Technical Committee on Airport Facilities (AIS-AAA)

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Technical Committee on Airport Facilities (AIS-AAA)"

Transcription

1 Technical Committee on Airport Facilities () M E M O R A N D U M DATE: June 24, 2014 TO: FROM: Principal and Alternate Members Barry Chase, NFPA Staff Liaison Office: (617) BChase@nfpa.org SUBJECT: AGENDA NFPA 409 and NFPA 415 Second Draft Meeting (Annual 2015) July 15-17, 2014, Baltimore, MD 1. Call to Order July 15, 8:00am ET 2. Introductions and Attendance 3. Chairman Comments 4. Review Agenda 5. Approval of Previous Meeting Minutes (August 13-15, 2013, New Orleans, LA) 6. NFPA Staff Liaison Presentation 7. NFPA 409 Second Draft a. Act on Public Comments b. Report from the Task Group on Zoning Low-Level Foam Systems [TG#3] (M. Aaron) c. Report from the Task Group on Group III Hangars [TG#5] (D. Burkhart) d. Report from the Task Group on Maintenance and Testing [TG#6] (M. Workman) e. Other Business 8. NFPA 415 Second Draft a. Act on Public Comments b. FPRF Report on Glass Boarding Bridges [attached] (J. Scheffey) c. Other Business 9. Other Business a. Protection for Automated Electrostatic Paint Hangars (J. Doctorman) Please submit requests for additional agenda items to the chair at least seven days prior to the meeting, and notify the chair and/or staff liaison as soon as possible if you plan to introduce any large-scale revisions at the meeting. All NFPA Technical Committee meetings are open to the public. Please contact me for information on attending a meeting as a guest. Read NFPA's Regulations Governing the Development of NFPA Standards (Section ) for further information. Additional Meeting Information: See the Meeting Notice on the Document Information Page ( or for meeting location details. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Elena Carroll, Project Administrator at or by ecarroll@nfpa.org. C. Standards Administration Page 1 of 1

2 Attachment #1: Technical Committee Roster

3 Address List No Phone Airport Facilities 06/24/2014 Barry D. Chase James R. Doctorman Chair The Boeing Company 4615 South Oliver, M/C K70-70 Wichita, KS Alternate: Robert J. Eaker U 4/28/2000 Michael E. Aaron Secretary The RJA Group, Inc. 600 West Fulton Street, Suite 500 Chicago, IL SE 1/1/1991 James Brent Abbott Principal US Department of Defense Defense Contracts Management Agency DCMAO-LSSA Contract Safety Aircraft Team PO Box 1418 Benton, AR Alternate: Michael W. Vasta E 10/23/2013 Andrew T. Barrowcliffe Principal XL Global Asset Protection Services Providence Avenue Kelowna, BC V1W 3W4 Canada Alternate: William J. Sedlak I 3/2/2010 Gene E. Benzenberg Principal Alison Control Inc. 35 Daniel Road Fairfield, NJ M 1/1/1970 James J. Blake Principal Vancouver Airport Authority PO Box Airport Postal Outlet Richmond, BC V7B 1Y7 Canada E 10/20/2010 David Brandenburg Principal Continental Airlines Corporate Real Estate 4975 Wright Road Houston, TX U 8/9/2011 Thomas G. Burk Principal Federal Express Corporation Fedex Fire Station 2788 Sprankle Avenue Memphis, TN Alternate: Delbert R. Chase, Jr. U 1/1/1990 David J. Burkhart Principal Code Consultants, Inc Woodland Parkway, Suite 300 St. Louis, MO Alternate: Richard M. DiMisa SE 1/1/1991 Patrick Corcoran Principal Wolverine Fire Protection Company 8067 North Dort Highway Mt. Morris, MI IM 3/2/2010 Matthew J. Daelhousen Principal FM Global 1151 Boston-Providence Turnpike PO Box 9102 Norwood, MA Alternate: Robert Kasiski I 8/2/2010 James Devonshire Principal Buckeye Fire Equipment Company 1170 West Corporate Drive, Suite 201 Arlington, TX M 1/1/1992 1

4 Address List No Phone Airport Facilities 06/24/2014 Barry D. Chase Scott Enides Principal S.R.I. Fire Sprinkler Corporation 1060 Central Avenue Albany, NY National Fire Sprinkler Association Alternate: Robert Vincent M 4/28/2000 Michael E. France Principal National Air Transportation Association 4226 King Street Alexandria, VA Alternate: W. Mercer Dye, Jr. U 8/5/2009 Thomas D. Gambino Principal Prime Engineering, Inc Northside Parkway, N.W 300 Northcreek, Suite 200 Atlanta, GA SE 8/5/2009 Elwin G. Joyce, II Principal Eastern Kentucky University 2148 Alexandria Drive Lexington, KY International Fire Marshals Association E 1/1/1987 John R. Kitchens Principal Los Angeles City Fire Department PO Box 178 Somis, CA E 03/07/2013 Keith C. Kremkow Principal Marsh Risk Consulting 540 West Madison Street Chicago, IL Alternate: Lee T. Rindfuss I 1/1/1987 Christy J. Marsolo Principal Tyco/SimplexGrinnell Darice Parkway, Suite A Strongville, OH M 1/1/1992 Maurice M. Pilette Principal Mechanical Designs Ltd. 19 Erie Drive PO Box 2188 Natick, MA SE 1/1/1993 Jack Poole Principal Poole Fire Protection, Inc West 161st Street Olathe, KS Alternate: Andrew W. Poole SE 1/1/1991 Randy D. Pope Principal Burns & McDonnell Engineering Company 9400 Ward Parkway PO Box Kansas City, MO SE 1/1/1989 Robert W. Rees Principal Sunland Fire Protection, Inc. PO Box 277 Jamestown, NC American Fire Sprinkler Association Alternate: Rick J. Jackson IM 7/24/1997 Robert Saunders Principal Wasatch Design Consultants 2715 Brinker Avenue Ogden, UT VL to Document: 415 SE 1/1/1986 Joseph L. Scheffey Principal Hughes Associates, Inc Commerce Drive, Suite 817 Baltimore, MD Alternate: Alison J. Wakelin SE 4/17/2002 2

5 Address List No Phone Airport Facilities 06/24/2014 Barry D. Chase Joseph A. Simone E 1/15/2004 Principal US Department of the Navy Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC) 1322 Patterson Avenue SE, Suite 1000 Washington, DC Alternate: Robert J. Tabet Fred K. Walker Principal US Department of the Air Force AFCEC/COS 139 Barnes Drive, Suite 1 Tyndall AFB, FL U 1/1/1987 Martin H. Workman Principal The Viking Corporation 210 North Industrial Park Road Hastings, MI M 10/28/2008 Kevin M. Wypychoski Principal Precision Mechanical Services, Inc. PO Box 79 Guilford, CT IM 3/4/2009 Delbert R. Chase, Jr. Alternate Federal Express Corporation 2900 Business Park Blvd. Memphis, TN Principal: Thomas G. Burk U 1/1/1989 Richard M. DiMisa Alternate Code Consultants, Inc Woodland Parkway, Suite 300 St. Louis, MO Principal: David J. Burkhart SE 8/2/2010 W. Mercer Dye,Jr. Alternate Dye Aviation Facilities, Inc Village Run Atlanta, GA National Air Transportation Association Principal: Michael E. France U 8/5/2009 Robert J. Eaker Alternate The Boeing Company 2223 Field Avenue, NE Renton, WA Principal: James R. Doctorman U 8/5/2009 Rick J. Jackson Alternate Jackson Associates, Inc Oakley Park, Suite 201 Walled Lake, MI American Fire Sprinkler Association Principal: Robert W. Rees IM 10/27/2009 Robert Kasiski Alternate FM Global 1151 Boston Providence Turnpike PO Box 9102 Norwood, MA Principal: Matthew J. Daelhousen I 3/4/2009 Andrew W. Poole Alternate Poole Fire Protection, Inc West 161st Street Olathe, KS Principal: Jack Poole SE 10/23/2013 Lee T. Rindfuss Alternate Marsh Risk Consulting 99 High Street Boston, MA Principal: Keith C. Kremkow I 8/5/2009 William J. Sedlak Alternate XL Global Asset Protection Services 190 South LaSalle Street, Suite 3900 Chicago, IL Principal: Andrew T. Barrowcliffe I 10/23/2013 3

6 Address List No Phone Airport Facilities 06/24/2014 Barry D. Chase Robert J. Tabet Alternate US Department of the Navy Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Atlantic 6506 Hampton Boulevard, Code CIFPE Norfolk, VA Principal: Joseph A. Simone E 7/22/1999 Michael W. Vasta Alternate US Department of Defense Defense Contracts Management Agency PO Box 16859, MS P23-50 Philadelphia, PA Principal: James Brent Abbott E 10/23/2013 Robert Vincent Alternate Shambaugh & Son, L.P Opportunity Drive Fort Wayne, IN National Fire Sprinkler Association Principal: Scott Enides M 3/4/2009 Alison J. Wakelin Alternate Hughes Associates, Inc Commerce Drive, Suite 817 Baltimore, MD Principal: Joseph L. Scheffey SE 1/16/2003 L. M. Krasner Member Emeritus 11 Penobscot Street Medfield, MA SE 1/1/1975 Thomas J. Lett Member Emeritus Albuquerque Fire & Safety Associates 909 Verde Place SE Rio Rancho, NM SE 1/1/1974 Barry D. Chase Staff Liaison National Fire Protection Association 1 Batterymarch Park Quincy, MA /29/2010 4

7 Attachment # : Previous Meeting Minutes

8 Meeting Title: 409, 415, 423 First Draft Meeting Meeting Date: Tuesday, August 13 Thursday, August 15, 2013 Meeting Location: Four Points by Sheraton French Quarter, New Orleans, LA Code or Standards: Standard on Aircraft Hangars (409), Standard on Airport Terminal Buildings, Fueling Ramp Drainage, and Loading Walkways (415), Standard for Construction and Protection of Aircraft Engine Test Facilities (423) Minutes Taken By: Michael Aaron Attendees: NFPA Staff Barry Chase NFPA (Staff Liaison) Andrew Holter NFPA Members of the Technical Committee on Airport Facilities James R. Doctorman Boeing Corporation (Committee Chair) Michael E. Aaron The RJA Group (Committee Secretary) James J. Blake Vancouver International Airport Authority, Canada J. Robert Boyer UTC/Edwards Company NEMA Thomas G. Burk Federal Express Corp. David J. Burkhart Code Consultants Inc. Patrick Corcoran Wolverine Fire Protection Company Matthew J. Daelhousen FM Global James Devonshire Buckeye Fire Equipment Company Scott Enides National Fire Sprinkler Association Michael E. France National Air Transportation Association Thomas D. Gambino Prime Engineering, Inc. Elwin G. Joyce, II International Fire Marshals Association Christy J. Marsolo Tyco Fire Suppression & Building Products Jack Poole Poole Fire Protection, Inc. Randy D. Pope Burns & McDonnell Engineering Company Robert W. Rees American Fire Sprinkler Association Joseph L. Scheffey Hughes Associates, Inc. Fred K. Walker US Department of the Air Force Martin H. Workman The Viking Corporation Kevin M. Wypychoski Precision Mechanical Services, Inc. Alternates Rick J. Jackson (non voting) American Fire Sprinkler Association Non Members / Guests / Presenters Tristan Mackintosh Fireless Flooring Committee Agenda: 1. Call to Oder and Introductions Introductions were made of those in attendance. 2. NFPA Staff Liaison Presentation Mr. Chase presented an explanation of recently revised NFPA procedures and terminology concerning disposition of public input and committee input. Mr. Doctorman added comments on the agenda. 3. Revision Schedule

9 409, 415, 423 First Draft Meeting Page 2 August 13 15, 2013 First Draft ballots due by January 31, 2014 NFPA to post First Draft for public comment by March 7, 2014 Public input closing date May 16, 2014 Second Draft committee meeting late summer/early fall 2014 (August likely) 4. Appointment of Committee Secretary Mr. Aaron was appointed as Secretary. 5. Approval of Minutes of Previous Meetings Minutes of two prior meetings were approved. 6. Action on Public and Committee Input for NFPA 423 No public input was received on NFPA 423. A first draft was generated. Task group #1 was formed by the Chair to consider the possible use of water mist in support areas. Members: Mr. Boyer (chair) and Mr. Daelhousen. The task group provided a report on the last day of the meeting, resulting in multiple Committee Inputs (CI) to seek public comment on the proposal to add water mist systems. 7. Presentation by Mr. Mackintosh Mr. Mackintosh presented information of the Fireless Flooring system. 8. Presentation by Mr. Scheffey Mr. Scheffey presented information from research in progress on the subject of egress through jet bridges. 9. Action on Public and Committee Input for NFPA 415 Public and committee input was considered, discussed and acted on. A first draft was generated. 10. Action on Public and Committee Input for NFPA 409 Public and committee input was considered, discussed and acted on. A first draft was generated. The Chair appointed the following task groups: #2 Redundancy: Mr. Aaron (chair), Mr. Burk, Mr. Rees and Mr. Workman. This task group was charged with reviewing the requirements for a redundant fire pump ( and ), a reserve supply of foam concentrate ( and ), and a divided water reservoir ( and ) and to determine whether revisions should be considered. The task group provided a report on the last day of the meeting, resulting in multiple First Revisions (FR) and Committee Inputs (CI). #3 Low Level Systems: Mr. Aaron (chair), Mr. Daelhousen, Mr. Poole and Mr. Workman. This task group was charged with considering the various proposals on the subject of permitting low level foam systems to be zoned. The task group provided a report on the last day of the meeting, resulting in no revisions to the standard. The task group was charged with further action to consider the topic for possible revision at the second draft. #4 Inside Air for HEF Systems: Mr. Devonshire (chair) and Mr. Poole. This task group was charged with considering the various proposals on the subject of permitting inside air to be used for generating foam. The task group provided a report on the last day of the meeting, resulting in no revisions to the standard. #5 Group III Hangars: Mr. Burkhart (chair)

10 409, 415, 423 First Draft Meeting Page 3 August 13 15, 2013 This task group was charged with reviewing the classification and separation of Group III hangars, specifically with respect to the concepts of hangar clusters, row hangars, and multiple occupancy buildings. The task group provided a report on the last day of the meeting, resulting in multiple Committee Inputs (CI) to seek public comments. #6 Testing Chapter: Mr. Workman (chair), Mr. Blake, Mr. Enides and Mr. Aaron. This task group was charged with reviewing and revising the maintenance requirements in Chapter 11. A Committee Input (CI) was created to seek public comments. The task group will report at the Second Draft meeting. None. 11. Other Business Meeting Adjourned.

11 Attachment # : NFPA 409 Public Comments

12 National Fire Protection Association Report Public Comment No. 23-NFPA [ Section No ] Hangar Building Cluster. A group of buildings with more than one area for the storage and servicing of aircraft and all attached or contiguous structures, or structures not separated as specified in of this standard, as appropriate. Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment NFPA's Building Code Development Committee (BCDC) agrees with CI #62 to delete this definition. The language in Chapter 8 is less confusing. Related Item Committee Input No. 62-NFPA [Section No ] Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: Jim Muir Organization: Building Safety Division, Clark County, Washington Affilliation: NFPA's Building Code Development Committee (BCDC) Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu May 15 14:42:57 EDT 2014 of 35 6/24/2014 9:07 AM

13 National Fire Protection Association Report of /24/2014 9:07 AM Public Comment No. 26-NFPA [ New Section after ] Active flooring system - A flooring system that actively removes and contains combustible and flammable liquids outside the hazard area. The flooring system is attached to a piping system that is connected to a water supply through a valve that is opened by the operation of a detection system. The detection system is installed in the same area as the flooring system. When the valve opens water flows through the floor to cool and expedite the removal of fuel. Flame arrestors are incorporated into the flooring system to extinguish and prevent the ignition of fuel during removal. Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment An active flooring system is a new technology for containing flammable liquids, so guidance should be given in the code. Related Item Public Input No. 45-NFPA [New Section after ] Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: TRISTAN MACKINTOSH Organization: FIRELESS FLOORING Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri May 16 10:03:01 EDT 2014

14 National Fire Protection Association Report of /24/2014 9:07 AM Public Comment No. 24-NFPA [ Section No ] * Where aircraft storage and servicing areas are subdivided into separate fire areas, the separation shall be by a fire wall barrier having not less than a 3 2 -hour fire resistance rating. Any openings in such fire walls barriers communicating directly between two aircraft storage and servicing areas shall be provided with a listed 3 2 -hour fire door or 3 2 -hour shutter actuated from both sides of the wall. Where areas are of different heights, the tallest wall shall have a fire resistance rating of not less than 3 than 2 hours. Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment NFPA's Building Code Development Committee (BCDC) supports Committee Input #29. A fire barrier of 2 hour rating is an adequate separation. Fire wall are over kill. To provide the structural protection necessary for a fire wall would be nearly impossible considering the clear span trusses being utilized in these facilities. Related Item Committee Input No. 29-NFPA [Section No ] Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: Jim Muir Organization: Building Safety Division, Clark County, Washington Affilliation: NFPA's Building Code Development Committee (BCDC) Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu May 15 14:48:41 EDT 2014

15 National Fire Protection Association Report of /24/2014 9:07 AM Public Comment No. 27-NFPA [ Section No [Excluding any Sub-Sections] ] Because entry of fuel, oil, and water into landing gear pits is inevitable, drainage, an active flooring system, or pumping facilities shall be provided. Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment An active flooring system is an alternative to drainage or pumping system to contain flammable liquid in landing gear pits, so guidance should be given in the code. Related Item Public Input No. 45-NFPA [New Section after ] Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: TRISTAN MACKINTOSH Organization: FIRELESS FLOORING Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri May 16 10:04:10 EDT 2014

16 National Fire Protection Association Report of /24/2014 9:07 AM Public Comment No. 29-NFPA [ New Section after ] Where active flooring systems are used they shall be designed, installed, and maintained in accordance to the manufacturer s instructions and be listed for the purpose. Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment Where active flooring systems are used they shall be designed, installed, and maintained in accordance to the manufacturer s instructions and be listed for the purpose. Related Item Public Input No. 45-NFPA [New Section after ] Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: TRISTAN MACKINTOSH Organization: FIRELESS FLOORING Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri May 16 10:06:33 EDT 2014

17 National Fire Protection Association Report of /24/2014 9:07 AM Public Comment No. 38-NFPA [ Section No ] In aircraft storage and servicing areas of hangars, floor trench drainage in accordance with through or a approved active flooring system in accordance with through and the manufacturer's instructions shall be provided. Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment Specific manufacturer's instructions could be applicable for active flooring systems Related Item Public Input No. 45-NFPA [New Section after ] Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: TRISTAN MACKINTOSH Organization: FIRELESS FLOORING Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri May 16 12:21:54 EDT 2014

18 National Fire Protection Association Report of /24/2014 9:07 AM Public Comment No. 32-NFPA [ Section No ] The protection of aircraft storage and servicing areas for Group I hangars shall be in accordance wtih any one of the following: (1) See text from 2011 edition (2) See text from 2011 edition (3) See text from 2011 edition Group I aircraft hangar storage and service areas housing unfueled aircraft shall be provided with protection in accordance with or with automatic sprinkler protection as specified in Chapter 12. Where the provisions of Chapter 12 are used, no provisions of Chapter 6 are required. Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment There are two changes being proposed here. The first is to return section with its three subsections to the text of the 2011 edition. No First Revision was recorded to delete existing section and its subsections, but they do not appear in the first draft language on the website. Second, the additional sentence has been suggested to clear up the protection requirements for unfueled aircraft. There is a great deal of confusion in the field as to whether the committee intends to also require the provisions of Chapter 6 when the user has chosen to protect an hangar for unfueled aircraft in accordance with Chapter 12. Of particular concern is section , which requires an extra fire pump. Some AHJ's are enforcing this section for hangars designed for unfueled aircraft that are protected in accordance with Chapter 12 even though Chapter 12 does not have similar language. Explicit instructions not to use Chapter 6 if Chapter 12 is followed would be extremely helpful to the users of NFPA 409. Related Item Public Input No. 47-NFPA [Section No ] Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: Kenneth Isman Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association Affilliation: NFSA Engineering and Standards Committee Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri May 16 11:31:47 EDT 2014

19 National Fire Protection Association Report of /24/2014 9:07 AM Public Comment No. 22-NFPA [ Section No ] Foam solution piping shall be permitted to be black steel meeting the requirements of NFPA 13. Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment The NFPA-11 Technical Committee respectfully requests the NFPA-409 Technical Committee reconsider the decision to permit the use of black steel pipe for foam solution lines used in foam systems that are dry and/or open to atmosphere. This will allow for alignment of the discharge piping requirements of foam systems between the two standards. NFPA-409 only requires operational flow testing of foam systems every 5 years. In the case of AFFF deluge sprinkler systems that testing is typically done by discharging through a test header with no flow through the sprinkler discharge piping network. As such there is no easy way to flush corrosion debris that may have formed in the foam solution piping since installation. In fact, there is no follow up water discharge testing for aircraft hangar AFFF deluge sprinkler systems that determines whether sprinkler piping and/or deluge sprinklers may be obstructed. High expansion foam systems are typically discharged with water through the foam generators to confirm proper operation of the water motor that drives the fan. Based upon experience of members of the NFPA-11 Technical Committee that service and test deluge sprinkler and high expansion foam systems it is clear that internal pipe scale and corrosion can cause systems failures due to obstruction of the piping and discharge outlets. Foam solution piping in aircraft hangar systems is subject to wide temperature and humidity fluctuations that create condensation that promotes internal corrosion of black steel pipe over time. This problem is more pronounced in hangars located in high humidity areas near the coasts and islands where the air can contain salt. Water remaining in the system piping from system commissioning tests will also cause corrosion over time. In some aircraft hangars corrosion of black steel foam solution sprinkler piping has been severe enough to warrant replacement due to leaks and concern about pipe integrity. A series nine of photos (attached) illustrate the problems discovered in black steel foam solution piping as the systems were being inspected and tested. Not all of the pictures directly relate to aircraft hangar system foam solution piping but they indicate the same problems that can be experienced in aircraft hangar foam systems. A technical article by FM Global and published in Sprinkler Age magazine (February 2013, Vol 32/02, page 22) states that bare black steel pipe is not suitable for dry or pre-action systems due to high volume of corrosion that can obstruct piping and sprinklers. The article also concludes that galvanized pipe may not eliminate corrosion but it is the best option and has served the industry well. Based on the field problems experienced with dry and/or deluge type foam systems installed with black steel foam solution piping the NFPA-11 Technical Committee urges the use of galvanized pipe for aircraft hangar foam systems where the internal foam solution pipe surfaces are exposed to atmosphere. Note: Supporting material is available for review at NFPA Headquarters. Related Item First Revision No. 13-NFPA [New Section after 6.1.1] Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: TC on FOM-AAA Organization: TC on Foam Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu May 15 09:16:01 EDT 2014

20 National Fire Protection Association Report of /24/2014 9:07 AM Public Comment No. 25-NFPA [ Section No ] Foam solution piping shall be permitted to be black steel meeting be any ferrous material meeting the requirements of NFPA 13. Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment NFPA's Building Code Development Committee (BCDC) believes NFPA 13 addresses the type of ferrous piping materials that are allowed. Black steel is a ferrous material, and ferrous materials should be referenced to NFPA 13. This revision simplifies the intent of the provision. Related Item First Revision No. 13-NFPA [New Section after 6.1.1] Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: Jim Muir Organization: Building Safety Division, Clark County, Washington Affilliation: NFPA's Building Code Development Committee (BCDC) Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu May 15 14:55:30 EDT 2014

21 National Fire Protection Association Report 0 of 35 6/24/2014 9:07 AM Public Comment No. 7-NFPA [ Section No ] Foam solution piping shall be permitted to be black steel meeting the requirements of NFPA 13. Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment No technical data or information was presented by the NFPA 409 Technical Committee to substantiate the use of black steel pipe for foam solution (99%, 98%, 97%, or 94% water) in place of galvanized pipe. This new Section would supersede the requirements of NFPA 11 and/or NFPA 16. NFPA 11 is in the current Fall 2014 revision cycle, with Section Piping (SR # 12) being completely revised, including differentiating the piping requirements between foam concentrate and foam solution. If adopted, this Second Draft Revision of NFPA 11 (which passed ballot by the Technical Committee) will also allow for the usage of black steel pipe when the discharge devices are closed to the atmosphere. To substantiate the usage of galvanized pipe, even for indoor systems (e.g. aircraft hangars), Steel Pipe Material Corrosion, an article authored by Paul Su and David Fuller of FM Global in Sprinkler Age (February 2013, Vol. 32/02, p22), concludes that bare/black steel should not be used in a dry or pre-action system due to the high volume of corrosion products that can obstruct piping and sprinklers. It also concludes galvanized pipe does not eliminate corrosion but is the best option and has served the industry well. Below is a hyperlink to Sprinkler Age, February 2013 for review of the article by Technical Committee members. (Hyperlink to Sprinkler Age, February 2013: Related Item First Revision No. 13-NFPA [New Section after 6.1.1] Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: Matthew Daelhousen Organization: FM Global Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu May 01 14:10:43 EDT 2014

22 National Fire Protection Association Report 1 of 35 6/24/2014 9:07 AM Public Comment No. 10-NFPA [ Section No ] Controllers for foam concentrate pumps shall be as follows: (1) For electric-drive foam concentrate pumps greater than 22.4kW (30 horsepower), a listed full-service (1) electric foam pump controller shall be used. (2) For electric-drive foam concentrate pumps not exceeding 22.4kW (30 horsepower), a listed electric foam pump controller or limited-service foam pump controller shall be used. (3) For diesel engine driven foam concentrate pumps, a listed fire pump controller shall be used. Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment This public comment is to reject FR No. 16 and return to language of previous edition. Limited service controllers are specifically designed for small horsepower motors. The reliability of limited service controllers is improved because NFPA 20 requires the same type of circuit breaker in a limited service controller as in a full service controller. The option of controller type should be left to the design professional utilizing the requirements of NFPA 20. Related Item First Revision No. 16-NFPA [Section No ] Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: Roland Asp Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association Affilliation: NFSA E&S Committee Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Mon May 12 11:50:14 EDT 2014

23 National Fire Protection Association Report Public Comment No. 34-NFPA [ Section No ] Fire Pumps Fire pumps shall be installed in accordance with NFPA 20 and in accordance with the provisions of through A The total pumping capacity shall be provided using fire pumps of equal capacity should be such that the maximum demand is met with the largest fire pump out of service No fewer than two fire pumps shall be provided Pump houses and rooms shall be of fire-resistive or noncombustible construction. Where internal combustion engines used for driving fire pumps are located inside the fire pump house or room, protection shall be provided by automatic sprinklers installed in accordance with NFPA * Fire pumps shall be started automatically by either a drop in water pressure or a signal from the detection control panel. Where two or more fire pumps are used, they shall be provided with automatic sequential starting Where pressure is used as the starting sequence for fire pumps, a small auxiliary pressure maintenance pump or other suitable means to maintain normal system pressures shall be provided Once started, fire pumps shall be arranged to run continuously until they are stopped manually. There shall be an audible pump running alarm in a constantly attended area. Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment NFPA's Building Code Development Committee (BCDC) is opposed to this First Revision and supports Committee Input #40. This First Revision would require two fire pumps which is overkill. There is no substantial evidence that this redundancy is necessary due to reliability problems with fire pumps. We agree that NFPA 20 takes considerable care in ensuring fire pump reliability. Related Item First Revision No. 41-NFPA [Section No ] Committee Input No. 40-NFPA [Section No ] Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: Jim Muir Organization: Building Safety Division, Clark County, Washington Affilliation: NFPA's Building Code Development Committee (BCDC) Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri May 16 11:44:32 EDT of 35 6/24/2014 9:07 AM

24 National Fire Protection Association Report Public Comment No. 19-NFPA [ Sections , , , ] Sections , , , The smallest single foam-water deluge system shall be discharged using foam concentrate or a suitable alternative test liquid. This test shall be run for a length of time to stabilize discharge before test samples are taken to determine foam concentrate percentage, or before readings of flow rates in the concentrate supply pipes and the water supply pipes are captured for the purpose of calculating the foam concentrate percentage The maximum number of systems expected to operate shall be simultaneously discharged with foam, or with a mixture of water and alternative test liquid. This test shall be run for a length of time to stabilize discharge before test samples are taken to determine foam concentrate percentage, or before readings of flow rates in the concentrate supply pipes and the water supply pipes are captured for the purpose of calculating the foam concentrate percentage Any proportioner not tested under the requirements of or shall be individually tested with foam concentrate to, or with an alternative test liquid, to determine concentrate percentage Supplementary and low-level protection systems shall be subjected to foam flow tests, with foam, or with a mixture of water and alternative test liquid, flowing simultaneously from the maximum number of sprinkler systems expected to operate, in order to ensure that the hazard is protected in conformance with the design specification and to determine whether the flow pressures, agent discharge capacity, foam coverage, percent concentration, and other operating characteristics are satisfactory Where separate proportioning systems are utilized for the foam-water deluge sprinklers and the supplementary protection systems, water only shall be permitted to be flowed in the foam-water deluge sprinkler systems simultaneously with foam, or with a mixture of water and alternative test liquid, in the supplementary protection system. Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment Please see problem statement under related comment #21. Related Public Comments for This Document Related Comment Relationship Public Comment No. 21-NFPA [New Comments #19, #20 and #21 are all related to alternative Section after A ] methods of testing the system. Related Item Public Input No. 78-NFPA [New Section after ] Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: KAARE HOLM Organization: NOFOAM SYSTEMS Affilliation: NAVFAC licensee Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed May 14 19:44:59 EDT of 35 6/24/2014 9:07 AM

25 National Fire Protection Association Report 4 of 35 6/24/2014 9:07 AM

26 National Fire Protection Association Report 5 of 35 6/24/2014 9:07 AM Public Comment No. 33-NFPA [ Section No ] Group II aircraft hangar storage and service areas housing unfueled aircraft shall be provided with automatic sprinkler protection as specified in Chapter 12. Where the provisions of Chapter 12 are used, none of the provisions on Chapter 7 are required. Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment The additional sentence has been suggested to clear up the protection requirements for unfueled aircraft. There is a great deal of confusion in the field as to whether the committee intends to also require the provisions of Chapter 7 when the user has chosen to protect a hangar for unfueled aircraft in accordance with Chapter 12. Of particular concern is section 7.8.8, which references the user back to section , which requires an extra fire pump. Some AHJ's are enforcing this section for hangars designed for unfueled aircraft that are protected in accordance with Chapter 12 even though Chapter 12 does not have similar language. Explicit instructions not to use Chapter 6 if Chapter 12 is followed would be extremely helpful to the users of NFPA 409. Related Item Public Input No. 70-NFPA [Sections 7.1, 7.2, 7.3, 7.4] Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: Kenneth Isman Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association Affilliation: NFSA Engineering and Standards Committee Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri May 16 11:43:07 EDT 2014

27 National Fire Protection Association Report 6 of 35 6/24/2014 9:07 AM Public Comment No. 35-NFPA [ Section No ] Foam solution piping shall be permitted to be black steel any ferrous material meeting the requirements of NFPA 13. Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment NFPA's Building Code Development Committee (BCDC) believes NFPA 13 addresses the type of ferrous piping materials that are allowed. Black steel is a ferrous material, and ferrous materials should be referenced to NFPA 13. This revision simplifies the intent of the provision. Related Public Comments for This Document Related Comment Public Comment No. 25-NFPA [Section No ] Related Item First Revision No. 42-NFPA [New Section after 7.1] Relationship similar Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: Jim Muir Organization: Building Safety Division, Clark County, Washington Affilliation: NFPA's Building Code Development Committee (BCDC) Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri May 16 11:55:47 EDT 2014

28 National Fire Protection Association Report 7 of 35 6/24/2014 9:07 AM Public Comment No. 8-NFPA [ Section No ] Foam solution piping shall be permitted to be black steel meeting the requirements of NFPA 13. Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment No technical data or information was presented by the NFPA 409 Technical Committee to substantiate the use of black steel pipe for foam solution (99%, 98%, 97%, or 94% water) in place of galvanized pipe. This new Section would supersede the requirements of NFPA 11 and/or NFPA 16. NFPA 11 is in the current Fall 2014 revision cycle, with Section Piping (SR # 12) being completely revised, including differentiating the piping requirements between foam concentrate and foam solution. If adopted, this Second Draft Revision of NFPA 11 (which passed ballot by the Technical Committee) will also allow for the usage of black steel pipe when the discharge devices are closed to the atmosphere. To substantiate the usage of galvanized pipe, even for indoor systems (e.g. aircraft hangars), Steel Pipe Material Corrosion, an article authored by Paul Su and David Fuller of FM Global in Sprinkler Age (February 2013, Vol. 32/02, p22), concludes that bare/black steel should not be used in a dry or pre-action system due to the high volume of corrosion products that can obstruct piping and sprinklers. It also concludes galvanized pipe does not eliminate corrosion but is the best option and has served the industry well. Below is a hyperlink to Sprinkler Age, February 2013 for review of the article by Technical Committee members. (Hyperlink to Sprinkler Age, February 2013: Related Item First Revision No. 42-NFPA [New Section after 7.1] Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: Matthew Daelhousen Organization: FM Global Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu May 01 14:17:49 EDT 2014

29 National Fire Protection Association Report 8 of 35 6/24/2014 9:07 AM Public Comment No. 20-NFPA [ Section No [Excluding any Sub-Sections] ] The systems shall be subjected to flow tests, with foam, or with a mixture of water and alternative test liquid, flowing from the maximum number of foam distributors expected to operate, in order to ensure that the hangar is protected in conformance with the design specifications and to determine if the flow pressures, agent discharge capacity, foam coverage, and percentage of concentration are satisfactory. Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment Please see the problem statement under related comment #21. Related Public Comments for This Document Related Comment Public Comment No. 19-NFPA [Sections , , , ] Public Comment No. 21-NFPA [New Section after A ] Related Item Public Input No. 78-NFPA [New Section after ] Submitter Information Verification Relationship Comments #19, #20 and #21 are all related to alternative methods of testing the system. Comments #19, #20 and #21 are all related to alternative methods of testing the system. Submitter Full Name: KAARE HOLM Organization: NOFOAM SYSTEMS Affilliation: NAVFAC licensee Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed May 14 20:22:48 EDT 2014

30 National Fire Protection Association Report Public Comment No. 36-NFPA [ Section No. 8.1 ] 8.1 Construction * Group III hangars shall be constructed of any of the types of construction specified in NFPA Group III hangars shall be limited to one story. Where a Group III hangar as defined in and exceeds one story, the hangar shall be designated as a Group II hangar The surface of the grade floor of aircraft storage and servicing areas, regardless of type of hangar construction, shall be noncombustible and above the grade of the approach or apron at the entrance to the hangar Hangar aprons shall slope away from the level of the hangar floors to prevent liquid on the apron surfaces from flowing into the hangars In hangar building clusters and in row hangars, a minimum of 15 cm (6 in.) high curbing shall be provided between each aircraft space to prevent the flow of liquid from one space to adjacent spaces Group III hangars protected with the fire protection specified in Chapter 7 shall be provided with floor drainage in accordance with Section * Roof coverings shall be listed as Class C or better Exposed interior insulation attached to walls and roofs in an aircraft storage or servicing area of a hangar shall comply with the special provisions for aircraft storage hangars, interior wall and ceiling finish criteria of NFPA 101. Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment NFPA's Building Code Development Committee (BCDC) agrees with Committee Input #62 and 61. The proposed text in Chapter 8 is less confusing than the definition. Related Public Comments for This Document Related Comment Public Comment No. 23-NFPA [Section No ] Related Item Committee Input No. 61-NFPA [Sections 8.1, 8.2, 8.3] Relationship they work together. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: Jim Muir Organization: Building Safety Division, Clark County, Washington Affilliation: NFPA's Building Code Development Committee (BCDC) Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri May 16 12:04:03 EDT of 35 6/24/2014 9:07 AM

31 National Fire Protection Association Report 0 of 35 6/24/2014 9:07 AM Public Comment No. 40-NFPA [ Section No ] Group III hangars shall III aircraft storage and servicing areas shall be limited to one story. Where a Group III hangar as defined in and exceeds 2.1 Where a Group III aircraft storage and servicing areas exceeds one story, the hangar shall be designated as a Group II hangar. Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment This is being submitted by Group III task group Related Item Committee Input No. 61-NFPA [Sections 8.1, 8.2, 8.3] Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Burkhart Organization: Code Consultants, Inc. Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri May 16 15:32:32 EDT 2014

32 National Fire Protection Association Report Public Comment No. 41-NFPA [ Section No ] In hangar building clusters and in row hangars, a minimum of 15 cm (6 in.) high curbing shall be provided between each aircraft space to prevent the flow of liquid from one space to adjacent spaces Group III hangars protected with the fire protection specified in Chapter 7 shall be provided with floor drainage in accordance with Section Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment Work by Group III task group Related Item Committee Input No. 61-NFPA [Sections 8.1, 8.2, 8.3] Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Burkhart Organization: Code Consultants, Inc. Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri May 16 15:36:08 EDT of 35 6/24/2014 9:07 AM

33 National Fire Protection Association Report 2 of 35 6/24/2014 9:07 AM Public Comment No. 42-NFPA [ Section No ] For single hangar buildings, the clear-space distances specified in Table shall in Table shall be maintained on all sides of the single hangar. Where mixed types of construction are involved, the less fire-resistant type of construction shall be used to determine the clear space required. Where the minimum clear spaces specified in Table are not met, the buildings shall be classified as a hangar building cluster. Table Clear-Space Distances for Single Hangar Buildings Minimum Separation Required Type of Construction m ft Type I (443) and (332) Type II (222) Type II (111), Type III (211), and Type IV (2HH) Type II (000) Type III (200) Type V (111) and (000) Where single hangar buildings adjoin each other and each has fire walls with a minimum rating of at least 2 hours, located so that fire areas shall not exceed the maximum areas specified in Table 4.1.3, no minimum separation distance shall be required. These buildings shall not be classified as a hangar building cluster. Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment Work by Group III Task Group Related Item Committee Input No. 61-NFPA [Sections 8.1, 8.2, 8.3] Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Burkhart Organization: Code Consultants, Inc. Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri May 16 15:38:43 EDT 2014

34 National Fire Protection Association Report 3 of 35 6/24/2014 9:07 AM Public Comment No. 43-NFPA [ Section No ] Row hangars shall be divided by solid partitions having a fire resistance that meets or exceeds the exterior walls or roof, whichever is greater, so that no more than three aircraft spaces shall be within an enclosed area Partitions and ceilings separating aircraft storage and serving areas from other areas, such as shops, offices, and parts storage areas, shall have at least a 1-hour fire resistive rating with openings protected by listed fire doors having a fire resistance rating of at least 45 minutes. Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment Work by Group III Task Group Related Item Committee Input No. 61-NFPA [Sections 8.1, 8.2, 8.3] Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Burkhart Organization: Code Consultants, Inc. Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri May 16 15:41:59 EDT 2014

35 National Fire Protection Association Report 4 of 35 6/24/2014 9:07 AM Public Comment No. 44-NFPA [ Section No. 8.3 ] 8.3 Hangar Building Clusters In hangar building clusters, Group III hangars within a cluster shall be limited in total area for the specific types of construction in accordance with Table Where mixed types of construction are involved, the less fire-resistant type of construction shall be used to determine the maximum allowable area in accordance with the table. Table Maximum Fire Areas for Hangar Building Clusters Maximum Total Fire Area Types of Construction m 2 ft 2 Type I (443) and (332) 5,574 60,000 Type II (222) 3,716 40,000 Type II (111), Type III (211), and Type IV (2HH) 2,787 30,000 Type II (000) 2,230 24,000 Type III (200) 2,230 24,000 Type V (111) 1,486 16,000 Type V (000) , Where the total area of all Group III hangars in a cluster exceeds that specified in Table 8.3.1, selected buildings in the hangar cluster shall be classified as Group II hangars and protected in accordance with Chapter 7 of this standard. These buildings shall be selected such that the total area of the unprotected Group III hangar buildings in the hangar cluster is below the maximum area allowed by Table for the less fire-resistant type of construction For hangar building clusters, the clear-space distances specified in Table shall be maintained on all sides of the hangar building clusters. Where mixed types of construction are involved, a less fire-resistant type of construction shall be used. Table Clear-Space Distances for Hangar Building Clusters Minimum Separation Required Type of Construction m ft Type I (433) and (332) Type II (222) Type IV (2HH) Type II (111) and Type III (211) Type II (000) Type III (200) Type V (111) and (000) Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment Work by Group III Task Group Related Item Committee Input No. 61-NFPA [Sections 8.1, 8.2, 8.3] Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Burkhart Organization: Code Consultants, Inc. Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri May 16 15:46:58 EDT 2014

36 National Fire Protection Association Report 5 of 35 6/24/2014 9:07 AM Public Comment No. 28-NFPA [ Section No ] Because entry of fuel, oil, and water into landing gear pits is inevitable, drainage or, an active flooring system, or pumping facilities shall be provided. Water-trapped vapor seals and separator fuel traps shall be provided. Where automatic pumping facilities are necessary, they shall be approved for use with aviation fuel and water. The drainage shall be fully enclosed pipe runs if drainage is routed through ventilation or access tunnels to external discharge points. Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment An active flooring system is an alternative to drainage or pumping system to contain flammable liquids in landing gear pits, so guidance should be given in the code Related Item Public Input No. 45-NFPA [New Section after ] Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: TRISTAN MACKINTOSH Organization: FIRELESS FLOORING Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri May 16 10:05:44 EDT 2014

37 National Fire Protection Association Report 6 of 35 6/24/2014 9:07 AM Public Comment No. 39-NFPA [ Section No ] Foam solution piping shall be permitted to be black steel any ferrous material meeting the requirements of NFPA 13. Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment NFPA's Building Code Development Committee (BCDC) believes NFPA 13 addresses the type of ferrous piping materials that are allowed. Black steel is a ferrous material, and ferrous materials should be referenced to NFPA 13. This revision simplifies the intent of the provision. Related Public Comments for This Document Related Comment Public Comment No. 35-NFPA [Section No ] Public Comment No. 25-NFPA [Section No ] Related Item First Revision No. 45-NFPA [Section No ] Relationship similar similar Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: Jim Muir Organization: Building Safety Division, Clark County, Washington Affilliation: NFPA's Building Code Development Committee (BCDC) Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri May 16 12:32:25 EDT 2014

38 National Fire Protection Association Report 7 of 35 6/24/2014 9:07 AM Public Comment No. 9-NFPA [ Section No ] Foam solution piping shall be permitted to be black steel meeting the requirements of NFPA 13. Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment No technical data or information was presented by the NFPA 409 Technical Committee to substantiate the use of black steel pipe for foam solution (99%, 98%, 97%, or 94% water) in place of galvanized pipe. This new Section would supersede the requirements of NFPA 11 and/or NFPA 16. NFPA 11 is in the current Fall 2014 revision cycle, with Section Piping (SR # 12) being completely revised, including differentiating the piping requirements between foam concentrate and foam solution. If adopted, this Second Draft Revision of NFPA 11 (which passed ballot by the Technical Committee) will also allow for the usage of black steel pipe when the discharge devices are closed to the atmosphere. To substantiate the usage of galvanized pipe, even for indoor systems (e.g. aircraft hangars), Steel Pipe Material Corrosion, an article authored by Paul Su and David Fuller of FM Global in Sprinkler Age (February 2013, Vol. 32/02, p22), concludes that bare/black steel should not be used in a dry or pre-action system due to the high volume of corrosion products that can obstruct piping and sprinklers. It also concludes galvanized pipe does not eliminate corrosion but is the best option and has served the industry well. Below is a hyperlink to Sprinkler Age, February 2013 for review of the article by Technical Committee members. (Hyperlink to Sprinkler Age, February 2013: Related Item First Revision No. 45-NFPA [Section No ] Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: Matthew Daelhousen Organization: FM Global Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu May 01 14:20:02 EDT 2014

39 National Fire Protection Association Report Public Comment No. 37-NFPA [ Section No ] Fire Pumps Fire pumps shall be installed in accordance with NFPA 20 and in accordance with the provisions of through A The total pumping capacity shall be provided using fire pumps of equal capacity such that maximum demand should be met with the largest fire pump out of service No fewer than two fire pumps shall be provided Fire pump houses and fire pump rooms shall be of fire-resistive or noncombustible construction. Where internal combustion engines used for driving fire pumps are located inside the fire pump house or fire pump room, protection shall be provided by automatic sprinklers installed in accordance with NFPA Fire pumps shall be started automatically by either a drop in water pressure or a signal from the detection control panel. Where two or more pumps are used, they shall be provided with automatic sequential starting Where pressure loss is used as the starting sequence for fire pumps, a small auxiliary pressure maintenance pump or other suitable means to maintain normal system pressures shall be provided Once started, fire pumps shall be arranged to run continuously until they are stopped manually. There shall be an audible pump running alarm in a continuously attended area Flushing Underground Pipe. Underground mains and each lead-in connection shall be flushed as specified in NFPA Acceptance Tests The tests in through shall be performed prior to final acceptance of any fire protection system in an aircraft hangar Hydrostatic pressure tests shall be conducted on each system as specified in NFPA 11, NFPA 13, or NFPA 14, as applicable All devices and equipment installed as part of the system shall be tested The maximum number of systems expected to operate shall be simultaneously discharged with foam. This test shall be run for a length of time to stabilize discharge before test samples are taken to determine foam concentrate percentage Any proportioner not tested under the requirements of shall be individually tested with foam concentrate to determine concentrate percentage Low-expansion and high-expansion foam protection systems shall be subjected to foam flow tests, with foam flowing simultaneously from the maximum number of foam nozzles or generators expected to operate, in order to ensure that the hazard is protected in conformance with the design specification and to determine whether the flow pressures, agent discharge capacity, foam coverage, and percent concentration, are satisfactory. 8 of 35 6/24/2014 9:07 AM

40 National Fire Protection Association Report 9 of 35 6/24/2014 9:07 AM Low-expansion and high-expansion foam protection systems shall be examined visually to determine that they have been installed correctly. Checks shall be made for such items in conformity with installation plans, continuity of piping, tightness of fittings, removal of temporary blank flanges, and accessibility of valves and controls. Devices shall be identified, and operating instructions shall be prominently posted * The timing of foam system discharge shall be measured beginning at the time of system actuation Final Approval. The installing company shall furnish a written statement that the work has been completed in accordance with and tested in accordance with the provisions of Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment NFPA's Building Code Development Committee (BCDC) is opposed to this First Revision #54 and supports Committee Input #53. This Firs Revision would require two fire pumps which is overkill. There is no substantial evidence that this redundancy is necessary due to reliability problems with fire pumps. We agree that NFPA 20 takes considerable care in ensuring fire pump reliability. Related Public Comments for This Document Related Comment Public Comment No. 34-NFPA [Section No ] Related Item First Revision No. 54-NFPA [Section No ] Committee Input No. 53-NFPA [Section No ] Relationship Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: Jim Muir Organization: Building Safety Division, Clark County, Washington Affilliation: NFPA's Building Code Development Committee Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri May 16 12:18:29 EDT 2014

41 National Fire Protection Association Report 0 of 35 6/24/2014 9:07 AM Public Comment No. 30-NFPA [ Section No ]

42 National Fire Protection Association Report 1 of 35 6/24/2014 9:07 AM

43 National Fire Protection Association Report 2 of 35 6/24/2014 9:07 AM Inspection and testing of fire protection systems in aircraft hangars shall be performed in accordance with NFPA 25 as modified by Table Table Inspection and Testing of Hangar Fire Protection Systems System Components Weekly Monthly Type and Frequency of Inspections and Tests Semiannually Annually Quarterly Every 5 Years Sprinkler heads V Piping V D Pipe hangers V Sprinkler alarm valve V O 1 Deluge valve V O D Shutoff valves V F Fire pumps F 2 D Water reservoirs V Hose stations V D Strainers V Foam concentrate F Concentrate storage tanks V Concentrate pump F 2 O D Concentrate control valve (automatic) V O D Concentrate shutoff valve V F Foam proportioning device V D Water-powered monitor nozzle V D Electric-powered manual nozzle V F D Water-powered high-expansion-foam (HEF) generator Electric-powered high-expansion-foam (HEF) generator V O D V F D Pneumatic detector F O 3 Electric detector F O 3 Optical detector V F O 3 Control panels V F O Alarm transmission (local and remote) F Tamper switch F Flow indication switch O Supervisory alarms F Manual actuation stations F Hangar floor drain system and separators V D Active flooring system V D D Fire doors V F Gas detectors V F Ventilation system in pits, tunnels, and ducts F

44 National Fire Protection Association Report 3 of 35 6/24/2014 9:07 AM System Components Weekly Monthly Type and Frequency of Inspections and Tests Semiannually Annually Quarterly Every 5 Years Grounding equipment F V: Visual inspection. D: Operational test with actual discharge. O: Operational test with flow, no discharge. F: Functional test, no flow. 1 For the purposes of this test, the inspector s flow valve is acceptable. 2 Churn test. 3 At this time it is necessary to check that the set points are the same as the original. Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment recommended maintenance schedule for active flooring system Related Item Public Input No. 45-NFPA [New Section after ] Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: TRISTAN MACKINTOSH Organization: FIRELESS FLOORING Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri May 16 10:10:14 EDT 2014

45 National Fire Protection Association Report 4 of 35 6/24/2014 9:07 AM Public Comment No. 21-NFPA [ New Section after A ] A : Novel approaches to determining the percentage of the foam solution have recently been introduced in both NFPA 11 and NFPA 412, with the purpose of avoiding the use of actual foam concentrate, except during a fire. The use of these alternative approaches will lower or eliminate many of the negative effects of system testing (cost, foam disposal, etc.), and may in some cases provide higher accuracy testing results as well as better preparedness through more frequent testing. Some approaches use metering equipment to measure flow rates of the liquids entering the system, instead of sampling and analyzing foam solution coming out of the system. Some approaches will substitute foam concentrate with a suitable alternative liquid with a similar flow characteristics. Other approaches will substitute the foam concentrate with water and apply a system-specific convertion factor. Some approaches will add dye or other tracing material to the alternative liquid to facilitate measuring the flow rate or the foam solution percentage. Whereas these approaches are described in other standards, it is the intension to specifically allow any current or future suitable alternative approaches that have been accepted by other NFPA standards, to also be allowed under this standard. Most AFFF and Class A foams can be substituted with a suitable alternative liquid with similar viscosity, whereas most AR-AFFF and AR-FFFP have flow properties that are non-newtonian, meaning that their viscosity changes depending on various factors such as flow rate, and careful evaluation should be applied to a broad range of flow properties and factors other than viscosity for the purpose of using alternative liquids for testing purposes for any non-newtonian liquids. Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment The recent updates to both NFPA 11 and NFPA 412 have both introduced novel approaches to determine the foam solution percentage. The NFPA 409 proposals #19, 20 and 21 are all aimed at updating NFPA 409 to allow the same approaches. There are two key elements proposed: - Using an alternative test liquid instead of actual foam concentrate. This is accepted in NFPA 11 section and further referenced in NFPA 11 section A (2) and new section D (committee accepted, pending final ballot). - Using an alternative to 'sample collection and analysis' for the purpose of determining percentage concentration. This is accepted in NFPA 11 section A (2) ("Solution flow rates can be calculated by utilizing recorded inlet or end-of-system operating pressures or both") and further referenced in new section D These alternatives are also approved in the new 2014 edition of NFPA 412 (input based testing), as follows: NFPA 412 section Method C (Input-Based Testing). A determination of the flow rates shall be made possible using the procedure and apparatus in through A concentrate substitute shall be used instead of actual concentrate Concentration. The foam solution concentrate shall be determined using this formula [.. concentrate flow rate divided by water flow rate.. ]. The problem addressed by the proposed changes corresponds well to the current demands for environmental stewardship and for agency cost reduction, and these changes will reflect positively on the committee and its members as they stand behind new innovative approaches and provide more testing options to its members and constituents. Related Item Public Input No. 78-NFPA [New Section after ] Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: KAARE HOLM Organization: NOFOAM SYSTEMS

46 National Fire Protection Association Report 5 of 35 6/24/2014 9:07 AM Affilliation: NAVFAC licensee Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed May 14 20:47:56 EDT 2014

47 Attachment # : NFPA 415 Public Comments

48 National Fire Protection Association Report Page 1 of 1 6/24/2014 Public Comment No. 3-NFPA [ Section No ] ASTM Publications. ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, P.O. Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA ASTM E 84, Standard Test Method for Surface Burning Characteristics of Building Materials, Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment Update Year date Related Item First Revision No. 3-NFPA [Section No. D.3] Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: Steve Mawn Organization: ASTM International Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu May 15 15:53:46 EDT 2014

49 Attachment # : FPRF Report on Aircraft Loading Walkways

50 TECHNICAL NOTES Aircraft Loading Walkways Literature and Information Review Joshua D. Swann Joseph L. Scheffey Hughes Associates Fire Protection Research Foundation May 2014 The Fire Protection Research Foundation One Batterymarch Park Quincy, Massachusetts, U.S.A Web:

51 ii

52 Acknowledgements The Fire Protection Research Foundation expresses gratitude to those that assisted with the development and review of the information contained in this report. The Research Foundation appreciates the guidance provided by the Project Technical Panel: James Blake, Vancouver Airport Authority Dave Brandenburg, Continental Airlines Jim Doctorman, Boeing Company Randy Pope, Burns and McDonnell Engineering Company Barry Chase, NFPA Special thanks are expressed to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) for providing the project funding through the NFPA Annual Code Fund. About the Fire Protection Research Foundation The Fire Protection Research Foundation plans, manages, and communicates research on a broad range of fire safety issues in collaboration with scientists and laboratories around the world. The Foundation is an affiliate of NFPA. About the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) NFPA is a worldwide leader in fire, electrical, building, and life safety. The mission of the international nonprofit organization founded in 1896 is to reduce the worldwide burden of fire and other hazards on the quality of life by providing and advocating consensus codes and standards, research, training, and education. NFPA develops more than 300 codes and standards to minimize the possibility and effects of fire and other hazards. All NFPA codes and standards can be viewed at no cost at Keywords: aircraft loading walkways, aircraft boarding bridges, glass boarding bridges iii

53 iv

54 Aircraft Loading Walkways Literature and Information Review Prepared for Fire Protection Research Foundation 1 Batterymarch Park Quincy, MA Prepared by Joshua D. Swann Joseph L. Scheffey Hughes Associates 3610 Commerce Drive, Suite 817 Baltimore, MD May 30, 2014 FIRE SCIENCE & ENGINEERING

55 AIRCRAFT LOADING WALKWAYS PAGE ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 BACKGROUND Introduction Terminology Issues Associated with Glass Loading Walkways OBJECTIVE SCOPE/APPROACH PERFORMANCE-BASED DESIGN Goal Objective and Performance Criteria Design to Meet Objective Findings CONSTRUCTION OF LOADING WALKWAYS Traditional Loading Walkways Glass Loading Walkways Test Criteria and Data Current Requirements FAA Tests of a Walkway Limitations of Current NFPA 415 Criteria Fire Testing of Glass Walkways Findings RAMP FIRE AND INCIDENT HISTORY Loss History Incidents at the Gate Taxiway/Runway/Ramp Incidents Findings MEANS OF EGRESS FROM AIRCRAFT Normal Egress Normal Boarding and Deplaning Issues Associated with the Use of Walkways Emergency Egress HUGHES ASSOCIATES

56 AIRCRAFT LOADING WALKWAYS PAGE iii Air Crew and Airline Standard Operating Procedures Flight Attendant Training Research and Testing on Air Crew Performance in Emergency Evacuations Airport Standard Operating Procedures ARFF Response Findings Normal Egress Emergency Egress HUMAN FACTORS RELATED TO EGRESS Human Factors Related to Typical Building Fires Human Factors Related to Aircraft Situations Findings SUMMARY OF FINDINGS REFERENCES BIBLIOGRAPHY HUGHES ASSOCIATES

57 AIRCRAFT LOADING WALKWAYS PAGE BACKGROUND 1.1 Introduction There are several manufacturers that build aircraft glass loading walkways, which are currently permitted in countries that have not adopted National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) standards. The Technical Committee for NFPA 415, Standard on Airport Terminal Buildings, Fueling Ramp Drainage, and Loading Walkways [NFPA, 2013] desired more information about the global experience of using glass loading walkways, including fire resistance of the loading walkways, fire test methods, use of alternate/additional escape routes from the plane, passenger behavior during actual emergency incidents, and psychology/sociology of occupants that might egress through a glass loading walkway with a large fire outside/below. The Fire Protection Research Foundation (FPRF) responded to the NFPA 415 committee request by sponsoring a project to investigate the many factors associated with glass loading walkways. This involved a literature search/information gathering project performed by a student intern. This intern was mentored by a senior engineer familiar with aviation safety and fire protection. A technical panel, comprised of professionals in the field of aviation safety and fire protection, was formed to provide input as well as review the results. 1.2 Terminology Aircraft Cab: The area at the aircraft mating end of the loading walkway in which the controls are located. This area can be raised or lowered, extended or retracted, and may pivot, in order accommodate many different types of aircraft [ThyssenKrupp, 2012a]. Aircraft Canopy: The accordion-like fabric that extends beyond the aircraft cab to ensure a tight seal against the side of the fuselage [ThyssenKrupp, 2012a]. Aircraft Loading Walkway (also called Jet Bridge, Jetway, Tunnel, or Boarding Bridge): An aboveground device through which passengers move between a point in an airport terminal building and an aircraft. Included in this category are walkways that are essentially fixed and permanently placed, or walkways that are mobile and that fold, telescope, or pivot from a fixed point at the airport terminal building [NFPA, 2013]. Airport Ramp: Any outdoor area, including aprons and hardstands, where aircraft can be positioned, stored, serviced, or maintained, irrespective of the nature of the surface of the area [NFPA, 2013]. Arm/disarm aircraft door: When an aircraft door equipped with a slide is armed, a girt bar is attached to the floor. When the door is disarmed, the girt bar is free from the floor and will not allow the slide to deploy: Girt Bar: Metal bar that connects the emergency evacuation slide to the floor to initiate deployment upon the door opening: Rotunda: The rotating portion of the walkway that is fixed to the airport terminal allows the walkway to move left and right: Issues Associated with Glass Loading Walkways Currently, NFPA 415 Section requires walkways to be fire resistant, as demonstrated by a fire exposure test specified in Section 6.4. An alternative to a fire resistive enclosure is the installation of an automatically operated deluge water spray or foam fire suppression system. For all walkways, there may be no transparent or translucent walls, windows, or surfaces other than those windows located in HUGHES ASSOCIATES

58 AIRCRAFT LOADING WALKWAYS PAGE 5 the ramp access door and in the cab area, for the purpose of operating the aircraft loading walkway. The sense of the committee to date, as reflected by the current requirements, is that: 1) A safe egress path must be available at the terminal gate in the event of a fuel spill fire; 2) A fire resistive loading walkway (or walkway with the area protected by an automatic suppression system) is the appropriate means to provide the necessary safe exit; and, 3) Passengers will be afraid or reluctant to exit through a path where they can see a fire (even though it may provide protection against heat and smoke). Therefore, glass should be prohibited as a primary walkway construction material. NFPA 415 background information provides some history related to the issue. The 2007 NFPA Report on Proposals includes some comments regarding the previous decision to prohibit glass in loading walkways [NFPA, 2007]: One committee member voted negatively stating: I believe the emergency evacuation of the airplane will be slowed with windows in the loading walkways because either people slowing down to look out the windows or people hesitate to exit the airplane when they see fire. It would seem easier to herd people through a passageway without any external influences than when people can be distracted by what they see through the glass. Another committee member had the following comment: To further support some comments I made during our discussion at the meeting in Miami concerning glazing in passenger loading walkways, I would like to pass along the following to the Committee. He distributed the Flight Attendant Training as required by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Regulations; see Section on flight attendant training. The prior NFPA Staff Liaison provided further background information: There has always been a prohibition on glass, except a window is permitted in the ramp access door and one in the cab area in order to move the loading walkway around safely. I think the concern of several members is the event where foam is not applied quickly or a problem occurs with actuating the system. Walking through a flaming glass tunnel would potentially create a backup at some point in an evacuation. One member stated, The architectural enhancement creates a potential for loss of life. [Conroy, 2006]. 2.0 OBJECTIVE The objective of this research is to gather pertinent information and provide insight on the fire safety aspects of glass loading walkways. The overall objective is the safe evacuation of passengers and crew from a fire engulfing an aircraft at or near an airport terminal. The information from this project is intended to provide guidance to the NFPA 415 Technical Committee on the use of glass loading walkways and may be used as the technical basis for the continued prohibition or future inclusion of glass loading walkways in the standard. Ultimately, the information is gathered to support or disprove the following null hypothesis: Current requirements which restrict the use of glass in constructing aircraft loading walkways do not significantly impact the probability of safe evacuation from the aircraft. Aircraft and airport operations are considered, along with the impact of building and fire codes HUGHES ASSOCIATES

59 AIRCRAFT LOADING WALKWAYS PAGE 6 applicable to airports. 3.0 SCOPE/APPROACH The scope of this project provides information directly related to the construction of both traditional and glass loading walkways, a review of fire history, a discussion of the loading walkway as a means of egress, and the psychological impacts occupants may experience while using the loading walkway as a means of egress during a fire event. A literature search of relevant information that addresses these topics was performed. 4.0 PERFORMANCE-BASED DESIGN 4.1 Goal Aside from the functional need for passengers boarding and deplaning, aircraft walkways should provide for safe egress for the passengers and crew members. In order to design a walkway with adequate safety, a performance-based design approach was used to analyze the available protection. It is important to understand that this is simply an approach and not a design method. A performancebased design analysis for fire safety is generally broken into the following four fundamental, yet related, goals: 1) Life safety minimize injuries as a result of the fire, and prevent undue loss of life; 2) Property protection minimize the damage to property from fire; 3) Continuity of operations minimize the time the operation will not be able to perform its job as a result of fire; and, 4) Limit environmental impact minimize the pollution effects from manufacturing, life cycle, and potential burning of the structure. Although these four goals are typical for performance-based design, the approach taken for glass loading walkways focuses on the first goal: life safety. The remaining three goals, property protection, continuity of operations, and limited environmental impact, are beneficial if achieved. They are not the overriding objective of this study. Aircraft loading walkways have a specific role in the routine operations of airports across the globe. The primary fire safety goal of the walkway is to provide protection to all passengers and crew members using the loading walkway. More specifically, NFPA 415 requires that the loading walkway must provide a safe path of egress for five minutes of fire exposure for passengers and crew members, as outlined in Section The remaining three typical design goals are secondary and do not contribute to the design process of aircraft loading walkways. The protection of the loading walkway structure itself, like that of an aircraft, is not a design goal. If the loading walkway prevents flame penetration and increased surface temperatures for a minimum of five minutes, allowing all the passengers and crew to safely evacuate the aircraft, the loading walkway has achieved an acceptable level of protection. If the minimum level of protection is achieved, the loading walkway is permitted to completely burn to the ground. 4.2 Objective and Performance Criteria The time in which Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF) vehicles are supposed to arrive at an aircraft fire and obtain 90% control of the fire is evaluated based on the requirements in NFPA 403 [NFPA, 2009]. ARFF vehicles should arrive and begin applying suppression within two minutes of an alarm and reach 90% control of the fire scenario in under a minute. (Note: The NFPA 403 Technical Committee recently revised the response time requirement from two minutes to three minutes, as HUGHES ASSOCIATES

60 AIRCRAFT LOADING WALKWAYS PAGE 7 reflected in the 2014 Edition.) As with an aircraft, the maximum time a loading walkway would need to maintain its integrity is three minutes. A more thorough explanation of this analysis will be provided in Section The performance objective for aircraft loading walkways was established at a minimum of five minutes, which provides a two-minute safety factor compared to the aircraft fuselage. In order to meet this design objective, the following performance criteria were established, several of which are explicitly included in current NFPA 415 requirements: 1) Prevent flame penetration to unexposed surfaces; 2) Prevent untenable surface temperatures in excess of 250 F (121 C) ; 3) Prevent structural collapse of walkway; 4) Maintain adequate visibility of 13 m or optical density of 0.15 m -1 [Jin, 2008]; and, 5) Prevent untenable toxicity levels. Flame penetration is a critical parameter. If a spill fire occurs below the walkway, the resulting flame has the potential to penetrate through the walkway structure and interfere with passengers and crew members deplaning the aircraft. If a fire were to penetrate the structure, passenger tenability may be affected. Tenability is related to several factors. If the unexposed surface temperatures increase to the 250 F threshold, passengers and crew may be unable to deplane through the loading walkway. Structural integrity of the loading walkway is also a concern in a fire event. If the steel support temperatures are too high for an extended duration, the loading walkway may collapse. Visibility and toxicity can directly obscure an exit path, and affect the decision making of people to choose the loading walkway as a means of egress. In a performance-based design for a glass loading walkways, the above mentioned performance criteria should be met in order to achieve a five-minute minimum safe path of egress. 4.3 Design to Meet Objective Fire safety for an aircraft loading walkway can be achieved by different techniques and fire protection practices. In order to prevent a fire from penetrating within the structure, passive fire protection principles are often implemented. A passive fire protection system is based on the structural integrity of the walkway. If the steel members, glass or solid panels, and other vital structural components have been tested to withstand a fire for a minimum of five minutes, it is understood that the walkway will be able to provide an adequate level of protection. Section 5.3 provides a more detailed analysis of testing procedures for loading walkways. Smoke within the loading walkway is another concern for life safety. In the event of a fire emergency, the loading walkway should be designed to prevent smoke infiltration. This could be achieved by maintaining the walkway interior at a positive pressure. In the event that a fire was to penetrate the structure and involve the interior of the walkway, other practices must be put in place to reduce the impact to the passengers trying to reach safety. Alternate active design approaches might be implemented by using detection and alarm systems or suppression systems. Detection and alarm systems could be used to detect any fire threat, alert the passengers, and initiate evacuation. Suppression could be used to achieve the required five minutes of safety. There are several options outlined within NFPA 415 regarding exterior suppression systems for aircraft loading walkways. Fixed water spray and fixed foam suppression systems are identified as alternatives to provide ample protection against a fire scenario. No automatic detection is required for this option. HUGHES ASSOCIATES

61 AIRCRAFT LOADING WALKWAYS PAGE Findings Two fundamental performance-based design approaches, passive and active, might be used to achieve fire safety goals and provide an acceptable level of safety. NFPA 415 currently emphasizes passive fire protection methods in order to protect a passenger loading walkway. Specific design approaches, as outlined in Section 5.3, provide a method for testing the various components of the loading walkway in order to ensure an acceptable level of protection is maintained during an emergency fire exposure. NFPA 415 specifies a maximum surface temperature of 250 F for a minimum duration of five minutes. The primary method to achieve these specific performance criteria is to conduct full-scale fire tests. 5.0 CONSTRUCTION OF LOADING WALKWAYS 5.1 Traditional Loading Walkways Manufacturers of traditional loading walkways include: Adelte Barcelona, Spain CIMC Airport Facilities Eau Claire, WI JBTAerotech (Jetway ) Chicago, IL ThyssenKrupp Airport Systems Frisco, TX A representative, mobile walkway of steel design is described by ThyssenKrupp [ThyssenKrupp, 2012b]. A rotunda, supported by a column, is shown in Figure 1. This is the primary support for the loading walkway. It is often attached directly adjacent to the terminal entrance and is constructed from steel. The telescoping tunnel consists of the exterior sides, roof, and floor panels. Each component is manufactured from galvanealed steel panels attached to a framework of steel angle and tubing. Strength is derived from formed sheet metal ribs. The minimum internal clear width of the loading walkway is 58 inches. An internal view of the telescoping tunnel is depicted in Figure 2. Other steel walkways may be fixed with only the cab/canopy being movable. Figures 1 and 2 Telescoping Boarding Bridge [ThyssenKrupp, 2012a] HUGHES ASSOCIATES

62 AIRCRAFT LOADING WALKWAYS PAGE 9 The aircraft cab is the portion of the loading walkway that connects to the aircraft. It consists of a bumper that is able to extend and retract in order to ensure a weather-tight fit to the fuselage. It is constructed with laminated safety glass windows in order to assist operation in less than desirable weather conditions. The windows are small and located to allow the loading walkway operator to properly align the loading walkway prior to any passengers or crew members boarding or deplaning the aircraft. The cab is shown in Figure 3. The service access includes a stair leading to the ramp which accommodates the loading walkway operator. This includes a safety wire glass window, and service door. This is shown in Figure 4. All surfaces, internal and external, have a painted finish [ThyssenKrupp, 2012b]. Figures 3 and 4 Walkway cab and service access [ThyssenKrupp, 2012b] 5.2 Glass Loading Walkways There are several manufacturers of glass loading walkways, including: Adelte Barcelona, Spain Airport Equipment Lower Hutt, New Zealand JBTAerotech (Jetway ) Chicago, IL ThyssenKrupp Airport Systems Frisco, TX ThyssenKrupp has a glass apron drive loading walkway that is nearly identical to their traditional loading walkway. Only a few differences exist in the construction [ThyssenKrupp, 2012a]. For instance, the roof and floor panels remain the same, being constructed of galvanealed steel panels attached a framework of steel tubing and angle. The walls, however, are constructed of a diagonal steel tube profile frame with side walls consisting of laminated double glass panes. The panes consist of an outer laminated pane (8 mm), an inner colored pane (6 mm), and an intermediate 8 mm air gap. Both panes are of tempered safety glass. As a result of the varied wall construction, the minimum clear internal width of the glass loading walkway is one inch wider (59 inches) than that of the steel loading walkway (58 inches). The key feature and difference between the traditional steel loading walkway and the glass loading walkways is simply in the fact that the walls are constructed using glass panels instead of steel panels. An example of a ThyssenKrupp glass walkway is shown in Figure 5. HUGHES ASSOCIATES

63 AIRCRAFT LOADING WALKWAYS PAGE 10 Figure 5 Glass Boarding Bridge [ThyssenKrupp, 2012b] In correspondence to the NFPA 415 Technical Committee, FMC (now JBTAerotech/Jetway ) indicated that they approached the design and construction of their glass loading walkways with the idea that they incorporated as much of the steel loading walkway design as possible [Smith, 2007]. The intent was to meet NFPA 415 requirements. They described in detailed the design of such a glass walkway, using a wall structure consisting of a truss structure that is skinned with glass panels. It is unclear from this correspondence whether the glass structure was ever subjected to a fire test. Figure 6 is an example of a Jetway walkway. Figure 6 Jetway Glass Loading Walkway Other glass loading walkways were identified. Another example is shown in Figure 7. It is not clear that other glass walkways have been subjected to fire testing. The manufacturers specifications were not readily available to indicate whether they were subjected to the NFPA 415 test criteria. Since NFPA 415 is typically applied in the United States, it is unclear that other countries, where glass loading walkways are commonly used, apply similar standards. HUGHES ASSOCIATES

64 AIRCRAFT LOADING WALKWAYS PAGE 11 Figure 7 Adelte Glass Loading Walkway Test Criteria and Data Current Requirements NFPA 415 provides detailed testing criteria for loading walkways. Tests are required to be conducted to establish the performance of materials and methods of construction and to verify their structural integrity and heat transfer characteristics so as to satisfy the 5-minute exit route criteria. Tests are conducted in several stages, rather than the entire assembly at once. For example, the floor assembly, as discussed below, is tested in a specific manor. Similarly, the wall assembly and cab materials are also individually tested in order to ensure they meet the minimum requirements of construction. Figure 8 shows the required average furnace temperature for the external floor and wall fire test exposure: Figure 8 Time-Temperature Curves for Fire Testing of Aircraft Loading Walkways [NFPA, 2013] HUGHES ASSOCIATES

65 AIRCRAFT LOADING WALKWAYS PAGE 12 The testing methods outlined for the floor and wall assemblies are similar; however, the floor assemblies are exposed to a greater temperature, as shown in Figure 8 (see rationale for this in the section 5.3.2). The test specimen must be representative of the construction for the classification desired in regard to materials, workmanship, and details such as dimensions of parts and it must be built under conditions representative of actual aircraft loading walkway construction and operation. Instrumentation for the testing includes a minimum of nine thermocouples strategically located throughout the test sample. Dimensions of the sample must be chosen based on specific construction features to ensure stress concentrations and separation will not result in failure. A worst case load is applied, derived from the following: 1) Floor live load: 40 lb/ft 2 (195 kg/m 2 ); 2) Roof load: 25 lb/ft 2 (122 kg/m 2 ); and, 3) Wind load: 12.5 lb/ft 2 (61 kg/m 2 ). The fire-endurance test is continued on the specimen with its applied load, until failure occurs, or until the specimen has withstood the test conditions for a period of 10 minutes. The test is considered successful when the following conditions of acceptance are met: 1) The wall or floor section must have sustained the applied load during the fire-endurance test without passage of flame for a minimum period of five minutes. Flaming must not appear on the unexposed face. 2) The maximum allowable surface temperature of the cool side of the wall or floor section may not exceed 250 F (121 C) during a five-minute exposure as determined by NFPA 415 Section NFPA 415 outlines specific testing requirements for the other components of a passenger walkway. Testing of the canopy, or flexible closures in NFPA 415 terminology, is conducted similarly to the wall assemblies. The same radiant exposure is produced by the furnace on a minimum sample size of 2 ft x 2 ft. The assembly is considered acceptable when flame penetration is prevented and the structural integrity of the framework is maintained for a minimum of five minutes. Tests of the cab and rotunda materials are exposed to the appropriate external floor or wall exposure outlined in Figure 8. Acceptance conditions are achieved if the specimen can withstand the design fire exposure without flame passage for a minimum of five minutes. Testing of bumper materials shall be conducted with a sample in continuous contact with a simulated aircraft fuselage. Acceptance is achieved if the sample material is capable of preventing flame passage when exposed to the external flooring exposure shown in Figure 8. The testing of miscellaneous seals and weather stripping assemblies requires the construction of a test apparatus. This testing apparatus is comprised of a steel stud wall assembly with a single layer of Type X Gypsum Wallboard on the exposed surface. This assembly has a portion cut out in the middle with a small wall assembly fabricated to fit inside the hole. The seals or weather stripping material is used to fill the gap in between. Conditions of acceptance are when these materials can prevent flame penetration to the unexposed side when exposed to the appropriate timetemperature curve in Figure 8 for a period of five minutes. The specific curve is determined depending on the intended location of the material being assessed. Compliance may be achieved by other methods such as modeling, calculation, or testing. If this approach is used, it is the responsibility of the submitter to show that the level of safety is at least equal to that of the fire tests. This provides an option for a designer or engineer to develop a loading walkway that provides adequate safety without incurring the costs involved with full-scale testing. HUGHES ASSOCIATES

66 AIRCRAFT LOADING WALKWAYS PAGE FAA Tests of a Walkway The FAA conducted tests on a loading walkway assembly [Geyer, 1973]. Fire test requirements already existed in the NFPA Standard on Aircraft Walkways (then NFPA 417). The fire test bed was comprised of a 40-foot cabin section of a four-engine commercial jet aircraft and an aircraft loading walkway positioned over a fire pit. The aircraft was protected by a 0.5 inch thick layer of ceramic insulation and inch thick stainless steel. The walkway consisted of a terminal entrance and two telescoping steel sections. The interior of the walkway was maintained at a very low positive pressure. Instrumentation included thermocouples, radiometers, smoke meters, cameras, and a physical metallurgical analysis of steel samples. The fire pit was approximately 30 ft x 32 ft. It contained approximately 960 ft 2 of JP-4 jet fuel spilled under the loading walkway. The exposure temperatures recorded during the tests are shown in Figure 9, reproduced from the test report. There were wind conditions which averaged 14 knots during the test. This promoted leaning of the fire plume, which resulted in an uneven exposure to the walkway. The thermocouple located below the centerline of the walkway and about 15 feet from the fuselage showed a minimum and maximum flame temperature variation from F. The thermocouple positions 1 foot from the fuselage and 4 feet on the side of the walkway ranged between F. The steel floor section reached 900 F in approximately 45 seconds. This is shown in the top envelope in Figure 9. The maximum temperature on the downwind side of the walkway was approximately 950 F after 390 seconds. The walls are shown by the center envelope in Figure 9. The maximum inside air temperature was 245 F at 465 seconds, which was considered within tenable limits. This is shown by the bottom envelope in Figure 9. At the conclusion of the fire, the overall structural integrity of the loading walkway remained for the entire ten minute duration of the free burn fire scenario. Figure 9 Summary of the Time-Temperature Data Obtained for the Aircraft Loading Walkway during Fire Exposure [Geyer, 1973] HUGHES ASSOCIATES

67 AIRCRAFT LOADING WALKWAYS PAGE 14 A majority of the seals and weather stripping materials experienced thermal failure which permitted smoke and flame penetration to be present within the loading walkway. Visibility due to smoke obscuration was estimated to be lost within seconds. This was due to rapid ignition of wood flooring material (located above the exterior steel assembly), and ignition of bumper seal material between the walkway and the simulated terminal entrance. Small scale testing, including the use of a smoke chamber, was subsequently conducted using alternative construction materials/design of the floor and gasket. It was concluded that designs to prevent flame penetration through the assembly would limit smoke development in the walkway Limitations of Current NFPA 415 Criteria The thermal exposure conditions shown in Figure 9 are very similar to those currently required in NFPA 415, see Figure 6. The wall exposure is lower than the floor exposure. The rationale is that, in a fuel spill fire scenario, the walls may not be exposed to a fire as severe as the floor. This occurred in the Geyer test. This is also the approach used by the Department of Transportation during the implementation of improved burn through criteria for aircraft fuselages: only the lower half of the fuselage must pass the new 4-minute burn through requirement [Federal Register, 2000]. Generally, in aircraft fire hazard analysis, no reduction in exposure temperature from a pool fire to vertical surfaces is assumed. For example, in a recent analysis of jet fuel fire exposures to aircraft to assess firefighting agent requirements, a standardized hydrocarbon exposure condition was assumed (e.g. UL 1709, Figure 10). The exposure was assumed to the entire fuselage profile, with little if any fire growth time assumed [Scheffey, et al. 2011]. This is a conservative approach which provides a safety factor, since jet fuel spill fires generally have some growth period before full fire involvement. The floor exposure in the NFPA 415 requirements is very similar to the UL 1709 exposure, but the wall exposure is lower. While the current fire exposure requirements in NFPA 415 are non-conservative, it might be considered sufficient for this particular application Temperature (F) Time (min) Figure 10 UL 1709 hydrocarbon fuel fire threat [UL, 2011] HUGHES ASSOCIATES

68 AIRCRAFT LOADING WALKWAYS PAGE 15 The current NFPA 415 allows testing of components of the walkway, in lieu of testing an entire assembly. This is a practical approach; however, the limitation is that reduced tenability due to smoke is not directly assessed. It is only assessed through limitation of flame passage to assemblies which does not necessarily mean smoke will not penetrate into and obscure the walkway Fire Testing of Glass Walkways The Department of Fire Technology at the Southwest Research Institute (SwRI) performed a fire test on a glass loading walkway wall assembly provided by ThyssenKrupp Airport Systems [Luna, 2005]. This report was made available to the NFPA 415 Technical Committee. The testing was conducted on a two-pane glass wall assembly measuring approximately 10 ft wide and 8 ft tall. The assembly framework was constructed from steel framing covered by two layers of glass. In accordance with NFPA 415 testing requirements, the wall assembly was instrumented with an arrangement of nine thermocouples positioned in a symmetric pattern on the unexposed side of the wall. The wall assembly was loaded with an I-beam and steel weights to provide a uniform load of 66.5 lb/ft along the sample. The specimen was subjected to the wall fire exposure conditions described in NFPA 415, which is depicted in Figure 8 of this report. Table 1 provides the visual observations made during the test. Table 1 Glass Wall Assembly Observations during Fire Test [Luna, 2005] Time (min:sec) Observations 0:00 Test Started. Initial temperature of glass is 72 F 1:00 No discoloration of glass observed. 2:00 Glass intact. No significant temperature rise. 3:00 Light smoke. Flaming on inside along gasket. 4:08 Inside layer of glass broke away on right side. 5:00 No flaming on unexposed surface. 5:47 Glass on unexposed side breaks and begins flaming. 6:00 Furnace shut off. Test ended. Remaining glass breaks away. The glass wall assembly passed the acceptance criteria outlined in NFPA 415. Within the first 5 minutes, the maximum average temperature on the unexposed surface was 193 F, as shown in Figure 11. Additionally, the flame never penetrated the assembly to the unexposed surface. The test continued to run beyond 5 minutes until the average temperature surpassed the maximum of 250 F permitted by NFPA 415 and the flames propagated to the unexposed side of the assembly. This took place at 5.5 minutes and 5.78 minutes, respectively. HUGHES ASSOCIATES

69 AIRCRAFT LOADING WALKWAYS PAGE Findings Figure 11 Thermocouple Temperatures during Fire Exposure Test [Luna, 2005] The construction of a representative glass loading walkway uses the same method and materials as the traditional style loading walkway. The difference is in the construction of the glass wall assembly, it is comprised of a steel framework covered by two layers of glass. The walls, ceilings, aircraft cab, aircraft canopy, and rotunda area are very similar. This unit passed the NFPA 415 fire exposure test; however, other glass loading walkways may not. Two representative glass loading walkways were provided that have not clearly endured the acceptance requirements outlined in section The thermal threat to the walls in the NFPA 415 test is non-conservative. The requirement in NFPA 415 allows a reduced exposure for the wall sections, based on the exposure observed in a single, wind driven fire test. A conservative approach would be to require a full hydrocarbon fire exposure (UL 1709) to the wall. The current approach might be considered acceptable, since it is similar to the rationale used by the Department of Transportation to implement improved fuselage protection. NFPA 415 testing procedures for loading walkways allows testing of each component individually, not as an entire unit. Prevention of flame passage and temperature limitations on the unexposed side of the loading walkway is the measure of performance and acceptance. This is a cost effective assessment technique. There is no assessment of tenability related to smoke passage or development on the unexposed side. Visibility and tenability within the loading walkway may be crucial in the evacuation process of the passengers and crew members. If enough smoke develops within the loading walkway, it will greatly limit, or potentially prevent, successful egress due to decreased visibility. Designing a glass loading walkway is a challenge if it is required to comply with the fire performance regulations of the traditional steel loading walkways. It was found that a glass loading walkway can be designed to pass the NFPA 415 fire acceptance test for loading walkways. There is at least one glass loading walkway currently available to meet the performance requirements of NFPA 415. HUGHES ASSOCIATES

70 AIRCRAFT LOADING WALKWAYS PAGE RAMP FIRE AND INCIDENT HISTORY 6.1 Loss History The following events include ramp fires or incidents where all occupants were required to evacuate the aircraft. These events, both at or near the gate, demonstrate the response by crews to land-based emergency evacuation. Although not necessarily specific for glass loading walkways, these incidents demonstrate human factors in emergency evacuations where there is visible or perceived fire. It has been reported that an average of ten fires annually have occurred at the airport passenger terminal between the years [Ahrens, 2005]. The following fire and incident history outlines representative events involving a fire or fuel spills associated with an aircraft Incidents at the Gate On November 21, 2012, a small engine fire was reported on JetBlue Airways flight 1329 as it was taxiing to its gate at BWI Thurgood Marshall International Airport. The plane proceeded to taxi to the gate where the fire crews responded and extinguished the fire on the Embraer E190 aircraft. All the passengers and crew members were able to evacuate through the walkway completely unharmed [WBAL TV, 2012]. This is shown in Figure 12. Figure 12 JetBlue Airways Fire, BWI, November On April 20, 1998, at O Hare International Airport, an American Airlines Boeing 727 incident resulted in an emergency evacuation. Slides were not armed. While the airplane was at the gate, the auxiliary power unit (APU) torched during start. Passengers saw the flame and proceeded to begin an uncommanded evacuation. The left overwing exits were opened by passengers. The aft flight attendant reported passengers moving toward the aft portion of the airplane. She tried to stop the passengers but could not. She also reported attempting to contact the flight crew. She opened the rear airstairs to avoid the stampede. The flight attendants in the front of the airplane were unaware of why the passengers were evacuating through the forward loading walkway and told the flight crew that a problem existed. In the rear of the airplane, two passengers opened the unarmed L2 door and lowered a passenger out of the exit. The flight crew was able to stop the evacuation and ordered passengers to deplane using the aft airstairs. Passengers on the wing who were unwilling to jump to the ground reentered the cabin and deplaned via the aft airstairs. Two minor injuries were reported, and one passenger sustained a serious injury as a result of jumping off the wing [NTSB, 2001]. On December 1, 1998, a B B was being refueled in Miami, FL. The entire crew of four was forced to evacuate as a result of a fire. There were no injuries during this event. At the time of the fire, HUGHES ASSOCIATES

71 AIRCRAFT LOADING WALKWAYS PAGE 18 the plane was being loaded with cargo, and part of the crew was manning the flight deck. Once notified, the entire crew on board exited the aircraft unaided via the airstairs to the ramp [NTSB, 2002]. On March 3, 2001, a Thai B parked at gate 62 of the Bangkok International Airport (BKK) had an explosion and fire in the wing (Figure 13). The plane was destroyed; nine of the ten occupants survived, but sustained some injuries. Two cabin attendants were near the first two passenger rows and exited via the partially blocked passenger door into the passenger walkway. A third cabin attendant was located above the wings during the explosion and was unable to evacuate the aircraft. The subsequent investigation suggests he was incapacitated during the initial explosion and was unable to exit prior to the resulting fire. Two more cabin attendants were located toward the rear of the aircraft. When the explosion occurred, they exited the aircraft by jumping onto the tarmac below; the door was not armed for the slide deployment at this time (see photo). Several other ground support personnel were in the vicinity of the aircraft at the time of the explosion and sustained minor injuries [Thai Airlines, 2001]. Figure 13 Thai Airways Fire, BKK, March At Denver International Airport on September 5, 2001, a British Airways Boeing ER experienced a refueling fire at the gate while passengers were deplaning. All twenty-six passengers and crew members on board safely evacuated through the walkway; however, the ground service refueler was fatally injured [Aviation Safety Network, 2001] Taxiway/Runway/Ramp Incidents China Airlines flight 120 landed in Okinawa on August 20, 2007, and taxied to its designated parking location for the passengers to deplane onto the ramp. The parking brake was set, seat belt sign turned off, and everything was perceived to be normal until the captain was notified of an engine fire. The intent was to have stair departure to the ramp and buses would transport passengers to the terminal. Once the pilot announced passenger evacuation, slides were deployed and all 118 persons evacuated the aircraft without any injury. During the evacuation, none of the passengers panicked and there was no crying or yelling in the cabin. The aircraft was totally destroyed in the ensuing fire [JTSB, 2009]. British Airtours flight G-BGJL was ready for take-off in the early morning on August 22, 1985 from Manchester International Airport (MAN). As the co-pilot was commanding the aircraft down the runway at 125 knots, a failure occurred in the left engine which caused a leak in the fuel tank. An audible thud was heard by the crew which forced the Boeing 737 to abort take-off. The aircraft was brought to a stop under the assumption that a tire blew out or a bird was ingested in the engine. It was not until the aircraft fuselage began taking on smoke that the crew realized there was a fire involved. The Captain immediately ordered an emergency evacuation from the aircraft on the right hand side. Although prompt action by the crew took place, the fire quickly consumed the fuselage and spread to the inside HUGHES ASSOCIATES

72 AIRCRAFT LOADING WALKWAYS PAGE 19 of the cabin. Additionally, the airport fire service responded quickly to begin controlling the fire. The slides were successfully deployed, as shown in Figures 14 and 15. This allowed eight-two passengers and crew members to safely evacuate the aircraft. Rapid fire growth resulted in the destruction of the aircraft and the loss of fifty-five persons on board [DOT, 1988]. Figures 14 and 15 British Airtours, MAN, August On April 14, 1993, American Airlines flight 102 was required to fully evacuate all 189 passengers and 13 crew members from an aborted landing due to an engine fire at Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport in Texas. During the decent, the plane was struck by lightning. This caused a fire to break out and prohibited some of the landing gear from function properly. Immediately upon the plane stopping, the cabin crew began organizing the emergency evacuation, implementing both overwing exits and slides from the doors. Two passengers received serious injuries, and thirty-eight other passengers/crew members sustained minor injuries while evacuating the aircraft. All the injuries were a result of the angle of the evacuation slides due to the position of the plane on landing. Some witnesses stated that slides were nearly vertical in orientation. Although not all exits were usable, the cabin crew successfully directed everyone off the plane in an orderly fashion [NTSB, 1993]. On February 19, 2003, Logan International Airport experienced a large fuel spill in the heart of the cargo transportation center. A 10,000-gallon tanker truck spilled its entire load of jet fuel on the ramp due to a ruptured line as it sat next to an Airborne Express DC-8 aircraft. A safety zone was established and all surrounding buildings within this area were immediately evacuated due to the threat of a large fire. Fortunately, the spill was able to be cleaned up in an orderly fashion while avoiding the ignition of the fuel [Nicholson, 2003]. On August 17, 1995, an SF-340-A aircraft had an engine fire in Philadelphia, PA. The fire was detected after taxiing to the runway, while waiting to be cleared for takeoff. All thirty-one occupants evacuated via the overwing exit without injury [Scheffey, et al, 2012]. In Atlanta, GA on November 29, 2000, a DC-9 experienced smoke and fire in the cabin. All ninetyseven occupants evacuated with only thirteen injuries. Electrical failures were noticed immediately upon take-off. The captain decided to return to the airport and upon landing, smoke was visible within the cabin. Evacuation took place on the ramp, immediately upon landing [NTSB, 2000a]. On November 29, 2000, a DC-9-82 was struck by lightning, at Dulles International Airport, which caused fire and smoke. All sixty-six occupants successfully evacuated the aircraft on the runway without sustaining any injuries [NTSB, 2000b]. HUGHES ASSOCIATES

73 AIRCRAFT LOADING WALKWAYS PAGE Findings Based on the summaries of fire and incident history, it is apparent that landside aircraft accidents do occur which result in the emergency evacuation of onboard passengers and crew members. In some of the scenarios identified, fuel spill fires and other threats occur at the airport terminal gate. This finding shows that loading walkways are involved in emergency egress situations. In the limited incident history outlined above, it has been observed that in the event of an emergency evacuation scenario, people will use any means of egress possible to get away from the perceived danger. They will evacuate down slides onto the ramp near the gate or on a ramp area/taxiway/runway, and via the over wing exits. Those who used the slides and over wing exits did so in many cases with a fire threat clearly visible. Passengers and crew members have successfully evacuated the aircraft through the walkway, or, if needed, from aircraft exits. In two cases identified, people evacuated (jumped) from apparently unarmed aircraft exit doors, where the evacuation slide was not deployed. In all other incidents, crew emergency response procedures were evident with the use of aircraft exit slides or loading walkways. This includes situations at the gate. 7.0 MEANS OF EGRESS FROM AIRCRAFT 7.1 Normal Egress Normal Boarding and Deplaning A normal means of egress is through an aircraft loading walkway (Figure 16). In most airports, aircraft loading walkways are the primary means for passengers and crew members to board and deplane the aircraft. They are particularly important where passengers need to be protected from inclement weather. There are occasions where the size of the airport or aircraft traffic demands other methods of egress (see China Air incident). Figure 16 Aircraft Loading Walkway An alternative means of egress from a plane is the use of stairs/ramps instead of an enclosed walkway (Figures 17 and 18). Although most operators prefer a loading walkway since it is better from a customer service perspective, there are no requirements for an enclosed walkway versus apron loading ramps or stairs. According to the participating Technical Panel members, if money is available and space permits the use of a loading walkway, it is very rare to choose alternatives. Smaller airlines/airports tend to use stairs simply because of cost restrictions. Small airports often require some stairs to accommodate the flow of traffic. If an airline or airport can afford the loading walkway, it is HUGHES ASSOCIATES

74 AIRCRAFT LOADING WALKWAYS PAGE 21 uncommon for them to use stairs [Anglin, 2013]. However, they can also be used for larger aircraft as well (Figure 17 is a B757). The use of apron loading (boarding and deplaning directly from/to the ramp) offers no protection against fires. Aircraft occupants are discharged directly onto the ramp and exposed to any fire situation. Figure 17 Ramp Loading [Scheffey, 2013a] Figure 18 Stair Loading [Scheffey, 2013a] Issues Associated with the Use of Walkways The FPRF Technical Panel indicated that the FAA regulates building construction through an Airport Improvement Plan Environmental Impact Statement (AIP-EIS) process. The FAA usually does not get involved in passenger loading walkways unless tower line-of-sight issues are involved. The FAA provides funding for airfields improvements, but typically not terminal renovations. Loading walkways are typically specified in a design package as developed by individual airlines as part of terminal/gate improvements. The FAA has no design requirements, per se, for walkways. NFPA 415 might also be invoked through an applicable building/fire code requirement, or through reference in a design specification for the walkway. The International Building and Fire Codes (IBC and IFC) do not reference NFPA 415 [IBC, 2012; IFC, 2012]. NFPA 1 Fire Code does reference NFPA 415 (NFPA 1, Section 21.2), although it is strictly from an operational standpoint and does not apply to the design or construction of the loading walkways [NFPA, 2012]. It is believed that NFPA 415 is most likely invoked in the United States by the airport authority, or more likely, the operator (airline) who specifies the loading walkway. The airport/airline design agent, such as an engineer or architect, might typically include NFPA 415 by reference in their specifications. This conclusion is based on a discussion with the Technical Panel. It was the opinion of the Technical Panel that none of the US codes, regulations, or jurisdictions (ICC, NFPA, or FAA) requires the use of an enclosed loading walkway versus open stairs or ramps directly to the tarmac. Unless the use of enclosed loading walkways is mandated, there is no required protected path for passengers and crew members boarding or deplaning from the aircraft. When a loading walkway is used as a means to board and deplane the aircraft, there are three factors that diminish its effectiveness as a protected path [Walker, 2001]: 1) Failure to properly use the canopy, especially at airports with stable climates. 2) Food carts being placed in the loading walkway. 3) Fire extinguisher installation within the walkway, restricting the clear width of egress. HUGHES ASSOCIATES

75 AIRCRAFT LOADING WALKWAYS PAGE 22 Several air carriers have stopped using the canopy to seal a loading walkway to a plane in order to save time getting in and out of the gate. However, a canopy won t be effective during a fire if it isn t sealed properly [Walker, 2001]. This scenario is demonstrated in Figure 19. Although weather is not a valid reason to eliminate canopy use, NFPA 415 recognizes that tight fits are not always possible (NFPA 415, Section A.6.2.8). Figure 19 Gap between Canopy and Aircraft [Scheffey, 2011] Bridge adapters are often employed when an aircraft parks at a gate not designed for that particular aircraft. Most loading walkways are universal and accommodate many different types of aircraft; however, they cannot incorporate them all. A loading walkway adapter makes it possible for the aircraft to use a loading walkway that is not designed for that specific aircraft. Although this is a very convenient option, the loading walkway adapters typically do not have a tight fit of the canopy to the fuselage. A loose fit or gap will not block potential smoke and flames from entering the loading walkway or aircraft. They may have a significant open gap which ultimately compromises the protected egress path. Figure 20 is an example of a loading walkway adapter that prohibits the proper use of the canopy. Figure 20 Example loading walkway adapter Another situation occurs where the loading walkway integrity is compromised. Aircraft may use a gate/walkway which can mate to the exit door, but canopy does not provide complete protection. This occurs where the walkway used is not designed for that particular aircraft. An example of this is shown in Figure 21. HUGHES ASSOCIATES

76 AIRCRAFT LOADING WALKWAYS PAGE 23 Figure 21 Aircraft parked at walkway with incomplete canopy mating [Scheffey, 2013b] 7.2 Emergency Egress If, for some reason, the walkway is unavailable (e.g., glass, with passengers afraid to exit due to visible fire), would alternative means of egress be readily available? To answer this, the requirements for aircraft exit doors, crew training, and crew response to emergencies were investigated Air Crew and Airline Standard Operating Procedures The Code of Federal Regulation (CFR) Part 121 requires that if at any time there are passengers onboard an aircraft, one door must be ready for evacuation [Federal Register, 2014). This includes when the aircraft is at the gate. This might be: 1) The forward or mid door being used for boarding/deplaning. This door usually has an emergency exit slide, which has been disarmed for the gate side operations; 2) An overwing exit door, which typically does not have an emergency exit slide, and is designed to be operated by passengers; or 3) Other doors (designated as floor level exits by the FAA). These are doors located aft, equipped with escape slides, which have been disarmed on arrival at the gate. The forward or mid door being used by passengers would also be categorized as a floor level exit. A flight attendant would likely be needed to assist with operation of a closed, floor level door (see Section 6 on incident history and door operation). The FAA recognizes the importance of flight attendants and/or crew being available to assist passengers in the event of an emergency when the aircraft is parked at the gate. They require both minimum staffing and training in handling emergencies. CFR requires that, during passenger boarding, on each airplane for which more than one flight attendant is required, the operator may reduce the number of required flight attendants by one. This can only occur if: 1) The flight attendant that leaves the aircraft remains within the immediate vicinity of the door through which passengers are boarding; 2) The flight attendant that leaves the aircraft only conducts safety duties related to the flight being boarded; 3) The airplane engines are shut down; and 4) At least one floor level exit remains open to provide for passenger egress. HUGHES ASSOCIATES

Page 1 of 12 Input No. 62-NFPA 409-2013 [ Section No. 3.3.9 ] 3.3.9 Hangar Building Cluster. A group of buildings with more than one area for the storage and servicing of aircraft and all attached or contiguous

More information

Report of the Committee on. Airport Facilities. Gene E. Benzenberg, Chair Alison Control Incorporated, NJ [M]

Report of the Committee on. Airport Facilities. Gene E. Benzenberg, Chair Alison Control Incorporated, NJ [M] Report of the Committee on Airport Facilities Gene E. Benzenberg, Chair Alison Control Incorporated, NJ [M] Dennis C. Kennedy, Secretary Tyco Suppression Systems, WI [M] (Alt. to C. J. Marsolo) Michael

More information

Correlating Committee on Automatic Sprinkler Systems

Correlating Committee on Automatic Sprinkler Systems Correlating Committee on Automatic Sprinkler Systems M E M O R A N D U M DATE: May 14, 2014 TO: FROM: Principal and Alternate Members of the Correlating Committee on Automatic Sprinkler Systems Matt Klaus,

More information

NFPA Technical Committee on Building Systems. NFPA 900 First Draft Teleconference/Web Meeting AGENDA. Thursday, February 13, :00 a.m.

NFPA Technical Committee on Building Systems. NFPA 900 First Draft Teleconference/Web Meeting AGENDA. Thursday, February 13, :00 a.m. 1. Call to Order: NFPA Technical Committee on Building Systems NFPA 900 First Draft Teleconference/Web Meeting AGENDA Thursday, February 13, 2014 11:00 a.m. Noon EDT Online meeting link: http://nfpa.adobeconnect.com/r366m2eaxx6/

More information

1. Welcome. Robert Smith, Chair. 2. Introductions and Update of Committee Roster. (attached)

1. Welcome. Robert Smith, Chair. 2. Introductions and Update of Committee Roster. (attached) TECHNICAL COMMITTEE ON WATER-COOLING TOWERS NFPA 214 (F2015) Second Draft Meeting Agenda February 17, 2014 10:00 AM - 1:00 PM EST Web/Teleconference Meeting 1. Welcome. Robert Smith, Chair 2. Introductions

More information

M E M O R A N D U M. According to the final ballot results, all ballot items received the necessary affirmative votes to pass ballot.

M E M O R A N D U M. According to the final ballot results, all ballot items received the necessary affirmative votes to pass ballot. 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: From: NFPA Technical Committee on Helicopter Facilities

More information

Technical Committee on Aircraft Fuel Servicing (AIF-AAA)

Technical Committee on Aircraft Fuel Servicing (AIF-AAA) Technical Committee on Aircraft Fuel Servicing () DATE: February 13, 2014 TO: FROM: M E M O R A N D U M and Alternate Members of the Technical Committee on Aircraft Fuel Servicing () Barry Chase, NFPA

More information

NFPA Technical Committee on Hybrid (Water and Inert Gas) Fire Extinguishing Systems

NFPA Technical Committee on Hybrid (Water and Inert Gas) Fire Extinguishing Systems San Antonio, TX October 12-14, 2016 The following are the meeting minutes from the third meeting of the Technical Committee on Hybrid (Water and Inert Gas) Fire Extinguishing Systems held in San Antonio,

More information

TECHNICAL COMMITTEE ON MANUFACTURE OF ORGANIC COATINGS First Draft Meeting Agenda March 19, :00 AM - 5:00 PM EST Web/Teleconference Meeting

TECHNICAL COMMITTEE ON MANUFACTURE OF ORGANIC COATINGS First Draft Meeting Agenda March 19, :00 AM - 5:00 PM EST Web/Teleconference Meeting TECHNICAL COMMITTEE ON MANUFACTURE OF ORGANIC COATINGS First Draft Meeting Agenda March 19, 2014 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM EST Web/Teleconference Meeting 1. Welcome. George Seuss, Chair 2. Introductions and Update

More information

Public Input No. 79-NFPA [ Section No. 1.1 ] Additional Proposed Changes. Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Input

Public Input No. 79-NFPA [ Section No. 1.1 ] Additional Proposed Changes. Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Input Public Input No. 79-NFPA 409-2013 [ Section No. 1.1 ] 1.1 Scope. 1.1.1 This standard contains the minimum requirements for the proper construction of aircraft hangars and protection of aircraft hangars

More information

Staff Liaison: Mark T. Conroy Committee Scope: This Committee shall have primary responsibility for documents on fire safety for the construction and

Staff Liaison: Mark T. Conroy Committee Scope: This Committee shall have primary responsibility for documents on fire safety for the construction and Report of the Committee on Airport Facilities Gene E. Benzenberg, Chair Alison Control Inc., NJ [M] Michael E. Aaron, The RJA Group, Inc., IL [SE] Thomas G. Burk, Federal Express Corporation, TN [U] David

More information

Public Input No. 1-NFPA 99B-2015 [ Section No. 2.3 ] Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Input. Related Public Inputs for This Document

Public Input No. 1-NFPA 99B-2015 [ Section No. 2.3 ] Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Input. Related Public Inputs for This Document 1 of 19 10/21/2015 1:20 PM Public Input No. 1-NFPA 99B-2015 [ Section No. 2.3 ] 2.3 Other Publications. 2.3.1 ASME Publications. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Three ASME International, Two

More information

National Fire Protection Association. 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA Phone: Fax:

National Fire Protection Association. 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA Phone: Fax: 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: FROM: NFPA Technical Committee on Mercantile and

More information

12/21/2015 National Fire Protection Association Report

12/21/2015 National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/terraviewweb/viewerpage.jsp?id=232 2012.ditamap&toc=false&draft=true 1/9 Public Comment No. 1 NFPA 232 2015 [ Chapter 2 ] Chapter 2 Referenced Publications 2.1 General. The documents

More information

TECHNICAL COMMITTEE ON FIRE CODE

TECHNICAL COMMITTEE ON FIRE CODE TECHNICAL COMMITTEE ON FIRE CODE M E M O R A N D U M TO: FROM: Technical Committee on Fire Code (FCC-AAA) Gregory Harrington, P.E., Staff Liaison DATE: February 3, 2011 SUBJECT: NFPA 1124 Amended CP#2

More information

Public Input No. 3-NFPA [ Chapter 2 ]

Public Input No. 3-NFPA [ Chapter 2 ] Public Input No. 3-NFPA 655-2014 [ Chapter 2 ] Chapter 2 Referenced Publications 2.1 General. The documents or portions thereof listed in this chapter are referenced within this standard and shall be considered

More information

Public Comment No. 23-NFPA [ Section No ] Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment Related Item

Public Comment No. 23-NFPA [ Section No ] Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment Related Item Public Comment No. 23-NFPA 96-2015 [ Section No. 2.3.1 ] 2.3.1 ASTM Publications. ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, P.O. Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. ASTM E84, Standard Test Method

More information

2016 Annual Revision Cycle Consent Document NFPA 75

2016 Annual Revision Cycle Consent Document NFPA 75 2016 Annual Revision Cycle Consent Document NFPA 75 The Committee on Electronic Computer Systems produced a Technical Committee Report that received at least one Notice of Intent to Make a Motion (NITMAM)

More information

Resolution: FR-2-NFPA Statement: The new language requires the action completed by NFPA 557 be prepared by a person that is approved.

Resolution: FR-2-NFPA Statement: The new language requires the action completed by NFPA 557 be prepared by a person that is approved. Public Input No. 1-NFPA 557-2012 [ New Section after 1.5.3 ] 1.6 Approved Qualifications The design shall be prepared by a person with qualifications acceptable to the AHJ. The term designer is used in

More information

TECHNICAL COMMITTEE ON SAFETY AT MOTORSPORTS VENUES. NFPA 610 First Draft Meeting. October 17-18, 2016

TECHNICAL COMMITTEE ON SAFETY AT MOTORSPORTS VENUES. NFPA 610 First Draft Meeting. October 17-18, 2016 TECHNICAL COMMITTEE ON SAFETY AT MOTORSPORTS VENUES NFPA 610 First Draft Meeting October 17-18, 2016 Westin Kansas City at Crown Center 1 East Pershing Road Kansas City, MO, 64108 Conference Call Access:

More information

Page 1 of 19 Committee Input No. 14-NFPA 33-2013 [ Global Input ] Type your content here... Supplemental Information File Name IndoorDraftforCI.docx Description This committee input would be added to new

More information

Standard Procedure s for Tenant Fire Sprinkler Work

Standard Procedure s for Tenant Fire Sprinkler Work Standard Procedure s for Tenant Fire Sprinkler Work 1. Provide tenant a copy of Simon Property Group Standards for Fire Protection Systems, Section 15400, requesting they in turn would give the standards

More information

TECHNICAL COMMITTEE ON WATER-COOLING TOWERS. First Draft Meeting Agenda. February 7, :00 AM - 5:00 PM EST Web/Teleconference Meeting

TECHNICAL COMMITTEE ON WATER-COOLING TOWERS. First Draft Meeting Agenda. February 7, :00 AM - 5:00 PM EST Web/Teleconference Meeting TECHNICAL COMMITTEE ON WATER-COOLING TOWERS First Draft Meeting Agenda February 7, 2014 10:00 AM - 5:00 PM EST Web/Teleconference Meeting 1. Welcome. Robert Smith, Chair 2. Introductions and Update of

More information

NFPA 550 ROP Meeting Minutes

NFPA 550 ROP Meeting Minutes NFPA 550 ROP Meeting Minutes NFPA Technical Committee on Fire Risk Assessment Methods (FIR-AAA) June 24, 2010 Microsoft Live Meeting 1. Call to order. The meeting was called to order at 1:00 PM on Monday,

More information

Remove the "Exception" text to be consistent with direction provided in the MOS.

Remove the Exception text to be consistent with direction provided in the MOS. of 37 1/11/2017 7:38 AM Public Input No. 9-NFPA 88A-2015 [ Global Input ] Remove the "Exception" text to be consistent with direction provided in the MOS. The current language in 88A has numerous section

More information

Standards and Safety Update

Standards and Safety Update Standards and Safety Update Presented By: Michael J. Johnston Executive Director Standards and Safety, NECA Update Objectives Update on NFPA 70E and NECA Safety products Update on NECA S National Electrical

More information

MEMORANDUM. Technical Committee on Mercantile and Business Occupancies. NFPA 101 Second Draft Technical Committee FINAL Ballot Results (A2017)

MEMORANDUM. Technical Committee on Mercantile and Business Occupancies. NFPA 101 Second Draft Technical Committee FINAL Ballot Results (A2017) National Fire Protection Association 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02169-7471 Phone: 617-770-3000 Fax: 617-770-0700 www.nfpa.org MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: Technical Committee on Mercantile and Business Occupancies

More information

Adobe Connect - Invitation to NFPA 385 Second Draft Web Conference

Adobe Connect - Invitation to NFPA 385 Second Draft Web Conference Matthews, Diane Subject: Location: Start: End: Show Time As: Recurrence: Meeting Status: Organizer: Required Attendees: Adobe Connect - Invitation to NFPA 385 Second Draft Web Conference http://nfpa.adobeconnect.com/rpbmeet/

More information

Public Comment No. 2-NFPA [ Section No ] Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment. Submitter Information Verification

Public Comment No. 2-NFPA [ Section No ] Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment. Submitter Information Verification Public Comment No. 2-NFPA 73-2014 [ Section No. 4.1.3 ] 4.1.3 Unused Openings. 4.1.3.1 Unused openings, other than those intended for the operation of equipment, those intended for mounting purposes, or

More information

Public Input No. 4-NFPA [ Section No. 4.2 ] Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Input. Submitter Information Verification

Public Input No. 4-NFPA [ Section No. 4.2 ] Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Input. Submitter Information Verification Public Input No. 4-NFPA 214-2013 [ Section No. 4.2 ] 4.2 * Fire Risk Analysis. A fire risk analysis shall be conducted. The following are some of the factors that shall be considered in determining the

More information

NFPA Technical Committee on Fire Tests FALL 2011 ROC MEETING MINUTES

NFPA Technical Committee on Fire Tests FALL 2011 ROC MEETING MINUTES National Fire Protection Association 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02169-7471 Phone: 617-770-3000 Fax: 617-770-0700 www.nfpa.org NFPA Technical Committee on Fire Tests FALL 2011 ROC MEETING MINUTES 1.

More information

Page 1 of 6 10/19/2016 9:49 AM. Public Input No. 4-NFPA [ Section No ] Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Input

Page 1 of 6 10/19/2016 9:49 AM. Public Input No. 4-NFPA [ Section No ] Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Input Public Input No. 4-NFPA 111-2016 [ Section No. 1.1.4.1 ] 1.1.4.1 * This standard shall not cover the following: (1) Application of the SEPSS (2) Distribution wiring (3) Systems having total outputs less

More information

MEMORANDUM. NFPA Technical Committee on Solvent Extraction Plants. NFPA 36 First Draft TC FINAL Ballot Results (F2016)

MEMORANDUM. NFPA Technical Committee on Solvent Extraction Plants. NFPA 36 First Draft TC FINAL Ballot Results (F2016) National Fire Protection Association 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02169-7471 Phone: 617-770-3000 Fax: 617-770-0700 www.nfpa.org MEMORANDUM To: From: NFPA Technical Committee on Solvent Extraction Plants

More information

Technical Committee on Record Protection (REA-AAA)

Technical Committee on Record Protection (REA-AAA) Technical Committee on Record Protection (REA-AAA) DATE: September 8, 2015 TO: FROM: M E M O R A N D U M Principal and Alternate Members of the Technical Committee on Record Protection (REA-AAA) Audrey

More information

Public Input No. 1-NFPA [ Global Input ] Additional Proposed Changes. Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Input

Public Input No. 1-NFPA [ Global Input ] Additional Proposed Changes. Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Input of 280 2/6/2015 12:06 PM Public Input No. 1-NFPA 58-2013 [ Global Input ] NOTE: This public input originates from Tentative Interim Amendment 58-14-1 (TIA 1079) issued by the Standards Council on August

More information

Public Input No. 16-NFPA [ Section No ] Additional Proposed Changes. Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Input

Public Input No. 16-NFPA [ Section No ] Additional Proposed Changes. Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Input Public Input No. 16-NFPA 211-2014 [ Section No. 2.3.1 ] 2.3.1 ASHRAE Publications. ASHRAE, Inc., 1791 Tullie Circle, NE, Atlanta, GA 30329-2305. ASHRAE Handbook: HVAC Systems and Equipment, 2008 2012.

More information

M E M O R A N D U M. Diane Matthews, Administrator, Technical Projects. NFPA 101 First Draft Letter Ballot (A2014)

M E M O R A N D U M. Diane Matthews, Administrator, Technical Projects. NFPA 101 First Draft Letter Ballot (A2014) 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: FROM: NFPA Technical Committee on Furnishings

More information

National Fire Protection Association. 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA Phone: Fax:

National Fire Protection Association. 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA Phone: Fax: National Fire Protection Association 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02169-7471 Phone: 617-770-3000 Fax: 617-770-0700 www.nfpa.org Meeting Agenda Draft Development Meeting NFPA 451, Guide for Fire Based

More information

MEMORANDUM. Technical Committee on Emergency Power Supplies. NFPA 111 First Draft Technical Committee FINAL Ballot Results (A2018)

MEMORANDUM. Technical Committee on Emergency Power Supplies. NFPA 111 First Draft Technical Committee FINAL Ballot Results (A2018) National Fire Protection Association 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02169-7471 Phone: 617-770-3000 Fax: 617-770-0700 www.nfpa.org MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: Technical Committee on Emergency Power Supplies Kelly

More information

Table A-4...Professional and Do-It-Yourself Improvement Expenditures by Homeowner Characteristics: 2007

Table A-4...Professional and Do-It-Yourself Improvement Expenditures by Homeowner Characteristics: 2007 Appendix Tables Table A-1... Homeowner Improvement : 2007 Table A-2...Professional and Do-It-Yourself Home Improvement : 2007 Table A-3... Improvement by Homeowner Characteristics: 2007 Table A-4...Professional

More information

MEMORANDUM. Technical Committee on Board and Care Facilities. NFPA 101 Second Draft Technical Committee FINAL Ballot Results (A2017)

MEMORANDUM. Technical Committee on Board and Care Facilities. NFPA 101 Second Draft Technical Committee FINAL Ballot Results (A2017) National Fire Protection Association 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02169-7471 Phone: 617-770-3000 Fax: 617-770-0700 www.nfpa.org MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: Technical Committee on Board and Care Facilities

More information

1. Call to Order. The meeting was called to order at 1:05 PM. (See Enclosure A [Agenda])

1. Call to Order. The meeting was called to order at 1:05 PM. (See Enclosure A [Agenda]) FINAL MINUTES Healthcare Interpretations Task Force Tuesday, June 15, 2016 Mandalay Bay Convention Center South Convention Center, Level 2 Room Surf F Las Vegas, NV 1. Call to Order. The meeting was called

More information

SACRAMENTO FIRE DEPARTMENT FIRE PREVENTION DIVISION FIRE DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES UNIT CONTRATOR INFORMATION PACKET

SACRAMENTO FIRE DEPARTMENT FIRE PREVENTION DIVISION FIRE DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES UNIT CONTRATOR INFORMATION PACKET SACRAMENTO FIRE DEPARTMENT FIRE PREVENTION DIVISION FIRE DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES UNIT CONTRATOR INFORMATION PACKET 1 SACRAMENTO FIRE DEPARTMENT FIRE PREVENTION DIVISION FIRE DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT

More information

NEMA CODES AND STANDARDS COMMITTEE

NEMA CODES AND STANDARDS COMMITTEE NEMA CODES AND STANDARDS COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN David H. Kendall 5/96 Director, Industry Affairs **01/05-09 Thomas & Betts Corp. 01/08 - Parliamentarian Mail Code: 3A-05 *01/2010-8155 T&B Blvd. Memphis, TN

More information

M E M O R A N D U M. NFPA 1 First Draft Technical Committee FINAL Ballot Results (A2017)

M E M O R A N D U M. NFPA 1 First Draft Technical Committee FINAL Ballot Results (A2017) 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: FROM: Technical Committee on Fire Code Kelly Carey,

More information

MEMORANDUM. NFPA 51 First Draft Technical Committee FINAL Ballot Results (A2017 Cycle)

MEMORANDUM. NFPA 51 First Draft Technical Committee FINAL Ballot Results (A2017 Cycle) National Fire Protection Association 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02169-7471 Phone: 617-770-3000 Fax: 617-770-0700 www.nfpa.org MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: Technical Committee on Industrial and Medical Gases

More information

NFPA Technical Committee on Deployment and Organization of Fire Prevention Activities

NFPA Technical Committee on Deployment and Organization of Fire Prevention Activities NFPA Technical Committee on Deployment and Organization of Fire Prevention Activities MEETING AGENDA Jackson Hole, WY October 3-4, 2011 1. Chair Farr calls meeting to order on October 3, 2011 at 8:00 am.

More information

First Revision No. 1-NFPA [ Chapter 2 ]

First Revision No. 1-NFPA [ Chapter 2 ] First Revision No. 1-NFPA 499-2014 [ Chapter 2 ] Chapter 2 Referenced Publications 2.1 General. The documents or portions thereof listed in this chapter are referenced within this recommended practice

More information

Correlating Committee on Automatic Sprinkler Systems

Correlating Committee on Automatic Sprinkler Systems Correlating Committee on Automatic Sprinkler Systems M E M O R A N D U M DATE: June 19, 2013 TO: FROM: and Alternate Members of the Correlating Committee on Automatic Sprinkler Systems Matt Klaus, Fire

More information

Technical Committee on Water Mist Fire Suppression Systems

Technical Committee on Water Mist Fire Suppression Systems Date: January 29, 2013 1. Call to Order. Meeting was called to order by Chair Larry Owen at 8:00 AM. 2. Building Safety Message. Building safety was discussed and exits identified by Chair Larry Owen.

More information

Public Comment No. 2-NFPA [ Section No ]

Public Comment No. 2-NFPA [ Section No ] Public Comment No. 2-NFPA 16-2013 [ Section No. 3.3.6 ] 3.3.6* Foam-Water Sprinkler System. A piping network connected to a source of foam concentrate and to a water supply. The piping network is equipped

More information

Report on First Revisions with Statement June 2014 NFPA 101

Report on First Revisions with Statement June 2014 NFPA 101 101 FR7040 SAF-MER (36.1.1.4) 36.1.1.4 The provisions of this chapter shall apply to life safety requirements for all new mercantile buildings. Specific requirements shall apply to suboccupancy groups,

More information

Public Input No. 1-NFPA [ Global Input ] Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Input. Submitter Information Verification

Public Input No. 1-NFPA [ Global Input ] Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Input. Submitter Information Verification Public Input No. 1-NFPA 36-2013 [ Global Input ] Revise the document to eliminate the use of "Exception" text. The use of "Exception" text is inconsistent with the Manual of Style. Exception text should

More information

National Fire Protection Association. 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA Phone: Fax:

National Fire Protection Association. 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA Phone: Fax: National Fire Protection Association 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02169-7471 Phone: 617-770-3000 Fax: 617-770-0700 www.nfpa.org MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: Technical Committee on Residential Occupancies Kelly

More information

National Fire Protection Association. 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA Phone: Fax:

National Fire Protection Association. 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA Phone: Fax: 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: FROM: Technical Committee on Standpipes Elena

More information

Agenda Technical Committee on Initiating Devices for Fire Alarm and Signaling Systems June 24-25, 2013 Saint Louis, MO

Agenda Technical Committee on Initiating Devices for Fire Alarm and Signaling Systems June 24-25, 2013 Saint Louis, MO Agenda Technical Committee on Initiating Devices for Fire Alarm and Signaling Systems June 24-25, 2013 Saint Louis, MO Item No. Subject 13-6-1 Call to Order (8:00 A.M) 13-6-2 Roll Call 13-6-3 Approval

More information

M E M O R A N D U M. NFPA Technical Committee on Wood and Cellulosic Materials Processing

M E M O R A N D U M. NFPA Technical Committee on Wood and Cellulosic Materials Processing 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: FROM: NFPA Technical Committee on Wood and Cellulosic

More information

MEETING AGENDA High Rise Building Safety Advisory Committee

MEETING AGENDA High Rise Building Safety Advisory Committee MEETING AGENDA High Rise Building Safety Advisory Committee Renaissance Blackstone Chicago 636 South Michigan Avenue, Chicago, IL 60605 May 13-14, 2014 Chicago, IL 1. Call to Order. Call the meeting to

More information

Second Revision No. 5-NFPA [ Section No ] Supplemental Information. Submitter Information Verification. Committee Statement

Second Revision No. 5-NFPA [ Section No ] Supplemental Information. Submitter Information Verification. Committee Statement 1 of 7 3/4/2016 12:02 PM Second Revision No. 5-NFPA 56-2016 [ Section No. 1.1.2 ] 1.1.2 Nonapplication of Standard. This standard shall not apply to the following items: (1)* Piping systems covered by

More information

"Spray area" is the term that is used throughout the document. This change is for consistency.

Spray area is the term that is used throughout the document. This change is for consistency. of 78 5/30/2014 2:08 PM Public Comment No. 39-NFPA 33-2013 [ Global Input ] For Chapter 18, replace "spray paint area" with "spray area". "Spray area" is the term that is used throughout the document.

More information

Public Input No. 1-NFPA 90B-2015 [ Chapter 2 ]

Public Input No. 1-NFPA 90B-2015 [ Chapter 2 ] Public Input No. 1-NFPA 90B-2015 [ Chapter 2 ] Chapter 2 Referenced Publications 2.1 General. The documents or portions thereof listed in this chapter are referenced within this standard and shall be considered

More information

Page 1 of 9 First Revision No. 2-NFPA 99B-2012 [ Section No. 2.2 ] 2.2 NFPA Publications. National Fire Protection Association, 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02169-7471. NFPA 10, Standard for Portable

More information

Public Comment No. 16-NFPA 13D-2014 [ Section No ]

Public Comment No. 16-NFPA 13D-2014 [ Section No ] of 52 9/22/2014 9:20 AM Public Comment No. 16-NFPA 13D-2014 [ Section No. 2.3.3 ] 2.3.3 ASTM Publications. ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, P.O. Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. ASTM

More information

NEMA CODES AND STANDARDS COMMITTEE 2014 Roster

NEMA CODES AND STANDARDS COMMITTEE 2014 Roster NEMA CODES AND STANDARDS COMMITTEE 2014 Roster CHAIRMAN C. D. (David) Mercier 01/00 Director Codes and Standards **01/09-12/12 Southwire Company ****07/11-12/12 Wire & Cable Technology *01/13 One Southwire

More information

National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Fire Service Occupational Safety and Health Technical Committee Meeting March 14 15, 2012 San Diego, CA

National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Fire Service Occupational Safety and Health Technical Committee Meeting March 14 15, 2012 San Diego, CA National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Fire Service Occupational Safety and Health Technical Committee Meeting March 14 15, 2012 San Diego, CA The NFPA 1521 Task Group and NFPA 1561 Task Group, established

More information

WORKING DRAFT OF COMMITTEE MEETING OUTPUT

WORKING DRAFT OF COMMITTEE MEETING OUTPUT WORKING DRAFT OF COMMITTEE MEETING OUTPUT CONTENT NOT FINAL SUBJECT TO REVISION PRIOR TO LETTER BALLOT AND PUBLICATION OF SECOND DRAFT REPORT Document: NFPA 221 Revision Cycle: A2014 Meeting Date: 5/20/2013

More information

Correlating Committee on Automatic Sprinklers

Correlating Committee on Automatic Sprinklers Correlating Committee on Automatic Sprinklers First Draft Correlating Committee Meeting December 6, 2016 MEETING MINUTES 1. Call to Order. CC Chair Ken Linder called the meeting to order at 8AM. 2. Self-Introductions

More information

M E M O R A N D U M. NFPA Technical Committee on Water Additives for Fire Control and Vapor Mitigation

M E M O R A N D U M. NFPA Technical Committee on Water Additives for Fire Control and Vapor Mitigation 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: From: NFPA Technical Committee on Water Additives

More information

FLAMMABLE AND COMBUSTIBLE LIQUIDS CODE COMMITTEE

FLAMMABLE AND COMBUSTIBLE LIQUIDS CODE COMMITTEE FLAMMABLE AND COMBUSTIBLE LIQUIDS CODE COMMITTEE MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: NFPA 30 Technical Committee on Storage and Warehousing of Containers and Portable Tanks R. P. Benedetti DATE: September 16, 2010 SUBJECT:

More information

National Fire Protection Association. 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA Phone: Fax:

National Fire Protection Association. 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA Phone: Fax: National Fire Protection Association 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02169-7471 Phone: 617-770-3000 Fax: 617-770-0700 www.nfpa.org MEMORANDUM To: From: NFPA Technical Committee on Building Service and

More information

MEMORANDUM. Technical Committee on Notification Appliances for Fire Alarm and Signaling Systems

MEMORANDUM. Technical Committee on Notification Appliances for Fire Alarm and Signaling Systems National Fire Protection Association 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02169-7471 Phone: 617-770-3000 Fax: 617-770-0700 www.nfpa.org MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: Technical Committee on Notification Appliances for

More information

National Fire Protection Association. 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA Phone: Fax:

National Fire Protection Association. 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA Phone: Fax: 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: FROM: NFPA Technical Committee on Mercantile and

More information

MEETING AGENDA High Rise Building Safety Advisory Committee

MEETING AGENDA High Rise Building Safety Advisory Committee MEETING AGENDA High Rise Building Safety Advisory Committee March 4, 2015 Teleconference/Web Meeting 1. Call to Order. Call the meeting to order by Chair, Jim Quiter, at 1:00 pm EST on Wednesday, March

More information

1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA Phone: Fax: M E M O R A N D U M

1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA Phone: Fax: M E M O R A N D U M 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: FROM: NFPA Technical Committee on Fire Pumps Patti

More information

Committee Comment No. 212-NFPA [ Section No [Excluding

Committee Comment No. 212-NFPA [ Section No [Excluding of 27 12/12/2016 12:23 PM Committee Comment No. 212-NFPA 30-2016 [ Section No. 16.4.1 [Excluding any Sub-Sections] ] This was a Second Revision that has been modified or deleted as the result of Second

More information

M EM O RA N D UM. NFPA 652 First Draft Correlating Committee FINAL Ballot Results (A2018)

M EM O RA N D UM. NFPA 652 First Draft Correlating Committee FINAL Ballot Results (A2018) M EM O RA N D UM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Correlating Committee on Combustible Dusts Yiu Lee, Project Administrator January 27, 2017 NFPA 652 First Draft Correlating Committee FINAL Ballot Results (A2018)

More information

Introductions made by the Chair, committee members, NFPA Staff Liaison, Jacqueline Wilmot and Dan Gorham of the Fire Protection Research Foundation.

Introductions made by the Chair, committee members, NFPA Staff Liaison, Jacqueline Wilmot and Dan Gorham of the Fire Protection Research Foundation. NFPA Technical Committee On Fire Hose NFPA 1961 Minutes Task Group Update Underwriters Laboratory November 15 th - 16 th 2016 Tuesday, November 15 th, 2016 Meeting called to order at 8:07 AM by Chairman

More information

Pre-First Draft Meeting Technical Committee on Wastewater Treatment Plants On line/conference Call November 20, PM EDT

Pre-First Draft Meeting Technical Committee on Wastewater Treatment Plants On line/conference Call November 20, PM EDT Pre-First Draft Meeting Technical Committee on Wastewater Treatment Plants On line/conference Call vember 20, 2012 2-4 PM EDT (1-3 PM CT; 12-2 PM MT; 11-1 PM PT) 1. Welcome-Glenn McGinley, Committee Chair

More information

1. The meeting was called to order by Chair James Lathrop at 8:00 AM (CDT) on Wednesday, August 26, 2015.

1. The meeting was called to order by Chair James Lathrop at 8:00 AM (CDT) on Wednesday, August 26, 2015. MINUTES NFPA Technical Committee on Residential Occupancies NFPA 101 and NFPA 5000 First Draft Meeting Wednesday, August 26, 2015 InterContinental Milwaukee Milwaukee, WI 1. The meeting was called to order

More information

Aircraft Hangars DESCRIPTION. A single fire area not larger than 40,000 sq. ft. (3,716 sq. m) per hangar construction type as defined by NFPA 409

Aircraft Hangars DESCRIPTION. A single fire area not larger than 40,000 sq. ft. (3,716 sq. m) per hangar construction type as defined by NFPA 409 Aircraft Hangars DESCRIPTION Considering the value of commercial and military aircraft, it has become extremely important to have a reliable fixed fire protection system in aircraft storage, servicing,

More information

National Fire Protection Association M E M O R A N D U M. NFPA Technical Committee on Construction and Demolition

National Fire Protection Association M E M O R A N D U M. NFPA Technical Committee on Construction and Demolition 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: FROM: NFPA Technical Committee on Construction

More information

Second Revision No. 1-NFPA 17A-2016 [ Section No ] Submitter Information Verification. Committee Statement. 1 of 14 6/22/2016 3:15 PM

Second Revision No. 1-NFPA 17A-2016 [ Section No ] Submitter Information Verification. Committee Statement. 1 of 14 6/22/2016 3:15 PM 1 of 14 6/22/2016 3:15 PM Second Revision No. 1-NFPA 17A-2016 [ Section No. 4.3.3 ] 4.3.3 All discharge nozzles shall be provided with caps or other suitable devices to prevent the entrance of grease vapors,

More information

Technical Committee on Heliports (HHH-AAA)

Technical Committee on Heliports (HHH-AAA) DATE: April 30, 2014 TO: FROM: Technical Committee on Heliports (HHH-AAA) M E M O R A N D U M Principal and Alternate Members of the Technical Committee on Heliports (HHH- AAA) Barry Chase, NFPA Staff

More information

NEMA CODES AND STANDARDS COMMITTEE 2014 Roster

NEMA CODES AND STANDARDS COMMITTEE 2014 Roster NEMA CODES AND STANDARDS COMMITTEE 2014 Roster CHAIRMAN C. D. (David) Mercier 01/00 Director Codes and Standards **01/09-12/12 Southwire Company ****07/11-12/12 Wire & Cable Technology *01/13 One Southwire

More information

NFPA Technical Committee on Unmanned Aerial Systems

NFPA Technical Committee on Unmanned Aerial Systems NFPA Technical Committee on Unmanned Aerial Systems NFPA 2400 DRAFT DEVELOPMENT MEETING (No. 2) AGENDA Renaissance Dallas Hotel 2222 Stemmons Freeway Dallas, TX 75207 May 7 9, 2017 Day One: 8:00 AM 5:00

More information

9/23/ :47 AM. Second Revision No NFPA [ New Section after ] Submitter Information Verification. Committee Statement

9/23/ :47 AM. Second Revision No NFPA [ New Section after ] Submitter Information Verification. Committee Statement Second Revision No. 5501-NFPA 5000-2016 [ New Section after 29.2.1.2 ] 29.2.1.3 Bathtubs, bathtub-shower combinations, and nonemergency showers shall be provided with grab bars in accordance with the provisions

More information

NFPA 30 FLC-SWC Public Comment Report

NFPA 30 FLC-SWC Public Comment Report of 224 9/6/2016 1:13 PM Public Comment No. 56-NFPA 30-2016 [ Global Input ] These definitions of Protected and Unprotected are intended for inclusion in Sections 9.2, 10.2, 11.2, 13.2 and 16.2. The current

More information

National Fire Protection Association. 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA Phone: Fax:

National Fire Protection Association. 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA Phone: Fax: 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: FROM: NFPA Technical Committee on Mercantile and

More information

Throughout standard remove references to the following and replace with the following:

Throughout standard remove references to the following and replace with the following: of 35 12/3/2015 7:13 AM Public Input No. 1-NFPA 90A-2015 [ Global Input ] Throughout standard remove references to the following and replace with the following: (1) ANSI/UL and replace with UL. (2) ANSI/ASHRAE

More information

- Residential Fire Sprinkler -

- Residential Fire Sprinkler - - Residential Fire Sprinkler - Update as of September 15, 2014 The information provided is a state-by-state status of the 2009 IRC adoption and legislation activities as reported by HBA s. NAHB staff monitors

More information

M E M O R A N D U M. NFPA Technical Committee on Alternative Approaches to Life Safety. SUBJECT: NFPA 101A ROP TC Letter Ballot (A2012 Cycle)

M E M O R A N D U M. NFPA Technical Committee on Alternative Approaches to Life Safety. SUBJECT: NFPA 101A ROP TC Letter Ballot (A2012 Cycle) M E M O R A N D U M TO: FROM: NFPA Technical Committee on Alternative Approaches to Life Safety Linda MacKay DATE: December 28, 2010 SUBJECT: NFPA 101A ROP TC Letter Ballot (A2012 Cycle) The ROP letter

More information

Technical Committee on Fluidized Bed Boilers

Technical Committee on Fluidized Bed Boilers Technical on Fluidized Bed Boilers AGENDA Web/Teleconference 1. Chair s welcome, call to order, and opening remarks at 1:00 pm EST. 2. Self-Introduction of Members and Guests 3. Approval of Minutes from

More information

Technical Committee on Liquefied Natural Gas

Technical Committee on Liquefied Natural Gas Technical Committee on Liquefied Natural Gas MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: Technical Committee on Liquefied Natural Gas Denise Beach, Senior Engineer/Staff Liaison DATE: March 16, 2011 RE: NFPA 59A LNG-AAA ROP

More information

9/20/2016 2:53 PM. Second Revision No NFPA [ Section No ] Supplemental Information. Submitter Information Verification

9/20/2016 2:53 PM. Second Revision No NFPA [ Section No ] Supplemental Information. Submitter Information Verification Second Revision No. 2011-NFPA 101-2016 [ Section No. 14.2.2.2.4 ] 14.2.2.2.4* Classroom Door Locking to Prevent Unwanted Entry. Classroom doors shall be permitted to be locked to prevent unwanted entry

More information

Second Revision No. 1 NFPA [ Chapter 2 ]

Second Revision No. 1 NFPA [ Chapter 2 ] Second Revision No. 1 NFPA 232 2015 [ Chapter 2 ] Chapter 2 Referenced Publications 2.1 General. The documents or portions thereof listed in this chapter are referenced within this standard and shall be

More information

National Fire Protection Association. 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA Phone: Fax:

National Fire Protection Association. 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA Phone: Fax: 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: FROM: NFPA Technical Committee on Merchant Vessels

More information

Committee on 51A M E M O R A N D U M. NFPA Technical Committee on Industrial and Medical Gases

Committee on 51A M E M O R A N D U M. NFPA Technical Committee on Industrial and Medical Gases Committee on 51A M E M O R A N D U M To: From: NFPA Technical Committee on Industrial and Medical Gases Patti Mucci, Administrative Assistant Date: June 14, 2010 Subject: NFPA 51A ROC Letter Ballot Circulation

More information

Subject: BSR Uniform Mechanical Code, 2015 Edition: Appeal on Proposal #333

Subject: BSR Uniform Mechanical Code, 2015 Edition: Appeal on Proposal #333 Paul Cabot Administrator National Fuel Gas Ms. Gabriella Davis Recording Secretary, IAPMO Standards Council International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials (IAPMO) IAPMO Group World Headquarters

More information

9/23/ :20 AM. Second Revision No NFPA [ Section No ] Supplemental Information. Submitter Information Verification

9/23/ :20 AM. Second Revision No NFPA [ Section No ] Supplemental Information. Submitter Information Verification of 4 9/23/2016 10:20 AM Second Revision No. 6501-NFPA 5000-2016 [ Section No. 17.2.2.2.4 ] 17.2.2.2.4* Classroom Door Locking to Prevent Unwanted Entry. Classroom doors shall be permitted to be locked

More information