AGENDA ATTACHMENT A...Alternate: Mark Terzigni IM 7/22/1999 AIC-AAA Marvin A. Koerber Principal ATCO Rubber Products Inc. 584 Crooked Road Abbeville, SC 29620 Air Diffusion Council

Meeting Agenda

Air Conditioning Technical Committee November 1, 2012 at 2:00pm Eastern

(11:00am Pacific, 12:00pm Mountain, 1:00pm Central)

Online Meeting from NFPA Headquarters

Quincy, MA

1. Call to Order. Call meeting to order by Chair Ralph Gerdes at 2:00pm on Thursday, November 1, 2012 at NFPA Headquarters, Quincy, MA via Adobe Connect Online Meeting.

2. Introduction of the Attendees. (For a current committee roster see attachment “A”)

3. Chair’s remarks – Ralph Gerdes

4. Staff Comments (NFPA Procedural, etc.) - Allan Fraser

5. Approval of minutes of the November 9, 2010 ROC meeting. (For a copy of the meeting minutes see attachment “B”)

6. Review of Public Inputs for the 2014 editions of 90B & 90A. (see attachment “C”)

a. NFPA 90B – Twelve (12) Public Inputs have been received.

b. NFPA 90A – Thirty (30) Public Inputs have been received.

c. Other Committee Proposals (if needed).

7. Other Business.

8. Date and location of next meeting.

9. Adjournment.

Attachments

AGENDA

ATTACHMENT A

Address List No PhoneAir Conditioning AIC-AAA

Allan Fraser09/10/2012

AIC-AAA

Ralph D. Gerdes

ChairRalph Gerdes Consultants, LLC5510 South East Street, Suite EIndianapolis, IN 46227

SE 08/09/2012AIC-AAA

Charles E. Altizer

PrincipalVirginia State Fire Marshal’s OfficeVirginia Department of Fire Programs1005 Technology Park DriveGlen Allen, VA 23059-4500International Fire Marshals Association

E 7/1/1993

AIC-AAA

Ramzi A. Amawi

PrincipalIntertek Testing Services1717 Arlingate LaneColumbus, OH 43228

RT 3/2/2010AIC-AAA

Jesse J. Beitel

PrincipalHughes Associates, Inc.3610 Commerce Drive, Suite 817Baltimore, MD 21227-1652

SE 4/16/1999

AIC-AAA

James S. Buckley

PrincipalJacobs5985 Rogerdale RoadHouston, TX 77072American Society for Heating, Refrigeration & AirConditioning Engineers Inc.

IM 1/17/1997AIC-AAA

Merton W. Bunker, Jr.

PrincipalUS Department of State22 Gray Birch CourtStafford, VA 22554

U 7/26/2007

AIC-AAA

Laurence W. Caraway, Jr.

PrincipalKitchen Klean Inc.AirDuct Clean27 Black Hall RoadPO Box 754Epsom, NH 03234National Air Duct Cleaners Association

IM 3/21/2006AIC-AAA

Michael Earl Dillon

PrincipalDillon Consulting Engineers, Inc.671 Quincy AvenueLong Beach, CA 90814-1818Alternate: Diane B. Copeland

SE 1/1/1980

AIC-AAA

James T. Dollard, Jr.

PrincipalIBEW Local Union 981701 Spring Garden StreetPhiladelphia, PA 19130International Brotherhood of Electrical WorkersAlternate: Harold C. Ohde

L 7/14/2004AIC-AAA

Thomas M. Dusza

PrincipalThe RJA GroupRolf Jensen & Associates, Inc.2125 Oak Grove Road, Suite 300Walnut Creek, CA 94598Alternate: Alex J. Kline

SE 4/1/1993

AIC-AAA

Thomas P. Hammerberg

PrincipalAutomatic Fire Alarm Association, Inc.14 Sammy McGhee Boulevard, #103PO Box 1569Jasper, GA 30143Automatic Fire Alarm Association, Inc.Alternate: David L. Hall

M 10/27/2005AIC-AAA

J. C. Harrington

PrincipalFM Global1151 Boston Providence TurnpikePO Box 9102Norwood, MA 02062-9102

I 10/27/2005

1



AIC-AAA

Thomas L. Hedges

PrincipalHedges Electric & Construction, Inc.633 Brazos Street, Suite 6Ramona, CA 92065National Electrical Contractors Association

IM 3/2/2010AIC-AAA

Marcelo M. Hirschler

PrincipalGBH International2 Friar’s LaneMill Valley, CA 94941American Fire Safety Council/Plenum Cable Assn.

M 10/3/2002

AIC-AAA

Charles C. Holt

PrincipalNational Energy Management Institute601 North Fairfax Street, Suite 240Alexandria, VA 22314Sheet Metal Workers’ International Association

L 11/2/2006AIC-AAA

Eli P. Howard, III

PrincipalSheet Metal & Air Conditioning Contractors Natl. Assn.4201 Lafayette Center DriveChantilly, VA 20151-1219Alternate: Mark Terzigni

IM 7/22/1999

AIC-AAA

Marvin A. Koerber

PrincipalATCO Rubber Products Inc.584 Crooked RoadAbbeville, SC 29620Air Diffusion CouncilAlternate: Ralph A. Koerber

M 1/1/1985AIC-AAA

William E. Koffel

PrincipalKoffel Associates, Inc.8815 Centre Park Drive, Suite 200Columbia, MD 21045-2107Society of the Plastics Industry, Inc.

M 11/2/2006

AIC-AAA

Richard E. Loyd

PrincipalR & N Associates24623 South Rocky Brook DriveSun Lakes, AZ 85248-6593American Iron and Steel InstituteAlternate: Robert J. Wills

M 7/28/2006AIC-AAA

Timothy J. Orris

PrincipalAMCA International, Inc.30 West University DriveArlington Heights, IL 60004-1893Air Movement & Control AssociationAlternate: Robert Van Becelaere

M 10/27/2005

AIC-AAA

Thomas E. Ponder

PrincipalCertainTeed Corporation1400 Union Meeting RoadBlue Bell, PA 19422North American Insulation Manufacturers AssociationAlternate: Charles C. Cottrell

M 1/1/1990AIC-AAA

Michael J. Rzeznik

PrincipalAon/Schirmer Engineering Corporation1 Barker Avenue, 3rd FloorWhite Plains, NY 10601

I 10/23/2003

AIC-AAA

Suresh K. Shah

PrincipalUS Department of Health & Human ServicesIndian Health ServicesDivision of Engineering Services-Dallas1301 Young Street, Suite 1071Dallas, TX 75202

U 4/28/2000AIC-AAA

Dwayne E. Sloan

PrincipalUL LLC12 Laboratory DrivePO Box 13995Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-3995Alternate: Randall K. Laymon

RT 4/14/2005

2



AIC-AAA

George A. Straniero

PrincipalAFC Cable Systems, Inc.106 Village Center DriveFreehold, NJ 07728National Electrical Manufacturers AssociationAlternate: Isaac I. Papier

M 9/30/2004AIC-AAA

Randolph W. Tucker

Principalccrd partners808 Travis, Suite 200Houston, TX 77002

SE 4/1/1996

AIC-AAA

Robert A. Wessel

PrincipalGypsum Association6525 Belcrest Road, Suite 480Hyattsville, MD 20782

M 4/17/1998AIC-AAA

Diane B. Copeland

AlternateDillon Consulting Engineers, Inc.671 Quincy AvenueLong Beach, CA 90814-1818Principal: Michael Earl Dillon

SE 4/15/2004

AIC-AAA

Charles C. Cottrell

AlternateNorth American Insulation Manufacturers Assn.44 Canal Center Plaza, Suite 310Alexandria, VA 22314Principal: Thomas E. Ponder

M 10/27/2009AIC-AAA

David L. Hall

AlternateAir Products and Controls Inc.1749 East HighwoodPontiac, MI 48340Automatic Fire Alarm Association, Inc.Principal: Thomas P. Hammerberg

M 7/28/2006

AIC-AAA

Alex J. Kline

AlternateThe RJA GroupRolf Jensen & Associates, Inc.5520 Dillard Drive, Suite 130Cary, NC 27518Principal: Thomas M. Dusza

SE 8/9/2011AIC-AAA

Ralph A. Koerber

AlternateATCO Rubber Products, Inc.Research & Development7101 ATCO DriveFort Worth, TX 76118Air Diffusion CouncilPrincipal: Marvin A. Koerber

M 4/17/2002

AIC-AAA

Randall K. Laymon

AlternateUL LLC333 Pfingsten RoadNorthbrook, IL 60062-2096Principal: Dwayne E. Sloan

RT 7/12/2001AIC-AAA

Harold C. Ohde

AlternateIBEW-NECA Technical Institute9318 South Longwood AvenueChicago, IL 60643International Brotherhood of Electrical WorkersPrincipal: James T. Dollard, Jr.

L 7/14/2004

AIC-AAA

Isaac I. Papier

AlternateHoneywell, Inc.Honeywell Life Safety3825 Ohio AvenueSt. Charles, IL 60174-5465National Electrical Manufacturers AssociationPrincipal: George A. Straniero

M 10/27/2005AIC-AAA

Mark Terzigni

AlternateSheet Metal & Air Conditioning Contractors Natl. Assn.4201 Lafayette Center DriveChantilly, VA 20151-1219Principal: Eli P. Howard, III

IM 8/2/2010

3



AIC-AAA

Robert Van Becelaere

AlternateRuskin Company3900 Dr. Greaves RoadGrandview, MO 64030Air Movement & Control AssociationPrincipal: Timothy J. Orris

M 1/10/2002AIC-AAA

Robert J. Wills

AlternateAmerican Iron and Steel Institute907 Spyglass CircleBirmingham, AL 35244-2252Principal: Richard E. Loyd

M 1/1/1992

AIC-AAA

Allan Fraser

Staff LiaisonNational Fire Protection Association1 Batterymarch ParkQuincy, MA 02169-7471

6/9/2003

4

AGENDA

ATTACHMENT B

MEETING MINUTES OF THE

TECHNICAL COMMITTEE ON AIR CONIDITIONING ROC Meeting

November 9, 2010 NFPA Headquarters

Quincy, MA & by Microsoft “Live Meeting”

Item 1, Call to Order

The ROP meeting of the Technical Committee on Air Conditioning was convened by the Chair, David Demers at 8:00 a.m. on Tuesday, November 9, 2010. Item 2, Introduction of Members and Guests

The Chair opened the meeting with welcoming remarks. The Chair provided a general overview of the agenda and opening remarks.

Self-introductions of meeting participants and guests were conducted on each day at the beginning of the session.

The following Technical Committee Principal and Alternate members participated:

In Quincy unless noted

NAME COMPANY David Demers, Principal (Chair) Demers Associates Inc. X James Buckley, Principal Representing ASHRAE X Thomas Hammerberg, Principal Automatic Fire Alarm Assoc., Inc. On phone & Live

Meeting David Hall, Alt. to T. Hammerberg

On phone & Live Meeting

Thomas Hedges, Principal NECA X Marcelo M. Hirschler, Principal GBH International representing:

American Fire Safety Council/Plenum Cable Assn.

X

Charles Holt, Principal Sheet Metal Workers International X Michael J. Jontry, Principal State of Illinois, Department of

Public Health On phone & Live

Meeting Ralph A. Koerber, Alt. to M. Koerber

ATCO Rubber Products Inc. Representing: Air Diffusion Council

On phone & Live Meeting

Richard Loyd, Principal American Iron & Steel Institute X Harold C. Ohde, Alt. to Dollard IBEW X Timothy Orris AMCA International, Inc. X Richard P. Owen, Principal Representing: National Electrical

Code Correlating Committee On phone & Live

Meeting Thomas E. Ponder, Alt.to W. Irwin

Certain Teed Corporation rep: North American Insulation Manufacturers

X

Technical Committee on Air Conditioning - ROC Meeting November 9, 2010 Page 2

2

Association Issac Papier, Alt. to G. Straneiro National Electrical Manufacturers

Assoc. (NEMA) On phone & Live

Meeting Suresh K. Shah, Principal US Department of Health & Human

Services, Indian Health Services On phone & Live

Meeting Dwayne Sloan, Principal Underwriters Laboratories Inc. X George A. Straniero, Principal AFC Cable Systems Representing:

National Electrical Manufacturers Assoc. (NEMA)

X

Michael J. Reznik, Alt. to Dusza Schirmer Engineering Corporation On phone & Live Meeting

Robert Van Becelaere, Alt. to Orris

Ruskin Manufacturing representing Air Movement & Control Assn/HVI

Division

X

The following Technical Committee Principals did not participate:

NAME COMPANY Charles E. Altizer, Principal DHCD-Jackson Center representing:

International Fire Marshals Association Ramzi Amani, Principal Intertek Testing Services Jesse Beitel, Principal Hughes Assoc., Inc Merton Bunker, Principal U.S. Department of State Laurence Caraway, Principal National Air Duct Cleaners Assoc. Michael Dillon, Principal Dillon Consulting Engineers, Inc. Doug Erickson, Principal American Society for Healthcare

Engineering Victor Ferrante, Principal US Dept. of Housing and Urban

Development John Harrington, Principal FM Global Eli Howard, Principal Sheet Metal & Air Conditioning

Contractors Brian Pagnini, Principal The RJA Group Robert Wessel, Principal Gypsum Asoc.

Guests Present: Vicki Lovell - Intercode, Inc David Seiler – Arkema, Inc. Pat Horton – Steel Tube Institute Stan Kaufman – CableSafe, Inc.

Technical Committee on Air Conditioning - ROC Meeting November 9, 2010 Page 3

3

The following NFPA staff participated:

Allan Fraser Item 3, Approval of Minutes The Committee approved the minutes of the February 8-10, 2010 ROP meeting as corrected to add James Buckley to those in attendance and correct the time of adjournment to 4:30 pm. Item 4 Review of Public Comments received for NFPA 90B The committee reviewed and acted on six (6) public comments. The committee actions on comments were sent out with a letter ballot for formal action by the TC members. Item 5, Review of Public Comments for NFPA 90A The committee reviewed and acted on seventy (70) public comments 90A.The committee actions on comments were sent out with a letter ballot for formal action by the TC members. Item 6, New Business:

1. The committee directed staff to draft a letter to the TCC for the Chair to review and sign asking them to review the actions of the BLD-BLC TC for NFPA 5000, specifically public comment 5000-51 and committee comment 5000-400 with respect to its allowing fire retardant treated wood in plenums in conflict with the provisions of NFPA 90A. All materials in contact with the airflow are under the jurisdiction of AIC-AAA.

2. The committee directed staff to send a letter/e-mail to the Standards Council requesting that they establish a task group made up of members from the appropriate NFPA 5000 and NFPA 101 projects, the NEC project, NFPA 1 project and AIC-AAA to coordinate common terminology among their documents.

Item 7, Next Meeting: Date, location and type (face to face or online) will be determined after proposals are received for the next cycle, Annual 2014. Item 8, Adjournment. On Tuesday, November 9, 2010, the meeting was adjourned at 1:40 pm by the Chair, David Demers. Minutes prepared by Allan B. Fraser, CBI, CPCA, NFPA Staff Liaison

AGENDA

ATTACHMENT C

Prop # Log#Comm.Action

Tech.Comm. Section

Sort Listing

Seq# ActivaArt Supp.

Find CP's

PI #

2 1.3- ( ):90B- AIC-AAA ActiveA2014 PI #4

9 2.3.2- ( ):90B- AIC-AAA ActiveA2014 PI #11

4 2.3.4- ( ):90B- AIC-AAA ActiveA2014 PI #2

6 3.3.8 Noncombustible (Material)- ( ):90B- AIC-AAA ActiveA2014 PI #8

1 3.3.8 Noncombustible Material and A.3.3.8 (New)- ( ):90B- AIC-AAA ActiveA2014 PI #1

7 4.1 (New)- ( ):90B- AIC-AAA ActiveA2014 PI #9

10 4.1 through 4.3- ( ):90B- AIC-AAA ActiveA2014 PI #12

12 4.1.1.1.3.1- ( ):90B- AIC-AAA ActiveA2014 PI #6

11 4.3.2.4.1- ( ):90B- AIC-AAA ActiveA2014 PI #7

3 A.1.3- ( ):90B- AIC-AAA ActiveA2014 PI #5

8 A.4.1- ( ):90B- AIC-AAA ActiveA2014 PI #10

5 B.1.2.3- ( ):90B- AIC-AAA ActiveA2014 PI #3

Page 1A2014Cycle

Prop # Log#Comm.Action

Tech.Comm. Section

Sort Listing

Seq# ActivaArt Supp.

Find CP's

PI #

13 2.3.2- ( ):90A- AIC-AAA ActiveA2014 PI #25




9 3.3.21 Limited-Combustible (Material)- ( ):90A- AIC-AAA ActiveA2014 PI #21

2 3.3.21 Noncombustible Material and A.3.3.21- ( ):90A- AIC-AAA ActiveA2014 PI #4

10 3.3.22 Noncombustible (Material)- ( ):90A- AIC-AAA ActiveA2014 PI #22

7 4.3.11.2.6- ( ):90A- AIC-AAA ActiveA2014 PI #19


3 4.3.11.2.6 and 4.3.11.5.5- ( ):90A- AIC-AAA ActiveA2014 PI #3

15 4.3.11.2.6.4- ( ):90A- AIC-AAA ActiveA2014 PI #34








30 4.3.12.1.1, 4.3.12.1.2, and A.4.3.12.1.1- ( ):90A- AIC-AAA ActiveA2014 PI #39


11 4.4 (New)- ( ):90A- AIC-AAA ActiveA2014 PI #23

20 5.3.4.6- ( ):90A- AIC-AAA ActiveA2014 PI #29

21 5.4.5.3 (New)- ( ):90A- AIC-AAA ActiveA2014 PI #30


19 A.4.3.11.2.6.5- ( ):90A- AIC-AAA ActiveA2014 PI #38

12 A.4.4.1 and A.4.4.2 (New)- ( ):90A- AIC-AAA ActiveA2014 PI #24

22 A.7.2- ( ):90A- AIC-AAA ActiveA2014 PI #31

23 C.1- ( ):90A- AIC-AAA ActiveA2014 PI #32

27 C.1.2.2- ( ):90A- AIC-AAA ActiveA2014 PI #18

6 C.1.2.5- ( ):90A- AIC-AAA ActiveA2014 PI #8

Page 1A2014Cycle

Report on Proposals – June 2014 NFPA 90B_______________________________________________________________________________________________90B- Log #2

_______________________________________________________________________________________________Arthur Londensky, Northeastern Regional Fire Code Development Committee

Revise text to read as follows:This standard shall apply to all systems for the movement of environmental air in structures that serve

the following:1.3.1 This standard shall apply to all systems for the movement of environmental air in structures that serve the

following:(1) One- or two-family dwellings(2) Spaces not exceeding 708 m3 (25,000 ft3) in volume in any occupancy(3) Buildings of combustible construction over three stories in height shall be in accordance with NFPA 90A.1.3.2 This standard shall not apply to systems for the movement of environmental air in buildings of combustible

construction over three stories in height.Currently 1.3 (3) denotes a condition where the Standard does not apply in a paragraph that indicates

where the Standard does apply. It seems clearer to create another paragraph that describes where the Standard doesnot apply.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________90B- Log #9

_______________________________________________________________________________________________Marcelo M. Hirschler, GBH International

Update ASTM publications to read:ASTM E 136, Standard Test Method for Behavior of Materials in a Vertical Tube Furnace at 750°C,2006 2011.ASTM E2652, Standard Test Method for Behavior of Materials in a Tube Furnace with a Cone-shaped Airflow

Stabilizer, at 750°C,(2009a)This change puts NFPA 90B in line with what was done for NFPA 101 (and many other documents) in

the 2012 cycle. NFPA requirements are that definitions cannot contain requirements and the definitions ofnoncombustible and limited combustible contain requirements. Therefore this public input proposes to put simply a placeholder in chapter 3 (definitions) and place the requirements into Chapter 4, just as was done in NFPA 101 and 5000.The proposed language is identical to the language in NFPA 101. If the technical committee wishes it can simply extractthe language from NFPA 101. The corresponding sections are: 3.3.8 would be extracted from 3.3.169.4 and 4.1 wouldbe extracted from 4.6.13.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________90B- Log #4

_______________________________________________________________________________________________John F. Bender, UL LLC

Revise text as follows:Underwriters Laboratories Inc., 333 Pfingsten Road, Northbrook, IL 60062-2096.

ANSI/UL 94, 1996,revised 2010 2011.

ANSI/UL 181, 2005, revised 2008.ANSI/UL 181A, 2005, revised 2008.ANSI/UL 181B, 2005, revised

2008.ANSI/UL 723, 2008, revised 2010.ANSI/UL 900, 2004, revised 2009 2010.

Update referenced standards to most recent edition as indicated.

1Printed on 9/11/2012



Revise text to read:See 4.1 A material that, in the form in which it is used and under the conditions

anticipated, will not ignite, burn, support combustion, or release flammable vapors when subjected to fire or heat.Materials that are reported as passing ASTM E 136,

, are considered noncombustible materials.

This change puts NFPA 90B in line with what was done for NFPA 101 (and many other documents) inthe 2012 cycle. NFPA requirements are that definitions cannot contain requirements and the definitions ofnoncombustible and limited combustible contain requirements. Therefore this public input proposes to put simply a placeholder in chapter 3 (definitions) and place the requirements into Chapter 4, just as was done in NFPA 101 and 5000.The proposed language is identical to the language in NFPA 101. If the technical committee wishes it can simply extractthe language from NFPA 101. The corresponding sections are: 3.3.8 would be extracted from 3.3.169.4 and 4.1 wouldbe extracted from 4.6.13.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________90B- Log #1

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

Marcelo M. Hirschler, GBH International / Rep. American Fire Safety CouncilRevise text to read as follows:

A material that, in the form in which it is used and under the conditions anticipated,will not ignite, burn, support combustion, or release flammable vapors, when subjected to fire or heat. [101, 2012]Materials that are reported as passing ASTM E 136, Standard Test Method for Behavior of Materials in a Vertical TubeFurnace at 750 Degrees C, shall be considered noncombustible materials.[220, 2009]

A material that is reported as passing ASTM E 136, Standard Test Method for Behavior of Materials in aVertical Tube Furnace at 750 Degrees C, is considered a noncombustible material. A material that is reported ascomplying with the pass/fail criteria of ASTM E 136 when tested in accordance with the test method and procedure inASTM E 2652, Standard Test Method for Behavior of Materials in a Tube Furnace with a Cone-shaped AirflowStabilizer, at 750 Degrees C, is considered a noncombustible material.

The definition of noncombustible material has been amended in NFPA 101 and 5000 to eliminate thesecond sentence with the requirements.




Add a new section to read:A material that complies with any of the following shall be considered a

noncombustible material:● (1)* A material that, in the form in which it is used and under the conditions anticipated, will not ignite, burn, support

combustion, or release flammable vapors when subjected to fire or heat● (2) A material that is reported as passing ASTM E 136, Standard Test Method for Behavior of Materials in a Vertical

Tube Furnace at 750 Degrees C● (3) A material that is reported as complying with the pass/fail criteria of ASTM E 136 when tested in accordance

with the test method and procedure in ASTM E 2652, Standard Test Method for Behavior of Materials in a Tube Furnacewith a Cone-shaped Airflow Stabilizer, at 750 Degrees C

This change puts NFPA 90B in line with what was done for NFPA 101 (and many other documents) inthe 2012 cycle. NFPA requirements are that definitions cannot contain requirements and the definitions ofnoncombustible and limited combustible contain requirements. Therefore this public input proposes to put simply a placeholder in chapter 3 (definitions) and place the requirements into Chapter 4, just as was done in NFPA 101 and 5000.The proposed language is identical to the language in NFPA 101. If the technical committee wishes it can simply extractthe language from NFPA 101. The corresponding sections are: 3.3.8 would be extracted from 3.3.169.4 and 4.1 wouldbe extracted from 4.6.13.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________90B- Log #10


Renumber sections 4.1 through 4.3 as 4.2 through 4.4.This change puts NFPA 90B in line with what was done for NFPA 101 (and many other documents) in





Revise text to read:4.1.1.1.3.1 The connector shall be made of approved fabric meeting the flame propagation performance criteria

contained in Test Method 1 or Test Method 2, as appropriate, of NFPA 701 and shall not exceed 254 mm (10 in.) inlength in the direction of airflow.

In 1989 the NFPA Technical Committee on Fire Tests eliminated the so-called “small-scale test” fromNFPA 701 because the results had been shown not to represent a fire performance that corresponded to whathappened in real scale. Instead of the “small-scale test” NFPA 701 now (and for over 20 years) contains two tests (Test1 and Test 2), which apply to materials as indicated by the text of NFPA 701 (2010) that is shown at the bottom of thispublic input.

However, a large number of manufacturers continue stating that the materials or products that they sell have beentested to NFPA 701, when they really mean the pre-1989 small-scale test in NFPA 701. That test no longer exists andmaterials or products meeting that test do not exhibit acceptable fire performance.

Text of NFPA 701 (2010):1.1.1.1 Test Method 1 shall apply to fabrics or other materials used in curtains, draperies, or other window treatments.

Vinyl-coated fabric blackout linings shall be tested according to Test Method 2.1.1.1.2 Test Method 1 shall apply to single-layer fabrics and to multilayer curtain and drapery assemblies in which the

layers are fastened together by sewing or other means. Vinyl-coated fabric blackout linings shall be tested according toTest Method 2.

1.1.1.3 Test Method 1 shall apply to specimens having an areal density less than or equal to 700 g/m2 (21 oz/yd2),except where Test Method 2 is required to be used by 1.1.2. 1.1.2.1 Test Method 2 (flat specimen configuration) shall beused for fabrics, including multilayered fabrics, films, and plastic blinds, with or without reinforcement or backing, withareal densities greater than 700 g/m2 (21 oz/yd2).

1.1.2.2 Test Method 2 shall be used for testing vinyl-coated fabric blackout linings and lined draperies using avinyl-coated fabric blackout lining.

1.1.2.3 Test Method 2 shall be used for testing plastic films, with or without reinforcement or backing, when used fordecorative or other purposes inside a building or as temporary or permanent enclosures for buildings underconstruction.

1.1.2.4 Test Method 2 shall apply to fabrics used in the assembly of awnings, tents, tarps, and similar architecturalfabric structures and banners.

Note also the following from the text of NFPA 701 (2010):1.2* Purpose.1.2.1 The purpose of Test Methods 1 and 2 shall be to assess the propagation of flame beyond the area exposed to

the ignition source.A.1.1 A small-scale test method appeared in NFPA 701 until the 1989 edition. It was eliminated from the test method

because it has been shown that materials that “pass” the test do not necessarily exhibit a fire performance that isacceptable. The test was not reproducible for many types of fabrics and could not predict actual full-scale performance.It should not, therefore, be used.

A.1.1.1 For the purposes of Test Method 1, the terms curtains, draperies, or other types of window treatments, whereused, should include, but not be limited to, the following items:

(1) Window curtains(2) Stage or theater curtains(3) Vertical folding shades(4) Roll-type window shades(5) Hospital privacy curtains(6) Window draperies) Fabric shades or blinds(8) Polyvinyl chloride blinds(9) Horizontal folding shades(10) SwagsExamples of textile items other than window treatments to which Test Method 1 applies include:(1) Table skirts


Report on Proposals – June 2014 NFPA 90B(2) Table linens(3) Display booth separators(4) Textile wall hangings(5) Decorative event tent linings not used in the assembly of a tentNote that this change was already approved by NFPA FUR for NFPA 101 and NFPA 5000 and was also approved for

the IBC.




Revise text to read:4.3.2.4.1 Tape, where exposed to the air in the system, shall not be more combustible than fabric complying with the

flame propagation performance criteria contained in Test Method 1 or Test Method 2, as appropriate, of NFPA 701.In 1989 the NFPA Technical Committee on Fire Tests eliminated the so-called “small-scale test” from

NFPA 701 because the results had been shown not to represent a fire performance that corresponded to whathappened in real scale. Instead of the “small-scale test” NFPA 701 now (and for over 20 years) contains two tests (Test1 and Test 2), which apply to materials as indicated by the text of NFPA 701 (2010) that is shown at the bottom of thispublic input.

However, a large number of manufacturers continue stating that the materials or products that they sell have beentested to NFPA 701, when they really mean the pre-1989 small-scale test in NFPA 701. That test no longer exists andmaterials or products meeting that test do not exhibit acceptable fire performance.

Text of NFPA 701 (2010):1.1.1.1 Test Method 1 shall apply to fabrics or other materials used in curtains, draperies, or other window treatments.

Vinyl-coated fabric blackout linings shall be tested according to Test Method 2.1.1.1.2 Test Method 1 shall apply to single-layer fabrics and to multilayer curtain and drapery assemblies in which the

layers are fastened together by sewing or other means. Vinyl-coated fabric blackout linings shall be tested according toTest Method 2.

1.1.1.3 Test Method 1 shall apply to specimens having an areal density less than or equal to 700 g/m2 (21 oz/yd2),except where Test Method 2 is required to be used by 1.1.2. 1.1.2.1 Test Method 2 (flat specimen configuration) shall beused for fabrics, including multilayered fabrics, films, and plastic blinds, with or without reinforcement or backing, withareal densities greater than 700 g/m2 (21 oz/yd2).

1.1.2.2 Test Method 2 shall be used for testing vinyl-coated fabric blackout linings and lined draperies using avinyl-coated fabric blackout lining.

1.1.2.3 Test Method 2 shall be used for testing plastic films, with or without reinforcement or backing, when used fordecorative or other purposes inside a building or as temporary or permanent enclosures for buildings underconstruction.

1.1.2.4 Test Method 2 shall apply to fabrics used in the assembly of awnings, tents, tarps, and similar architecturalfabric structures and banners.

Note also the following from the text of NFPA 701 (2010):1.2* Purpose.1.2.1 The purpose of Test Methods 1 and 2 shall be to assess the propagation of flame beyond the area exposed to

the ignition source.A.1.1 A small-scale test method appeared in NFPA 701 until the 1989 edition. It was eliminated from the test method

because it has been shown that materials that “pass” the test do not necessarily exhibit a fire performance that isacceptable. The test was not reproducible for many types of fabrics and could not predict actual full-scale performance.It should not, therefore, be used.

A.1.1.1 For the purposes of Test Method 1, the terms curtains, draperies, or other types of window treatments, whereused, should include, but not be limited to, the following items:

(1) Window curtains(2) Stage or theater curtains(3) Vertical folding shades(4) Roll-type window shades(5) Hospital privacy curtains(6) Window draperies) Fabric shades or blinds(8) Polyvinyl chloride blinds(9) Horizontal folding shades(10) SwagsExamples of textile items other than window treatments to which Test Method 1 applies include:(1) Table skirts(2) Table linens


Report on Proposals – June 2014 NFPA 90B(3) Display booth separators(4) Textile wall hangings(5) Decorative event tent linings not used in the assembly of a tent

_______________________________________________________________________________________________90B- Log #3

_______________________________________________________________________________________________Arthur Londensky, Northeastern Regional Fire Code Development Committee

Add new text to read as follows:For the purposes of this standard, a space is considered as an entire building or a portion thereof separated from

all other portions of the building by fire resistance–rated construction and whose environmental air does not mix with thatof any other space. For spaces exceeding 708 m3 (25,000 ft3) in volume and for building of combustible constructionover three stories in height, see NFPA 90A, Air-Conditioning and Ventilating Systems.

Mirrors, and is consistent with similar wording found in A.1.3 of NFPA 90A and directs the user to theStandard this is applicable for to building of combustible construction over three stories in height.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________90B- Log #8


Add a new section to read:The provisions of 4.1 do not require inherently noncombustible materials to be tested in order to be classified as

noncombustible materials.This change puts NFPA 90B in line with what was done for NFPA 101 (and many other documents) in


_______________________________________________________________________________________________90B- Log #5



ANSI/UL 181, 2005, revised 2008.2010 2012.

Update referenced standards to most recent edition as indicated.


Report on Proposals – June 2014 NFPA 90A_______________________________________________________________________________________________90A- Log #13


Update ASTM publications to read:ASTM E 84, Standard Test Method for Surface Burning Characteristics of Building Materials, 2010b 2012.ASTM E 136, Standard Test Method for Behavior of Materials in a Vertical Tube Furnace at 750°C, 2009b 2012..ASTM E2652, Standard Test Method for Behavior of Materials in a Tube Furnace with a Cone-shaped Airflow

Stabilizer, at 750°C, (2009a)This change puts NFPA 90A in line with what was done for NFPA 101 (and many other documents) in

the 2012 cycle. NFPA requirements are that definitions cannot contain requirements and the definitions ofnoncombustible and limited combustible contain requirements. Therefore this public input proposes to put simply a placeholder in chapter 3 (definitions) and place the requirements into Chapter 4, just as was done in NFPA 101 and 5000.The proposed language is identical to the language in NFPA 101. If the technical committee wishes it can simply extractthe language from NFPA 101. The corresponding sections are: 3.3.21 would be extracted from 3.3.169.2, 3.3.22 wouldbe extracted from 3.3.169.4, 4.4.1 would be extracted from 4.6.13 and 4.4.2 would be extracted from 4.6.14.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________90A- Log #26


Update the following references:2.3.2 ASTM International Publications.ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, P.O. Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959.ASTM C 411, , 2005

2011.ASTM D 93, , 2010 2011.ASTM E 84, , 2010b 2012.ASTM E 119, 2011 2012.ASTM E 136, , 2009b 2011.

Standards date updates.





ANSI/UL 181, , 2005, Revised 2008.ANSI/UL 181A, , 2005, Revised 2008.ANSI/UL 181B, , 2005,

Revised 2008 2011.ANSI/UL 263, , 2009.ANSI/UL 555, , 2006, Revised 2010 2011.ANSI/UL 555C, , 2006, Revised 2010.ANSI/UL 555S, , 1999, Revised 2010 2011.ANSI/UL 723, , 2008, Revised 2010.ANSI/UL 867, , 2000, Revised 2007 2011.ANSI/UL 900, , 2004, Revised 2009 2010.ANSI/UL 1820, , 2004,

Revised 2009.ANSI/UL 1887, ,

2004, Revised 2009.ANSI/UL 1995, , 2003, Revised 2008 2011.ANSI/UL 2024, , 2004, Revised 2007 2011.ANSI/UL 2043,

, 2008.Update referenced standards to most recent edition as indicated.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________90A- Log #14

_______________________________________________________________________________________________Frank W. Peri, Communications Cable & Connectivity Assoc.

Revise text to read as follows:ANSI/UL 2024,

20042011, Revised 20072011.UL 2024, which previously covered optical fiber and communications raceways, and UL 2024A which

previously covered cable routing assemblies, have been merged. UL 2024A has been dropped and the new UL 2024covers raceways (signaling, optical fiber and communications types) and cable routing assemblies. This Public Inputrecommends updating the reference to UL 2024.




Revise to read:See 4.4.2 Refers to a building construction material not complying with the

definition of that, in the form in which it is used, has a potential heat value not exceeding 8141kJ/kg (3500 Btu/lb), where tested in accordance with NFPA 259,

and that includes either of the following: (1) materials having a structural base of noncombustible material, witha surfacing not exceeding a thickness of 3.2 mm ( 1/8 in.) that has a flame spread index not greater than 50; or (2)materials, in the form and thickness used, having neither a flame spread index greater than 25 nor evidence ofcontinued progressive combustion, and of such composition that surfaces that would be exposed by cutting through thematerial on any plane would have neither a flame spread index greater than 25 nor evidence of continued progressivecombustion when tested in accordance with ASTM E 84,

, or ANSI/UL 723, .

This change puts NFPA 90A in line with what was done for NFPA 101 (and many other documents) inthe 2012 cycle. NFPA requirements are that definitions cannot contain requirements and the definitions ofnoncombustible and limited combustible contain requirements. Therefore this public input proposes to put simply a placeholder in chapter 3 (definitions) and place the requirements into Chapter 4, just as was done in NFPA 101 and 5000.The proposed language is identical to the language in NFPA 101. If the technical committee wishes it can simply extractthe language from NFPA 101. The corresponding sections are: 3.3.21 would be extracted from 3.3.169.2, 3.3.22 wouldbe extracted from 3.3.169.4, 4.4.1 would be extracted from 4.6.13 and 4.4.2 would be extracted from 4.6.14.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________90A- Log #2

_______________________________________________________________________________________________


A material that, in the form in which it is used and under the conditions anticipated,will not ignite, burn, support combustion, or release flammable vapors, when subjected to fire or heat. [101, 2012]Materials that are reported as passing ASTM E 136, Standard Test Method for Behavior of Materials in a Vertical TubeFurnace at 750 Degrees C, shall be considered noncombustible materials.[220, 2009]

A material that is reported as passing ASTM E 136, Standard Test Method for Behavior of Materials in aVertical Tube Furnace at 750 Degrees C, is considered a noncombustible material. A material that is reported ascomplying with the pass/fail criteria of ASTM E 136 when tested in accordance with the test method and procedure inASTM E 2652, Standard Test Method for Behavior of Materials in a Tube Furnace with a Cone-shaped AirflowStabilizer, at 750 Degrees C, is considered a noncombustible material.

The definition of noncombustible material has been amended in NFPA 101 and 5000 to eliminate thesecond sentence with the requirements.




Revise to read:See 4.4.1 A material that, in the form in which it is used and under the conditions

anticipated, will not ignite, burn, support combustion, or release flammable vapors when subjected to fire or heat.Materials that are reported as passing ASTM E 136,

, are considered noncombustible materials.


_______________________________________________________________________________________________90A- Log #7


Revise to read: Materials within a ceiling cavity plenum exposed to the airflow shall be (a) noncombustible or (b) exhibit a

maximum flame spread index of 25 and a maximum smoke developed index of 50 when tested in accordance withASTM E 84, , or with ANSI/UL 723,

, or (c) comply with 4.3.11.2.6.1 through4.3.11.2.6.10, as applicable.

This is simply a correction of an omission in the text. The default requirement for materials exposed tothe airflow in ceiling cavity plenums and raised floor plenums is always considered to be, and should continue to be, thatthey be noncombustible (which is already shown) or be limited combustible (which is the option in 4.3.11.2.6.9 and in4.3.11.5.5.8) or that they meet a flame spread index of 25 and a smoke developed index of 50 in the ASTM E84/UL 723test (and that portion is implied but missing from the text). This same default applies in the International MechanicalCode.

This change does not affect (of course) the requirements for materials of construction of the plenum, electricalwires and cables, optical fiber cables, pneumatic tubing, sprinkler piping, raceways, discrete electrical products,supplementary materials, air ducts or air connectors. It is simply clarification consistent with the intent.In the absence of this change the default would be for the materials to be noncombustible, which was never the intent.

The technical committee clearly noticed that because its committee statement on comment 90A-33 was “The committeeconcludes that this is a material that would default to the general material requirements”. However, as pointed out byboth Dwayne Sloan and myself, the default, if this language is not incorporated into the standard, is that materials thatare not specifically mentioned must be noncombustible. At present NFPA 90A sends the user to a section that refers tothe ASTM E 84/UL 723 requirements (section 4.3.3) but it applies only to “supplementary materials for air distributionsystems”.This was proposed at the last cycle but it came in at the comment stage and was deemed new material and held. It

was then proposed as a TIA but it did not get the ¾ majority needed for emergency nature. It received 21 affirmatives, 5negatives, 1 abstention and 2 non returns on technical merit (20 affirmatives were needed, so that it passed on technicalmerit) and 19 affirmatives, 8 negatives, 0 abstentions and 2 non returns on emergency nature (21 affirmatives wereneeded, so that it failed on emergency nature).



_______________________________________________________________________________________________William E. Koffel, Koffel Associates, Inc. / Rep. SPI Wire and Cable Section

Revise text to read:Materials within a ceiling cavity plenum exposed to the airflow shall be noncombustible or comply with (a) be

noncombustible or (b) exhibit a maximum flame spread index of 25 and a maximum smoke developed index of 50 whentested in accordance with ASTM E84, ,or with ANSI/UL 723, , or (c) comply with4.3.11.2.6.1 through 4.3.11.2.6.10, as applicable.

The proposed language was the subject of proposed TIA Log No. 1022 which achieved the required75% vote for Technical Merit ballot but did not pass the Emergency Nature ballot.This is simply a correction of an omission in the text. The default requirement for materials exposed to the airflow in

ceiling cavity plenums was always considered to be, and should continue to be, that they be noncombustible (which isalready in the Standard) or be limited-combustible or that they meet a flame spread index of 25 and a smoke developedindex of 50 in teh ASTM E84/UL 723 test. The same default applies in the International Mechanical Code.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________90A- Log #3

_______________________________________________________________________________________________


Materials within a ceiling cavity plenum exposed to the airflow shall be (a) noncombustible or (b) exhibit amaximum flame spread index of 25 and a maximum smoke developed index of 50 when tested in accordance withASTM E 84, , or with ANSI/UL 723,


Materials within a raised floor plenum exposed to the airflow shall be (a) noncombustible or (b) exhibit amaximum flame spread index of 25 and a maximum smoke developed index of 50 when tested in accordance withASTM E 84, , or with ANSI/UL 723,


This is simply a correction of an omission in the text. The default requirement for materials exposed tothe airflow in ceiling cavity plenums and raised floor plenums is that they be noncombustible (which is already shown) orbe limited combustible (which is the option in 4.3.11.2.6.9 and in 4.3.11.5.5.8) or that they meet a flame spread index of25 and a smoke developed index of 50 in the ASTM E84/UL 723 test (and that portion is implied but missing from thetext).This change does not affect (of course) the requirements for materials of construction of the plenum, electrical wires

and cables, optical fiber cables, pneumatic tubing, sprinkler piping, raceways, discrete electrical products,supplementary materials air ducts or air connectors. It is simply clarification consistent with the intent.




Revise text to read as follows:Signaling, optical Optical fiber and communications and signaling raceways, and cable routing

assemblies shall be listed as having a maximum peak optical density of 0.50 or less, an average optical density of 0.15or less, and a maximum flame spread distance of 1.5 m (5 ft) or less when tested in accordance with ANSI/UL 2024,

. Cablesinstalled within these raceways and cable routing assemblies shall be listed as plenum cable in accordance with therequirements in 4.3.11.2.6.1.

UL 2024, which previously covered optical fiber and communications raceways, and UL 2024A whichpreviously covered cable routing assemblies, have been merged. UL 2024A has been dropped and the new UL 2024covers raceways (signaling, optical fiber and communications types) and cable routing assemblies. This Public Inputrecommends updating the reference to UL 2024, as well as expanding the section to reflect the expanded scope of UL2024, which now includes signaling raceways, and cable routing assemblies. UL 2024 has identical fire testrequirements for raceways (signaling, optical fiber and communications types) and cable routing assemblies.The parallel Section 4.3.11.5.5.4 (raised floor plenum) contains the requirement that only plenum cables shall bepermitted to be installed in plenum raceways. Since cable routing assemblies, unlike raceways, are not required to beenclosed, the cables in a cable routing assembly may be exposed to the airflow and therefore must be listed for use in aplenum. The recommended additional last sentence therefore requires plenum grade cables in signaling, optical fiberand communications raceways and in cable routing assemblies installed in ceiling cavity plenums.See our companion Public Input for 4.3.11.5.5.4 which recommends identical requirements for raised floor plenums.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________90A- Log #16


Revise text to read as follows:Loudspeakers, recessed lighting fixtures, and other electrical equipment with combustible enclosures,

including their assemblies and accessories, nonmetallic cable ties, wraps and supports, and other discrete products,shall be permitted in the ceiling cavity plenum where listed as having a maximum peak optical density of 0.5 or less, anaverage optical density of 0.15 or less, and a peak heat release rate of 100 kW or less when tested in accordance withANSI/UL 2043,

A variety of products are used for cable support and cable organization, including hooks, wraps andcable ties. Some of the wrap products are a hook and loop design (think Velcro) that have the same function as cableties. Nonmetallic cable hangers of various designs are also used. This Public Input seeks to clarify what some of the“other discrete products” are.Examples of some of these products can be found on the web at:http://www.panduit.com/stellent/groups/mpm-wc/documents/selectionguide/cmscont_035126.pdfhttp://www.azcotechnologies.com/#!_wire-managementhttp://www.comdangles.com/http://panduitsolutions.com/networkers/staticfiles/assets/gb/SA-WAC06.pdfhttp://www.te.com/us/en/industries/energy/productsubcontents.aspx?name=9202



_______________________________________________________________________________________________David W. Ash, Lubrizol Advanced Materials, Inc.

Revise text to read: 4.3.11.2.6.6 Plastic piping and tubing used in plumbing systems shall be permitted to be used within a ceiling cavity

plenum if it exhibits a flame spread index of 25 or less and a smoke developed index of 50 or less when tested inaccordance with ASTM E 84, , orANSI/UL 723, , at full width of the tunnel andwith no water or any other liquid in the pipe during the test.

Specifying test conditions is not the responsibility of an installation standard, such as NFPA 90A. Suchmatters are the responsibility of the organization that develops and maintains the test standard, in this case the ASTME-5 committee. That ASTM committee consists of representatives with the knowledge and experience to define thedetails involved with conducting such a test. The appropriate method of testing plastic pipe in the ASTM E-84 test hasbeen vigorously debated by the E-5 committee without resolution to date. This is a current and active topic for thisASTM group. NFPA 90 should not contain language that modifies another organization's standard.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________90A- Log #8


Revise to read: Materials within a raised floor plenum exposed to the airflow shall be (a) noncombustible or (b) exhibit a

maximum flame spread index of 25 and a maximum smoke developed index of 50 when tested in accordance withASTM E 84, , or with ANSI/UL 723,


This is simply a correction of an omission in the text. The default requirement for materials exposed tothe airflow in ceiling cavity plenums and raised floor plenums is always considered to be, and should continue to be, thatthey be noncombustible (which is already shown) or be limited combustible (which is the option in 4.3.11.2.6.9 and in4.3.11.5.5.8) or that they meet a flame spread index of 25 and a smoke developed index of 50 in the ASTM E84/UL 723test (and that portion is implied but missing from the text). This same default applies in the International MechanicalCode.This change does not affect (of course) the requirements for materials of construction of the plenum, electrical wires

and cables, optical fiber cables, pneumatic tubing, sprinkler piping, raceways, discrete electrical products,supplementary materials, air ducts or air connectors. It is simply clarification consistent with the intent.In the absence of this change the default would be for the materials to be noncombustible, which was never the intent.

The technical committee clearly noticed that because its committee statement on comment 90A-33 was “The committeeconcludes that this is a material that would default to the general material requirements”. However, as pointed out byboth Dwayne Sloan and myself, the default, if this language is not incorporated into the standard, is that materials thatare not specifically mentioned must be noncombustible. At present NFPA 90A sends the user to a section that refers tothe ASTM E 84/UL 723 requirements (section 4.3.3) but it applies only to “supplementary materials for air distributionsystems”.This was proposed at the last cycle but it came in at the comment stage and was deemed new material and held. It

was then proposed as a TIA but it did not get the ¾ majority needed for emergency nature. It received 21 affirmatives, 5negatives, 1 abstention and 2 non returns on technical merit (20 affirmatives were needed, so that it passed on technicalmerit) and 19 affirmatives, 8 negatives, 0 abstentions and 2 non returns on emergency nature (21 affirmatives wereneeded, so that it failed on emergency nature).



_______________________________________________________________________________________________William E. Koffel, Koffel Associates, Inc.

Revise text to read:Materials within a raised floor plenum exposed to the airflow shall be noncombustible or shall (a) be noncombustible or

(b) exhibit a maximum flame spread index of 25 and a maximum smoke developed index of 50 when tested inaccordance with ASTM E84, , or withANSI/UL 723, , or (c) shall comply with4.3.11.5.5.1 through 4.3.11.5.5.11, as applicable.

The proposed language was the subject of proposed TIA Log No. 1022 which achieved the required75% vote for Technical Merit ballot but did not pass the Emergency Nature ballot.This is simply a correction of an omission in the text. The default requirement for materials exposed to the airflow in

raised floor plenums was always considered to be, and should continue to be, that they be noncombustible (which isalready in the Standard) or be limited-combustible or that they meet a flame spread index of 25 and a smoke developedindex of 50 in teh ASTM E84/UL 723 test. The same default applies in the International Mechanical Code.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________90A- Log #17


Revise text to read as follows:Signaling, optical Optical fiber and communications and signaling raceways, and cable routing

assemblies shall be listed as having a maximum peak optical density of 0.50 or less, an average optical density of 0.15or less, and a maximum flame spread distance of 1.5 m (5 ft) or less when tested in accordance with ANSI/UL 2024,

. Cablesinstalled within these raceways and cable routing assemblies shall be listed as plenum cable in accordance with therequirements in 4.3.11.5.5.1.

UL 2024, which previously covered optical fiber and communications raceways, and UL 2024A whichpreviously covered cable routing assemblies, have been merged. UL 2024A has been dropped and the new UL 2024covers raceways (signaling, optical fiber and communications types) and cable routing assemblies. This Public Inputrecommends updating the reference to UL 2024, as well as expanding the section to reflect the expanded scope of UL2024, which now includes signaling raceways, and cable routing assemblies. UL 2024 has identical fire testrequirements for raceways (signaling, optical fiber and communications types) and cable routing assemblies.Since cable routing assemblies, unlike raceways, are not required to be enclosed, the cables in a cable routingassembly may be exposed to the airflow and therefore must be listed for use in a plenum. The recommended additionallast sentence therefore requires plenum grade cables in cable routing assemblies in addition to the existing requirementfor plenum grade cables in plenum raceways.See our companion Public Input for 4.3.11.5.5.4 which recommends identical requirements for ceiling cavity plenums.




Revise text to read as follows:Loudspeakers, recessed lighting fixtures, and other electrical equipment with combustible enclosures,

including their assemblies and accessories, nonmetallic cable ties, wraps and supports, and other discrete products,shall be permitted in the raised floor plenum where listed as having a maximum peak optical density of 0.5 or less, anaverage optical density of 0.15 or less, and a peak heat release rate of 100 kW or less when tested in accordance withANSI/UL 2043,

A variety of products are used for cable support and cable organization, including hooks, wraps andcable ties. Some of the wrap products are a hook and loop design (think Velcro) that have the same function as cableties. Nonmetallic cable hangers of various designs are also used. This Public Input seeks to clarify what some of the“other discrete products” are.Examples of some of these products can be found on the web at:http://www.panduit.com/stellent/groups/mpm-wc/documents/selectionguide/cmscont_035126.pdfhttp://www.azcotechnologies.com/#!_wire-managementhttp://www.comdangles.com/http://panduitsolutions.com/networkers/staticfiles/assets/gb/SA-WAC06.pdfhttp://www.te.com/us/en/industries/energy/productsubcontents.aspx?name=9202

_______________________________________________________________________________________________90A- Log #24

_______________________________________________________________________________________________David W. Ash, Lubrizol Advanced Materials, Inc.

Revise text to read:4.3.11.5.5.7 Plastic piping and tubing used in plumbing systems shall be permitted to be used within a raised floor

plenum if it exhibits a flame spread index of 25 or less and a smoke developed index of 50 or less when tested inaccordance with ASTM E 84, , orANSI/UL 723, , at full width of the tunnel andwith no water or any other liquid in the pipe during the test.

Specifying test conditions is not the responsibility of an installation standard, such as NFPA 90A. Suchmatters are the responsibility of the organization that develops and maintains the test standard, in this case the ASTME-5 committee. That ASTM committee consists of representatives with the knowledge and experience to define thedetails involved with conducting such a test. The appropriate method of testing plastic pipe in the ASTM E-84 test hasbeen vigorously debated by the E-5 committee without resolution to date. This is a current and active topic for thisASTM group. NFPA 90 should not contain language that modifies another organization's standard.



_______________________________________________________________________________________________

Peter A. Larrimer, US Department of Veterans Affairs

Egress corridors in health care nursing and long term care facilities, detention and correctional, andresidential occupancies shall not be used as a portion of a supply, return, or exhaust air system serving adjoining areasunless otherwise permitted by 4.3.12.1.3.1 through 4.3.12.1.3.4.

Air movement between rooms and egress corridors in hospitals, nursing facilities, and ambulatory carefacilities shall be permitted where the transfer of air is required for clinical purposes by other standards.

See ANSI/ASHRAE/ASHE Standard 170, .

The restriction to using corridors in hospitals as a portion of the supply, return or exhaust air systemwas inadvertently removed from the wording in the 2012 Edition of NFPA 90A. The new wording in NFPA 90A willallow hospitals to use the corridor as a return air plenum. If the corridor is used as a return air plenum, smoke from afire would be drawn into the corridor by design, creating a hazard by compromising the corridor from being used as anegress path. The use of the corridor as part of the supply, return or exhaust air system was explicitly restricted inhospitals in the 2009 edition of the standard and the modifications proposed by this TIA will again restrict corridors inhospitals from being used as part of the air system.In addition, the air movement between rooms and the egress corridors in nursing facilities will be inadvertently

restricted unless the change proposed for paragraph 4.3.12.1.2 is accepted.Without the proposed changes, NFPA 90A will permit hospitals to be constructed using corridors

as a return air plenum thereby creating a potentially serious hazard to the occupants.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________90A- Log #4

_______________________________________________________________________________________________Lawrence P. Gallagher, Gallagher and Associates

Revise text to read as follows:4.3.12.1.2 Air movement between rooms and egress corridors in health care, nursing facilities, and ambulatory care

facilities occupancies shall be permitted where the transfer of air is required for clinical purposes by other standards.Use of the term "nursing facilities' is an undefined term that is vague and subject to varying

interpretations. The proposed revisionshould clearly define which occupancies shall be permitted using exiting code terminology for each such occupancyclassification.




Add a new section to read:

A material that complies with any of the following shall be considered a noncombustible material:● (1)* A material that, in the form in which it is used and under the conditions anticipated, will not ignite, burn,

support combustion, or release flammable vapors when subjected to fire or heat● (2) A material that is reported as passing ASTM E 136,

● (3) A material that is reported as complying with the pass/fail criteria of ASTM E 136 when tested inaccordance with the test method and procedure in ASTM E 2652,

Where the term is used in this , it shall also include the term . A material shall be considered a limited-combustible material where all the

conditions of 4.4.2.1 and 4.4.2.2, and the conditions of either 4.4.2.3 or 4.4.2.4, are met. The material shall not comply with the requirements for noncombustible material in accordance with 4.4.1. The material, in the form in which it is used, shall exhibit a potential heat value not exceeding 3500 Btu/lb

(8141 kJ/kg) where tested in accordance with NFPA 259, . The material shall have the structural base of a noncombustible material with a surfacing not exceeding a

thickness of 1/8 in. (3.2 mm) where the surfacing exhibits a flame spread index not greater than 50 when tested inaccordance with ASTM E 84, , orANSI/UL 723, .

The material shall be composed of materials that, in the form and thickness used, neither exhibit a flamespread index greater than 25 nor evidence of continued progressive combustion when tested in accordance with ASTME 84, or ANSI/UL 723,

and shall be of such composition that all surfaces thatwould be exposed by cutting through the material on any plane would neither exhibit a flame spread index greater than25 nor exhibit evidence of continued progressive combustion when tested in accordance with ASTM E 84 or ANSI/UL723.

Where the term is used in this , it shall also include the term .




_______________________________________________________________________________________________Vickie J. Lovell, InterCode Incorporated

Revise text to read as follows:Combination fFire/smoke dampers shall be installed at each direct or ducted opening into and out of

enclosures required by 5.3.4.1, unless otherwise permitted by 5.3.4.6.1 through 5.3.4.6.23.Combination fire/smoke dampers shall not be required in shafts where smoke dampers are exempted by

NFPA 101, .A fFire dampers or combination fire/smoke dampers shall not be required where an air duct system serving

only one story is used only for exhaust of air to the outside and is contained within its own dedicated shaft.A fire damper or a combination fire/smoke damper shall not be required where the following conditions

exist:(Items 1-4 is unchanged…)

The NFPA 90A technical committee overwhelmingly approved 90A-68 Log #CP15 during the lastcycle, which is similar to the intent of this proposal.Out of 29 eligible voters, 23 voted affirmatively (3 negatives, 3 abstentions) to require combination fire/smoke dampers

in shafts during the last cycle. In fact, the TC approved similar proposals during the past two cycle. However, theproposals was overturned with NITMAMs, primarily due to opposition from health care industry representatives. TheNFPA LSC currently exempts dampers in shafts in health care facilities.This new proposal specifically exempts any new or existing occupancy, including health care, from this requirement

when the LSC does not require smoke dampers in shafts.In view of the committees previous support of this proposal and their request for additional information, the Air

Movement and Control Association (AMCA.org) retained Koffel Associates in 2008 to initiate an investigation to evaluatethe performance of smoke dampers in building air handling systems, and to determine whether the statements made byvarious individuals during the Association meeting were accurate regarding fire and or fire/smoke dampers, and whetherthey are essential elements of a fire and smoke protection design, particularly in sprinklered buildings. The investigationalso considered the claims that the cost of smoke dampers installed in fire resistance rated shafts was unjustified or costprohibitive.The investigation included three initial phases:During Phase 1 LITERATURE SEARCH, Koffel Associates performed a literature review of code change proposals,

codes and standards, and additional resources to gather information on what work has been done concerning theperformance of smoke dampers in shaft penetrations and in corridor walls. Koffel Associates was directed to seekprevious studies, reports or other unbiased, credible third-party research regarding the effectiveness of fire/smokedampers in sprinklered and nonsprinklered buildings.The scope of Phase II COMPUTER MODELING was to conduct computer fire modeling to evaluate the performance of

smoke dampers in building air handling systems.The scope of Phase III COST ANALYSIS was to prepare a cost analysis by an independent mechanical engineering

firm to determine the additional cost of installing a fire/smoke damper as compared to the cost of a fire damper in thesimulated buildings that were used in the computer fire modeling.

Despite the concern about smoke spread throughout a building, the literature search revealed that little research hasbeen documented concerning the benefit or performance of smoke dampers in corridor walls and in duct penetrationsof shaft enclosures. The literature search resulted in finding very few documents of value in attempting to define theproblem of smoke spread through HVAC ductwork with few references to acceptable performance criteria, other thanresearch that was previously conducted by Hughes and Associates in 2001 for AMCA. Most of the other published workhas focused on major sources of leakage such as door assemblies or in the case of the exterior wall work (not includedherein), door and window assemblies. Cracks and penetrations in the walls is often identified but not evaluatedquantitatively.The conclusion should not be made however, that smoke dampers do not provide an essential function or that there is

no benefit; the performance and benefits simply have not been documented. The claims that smoke dampers do notcontribute significantly to the fire/smoke safety of the building, or that they are cost prohibitive, are not substantiated bythe literature search. Overall, it appears that insufficient, specific research has been performed and reported in this areato date to support either side of the case (for or against) a mandatory requirement for smoke dampers in shafts andcorridors. However, the literature search did confirm that smoke spreads beyond the area of the fire’s origin in both


Report on Proposals – June 2014 NFPA 90Asprinklered and non-sprinklered buildings, and that methods and materials/devices to manage such smoke should beconsidered in the building’sfire/smoke safety design. Automatic sprinkler systems alone do not adequately control the migration of smoke, as hasbeen suggested by opponents of this proposal.

The literature search identified two relatively recent modeling efforts looking at the vertical spread of smoke in buildingsvia shafts. Using these recent modeling projects as a basis, Koffel Associates was directed to conduct a computer firemodeling project to evaluate the performance of smoke dampers in building air handling systems to compile informationand data on the effectiveness of smoke dampers.The scope of work involved creating a computer model of a building using CONTAM. The initial (Phase I) modeling

effort by Koffel Associates was to replicate the results presented in a research paper previously provided to AMCA, titled“A Comparison of Driving Forces for Smoke Movement in Buildings”, by Frederick W. Mowrer, James A. Milke, and JoseL. Torero. Once the initial model was confirmed to be consistent with the work presented in the paper, conditions werethen varied to evaluate the benefit of smoke dampers to demonstrate the difference in smoke movement throughout thebuilding. A series of simulations was performed using buildings of varying heights including five stories, ten stories,twenty stories, and fifty stories, simulating both non-sprinklered and sprinklered fires. Data from the Plaza Hotel smokecontrol experiments performed by NIST in 1989 was used to enable a discussion of actual smoke concentration valuesand tenability times. For this analysis, a simple building model was constructed in CONTAM having the same attributesas the building evaluated in the “Mowrer Comparison”. A simple air handling system was provided with a single supplyand return point at each floor. A very small leakage area was provided at the boundary wall between the interior andexterior zone on each story to provide balancing within the computer model, however this very small leakage area didnot have any significant effect on the results. As in the hand calculations, a ventilation rate of 4 ACH and a recirculationrate of 90% were specified for the model. Smoke was modeled by introducing a contaminant with the same propertiesas air to simulate the behavior of well-mixed smoke. The exact smoke concentrations specified in the model were 5.66 x10-5 lb/ft3 for the nonsprinklered fire and 1.89 × 10-6 lb/ft3 for the sprinkler-controlled fire. These values were calculatedfrom the mass of the wood cribs used in the Plaza Hotel experiments and the smoke obscuration measurementsobtained during the sprinklered test.For the 5-story building, after 12 hours the relative smoke concentration on non-fire floors was determined to be 7.8%

of the smoke concentration on the fire floor with smoke dampers installed, as opposed to 64.3% without smoke dampersinstalled. This is equal to an 87.9% reduction in the smoke concentration for an unsprinklered fire. Again, the non-firefloor smoke concentrations are smaller in taller buildings simply because there is more building volume for the sameamount of smoke.

AMCA retained the services of Leach Wallace, a mechanical engineering firm to estimate the costs of adding smokedampers to the modeled buildings, which would have already been required to have fire dampers in fire ratedassemblies. is a consulting engineering firm headquartered in Baltimore Marylandarea, with branch offices in York, Pennsylvania and Charlotte, North Carolina. The firm was established in 1990 with thepurpose of providing comprehensive mechanical, electrical, and energy systems engineering design services forhealthcare, institutional, commercial, industrial and governmental clients.This study consists of designing the HVAC system for a theoretical office building for the purpose of analyzing the

costs for installation and maintenance of the code required fire/smoke dampers located in supply and return ductwork at2-hour shaft separations. The office building is designed as a 100 square meter building (10 meters × 10 meters) ofvarying heights.

From the Koffel Associates report, “Smoke Damper Evaluation for Air Movement & Control Association International,Inc.”, Dated January 14, 2010, the building analyzed is a typical office building with floor sizes of 100 square meters(10m × 10m). Four different building heights were analyzed; five, ten, twenty and fifty stories. The slab to slab height isstated as being 3m. The HVAC design for this study includes the sizing of the central air handling equipment, mainductwork risers, floor branch ductwork, and damper. For each scheme, a single air handling unit with a single supplyand return shaft has been designed with a single branch per floor. Based on 2009 International Mechanical Code,combination fire/smoke dampers are indicated at each floor take-off. The HVAC system design is based on a variablevolume overhead air distribution system. The supply system is a medium pressure variable volume system withpressure independent terminal units for zone temperature control. The return system is low pressure with fan tracking tomaintain building pressurization. The duct sizing method is the equal-friction method as described in 2009 ASHRAE


Report on Proposals – June 2014 NFPA 90AHandbook of Fundamentals. A friction rate of 0.08”/100ft or 1600 fpm velocity are the maximum parameters for lowpressure return air duct sizing. A friction rate of 0.3”/100 ft or 2600 fpm velocity are the maximum parameters formedium pressure supply air duct sizing. Refer to the attached Sketches, SK-1 and SK-2, for the schematic-level systemdesigns, including duct sizes and air handling unit sizes.

The air handling system sizing is based on building peak cooling load calculations. The cooling loads have beencalculated using Carrier’s Hourly Analysis Program version 4.31. The input parameters for the design are furtherdescribed below.The building interior is assumed to be 85% usable office space and 15% support spaces (stairwells, shafts, elevators).

Loads are based on 8 foot by 8 foot cubicles with one occupant and one computer per cubicle within the 85% usablespace, yielding 14 cubicles per floor. Lighting load density is 1 W/sqft as per office use criteria in 2009 InternationalEnergy Conservation Code. The building envelope was assumed to be commonly used construction assemblies asfound in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2007 as follows:● 40% of the exterior surface as glazing which is the maximum allowable.● Windows are “curtain wall type” with a maximum U number of 0.6 BTU/sqft*F.● Walls are “steel framed” with a maximum U value of 0.084 BTU/sqft*F.● Roof is “insulation entirely above deck” with a maximum U value of 0.048 BTU/sqft*F.The setpoints of the HVAC system are based on the recommendations for office space in the 2007 ASHRAE

Handbook – HVAC Applications – Section 3.2:● 74 degrees F for summer cooling.● 70 degrees F for winter heatingOutdoor temperatures are for Baltimore Maryland from 2009 ASHRAE Handbook – Fundamentals:● 93.9 degrees F dry bulb in cooling mode. (0.4% design day)● 74.9 degrees F mean coincident wet bulb in cooling mode. (0.4% design day)● 12.9 degrees F dry bulb in heating mode. (99.6% design day)

From a cost standpoint, it is assumed that if combination fire/smoke dampers are removed from the system, thatfusible link fire dampers would still be required to maintain the 2-hour shaft rating. Therefore the cost associated with thesmoke dampers is analyzed as a “delta” between the combination fire/ smoke dampers and fusible link fire dampers.In accordance with the system sizing, the duct tap and damper sizes for the single supply and return tap per floor are

24” × 8” and 24” × 12” respectively. Refer to attached sketches, SK-1 and SK-2. Installation costs have been determinedthrough 2010 RS Means. The detailed breakdown for each damper type and size and for each source of cost data hasbeen included in the cost estimate sheets (available upon request). Fire/smoke dampers are assumed to use the “areadetection” system, whereby fire/smoke dampers are activated by the floor wide smoke detection system indexed to thefire alarm system as per International Mechanical Code, 2009. Because the floor wide smoke detection system and firealarm system are independently required, the cost of these systems are not counted towards the cost of the fire/smokedampers. For comparison purposes, the costs for the 24” × 12” dampers (including installation) based on contractorinput are as follows:24” × 12” Combination Fire/smoke Damper: $72124” × 12” Fusible Link Fire Damper: $64

:Although it is agreed by both Koffel Associates and Air Movement and Control Association that more work is required

before irrefutable conclusions may be made the preliminary findings supports what many mechanical engineers and fireprotection engineers have concluded for decades: that smoke does migrate from the area of origin in both sprinkleredand non sprinklered buildings, that smoke dampers can reduce the movement of such smoke within the HVAC system,and that it is not cost prohibitive to require them. The statements by opponents to this proposal that automatic sprinklersystems completely manage/control smoke, and that there is no cost/benefit to incorporating smoke dampers isunsubstantiated.The statement made that there is no substantiation for requiring dampers in HVAC systems is also unfounded. Based

on an examination of NFPA data in the 1930s, the National Board of Fire Underwriters in 1939 recommended thatdampers be installed in the HVAC system to interrupt the passage of smoke, flame and heat during a fire. Since that


Report on Proposals – June 2014 NFPA 90Atime, dampers have been installed in HVAC systems. The usefulness of automatic closing fire and/or smoke dampersand automatic fan shutdown of the HVAC system in preventing the migration of smoke, flame and heat to areas of abuilding remote from the area of origin has been substantiated by numerous experts in the field of the fire sciences. Theimpressive fire death record in many buildings types and occupancy groups in recent years can be attributed, in part, tothe successful activation of a property designed and maintained automatic sprinklers AND the management of smokeand toxic gases to prevent migration to areas remote from the fire.A copy of the AMCA research to date is available upon request to Tim Orris,at www. AMCA.org.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________90A- Log #21


Add new text to read as follows:Fire dampers, smoke damper, and combination fire/smoke dampers shall not be required in ducts used for

kitchen or clothes dryer exhaust systems.Dampers installed in these locations is not recommended by designers or manufacturers due to the

grease laden vapors or lint that may be conveyed through the ducts.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________90A- Log #1

_______________________________________________________________________________________________Kenneth Husbands, Gillan & Hartmann, Inc.

Revise text to read as follows:Smoke dampers installed to isolate the air-handling system in accordance with 4.3.9.2 4.3.10.2 shall be arranged to

close automatically when the system is not in operation.It appears that Section 6.3.3 references the incorrect paragraph.




Revise text to read as follows:Nonmetallic cable Cable ties, listed to ANSI/UL 62275,

and nonmetallic wraps and supports listed to ANSI/UL 1565, , and marked foruse in plenums are considered suitable for use wherever cable ties tested in accordance with ANSI/UL 2043,

, are required.Cable ties have been split out from ANSI/UL 1565, into a new standard, ANSI/UL

62275,The scope of UL 1565 is:

1.1 This standard applies to those metallic and nonmetallic devices used for positioning - which may include bundlingand securing - or to a limited extent supporting cable, wire, conduit, or tubing of a wiring system in electrical installations,to reduce the risk of fire, electric shock, or injury to persons. This standard applies to, but is not limited to, cable ties,cable tie mounting blocks, cable clamps, cable and conduit clips, and non-raceway ducts.1.2 These requirements do not apply to coated electrical sleeving, extruded insulating tubing, metallic or nonmetallic

raceways or woven flexible nonmetallic tubing (fiber loom), employed as mechanical protection for insulated wires orequipment covered by other standards or requirements.1.3 These requirements do not apply to any mechanical protection or electrical insulation that is provided by these

devices.1.4 In Canada, the requirements in this standard generally address class of workmanship in accordance with the

Canadian Electrical Code Part 1, and where applicable, minor combustible components in the National Building Code ofCanada.The scope of UL 62275 is:

This International Standard specifies requirements for metallic, non-metallic and composite cable ties and theirassociated fixing devices used for the management and support of wiring systems in electrical installations.Cable ties and associated fixing devices may also be suitable for other applications and where so used, regard should

be taken of any additional requirements.This standard does not contain requirements that evaluate any electrical insulation properties of the cable tie or

mechanical protection of the cables provided by the cable tie.This is a companion Public Input to our proposal for 4.3.11.2.6.5 which recommends recognition of other cable support

and organization devices beyond just cable ties.




Add new text to read:The provisions of 4.4.1 do not require inherently noncombustible materials to be tested in order to be classified

as noncombustible materials.Materials subject to increase in combustibility or flame spread index beyond the limits herein established

through the effects of age, moisture, or other atmospheric condition are considered combustible. (See NFPA 259,, and NFPA 220,

.)





Add new text to read as follows:See NFPA 105, Standard for Smoke Door Assemblies and Other Opening Protectives, for testing requirements

for smoke dampers and combination fire and smoke dampers. See NFPA 80, Standard for Fire Doors and OtherOpening Protectives, for testing requirements, for testing requirements for fire dampers. AMCA International’s

(2011)provides recommendations from damper manufacturers on how to test dampers for acceptance testing and for follow upperiodic testing.

There is widespread inconsistency on how to test life safety dampers. This document is intended toprovide a resource document to help eliminate unnecessary steps to proper inspection and testing procedure, whileensuring that damper testing is useful and yields inspection and maintenance information that supports their properfunction in the event of an emergency.The entire document is not intended to be published in the 90A annex, but has been re-printed here for information

purpose, and review by the TC and other interested parties.

Fire Dampers, Smoke Dampers, Combination Fire Smoke Dampers, Ceiling Radiation Dampers, and other types ofdampers that perform as part of a building’s Fire Protection or Life-Safety System must function properly during a fire orlife-safety emergency. Proper installation and periodic performance testing are required to ensure these dampersfunction as intended in a fire emergency.The purpose of this document is to provide recommendations for the proper commissioning of Fire and Life Safety

Related Dampers and to describe the appropriate intervals and methods for performing periodic performance testing ofthese dampers.

Life Safety Dampers are designed to perform a number of functions in a building’s HVAC, Fire and/or Smoke ControlSystem and are an integral part of the overall life-safety system within the building. Generally, Fire Dampers aredesigned to close and prevent the spread of fire through an opening in a fire resistive barrier. Ceiling Radiation Dampersare designed to close and reduce the transfer of heat through an opening in the ceiling membrane of floor-ceiling orroof-ceiling assembly. Refer to the specified ceiling design for details regarding penetrations. Smoke Dampers operateto prevent the spread of smoke by closing to stop airflow or by opening to exhaust smoke. They can also be opened orclosed to create pressure differences (as in an engineered smoke control system) to reduce the spread of smoke.Combination Fire Smoke Dampers perform the dual role of both Fire Dampers and Smoke Dampers. Underwriters

Laboratories (UL) has developed and maintains standards for the testing, qualification, and appropriate labeling of FireDampers (UL 555), Smoke Dampers (UL 555S), Combination Fire Smoke Dampers (UL 555 and UL 555S) and CeilingRadiation Dampers (UL 555C & UL 263). Manufacturers of these dampers, who have complied with these ULrequirements, provide classified and labeled dampers for installation where required in HVAC and Engineered SmokeControl Systems. Building Codes and several NFPA and ASHRAE Standards identify where Fire, Smoke and CeilingRadiation Damper s are required to be installed in a building’s HVAC and/or Smoke Control System. Architects andDesign Engineers incorporate Code required dampers in their building designs but also may incorporate additionalrequirements depending on a building’s specific purpose and intended function.

The term Commissioning is used to define an inspection process to determine if all components of a building areoperating as intended by the building’s design. Ensuring that a building’s mechanical system, its HVAC System, and anySmoke Control or other Life-Safety related systems operate properly (including all Fire and Life-Safety RelatedDampers), and documenting their proper operation is the result of the Commissioning process. This process is alsoknown as Acceptance Testing.Below are the AMCA recommended checklists for the commissioning of Fire and Life-Safety Related Dampers. For

specific installation requirements of the brand and model damper being commissioned, the damper manufacturer’sinstallation instructions shall be referenced.


Report on Proposals – June 2014 NFPA 90A1. – Unless specifically allowed by the damper manufacturer’s installation

instructions, the centerline of the fire damper’s frame shall be located in the plane of the fire rated assembly.2. – Unless the damper frame is wide enough to provide for direct attachment of retaining angles, all

fire dampers shall be mounted in a sleeve fabricated per the damper manufacturer’s installation instructions. The sleeveshall not extend more than 6 inches beyond the wall or floor opening unless there is an actuator or factory mountedaccess door on the damper. When an actuator or factory mounted access door is installed, the sleeve shall notextend more than 16 inches beyond the wall or floor opening. The sleeve is still limited to extending 6 inches beyond thewall or floor opening on the side opposite the actuator or factory mounted access door.3. – Most dampers are tested with defined clearances between

the damper’s sleeve and the wall or floor opening. Unless otherwise indicated in the installation instructions, the annularspace between the sleeve of the damper and the wall/floor opening should not be filled with firestop materials such asfill, void or cavity materials. Reference the damper manufacturer’s installation instructions for the specific clearancerequirements.4. – Most approved damper installation methods require

the use of retaining angles to secure the damper in the wall or floor opening. Reference the damper manufacturer’sinstallation instructions for the required material gauge of the retaining angles, the required overlap between theretaining angles and the wall or floor, and the spacing and type of fasteners to be used.5. – Dampers are tested and approved to use specific methods for connecting the

damper sleeve to adjoining ductwork. Reference the damper manufacturer’s installation instructions for the allowableduct to sleeve connections.6. – Access to the dampers shall be provided. Access shall be large enough to allow inspection andmaintenance of the damper and its operating parts. The access points shall be permanently identified on the exterior bya label having letters not less than ½ inch in height reading: FIRE/SMOKE DAMPER or FIRE DAMPER.7. – For dynamic fire dampers and combination fire smoke dampers, it shall be

verified that the system airflow and pressure are within the damper’s ratings8. – After the damper is installed it shall be cycled to ensure proper operation. The operation

test performed as part of the commissioning process shall follow the same procedure described in the PeriodicPerformance Testing section below.

1. – The centerline of the damper shall be mounted within 24inches of the opening it is protecting. In addition, no ductwork shall branch-off between the damper and the wall or flooropening it is protecting.2. – Many damper installations require that the damper frame be sealed

to the ductwork it is being installed in. Reference the damper manufacturer’s installation instructions to determine if thisrequirement applies and to determine the allowable sealants.3. – Access to the dampers shall be provided. Access shall be large enough to allow inspection and

maintenance of the damper and its operating parts. The access points shall be permanently identified on the exterior bya label having letters not less than ½ inch in height reading: SMOKE DAMPER.4. – It shall be verified that the system airflow and pressure are within the

dampers ratings.5. – After the damper is installed it shall be cycled to ensure proper operation. The operation

test performed as part of the commissioning process shall follow the same procedure described in the periodicperformance testing section below.

1. – Ceiling dampers carry a maximum hourly rating for the assembly in which they are installed. Checkthat the maximum hourly rating of the damper installed is approved for the same hourly rating as the ceiling assembly.2. – The damper can be installed on top of a steel diffuser,

sitting directly on the rated ceiling grid, in a steel duct drop, or supported such that the frame rest at the penetration.Refer to the manufacturer’s installation instructions for the maximum allowed distance that the closed blades areallowed from the bottom of the rated ceiling. In the case of drywall installation, consult instructions for maximum allowedclearance between penetration and damper frame.3. – When a damper is not located directly in the penetration and the damper frame is more than 1

inch smaller than the penetration, then a thermal blanket is normally required to reduce heat transfer across the grilleback pan. Refer to the manufacturers installation instructions for the recommended material and size of the thermalblanket.4. – Most dampers are tested with defined

clearances as specified in their instructions. If not specified, a rule of thumb is to keep tolerances minimal (less than 1/8


Report on Proposals – June 2014 NFPA 90Ainch) between connecting components. If possible, have the largest component extend over the smaller one below it.Reference the damper manufacturer’s installation instructions for the specific clearance requirements.5. – Most of the time, dampers are to be installed so that they are

supported by the structural members above them or the ceiling grid. Ceiling dampers are not normally supported by thedrywall, gypsum, or ceiling tiles alone. They are normally supported via steel wires, hangers, or duct drops with directfasteners such as screws, rivets, and bolts. Reference the damper manufacturer’s installation instructions for therequired material and fasteners.6. – Unless otherwise stated in the manufacturer’s installation instructions, the

damper will either lie on the ceiling grid or cover the neck of the diffuser. If connected to duct, the damper should beinstalled inside the duct connection.7. – After the damper is installed, the fuse link shall be removed and the damper blades

allowed to close upon its own mechanics. Cycling the damper ensures proper operation. The operation test performedas part of the commissioning process shall follow the same procedure described in periodic performance testing sectionbelow.

Fire Life-Safety related dampers that are properly applied and installed and that have proven the ability to function asintended through a building commissioning process should require no specific on-going maintenance beyond theperiodic testing described below to confirm operability. Although the required frequency of this periodic operation testingvaries by local jurisdiction, most local requirements reference one of two national standards, either NFPA 80 or NFPA105. NFPA 80 covers the requirements for fire dampers and NFPA 105 covers the requirements for smoke dampers.Both documents contain the following frequency requirements for periodic operation testing:

The method used to perform the periodicoperation testing depends on the type of damper. More specifically, it depends on how the damper operates. From anoperability standpoint, fire life-safety related dampers fall into one of the two following categories:1. – Most Fire Dampers and Ceiling Radiation Dampers, and some

Combination Fire Smoke Dampers are held in an open position by a fusible link. The fusible link is designed to melt at aspecified temperature allowing gravity or a spring to close the damper. After the fusible link has melted these dampersremain closed until reopened manually and a new fusible link is installed.2. – Smoke Dampers, some Fire Dampers and most

Combination Fire Smoke Dampers do not use fusible links to operate. These dampers use an electric or pneumaticactuator to operate the damper. Fire Dampers and Combination Fire Smoke Dampers that do not use fusible links use abi-metallic disc type thermostat to interrupt electrical power or air pressure to the actuator at a specified temperature.Once the electrical power or air pressure is interrupted the spring return feature of the actuator closes the damper.The recommended procedure for performing the periodic operation testing on fusible link operated dampers is describedbelow. As always, the damper manufacturer’s installation and operation instructions should be followed:1. For safety considerations, ensure that the fan is off.2. With the damper in the full-open position, remove the fusible link. Care should be taken to ensure that there are no

obstructions, including hands, in the path of the damper blades before the fusible link is removed.3. Once the fusible link is removed, ensure that the damper closes completely without assistance. If the damper is

designed with a latch to hold the damper in the full-closed position confirm that the damper latches properly.4. Return the damper to the full-open position and replace the fusible link. If the link appears damaged, replace with a

functionally equivalent link.

The recommended procedure for performing periodic operation testing on dampers that do not require a fusible link tooperate is described below. Two procedures are described. The first describes the procedure for dampers designed withposition indication switches to verify that the damper has reached the full-open and full-closed position These switchescan be wired to local or remote control panels or building automation systems (BAS) to indicate if the damper is in thefull-open position, the full-closed position, or neither. The second procedure describes the procedure for testing damperswithout position indication switches. As always, the damper manufacturer’s installation and operation instructions shouldbe followed.

1. Use the signal from the damper’s position indication device to confirm that the damper is in the full-open position.2. Remove electrical power or air pressure from the actuator to allow the actuator’s spring return feature to close the

damper.3. Use the signal from the damper’s position indication device to confirm that the damper reaches its full-closed

position.


Report on Proposals – June 2014 NFPA 90A4. Reapply electrical power or air pressure to reopen the damper.5. Use the signal from the damper’s position indication device to confirm that the damper reaches its full-open position.

1. Visually confirm that the damper is in the full-open position.2. Ensure that all obstructions, including hands, are out of the path of the damper blades and then remove electrical

power or air pressure from the actuator to allow the actuator’s spring return feature to close the damper.3. Visually confirm that the damper closes completely4. Reapply electrical power or air pressure to reopen the damper.5. Visually confirm that the damper is in the full-open position.In addition to these requirements, NFPA 72 and NFPA 92 describe the periodic testing requirements for smoke control

systems. Dampers that are part of smoke control systems shall be cycled as part of this testing.

UL 555UL 555SUL 555CUL 263NFPA 80NFPA 105NFPA 72NFPA 92




Add new text to read as follows:AMCA Intl, 2011

to Annex C Informational References.There is widespread inconsistency on how to test life safety dampers. This document is intended to

provide a resource document to help eliminate unnecessary steps to proper inspection and testing procedure, whileensuring that damper testing is useful and yields inspection and maintenance information that supports their properfunction in the event of an emergency.The entire document is not intended to be published in the 90A annex, but has been re-printed here for information

purpose, and review by the TC and other interested parties.

Fire Dampers, Smoke Dampers, Combination Fire Smoke Dampers, Ceiling Radiation Dampers, and other types ofdampers that perform as part of a building’s Fire Protection or Life-Safety System must function properly during a fire orlife-safety emergency. Proper installation and periodic performance testing are required to ensure these dampersfunction as intended in a fire emergency.The purpose of this document is to provide recommendations for the proper commissioning of Fire and Life Safety

Related Dampers and to describe the appropriate intervals and methods for performing periodic performance testing ofthese dampers.

Life Safety Dampers are designed to perform a number of functions in a building’s HVAC, Fire and/or Smoke ControlSystem and are an integral part of the overall life-safety system within the building. Generally, Fire Dampers aredesigned to close and prevent the spread of fire through an opening in a fire resistive barrier. Ceiling Radiation Dampersare designed to close and reduce the transfer of heat through an opening in the ceiling membrane of floor-ceiling orroof-ceiling assembly. Refer to the specified ceiling design for details regarding penetrations. Smoke Dampers operateto prevent the spread of smoke by closing to stop airflow or by opening to exhaust smoke. They can also be opened orclosed to create pressure differences (as in an engineered smoke control system) to reduce the spread of smoke.Combination Fire Smoke Dampers perform the dual role of both Fire Dampers and Smoke Dampers. Underwriters

Laboratories (UL) has developed and maintains standards for the testing, qualification, and appropriate labeling of FireDampers (UL 555), Smoke Dampers (UL 555S), Combination Fire Smoke Dampers (UL 555 and UL 555S) and CeilingRadiation Dampers (UL 555C & UL 263). Manufacturers of these dampers, who have complied with these ULrequirements, provide classified and labeled dampers for installation where required in HVAC and Engineered SmokeControl Systems. Building Codes and several NFPA and ASHRAE Standards identify where Fire, Smoke and CeilingRadiation Damper s are required to be installed in a building’s HVAC and/or Smoke Control System. Architects andDesign Engineers incorporate Code required dampers in their building designs but also may incorporate additionalrequirements depending on a building’s specific purpose and intended function.

The term Commissioning is used to define an inspection process to determine if all components of a building areoperating as intended by the building’s design. Ensuring that a building’s mechanical system, its HVAC System, and anySmoke Control or other Life-Safety related systems operate properly (including all Fire and Life-Safety RelatedDampers), and documenting their proper operation is the result of the Commissioning process. This process is alsoknown as Acceptance Testing.Below are the AMCA recommended checklists for the commissioning of Fire and Life-Safety Related Dampers. For

specific installation requirements of the brand and model damper being commissioned, the damper manufacturer’sinstallation instructions shall be referenced.

1. – Unless specifically allowed by the damper manufacturer’s installationinstructions, the centerline of the fire damper’s frame shall be located in the plane of the fire rated assembly.2. – Unless the damper frame is wide enough to provide for direct attachment of retaining angles, all

fire dampers shall be mounted in a sleeve fabricated per the damper manufacturer’s installation instructions. The sleeve


Report on Proposals – June 2014 NFPA 90Ashall not extend more than 6 inches beyond the wall or floor opening unless there is an actuator or factory mountedaccess door on the damper. When an actuator or factory mounted access door is installed, the sleeve shall notextend more than 16 inches beyond the wall or floor opening. The sleeve is still limited to extending 6 inches beyond thewall or floor opening on the side opposite the actuator or factory mounted access door.3. – Most dampers are tested with defined clearances between

the damper’s sleeve and the wall or floor opening. Unless otherwise indicated in the installation instructions, the annularspace between the sleeve of the damper and the wall/floor opening should not be filled with firestop materials such asfill, void or cavity materials. Reference the damper manufacturer’s installation instructions for the specific clearancerequirements.4. – Most approved damper installation methods require

the use of retaining angles to secure the damper in the wall or floor opening. Reference the damper manufacturer’sinstallation instructions for the required material gauge of the retaining angles, the required overlap between theretaining angles and the wall or floor, and the spacing and type of fasteners to be used.5. – Dampers are tested and approved to use specific methods for connecting the

damper sleeve to adjoining ductwork. Reference the damper manufacturer’s installation instructions for the allowableduct to sleeve connections.6. – Access to the dampers shall be provided. Access shall be large enough to allow inspection andmaintenance of the damper and its operating parts. The access points shall be permanently identified on the exterior bya label having letters not less than ½ inch in height reading: FIRE/SMOKE DAMPER or FIRE DAMPER.7. – For dynamic fire dampers and combination fire smoke dampers, it shall be

verified that the system airflow and pressure are within the damper’s ratings8. – After the damper is installed it shall be cycled to ensure proper operation. The operation

test performed as part of the commissioning process shall follow the same procedure described in the PeriodicPerformance Testing section below.

1. – The centerline of the damper shall be mounted within 24inches of the opening it is protecting. In addition, no ductwork shall branch-off between the damper and the wall or flooropening it is protecting.2. – Many damper installations require that the damper frame be sealed

to the ductwork it is being installed in. Reference the damper manufacturer’s installation instructions to determine if thisrequirement applies and to determine the allowable sealants.3. – Access to the dampers shall be provided. Access shall be large enough to allow inspection and

maintenance of the damper and its operating parts. The access points shall be permanently identified on the exterior bya label having letters not less than ½ inch in height reading: SMOKE DAMPER.4. – It shall be verified that the system airflow and pressure are within the

dampers ratings.5. – After the damper is installed it shall be cycled to ensure proper operation. The operation

test performed as part of the commissioning process shall follow the same procedure described in the periodicperformance testing section below.

1. – Ceiling dampers carry a maximum hourly rating for the assembly in which they are installed. Checkthat the maximum hourly rating of the damper installed is approved for the same hourly rating as the ceiling assembly.2. – The damper can be installed on top of a steel diffuser,

sitting directly on the rated ceiling grid, in a steel duct drop, or supported such that the frame rest at the penetration.Refer to the manufacturer’s installation instructions for the maximum allowed distance that the closed blades areallowed from the bottom of the rated ceiling. In the case of drywall installation, consult instructions for maximum allowedclearance between penetration and damper frame.3. – When a damper is not located directly in the penetration and the damper frame is more than 1

inch smaller than the penetration, then a thermal blanket is normally required to reduce heat transfer across the grilleback pan. Refer to the manufacturers installation instructions for the recommended material and size of the thermalblanket.4. – Most dampers are tested with defined

clearances as specified in their instructions. If not specified, a rule of thumb is to keep tolerances minimal (less than 1/8inch) between connecting components. If possible, have the largest component extend over the smaller one below it.Reference the damper manufacturer’s installation instructions for the specific clearance requirements.5. – Most of the time, dampers are to be installed so that they are

supported by the structural members above them or the ceiling grid. Ceiling dampers are not normally supported by the


Report on Proposals – June 2014 NFPA 90Adrywall, gypsum, or ceiling tiles alone. They are normally supported via steel wires, hangers, or duct drops with directfasteners such as screws, rivets, and bolts. Reference the damper manufacturer’s installation instructions for therequired material and fasteners.6. – Unless otherwise stated in the manufacturer’s installation instructions, the

damper will either lie on the ceiling grid or cover the neck of the diffuser. If connected to duct, the damper should beinstalled inside the duct connection.7. – After the damper is installed, the fuse link shall be removed and the damper blades

allowed to close upon its own mechanics. Cycling the damper ensures proper operation. The operation test performedas part of the commissioning process shall follow the same procedure described in periodic performance testing sectionbelow.

Fire Life-Safety related dampers that are properly applied and installed and that have proven the ability to function asintended through a building commissioning process should require no specific on-going maintenance beyond theperiodic testing described below to confirm operability. Although the required frequency of this periodic operation testingvaries by local jurisdiction, most local requirements reference one of two national standards, either NFPA 80 or NFPA105. NFPA 80 covers the requirements for fire dampers and NFPA 105 covers the requirements for smoke dampers.Both documents contain the following frequency requirements for periodic operation testing:

The method used to perform the periodicoperation testing depends on the type of damper. More specifically, it depends on how the damper operates. From anoperability standpoint, fire life-safety related dampers fall into one of the two following categories:1. – Most Fire Dampers and Ceiling Radiation Dampers, and some

Combination Fire Smoke Dampers are held in an open position by a fusible link. The fusible link is designed to melt at aspecified temperature allowing gravity or a spring to close the damper. After the fusible link has melted these dampersremain closed until reopened manually and a new fusible link is installed.2. – Smoke Dampers, some Fire Dampers and most

Combination Fire Smoke Dampers do not use fusible links to operate. These dampers use an electric or pneumaticactuator to operate the damper. Fire Dampers and Combination Fire Smoke Dampers that do not use fusible links use abi-metallic disc type thermostat to interrupt electrical power or air pressure to the actuator at a specified temperature.Once the electrical power or air pressure is interrupted the spring return feature of the actuator closes the damper.The recommended procedure for performing the periodic operation testing on fusible link operated dampers is describedbelow. As always, the damper manufacturer’s installation and operation instructions should be followed:1. For safety considerations, ensure that the fan is off.2. With the damper in the full-open position, remove the fusible link. Care should be taken to ensure that there are no

obstructions, including hands, in the path of the damper blades before the fusible link is removed.3. Once the fusible link is removed, ensure that the damper closes completely without assistance. If the damper is

designed with a latch to hold the damper in the full-closed position confirm that the damper latches properly.4. Return the damper to the full-open position and replace the fusible link. If the link appears damaged, replace with a

functionally equivalent link.

The recommended procedure for performing periodic operation testing on dampers that do not require a fusible link tooperate is described below. Two procedures are described. The first describes the procedure for dampers designed withposition indication switches to verify that the damper has reached the full-open and full-closed position These switchescan be wired to local or remote control panels or building automation systems (BAS) to indicate if the damper is in thefull-open position, the full-closed position, or neither. The second procedure describes the procedure for testing damperswithout position indication switches. As always, the damper manufacturer’s installation and operation instructions shouldbe followed.

1. Use the signal from the damper’s position indication device to confirm that the damper is in the full-open position.2. Remove electrical power or air pressure from the actuator to allow the actuator’s spring return feature to close the

damper.3. Use the signal from the damper’s position indication device to confirm that the damper reaches its full-closed

position.4. Reapply electrical power or air pressure to reopen the damper.5. Use the signal from the damper’s position indication device to confirm that the damper reaches its full-open position.

1. Visually confirm that the damper is in the full-open position.


Report on Proposals – June 2014 NFPA 90A2. Ensure that all obstructions, including hands, are out of the path of the damper blades and then remove electrical

power or air pressure from the actuator to allow the actuator’s spring return feature to close the damper.3. Visually confirm that the damper closes completely4. Reapply electrical power or air pressure to reopen the damper.5. Visually confirm that the damper is in the full-open position.In addition to these requirements, NFPA 72 and NFPA 92 describe the periodic testing requirements for smoke control

systems. Dampers that are part of smoke control systems shall be cycled as part of this testing.

UL 555UL 555SUL 555CUL 263NFPA 80NFPA 105NFPA 72NFPA 92

_______________________________________________________________________________________________90A- Log #27


Update the following references:C.1.2.2 ASTM International Publications.ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, P.O. Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959.ASTM E 84, , 2010b 2012.ASTM E 136, , 2009b 2011.ASTM E 2652,

, 2009 2009a.Standards date updates.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________90A- Log #6



ANSI/UL 555, , 2006, Revised 2010 2011.ANSI/UL 555S, , 1999, Revised 2010 2011.ANSI/UL 1565, , 2002, Revised 2008.ANSI/UL 2043,

, 2008.UL Subject 2424, , 2006.

, 2010 2012., 2010 2012.

, 2009 2012.Update referenced standards to most recent edition as indicated.


Documents

AGENDA ATTACHMENT A...Alternate: Mark Terzigni IM 7/22/1999 AIC-AAA Marvin A. Koerber Principal ATCO Rubber Products Inc. 584 Crooked Road Abbeville, SC 29620 Air Diffusion Council