NFPA 1125 -- A95 ROC€¦ · NFPA 1125 -- A95 ROC NOTICE: The following report is reprinted from the 1994 Fall Meeting Report on Proposals for the convenience of the user. Report

N F P A 1125 - - A 9 5 R O C

NOTICE: The following report is reprinted from the 1994 Fall Meeting Report on Proposals for the convenience of the user.

Report of the Committee on

Pyrotechnics

G. Harry Stine, Chair Phoenix, AZ

Rep. Nat'l Assoc. of Rocketry

Kenneth L. Kosanke, Secretary Pyrolabs, CO

Dane Boles, Quest Aerospace Education, Inc., AZ Maurice Cardinal, NJ Fireworks Mfg Co., MD Rep. American Pyrotechnics Assn.

Jose R.Colon, CT Dept. of Public Safety, CT Rep. Fire Marshals Assn. of North America

A. Conkllng, Chestertown, MD 1W, A. Davldson, Risk Int'l Inc./USITT, CA

John G. Degenkolb, Carson City, NV Rep. Alliance of Motion Picture & Television Producers

Thomas DeWille, Luna Tech Inc., AL Vernon Estes, Canon City, CO Gary A. Fadorsen, Pyrotech lnt'l Inc., OH Felix J. Grucci, Jr., Fireworks by Grucci, Inc., NY Lansden E. Hill, E. E. Hill & Son, Inc./Pyro Shows, TN Alfred J. Hogan, Reedy Creek Improvement District, FL Bonnie J. Kosanke, Whitewater, CO Rep. Pyrotechnics Guild Int'l

L~slle W. Ledogar, US Aerials, Inc., AL Duane B. Matthews, State of CA, Dept. of Consumer Affairs, CA Donald F. McCaulley, Falls Church, VA FLarryJ. McCune, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms, DC

rederick L. Mclntyre, FLMc, Inc., MS Dale C. Miller, Falls Church, VA BillyJ. Phillips, Division of State Fire Marshal, OH DavidJ. Pier, MP Assoc., Inc., CA Mary Roberts, Estes Industries, CO Charles E. Rogers, Lancaster, CA Rep. Tripoli Rocketry Assn., Inc.

Gary C. Rosenfield, Industrial Solid Propulsion Inc., NV Pamela K. Stout Hunt, Fireworks Productions Int'l Inc., AZ Gerald D. Ward, Bethany Fire & Protection District, IL

Rep. NFPA Fire Service Section Charles Weeth, Skyrockets of LaCrosse, Inc., WI

Alternates

Michael Cartolano, Melrose Pyrotechnics Inc., IN (Alt. to P. K. Stout)

Ernest F. DeBlaslo, Keystone Fireworks Mfg. Co. Inc., PA (Alt. to M. Cardinal)

David Degenkolb, Degenkolb Engineering, NV (AIt. toJ. G. Degenkolb)

Tom Foster, Luna Tech Inc., AL (Alt. to T. DeWille)

Felix J. (Phil) Gracci, Fireworks by Grucci, Inc., NY (Air. to F.J. Grucci,Jr.)

Paul C. Hans, P. Hans & Co., AZ (Alt. to G. C. Rosenfield)

Julie L. Heekman, Keller and Heckman, DC (Alt. toJ. A~ Conlding)

Bruce E. Kelly, Orem, UT (Alt. to C. E. Rogers)

Dennis Manochio, Saratoga, CA (AIt. to D. Miller)

Jane B. McCaulley, D&J Assoc., Va (Air. to D. F. McCaulley)

Robert E. Melton, Dallas Fire Dept., TX (Alt. toJ. R. Colon)

J. Patrick Miller, Nat'l Assn. of Rocketry, TX (Air. to G. H. Stine)

Thaine Morris, MP Assoc. Inc., CA (Alt. to D.J. Pier)

David S. Shatzer, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms, DC (Alt. to L. M. McCune)

Bill Stlne, Quest Aerospace Education, Inc., AZ (Alt. to D. Boles)

Robert Winokur, Las Vegas, NV (Alt. to B.J. Kosanke)

Nonvoting

Richard Bowes, Canadian Explosives Research Laboratory, Canada (Alt. to E. Contestabile)

Ettore Contestabile, Canadian Explosives Research Laboratory, Ganada Glen E. Gardner, US Occupational Safety & Health Admin., DC

(Alt toJ. Zucchero) Samuel B. Hall, US Consumer Product Safety Commission, MD James J. Zucchero, US Dept. of Labor, OH

Staff Liaison: Martha H. Curtis

This list represents the membership at the time the Committee was balloted on the text of this edition. Since that time, changes in the membership may have occurred~

Committee Scope: This committee shall have primary responsibility for documents on protection against the fire and life hazards associated with the manufacture, transportation, and storage of fireworks; fireworks used in outdoor displays; pyrotechnics used before a proximate audience; and the construction, launching and other operations involving unmanned rockets including the manufacture of model rocket motors. This committee does not have responsibility for documents on the use of fireworks by the general public.

The Report of the Committee on Pyrotechnics is presented for adoption in 2 parts.

Part I of this Report was prepared by the Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics and proposes for adoption amendments to NFPA 1124- 1988, Code for the Manufacture, Transportation, and Storage of F'treworks. NFPA 1124-1988 is published in Volume 7 of the 1993 National Fire Codes and in separate pamphlet form.

Part I of this Report has been submitted to letter ballot of the Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics which consists of 29 voting members. Results of balloting will be found in the Report.

Part II of this Report was prepared by the Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics and proposes for adoption amendments to NFPA 1125- 1988, Code for the Manufacture of Model Rocket Motor& NFPA 1125-1988 is published in Volume 7 of the 1993 National Fire Codes and in separate pamphlet form.

The Committee has also proposed a title change as follows: "Code for the Manufacture of Model Rocket and High Power Rocket Motors."

Part II of this Report has been submitted to letter ballot of the Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics which consists of 29 voting members. Results of balloting will be found in the Report.

357

N F P A 1 1 2 5 A A 9 5 R O C

!

(Log #CP77) 1125- 1 - (Tide): Accept SUBMITrER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Revise document title to read as follows:

"NFPA 1125, Code for the Manufacture of Model Rocket and High Power Rocket Motors" SUBSTANTIATION: The Code should apply equally to high power rocket motors as well as model rocket motors. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. ,. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:

AFFIRMATIVE: 25 NEGATIVE: Roberts NOT RETURNED: Hill, Mchatyre, Pier

EXPLANATION OF NEGATIVE: ROBERTS: Does not include motor reload kits.

(Log #CP2) 1125- 2- (1-1.1): Accept SUBMITI'ERa Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Revise the name of the reference to read:

"See NFPA 11R2, Code for Model Rocketry." SUBSTANTIATION: The name of NFPA 1122 has been changed. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:

AFFIRMATIVE: 26 NOT RETURNED: Hill, Mclntyre, Pier

(Log #CP4) 1125- 3 - (1-1.2): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Renumber I-1.2 as 1-1.3 per 1125-4 (Log #CP3) and revise to read:

1-1.3 This code shall not apply to the sale and use of: (a) Model rocket motors (See NFPA 1122, Code for Model

Rocketry). (b) High power rocket motors.

SUBSTANTIATION: This is a model rocket motor and high-power rocket motor manufacturing code. Separate codes exist or are in

rocess covering sale and use. OMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMrI'TEE ACTION: AFFIRMATIVE: 26 NOT RETURNED: Hill, Mclntyre, Pier

1125- 4- (1-1.2 (New)): Accept . (Log#CP3) SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Add a new 1-1.2 and renumber remaining paragraphs. New 1-1.2 to read as follows:

1-1.~ This code shall also apply to high power rocket motors. SUBSTANTIATION: This code has been expanded to cover high power rocket motors. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITrEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:

AFFIRMATIVE: 25 NEGATIVE: Roberts NOT RETURNED: Hill, Mclntyre, Pier

EXPLANATION OF NEGATIVE: ROBERTS: Does not include motor reload kits

(Log #CP6) 1125- 5 - (1-1.6 (New)): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Add a new 1-1.6 as follows:

1-1.6 This Code shall not apply to the assembly of reloadable model rocket motors or reloadable high power rocket motors by the t l ~ e r .

SUBSTANTIATION: Assembly of reloadable motors by a user should not be considered as "manufacturing." COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:

AFFIRMATIVE: 26 NOT RETURNED: Hill, McIntyre, Pier

(Log #CPS) 1125- 6- (1-2.1): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Revise 1-2.1 to add the Words "and high power rocket motors" to the end of the sentence. SUBSTANTIATION: The Code has been expanded to cover high

wer rocket motors. MMITrEE ACTION: Accept.


AFFIRMATIVE: 25 NEGATIVE: Roberts NOT RETURNED: Hill, McIntyre, Pier

EXPLANATION OF NEGATIVE: ROBERTS: Does not include motor reload kits

(Log #CP7) 1125- 7 - (1-3): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Revise 1-3 to read as follows:

1-3 Equivalency. Nothing in this code is intended to prevent the use of systems, methods, or devices of equivalent or superior quality, strength, fire resistance, effectiveness, durability, and safety over those prescribed by this Code, provided technical documentation i~ submKted to the authority havingjurisdiction to demonstrate equivalency and the system, method or device is approved for the intended purpose. . • SUBSTANTIATION: Conformance with the NFPA Manual of Style regarding language for Equivalency. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITrEE ACTION:


(Log #CP8) 1125- 8 - (1-4 Approved, Authority Having Jurisdiction, and Listed): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: 1. Add an asterisk to the definition for Approved and move the NOTE to become appendix material.

2. Add an asterisk to the definition for Authority Having Jurisdiction and move the NOTE to become appendix material.

3. Add an asterisk to the definition for Listedand move the NOTE to become appendix material. SUBSTANTIATION: Conformance with the NFPA Manual of Style. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


(Log #CPg) 1125- 9 - (1-4 Composite Propellant Model Rocket Motor): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Delete the word "Model" from the title and the body of the definition. Revise to read:

Composite Propellant Rocket Motor. Any device as defined under "rocket motor" below, but which utilizes a propellant charge consisting primarily of an inorganic oxidizer dispersed in a carbonaceous polymeric binder. SUBSTANTIATION: The Code has been expanded to include high power rocket motors. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION: AFFIRMATIVE: 26 NOT RETURNED: Hill, Mclntyre, Pier

358

N F P A 1125 m A 9 5 R O C

(Log #CP1 0) 1125- 10 - (1-4 Explosive): Accept SUBMFITER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Delete the words "a Class A or Class B" and replace with the word "an" in the last sentence of the definition. SUBSTANTIATION: High power rocket motors are UN Explosives Class 1.2 or 1.3. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMI'Iq'EE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION: .AFFIRMATIVE: 26 NOT RETURNED: Hill, Mclntyre, Pier

(Log #CP1 1) 1125- 11 - (1-4 Facility): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Revise definition of Facility to read as follows:

Facility. All land and buildings (including the rocket motor plant) comprising a rocket manufacturing operation. SUBSTANTIATION: Clarification of meaning and to incorporate high power rocket motor manufacturing. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION: AFFIRMATIVE: 26 NOT RETURNED: Hill, McIntyre, Pier

(Log #CP12) 1125- 12- (1-4 Flash Powder): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Delete the definition of Flash Powder. SUBSTANTIATION: The term is not used in this Code. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITrEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION: AFFIRMATIVE: 26 NOT RETURNED: Hill, Mclntyre, Pier

( Log #CP14) 1125- 13 - (1-4 High Power Rocket Motor (New)): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Add a new definition for High Power Rocket Motor as follows:

High Power Rocket Motor. A rocket motor of more than 160 newton-seconds but less than 40,160 newton-seconds total impulse or producing more than 80 newtons average thrusL SUBSTANTIATION: The Code has been expanded to cover high power rocket motors. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMFITEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMrITEE ACTION:


(Log #CP13) 1125- 14 - (1-4 Highway): Accept SUBMITIT.R: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Revise the definition of "Highway" to read:

Highway. Any public street, public alley or public road. SUBSTANTIATION: Clarification of Committee intent and change to be consistent with other NFPA codes. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


(Log #CP15 ) 1125- 15 - (1-4 Igniter): Accept $UBMI'ITER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Revise the definition of Igniter to read:

Igniter. A device containing a small quantity of igniting compound in contact with a bridge wire or resistance element used to ignite a rocket motor.

SUBSTANTIATION: The definition has been modified to indude niters that use resistance elements other than bridge wires.

MMITrEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMrIWEE ACTION:


(Log #CP16) 1125- l0 - (1-4 Inhabited Building): Accept SUBMITrER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Revise definition of Inhabited Building to read as follows:

Inhabited Building. A building regularly occupied in whole or in part as a habitation for human beings, or any church, schoolhouse, railroad station, store, or other structure where people are accustomed to assemble, except any building or structure occupied in connection with the rocket motor plant. SUBSTANTIATION: Clarification of Committee intent. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITIT.E ACTION:

AFFIRMATIVE: 26 NOT RETURNED: Hill, Mcintyre, Pier

(Log #CP17) 1125- 17 - (1-4 Manufacture): Accept SUBMITT£R: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Revise definition for Manufacture to read as follows:

Manufacture. The preparation of propellant, delay, and ejection mixes and the loading and assembly of model rocket or high power rocket motors and igniters. SUBSTANTIATION: The Code has been expanded to include high power rocket motors. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMI'ITEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


EXPLANATION OF NEGATIVE: ROBERTS: Exempts assembly of model rocket motors.

(Log #CP18) 1125- 18 - (1-4 Model Rocket Motor): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Revise the tide of the reference from "NFPA 1122, Code for Unmanned Rockets" to "NFPA 1122, Code For Model Rocketry". SUBSTANTIATION: The name of NFPA 1122 has been changed. C O ~ ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


(Log #CP19) 1125- 19 - (1-4 Model Rocket Motor Plant): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Delete the Word "Model" in the entry and move to the appropriate alphabetical location in 1-4 and revise to read:

Rocket Motor Plane All land and buildings hereon used for the manufacture or processing of propellants and model rocket or high power rocket motors, including storage buildings with or in connection with plant operation. SUBSTANTIATION: The Code has been expanded to include high power rocket motors. COMMITFEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMrITEE ACTION:


359

N F P A 1125 - - A 9 5 R O C

EXPLANATION OF NEGATIVE: ROBERTS: Definition is not complete without the mention of

motor reload kits.

(Log #CP20) 1125- 20 - (1-4 Nonprocess Building): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Delete the word "model" in the definition of Nonprocess Building. SUBSTANTIATION: The Code has been expanded to include high PcOWer rocket motors.

OMMITrEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION: AFFIRMATIVE: 26 NOT RETURNED: Hill, McIntyre, Pier

(Log #CP21) 1125- 21 - (1-4 Pressing System): Accept SUBMITrER: Technical Corrplli~ee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Delete the word "model" in the definition of Pressing System. SUBSTANTIATION: The Code has been expanded to include high pCower rocket motors.

OMMITI'EE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITrEE ACTION:


• (Log #CP22) 1125- 22 - (1-4 Railway): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Delete the word "model" in the definition of Railway. SUBSTANTIATION: The Code has been expanded to include high PcOWer rocket motors.

OMMITrEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


(Log #CP23) 1125- 23 - (1-4 Reloadable Rocket Motor ~New))- Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on l'yrotectmics RECOMMENDATION: Add a new definition for Reloadable Rocket Motor to read as follows:

Reloadable Rocket Motor. A rocket motor that has been designed and manufactured so that the user can load, re-load and re-use the pressure containing body or casing using the parts and components of a motor reloading kit spedfically designed, manufactured, and intended for use with that rocket motor casing by the manufacturer. SUBSTANTIATION: New technology has made possible a reloadable rocket motor. Definition therefore is needed. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


(Log #CP24) • 1125- 24 - (1-4 Rocket Motor (New)): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Add a new definition for Rocket Motor to read as follows:

Rocket Motor. As used in this Code, rocket motor means model rocket motor or high power rocket motor. S ~ A N T I A T I O N : The Code has been expanded to include high

wer rocket motors. MMITrRE ACTION: Accept.

NUMBER OF COMMITTgR MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION: AFFIRMATIVE: 26 NOT RETURNED: Hill, Mclntyre, Pier

(LOg #CP78) 1125- 25- (1-4 Storage Building): Accept SUBMITTER: Tectinical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Revise the definition of Storage Building to read as follows:

Storage Building. Any building or structure in the rocket motor plant in which model rocket motors or high power rocket motors in hny state of processing or in which finished model rocket motors or high power ~ocket mStors are stored, but in which no processing or manufacturing is actually performed. SUBSTANTIATION: The Code has been expanded to include high




EXPLANATION O F NEGATIVE: ROBERTS: Definition is not complete without the mention of

motor reload kits.

(Log #CP79) 1125- 26 - (1-4 Warehouse): Accept SUBMITI~lCa Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Add "or high power rocket motors" to the end of sentence and revise to read: Warehouse. Any building or structure used exdusively for the

storage of materials that are not used to manufacture model rocket motors or high power rocket motors. SUBSTANTIATION: The Code has been expanded to include high




(Log #CP82) 1125- 27 - (Chapter 2 Title): Accept SUBMITTER: T'echnical Committee on Pyrotectmics RECOMMENDATION: Revise the title of Chapter 2 to read:

"Chapter 2 Manufacturing Operations for Rocket Motors" SUBSTANTIATION: The Code has been expanded to include high


NUMBER OF COMMITrEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMrrTEE ACTION:


(Log #CP83) 1125-28- (2-1.1, 2-2.1, and 2-2.1.1): Accept SUBMITTER= Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Delete the word "model" from the identified paragraphs. SUBSTANTIATION: The Code has been expanded to include high




(Log #CP66) 1125-29- (2-1.2 (New)): Accept SUBMI~T.R: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Add a new 2-1.2 as follows:

2-1.2 The manufacture of any rocket motor shall be prohibited in - any residence, dwelling or any inhabited building in an area zoned residential by the local-building authority and building codes in effect. SUBSTANTIATION: The Committee does not believe it is safe to manufacture rocket motors in the mentioned locations. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMrlTEE ACTION:


360

N F P A 1 1 2 5 - - A 9 5 R O C

I (Log #CP80)

1125- 30 - (2-4): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Delete the word "model" from the section and revise to read:

2-4 Applicability. All rocket motor plants that manufacture black powder-based motors shall meet the requirements of this chapter. SUBSTANTIATION: The Code has been expanded to include high power rocket motors. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COM~TTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION: AFFIRMATIVE: 26 NOT RETURNED: Hill, Mclntyre, Pier

(Log #CP81) 1125- 31 - (Table 2-6.1 and Notes): Accept SUBM]TrER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Revise Table 2-6.1 and notes to read:

Table 2-6.1 Minimum Separation Distances of Process Buildings from Inhabited Buildings, Passeng?r Railways, mad Public

l-Kghways I

Distance from Passenger Railways Distance from

Net Weight of Rocket and Pubfic Inhabited Motor Composition 2 I ~ w a y s 3,4 Buildin~ $,4

Pounds Feet Feet 100 200 200 200 200 2OO 400 200 200 600 200 208 800 200 252

lt000 200 292

For SI Units: 1 pound = 0.454 kg

1 foot = 0.305 m

NOTE 1:

NOTE 2:

NOTE $:

NOTE 4:

This table does not apply to separation distances for magazines containing 1.4 or 1.3 explosives. Net weight of all propellant, delay, and ejection composition only. See Chapter I for definitions of"passenger railways," "public highways," and "inhabited buildings." All distances in this table are to be appfied with or without barricades or screen-type barricades.

SUBSTANTIATION: The table in the old edition has been replaced by the currently accepted table. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMrFTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION: AFFIRMATIVE: 26 NOT RETURNED: Hill, Mclntyre, Pier

(Log #CP25) 1125- 32 - (Table 2-6.2 and Notes): Accept SUBMYVrER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Revise Table 2-6.2 and Notes as follows: SUBSTANTIATION: The table in the old edition has been replaced by the currently accepted table. COMMYITEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


Table 2-6.2 Minimum Separation Distances at Rocket Motor Manufacturing Plants 1

Net Weight of Low Explosives

Pounds

Distance of Magazine from Distance Between

Process Buildings Process Buildings and Nonprocess and Nonprocess

Buildings 2,3 Buildings 2,3 Feet Feet

]00 30 30 200 35 35 400 44 44 600 51 51 800 56 56

1,000 60 60 2,0O0 76 76 3,000 87 87

For SI Units: 1 pound = 0.454 kg

1 foot = 0.305 m

NOTE 1:

NOTE 2:

NOTE 3:

For the purposes of applying separation distances in Table 2.6.2, process buildings include mixing buildings or any buildings in which propellant, pyrotechnic, or explosive compositions are pressed or otherwise prepared for finishing and assembling. Nonprocess buildings are office buildings, warehouses, and other facility buildings where no propellant, delay, or explosive compositions are processed. Distances apply with or without barricades or screen-type barricades. Distances include those between magazines, between a magazine and a process building, and between a magazine and a nonprocess building.

(Log #CP26) 1125- 33 - (2.6.3): Accept SUBMrrTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Revise 2-6.3 to read:

2-6.3 Magazines containing either black powder or Explosives 1.1, 1.2, or 1.3 shall be separated from each other and from inhabited buMdings, public highways, and passenger railways accordingto the distances specified by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms or Table 2-6.K SUBSTANTIATION: The revision reflects current separation distance tables. C O ~ ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMrITEE ACTION:

AFFIRMATIVE: 26 NOT ~ E D : Hill, Mclntyre, Pier

(Log #CP27) 1125- 34 - (Table 2.6.3): Accept SUBMITI~R: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: 1. Revise the Heading of Table 2-6.3 to read:

Minimum Separation Distances for Magazines Storing Black Powder or 1.3 Propellant from Inhabited Buildings, Public Highways, and Other Magazines Storing Black Powder or 1.4 Propellant

SUBSTANTIATION: The table in the old edition has been replaced by the currently accepted table. COMM]TlqgE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


361

N F P A 1 1 2 5 - - A 9 5 R O C

Table 24 .$ ~ u m ~ D i ~ m c e s for ~ Storing Black Powder or 1.$ Propellant from Inhabi ted Buildings, Public H i g h n ~ , a ~ l Other Magaz lau Storing Bledt Powder or I A propelhmt

(The American Table of Distances is completely reproduced from the American Table of Distances for Storage of Explosives as revised and approved by the Institute of Makers of Explosives in June of 1991.)

Distances in ,Feet

Quantity of Explosive Materials mgJ,4~ Inhabited Buildings ~°)

Public Highways Class A to D ot)

Passenger Railways -- Public Highways with

Traffic Volume of More than 3,000 Vehicles/Day (l°'n)

Separation of Magazines (m

Pounds Pounds Over Not Over

Barri. Unbarri. Barri- Unbarri- caded ~ea~s) caded caded <e'~'s) caded

Barri- caded (ea~s)

UnbarS- Bard- Unbarri- caded caded ~aa's) caded

0 5 5 10

10 20 20 30 30 40

70 140 30 60 51 90 180 35 70 64

110 220 45 90 81 125 250 50 100 93 140 280 55 110 103

102 6 12 128 8 16 162 10 20 186 11 22 206 12 24

40 50 50 75 75 100

100 . 125 125 150

150 300 60 120 110 170 340 70 140 127 190 380 75 150 139 200 400 80 160 150 215 430 85 170 159

220 14 28 254 15 30 278 16 32 300 18 36 318 19 38

150 200 200 250 250 300 300 400 400 500

235 470 95 190 255 510 105 210 270 540 110 220 295 590 120 240 320 640 130 260

175 189 201 221 238

350 21 42 378 23 46 402 24 48 442 27 54 476 29 58

500 600 600 700 700 800 800 900 900 1,000

340 680 135 270 355 710 145 290 375 750 150 300 390 780 155 310 400 800 160 520

253 266 278 289 300

506 31 62 532 32 64 556 33 66 578 35 70 600 36. 72

1,000 1,200 1,200 1,400 1,400 1,600 1,600 1,800 1~800 2,000

425 850 165 330 450 900 " 170 340 470 940 175 350 490 9 8 0 180 360 505 1,010 185 370

318 336 351 366 378

636 39 78 672 41 82 702 43 86 732 44 88 756 45 90

2,000 2,500 2,500 3,000 3,000 4,000 4,000 5,000 5,000 6,000

545 1,090 190 . 380 580 1,160 195 390 635 1,270 210 420 685 1,370 225 450 730 1,460 235 470

408 432 474 513 546

816 49 98 864 52 104 948 58 116

1,026 61 122 1,092 65 130

6,000 7,000 7,000 8,000 8,000 9,000 9,000 10,000

10,000 12,000

770 1,540 245 490 800 1,600 250 500 835 1,670 255 510 865 1,730 260 520 875 1,750 270 540

573 600 624 645 687

1,146 68 136 1,200 72 144 1,248 75 150 1,290 78 . 156 1,374 82 164

12,000 14,000 14,000 16,000 16,000 18,000 18,000 20,000 20,000 25,000

885 1,770 275 550 900 1,800 280 560 940 1,880 285 570 975 1,950 290 580

1,055 2,000 315 630

723 756 786 813 876

1,446 87 174 1,512 90 180 1,572 94 188 1,626 98 196 1,752 105 210

25,000 30,000 30,000 35,000 35,000 40,000 40,000 45,000 45,000 50,000

1,130 2,000 340 680 933 1,205 2,000 360 720 981 1,275 2,000 380 760 1,026 1,340 2,000 400 800 1,068 1,400 2,000 420 840 1,104

1,866 112 224 " 1,962 119 238 2,000 124 248 2,000 129 258 2,000 135 270

50,000 55,000 55,000 60,000 60,000 65,000 65,000 70,000 70,000 75,000

1,460 2,000 440 880 1,140 1,515 2,000 455 910 1,173 1,565 2,000 470 940 1,206 1,610 2,000 485 970 1,236 1,655 2,000 500 1,000 1,263

2,000 140 280 2,000 145 290 2,000 150 300 2,000 155 310 2,000 160 320

362

N F P A 1 1 2 5 - - A 9 5 R O C

Distances in Feet

Quantity of. Ex0~4)losive Matertals ' ' Inhabited Buildings (9~

Public Highways Class A tO D °

Passenger Railways -- Public Highways with

Traffic Volume of More than 3,000 Vehicles/Day (n°'m

Separation of Magazines Cm

Pounds Pounds Over Not Over

Barri- Unbarri- Barri- Unbarri- caded ~7's~ caded caded ¢ea's) caded

Barri- Unbarri- Barri- Unbarri- caded (e'7,s) caded caded (6'7's) caded

75,000 80,000 80,000 85,000 85,000 90,000 90,000 95,000 95,000 100,000

1,695 2,000 510 1,020 1,730 2,000 520 1,040 1,760 2,000 530 1,060 1,790 2,000 540 1,080 1,815 2,000 545 1,090

1,293 2,000 165 330 1,317 2,000 170 340 1,344 2,000 1"75 350 1,368 2,000 180 360 1,392 2,000 185 370

100,000 110,000 110,000 120,00(I 120,000 130,00(} 130,000 140,000 140,000 150,000

1,835 2,000 550 1,100 1,855 2,000 555 l , l l 0 1,875 2,000 560 1,120 1,890 2,000 565 1,130 1,900 2,000 570 1,140

1,437 2,000 195 390 1,479 2,000 205 410 1,521 2,000 215 430 1,557 2,000 225 450 1,593 2,000 235 470

150,000 160,000 160,000 170,000 170,000 180,000 180,000 190,000 190,000 200,000

1,935 2,000 580 1,160 1,965 2,000 590 1,180 1,990 2,000 600 1,200 2,010 2,010 605 1,210 2,030 2,030 610 1,220

1,629 2,000 245 490 1,662 2,000 255 510 1,695 2,000 265 530 1,725 2,000 275 550 1,755 2,000 285 570

200,000 210,000 210,000 230,000 230,000 250,000 250,000 275,000 275,000 300,000

2,055 2,055 620 1,240 2,100 2,100 635 1,270 2,155 2,155 650 1,300 2,215 2,215 670 1,340 2,275 2,275 690 1,380

1,782 2,000 295 590 1,836 2,000 315 630 1,890 2,000 335 670 1,950 2,000 360 720 2,000 2,000 385 770

Numbers in ( ) reter to explanatory notes.

Explanatory Notes Essential to the Application of the American Table of Distances for Storage of Explosives

NOTE 1: "Explosive materials" means explosives, blasting agents, and detonat,,rs. NOTE 2: "Explosives" means any chemical compound, mixture, or device, the primary on" common purpose of which is to function by explosion. A list of exph,sives determined to be within the coverage of "18 U.S.C. Chapter 40, Importation, Manufacturer, Distribution and Storage of Explosive Mate- rials" is issued at least annually by the Director of theBureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms of the Department of the Treasury. For quantity and distance purposes, detunating cord of 50 grains per fi,ot should be calculated as equivalent to 8 lb (3.7 kg) of high explosives per 1,000 fi (305 m). Heavier or lighter core loads should be rated proportionately. NOTE 3: "Blasting agents" means any material or mixture, consisting of finel and oxidizer, intended tot blasting, m~t otherwise defined as an exph,- site: Provided that the finished prnduct, as mixed for use or shipment, cannot be detonated by means of a No. 8 test blasting cap when unconfined. NOTE 4: "Detonator" means any device containing any initiating or primary explosive that is used fi~r initiating detonatk, n. A detonator may not contain nlore than 10 g of total explosives by weight, excluding ignition or delay charges. The term includes, but is not limited to. electric blasting caps of instantaneous and delay types, blasting caps for use with safety fhses, detonat- ing cord delay connectors, and nonelectric instantaneous and delay blasting caps that use det,mating cord, shock tube, or any other replacement for electric leg wires. All types of detonators in strengths through No, 8 cap should be rated at In/'_ , Ib (.7 kg) ,,fexph,sives per 1,000 caps. For strengths higher than No. 8 cap, consult the manutZacturer. NOTE 5: "Magazine" means any building, structure, ur container, other than an explosives mamufacturing building, approved for the storage of explosive materials. NOTE 6: "Natural Barricade" means natural features of the ground, such as hills, or timber of sufficient density that the surrounding exposures that require protection cannot be seen from the magazine when the trees are bare of leaves. NOTE 7: "Artificial Barricade" means an artificial mound or reverted wall of earth of a minimum thickness of 3 It (0.9 m). NOTE 8: "'Barricaded" n,eans the efl~'ctive screening of a building containing explosive materials from the magazine or other building, railway, or

highway by a natural or an artificial barrier. A straight line in'ore the top of any sidewall of the building containing explosive materials to the eave line of any magazine or other building or to a point 12 fi (3.7 m) above the center of a railway or highway shall pass through such barrier. NOTE 9: "Inhabited Building" means a building regularly occupied in whole or part as a habitation fi,r human beings, or any church, schtml- house, railroad station, store, or other structure where people are accustomed to assemble, except any building or structure ,n:cupied in connection with the manufacture, transportation, storage, or use of explusive materials. NOTE 10: "Railway" means any stream, electric, or other railroad or railway that carries passengers fi,r hire. NOTE I 1: "Highway" means any public street, public alley, or public road. NOTE 12: When 2 or more storage magazines are h,cated on the same property, each magazine must comply with the minimum distances specified fi'om inhabited buildings, railways, and highways, and, in addition, they should be separated t?om each other by not less than the distances shown fi, r "Separation of Magazines," except that the quantity of explosive materials contained in detonator magazines shall govern in regard to the spacing of said detonator magazines fi'om magazines containing other explosive materials. If any 2 or more magazines are separated fi'om each other by less than the specified "Separation of Magazines" distances, then such 2 or more magazines, as a group, must be considered as I magazine, and the total quantity of explosive materials stored in such group must he treated as if stored in a single magazine Itsrated on the site of any magazine ,,/'the group, and must comply with the minimum of distances specified fi'om other magazines, inhabited buildings, railways, and highways. NOTE 13: Storage in excess of 300,000 Ib (136,200 kg) of explosive materials in one magazine is generally not required fi~r commercial enterprises. NOTE 14: This table applies only to the manutacture and permanent storage of commercial explosive materials. It is not applicable to transp,,rtation of explosives or any handling ,,r temporary storage necessary or incident thereto. It is not intended.In apply to bombs, projectiles, ,,r other heavily encased explosives. NOTE 15: When a manu|acturing building on an exph,sive materials plant site is designed to contain explosive materials, such building shall be located from inhabited buildings, public highways, and passenger railways in accordance with the American Table of Distances based ,,n the maximum quantity of explosive materials permitted to be in the building at one time.

363

N F P A 1125 - - A 9 5 R O C

(Log #CP28) 1125- 35 - (2-7.2): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics

[ RECOMMENDATION: Change the word "may" to "can". SUBSTANTIATION: Conformance with the NFPA Manual of Style. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:

AFFIRMATIVE: 26 NOT RE-~rURNED: Hill, Mclntyre, Pier

(Log #CP29) 1125- 36 - (2-7.3): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Change the word "may" to "can" in the first sentence. SUBSTANTIATION: Conformance with the NFPA Manual of Style. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:

AFFIRMATIVE: 2fi NOT RETURNED: Hill, McIntyre, Pier

(Log #CP84) 1125-37- (2-7.3, 2-8.1 Exception, 2-9.1, 2-9.2.1, 2-10.3, 2-11.3 (last sentence), 2-12.5.1, 2-12.6 Exception, 2-13.3.1, 4-4.11, 44.13, 4-4.14, 4-4.15, and 4-4.16): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Change terminolo~] throughout the Code from "explosive or pyrotechnic material" to propellant composition." SUBSTANTIATION: Clarification. Somepropellant materials do not explode but will burn vigorously instead. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


EXPLANATION OF NEGATIVE: ROBERTS: Pyrotechnic is more encompassing. Propellant

materials does not cover delay materials.

(Log #CP3O) 1125- 38 - (2-9.2.1): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Change the word "may" to "can". SUBSTANTIATION: Conformance with the NFPA Manual of Style. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


(Log#CP31) 1125- 39 - (2-9.3): Accept SUBMITTEI~ Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Revise 2-9.3 to read as follows:

2-9.3 All wiring, switches, and electrical fixtures in process buildings shall comply with NFPA 70, National Electrical Code, and be suitable for hazardous locations Class Ii, Group E, Division 1. (See Article 502 of NFPA 70, National Electrical Code.) SUBSTANTIATION: Clarification of Committee intent. COMMITI'EE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


(Log #CP33) 1125- 40 - (2-9.3.2): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Revise 2-9.3.2 to read as follows:

2-9.3.2 When temporary lighting is necessary within a magazinE, electric safety flashlights, electric safety lanterns, or chemical illuminescent lighting shall be used.

Exception: Listed portable lighting equipment shall be permitted to be used during repair operations, provided the area has been cleared of all propellant materials and all duat or residue has been removed by washing. SUBSTANTIATION: Chemical illuminescent lighting is a new development that is safe to use under these conditions. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


(Log #CP1) 1125- 41 - (2-11.7): Accept SUBMITTER: TechnicalCommittee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Change the first instance of "may" to "is" and the second instance of "may" to "can" and revise to read:

2-11.7 Personnel whose clothing is contaminated with explosive or pyrotechnic composition to a degree that can endanger personnel safety shall not be permitted in smoking locations. SUBSTANTIATION: Conformance to NFPA Style Manual, clarification, and safety considerations. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


(Log #CP34) 1125. 42 - (2-12.6): Accept SUBMITTEI~ Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Change the word "may" to "can". SUBSTANTIATION: Conformance with the NFPA Manual of Style. COMMITI'EE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


(Log #CP32) 1125- 49 - (2-13.3): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Change the word "may" to "can". SUBSTANTIATION: Conformance with the NFPA Manual of Style. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMrrTEE ACTION:

AFFIRMATIVE: 2fi NOT RETURNED: Hill, Mclntyre, Pier

(Log #CP35) 1125. 44- (2-13.3.1): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Change the word "may" to the word "can" in the first sentence. SUBSTANTIATION: Conformance with the NFPA Manual of Style. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMrITEE ACTION:


(Log #CP36) 1125- 45 - (2-14): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Delete the word "Model!' from the heading. SUBSTANTIATION: The Code has been expanded to include high power rocket motors. COMMI'VrEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


364

N F P A 1125 - - A 9 5 R O C

(Log #CP37) 1125- 46 - (Chapter 3 Tide): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Revise tide to read:

Chapter 3 Limited Quantity Manufacturing Operations for Composite Propellant Rocket Motors. SUBSTANTIATION: The Code has been expanded to include high PcOWer rocket motors.

OMMIT1"EE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION: AFFIRMATIVE: 26 NOT RETURNED: Hill, McIntyre, Pier

(Log #CP38) 1125- 47- (3-1.1): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Delete the word "model". SUBSTANTIATION: The Code has been expanded to include high

ower rocket motors. OMMrITEE ACTION: Accept.



(Log #CP39) 1125- 48- (3-1.1.1): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Revise text inparentheses to read "(Explosive 1.3 or lesser classification)". SUBSTANTIATION: Required by adoption and use of the new United Nations classifications for explosive materials. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITrEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:

AFFIRMATIVE: 25 NEGATIVE: Roberts NOT RETURNED: Hill, Mclnl~re, Pier

EXPLANATION OF NEGATIVE: ROBERTS: Is black powder used? Ejection charge etc.


3-1.1.2 The propellant ingredients are mixed either by hand or in a mixer that does not use moving parts in contact with the

~ ropellant composition to effect mixing. UBSTANTIATION: Classification of Committee intent. Sigma

blade or other types of mixers with movingelements in the propellant mixture are not considered to be safe for the manufacture of model or high power rocket motors. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON CoMMrlTEE ACTION:


(Log #CP41) 1125- 50 - (3-1.1.3): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Revise 3-1.1.3 to read:

3-1.1.3 The propellant batch being mixed at any one time shall not exceed a weight of 35 lb (15.9 kg). SUBSTANTIATION: The Committee believes that mixing up to 35 pounds of propellant at once is a quantity that possess a minimum and acceptable safety hazard. COMMI'ITEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTI~E MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON C O M M r r r l ~ ACTION:


(Log #CP86) 1125- 51 - (3-1.3): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Delete the word "model." SUBSTANTIATION: The Code has been expanded to include high Pcower rocket motors.

OMMITrEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION: AFFIRMATIVE: 26 NOT RETURNED: Hill, McIntyre, Pier

(Log #CP42) 1125- 52 - (3-2.1): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Delete the word "model". SUBSTANTIATION: The Code has been expanded to include high PcOWer rocket motors.

OMMITrEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITI'EE ACTION:


(Log #CP43) 1125- 53 - (3-2.1.1): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Delete the word "model". SUBSTANTIATION: The Code has been expanded to include high power rocket motors. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


(Log #CP44) 1125- 54- (3-4.1): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Revise 3-4.1 to read as follows:

3-4.1 The storage of ammonium perchlocate oxidizer shipped in 250 Ib (113.4 kg) drums shall complywith NFPA 43A, Code for the Storage of Solid and Liquid Oxidizers. SUBSTANTIATION: Conformance with NFPA 43A, Code for the Storage of Solid and Liquid Oxidizers. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITI'EE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


COMMENT ON AFFIRMATIVE: BOLES: Additional wording should be added at tile end of the

sentence..."and should also comply with ATF Regulations where applicable." It should be stated that this requirement must also meet federal government regulations considering dangers associated with the storage of ammonium perchlorate.

DEWILLE: Additional wording should be added at the end of the sentence..."and should also comply with ATF Regulations where applicable." It should be stated that this requirement must also meet federal government regulations considering dangers associated with the storage of ammonium perchlorate.

(.Log #CP46) 1125- 55 - (3-4.2): Accept SUBMI'['FER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Renumber 3-4.2 as 3-4.3 as per 1125-56 (Log #CP45) and revise to read: 3-4.3 Uncast propellant mix in excess of 100 lb (45.4 kg) shall be

stored in magazines meeting the requirements of Chapter 4. SUBSTANTIATION: The Committee believes this quantity constitutes a minimum acceptable safety hazard. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TOVOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


365

N F P A 1125 - - A 9 5 ROC

COMMENT ON AFFIRMATIVE: BOLES: Appears to be in conflict with 3-8.2 and 3-8.3. Needs

clarification and additional discussion as to amount limits. DEWILLE: Appears to be in conflict with 3-8.9 and 3-8.3. Needs

clarification an~additional discussion as to amount limits.

(Log #CP45) 1125. 56 - (3-4.2 (New)): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Add a new 3-4.2 and renumber remaining p3aragraphs. Add new 3-4.2 as follows:

-4.2 In-process sto_rage of less than 100 lb (45.4 kg) of uncast propellant mix shall be permitted in covered containers in the mix room. SUBSTANTIATION: The Committee believes this quantity constitutes a minimum acceptable safety hazard. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITI'F~ ACTION:


(Log #CP47) 1125- 57- (3-5.2): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Change the word "may" to "can". SUBSTANTIATION: Conformance with the NFPA Manual of Style. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION: AFFIRMATIVE: 26 NOT RETURNED: Hill, Mclntyre, Pier

(Log #CP48) 1125- 58 - ($-5.4.1): Accept SUBMITTER: TechnicafCommittee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Delete 3-5.4.1. SUBSTANTIATION: The Committee believes this is no longer required. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITIT~ MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITY-EE ACTION:

,: AFFIRMATIVE: 26 NOT RETURNED: Hill, Mclntyre, Pier

(Log #CP49) 1125- 59 - (3-5.4.2): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Renumber 3-5.4.2 as 3-5.5 and revise to read:

3-5.5 A remotely activated or automatic water deluge or sprinkler system shall be provided to the mix room or building. The deluge system or sprinkler system shall be acceptable to the authority having Jsurisdiction.

UBSTANTIATION: An automatic system should be cited as acceptable under this Code. A sprinkler system may be adequate and preferable under some conditions. COMMIq[TEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


" (Log #CP50) 1125- 60 - (3-6.1.1): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Change "150 sq ft (1&.5 sq m)" to "100 sq ft (9 sq m)." SUBSTANTIATION: Conformance with NFPA 101®, Life Safety Code®. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMrrTEE ACTION:


366

(Log #CP52) 1125- 61 - (3-7.1): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Revise 3-7.1 to read as follows:

3-7.1 Stoves, exposed flames, and portable electric heaters shall be prohibited in any manufacturing room where propellant composition, delay composition, ejection composition or components for the preceding, are weighed, mixed, cast, machined or in-process stored. SUBSTANTIATION: Clarification of Committee intent. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION: AFFIRMATIVE: 26 NOT RETURNED: Hill, McIntyre, Pier

(Log #CP53) 1125- 62- (3-7.2.1): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical-Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Revise 3-7.2.1 to read as follows:

3-7.2.1 Unit heaters located in rooms where propellant composition, delay composition, ejection composition or components for the proceeding are being weighed, mixed, cast, machined or in-process stored shall be equipped with motors and electrical devices suitable for use in Glass II, Group E, Division 1 locations. (See Article 502 of NFPA 70, National Electrical Code.) SUBSTANTIATION: Clarification. Conformance with NFPA 70, National Electrical Code. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF C OM M I T ~ E MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


(Log #CP54) 1125- 63 - (3-7.3): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Revise 3-7.3 to read as follows:

3-7.3 All wiring, switches, and electrical fixtures in process buildings shall comply with NFPA 70, National Electrical Code, and be suitable for hazardous locations Class II, Group E, Division 1. SUBSTANTIATION: Conformance with NFPA 70, National Electrical Code. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:



3-7.3.2 When temporary lighting is necessary within a magazine, electric safety flashlights, electric safety lanterns, or chemical illuminescent lighting shall be used.

Exception: Listed portable lighting equipment shall be permitted to be used during repair operations, provided the area has been cleared of all propellant materials and all dust or residue has been removed by washing. SUBSTANTIATION: Chemical illuminescent lighting is a new development that is safe to use under these conditions. COMI~TFEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:

AFFIRMATIVE: 25 NEGATIVE: Ward NOT RETURNED: Hill, McIntyre, Pier

EXPLANATION OF NEGATIVE: WARD: I don' t agree with electric safetyflashlight or electric safety

lantern. These items should be shown as intrinsically safe.

(Log #CP57) 1125- 65 - (3-8.2): Accept $UBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Revise 3-8.2 to read:

3-8.2 No more than 70 lb (31.8 kg) of propellant composition shall be permitted at any one time in any mixing room or building. SUBSTANTIATION: The Committee believes this quantity constitutes a minimum acceptable safety hazard.

N F P A 1 1 2 5 m A 9 5 R O C

COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMrlWEE ACTION: AFFIRMATIVE: 26 NOT RETURNED: Hill, McIntyre, Pier



clarification andadditional discussion as to amount limits.

(Log #CP58) 1125- 66- (3-8.3): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Revise 3-8.3 to read:

3-8.3 No more than 70 lb (31.8 kg) ofuncased propellant composition shall be permitted at any one time in a finishing or assembly room or building. SUBSTANTIATION: The Committee believes this quantity constitutes a minimum acceptable safety hazard. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:

AFFIRMATIVE: 26 NOT RETURNED: Hill McIntyre, Pier



clarification and-additional discussion as to amount limits.

(Log #CP56) 1125- 67- (3-8.4 and Table 3-8.4 with Notes (New)): Accept SUBMITI'ER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Add a new 3-8.4 to read as follows:

3-8.4 When the quantities of propellant composition exceed the uantity limits stated in 3-8.2 and 3-8.3, the minimum separation stances shall be as stated in Table 3-8.4 below.

Table 3-8.4 Minimum Separation Distances of Process Buildings from Inhabited Buildings, Passenger Railways, and

Public Highways 1

Net Weight of Distance from Propellant Passenger Railways Distance from

Composition 2 Not and Public Inhabited to Exceed Hi#awa~s3,4 Buildings3,4

Pounds Feet Feet 100 200 200 200 200 200 400 200 200 600 200 208 800 200 252

1~000 200 292

For SI Units: 1 pound = 0.454 kg 1 foot = 0.305 m

NOTE h

NOTE 2:

NOTE 3:

NOTE 4:

This table does not apply to separation distances for magazines containing 1.4 or 1.3 explosives~ Net weight of all propellant, delay, and ejection composition only. See Chapter I for definitions of"p.assenger railways," "public highways," and 'inhabited buildings." All distances in this table are to be applied with or without barricades or screen-type barricades.

SUBSTANTIATION: Revision required to encompass new table. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITFEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION: AFFIRMATIVE: 25 NEGATIVE: Ward NOT RETURNED: Hill, Mclntyre, Pier

EXPLANATION OF NEGATIVE: WARD: If we areputting limits on the quantity of propellant

(3-8.2) and uncasedpropellant (3-8.3) we should not make provision for any amounts in excess of what is permitted.

COMMENT ON AFFIRMATIVE: BOLES: Moving quantity limit down to 20 lb on table needs to be

reconsidered. Consideration that treamaent of distances for prop.ellant, compositions needs to . . . . be closer to treatment of similar matenals m fireworks manufactunng facxhties. DEWILLE: Moving quantity limit down to 20 Ib on table needs to

be reconsidered. Consideration that treatment of distances for prop.ellant, compositions needs to . . . . be closer to treatment of similar materials m fireworks manufactunng facilities.

(Log #CP59) 1125- 68 - (3-9.2.3): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Revise 3-9.2.3 to read:

3-9.2.3 Personnel whose clothing is contaminated with propellant composition to a degree that endangers personnel safety, shall not be permitted in smoking locations. SUBSTANTIATION: Conformance with the NFPA Manual of Style. COMMITI'EE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


COMMENT ON AFFIRMATIVE: BOLES: Take out wording..."to a degree that endangers personnel

safety." Wording is too subjective and any clothing contaminated with propellant composition should not be permitted in smoking locations. DEWILLE: Take out wording..."to a degree that endangers

personnel safety." Wording is too subjective and any clothing contaminated with propellant composition should not be permitted in smoking locations.

(Log #CPt0) 1125- 69 - (3-9.6): Accept SUBMITI'F~ Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Delete the word "may". Exception remains unchanged. SUBSTANTIATION: Conformance with the NFPA Manual of Style. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


(Log #CP61) 1125- 70- (3-10.3): Accept SUBMITTER: TechnicalCommittee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Change the word "may" to "are permitted to'• SUBSTANTIATION: Conformance with the NFPA Manual of Style. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMYI'TEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITFEE ACTION: AFFIRMATIVE: 26 NOT RETURNED: Hill, Mclntyre, Pier

(Log #CP62) 1125. 71 - (3-10.3.1): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Change the word "may" to "can". SUBSTANTIATION: Conformance with the NFPA Manual of Style. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


(Log #CP63) 1125- 72- (3-11): Accept SUBMYUrER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Revise the heading to read:

"3-11 Testing of Rocket Motors." SUBSTANTIATION: The Code has been expanded to include high power rocket motors• COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

367

NFPA 1125 - - A95 ROC

NUMBER OF COMMITYEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


(Log #CP64) 1125- 73 - (Chapter 4 Tide): Accept SUBMITIT, R: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics

I ECOMMENDATION: Revise title to read: Chapter 4 Storage of Explosives Division 1.3 and Black Powder

SUBSTANTIATION: Required by adoption of UN classification of explosive materials. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept- NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMrVIT~ ACTION:


(Log #CP65) 1125. 74- (4-1.1): Accept SUBMITI'ER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics

I RECOMMENDATION: Revise 4-1.1 to read: "Division 1.3 propellants and black powder shall be stored in

magazines meeting the requirements of this chapter. They shall be so stored at all times unless in the process of manufacture, p~ckaging, or transport." " SUBSTANTIATION: Required by new UN classification for explosive materials. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMrrFEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


(Log #CP67) 1125- 75 - (4-1.2): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics

I RECOMMENDATION: Revise 4-1.2 to read: 4-1.2 Magazines containing black powder or Division 1.3 Explosives

shall be separated from inhabited buildings, passenger railways, public highways, and other magazines by the distances specified by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms. SUBSTANTIATION: Required by new UN classification for explosive materials. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:

AFFIRMATIVE: 26 NOT RETURNED: Hill, Mclntyre, ~'ier

(Log #CP87) 1125- 76 - (4-2.4): Accept SUBMITTERa Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Revise 4-2.4 to read:

4-2.4 When temporary lighting is necessary within a magazine, electric safety flashlights, electric safety lanterns, or chemical illuminescent lighting shall be used.

Exception: Listed portable lighting equipment shall be permitted to be used during repair operations, provided the area has been cleared of all propellant materials and all dust or residue has been removed by washing. SUBSTANTIATION: Chemical illuminescent lighting is a new development that is safe to use under these conditions. COMMITFEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:

AFFIRMATIVE: 25 NEGATIVE: Ward NOT RETURNED: Hill, McIntyre, Pier

EXPLANATION OF NEGATIVE: WARD: I do not agree with electric safety flashlight or electric

safety lantern. These items should be shown as inlriusically safe.

(Log #CP68) 1125- 77 - (4-2.4.1): Accept SUBMITrER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Change the word "may" to "shall be permitted to". SUBSTANTIATION: Conformance with the NFPA Manual of Style. COMMITIT.E ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITII~ ACTION:


(Log #CP69) 1125- 78- (4-2.4.1(g)): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Delete the word "may". SUi~TANTIATION: Conformance with the NFPA Manual of Style. COMMITI~E ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMM1TrEE ACTION:


(Log #CP70) 1125- 79 - (4-2.5): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Revise 4-2.5 to read:

4-2.5 There shall be no exposed ferrous metal on the interior of the magazine where it contacts materials stored within. SLrBSTANTIATION: Conformance with the NFPA Manual of Style. COMMITIT, E ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


(Log #CP71) 1125- 80-(4-3.1(a), (b), (d), and (e)): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Revise as follows:

4-3.1 (a) Change "may" to "shall be permitted to". 4-3.1 (b) Change "may" to "shall be permitted to". 4-3.1 (d) Change "may" to "shall be permitted to". 4-3.1 (e) Change "may" to "can".

SUBSTANTIATION: Conformance with the NFPA Manual of Style. COMMITIT.E ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


(Log #CP72) 1125- 81 - (4-4.8): Accept SUBMII"rEPa Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Change "may" to "shall". SUBSTANTIATION: Conformance with the NFPA Manual of Style. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITIT, E MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


(Log #CP73) 1125-82- (4-4.9 Exception): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics

[ RECOMMENDATION: Change "may" to "shall be permitted to". SUBSTANTIATION: Conformance with the NFPAManual of Style. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITrEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITrEE ACTION:


368

N F P A 1125 w A 9 5 R O C

(Log #CP74) 1125- 83 - (4-4.10 Exception): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Change "may" to "shall be permitted to". SUBSTANTIATION: Conformance with the NFPAManual of Style. COMMI'I"TEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


(Log #CP75) 1125- 84- (4-4.11): Accept SUBblITTE~ Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics

I RECOMMENDATION: Change the word "may" to "shall be permitted to" in the last sentence. SUBSTANTIATION: Conformance with the NFPA Manual of Style. COMMITI'EE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBER~ ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMM1TrEE ACTION:


(Log #CP76) 1125- 85 - (A-l-4 Explosive): Accept SUBMITTERa Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics RECOMMENDATION: Change "Class A, Glass B and Class C" references to their proper DOT Classification:

Change "Glass A" to "Explosive 1.1." Change "Class B" to "Explosive 1.2." Change "Class C" to "Explosive 1.3 or 1.4."

SUBSTANTIATION: Required by adoption of new UN classification for explosive materials. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 29 VOTE ON COMMITYF~ ACTION:


369

N F P A 1 1 2 5 - - A 9 5 R O C

P ~ T H

(Log #CC12) 1125- 1 - (1.4 Low explosive (New)): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1125-10 RECOMMENDATION: In 1-4, add a new definition for low explosive to read: Low explosive. Explosive materials which can be caused to

deflagrate when confined, (for example, black powder, safety fuses, igniters, igniter cords, fuse lighters, and display fireworks defined as low explosives by U.S. Department of Transportation regulations in Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 173, except for bulk salutes). SUBSTANTIATION: The U.S. Department of Transportation does not govern explosive storage requirements so new wording has been provided to be consistent with the terminology of the U.S. Depart- ment of the Treasury, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms regulations for low explosives. COMMITFEE ACTION: Accept` NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 V O T E ON COMMITTEE ACTION:

AFFIRMATIVE: 25 ABSTENTION: Estes NOT RETURNED: McIntyre

EXPLANATION OF ABSTENTION: ESTES: 1 am abstaining on all items.

(Log #CC2) 1125- 2 - (Table 2-6.1 Note 1): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1125.31 RECOMMENDATION: Revise the wording of Note 1 to Table 2-6.1 in the ROP to read:

Note 1: This table does not apply to separation distances for magazines containing low explosives. SUBSTANTIATION: The U.S. Department of Transportation does not govern explosive storage requirements so the previously proposed wording has been changed to be consistent with the terminology of the U.S. Department of the Treasury, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms regulations governing the storage of low explosives. COMMITITEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMITrEE ACTION: . AFFIRMATIVE: 25 ABSTENTION: Estes NOT RETURNED: Mclntyre

EXPLANATION OF ABSTENTION: ESTES: I am abstaining on all items.

(Log #CC7) 1125- 3 - (2-6.3 and 4-1.2): Accept SUBMrlq'ER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1125.33, 1125.75 RECOMMENDATION: Move and redesiguate the proposed wording of 2-6.3 to become 4-1.2. Revised 4-1.2 to read:

4-1.2 Magazines containing low explosives shall be separated from each other and from inhabited buildings, public highways, and passenger railways, according to the distances specified by Table 4-1. SUBSTANTIATION: The U.S. Department of Transportation does not govern explosive storage requirements so the previously proposed wording has been changed to be consistent with the terminology of the'U.S. Department of the Treasury, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms regulations governing the storage of low explosives. C O M I ~ T r E E ACTION: Accept. N U M B E R OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE T O VOTE: 27 V O T E O N COMMITTEE ACTION:

AFFIRMATIVE: 25 ABSTENTION: Estes NOT RETURNED: Mclntyre


(Log #CC1) 1125- 4 - (Table 2q5.$ and Table 4-1 (New)): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1125-34 RECOMMENDATION: Delete proposed Table 2-6.$ in the ROP and replace it with the following table to b e placed in Chapter 4, identified as Table 4-1 to read:

Table 4-1 Table of Storage Distances for Low Explosives at Model and High Power Rocket Motor Manufacturing Facilities.

Table 4-1 Table of Storage Distances for Low Explosive* at Model and I-Ftgh Power Rocket Motor Manufacmrk~ Facilities

Pomads Distancea hi Feet

Over Not Over From Inhabited Btmdmg

0 1,000 75 1~000 5r000 115 5,000 10,000 150

10o000 20,000 190 , 20t000 30t000 215

80,000 40~000 285 40,000 501000 250 50)000 60)000 960 60,000 70,000 270 70,000 80,000 280 80tO00 90tO00 2 9 5 90,000 100,000 300

1001000 200r000 B75 2001000 800,000 WI,

From Public Railroad

~ mghwar

75 I15 150 190 215 285 950 260 270 280

,295 300 875

From Above.Ground

mq:~m~

50

I00 125 145 155 165 175 185 190 105

~,'II ill

* Table is extracted from 27 CFR, Part 55 (B/~TF regulations for the storage of explosive materials).

SUBSTANTIATION: The Committee has modified the document by providing a table that conveys essential safety distances for the storage of low explosives that is appropriate for use at model and high power rocket manufacturing plants. The previous table only covered black powder. The new table belongs in Chapter 4 with the other requirements addressing black powder and other low explosive propellant materials. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:



(Log #COt) 1125- 5 - (3-1.1.1): Accept SUBMrrrER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1125-48 RECOMMENDATION: Revise the wording of 3-1.1.1 in the document and renumber it to become 3-1.1 (a) to read:

3-1.1(a) Both the raw materials and the finished propellant shall be classified by the U.S. Department of the Treasury, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms as a low explosive. SUBSTANTIATION: The U.S. Department of Transportation does not govern explosive storage requirements so the previously proposed wording has been changed to be consistent with the terminology of the U.S. Department of the Treasury, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms regulations governing the storage of low explosives. COMMI'FrEE ACTION: Accept. N U M B E R OF C O M M I T T ~ MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMrlq'EE ACTION:

AFFIRMATIVE: 21 NEGATIVE: Conlding, J. P. Miller, Roberts ABSTENTION: Estes, Kosanke NOT RETURNED: McIntyre

EXPLANATION OF NEGATIVE: CONKLING: I wish to vote "negative" on 1125-5 (Log #CCA) as

this language must be correct tobe in NFPA 1125. J. P. MILLER: .I agree with Mary Robert's reasons. This section

needs to be in NFPA 1125 but with adjusted wording. ROBERTS: DOT classifies explosives. BATF regulates storage and

distribution.

370

N F P A 1 1 2 5 - - A 9 5 R O C

EXPLANATION OF ABSTENTION: ESTES: I am abstaining on all items. K. KOSANKE: Raw materials are not low explosives and should not

be classed as such,

(Log #CC5) 1125- 6 - (3-2): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1125-1, 1125-52 RECOMMENDATION: Revise the heading of section 3-2 to read:

3-2 License and Permit Requirements. SUBSTANTIATION: The U.S. Department of Transportation does not govern explosive storage requirements so the previously proposed wording has been changed to be consistent with the terminology of the U.S. Department of the Treasury, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms regulations governing the storage of low explosives. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:



(Log #CC8) 1125- 7- (Table 3-8.4 Note 1): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1125-67 RECOMMENDATION: Revise the wording of Note 1 to Table 3-8.4 in the ROP to read:

Note 1: This table does not apply to separation distances for magazines containing low explosives. SUBSTANTIATION: The U.S. Department of Transportation does not govern explosive storage requirements so the previously proposed wording has been changed to be consistent with the terminology of the U.S. Department of the Treasury, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms regulations governing the storage of low explosives. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:



(Log #CC6) 1125- 8 - (Chapter 4): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1125-73 RECOMMENDATION: Revise the heading of Chapter 4 to read:

Chapter 4 Storage of Low Explosives at Rocket Motor Manufactur- ink Plants S ~ T A N T I A T I O N : The U.S. Department of Transportation does not govern explosive storage requirements so the previously proposed wording has been changed to be consistent with the terminology of the U.S. Departlnent of the Treasury, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms regulations governing the storage of low explosives. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITrEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMITrEE ACTION:



(Log #CC9) 1125- 9 - (4-1.1): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1125-74 RECOMMENDATION: Revise the wording of 4-1.1 in the ROP to read:

4-1.] Low explosives shall be stored in magazines meeting the requirements of this chapter. They shall be so stored at all times unless in the process of manufacture, packaging, or transport. SUBSTANTIATION: The U.S. Department of Transportation does not govern explosive storage requirements so the previously proposed wording has been changed to be consistent with the terminology of the U.S. Deparmaent of the Treasury, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms regulations governing the storage of low explosives. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. " NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:



(Log #CC11) 1125- 10- (A-l-4 Explosive): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1125-85 RECOMMENDATION: ForA-1-4 Explosive, delete the second paragraph of this entry starting with Classification of explosives..." down through "Forbidden Explosives". " SUBSTANTIATION: The U.S. Depa~ment of Transportation does not govern explosive storage requirements so the previously proposed wording has been changed to be consistent with the terminology of the U.S. Department of the Treasury, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms regulations governing the storage of low explosives. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:



371

N F P A 1127 - - A 9 5 R O C

PART Ill

(Log#I) 1127- 1 - (Notice): Reject SUBMITTER: Ddvin IL Bunton, USDA Forest Service COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1127-1 RECOMMENDATION: Revise the text to read:

"...explanatory material on that paragraph is in Appendix A." Underscored word is the change.

SUBSTANTIATION: Editorial_Addition of the verb "is" makes the notice a complete sentence. COMMITTEE ACTION: Reiect. COMMITFEE STATEMENT: It is not within the purview of the Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics to make a change in the Notice that appears at the front of the document. The NFPA Standards Administration Department will be notified that a change has been proposed to the Notice for their consideration. NUMBEROFCOMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:



(Log #17) 112% 2 - (1-3 Certified High Power Rocket Motor): Accept SUBMITTER: Arthur H.Barber III, Springfield, VA COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1127-1 RECOMMENDATION: Revise the definition of "Certified High Power Rocket Motor" to begin:

"A commercially made high:power rocket motor that has been tested...". This removes the text restricting the definition of such motors to

solid propellant designs. S ~ A N T I A T I O N : The Code defines other types of rocket motors, such as hybrid, liquid propellant, and pressurized liquid. It is possible that such types may be developed and certified in the future as "high power rocket motor". Tile Code should be broad enough to recognize this possibility. COMMITFEE ACTION: Accept. " Accept the revised language that appears within the quotation

marks. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON ~OMMIIWEE ACTION:






(Log #CC5) 1127- 5 - (1-3 Parking Area (New)): Accept SUBMITFER: Technical Committee on t'yrotechnics COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1127-1 RECOMMENDATION: Add a new definition to 1-3 in the ROP for parking area to read: -Parking Area. An area designated by the safety monitor where spectators park their vehicles. SUBSTANTIATION: The Committee has added a definition essential to the code for clarification of the term "parking area" used elsewhere in the code. COMMITI'EE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:



(Log #CCA) 1127- 6 - ( 1-3 Prepping Area (New)): Accept SUBMI'FI~R: T-echmeal Committee on'Pyrotechnics COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1127-1 RECOMMENDATION: Add a new definition to 1-$ in the ROP for prepping area to read:

Prepping Area. An area designated by the safety monitor where high power rockets and high power rocket motors are prepared for launch. SUBSTANTIATION: The Committee has added a definition essential to the code for clarification of the term "prepping area" used elsewhere in the code. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:



(Log #CC9) 1127- 3 - (1-3 Launch Site (New)): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1127-1 RECOMMENDATION: Add a new definition to 1-3 in the ROP for launch site to read:

Launch Site. An area used for high power rocket activities which includes: prepping area(s), launching area(s), recovery area(s), spectator area(s), and parking area(s). SUBSTANTIATION: The Committee has added a definition essential to the code for clarification of the term "launch site" used elsewhere in the code. COMMITITEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITIXE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMI'VITEE ACTION:



(Log #CC7) +. 1127- 4 -(1-3 Launching Area (New)): Accept SUBMITTER: Technickl Committee on Pyrotechnics COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO:. 1127-1 RECOMMENDATION: Add a new definition to 1-3 in the ROP for launching area to read: Launching Area. An area designated by the safety monitor in

which high power rockets are placed on a launching device and ignited. SUBSTANTIATION: The Committee has added a definition essential to the code for clarification of the term "launching area" used elsewhere in the code. COMMITI'EE ACTION" Accept.

(Log #CC8) 1127- 7 - (1-3 Recovery Area (New)): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1127-1 RECOMMENDATION: Add a new definition to 1-3 in the ROP for recovery area to read:

Recovery Area. An area designated by the safety monitor for the intended recovery of high power rockets. SUBSTANTIATION: The Committee has added a definition essential to the code for clarification of the term "recovery area" used elsewhere in the code. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITrEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:



(Log #CC10) 1127- 8 - (1-3 Safety Monitor): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1127-1 RECOMMENDATION: Revise the definition of safety monitor in the ROP to read: Safety Monitor. A certified user of high power rocket motors whose

responsibility and duty during the operation of high power rockets is to confirm a rocket's compliance with the applicable provisions of this code, be confident that the rocket will fly in a safe manner, designate the areas of the launch site, and oversee the safety of all spectators and participants.

372

N F P A 1127 m A 9 5 R O C

SUBSTANTIATION: T he Commi t tee revision better defines the responsibilities o f the safety moni to r as used in this code. COMMITrEE ACTION: AccepL NUMBER OF COMMI'ITIXE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMrVrEE ACTION:



(Log #CC3) 1127- 9 - (1-3 Spectator (New)): Accept SUBMIT~R: Technical Commit tee on 1127.1" ° technics Pvr COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: RECOMMENDATION: Add a new definit ion to 1-3 in the ROP for spectator to read: b.p ectator. A n o n p~articipant whose primary p ur pose is to view a

h igh power rocket l aunch . SUBSTANTIATION: T he Commit tee has added a definit ion essential to the code for clarification of the use of the te rm "spectator" used elsewhere in the code. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITI~E MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:

AFFIRMATIVE: 25 ABSTENTION: Estes N O T RETURNED: Mclntyre


(Log #CC6) 1127- 10 - (1-3 Spectator Area (New)): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Commit tee on Pyrotechnics COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1127-1 RECOMMENDATION: Add a new definit ion to 1-3 in the ROP for sl~ectator area to read: spec t a to r Area. An area designated where spectators view a h igh

~ ower rocket launch. UBSTANTIATION: The Commit tee has added a definit ion

essential to the code for clarification of the t e rm "spectator area" used elsewhere in the code. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:

AFFIRMATIVE: 25 ABSTENTION: Estes NOT RETURNED: McIntyre "

EXPLANATION OF ABSTENTION: ESTES: I am absta ining on all items.

(Log #22) 1127- 11 - (Chapter 2 ): Accept in Principle in Part SUBMITTER: Rober t G. Haplow, Nor the rn Illinois Rocketry Assn. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1127-1 RECOMMENDATION: 2-12.3 [Ignition systems] Requi rements for ignition systems should be conce rned no t with how long after pressing the bu t ton the mode l will take off, bu t with the fact that if the but ton is released tha t the mode l will NOT take off. Several examples for illustration: An unau thor ized person wanders into the restricted area; the mode l falls over while on the pad; or an airplane unexpec ted lyappea r s in the area. In each of these cases it is desirable to stop the launcb. We need to be sure tha t the ignitor trains are not s61ong that the model will still launch several seconds after the f i r ing but ton is released a n d / o r the paid is disarmed.

There shou ld be a r equ i r emen t that port ions des igned to separate f rom the model after biarnout be des igned so that they canno t separate while unde r power. I have vntnessed m o r e than one incident where early s-eparation of strap on boosters resulted in hazardous condit ions to o ther part icipant in the launch. O n e of these incidents resul ted in minbr injuries to several participants, which would have been lessened if they all had not Been s thnding packed so close together. W h e n the errant part headed for the crowd, they had nowhere to move, even t hough they were all standing. At least one of the injuries was believed to be f rom someones elbow hi t t ing s o m e o n e else in the m o u t h while fleeing the a r e a .

2-13.2 t h rough 2-13.5 [Launch Site Dimensions] The addit ion of 13.4 and 13.5 together make table 2-13 totally redundant . 2-13.4 a l low/ the requ i rements of 2-13 to be overruled as long as 13.5 is met, and 13.5 is required even if 2-13 is compl ied with7 Since this makes table 2-13 totally unnecessary, it should be eliminated.

In reality this is how it should be, s ince the alt i tude of a high power rocket is more related to its mass and drag (a funct ion of frontal area) than it is to the motor size. A mode l rocket unde r NFPA 1122 can reach alti tudes of over 6000 ft; I canno t recall seeing a single

h igh power rocket, up t h rough a cluster of several K motors ever get close to one mile high.

2-15.3 [Safe Distances] Table 2-15 is totally arbitrary and there has been no research done to de te rmine what these distances are. In some cases they may be excessive, others may be inadequate . Further, they are inconsis tent with the equivalent requii-ements of NFPA 1122. Specifically, a model rocket with 2 G claks motors u n d e r 1122 requires a 30 ft safe dis tance for launch. Tha t same model u n d e r 1127 (say the model weights 1503 grams instead of 1498 grams) , bu t contains the same motors for power, is considered a complex H class rocket, requi r ing a sage distance of 100 ft.

There is no reason tha t both I a n d J motors shou ld require the same safe distance. I motor safe disfance should be sorfiewhere between the H a n d J values. While the step sizes beyond the K rat ing appear overly large to me, I do no t have any first h a n d experience vath models that large to base that on. f fyou are a third of a mile f rom the rocket at ignition, you can not detect some th ing that is going wrong at the l aunch site; be it a rocket failure, gras% fire, or whatever.

I have painful f irst-hand exper ience tha t shows how ha rd it is to change things like this once -they are written into law. PLEASE investigate what distances really are or are no t safe for these models, ra ther than adopt ing an arbitrary list of n u m b e r s as law. Th e NAR studies tha t resulted in the changes to NFPA 1122 back in the mid 1980's showed that beyond the distance that a motor migh t spread bu rn ing propel lant in the event of an explosion, there is no increas~dsagety in requi r ing extra distance. This is due to the m o d e of injury at these increasing distances (being struck by an er rant rocke t tha t is flying in cruise missile mode) , and its increased velocity and thus increased kinetic energy as it gets fur ther f rom the pad. If I had to be s truck by a model, I would ra ther have it h a p p e n 10 ft f rom the pad, while it is still moving slow, than 300 ft away, when it is moving VERY fast.

5-3.1 [ U s e r Certification] The actual certification process an d level needs to be def ined at least to some ex ten t by the text of NFPA 1127, in order to insure consistency of requi rements and purpose. Currently there are two national o r l ~ i z a t i o n s , with two very different certification procedures . - -

TRA allowed certification by an individual by flying any sized high power rocket, regardless of the exper ience of the modeller. I personally certified by flying avery low-end H motor , bu t I have seen c- ertificafion flights tha t con-sisted of J and K class motors clustered with additional-motors. Some of these fl ights have not been safe at alll A newcomer should no t be allowed toffy such a large motor , no r a complex clustered rocket, for their certification effort. They should first demons t ra te some sort of competency with smaller motors first.

Further, the TRA certification process, once completed, allows a consumer to buy ANY high power rocket motor . Once I flew my H motor, I could go out and buy, fly, a n d crash an "O" class motor, which I readily admi t I still have a totally insufficient a m o u n t of exper ience to deal with safely. The certification process does n eed t o b e a mult i step process.

Finally the TRA requires selected but no t necessarily compe ten t individuals to carry out his process. By des ignat ing all manufacturers and distributors as certifying agents, this autho-rity is vested in individuals who have more of a financial interest than a concern for safety in the process. Prefects (presidents of local groups) can have no h igh power rocket experience, yet by being elected are automati- cally ~Q~rafited certiticatiofi status.

The-NAR on the o ther h a n d has carried the mult i step process too far. They require separate flights, applications, and fees for each motor class of certification. To move f rom H to I toJ requires three flights at 3 separate launches, to give the paperwork]time-to flow th rough headquar ters . All owing any a d u k m e m b e r to per form the cert if icat ionprocess may be too3iberal; tha t individual should have some level o f competency to know what they are witnessing. Note that the r equ i r emen t of the certifying individual to have a(tained the level that they are s igning o f f o n is N O T practical, as unti l there are highly certified members a round the country, no one would be able to reach any advanced level.

Nei ther organization requires the testing to demons t ra te any knowledge that shou ld be required of anyone allowed to fly a high powered rocket. This test should cover simple terms such as ceffter of gravity, center of pressure, and their relationships, construct ion teclaniques, motor choices, knowledge of NFPA, FAA and o ther regnlauons, etc.

I would r e c o m m e n d a compromise between these two plans: a 2-3 step process, first requi r ing a successful witnessed flight with a large model rocket (at or near the uppe r limit of NFPA 1122), poweredby a single G motor . This would .grant certification for H-I-J-K class. motors. It has been my exper ience tha t these models can be budt us ing the same construct ion techniques, materials, and experience as large moo[el rockets. - -

A successful witnessed flight with a K class motor would g ran t certification for L-M-N-O c]ass motors. Again, it has been-my experience tha t this class of motors requires materials, techniques, and experience beyond the typical large model rocket. This include-s fiberglass, graphite, o-r a l u m i n u m structural parts , . electronics for parachute ejection, r e d u n d a n t components , an d significantly s t ronger construct ion th roughout .

373

N F P A 1127 - - A 9 5 R O C

Such a certification process that starts with a large model rocket, rather than a high power rocket would eliminate the need for the exemption in 6-2(j[and (k) regarding possession of motors for the purpose of certification. If high power rocket motors are to be conirolled, then the exceptiofi ctuld create significant problems im. plemeutin, g. This. alon-g.with a 2-3 level, writien, test, along the hnes of a drivers hcense written (muluple chmce) test should provide a more reasonable certification process. Finally, there should be a requirement that the safety monitor be certified to the level of models being flown at any launch. This section shouldalsoprohibit certification of mentally incompe-

tent individuals, along with d rugand /o r alcohol abusers. Some- where in 112% either-here or where it might be appropriate, there MUST be a prohibition against flying high power rockets while intoxicated, lust as t is prohibited from driving a motor vehicle in dais condition. Urffortunately, at too many high power rocket launches, I have observed excessive smoking and-drinking by fliers oF high power rockets. My wife has described this type of individual as th~ "Outlaw Biker Rocketeer". Smoking around rocket motors has already been addressed by this code. Drinking (or use of illegal drugs) while flyinghigh power rockets has not been addressed, and needs to be prohibitea. ] d o n ' t care what folks do after the launch back in the motel or restaurant, but drinking on a high power rocket range is totally out of place.

I urge the committee to adopted NFPA 1127, with these few minor chan~es to increase safety or simplify the rules, as soon as possible. SUBSTANTIATION: I have been involved in model rockewy for 30 years, and high power rocketry for 6 years. In that time I have flown thousands of-models safely; and have observed many others fly rockets. My comments and observations are based on this experience, indicating both that should done, and what should NOT be done in order to maintain the safety of this hobby. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle in Part. Take the following actions on the submitter's recommendation: 1. Reject the proposed revision of 2-12.3 [Ignition systems] in the

submitter's recommendation. 2. Accept in Principle in Part the proposed revision of 2-13.2

through 2-13..5 [Launch Site Dimensions] in . . . . the submitter's recommendauon. In Table 2-13 [Launch Stte Dimensions] m the ROP, change the order of the columns under Minimum Site Dimensions, Equivalent to: (ft), (miles), (m), and (kin).

3. Accept in Principle the proposed revision of 2-15.3 [Safe Distances] in the suSmitter's recommendation. In Table 2-15 [Safe Distances] in the ROP, revise the minimum safe distance for "H" motor equivalents from: "50" to "100" ft; "15" to "30" m; "100" to "200" ft; had "30" to "61" m. 4. Accept in Principle the proposed revision of 5-3.1 [User

Certificatl%n] in the s-ubmitter's-recommendation. See Committee Action on comment 1127-43 (Log #CC1). COMMITrEE STATEMENT: 1. T h e Committee believes that

~ nition systems are sufficiently addressed in NFPA 1127, Code for igh Power Rocketry, and the national users' safety code. The

Committee also believes that the text is complete as presented. 2. The Committee change reflects the com3bination of distance

units that work together for ease of use by the authorities having jurisdiction. The intent of the other sections, that were not rew~sed, are aimed at the authority having jurisdiction and not the user of the code.

3. The revised distances for "H" motor equivalents in Table 2-15 bring all high power rocketry ranges to a safe starting distance of 100 ft and help the authorities having]urisdiction discriminate the activity from model rocketry activities which start at a 30 ft safe distance. The Committee believes that the balance of NFPA 1127 sufficiendy addresses the submitter's comments on the identified section.

4. See the proposed Committee Action on comment 1127-43 (Log #CC1). The Committee believes that the user certificationprocess for the two organizations is the proper arena for resolving the identified issubs and belong in the iaser organizations' users certification processes andho t in the body-of NFPA 1127, Code for High Power Rocketry. The two organizations will continue to work to achieve a common approach to-the identified issues. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMrrTEE ACTION:

AFFIRMATIVE: 2.5 ABSTENTION: Estes NOT RETURNED: Mclntyre


(Log #20) 112% 12 - (2-6): Accept SUBMITTER: Arthur H. Barber lit, Springfield, VA COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1127-1 RECOMMENDATION: Delete the reference to "solid propellant" in the first sentence of the paragraph of description onRoc-ket Airframe materials. The sentence should read5

"...propelled by one or more high power rocket motors shall be constructed..."

374

SUBSTANTIATION: The Code defines other types of rocket motors, such as hybrid, liquid propellant, and pressurized liquid. The Code should be broad enough to recognize the possibility that motors other than solid propellafit types may be developed and certified in the future. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION: AFFIRMATIVE: 25 ABSTENTION: Estes NOT RETURNED: Mclntyre


(Log #24) 1127- 13 - (2-11.2): Accept SUBMITrER: Dane Boles, Quest Aerospace Education, Inc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1127-1 R E C O ~ N D A T I O N : In the second line change the term 'Jet deflecto~ to "blast deflector". SUBSTANTIATION: Agrees with same terminology used in NFPA 1122, 2-11 Model Rocket Launch Safety. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMrI'TEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMrrTEE ACTION: AFFIRMATIVE: 25 ABSTENTION: Estes NOT RETURNED: McIntyr.e


(Log #CC11) 1127- 14- (2-13.2): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee o n Pyrotechnics COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1127-1 RECOMMENDATION: In 2-13.2 in the ROP, replace the words "flying field" with the words "launch site" and delete the words "(laufich site)." SUBSTANTIATION: The revision reflects the use of consistent terminology in the document that is essential to the code. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION: AFFIRMATIVE: 25 ABSTENTION: Estes NOT RETURNED: Mclntyre


(Log #25) 1127-15 - (2-17.2): Accept in Principle SUBMITrER: Dane Boles, Quest Aerospace Education, Inc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAENO: 112%1 RECOMMENDATION: Delete "if requested to do so by the safety monitor". SUBSTANTIATION: Makes this practice a requirements to increase range safety. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept in Principle.

1. In 2-17.2 in the ROP, insert the word' prepping" between the words" launching" and "spectator".

2. Add a new exception to 2-17.2 in the ROP to read: Exception: Those individuals that have mobility restrictions.

COM~flTrEE STATEMENT: The Committee believes that it is sufficient for the range safety officer to make the decision to determine when all participants at high power rocket launchings must star/d and direct their attention to the launch activity. The Committee has added an exception for those individuals that may be present at a rocket launch site that have mobility restrictions. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:



(Log #26) 1127- 16 - (2-17.2.1 (New)): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Dane Boles, Quest Aerospace Education, Inc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1127-1 RECOMMENDATION: Add new text:

"The safety monitor shall instruct all persons in the launching, spectator, and parking areas to stand and face the launcher during all countdowns and lannchings".

N F P A 1127 - - A 9 5 R O C

SUBSTANTIATION: Requires safety moni tor to be sure that 2-17.2 requirement is being followed to increase range safety. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. COMMITrEE STATEMENT: See Comment Action and Committee Statement on comment 112%15 (Log #25). NUMBER OF CoMMrrTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:



(Log#3) 1127-17 - (2-18): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Vernon Estes, Canon City, CO COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1127-1 RECOMMENDATION: Revise this section to meet the requirements of the BATF regulations. SUBSTANTIATION: NFPA codes should not be in conflict with federal laws and regulations. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: See Committee Action and Commit- tee Statement on comment 1127-18 (Log #13) and comment 1127- 22 (Log #35). NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:

AFFIRMATIVE: 25 ABSTENTION: Estes - NOT RETURNED: McIntyre


(Log #13) 112% 18 - (2-18.1): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: I. PatrickMiller, National Association of Rocketry COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1127-1 RECOMMENDATION: Consideration needs to be given to changing this paragraph to include the BATF magazine requirements for the storage of low explosives. SUBSTANTIATION: The Trip-oil Rocketry Association (TRA), National Association of Rocketry (NAR), and the High Power Rocket Manufacturers & Trade Association (HPRMTA) have peti t ioned the BATF to meet with the sport rocket industry and fully clarify regulatory issues as pertain to high power rocketry.

To date the BATFhas not resp6nded to the petition for such a meeting. Pending this meet ing mad the clarification of the regulatory issues, ibis comment serves as ap lace holder. The Committee has the option to build the BATF requirements into NFPA 1127 _ _ the specific numbers. From die floor of the May 1995 meet ing in Denver, CO at the time 1127 comes before the full NFPA for approval, the documen t can be amended to incorporate the spedfic-number sine in all likelihood the sport rocket in-dustl T will Have met with the BATF and obtained clarification by the May 1995 meet ing date. NOTE: SulSporting material is available for review at NFPA

Headquarters. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle.

Revise the wording in 2-18.1 in the ROP to read: 2-18.1 I~igh power rocket motors, motor reloading kits, and

pyrotechnic modules shall be stored in resealable noncombustible containers away from open flames and sources of hea l COMMITrEE STATEMENT: The Committee revision reflects enhanced safety in the storage of these materials which is consistent with the intent of the submitter. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


.EXPLANATION OF ABSTENTION: ESTES: I am abstaining on all items.

(Log #14) 1127- 19 - (2-18.2): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: J. PatrickMiller, National Association of Rocketry COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1127-1 RECOMMENDATION: Revise text:

Consideration needs to be given to changing the 25 ft (7.6 m) smoking radius to include di-e BATF requi-ren~ents for such a radius, and including other BATF requirements which may exist as pertains to storage radii for low explosives (e.g., no flammable matetaal or electrical appliances within a specified distance of the magazine storage area).

SUBSTANTIATION: The Tripoli RocketryAssociation (TRA), National Association of Rocketry (NAR), and the High Power Rocket Manufacturers & Trade Association (HPRMTA) have peti t ioned the BATF to meet with the sport rocket industry and fully clarify regulatory issues as pertain to h ighpower rocketry.

To date the BATF has not responded to the pedtion for such a meeting. Pending this meet ing and the clarification of the regulatory issues, this comment serves as ap tace holder. The Committee has the option to build the BATF requirements into NFPA 1127 _ _ the specific numbers. From die floor of the May 1995 meet ing in Denver, CO at the time 1127 comes before the full NFPA for approval, the document can be a m e n d e d to incorporate the specific number sine in all likelihood the sport rocket industry will Have met with the BATF and obtained clarification by the May 1995 meet ing date.

NOTE: Supporting material is available for review at NFPA Headquarters. COMTVflTrEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. COMMYFrEE STATEMENT: See Committee Action and Commit- tee Statement on comment 1127-18 (Log#13) and comment 1127- 22 (Log #35). NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:



(Log #27) 1127- 20 - (2-18.2): Accept in Principle SUBMITrER: Dane Boles, Quest Aerospace Education, Inc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1127-1 RECOMMENDATION: Revise text to read:

"Smoking shall not be permit ted on the launch site. SUBSTANTIATION: Increases range safety and decreases the potential for a propellant or brush fire on the launch site. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle.

Revise the wording of 2-18.2 in the ROP to read: 2-18.2 Smoking or open flames shall not be permit ted in the

launching area, prepping area, or within 25 ft'(7.6 m) of any high power rocket motors, motor reloading kits, or pyrotechnic modules. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: The Committee revision reflects fur ther clarification of the Committee 's intent to move the activities involving open flames to a safe distance of 25 ft away f rom any high power r tck~t motors, motor reloading kits, or pyrotechnic modules. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION: • AFFIRMATIVE: 25 ABSTENTION: Estes NOT RETURNED: Mclntyre


(Log #15) 1127- 21 - (2-18.3): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: j . PatrickMiller, Nalaonal Association of Rocketry COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1127-1 RECOMMENDATION: Revise text:

Consideration needs to be ~ven to change the quantity storage limits of 150 lb (68 kg) to include the BATF quantity storage requirements for low explosives. SUBSTANTIATION: The Tripoli Rockeu-y Association (TRA), National Association of Rocketry (NAR), and the High Power Rocket Manufacturers & Trade Association (HPRMTA) have peti t ioned the BATF to meet with the sport rocket industry mad fully clarify regulatory issues as pertain to high power rockelly.

To d a t e t h e BATF has not responded to the petition for such a meeting. Pending this meet ing and the clarification of the regulat()ry issues,-this comment serves as ap lace holder. The Committee has the option to build the BATF requirements into NFPA 1127" _ _ the specific numbers. From the floor of the May 1995 meet ing in Denver, CO at the time 1127 comes before the full NFPA for approval, the document can be amended to incorporate the specific number sine in all likelihood the sport rocket industry will have met with the BATF and obtained clarification by the May 1995 meet ing date. NOTE: Supporting material is available for review at NFPA

Headquarters. COMMITI"EE ACTION: Accept in Principle. COMMITrEE STATEMENT: See Committee Action and Commit- tee Statement on comment 1127-18 (Log #15) and comment 1127- 22 (Log #35). NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMITrEE ACTION:

AFFIRMATIVE: 25

375

NFPA 1127 - - A95 ROC

ABSTENTION: Estes NOT RETURNED: Mclntyre


(Log #35) 1127- 22- (2-18.3): Accept in Principle $ U B M I ~ Robert E. Melton, Flg~ANA COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1127-1 RECOMMENDATION: Revise text to read:

"i~.'.. ,~o,,. ~I.~ 15~ I~ (~.~ kg) High power rocket motors, motor reloading kits, or pyrotechnidmodul~s shall be stored in conformance with NFPA 495. Exviosives Materials Code." SUBSTANTIATION: One hundred and fifty,rounds of high powered rocket motors, motor reloading kits is far in excess of what should be stored by a user. NFPA 495 gfve guidance for distances from buildings andproper storage magazines to be used. BAIT has indicated rocket motors not classified by _DOT as a flammable solid 41 or as an explosive 1.4 c, which is with 62.5 grams are applicable to the federal explosives law. COMMITIT, EACTION: Accept in Principle.

1. Revise the text of 2-18.3 in the ROP to read: 2-18.3 No more than 25 lb (11.3 kg) of net propellant weight of

high power rocket motors, motor reloading kits, or pyrotechnic m~xlules shall be stored in a single family d-welling.

2-18.3.1 Storage in a duplex or multi-family residence shall be permitted if no more than 25 lb (11.3 kg) of net propellant weight of high power rocket motors, motor reloading kits, or pyrotechnic modules is enclosed in a reclosable, noncombustible container and if kept in a wooden box or cabinet having a self-closing lid and all surfaces at least 1 in. (2.5-cm) nominal thickness, when approved by the authority having jurisdiction.

2-18.3.2 Storage oTmore than 25 lb (11.3 kg) net propellant weight of high power rocket motors, motor reloading kits, or pyrotechnic modules shall be in accordance with Title 27, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 55.

2. In 2-18.3 in the ROP, delete the existing exception to 2-18.3. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: 1. The Committeehas revised the submitter's recommendation to further clarify the submitter's intent for enhanced safety for storage of these items in single family residences and multi-family dwellings.

2. The Committee's proposed revision to the section makes the rUMBevious exception unnecessary. "

ER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:



(Log #23) 1127- 23 - (2-18.4 (New)): Accept SUBMITTER: MichaelW. Platt, High Power Rocket Manufacturers and Dealers Assn., Inc. COMMENT ON-PROPOSAL NO: 1127-1 RECOMMENDATION: Add new text:

"High power rocket motors, motor reloading kits and pyrotechnic modulesshall be stored in accordance with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, rules, regulations, statutes, and ordinances." SUBSTANTIATION: Questions have been recently raised concern- ing the applicability of certain federal regulations regarding high power rocket 'motors, motor reloading kits and pyrotechnic inodules. This additional text is designed to address this problem until it is further determined which regulations are in fact applicable. COMMITYEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:



(Log #28) 1127- 24- (3-1.1.2): Accept SUBMITTER: Dane Boles, Quest Aerospace Education, Inc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAE NO: 1127-1 RECOMMENDATION: Add to the end of the sentence: • "..., in the opinion of the authority having jurisdiction". SUBSTANTrATION: Does not leave thejilklgement for safety in handling raw ejection charges in hands of a user. COMMITFEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27

376

VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION: AFFIRMATIVE: 25 ABSTENTION: Estes NOT RETURNED: McIntyre


(Log #12) 1127- 25 - (3-1.1.3): Reject SUBMITTER: J. Patrick Miller, National Association of Rocketry COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO- 1127-1 RECOMMENDATION: Consideration needs to be given to chang, gin the entire p ..acagr ~ h to.require the combustible, com. p.o- nents m a motor re l tadi tg klt or m a separate delay wain or ejecuon charge system to be individually and corhpleted enclosed by a layer of fire-resistant protective material.

One possible wording for this change is to replace the text of this paragraph with the following text=

"Each of the combustible components in a motor reloading kit or in a separate delay train or ejection charge system shall be in.di~du- ally and completely enclosed in a layer off'we-resistant material." SUBSTANTIATION: Arthur H. ("Trip") Barber conducted a series of tests on behalf of the National Assodation of Rocketry (NAR) in March 1993. These tests studied how the exposed and unprotected propellant surfaces of the ~ropeilant and delay modules in a sport rocket motor reloading kit s retail package can be ignited in a small paper fire. The tests also studied how thLs possible hazard does not exist with single-use, expendable motors, and that it is greatly reduced in a reloading kit when eachpropellant module is fully enclosed a flame resistant wrapping (alun:finum foil was used for this purpose in the March 1903 tests). These tests further showed that the open-end fiber sleeves specified

in the draft of NFPA 1127 are not necessarily effective as fire retardants because they do not fully cover the propellant grain (i.e., the two ends of the grain remain exposed).

The Sport Rocket Caucus debated this issue at length during its April 1994 meeting (Salt Lake City, UT). At that time it was conjectured that a reload or delay propellant module igniting in this fashion out in the field (i.e., during handling at retail or consumer use) might be unlikely. The National Association of Rocketry and the Tripoli Rocketry Association (TRA) agreed in the Caucus meeting to conduct follow-up tests on this conjecture. At the time of the writing of this public comment these tests are being formulated by the two organizations. This public comment serves as a place holder until which time the

follow-up tests are completed and the potential hazard is quantified. If the potential hazard is unlikely then there will be no reason to change 3-1.1.3. If the hazard is likely then this section and paragraph should be changed. COMMITrEE ACTION: Reject. COMMITrEE STATEMENT: The results of recently conducted tests did not provide substantial affirmation that the recommendation as proposeit is necessary, and equivalent protection is achieved by the Eroposed modifications to 2-18.1. See Committee Action and committee Statement on comment 1127-18 (Log #13)• NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:



(L~g #21) 1127- 26- (3-1.1.3): Reject S U B ~ Arthur H. Barber III, Springfield, VA COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1127-1 RECOMMENDATION: Replace the entire text of this paragraph with the following text:

"Each of the combustible components in a motor reloading kit or in a separate delay train or ejecting charge system shall be individually and completely enclosed by a Iayer of fire-resistant protective material." SUBSTANTIATION: Testing that Iperformed for the National Association of Rocketry in March 1993 showed clearly that me exposed and unprotected propellant surfaces of the propellant and delay modules ifi a sport rocket motor reloading kit's refail package can bequickiy ignited in even a small paper fire. The tests filso showed that this hazard does not exist vffth single-use motors, and that the hazard in reloading kits is greatly reduced when each propellant module is fully encloseffin a fireproof wrapping (aluminum foil being used for this purpose ha the tesfs). These test further showed that the open-end fiber sleeves specified in the draft of NFPA 1127 are ineffective as fire retardants because they do not protect the ends of the propellant grain. NFPA 1122 ( 1994 edition) paragraph 3-1.1.2.3 currently requires fire-resistant packaging for ejectiO T n charges. The proposed new wording above for NFPA 1127 follows and expands this precedent from NFPA 1122.

N F P A 1 1 2 7 - - A 9 5 R O C

Sport rocketry products are typically removed from their shipping containers and Stored in bulk by retailer and consumers, with-any protective materials outside their retail packaging removed. Single- use motors have proved to be relatively resistant to rapid ignition in fires in this environment, because of the protective effect 6f their casings. Motor" reioadingkits have no such casing protection. They represent a consumer risk of significant seriousness (although low probability) unless they are required to have some form of replacement protection such as that proposed by this comment . Th~risk is not from propulsive behavior, but ra ther from an intense, easily- tr iggered, and rapidly cross-propagating fire that produces significant amounts of radiant heat and toxic fumes. COMMITTEE ACTION: Reject. COMMITrEE STATEMENT: The results of recently conducted tests did not provide substantial affirmation that the recommendat ion as proposed is necessary, and equivalent protection is achieved by the pro[0osed modifications to 2-18.1. See Committee Action and Committee Statement on comment 1127-18 (Log #13). NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:



(Log #4) 1127- 27- (3-2(d) Exception): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Vernon Estes, Canon CiW, CO COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1127-1 RECOMMENDATION: REC 3-2(d) Exception

Delete the exception. .SUBSTANTIATION: The exception has no meaning or is not specific enough to know what is intended. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. Revise the wording in the existing exception to 3-2(d) in the ROP

to read: Exception: AS an alternative to a random sample of 1 percent of

each product ion lot, a written quality control plan and recordkeeping acceptable to the nationally rei:ognized testing organizations or the authority having jurisdiction, shall be permitted to b e maintained for product ion lots of propellant composition, delay composition, and motor components to assure compliance with 3-2.1 (a), (b), (c), and (d). COMMITTEE STATEMENT: The Committee action addresses the intent of the submitter by clarifying the wording of the exception. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


COMMENT ON AFFIRMATIVE: MILLER: The exception to 3-2(d) approved at the San Diego

meet ing allows a manufacturer to submit a written .quality control plan and recordkeeping acceptable to the nationally recognized testing organization or the authority having jurisdiction as an altern~ttiv6 to a random sample of 1 percenYof each production lot.

This was put into place for small production lots. It is no t in tended to permit/~ manufacturer to circumvent the production lot testing nebded to assure quality control of product 15riot to sale to consumers.

It should be noted that this places the testing organization or authority having jurisdiction direcdy into the~production process in a way that has never been done in the past 40-years. The responsibility now resides with the testing organization or authority having jurisdiction to ensure that the control plan and recordkeeping -produce quality control functionally eq-uivalent to 1 percefit I:~tch testing. P~eviously this responsibility was that of the manufacturer. EXPLANATION OF ABSTENTION:

ESTES: I am abstaining on all items.

(Log #32) 1127- 28 - (3-2.1): Hold for Further Study SUBMITTER: C. |ames Cook, Hopkington, MA COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1127-1 RECOMMENDATION: Insert the following new sentence in paragraph 3-2.1 after the current first sentence:

"The total impulse shall be measured between t h e p o i n t of the motor 's thrust-time characteristic where the thrust tlrst rises above five percent of its eventual peak value, and the point where thrust falls~back below five pe rcen t of peak. Delay time measurement shall start at this latter point and continue to the point of ejection activation." SUBSTANTIATION: As a certification organization, the Standards and Testing Committee of the National Association of Rocketry has experienced problems with arguing with manufacturers over the validity of its t-esting standards. This disagreement has been despite the fat that the NAR's testing standards have been in use for over 30

ears, and served as the basis for NFPA 1122, Code for Model ockets. Furthermore, as new certification organizations make their

services available in addition to NAR S&T, it is important that a consistent set of test sand standards be employed. By codifying these testing criteria, we hope to eliminate these problems. COMMITFEE ACTION: Hold for Further Study. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: This comment presents new material that the Committee had no t previonsly considered. The issue would require considerable research and discussion by the Committee and cannot be properly handled within the time frame established for proceeding with the Committee 's report. The two user organizations will establish a task force to study this issue and repor t back to the Pyrotechnics Committee at their regularly scheduled meet ing in the Spring of 1996. N I ~ E R OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


COMMENT ON AFFIRMATIVE: MILLER: This comment was submitted by c . J ames Cook of the

NAR Standards & Testing Committee. They contain new material pertaining to the testing and certification of high power rocket motors which was not previously considered by the Committee, and requir ingextensive research and discussion. For this reason they were heli] for fur ther study.

The NAP, has invited the sport rocket motor manufacturers and the Tripoli Rocketry Association Motor Testing Committee to meet with the NAR Standards & Testing Committee on April 1, 1995, in Huntsville, AL. The purpose of this meet ing is to begin the research and discussion necessary to address these public comments.

It is hoped that by_ the Fall 1995 or Spring 1996 meet ing of the NFPA Committee that the Sport RocKet Caucus will be ready to submit recommendat ions to the Committee regarding these comments. EXPLANATION OF ABSTENTION:


(Log #33) 1127- 29 - (3-2.1 (New)): Hold for Further Study SUBMITTER: C.James Cook, Hopkington, MA COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1127-1 RECOMMENDATION: The following text should be added as a new section, inserted between existing paragraphs 3-2.1 (a) and 3- 2.1 (b), wit1 appropriate renumber ing or letterl ng:

"The average impulse, calculated by dividing the total impulse by propellant burn ffrne, departs more than 20pe rcen t from ihe certified mean average impulse value of the high power rocket motor type."

Alternative wording: The average impulse, calculated by dividing the total impulse by-period of thrust producing it, departs more than 20 percent f rom the certified mean average impulse ~alue of the high power rocket motor type. SUBSTANTIATION: The certification requirements in 4-1.4(b) require static testing of the average thrust. We believe this is a good idea, but the standard does not s~ecify how the average thrust is to be measured.

Members of the NAR have complained over the years that Model Rocket motor average thrust desq~at ions have been inaccurate. Indeed, it appears that average th-rust designations have often been chosen foi" reasons of marketlng by many manufacturers, rather than be based on actual performanc~ characteristics. In the case of Model Rockets, cerfffying bodies, such as the Standards and Testing Committee of the national Association of Rocketry, have been without grounds to comment or certify average thrust numbers due to the absence of language in NFPA 1122, Code for Model Rockets in this area. We do not wish to repeat this lack in NFPA 1127. Given that the

approval of NFPA 1127 will represent the first recognized national standard for high power rocket motors, we believe that it is important to start on the right footing. It would be far more difficult to correct this problem in a revised version at a later date. The allowed variance (20 percent) should make the adopt ion of this paragraph avoid placing undue hardship on manufacturers. COMMITrEE ACTION: Hold for Further Study. COMMITrEE STATEMENT: This comment presents new material that the Committee had not previously considered. The issue would require considerable research and discussion by the Committee and cannot be properly handled within the time frame established for proceeding with the Committee 's report. The two user organizations will establish a task force to study this issue and report back to the Pyrotechnics Committee at their regularly scheduled meet ing in the Spring of 1996. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


377

N F P A 1127 m A 9 5 R O C

COMMENT ON AFFIRMATIVE: MILLER: See my affirmative c o m m e n t on 1127-28 (Log #32), 1127-

33 (Log #29), and1127-34 (Log #30). EXPLANATION OF ABSTENTION:

ESTES: I am absta ining on all items.

(Log #5) 112% 30 - (3-2.3, 3-4, 3-5): Accept SUBMITTER: Vernon Estes, C anon City, CO COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1127-1 RECOMMENDATION: Insert the word "motor" before "reloading kit" in 3-2.3 (one) , 3-4 (one), 3-4(e) ( one ) , 3-4(f) (one), and 3-5 (three) in each o f the paragraphs in the n u m b e r of places written in parenthesis SUBSTANTIATION: The term "reloadingki t" a lone is no t defined. By making the sugges ted changes the code uses consistent l anguage a n d def ined terms. - - - - COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept.

Make the submi t te r ' s r e c o m m e n d e d changes inc luding section 3-5 in four places ra ther than three. ~ - COMMIT1"EE STATEMENT: Editorial consistency. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:

AFFIRMATIVE: 25 ABSTENTION: Estes N O T RETURNED: Mclntyre "

EXPLANATION OF ABSTENTION: ESTES: I a m abstaining on all items.

(Log #6) 1127- 31 - (3-4(d)): Accept in Principle SUBMITIXR: Vernon Estes, Canon City, CO COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1127-1 RECOMMENDATION: Insert the word "or module" following the words "rocket motor" in the first line. SUBSTANTIATION: Clarifies the in ten t o f the paragraph and makes it inclusive of all pyrotechnic materials. COMMITI'EEACTION: Accept in Principle.

Revise 3-4(d) in the ROP to read: (d) Proper and safe disposal.of the h igh power rocket motor ,

motor reFoading kit, or pyrotechnic module , if it has become too old, been subjected to condi t ions tha t could impair its per formance , or, in the op in ion of the user, could have become unsaIe; CO MITrEE STATEMENT: T he Commi t tee revision has incorpo- rated the submit ter ' s suggested r ecommenda t ion . The Commi t tee has inserted addit ional wording to ensure that the entire set of pyrotechnic material is included in the code. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMITI'EE ACTION:


EXPLANATION OF ABSTENTION: ESTES: I am absta ining on all items.

(Log #7) 1127- 32 - (3-4(e)): Accept SUBMITTER: Vernon Estes, Canon City, CO COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1127-1 RECOMMENDATION: Insert the words" motor re loading kits, or modules" after the word "motors". SUBSTANTIATION: All i tems conta in ing pyrotechnic composi- t ions n e e d to be included in this requi rement . COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:

AFFIRMATIVE: 25 ABSTENTION: Estes N O T RETURNED: McIntyre


(Log #29) 1127- 33 - (3-6): Hold for Fur ther Study SUBMITrEI~ C . James Cook, Hopkington, MA COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1127-1 RECOMMENDATION: T he following text should be .added to the end of the text p resen t in section 3-6:

"This informat ion shall n o t be overprinted so as to be made illegible. It shall also be impr in ted so that it is legible after the h igh power rocket moto r or moto r re loading kit has be-en fired". - Alternative wor0in~: This in format ion shall no t impr in ted in such a way as to be illegible due to overpr int ing or due to f ir ing the h igh power rocket motor or moto r re loading kit". -

SUBSTANTIATION: We have seen motors where the mo to r type and lot n u m b e r informat ion has been overpr inted with the State of California Certification Stamp. Rende r ing the moto r type illegible results in a dangerous situation, as it may cause a motor to be mistaken for ano the r motor type, result ing in an unsafe h igh power rocket flight. Had the motor Qpe been legible, this type ofac-cident could have been avoided. " "

We have also f requent ly seen h igh power motors f rom more than one manufac tu re r where the motor type and lot n u m b e r were impr in ted in a m a n n e r such that they~vere destroyed du r ing use (they are impr in ted on a paper cap re ta ining the ejection cfiarge). In the event of an unsuccessful flight, we canno t check the moto r designat ion to de te rmine whether an improper motor was used or whe ther the moto r had failed. In the cages of catastrophic moto r failure, ne i ther we no r the manufac tu re r can de te rmine the manufac tu r ing date or code to de te rmine whe the r o ther motors in this p roduct ion r u n were defective. Wi thou t this information, manufac ture rs canno t correct their p roduct ion problems and en d users canno t be warned to no t use d-efective motors . COMMrlTEE ACTION: Hold for Fur ther Study. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: This c o m m e n t presents new material tha t the Commit tee had no t previously considered. The issue would require considerable research and discussion by the Commi t tee an d canno t be properly hand led within the t ime f rame established for p roceed ing with the Commit tee ' s report. The two user organiza- t ions will establish a task force to stu~ly this issue and repor t back to the Pyrotechnics Commit tee at their regularly schedu led mee t ing in the Spring o f 1996. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON C O M M r r T E E ACTION:


COMMENT ON AFFIRMATIVE: MILLER: See my affirmative c o m m e n t on 1127-28 (Log #32), 1127-

• 29 (Log #33), and112%34 (Log #30). EXPLANATION OF ABSTENTION:

ESTES: I am absta ining on all items.

(Log #30) 1127- 34 - (3-6 (New)): Hold for Fur ther Study SUBMITrER: C . James Cook, Hopkington, MA COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 112%1 RECOMMENDATION: The following text shou ld be added as a new section, inserted between existing sections 3-6 a n d 3-7 with appropria te renumbering~

"The-recognized code impr in ted on each h igh power motor or re loading klt shall use the nomenc la tu re "Xyy-zz-where '~X" is a letter represent ing the total impulse as shown in Table 2-13; "yy" is a n u m b e r indicat ing the average th rus t in newtons; and "zz" is a n u m b e r indicat ing the delay m seconds before ejection. If the motor is certified, only the certified designat ion may be used. Other letters may be appended , if they are clearly dist inguished, to indicate addit ional moto r characteristics.

Alternative wording: The recog~_ ized code impr in ted on each h igh power motor or re loading kit shall use the nomenc la tu re "Xyy-zz" where "X" is a letter represent ing the total impulse as shown m Table 2-13; "yy" is a nuhaber indicating the a v e r s e thrus t in newtons; a n d "zz" is a n u m b e r indicating the delay in seconds before ejection. Designations on certified motors mus t agree with the certified per fo rmance and are subject to approval by the certifying organization. O the r letters may be appended , if they are clearly dist inguished, to indicate addit ional motor characteristics. In no case rfiay o ther designat ions resemble this nomencla ture . SUBSTANTIATION: The nomenc la tu re descr ibed above has been commonly used for over 20 years in Model Rocketry. While mos t h igh power motors and reload kits are labeled us ing the nomencla- tur-e, t he re have been a n u m b e r o f unfo r tuna te exceptions by manufac ture rs and certification organizations in the last ten years. These exceptions have cause confusion, leading to dangerous rocket flights and projectile recoveries. This is a very serious problem.

For examp-le,-one certification organization used an o-ld govern- m e n t system of motor labeling tha t no one is familiar with. An o th e r example is the case where a manufac tu re r has used letters, such "S" "M" "L" and "XL," ra ther than n u m b e r s to indicate the delay periods before ejection. The definit ions are imprecise and the manufacturer has changed (redefined) their m e a n i n g over the lifespan of some motors without telling consumers . This resul ted in confusion by users as to how many seconds are represented.

In a third case, a manufac tu re r in terspersed its own parenthet ical delay values between the certified values, again leading to confusion as to what the actual delay was. Yet ano the r case has been the labeling o f motors by more than one manufac tu re r with average thrusts number s chosen for marke t ing purposes ra ther than being based on actual per formance . As a result, p r in ted average thrus t informat ion has deviated f rom measu red average thrus t by over 50 percent in some cases.

378

N F P A 1 1 2 7 - - A 9 5 R O C

By codifying this nomenclature in the standard, it will avoid misinformed use of ahernate codes. The proposed code is well understood. It contains the necessary information (total impulse, average thrust, and delay before e~ection), while still permitt ing auxiliary information such as special propellant characteristics, special uses (such as for Radio-Contrblled vehicles), and catalog numbers to be added. COMMITTEE ACTION: Hold for Further Study. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: This comment presents new material that the Committee had not previously considered. The issue would require considerable research and discussion by the Committee and cannot be properly handled within the time frame established for proceeding with the Committee 's report. The two user organizations will e~tablish a task force to study this issue and repodt back to the Pyrotechnics Committee at their regularly scheduled meet ing in

o f1990 OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27

VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION: AFFIRMATIVE: 25 ABSTENTION: Estes NOT RETURNED: Mclntyre

COMMENT ON AFFIRMATIVE: MILLEI~ See my affirmative comment on 1127-28 (Log #32), 1127-

29 (Log #33), and1127-33 (Log #29). EXPLANATION OF ABSTENTION:


(Log #8) 1127- 35 - (Chapter 4): Reject SUBMITTER: Vernon Estes, Canon City, CO COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1127-1 RECOMMENDATION: Delete the words "Solid Propellant" in the heading. SUBST~ANTIATION: This Chapter 4 is in tended to cover all types of high power rocket motors, not just those using solid propellants. COMMITrEE ACTION: Reject. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: The Committee does not agree with the submitter 's recommendat ion to delete these words in the heading of Chapter 4 that addresses a major subject of the entire chapter. The standards that apply to this pordon of the code relate to solid propellant high power rocket mofors. NUMBER OF COMMI'I'rEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:



(Log #18) 1127- 36 - (4-1.3): Accept SUBMITTER: Arthur H. Barber II1, Springfield, VA COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1127-1 RECOMMENDATION: Insert the words "solid propellant" in the first sentence of the paragraph, as follows:

"A prerequisite for this certification of a [solid propellant] high power rocket motor..." SUBSTANTIATION: This paragraph as currendy written imposes classification requirements on all forms of motors, including hybrid, liquid, and pressurized liquid, that are only applicable to solid propellant systems. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:



(Log #19) 1127- 37- (4-1.4(b)): Accept SUBMITrER: Arthur H. Barber III, Springfield, VA COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 11~7-1 RECOMMENDATION: Delete reference to average thrust in this section.

Revise the reference to paragraph 3-1.6 in this section to refer instead to paragraph 3-2.1. This section should read as follows:

(b) Static testing to determine that total impulse and delay time comply with the requirements of 3-2.1. S ~ A N T I A T I O N : There is no paragraph 3-1.6 in the draft of NFPA 1127. Motor static test standards are def ined only in 3-2.1, and these standards make no reference to requirements for average thrust. COMMITFF~ ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27

VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION: AFFIRMATIVE: 25 ABSTENTION: Estes NOT RETURNED: Mclntyre


(Log#M) 1127- 38 - (4-1.4(b)): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: C.James Cook, Hopkington, MA COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1127-1 RECOMMENDATION: Revise 4-1.4(b) to read:

(b) Static testing to determine that total impulse, average thrust and delay time comply with the requirements of 3-2.1. SUI~TANTIATION: This existing text refers to sections 3-1.6, which does not exist. The standar0s in section 3-2.1 are adequate to serve as the basis for certification testing. We have submit ted additional comments to improve and standardize this testing, separa te ly . COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: See Committee Action on comment 1127-37 (Log #19). NUMBER O'F COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:



(Log #16) 1127- 39 - (5-3.1(d)): Hold for Further Study SUBMITTER: J. Patrick Miller, National Assodation of Rocketry COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1127-1 RECOMMENDATION: Add item (d) to read:

(d) The person shall possess a low explosives user permit or other such permit as r equ i redby the Bureau bfAlcohol , Tobacco and Firearms for the handl ing of explosive materials. SUBSTANTIATION: The Tripoli RocketxyAssociafion (TRA), National Association of Rocketry (NAR), and the High Power Rocket Manufacturers & Trade Association (HPRMTA) have peti t ioned the BATF to meet with the sport rocket industry and fully clarify regulatory issues as pertain to high power rocketry.

To date the BATF has not responded to thepe t i t ion for such a meeting. Pending this m e e t i n g a n d the clarhqcation of the regulatory issues, this comment serves as a place holder. The Committee has the option to build the BATF requirements into NFPA 1127 _ _ the specific numbers. From die floor of the May 1995 meet ing in Denver, CO at the time 1127 comes before the full NFPA for approval, the document can be amended to incorporate the specific-n-umber sine in all likelihood the sport rocket in-dustry will h-ave met with the BATF and obtained clarification by the May 1995 meet ing date. NOTE: Support ing material is available for review at NFPA

Headquarters. COMMrlTEE ACTION: Hold for Further Study. COMMrlTEE STATEMENT: This comment presents new material that the Committee had no t previously considered. The issue would require considerable research and discussion by the Committee and cannot be properly handled within the time frame established for proceeding with the Committee 's report. At this time, there has yet to be a definitive determinat ion by governmental agencies on whether the r .e~t.uirement for user p~rmits for h ighpower rockets is a necessary provtslon. NUMBER-OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:



(Log #34) 1127- 40 - (5-3.1 (d) (New)): Hold for Further Study SUBMIq[q'ER: Dale March, Canadian Association of Rocketry COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1127-1 RECOMMENDATION: Add new text:

(d) A person lawfully admit ted for pe rmanen t residence a n d / o r a non residence person, having no felony convictions shall show a level of knowledge and competence acceptable to the certifying organization in handling, storing, and using a high power solid propellant rocket motor and high power rockets. Said person should belong to a recognized authority within their own country. SUI~TANTIATION: Individuals from over 17 countries already participate in HPR as certified users during visits to the U.S. They exchange ideas and technology and stimul-ate growth within HPR. They also help provide awareness on a national and world-wide basis.

379

N F P A 1127 n A 9 5 R O C

Also many L.A.P.IL individuals have been certified for years, actively partidpating andproviding guidance to others entering HPR. These people prefer to legS.lIy participate under a certifying authority rather than as adandestine- group. COMMITrEEACTION: Hold for Fu/-thefStudy. COMMI'I~rEE STATEMENT: This comment presents new material that the Committee had not previously considered. The issue would require considerable research and discussion by the Committee and cannot be properly handled within the time fi'ame established for proceeding with the Committee's report. At this time, there has yet to be a definitive determination by governmental agencies on wbether the re.q.uirement for user permits for high power rockets is a necessary prowslon. NUMBER-OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION: AFFIRMATIVE: 25 ABSTENTION: Estes NOT RETURNED: Mclntyre


(Log #10) 1127- 42- (6-1(k) (New)): Accept SUBMITTER: Vernon Estes, Canon City, CO COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1127-1 RECOMMENDATION: Add a new section:

"The storage of high power rocket motors, motor reloading kits, or modules conu'ary to the provisions of the regulations of the'Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and~rearros." SUBSTANTIATION: Absent specific language for storage that is consistent with BATF regulations a general provision needs to be included in the code. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept. Add the submitter's recommendation as new item 6-1 (m).




(Log #9) 1127- 41 - (6-1(0): Accept in Principle SUBMITTRR: Vernon Estes, CanofiCity, CO COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1127-1 RECOMMENDATION: Delete the words "high power rockets" in the third line. I SUBSTANTIATION: The text reference to Chapter 4 does not deal

1 with rockets -just motors. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle.

1. Revise the wording of 6-1 (f) in the ROP to read: - (f) The manufacture, production, fabrication, operation, .

maintenance, launch, flight, test, discharge, or other experimenta- tion with high power rocket motors, motor reloading kiis, or pyrotechnic modules that have not been certified in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 4 including but not limited to, cold projSellant rocket motors, hybrid rocket motors, liquid propellant rocget motors, steam rocket motors, and rocket propellant chemi- cals for solid, liquid, and hybrid rocket motors including monopro- pellants.

2. Add a new exception to 6-1 (f) in the ROP to read: Exception: This prohibition shall not be conswued as prohibiting

the evaluation and certification of new high power rocket motor v technology by a recognized national userbrl~aization or an authorityhavingjuri~diction provided that all other requirements of this code are complied with and all activities are in accordance with applicable federal], state, and local laws, regulations, and ordinances. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: 1. A high power rocket by itself is not a regulated item and does not need to bd certified, but the high I power rocket motor, motor reloading kit, and pyrotechnic module

I are the items that would need to be certified. 2. The Committee has added a mechanism that needs to be in

place for new technology to emerge and for eventual incorporation into NFPA 1127, Code fbr High Power Rocketry. NUMBER OF COMMITrEE'MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:

AFFIRMATIVE: 25 [ ABSTENTION: Estes NOT RETURNED: Mclntyre

COMMENT ON AFFIRMATIVE: MILLER: The exception to O-1 (f) approved at the San Diego

meeting was not intended to permit a manufacturer to introduce new technology for sale to general consumers without having had this technology first evaluated and certified by a nationally recognized testing organization or the authority.having:jurisdiction. The S.portRocket Caucus met briefly_ on the afternoon that this

exception was discussed before the full Committee. At that time it. was agreed that new technology can be made available for sale t o geneial consumers prior to its mciusion in the NFPA codes provided:

1. The manufacturer works with a testing organization or the authority having jurisdiction to establish certification standards. I

2. The testing organization or authority having jurisdiction I formally certifies the product with respect to these standards. 3. The manufacturer is in full compliance with all local, state, and

federal regulations. Once #1,#2, and #3 are met, the manufacturer and the testing

organization (or authority having jurisdiction) can approach the Support Rocket Caucus to work on proposed code wording to subfilit to the full Committee. Sport rocketry for 40 years has thrived upon the cooperative

working relationship between the testing organizations and the manufacturers. Manufacturers have rehed upon the testing and certification of their new products by independent consumer service organizations. In essence these organizations provide a second, independent check on new products- before th-ese are made available for s/tie to general consumers. EXPLANATION OF ABSTENTION:


(Log #CC1) 1127- 43 - (6-1(1) (New)): Accept SUBMITrER: Technical Committee onPyrotechnics COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1127-1 RECOMMENDATION: Add a new 6-1 (l) in the ROP to read:

6-1 (i) Persons participating in the prepping or launching of high power rockets, includingps e-ctators, ha. th6 pr~:ppp gin areas,-that hgve consumed alcohol, narcotics, medication, or drugs that could affect _judgement, movement, or stability. -SUBSTANTIATION: The Committee has added an essential safety

ecaution that was omitted from the code. MMITrEE ACTION: Accept.




(Log#11) 1127- 44- (6-1.1 (New)): Accept SUBMITIY~ Vernon Estes, Canon City, CO COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1127-1 RECOMMENDATION: Add a new section:

"The transporting of high power rocket motors, motor reloading kits, or modules contrary to theprovision of regulation of the Department of Transportation. SUBSTANTIATION: Absent specific language for Iransportation that is.com, istent with the provisions of DOT regulations this general [~MMiTrO~S, o n ,s n e c e s ~ - y .

ACTION: Accept. Add the submitter's recommendation as new item 6-1 (n).




(Log #CC12) 1127- 45 - (7-1.2 (New)): Accept SUBMITYER: Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1127-1 RECOMMENDATION: In 7-1.2 in the ROP, add a reference for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms regulations for the storage of explosives to read:

Code of Federal Regulations, Title 27, Part 55. SUBSTANTIATION: The Committee has added a reference that is essential for safe storage requirements. See Committee Action and Committee Statement on comment 1127-22 (Log #35). COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 27 VOTE ON COMMrITEE Ac'rION: AFFIRMATIVE: 25 ABSTENTION: Estes NOT RETURNED: McIntyre

EXPLANATION OF ABSTENTION: ESTES: I am absudning on all items.

380

Documents

NFPA 1125 -- A95 ROC€¦ · NFPA 1125 -- A95 ROC NOTICE: The following report is reprinted from the 1994 Fall Meeting Report on Proposals for the convenience of the user. Report