Report onProposals

2013 Annual Revision Cycle

NOTE: The proposed NFPA documents addressed in this Report on

Proposals (ROP) and in a follow-up Report on Comments (ROC) will

only be presented for action when proper Amending Motions have been

submitted to the NFPA by the deadline of April 5, 2013. The June 2013

NFPA Conference & Expo will be held June 10–13, 2013, at McCormick

Place Convention Center, Chicago, IL. During the meeting, the Association

Technical Meeting (Tech Session) will be held June 12–13, 2013.

Documents that receive no motions will not be presented at the meeting

and instead will be forwarded directly to the Standards Council for action on

issuance. For more information on the rules and for up-to-date information

on schedules and deadlines for processing NFPA documents, check the

NFPA website (www.nfpa.org) or contact NFPA Standards Administration.

ISSN 1079-5332 Copyright © 2012 All Rights Reserved

NFPA and National Fire Protection Association are registered trademarks of the National Fire Protection Association, Quincy, MA 02169.

National Fire Protection Association®1 BATTERYMARCH PARK, QUINCY, MA 02169-7471

A compilation of NFPA® TechnicalCommittee Reports on Proposals for public review and comment

Public Comment Deadline: August 31, 2012

Information on NFPA Codes and Standards Development

I. Applicable Regulations. The primary rules governing the processing of NFPA documents (codes, standards, recommended practices, and guides) are the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee Projects (Regs). Other applicable rules include NFPA Bylaws, NFPA Technical Meeting Convention Rules, NFPA Guide for the Conduct of Participants in the NFPA Standards Development Process, and the NFPA Regulations Governing Petitions to the Board of Directors from Decisions of the Standards Council. Most of these rules and regulations are contained in the NFPA Directory. For copies of the Directory, contact Codes and Standards Administration at NFPA Headquarters; all these documents are also available on the NFPA website at “www.nfpa.org.”

The following is general information on the NFPA process. All participants, however, should refer to the actual rules and regulations for a full understanding of this process and for the criteria that govern participation.

II. Technical Committee Report. The Technical Committee Report is defined as “the Report of the Technical Committee and Technical Correlating Committee (if any) on a document consisting of the ROP and ROC.” A Technical Committee Report consists of the Report on Proposals (ROP), as modified by the Report on Comments (ROC), published by the Association.

III. Step 1: Report on Proposals (ROP). The ROP is defined as “a report to the Association on the actions taken by Technical Committees and/or Technical Correlating Committees, accompanied by a ballot statement and one or more proposals on text for a new document or to amend an existing document.” Any objection to an action in the ROP must be raised through the filing of an appropriate Comment for consideration in the ROC or the objection will be considered resolved.

IV. Step 2: Report on Comments (ROC). The ROC is defined as “a report to the Association on the actions taken by Technical Committees and/or Technical Correlating Committees accompanied by a ballot statement and one or more comments resulting from public review of the Report on Proposals (ROP).” The ROP and the ROC together constitute the Technical Committee Report. Any outstanding objection following the ROC must be raised through an appropriate Amending Motion at the Association Technical Meeting or the objection will be considered resolved.

V. Step 3a: Action at Association Technical Meeting. Following the publication of the ROC, there is a period during which those wishing to make proper Amending Motions on the Technical Committee Reports must signal their intention by submitting a Notice of Intent to Make a Motion. Documents that receive notice of proper Amending Motions (Certified Amending Motions) will be presented for action at the annual June Association Technical Meeting. At the meeting, the NFPA membership can consider and act on these Certified Amending Motions as well as Follow-up Amending Motions, that is, motions that become necessary as a result of a previous successful Amending Motion. (See 4.6.2 through 4.6.9 of Regs for a summary of the available Amending Motions and who may make them.) Any outstanding objection following action at an Association Technical Meeting (and any further Technical Committee consideration following successful Amending Motions, see Regs at 4.7) must be raised through an appeal to the Standards Council or it will be considered to be resolved.

VI. Step 3b: Documents Forwarded Directly to the Council. Where no Notice of Intent to Make a Motion (NITMAM) is received and certified in accordance with the Technical Meeting Convention Rules, the document is forwarded directly to the Standards Council for action on issuance. Objections are deemed to be resolved for these documents.

VII. Step 4a: Council Appeals. Anyone can appeal to the Standards Council concerning procedural or substantive matters related to the development, content, or issuance of any document of the Association or on matters within the purview of the authority of the Council, as established by the Bylaws and as determined by the Board of Directors. Such appeals must be in written form and filed with the Secretary of the Standards Council (see 1.6 of Regs). Time constraints for filing an appeal must be in accordance with 1.6.2 of the Regs. Objections are deemed to be resolved if not pursued at this level.

VIII. Step 4b: Document Issuance. The Standards Council is the issuer of all documents (see Article 8 of Bylaws). The Council acts on the issuance of a document presented for action at an Association Technical Meeting within 75 days from the date of the recommendation from the Association Technical Meeting, unless this period is extended by the Council (see 4.8 of Regs). For documents forwarded directly to the Standards Council, the Council acts on the issuance of the document at its next scheduled meeting, or at such other meeting as the Council may determine (see 4.5.6 and 4.8 of Regs).

IX. Petitions to the Board of Directors. The Standards Council has been delegated the responsibility for the administration of the codes and standards development process and the issuance of documents. However, where extraordinary circumstances requiring the intervention of the Board of Directors exist, the Board of Directors may take any action necessary to fulfill its obligations to preserve the integrity of the codes and standards development process and to protect the interests of the Association. The rules for petitioning the Board of Directors can be found in the Regulations Governing Petitions to the Board of Directors from Decisions of the Standards Council and in 1.7 of the Regs.

X. For More Information. The program for the Association Technical Meeting (as well as the NFPA website as information becomes available) should be consulted for the date on which each report scheduled for consideration at the meeting will be presented. For copies of the ROP and ROC as well as more information on NFPA rules and for up-to-date information on schedules and deadlines for processing NFPA documents, check the NFPA website (www.nfpa.org) or contact NFPA Codes & Standards Administration at (617) 984-7246.

i

2013 Annual Revision Cycle ROP Contents

by NFPA Numerical Designation

Note: Documents appear in numerical order.

NFPA No. Type Action Title Page No.

25 P Standard for the Inspection, Testing, and Maintenance of Water-Based Fire Protection Systems ............... 25-1 51B P Standard for Fire Prevention During Welding, Cutting, and Other Hot Work ........................................... 51B-1 56(PS) P Standard for Fire and Explosion Prevention During Cleaning and Purging of Flammable Gas Piping Systems .......................................................................................................... 56(PS)-1 58 P Liquefied Petroleum Gas Code ....................................................................................................................... 58-1 77 P Recommended Practice on Static Electricity .................................................................................................. 77-1 96 P Standard for Ventilation Control and Fire Protection of Commercial Cooking Operations.......................... 96-1 130 P Standard for Fixed Guideway Transit and Passenger Rail Systems ............................................................. 130-1 306 P Standard for the Control of Gas Hazards on Vessels ................................................................................... 306-1 403 P Standard for Aircraft Rescue and Fire-Fighting Services at Airports .......................................................... 403-1 412 P Standard for Evaluating Aircraft Rescue and Fire-Fighting Foam Equipment ............................................ 412-1

502 P Standard for Road Tunnels, Bridges, and Other Limited Access Highways ............................................... 502-1 610 P Guide for Emergency and Safety Operations at Motorsports Venues ......................................................... 610-1 780 P Standard for the Installation of Lightning Protection Systems..................................................................... 780-1 1002 P Standard for Fire Apparatus Driver/Operator Professional Qualifications ................................................ 1002-1

1021 P Standard for Fire Officer Professional Qualifications ................................................................................ 1021-1

1026 P Standard for Incident Management Personnel Professional Qualifications ............................................... 1026-1 1031 P Standard for Professional Qualifications for Fire Inspector and Plan Examiner ....................................... 1031-1 1033 P Standard for Professional Qualifications for Fire Investigator ................................................................... 1033-1 1123 P Code for Fireworks Display ....................................................................................................................... 1123-1 1143 P Standard for Wildland Fire Management ................................................................................................... 1143-1

TYPES OF ACTION

P Partial Revision N New Document R Reconfirmation W Withdrawal

ii

2013 Annual Revision Cycle ROP Committees Reporting

Type Action Page No. Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting 403 Standard for Aircraft Rescue and Fire-Fighting Services at Airport P 403-1 412 Standard for Evaluating Aircraft Rescue and Fire-Fighting Foam Equipment P 412-1 Fixed Guideway Transit and Passenger Rail Systems 130 Standard for Fixed Guideway Transit and Passenger Rail Systems P 130-1 Forest and Rural Fire Protection 1143 Standard for Wildland Fire Management P 1143-1 Gas Hazards 306 Standard for the Control of Gas Hazards on Vessels P 306-1 Gas Process Safety 56(PS) Standard for Fire and Explosion Prevention During Cleaning and Purging of Flammable Gas Piping

Systems

P

56(PS)-1 Hot Work Operations 51B Standard for Fire Prevention During Welding, Cutting, and Other Hot Work P 51B-1 Inspection, Testing, and Maintenance of Water-Based Systems 25 Standard for the Inspection, Testing, and Maintenance of Water-Based Fire Protection Systems P 25-1 Lightning Protection 780 Standard for the Installation of Lightning Protection Systems P 780-1 Liquefied Petroleum Gases 58 Liquefied Petroleum Gas Code P 58-1 Professional Qualifications Fire Fighter Professional Qualifications 1002 Standard for Fire Apparatus Driver/Operator Professional Qualifications P 1002-1 Fire Officer Professional Qualifications 1021 Standard for Fire Officer Professional Qualifications P 1021-1 Incident Management Professional Qualifications 1026 Standard for Incident Management Personnel Professional Qualifications P 1026-1 Fire Inspector Professional Qualifications 1031 Standard for Professional Qualifications for Fire Inspector and Plan Examiner P 1031-1 1033 Standard for Professional Qualifications for Fire Investigator P 1033-1 Pyrotechnics 1123 Code for Fireworks Display P 1123-1 Road Tunnel and Highway Fire Protection 502 Standard for Road Tunnels, Bridges, and Other Limited Access Highways P 502-1 Static Electricity 77 Recommended Practice on Static Electricity P 77-1 Safety at Motorsports Venues 610 Guide for Emergency and Safety Operations at Motorsports Venues P 610-1 Venting Systems for Cooking Appliances 96 Standard for Ventilation Control and Fire Protection of Commercial Cooking Operations P 96-1

iii

COMMITTEE MEMBER CLASSIFICATIONS1,2,3,4

The following classifications apply to Committee members and represent their principal interest in the activity of the Committee. 1. M Manufacturer: A representative of a maker or marketer of a product, assembly, or system, or portion thereof,

that is affected by the standard. 2. U User: A representative of an entity that is subject to the provisions of the standard or that voluntarily uses the

standard. 3. IM Installer/Maintainer: A representative of an entity that is in the business of installing or maintaining a product,

assembly, or system affected by the standard. 4. L Labor: A labor representative or employee concerned with safety in the workplace. 5. RT Applied Research/Testing Laboratory: A representative of an independent testing laboratory or independent

applied research organization that promulgates and/or enforces standards. 6. E Enforcing Authority: A representative of an agency or an organization that promulgates and/or enforces

standards. 7. I Insurance: A representative of an insurance company, broker, agent, bureau, or inspection agency. 8. C Consumer: A person who is or represents the ultimate purchaser of a product, system, or service affected by the

standard, but who is not included in (2). 9. SE Special Expert: A person not representing (1) through (8) and who has special expertise in the scope of the

standard or portion thereof. NOTE 1: “Standard” connotes code, standard, recommended practice, or guide. NOTE 2: A representative includes an employee. NOTE 3: While these classifications will be used by the Standards Council to achieve a balance for Technical Committees, the Standards Council may determine that new classifications of member or unique interests need representation in order to foster the best possible Committee deliberations on any project. In this connection, the Standards Council may make such appointments as it deems appropriate in the public interest, such as the classification of “Utilities” in the National Electrical Code Committee. NOTE 4: Representatives of subsidiaries of any group are generally considered to have the same classification as the parent organization.

FORM FOR COMMENT ON NFPA REPORT ON PROPOSALS 2013 Annual Revision CYCLE

FINAL DATE FOR RECEIPT OF COMMENTS: 5:00 pm EDST, August 31, 2012

For further information on the standards-making process, please contact the Codes and Standards Administration at 617-984-7249 or visit www.nfpa.org/codes.

For technical assistance, please call NFPA at 1-800-344-3555.

FOR OFFICE USE ONLY

Log #:

Date Rec’d:

Please indicate in which format you wish to receive your ROP/ROC electronic paper download (Note: If choosing the download option, you must view the ROP/ROC from our website; no copy will be sent to you.)

Date 8/1/200X Name John B. Smith Tel. No. 253-555-1234

Company Email

Street Address 9 Seattle St. City Tacoma State WA Zip 98402

***If you wish to receive a hard copy, a street address MUST be provided. Deliveries cannot be made to PO boxes.

Please indicate organization represented (if any) Fire Marshals Assn. of North America

1. (a) NFPA Document Title National Fire Alarm Code NFPA No. & Year NFPA 72, 200X ed.

(b) Section/Paragraph 4.4.1.1

2. Comment on Proposal No. (from ROP): 72-7

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).]

Delete exception.

5. Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Comment: (Note: State the problem that would 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 may be abstracted for publication.)

A properly installed and maintained system should be free of ground faults. The occurrence of one or more ground faults should be required to cause a ‘trouble’ signal because it indicates a condition that could contribute to future malfunction of the system. Ground fault protection has been widely available on these systems for years and its cost is negligible. Requiring it on all systems will promote better installations, maintenance and reliability.

6. Copyright Assignment

(a) I am the author of the text or other material (such as illustrations, graphs) proposed in the 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

Mail to: Secretary, Standards Council · National Fire Protection Association 1 Batterymarch Park · Quincy, MA 02169-7471 OR

Fax to: (617) 770-3500 OR Email to: proposals_comments@nfpa.org

FORM FOR COMMENT ON NFPA REPORT ON PROPOSALS 2013 Annual Revision CYCLE

FINAL DATE FOR RECEIPT OF COMMENTS: 5:00 pm EDST, August 31, 2012

For further information on the standards-making process, please contact the Codes and Standards Administration at 617-984-7249 or visit www.nfpa.org/codes.

For technical assistance, please call NFPA at 1-800-344-3555.

FOR OFFICE USE ONLY

Log #:

Date Rec’d:

Please indicate in which format you wish to receive your ROP/ROC electronic paper download (Note: If choosing the download option, you must view the ROP/ROC from our website; no copy will be sent to you.)

Date Name Tel. No.

Company Email

Street Address City State Zip

***If you wish to receive a hard copy, a street address MUST be provided. Deliveries cannot be made to PO boxes.

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 would 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 may be abstracted for publication.)

6. Copyright Assignment

(a) I am the author of the text or other material (such as illustrations, graphs) proposed in the 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

Mail to: Secretary, Standards Council · National Fire Protection Association 1 Batterymarch Park · Quincy, MA 02169-7471 OR

Fax to: (617) 770-3500 OR Email to: proposals_comments@nfpa.org 5/15/2012

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.

▼ Report on Proposals (ROP) is published for public review and comment.

Step 3 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, Report goes forward. Lacking two-thirds approval, Report returns to Committee.

▼ Report on Comments (ROC) is published for public review.

Step 4 Association Technical Meeting

▼ “Notices of intent to make a motion” are filed, are reviewed, and valid motions are certified for presentation at the Association Technical Meeting. (“Consent Documents” that have no certified motions bypass the Association Technical Meeting and proceed to the Standards Council for issuance.)

▼ NFPA membership meets each June at the Association Technical Meeting and acts on Technical Committee Reports (ROP and ROC) for documents with “certified amending motions.”

▼ Committee(s) vote on any amendments to Report approved at NFPA Annual Membership Meeting.

Step 5 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.

The Association Technical 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 Association Technical Meeting that takes place at the NFPA Annual Meeting.

The Association Technical Meeting 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 an Association Technical Meeting. The following presents some of the main features of how a Report is handled.

The Filing of a Notice of Intent to Make a Motion. Before making an allowable motion at an Association Technical Meeting, 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 Association Technical Meeting.

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 Association Technical Meeting and head straight to the Standards Council for issuance. The remaining documents are then forwarded to the Association Technical Meeting for consideration of the NFPA membership.

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 NFPA Conference & Expo, 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. NFPA rules also define those authorized to make amending motions. 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, the NFPA Regs should be consulted.

Action on Motions at the Association Technical Meeting. In order to actually make a Certified Amending Motion at the Association Technical Meeting, 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 Association Technical Meeting 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. Subject only to limited review by the NFPA Board of Directors, the decision of the Standards Council is final, and the new NFPA code or standard becomes effective twenty days after Standards Council issuance.

1123-1

Report on Proposals A2013 — Copyright, NFPA NFPA 1123 Report of the Committee on

Pyrotechnics

Rachel Robbins, ChairNatural Resources Canada, Canada [E]

Kenneth L. Kosanke, SecretaryPyroLabs, Incorporated, CO [SE]

Gregory S. Altland, City of York Fire/Rescue Services, PA [E] Richard Bowes, Natural Resources Canada, Canada [RT] W. G. Bulifant, III, Dominion Fireworks, Inc., VA [U] Anthony J. Cesaroni, Cesaroni Technology Inc., FL [M] Edward L. Cochran, Minneapolis, MN [SE] John A. Conkling, Chestertown, MD [SE] Randall W. A. Davidson, Risk International & Associates, Inc., CO [SE] Glenn A. Dean, Virginia Department of Fire Programs, VA [E] Rep. International Fire Marshals Association Phil Grucci, Fireworks by Grucci, Inc., NY [M] Garry Hanson, Precocious Pyrotechnics, Inc., MN [M] Rep. National Fireworks Association Julie L. Heckman, American Pyrotechnics Association, MD [M] Lansden E. Hill, Jr., E. E. Hill & Son, Inc./Pyro Shows, TN [U] Edward J. Kaminski, Clark County Fire Department, NV [E] John R. Kitchens, Los Angeles City Fire Department, CA [E] Joshua Lazarus, State of New Jersey, NJ [E] J. Patrick Miller, Hardin-Simmons University, TX [U] Rep. National Association of Rocketry David J. Pier, MP Associates, Inc., CA [M] Mary Roberts, Estes Industries, CO [M] John D. Rogers, American Fireworks Standards Laboratory, MD [RT] Gary C. Rosenfield, RCS Rocket Motor Components, Inc., UT [M] David S. Shatzer, US Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms & Explosives, DC [E] James R. Souza, Pyro Spectaculars, Inc., CA [U] John R. Steinberg, Pyrotechnics Guild International, Inc., MD [U] Bill Stine, Quest Aerospace, Inc., CO [M]Charles P. Weeth, Weeth & Associates, LLC, WI [SE] William A. Weimer, B. J. Alan Company, OH [M] Christopher J. Weir, Port Orange Department of Fire & Rescue, FL [E] Rep. International Association of Fire Chiefs Dan Westcott, Gadsden Fire Department, AL [E] Rep. NFPA Fire Service Section Darren Wright, Tripoli Rocketry Association, DE [U] Marge Yarbrough, State of California, State Fire Marshal, CA [E]

Alternates

Arthur H. Barber, III, National Association of Rocketry, VA [U](Alt. to J. Patrick Miller)Karl E. Baumann, RCS Rocket Motor Components, Inc., UT [M](Alt. to Gary C. Rosenfield)Gary E. Brown, Pyro Spectaculars, Inc., CA [U](Alt. to James R. Souza)Albert M. Comly, Jr., Lower Gwynedd Township, PA [E] (Alt. to Christopher J. Weir) Derek D. Deville, KMS Medical, FL [U] (Alt. to Darren Wright) Jerald E. Farley, American Promotional Events, Inc., WA [M] (Alt. to David J. Pier) Felix J. Grucci, Jr., Fireworks by Grucci, Inc., NY [M] (Alt. to Phil Grucci) Bonnie J. Kosanke, Journal of Pyrotechnics, Inc., CO [SE] (Alt. to Kenneth L. Kosanke) Gerald R. Laib, Naval Surface Warfare Center, MD [SE] (Alt. to Charles P. Weeth) Jeroen Louwers, Cesaroni Technology Inc., Canada [M] (Alt. to Anthony J. Cesaroni)

Stephen Lubliner, Tucson, AZ [SE] (Alt. to Edward L. Cochran) Daryl Marmon, Wald-All American Fireworks, KS [U] (Alt. to John R. Steinberg) Craig A. Meyers, Clark County Fire Department, NV [E] (Alt. to Edward J. Kaminski) Andrew T. Nicholls, Orlando Special Effects, Inc., FL [M] (Alt. to Garry Hanson) Daniel P. Peart, B. J. Alan Company, OH [M] (Alt. to William A. Weimer) Brennan S. Phillips, US Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms & Explosives, WA [E] (Alt. to David S. Shatzer) Gregg S. Smith, American Pyrotechnics Association, PA [M] (Alt. to Julie L. Heckman) Tad A. Trout, American Promotional Events, Inc., CA [U] (Alt. to W. G. Bulifant, III) Marie Vachon, Natural Resources Canada, Canada [E] (Alt. to Rachel Robbins) Bert von Rosen, Natural Resources Canada, Canada [RT] (Alt. to Richard Bowes) Lawrence T. Weinman, Schneier-Weinman Consultants, TX [SE] (Alt. to Randall W. A. Davidson)

Nonvoting

Joseph A. Domanico, US Department of the Army, MD [RT]Virginia G. Fitzner, US Department of Labor, DC [E] (Alt. to Mark Hagemann) Demar Granados, US Consumer Product Safety Commission, MD [C] Mark Hagemann, US Department of Labor, DC [E] Gary Zeller, Zeller International, NY

Staff Liaison: Nancy Pearce

Committee Scope: This Committee shall have primary responsibility for documents on the manufacture, transportation, and storage of consumer and display fireworks, pyrotechnic special effects, and model and high power rocket motors. This Committee shall have primary responsibility for the use of display fireworks and for model and high power rocketry, and the construction, launching, and other operations that involve model and high power rocket motors. The Committee shall have primary responsibility for documents on the wholesale and retail sale and storage of consumer fireworks. The Committee shall have responsibility for the development of fire test standards applicable to the packaging, covered fuses, and flame breaks used in retail sales display of consumer fireworks. The Committee shall coordinate the fire test documents with the Fire Tests Committee. The Committee does not have responsibility for documents on the use of consumer fireworks by the general public; on the use of pyrotechnic special effects before a proximate audience; on the manufacture, transportation, storage for use of military, automotive, agricultural, and industrial pyrotechnics.

This list represents the membership at the time the Committee was balloted on the text of this report. Since that time, changes in the membership may have occurred. A key to classifications is found at the front of the document.

The Report of the Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics is presented for adoption.

This Report was prepared by the Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics and proposes for adoption, amendments to NFPA 1123, Code for Fireworks Display, 2010 edition. NFPA 1123-2010 is published in Volume 12 of the 2012 National Fire Codes and in separate pamphlet form.

This Report has been submitted to letter ballot of the Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics, which consists of 32 voting members. The results of the balloting, after circulation of any negative votes, can be found in the report.

1123-2

Report on Proposals A2013 — Copyright, NFPA NFPA 1123 _______________________________________________________________1123-1 Log #CP1 Final Action: Accept(Entire Document)_______________________________________________________________Submitter: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics, Recommendation: Review entire document and update both extracted material and reference sources as necessary per the actions below: 1) Extracted material has been reviewed against source documents and updated as noted below: 3.3.9.2 Pyrotechnic Device. Any device containing pyrotechnic materials and capable of producing a special effect as defined in this code. [1126, 201106]3.3.13 Fire (verb). To ignite pyrotechnics by using an electric match, electrical current, or some other means. [1126, 201106]3.3.15* Fireworks. Any composition or device for the purpose of producing a visible or an audible effect for entertainment purposes by combustion, deflagration, or detonation, that meets the definition of Consumer Fireworks or Display Fireworks as set forth in this code. [1124, 201306]3.3.15.1* Consumer Fireworks. Small fireworks devices containing restricted amounts of pyrotechnic composition, designed primarily to produce visible or audible effects by combustion, that comply with the construction, chemical composition, and labeling regulations of the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), as set forth in CPSC 16 CFR 1500 and 1507, 49 CFR 172, and APA Standard 87-1, Standard for the Construction and Approval for Transportation of Fireworks, Novelties, and Theatrical Pyrotechnics. [1124, 201306]3.3.15.2* Display Fireworks. Large fireworks devices that are explosive materials intended for use in fireworks displays and designed to produce visible or audible effects by combustion, deflagration, or detonation, as set forth in 27 CFR Part 555 CPSC 16 CFR 1500 and 1507, 49 CFR 172, and APA Standard 87-1, Standard for the Construction and Approval for Transportation of Fireworks, Novelties, and Theatrical Pyrotechnics. [1124, 201306]3.3.31.1 Black Powder. A low explosive consisting of an intimate mixture of potassium or sodium nitrate, charcoal, and sulfur. [1126, 201106]3.3.32 Pyrotechnic Material (Pyrotechnic Special Effects Material). A chemical mixture used in the entertainment industry to produce visible or audible effects by combustion, deflagration, or detonation. [1124, 201306]3.3.33 Pyrotechnic Special Effect. A special effect created through the use of pyrotechnic materials and devices. [1126, 201106]3.3.34 Pyrotechnics. Controlled exothermic chemical reactions that are timed to create the effects of heat, gas, sound, dispersion of aerosols, emission of visible electromagnetic radiation, or a combination of these effects to provide the maximum effect from the least volume. [1124, 201306]2) References to NFPA and other organizations’ documents have been reviewed and updated as noted below: 2.2 NFPA Publications. National Fire Protection Association, 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02169-7471. NFPA 160, Standard for the Use of Flame Effects Before an Audience, 201106 edition. NFPA 306, Standard for the Control of Gas Hazards on Vessels, 2009 edition. NFPA 1122, Code for Model Rocketry, 201308 edition.NFPA 1124, Code for the Manufacture, Transportation, Storage, and Retail Sales of Fireworks and Pyrotechnic Articles, 201306 edition.NFPA 1126, Standard for the Use of Pyrotechnics Before a Proximate Audience, 201106 edition.NFPA 1127, Code for High Power Rocketry, 201308 edition.2.3 Other Publications. 2.3.1 APA Publications. American Pyrotechnics Association, P. O. Box 30438, Bethesda, MD 20824. APA Standard 87-1, Standard for Construction and Approval for Transportation of Fireworks, Novelties, and Theatrical Pyrotechnics, 2001. 2.3.2 U.S. Government Publications. U.S. Government Printing Office,Washington, DC 20402. Title 16, Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 1500 and 1507, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission. Title 18 USC, Chapter 40, “Importation, Manufacture, Distribution and Storage of Explosive Materials,” Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, U.S. Department of Justice.

Title 27, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 555, Commerce in Explosives, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, U.S. Department of Justice. Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 171 to end, U.S. Department of Transportation. 2.3.3 Other Publications. Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, 11th edition, Merriam-Webster, Inc., Springfield, MA, 2003. 2.4 References for Extracts in Mandatory Sections. NFPA 1124, Code for the Manufacture, Transportation, Storage, and Retail Sales of Fireworks and Pyrotechnic Articles, 201306 edition.NFPA 1126, Standard for the Use of Pyrotechnics Before a Proximate Audience, 201106 edition.Substantiation: To conform to the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee Projects, extracted material contained in Chapter 3 has been reviewed and modified as needed and identified with the appropriate edition for the source of the extract. In addition, references in Chapter 2 have been updated to the most current edition. The previously extracted definition for “Fire (verb)” shown as 3.3.15 taken from NFPA 1126 is no longer an extract definition and is shown as deleted here in the recommendation for this Committee Proposal. A new definition for “Fire (verb)” has been approved through the Committee Action on Proposal 1123-4 (Log #7). It is no longer extracted. Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 32 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 30 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Grucci, P., Shatzer, D._______________________________________________________________ 1123-2 Log #23 Final Action: Reject(3.3.x Area (New), 4.2.2, and 4.2.3 (New) )_______________________________________________________________ Submitter: Charles P. Weeth, Weeth & Associates, LLCRecommendation: Add new definitions for Preparation Area and Storage Area and renumber as may be needed. 3.#.# Area 3.#.#.1 Preparation Area. The area(s) at a display site where fireworks are prepared for the display. 3.#.#.1 Temporary Storage Area. The area(s) at a display site where fireworks are temporarily stored in the truck(s) or trailer(s) prior to being prepared, loaded or setup for the display. Also add the definitions for Inhabited Buildings, Passenger Railways, Public Highways from NFPA 1124. [NEW] 4.2.2 Temporary Storage and Preparation of Fireworks at the Display Site 4.2.2.1 A temporary storage area(s) shall be established at the display site where any trucks or trailers that have delivered fireworks from the supplier to the display site are located. 4.2.2.2 A temporary storage area(s) shall be located from any inhabited buildings, passenger railways, public highways, preparation areas and bulk storage of hazardous materials according to the Table 4.2.2.2 shown on the bottom of this page: (Was 4.2.2.2) 4.2.2.3 A preparation area(s) shall be temporarily established at the display site where any fireworks are to be prepared, inspected or repaired prior to the display. 4.2.2.4 Temporary storage and preparation areas shall be permitted in spectator and parking areas prior to the fireworks display, provided they are secured from public access for at least 300 feet while fireworks are temporarily stored inside the cargo box of trucks or trailers. 4.2.2.5 Fireworks shall be kept in their shipping cartons inside the cargo box of a truck or trailer until they are prepared, loaded or setup for display.(Was 4.2.2.1) 4.2.2.6 The door(s) to any truck or trailer cargo box with fireworks shall remain closed unless fireworks, equipment, gear or supplies are being moved in or out of the truck or trailer.

Table 4.2.2.2

<1,000 pounds*1.4G/1.4S >1,000 pounds*1.4G/1.4S Less than 100 pounds* 101-499 pounds* > 500 pounds*

100 feet 200 feet 100 feet 200 feet 300 feet

* Gross weight

1123-3

Report on Proposals A2013 — Copyright, NFPA NFPA 1123 4.2.2.7 Smoking materials, matches, lighters or open flame devices shall not be allowed within 50 feet (15.2 m) of any temporary storage area or preparation area, or any discharge area when any fireworks are present. 4.2.2.8 Aerial fireworks shall not be discharges 300 feet (91 m) of any temporary storage area or preparation area, or discharge area where personnel are present and loading or setting up fireworks. 4.2.2.8. Temporary storage and preparation areas shall be attended by authorized personnel at all times fireworks are present. 4.2.2.9 Only authorized personnel shall be permitted in temporary storage and preparation areas. 4.2.2.10 The number of personnel in each temporary storage and preparation area shall not exceed the number necessary to conduct operations. 4.22.11* The quantity of explosive material in a preparation area at any one point in time shall not exceed 500 pounds net weight. A-4.22.11 Best practice is to limit the quantity of fireworks in a preparation area to only the amount that is needed to be prepared at any one time. This usually is one carton of fireworks at a time with a working stock of igniters or fuses. Existing 4.2.2.2 is replaced with proposed 4.2.2.2 4.2.2.3 is replaced with proposed 4.2.2.8 4.2.2.4*, 4.2.2.5* are retained and should be renumbered 4.2.2.6 is replaced with another more detailed proposal. 4.2.3 Inspections 4.2.3.1, 4.2.3.2 and 4.3.3.3 Replace “shells” or “aerial shells” with fireworks 4.2.3.4 is deleted and replaced with proposed 4.2.2.2 Remainder 4.2.3.5 to end of section is retained. Substantiation: The terms “preparation area” and “fireworks storage” are used in the existing document, but neither defined. The storage of fireworks at the display site is only temporary anyway during the time the fireworks are delivered by to the display site and the time the fireworks are loaded and setup.. Over the last 13 years there have been numerous fatal and near fatal incidents involving igniters and fireworks including but not limited to: Ft Worth, TX, Uffculme, Devon, UK, Peoria, AZ, New Orleans, LA, Landsford, SC, Carmel, West Australia, Bonita Springs, FL, Kilgore, TX, Wellfleet, MA, Kolding, Denmark, Crestline, KS, Shortgate, East Sussex, UK, and Oracoke, NC. The unintended impact or friction of the igniter matchhead during the installation, handling or removal of the igniter is apparently the primary cause of these incidents and could easily have been avoided had the proposed standards been followed. In some of these incidents, the fireworks were being prepared or handled inside or near the truck where the fireworks were temporarily stored at the display site, and with more than one Assistant nearby. The inadvertent ignition of a single device being handled by a single assistant, outside and some distance away from other personnel and fireworks would most certainly pose a significant risk to that Assistant, but the same inadvertent ignition of a single device inside or near a truck with cartons and cartons of fireworks and 2,3 or more people inside of close proximity increases the negative results exponentially. It is essential to apply the similar standards of care used at a manufacturing facility when finished fireworks are in process or storage at a display site when the same activities are occurring. The quantity of product and the number of personnel need to be limited, minimum distances between areas where finished fireworks are being prepared and where they are temporarily stored, and basic protocols for limiting the domino effect in the event of an inadvertent ignition need to be established in order to minimize risks. The proposed standards are based on the current practices of most experienced display operators and intended to serve as the basis for further refinement by the committee. The issues of electrostatic discharge while installing and removing igniters also needs to be addressed. The definitions are proposed in order to differentiate the preparation area from the temporary storage area at a display site, and to establish standards for what activities are permitted in each area as well as what limitations apply to each area. The proponent strongly urges the Committee to address this issue as it has led to over 20 fatalities, numerous injuries including severe maiming and significant property damage. This issue also poses a risk to public safety given the volume of display fireworks with igniters attached without the shroud in storage and transit, and if not properly addressed the long term viability of the display fireworks trade given the heavy reliance on imports from China via container ships through major ports. Committee Meeting Action: RejectCommittee Statement: The Committee notes a number of concerns with the recommended revision to the code as submitted. These are: The submitter notes incidents without providing specific details that clearly indicate what aspects of the current code are not sufficient with respect to any of the identified incidents. No data have been submitted to indicate how the code was used or not used in relationship to the displays involved with these incidents. The submitter has provided a proposed Table 4.2.2.2 that would apparently provide separation distances based on pyrotechnic weight and distances, but no technical basis has been presented for the numbers presented in the proposed table. In addition, there are no headings for the table columns and the table values are inconsistent as the values go from less than 500 and greater than 500

for example, which leaves equal to 500 pounds in question. The proposal indicates that some current content is replaced with the proposed new content but no justification has been provided for deleting the current content and there could be a gap as not all the new content exactly replaces the existing content. For example, the proposal would replace existing 4.2.3.4 with new proposed 4.2.2.2 but the subject of each of these sections does not match, so it is likely that important provisions would be lost in this revision if supported. It appears that the proposed separation and preparation area requirements introduce revised distances from those currently in the code and again provides no basis for the suggested distances. The submitter in 4.2.11 establishes a limit of explosive material in the preparation area shall not exceed 500 pounds; no basis for the weight threshold has been provided and from an enforcing perspective weighing the material in the field is not an effective proposal. With all the proposed changes being made in this proposal, the submitter has failed to indicate clearly in all changes what is new, what is revised, and what is deleted, so it is difficult to determine what current requirements might be lost inadvertently with the acceptance of the proposed changes as submitted. Number Eligible to Vote: 32 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 29 Negative: 1 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Grucci, P., Shatzer, D.Explanation of Negative: WEETH, C.: The submitter thanks the TC for requesting additional information related to the referenced incidents, but is actually surprised the TC is apparently unaware of any of the referenced incidents. If the TC desires, the submitter will be happy to submit additional details, including photographs, for public review. The proposed standards are nothing new and follow existing storage and process regulations at manufacturing facilities as well as best industry practices. They follow the time tested philosophy of limiting the quantity of explosives materials and personnel in storage or in process at any one place at one time, and establishing minimum setbacks from the public as well as known hazards. Public safety is our primary goal and the risks and hazards associated with the storage, handling and preparation of display fireworks at a display site need to be addressed in greater detail. The submitter invites the TC to develop better language and standards to address this need. _______________________________________________________________ 1123-3 Log #24 Final Action: Reject(3.3.2 Igniter (New), 4.1.8, 4.2.2.6, 9.5, 9.6, and 9.7)_______________________________________________________________ Submitter: Charles P. Weeth, Weeth & Associates, LLCRecommendation: Delete 4.2.2.6 and replace with the following standards. Add new definitions for Igniter, Non-pyrogen Igniter and their parts and renumber as may be needed. 3.3.2# Igniter3.3.2#.1 Igniter. An electrical ignition device consisting of a matchhead of pyrotechnic material soldered to two PVC insulated lead wires that are connected to an electrical firing unit for firing. Igniters designed and manufactured for use with fireworks are capable of being tested at 0.20 amperes and fired at less than 1.0 amperes. Igniters are classified as a low explosive for storage purposes and 1.4G or 1.4S for transportation purposes. 3.3.2#.2 Matchhead, Igniter. The pyrotechnic material of an igniter or the tip of a non-pyrogen igniter that is the ignition source that ignites the fireworks. Upon the application of the minimum test current to the matchhead via the lead wires, the viability of the circuit can be tested, and upon application of the minimum fire current, the matchhead will function. 3.3.2#.3 Non-pyrogen Igniter. An electrical ignition device consisting of a matchhead of non-combustible material soldered to PVC insulated lead wires and connected to an electrical firing unit for firing. Non-pyorgen igniters designed and manufactured for us with fireworks are capable of being tested at 0.35 amperes and fired at less than 1.6 amperes. Non-pyrogen igniters are not classified as an explosive material and thus have no classification for storage or transportation purposes. Add a new section to Chapter 4 and renumber as may be needed. 4.1.8 Igniters and Non-pyrogen Igniters4.1.8.1 Only igniters or non-pyrogen igniters manufactured and intended for use with electrical firing systems that meet the standards of this code shall be used. 4.1.8.2 Electric blasting caps, boosters or detonators and other high explosive initiating devices used by the commercial blasting industry and the military shall not be used at a fireworks display. 4.1.8.3 Non-electric high shock tube shall be permitted to be used by an ATF high explosive licensee with the required state blasting license and approval of the local AHJs. 4.1.8.4 Igniters that require more than at 0.20 amperes to test or 1.0 amperes to fire shall not be used. 4.1.8.5 Non-pyrogen igniters that require more than at 0.35 amperes to test or 1.6 amperes to fire shall not be used. 4.1.8.6* Igniters shall have a plastic shroud or other protective cover over the matchhead, but non-pyrogen igniters shall be permitted without a shroud or other protective cover.

1123-4

Report on Proposals A2013 — Copyright, NFPA NFPA 1123 A-4.8.6 The purpose of the shroud or protective cover is to reduce the sensitivity of the igniter’s matchhead to impact or friction. Non-pyrogen igniters are not sensitive to impact or friction and thus do not need a shroud or protective cover. 4.1.8.7* Igniters and non-pyrogen igniters shall have the exposed wire of the lead wires shunted, and the lead wires neatly bundled. A-4.1.8.7 Shunting the exposed wires of the lead wires reduces, but does not eliminate the risks of electrostatic discharge. 4.1.8.8 Manufacturers of igniters and non-pyrogen igniters shall provide written instructions and warnings regarding the transportation, storage, installation, handling and removal with respect to fireworks that include. (1) Warnings and instructions regarding the matchheads of igniter’s sensitivity to impact, friction, heat, spark, flame and electrostatic discharge and can function suddenly and unexpectedly. (2) Proper procedures to mitigate these risks when handling, storing, installing, handling and removing igniters with and without fireworks present. (3) Proper procedures for packing and unpacking aerial fireworks into DOT shipping cartons with igniters installed into the leader fuses or lift charges of fireworks. (4) Proper procedures for packing and unpacking ground display fireworks into DOT shipping cartons with igniters installed into the nozzles of gerbs, fountains, wheel drivers and similar ground display fireworks. (5) Proper procedures for using igniters and pyrogen igniters with electrical firing systems, including the connection to electrical firing systems as well as the testing and firing. Add a new Section 9.5 to Chapter 9, revise and expand existing Section 9.5 Post Display Operations and renumber as follows: 9.5 Installation of Igniters and Non-pyrogen Igniters to Fireworks at the Display Site9.5.1* The installation of igniters and non-pyrogen igniters to fireworks at the display site shall be conducted according to this section. A-9.5.1 The matchheads on igniters are sensitive to impact, friction, heat, spark, flame and electrostatic discharge and can function suddenly and unexpectedly. Non-pyrogen igniters are not sensitive to impact, friction, heat, spark, flame and are less sensitive to electrostatic discharge. 9.5.2* Igniters or non-pyrogen igniters shall be permitted to be installed to fireworks prior to the display in the preparation area(s) or discharge area(s). A-9.5.2 Igniters or non-pyrogen igniters may also installed to fireworks prior to the display by the manufacturer and shipped to the display site. 9.5.3 Igniters shall remain in their DOT approved shipping cartons or individual packages until needed. 9.5.4* Igniters and or non-pyrogen igniters shall be handled with care and impact, friction, heat, spark, flame or electrostatic discharge avoided. A-9.5.4 Although non-pyrogen igniters are not sensitive to impact, friction, heat, spark or flame and less sensitive to electrostatic discharge than igniters, it is important for handling practices to remain consistent. 9.5.5* Electronic communications devices, radar, and other similar devices capable of generating 5 watts or more of power shall be turned off or at least 100 feet away from igniters or non-pyrogen igniters or fireworks with igniters or non-pyrogen igniters attached. A-9.5.5 Modern cell phones are not capable of generating sufficient power to pose a significant risk, however their use around igniters should be discouraged. 9.5.6 High power transmissions lines and electric power sub stations shall be at least 300 feet away from igniters or non-pyrogen igniters or fireworks with igniters or non-pyrogen igniters attached. 9.5.7* Batteries and portable electric devices carried by the Operator and Assistants or in the immediate vicinity of areas where igniters or non-pyrogen igniters are located or used shall have any exposed battery connections covered or protected. A-9.5.7 Portable electric devices such as cell phones, radios and tools may have exposed battery connections for use in rechargers. Batteries used to power the electrical firing system or other devices such as tools, flashlights, cell phones, and radios may be in locations where igniters or non-pyrogen igniters are located. Although unlikely, there are reports from the commercial blasting industry of unintended initiation of blasting caps possibly due to the lead wires bumping into exposed battery connections. 9.5.8 Exposed electrical lead wires on igniters or non-pyrogen igniters shall remain shunted until connected to the terminals of an electrical firing unit. 9.5.9* Plastic shrouds or other protective covers shall remain over the matchheads of igniters, especially when installed into the leader fuses of lift charges of fireworks. A-9.5.9 The sensitivity of the matchhead to function due to impact or friction increases with direct contact with blackpowder. 9.5.10* Plastic shrouds or other protective covers shall be permitted to be removed from the matchheads of igniters when installed into the nozzles of gerbs, fountains, wheel drivers and similar ground display fireworks that are too small to accommodate the matchhead with the shroud or protective cover. A-9.5.9 Although the sensitivity of the matchhead to function due to impact or friction increases with direct contact with blackpowder, when the matchhead is inside of the nozzle of a gerbs, fountains, wheel drivers or similar ground display fireworks, the cardboard casing of the device provides protection from external impact or friction at least equal to if not greater than the shroud or protective cover.

9.5.10 The igniter matchhead with shroud or protective cover, or the matchhead of a non-pyrogen igniter shall be attached to either the leader fuse or the lift charge of aerial shells, mines or comets. (1) If attached to the leader fuse, the paper piping of the leader fuse shall be carefully cut open with a non-sparking tool in order to insert the matchhead into the leader fuse. (2) If a plastic connector for igniters is attached to the leader fuse, the matchhead of the igniter shall be carefully inserted into the plastic connector and secured. (3) If attached to the lift charge, a non-sparking tool such as a bronze punch or wooden dowel shall be used carefully to open a hole into the lift charge in order to insert the matchhead into the lift charge (4) In order to ensure reliable ignition, the matchhead of the igniter or non-pyrogen igniter shall be placed so it is in direct contact with the blackpowder of the leader fuse or lift charge. (5) The open paper piping of the leader fuse, or the hole in the paper wrap or paperboard casing of the lift charge shall be repaired using masking tape or other similar materials in order to protect the blackpowder and prevent spills. (6)* The lead wires of igniters and non-pyrogen igniters installed to fireworks shall be secured to the fireworks device by taping or wrapping the lead wires to the fireworks device in order to minimize the inadvertent pulling or removal of the igniter from the fireworks device, and remain neatly bundled until ready to be connected to the electrical firing unit. A-9.5.11(6) In order for the lead wires of igniters or non-pyrogen igniters to reach from the fireworks to the electrical firing unit junctions, it may be necessary to have 3 feet or more of lead wires for each device. If the lead wires are not secured to the fireworks and neatly bundled, it increases the odds that an igniter may be inadvertently pulled or yanked from the fireworks, essentially disconnecting the matchhead from the blackpowder and resulting in the ignition of the igniter of non-pyrogen igniter, but no fire of the fireworks. In the case of igniters, the inadvertent pulling or yanking of the lead wires may create sufficient friction that it causes an ignition. 9.5.12 Any fireworks with igniters or non-pyrogen igniters attached that are not immediately loaded into mortars or holders, or otherwise setup for the display shall be carefully repacked into DOT approved shipping cartons and the lids closed, and returned to the truck or trailer until ready to be loaded. Add a new section 9.6 to Chapter 9 as follows: 9.6 Loading or Setup of Fireworks with Igniters or Non-pyrogen Igniters9.6.1* Prior to loading and setting up fireworks with Igniters and non-pyrogen igniters, the electrical firing unit cables and junctions with the connections for igniters and non-pyrogen igniters shall be laid out in the discharge areas(s) in order to ensure they reach the mortars, holders and areas as required in the show plan. A-9.6.1 Moving mortars, mortar racks and holders loaded with aerial fireworks with igniters attached to where cables and junctions will reach poses additional risks that can easily be mitigated by locating the cables and junctions before loading and setting up any fireworks. Running spools of zip wire also can increase risks requiring additional circuit checks and increased numbers of unfired fireworks due to poor connections or circuits with too much resistance. 9.6.2* Aerial shells, comets and mines with igniters attached shall be removed from the truck or trailer one carton at a time to the discharge area to be loaded into mortars. (1) Prior to loading into the mortar, each aerial firework shall be permitted to be temporarily placed on the top of each mortar to ensure each is located in the location according to the show plan. (2) As soon as the location in the show plan is determined, each aerial firework shall be loaded into the designated mortar, the lead wire carefully unbundled to connect to the terminal of the junction of the electrical firing unit. (3) The lead wire shall be secured to the mortar or mortar rack and any excess wire neatly bundled in order to minimize the inadvertent pulling or yanking that might disconnect the igniter or non-pyrogen igniter from the fireworks. (4) At this time, the shunt shall be permitted to be removed in order to connect the lead wires to the junction of the electrical firing unit. A-9.6.2 The practice of unloading all of the aerial fireworks for a display and mounting all of them on top of the mortars prior to loading should be discouraged. Placing hundreds or thousands of aerial fireworks on the tops of the mortar where they are exposed to any number of potential ignition sources increases risks to the crew to an unacceptable level. 9.6.3 Roman candles, cakes and ground display pieces with igniters attached shall be removed from the truck or trailer one carton at a time to the discharge area to be setup in the location according to the show plan. 9.6.4 Fireworks without igniters or non-pyrogen igniters attached shall be permitted to be loaded or setup according to the show plan, and then igniters or non-pyrogen igniters attached to the leader fuses, provided: (1) The requirements of 9.5.10 (1), (2), (4), (5) and (6) are complied with, and: (2) The personnel are wearing personal protective equipment including eye protection, and they place no part of their body over the mortars or tubes of any aerial fireworks. 9.7 Post Display Operations9.7.2.1* (Was 9.5.2.1) [REVISED] (2) Fireworks with igniters or non-pyrogen igniters that have been unloaded from mortars or holders, or disassembled, shall have the exposed wires of the lead wires shunted and the lead wires neatly bundled, and

1123-5

Report on Proposals A2013 — Copyright, NFPA NFPA 1123 packaged with the igniter or non-pyrogen igniter attached to the fireworks into approved DOT shipping cartons and returned to the supplier in compliance withal applicable regulations. [NEW] 9.7.2.2 If the igniter or non-pyrogen igniter is to be removed from the fireworks device at the display site, it shall be removed in the discharge area using non-sparking tools and following the same standards in 4.2.2. (1) The igniter or non-pyrogen igniter shall have the exposed wires of the lead wires shunted and the lead wires neatly bundled. (2) If an igniter is installed into the leader fuse, the matchhead shall be carefully located by feeling for it and using non-sparking tools, the paper piping carefully cut open in order to remove the matchhead. A-9.7.2.2(2) Cutting into the matchhead may create sufficient impact or friction to cause ignition of the pyrotechnic material and thus should be avoided. (3) The leader fuse or lift charge of the fireworks device shall be repaired with tape or paper so no blackpowder is exposed or leaks. (4) The igniter or non-pyrogen igniter be returned to the individual package. (5) Igniters shall be returned to their DOT approved shipping cartons and returned to the supplier. Substantiation: Over the last 13 years there have been numerous fatal and near fatal incidents involving igniters and fireworks including but not limited to: Ft Worth, TX, Uffculme, Devon, UK, Peoria, AZ, New Orleans, LA, Landsford, SC, Carmel, West Australia, Bonita Springs, FL, Kilgore, TX, Wellfleet, MA, Kolding, Denmark, Crestline, KS, Shortgate, East Sussex, UK, and Oracoke, NC. The unintended impact or friction of the igniter matchhead during the installation, handling or removal of the igniter is apparently the primary cause of these incidents and could easily have been avoided had the proposed standards been followed. Manufacturers of igniters have been unwilling or unable to provide proper instructions without an industry standard for guidance. As a result, each display operator has had to develop their own standards based on what they have learned from personal experience and what they’ve heard through the grapevine. The APA exemption obtained from the DOT in 1996 allowing the attachment of igniters to the leader fuse without a shroud, but requiring a shroud if attached to the lift charge remains in force. It continues to lead some display operators to believe this is acceptable in spite of the research by the Kosankes detailing there is even greater risk from impact and friction to the matchhead when attached without a shroud to the leader fuse than into the lift charge, The proposed standards are based on the current practices of most experienced display operators and intended to serve as the basis for further refinement by the committee. The issues of electrostatic discharge while installing and removing igniters also needs to be addressed. The definitions are proposed in order to differentiate the newer non-pyrogen igniters that are not sensitive to impact, friction, heat, spark or flame and less sensitive to electrostatic discharge so standards that are required for shrouds over matchheads are not applied to these devices. The proposed standards differentiate what is required for each to the same end. The proponent strongly urges the Committee to address this issue as it has led to over 20 fatalities, numerous injuries including severe maiming and significant property damage. This issue also poses a risk to public safety given the volume of display fireworks with igniters attached without the shroud in storage and transit, and if not properly addressed the long term viability of the display fireworks trade given the heavy reliance on imports from China via container ships through major ports. Committee Meeting Action: RejectCommittee Statement: While the Committee believes that some of the recommended additions to the code regarding the Electric Match and non-pyrotechnic Electric Match have merit, corresponding input from the manufacturers that are best suited to provide validation of the proposed limits (0.20 amperes and 1.0 ampere for example) is needed. The Committee invites the submitter and manufacturers to provide specification information for these items during the Public Comment period so that the Committee might more credibly evaluate the proposed establishment of thresholds for these devices. The terminology used by the submitter is inconsistent with current code. Aspects of the proposed revision to the code are not able to be enforced at the display site (such as testing of current characteristics). The Committee also invites comments from enforcing officials on how they view such proposed requirements and their ability to effectively enforce in the field. The Committee notes that some of the proposed changes might be better suited in scope to NFPA 1124 as they address manufacturing; for example, proposed 4.1.8.8. The Committee also invites comment from the users of these devices to justify the statement that the proposed requirements match current practices of experienced display operators. The Committee seeks further evidence from those operators to support his view. The Committee also notes numerous errors in the overall structure of the proposal with respect to use of unenforceable terms and requirements. Such examples include use of “neatly bundled” without making it clear what would constitute “neatly” which again reinforces the Committee’s concern with enforceability. The lack of legislative text provided by the submitter makes tracking what has been added, deleted or revised very difficult and makes it impractical for the Committee to ensure that nothing unintended has been lost.

Number Eligible to Vote: 32 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 29 Negative: 1 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Grucci, P., Shatzer, D.Explanation of Negative: WEETH, C.: The TC substantiation for rejection is quite enlightening. The submitter has forwarded the TC action to the manufacturers of these devices and systems for their follow-up directly o the TC. This is the first time in the submitter’s experience (Since 1988) where the TC has been unwilling to at the very least accept in principle proposed standards to address a new technology without direct input from a manufacturer. The submitter requests further clarification on the “numerous errors” of unenforceable terms and requirements cited, as only one example was provided. “Neatly bundled” is certainly not the most objective term, but it is certainly better than the subjective terms “sufficient” and “adequate”this TC has used numerous times in body of the code including. Finally, the submitter will be happy to once again submit proposals and comments individually if that is what the TC prefers. The submitter reminds the TC that it was the TC that requested proposals and comments be grouped when addressing the same or similar issues, rather than individual submissions. _______________________________________________________________ 1123-4 Log #7 Final Action: Accept in Principle(3.3.13 Fire (verb))_______________________________________________________________ Submitter: William E. Koffel, Koffel Associates, Inc.Recommendation: Revise text to read as follows: 3.3.13 Fire (verb). To ignite pyrotechnics or fireworks by using ana portfire, fusee, electric match, electric current, or some other means.Substantiation: This is a definition from NFPA 1126 and deals with “pyrotechnics”. This definition should include the words fireworks, portfire and fussee to reflect the way products are fired for display fireworks shows. Committee Meeting Action: Accept in Principle Revise text to read as follows: 3.3.13 Fire (verb). To ignite pyrotechnics fireworks by using ana portfire, fusee, electric match, electric current, or some other means.Committee Statement: Based on the submitter’s substantiation, the Committee believed that a more effective revision would be to add “fireworks” and delete “pyrotechnics” so that consistent with the scope of NFPA 1123, the term “fire” applies to fireworks only. The Committee agreed with the suggested additions of other ignition methods that are applicable for fireworks but not for pyrotechnics within the context of proximate pyrotechnics which are within the scope of NFPA 1126. The revision by the Committee is primarily editorial. See also Committee Action on Committee Proposal 1123-30 (Log# CP7) which added an annex to this definition that supplements the change from “pyrotechnics” to “fireworks.” Number Eligible to Vote: 32 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 30 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Grucci, P., Shatzer, D._______________________________________________________________ 1123-5 Log #8 Final Action: Accept in Principle(3.3.18 Ground Display Piece)_______________________________________________________________ Submitter: William E. Koffel, Koffel Associates, Inc.Recommendation: Revise text to read as follows: 3.3.18 Ground Display Piece. A fireworks device that functions on the ground (as opposed to an aerial shell that functions in the air) and that includes fountains, wheels, and “set-pieces. A fireworks device that functions on the ground or functions while mounted securely above the ground (as opposed to an aerial shell that functions in the air) and may include gerbs, wheels, and “set pieces.”Substantiation: The original statement suggests that the Ground Display Piece must include “fountains, wheels, and set pieces rather than includes but is not limited to those components. It also does not reflect that the items must be securely mounted. Committee Meeting Action: Accept in Principle Revise text to read as follows: 3.3.18* Ground Display Piece. A fireworks device that functions on the ground (as opposed to an aerial shell that functions in the air) and that includes fountains, wheels, and “set-pieces. A fireworks device that functions on the ground or functions while mounted securely above the ground (as opposed to an aerial shell that functions in the air). A.3.3.18 Ground Display Piece. Ground display pieces can include but not be limited to the following devices: fountains (gerbs), wheels, and “set pieces.”Committee Statement: The Committee modified the definition as proposed to be consistent with NFPA Manual of Style guidelines by removing the examples of some ground display pieces from the definition text and creating an annex item. Number Eligible to Vote: 32 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 30 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Grucci, P., Shatzer, D.

1123-6

Report on Proposals A2013 — Copyright, NFPA NFPA 1123 _______________________________________________________________1123-6 Log #9 Final Action: Accept(3.3.25 Mine and A.3.3.25 (New) )_______________________________________________________________Submitter: William E. Koffel, Koffel Associates, Inc.Recommendation: Revise text to read as follows: 3.3.25* Mine. A device containing multiple pyrotechnic effects that are simultaneously ignited and dispersed by a lift charge into the air from a mortar or tube. A.3.3.25 A mine is a fireworks device designed to project stars and/or other effects or components into the air from a mortar. A black powder lift charge at the base of the mine ignites its contents and projects them into the air usually to an altitude that is lower than that reached by an aerial shell of the same diameter. The visual effect is similar to that of a flowerpot. Mines are not aerial shells or comets.Substantiation: The current definition does not adequately describe the actual performance of a mine or the difference between a mine and other display fireworks products. Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 32 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 30 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Grucci, P., Shatzer, D._______________________________________________________________1123-7 Log #10 Final Action: Accept(3.3.28 Mortar Trough)_______________________________________________________________Submitter: William E. Koffel, Koffel Associates, Inc.Recommendation: Revise text to read as follows: 3.3.28 Mortar Trough. Above ground structure enclosure filled with sand or similar material into which mortars are positioned and securely held in place.Substantiation: The current definition does not adequately describe what a mortar trough is and that the purpose is to secure the mortar and hold them in place. It is important to include that the trough is backfilled after the mortars are positioned in the trough. Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 32 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 30 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Grucci, P., Shatzer, D._______________________________________________________________ 1123-8 Log #11 Final Action: Accept in Principle(3.3.35 Ready Box)_______________________________________________________________ Submitter: William E. Koffel, Koffel Associates, Inc.Recommendation: Revise text to read as follows: 3.3.35 Ready Box. A storage container for aerial fireworks devices for use during setup and display. A sturdy container for storage of fireworks devices at the discharge area of a manually fired and reloaded outdoor display.Substantiation: The current definition does not adequately describe that the ready box should be a sturdy, fire-resistive container and is only used for manually fired, reloaded displays. Committee Meeting Action: Accept in Principle Revise text to read as follows: 3.3.35 Ready Box. A storage container for aerial fireworks devices for use during setup and display. A sturdy container for storage of fireworks devices to be reloaded at the discharge site of a display.Committee Statement: The Committee modified the submitter’s recommended text to emphasize that the ready box is required for storage when reloading of mortars is planned at the discharge site of a display. The Committee deleted “outdoor” as a type of display as NFPA 1123 is only for outdoor displays. The Committee also notes the submitter’s substantiation includes “fire-resistive” to describe the ready box, but did not include such conditions as part of the proposed text. Other aspects of ready box design are covered already in 4.2.4 of the code. Number Eligible to Vote: 32 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 30 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Grucci, P., Shatzer, D._______________________________________________________________ 1123-9 Log #6 Final Action: Accept in Principle(3.3.41.1 Discharge Site)_______________________________________________________________ Submitter: William E. Koffel, Koffel Associates, Inc.Recommendation: Revise text to read as follows: 3.3.41.1 Discharge Site. The area immediately surrounding the fireworks mortars used for an outdoor fireworks display. The area immediately surrounding the location where fireworks and other devices are ignited for an outdoor display.Substantiation: The current definition does not adequately describe that the Discharge Site is the area where the fireworks and other devices are ignited, not just the area where mortars are located. Committee Meeting Action: Accept in Principle Revise text to read as follows: 3.3.41.1 Discharge Site. The area immediately surrounding the fireworks mortars used for an outdoor fireworks display. The area immediately surrounding the location where fireworks and other devices are ignited for a display.

Committee Statement: The Committee deleted the word “outdoor” from the recommended text as it is redundant since NFPA 1123 applies to only outdoor displays. Number Eligible to Vote: 32 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 30 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Grucci, P., Shatzer, D._______________________________________________________________ 1123-10 Log #4 Final Action: Reject(3.3.41.3 Loading Site (New) )_______________________________________________________________ Submitter: Joshua Lazarus, New Jersey Division of Fire SafetyRecommendation: Add new text to read as follows: Loading Site: The area where fireworks are loaded into mortars and where other devices such as cakes and ground display pieces are set in place in preparation for a fireworks display.Substantiation: No definition of a loading site currently exists in the document. Committee Meeting Action: RejectCommittee Statement: The term is not used in the code, so no definition is required. Number Eligible to Vote: 32 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 30 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Grucci, P., Shatzer, D._______________________________________________________________ 1123-11 Log #12 Final Action: Reject(4.1.7.1)_______________________________________________________________ Submitter: William E. Koffel, Koffel Associates, Inc.Recommendation: Revise text to read as follows: 4.1.7.1 Single-break aerial salute shells shall be limited to a size of 5 in. (127 mm) 3 in. (76 mm) in diameter and length or, if the diameter or length exceeds these limitations, the amount of salute powder shall not exceed 3 ounces. Substantiation: The risk presented by salute shells is greater than other aerial shells and therefore should be limited. There may be some correlative changes that will be required to other paragraphs in Section 4.1.7 if this proposal is accepted. Committee Meeting Action: RejectCommittee Statement: The submitter has not provided a technical basis for making the recommended changes. No scientific or practical basis has been provided to support this further limitation. In the definition for display fireworks in Chapter 3, current ATF storage regulations and DOT transportation regulations already address permissible salute size provisions. Code requirements that require enforcing officials to weigh salute composition would not be practically implemented in the field. Number Eligible to Vote: 32 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 30 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Grucci, P., Shatzer, D._______________________________________________________________ 1123-12 Log #13 Final Action: Accept(4.2.3.1)_______________________________________________________________ Submitter: William E. Koffel, Koffel Associates, Inc.Recommendation: Revise text to read as follows: 4.2.3.1 Shells shall be inspected by the operator or assistants following their delivery to the display site at any time prior to the shells being loaded into their mortars or into ready boxes. Substantiation: The current provision does not adequately describe that the shells must be inspected prior to being loaded into mortars or ready boxes. Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 32 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 30 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Grucci, P., Shatzer, D._______________________________________________________________ 1123-13 Log #CP2 Final Action: Accept(4.3.4.1)_______________________________________________________________ Submitter: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics, Recommendation: Revise 4.3.4.1 as shown:4.3.4.1 Unless the requirements of 4.3.4.2 are met, any type of mortar 6 in. (152 mm) in diameter or less shall be permitted to be reloaded and fired used up to seven times during a performance. Substantiation: This revision corrects the terminology in this requirement by changing “fired” to “used” as the mortars are used to fire shells and that is not the mortar itself that is actually fired. This is essentially an editorial clarification of terms. Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 32 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 30 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Grucci, P., Shatzer, D.

1123-7

Report on Proposals A2013 — Copyright, NFPA NFPA 1123 _______________________________________________________________1123-14 Log #14 Final Action: Accept in Principle(4.3.7)_______________________________________________________________Submitter: William E. Koffel, Koffel Associates, Inc.Recommendation: Revise text to read as follows: 4.3.7 Mortars shall be of sufficient strength and durability to safely fire the aerial shells loaded into them and to be used safely.Substantiation: The revised text more clearly describes the safety requirement based upon the type of shells that are loaded into their respective mortars. Committee Meeting Action: Accept in Principle Revise text to read as follows: 4.3.7* Mortars shall be of sufficient strength and durability to fire launch safely the aerial shells loaded into them and to be used safely.Committee Statement: The Committee modified the proposed change to this requirement by replacing “fire” with “launch” as that is more appropriate with the function of the mortars. The Committee also made an editorial change in the placement of “safely” within the revised text. Number Eligible to Vote: 32 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 29 Negative: 1 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Grucci, P., Shatzer, D.Explanation of Negative: DEAN, G.: I found nothing wrong with the existing language. I think it’s clear and concise. But if the choice were only between the proponent’s original proposal versus the committee’s revision, I’d have to choose the proponent’s submission without edits. The point of the section is the mortar’s strength and durability for reloads and repeated firing. As a result of the strength and durability the section speaks to, the default result will be a safe launch. I think the committee further muddied the water and distracted from the section’s focus. _______________________________________________________________ 1123-15 Log #1 Final Action: Accept in Principle(4.3.7.2 and 4.3.7.3)_______________________________________________________________ Submitter: Robert Bourke, Northeastern Regional Fire Code Development Committee Recommendation: Revise text to read as follows:4.3.7.32 Metal mortars shall be permitted to be either seamed or seamless.4.3.7.23 Cast iron, stove pipe, corrugated culvert, clay, bamboo, and wood shall not be used to make mortars. Substantiation: Reversing the order places the requirements in better order. Those items permitted to be used are first than those not a after. Committee Meeting Action: Accept in PrincipleRearrange paragraphs 4.3.7.2 through 4.3.7.4 as shown (4.3.7.1 remains unchanged): 4.3.7.1* Paper, high-density polyethylene (HDPE), and fiberglass mortars shall be permitted to be used. 4.3.7.32 Metal mortars shall be permitted to be either seamed or seamless.4.3.7.43 Where seamed mortars are used, mortars shall be placed so that all seams face either right or left when the line of mortars is viewed. 4.3.7.24 Cast iron, stovepipe, corrugated culvert, clay, bamboo, and wood shall not be used to make mortars. Committee Statement: The Committee added one additional related requirement into the renumbering that was proposed by the submitter. No technical changes were made, only the sequence of the existing requirements was revised. Number Eligible to Vote: 32 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 30 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Grucci, P., Shatzer, D._______________________________________________________________1123-16 Log #CP3 Final Action: Accept(4.5.1.1, 4.5.1.2 (New))_______________________________________________________________Submitter: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics, Recommendation: Add the following new paragraphs and annex items:4.5.1.1* A device constructed of two or three single break, 3 in (76 mm) spherical shells shall be permitted to be fired from aboveground mortar racks. A.4.5.1.1 The code does not permit the loading of multiple, individually lifted aerial shells into a single mortar. This section permits the use of commercially manufactured devices that contain multiple spherical aerial shells assembled with a single lift charge. Common names for these items include “peanut shells”, “double-bubble”, stacked shells, and piled shells. 4.5.1.2* A device constructed of two single break, 4 in (102 mm) spherical shells shall be permitted to be fired from aboveground mortar racks. A.4.5.1.2 See A.4.5.1.1.Substantiation: The Committee has proposed this new requirement to reflect that the use of these devices is a long-standing, common practice. The net explosive weight of such devices is considerably less than that which would require buried mortars for single break spherical shells. The Committee has included this during the ROP phase of the code’s revision process in order to provide the opportunity for manufacturers, operators, and enforcers to provide comments during the Public Comment period.

Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 32 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 30 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Grucci, P., Shatzer, D._______________________________________________________________ 1123-17 Log #17 Final Action: Reject(4.6)_______________________________________________________________ Submitter: William E. Koffel, Koffel Associates, Inc.Recommendation: Revise text to read as follows: While we have submitted several proposals, the entire Section 4.6 needs revision. The proponent will provide more specific recommendations for revisions to the Technical Committee during the ROP meeting. Substantiation: This entire section is confusing and vague.Committee Meeting Action: RejectCommittee Statement: No specific wording was provided so there is no technical recommendation to consider. Number Eligible to Vote: 32 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 30 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Grucci, P., Shatzer, D._______________________________________________________________ 1123-18 Log #25 Final Action: Reject(4.6 and 5.1.3.3, and A.4.6)_______________________________________________________________ Submitter: Charles P. Weeth, Weeth & Associates, LLCRecommendation: Delete 4.6 and 4.6.1.1 Revise 4.6.1.2 by deleting the opening phrase “Where there is doubt concerning the strength of racks holding chain fused mortars” move to new 4.5.6 and revise as follows: [NEW] 4.5.6 The separation distanced for aerial shells loaded in above ground wood frame racks and finale boxes shall be twice those listed in Table 5.1.3.1. Move A-4.6.1 to A-4.5.4 Revise 4.6.2 as follows: 4.6.2 Chain Fused Mortar Rack and Finale Box Requirements 4.6.2.1* Unless the requirements of 4.6.2.2. apply, chain fused mortar racks and finale boxes shall comply with the following: (1) ….. (2) ….. (3) ….. (4) ….. (5) Finale boxes shall not be used for mortars greater than 3 inch (76mm) and shall be limited to no more than 9 mortars per finale box. A-4.6.2.1 Connecting mortar racks so the racks rely on each other for mutual support creates a single mortar rack that is subject to these limits. 4.6.2.2 replace 2.5 inch (64 mm) with 1.5 inch (38 mm) Add a heading 4.6.3 Chain Fused Fireworks and renumber 4.6.3, 4.6.4 and 4.6.5 accordingly. Renumber 4.6.3* and add “finale box” after “mortar racks”. Revise 5.1.3.3 as follows 5.1.3.3 Minimum Radius for Chain Fused Aerial Shells, Comets and Mines Fired from Mortar Racks5.1.3.3.1 For chain fused aerial shells, comets and mines to be fired from mortars, racks, or other holders that are sufficiently strong to prevent their being repositioned in the event of an explosive malfunction of the aerial shells, comets, or mines, the minimum required radius shall be the same as that required in 5.1.3.1 and 5.1.3.2. (See also Section 4.6) 5.1.3.3.2 For chain fused aerial shells and splitting or bursting comets and mines to be fired from mortars, racks or finale boxes, or other holders that are not sufficiently strong to prevent their being repositioned in the event of an explosive malfunction of the aerial shells, comets, or mines, the minimum required radius shall be double that required in 5.1.3.1 and 5.1.3.2. (See also Section 4.6) Revise 5.1.3.4 5.1.3.4.1 For Roman candles and cakes that fire aerial shells and splitting or bursting comets and mines, the minimum required radius shall be double that required in 5.1.3.1 and 5.1.3.2 that specified for chain fused aerial shells, comets or mines, depending on whether they produce aerial shell, comet, or mine effects.Substantiation: Unless the aerial shells have dump breaks such as parachute shells or falling leaves, the typical peonies, chrysanthemums and other aerial shells used today will routinely and regularly shred all lightweight mortar materials such as high density polyethylene, fiberglass, and cardboard, as well as the above ground wood frame racks and finale boxes used to hold them upright. Splitting or bursting comets and mines also will do the same damage if they function prematurely in a mortar, Roman candle or cake.

1123-8

Report on Proposals A2013 — Copyright, NFPA NFPA 1123 The issue is primarily mortar type and how the mortars are secured, either in above ground wood frame racks, finale boxes or cakes or Roman candle holders above ground, or buried in the ground or troughs. Chain fusing is not as important as mortar or tube type and placement, especially for the many electrically fired displays fire as fast or faster than chain fusing anyway. If the aerial shells are not chain fused a premature functioning of an aerial shell in a lightweight mortar can and often will ignite other aerial shells in adjacent mortars, whether chain fused or not, and when that occurs it is quite possible and often probable that those shells will be fired at angles less than 90º and fly downrange more than the current table of distances. The data from research such as the reports from CANMET shows that almost without fail, all lightweight mortar materials will fail with either star shells or salute shells. Other research details the high degree of likelihood that the typical above ground wood frame racks will shred or fail from such an event, tipping over the other mortars at steep angles and firing any other shells at those angles We have also experienced numerous incidents involving finale boxes where they have failed and shot aerial shells, including salutes, into the spectators. By limiting the size and number of mortars in finale boxes, and increasing the distances we can reduce the potential for aerial shells firing into spectators. Many Operators have setup their displays based on the 70 feet per ID inch standard only to experience a catastrophic mortar failure and watch helplessly as the rack or finale box shreds and the remaining aerial shells fire in all directions, often into the spectators. The doubling the distance requirements in 4.6.1 should be in Chapter 5. Unless or until standards are developed for above ground wood frame racks and finale boxes that can routinely withstand a catastrophic mortar failure, the distances should at the very least be doubled, no matter if the aerial shells are chain fused or not. Committee Meeting Action: RejectCommittee Statement: The Committee notes that the changes proposed by the submitter represent a significant departure from current long-standing practice based on current code requirements, and for that reason, the Committee is reluctant to make this change at this time without further input from those impacted - the operators, manufacturers, sponsors, and enforcers. For that reason, the Committee invites input during the Public Comment period to guide the Committee on consideration of changes such as those proposed. The submitter uses the words “routinely and regularly” in the first sentence of the substantiation but does not provide specific evidence to support such broad statements. The lack of legislative text provided by the submitter makes tracking what has been added, deleted or revised very difficult and makes it impractical for the Committee to ensure that nothing unintended has been lost. See Committee Action and Committee Statement on Proposal 1123-19 (Log# 15) for the Committee’s action regarding requirements for boxed finale items. See Committee Action and Committee Statement on Proposal 1123-20 (Log# 16) for the Committee’s action regarding requirements for rack placement and stability. Number Eligible to Vote: 32 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 29 Negative: 1 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Grucci, P., Shatzer, D.Explanation of Negative: WEETH, C.: The TC continues to struggle with the issue of aerial fireworks malfunctions in lightweight mortars in above ground wood frame racks and the potential results to the crew and spectators. The submitter recognizes the difficulty of addressing this complex issue, however it is one that remains in need of something more than the “When there is doubt.....” model of risk mitigation and hazard control. Perhaps it would be helpful for the TC to arrange for an up close and personal demonstration? There is nothing like being only 12’ feet away from a 6” aerial shell that functions prematurely in a lightweight mortar in an above ground wood frame rack to get one’s attention. _______________________________________________________________1123-19 Log #15 Final Action: Accept in Principle(4.6.2.2)_______________________________________________________________Submitter: William E. Koffel, Koffel Associates, Inc.Recommendation: Revise text to read as follows: 4.6.2.2 The requirements of 4.6.2.1 shall not apply to boxed finale items containing mortars 2.5 3 in. (64 76 mm) or less in diameter only.Substantiation: Three inch boxed finales are in widespread commercial use. It would be extremely costly and take a very long time to phase out the boxed finales or change internal mortar quantities with only a speculative and undocumented marginal change in safety. Committee Meeting Action: Accept in Principle Revise text to read as follows: 4.6.2.2 The requirements of 4.6.2.1 shall not apply to boxed finale items as supplied by the manufacturer containing mortars 2.5 4 in. (64 102 mm) or less in diameter only. Committee Statement: The Committee further revised the mortar size limit by changing it from 3 in. as proposed by the submitter to 4 in. The same justification provided by the submitter is the reason for the Committee’s action

to increase further - the 4” size matches what is commercially in use. The Committee added that the boxed finale items are intended to be as supplied by the manufacturer in this configuration and not intended to be constructed on site. Number Eligible to Vote: 32 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 29 Abstain: 1Ballot Not Returned: 2 Grucci, P., Shatzer, D.Explanation of Abstention: HILL, JR., L.: More industry users should be asked how wide spread the use of 4 in. finale boxes are. I agree with 3 in. Comment on Affirmative: DEAN, G.: While I accept the increase to 3-inch, I have reservations with increasing to 4-inch. _______________________________________________________________ 1123-20 Log #16 Final Action: Accept in Principle(4.6.2.3)_______________________________________________________________ Submitter: William E. Koffel, Koffel Associates, Inc.Recommendation: Add new text to read as follows: 4.6.2.3 The number of racks in a group of racks shall not be limited so long as each individual rack in the group complies with 4.6.2.1 and the racks are securely fastened into a stable group.Substantiation: While there may be reason for limiting the number of mortars in a single rack, the same rationale does not hold for groups of racks secured together. The grouping of racks is a long standing practice, and experience has shown that there is additional strength and stability by grouping racks securely together, especially when grouping is compared to free-standing individual racks. Committee Meeting Action: Accept in Principle Add new text to read as follows and renumber existing 4.5.5 as 4.5.6: 4.5.5 The number of racks in a group of racks shall not be limited so long as the racks are securely fastened and stable. Add new text to read as follows: 4.6.2.3 The number of racks in a group of racks shall not be limited so long as each individual rack in the group complies with 4.6.2.1 and the racks are securely fastened and stable.Committee Statement: The Committee included a similar provision to that proposed by the submitter as applicable only for chain-fused mortar racks. The additional provision applies to all mortar racks. The Committee also modified the original recommendation with an editorial change. Number Eligible to Vote: 32 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 30 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Grucci, P., Shatzer, D._______________________________________________________________ 1123-21 Log #CP8 Final Action: Reject(5.1.3, 5.2.1.3)_______________________________________________________________ Submitter: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics, Recommendation: Revise paragraphs 5.1.3 and 5.2.1.3 as shown:5.1.3* Minimum Site Size Requirements. The display site for the outdoor land or water display shall have a radius perimeter at least as great as specified for those items in the display with the greatest required radius separation distances.

5.1.3.1 Ground Level Firing Positions, Vertical Mortars. For aerial shells fired vertically from ground level, the minimum required radius of the display site shall be 70 feet per inch (22 meters per 25 mm) of the internal mortar diameter of the largest aerial shell to be fired, as shown in Table 5.1.3.1.

5.1.3.2* Elevated Firing Positions, Vertical Mortars. For aerial shells fired vertically from firing positions elevated more than 25 feet (7.6 meters) above spectators, the minimum required radius of the display site shall be increased by 40 feet for each 100 feet of elevation of the firing point above 25 feet (7.6 meters) as shown in Table 5.1.3.2.

5.1.3.2.1 Variations in wind direction and velocity up to XX miles per hour have been factored into the requirements set forth in 5.1.3.1 and 5.1.3.2. The AHJ and operator shall be permitted to adjust the separation requirement where winds in excess of XX mph or other specific, hazardous conditions exist or where alternative means of protection are provided.

Table 5.1.3.1 No change [revise caption to reference ground level firing positions, vertical mortars]

1123-9

Report on Proposals A2013 — Copyright, NFPA NFPA 1123

Table 5.1.3.1 Distances for Outdoor Aerial Shell Display Sites Fired Vertically from Ground Positions: Minimum Separation Distances from Mortars to Spectators for Land or Water Displays

Mortar Sizea Minimum Secured Diameter of Siteb

Vertical Mortarsc Angled Mortarsd

Offset

Mortars to Special Hazardse

in. mm ft m ft m ft m ft m

125 150 46 75 23 75 23 150 46

1.5 38 210 64 105 32 75 23 210 64 2 50 280 85 140 43 95 29 280 85

2.5 63 350 107 175 54 115 35 350 107 3 76 420 128 210 64 140 43 420 128 4 102 560 171 280 85 190 58 560 171 5 127 700 213 350 107 230 70 700 213 6 152 840 256 420 128 280 85 840 256 7 178 980 299 490 149 320 98 980 299 8 203 1120 341 560 171 370 113 1120 341 10 254 1400 427 700 213 460 140 1400 427 12 305 1680 512 840 256 560 171 1680 512

Note: >12 in. (>305 mm) requires the approval of the AHJ. a See 4.1.1. b See 5.1.3. c See 5.2.1.3. d See 5.2.1.3. Note that for angled mortars, the minimum secured diameter of the display site does not change. Only the location of the mortars within the secured area changes when the mortars are angled. e See 5.1.4. Note that this is only the distance to the special hazards. The minimum secured diameter of the display site does not change.

 

Table 5.1.3.2 (New) Table of Distances for Outdoor Aerial Shell Display Sites Fired Vertically from Elevated Positions: Minimum Separation Distances from Mortars to Spectators for Land and Water Displays

Elevation(in feet)

Radial Separation Distance (feet) for Shell Sizes

3-inch 4-inch 5-inch 6-inch 8-inch 10-inch 12-inch

0 to < 25 210 280 350 420 560 700 840

25 to < 125 250 320 390 460 600 740 880

125 to < 225 290 360 430 500 640 780 920

225 to < 325 330 400 470 540 680 820 960

325 to < 425 370 440 510 580 720 860 1000

425 to < 525 410 480 550 620 760 900 1040

525 to < 625 450 520 590 660 800 940 1080

625 to < 725 490 560 630 700 840 980 1120

725 to < 825 530 600 670 740 880 1020 1160

825 to < 925 570 640 710 780 920 1060 1200

925 to 1000 610 680 750 820 960 1100 1240

 

Existing 5.1.3.2 is to be renumbered and retained

5.2.1.3* Angling of Mortars 5.2.1.3.1 Aerial shells, comets, mines, Roman candles and cakes shall be

permitted to be angled if the dud shells or components are carried away from the main spectator area and if either of the following requirements is satisfied:

(1) The offset specified in Table 5.1.3.1 is followed; or(2) The separation distance is correspondingly increased in the direction of the angle as specified in 5.2.1.3.3.

5.2.1.3.2 If the offset specified in Table 5.1.3.1 is followed, the mortars or tubes shall be angled so that any dud shells or components fall at a point approximately equal to the offset of the mortars or tubes from the otherwise required discharge point but in the opposite direction.

5.2.1.3.3 If the separation distance is increased in the direction of the angle, the following requirements shall be satisfied as applicable.

5.2.1.3.3.1 Ground Level Firing Positions, Angled Mortars5.2.1.3.3.1.1 Angling shall not exceed (X) degrees from vertical for aerial shells, and (X) degrees for non-splitting or non-bursting comets and mines. 5.2.1.3.3.1.2* For aerial shells fired at an angle from ground level, the display site separation distances shall be established using the following method: (1) Draw circle(s) showing the separation distance(s) for the vertical mortars required in Table 5.2.1.3

1123-10

Report on Proposals A2013 — Copyright, NFPA NFPA 1123 (2) Using Table 5.2.1.3.3.1.2 determine the impact points for all devices fired from angled mortars. (3) At each projected impact point, draw a circle with a radius of 100 feet per inch of internal mortar diameter for aerial shells, or 50 feet per inch of internal mortar diameter for non-splitting or non-bursting comets, in order to allow for drift and variations in velocity, wind and other common site and device conditions.(4) Enclose the display site by drawing lines tangent to the circles drawn around vertical mortars (paragraph 1, above) and the circles drawn around impact points (paragraph 3, above).

Table 5.2.1.3.3.1.2 Projected Impact Points for Dud Aerial Shells, Non-splitting Comets and Non-Bursting Comets Fired at an Angle from Ground Level

Tilt Angle(degrees)

Impact Point Displacement (feet) From Firing Point for Shell Sizes

3-inch 4-inch 5-inch 6-inch >6-inch

0 < 3b 0 0 0 0 a

3 < 5 TBD TBD TBD TBD a

5 < 8 TBD TBD TBD TBD a

8 < 12 TBD TBD TBD TBD a

12 < 16 TBD TBD TBD TBD a

16 < 20 TBD TBD TBD TBD a

20 < 25 TBD TBD TBD TBD a

25 < 30 TBD TBD TBD TBD a

>30 a a a a a

a Requires approval by the AHJ.b Assumes mortar tube(s) are set within 3 degrees of vertical.

 

5.2.1.3.3.2 Elevated Firing Positions, Angled Mortars. Where aerial shells are fired at an angle from elevated platforms, audience separation distances specified in 5.2.1.3.3.1.2 shall be increased by 40 feet per 100 feet of elevation above 25 feet of the firing point, as shown in Table 5.2.1.3.3.2.

Table 5.2.1.3.3.2: Radial Separation Distances from Point of Impact for Aerial Shells Fired at an Angle from Elevated Firing Points

Elevation(in feet)

Radial Separation Distance (feet) for Shell Sizes

3-inch 4-inch 5-inch 6-inch >6-inch

25 to < 125 340 440 540 640 a

125 to < 225 380 480 580 680 a

225 to < 325 420 520 620 720 a

325 to < 425 460 560 660 760 a

425 to < 525 500 600 700 800 a

525 to < 625 540 640 740 840 a

625 to < 725 580 680 780 880 a

725 to < 825 620 720 820 920 a

825 to < 925 660 760 860 960 a

925 to 1000 700 800 900 1000 a

a Requires approval by AHJ.

 

1123-11

Report on Proposals A2013 — Copyright, NFPA NFPA 1123 5.2.1.4 Stabilization and Positioning of Angled Mortars 5.2.1.4.1 The base of the mortar shall be secured in a manner that allows transfer of recoil forces to the ground or other stable firing surface.

5.2.1.4.2 Both the angle and direction of the mortars shall be verified. Substantiation: Chapter 7, Rooftops, Other Structures, and Other Limited Egress Locations was added to the 2005 edition. As a result of those new provisions and the increased use of sites located within populated areas (like downtown), the number of displays using angled mortars and/or elevated launch points has increased. The Committee became aware of research into the potential adjustments that might become necessary due to use of angled mortars or elevated launch points when considering the design of the display site and addressing the separation distances to the spectators. The Chair established a task group to study the ballistics issues related to angled mortars and elevated launch positions and to develop proposed amendments to the code. Using some limited test data, the task group focused on an approach that would address four conditions - vertical mortars from both ground and elevated positions and angled mortars from both ground and elevated positions. The task group report to the Committee resulted in this Committee Proposal seeking to modify the minimum site size requirements for ground level, vertical firing positions through the addition of an adjustment to the existing 70 feet per inch of the internal mortar diameter specification now found in Table 5.1.3.1. The adjustment results in a proposed second table increasing the separation distance based on each 100 feet of elevation for increments starting above 25 feet. A similar approach has been attempted for angled mortars, using tables for ground and elevated firing positions, independently. The proposed change also incorporates provisions regarding the stabilization and positioning of angled mortars. Committee Meeting Action: RejectCommittee Statement: The Committee has recommended that the action on this Proposal be Reject at this time as the table on projected impact points for ground firing positions with angled mortars has not been completed and for several other reasons. The Committee has been unable to obtain sufficient data to validate the values for this table at this time. The Committee cautions against using the tabular data offered in the rejected proposal absent further substantial validation. The Committee acknowledges the novelty and complexity of the proposed method for establishing the display site, particularly for installations with multiple shell sizes and multiple angles. It invites comments that suggest alternative, simpler, and/or more practical methods. The Committee expects that such public input is necessary and appropriate in order to involve the broadest levels of experience and develop a standard that achieves the appropriate balance of safety, security and practicality. Additionally, the Committee seeks input from experienced parties on the need for different requirements for the smaller size shells and comets as well as practical limitations for the larger size shells, particularly with respect to the greater angles. Security concerns have also been raised about making public detailed impact point information for such devices. The Committee also notes the following additional aspects of this proposal that have not been satisfied as yet as further reasons for rejecting the proposal at this time. Provisions for nautical shells have not been addressed at this time. Provisions for extraordinary firing positions, e.g., below horizontal from an elevated vertical firing surface have not been developed. Provisions for fan cakes that may have angles greater than the maximum prescribed angles are not included. Provisions for angling of mines in their various configurations need to be developed. Standard requirements described in this proposal must be integrated and harmonized with existing provisions; for example, roman candles, chain-fused devices. Development of annex notations regarding ambient test conditions and other bases for tables and separation distances are not provided at this time. Development of annex materials regarding sources of calculations (referenced materials annex), simplified and complex examples have also not been completed. The proposal also notes consideration for additional actions during increased wind conditions, but no specific threshold for wind speed has been included. The Committee seeks display operators, designers, manufacturers of fireworks devices, and enforcers to review the recommendations outlined in this proposal, particularly those aspects related to the separation distance tables, that are not complete at this point and to provide data if available and to provide comments through the Public Comment process. Number Eligible to Vote: 32 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 28 Abstain: 2Ballot Not Returned: 2 Grucci, P., Shatzer, D.Explanation of Abstention: KOSANKE, K.: The already published data from Canadian, Japanese and other researchers is more than adequate to have finalized the requirements for elevated and/or angled mortars, including the distances that were deleted from Table 5.2.1.3.3.1.2 as drafted by the committee. WEINMAN, L.: I do not believe that the group fully understands the technical basis of the proposal and therefore could not have made a proper decision - one way, or another.

_______________________________________________________________ 1123-22 Log #2 Final Action: Reject(5.1.5.2)_______________________________________________________________ Submitter: Richard Protctor, Fireworks by JOERecommendation: Revise text to read as follows:5.1.5.2 Spectators, unauthorized vehicles, watercraft that are able to be moved, or readily combustible materials shall not be located within the fallout area during the display. Watercraft that are unable are permitted to remain in the fallout area provided the owner gives written permission to shoot over said watercraft.Substantiation: Watercraft not in the water and in the fallout zone may be unable to be moved. Committee Meeting Action: RejectCommittee Statement: The Committee identified several questions pertaining to the submitter’s recommended change. First, it is not clear from the proposed revisions what constitutes “unable to be moved” when considering the watercraft. The Committee also questioned why no requirements were suggested for unauthorized vehicles that are unable to be moved (the initial sentence includes those that are able to be moved). This represents an inconsistency in the proposed changes. The Committee is also unclear as to the intent of the submitter with these changes as the substantiation seems to focus on watercraft not in the water and also not able to be moved, yet the proposed changes include both watercraft that can and cannot be moved. The Committee recommends the submitter reconsider the proposed changes and resubmit as Public Comments if these questions can be addressed. Number Eligible to Vote: 32 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 30 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Grucci, P., Shatzer, D._______________________________________________________________ 1123-23 Log #18 Final Action: Reject(6.3.2.1)_______________________________________________________________ Submitter: William E. Koffel, Koffel Associates, Inc.Recommendation: Revise text to read as follows: 6.3.2.1 A minimum of two separate egress paths from the floating platform shall be provided at all times. Substantiation: This change clarifies that this requirement applies to the floating platform only. Committee Meeting Action: RejectCommittee Statement: The Committee is not clear about what is intended by the proposed inclusion of “floating platform” and therefore, suggests that before the Committee can act the intended meaning needs to be clarified. The Chapter in the code deals with floating vessels and floating platforms as the site for setting up and launching the display. It is not clear that the submitter’s use of floating platform in this recommended change regarding egress paths is consistent with the other use of the term in this Chapter. The Committee recommends that the submitter consider clarifying the intended meaning as noted above and submit a Public Comment. Number Eligible to Vote: 32 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 30 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Grucci, P., Shatzer, D._______________________________________________________________ 1123-24 Log #19 Final Action: Accept(6.4.4)_______________________________________________________________ Submitter: William E. Koffel, Koffel Associates, Inc.Recommendation: Revise text to read as follows: 6.4.4 At an electrically fired display Aall personnel, other than spotters orand fire watch, shall be in safety shelters. Substantiation: 6.4.1 (5) correctly allows the shooter and operator at a manually fired display to be outside the required barrier, as they must be outside in order to manually fire the display. Although 6.4.4 may have been intended to address electrically fired displays only, it is not expressly limited to electrical firing, so it seems to conflict with 6.4.1(5) by requiring everyone but the spotter and fire watch to be in a shelter. Obviously, the shooter and operator can neither be in a shelter nor behind a barrier at a manually fired display, so 6.4.4 either must be revised to limit itself to electrically fired displays or to also expressly exclude the shooter and operator from being in a shelter at manually fired displays. The former is simpler. Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 32 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 30 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Grucci, P., Shatzer, D._______________________________________________________________ 1123-25 Log #5 Final Action: Accept in Principle(6.8.1)_______________________________________________________________ Submitter: Joshua Lazarus, New Jersey Division of Fire SafetyRecommendation: Add new text to read as follows: Separation distances: Dwellings, buildings, structures and marine craft shall be permitted to be located within the loading site with the approval of the AHJ and the owner of the dwelling, building, structure or marine craft, provided that the dwelling, building, structure or marine craft is unoccupied during the

1123-12

Report on Proposals A2013 — Copyright, NFPA NFPA 1123 Committee Statement: The Committee changed the requirement so that the shooter “turns and steps away” as opposed to the proposed change which would instruct the shooter to “turn or step away.” The Committee believes that turning and stepping away is the more safe approach. The Committee accepted this part of the recommendation with that change in the requirement. The Committee rejected the proposed added content “...to a safe distance from the mortar until the shell has safely ignited and lifted from the mortar.” This provision is not consistent with the required practice as the operator would need to go back to the mortar and mark it according to the code in the case of a misfire and would also need to be in the proximity of the mortar to continue shooting the other mortars in the display. Number Eligible to Vote: 32 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 30 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Grucci, P., Shatzer, D._______________________________________________________________ 1123-29 Log #CP4 Final Action: Accept(8.2.10.1.1)_______________________________________________________________ Submitter: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics, Recommendation: Revise 8.2.10.1.1 as shown:8.2.10.1.1 Unless the requirements of 8.2.10.1.2 apply, immediately following the display but no sooner than 15 minutes after the attempted firing, if the shell still has not fired, the mortar shall be flooded with water and allowed to stand for a minimum of 5 minutes before the shell is removed from the mortar. the following procedure shall be required: (1) Any shells that were fired but are not exploded shall not be handled until at least 15 minutes have elapsed from the time the shells were fired. (2) The fireworks then shall be treated as follows in either 8.2.10.1.1(2)(a) or (b): (a) The fireworks shall be doused with water and allowed to remain undisturbed for at least 5 additional minutes before being placed in a plastic bucket or fiberboard box. (b) The fireworks shall remain undisturbed for at least 30 additional minutes before being placed in a plastic bucket or fiberboard box.Substantiation: The Committee incorporated the procedures for handling duds into the procedures for handling misfires, so that consistent practices will be followed for either instance of device non-performance. Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 32 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 30 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Grucci, P., Shatzer, D._______________________________________________________________ 1123-30 Log #CP7 Final Action: Accept(A.3.3.13)_______________________________________________________________ Submitter: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics, Recommendation: Create an annex item as shown:A.3.3.13 Fireworks can include but not be limited to: aerial shells, ground display pieces, proximate pyrotechnics, and other pyrotechnic devices intended for entertainment purposes.Add an asterisk to 3.3.13 to indicate that an annex note is provided for this requirement. Substantiation: Added for clarification and linked with the change to the definition by action on Proposal 1123-10 (Log #7). Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 32 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 30 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Grucci, P., Shatzer, D._______________________________________________________________ 1123-31 Log #CP6 Final Action: Accept(A.4.2.2.2)_______________________________________________________________ Submitter: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics, Recommendation: Create a new annex item as shown:A.4.2.2.2 For displays conducted on floating platforms and barges, the preparation site can be in a location different from the display site.Add an asterisk to 4.2.2.2 to indicate that an annex note is provided for this requirement. Substantiation: Added to make it clear that for displays on floating platforms and vessels the preparation area can be in an area different from the display area. See also action on 1123-23 (Log #5). Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 32 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 30 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Grucci, P., Shatzer, D._______________________________________________________________ 1123-32 Log #22 Final Action: Accept in Principle(A.4.3.8)_______________________________________________________________ Submitter: William E. Koffel, Koffel Associates, Inc.Recommendation: Revise text to read as follows: Renumber as A.4.3.9. Substantiation: The annex note to section 4.3.9 is incorrectly numbered “A.4.3.8” and should be renumbered “A.4.3.9”

loading of the floating platform, or if the structure or craft provides protection for the occupants through noncombustible or fire-resistant construction.Substantiation: No provisions for providing a separation to buildings or watercraft exist for the loading of barges in inhabited areas or on navigable waterways. Committee Meeting Action: Accept in Principle Add new text to read as follows: 6.8 Marine Preparation Area Separation. 6.8.1 Dwellings, buildings, structures and marine craft shall be permitted to be located within 100 ft (30 m) of the preparation area with the approval of the AHJ and the owner of the dwelling, building, structure or marine craft, provided that either of the following conditions is met: 1. The dwelling, building, structure or marine craft is unoccupied during the loading of the floating platform, or 2. The dwelling, building, structure or marine craft provides protection for the occupants through noncombustible or fire-resistant construction.Committee Statement: The Committee used the submitter’s recommended text, modified the title of the new section and arranged the requirements in a more easily understood format. The Committee also utilized the requirements in 4.2.2 related to preparation areas and added the requirement from 4.2.2.2 for a 100 ft separation distance to maintain consistency. The Committee recommends numbering this new requirement as 6.8.1 to be consistent with the recommended action in Proposal 1123-26 (Log# 3) which adds a 6.8.2. Number Eligible to Vote: 32 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 30 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Grucci, P., Shatzer, D._______________________________________________________________1123-26 Log #3 Final Action: Accept in Principle(6.8.2)_______________________________________________________________Submitter: Joshua Lazarus, New Jersey Division of Fire SafetyRecommendation: Add new text to read as follows: Loading on active waterways: Floating vessels or platforms must be separated from active waterways by a minimum distance of 25 feet (7.6 m).Substantiation: No provisions for providing a separation to buildings or watercraft exist for the loading of barges in inhabited areas or on navigable waterways. Committee Meeting Action: Accept in PrincipleAdd new text to read as follows: 6.8.2 Unauthorized marine craft shall be separated from floating vessels or platforms by a minimum distance of 25 feet (7.6 m) during loading of fireworks.Committee Statement: The Committee clarified that the separation distance being established by this new provision was the distance between unauthorized vessels and those floating vessels or floating platforms in use during loading of fireworks. Number Eligible to Vote: 32 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 30 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Grucci, P., Shatzer, D._______________________________________________________________1123-27 Log #20 Final Action: Accept(8.1.2.3)_______________________________________________________________Submitter: William E. Koffel, Koffel Associates, Inc.Recommendation: Revise text to read as follows: 8.1.2.3 Portions of the display site, other than the discharge sites(s), shall be permitted to be open to the public prior to the display as long as provisions of section 4.2.2.2 are maintained.Substantiation: It is important to maintain the integrity and security of the discharge site and all the related fixtures, enclosures, devices, wiring, support elements and other pyrotechnic devices. The requirement of a separation of 100’ feet from any member of the public whether escorted or not should be maintained. Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 32 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 30 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Grucci, P., Shatzer, D._______________________________________________________________1123-28 Log #21 Final Action: Accept in Principle in Part(8.2.6.2)_______________________________________________________________Submitter: William E. Koffel, Koffel Associates, Inc.Recommendation: Revise text to read as follows: 8.2.6.2 As soon as the fuse is ignited, the shooter shall vacate turn away or step away from the immediate proximity of the mortar area to a safe distance from the mortar until the shell has safely ignited and lifted from the mortar.Substantiation: The phrase “vacate the mortar area” is vague and confusing. Depending upon the size of the shell and type of shell, the distance that the shooter should be from the mortar will vary. The way the language currently reads, the mortar area could be construed to be the entire discharge area. Committee Meeting Action: Accept in Principle in Part Revise text to read as follows: 8.2.6.2 As soon as the fuse is ignited, the shooter shall vacate turn and step away from the immediate proximity of the mortar area.

1123-13

Report on Proposals A2013 — Copyright, NFPA NFPA 1123 Committee Meeting Action: Accept in PrincipleCombine existing A.4.3.8 and A.4.3.9 and renumber as all A.4.3.9 and also renumber references to Table A.4.3.8 to Table A.4.3.9, plus the label for the table. Also delete the asterisk for 4.3.8 as the annex for this paragraph is being attached to 4.3.9. A.4.3.89 Where there is concern that a mortar is too short to cause an aerial shell to be propelled to a safe altitude, a test firing should be conducted. However, it generally is believed that mortars of the lengths specified in Table A.4.3.89 are sufficient.A.4.3.9 The lengths specified in Table A.4.3.89 are not intended to be construed as absolute minimums; however, experience has demonstrated that these recommendations function reliably in use. Committee Statement: The Committee completed the renumbering of A.4.3.8 to A.4.3.9 as recommended by this proposal, but also combined existing A.4.3.9 with the prior A.4.3.8 to all be part of A.4.3.9. Number Eligible to Vote: 32 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 30 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Grucci, P., Shatzer, D._______________________________________________________________ 1123-33 Log #CP5 Final Action: Accept(A.4.6.2.2)_______________________________________________________________ Submitter: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics, Recommendation: Add a new annex as shown:A.4.6.2.2 A boxed finale item can be fired at any point during the display.Add an asterisk to 4.6.2.2 to indicate that an annex note is provided for this requirement. Substantiation: This annex item is added to provide guidance that boxed finale item is a term used by the manufacturer but not necessarily intended to designate when the item should be used. Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 32 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 30 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Grucci, P., Shatzer, D.