National Fire Protection Association 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02169-7471 Phone: 617-770-3000 Fax: 617-770-0700 www.nfpa.org M E M O R A N D U M To: From: NFPA Technical Committee on Telecommunications Elena Carroll, Project Administrator Date: May 20, 2015 Subject: NFPA 76 Second Draft TC FINAL Ballot Results (F2015 Cycle) According to the final ballot results, all ballot items received the necessary affirmative votes to pass ballot. 25 Members Eligible to Vote 6 Not Returned (Betz, Backstrom, Custer, Durgin, Quillin, Rice) ffirmative on All Revisions (Kasiski, Nelson, Oimette with comment) Negative on one or more Revision (Ingram, Kasiski, Nelson, Oimette) 0 Abstentions The attached report shows the number of affirmative, negative, and abstaining votes as well as the explanation of the vote for each second revision. There are two criteria necessary for each second revision to pass ballot: (1) simple majority and (2) affirmative 2 /3 vote. The mock examples below show how the calculations are determined. (1) Example for Simple Majority: Assuming there are 20 vote eligible committee members, 11 affirmative votes are required to pass ballot. (Sample calculation: 20 members eligible to vote 2 = 10 + 1 = 11) (2) Example for Affirmative 2 /3: Assuming there are 20 vote eligible committee members and 1 member did not return their ballot and 2 members abstained, the number of affirmative votes required would be 12. (Sample calculation: 20 members eligible to vote 1 not returned 2 abstentions = 17 x 0.66 = 11.22 = 12 ) As always please feel free to contact me if you have any questions.
of 36 5/20/2015 9:27 AM Second Revision No. 7-NFPA 76-2015 [ Detail ] Change title of 8.8 to the following: Telecommunications Equipment Ignition and Fire Performance Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: Jon Hart Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu Mar 26 12:59:51 CDT 2015 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Fire resistance is defined as a property assessing the ability of a material, product, or assembly to withstand fire or give protection from it for a period of time. This chapter addresses fire performance requirements. Response Message: Public Comment No. 21-NFPA 76-2014 [Section No. 8.8] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 25 Eligible Voters 6 Not Returned 17 Affirmative All 2 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Backstrom, Robert G. Betz, Jeffrey A. Custer, Richard L. P. Durgin, Ronald A. Quillin, Charles A. Rice, Buddy Affirmative All Belliveau, Jr., Leonard Bosma, Michael J.
Brasseau, Shaun A. Driggers, Mickey L. Dryden, Steve C. Gardner, Robert P. Ingram, Jonathan G. Johnson, William D. Kasiski, Robert Kaufman, Stanley Lang, Scott R. McNamara, Jack Meyring, William Norton, Thomas F. O'Connor, Daniel J. Reiswig, Rodger Ziegler, Thomas F. Affirmative with Comment Nelson, Paul R. Affirm, no comments Ouimette, Ronald D. Affirmative vote - no comment of 36 5/20/2015 9:27 AM
of 36 5/20/2015 9:27 AM Second Revision No. 2-NFPA 76-2015 [ Section No. 2.3.2 ] 2.3.2 ASTM Publications. ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, P.O. Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. ASTM E84, Standard Test Method for Surface Burning Characteristics of Building Materials, 2013 Rev A 2014. ASTM E814, Standard Test Method for Fire Tests of Penetration Firestop Systems, 2013 Rev A 2013a. ASTM E1537, Standard Test Method for Fire Testing of Upholstered Furniture, 2013. ASTM E1966, Standard Test Method for Fire Resistive Joint Systems, 2011 2007 (2011). Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: Jon Hart Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu Mar 26 10:58:56 CDT 2015 Committee Statement Committee Statement: This revision updates the referenced standards to the most current editions. Response Message: Public Comment No. 2-NFPA 76-2014 [Section No. 2.3.2] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 25 Eligible Voters 6 Not Returned 17 Affirmative All 2 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Backstrom, Robert G. Betz, Jeffrey A. Custer, Richard L. P. Durgin, Ronald A. Quillin, Charles A. Rice, Buddy Affirmative All Belliveau, Jr., Leonard Bosma, Michael J.
Brasseau, Shaun A. Driggers, Mickey L. Dryden, Steve C. Gardner, Robert P. Ingram, Jonathan G. Johnson, William D. Kasiski, Robert Kaufman, Stanley Lang, Scott R. McNamara, Jack Meyring, William Norton, Thomas F. O'Connor, Daniel J. Reiswig, Rodger Ziegler, Thomas F. Affirmative with Comment Nelson, Paul R. Affirm, no comments Ouimette, Ronald D. Affirmative vote - no comment of 36 5/20/2015 9:27 AM
of 36 5/20/2015 9:27 AM Second Revision No. 17-NFPA 76-2015 [ Section No. 2.3.4 ] 2.3.4 UL Publications. Underwriters Laboratories Inc., 333 Pfingsten Road, Northbrook, IL 60062-2096. ANSI/UL 44, Thermoset-Insulated Wires and Cables, 2014. ANSI/UL 83, Thermoplastic-Insulated Wire and Cables, 2014. ANSI/UL 444, Communications Cables, 2008, revised 2010. ANSI/UL 568, Nonmetallic Cable Tray Systems, 2002, reaffirmed 2009. UL 723, Standard for Test For Surface Burning Characteristics of Building Materials, 2008. ANSI/UL 900, Standard for Air Filter Units, 2004, revised 2009. ANSI/UL 1277, Electrical Power and Control Tray Cables with Optional Optical-Fiber Members, 2010. ANSI/UL 1651, Optical Fiber Cable, 2008. ANSI/UL 1666, Standard Test for Flame Propagation Height of Electrical and Optical-Fiber Cables Installed Vertically in Shafts, 2007. ANSI/UL 1685, Standard for Vertical Tray Fire-Propagation and Smoke-Release Test for Electrical and Optical-Fiber Cables, 2007, including revisions through July 7, 2010. ANSI/UL 2024, Cable Routing Assemblies and Communications Raceways, 2014, including revisions through January 9, 2015. ANSI/UL 60950-1, Information Technology Equipment Safety Part 1: General Requirements, 2013. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: Jon Hart Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu Mar 26 14:31:42 CDT 2015 Committee Statement Committee Statement: update Response Message: Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 25 Eligible Voters 6 Not Returned 17 Affirmative All 2 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention
Not Returned Backstrom, Robert G. Betz, Jeffrey A. Custer, Richard L. P. Durgin, Ronald A. Quillin, Charles A. Rice, Buddy Affirmative All Belliveau, Jr., Leonard Bosma, Michael J. Brasseau, Shaun A. Driggers, Mickey L. Dryden, Steve C. Gardner, Robert P. Ingram, Jonathan G. Johnson, William D. Kasiski, Robert Kaufman, Stanley Lang, Scott R. McNamara, Jack Meyring, William Norton, Thomas F. O'Connor, Daniel J. Reiswig, Rodger Ziegler, Thomas F. Affirmative with Comment Nelson, Paul R. Affirm, no comments Ouimette, Ronald D. Affirmative vote - no comment of 36 5/20/2015 9:27 AM
of 36 5/20/2015 9:27 AM Second Revision No. 3-NFPA 76-2015 [ Section No. 3.3.4 ] 3.3.4 Cable Telecommunications. One- and two-way communications service provided over a network, generally through optical fiber-optic and coaxial cable. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: Jon Hart Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu Mar 26 11:02:26 CDT 2015 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: This editorial change correlates with National Electrical Code Article 770 which refers to optical fiber cables, not fiber-optic cables. Public Comment No. 4-NFPA 76-2014 [Section No. 3.3.4] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 25 Eligible Voters 6 Not Returned 17 Affirmative All 2 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Backstrom, Robert G. Betz, Jeffrey A. Custer, Richard L. P. Durgin, Ronald A. Quillin, Charles A. Rice, Buddy Affirmative All Belliveau, Jr., Leonard Bosma, Michael J. Brasseau, Shaun A. Driggers, Mickey L. Dryden, Steve C.
Gardner, Robert P. Ingram, Jonathan G. Johnson, William D. Kasiski, Robert Kaufman, Stanley Lang, Scott R. McNamara, Jack Meyring, William Norton, Thomas F. O'Connor, Daniel J. Reiswig, Rodger Ziegler, Thomas F. Affirmative with Comment Nelson, Paul R. Affirm, no comments Ouimette, Ronald D. Affirmative vote - no comment of 36 5/20/2015 9:27 AM
of 36 5/20/2015 9:27 AM Second Revision No. 4-NFPA 76-2015 [ Section No. 8.8.2.8.1 ] 8.8.2.8.1 Wires and cables intended for powering signal-processing equipment, telecommunications cables, optical fiber cables, and insulated ground wires installed in plenums shall be listed as having a maximum flame spread of 1.52 1.5 m (5.0 ft) or less, a maximum peak optical density of 0.50 or less, and a maximum average optical density of 0.150 0.15 or less when tested in accordance with NFPA 262 or Flame and Smoke Test in the Appendix to CSA C22.2 No. 0.3-M-1996 (FT6 Rating). Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: Jon Hart Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu Mar 26 11:08:41 CDT 2015 Committee Statement Committee Statement: This revision does not extract language from NFPA 90A but simply makes the requirements identical. Note that CSA FT6 is not referenced in NFPA 90A because it has not kept up with the advances incorporated into NFPA 90A. Standards Council has stated that NFPA 90A has jurisdiction over the requirements for materials in plenums. This revision does not incorporate any material or products that are not already referenced in NFPA 76. Response Message: Public Comment No. 17-NFPA 76-2014 [Section No. 8.8.2.8.1] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 25 Eligible Voters 6 Not Returned 17 Affirmative All 2 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Backstrom, Robert G. Betz, Jeffrey A. Custer, Richard L. P. Durgin, Ronald A. Quillin, Charles A. Rice, Buddy Affirmative All
Belliveau, Jr., Leonard Bosma, Michael J. Brasseau, Shaun A. Driggers, Mickey L. Dryden, Steve C. Gardner, Robert P. Ingram, Jonathan G. Johnson, William D. Kasiski, Robert Kaufman, Stanley Lang, Scott R. McNamara, Jack Meyring, William Norton, Thomas F. O'Connor, Daniel J. Reiswig, Rodger Ziegler, Thomas F. Affirmative with Comment Nelson, Paul R. Affirm, no comments Ouimette, Ronald D. Affirmative vote - no comment 0 of 36 5/20/2015 9:27 AM
1 of 36 5/20/2015 9:27 AM Second Revision No. 5-NFPA 76-2015 [ Section No. 8.8.2.8.2 ] 8.8.2.8.2 Communications raceways installed in plenums shall be listed as having a maximum flame spread of 1.52 1.5 m (5.0 ft) or less, a maximum peak optical density of 0.50 or less, and a maximum average optical density of 0.150 0.15 or less when tested per in accordance with ANSI/UL 2024 or the flame and smoke test in CSA C22.2 No. 0.3, Appendix B (FT6 Rating), Cable Routing Assemblies and Communications Raceways. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: Jon Hart Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu Mar 26 11:17:28 CDT 2015 Committee Statement Committee Statement: This revision simply slightly revises the requirements by incorporating language that corresponds to the language from NFPA 90A, which has jurisdiction over materials in plenums, in accordance with Standards Council. The reference to the CSA standard is being removed because it has not kept up to date with the changes in NFPA standards. Response Message: Public Comment No. 18-NFPA 76-2014 [Section No. 8.8.2.8.2] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 25 Eligible Voters 6 Not Returned 17 Affirmative All 2 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Backstrom, Robert G. Betz, Jeffrey A. Custer, Richard L. P. Durgin, Ronald A. Quillin, Charles A. Rice, Buddy Affirmative All Belliveau, Jr., Leonard
Bosma, Michael J. Brasseau, Shaun A. Driggers, Mickey L. Dryden, Steve C. Gardner, Robert P. Ingram, Jonathan G. Johnson, William D. Kasiski, Robert Kaufman, Stanley Lang, Scott R. McNamara, Jack Meyring, William Norton, Thomas F. O'Connor, Daniel J. Reiswig, Rodger Ziegler, Thomas F. Affirmative with Comment Nelson, Paul R. Affirm, no comments Ouimette, Ronald D. Affirmative vote - no comment 2 of 36 5/20/2015 9:27 AM
3 of 36 5/20/2015 9:27 AM Second Revision No. 6-NFPA 76-2015 [ Section No. 8.8.2.8.4 ] 8.8.2.8.4* Nonmetallic cable trays used in plenums shall be listed for use in plenums and shall be constructed of materials that are either noncombustible or that exhibit a maximum flame spread index of 25 and a maximum smoke developed index of 50 when tested in accordance with ASTM E84, Standard Test Method for Surface Burning Characteristics of Building Materials, or with UL 723, Standard Test Method for Surface Burning Characteristics of Building Materials. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: Jon Hart Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu Mar 26 11:40:41 CDT 2015 Committee Statement Committee Statement: This introduces the requirements from NFPA 90A for materials in plenums. The requirements for noncombustible or low flame spread and smoke based on testing to ASTM E84 are those that apply to all materials and products not otherwise mentioned with specific requirements. Response Message: Public Comment No. 19-NFPA 76-2014 [Section No. 8.8.2.8.4] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 25 Eligible Voters 6 Not Returned 17 Affirmative All 2 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Backstrom, Robert G. Betz, Jeffrey A. Custer, Richard L. P. Durgin, Ronald A. Quillin, Charles A. Rice, Buddy Affirmative All Belliveau, Jr., Leonard Bosma, Michael J.
Brasseau, Shaun A. Driggers, Mickey L. Dryden, Steve C. Gardner, Robert P. Ingram, Jonathan G. Johnson, William D. Kasiski, Robert Kaufman, Stanley Lang, Scott R. McNamara, Jack Meyring, William Norton, Thomas F. O'Connor, Daniel J. Reiswig, Rodger Ziegler, Thomas F. Affirmative with Comment Nelson, Paul R. Affirm, no comments Ouimette, Ronald D. Affirmative vote - no comment 4 of 36 5/20/2015 9:27 AM
5 of 36 5/20/2015 9:27 AM Second Revision No. 8-NFPA 76-2015 [ Section No. 9.1.4 ] 9.1.4* Heat-Producing Appliances. The use of portable Portable heat-producing appliances shall not be located used in any telecommunications equipment area, computer room, individual office areas, individual office cubicles, storage areas, or shipping areas. 9.1.4.1 The use of portable heat-producing tools necessary for installation and maintenance activities within the telecommunications facility shall be permitted. Supplemental Information File Name SR_8.docx Description Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: Jon Hart Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu Mar 26 13:19:04 CDT 2015 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: This revision removes unintended restrictions in 9.1.4. An example of an unintended restriction is a heat-producing tool such as a soldering iron or heat shrink device. Public Comment No. 7-NFPA 76-2014 [Section No. 9.1.4] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 25 Eligible Voters 6 Not Returned 17 Affirmative All 2 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Backstrom, Robert G. Betz, Jeffrey A. Custer, Richard L. P. Durgin, Ronald A. Quillin, Charles A.
Rice, Buddy Affirmative All Belliveau, Jr., Leonard Bosma, Michael J. Brasseau, Shaun A. Driggers, Mickey L. Dryden, Steve C. Gardner, Robert P. Ingram, Jonathan G. Johnson, William D. Kasiski, Robert Kaufman, Stanley Lang, Scott R. McNamara, Jack Meyring, William Norton, Thomas F. O'Connor, Daniel J. Reiswig, Rodger Ziegler, Thomas F. Affirmative with Comment Nelson, Paul R. Affirm, no comments Ouimette, Ronald D. Affirmative vote - no comment 6 of 36 5/20/2015 9:27 AM
Second Revision No. 9-NFPA 76-2015 [ Section No. 9.6 ] 9.6 Physical Security. 9.6.1 A key box(es), where required by the authority having jurisdiction, shall be listed and installed in an accessible location. 9.6.2 The operator of the premises shall immediately notify the authority having jurisdiction and provide the new key(s) when a lock shall be changed or re-keyed, and a key(s) to that lock shall be contained in the key box. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: Jon Hart Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu Mar 26 13:26:29 CDT 2015 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Key boxes are not unique to telecommunications facilities. The requirements in NFPA 1 specifically address the use of key boxes in more detail than do those in Section 9.6. NFPA 76 should only address fire hazards unique to the telecommunications equipment occupancy. More general hazards are already addressed in other NFPA standards. NFPA 1 is the fundamental document that provides general fire protection requirements. It is the definitive standard and should be the only one that contains general requirements. Repeating requirements already in NFPA 1 leads to confusion and conflicting enforcement when requirements of one document diverge from the other, which occurs because they are not on the same revision cycle. Response Message: Public Comment No. 9-NFPA 76-2014 [Section No. 9.6] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 25 Eligible Voters 6 Not Returned 16 Affirmative All 2 Affirmative with Comments 1 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Backstrom, Robert G. Betz, Jeffrey A. Custer, Richard L. P. 7 of 36 5/20/2015 9:27 AM
Durgin, Ronald A. Quillin, Charles A. Rice, Buddy Affirmative All Belliveau, Jr., Leonard Bosma, Michael J. Brasseau, Shaun A. Driggers, Mickey L. Dryden, Steve C. Gardner, Robert P. Ingram, Jonathan G. Johnson, William D. Kaufman, Stanley Lang, Scott R. McNamara, Jack Meyring, William Norton, Thomas F. O'Connor, Daniel J. Reiswig, Rodger Ziegler, Thomas F. Affirmative with Comment Nelson, Paul R. Affirm, no comments Ouimette, Ronald D. Affirmative vote - no comment Negative with Comment Kasiski, Robert NFPA 1 is a general occupancy document. Specific requirements should identified in NFPA 76 for the security of this occupancy. 8 of 36 5/20/2015 9:27 AM
Second Revision No. 10-NFPA 76-2015 [ Sections 9.8.1, 9.8.2, 9.8.3, 9.8.4, 9.8.5 ] 9.7.1 Displays, holiday trees, or other decorations shall not be allowed to obstruct corridors, exit ways, or other means of egress. 9.7.2 Natural cut holiday trees shall not be permitted. 9.7.3 Artificial holiday trees, displays, and decorations shall be labeled or otherwise identified or certified by the manufacturer as being flame retardant or flame resistive. 9.7.4 Only listed electric lights and wiring shall be used on holiday trees and similar decorations. 9.7.5 Electric lights shall be prohibited on metal artificial trees, displays, and other decorations not labeled for the use of listed lights. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: Jon Hart Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu Mar 26 13:41:54 CDT 2015 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Section 9.8 already prohibits displays, holiday trees or other decorations in telecommunication areas. Sections 9.8.1 through 9.8.5 contain requirements not unique to telecommunications facilities. NFPA 76 should only address fire hazards unique to the telecommunications equipment occupancy. More general hazards are already addressed in other NFPA standards. NFPA 1 is the fundamental document that provides general fire protection requirements. It is the definitive standard and should be the only one that contains general requirements. Response Message: Public Comment No. 11-NFPA 76-2014 [Sections 9.8.1, 9.8.2, 9.8.3, 9.8.4, 9.8.5] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 25 Eligible Voters 6 Not Returned 17 Affirmative All 2 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned 9 of 36 5/20/2015 9:27 AM
Backstrom, Robert G. Betz, Jeffrey A. Custer, Richard L. P. Durgin, Ronald A. Quillin, Charles A. Rice, Buddy Affirmative All Belliveau, Jr., Leonard Bosma, Michael J. Brasseau, Shaun A. Driggers, Mickey L. Dryden, Steve C. Gardner, Robert P. Ingram, Jonathan G. Johnson, William D. Kasiski, Robert Kaufman, Stanley Lang, Scott R. McNamara, Jack Meyring, William Norton, Thomas F. O'Connor, Daniel J. Reiswig, Rodger Ziegler, Thomas F. Affirmative with Comment Nelson, Paul R. Affirm, no comments Ouimette, Ronald D. Affirmative vote - no comment 0 of 36 5/20/2015 9:27 AM
Second Revision No. 11-NFPA 76-2015 [ Section No. 9.9 ] 9.8 Open Flame Devices. 9.8.1 In nontelecommunications areas, the use of solid-fueled heat sources for warming of food trays shall be permitted and shall be constantly attended and operated with the approval of management. 9.8.2 Other open flames shall only be permitted as otherwise stated in this document. 9.8.3 Portable fire extinguishers shall be provided in accordance with NFPA 10. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: Jon Hart Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu Mar 26 13:42:24 CDT 2015 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Section 9.9 contains requirements not unique to telecommunications facilities. NFPA 76 should only address fire hazards unique to the telecommunications equipment occupancy. More general hazards are already addressed in other NFPA standards. NFPA 1 is the fundamental document that provides general fire protection requirements. It is the definitive standard and should be the only one that contains general requirements. Response Message: Public Comment No. 12-NFPA 76-2014 [Section No. 9.9] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 25 Eligible Voters 6 Not Returned 17 Affirmative All 2 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Backstrom, Robert G. Betz, Jeffrey A. Custer, Richard L. P. Durgin, Ronald A. Quillin, Charles A. Rice, Buddy 1 of 36 5/20/2015 9:27 AM
Affirmative All Belliveau, Jr., Leonard Bosma, Michael J. Brasseau, Shaun A. Driggers, Mickey L. Dryden, Steve C. Gardner, Robert P. Ingram, Jonathan G. Johnson, William D. Kasiski, Robert Kaufman, Stanley Lang, Scott R. McNamara, Jack Meyring, William Norton, Thomas F. O'Connor, Daniel J. Reiswig, Rodger Ziegler, Thomas F. Affirmative with Comment Nelson, Paul R. Affirm, no comments Ouimette, Ronald D. Affirmative vote - no comment 2 of 36 5/20/2015 9:27 AM
3 of 36 5/20/2015 9:27 AM Second Revision No. 12-NFPA 76-2015 [ Section No. 9.11 ] 9.9 Vacant Areas. Vacant areas or spaces in a building shall be reviewed annually for the fire risk. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: Jon Hart Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu Mar 26 13:48:45 CDT 2015 Committee Statement Committee Statement: The term vacant areas or spaces is ambiguous. Vacant spaces are not unique to telecommunications facilities. All facilities are vulnerable to the hazards of combustible material stored in vacant spaces. However if those spaces contain stored material, they are not vacant and therefore not covered by Section 9.11. If the space is truly vacant (i.e., clean and empty floor to ceiling and wall to wall) then there are no additional fire protection measures necessary. The risk is already minimized. In addition, the requirement is vague. It gives no guidance as to what an annual review for the fire risk consists of and what should be done with any findings. Response Message: Public Comment No. 13-NFPA 76-2014 [Section No. 9.11] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 25 Eligible Voters 6 Not Returned 16 Affirmative All 2 Affirmative with Comments 1 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Backstrom, Robert G. Betz, Jeffrey A. Custer, Richard L. P. Durgin, Ronald A. Quillin, Charles A. Rice, Buddy Affirmative All Belliveau, Jr., Leonard Bosma, Michael J.
Brasseau, Shaun A. Driggers, Mickey L. Dryden, Steve C. Gardner, Robert P. Ingram, Jonathan G. Johnson, William D. Kaufman, Stanley Lang, Scott R. McNamara, Jack Meyring, William Norton, Thomas F. O'Connor, Daniel J. Reiswig, Rodger Ziegler, Thomas F. Affirmative with Comment Nelson, Paul R. Affirm, no comments Ouimette, Ronald D. Affirmative vote - no comment Negative with Comment Kasiski, Robert If the vacant area has changed its use and there is no record, inadequate protection may be provided for the additional risk. 4 of 36 5/20/2015 9:27 AM
5 of 36 5/20/2015 9:27 AM Second Revision No. 13-NFPA 76-2015 [ Section No. 10.1.1.1 ] 10.1.1.1 The pre-fire plan shall be reviewed and updated annually and where as personnel changes, management structure realignment, or facility changes occur that potentially affect the existing pre-fire plan. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: Jon Hart Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu Mar 26 13:54:32 CDT 2015 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Neither OSHA regulations covering emergency action plans nor NFPA 101 emergency plans require annual review. There is nothing unique about a telecommunications facility that requires annual review. The requirement is vague. No guidance is provided as to what constitutes an annual review. Response Message: Public Comment No. 14-NFPA 76-2014 [Section No. 10.1.1.1] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 25 Eligible Voters 6 Not Returned 16 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Backstrom, Robert G. Betz, Jeffrey A. Custer, Richard L. P. Durgin, Ronald A. Quillin, Charles A. Rice, Buddy Affirmative All Belliveau, Jr., Leonard Bosma, Michael J. Brasseau, Shaun A.
Driggers, Mickey L. Dryden, Steve C. Gardner, Robert P. Ingram, Jonathan G. Johnson, William D. Kaufman, Stanley Lang, Scott R. McNamara, Jack Meyring, William Norton, Thomas F. O'Connor, Daniel J. Reiswig, Rodger Ziegler, Thomas F. Affirmative with Comment Kasiski, Robert I disagree with the Committee Substantiation as Telecommunication Facilities are unique as they have been deemed as mission critical so it is imperative that confirmation the pre-fire plan can be implemented. In some cases fire protection is reliant upon the Fire Service as part of the Pre-fire plan and would be addressed in the conditions identified unless there is a annual review. Nelson, Paul R. Affirm, no comments Ouimette, Ronald D. Affirmative vote - no comment 6 of 36 5/20/2015 9:27 AM
7 of 36 5/20/2015 9:27 AM Second Revision No. 1-NFPA 76-2015 [ Section No. A.8.2.3.7 ]
8 of 36 5/20/2015 9:27 AM A.8.2.3.7
9 of 36 5/20/2015 9:27 AM The design and installation of fire detection and suppression systems for areas in which aisle containment systems are installed should meet the performance or prescriptive requirements of Chapters 5, 6, or 7 that have been applied to the areas. The following outline provides smoke detector: sensitivity and spacing guidance for protection of signalprocessing equipment in high airflow areas: General For smoke detection systems to detect products of combustion, the products must travel from the source to a sensor or port and arrive there in sufficient density to be detectable. Products of combustion follow forced air streams early in the development of a fire or overheat condition where the influence of mechanical systems is greater than the buoyant forces of the fire or overheat condition. Detection system sensors or ports installed in the paths of cooling air exhaust from the cooled equipment can be expected to respond to a small fire in the equipment sooner than sensors or ports located outside of the ventilation air envelope. To be effective, the detection equipment installed within the ventilation air envelope should be suitable for the temperatures, air velocities, and other conditions present. If suitable detection equipment cannot be installed within the exhaust ventilation air envelope, a fire in the cooled equipment should be expected to grow to a size at which its energy is sufficient to overcome the mechanical forces of the HVAC containment system. In the presence of aisle containment systems used to enhance the effectiveness of cooling signalprocessing equipment, sensors or ports located in hot aisles or in the above ceiling plenum might be effective. Regardless, sensors or ports located on the ceiling in signal-processing equipment areas are a basic requirement and contribute to effective detection over a broad range of signal-processing equipment area configurations. Listed signal-processing equipment has inherent fire-resistant characteristics. Failing or overheated components or connections can lead to smoldering events that produce smoke but tend to remain small due to the very low electrical voltages present at the board level in the signal-processing equipment. Exceptions can occur where a source of energy external to the signal-processing equipment drives increasing involvement of the materials present. In such exceptional cases, flaming fires can result. Automatic fire and smoke detection systems installed to detect smoldering events and/or flaming fires in signal-processing equipment areas are more effective in detecting flaming fires than smoldering events due to the respective release rates of combustion products and the effects of forced air flow on the products of combustion. The greater the air flow, which dilutes and channels detectable products of combustion, the less effective will be the performance of the detection system. Damage or losses that could result from smoldering events or flaming fires in signal-processing equipment prior to detection are likely to be greater in the presence of greater forced air flow due to the likely decrease in detection system performance. Smoke Detection Systems for Very Early Warning Where a smoke detection system is installed for the primary purpose of summoning responsible people to the presence of a small signal-processing equipment fire or electrical event that produces smoke, the system should be arranged with high sensitivity and close spacing to achieve response to low-density products of combustion suspended in air with reasonable stability and tolerance of the environment. Smoke Detection Systems to Initiate Operation of HVAC Dampers or to Close Openings in Fire Rated Walls Where a smoke detection system is installed for the primary purpose of initiating operation of dampers, shutters, doors, or other closures in the event of a fire in a signal-processing equipment area, the system should be arranged with medium sensitivity and spacing less than listed spacing to assure the integrity of fire-resistive barriers. Smoke Detection Systems to Initiate Release of a Fire Suppression Agent Where a smoke detection system is installed for the primary purpose of initiating the release of a fire suppression agent into a signal-processing equipment area, the system should be arranged with low sensitivity, spacing less than listed spacing, and should include a form of logical confirmation of the presence of products of combustion to assure that a single indication does not release the agent. Sensitivity and Spacing Ranges The following is guidance for sensitivity and spacing ranges for different locations in high airflow areas:
0 of 36 5/20/2015 9:27 AM (1) Smoke sensor and port spacing on ceilings in the presence of high air movement should follow the requirements of 17.7.6.3 of NFPA 72. (2) Where air changes per hour (ACH) in the room served by the ventilation system exceeds 60, and where the supply air is delivered to the room through a raised floor, smoke sensors or ports under the floor might not be effective in detecting a fire originating under the floor. They might, however, be effective in detecting a fire originating in an air-handling unit supplying air to the underfloor space. (3) In applying the sensor or port spacing, it is recommended that sensors and ports be located at strategic points where smoke is likely to pass; for example, in hot air return streams and at return air registers. (4) For sensors and ports installed in the exhaust/return air stream in hot aisles or above ceiling plenums, the spacing and sensitivities listed in Table A.8.2.3.7 should be used. The guidance in Table A.8.2.3.7 comes partly from a study sponsored by the Fire Protection Research Foundation. That guidance is conservative because it is based on testing using airflow without recirculation into the volume being studied. Table A.8.2.3.7 Recommended Sensitivity and Spacing of Smoke Sensors or Ports in Exhaust/Return Air Streams in Telecommunications Facilities with High Air Flow Where Aisle Containment Is Present Intended Function Low ACH Up to 30 High ACH Greater Than 30 Sensitivity Spacing Sensitivity Spacing Very early warning 0.2%/ft 200 ft 2 0.1%/ft 100 ft 2 Operating dampers, doors, and shutters 1.5%/ft 400 ft 2 0.75%/ft 200 ft 2 Suppression agent release > 2.5% 4%/ft 400 ft 2 > 1.5% 3%/ft 200 ft 2 Notes: (1) See Fire Protection Research Foundation reports Validation of Modeling Tools for Detection Design in High Air Flow Environments, and Validation of Modeling Tools for Detection Design in High Air Flow Environments Phase II, and FM Global report "Experimental Data for Model Validation of Smoke Transport in Data Centers. (2) It is essential that the user understand the material in A.8.2.3.7 prior to the application of the recommended sensitivity and spacing in this table. Where aisle containment systems are installed in an area after the fire detection or suppression systems have been designed and installed in the area, the design and installation of the fire detection and suppression systems should be reviewed for the following: (1) If system changes are necessary to maintain the level of protection as required in 1.4.1.1. (2) If changes to the fire detection or suppression systems are necessary to maintain the previously existing level of protection. Where sensors or ports are installed to monitor return air in accordance with 8.5.3.1.2.3, a review should be conducted to determine that a containment system does not degrade the performance level of the detection system. Supplemental Information File Name SR_1_A.8.2.3.7_Final_.docx SR_1_Table_A.8.2.3.7.docx Description Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: Jon Hart Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address:
1 of 36 5/20/2015 9:27 AM City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu Mar 26 10:13:44 CDT 2015 Committee Statement Committee Statement: A joint task group of the NFPA 75 and 76 technical committees developed more thorough guidance on the subject of detection in high air flow electronic equipment areas. The additional text is based on results of a study sponsored by FPRF and previously known detection application guidance. Response Message: Public Comment No. 23-NFPA 76-2014 [Section No. A.8.2.3.6] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 25 Eligible Voters 6 Not Returned 16 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 3 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Backstrom, Robert G. Betz, Jeffrey A. Custer, Richard L. P. Durgin, Ronald A. Quillin, Charles A. Rice, Buddy Affirmative All Belliveau, Jr., Leonard Bosma, Michael J. Brasseau, Shaun A. Driggers, Mickey L. Dryden, Steve C. Gardner, Robert P. Johnson, William D. Kasiski, Robert Kaufman, Stanley Lang, Scott R. McNamara, Jack Meyring, William Norton, Thomas F. O'Connor, Daniel J. Reiswig, Rodger Ziegler, Thomas F. Negative with Comment
2 of 36 5/20/2015 9:27 AM Ingram, Jonathan G. I am still having issue with the guidance given based upon the Hughes report for a number of reasons. 1) The testing Hughes did was with 100% air change with no recirculation of air. You would typically find a substantial amount of air recirculated in a telecomm facility than completely exhausted. Feel the chart using "up to 30" and "Over 30" does not help reference anything or tie back to NFPA 72. We have guidance in NFPA 72 that states up to 60 ACH deration of spacing is down to approximately 125 sq ft per detector, but not sure what the new table is actually telling the designer and installer, and quite frankly is a bit confusing on how we are defining ACH in this section versus NFPA 72 guidance. Nelson, Paul R. Significant concern regarding this table: Table A.8.2.3.7 Recommended Sensitivity and Spacing of Smoke Sensors or Ports in Exhaust/Return Air Streams in Telecommunications Facilities with High Air Flow Where Aisle Containment 3 weeks following our meeting, an air sampling supplier shared with me some information that suggested our spacing of 100 sq. ft. for high air flow will not detect smoke. I think this graph should be reevaluated again before this is published. Ouimette, Ronald D. The reference to NFPA 72, table 17.7.3 for spacing is not germane to NFPA 76 and could cause confusion in the standard and reduce the minimum detection level required to prevent a network outage. I believe this section may have been inadvertently carried over from the NFPA 75/76 joint committee discussions to the NFPA 76 annex material. All previous NFPA 76 prescriptive spacing references require 200 sq. ft. spacing for all signal processing (VEWFD) areas, regardless of airflow or air changes per hour. The reference to NFPA 72 table 17.7.3 could diminish the minimum detection levels previously established by adding the possibility to increase the spacing requirement. If this was the intent of adding the reference to NFPA 72 table 17.7.3, I would ask what new test data has been provided to substantiate the change and allow the increased spacing? In order to prevent confusion for AHJ's and designers, I recommend that the reference to NFPA 72, table 17.7.3 be deleted from the annex material or new test data be provided to substantiate the change.
3 of 36 5/20/2015 9:27 AM Second Revision No. 14-NFPA 76-2015 [ Section No. A.8.8.3 ] A.8.8.3 UL 60950-1, Information Technology Equipment Safety Part 1: General Requirements, specifies the fire resistance performance of the materials used in making the equipment and therefore provides a level of protection. However, UL 60950-1 does not require fire safety performance testing of the final equipment configuration as Telcordia-GR-63-CORE, Network Equipment Building System (NEBS) Requirements: Physical Protection, does, and does not provide assurances that the fire will not continue to propagate past a single piece of equipment as required by GR-63. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: Jon Hart Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu Mar 26 13:58:47 CDT 2015 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Fire resistance is defined as a property assessing the ability of a material, product, or assembly to withstand fire or give protection from it for a period of time. Thissection addresses fire performance requirements. Response Message: Public Comment No. 22-NFPA 76-2014 [Section No. A.8.8.3] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 25 Eligible Voters 6 Not Returned 17 Affirmative All 2 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Backstrom, Robert G. Betz, Jeffrey A. Custer, Richard L. P. Durgin, Ronald A. Quillin, Charles A. Rice, Buddy Affirmative All Belliveau, Jr., Leonard
Bosma, Michael J. Brasseau, Shaun A. Driggers, Mickey L. Dryden, Steve C. Gardner, Robert P. Ingram, Jonathan G. Johnson, William D. Kasiski, Robert Kaufman, Stanley Lang, Scott R. McNamara, Jack Meyring, William Norton, Thomas F. O'Connor, Daniel J. Reiswig, Rodger Ziegler, Thomas F. Affirmative with Comment Nelson, Paul R. Affirm, no comments Ouimette, Ronald D. Affirmative vote - no comment 4 of 36 5/20/2015 9:27 AM
5 of 36 5/20/2015 9:27 AM Second Revision No. 15-NFPA 76-2015 [ Section No. G.1.2.2 ] G.1.2.2 ASTM Publications. ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, P.O. Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. ASTM E648, Standard Test Method for Critical Radiant Flux of Floor-Covering Systems Using a Radiant Heat Energy Source, 2010e1 2014c. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: Jon Hart Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu Mar 26 14:07:24 CDT 2015 Committee Statement Committee Statement: date update Response Message: Public Comment No. 3-NFPA 76-2014 [Section No. G.1.2.2] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 25 Eligible Voters 6 Not Returned 17 Affirmative All 2 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Backstrom, Robert G. Betz, Jeffrey A. Custer, Richard L. P. Durgin, Ronald A. Quillin, Charles A. Rice, Buddy Affirmative All Belliveau, Jr., Leonard Bosma, Michael J. Brasseau, Shaun A. Driggers, Mickey L. Dryden, Steve C.
Gardner, Robert P. Ingram, Jonathan G. Johnson, William D. Kasiski, Robert Kaufman, Stanley Lang, Scott R. McNamara, Jack Meyring, William Norton, Thomas F. O'Connor, Daniel J. Reiswig, Rodger Ziegler, Thomas F. Affirmative with Comment Nelson, Paul R. Affirm, no comments Ouimette, Ronald D. Affirmative vote - no comment 6 of 36 5/20/2015 9:27 AM