Technical Committee on Hyperbaric and Hypobaric …...Technical Committee on Hyperbaric and Hypobaric Facilities (HEA-HYP) NFPA 99 Second Draft Meeting (Annual 2017) Monday, June 20,

Technical Committee on Hyperbaric and Hypobaric Facilities

(HEA-HYP)

M E M O R A N D U M

DATE: May 24, 2016

TO: Principal and Alternate Members of the Technical Committee on Hyperbaric and

Hypobaric Facilities (HEA-HYP)

FROM: Chelsea Tuttle, Staff Liaison

SUBJECT: AGENDA PACKAGE– NFPA 99 Second Draft Meeting (A2017)

________________________________________________________________________

Enclosed is the agenda for the NFPA 99 Second Draft meeting of the Technical Committee on

Hyperbaric and Hypobaric Facilities, which will be held on Monday, June 20 through Tuesday,

June 21, 2016 at the Crowne Plaza Dallas Downtown, in Dallas, TX. Please review the attached

Public Comments in advance, and if you have alternate suggestions, please come prepared with

proposed language and respective substantiation.

If you have any questions prior to the meeting, please do not hesitate to contact me at:

Office: (617) 984-7376

Email: [email protected]

For administrative questions, please contact Elena Carroll at (617) 984-7952.

I look forward to working with everyone.

Technical Committee on Hyperbaric and Hypobaric

Facilities

(HEA-HYP) NFPA 99 Second Draft Meeting (Annual 2017)

Monday, June 20, 2016 - Tuesday, June 21, 2016

Crowne Plaza Dallas Downtown 1015 Elm Street, Dallas, TX 75202

AGENDA

Monday, June 20, 2016 – Tuesday, June 21, 2016

1. Call to Order – 8:00 am (6/20)

2. Introductions and Attendance

3. Chairman Comments

4. Approval of Previous Meeting Minutes

5. Staff Liaison Presentation on NFPA Revision Process and A2017 Cycle

6. Preparation of the Second Draft

Review Public Comments

Create Second Revisions

7. New Business

Discuss hyperbaric facilities in relation to NFPA 150, Standard on Fire and Life

Safety in Animal Housing Facilities

Discuss educational Session at 2017 Conference and Expo

8. Adjournment

Please submit requests for additional agenda items to the chair and staff liaison at least

seven days prior to the meeting.

Technical Committee on Hyperbaric and Hypobaric

Facilities

(HEA-HYP) NFPA 99 Second Draft Meeting (Annual 2017)

Monday, June 20, 2016 - Tuesday, June 21, 2016

Crowne Plaza Dallas Downtown 1015 Elm Street, Dallas, TX 75202

Key Dates for the Annual 2017 Revision Cycle

Public Input Closing Date July 6, 2015

Final Date for First Draft Meeting September 14,

2015

Final First Draft Posted March 7, 2016

Public Comment Closing Date May 16, 2016

Final Date for Second Draft Meeting July 25, 2016

Posting of Ballot by September 5, 2016

Ballots due by September 26,

2016

Correlating Committee Second Draft Meeting by November 21,

2016

Final Second Draft Posted January 16, 2017

Closing Date for Notice of Intent to Make a Motion

(NITMAM) February 20, 2017

Issuance of Consent Document (No NITMAMs) May 12, 2017

NFPA Annual Meeting (Boston) June 4-7, 2017

Issuance of Document with NITMAM August 10, 2017

Technical Committee deadlines are in bold.

Technical Committee Roster

Address List No PhoneHyperbaric and Hypobaric Facilities HEA-HYP

Health Care Facilities

Chelsea Tuttle05/13/2016

HEA-HYP

James Bell

ChairIntermountain HealthcareIntermountain Medical Ctr/Hyperbaric Medicine5121 South Cottonwood StreetMurray, UT 84517

U 1/10/2008HEA-HYP

Michael W. Allen

PrincipalLife Support Technologies Group Inc.Hyperbaric Medical Technologies, Inc.504 St. Lawrence WayFurlong, PA 18925Alternate: Mark Chipps

U 10/4/2001

HEA-HYP

Peter Atkinson

PrincipalRoyal Brisbane and Womens HospitalHyperbaric Medicine ServiceNed Hanlon Bldg., Ground FloorRBWH, Butterfield StreetHerston, QLD 4029 AustraliaHyperbaric Technicians & Nurses Association Inc.Alternate: Justin Callard

C 7/20/2000HEA-HYP

Richard C. Barry

PrincipalHealogics5220 Belfort Road, Suite 130Jacksonville, FL 32256

SE 4/15/2004

HEA-HYP

Chad E. Beebe

PrincipalASHE - AHAPO Box 5756Lacey, WA 98509-5756American Society for Healthcare Engineering

U 03/05/2012HEA-HYP

W. Robert Bryant

PrincipalPerry Baromedical Corporation11610 Aspenway DriveHouston, TX 77070

M 8/2/2010

HEA-HYP

Mario Caruso

PrincipalHyperbaric Consulting LLC3231 Glenwood CircleHoliday, FL 34691-2545Alternate: Paul Mario Caruso

SE 7/26/2007HEA-HYP

Keith Ferrari

PrincipalPraxair, Inc.2807 Gresham Lake RoadRaleigh, NC 27615

M 1/25/2007

HEA-HYP

W. T. Gurnée

PrincipalOxyHeal Medical Systems, Inc.3224 Hoover AvenueNational City, CA 91950

M 10/10/1998HEA-HYP

Barry E. Newton

PrincipalWHA International, Inc.5605 Dona Ana RoadLas Cruces, NM 88007-5953

SE 7/24/1997

HEA-HYP

Kevin A. Scarlett

PrincipalWashington State Department of Health5801 60th Street WestUniversity Place, WA 98467-2831NFPA Health Care Section

E 10/23/2013HEA-HYP

Robert B. Sheffield

PrincipalInternational ATMO, Inc.414 Navarro, Suite 502San Antonio, TX 78205Alternate: Kevin I. Posey

U 1/17/1997

HEA-HYP

John M. Skinner

PrincipalMedical Equipment Technology, Inc.2723 Brickton North DriveBuford, GA 30518

IM 3/15/2007HEA-HYP

Deepak Talati

PrincipalSechrist Industries, Inc.4225 East LaPalma AvenueAnaheim, CA 92807

M 10/27/2009

1

Address List No PhoneHyperbaric and Hypobaric Facilities HEA-HYP

Health Care Facilities

Chelsea Tuttle05/13/2016

HEA-HYP

Viky G. D. Verna

PrincipalUS Food and Drug Administration10903 New Hampshire AvenueWO 66 - 2628White Oak, MD 20993

E 08/17/2015HEA-HYP

Wilbur T. Workman

PrincipalUndersea & Hyperbaric Medical Society14607 San Pedro Avenue, Suite 270San Antonio, TX 78232

U 1/1/1984

HEA-HYP

Justin Callard

AlternateHyperbaric Technicians & Nurses Association Inc.Pow Hospital, RandwickSydney, NSW 2031 AustraliaPrincipal: Peter Atkinson

C 03/07/2013HEA-HYP

Paul Mario Caruso

AlternateHyperbaric Consulting LLC4422 Foxboro DrriveNew Port Richey, FL 34653Principal: Mario Caruso

SE 04/05/2016

HEA-HYP

Mark Chipps

AlternateLife Support Technologies Group Inc.314 West 2nd StreetWest Islip, NY 11795Principal: Michael W. Allen

U 10/29/2012HEA-HYP

Kevin I. Posey

AlternateInternational ATMO, Inc.414 Navarro Street, Suite 502San Antonio, TX 782905Principal: Robert B. Sheffield

U 10/27/2009

HEA-HYP

Chelsea Tuttle

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

3/1/2016

2

Technical Committee

Distribution

Friday 5 13, Friday

Hyperbaric and Hypobaric FacilitiesHEA-HYPName Representation Class Office

Distribution by %

Company

Peter Atkinson Royal Brisbane and Womens Hospital HTNA C Principal

1Voting Number Percent 6%

Kevin A. Scarlett Washington State Department ofHealth

NFPA/HCS E Principal

Viky G. D. Verna US Food and Drug Administration E Principal


John M. Skinner Medical Equipment Technology, Inc. IM Principal


W. Robert Bryant Perry Baromedical Corporation M Principal

Keith Ferrari Praxair, Inc. M Principal

W. T. Gurnée OxyHeal Medical Systems, Inc. M Principal

Deepak Talati Sechrist Industries, Inc. M Principal


Richard C. Barry Healogics SE Principal

Mario Caruso Hyperbaric Consulting LLC SE Principal

Barry E. Newton WHA International, Inc. SE Principal


James Bell Intermountain Healthcare U Chair

Michael W. Allen Life Support Technologies Group Inc. U Principal

Chad E. Beebe ASHE - AHA ASHE U Principal

Robert B. Sheffield International ATMO, Inc. U Principal

Wilbur T. Workman Undersea & Hyperbaric MedicalSociety

UHMS U Principal


16Total Voting Number

Previous Meeting Minutes

MINUTES NFPA Technical Committee on Hyperbaric and Hypobaric Facilities

(HEA-HYP)

August 5 + 6, 2015

First Draft Meeting

Sheraton Inner Harbor Hotel – Baltimore, MD

1. Call to Order. The meeting was called to order at 8:00 am on Monday

August 5, 2015 by Committee Chair, James Bell.

2. Attendance and Introductions: Attendance was taken and those present at

the meeting introduced themselves and stated who they represent on the

committee. Those who were present at the meeting are listed below:

Name Representing Bell, James – Chair Intermountain Healthcare

Barry, Richard – Principal Healogics Beebe, Chad – Principal ASHE

Bryant, W. Robert – Principal Perry Baromedical Corporation Caruso, Mario – Principal Hyperbaric Consulting LLC

Ferrari, Keith – Principal Praxair, Inc.

Gurnée, W. – Principal OxyHeal Health Group Scarlett, Kevin – Principal NFPA Health Care Section

Sheffield, Robert – Principal International ATMO, Inc. Talati, Deepak – Principal Sechrist Industries, Inc.

Chipps, Mark – Alternate Life Support Technologies Group Inc.

Hart, Jonathan – Staff Liaison NFPA

3. Chairman Comments: Jim Bell spoke to the agenda for the meeting and

provided opening comments.

4. Minutes Approval: The minutes of the HEA-HYP May 23 and 24, 2013

Second Draft Meeting were approved as distributed in the Agenda Package

5. Staff Liaison Presentation: Jon Hart gave a staff presentation which

included general meeting procedures and a review of the Annual 2017

revision cycle.

6. Development of First Draft: The committee reviewed all public input (PI)

under their jurisdiction for NFPA 99 (77 PIs) and NFPA 99B (19 PIs) and

resolved each by either providing a committee statement or by creating a

first revision (FR) based on the PI. Other First Revisions were also created.

See the First Draft and First Draft Report for the official committee actions

on each document.

7. New Business: There was no new business.

8. Next Meeting: TBD in the June/July 2016 timeframe.

9. Meeting Adjourned: The meeting was adjourned at 12:30 pm on August 6,

2015.

Public Comments

Public Comment No. 79-NFPA 99-2016 [ Section No. 14.3.1.6.4.5(A) ]

(A)

Upholstered furniture (fixed or portable), shall be resistant to smoldering (or cigarette) ignition in accordance with one of the following:

(1) The components of the upholstered furniture shall meet the requirements for Class 1 when tested in accordance with NFPA 260, ASTME1353, Standard Test Methods for Cigarette Ignition Resistance of Components of Upholstered Furniture ; or California Technical Bulletin133, Flammability Test Procedure for Seating Furniture for Use in Public Occupancies .

(2) Mocked-up composites of the upholstered furniture shall have a char length not exceeding 1 1�2 in. (38 mm) when tested in accordance withNFPA 261, or ASTM E1352, Standard Test Method for Cigarette Ignition Resistance of Mock-Up Upholstered Furniture Assemblies .

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This proposed change addresses three issues.

First: CA TB 133 cannot be used to assess ignitability of any kind because any furniture item will ignite. Moreover it is an open flame ignition and cannot therefore be compared to smoldering ignition by cigarettes (such as in NFPA 260) and does not generate a Class 1 material. CA TB 133 is equivalent to ASTM E1537 (part B).

Second: ASTM E1352 and ASTM E1353 are not equivalent tests to NFPA 260 and NFPA 261 because they use as ignition source a cigarette that was designed not to cause ignition of fabrics. Therefore the results are not meaningful. NFPA 101, NFPA 1 and the IFC have already eliminated ASTM E1352 and ASTM E1353 as adequate test methods and the methods have a 2008 date because there is little interest in renewing them and they may soon be withdrawn. The test methods are not alternative means of testing for cigarette ignition but simply inadequate test methods that do not produce correct results.

Third: This section is about smoldering ignition (by cigarettes) and it is to assess whether cigarettes will cause the fabric (or the product) to ignite (and potentially burst into open flame). The open flame tests referenced here (CA TB 133 and ASTM E1537) are not ignition tests but are tests where a flaming ignition source is used to ignite (ignition always occurs) to assess the heat release of the upholstered furniture (or its components) and that is done in part B. The part A items address purely smoldering ignition.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment RelationshipPublic Comment No. 80-NFPA 99-2016 [Section No. 14.3.1.6.4.5(B)]

Related ItemFirst Revision No. 329-NFPA 99-2015 [Section No. 14.3.1.5.4.5(A)]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Marcelo HirschlerOrganization: GBH InternationalStreet Address:City:State:Zip:Submittal Date: Wed May 04 18:56:44 EDT 2016

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

114 of 145 5/17/2016 3:43 PM

Public Comment No. 80-NFPA 99-2016 [ Section No. 14.3.1.6.4.5(B) ]

(B)

Upholstered furniture shall have limited rates of heat release when tested in accordance with ASTM E 1537, Standard Test Method for FireTesting of Upholstered Furniture, or with California Technical Bulletin 133, Flammability Test Procedure for Seating Furniture for Use in PublicOccupancies, as follows:

(1) The peak rate of heat release for the single upholstered furniture item shall not exceed 80 kW.

(2) The total heat released by the single upholstered furniture item during the first 10 minutes of the test shall not exceed 25 MJ.


CA TB 133 is an alternate option that is equivalent to ASTM E1537 and assesses heat release.


Related Comment RelationshipPublic Comment No. 79-NFPA 99-2016 [Section No. 14.3.1.6.4.5(A)]

Related ItemPublic Input No. 278-NFPA 99-2015 [Section No. 14.3.1.5.4.5(A)]




115 of 145 5/17/2016 3:43 PM

Public Comment No. 81-NFPA 99-2016 [ Section No. 14.3.1.6.4.6(A) ]

(A)

Mattresses and mattress components shall have a char length not exceeding 2 in. (51 mm) when tested in accordance with 16 CFR 1632,Standard for the Flammability of Mattresses and Mattress Pads (FF 4-72) ; 16 CFR Part 1633, “Standard for the Flammability (Open Flame) ofMattress Sets” ; California Technical Bulletin 129, Flammability Test Procedure for Mattresses for Use in Public Buildings ; . or NFPA 260.


This proposed change addresses three issues.

First: CA TB 129 and 16 CFR 1633 cannot be used to assess ignitability of any kind because any mattress will ignite. Moreover they are open flame ignition tests and cannot therefore be compared to smoldering ignition by cigarettes (such as in NFPA 260 or 16CFR1632) and do not assess char. CA TB 129 is equivalent to ASTM E1590 (part B).

Second: NFPA 260 and 16CFR1632 assess mattress components while CA TB 129 and ASTM E1590 (and 16CFR1633) address full mattresses.

Third: This section is about smoldering ignition (by cigarettes) and it is to assess whether cigarettes will cause the mattress component to ignite (and potentially burst into open flame). The open flame tests referenced here (CA TB 129 and ASTM E1590) are not ignition tests but are tests where a flaming ignition source is used to ignite (ignition always occurs) to assess the heat release of the mattress and that is done in part B. The part A items address purely smoldering ignition.


Related Comment RelationshipPublic Comment No. 82-NFPA 99-2016 [Section No. 14.3.1.6.4.6(B)]

Related ItemFirst Revision No. 330-NFPA 99-2015 [Section No. 14.3.1.5.4.6]




116 of 145 5/17/2016 3:43 PM

Public Comment No. 82-NFPA 99-2016 [ Section No. 14.3.1.6.4.6(B) ]

(B)

Mattresses shall have limited rates of heat release when tested in accordance with ASTM E1590, Standard Test Method for Fire Testing ofMattresses,or California Technical Bulletin 129, Flammability Test Procedure for Mattresses for Use in Public Buildings , as follows:

(1) The peak rate of heat release for the mattress shall not exceed 100 kW. .

(2) The total heat released by the mattress during the first 10 minutes of the test shall not exceed 25 MJ.


CA TB 129 and ASTM E1590 are equivalent tests, intended to assess the heat release of mattresses following flaming ignition.

16CFR1633 is not added here because it is not equivalent to CA TB 129 (or ASTM E1590) as it is intended for residential occupancies (while the other tests are scoped for public occupancies) and it is a basic requirement for all US mattresses anyway, with ASTM E1590 (or CA TB 129) an additional requirement.


Related Comment RelationshipPublic Comment No. 81-NFPA 99-2016 [Section No. 14.3.1.6.4.6(A)]

Related ItemFirst Revision No. 330-NFPA 99-2015 [Section No. 14.3.1.5.4.6]




117 of 145 5/17/2016 3:43 PM

Public Comment No. 17-NFPA 99-2016 [ Section No. 14.3.4.1.2 ]

14.3.4.1.2

The hyperbaric safety director shall ensure that all gas outlets in the chambers are labeled or stenciled in accordance with CGA C-4, StandardMethod of Marking Portable Compressed Gas Containers to Identify the Material Contained.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description ApprovedCCN_22.pdf 99_CC Note 22


This Public Comment appeared as CC Note No. 22 in the First Draft Report.The Correlating Committee directs HEA-HYP to review the reference to CGA C-4 and determine if it is still the appropriate reference. CGA C-7 is the document that superseded it.

Related ItemCorrelating Committee Note No. 22-NFPA 99-2015 [Sections 14.3.4, 14.3.5, 14.3.6]


Submitter Full Name: Tc On Hea-AacOrganization: CC on Health Care FacilitiesStreet Address:City:State:Zip:Submittal Date: Tue Mar 15 14:54:34 EDT 2016


118 of 145 5/17/2016 3:43 PM

Public Comment No. 106-NFPA 99-2016 [ Section No. A.14.3.1.6.4.3 ]


133 of 145 5/17/2016 3:43 PM

A.14.3.1.6.4.3


134 of 145 5/17/2016 3:43 PM

The textiles definitions and risk assessment process for hyperbaric wound dressings are as follows:

Combustion. A chemical process of oxidation that occurs at a rate fast enough to produce heat in the form of either a glow or a flame.

Flammable. Refers to a combustible (solid, liquid, or gas) that is capable of easily being ignited and rapidly consumed by fire.

Flash Point. The minimum temperature of a liquid or solid at which it gives off vapor sufficient to form an ignitible mixture with oxygen underspecified environmental conditions.

Ignition Temperature. The minimum temperature required to initiate or cause self-sustaining combustion under specified environmentalconditions.

Lower Explosive Limit (LEL) or Lower Flammable Limit (LFL). The minimum concentration of fuel vapor (percent by volume) over whichcombustion will occur on contact with an ignition source.

General Risk Assessment Information. This risk assessment process was designed to evaluate wound dressing products for use in a hyperbaricchamber. However, the same decision process can be applied to the evaluation of textiles for hyperbaric use. Wound dressings are commonlyused inside hyperbaric chambers. They play an important role in infection control and patient outcome. Important safety concerns includeproduction of heat, production of static electricity, production of flammable vapor, ignition temperature, and total fuel load. Many wound dressingsemploy fabrics and other materials that are gas-permeable. It is a common misconception that a gauze bandage will isolate an undesirableproduct from the chamber environment. Gauze is gas-permeable and will allow oxygen from the chamber to interact with the product and vaporsfrom the product to interact with the chamber environment. Also, gas-permeable materials exposed to hyperbaric oxygen will hold additionaloxygen for some period of time after the exposure. These materials should be kept away from open flames for at least 20 minutes after thehyperbaric treatment.

Figure A.14.3.1.6.4.3 Risk Assessment Process.

Risk Assessment Process (see Figure A.14.3.1.6.4.3).

(1) Is there a more suitable alternative to this dressing? The issue of need must first be addressed. There might be a substitute dressing thathas already been deemed acceptable for the hyperbaric environment. The wound dressing orders can be changed to the more desirablesubstitute (if there is no negative impact on patient outcome). It might be viable to remove the dressing before the hyperbaric treatment,


135 of 145 5/17/2016 3:43 PM

leave it off during the treatment, and replace it after the treatment. Before making this decision, it is important to remember that somedressings should not be disturbed (e.g., in the case of a new skin graft); some dressings are designed to stay in place for several days;some dressings are very expensive; and it can be detrimental for the wound to remain undressed during the treatment. If there is a suitablealternative to using this dressing, the rest of the decision process can be eliminated.

(2) Does this dressing produce heat in the chamber? Dressings are made from a large variety of materials. The concern is that materials in adressing can rapidly oxidize and produce heat (exothermic reaction) when exposed to additional oxygen. For example, air-activated heatpatches (commonly used for pain relief) have been tested in hyperbaric environments. The average operating temperature increased from48.1°C (119°F) in normobaric air to 121.8°C (251°F) in hyperbaric oxygen. In this circumstance, the patient’s skin would be burned, and theheat could ignite combustible material in the chamber. Information on oxygen compatibility can be found in a product material safety datasheet (MSDS).

(3) Does this dressing produce too much static electricity? All common textiles will contribute to static production. Wool and synthetic materialsgenerally contribute more to static production than cotton. Although static charge is constantly accumulating, it will dissipate into theenvironment when humidity is present. At less than 30 percent relative humidity, static charge can accumulate faster than it can dissipate.At greater than 60 percent relative humidity, static charge is all but completely eliminated. Use of conductive surfaces and electricalgrounding will allow static charge to dissipate. Paragraph 14.2.9.4.1 requires all hyperbaric chambers to be grounded. Paragraph 14.2.11.1requires any furniture installed inside a chamber to be grounded. Paragraph 14.3.1.6.3.2 requires all occupants of the chamber to begrounded when the oxygen percentage in the chamber is above 23.5 percent. The continuity of electrical grounds should be verifiedperiodically.

(4) Does this dressing have a low ignition temperature/flash point? ASTM G72 -Standard Test Method for Autogenous Ignition Temperatureof Liquids and Solids in a High-Pressure Oxygen-Enriched Environment can be used to determine the autogenous ignition temperatures ofproducts entering a hyperbaric chamber. In 2016 ASTM G72 added a new test for oxygen-enriched environments of less than 300 psi ofpressure. In all hyperbaric environments, the partial pressure of oxygen is higher than at normal atmospheric conditions. Increasing thepartial pressure of oxygen can change the classification of a material from non-flammable to flammable. Many materials are flammable in a100 percent oxygen environment. Any material used in a hyperbaric chamber should have an ignition temperature higher than it can beexposed to. Paragraph 14.2.9.3.12 limits electrical equipment inside a Class A (multi-place) chamber to a maximum operating surfacetemperature of 85°C (185°F). Paragraph 14.2.9.6.3 limits electrical circuits inside a Class B (monoplace) chamber to a maximum operatingtemperature of 50°C (122°F). As the oxygen percentage increases, it takes less energy to ignite materials. This leads to more conservativedecisions in a 100 percent oxygen environment. A greater margin of safety is achieved when there is a greater difference between thetemperature limit of the equipment inside a Class A and B chamber and the ignition temperature of material in question. A material willrelease vapor into the chamber environment as it approaches its flash point temperature. Once a sufficient quantity of vapor is present inthe chamber (LEL), it takes very little energy for ignition to occur. Paragraph 14.3.1.6.2.2 sets limits on flammable agents inside Class A(multi-place) chambers. Paragraph 14.3.1.6.2.3 specifically prohibits flammable liquids, gases, and vapors inside Class B (monoplace)chambers. Information on ignition temperature and flash point in air can be found in a product MSDS.

(5) Is the total fuel load too high? If a fire does occur, the energy produced is a function of the partial pressure of oxygen and the total fuelload. In a hyperbaric environment, the partial pressure of oxygen is higher and contributes to greater energy production. Any dressingproduct placed inside of a hyperbaric chamber is a combustible material and, therefore, adds to the fuel load. Therefore, total fuel loadinside the chamber should be minimized to only what is necessary.

(6) Is there an adverse effect when this product is used inside the hyperbaric chamber? It has been reported that the antibacterial agentmafenide acetate (Sulfamylon®), in combination with hyperbaric oxygen, has a poorer clinical result than either one by itself. There can beother drug interactions with hyperbaric oxygen that are undesirable. The mechanical effects of pressure change can cause a dressingmaterial to rupture. If the material is capable of venting/equalizing during pressure change, this should not occur.

(7) The hyperbaric facility should maintain a “use list” and a “do not use list” of items that have been evaluated for hyperbaric use. In additionto this list, it is important to keep documentation on file explaining the risk assessment for each item. This will prevent future duplication ofeffort. It also serves as evidence that due diligence was used.


Public Input No. 501-NFPA 99-2015 [New Section after 14.3.1.5.4.4] was sent back to this submitter (Richard Barry) for additional information. At that time, ASTM as not finalized the new G72 low pressure test standard. In early 2016 the standard was publish and made available for public purchasing/use. The UHMS Guidelines are not complete, therefore omitted. By adding this new G72 standard to Annex material the end users are provided a means to test products for autogenous ignition temperatures.

Related ItemPublic Input No. 501-NFPA 99-2015 [New Section after 14.3.1.5.4.4]


Submitter Full Name: Richard BarryOrganization: HealogicsAffilliation: HealogicsStreet Address:City:State:Zip:Submittal Date: Mon May 16 15:04:31 EDT 2016


136 of 145 5/17/2016 3:43 PM

Public Comments

Public Comment No. 3-NFPA 99B-2016 [ Section No. 2.3.2 ]

2.3.2 ASTM Publications.

ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, P.O. Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959.

ASTM D2863, Standard Test Method for Measuring the Minimum Oxygen Concentration to Support Candle-like Combustion of Plastics (OxygenIndex),2014.

ASTM E48 E84 , Standard Test Method for Surface Burning Characteristics of Building Materials, 2015 2015b .

ASTM E648, Standard Test Method for Critical Radiant Flux of Floor-Covering Systems Using a Radiant Heat Energy Source, 2014 2015 e1 .


date updates

Related Item

First Revision No. 1-NFPA 99B-2015 [Section No. 2.3]


Submitter Full Name: Marcelo Hirschler

Organization: GBH International

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Wed May 04 22:19:04 EDT 2016


1 of 7 5/17/2016 4:39 PM

Public Comment No. 5-NFPA 99B-2016 [ Section No. 3.3.3.5 ]

3.3.3.5 Oxygen-Enriched Atmosphere (OEA).

For the purposes of this standard, an atmosphere in which the concentration of oxygen exceeds 23.5 percent by volume, under normaloperating conditions .


There are references in other sections that differentiate Class D and E and have NFPA 70 requirements pursuant to those class designations. This proposed change will clarify and assert that chambers remaining under 23.5% O2 (properly mitigated) are indeed Class D.

Related Item

Public Input No. 1-NFPA 99B-2015 [Section No. 2.3]


Submitter Full Name: Michael Quiring

Organization: ETC

Affilliation: Environmental Tectonics Corp.

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon May 09 13:06:45 EDT 2016


2 of 7 5/17/2016 4:39 PM


3.3.15 Oxygen Index.

The minimum concentration of oxygen, expressed as percent by volume, in a mixture of oxygen and nitrogen that will just support combustion ofa material under conditions of ASTM D2863, Standard Test Method for Measuring the Minimum Oxygen Concentration to Support Candle-LikeCombustion of Plastics (Oxygen Index).


I understand that the technical committee is interested in find a reference for ASTM D2863. I suggest that a good location might be as a discussion about one other small scale fire test referenced, which is NFPA 701. Thus, the committee might want to add a sentence as an annex comment to 5.1.7.5, and I will propose one.

NFPA Manual of Style states that references to codes, standards and regulations should not be included in definitions. Also, the terms that are defined in an NFPA document are supposed to be those used in the document.


Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 4-NFPA 99B-2016 [Section No. 5.1.7.5]

Related Item

Public Input No. 20-NFPA 99B-2015 [Section No. 3.3.15]




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



3 of 7 5/17/2016 4:39 PM


4.2.1 *

Hypobaric chambers shall be designed, fabricated and fabricated by tested by qualified personnel in compliance with the following codes:

(1) ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code , Section VIII, Unfired Pressure Vessels, Division 1 or Division 2

(2) ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section II, Materials

(3) ASME PVHO-1, Safety Standard for Pressure Vessels for Human Occupancy

The Hypobaric chamber fabricator shall be a current A.S.M.E. "U" stamp certificate holder. All welding performed on the chamber shall be doneby welders qualified to and in accordance with ASME Section IX, Welding, Brazing and Fusing Qualifications.


Resolve problem of some suppliers not using a ASME certified stamp holder. Although the guidelines of the code book may be followed by any fabricator it does not necessarily mean the fabricator is a certified ASME certificate holder. Any weld shop can "follow" specific rules of a code but that does not mean they are ASME certified. They may lack the internal QA programs, testing means, or any other regulations required by ASME. Requiring the fabricator of the chamber to be a "U" stamp holder ensures all aspects of ASME guidelines and codes are followed.

Related Item

First Revision No. 1-NFPA 99B-2015 [Section No. 2.3]



Organization: Environmental Tectonics Corporation

Affilliation: ETC

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



4 of 7 5/17/2016 4:39 PM


4.5.2.1

A fixed water deluge extinguishing system shall be installed in all chamber compartments that are designed for human occupancy. As analternative a fixed inert gas deluge extinguishing system may be used in all chamber compartments. The inert gas deluge system ifemployed, shall reduce residual oxygen concentration to a level that will no longer support combustion yet still provide a safe oxygen levelallowing sufficient time for egress.


Water deluge by nature is not compatible with electronics or other equipment typically used in a hypobaric chamber. The use of a electrically non conductive gas typically found in the atmosphere does not harm major components after discharge and therefore no replacement of these components after discharge, unless effected by fire, would be necessary. The discharged gas may be removed from the chamber through ventilation only - no water clean up. The gas discharge maintains safe residual O2 levels (however not enough to maintain combustion) which allows for "normal breathing" while exiting the chamber.

Related Item




Organization: ETC

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Tue May 10 06:58:51 EDT 2016


5 of 7 5/17/2016 4:39 PM


4.6.2.3

If handheld extinguishers are provided in a single compartment chamber, at least two specially modifed water or water mist extinguishers ,minimum 6 liter capacity and capable of a 2A or 2A:C rating shall be provided.

4.6.2.3.1

If the chamber has two compartments, at least two specially modified water or water mist extinguishers, minimum 6 liter capacity and capable ofa 2A or 2A:C rating, shall be provided in the main compartment and one in the personnel transfer compartment.

4.6.2.3.2

Extinguishers shall be located to ensure easy access, and secured so as to allow rapid deployment.


This proposal modifies Public Input 17 and Public input 16. the new language addresses the committee rejection statement and further clarifies the type extinguishers to be used in a hyperbaric chamber.Any extinguisher used in a hyperbaric chamber will need to be modified so that it will function when the chamber is fully pressurized . the modifications involve increasing the operating pressure to overcome the pressure in the chamber and also providing pressure relieve devices for the protection of the extinguisher. Water type extinguishers are the best choice for this type environment and have historically been used in hyperbaric chambers. Water type extinguishers provide a clean discharge that will not obscure vision within the chamber and will not add an agent that reduces the breathable air in the chamber( as would CO2 or some of the halogenated agent extinguishers). Also the water will not introduce any additional agents that can cause cardiac sensitization or arythemias of the occupants. It is not anticipated that a class B flammable will be inside a hyperbaric chamber while it is occupied, other than alcohols which can be diluted with water to extinguish. If class B flammbles are to be present, then the extinguishers should be specially modified foam extinguishers...again a water based agent that will not pose significant additional hazard within the chamber.

Related Item

Public Input No. 17-NFPA 99B-2015 [Section No. 4.6.2.3.1]

Public Input No. 16-NFPA 99B-2015 [Section No. 4.6.2.3 [Excluding any Sub-Sections]]


Submitter Full Name: Fred Goodnight

Organization: Amerex Corporation

Affilliation: Fire Equipment Manufacturers Association

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



6 of 7 5/17/2016 4:39 PM


5.1.7.5 *

Fabric used in Class E chambers shall meet the flame propagation requirements contained in Test Method 1 or Test Method 2, as appropriate, ofNFPA 701.

A.5.1.7.5 NFPA 701 is a small scale fire test that is widely used for assessing flame propagation requirements of fabrics or plastics. Anotherwidely used small scale fire test for fabrics and plastics is ASTM D2863, Standard Test Method for Measuring the Minimum OxygenConcentration to Support Candlelike Combustion of Plastics (Oxygen Index) , which assesses the minimum concentration of oxygen, expressedas percent by volume, in a mixture of oxygen and nitrogen that will just support combustion of a material.

(Also, add ASTM D2863 (2014) into a new annex section on Informational ASTM references)


This allows the committee to continue including a reference to ASTM D2863.


Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 2-NFPA 99B-2016 [Section No. 3.3.15]

Related Item





Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



7 of 7 5/17/2016 4:39 PM

Documents

Technical Committee on Hyperbaric and Hypobaric …...Technical Committee on Hyperbaric and Hypobaric Facilities (HEA-HYP) NFPA 99 Second Draft Meeting (Annual 2017) Monday, June 20,