Report on Proposals F2007 Copyright, NFPA NFPA 499 Report of the Committee on

Report on Proposals F2007 Copyright, NFPA NFPA 499 Report of the Committee on 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 Electrical Equipment in Chemical Atmospheres have occurred. A key to classifications is found at the front of this book. James G. Stallcup, Chair Grayboy, Inc., TX [SE] A. W. Ballard, Crouse-Hinds, NY [M] Rep. National Electrical Manufacturers Association Edward M. Briesch, Underwriters Laboratories Inc., IL [RT] Steven R. Carlson, Pfizer Inc., MI [U] Mark Driscoll, Swiss Re, Global Asset Protection Services, MA [I] William T. Fiske, Intertek Testing Services NA, Inc., NY [RT] William G. Lawrence, Jr., FM Global, MA [I] Robert Malanga, Fire and Risk Engineering, NJ [SE] Joseph V. Saverino, Air Products and Chemicals, Inc., PA [U] Richard F. Schwab, Honeywell, Inc., NJ [U] Sukanta Sengupta, FMC Corporation, NJ [U] David B. Wechsler, The Dow Chemical Company, TX [U] Rep. American Chemistry Council Jack H. Zewe, Electrical Consultants Inc., LA [SE] Alternates Donald W. Ankele, Underwriters Laboratories Inc., IL [RT] (Alt. to Edward M. Briesch) Samuel A. Rodgers, Honeywell, Inc., VA [U] (Alt. to Richard F. Schwab) James W. Stallcup, Jr., Grayboy, Inc., TX [SE] (Alt. to James G. Stallcup) Dann Strube, Intertek Testing Services NA, Inc., IN [RT] (Alt. to William T. Fiske) George H. St. Onge, Shelbyville, DE (Member Emeritus) Staff Liaison: Jeffrey S. Sargent Nonvoting Committee Scope: This Committee shall have primary responsibility for documents on (1) developing data on the properties of chemicals enabling proper selection of electrical equipment for use in atmospheres containing flammable gases, vapors or dusts; (2) making recommendations for the prevention of fires and explosions through the use of continuously purged, pressurized, explosion-proof, or dust-ignition-proof electrical equipment where installed in such chemical atmospheres. The Technical Committee on Electrical Equipment in Chemical Atmospheres is presenting three Reports for adoption, as follows: Report I: The Technical Committee proposes for adoption, amendments to NFPA 496, Standard for Purged and Pressurized Enclosures for Electrical Equipment, 2003 edition. NFPA 496-2003 is published in Volume 9 of the 2006 National Fire Codes and in separate pamphlet form. The report on NFPA 496 has been submitted to letter ballot of the Technical Committee on Electrical Equipment in Chemical Atmospheres, which consists of 13 voting members. The results of the balloting, after circulation of any negative votes, can be found in the report. Report II: The Technical Committee proposes for adoption, amendments to NFPA 497, Recommended Practice for the Classification of Flammable Liquids, Gases, or Vapors and of Hazardous (Classified) Locations for Electrical Installations in Chemical Process Areas, 2004 edition. NFPA 497-2004 is published in Volume 14 of the 2006 National Fire Codes and in separate pamphlet form. The report on NFPA 497 has been submitted to letter ballot of the Technical Committee on Electrical Equipment in Chemical Atmospheres, which consists of 13 voting members. The results of the balloting, after circulation of any negative votes, can be found in the report. Report III: The Technical Committee proposes for adoption, amendments to NFPA 499, Recommended Practice for the Classification of Combustible Dusts and of Hazardous (Classified) Locations for Electrical Installations in Chemical Process Areas, 2004 edition. NFPA 499-2004 is published in Volume 14 of the 2006 National Fire Codes and in separate pamphlet form. The report on NFPA 499 has been submitted to letter ballot of the Technical Committee on Electrical Equipment in Chemical Atmospheres, which consists of 13 voting members. The results of the balloting, after circulation of any negative votes, can be found in the report. 499-

Report on Proposals F2007 Copyright, NFPA NFPA 499 499-1 Log #1 Final Action: Accept in Principle (1.1.8) NOTE: This proposal appeared as Comment 499-2 (Log #1) which was held from the November 2003 ROC on Proposal N/A. Submitter: Robert T. Ford, Safety Management Services, Inc. Recommendation: Add text to read as follows: 1-1.8 This recommended practice does not apply to locations where propellant, explosives, pyrotechnics, and blasting agents amy be present during normal or abnormal conditions. Substantiation: The NFPA and NEC do not address the unique hazards pertaining to electrical equipment in proximity to propellants, explosives, pyrotechnics, and blasting agents. Application of NFPA 496, 497, 499 and NEC Article 500 to locations where these materials are present during normal or abnormal conditions may result in serious personal injury or death and/or facility damage or loss. Corresponding proposals have been submitted. Note: Supporting material is available for review at NFPA Headquarters. Committee Meeting Action: Accept in Principle Revise recommended text to read: 1.1.7 This recommended practice does not apply to locations where explosives, pyrotechnics, and blasting agents may be present during normal or abnormal conditions. Committee Statement: The committee has deleted propellants because it is too general of a term and could preclude materials such as aerosol products, from being covered by this standard. Deleting propellants from the recommended text aligns with a similar action taken by CMP-14 in Fine Print Note No. 1 to Section 500.1 of NEC. The paragraph number has been corrected to correlate with the numbering of Section 1.1 in the 2004 edition of NFPA 499. Number Eligible to Vote: 13 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 9 Negative: 2 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Driscoll, M., Sengupta, S. Explanation of Negative: RODGERS, S.: I agree with the comment by Mr. Wechsler. WECHSLER, D.: Committee should have been to reject this proposal. While I think I understand the submitter s problem, what is being proposed and the action taken by the Committee will unfortunately not in my opinion resolve the submitter s problem but will instead create more problems. To begin with the exclusion is too general. Just because an area or a location has blasting agents, pyrotechnics, etc. does not mean that certain portions of the operation or other locational criteria, which may involve flammable gases, liquids or combustible liquids, vapors or dusts, and therefore should not be required to reviewed as appropriate for the installation and use of special electrical equipment, i.e. the assessment for a hazardous (classified) location. The proposed action of this exemption would be like suggesting that the application of 497 and 499 would not apply to boilers, furnaces or fired vessels because of the nature of the flame being present. This is simply not correct. The assessment needs to be made if flammable gases, flammable vapors, combustible liquid produced vapors, etc, are or a likely to be present in ignitible concentrations per NFPA 70, Article 500. The Panel actions to delete propellants because of Article 500, FPN No.1 should again consider what the 500 fpn really states. It does not address the location or electrical equipment, but rather correctly states that the nature of the hazards for explosives, pyrotechnics, etc. materials is not addressed. This fpn is a true statement and it perhaps should have been a fpn to both NFPA 497 and NFPA 499. Despite the justification provided by the submitter, NFPA clearly address explosives, pyrotechnics within NFPA 5000, NFPA 1, NFPA 1124 and NFPA 1126. Additionally blasting agents and Explosives are addressed in NFPA 495. It should be within these documents that the submitter should be addressing refinements. Lastly, the submitter has provided no support to the statement that the application of the criteria within NFPA 497, 499 and Article 500 may result in serious personal injury or death. 499-2 Log #CP1 Final Action: Accept in Part (Chapter 3 Definitions (GOT)) Submitter: Technical Committee on Electrical Equipment in Chemical Atmospheres, Recommendation: Adopt the preferred definitions from the NFPA Glossary of Terms for the following terms: Combustible Dust. (preferred) NFPA 654, 2000 ed. Any finely divided solid material that is 420 microns or smaller in diameter (material passing a U.S. No. 40 Standard Sieve) and presents a fire or explosion hazard when dispersed and ignited in air. Combustible Dust. (secondary) NFPA 499, 2004 ed. Any finely divided solid material 420 microns or less in diameter (i.e., material passing through a U.S. No. 40 Standard Sieve) that presents a fire or explosion hazard when dispersed. Combustible Material. (preferred) Boilerplate: NFPA 220, 2005 ed. Any material that will burn, regardless of its autoignition temperature. Combustible Material. (secondary) NFPA 499, 2004 ed. A generic term used to describe either a mixture of dust in air, or a hybrid 499-2 mixture, that may burn, flame, or explode. Hybrid Mixture. (preferred) NFPA 68, 2002 ed. A mixture of a flammable gas with either a combustible dust or a combustible mist. Hybrid Mixture. (secondary) NFPA 499, 2004 ed. A mixture of a dust with one or more flammable gases or vapors. Ignitable Mixture. (preferred) NFPA 77, 2000 ed. A gas-air, vapor-air, mist-air, or dust-air mixture, or combinations of such mixtures, that can be ignited by a sufficiently strong source of energy, such as a static electric discharge. Ignitable Mixture. (secondary) NFPA 499, 2004 ed. A combustible material that is within its flammable range. Substantiation: Adoption of preferred definitions will assist the user by providing consistent meaning of defined terms throughout the National Fire Codes. Committee Meeting Action: Accept in Part This committee proposal was developed by NFPA staff on behalf of the Technical Committee on Electrical Equipment in Chemical Atmospheres for the reasons stated in the substantiation. The committee accepts the recommended preferred definition of combustible dust, but wishes to retain the secondary definitions of combustible material, hybrid mixture, and ignitable mixture that are in the 2004 edition of NFPA 499. Committee Statement: The EECA committee will seek Standards Council approval for retaining these three secondary definitions for the following reasons: 1. Combustible Material-The secondary definition of combustible material is unique to NFPA 499 in its usage as a generic term limited to combustible dust or a hybrid mixture of dust and flammable gases or vapors. 2. Hybrid Mixture - The secondary definition of hybrid material recognizes that such mixtures can be a dust with a flammable gas or vapor or can be a dust and more than one flammable gas(es) or vapor(s). 3. Ignitable Mixture - The secondary definition of ignitable mixture correlates with the current NFPA 499 definitions of combustible material and hybrid mixture. The preferred definition of ignitable material is more generic and covers other ignitible mixtures besides dust. The preferred definition only discusses static electric discharge and similar strong sources of energy as ignition source whereas NFPA 499 also addresses high surface temperature of electrical equipment as a potential ignition source. Number Eligible to Vote: 13 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 11 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Driscoll, M., Sengupta, S. 499-3 Log #CP2 Final Action: Accept (Table 4.5.2) Submitter: Technical Committee on Electrical Equipment in Chemical Atmospheres, Recommendation: Revise Note 2 to by deleting the reference to zirconium. Add a new Note 3 to the table to read: Due to the impurities found in coal, its ignition temperatures vary regionally and ignition temperatures are not available for all regions in which coal is mined. Substantiation: The use of zirconium as an example in Note 2 is not valid based on its layer or cloud ignition temperature specified in Table 4.5.2. The addition of a new note on varying ignition temperatures for coal demonstrates that ignition temperatures vary regionally and in some cases ignition temperature data is not available. Committee Meeting Action: Accept Number Eligible to Vote: 13 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 10 Negative: 1 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Driscoll, M., Sengupta, S. Explanation of Negative: WECHSLER, D.: Action should have been to accept in principle in part. This section has needed some work and was identified as such in our last face-to-face meeting. A partial correction may be attained by revising the second sentence by deleting uranium, and indicating that fine pure zirconium and thorium dusts will ignite spontaneously in air especially at elevated temperatures. Additionally the table should be revised by deleting the temperature for both these chemicals, as the potential hazards should not permit a layer dust accumulations. See below Suggested action for the text in question: 2. Certain metal dusts may have characteristics that require safeguards beyond those required for atmospheres containing the dusts of aluminum, magnesium, and their commercial alloys. For example, zirconium, and thorium, and uranium dusts may ignite spontaneously in air, especially at elevated temperatures. have extremely low ignition temperatures [as low as 20 C (68 F)] and minimum ignition energies lower than any material classified in any of the Class I or Class II groups. Comment on Affirmative: BRIESCH, E.: While I agree with the Committee Action to accept this proposal, I would recommend that thorium be deleted from the note as well. Table 4.5.2 gives an ignition temperature of 280C for thorium which is not extremely low as the Note suggests. In addition, uranium is given as an example of an extremely low ignition temperature material in the Note. But uranium and its 20C ignition temperature are not included in Table 4.5.2 and should be added.

FORM FOR COMMENTS ON NFPA REPORT ON PROPOSALS 2007 FALL REVISION CYCLE FINAL DATE FOR RECEIPT OF COMMENTS: 5:00 pm EST, 3/2/2007 For further information on the standards-making process, please contact the Codes and Standards Administration at 617-984-7249 FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Log #: For technical assistance, please call NFPA at 617-770-3000 Date Rec'd: Please indicate in which format you wish to receive your ROP/ROC electronic paper download (Note: In choosing the download option you intend to view the ROP/ROC from our Website; no copy will be sent to you.) Date Name Tel. No. Company Street Address City State Zip Please Indicate Organization Represented (if any) 1. a) NFPA Document Title NFPA No. & Year b) Section/Paragraph 2. Comment on Proposal No. (from ROP): 3. Comment recommends: (check one) new text revised text deleted text 4. Comment (include proposed new or revised wording, or identification of wording to be deleted): (Note: Proposed text should be in legislative format: i.e., use underscore to denote wording to be inserted (inserted wording) and strike-through to denote wording to be deleted ( deleted wording). 5. Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Comment: (Note: State the problem that will be resolved by your recommendation; give the specific reason for your comment including copies of tests, research papers, fire experience, etc. If more than 200 words, it m ay be abstracted for publication.) 6. Copyright Assignment a) I am the author of the text or other material (such as illustrations, graphs) proposed in this Comment. b) Some or all of the text or other material proposed in this Comment was not authored by me. Its source is as follows: (please identify which material and provide complete information on its source) I hereby grant and assign to the NFPA all and full rights in copyright in this Comment and understand that I acquire no rights in any publication of NFPA in which this Comment in this or another similar or analogous form is used. Except to the extent that I do not have authority to make an assignment in materials that I have identified in (b) above, I hereby warrant that I am the author of this comment and that I have full power and authority to enter into this assignment. Signature (Required) PLEASE USE SEPARATE FORM FOR EACH COMMENT NFPA Fax: (617) 770-3500 Mail to: Secretary, Standards Council, National Fire Protection Association, 1 Batterymarch Park, P.O. Box 9101, Quincy, MA 02269 11/1/2005

Sequence of Events Leading to Issuance of an NFPA Committee Document Step 1 Call for Proposals Proposed new Document or new edition of an existing Document is entered into one of two yearly revision cycles, and a Call for Proposals is published. Step 2 Report on Proposals (ROP) Committee meets to act on Proposals, to develop its own Proposals, and to prepare its Report. Committee votes by written ballot on Proposals. If two-thirds approve, Report goes forward. Lacking two-thirds approval, Report returns to Committee. Step 3 Report on Proposals (ROP) is published for public review and comment. Report on Comments (ROC) Committee meets to act on Public Comments to develop its own Comments, and to prepare its report. Committee votes by written ballot on Comments. If two-thirds approve, Reports goes forward. Lacking two-thirds approval, Report returns to Committee. Step 4 Report on Comments (ROC) is published for public review. Technical Committee Report Session Notices of intent to make a motion are filed, are reviewed, and valid motions are certified for presentation at the Technical Committee Report Session. ( Consent Documents that have no certified motions bypass the Technical Committee Report Session and proceed to the Standards Council for issuance.) NFPA membership meets each June at the Annual Meeting Technical Committee Report Session and acts on Technical Committee Reports (ROP and ROC) for Documents with certified amending motions. Step 5 Committee(s) vote on any amendments to Report approved at NFPA Annual Membership Meeting. Standards Council Issuance Notification of intent to file an appeal to the Standards Council on Association action must be filed within 20 days of the NFPA Annual Membership Meeting. Standards Council decides, based on all evidence, whether or not to issue Document or to take other action, including hearing any appeals. viii

The Technical Committee Report Session of the NFPA Annual Meeting The process of public input and review does not end with the publication of the ROP and ROC. Following the completion of the Proposal and Comment periods, there is yet a further opportunity for debate and discussion through the Technical Committee Report Sessions that take place at the NFPA Annual Meeting. The Technical Committee Report Session provides an opportunity for the final Technical Committee Report (i.e., the ROP and ROC) on each proposed new or revised code or standard to be presented to the NFPA membership for the debate and consideration of motions to amend the Report. The specific rules for the types of motions that can be made and who can make them are set forth in NFPA s rules, which should always be consulted by those wishing to bring an issue before the membership at a Technical Committee Report Session. The following presents some of the main features of how a Report is handled. What Amending Motions Are Allowed. The Technical Committee Reports contain many Proposals and Comments that the Technical Committee has rejected or revised in whole or in part. Actions of the Technical Committee published in the ROP may also eventually be rejected or revised by the Technical Committee during the development of its ROC. The motions allowed by NFPA rules provide the opportunity to propose amendments to the text of a proposed code or standard based on these published Proposals, Comments, and Committee actions. Thus, the list of allowable motions include motions to accept Proposals and Comments in whole or in part as submitted or as modified by a Technical Committee action. Motions are also available to reject an accepted Comment in whole or part. In addition, motions can be made to return an entire Technical Committee Report or a portion of the Report to the Technical Committee for further study. The NFPA Annual Meeting, also known as the World Safety Conference and Exposition, takes place in June of each year. A second Fall membership meeting was discontinued in 2004, so the NFPA Technical Committee Report Session now runs once each year at the Annual Meeting in June. Who Can Make Amending Motions. Those authorized to make these motions are also regulated by NFPA rules. In many cases, the maker of the motion is limited by NFPA rules to the original submitter of the Proposal or Comment or his or her duly authorized representative. In other cases, such as a Motion to Reject an accepted Comment, or to Return a Technical Committee Report or a portion of a Technical Committee Report for Further Study, anyone can make these motions. For a complete explanation, NFPA rules should be consulted. The Filing of a Notice of Intent to Make a Motion. Before making an allowable motion at a Technical Committee Report Session, the intended maker of the motion must file, in advance of the session, and within the published deadline, a Notice of Intent to Make a Motion. A Motions Committee appointed by the Standards Council then reviews all notices and certifies all amending motions that are proper. The Motions Committee can also, in consultation with the makers of the motions, clarify the intent of the motions and, in certain circumstances, combine motions that are dependent on each other together so that they can be made in one single motion. A Motions Committee report is then made available in advance of the meeting listing all certified motions. Only these Certified Amending Motions, together with certain allowable Follow-Up Motions (that is, motions that have become necessary as a result of previous successful amending motions) will be allowed at the Technical Committee Report Session. Consent Documents. Often there are codes and standards up for consideration by the membership that will be noncontroversial, and no proper Notices of Intent to Make a Motion will be filed. These Consent Documents will bypass the Technical Committee Report Session and head straight to the Standards Council for issuance. The remaining Documents are then forwarded to the Technical Committee Report Session for consideration of the NFPA membership. ix

Action on Motions at the Technical Committee Report Session. In order to actually make a Certified Amending Motion at the Technical Committee Report Session, the maker of the motion must sign in at least an hour before the session begins. In this way, a final list of motions can be set in advance of the session. At the session, each proposed Document up for consideration is presented by a motion to adopt the Technical Committee Report on the Document. Following each such motion, the presiding officer in charge of the session opens the floor to motions on the Document from the final list of Certified Amending Motions followed by any permissible Follow-Up Motions. Debate and voting on each motion proceeds in accordance with NFPA rules. NFPA membership is not required in order to make or speak to a motion, but voting is limited to NFPA members who have joined at least 180 days prior to the session and have registered for the meeting. At the close of debate on each motion, voting takes place, and the motion requires a majority vote to carry. In order to amend a Technical Committee Report, successful amending motions must be confirmed by the responsible Technical Committee, which conducts a written ballot on all successful amending motions following the meeting and prior to the Document being forwarded to the Standards Council for issuance. Standards Council Issuance One of the primary responsibilities of the NFPA Standards Council, as the overseer of the NFPA codes and standards development process, is to act as the official issuer of all NFPA codes and standards. When it convenes to issue NFPA documents it also hears any appeals related to the Document. Appeals are an important part of assuring that all NFPA rules have been followed and that due process and fairness have been upheld throughout the codes and standards development process. The Council considers appeals both in writing and through the conduct of hearings at which all interested parties can participate. It decides appeals based on the entire record of the process as well as all submissions on the appeal. After deciding all appeals related to a Document before it, the Council, if appropriate, proceeds to issue the Document as an official NFPA code or standard, recommended practice or guide. Subject only to limited review by the NFPA Board of Directors, the decision of the Standards Council is final, and the new NFPA document becomes effective twenty days after Standards Council issuance. The illustration on page 9 provides an overview of the entire process, which takes approximately two full years to complete. x