NFPA Technical Committee On Fire Doors and Windows · PDF filePhone: 617-770-3000 ∙ Fax: ... AREVA NP, Inc. 6100 Southwest Blvd., ... NFPA Technical Committee On . Fire Doors and

National Fire Protection Association 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02169-7471 Phone: 617-770-3000 ∙ Fax: 617-770-0770 ∙ www.nfpa.org

ROC Meeting Agenda

NFPA Technical Committee On Fire Doors and Windows

(FDW-AAA)

September 28, 2011 Doubletree Nashville Airport

Nashville, TN

1. Call meeting to order. Call meeting to order by the Chair Bruce Campbell at 8:00 AM on

Wednesday, September, 28, 2011 at the Doubletree Nashville Airport Hotel, Nashville, TN.

2. Self-introduction of members and guests.

For a current committee roster - See Page 2.

3. Approval of Minutes.

Approve the meeting minutes - See Page 6.

4. Chair Report and review of Agenda (B. Campbell).

5. Staff Report. (K. Collette)

a. ROC presentation. b. Inspection, Testing, and Maintenance Review. c. NFPA’s New Code Development Process – See Page 9.

6. Report of Chapter 5 Task Group.

7. Act on proposed changes to NFPA 80.

a. For Public Comments – See Page 15.

8. Act on proposed changes to NFPA 105.

a. For Public Comments – See Page 21.

9. Other Business.

10. Scheduling of Next Meeting.

11. Adjournment.

ROC Agenda - Page 1 of 22

Address List No PhoneFire Doors and Windows FDW-AAA

Kristin Collette9/6/2011

FDW-AAA

Bruce G. Campbell

ChairHughes Associates, Inc.520 Courtney Way, Suite ALafayette, CO 80026-8863Alternate: David V. Tomecek

SE 4/3/2003FDW-AAA

Calvin A. Banning

PrincipalAREVA NP, Inc.6100 Southwest Blvd., Suite 400Fort Worth, TX 76109Alternate: Scott Groesbeck

SE 1/1/1991

FDW-AAA

Chad E. Beebe

PrincipalAmerican Society for Healthcare EngineeringPO Box 5756Lacey, WA 98509-5756

U 10/20/2010FDW-AAA

Daniel R. Bernacki

PrincipalInternational Door Association28 Lowry DriveWest Milton, OH 45383International Door AssociationAlternate: Garry Stewart

IM 7/16/2003

FDW-AAA

Paul R. Coleman

Principal676 SE 35th AvenueHillsboro, OR 97123-7419

SE 1/1/1996FDW-AAA

William Conner

PrincipalBill Conner Associates LLC637 North Marion StreetOak Park, IL 60302American Society of Theater Consultants

SE 4/3/2003

FDW-AAA

Jerrold S. Gorrell

PrincipalTheatre Safety Programs15514 East Bumblebee LaneFountain Hills, AZ 85268US Institute for Theatre Technology

IM 4/3/2003FDW-AAA

Jeffrey E. Gould

PrincipalFM Approvals/FM Global1151 Boston-Providence TurnpikePO Box 9102Norwood, MA 02062-9102Alternate: Michael F. Daly

I 7/1/1993

FDW-AAA

Steven C. Hahn

PrincipalLawrence Roll-Up Doors, Inc.2420-C1 Sand Creek Road, #181Brentwood, CA 94513Door & Access Systems Manufacturers Assn. InternationalAlternate: Richard Cookson

M 1/1/1992FDW-AAA

Harold D. Hicks, Jr.

PrincipalAtlantic Code Consultants4530 William Penn Highway, #4350Murrysville, PA 15668-2002

SE 1/1/1994

FDW-AAA

Charles C. Holt

PrincipalNational Energy Management Institute601 North Fairfax Street, Suite 240Alexandria, VA 22314

SE 8/9/2011FDW-AAA

Thomas R. Janicak

PrincipalCeco Door Products801 Mark LaneHampshire, IL 60140Steel Door InstituteAlternate: Kurt A. Roeper

M 1/1/1986

1ROC Agenda - Page 2 of 22



FDW-AAA

William E. Koffel

PrincipalKoffel Associates, Inc.8815 Centre Park Drive, Suite 200Columbia, MD 21045Glazing Industry Code CommitteeAlternate: Vickie J. Lovell

M 1/1/1990FDW-AAA

Nancy L. Kokesh

PrincipalIntertek Testing Services8431 Murphy DriveMiddleton, WI 53562Alternate: Michael Puls

RT 1/15/2004

FDW-AAA

Keith E. Pardoe

PrincipalDoor and Hardware Institute14150 Newbrook Drive, Suite 200Chantilly, VA 20151-2223Alternate: Thomas M. Rubright

M 4/15/2004FDW-AAA

Vernon J. Patton

PrincipalFirst Energy Corporation5501 North State Route 2Oak Harbor, OH 43449

U 4/3/2003

FDW-AAA

James S. Peterkin

PrincipalHeery International1717 Arch Street, Suite 3730Philadelphia, PA 19103NFPA Health Care Section

U 3/4/2008FDW-AAA

Steven P. Reynolds

PrincipalThe Peelle Company Ltd.195 Sandalwood Parkway WestBrampton, ON L7A 1J6 CanadaNational Elevator Industry Inc.Alternate: Brian D. Black

M 3/21/2006

FDW-AAA

Ronald Rispoli

PrincipalEntergy Corporation2414 West 5th StreetRussellville, AR 72801

U 1/1/1985FDW-AAA

Thomas A. Salamone

PrincipalAKF Engineers20 Elmwood CirclePeekskill, NY 10566

SE 11/2/2006

FDW-AAA

David A. San Paolo

PrincipalThe Maiman Company3839 East Mustard WaySpringfield, MO 65803Window & Door Manufacturers AssociationAlternate: John Woestman

M 4/17/1998FDW-AAA

Michael L. Savage, Sr.

PrincipalMiddle Department Inspection Agency, Inc.12136 Holly RoadRidgely, MD 21660

E 4/28/2000

FDW-AAA

Matthew E. Schumann

PrincipalUnderwriters Laboratories Inc.333 Pfingsten RoadNorthbrook, IL 60062-2096Alternate: Emmanuel A. Sopeju

RT 10/27/2009FDW-AAA

Michael Tierney

PrincipalBuilders Hardware Manufacturers Association18 Hebron RoadBolton, CT 06043Builders Hardware Manufacturers AssociationAlternate: John Woestman

M 1/12/2000

FDW-AAA

Garrett S. Tom

PrincipalInternational Fire Door Inspector Association52 Laxalt DriveCarson City, NV 89706

U 3/1/2011FDW-AAA

Yunyong P. Utiskul

PrincipalExponent, Inc.17000 Science Drive, Suite 200Bowie, MD 20715

SE 8/9/2011




FDW-AAA

Robert Van Becelaere

PrincipalRuskin Company3900 Dr. Greaves RoadGrandview, MO 64030

M 4/3/2003FDW-AAA

Anthony W. Yuen

PrincipalUniversity of CaliforniaEnvironment, Health & Safety317 University Hall, #1150Berkeley, CA 94720-1150

U 1/12/2000

FDW-AAA

Brian D. Black

AlternateBDBlack Codes, Inc.4034 North Hampton Brook DriveHamburg, NY 14075National Elevator Industry Inc.Principal: Steven P. Reynolds

M 1/10/2008FDW-AAA

Richard Cookson

AlternateThe Cookson CompanyPO Box 23880Phoenix, AZ 85063Door & Access Systems Manufacturers Assn. InternationalPrincipal: Steven C. Hahn

M 1/1/1991

FDW-AAA

Michael F. Daly

AlternateFM Global1151 Boston-Providence TurnpikeNorwood, MA 02062Principal: Jeffrey E. Gould

I 8/9/2011FDW-AAA

Scott Groesbeck

AlternateAREVA NP, Inc.6100 Southwest Blvd., Suite 400Fort Worth, TX 76109Principal: Calvin A. Banning

SE 8/9/2011

FDW-AAA

Vickie J. Lovell

AlternateInterCode Incorporated777 East Atlantic Avenue, Suite 301Delray Beach, FL 33483Glazing Industry Code CommitteePrincipal: William E. Koffel

M 10/28/2008FDW-AAA

Michael Puls

AlternateIntertek8431 Murphy DriveMiddleton, WI 53562Principal: Nancy L. Kokesh

RT 8/9/2011

FDW-AAA

Kurt A. Roeper

AlternateIngersoll-Rand Security Technologies9017 Blue Ash RoadCincinnati, OH 45242Steel Door InstitutePrincipal: Thomas R. Janicak

M 9/30/2004FDW-AAA

Thomas M. Rubright

AlternateWilliam S. Trimble Company, Inc.2200 Atchley StreetKnoxville, TN 37920Door and Hardware InstitutePrincipal: Keith E. Pardoe

M 1/14/2005

FDW-AAA

Emmanuel A. Sopeju

AlternateUnderwriters' Laboratories of Canada7 Underwriters RoadScarborough, ON M1R 3B4 CanadaPrincipal: Matthew E. Schumann

RT 4/17/1998FDW-AAA

Garry Stewart

AlternateThe Doorman Service Company, Inc.PO Box 1603Kent, WA 98035International Door AssociationPrincipal: Daniel R. Bernacki

IM 3/15/2007




FDW-AAA

David V. Tomecek

AlternateHughes Associates, Inc.520 Courtney Way, Suite ALafayette, CO 80026Principal: Bruce G. Campbell

SE 7/26/2007FDW-AAA

John Woestman

AlternateThe Kellen Company808 North York Street, Box 989Monroe, IA 50170-0989Principal: David A. San Paolo

M 7/23/2008

FDW-AAA

John Woestman

AlternateThe Kellen Company808 North York Street, Box 989Monroe, IA 50170-0989Builders Hardware Manufacturers AssociationPrincipal: Michael Tierney

M 8/9/2011FDW-AAA

John G. Degenkolb

Member Emeritus71 Gold Hill DriveCarson City, NV 89706-0736

1/1/1955

FDW-AAA

Joseph N. Saino

Member Emeritus6560 Kirby Forest CoveMemphis, TN 38119

SE 1/1/1973FDW-AAA

Kristin Collette

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

6/29/2007


National Fire Protection Association 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02169-7471 Phone: 617-770-3000 ∙ Fax: 617-770-0770 ∙ www.nfpa.org

NFPA 80 & 105 ROP Meeting Minutes

NFPA Technical Committee On Fire Doors and Windows

(FDW-AAA)

February 9-10, 2011 Embassy Suites, New Orleans, LA

1. Call meeting to order. The meeting was called to order by Chair Bruce Campbell at 8:00 AM

on Wednesday, February 9, 2011 at the Embassy Suites, New Orleans, LA.

2. Self-introduction of members and guests. The following committee members and guest were in attendance.

NAME REPRESENTING Campbell, Bruce (Chair) Hughes Associates, Inc. Banning, Calvin AREVA NP, Inc. Beebe, Chad American Society for Healthcare Cha, David Northwestern Memorial Hospital Coleman, Paul Oregon Fire Code Committee Conner, William American Society of Theater Consultants Gorrell, Jerrold US Institute for Theatre Technology Gould, Jeffrey FM Approvals/FM Global Hahn, Steven Lawrence Roll-Up Doors, Inc.

Rep. Door & Access Systems Manufacturers Hicks, Harold Atlantic Code Consultants Janicak, Thomas Ceco Door Products

Rep. Steel Door Institute Koffel, William Koffel Associates, Inc.

Rep. Glazing Industry Code Committee Kokesh, Nancy Intertek Testing Services, NA Inc. Peterkin, James Heery International

Rep. NFPA Health Care Section Reynolds, Steven The Peelle Company Ltd.

Rep. National Elevator Industry Inc. Roeper, Kurt (Alt to Janicak) Ingersoll-Rand Security Technologies

Rep. Steel Door Institute San Paolo, David The Maiman Company

Rep. Window & Door Manufacturers Association Savage, Michael Middle Department Inspection Agency, Inc. Schumann, Matthew Underwriters Laboratories Inc.


2

NAME REPRESENTING Tierney, Michael Builders Hardware Manufacturers Association

Rep. Builders Hardware Manufacturers Association Van Becelaere, Robert Ruskin Manufacturing Yuen, Anthony University of California Collette, Kristin National Fire Protection Association

The following guests were in attendance:

NAME REPRESENTING Archer, Riley International Firestop Council Brown, Karen Won Door Corp Steel, Kate Steel Consulting, rep. SAFTI First Inks, Jeff Zaremba, Thom Pilkington

The following committee members were absent

NAME REPRESENTING Bernacki, Daniel International Door Association

Rep. International Door Association Holmes, Wayne HSB Professional Loss Control Pardoe, Keith Door & Hardware Institute Patton, Vernon First Energy Corporation Rispoli, Ronald Entergy Corporation Rubright, Thomas (Alt. to K. Pardoe) William S. Trimble Company, Inc.

Rep. Door and Hardware Institute Salamone, Thomas AKF Engineers Stewart, Gary (Alt. to D. Bernacki) The Doorman Service Company, Inc.

Rep. International Door Association 3. Approval of Minutes. The minutes from the 30 January 2008 meeting were approved with no

modifications.

4. Review of Agenda. Chair Campbell reviewed the contents of the agenda.

5. Staff Report. Ms. Collette provided an overview of the ROP meeting process and the Annual 2012 revision cycle, the Inspection, Testing, and Maintenance Summit, NFPA’s new code development process, the features and functions of the new Document Information Pages on NFPA’s website and the status of the recent TIAs acted on by the committee. The Document Information Pages for NFPA 80 and NFPA 105 can be found at www.nfpa.org/80 and www.nfpa.org/105.

6. Report of Glazing Task Group. The task group presented the results from their meeting that

occurred on February 7, 2011. The task group recommended action on one public proposal and generated multiple recommended committee proposals. Members present at the February 7, 2011 Glazing Task Group meeting included: Nancy Kokesh, Harold Hicks, David San Paolo, Matt Schumann, Kate Steel, Tom Zaremba, Bill Koffel, Bruce Campbell, and Kristin Collette.


http://www.nfpa.org/80

http://www.nfpa.org/105

3

7. Act on proposed changes to NFPA 80. All public proposals were addressed. Committee proposals were developed as needed. See ROP letter ballot package.

8. Act on proposed changes to NFPA 105. All public proposals were addressed. Committee

proposals were developed as needed. See ROP letter ballot package.

9. Other Business a. TIAs. Ms. Collette provided a summary to the committee of the actions taken on the

two TIAs that have been brought to the committee this past fall/winter. TIA 10-2 was issued in October 2010. Proposed TIA 1009, from December 2010, did not pass the formal letter ballot. The International Firestop Council (IFC) has issued an appeal to NFPA and will be submitting a written appeal to be acted on at the March Standards Council meeting. All members of the FDW-AAA Technical Committee were urged to submit written letters in support of the committee’s view to NFPA. A representative of the IFC was present at this meeting to speak in support of Log#15. Log #15, which was submitted by Toni Crimi of the IFC, proposed the addition of similar language to that as proposed in TIA 1009. Log#15 was rejected by the committee and the committee did provide lengthy justification for their rejection to ensure proper technical reasons and background for the rejection was documented. The IFC representative was able to speak to the committee on Thursday, February 10 and was provided adequate time by Chair Campbell.

10. Scheduling of the next meeting. Ms. Collette will be distributing a survey to the committee offering 3 meeting location options for this fall’s ROC meeting which will tentatively be held the last week of September, 2011. The Comment closing date for NFPA 80 and NFPA 105 is August 30, 2011.

11. Adjournment. The meeting was adjourned at 3:15 P.M. CST on Thursday, February 10, 2011.

Meeting minutes prepared by,

Kristin Collette, NFPA Staff Liaison


9/7/2011

1

FDW-AAA ROC MEETING

Welcome!!

September 28 2011

9/6/11

September 28, 2011

Nashville, TN

FDW-AAA ROC

At this and all NFPA committee meetings we are concerned with your safety. If the fire alarm sounds, please proceed to an exit.

(Your Staff Liaison will now explain how to exit from this ti )

9/6/11

meeting room.)

FDW-AAA ROC

Members, please verify/update your contact information

Use of tape recorders or other means capable of reproducing verbatim transcriptions of this or any NFPA ti i t itt d

9/6/11

NFPA meeting is not permitted

No New Material after the ROP stage

FDW-AAA ROC

Guests All guests are required to sign in and identify

their affiliations. Participation limited to those individuals who

have previously requested of the chair time to

9/6/11

have previously requested of the chair time to address the committee on a particular subject or individuals who wish to speak to public proposals they have submitted.

Guest chairs are located around the room as a courtesy.

FDW-AAA ROC

Members categorized in ANY interest category who has been retained to represent the interests of ANOTHER interest category (with respect to a specific issue or issues that are to

9/6/11

be addressed by a TC/TCC) shall declare those interests to the committee and refrain from voting on any proposal, comment, or other matter relating to those issues.

FDW-AAA ROC

Remaining Timeline

ROC published: February 2012 NITMAM Closing Date: April 6, 2012 NITMAM/CAM Posting date: May 4 2012

9/6/11

NITMAM/CAM Posting date: May 4, 2012 NFPA Annual Meeting: June 11-14, 2012 Standards Council Issuance: August 2012 with

2013 edition date


9/7/2011

2

FDW-AAA ROC

General ProceduresFollow Robert’s Rules of Order.

Discussion requires a motion.

9/6/11

FDW-AAA ROC

Motions for Ending Debate Previous Question or “Call the Question” Not in order when another has the floor

Requires a second

Thi i i d b bl d DOES NOT

9/6/11

This motion is not debatable and DOES NOT automatically stop debate

A 2/3 affirmative vote will immediately close debate and return to the original motion on the floor. Less then 2/3 will allow debate to continue.

FDW-AAA ROC

Committee member actions:

Member addresses the chair.

Receives recognition from the chair.

9/6/11

Introduces the motion.

Another member seconds the motion.

FDW-AAA ROC

Committee chair actions:

States the motion.

Calls for discussion.

9/6/11

Ensures all issues have been heard.

Takes the vote.

Announces the result of the vote.

FDW-AAA ROC

Committee Actions on comments:

Accept (A)

Accept In Principle (APR)

9/6/11

Accept In Part (APA)

Accept In Principle In Part (APP)

Reject (R)

FDW-AAA ROC

Accept:

The comment will be accepted by the committee without change. No committee statement is required for an accept, but one could be developed for

9/6/11

p pclarification if desired.


9/7/2011

3

FDW-AAA ROC

Accept in Principle:

The Committee agrees with the change in principle, and wishes to accept the comment but with a change in wording. Committee must indicate reason

9/6/11

g gfor change and rationale in committee statement.

FDW-AAA ROC

Accept in Part:

Only part of the comment is accepted. Committee must indicate accepted AND rejected parts and rationale in committee statement.

9/6/11

FDW-AAA ROC

Accept in Principle in Part:A combination of Accept in Principle and Accept in Part. Committee must indicate accepted/rejected/changed parts and rationale in

9/6/11

p j g pcommittee statement.

FDW-AAA ROC

RejectThis is a complete rejection of the entire comment. Committee must clearly indicate reasons for rejection in committee statement.

9/6/11

j

HoldA comment may be held for processing as a proposal during the next revision cycle if it:

9/6/11

cycle if it: Introduces a concept that has not had public review Changes the text proposed by the TC to the point that the TC

would have to restudy the text of the report or other affected parts of the document

Proposes something that cannot be handled properly within the time frame established for processing the report.

FDW-AAA ROC

Committee Statements (Substantiation):“Accept” requires no committee statement

All other actions require a committee t t t t l i th ti f th

9/6/11

statement to explain the actions of the committee.


9/7/2011

4

FDW-AAA ROC

Committee Statements (Substantiation):

Must include a valid technical reason for the action

Must explain why the comment was not

9/6/11

Must explain why the comment was not accepted

No vague references to “intent”

Explain how submitter’s substantiation is inadequate

FDW-AAA ROC

Committee Statements (Substantiation):

Should not reference an opposite action unless there is satisfactory explanation for the rejection

9/6/11

the rejection

Acceptance of another comment alone is not a valid reason to reject a comment

FDW-AAA ROC

Formal voting Voting during meeting is used to establish

a sense of agreement (simple majority)

S d b l tt b ll t (2/3 t)

9/6/11

Secured by letter ballot (2/3 agreement)

Only the results of the formal ballot determine the official position of the committee on any comment

FDW-AAA ROC

Ballots are on the committee actions

Ballot form allows you to vote: Affirmative on all actions

Affirmative on all actions with exceptions specifically noted

9/6/11

Ballot form provides a column for affirmative with comment Note: This box only needs to be checked if there is an

accompanying comment.

Reject or abstain requires a reason.

FDW-AAA ROC

Initial ballot

Circulation of negatives and comments

M b h t d i

9/6/11

Members may change votes during circulation

FDW-AAA ROC

Balloting

Ballots may be returned by mail, fax, or email. Please do not submit in multiple formats.

9/6/11

formats.

PDF ballot

Alternates are required to return ballots.


9/7/2011

5

Legal

Antitrust: the single most important provision-Federal law prohibits contracts, combinations, or conspiracies which unreasonably restrain trade or commerce. Section 1 of the Sherman Act

9/6/11

Patent: Disclosures of essential patent claims should be made by the patent holder, but others may also notify NFPA if they believe that a proposed or existing NFPA standard includes an essential patent claim. See Handout

Legal

Activities Disapproved by the Courts Packing meetings

Hiding commercial interest throwing the committees out of balance

9/6/11

committees out of balance

No decision-making authority to unbalanced Task Groups; include all interested parties.

Hiding scientific or technical information from committees

TC Struggles with an Issue

• TC needs data on a new technology or emerging

Code Fund Lends a Hand

• TC rep and/or staff liaison submits a Code Fund

Research Project Carried Out

• Funding for project is provided by the Code emerging

issue• Two opposing

views on an issue with no real data

• Data presented is not trusted by committee

Code Fund Request

• Requests are reviewed by a Panel and chosen based on need / feasibility

the Code Fund and/or industry sponsors

• Project is completed and data is available to TC

www.nfpa.org/codefund9/6/11

Doc Info Pages(replacing E-committee)

Document Information Tab Current/Previous Edition information Issued TIAs, FIs and Errata Archived revision information Standard Council Decisions Research Articles and Reports

Next Edition Tab

9/6/11

Next Edition Tab Meeting and Ballot info (notices, agendas and minutes) ROPs and ROCs NITMAM and Standard Council Decisions Private TC info

Ballot circulations, informational ballots and other committee info

Technical Committee Tab Committee name, scope, Committee list and application Staff Liaison Private TC info

Private contact information Current committee documents in PDF format

Re-Engineering the Codes and Standards Process

• 2008 committee member surveyYou asked for simplification

• Leverages advances in technology

9/6/11

• Leverages advances in technology

• Starting Fall 2013 cycle


Living DocumentDraft available at any point in process-

essentially publication ready

9/6/11

Real time edited version of the document throughout the process

No deciphering ROP/ROC in a recipe approach

Committee sees and votes on only text they want.


9/7/2011

6


Electronic Submission of Public InputText box auto-populates the section you are

9/6/11

p p ychanging of the current edition of document.

Legislative text incorporated into changes

Ability to insert files/tables/equations

Prevents transcription errors

Identity verified – no signatures


Simplified Participation and MeetingsE-submission of inputPublic comments are on the first draft onlyCan review technical committee reports

li

9/6/11

online Input and comments stored online under

your profileSimplified Actions- no “APP” etcCommittee votes on the resulting textNITMAMs only on a provision that has had a

comment (less beating a dead horse)

FDW-AAA ROC

Thank you for participating!

Any questions?

9/6/11

y q


Report on Comments – June 2012 NFPA 80_______________________________________________________________________________________________80- Log #11

_______________________________________________________________________________________________Michael A. Anthony, University of Michigan / Rep. APPA.ORG - Leadership in Education | Association of

Education Facility Executives80-1

Consolidate related material from NFPA 72, NFPA 90A, NFPA 92A and NFPA 105 into thisdocument or create an entirely new document from all of the foregoing.

Users of NFPA documents regarding this part of fire safety technology are typically confused by thisconstellation of documents. It would be cost effective for APPA member institutions - as well as more of a commercialprospect for NFPA - if a Task Group and/or a technical committee could be set up to develop a consolidated documentthat presents everyone with a win-win-win situation as far as conformity of relevant fire safety codes are concerned.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________80- Log #6

_______________________________________________________________________________________________Marcelo M. Hirschler, GBH International

80-1Revised text to read as follows:

NFPA 251, Standard Methods of Tests of, Fire Resistance of Building Construction and MaterialsASTM E119, Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials (2011)

NFPA 251 was withdrawn by the technical committee on fire tests and is being replaced in all NFPAdocuments by ASTM E119, which is technically equivalent.

1Printed on 9/7/2011



_______________________________________________________________________________________________John F. Bender, Underwriters Laboratories Inc.

80-3Revise text as follows:

2.3.6 UL Publications. Underwriters Laboratories Inc., 333 Pfingsten Road, Northbrook, IL 6062-2096.ANSI/UL 9, , 2000 2009.ANSI/UL 10A, , 1998 2009.ANSI/UL 14C, , 2006 Revised 2008.ANSI/UL 33, , 2003 2010.UL 555, , 2006, Revised 2011.D.2 The hourly designation indicates the duration of the fire test exposure and is known as the fire protection rating.

Fire protection ratings of fire doors meeting this standard should be as determined and reported by a testing agency inaccordance with NFPA 252, Standard Methods of Fire Tests of Door Assemblies. (See ASTM E 2074, Standard TestMethod for Fire Tests of Door Assemblies, Including Positive Pressure Testing of Side-Hinged and Pivoted SwingingDoor Assemblies; ANSI/UL 10B, Standard for Safety Fire Tests of Door Assemblies; ANSI/UL 10C, Standard forPositive Pressure Fire Tests of Door Assemblies; and CAN4-S104-M80, Standard Method for Fire Test of DoorAssemblies.)D.10 The hourly designation indicates the duration of the fire test exposure and is known as the fire protection rating.

Fire protection ratings of windows meeting this standard should be as determined and reported by a testing agency inaccordance with NFPA 257, Standard on Fire Test for Window and Glass Block Assemblies. (See ASTM E 2010,Standard Test Method for Positive Pressure Fire Tests of Window Assemblies; ANSI/UL 9, Standard for Safety FireTests of Window Assemblies; and CAN4-S106-M80, Standard Method for Fire Test of Window and Glass BlockAssemblies.)L.1.2.7 UL Publications. Underwriters Laboratories Inc., 333 Pfingsten Road, Northbrook, IL 60062-2096.ANSI/UL 9, Standard for Safety Fire Tests of Window Assemblies, 2000 2009.ANSI/UL 10B, Standard for Safety Fire Tests of Door Assemblies, 2008, Revised 2009.ANSI/UL 10C, Standard for Positive Pressure Fire Tests of Door Assemblies, 1998 2009.UL 752, Standard for Safety Bullet-Resisting Equipment, 2005, Revised 2010.Fire Resistance Directory, 2008 2010.

Add ANSI approval designation to ANSI/UL 9, ANSI/UL 10A, ANSI/UL 10B, ANSI/UL 10C, ANSI/UL14C and ANSI/UL 33 and update references to current edition.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________80- Log #10

_______________________________________________________________________________________________Allison C. Carey, Koffel Associates, Inc.

80-7Revise text to read as follows:

Fire Door Assembly. Any combination of a fire door, a frame, hardware, and other accessories that together provide aspecific degree of fire protection or fire resistance to the opening.

A fire resistance rating provides the same level of protection in the opening as the assembly that wasestablished during the fire test. The fire test for a fire resistance rating limits the temperature transmission to theunexposed side of the assembly. A fire protection rating is determined for opening protectives and does not provide thesame level of fire resistance as the assembly. A fire protection rating provides a lesser degree of protection than a fireresistance rating. NFPA 80 does not address fire resistance-rated glazing and certain types of doors.




_______________________________________________________________________________________________Thomas Zaremba, Roetzel and Andress / Rep. Alliance of Primary Fire Rated Glazing Manufacturers


For new wood doors, glazing materials in vision panels shall be installed in labeled glass light kits or in accordancewith the fire door listing and shall be installed in accordance with inspection service procedure and under label service ,or by certified or listed personnel, or by approved and qualified persons.

The text developed and favorably voted on by the Technical Committee at the ROP was intended toprovide greater compliance options by allowing glazing in vision panels to be installed in new wood doors either (i) underlabel service (as currently allowed), or (ii) by certified or listed personnel. By adding “approved and qualified persons” tothose permitted to install vision panels in new wood doors, an additional compliance option is added with no loss insafety. The term “Approved” is defined in Chapter 3 to mean “[a]cceptable to the authority having jurisdiction” and theterm “qualified person” is defined to mean “[a] person who, by possession of a recognized degree, certificate,professional standing, or skill, and who, by knowledge, training, and experience, has demonstrated the ability to dealwith the subject matter, the work, or the project.” Whether or not the Committee ultimately decides to include “certifiedor listed personnel in this section, adding “approved and qualified persons” expands compliance options while assuringthat those installing glazing in vision panels are both acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction and technicallyqualified to do the work.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________80- Log #7

_______________________________________________________________________________________________Joshua Elvove, U.S. General Services Administration

80-11Reject ROP 80-11 as modified by the technical committee.

Concur with all three committee member’s explanation of negative. Without a national recognizedcertification program in place, one cannot mandate products be installed by such a program. We building owners wentthrough this before with fire extinguishers; let’s not do this again for fire doors. Note: I am ok with changing “certified orlisted” to “qualified persons” since that is a defined and recognized term.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________80- Log #12

_______________________________________________________________________________________________Michael A. Anthony, University of Michigan / Rep. APPA.ORG - Leadership in Education | Association of

Education Facility Executives80-17

Periodic inspections and testing shall be performed not less than annually.

Most users of NFPA consensus documents do not have the O&M budget to conform to all of thebuilding codes and related regulations. Owners should have the option to scale their resources according to the degreeof hazard and AHJ's should not be put at risk by approving relaxed testing intervals that are practical and result in a netincrease in occupant safety.






If where a fire door or fire window is opening is no longer in use removed and notreplaced, the opening shall be filled with fire resistance rated construction material equivalent to that of the wall.

The Technical Committee’s proposal is intended to reorganize and update Chapter 5. In that spirit,5.1.2 of the current code (renumbered as 5.5 in Proposal No. 80-17), requires an update. The intent of this section isnot to determine when a fire door or fire window “is no longer in use.” Instead, it is intended to require that, if a firewindow or fire door is removed, but not replaced, the opening be filled with rated materials equivalent to the wall. Thissection of the code should be updated to focus the language of this section on its intended purpose and to deletelanguage that is undefined and unnecessary.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________80- Log #13

_______________________________________________________________________________________________Garrett S. Tom, International Fire Door Inspector Association

80-19Delete “through the manufacturer”

5.1.5.2.1 In cases where a field modification to a fire door or a fire door assembly is desired, the laboratory with whichthe product or component being modified is listed shall be contacted through the manufacturer and a written or graphicdescription of the modifications shall be presented to that laboratory.

Current practice for requests directed to the listing agency for review of field modifications of fire doorassemblies commonly come from building owners, contractors, architects and manufacturers. Deleting the new text“through the manufacturer “ would permit current practice to continue.The proposal as written would be a limitation and is not common and current industry practice based on my previous

experience at a listing agency conducting field evaluations. Adding the limitation of contact with the listing agency onlythrough the manufacturer would create issues if the manufacturer is no longer in business. The listing agency reviewwould not be possible. An example would be a fire door frame. The frame is constructed to Subject 63 and the fieldmodification continues to comply with Subject 63. If the frame manufacturer is no longer in business, the frame wouldneed to be replaced at significant expense because the manufacturer would not be available to request the listingagency review.The perception that the manufacturer of the fire rated component is the only entity permitted to contact the listing

agency could also be looked upon as a means to require the purchase of a new fire rated component if themanufacturer declined to contact the listing agency.I do support the need for the manufacturer to be involved if proprietary test information must be accessed to evaluate

the field modification but not to specify the manufacturer is the only entity who can contact the listing agency.





80-21Reject ROP 80-21.

We’re seeing a proliferation of requirements that only seek individuals with superior credentials toperform rudimentary tasks. I’m ok with “upping” the credentials of individuals who are tasked to do certain tests thatwarrant additional education or experience, but come on, for verifying that fire door closes and latches, what type ofcredentials are necessary? We fought this battle in NFPA 101 for means of egress doors - here’s what it says:7.2.1.15.5 Functional testing of door assemblies shall be performed by individuals who can demonstrate knowledge andunderstanding of the operating components of the type of door being subjected to testing. The NFPA 72 TMS committeeis correcting this problem now for inspecting and testing fire alarm systems; hence, we don’t need to create anotherproblem in NFPA 80 (or 105 if similar text has been proposed there). Use the term “qualified persons” where suchpersons are necessary, but give owners the opportunity to use their own staff to do the “simple” tasks. I am thereforeseeking rejection of this proposal; however, I’m not adverse to revising the text so that there is a clear division as towhat a qualified person needs to do vis-à-vis what “an individual with knowledge and understanding….” can do.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________80- Log #1

_______________________________________________________________________________________________John W. Palmieri, Inspection Help, LLC

80-17Add new text to read as follows:

(12) Signage affixed to a door must meet the requirements listed in 4.1.4.Signage can be added to a fire door at any time and because it can have a significant impact on a

door's fire safety rating, it should be part of the minimum inspection criteria.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________80- Log #14

_______________________________________________________________________________________________Michael Tierney, Builders Hardware Manufacturers Association

80-256.4.3.1.6 Change to: The length of continuous hinges shall be within one inch of the height of the

door leaves.To provide a tolerance for the hinge length reflecting industry practice.




_______________________________________________________________________________________________William E. Koffel, Koffel Assoc., Inc. / Rep. Won-Door Corporation


Closing devises shall be listed in accordance with UL 864,.

When the language was originally included in NFPA 80, UL 864 was the standard established by ULfor the motor/control system driving the horizontal sliding fire door assembly. UL 864,

is a nationally recognized standard that provides appropriate tests and guidelines toassure compatibility. It further deals with critical functions such as alarm verification, endurance, life safety networks,notification, power supplies, resets, risk of electrical shock, risk of fire, standby power sources, storage batteries, dualpower source systems, supervisory signals, and trouble signals. In order to ensure the fire protection integrity andoperational reliability of this product category, it is imperative that the closing devices be labeled to a signaling standard.Because the UL 864 standard is not specifically referenced in NFPA, it leaves open a standard against which to do thetesting. Holding said closing devices to a nationally recognized standard ensures consistency and reliability for SpecialPurpose Horizontally Sliding Accordion Style Opening Protectives.The Committee noted that some products have been listed using another UL Standard (UL 325). It is recognized that

this is the case but the requirements of NFPA 80 are not retroactive and as such will not impact existing products unlessthe AHJ determines the lack of compliance with the current provisions represent an unacceptable hazard. It is alsorecognized that the industry is trending towards the use of UL 864 and that UL 864 is being revised to better address theissues.The 2013 Edition of NFPA 80 will be the edition referenced in the 2015 Edition of the NFPA codes and the I-codes. If

the revision is not incorporated into this coming edition of NFPA 80, it will be the 2018 editions of the codes when therevisions could then be incorporated by a reference to the next edition of NFPA 80.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________80- Log #4



Walls with openings will typically have less be fire resistantce for a shorter period than unpierced walls withoutopenings. Fire doors, shutters, and fire windows are designed to protect the openings under normal conditions of use,with clear spaces on both sides of the opening. Where the door opening is not used and combustible material is couldbe piled against or near the door, window, or shutter, the fire door may not provide its full level of rated fire protection.designed protection cannot be expected.

The Technical Committee’s proposal is intended to reorganize and update Chapter 5. In that spirit,A.5.1 needs updating. It is awkward and makes overstatements. First, use of the term “unpierced” to describe theabsence of openings in a wall is inappropriate. The dictionary definition of “pierced” means: “punctured or perforated, asto form a decorative design.” Second, it is true that 20-minute doors are permitted in 1-hour rated corridors based, inpart, on the assumption that the need to enter and exit through the doorway will naturally prevent fuel loads from pilingup against one or both sides of the door. It is also true that piling combustibles against a fire door could jeopardize itsdesigned protection. However, the same is not true of rated windows or shutters. In that regard, windows and shuttersare not necessarily designed to protect openings with clear spaces on both sides. Windows and shutters have a higherrequired fire protection rating and can be expected to perform to those higher levels of performance whether they are inproximity to combustible materials or not. A.5.1 should be updated to be more accurate and include more appropriatelanguage.




_______________________________________________________________________________________________William E. Koffel, Koffel Assoc., Inc.


In lieu of referencing NFPA 80 for inspection, testing, and maintenance requirements, provide a specific set ofrequirements for inspection, testing, and maintenance for smoke door assemblies.

Not all smoke door assemblies have a fire protection rating. As such, to rely on NFPA 80requirements is inappropriate. In addition, as included in Proposal 80-17, the language in Chapter 5 of NFPA 80 willspecifically apply to fire door assemblies. Does this mean that there are no requirements for smoke door assemblies?

_______________________________________________________________________________________________105- Log #3

_______________________________________________________________________________________________Nicholas A. Sealover, Koffel Associates, Inc.


Reject original proposal and revise 6.3.2.2 to read as follows:A smoke damper access panel shall be labeled with the words “Smoke Damper” in letters not less than 1 in.

(25.4mm) ½ in. (13 mm) in height. External insulation shall…”There are inconsistencies among NFPA 5000, 105, 80, and the International Building Code which

should be addressed by creating uniformity, not by broadening the problem with new requirements pertainingspecifically to smoke damper labeling proportionality. None of these documents currently contain requirementspertaining to the width of characters on damper signage. However, NFPA 80 and 105 currently require lettering with aminimum height of 1” while NFPA 5000 and the International Building Code specify a minimum height of ½”. If theabove recommendation is adopted, the only additional change required to establish consistency among theaforementioned codes is the modification of the text in NFPA 80 to require ½” high lettering as opposed to 1”. Thissolution is much more reasonable than modifying all documents to specify 1” high lettering, with or without widthproportionality. In addition, there is no justification for requiring a specific width for this type of lettering for which theprimary use of such is the distinguishing of different types of dampers by trained personnel. It is a reasonableexpectation that these personnel would be able to distinguish between the words FIRE and SMOKE regardless ofcharacter width and that those responsible for fabrication of such labels would take into consideration the legibility ofthem and refrain from producing labels with abnormally sized characters. The proportionality requirements pertaining toEXIT signs and accessibility signage are a separate issue and must be maintained because these signs must be legiblefrom greater distances in emergency situations by those with varying levels of visual acuity. However, theserequirements do not apply to the labels in consideration.




_______________________________________________________________________________________________Allison C. Carey, Koffel Associates, Inc.


6.5.2 Each damper shall be tested and inspected one year after installation.6.5.2.1 In all occupancies other than hospitals buildings not containing a healthcare occupancy, each damper shall be

tested and inspected every 4 years thereafter.6.5.2.2 In hospitals buildings containing a healthcare occupancy, each damper shall be tested and inspected every 6

years thereafter.Current wording suggests that a “hospital” is an occupancy. Hospitals often contain numerous

occupancies, including healthcare, ambulatory healthcare, business, and hotel and dormitory. This revision clarifies thatbuildings on a hospital campus without healthcare occupancies must maintain the 4-year damper testing and inspectionperiod. Buildings with multiple occupancies that include a healthcare occupancy are permitted to extend the testing andinspection period to every 6 years. The definition of a “building” is outlined in the Life Safety Code and building codes.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________105- Log #1


105-8Revise A.6.5.2 as modified by ROP-8 as follows

If the damper is arranged to be activated automatically, such as by a smoke detector or other device orsystem, the periodic test required by 6.5.2 should involve the initiation of the detector or other device or system by thesmoke detection system or some detector, the associated detector should be used as part of the periodic test. Thedamper may also be actuated and cycled as part of the associated smoke detector testing in accordance with NFPA 72,National Fire Alarm and Signaling Code, however, such. The testing as required per NFPA 72 does not meet all thetesting and inspection requirements of this Standard. The NFPA 72 testing can be combined with the requiredinspection and testing requirements of this Standard providing all testing aspects of this Standard are met. If operationalissues are discovered during NFPA 72 testing, the operational issue should be reported to the building owner forcorrective measures as required by this standard.

I’ve added “or other device or system” so not to limit smoke damper initiation during testing to merely adetector, since dampers may be activated by other automatic means (e.g., sprinkler waterflow switch that is part of asmoke control system).



Documents

NFPA Technical Committee On Fire Doors and Windows · PDF filePhone: 617-770-3000 ∙ Fax: ... AREVA NP, Inc. 6100 Southwest Blvd., ... NFPA Technical Committee On . Fire Doors and