Technical Committee on NFPA 17 & 17A Dry & Wet Chemical Extinguishing Systems (DRY-AAA)

Transcription

1 Technical Committee on NFPA 17 & 17A Dry & Wet Chemical Extinguishing Systems () M E M O R A N D U M TO: FROM: and Alternate Members of the Technical Committee on NFPA 17 & 17A Dry & Wet Chemical Extinguishing Systems (DRY- AAA) Sandra Stanek, NFPA Staff Liaison DATE : March 26, 2012 SUBJECT: AGENDA NFPA 17 & 17A ROC (Fall 2012 revision cycle) for the 2013 edition Enclosed is the agenda for the Report on Comments (ROC) for NFPA 17 & 17A Dry & Wet Chemical Fire Extinguishing Systems which will be held on Wednesday, April 18th and Thursday, April 19 th in Nashville, TX. Please review the meeting notice, sent to your address of record, for pertinent information concerning hotels, etc. As your new staff liaison, I welcome any questions you may have & look forward to working with all of you. Office: (617) sstanek@nfpa.org For administrative questions, please contact Elena Carroll at (617)

2 Technical Committee on NFPA 17 & 17A Dry & Wet Chemical Extinguishing Systems () ROC (F2012) Agenda April 18-19, 2012 Hilton Garden Inn Nashville Vanderbilt 1715 Broadway Nashville, TN Wednesday, April 18, 2012: 8:00 A.M. -5:00 P.M. or at the discretion of the Chairman 1. Call to Order 8:00 A.M. MST 2. Introductions & Attendance 3. Committee member status & Update of membership Roaster 4. Review Agenda 5. Approval of Previous Meeting minutes (see attachments) 6. NFPA Staff Liaison presentation, review of key dates within current cycle. 7. Chairman Comments 8. Task Group reports 9. Process Public Comments & generate Committee Comments for NFPA 17 & 17A revision cycles F2012 (see attachments) 10. Adjourn 5:00 P.M. CST or at the discretion of the Chairman

3 Technical Committee on NFPA 17 & 17A Dry & Wet Chemical Extinguishing Systems () Thursday, April 19,2012: 8:00 A.M. -5:00 P.M. or at the discretion of the Chairman 1. Call to Order 8:00 A.M. CST 2. Process Public Comments & generate Committee Comments for NFPA 17 & 17A revision cycles F2012 (see attachments) 3. Adjourn 5:00 P.M. CST or at the discretion of the Chairman Please submit requests for additional agenda items to the chair at least seven days prior to the meeting. Key Dates: for the Fall 2012 Revision Cycle (NFPA 17 & 17A 2013 edition) Comment Closing date March 2, 2012 Final date for ROC Meeting May 4, 2012 Final Date for mailing TC ballots May 18, 2012 Receipt of ballots returned by June 8, 2012 ROC Published & Posted Aug. 24, 2012 Closing Date for Notice of Intent to Make a Motion (NITMAM) Oct. 5, 2012 Issuance of Consent Document (No NITMAMs) Nov. 27, 2012 NFPA Annual Meeting June 2013 Issuance of Document with NITMAM Aug. 1, 2013 Technical Committee deadlines are in bold.

4 Technical Committee on NFPA 17 & 17A Dry & Wet Chemical Extinguishing Systems () General Procedures for Meetings Use of tape recorders or other means capable of producing verbatim transcriptions of any NFPA Committee Meeting is not permitted. Attendance at all NFPA Committee Meetings is open. All guests must sign in and identify their affiliation. Participation in NFPA Committee Meetings is generally limited to committee members and NFPA staff. Participation by guests is limited to individuals, who have received prior approval from the chair to address the committee on a particular item, or who wish to speak regarding public proposals or comments that they submitted. The chairman reserves the right to limit the amount of time available for any presentation. No interviews will be allowed in the meeting room at any time, including breaks. All attendees are reminded that formal votes of committee members will be secured by letter ballot. Voting at this meeting is used to establish a sense of agreement, but only the results of the formal letter ballot will determine the official action of the committee. Note to Special Experts: Particular attention is called to Section 3.3(e) of the NFPA Guide for the Conduct of Participants in the NFPA Codes and Standards Development Process in the NFPA Directory. This section requires committee members to declare any interest they may represent, other than their official designation as shown on the committee roster. This typically occurs when a special expert is retained by and represents another interest category on a particular subject. If such a situation exists on a specific issue or issues, the committee member shall declare those interests to the committee and refrain from voting on any action relating to those issues. Smoking is not permitted at NFPA Committee Meetings.

5 Technical Committee on NFPA 17 & 17A Dry & Wet Chemical Extinguishing Systems () Attachment #1: Previous Meeting Minutes

6 Page 1 Members & Alternates Present: Report on Proposals Meeting (F2012) Minutes July 13 th, 14 th & 15 th, 2011 UL Laboratories Inc. Main Bldg. #8 333 Pfingsten Rd. Northbrook, IL :00 A.M. to 6:30 P.M. David de Vries Firetech Engineering Inc. Committee Chairman Thomas Brown RJA Group, Inc. Jack Dick Heiser Logistics Thomas Kelly Zurich Serices Corp. Doug Kline Fire Suppression Systems Assoc. William Klingenmaier, Tyco Fire Suppression & Building Products Michael McGreal Firedyne Engineering, PC Thomas McVerry III, DunnWell, LLC J.R. Nerat UTC/Badger Fire Protection Erik Olsen Chubb Group of Insurance Companies Blake Shugarman UL Laboratories Inc. William Vegso Fire Equipment Manufacturers Assoc. J. Voelkert Amerex Corporation Mark Conroy Tyco Fire Suppression & Building Products Robert Kaisiki FM Global Richard Lupien UTC/Kidde-Fenwal Edward Leedy retired (member emeritus) Guests Present: Sheryl Lemire Tyco Fire Suppression & Building Products Guy Jones Amerex Corporation Joseph Ciesiel NAFED ( National Association of Fire Extinguisher Distributors) Larry Engle M. Jacks Fire & Safety Scott Plumer Liberty Mutual Insurance Fred Sanford Liberty Mutual Insurance NFPA Staff: Sandra Stanek NFPA Staff Liaison Jonathan Hart NFPA Staff Meeting Minutes: The meeting was called to order by Chairman de Vries at 8:00 AM CST. Chairman de Vries welcomed Committee s, Alternates and Guest attendees and noted the 179 proposals to discuss & vote upon. He introduced new NFPA staff liaison Sandra Stanek, and she reviewed a presentation on meeting protocols, etc. for the benefit of attendees. The minutes from the past ROC web conference meeting on April 11, 2007 were reviewed and approved. A motion was made & seconded to accept the minutes of the ROC meeting in April 2011.

7 Page 2 Chairman de Vries discussed the agenda inclusion of the NFPA paper, U.S. Experience with Non-Water-Based Automatic Fire Extinguishing Equipment, as well as a short review of NFPA 17/17A proposals. It was decided that the following Task Groups would break into their respective groups & work from 8:30-10:30. The groups were assigned to undertake the proposal review for the following areas: System Design/Layout Tom Brown Chair Larry Engle Bill Klingenmaier Mike McGreal Tom McVerry Richard Wood (not in attendance) Training/Qualifications Doug Kline Chair Andrew Blum (not in attendance) Paul Buchh0fer (not in attendance) Sam Dannaway Jack Dick J.R. Nerat Sheryl Lemire Joe Ciesiel System Acceptance Erik Olsen Chair Mark Conroy Ed Kaminske (not in attendance) Mike Luna (not in attendance) Rich Lupien Mike Mitchell (not in attendance) Scott Plumer Robert Scholes (not in attendance) Blake Shugarman Laurie Szumla (not in attendance) Inspection, Testing & Maintenance Bill Vegso Chair Bradley Howard (not in attendance) Bill Isemann (not in attendance) Guy Jones Tom Kelly Robert Popa (not in attendance) Fred Sanford Raymond Stacy (not in attendance) Bob Kasinski Craig Voelkert Steve Wright (not in attendance) Mobile Equipment Mike McGreal Chair Bill Isemann (not in attendance) Bob Kasiski Bill Klingenmaier Mike Luna (not inattendance) Mike Mitchell (not in attendance) J.R. Nerat Craig Voelkert The above Task Groups were formed prior to the ROP meeting, including members who were not in attendance and will be retained for the duration of this

8 Page 3 development cycle to review comments on proposals in the assigned subject areas. The Task Groups on System Acceptance & Mobile Equipment will develop committee comments and welcome any public input. Meeting participants voted upon Proposals and generated Committee proposals. Any & all Formal Interpretations were retired. The Committee discussed the future ROC meeting location of Washington, DC or surrounding area for April A Task Group was formed & continues to work on alternatives to full discharge testing protocols prior to the ROC meeting. Any and all public input is welcome. The meeting adjourned at 3:00 PM on Friday, July 15, 2011 Respectfully Submitted, Sandra Stanek Staff Liaison for NFPA 17/17A sstanek@nfpa.org

9 Technical Committee on NFPA 17 & 17A Dry & Wet Chemical Extinguishing Systems () Attachment #2: Committee Member Information

10 Address List No Phone Dry and Wet Chemical Extinguishing Systems 03/26/2012 Sandra Stanek David A. de Vries Chair Firetech Engineering Inc Harrison Street Evanston, IL SE 1/10/2008 Larry Angle M. Jacks Fire & Safety 538 Sandau Road San Antonio, TX National Association of Fire Equipment Distributors Alternate: Norbert W. Makowka IM 8/9/2011 Art Black Carmel Fire Protection Associates PO Box 7168 Carmel-by-the-Sea, CA E 10/18/2011 Andrew Blum Exponent, Inc Forest Grove Drive Silver Spring, MD Alternate: Richard T. Long, Jr. SE 10/28/2008 Thomas C. Brown The RJA Group, Inc. Rolf Jensen & Associates, Inc Greenview Drive, Suite 500 Laurel, MD Alternate: Stephen M. Hill SE 11/2/2006 Samuel S. Dannaway S. S. Dannaway Associates, Inc. 720 Iwilei Road, Suite 412 Honolulu, HI SE 7/1/1996 Jack K. Dick Heiser Logistics, Inc Fire Hall Road PO Box 730 Canadaigua, NY Alternate: Mark T. Conroy M 1/1/1992 Bradley T. Howard Koorsen Fire & Security 727 Manor Park Drive Columbus, OH IM 8/5/2009 Bill Isemann Guardian Fire Protection Services LLC 7668 Standish Place Rockville, MD IM 10/28/2008 Edward J. Kaminski Clark County Fire Department 575 East Flamingo Las Vegas, NV E 1/1/1991 Thomas H. Kelly Zurich Services Corporation 1333 Richwood Drive, SE Grand Rapids, MI I 8/5/2009 Doug Kline Nowak Supply Fire Systems 302 West Superior Street Fort Wayne, IN Fire Suppression Systems Association IM 1/10/2008 William Klingenmaier Tyco Fire Protection Products One Stanton Street Marinette, WI Alternate: Richard J. Biehl M 4/4/1997 Michael E. Luna Intertek Testing Services Shady Falls Road Elmendorf, TX RT 8/5/2009 1

11 Address List No Phone Dry and Wet Chemical Extinguishing Systems 03/26/2012 Sandra Stanek Michael P. McGreal Firedyne Engineering, PC Cork Road Tinley Park, IL SE 7/1/1996 Thomas L. McVerry III DunnWell, LLC 4601 Creekstone Drive, Suite 200 Durham, NC IM 10/28/2008 Stephen M. Micke Fireman's Fund Insurance Company 2744 Bonnard Street Davis, CA Alternate: Robert V. Scholes I 10/20/2010 Michael S. Mitchell Boulder Fire Rescue Department rd Street Boulder, CO E 7/23/2008 J. R. Nerat UTC/Badger Fire Protection W-6615 Number 11.5 Road Wallace, MI NFPA Industrial Fire Protection Section Alternate: Richard L. Lupien M 10/1/1996 Erik G. Olsen Chubb Group of Insurance Companies 132 Naughright Road Long Valley, NJ I 3/2/2010 Robert B. Popa Farmington Fire Department Fire Marshal s Office 850 Municipal Drive Farmington, NM E 10/28/2008 Neal G. Pulvermacher West Bend Mutual Insurance NSI Division 8401 Greenway Blvd., Suite 1100 Middleton, WI I 10/18/2011 Frederick Sanford Liberty Mutual Insurance Company 9 Riverside Road Weston, MA Alternate: Scott M. Plumer I 8/9/2011 Blake M. Shugarman Underwriters Laboratories Inc. 333 Pfingsten Road Northbrook, IL Alternate: Kevin Holly, Jr. RT 11/2/2006 Raymond A. Stacy FM Approvals 1151 Boston-Providence Turnpike PO Box 9102 Norwood, MA FM Global Alternate: Robert Kasiski I 8/5/2009 Laurie K. Szumla All State Fire Equipment of WNY 4804 Transit Road Depew, NY IM 7/23/2008 2

12 Address List No Phone Dry and Wet Chemical Extinguishing Systems 03/26/2012 Sandra Stanek William Vegso Buckeye Fire Equipment Company 110 Kings Road Kings Mountain, NC Fire Equipment Manufacturers' Association Alternate: Bruce J. Euler M 7/23/2008 J. Craig Voelkert Amerex Corporation 7595 Gadsden Highway PO Box 81 Trussville, AL Alternate: Guy L. Jones, Jr. M 4/1/1996 Richard W. Wood City of Nashua Fire Rescue Department 177 Lake Street Nashua, NH E 3/2/2010 Thomas Steven Wright Fisher Engineering, Inc South Copper Key Court Gilbert, AZ Alternate: Steven A. Sheldon SE 7/23/2008 Richard J. Biehl Alternate Tyco Suppression Systems One Stanton Street Marinette, WI : William Klingenmaier M 4/16/1999 Mark T. Conroy Alternate Brooks Equipment Company 20 Hampden Drive, Suite 2 South Easton, MA : Jack K. Dick M 3/1/2011 Bruce J. Euler Alternate Buckeye Fire Equipment Company 110 Kings Road PO Box 428 Kings Mountain, NC Fire Equipment Manufacturers' Association : William Vegso M 8/9/2011 Stephen M. Hill Alternate The RJA Group, Inc. Rolf Jensen & Associates, Inc Greenview Drive, Suite 500 Laurel, MD : Thomas C. Brown SE 8/9/2011 Kevin Holly,Jr. Alternate Underwriters Laboratories Inc. 333 Pfingsten Road Northbrook, IL : Blake M. Shugarman RT 10/20/2010 Guy L. Jones, Jr. Alternate Amerex Corporation 7595 Gadsden Highway PO Box 81 Trussville, AL : J. Craig Voelkert M 10/18/2011 Robert Kasiski Alternate FM Global 1151 Boston Providence Turnpike PO Box 9102 Norwood, MA : Raymond A. Stacy I 7/23/2008 Richard T. Long, Jr. Alternate Exponent, Inc Science Drive, Suite 200 Bowie, MD : Andrew Blum SE 8/5/2009 3

13 Address List No Phone Dry and Wet Chemical Extinguishing Systems 03/26/2012 Sandra Stanek Richard L. Lupien Alternate UTC/Kidde-Fenwal, Inc. 400 Main Street Ashland, MA NFPA Industrial Fire Protection Section : J. R. Nerat M 10/4/2001 Norbert W. Makowka Alternate National Association of Fire Equipment Distributors 122 South Michigan Avenue, Suite 1040 Chicago, IL : Larry Angle IM 1/1/1992 Scott M. Plumer Alternate Liberty Mutual 20 Riverside Road Weston, MA : Frederick Sanford I 8/9/2011 Robert V. Scholes Alternate Fireman's Fund Insurance Company 1711 Baywood Drive Concord, CA : Stephen M. Micke I 8/5/2009 Steven A. Sheldon Alternate Fisher Engineering, Inc East Southern Avenue Mesa, AZ : Thomas Steven Wright SE 3/4/2008 Edward D. Leedy Member Emeritus 2033 Butterfly Lane, CC304 Naperville, IL /1/1990 Sandra Stanek Staff Liaison National Fire Protection Association 1 Batterymarch Park Quincy, MA /6/2011 4

14 Technical Committee on NFPA 17 & 17A Dry & Wet Chemical Extinguishing Systems () Attachment #3: Report on Comments

15 Report on Comments November 2012 NFPA Log #2 John F. Bender, Underwriters Laboratories Inc Revise text to read as follows: Underwriters Laboratories Inc., 333 Pfingsten Road, Northbrook, IL ANSI/UL 300,, 2005, Revised ANSI/UL 1254,, Update reference to ANSI/UL 300 to indicate and clarify that the date of the UL standard is 2005 with revisions adopted through Log #4 Marcelo M. Hirschler, GBH International Revise text to read as follows: Those having predetermined flow rates, nozzle pressures, and quantities of extinguishing agent. These systems have the specific pipe size, maximum and minimum pipe lengths, flexible hose specifications, number of fittings, and number and types of nozzles prescribed by a testing laboratory. The maximum and minimum pipe lengths and the number of fittings shall be permitted to be expressed in equivalent feet of pipe. The hazards protected by these systems are specifically limited as to type and size by a testing laboratory, based on actual fire tests. Limitations on hazards that are permitted to be protected by these systems and piping and nozzle configurations are contained in the manufacturer s listed installation and maintenance manual, which is part of the listing of the system. A These systems have the specific pipe size, maximum and minimum pipe lengths, flexible hose specifications, number of fittings, and number and types of nozzles prescribed by a testing laboratory. The maximum and minimum pipe lengths and the number of fittings shall be permitted to be expressed in equivalent feet of pipe. The hazards protected by these systems are specifically limited as to type and size by a testing laboratory, based on actual fire tests. Limitations on hazards that are permitted to be protected by these systems and piping and nozzle configurations are contained in the manufacturer s listed installation and maintenance manual, which is part of the listing of the system. Definitions are supposed to be in single sentences. The balance of this definition is additional information that should be in the annex or in an alternate section of the document. Printed on 3/26/2012 1

16 Report on Comments November 2012 NFPA Log #9 Mark T. Conroy, Brooks Equipment Company Add text to read as follows: During assembly, the piping system shall be examined internally to detect the possibility of contaminants or other foreign materials. Contaminants and foreign materials could affect the extinguishing agent distribution due to a reduction in the effective nozzle orifice area. All extinguishing agent storage containers shall be examined to assure that they are fastened securely to their mounting brackets. The proposed new text provides reasonable minimum requirements for examination during assembly and installation approval to assure safety of these systems and provide a reasonable assurance that the systems will work as intended. 17- Log #7 Arthur Londensky, Northeastern Regional Fire Code Development Committee Revise text to read as follows: Revise section as follows: Expellant gas that is used to pneumatically operate shutoff devices shall be taken prior to its entry into the dry chemical tank containers. Currently 4.9 refer to the tanks as containers. The proposed text correlates with the rest of the document. 17- Log #5 Doug Hohbein, Northcentral Regional Fire Code Development Committee Revise to read: An audible and visual indicator shall be provided to show that the system has operated, that personnel response is needed, and that the system is in need of recharge. The audible and visible indicator shall be placed within 10 feet of the protected equipment. Many times the fire-extinguishing system is located in a remote location from the cooking equipment being protected, such as an adjacent room or above a ceiling. There have been instances where, due to the clean agent being utilized, it is difficult to see that the system has triggered and the audible/visual notification cannot be heard/seen due to the remote or inaccessible location of the system. Printed on 3/26/2012 2

17 Report on Comments November 2012 NFPA Log #10 Mark T. Conroy, Brooks Equipment Company Revise text to read as follows: The completed system shall be tested by a service technician as outlined in The tests shall determine that the system has been properly installed and will function as intended. Only listed equipment and devices shall be used in these systems. The installer shall certify that the installation has been made in accordance with the approved plans and the system listing of a testing laboratory. Verify that nozzles and pipe sizes are in accordance with approved plans and the system listing. Verify that piping supports are securely fastened. Acceptance tests shall include a discharge of dry chemical in sufficient amounts to verify that the system is properly installed and functional. Prior to the test required by , piping shall be physically checked for tightness. A test using nitrogen or dry air shall be performed on the piping network at a pressure not to exceed the normal operating pressure of the extinguishing system and verify that nitrogen or dry air has discharged out of each nozzle in the system. The test is intended to verify that flow is continuous and that the piping and nozzles are reasonably unobstructed. The nitrogen or dry air should be introduced into the piping network at the extinguishing agent container connection. The quantity of nitrogen or dry air used for this test should be sufficient to verify that each nozzle is unobstructed. Nozzle flow should be verified by the installation of balloons or similar devices on discharge nozzles. The method of verification shall be acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction. Piping shall not be hydrostatically tested. Where pressure testing is required, it shall be by means of a dry gas. The labeling of devices with proper designations and instructions shall be checked. The use of dry chemical for the approval test shall be permitted to be waived by the authority having jurisdiction. After any discharge of dry chemical, all piping and nozzles shall be blown clean using compressed dry air or nitrogen. Where the system is connected to a building alarm system, verify that alarm-sounding or displaying devices and remote annunciation devices are functional. Verify that all manual release devices (manual pull stations) are readily accessible and accurately identified. Where a control panel is provided, verify that it is connected to a dedicated circuit and labeled properly. Where a control panel is provided, verify that it is readily accessible and restricted from unauthorized personnel. System operational tests shall be performed and include functional tests of the automatic detection system and the manual release devices. The system shall be properly charged and placed in the normal set condition. Verify that each extinguishing agent storage container is reconnected and the system has been returned to its fully operational condition. After completion of functional testing, if system is connected to an alarm receiving office, the alarm-receiving office and all concerned personnel at the end-user s facility shall be notified that the fire system test is complete and that the system has been returned to full service operational condition. The proposed new text provides reasonable minimum requirements for examination during assembly and installation approval to assure safety of these systems and provide a reasonable assurance that the systems will work as intended. Printed on 3/26/2012 3

18 Report on Comments November 2012 NFPA Log #6 Doug Hohbein, Northcentral Regional Fire Code Development Committee Revise text to read as follows: Where pressure testing or purge testing is required, it shall be by means of a dry gas. We would like the committee to reconsider the original proposal. One purpose for discharging dry powder is to ensure the piping is not obstructed. By adding purge testing as permitted in Annex A, this gives the AHJ an option beyond waiving the dry powder discharge as permitted in Log #1 David R. Hague, Liberty Mutual Property Risk Engineering Add new text to read as follows: The installing contractor shall complete and sign the acceptance test form in Figure ******Insert Figure Dry Chemical System Acceptance Test Report Here****** Currently there is no form for documenting the test results for a dry chemical system acceptance test. The proposed form is consistent with the required tests in the installation standard. This form has been changed from that proposed (and rejected) in the ROP to document the basic common elements that need to be evaluated in all dry chemical systems to document proper operation at the time of acceptance. 17- Log #3 R. T. Leicht, Delaware State Fire Marshal s Office Revise text to read as follows: A service technician who performs maintenance on an extinguishing system shall be trained and shall have passed a written or online test that is in a manner acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction. Contrary to the Committee Statement to ROP 17-62; Log #11, the wording cannot be too specific since different AHJ s will have different requirements. The AHJ, by definition is the organization, office, or individual responsible for enforcing the requirements of the standard and for approving procedures. There is nothing in the definition that states that this responsibility excludes the responsibility of promulgating rules for his jurisdiction. Committee makes the assumption, without substantiation, that the task of determining competency causes some undue pressure and no substantiation had been provided that shows that this particular portion of the AHJ s responsibility causes any significant burden. If the Committee feels that a sample program, such as written testing, needs to be provided as an option for what the AHJ should establish to confirm the level of competency, that material can be included as guidance in an Annex section. That way, and AHJ may choose that option or may choose to use any combination of other options to determine who is and who isn t qualified in his jurisdiction. Printed on 3/26/2012 4

19 Dry Chemical System Acceptance Test Report Property Information Building Name: Address: Building Owner: Address: Phone/Fax/ Designer / Installer Information Company Name: Address: Contact Person: Phone/Fax/ System Check or Test Installation in accordance with approved plans and listing laboratory. Piping Integrity Test (where required) Operational Test (where required) Detection System Manual release Device(s) Gas Shutoff Electrical Power Shutoff System properly charged and left in normal set condition. One copy of installation and maintenance manual left with owner. Date System left in Service: Results Test Witnessed By: Owner/authorized agent Title Date Installing Contractor Title Date Additional comments: Page 1 of 1 17_F2012_ROC_Log #1_Figure _Rec

20 Report on Comments November 2012 NFPA Log #8 Arthur Londensky, Northeastern Regional Fire Code Development Committee Revise to read: A service technician who performs maintenance on an extinguishing system shall be trained and shall have passed a written or online test that is acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction. Persons performing maintenance and recharging of extinguishing system shall meet one of the following criteria: (1) Factory training and certification for the specific type and brand of fire extinguishing system being serviced (2) Certification by an organization acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction (3) Registration, licensure, or certification by a state or a local authority having jurisdiction. As currently worded certification if personnel performing work on fire extinguishing systems is a state or local issue. The proposed wording provides better guidance to the user, ahj etc. for what constitutes an approved certification program instead of stating a certification program that may not be acceptable to the ahj. The proposed wording is consistent with other NFPA Standards. Printed on 3/26/2012 5

21 Report on Comments November A- Log #6 Mark T. Conroy, Brooks Equipment Company 17A-4 Incorporate proposal 17A-4 into proposals 17A-2, 17A-3, and 17A-70. Editorial. NFPA 17A Printed on 3/26/2012 1

22 Report on Comments November A- Log #15 NFPA 17A Richard L. Lupien, UTC/Kidde-Fenwal, Inc. 17A-5 I request that the committee reconsider the action taken in the ROP for this log. The following text contains changes from the original log proposal with some renumbering and an additional section added for consideration. 1.3 Minimum requirements are specified for restaurant, commercial and institutional hoods, plenums, ducts and associated cooking appliances. Minimum requirements are also specified for mobile equipment UL Publications Underwriters Laboratories Inc., 333 Pfingsten Road, Northbrook, IL ANSI/UL 300, Fire testing of Fire Extinguishing Systems for Protection of Commercial Cooking Equipment, ANSI/UL 1254, Pre-Engineered Dry Chemical Extinguishing System Units, ASME Publications American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Three Park Avenue, New York, NY Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, ANSI/ASME B31.1. Power Piping 1998 edition (including B31.1a 1999 Addenda and B31.1b 2000 Addenda) Discharge nozzles utilized for restaurant applications shall be provided with an internal strainer or a separate listed located immediately upstream of the nozzle. 4.9 Storage Containers The wet chemical containers used in these systems shall be designed to meet the requirements of the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) or Transport Canada (TC) is used as shipping containers under pressure If not shipping containers under pressure, the wet chemical containers shall be designed, fabricated, inspected, certified, and stamped in accordance with ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Rules for Construction of Pressure Vehicles Wet chemical fire extinguishing systems intended to protect restaurants, commercial and institutional hoods, plenums, ducts and associated cooking appliances shall comply with ANSI/UL (6) Mobile equipment Pneumatic actuation piping, hose and tubing that is not normally pressurized shall not require supervision. 5.7 Systems for Protection of Mobile Equipment Only pre-engineered wet chemical systems, including detection systems that have been listed for such use, shall be installed on mobile equipment Compartments or areas that could be subject to fire shall be protected in accordance with the manufacturer s listed installation and maintenance manual Each protected compartment or area shall be provided with a listed fire detection device specified in the manufacturer s listed installation and maintenance manual to automatically actuate the extinguishing system Manual actuation only shall be permitted to be provided if acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction Only the flexible hose and hose fittings specified in the manufacturer s listed installation and maintenance manual shall be used All discharge nozzles shall be located to minimize the likelihood of damage or misalignment and within the limitations and constraints of the manufacturer s listed installation and maintenance manual Location of agent containers, expellant gas cartridges or cylinders, and a manual actuator station(s) shall be appropriate to each application, protected against physical damage and accessible At least one easily accessible manual actuator or operating device shall be provided for use by the equipment operator An additional manual actuator or operating device shall be located so that it is in the path of egress and operable from the ground level If the system is provided with a discharge delay device, both audible and visual alarms shall be provided to warn of the impending system discharge In the event of system discharge, the vehicle being protected shall not be returned to service until the system is recharged and operational. Current applications of wet chemical systems are being utilized on mobile machinery equipment without an applicable standard. This change seeks to ensure that guidance is given to these systems utilizing similar information from the pertinent mobile machinery text in NFPA 17 (Dry chemical extinguishing systems). The existing text Printed on 3/26/2012 2

23 Report on Comments November 2012 NFPA 17A in 17A is primarily focused on commercial restaurant applications but the standard has a broad scope of wet chemical extinguishing systems. 17A- Log #2 John F. Bender, Underwriters Laboratories Inc. 17A-2 Revise text to read as follows: Underwriters Laboratories Inc., 333 Pfingsten Road, Northbrook, IL ANSI/UL 300,, 2005, Revised ANSI/UL 1254,, 2005, Revised Update reference to ANSI/UL 300 to indicate that the date of the UL standard is 2005, with revisions adopted through Add reference to ANSI/UL 1254 in support of TC action on 17A-5 Log #CP1. 17A- Log #7 Mark T. Conroy, Brooks Equipment Company 17A-10 Add a reference to NFPA 72 as the source of the definition. Conformance to the NFPA Manual of Style. 17A- Log #4 Arthur Londensky, Northeastern Regional Fire Code Development Committee 17A-69 Revise to read: A service technician who performs maintenance on an extinguishing system shall be trained and shall have passed a written or online test that is acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction. Persons performing maintenance and recharging of extinguishing system shall meet one of the following criteria: (1) Factory training and certification for the specific type and brand of fire extinguishing system being serviced (2) Certification by an organization acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction (3) Registration, licensure, or certification by a state or a local authority having jurisdiction. As currently worded, certification if personnel performing work on fire extinguishers are a state or local issue. The proposed wording provides better guidance to the user, ahj etc. for what constitutes an approved certification program instead of stating a certification program that may not be acceptable to the ahj. The proposed wording is consistent with other NFPA Standards. Printed on 3/26/2012 3

24 Report on Comments November A- Log #8 NFPA 17A Mark T. Conroy, Brooks Equipment Company 17A-21 Revise text to read as follows: All remote readily accessible manual operating devices shall be identify identified to the hazard(s) they protect. (See ). From a safety standpoint, all manual operating devices should be identified to the hazard(s) they protect. It would seem odd and would be unsafe to have a manual operating device which is not readily accessible. 17A- Log #9 Mark T. Conroy, Brooks Equipment Company 17A-53 Add the following new text: During assembly, the piping system shall be examined internally to detect the possibility of contaminants or other foreign materials. Contaminants and foreign materials could affect the extinguishing agent distribution due to a reduction in the effective nozzle orifice area. All extinguishing agent storage containers shall be examined to assure that they are fastened securely to their mounting brackets. The proposed new text provides reasonable minimum requirements for examination during assembly and installation approval to assure safety of these systems and provide a reasonable assurance that the systems will work as intended. 17A- Log #10 Mark T. Conroy, Brooks Equipment Company 17A-30 Delete the proposed new text. The requirement is currently in the latest edition of NFPA 96. This type of requirement should be in an occupancy standard such as NFPA 96, which covers all automatic extinguishing systems. It should not be in NFPA 17A which covers the installation requirements. Copying part of the requirement and placing it in NFPA 17A is not only inappropriate, but creates an unnecessary conflict between the two documents. Printed on 3/26/2012 4

25 Report on Comments November A- Log #11 NFPA 17A Mark T. Conroy, Brooks Equipment Company 17A-38 Delete the proposed new text. The requirements for manual actuation devices are appropriately located in the occupancy standard, NFPA 96 and modifications should not be introduced in the installation standards such as NFPA 17A. Recommendations for proposed changes should be submitted to the committee responsible for updating NFPA 96 (refer to of the NFPA Regulations and section V, subsection F of the NFPA Officers Guide). 17A- Log #12 Mark T. Conroy, Brooks Equipment Company 17A-48, 17A-49 Revise text to read as follows: Either a common extinguishing system shall be provided to protect both the ignition source(s) contained within an exhaust system as well as the exhaust system itself, or separate extinguishing systems protecting shall be provided to protect the exhaust system and the ignition sources which shall be arranged for simultaneous automatic operation upon actuation of any one of the those systems. Proposal 17A-48 and proposal 17A-49 were both accepted and they contain different wording. The recommended text provides a clarification of the proposed requirement. 17A- Log #13 Mark T. Conroy, Brooks Equipment Company 17A-50 Delete the proposed new text. Proposal 17A-50 sets up an awkward precedent. A provision addressing all types of automatic fire suppression systems is currently in the occupancy standard, NFPA 96 (paragraph 9.3.3). A conflict has now been created by adding a modified version of the NFPA 96 occupancy requirement. The NFPA Regulations Governing Committee Projects, section covers this topic and the Committee Officers Guide section V, subsection F provides guidance for inter-committee coordination. A modified version of NFPA 96, paragraph should not be added to NFPA 17A. Rather, a committee proposal should be submitted to the NFPA 96 and followed through the process. Printed on 3/26/2012 5

26 Report on Comments November A- Log #9a Mark T. Conroy, Brooks Equipment Company 17A-53 Add the following new text: NFPA 17A Verify that the appliances, hoods, and ducts are properly protected with nozzles and positioned in accordance with the manufacturer s design, installation, and maintenance manual. Verify that nozzles and pipe sizes are in accordance with the manufacturer s design, installation, and maintenance manual. Verify that piping supports are securely fastened. Verify that the installed appliances are the same and in the same locations as the approved system design. Prior to the test required by , piping shall be physically checked for tightness. A test using nitrogen or dry air shall be performed on the piping network at a pressure not to exceed the normal operating pressure of the extinguishing system and verify that nitrogen or dry air has discharged out of each nozzle in the system. The test is intended to verify that flow is continuous and that the piping and nozzles are reasonably unobstructed. The nitrogen or dry air should be introduced into the piping network at the extinguishing agent container connection. The quantity of nitrogen or dry air used for this test should be sufficient to verify that each nozzle is unobstructed. Nozzle flow should be verified by the installation of balloons or similar devices on discharge nozzles. Where the system is connected to a building alarm system, verify that alarm-sounding or displaying devices and remote annunciation devices are functional. Verify that all manual release devices (manual pull stations) are readily accessible and accurately identified. System operational tests shall be performed in accordance with the manufacturer s design, installation, and maintenance manual and include functional tests of the automatic detection system, the manual release devices, the gas shutoff, and to verify that the electrical power shutdown operates. Where a control panel is provided, verify that it is connected to a dedicated circuit and labeled properly. Where a control panel is provided, verify that it is readily accessible and restricted from unauthorized personnel. Verify that each extinguishing agent storage container is reconnected and the system has been returned to its fully operational condition. After completion of functional testing, if system is connected to an alarm receiving office, the alarm-receiving office and all concerned personnel at the end-user s facility shall be notified that the fire system test is complete and that the system has been returned to full service operational condition. The proposed new text provides reasonable minimum requirements for examination during assembly and installation approval to assure safety of these systems and provide a reasonable assurance that the systems will work as intended. Printed on 3/26/2012 6

27 Report on Comments November A- Log #1 David R. Hague, Liberty Mutual Property Risk Engineering 17A-60 Add new text to read as follows: The installing contractor shall complete and sign the acceptance test form in Figure NFPA 17A ******Insert Figure Wet Chemical System Acceptance Test Report Here****** Currently there is no form for documenting the test results for a dry chemical system acceptance test. The proposed form is consistent with the required tests in the installation standard. This form has been changed from that proposed (and rejected) in the ROP to document the basic common elements that need to be evaluated in all dry chemical systems to document proper operation at the time of acceptance. 17A- Log #3 R. T. Leicht, Delaware State Fire Marshal s Office 17A-69 Revise text to read as follows: A service technician who performs maintenance on an extinguishing system shall be trained and shall have passed a written or online test that is to a level and in a manner acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction. Where required by the authority having jurisdiction the The service technician shall possess a certification document acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction confirming the requirements in Section and issued by the manufacturer or testing organization that is acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction. Contrary to the Committee Statement to ROP 17A-69; Log #8, the wording cannot be too specific since different AHJ s will have different requirements. The AHJ, by definition is the organization, office, or individual responsible for enforcing the requirements of the standard and for approving procedures. There is nothing in the definition that states that this responsibility excludes the responsibility of promulgating rules for his jurisdiction. Committee makes the assumption, without substantiation, that the task of determining competency causes some undue pressure and no substantiation had been provided that shows that this particular portion of the AHJ s responsibility causes any significant burden. If the Committee feels that a sample program, such as written or on-line testing, needs to be provided as an option for what the AHJ should establish to confirm the level of competency, that material can be included as guidance in an Annex section. That way, and AHJ may choose that option or may choose to use any combination of other options to determine who is and who isn t qualified in his jurisdiction. Printed on 3/26/2012 7

28 Wet Chemical System Acceptance Test Report Property Information Building Name: Address: Building Owner: Address: Phone/Fax/ Designer / Installer Information Company Name: Address: Contact Person: Phone/Fax/ System Check or Test Installation in accordance with approved plans and listing laboratory. Piping Integrity Test (where required) Operational Test (where required) Detection System Manual release Device(s) Gas Shutoff Electrical Power Shutoff System properly charged and left in normal set condition. One copy of installation and maintenance manual left with owner. Date System left in Service: Results Test Witnessed By: Owner/authorized agent Title Date Installing Contractor Title Date Additional comments: Page 1 of 1 17A_F2012_ROC_Log #1_Figure 6.4.3_Rec

29 Report on Comments November A- Log #14 NFPA 17A Mark T. Conroy, Brooks Equipment Company 17A-76 Revise to read as follows: Where maintenance of any wet chemical containers reveals conditions such as, but not limited to, corrosion or pitting in excess of the manufacturer s limits; structural damage; fire damage; or repairs by soldering, welding, or brazing, the affected container shall be replaced or hydrostatically tested or replaced in accordance with the recommendations instructions of the manufacturer or the listing agency. The hydrostatic testing of wet chemical containers shall be in accordance with Section 7.5. Recommendations do not belong in the body of the standard. 17A- Log #5 Bill Galloway, Southern Regional Fire Code Development Committee 17A-81 Revise to read: Until such repairs are accomplished, the systems shall be tagged as noncompliant impaired, and the owner or owner s representative responsible for the system shall be notified and where required, the authority having jurisdiction shall be notified of the impairment. The decision and enforcement should remain with the AHJ, not the vendor. The section talks about impaired systems and the correct term that should be used when tagging the system is impaired not non compliant. There are many items that may impair the system such as a fusible link not replaced that does not make the system noncompliant which appears to be the intent of this section. Printed on 3/26/2012 8