 240d,e 1,250 125 1,250 125 1,250 125

TOTAL 2,760 3,340 3,580

Q1b 180b 1,245 1,245 1,725 1,725 1,920 1,920 4

6 Q2c 210c 1,245 1,725 1,920

Q3d 240d,e 1,250 125 1,250 125 1,250 125

TOTAL 3,740 4,700 5,090

Q1b 180b 1,585 1,585 2,192 2,192 2,437 2,437 4

7 Q2c 210c 2,045 2,828 3,143

Q3d 240d,e 1,250 125 1,250 125 1,250 125

TOTAL 4,880 6,270 6,830

Q1b 180b 2,095 2,095 2,901 2,901 3,222 3,222 9

8 Q2c 210c 3,185 4,409 4,898


3 of 13 7/28/2016 2:23 PM


Page 17 of 31

Airport

Category

Response

Phases

Response

Capa-

bility

(sec)

AFFF


FFFP

Protein Foam

Required

Water

(U.S. gal)

Discharge

Capability

(gpm)

Required

Water

(U.S. gal)

Discharge

Capability

(gpm)

Required

Water

(U.S. gal)

Discharge

Capability

(gpm)

Q

Q3d 240d,e 2,500 250 2,500 250 2,500 250

TOTAL 7,780 9,810 10,620

Q1b 180b 2,619 2,619 3,626 3,626 4,030 4,030 9

9 Q2c 210c 4,451 6,164 6,850

Q3d,f 240d,e 2,500 250 2,500 250 2,500 250

TOTAL 9,570 12,290 13,380

Q1b 180b 3,195 3,195 4,424 4,424 4,915 4,915 9

10 Q2c 210c 6,069 8,405 9,338

Q3d 240d,e 5,000 500 5,000 500 5,000 500

TOTAL 14,260 17,830 19,250

aThe minimum quantity is based on ISO qualified potassium bicarbonate. Powder can be substituted by alisted agent exceeding the performance of potassium bicarbonate.

bQuantity of water for foam production for initial control of the pool fire.

cQuantity of water for foam production to continue control or fully extinguish the pool fire.

dWater available for interior fire fighting.

eThe 240-second requirement begins after arrival of the first ARFF apparatus.

fFor multiple passenger deck aircraft within this category, the Q3 discharge capability should be increasedto 375 gpm (1420 L/min) and required water increased to 3750 gal (14,195 L).

Table 5.3.1(b) Extinguishing Agents, Discharge, and Response Capability in SI Units

Airport

Category

Response

Phases

Response

Capa-

bility

(sec)

AFFF


FFFP

Protein Foam

Required

Water

(L)

Discharge

Capa-

bility

(L/min)

Required

Water

(L)

Discharge

Capa-

bility

(L/min)

Required

Water

(L)

Discharge

Capa-

bility

(L/min)

Q

Q1b 180b 450 450 600 600 700 700 4

1 Q2c 0 0 0

Q3d 0 0 0

TOTAL 450 600 700

Q1b 180b 591 591 787 787 906 906 9

2 Q2c 210c 159 213 244

Q3d 0 0 0

TOTAL 750 1,000 1,150


4 of 13 7/28/2016 2:23 PM


Page 18 of 31

Airport

Category

Response

Phases

Response

Capa-

bility

(sec)

AFFF


FFFP

Protein Foam

Required

Water

(L)

Discharge

Capa-

bility

(L/min)

Required

Water

(L)

Discharge

Capa-

bility

(L/min)

Required

Water

(L)

Discharge

Capa-

bility

(L/min)

Q

Q1b 180b 1,077 1,077 1,500 1,500 1,692 1,692 1

3 Q2c 210c 323 450 508

Q3d 240d,e 1,100 110 1,100 110 1,100 110

TOTAL 2,500 3,050 3,300

Q1b 180b 1,772 1,772 2,468 2,468 2,722 2,722 1

4 Q2c 210c 1,028 1,432 1,578

Q3d 240d,e 2,250 225 2,250 225 2,250 225

TOTAL 5,050 6,150 6,550

Q1b 180b 3,257 3,257 4,514 4,514 5,029 5,029 2

5 Q2c 210c 2,443 3,386 3,771

Q3d 240d,e 4,750 475 4,750 475 4,750 475

TOTAL 10,450 12,650 13,550

Q1b 180b 4,700 4,700 6,525 6,525 7,250 7,250 2

6 Q2c 210c 4,700 6,525 7,250

Q3d 240d,e 4,750 475 4,750 475 4,750 475

TOTAL 14,150 17,800 19,250

Q1b 180b 5,983 5,983 8,297 8,297 9,214 9,214 2

7 Q2c 210c 7,717 10,703 11,886

Q3d 240d,e 4,750 475 4,750 475 4,750 475

TOTAL 18,450 23,750 25,850

Q1b 180b 7,937 7,937 10,992 10,992 12,202 12,202 4

8 Q2c 210c 12,063 16,708 18,548

Q3d 240d,e 9,450 945 9,450 945 9,450 945

TOTAL 29,450 37,150 40,200

Q1b 180b 9,907 9,907 13,722 13,722 15,259 15,259 4

9 Q2c 210c 16,843 23,328 25,941

Q3d,f 240d,e 9,450 945 9,450 945 9,450 945

TOTAL 36,200 46,500 50,650

Q1b 180b 12,103 12,103 16,759 16,759 18,603 18,603 4

10 Q2c 210c 22,997 31,841 35,347

Q3d 240d,e 18,900 1,890 18,900 1,890 18,900 1,890

TOTAL 54,000 67,500 72,850

aThe minimum quantity is based on ISO qualified potassium bicarbonate. Powder can be substituted by alisted agent exceeding the performance of potassium bicarbonate.


5 of 13 7/28/2016 2:23 PM


Page 19 of 31

bQuantity of water for foam production for initial control of the pool fire.

cQuantity of water for foam production to continue control or fully extinguish the pool fire.

dWater available for interior fire fighting.

eThe 240-second requirement begins after arrival of the first ARFF apparatus.

fFor multiple passenger deck aircraft within this category, the Q3 discharge capability should be increasedto 375 gpm (1420 L/min) and required water increased to 3750 gal (14,195 L).

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

NFPA_403_Code_Change_PC_to_table_5.docx Revisions to Tables 5.3.1(a) and 5.3.1(b)

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Companion revisions to PC2 and PC 3, original PI21. See rationale to PC 2

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 2-NFPA 403-2016 [Section No. 9.1.3.1]

Related Item

Public Input No. 21-NFPA 403-2015 [Section No. 5.3.1]


Submitter Full Name: Joseph Scheffey

Organization: JENSEN HUGHES

Affilliation: None, independent expert

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Wed May 11 10:49:20 EDT 2016


6 of 13 7/28/2016 2:23 PM


Page 20 of 31

EXTINGUISHING AGENTS

Table 5.3.1(a) Extinguishing Agents, Discharge and Response Capability in U.S. Customary Units

AFFF

Fluorine-Free Synthetic Foam, Fluoroprotein, or

FFFP Protein Foam Complementary

Agentsa

Airport Category

Response Phases

Response Capability

(sec)

Required Water

(U.S. gal)

Discharge Capability

(gpm)

Required Water (U.S. gal)


(gpm)

Required Water

(U.S. gal)


(gpm) Quantity

(lb) Discharge

(lb/sec) 1

Total

Q1b Q2c Q3d

180b 120b 120 0 0

120

120 160 0 0

160

160 180 0 0

180

180 100 5

2

Total

Q1b Q2c Q3d

180b 120b 210c 180c

157 43 0

200

157 213 57 0

270

213 236 64 0

300

236 200 5

3

Total

Q1b Q2c Q3d

180b 120b 210c 180c 240d,e

285 85

300 670

285

60

392 118 300 810

392

60

438 132 300 870

438

60

300 5

4

Total

Q1b Q2c Q3d

180b 120b 210c 180c 240d,e

468 272 600

1,340

468

60

646 374 600

1,620

646

60

715 415 600

1,730

715

60

300 5

5

Total

Q1b Q2c Q3d

180b 120b 210c 180c 240d,e e

863 647

1,250 2,760

863

125

1,194 896

1,250 3,340

1,194

125

1,331 999

1,250 3,580

1,331

125

450 5

6

Total

Q1b Q2c Q3d

180b 120b 210c 180c 240d,e

1,245 1,245 1,250 3,740

1,245

125

1,725 1,725 1,250 4,700

1,725

125

1,920 1,920 1,250 5,090

1,920

125

450 5

7

Total

Q1b Q2c Q3d

180b 120b 210c 180c 240d,e

1,585 2,045 1,250 4,880

1,585

125

2,192 2,828 1,250 6,270

2,192

125

2,437 3,143 1,250 6,830

2,437

125

450 5

8

Total

Q1b Q2c Q3d

180b 120b 210c 180c 240d,e

2,095 3,185 2,500 7,780

2,095

250

2,901 4,409 2,500 9,810

2,901

250

3,222 4,898 2,500

10,620

3,222

250

900 10

9

Total

Q1b Q2c Q3d,f

180b 120b 210c 180c 240d,e

2,619 4,451 2,500 9,570

2,619

250

3,626 6,164 2,500

12,290

3,626

250

4,030 6,850 2,500

13,380

4,030

250

900 10

10

Total

Q1b Q2c Q3d

180b 120b 210c 180c 240d,e

3,195 6,069 5,000

14,260

3,195

500

4,424 8,405 5,000

17,830

4,424

500

4,915 9,338 5,000

19,250

4,915

500

900 10

aThe minimum quantity is based on ISO qualified potassium bicarbonate. Powder can be substituted by a listed agent exceeding the performance of potassium bicarbonate. bQuantity of water for foam production for initial control of the pool fire. cQuantity of water for foam production to continue control or fully extinguish the pool fire. dWater available for interior fire fighting. eThe 240-second requirement begins after arrival of the first ARFF apparatus. fFor multiple passenger deck aircraft within this category, the Q3 discharge capability should be increased to 375 gpm (1420 L/min) and required water increased to 3750 gal (14,195 L).


Page 21 of 31

Table 5.3.1(b) Extinguishing Agents, Discharge and Response Capability in SI Units

AFFF

Fluorine-Free Synthetic Foam, Fluoroprotein, or

FFFP Protein Foam Complementary

Agentsa

Airport Category

Response Phases

Response Capabilit

y (sec)

Required Water

(L)


(L/min)

Required Water

(L)


(L/min)

Required Water

(L)


(L/min) Quantity

(kg) Discharge

(kg/sec) 1

Total

Q1b Q2c Q3d

180b 120b 450 0 0

450

450 600 0 0

600

600 700 0 0

700

700 45 2.25

2

Total

Q1b Q2c Q3d

180b 120b 210c 180c

591 159

0 750

591 787 213

0 1,000

787 906 244

0 1,150

906 90 2.25

3

Total

Q1b Q2c Q3d

180b 120b 210c 180c 240d,e

1,077 323

1,100 2,500

1,077

110

1,500 450

1,100 3,050

1,500

110

1,692 508

1,100 3,300

1,692

110

135 2.25

4

Total

Q1b Q2c Q3d

180b 120b 210c 180c 240d,e

1,772 1,028 2,250 5,050

1,772

225

2,468 1,432 2,250 6,150

2,468

225

2,722 1,578 2,250 6,550

2,722

225

135 2.25

5

Total

Q1b Q2c Q3d

180b 120b 210c 180c 240d,e

3,257 2,443 4,750

10,450

3,257

475

4,514 3,386 4,750

12,650

4,514

475

5,029 3,771 4,750

13,550

5,029

475

205 2.25

6

Total

Q1b Q2c Q3d

180b 120b 210c 180c 240d,e

4,700 4,700 4,750

14,150

4,700

475

6,525 6,525 4,750

17,800

6,525

475

7,250 7,250 4,750

19,250

7,250

475

205 2.25

7

Total

Q1b Q2c Q3d

180b 120b 210c 180c 240d,e

5,983 7,717 4,750

18,450

5,983

475

8,297 10,703

4,750 23,750

8,297

475

9,214 11,886

4,750 25,850

9,214

475

205 2.25

8

Total

Q1b Q2c Q3d

180b 120b 210c 180c 240d,e

7,937 12,063

9,450 29,450

7,937

945

10,992 16,708

9,450 37,150

10,992

945

12,202 18,548

9,450 40,200

12,202

945

410 4.5

9

Total

Q1b Q2c Q3d,f

180b 120b 210c 180c 240d,e

9,907 16,843

9,450 36,200

9,907

945

13,722 23,328

9,450 46,500

13,722

945

15,259 25,941

9,450 50,650

15,259

945

410 4.5

10

Total

Q1b Q2c Q3d

180b 120b 210c 180c 240d,e

12,103 22,997 18,900 54,000

12,103

1,890

16,759 31,841 18,900 67,500

16,759

1,890

18,603 35,347 18,900 72,850

18,603

1,890

410 4.5

aThe minimum quantity is based on ISO qualified potassium bicarbonate. Powder can be substituted by a listed agent exceeding the performance of potassium bicarbonate. bQuantity of water for foam production for initial control of the pool fire. cQuantity of water for foam production to continue control or fully extinguish the pool fire. dWater available for interior firefighting. eThe 240-second requirement begins after arrival of the first ARFF apparatus. fFor multiple passenger deck aircraft within this category, the Q3 discharge capability should be increased to 375 gpm (1420 L/min) and required water increased to 3750 gal (14,195 L).


Page 22 of 31

Old Arguments “It would be impossible for many airports to meet some of the time criteria because of geographic boundaries which aren’t taken into account in this document.” “This would place an impractical and unwarranted financial burden on many airports and local governments.” “Two minutes from fire station to end of runway is impossible with loaded ARF vehicles.” “Wording should be changed to coincide with FAA standards and should be a recommended practice.” “Although the response times stated in this section are morally correct and laudable as a goal, they are critically flawed by reality.” “… what would be sacrificed in the way of firefighter safety by introducing these very strict time requirements.” “… the provisions of these requirements could doom some smaller facilities…” “It translates into the need for additional money-equipment-personnel.” “… the history of life-saving by CFR responses involving aircraft accidents is questionable.” “A good economic argument could be made by to revise the current FAR Part 139 Standards from three minutes to five or six minutes.”


Page 23 of 31

Public Comment No. 6-NFPA 403-2016 [ Section No. 8.1.2.1 ]

8.1.2.1

The minimum total number of trained personnel responding to an initial alarm, based on the minimumresponse times in Chapter 9 and extinguishing agent discharge rates and quantities required inChapter 5 , shall be in accordance with Table 8.1.2.1 .

Table 8.1.2.1 Minimum Required ARFF Personnel at Airports

Airport Category ARFF Personnel 1 2 2 2 3 2 4 3 5 6 6 9 7 12 8 12 9 15 10 15

Note: Variations to staffing levels can be done through Staffing levels shall be established through a taskresource analysis based on the needs and demands of the airport.


The response time in Section 9.1.3 was changed from 2 minutes to 3 minutes in the 2014 Edition. The rationale for this increase, and the defeat of current PIs 21 and 22 to reestablish the 2 minutes, included the following:1. No agency will adopt NFPA 403 where it is more stringent the current requirements of the agency;2. An airport not capable of achieving the NFPA 403 requirements may be subject to litigation for non-compliance; and,3. Costs and expenses of more stringent requirements.

By establishing specific staffing requirements, NFPA 403 is more stringent than FAA and ICAO regulatory staffing requirements. To be consistent in its approach and philosophy, and overcome the expressed concerns, NFPA 403 should delete the specific staffing requirements.

Related Item

Public Input No. 30-NFPA 403-2015 [Section No. 8.1.2.1]





Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon May 16 08:32:14 EDT 2016


7 of 13 7/28/2016 2:23 PM


Page 24 of 31


9.1.3.1

The response time of the first arriving ARFF vehicle to reach any point on the operational runway and beginagent application shall be within 3 minutes of the time of the alarm. 2 minutes or less, and to any pointremaining within the on-airport portion of the rapid respponse area shall ne no more than 2.5 minutes.


See rationale to PI 22. Subsequent information by the reinvigorated response time task group has failed to identify any new technical data related to fuselage burn through and passenger exposure to fire. The data show that life threatening conditions can occur in the first three minutes, necessitating the 2 minute response time, which is the historic norm for the NFPA 403 optimum response.




Public Comment No. 4-NFPA 403-2016 [Section No. 5.3.1]

Public Comment No. 5-NFPA 403-2016 [Section No. 10.1.2]

Related Item

Public Input No. 22-NFPA 403-2015 [Sections 9.1.3.1, 9.1.3.2]





Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



8 of 13 7/28/2016 2:23 PM


Page 25 of 31


9.1.3.2

The response time of the first arriving ARFF vehicle to reach any point remaining within the on-airportportion of the RRA with improved surface conditions shall be within 4 minutes 3 minutes from the time ofthe alarm.


See rationale from PI 22 and PC 2




Related Item

Public Input No. 22-NFPA 403-2015 [Sections 9.1.3.1, 9.1.3.2]





Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



9 of 13 7/28/2016 2:23 PM


Page 26 of 31

Public Comment No. 5-NFPA 403-2016 [ Section No. 10.1.2 ]

10.1.2*

ARFF vehicles and crew shall be prepositioned during the period of the air show waiver in such a way thatARFF personnel can respond to an accident or incident and deploy fire-fighting agents within 60 within 120seconds to anywhere within the aerobatic box in optimum conditions of visibility and surface conditions.


Air show participants should be afforded the same level of protection as the flying public and passenger aircraft flight crews . No technical data was provided to demonstrate the need for reduced response time for air shows. Quite the opposite: a different level of protection, i.e. no required response time, is provided to air show participants outside the airport. So this modest increase at the airport should be acceptable.

If the committee rejects PC 2, then the required response time should be 180 seconds, the same as that provided to the flying public and passenger aircraft crews




Related Item

First Revision No. 21-NFPA 403-2015 [New Section after 9.1.4]





Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



10 of 13 7/28/2016 2:23 PM


Page 27 of 31

Public Comment No. 7-NFPA 403-2016 [ New Section after A.9.1.3 ]

A9.1.3.1

The operational objective of the first responding ARFF vehicle is to reach any point on the operationalrunway and begin agent application should be within 2 minutes of the time of the alarm , in optimumconditions of visibility and surface conditions. .


Each revision of NFPA 403 comes with a heavy debate on whether the response time requirements should be changed from 3 to 2 minutes. Early response time requirements were based on capabilities of the ARFF vehicles and the time an external fuel fire could breach or burn through the fuselage. FAA studies have shown that new aircraft construction materials such as composite materials have produced greater burnthrough resistance. As these materials are phased into the construction of new aircraft, older aircraft will have to meet new thermal acoustic barrier requirements which research has shown also increases burnthrough times of the fuselage. The process of receiving the emergency call, donning the minimum necessary PPE and responding in the ARFF vehicle to any point on the operational runway on the airport in 2 minutes is not practical in many airports. In cases where airports are regulated by FAA, EASA or ICAO standards, these response time requirements must be demonstrated on an annual basis. By passing a new response time requirement in NFPA 403 that is significantly more difficult to meet than current international regulatory standards, there would be no reason for an airport to adopt a standard that exceeds their regulatory requirement. By adding the proposed language to the Annex material, we are encouraging airports to strive for a higher standard while adopting one that is achievable to a greater number of airports. This proposal matches the same intent of the ICAO Annex 14 standard where below the requirement there is a recommendation for an operational goal which exceeds the standard.

Related Item

First Revision No. 18-NFPA 403-2015 [Section No. 9.1.3.1]


Submitter Full Name: Keith Bagot

Organization: US Federal Aviation Administration

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



11 of 13 7/28/2016 2:23 PM


Page 28 of 31


A9.1.3.2

The operational objective of first arriving ARFF vehicle to reach any point remaining within the on-airportportion of the RRA with improved surface conditions should be within 3 minutes from the time of thealarm, in optimum conditions of

visibility and surface conditions.


By adding the proposed language to the Annex material, we are encouraging airports to strive for a higher standard while adopting one that is achievable to a greater number of airports. This proposal matches the same intent of the ICAO Annex 14 standard where below the requirement there is a recommendation for an operational goal which exceeds the standard.

Related Item

First Revision No. 19-NFPA 403-2015 [Section No. 9.1.3.2]




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



12 of 13 7/28/2016 2:23 PM


Page 29 of 31


A9.1.3.3

The operational objective of the first arriving ARFF vehicle to reach any passenger boarding areas withi mproved surface conditions should be within 3 minutes from the time of alarm.


By adding the proposed language to the Annex material, we are encouraging airports to strive for a higher standard while adopting one that is achievable to a greater number of airports. This proposal matches the same intent of the ICAO Annex 14 standard where below the requirement there is a recommendation for an operational goal which exceeds the standard.

Related Item

First Revision No. 20-NFPA 403-2015 [New Section after 9.1.3.3]




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



13 of 13 7/28/2016 2:23 PM


Page 30 of 31

No Public Comments

Received for NFPA 424


Page 31 of 31

Documents

NFPA Technical Committee on Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting€¦ · The Chair discussed the merits of having task group work being submitted as public comments The Chair explained