Report on Proposals Copyright, NFPA NFPA 10 Report of the Committee on

Transcription

1 Report of the Committee on Committee Scope: This Committee shall have primary responsibility for documents on the installation, maintenance, and use of portable fire Portable Fire Extinguishers extinguishers and equipment. Does not apply to permanently installed fire extinguishing systems even though portions of those systems are portable, such David J. Burkhart, Chair as hose and nozzles, which may be attached to a fixed supply of extinguishing agent. Code Consultants, Inc., MO [SE] This list represents the membership at the time the Committee was balloted on the text of this edition. Since that time, changes in the membership may Richard J. Fairclough, Secretary have occurred. A key to classifications is found at the front of this book. Brooks Equipment Company, Inc., NC [M] The Report of the Technical Committee on Portable Fire Extinguishers is presented for adoption. James C. Elenbaas, Jr., Michigan Dept. of Consumer & Industry Services, MI [E] Fred B. Goodnight, Amerex Corporation, AL [M] Rep. Compressed Gas Association Ernest E. Horvath, Reliable Fire Equipment, IL [IM] Rep. National Assn. of Fire Equipment Distributors Robert Kasiski, FM Approvals/FM Global, RI [I] Rep. FM Global Michael J. Laderoute, MJL Associates, Inc., VA [M] Rep. Fire Equipment Manufacturers Association Emil W. Misichko, Underwriters Laboratories Inc., IL [RT] J. R. Nerat, Badger Fire Protection/Kidde, MI [M] Rep. NFPA Industrial Fire Protection Section James A. Oldham, Duke Power Company, NC [U] Rep. Edison Electric Institute Richard R. Osman, Schirmer Engineering Corporation, IL [I] Joseph E. Parkany, Nuclear Service Organization, DE [I] George Unger, Underwriters Laboratories of Canada, Canada [RT] Klaus Wahle, US Coast Guard, DC [E] Alternates Warren D. Bonisch, Schirmer Engineering Corporation, TX [I] (Alt. to Richard R. Osman) Randall Eberly, US Coast Guard Headquarters, DC [E] (Alt. to Klaus Wahle) James A. Engman, Ansul Inc./Tyco, WI [M] (Alt. to Michael J. Laderoute) Rod Getz, Getz Fire Equipment, IL [M] (Alt. to Ernest E. Horvath) Michael T. Larabel, Alticor, Inc., MI [M] (Alt. to J. R. Nerat) George E. Laverick, Underwriters Laboratories Inc., IL [RT] (Alt. to Emil W. Misichko) Byron J. Sarago, Detroit Edison Company, MI [U] (Alt. to James A. Oldham) Peter M. Shank, Nuclear Service Organization, DE [I] (Alt. to Joseph E. Parkany) David C. Smith, Factory Mutual Research Corporation, MA [I] (Alt. to Robert Kasiski) Nonvoting Marshall Petersen, Marshall Petersen & Company, IL [SE] (Member Emeritus) This Report was prepared by the Technical Committee on Portable Fire Extinguishers, and proposes for adoption, a complete revision to NFPA 10, Standard for Portable Fire Extinguishers, 2002 edition. NFPA is published in Volume 1 of the 2004/2005 National Fire Codes and in separate pamphlet form. This Report has been submitted to letter ballot of the Technical Committee on Portable Fire Extinguishers, which consists of 14 voting members; of whom 13 voted affirmatively, and 1 ballot was not returned (Elenbaas). Mr. Laverick voted affirmatively with these comments: Comment 1) The ballot should have been segmented so that each proposal could have been voted separately allowing the flexibility to accept or reject the individual committee action. Comment 2) Proposal 10-2 (Log #102) The committee action on paragraph returned the proposal to the current wording in the standard requiring extinguishers to meet or exceed all the requirements of one of the following test standards. In reality, extinguishers may not be able to meet or exceed all the requirements within the standards since requirements to do not pertain to all extinguishers covered by the document. An example is a fixed extinguisher cannot be tested to the requirements for the hose. Therefore, only applicable parts of the standard can be used to test the extinguisher. The committee should reconsider acceptance of this proposal in its entirety. Comment 3) Proposal (Log #2) The committee accepted the requirement for large capacity extinguishers for use on Class B Fires for Pressurized Flammable Liquids and Pressurized Gas Fires with a discharge rate of 1 lb. per second. There has been no data provided to the committee to justify this flow rate. The committee should have rejected this proposal until appropriate substantiation is provided that this flow rate is adequate for this application. Mr. Nerated voted affirmatively with these comments: Editorial issues/comments Table note references need update (4.3.4 = 5.5.3) (4.3 = 5.5) and repeated? and same? 3-Dimensional Fire Reference was left out (10-36 (Log #36) Staff Liaison : Mark T. Conroy 10-1

2 10-1 Log #1 Final Action: Reject (Entire Document) Submitter: Zeb Wilson, General Fire Extinguisher Service, Inc. Recommendation: Add text to read as follows: All dry chemical fire extinguishers shall have manufacture date in a universal location on all makes and models. Substantiation: AHJ s Fire Ext. Technicians, and owner can find date of manufacture of fire extinguisher with ease, so that it can be easily identified for six (6) year maintenance or hydro-testing. Committee Statement: The date of manufacture is provided on the extinguisher and the committee feels that it is unnecessary to require it in the same location for all extinguishers. UL 299 requires this information on the extinguisher. 10-1a Log #CP6 Final Action: Accept (Entire Document) Submitter: Technical Committee on Portable Fire Extinguishers Recommendation: The Technical Committee on Portable Fire Extinguishers proposes a complete revision to NFPA 10, Standard for Portable Fire Extinguishers, as shown at the end of this report. Substantiation: Revised the standard to accomplish the following: 1. Each requirement (sentence) needs a separate paragraph number. 2. Reorganized the document for a more logical flow. 3. Moved explanatory text to the Annex. 4. Reworded some body paragraphs which were unclear in order to clearly state requirements Log #102 Final Action: Accept in Principle (1.3.1) Submitter: Bob Eugene, Underwriters Laboratories Inc. Recommendation: Revise text to read: Portable fire extinguishers used to comply with this standard shall be listed and labeled and shall comply with meet or exceed all the applicable requirements of one of the fire test standards and one of the appropriate performance standards shown below: (1) Fire Test Standards: (a) ANSI/UL 711, Standard for Rating and Fire Testing of Fire Extinguishers (b) CAN/ULC-S M90, Standard for Rating and Fire Testing of Fire Extinguishers and Class D Extinguishing Media (2) Performance Standards: (a) Carbon Dioxide Types. ANSI/UL 154, Standard for Carbon - Dioxide Fire Extinguishers; CAN/ULC-S503-M90, Standard for Carbon Dioxide Hand and Wheeled Fire Extinguishers (b) Dry Chemical Types. ANSI/UL 299, Standard for Dry Chemical Fire Extinguishers; CAN/ULC-S M86, Standard for Dry Chemical and Dry Powder Hand and Wheeled Fire Extinguishers (c) Water Types. ANSI/UL 626, Standard for 2 1/2-Gallon Stored-Pressure, Water-Type Fire Extinguishers; CAN/ULC-S507-92, Standard for 9 Litre Stored Pressure Water Type Fire Extinguishes (d) Halon Types. ANSI/UL 1093, Standard for Halogenated Agent Fire Extinguishers; CAN/ULC-S512-M87, Standard for Halogenated Agent Hand and Wheeled Fire Extinguishers (e) Film-Forming Foam Types. ANSI/UL 8, Standard for Foam Fire Extinguishers ; ULC-S554-98, Standard for Foam Fire Extinguishers (f) Halocarbon Type. ANSI/ UL 2129, Standard for Halocarbon Clean Agent Fire Extinguishers. Substantiation: 1) Not all extinguishers are subjected to all requirements contained in the fire test and performance standards. 2) Added a reference to ULC-S This standard will be added to under a separate proposal. 3) Revise text to reflect current titles of referenced standards. Title modifications include adding a hyphen in carbon-dioxide in 1.3.1(2)(a) for UL 154. Revise text to read: Portable fire extinguishers used to comply with this standard shall be listed and labeled and shall meet or exceed all the requirements of one of the fire test standards and one of the appropriate performance standards shown below: (1) Fire Test Standards: (a) ANSI/UL 711, Standard for Rating and Fire Testing of Fire Extinguishers (b) CAN/ULC-S M90, Standard for Rating and Fire Testing of Fire Extinguishers and Class D Extinguishing Media (2) Performance Standards: (a) Carbon Dioxide Types. ANSI/UL 154, Standard for Carbon - Dioxide Fire Extinguishers; CAN/ULC-S503-M90, Standard for Carbon Dioxide Hand and Wheeled Fire Extinguishers (b) Dry Chemical Types. ANSI/UL 299, Standard for Dry Chemical Fire Extinguishers; CAN/ULC-S M86, Standard for Dry Chemical and Dry Powder Hand and Wheeled Fire Extinguishers (c) Water Types. ANSI/UL 626, Standard for 2 1/2-Gallon Stored-Pressure, Water-Type Fire Extinguishers; CAN/ULC-S507-92, Standard for 9 Litre Stored Pressure Water Type Fire Extinguishes (d) Halon Types. ANSI/UL 1093, Standard for Halogenated Agent Fire Extinguishers; CAN/ULC-S512-M87, Standard for Halogenated Agent Hand and Wheeled Fire Extinguishers (e) Film-Forming Foam Types. ANSI/UL 8, Standard for Foam Fire Extinguishers ; ULC-S554-98, Standard for Foam Fire Extinguishers (f) Halocarbon Type. ANSI/ UL 2129, Standard for Halocarbon Clean Agent Fire Extinguishers. Committee Statement: The committee believes that the current wording ensures compliance Log #103 Final Action: Accept (1.3.4) Submitter: Bob Eugene, Underwriters Laboratories Inc. Recommendation: Revise text to read: Extinguishers listed for the Class C rating shall not contain an agent that is a conductor of electricity. In addition to successfully meeting the requirements of ANSI/UL 711, Standard for Rating and Fire Testing of Fire Extinguishers, water-based agents shall be tested in accordance with ASTM D , Standard Test for Electrical Conductivity and Resistivity of a Flowing High Purity Water Sample. Fire extinguishers containing water-based agents that have a conductivity higher than 1.00 microsiemens/cm at 25 C (77 F) shall be considered a conductor of electricity and therefore shall not be rated Class C. This requirement shall apply only to water-based extinguishers manufactured after August 15, Substantiation: Revise title of UL 711 to reflect current title of bi-national standard Log #15 Final Action: Accept in Principle in Part (1.5.4) Recommendation: Add: 9) Any extinguisher that must be inverted to operate. 10) Any dry chemical extinguisher using a stainless steel shell 11) Any stored pressure extinguisher manufactured prior to ) Any extinguishers with 4B, 6B, 8B, 12B and 16B ratings. Substantiation: None of these extinguishers have had OEM parts and/or listed recharge chemicals available for some time and therefore have lost their listing. Inverting type extinguishers will confuse novice operators. Pre-1955 extinguishers used a different rating system that will confuse local authorities. in Part Add: 9) Any extinguisher that must be inverted to operate. 10) Any stored pressure extinguisher manufactured prior to ) Any extinguishers with 4B, 6B, 8B, 12B and 16B ratings. Committee Statement: The committee found no technical reason for prohibiting the dry chemical stainless steel extinguishers Log #68 Final Action: Accept (1.5.4) Recommendation: Add new text to read: (9) Pressurized water fire extinguisher manufactured prior to Substantiation: Pressurized water fire extinguishers manufactured prior to 1971 were not designed to meet pressure vessel standard and brass collars were joined to stainless steel sheels by brazing. This joint often failed due to corrosion of the dissimilar metals. Note: Supporting material is available for review at NFPA Headquarters Log #17 Final Action: Accept in Principle ( ) Recommendation: New text to read as follows: Stored pressure extinguishers manufactured prior to October 1984 shall be removed from service at the next 6 year maintenance interval, the next hydrotest interval, or both. Substantiation: Sweeping changes were made to UL standard 299 in 1984 based on improving novice operation as a result of extensive live fire testing by UL, FEMA, and NFPA in the 1970 s. 10-2

3 Add new text to read as follows: Dry chemical stored pressure extinguishers manufactured prior to October 1984 shall be removed from service at the next 6 year maintenance interval or the next hydrotest interval, whichever comes first. Committee Statement: The committee accepted the concept and made editorial changes Log #19 Final Action: Reject (1.5.8) Recommendation: Revise as follows: Fire extinguishers subject to dislodgment located in high traffic areas, either including but not limited to foot traffic or vehicular such as hand carts or forklifts, installed under conditions where they are subject to dislodgment shall be installed in manufacturer s strap-type brackets or cabinets specifically designed to prevent accidental dislodgment, cope with this problem. Substantiation: Dislodgement of extinguishers in these areas is becoming an increasing problem resulting in personal injury, and/or damage to the extinguisher. Committee Statement: The proposed text limits to specific circumstances for dislodgement. Brackets should be provided wherever conditions for dislodgement exist Log #133 Final Action: Reject (1.5.8) Submitter: Marshall Petersen, Marshall Petersen & Co. Recommendation: Revise to read: Fire extinguishers installed under conditions where they are subject to dislodgment, caused by severe vibration shall be installed in manufacturer s strap-type brackets specifically designed to cope with this problem. Substantiation: Section requires that fire extinguishers subject to dislodgment be installed in strap-type brackets. Section recommends that fire extinguishers shall be located along normal paths of travel. Therefore, any fire extinguisher that can be dislodged by bumping or physical force must be installed in a strap-type bracket. This was not the original intent as stated in the 1973 edition. Section 1133 stated Extinguishers installed under conditions where they are subject to severe vibration shall be installed in brackets specifically designed to cope with this problem. When this Section was revised for the 1974 edition, (1-4.6) the words severe vibration were replaced with dislodgment. At this time I served as Chair of the Rewrite Subcommittee. To the best of my recollection, severe vibration was accidentally left out of the revision. The 1974 wording in continued through the next 8 editions without comment or known problems. Recently, I became aware of litigation where fire extinguishers, located in normal paths of travel, were bumped and dislodged causing an accident. One litigation case specifically referred to dislodgment and based their allegations on the lack of a strap-type bracket not being furnished and used for fire extinguishers located in normal paths of travel. The UL/ANSI Fire Extinguisher Standards require compliance with a vibration test, that does not include dislodgment due to bumping or the application of a physical force, which would dislodge the fire extinguisher from the hanger supplied by the manufacturer. General Note: Chapter 1 of the 2002 edition does not contain specific data on mounting fire extinguishers on round building columns, catwalk railings, and other locations, which may require special provisions, materials and/or brackets. Possibly a Task Group could be appointed to submit recommended text and, if appropriate, descriptive Appendix material. Committee Statement: The proposed text limits to specific circumstances for dislodgment. Brackets should be provided wherever conditions for dislodgment exist Log #4 Final Action: Reject (1.6.3) Submitter: Hal Cohen, HCC and Associates Recommendation: Add sentence to read as follows: Fire extinguishers shall not be located in stairways. Substantiation: Fire extinguishers in stairways is a bad idea. They are not conspicuous, can impede exit travel getting them while others evacuate, and results in an occupant leaving the safety of the stair to reenter the building. The code should clearly state not put fire extinguisher in stairs. Committee Statement: The committee agrees with the intent of the submitter but feels that this should be addressed in NFPA 101. NFPA 10 addresses more than just building installations Log #3 Final Action: Reject ( and A.1.6.6) Submitter: Richard H. Bell, Bell s Fire Stop, Inc. Recommendation: 1. Delete Hazardous Material Identification Systems (HMIS) Labels 2. Delete could include arrows, lights, signs, or coding of the wall or column Insert should include signs stating fire extinguisher or fire extinguisher inside and be located no further than 3 ft away from extinguisher. Substantiation: 1. OSHA plainly states they have jurisdiction in these matters. NFPA should not be placing restrictions to what OSHA is trying to accomplish. 2. Regarding acceptable means of identifying fire extinguishers, the standard is too ambiguous. I ve seen flagrant violations and totally ignoring this standard. Committee Statement: HMIS labels should not be placed on the front of the extinguisher. The committee s recommendation is that other means such as arrows, lights, or codes should be considered. Paragraph requires that locations of extinguishers be clearly marked. A 3 foot restriction might not be appropriate for all locations Log #100 Final Action: Reject (Chapter 2) Recommendation: Add the following informational reference: NAFED. National Association of Fire Equipment Distributors, 104 S. Michigan Ave., Suite 300, Chicago, IL NFPA References to Portable Fire Extinguishers, Second Edition, 2004 Substantiation: This publication provides a review of approximately 70 NFPA documents that reference fire extinguishers. A copy of the publication is available at NFPA. Committee Statement: The document is not referenced in the standard Log #104 Final Action: Accept (2.3.4) Submitter: Bob Eugene, Underwriters Laboratories Inc. Recommendation: Revise text to read: UL Publications. Underwriters Laboratories Inc., 333 Pfingsten Road, Northbrook, IL ANSI/UL 8, Standard for Foam Fire Extinguishers, 1995 with revisions through April ANSI/UL 154, Standard for Carbon - Dioxide Fire Extinguishers, 1995 with revisions through April ANSI/UL 299, Standard for Dry Chemical Fire Extinguishers, ANSI/UL 626, Standard for 2 1/2-Gallon Stored-Pressure, Water-Type Fire Extinguishers, 1995 with revisions through March ANSI/UL 711, Standard for Rating and Fire Testing of Fire Extinguishers, ANSI/UL 1093, Standard for Halogenated Agent Fire Extinguishers, 1995 with revisions through March ANSI/UL 1803, Standard for Factory Follow-up on Third Party Certified Portable Fire Extinguishers, 1994 with revisions through July ANSI/ UL 2129, Standard for Halocarbon Clean Agent Fire Extinguishers, 1999 with revisions through April Substantiation: Update to current editions of referenced standards and revising titles as necessary. Title modifications include a hyphen in carbondioxide for UL 154. In UL 711, the first Fire was deleted in this now binational standard. Add the word Clean on UL 2129, and delete ANSI/ until such time that the standard receives ANSI approval Log #107 Final Action: Accept (2.3.5) Submitter: Bob Eugene, Underwriters Laboratories Inc. Recommendation: Revise text to read: ULC Publications. Underwriters Laboratories of Canada, 7 Crouse Underwriters Road, Scarborough Toronto, Ontario M1R 3A9 M1R 3B4, Canada. CAN/ULC-S503 -M90, Standard for Carbon Dioxide Hand and Wheeled Fire Extinguishes, 1990, amended CAN/ULC-S504-02, Standard for Dry Chemical and Dry Powder Hand and Wheeled Fire Extinguishers, 1 986, amended CAN/ULC-S507-92, Standard for 9 Litre Stored Pressure Water Type Fire Extinguishers, 1992, amended CAN/ULC-S508-02, Standard for Rating and Fire Testing of Fire Extinguishers, and Class D Extinguishing Media, 1990, amended CAN/ULC-S512 -M87, Standard for Halogenated Agent Hand and Wheeled Fire Extinguishers, 1987, amended ULC-S554-98, Standard for Foam Fire Extinguishers, 1998, amended 2001.

4 Substantiation: Update to current editions and titles of referenced standards. Update address for publications. Added reference to ULC-S based on proposal for addition of the standard in Log #97 Final Action: Accept (2.3.6) Recommendation: Update the reference publication as follows: Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, Substantiation: 2003 is the current edition of Title Log #CP2 Final Action: Accept in Principle in Part (Chapter 3 (GOT)) Submitter: Technical Committee on Portable Fire Extinguishers Recommendation: Adopt the preferred definitions from the NFPA Glossary of Terms for the following terms: Dry Chemical. (preferred) NFPA 17, 2002 ed. A powder composed of very small particles, usually sodium bicarbonate-, potassium bicarbonate-, or ammonium phosphate-based with added particulate material supplemented by special treatment to provide resistance to packing, resistance to moisture absorption (caking), and the proper flow capabilities. Dry Chemical. (secondary) NFPA 10, 2002 ed. A mixture of finely divided solid particles, usually sodium bicarbonate-, potassium bicarbonate-, or ammonium phosphate based with added particulate material supplemented by special treatment to provide resistance to packing, and moisture absorption (caking), and to promote proper flow characteristics. Inspection. (preferred) NFPA 820, 2003 ed. A visual examination of a system or portion thereof to verify that it appears to be in operating condition and is free of physical damage. Inspection. (secondary) NFPA 10, 2002 ed. A quick check that a fire extinguisher is available and is in operating condition. It is intended to give reasonable assurance that the fire extinguisher is fully charged. This is done by verifying that it is in its designated place, that it has not been actuated or tampered with, and that there is no obvious physical damage or condition to prevent its operation. Wet Chemical. (preferred) NFPA 17A, 2002 ed. Normally an aqueous solution of organic or inorganic salts or a combination thereof that forms an extinguishing agent. Wet Chemical. (secondary) NFPA 10, 2002 ed. Wet chemicals include, but are not limited to, solutions of water and potassium acetate, potassium carbonate, potassium citrate, or any combinations thereof. Wetting Agent. (preferred) NFPA 18, 1995 ed. A chemical compound that, when added to water in proper quantities, materially reduces its surface tension, increases its penetrating and spreading abilities, and might also provide emulsification and foaming characteristics. Wetting Agent. (secondary) NFPA 10, 2002 ed. A surface-active material added to water to materially reduce the surface tension of the water and thus increase penetrating and spreading characteristics. Substantiation: Adoption of preferred definitions will assist the user by providing consistent meaning of defined terms throughout the National Fire Codes. The following procedure must be followed when acting on defined terms (extract from the Glossary of Terms Definitions Procedure): 2.1 Revising Definitions Prior to revising Preferred definitions, the Glossary of Terms should be consulted to avoid the creation of additional Secondary definitions All Secondary definitions should be reviewed and eliminated where possible by the following method (in order of preference): a) adopt the preferred definition if suitable. b) modify the secondary term and/or definition to limit its use to a specific application within the scope of the document. c) request that the Standards Council determine responsibility for the term. d) request that the Standards Council authorize a secondary definition. (extract from the NFPA Manual of Style): Existing general definitions contained in the NFPA Glossary of Terms shall be used where technically accurate and correct. in Part Wet Chemical. (preferred) NFPA 17A, 2002 ed. Normally an aqueous solution of organic or inorganic salts or a combination thereof that forms an extinguishing agent. Wetting Agent. (preferred) NFPA 18, 1995 ed. A chemical compound that, when added to water in proper quantities, materially reduces its surface tension, increases its penetrating and spreading abilities, and might also provide emulsification and foaming characteristics. Committee Statement: The committee will work with the NFPA 17 committee to resove the conflict with the dry chemical definition Log #64 Final Action: Reject (Chapter 3, Monthly (or 30-Day); Quarterly; Semi-anual; Annual) Submitter: James Wendell, Sunoco, Inc. Recommendation: Add the following definitions to Chapter 3. Monthly (or 30-Day). Time frequency where the requirements should be accomplished every 30 days and should not exceed 40 days between sessions. Quarterly. Time frequency where the requirements should be accomplished every 90 days and should not exceed 120 days between sessions. Semi-annual. Time frequency where the requirements should be accomplished every 183 days and should not exceed 243 days between sessions. Annual. Time frequency where the requirements should be accomplished every 365 days and should not exceed 455 days between sessions. Substantiation: Large industrial concerns, such as those in the Petrol- Chemical Industry maintain many facilities that contain significant numbers of fire protection appliances (Pumps, Valves, Hydrants, etc.) It is difficult to maintain compliance with referenced time frequencies without clear definitions and associated grace periods. Grace periods are required for issues involving scheduling due to manpower availability (Vacations, Training, Sick Time etc.), construction, processing issues, and climate. Committee Statement: Quarterly and semi-annual are not used. The committee requires 30 day inspections (6.2.1) and annual maintenance (6.3.1). The submitter provides no rationale for extending beyond the minimums stated Log #76 Final Action: Accept in Principle (3.3 Appreciable Depth (New) ) Recommendation: Add the following definition: Appreciable Depth. Flammable liquids of appreciable depth are those with a depth greater than 1/4 in. Substantiation: The term appreciable depth is used throughout Sections 5.3 and 5.4 but the term is defined in Annex A and not the body of the standard. 1. Add the following definition: Flammable Liquids of Appreciable Depth. Flammable liquids of appreciable depth are those with a depth greater than 1/4 in. 2. Delete A.5.3. Committee Statement: Clarified the term being defined Log #69 Final Action: Reject (3.3 Certification of Personnel (New) ) Recommendation: Add a new definition to read: Certification of Personnel. A formal program of related instruction and testing as provided by a recognized organization or authority having jurisdiction. Substantiation: Adds the definition for certified personnel in conjunction with other proposals that would require maintenance be performed by certified individuals. Committee Statement: See Committee Action on Proposal (Log #78) Log #21 Final Action: Accept in Principle ( Dry Chemical Closed Recovery System) Recommendation: Add the following at the end: The system shall be constructed in a manner that will insure that no foreign material is introduced into the agent being recovered. The system shall have a means of visually inspecting the recovered agent for contaminates and type of agent. Substantiation: Gives details on what is required for a proper closed recovery system for dry chemical agents. Add the following text: Dry Chemical Closed Recovery System. The system shall be constructed in a manner that will not introduce foreign material into the agent being recovered. The system shall have a means of visually inspecting the recovered agent for contaminates. Committee Statement: Editorially revised the submitted text. 10-4

5 10-20 Log #23 Final Action: Accept in Principle ( Bracket, Cabinet, Hanger (New) ) Recommendation: New text to read as follows: Bracket. Extinguisher retention device designed and tested by extinguisher manufacturer to mount and secure a specific extinguisher model onto various surfaces. Extinguisher brackets typically incorporate releasable straps or bands to secure the fire extinguisher from any unwanted movement or dislodgment Cabinet. An identifiable and readily accessible fire extinguisher housing device designed to store and protect fire equipment from unwanted exposures. Extinguisher cabinets are available for both indoor and outdoor fire extinguisher mounting applications Hanger.- Extinguisher mounting device designed and tested by the extinguisher manufacturer for mounting a specific extinguisher model onto stationary vertical surfaces. Extinguisher hanger designs are typically intended for mounting fire extinguishers in areas free from vibration and congested areas and where accidental dislodgment is unlikely and the quick removal of unit desired. Substantiation: These three new definitions are needed to better clarify extinguisher hardware terminology and reduce confusion within the industry related to the various forms of devices available and required for properly mounting portable fire extinguishers. The fire extinguisher manufacturers and approval agencies perform various extinguisher equipment installation and retention testing to address the existing hardware mounting criteria contained with ANSI/UL standards. Some government agencies such as the USCG specifically require portable extinguishers to be mounted into Brackets meeting special retention requirements, subjected to and passing various forms of equipment vibration testing. Refer to existing NFPA 10 Standard References: 1.5.5, 1.5.7, 1.5.8, 1.5.9, , , A.1.5.7, A , F.5.2.1(3). Add new text as follows: Extinguisher Bracket. Extinguisher retention device designed to mount and secure a specific extinguisher model onto various surfaces by incorporating releasable straps or bands to secure the fire extinguisher Extinguisher Cabinet. An identifiable and readily accessible fire extinguisher housing device designed to store and protect fire equipment Extinguisher Hanger. Extinguisher mounting device designed for mounting a specific extinguisher model onto stationary vertical surfaces. Committee Statement: Editorially revised the submitted definitions Log #24 Final Action: Reject ( Extinguisher Inspection) Recommendation: Revise as follows: Extinguisher Inspection: A quick check that... Substantiation: Editorial and to be consistent with title and chapter 6 title. Committee Statement: This would create a conflict within the glossary of terms. During the last revision of the standard the term was changed to extinguisher inspection to make it a special definition for this standard Log #70 Final Action: Reject ( Maintenance) Recommendation: Add the following to the end of : Maintenance of fire extinguishers shall be performed by properly trained, qualified and certified persons(s) or company acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction. Substantiation: All individuals that provide maintenance procedures for fire extinguishers should be properly trained and certified. NAFED currently offers a national certification program for individuals in the field of portable fire extinguisher technicians. Committee Statement: Definitions should not contain requirements Log #132 Final Action: Reject ( Maintenance and 6.2.2) Submitter: Sandie Hastings, Torrance Fire Dept., CA Recommendation: In , delete the statement, It will normally reveal if hydrostatic testing or internal maintenance is required. Amend the statement to read: Determine if hydrostatic testing or internal maintenance is required, and 10-5 insert it instead in as a number (10). Substantiation: Determining the need for hydrostatic testings more appropriately located in the Inspection Procedures. The hydrostatic test due date is specified by month and year, on the cylinder. The due date should be checked more frequently, at 30-day intervals, to prevent the test from becoming past due. Only checking the due date once a year can cause the test to be past due up to a year. It should be within the scope of the visual inspection, and the ability of the equipment owner, to determine the need for a hydrostatic test, as the date is clearly indicated on the cylinder. In addition, states: The owner or the owner s agent shall be provided with a fire extinguisher instruction manual that details condensed instructions and cautions necessary to the installation, operation, inspection, and maintenance of the fire extinguisher(s). The manual shall refer to this standard as a source of detailed instruction. Consequently, the owner has been provided the knowledge and should have the option to use it. Committee Statement: It appears that the submitter has mixed inspection and maintenance requirements. The recommendation is to add this to inspection (which is a quick check). Maintenance should reveal the need for a hydrostatic test Log #72 Final Action: Reject ( Servicing) Recommendation: Add the following to the end of : Maintenance of fire extinguishers shall be performed by properly trained, qualified and certified persons(s) or company acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction. Substantiation: All individuals that provide servicing of fire extinguishers should be properly trained and certified. NAFED currently offers a national certification program for individuals in the field of portable fire extinguisher technicians. Committee Statement: Definitions should not contain requirements Log #28 Final Action: Accept in Principle (3.4.5 Residential Fire Extinguisher, , ) Recommendation: Move these items to Annex F and renumber as needed. Substantiation: These terms not used in the body of the standard. They refer to residential extinguishers only that are covered in Annex F. At the end of the two defined terms ( and ) add (see Annex F) Committee Statement: Adding the reference to Annex F accomplishes the intent of the submitter Log #26 Final Action: Accept ( Automatic Residential Fire Extinguisher Unit) Recommendation: Deleted text: Automatic Residential Fire Extinguisher Unit. A fixed extinguishing device, fitted with an automatic means of operation that is designed, tested, and listed for use on a particular type of hazard as identified on its label. Substantiation: Automatic residential fire extinguisher units are outside the scope of NFPA 10, and are included in NFPA 17A Log #71 Final Action: Accept in Principle ( Automatic Residential Fire Extinguisher Unit) Recommendation: Delete entire section. Substantiation: Not within the scope of this standard. An automatic extinguishing systems is not a portable fire extinguisher. Committee Statement: See Committee Action on Proposal (Log #26) Log #30 Final Action: Accept (3.4.8 Water Mist Fire Extinguishers) Recommendation: Revise as follows: Water Mist Fire Extinguishers. A water-type portable extinguisher containing distilled or de-ionized water and... Substantiation: More accurately describes the product.

6 10-29 Log #32 Final Action: Accept ( (New) ) Recommendation: Add: (5) Limited available personnel. Substantiation: Wheeled extinguishers have been found to be more effective than hand portables when limited personnel were available Log #124 Final Action: Accept ( ) Submitter: Jeff Gibson, American Pacific Corporation Recommendation: Revise (For halon halogenated agent-type... Substantiation: The reference to halon limits the intent to reference halogenated agents described in Log #125 Final Action: Accept ( ) Submitter: Jeff Gibson, American Pacific Corporation Recommendation: Revise (For halon halogenated agent-type... Substantiation: The reference to halon limits the intent to reference halogenated agents described in Log #126 Final Action: Accept ( ) Submitter: Jeff Gibson, American Pacific Corporation Recommendation: Revise (For halon halogenated agent-type... Substantiation: The reference to halon limits the intent to reference halogenated agents described in Log #73 Final Action: Accept (4.3.1) Recommendation: Increase the font size of the entire CAUTION notation at the end of this section. If the information is important enough to necessitate the caution the size of the font should be at least the same as that used throughout the standard. Substantiation: This editorial change allows the caution notice to be easily recognized by users of this standard Log #34 Final Action: Reject (4.3.2) Recommendation: Revise as follows: Class K Fire Extinguishers for Cooking Oil Fires. Fire extinguishers provided for the protection of cooking appliances that use combustible cooking media (vegetable or animal oils and fats) shall be listed and labeled for Class K fires. Class K fire extinguishers manufactured after January 1, 2002, shall not be equipped with extended wand type discharge devices Fire extinguishers installed specifically for the protection of cooking appliances that use combustible cooking media (animal, vegetable oils and fats) prior to June 30, 1998, shall not be required to comply with (Also see ) Wet chemical extinguishers containing a minimum of 6 liters of wet chemical and having a rating of 1B:C or 1A-1B:C that were manufactured prior to June 30, 1998 and acceptable to meet the requirements of A placard shall be conspicuously placed above or near the extinguisher (s), protecting commercial cooking operations, that states that the fire protection system shall be activated prior to using the fire extinguisher All dry chemical extinguishers that were installed to protect class K hazards shall be replaced with extinguishers with a Class K listing when the dry chemical extinguishers become due for either a 6 year maintenance or a hydrostatic test. All dry chemical extinguishers without a Class K rating used to protect a Class K hazard shall be replaced with Class K rated extinguishers before June 30, Wet chemical extinguishers with a Class K rating manufactured after January 1, 2002 shall not be equipped with an extended wand type discharge device. Substantiation: More clearly states intent of and makes it easier to read and understand. Committee Statement: The committee disagrees with the submitter on clarity of the existing text Log #74 Final Action: Reject (4.3.2) Recommendation: Delete the last sentence of the section, Class K fire extinguishers manufactured after January 1, 2002 shall not be equipped with an extended wand-type discharge device. Substantiation: NO Class K fire extinguishers are currently manufactured with an extended wand-type discharge device. Committee Statement: The committee feels that this sentence will prevent wands from being introduced Log #36 Final Action: Accept in Principle (4.3.3) Recommendation: Add text at end of paragraph: Large capacity extinguishers of 10 lb or greater and having a discharge rate of 1 lb/second or more shall be used to protect these hazards. Substantiation: More clearly defines the requirement. Increased capacity extinguishers with higher flow rates have been found to be more effective, and are of the type recommended by manufacturers. Revise to read : Three Dimensional Fires. Large capacity dry chemical extinguishers of 10 lb (4.54 KG) or greater and having a discharge rate of 1 lb/second (0.45 kg/sec) or more shall be used to protect these hazards. Committee Statement: Dry chemical is the only appropriate type of extinguisher for this type of fire Log #CP3 Final Action: Accept (4.3.1) Submitter: Technical Committee on Portable Fire Extinguishers Recommendation: Replace with the following: Extinguishers for Pressurized Flammable Liquids and Pressurized Gas Fires. Large capacity dry chemical extinguishers of 10 lb (4.54 KG) or greater and having a discharge rate of 1 lb/second (0.45 kg/sec) or more shall be used to protect these hazards. Substantiation: Added prescriptive criteria for the extinguisher that is needed Log #2 Final Action: Accept in Principle ( ) Submitter: Joshua W. Elvove Aurora, CO Recommendation: Revise as follows: * Records shall be kept on a tag or label attached to the fire extinguisher, on an inspection checklist maintained on file, or in an electronic system (e.g., bar coding) that provides a permanent record of the last twelve monthly inspections. Add the following annex note: A If using tags or labels attached to the fire extinguisher as a means for documenting monthly inspections, these tags or labels should either be affixed to the fire extinguisher or kept on file, even after the annual maintenance has been conducted, to demonstrate at least 12 months of monthly inspections have been accomplished. Substantiation: As currently written, requires a permanent record of monthly fire extinguisher inspections. This is a ridiculous requirement. As an AHJ, I only need to know if my facilities have been performing monthly inspections over the last year. Therefore, maintaining records of the last 12 months should suffice. Especially, if an electronic filing method is not being used. In reality, how does the committee think hard copy records of monthly inspections will be kept? Should the annual service tags really be kept for each extinguisher individually in perpetuity? Even as proposed, it will be difficult for some facilities to document compliance with a whole year s worth of monthly inspections, especially after the annual maintenance has been required and the previous tag has been removed. Hence, the annex note will help remind facilities to keep these tags for at least one year. Committee Statement: See Committee Proposal 10-54a (Log #CP4) Log #8 Final Action: Accept in Principle ( ) Submitter: Joshua W. Elvove, U.S. Dept. of Veterans Affairs Recommendation: Revise as follows: * Records shall be kept on a tag or label attached to the fire extinguisher, or an inspection checklist maintained on file, or in an electronic system (e.g., bar coding) that provides a permanent record of the last twelve monthly inspections.

7 Add the following annex note: A If using tags or labels attached to the fire extinguisher as a means for documenting monthly inspections, these tags or labels should either be affixed to the fire extinguisher or kept on file, even after the annual maintenance has been conducted, to demonstrate at least 12 months of monthly inspections have been accomplished. Substantiation: As currently written, requires a permanent record of monthly fire extinguisher inspections. This is a ridiculous requirement. As an AHJ, I only need to know if my facilities have been performing monthly inspections over the last year. Therefore, maintaining records of the last 12 months should suffice. Especially, if an electronic filing method is not being used. In reality, how does the committee think hard copy records of monthly inspections will be kept? Should the annual service tags really be kept for each extinguisher individually in perpetuity? Even as proposed, it will be difficult for some facilities to document compliance with a whole year s worth of monthly inspections, especially after the annual maintenance has been required and the previous tag has been removed. Hence, the annex note will help remind facilities to keep these tags for at least one year. Committee Statement: See Committee Proposal (Log #CP3) Log #37 Final Action: Reject (4.3.5) Recommendation: Revise as follows: 4.3.5* Electronic Equipment Fires. Fire extinguishers for the protection of delicate electronic equipment shall be selected from the following types ; carbon dioxide, halogenated agent or water mist types, specifically listed and labeled for Class C. (See ) Substantiation: Needed to give advice on the types of extinguishers used to protect this specific hazard. The current wording allows dry chemical in this hazard that can cause extensive damage to delicate electronic equipment. Committee Statement: The committee believes that the final selection should be left to the end user. The minimum criteria is based on the listing of the extinguisher for the class C application. Further guidance on the topic is in the annex Log #108 Final Action: Accept in Principle (4.3.6 (New) ) Submitter: J. R. Nerat, Badger Fire Protection Recommendation: Add new text to read: Obstacle Class B Fires. Flammable liquid fire situations containing obstacles are considered to be a special hazard. Any time a sizable obstacle is directly located within a flammable liquid fire situation, it can present a special extinguishment problem because the obstacle may effectively block the necessary application of an extinguishing agent. The system used to rate class B fire extinguishers is not applicable to these types of fire hazard situations. The selection of extinguishers for these hazards should be made on the basis of the equipment manufacturer s recommendations. The extinguishment of obstacle fires can best be accomplished using one of the following methods: (1) The simultaneous discharge of non-securing or non-vapor suppressing types of class B extinguishing agents from multiple location points to overcome and eliminate any blind spot presented by an obstacle. (2) The selection and use of vapor securing extinguishing agents like foam, which effectively secure and suppress fuel vapors, allow operators to move and apply agent around an obstacle. (3) Utilization of larger extinguisher models having higher agent discharge flow rates sufficient to effectively overcome and overwhelm any blind spot created by an obstacle. Substantiation: The addition of this new paragraph provides fundamental hazard analysis information. Class B obstacle fire hazard situations are one of the most common hazards typically found within industry. Providing this information supports the scope of this standard and will assist anyone attempting to understand how to better address the proper selection and placement of fire extinguishers * Obstacle Fires. When selecting a fire extinguisher for this type of hazard, selection shall be based on one of the following: 1. An extinguisher containing a vapor suppressing foam agent. 2. Multiple extinguishers containing non-vapor suppressing class B agents intended for simultaneous application. 3. Larger capacity extinguishers of 10 lbs (4.54 KG) or greater and having a minimum discharge rate of 1 lb/sec (0.45 kg/sec). A (item 2) Where multiple extinguisher are utilized, simultaneous discharge from multiple locations to eliminate any blind spots created by an obstacle should be employed. Committee Statement: Editorial clarification of submitted text Log #134 Final Action: Accept in Principle (4.3.6 (New) ) Submitter: Elwin G. Joyce, II, Eastern Kentucky University Recommendation: Add a new section to read: Dry chemical fire extinguishers shall not be installed in areas containing oxidizers such as pool chemicals, only water type extinguishers shall be installed. Substantiation: Due to hazardous noncompatibility of dry chemical extinguishing agents with oxidizers such as pool chemicals as noted in NFPA 430 the standard on oxidizer storage only water class extinguishers need to be installed. The chemical reaction between dry chem and pool chemicals can be violent as in one case I had an incident locally where a fire in some pool chemicals was attacked with an ABC extinguisher. An exothermic release of energy caused by the mixing of the two elements caused the operation instantly of 277 standard response sprinklers. The actual fire damage was very minor, it an actual example of the problem stated in NFPA 430. I am only attempting to get this information in NFPA 10 where it belongs. Add a new section to read: Areas Containing Oxidizers. Only water type extinguishers shall be installed in areas containing oxidizers such as pool chemicals. Multipurpose dry chemical fire extinguishers shall not be installed in areas containing oxidizers such as pool chemicals. Committee Statement: ABC dry chemical is not appropriate for this application Log #38 Final Action: Reject (5.1.1 (New) ) Recommendation: Extract Table from NFPA 1 and insert into NFPA 10 as a new section and renumber that that follows. Table Portable Fire Extinguishers Required Occupancy Use Where Required Ambulatory health care occupancies Yes Apartment occupancies 1 Yes Assembly occupancies 2 Yes Business occupancies Yes Day-care occupancies Yes Detention and correctional occupancies 3,4 Yes Educational occupancies Yes Health care occupancies Yes Hotel and dormitory occupancies Yes Industrial occupancies Yes Lodging and rooming house occupancies Yes Mercantile occupancies Yes Occupancies in Special Structures Yes One- and two-family dwelling occupancies No Residential board and care occupancies Yes 10-7 Storage occupancies Yes 1 Portable fire extinguishers shall be permitted to be located at exterior locations or interior locations so that all portions of the buildings are within 75 ft (22.8 m) of travel distance to an extinguishing unit. 2 Portable fire extinguishers are not required in seating or outdoor performance areas. 3 Access to portable fire extinguishers shall be permitted to be locked. 4 Portable fire extinguishers shall be permitted to be located at staff locations only. Substantiation: There is tremendous inconsistency between the various codes when they refer to when and where fire extinguishers shall be provided. Both NFPA 101 and 5000 refer to NFPA 10 as the guideline, however NFPA 10 doesn t presently provide guidance as to which occupancies require fire extinguishers. NFPA 1 created Table last cycle and we are recommending that this table be insert into NFPA 10 section and renumber that which follows. By doing so, consistency between NFPA 101, 5000, 1 and 10 will be accomplished. This will significantly reduce the confusion now taking place within the code development technical committees where many members believe that fire extinguisher requirements shall be spelled out by NFPA 10 and the Fire Code and only referenced within the other codes. Also, we believe the inclusion of this table is within the scope of NFPA 10 which states: The provisions of this standard apply to the selection, installation, inspection, maintenance, and testing of portable extinguishing equipment. Committee Statement: Outside the scope of the committee.