Technical Committee on Laboratories Using Chemicals NFPA 45 First Draft Meeting Exxon/Mobile Annadale, NJ May 1-3, 2013 AGENDA

Transcription

1 Technical Committee on Laboratories Using Chemicals NFPA 45 First Draft Meeting Exxon/Mobile Annadale, NJ May 1-3, 2013 AGENDA 1. Call to order and roll call at 8:00 a.m. each day. 2. Approval of Minutes from April 23, 2009 ROC Meeting held at Hughes Associates. 3. Staff Liaison s Report a. Committee Membership b. Update New Standards Process 4. Task Groups: a. Task Group 1: Ajay Prasad b. Task Group 2: Mike Cooper c. Task Group 3: Rich Palluzi d. Task Group 4: Andy Minister 5. Committee action on Public Input. 6. Action on committee proposals. 7. Future meetings and locations. The next meeting is the Public Comment/Second Draft Meeting. The public comment closing date November 15, 2013 and the last day to meet is May 2, Adjournment Will adjourn at 5 pm each day except for Friday, May 3 rd, when we will adjourn at 3 pm.

2 Technical Committee on Laboratories Using Chemicals Minutes of Meeting Report on Comments (ROC) Hughes Associates, Inc. Baltimore, MD April 23, 2009 Attendance: and Alternate Members / Staff: Andy Minister Battelle, Pacific Northwest Laboratory, WA Committee Chair Martha H. Curtis NFPA Staff Liaison, MA Bill Barlen Barlen and Associates, CT Rep. Airgas (on conference call) Michael Cooper, Harley Ellis Devereaux, MI William Eckholm, Firetrace International, AZ Kevin Gilkison Labconco Corp., MO Brian Goodman Lawrence Livermore National Lab, CA Craig Hofmeister The RJA Group, Inc., NC Don Kohn Kohn Engineering, PA Joseph J. Milligan GlaxoSmithKline, PA Rep. Industrial Fire Protection Section Richard Palluzi, ExxonMobil Research & Engineering, NJ Paul Pelczynski, Siemens Building Technologies, IL Rudy Poblete Kewaunee Scientific Corp., NC Michael Pokorny Montgomery County Permitting, MD Ajay Prasad, Hughes Associates, Inc., MD David Quigley BWXT Y-12, TN James Riley Riley Laboratory Consulting, LLC, GA Steve Waller CUH2A, Inc., NJ (on conference call) Guests: Ryan Bierwerth Summit Fire Consulting, MN Absent Members with no Alternate present Richard Anderson Anderson Risk Consultants, NJ (sent in comments by ) Ray Arntson Rayden Research LLC, WI (Ryan Bierwerth was representing Ray Arnston at the ROC meeting.) Hal Cohen HCC and Associates, Inc., DE John Dembishack CT Office of the State Fire Marshal, CT Diane Kroll US Dept of Veterans Affairs, MN J.P. McCabe US NIH, MD Robert Myers Myers & Associates (Amoco), GA Peter Puhlick University of Connecticut, CT 1

3 David S. Rausch Phoenix Controls Corporation, MA Michael St. Clair Industrial Fire Protection Section, OH 1. Call to order and welcome. The meeting was called to order at 8:40 AM. TC Chair Andy Minister welcomed the Committee. Ajay reviewed the exits from the Conference room. Two members of the Committee participated on a conference call during the meeting. 2. Self-Introduction. The Committee Members and guest were welcomed and introduced themselves. 3. Minutes Approval. The minutes from the July 2008 ROP meeting at NFPA HQ (see Committee webpage to review minutes) and from the Conference call held on March 19, 2009 were approved without amendment. 4. Staff Liaison s Report: a. Committee Membership Update and review of TC size and balance. b. Martha gave a PowerPoint presentation that addressed the procedures for the ROC meeting. 5. Committee Action on Public Comments. The public comments were reviewed and acted upon. Committee comments were created as needed. Balloted Committee actions will be published in the Fall 2009 Report on Comments (ROC) which will be sent to all TC members and submitters of comments by August 28, Anyone else who would like to receive a free copy can call our Publications Department at (800) or view the ROC via the NFPA website at 6. Task Groups. There were no task group reports given. The Task Group on Building Code Coordination consisted of the following members: Michael Cooper (Chair), Rich Anderson, John Dembishack, Craig Hoffmeister, Andy Minister, Richard Palluzi, Mike Pokorny, Ajay Prasad, Jim Riley, and David Rausch. 7. Next Meeting. The Committee will not meet again in this revision cycle unless there is a NITMAM received on NFPA 45 by Oct. 23, If there is a NITMAM received, there may be a conference call held to discuss the NITMAM prior to the document being debated at the NFPA World Safety Conference in Las Vegas, NV in June Adjournment. The meeting adjourned at 5 PM on April 23, Respectfully submitted, Martha H. Curtis Staff Liaison to the TC on Laboratories Using Chemicals 2

4 Address List No Phone Laboratories Using Chemicals 03/26/2013 Susan Bershad Andrew Minister Chair Battelle Northwest Laboratory 902 Battelle Blvd., MSIN J2-50 PO Box 999 Richland, WA Alternate: Jeffrey J. Foisel U 4/1/1995 Richard R. Anderson Anderson Risk Consultants 209 Goat Hill Road Lambertville, NJ SE 4/17/1998 Raymond E. Arntson Rayden Research, LLC th Street Hammond, WI SE 1/1/1991 William H. Barlen Barlen and Associates, Inc. 24 Gettysburg Court Allentown, NJ Airgas, Inc. and Purification Technologies Inc. M 1/1/1991 Michael F. Cooper Harley Ellis Devereaux Northwestern Hwy, Suite 200 Southfield, MI Alternate: Louis Hartman SE 7/16/2003 John L. Dembishack, III Connecticut Department of Construction Services Office of State Fire Marshal 1111 Country Club Road Middletown, CT Alternate: Darren G. Cooke E 7/1/1996 William A. Eckholm Firetrace International 8435 North 90th Street, Suite 2 Scottsdale, AZ Alternate: David Hoffman M 10/23/2003 Barbara L. Foster West Virginia University C. Eugene Bennett Department of Chemistry Clark Hall 100 Prospect Street, Room 217 Morgantown, WV Alternate: Stephanie Graham-Sims U 10/27/2009 Scott T. Franson The Viking Corporation 210 North Industrial Park Road Hastings, MI National Fire Sprinkler Association Alternate: Joseph R. Fowler M 8/2/2010 Kevin C. Gilkison Labconco Corporation 8811 Prospect Avenue Kansas City, MO Alternate: Luke Savage M 4/1/1996 Brian K. Goodman Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory 7000 East Avenue PO Box 808, L-344 Livermore, CA Alternate: John A. Sharry U 1/14/2005 William F. Guffey University of Maryland Office of the Fire Marshal 3115 Chesapeaike Building College Park, MD E 03/05/2012 1

5 Address List No Phone Laboratories Using Chemicals 03/26/2013 Susan Bershad Craig E. Hofmeister The Fire Consultants, Inc. 182 Briarfield Drive Apex, NC SE 1/16/2003 Michael E. Hudkins Hillsborough County Fire Rescue Fire Prevention Division 4523 New Dawn Court Lutz, FL E 03/05/2012 Jeffrey S. Kidd Hiller New England Fire Protection, Inc. 240 Ballardvale Street Wilmington, MA Fire Suppression Systems Association Alternate: Mark L. Robin IM 8/2/2010 Robert C. Klein Yale University Environmental Health & Safety 135 College Street New Haven, CT U 10/27/2009 Diane L. Kroll US Department of Veterans Affairs Veterans Health Administration 6636 Cedar Avenue South Suite 350, Room 317 Richfield, MN Alternate: Richard K. Hofman U 7/29/2005 John P. McCabe US National Institutes of Health Division of the Fire Marshal Security and Emergency Response Program 9000 Rockville Pike, Bldg. 15G-2 Bethesda, MD Alternate: Samuel A. Denny E 1/1/1989 Richard P. Palluzi ExxonMobil Research & Engineering Company 1545 Route 22 East Annandale, NJ U 7/29/2005 Paul Pelczynski Siemens Building Technologies, Inc Deerfield Parkway Buffalo Grove, IL M 7/16/2003 Rudolph Poblete Kewaunee Scientific Corporation PO Box 1842 Statesville, NC M 1/1/1985 Ajay V. Prasad Hughes Associates, Inc Commerce Drive, Suite 817 Baltimore, MD SE 1/25/2007 Peter Puhlick University of Connecticut Facilities Operations Unit 3038 Co-Generation/Central Utilities Plant Storrs, CT U 7/22/1999 David R. Quigley Babcock & Wilcox Y-12, LLC PO Box 2009, MS8048 Oak Ridge, TN U 4/17/2002 Ricardo A. Ramirez Tokio Marine Management, Inc. 800 East Colorado Boulevard Pasadena, CA I 3/1/2011 David S. Rausch Phoenix Controls Corporation 75 Discovery Way Acton, MA Alternate: Kenneth Crooks M 3/15/2007 2

6 Address List No Phone Laboratories Using Chemicals 03/26/2013 Susan Bershad Stephen E. Waller HDR CUH2A, Inc Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 501 Bethesda, MD SE 10/23/2003 Jason D. Johnson Voting Alternate The RJA Group, Inc. Rolf Jensen & Associates, Inc Northwest Freeway, Suite 330 Houston, TX Voting Alt. to RJA Rep. SE 3/2/2010 Darren G. Cooke Alternate University of Connecticut Office of the Fire Marshal 1111 Country Club Road PO Box 2794 Middletown, CT : John L. Dembishack, III E 10/1/1996 Kenneth Crooks Alternate Phoenix Controls Corporation 75 Discovery Way Acton, MA : David S. Rausch M 10/29/2012 Samuel A. Denny Alternate US National Institutes of Health Division of the Fire Marshal 9000 Rockville Pike, Bldg. 15G-2 Bethesda, MD : John P. McCabe E 10/1/1999 Jeffrey J. Foisel Alternate Dow Corning Corporation PO Box 994, Mail Stop CO42M1 Midland, MI : Andrew Minister U 3/1/2011 Joseph R. Fowler Alternate S.A. Comunale Company, Inc Newpark Drive Barberton, OH National Fire Sprinkler Association : Scott T. Franson M 8/2/2010 Stephanie Graham-Sims Alternate West Virginia University Health Sciences Center Safety Office PO Box 9004 Morgantown, WV : Barbara L. Foster U 08/09/2012 Louis Hartman Alternate Harley Ellis Devereaux Northwestern Hwy, Suite 200 Southfield, MI : Michael F. Cooper SE 4/1/1996 David Hoffman Alternate Firetrace International 8435 North 90th Street, Suite 2 Scottsdale, AZ : William A. Eckholm M 10/29/2012 Richard K. Hofman Alternate US Department of Veterans Affairs Veterans Health Administration 810 Vermont Avenue, NW VHACO 10NA8, Office of OSHA & GEMS Washington, DC : Diane L. Kroll U 10/29/2012 Joseph J. Milligan, III Alternate GlaxoSmithKline One Franklin Plaza PO Box 7929 Philadelphia, PA U 1/12/2000 3

7 Address List No Phone Laboratories Using Chemicals 03/26/2013 Susan Bershad Mark L. Robin Alternate DuPont Fluoroproducts 107 Saint Andrews Court Middletown, DE Fire Suppression Systems Association : Jeffrey S. Kidd IM 03/05/2012 Luke Savage Alternate Labconco Corporation 8811 Prospect Avenue Kansas City, MO : Kevin C. Gilkison M 10/29/2012 John A. Sharry Alternate Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory PO Box 808, L-388 Livermore, CA : Brian K. Goodman U 08/09/2012 Hal Cohen Member Emeritus HCC and Associates, Inc. 3 Mill Park Court Newark, DE SE 1/1/1995 John Fresina Member Emeritus 2101 Avalon Drive Bedford, MA SE 1/1/1978 Norman V. Steere Member Emeritus Norman V. Steere & Associates, Inc th Street North Stilwater, MN SE 1/1/1969 Susan Bershad Staff Liaison National Fire Protection Association 1 Batterymarch Park Quincy, MA /05/2012 4

8 There are only three actions a TC can take at the First Draft (ROP) meeting: 1. Resolve a Public Input (no change to the document) 2. Create a First Revision (change to the document) 3. Create Committee Input Resolve Public Input (no change to the document) TC must provide a response (Committee Statement/CS) to ALL Public Input (proposal). CS for not doing what is suggested Sample Motion: I make a motion to resolve PI#_ with the following committee statement. Approval by meeting vote (simple majority). Not subject to Ballot. Create a First Revision (change to the document) TC must create a First Revision (FR) for each change they wish to make to the document, either using Public Input for the basis of the change or not using a Public Input for the basis. One or more Public Input can be considered for the FR. All Public Input requires a response TC can use a Public Input for basis i. Sample Motion: I make a motion to revise section using PI#_ as the basis for change. Approval by meeting vote (simple majority) and final approval through ballot. TC develops revision without a Public Input for basis i. Sample Motion: I make a motion to revise section as follows. Approval by meeting vote (simple majority) and final approval through ballot. First Revisions require a committee statement Committee Input TC may create a Committee Input (CI). This replaces the old system rejected Committee Proposals. CIs will get printed in the report but will not be balloted or shown as a change in the draft. CIs are used to solicit public comments and/or as a placeholder for the comment stage. i. Sample Motion: I make a motion to create a CI with a proposed revision to section as follows. Approval by meeting vote (simple majority). Not subject to ballot. Requires a committee statement to explain the intent of making a CI.

9 Comparison to Previous Process: PREVIOUS ACTIONS NEW PROCESS ACTIONS Sample Motion 1) Committee generates a First Revision and Substantiation (CS) for change Accept or any variation of Accept (APA, APR, APP) on a public proposal 2) Committee provides response (CS) to each PI that is associated with the revision 1) I make a motion to revise section using PI#_ as the basis for change. 2) I make a motion to resolve PIs#_ through ## with the following statement Rejected Public Proposal Accepted Committee Proposal Rejected Committee Proposal Committee provides response (CS) to PI Committee generates a First Revision and Substantiation (CS) for change Committee generates a Committee Input (CI) and reason (CS) for proposed change I make a motion to resolve PI#_ with the following committee statement. I make a motion to revise section as follows. Committee generates a statement for reason for change. I make a motion to create a CI with a proposed revision to section as follows. Committee generates a statement for reason for CI. Notes: 1) All meeting actions require a favorable vote of a simple majority of the members present. 2) All First Revisions will be contained in the ballot and will require a 2/3 affirmative vote to confirm the meeting action. 3) Only the First Revisions will be balloted. PIs and CIs will be contained in the report but will not be balloted. 4) Comments may be submitted on all PIs, FRs and CIs

10 New Terms: NEW TERM Input Stage Public Input (PI) First Draft Meeting Committee Input Committee Statement (CS) First Revision (FR) First Draft Report First Draft Comment Stage Public Comment Second Draft Meeting Committee Comment Committee Action Second Revision Second Draft Report Second Draft OLD TERM ROP Stage Proposal ROP Meeting Committee Proposal that Fail Ballot Committee Statement Committee Proposal or Accepted Public Proposal ROP ROP Draft ROC Stage Public Comment ROC Meeting Committee Comment that Fail Ballot Committee Action Committee Comment or Accepted Public Comment ROC ROC Draft Note: The highlighted terms are the ones that will be most applicable at the First Draft Meeting.

11 Page 1 of 39 Public Input No. 30-NFPA [ Global Input ] Revise Tables (a) and (b) to be consistent with NFPA Codes 1, 400, and See proposed revision to Table (b) in U.S. customary units. A similar Table (a) can be created with equivalent metric units. ***Insert Table (b) here*** Additional Proposed Changes File Name 45_tbl10.1.1(b)_A2014_R.doc Description Approved The annex note to indicates that the committee was attempting to provide some correlation of maximum allowable quantities between the fire and buildings codes and the laboratory standard. However, the quantities for flammable and combustible liquids in Chapter 10 differ, in some cases, from the quantities specified in the fire and building codes. This creates a conflict between NFPA Standard 45 and NFPA Codes 1, 400, and Each of the NFPA Codes 1, 400, and 5000 state that if there is a conflict between a requirement in the Code and a requirement in a standard, the requirement in the Code shall apply. The proposed revision to Table (b) is intended to resolve this conflict. The revised quantities are consistent with quantity limits in NFPA 1, 400, and The maximum allowable quantities for flammable liquids in Chapter 10 are arbitrarily different than those specified in the Fire Code, the Hazardous Materials Code, and the Building Code. There is no technical justification presented for the different (in some cases much lower) maximum allowable quantities in NFPA 45. Having lower limits for wellprotected, well-arranged, and regulated laboratories than for unprotected, unregulated general occupancies is counterintuitive. Having to design, construct, operate, and regulate laboratory maximum allowable quantities to NFPA 45 limits in addition to fire and building code limits creates an unnecessary burden which Is not justified. Laboratories using chemicals should follow the same maximum allowable quantities as specified by the applicable fire and building codes. Submittal Date: Wed Jun 06 09:26:53 EDT 2012 in any publication of the NFPA in which this Public Input in this or another similar or derivative form is used. Except to the extent that I may lack authority to make an assignment of content identified above, I hereby warrant that I am the author of this Public Input and that I have full power and authority to enter into this

12 Proposed Table (b) Maximum Quantities of Flammable and Combustible Liquids in Sprinklered Laboratory Units Outside of Inside Liquid Storage Units (U.S. Customary Units) Lab Unit Fire Hazard Class Flammable and Combustible Liquid Class a Quantities In-Use a Maximum Quantity b per 100 ft 2 of Laboratory Unit c gal Maximum Quantity b per Laboratory Unit gal Quantities In-Use a and Storage Maximum Quantity b per 100 ft 2 of Laboratory Unit c gal Maximum Quantity b per Laboratory Unit gal A (high fire hazard) I I, II, and IIIA B (moderate fire hazard) C (low fire hazard) I I d, II, and IIIA I I, II, and IIIA D (minimal fire hazard) I I, II, and IIIA Note: For maximum container sizes, see Table a The maximum amount in-use in open systems is limited to 10 percent of the quantities listed. b See for additional requirements for instructional and educational laboratories. c The quantities per 100 ft 2 do not imply the quantities must be with that 100 ft 2 are; the quantities per 100 ft 2 are for calculation purposes to determine the total quantity allowed per laboratory work area and the total amount overall in the laboratory unit. NFPA45_tbl10.1.1(b)_A2014_R 1

13 Page 2 of 39 and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by Origin (from sources other than the submitter) Quantities are from NFPA 1, 400, and 5000.

14 Page 3 of 39 Public Input No. 1-NFPA [ New Section after ] Add new text to read as follows: Code Requirements. When the requirements of this standard differ from the requirements of applicable building or fire codes, the requirements of the code shall govern. Current Paragraph implies that that the requirements of NFPA 45 modify any requirements that might exist in applicable building and fire codes. This creates a conflict with codes such as NFPA 5000, NFPA 1, and NFPA 400. Each of the codes specify that Where the requirements of a referenced code or standard differ from the requirements of this Code, the requirements of this Code shall govern. The NFPA Standards Council has officially confirmed that it is the official position that NFPA Code requirements have priority over NFPA standards requirements whenever there is a conflict. The proposed Paragraph is necessary to resolve the conflict between this standard and the codes to provide for effective enforcement of codes, where applicable. Submittal Date: Tue Jun 05 14:31:33 EDT 2012 and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by

15 Page 4 of 39 Public Input No. 33-NFPA [ Section No ] ASTM Publications. ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, P.O. Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA ASTM D 5, Standard Test Method of Penetration of Bituminous Materials, 2006 e1. ASTM E 84, Standard Test Method for Surface Burning Characteristics of Building Materials, c. standards date updates Submitter Full Name: Marcelo Hirschler GBH International Submittal Date: Mon Dec 17 18:15:02 EST 2012 I, Marcelo Hirschler, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all By checking this box I affirm that I am Marcelo Hirschler, and I agree to be legally bound by the above and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by

16 Page 5 of 39 Public Input No. 37-NFPA [ Section No ] UL Publications. Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. 333 Pfingsten Road, Northbrook, IL ANSI/UL 723, Standard for Test for Surface Burning Characteristics of Building Materials, 2008, revised UL 1275, Standard for Flammable Liquid Cabinets, 2005, revised Update referenced standards to most recent edition as indicated. Submitter Full Name: John Bender UL LLC Submittal Date: Fri Dec 28 08:30:19 EST 2012 I, John Bender, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full rights in copyright in this Public Input (including both the Proposed Change and the Statement of Problem and Substantiation). I understand and intend that I acquire no rights, including rights as a joint author, in any publication of the NFPA in which this Public Input in this or another similar or derivative form is used. I hereby warrant that I am the author of this Public Input and that I have full power and authority to enter into this By checking this box I affirm that I am John Bender, and I agree to be legally bound by the above and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by

17 Page 6 of 39 Public Input No. 2-NFPA [ Section No ] Canopy 7* Canopy Hood. A suspended ventilating device used only to exhaust heat, water vapor, odors, and other nonhazardous materials. This is not a chemical fume hood and generally is not effective for exhausting toxic or flammable materials. The second sentence is not part of the definition but rather is explanatory material. As such, it should appear in Annex A. Submittal Date: Tue Jun 05 14:35:06 EDT 2012 and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by

18 Page 7 of 39 Public Input No. 36-NFPA [ Section No ] Instructional 31* Instructional Laboratory Unit. A laboratory unit used for education past the 12th grade and before postcollege graduate-level instruction for the purposes of instruction of six or more persons for four or more hours per day or more than 12 hours per week. A Experiments and tests conducted in instructional laboratory units are under the direct supervision of an instructor. Laboratory units used for graduate or post-graduate research are should not to be considered instructional laboratory units. Definitions should not have requirements - The second and third sentence are requirements which should be in the body of the standard or in an annex. The recommendation is that they be placed in the annex. Submitter Full Name: Marcelo Hirschler GBH International Submittal Date: Thu Dec 27 13:49:43 EST 2012 I, Marcelo Hirschler, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all By checking this box I affirm that I am Marcelo Hirschler, and I agree to be legally bound by the above and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by

19 Page 8 of 39 Public Input No. 35-NFPA [ Section No ] Laboratory Unit. An enclosed space used for experiments or tests. A laboratory unit can include offices, lavatories, and other incidental contiguous rooms maintained for or used by laboratory personnel, and corridors within the unit. It can contain one or more separate laboratory work areas. It can be an entire building. A laboratory unit is classified as A, B, C, or D in accordance with (See also Section 4.2. (See also and Annex D.) The definition should not contains requirements that address a specific section of the standard but should be generic. Submitter Full Name: Marcelo Hirschler GBH International Submittal Date: Thu Dec 27 13:45:51 EST 2012 I, Marcelo Hirschler, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all By checking this box I affirm that I am Marcelo Hirschler, and I agree to be legally bound by the above and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by

20 Page 9 of 39 Public Input No. 4-NFPA [ Section No ] Laboratory 36* Laboratory Unit. An enclosed space used for experiments or tests. A laboratory unit can include offices, lavatories, and other incidental contiguous rooms maintained for or used by laboratory personnel, and corridors within the unit. It can contain one or more separate laboratory work areas. It can be an entire building. A laboratory unit is classified as A, B, C, or D in accordance with Section 4.2. (See also Annex D.) The text following the first sentence of is not part of the definition. Rather, it is explanatory material that belongs in Annex A. The change is needed to comply with the NFPA Manual of Style. Submittal Date: Tue Jun 05 14:40:02 EDT 2012 and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by

21 Page 10 of 39 Public Input No. 6-NFPA [ Section No ] * Storage Cabinet. A cabinet for the storage of flammable and combustible liquids constructed in accordance with Section 9.5 of NFPA 30, Flammable and Combustible Liquids Code. The existing definition contains requirements to comply with NFPA 30. The NFPA Manual of Style prohibits requirements in definitions. A definition of Storage Cabinet is not needed and can be deleted. Requirements for storage cabinets are contained in and Note that the term, Storage Cabinet, is used in NFPA 30 but is not defined. Submittal Date: Tue Jun 05 14:42:54 EDT 2012 and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by

22 Page 11 of 39 Public Input No. 7-NFPA [ Section No ] A laboratory unit shall not be considered to contain an explosion hazard unless a laboratory work area within that unit contains an explosion hazard great enough to cause major property damage or serious injury outside that laboratory work area. The phrase, an explosion hazard great enough to cause major property damage or serious injury is vague, subjective, and unenforceable. The NFPA Manual of Style prohibits unenforceable terms in standards. This paragraph can be deleted from NFPA 45 without resulting in any significant change in the intent of the standard. Submittal Date: Tue Jun 05 14:44:02 EDT 2012 and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by

23 Page 12 of 39 Public Input No. 8-NFPA [ Section No ] The required construction of laboratory units shall be in accordance with Table Table Separation Requirements and Height Allowances for Laboratory Units Protected by Sprinklers Laboratory Unit a Area of Lab Unit Fire Separation b Permitted Stories Above Grade A 929 m 2 ( 10,000 ft 2 ) 2 hours 1 3 c >929 m 2 (>10,000 ft 2 ) Not permitted d B 929 m 2 ( 10,000 ft 2 ) 1hour 1 3 c 929 m 2 ( 10,000 ft 2 ) 2 hours 4 6 c >929 m 2 (>10,000 ft 2 ) Not permitted d C Any size Not required 1 3 Any size 1 hour 4 6 Any size 2 hours Over 6 D Any size Not required No limit a Refer to Table for laboratory unit classification. b Separation in this table refers to separation from laboratory unit(s) to nonlaboratory areas and/or separations from laboratory unit(s) of equal or lower hazard classification. c Not allowed in structures below grade. d Labs of this classification and size are not permitted.

24 Page 13 of 39 NFPA 45 requires automatic sprinkler protection only for new laboratories. Existing laboratories are not required to be protected by automatic sprinklers. Table applies only to laboratories protected by sprinklers. The additional text in the title is needed to clarify that the separation and height requirements only apply to sprinklered laboratories and not to existing, non-sprinklered laboratories. Submittal Date: Tue Jun 05 14:45:06 EDT 2012 and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by

25 Page 14 of 39 Public Input No. 9-NFPA [ New Section after ] Add new text to read as follows: Table for separation requirements applies to existing, nonsprinklered laboratory units. See proposed Table ***Insert Table here*** Additional Proposed Changes File Name 45_tbl5.1.5_A2014_R.doc Description Approved Only new laboratories are required to be protected by automatic sprinklers in Existing laboratories are permitted to be nonsprinklered. Table provides separation requirements only for sprinklered laboratory units. Separation requirements for nonsprinklered laboratory units are needed to be specified in the standard. Proposed Paragraph and Table provide the needed information. Proposed Table is based on NFPA , Table 3-1(b) for nonsprinklered laboratory units. Submittal Date: Tue Jun 05 14:46:37 EDT 2012 and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by

26 Proposed Table Separation Requirements For Existing, Nonsprinklered Laboratory Units Laboratory Unit Fire Hazard Class A B C D Area of Laboratory Unit (ft 2 ) Required Fire Separation Construction Types I and II Construction Types III, IV, and V <1,000 1 hr 2 hr 1,001 2,000 1 hr Not permitted 2,001 5,000 2 hr Not permitted 5,001 10,000 Not permitted Not permitted >10,001 Not permitted Not permitted <20,000 1 hr 1 hr >20,000 Not permitted Not permitted <10,000 1 hr 1 hr >10,000 1 hr 1 hr <10,000 1 hr 1 hr >10,000 1 hr 1 hr NFPA45_tbl5.1.5_A2014_R 1

27 Page 15 of 39 Public Input No. 10-NFPA [ Section No ] Laboratory work areas, laboratory units, and chemical fume hood interiors shall be considered as unclassified electrically with respect to Article 500 of NFPA 70, National Electrical Code. Exception : Under some conditions of hazard, it could be necessary to classify a laboratory work area, or a part thereof, as a hazardous location, for the purpose of designating the electrical installations. [See (electric motors) and (refrigerators).] The NFPA Manual of Style prohibits exceptions used in this manner. The text is more appropriately explanatory material and should appear in Annex A. Submittal Date: Tue Jun 05 14:48:41 EDT 2012 and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by

28 Page 16 of 39 Public Input No. 12-NFPA [ Section No ] All laboratory units shall be provided with fire protection appropriate to the fire hazard, as follows: (1) Portable fire extinguishers (see Section 6.4 ) (2) Fire alarm systems (see Section 6.5 ) (3) Evacuation and emergency plans (see ) The phrase, appropriate to the hazard is vague, subjective, and unenforceable. The NFPA Manual of Style prohibits unenforceable terms in standards. The requirements in are adequately covered in 6.4, 6.5, and 6.6. This paragraph can be deleted from NFPA 45 without resulting in any significant change in the intent of the standard. Submittal Date: Wed Jun 06 08:52:50 EDT 2012 and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by

29 Page 17 of 39 Public Input No. 13-NFPA [ Section No ] In addition to the fire protection specified in 6.1.1, laboratory units under some conditions shall be provided with automatic extinguishing systems (see Section 6.2 ) and inside standpipe and hose systems (see Section 6.3 ). The phrase, under some conditions is vague, subjective, and unenforceable. The NFPA Manual of Style prohibits unenforceable terms in standards. The requirements in are adequately covered in 6.2 and 6.3. This paragraph can be deleted from NFPA 45 without resulting in any significant change in the intent of the standard. Submittal Date: Wed Jun 06 08:53:51 EDT 2012 and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by

30 Page 18 of 39 Public Input No. 14-NFPA [ Section No ] Certain critical areas shall require special consideration, including, but not limited to, the following: (1) Handling and storage of chemicals, flammable and combustible liquids, and gases (2) Open flame and spark-producing equipment work permit system (3) Arrangements and use of portable electrical cords (4) Smoking area controls This entire paragraph is very vague. Except for the listed items, the certain critical areas, which are not limited to the listed items, are not specified. For the listed items, the special considerations are not specified. The NFPA Manual of Style prohibits unenforceable terms in standards. This paragraph can be deleted from NFPA 45 without resulting in any significant change in the intent of the standard. Submittal Date: Wed Jun 06 08:54:44 EDT 2012 and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by

31 Page 19 of 39 Public Input No. 15-NFPA [ Section No ] When a laboratory work area or a laboratory unit is considered to contain an explosion hazard, as defined in and 4.3.2, appropriate protection shall be provided for the occupants of the laboratory work area, the laboratory unit, adjoining laboratory units, and non-laboratory areas as specified in (See Annex C for further information.) The phrases is considered to and appropriate are vague and unenforceable and should be removed. The required protection is described in Submittal Date: Wed Jun 06 08:55:49 EDT 2012 and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by

32 Page 20 of 39 Public Input No. 16-NFPA [ Section No. 7.2 ] 7.2 Explosion-Resistant Construction. When explosion-resistant construction is used, adequately designed explosion resistance shall be achieved by the use of one of the following methods: (1) Reinforced concrete walls (2) Reinforced and fully grouted concrete block walls (3) Steel walls (4) Steel plate walls with energy-absorbing linings (5) Barricades, such as those used for explosives operations, constructed of reinforced concrete, sand-filled/wood-sandwich walls, wood-lined steel plate, or earthen or rock berms (6) Specifically engineered construction assemblies The phrase is vague and unenforceable. Submittal Date: Wed Jun 06 08:57:45 EDT 2012 and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by

33 Page 21 of 39 Public Input No. 17-NFPA [ Section No ] * Laboratory ventilation systems shall be designed to ensure that fire hazards and risks are minimized. Minimization of hazards and risks is a highly subjective concept. Paragraph is vague, subjective, and unenforceable. The NFPA Manual of Style prohibits unenforceable terms in standards. This paragraph can be deleted from NFPA 45 without resulting in any significant change in the intent of the standard. Submittal Date: Wed Jun 06 08:59:03 EDT 2012 and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by

34 Page 22 of 39 Public Input No. 18-NFPA [ Section No ] * Air exhausted from chemical fume hoods and other special local exhaust systems shall not be recirculated. (See also ) prohibits recirculation of fumes, vapors, or gases prohibits recirculation of air from chemical fume hoods allows energy conservation devices, such as ductless hoods, that recirculate filtered air under certain conditions creates a conflict with and should be deleted. Submittal Date: Wed Jun 06 08:59:58 EDT 2012 and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by

35 Page 23 of 39 Public Input No. 19-NFPA [ Section No ] * Canopy hoods shall not be used in lieu of chemical fume hoods. By definition, a canopy hood is a suspended device use only to exhaust heat, vapor, odors, and other nonhazardous materials. This is not a chemical hood and generally is not effective for exhausting toxic or flammable materials. By definition, a chemical fume hood is a ventilated enclosure designed to contain and exhaust fumes, gases, vapors, mists, and particulate matter generated within the hood interior. To state that canopy hoods shall not be used in lieu of chemical fume hoods is simply restating the difference in their definitions. This paragraph adds noting to the standard and should be deleted. Submittal Date: Wed Jun 06 09:01:49 EDT 2012 and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by

36 Page 24 of 39 Public Input No. 20-NFPA [ Section No. 8.8 [Excluding any Sub-Sections] ] (See also alsosection and Section ) covers ventilation and not construction and should not be referenced in 8.8 on construction. Submittal Date: Wed Jun 06 09:03:03 EDT 2012 and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by

37 Page 25 of 39 Public Input No. 21-NFPA [ Section No ] The fire extinguishing system shall be suitable to extinguish fires within the chemical fume hood under the anticipated conditions of use. A suitable fire extinguishing system is vague, subjective, and unenforceable. The NFPA Manual of Style prohibits unenforceable terms in standards. Providing a fire protection system in accordance with would be deemed to comply with the intent of Paragraph can be deleted from NFPA 45 without resulting in any significant change in the intent of the standard. Submittal Date: Wed Jun 06 09:04:03 EDT 2012 and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by

38 Page 26 of 39 Public Input No. 22-NFPA [ Section No ] Proper door Door operation for egress shall be maintained when the supply system shuts down and the lab exhaust system operates, creating a pressure differential. "Proper door operation is vague. It should be sufficient to simply state that Door operation shall be maintained... If the committee desires to be more specific on door operation, the standard might specify that the force to open existing side-hinged swinging doors shall not exceed 50 lbf (222 N) applied to the latch style, which is the requirement for egress doors in NFPA 101. Submittal Date: Wed Jun 06 09:04:55 EDT 2012 and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by

39 Page 27 of 39 Public Input No. 23-NFPA [ Section No ] * Perchloric acid heated above ambient temperatures shall only be used in a chemical fume hood specifically designed for its use and identified as follows: FOR PERCHLORIC ACID OPERATIONS Exception : Hoods not specifically designed for use with perchloric acid shall be permitted to be used or in hoods where the perchloric vapors are trapped and scrubbed before they are released into the hood. (See also ) To delete the exception in accordance with the NFPA Manual of Style. Submittal Date: Wed Jun 06 09:06:20 EDT 2012 and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by

40 Page 28 of 39 Public Input No. 32-NFPA [ New Section after ] The organization should maintain a compatible spill kit for the chemicals stored or used within the lab. All personnel should be trained at least annually in its use. While quantities are limited, any liquid that may be corrosive could erode other containers resulting in an adverse reaction with other chemicals. Additionally, occupants of the lab trying to contain a spill or clean a spill without the proper training and equipment could make the situation worse. Submitter Full Name: Kelly Nicolello Western Regional Fire Code Dev Submittal Date: Thu Aug 16 11:50:53 EDT 2012 I, Kelly Nicolello, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full rights in copyright in this Public Input (including both the Proposed Change and the Statement of Problem and Substantiation). I understand and intend that I acquire no rights, including rights as a joint author, in any publication of the NFPA in which this Public Input in this or another similar or derivative form is used. I hereby warrant that I am the author of this Public Input and that I have full power and authority to enter into this By checking this box I affirm that I am Kelly Nicolello, and I agree to be legally bound by the above and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by

41 Page 29 of 39 Public Input No. 24-NFPA [ Section No [Excluding any Sub-Sections] ] Chemical inventories in each laboratory unit shall be maintained within the maximum allowable quantities specified in the applicable fire prevention code or building code except as modified in Chapter 10 for buildings with more than three stories. The annex note to indicates that the committee was attempting to provide some correlation of maximum allowable quantities between the fire and buildings codes and the laboratory standard. However, the quantities for flammable and combustible liquids in Chapter 10 differ, in some cases, from the quantities specified in the fire and building codes. This creates a conflict between NFPA Standard 45 and NFPA Codes 1, 400, and Each of the NFPA Codes 1, 400, and 5000 state that if there is a conflict between a requirement in the Code and a requirement in a standard, the requirement in the Code shall apply. The proposed revision to is intended to resolve this conflict. The maximum allowable quantities for flammable liquids in Chapter 10 are arbitrarily different than those specified in the Fire Code, the Hazardous Materials Code, and the Building Code. There is no technical justification presented for the different (in some cases much lower) maximum allowable quantities in NFPA 45. Having lower limits for wellprotected, well-arranged, and regulated laboratories than for unprotected, unregulated general occupancies is counterintuitive. Having to design, construct, operate, and regulate laboratory maximum allowable quantities to NFPA 45 limits in addition to fire and building code limits creates an unnecessary burden which Is not justified. Laboratories using chemicals should follow the same maximum allowable quantities as specified by the applicable fire and building codes. Submittal Date: Wed Jun 06 09:12:18 EDT 2012 and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by

42 Page 30 of ] Public Input No. 25-NFPA [ Sections , , Sections , , Maximum allowable quantities shall be reduced by 50 percent for Class B in laboratory units located above the third floor Maximum allowable quantities shall be reduced by 25 percent for Class C and Class D laboratory units located on the fourth through sixth floors of a building Maximum allowable quantities shall be reduced by 50 percent for Class C and Class D laboratory units located above the sixth floor. first floor shall be reduced as follows: (a) Second Floor 75% (b) Third Floor 50% (c) Fourth through Sixth Floor 12.5% (d) Seventh through Ninth Floor 5% Despite the difference between Laboratory Units in this standard and Control Areas in the building and fire codes, there is no justification for having different reductions in maximum allowable quantities for upper stories in the standard which differ from those in the codes. The proposed change harmonizes the MAQ reductions in the standard with the MAQ reductions in the codes. The MAQ reductions in Chapter 9 differ from the MAQ reductions specified in the fire and building codes. This creates a conflict between NFPA Standard 45 and NFPA Codes 1, 400, and Each of the NFPA Codes 1, 400, and 5000 state that if there is a conflict between a requirement in the Code and a requirement in a standard, the requirement in the Code shall apply. The proposed revision to is intended to resolve this conflict. The maximum allowable quantity reductions in Chapter 9 are arbitrarily different than those specified in the Fire Code, the Hazardous Materials Code, and the Building Code. There is no technical justification presented for the different factors in NFPA 45. Having to design, construct, operate, and regulate laboratory maximum allowable quantities to NFPA 45 limits in addition to fire and building code limits creates an unnecessary burden which Is not justified. Laboratories using chemicals should follow the same maximum allowable quantities as specified by the applicable fire and building codes.

43 Page 31 of 39 Submittal Date: Wed Jun 06 09:13:29 EDT 2012 and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by

44 Page 32 of 39 Public Input No. 26-NFPA [ Section No ] Electric motors shall be suitable for Class I, Division 2 locations when flammable and combustible liquids or flammable gas concentrations can produce hazardous concentrations of flammable mixtures.exception : Electric motors shall be exempt from this requirement if they Electric motors that are located in chemical fume hoods or provided with special local ventilation that the will prevent flammable concentrations of gases or vapors from reaching the motor shall not be required to be listed or labeled for Class I, Division 2 hazardous locations. The NFPA Manual of Style prohibits the use of exceptions in this manner. The proposed revision deletes the exceptions and creates an new paragraph that contains the intent of the deleted exception. Submittal Date: Wed Jun 06 09:15:08 EDT 2012 and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by

45 Page 33 of 39 Public Input No. 31-NFPA [ Section No ] An emergency gas shutoff device in an accessible location near at the least one room exit access door shall be provided in addition to the manual pointof-use valve in each educational and instructional laboratory space that has a piped gas dispensing valve. Some code officials are interpreting the phrase "exit" to mean at the stairway door or door that leads to the outside. I think the intent was to have the device inside the room near the exit access door that typically leads to a building corridor. Submitter Full Name: Hal Cohen HCC and Associates, Inc. Submittal Date: Wed Jun 06 09:32:04 EDT 2012 I, Hal Cohen, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full rights in copyright in this Public Input (including both the Proposed Change and the Statement of Problem and Substantiation). I understand and intend that I acquire no rights, including rights as a joint author, in any publication of the NFPA in which this Public Input in this or another similar or derivative form is used. I hereby warrant that I am the author of this Public Input and that I have full power and authority to enter into this By checking this box I affirm that I am Hal Cohen, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright Assignment and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by checking this box, I am creating an electronic signature that will, upon my submission of this form, have the same legal force and effect as a handwritten signature

46 Page 34 of 39 Public Input No. 27-NFPA [ Section No ] * Domestic refrigerators Refrigerators, freezers, and other cooling equipment which are not approved for Class I hazardous locations shall be permitted to store or cool flammable liquids if modified as follows: (1) Any electrical equipment located within the outer shell, within the storage compartment, on the door, or on the door frame shall meet the requirements for Class I, Division 1 locations, as described in Article 501 of NFPA 70, National Electrical Code. (2) Electrical equipment mounted on the outside of the storage compartment shall be installed in one of the following ways: (a) (b) (c) To meet the requirements for Class I, Division 2 locations To be located above the storage compartment To be located on the outside surface of the equipment where exposure to hazardous concentrations of vapors will be minimal The concern covered by this paragraph is not limited to domestic (e.g., household use) refrigerators but also includes commercial refrigerators which are not approved for hazardous locations. The revised text is more inclusive and reflects the primary intent to apply to cooling equipment which is not listed for hazardous locations but which may be suitable if modified as required by this paragraph. Submittal Date: Wed Jun 06 09:17:55 EDT 2012 and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by

47 Page 35 of 39 Public Input No. 28-NFPA [ Section No ] Refrigerators, freezers, and cooling equipment located in a laboratory work area designated as a Class I location, as specified in the Exception to 5.6.2, shall be approved for Class I, Division 1 or 2 locations and shall be installed in accordance with Article 501 of NFPA 70, National Electrical Code. To conform to the NFPA Manual of Style, the exception to should be deleted. (See separate proposal.) The reference to the Exception to can be deleted in without creating any change in the intent of the requirement stated in Submittal Date: Wed Jun 06 09:19:10 EDT 2012 and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by