National Fire Protection Association 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02169-7471 Phone: 617-770-3000 Fax: 617-770-0700 www.nfpa.org MEMORANDUM To: From: NFPA Technical Committee on Building Service and Fire Protection Equipment (BLD-BSF) Diane Matthews, Administrator, Technical Projects Date: October 4, 2012 Subject: NFPA 5000 First Draft TC FINAL Ballot Results (A2014) According to the final ballot results, all ballot items received the necessary affirmative votes to pass ballot. 30 Members Eligible to Vote 2 Members that did not Return a Ballot (P. Donga and M. Szmanda) 24 Members who voted Affirmative on All (1 with comment D. Klepitch) 4 Members who voted Negative on one or more First Revisions: (S. Caron, C. Hutton, K. Isman, and D. Klepitch) 0 Members who Abstained on one or more First Revisions The attached report shows the number of affirmative, negative, and abstaining votes as well as the explanation of the vote for each first revision. There are two criteria necessary for each first 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 eligble 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.
NFPA 5000 BLD BSF FIRST DRAFT FINAL REPORT NFPA 5000 FR620 Eligible To Vote: 30 Affirmative: 27 1 Abstain: 0 Not Returned: 2 55.2.1.2 D. Klepitch: This section would require all occupancy chapters to specifically require the reference to NFPA 96. Commercial cooking equipment could be found in practically every occupancy type except 1 and 2 family homes. NFPA 5000 FR601 Eligible To Vote: 30 Affirmative: 28 0 Abstain: 0 Not Returned: 2 55.2.1.2 (New) NFPA 5000 FR621 Eligible To Vote: 30 Affirmative: 27 1 Abstain: 0 Not Returned: 2 55.2.1.3 S. Caron: This ensures that the fire alarm completes all three functions. Without this, you can have systems that may not provide occupant or emergency forces notification. NFPA 5000 FR602 Eligible To Vote: 30 Affirmative: 27 1 Abstain: 0 Not Returned: 2 55.2.1.4 S. Caron: Smoke detectors provide protection for those areas containing FACP or other electrical equipment. It also allows the system to monitor for electrical issues. 1 Page
NFPA 5000 FR604 Eligible To Vote: 30 Affirmative: 28 0 Abstain: 0 Not Returned: 2 55.2.2 Affirm with Comment D. Klepitch: Recommend that the silencing portion of Section 55.2.2.10.3 include provisions that when a smoke alarm is silenced, an alarm condition (not occupant notification) is received at the building fire alarm system when detectors are connected to a building fire alarm system. NFPA 5000 FR605 Eligible To Vote30 Affirmative: 28 0 Abstain: 0 Not Returned: 2 55.2.3.2.1 NFPA 5000 FR606 Eligible To Vote: 30 Affirmative: 26 2 Abstain: 0 Not Returned: 2 55.2.3.5 Negatives: S. Caron: Areas considered used by hearing impaired NEED the visible signals. These people are deaf, not blind. D. Klepitch: Section 55.2.3.5.1 is too general and opens the door to omission of visual occupant notification in areas that may not at first glance have hearing impaired occupants, but may in the future. Also, I disagree with Section 55.2.3.5.6 altogether; alternatives to visible signals are not as reliable (e.g. paging). NFPA 5000 FR607 Eligible To Vote: 30 Affirmative: 28 0 Abstain: 0 Not Returned: 2 55.2.3.6.3 2 Page
NFPA 5000 FR608 Eligible To Vote: 30 Affirmative: 26 2 Abstain: 0 Not Returned: 2 55.2.3.7 and 55.2.3.8 Negatives: S. Caron: Why would we allow systems NOT to follow NFPA 72? D. Klepitch: The proposed language is a step back to the BOCA days where audible notification was "effectively heard". Effectively heard is too subjective. Quantifiable sound pressure level increases with table of baseline sound pressure levels for occupancies is not problematic. NFPA 5000 FR603 Eligible To Vote: 30 Affirmative: 27 1 Abstain: 0 Not Returned: 2 55.2.3.9.2 D. Klepitch: Sections 55.2.3.10.1 and 55.2.3.10.2 are in direct conflict. Also, Section 55.2.3.10.1 does not follow current direction of NFPA 72 that speakers may be used for purposes other than emergency as long as emergency messages have priority. NFPA 5000 FR610 Eligible To Vote: 30 Affirmative: 27 1 Abstain: 0 Not Returned: 2 55.2.4.2 S. Caron: These sprinkler systems must be zoned by floor or other zones to allow emergency responders to find the affected areas ASAP. Many times the sprinkler head will control of extinguish the fire and compartmentalize the smoke, not allow it to reach a smoke detector. NFPA 5000 FR611 Eligible To Vote: 30 Affirmative: 28 0 Abstain: 0 Not Returned: 2 55.2.7 3 Page
NFPA 5000 FR612 Eligible To Vote: 30 Affirmative: 28 0 Abstain: 0 Not Returned: 2 55.3.1.2 NFPA 5000 FR616 Eligible To Vote: 30 Affirmative: 28 0 Abstain: 0 Not Returned: 2 55.3.1.4 NFPA 5000 FR613 Eligible To Vote: 30 Affirmative: 28 0 Abstain: 0 Not Returned: 2 55.7 Affirm with Comment: D. Klepitch: I recommend that "special inspector" be replaced with "testing representative" or equivalent. Inspector has a special meaning in fire field outside of fire alarm (e.g., fire inspectors and investigators) that should be maintained. NFPA 5000 FR600 Eligible To Vote: 30 Affirmative: 28 0 Abstain: 0 Not Returned: 2 55.10 NFPA 5000 FR614 Eligible To Vote: 30 Affirmative: 28 0 Abstain: 0 Not Returned: 2 55.12.4 Affirm with Comment: D. Klepitch: I recommend that "special inspector" be replaced with "testing representative" or equivalent. Inspector has a special meaning in fire field outside of fire alarm (e.g., fire inspectors and investigators) that should be maintained. NFPA 5000 FR609 Eligible To Vote: 30 Affirmative: 25 3 Abstain: 0 Not Returned: 2 55.13 (New) 4 Page
Negatives: C. Hutton: Sufficient operating experience data has not been provided or submitted to the committee to justify an equivalency for construction alternatives equal to that which has been earned over the years with automatic fire sprinkler systems. Additional documented operating experience is needed to establish the long term reliability of these systems. K. Isman: Water mist systems have not established equivalency with fire sprinkler systems. The long term reliability data has not been submitted to the committee and we do not believe that it exists. The blanket provision to give all of the trade ups to water mist systems that have been painstakingly developed for fire sprinkler systems over a period of more than 100 years has not been substantiated. D. Klepitch: In my opinion, testing has not yet shown that water mist systems are equivalent to fire sprinklers (See "Water Mist Fire Protection Reliability Analysis" by Xu and Fuller (NFPA). Also, parameters of water mist coverage are not defined well enough for this blanket statement (e.g., single nozzle vs. flooding). NFPA 5000 FR618 Eligible To Vote: 30 Affirmative: 28 0 Abstain: 0 Not Returned: 2 A.55.2.1.4.1 and A.55.2.1.4.1.2 NFPA 5000 FR619 Eligible To Vote: 30 Affirmative: 27 1 Abstain: 0 Not Returned: 2 A.55.5 (New) D. Klepitch: I disagree with the second paragraph. In my opinion, testing has not yet shown that water mist systems are equivalent to fire sprinklers (See "Water Mist Fire Protection Reliability Analysis" by Xu and Fuller (NFPA). An AHJ should not be told he should accept something in this fashion as written in Para. 2. 5 Page