NFPA and National Fire Protection Association are registered trademarks of the National Fire Protection Association, Quincy, MA 02169
National Fire Protection Association®1 BATTERYMARCH PARK, QUINCY, MA 02169-7471
A compilation of NFPA® TechnicalCommittee Reports on Comments for the 2011 Annual Revision Cycle.
Notice of Intent to Make a Motion (NITMAM) deadline: April 8, 2011.
Information on NFPA Codes and Standards Development
I. Applicable Regulations. The primary rules governing the processing of NFPA documents (codes, standards, recommended practices, and guides) are the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee Projects (Regs). Other applicable rules include NFPA Bylaws, NFPA Technical Meeting Convention Rules, NFPA Guide for the Conduct of Participants in the NFPA Standards Development Process, and the NFPA Regulations Governing Petitions to the Board of Directors from Decisions of the Standards Council. Most of these rules and regulations are contained in the NFPA Directory. For copies of the Directory, contact Codes and Standards Administration at NFPA Headquarters; all these documents are also available on the NFPA website at “www.nfpa.org.”
The following is general information on the NFPA process. All participants, however, should refer to the actual rules and regulations for a full understanding of this process and for the criteria that govern participation.
II. Technical Committee Report. The Technical Committee Report is defined as “the Report of the Technical Committee and Technical Correlating Committee (if any) on a document. A Technical Committee Report consists of the Report on Proposals (ROP), as modified by the Report on Comments (ROC), published by the Association.”
III. Step 1: Report on Proposals (ROP). The ROP is defined as “a report to the Association on the actions taken by Technical Committees and/or Technical Correlating Committees, accompanied by a ballot statement and one or more proposals on text for a new document or to amend an existing document.” Any objection to an action in the ROP must be raised through the filing of an appropriate Comment for consideration in the ROC or the objection will be considered resolved.
IV. Step 2: Report on Comments (ROC). The ROC is defined as “a report to the Association on the actions taken by Technical Committees and/or Technical Correlating Committees accompanied by a ballot statement and one or more comments resulting from public review of the Report on Proposals (ROP).” The ROP and the ROC together constitute the Technical Committee Report. Any outstanding objection following the ROC must be raised through an appropriate Amending Motion at the Association Technical Meeting or the objection will be considered resolved.
V. Step 3a: Action at Association Technical Meeting. Following the publication of the ROC, there is a period during which those wishing to make proper Amending Motions on the Technical Committee Reports must signal their intention by submitting a Notice of Intent to Make a Motion. Documents that receive notice of proper Amending Motions (Certified Amending Motions) will be presented for action at the annual June Association Technical Meeting. At the meeting, the NFPA membership can consider and act on these Certified Amending Motions as well as Follow-up Amending Motions, that is, motions that become necessary as a result of a previous successful Amending Motion. (See 4.6.2 through 4.6.9 of Regs for a summary of the available Amending Motions and who may make them.) Any outstanding objection following action at an Association Technical Meeting (and any further Technical Committee consideration following successful Amending Motions, see Regs at 4.7) must be raised through an appeal to the Standards Council or it will be considered to be resolved.
VI. Step 3b: Documents Forwarded Directly to the Council. Where no Notice of Intent to Make a Motion (NITMAM) is received and certified in accordance with the Technical Meeting Convention Rules, the document is forwarded directly to the Standards Council for action on issuance. Objections are deemed to be resolved for these documents.
VII. Step 4a: Council Appeals. Anyone can appeal to the Standards Council concerning procedural or substantive matters related to the development, content, or issuance of any document of the Association or on matters within the purview of the authority of the Council, as established by the Bylaws and as determined by the Board of Directors. Such appeals must be in written form and filed with the Secretary of the Standards Council (see 1.6 of Regs). Time constraints for filing an appeal must be in accordance with 1.6.2 of the Regs. Objections are deemed to be resolved if not pursued at this level.
VIII. Step 4b: Document Issuance. The Standards Council is the issuer of all documents (see Article 8 of Bylaws). The Council acts on the issuance of a document presented for action at an Association Technical Meeting within 75 days from the date of the recommendation from the Association Technical Meeting, unless this period is extended by the Council (see 4.8 of Regs). For documents forwarded directly to the Standards Council, the Council acts on the issuance of the document at its next scheduled meeting, or at such other meeting as the Council may determine (see 4.5.6 and 4.8 of Regs).
IX. Petitions to the Board of Directors. The Standards Council has been delegated the responsibility for the administration of the codes and standards development process and the issuance of documents. However, where extraordinary circumstances requiring the intervention of the Board of Directors exist, the Board of Directors may take any action necessary to fulfill its obligations to preserve the integrity of the codes and standards development process and to protect the interests of the Association. The rules for petitioning the Board of Directors can be found in the Regulations Governing Petitions to the Board of Directors from Decisions of the Standards Council and in 1.7 of the Regs.
X. For More Information. The program for the Association Technical Meeting (as well as the NFPA website as information becomes available) should be consulted for the date on which each report scheduled for consideration at the meeting will be presented. For copies of the ROP and ROC as well as more information on NFPA rules and for up-to-date information on schedules and deadlines for processing NFPA documents, check the NFPA website (www.nfpa.org) or contact NFPA Codes & Standards Administration at (617) 984-7246.
i
2011 Annual Revision Cycle ROC Contents
by NFPA Numerical Designation
Note: Documents appear in numerical order.
NFPA No. Type Action Title Page No.
1 P Fire Code ........................................................................................................................................................... 1-1 3 N Recommended Practice on Commissioning and Integrated Testing of Fire Protection and Life Safety Systems ........................................................................................................................................... 3-1 15 P Standard for Water Spray Fixed Systems for Fire Protection ........................................................................ 15-1 30 P Flammable and Combustible Liquids Code .................................................................................................... 30-1 30A P Code for Motor Fuel Dispensing Facilities and Repair Garages ................................................................. 30A-1 54 P National Fuel Gas Code .................................................................................................................................. 54-1 59 P Utility LP-Gas Plant Code .............................................................................................................................. 59-1 70E P Standard for Electrical Safety in the Workplace® ........................................................................................ 70E-1 80A P Recommended Practice for Protection of Buildings from Exterior Fire Exposures ................................... 80A-1 90A P Standard for the Installation of Air-Conditioning and Ventilating Systems ............................................... 90A-1 90B P Standard for the Installation of Warm Air Heating and Air-Conditioning Systems ................................... 90B-1 92 N Standard for Smoke Management Systems .................................................................................................... 92-1 99 P Standard for Health Care Facilities ................................................................................................................. 99-1 (will be redesignated as NFPA 99, Health Care Facilities Code) 101® P Life Safety Code® .......................................................................................................................................... 101-1 204 P Standard for Smoke and Heat Venting ......................................................................................................... 204-1 220 P Standard on Types on Building Construction ............................................................................................... 220-1 221 P Standard for High Challenge Fire Walls, Fire Walls, and Fire Barrier Walls ............................................. 221-1
232 P Standard for the Protection of Records ......................................................................................................... 232-1 318 P Standard for the Protection of Semiconductor Fabrication Facilities .......................................................... 318-1 407 P Standard for Aircraft Fuel Servicing ............................................................................................................. 407-1 414 P Standard for Aircraft Rescue and Fire-Fighting Vehicles ............................................................................ 414-1 484 C Standard for Combustible Metals ................................................................................................................. 484-1 664 P Standard for the Prevention of Fires and Explosions in Wood Processing and Woodworking Facilities ................................................................................................................................ 664-1 703 P Standard for Fire Retardant−Treated Wood and Fire-Retardant Coatings for Building Materials ............. 703-1 704 P Standard System for the Identification of the Hazards of Materials for Emergency Response ................... 704-1 720 P Standard for the Installation of Carbon Monoxide (CO) Detection and Warning Equipment .................... 720-1
790 N Standard for Competency of Third-Party Field Evaluation Bodies ............................................................. 790-1 791 N Recommended Practice and Procedures for Unlabeled Electrical Equipment Evaluation .......................... 791-1 820 P Standard for Fire Protection in Wastewater Treatment and Collection Facilities ........................................ 820-1
1081 P Standard for Industrial Fire Brigade Member Professional Qualifications ................................................ 1081-1 1125 P Code for the Manufacture of Model Rocket and High Power Rocket Motors .......................................... 1125-1
ii
1141 P Standard for Fire Protection Infrastructure for Land Development in Suburban and Rural Areas ........... 1141-1 (will be redesignated as NFPA 1141, Standard for Fire Protection Infrastructure for Land Development in Wildland, Rural, and Suburban Areas)
1142 P Standard on Water Supplies for Suburban and Rural Fire Fighting ........................................................... 1142-1 2112 P Standard on Flame-Resistant Garments for Protection of Industrial Personnel Against Flash Fire .......... 2112-1 2113 P Standard on Selection, Care, Use, and Maintenance of Flame-Resistant Garments for Protection of Industrial Personnel Against Flash Fire ................................................................................................. 2113-1 5000 P Building Construction and Safety Code® .................................................................................................... 5000-1
TYPES OF ACTION
P Partial Revision C Complete Revision N New Document R Reconfirmation W Withdrawal
Type Action Page No. Air Conditioning 90A Standard for the Installation of Air-Conditioning and Ventilating Systems P 90A-1 90B Standard for the Installation of Warm Air Heating and Air-Conditioning Systems P 90B-1 Aircraft Fuel Servicing 407 Standard for Aircraft Fuel Servicing P 407-1 Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting 414 Standard for Aircraft Rescue and Fire-Fighting Vehicles P 414-1 Automotive and Marine Service Stations 30A Code for Motor Fuel Dispensing Facilities and Repair Garages P 30A-1 Building Code 5000 Building Construction and Safety Code® P 5000-1 Building Construction 220 Standard on Types of Building Construction P 220-1 221 Standard for High Challenge Fire Walls, Fire Walls, and Fire Barrier Walls P 221-1 Classification and Properties of Hazardous Chemical Data 704 Standard System for the Identification of the Hazards of Materials for Emergency Response P 704-1 Cleanrooms 318 Standard for the Protection of Semiconductor Fabrication Facilities P 318-1 Combustible Metals and Metal Dusts 484 Standard for Combustible Metals C 484-1 Commissioning Fire Protection Systems 3 Recommended Practice on Commissioning and Integrated Testing of Fire Protection and Life Safety Systems
N 3-1
Electrical Equipment Evaluation 790 Standard for Competency of Third-Party Field Evaluation Bodies N 790-1 791 Recommended Practice and Procedures for Unlabeled Electrical Equipment Evaluation N 791-1 Electrical Safety in the Workplace 70E Standard for Electrical Safety in the Workplace® P 70E-1 Exposure Fire Protection 80A Recommended Practice for Protection of Buildings from Exterior Fire Exposures P 80A-1 Fire Code 1 Fire Code P 1-1 Flammable and Combustible Liquids 30 Flammable and Combustible Liquids Code P 30-1 Flash Fire Protective Garments 2112 Standard on Flame-Resistant Garments for Protection of Industrial Personnel Against Flash Fire P 2112-1 2113 Standard on Selection, Care, Use, and Maintenance of Flame-Resistant Garments for Protection of
Industrial Personnel Against Flash Fire
P
2113-1 Forest and Rural Fire Protection 1141 Standard for Fire Protection Infrastructure for Land Development in Suburban and Rural Areas P 1141-1 1142 Standard on Water Supplies for Suburban and Rural Fire Fighting P 1142-1 Health Care Facilities 99 Standard for Health Care Facilities P 99-1
LP-Gases at Utility Gas Plants 59 Utility LP-Gas Plant Code P 59-1
iv
National Fuel Gas Code 54 National Fuel Gas Code P 54-1 Professional Qualifications Industrial Fire Brigades Professional Qualifications 1081 Standard for Industrial Fire Brigade Member Professional Qualifications P 1081-1 Pyrotechnics 1125 Code for the Manufacture of Model Rocket and High Power Rocket Motors P
1125-1
Record Protection 232 Standard for the Protection of Records P 232-1 Safety to Life 101® Life Safety Code® P 101-1 Signaling Systems for the Protection of Life and Property Carbon Monoxide Detection 720 Standard for the Installation of Carbon Monoxide (CO) Detection and Warning Equipment P 720-1 Smoke Management Systems 92 Standard for Smoke Management Systems N 92-1 204 Standard for Smoke and Heat Venting P 204-1 Structures, Construction, and Materials
703 Standard for Fire Retardant−Treated Wood and Fire-Retardant Coatings for Building Materials P 703-1 Wastewater Treatment Plants
820 Standard for Fire Protection in Wastewater Treatment and Collection Facilities P 820-1 Water Spray Fixed Systems 15 Standard for Water Spray Fixed Systems for Fire Protection P 15-1 Wood and Cellulosic Materials Processing 664 Standard for the Prevention of Fires and Explosions in Wood Processing and Woodworking
Facilities P 664-1
v
COMMITTEE MEMBER CLASSIFICATIONS1,2,3,4
The following classifications apply to Committee members and represent their principal interest in the activity of the Committee. 1. M Manufacturer: A representative of a maker or marketer of a product, assembly, or system, or portion thereof,
that is affected by the standard. 2. U User: A representative of an entity that is subject to the provisions of the standard or that voluntarily uses the
standard. 3. IM Installer/Maintainer: A representative of an entity that is in the business of installing or maintaining a product,
assembly, or system affected by the standard. 4. L Labor: A labor representative or employee concerned with safety in the workplace. 5. RT Applied Research/Testing Laboratory: A representative of an independent testing laboratory or independent
applied research organization that promulgates and/or enforces standards. 6. E Enforcing Authority: A representative of an agency or an organization that promulgates and/or enforces
standards. 7. I Insurance: A representative of an insurance company, broker, agent, bureau, or inspection agency. 8. C Consumer: A person who is or represents the ultimate purchaser of a product, system, or service affected by the
standard, but who is not included in (2). 9. SE Special Expert: A person not representing (1) through (8) and who has special expertise in the scope of the
standard or portion thereof. NOTE 1: “Standard” connotes code, standard, recommended practice, or guide. NOTE 2: A representative includes an employee. NOTE 3: While these classifications will be used by the Standards Council to achieve a balance for Technical Committees, the Standards Council may determine that new classifications of member or unique interests need representation in order to foster the best possible Committee deliberations on any project. In this connection, the Standards Council may make such appointments as it deems appropriate in the public interest, such as the classification of “Utilities” in the National Electrical Code Committee. NOTE 4: Representatives of subsidiaries of any group are generally considered to have the same classification as the parent organization.
vi
Documents Without Comments The documents listed below appeared in the 2011 Annual Revision Cycle Report on Proposals but did not receive comments. Therefore, no reports of these documents appear in this Report on Comments. 92A W Standard for Smoke-Control Systems Utilizing Barriers and Pressure Differences 92B W Standard for Smoke Management Systems in Malls, Atria, and Large Spaces
Key to Comment Headings
The first line of every proposal includes the following information:
FORM FOR FILING NOTICE OF INTENT TO MAKE A MOTION (NITMAM)
AT AN ASSOCIATION TECHNICAL MEETING 2011 ANNUAL REVISION CYCLE
FINAL DATE FOR RECEIPT OF NITMAM: 5:00 pm EDT, April 8, 2011
If you have questions about filling out or filing the NITMAM, please contact the Codes and Standards Administration at 617-984-7249
For further information on the Codes- and Standards-Making Process see the NFPA website
(www.nfpa.org)
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
Log #: Date Rec'd:
Date______8/10/2005__________Name__John B. Smith_________________________________________Tel. No.617-555-1212 _
Company or Affiliation ___________John B. Smith Consulting___________________Email Address__________________________
Street Address_____________9 Seattle Street____________________City_______Seattle____________State__WA__Zip 02255__ 1. (a) NFPA Document (include Number and Title)_ National Fire Alarm Code/NFPA 72 1999ed____________________________________ (b) Proposal or Comment Number____72-5_______________________________ (c) Section/Paragraph _______1.5.8.1 ______________________________
2. Motion to be made. Please check one (See also 4.6 of the Regulations Governing Committee Projects): (a) Proposal X (1) Accept. (2) Accept an Identifiable Part.* _ (3) Accept as modified by the TC. (4) Accept an Identifiable Part as modified by TC.* (b) Comment (1) Accept. (2) Accept an Identifiable Part. * (3) Accept as modified by the TC. (4) Accept an Identifiable Part as modified by TC.* __ (5) Reject (6) Reject an Identifiable Part.* (c) Return Technical Committee Report for Further Study _____ (1) Return entire Report. (2) Return a portion of a Report in the form of a proposal and related comment(s). _____ (3) Return a portion of a Report in the form of identifiable part(s) of a proposal and related comments(s). (Identify the specific portion of the proposal and the related comments below)* * Clearly identify the Identifiable Part(s) indicated above (use separate sheet if required).
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 3. I am entitled to make this motion in accordance with 4.6.8 of the Regulations Governing Committee Projects, as follows [check (a), (b), or (c)]: (a)_X_ This motion may be made by the original submitter or their designated representative, and I am the [if you check (a) indicate one of the
following]:
X I am the original submitter of the proposal or comment, or
___I am the submitter’s designated representative (attach written authorization signed by the original submitter)
(b)____This motion may be made by a Technical Committee Member and I am a Member of the responsible Technical Committee.
(c)____This motion may be made by anyone.
(Form continued on next page) vii
NITMAM form (continued) 4. Comments or Clarification (optional): This NITMAM will be reviewed by a Motions Committee. In addition to determining whether your Amending Motion is proper, the Committee may take other actions as described in 2.3 of the Technical Meeting Convention Rules as follows:
Restating and Grouping of Motions. Upon request or on its own initiative, and in consultation with the mover(s), the Motions Committee may: (a) restate an Amending Motion to facilitate the making of a proper motion or to clarify the intent of the mover; and (b) group Amending Motions which are dependent on one another into a single Amending Motion. Dependent motions are motions that the mover(s) wish to be considered by the assembly and voted on as single up or down package. In addition to the foregoing, the Motions Committee may take such other actions or make such other recommendations as will facilitate the fair and efficient consideration of motions within the available time.
The NFPA Staff may contact you to clarify your motion or to consult on the permitted actions in 2.3. If you have any comments, suggestions or requests of the Motions Committee as it reviews your NITMAM and considers actions permitted in 2.3, please provide them below. (Use additional sheet if necessary): __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Name (please print):______John B. Smith___________________________________________________
Signature (required):_____________________________________________________________________ (Note: This NITMAM will be reviewed, and if proper, your Amending Motion will be certified in accordance with the Technical Meeting Convention Rules and posted on the NFPA website by May 6, 2011. Documents that have Certified Amending Motions will be considered at the June 2011 Annual Meeting Technical Committee Report Session. In order to have your Certified Amending Motion considered at that meeting you must appear, sign in, and make the motion as prescribed in the Convention Rules).
PLEASE USE A SEPARATE NITMAM FORM FOR EACH AMENDING MOTION YOU WISH TO MAKE
Mail to: Secretary, Standards Council, National Fire Protection Association, 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02169-7471 NFPA Fax: (617) 770-3500 • Email: [email protected]
viii
FORM FOR FILING NOTICE OF INTENT TO MAKE A MOTION (NITMAM)
AT AN ASSOCIATION TECHNICAL MEETING 2011 ANNUAL REVISION CYCLE
FINAL DATE FOR RECEIPT OF NITMAM: 5:00 pm EDT, April 8, 2011
If you have questions about filling out or filing the NITMAM, please contact the Codes and Standards Administration at 617-984-7249
For further information on the Codes- and Standards-Making Process, see the NFPA
Company or Affiliation __________________________________________________Email Address
Street Address_________________________________City________________________State______Zip _________________ 1. (a) NFPA Document (include Number and Title)_______________________________________________________________ (b) Proposal or Comment Number____________________ (c) Section/Paragraph _____________________________________
2. Motion to be made. Please check one: (See also 4.6 of the Regulations Governing Committee Projects) (a) Proposal _(1) Accept. (2) Accept an Identifiable Part.* __ (3) Accept as modified by the TC. (4) Accept an Identifiable Part as modified by TC.* (b) Comment (1) Accept. (2) Accept an Identifiable Part.* (3) Accept as modified by the TC. (4) Accept an Identifiable Part as modified by TC.* __ (5) Reject (6) Reject an Identifiable Part.* (c) Return Technical Committee Report for Further Study _____ (1) Return entire Report. (2) Return a portion of a Report in the form of a proposal and related comment(s). _____ (3) Return a portion of a Report in the form of identifiable part(s) of a proposal and related comment(s). (Identify the specific portion of the proposal and the related comments below)* * Clearly identify the Identifiable Part(s) indicated above (use separate sheet if required).
3. I am entitled to make this motion in accordance with 4.6.8 of the Regulations Governing Committee Projects, as follows: [(check (a), (b), or (c)]. (a)____ This motion may be made by the original submitter or their designated representative, and I am the [(if you check (a) indicate
one of the following)]:
___I am the original submitter of the proposal or comment, or
___I am the submitter’s designated representative (attach written authorization signed by the original submitter)
(b)____This motion may be made by a Technical Committee Member and I am a Member of the responsible Technical Committee.
(c)____This motion may be made by anyone.
(Form continued on next page)
ix
NITMAM form (continued) 4. Comments or Clarification (optional): This NITMAM will be reviewed by a Motions Committee. In addition to determining whether your Amending Motion is proper, the Committee may take other actions as described in 2.3 of the Technical Meeting Convention Rules as follows:
Restating and Grouping of Motions. Upon request or on its own initiative, and in consultation with the mover(s), the Motions Committee may: (a) restate an Amending Motion to facilitate the making of a proper motion or to clarify the intent of the mover; and (b) group Amending Motions which are dependent on one another into a single Amending Motion. Dependent motions are motions that the mover(s) wish to be considered by the assembly and voted on as single up or down package. In addition to the foregoing, the Motions Committee may take such other actions or make such other recommendations as will facilitate the fair and efficient consideration of motions within the available time.
The NFPA Staff may contact you to clarify your motion or to consult on the permitted actions in 2.3. If you have any comments, suggestions, or requests of the Motions Committee as it reviews your NITMAM and considers actions permitted in 2.3, please provide them below. (Use additional sheet if necessary): __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Name (please print):_____________________________________________________________________
Signature (required):_____________________________________________________________________ (Note: This NITMAM will be reviewed, and if proper, your Amending Motion will be certified in accordance with the Technical Meeting Convention Rules and posted on the NFPA website by May 6, 2011. Documents that have Certified Amending Motions will be considered at the June 2011 Annual Meeting Technical Committee Report Session. In order to have your Certified Amending Motion considered at that meeting, you must appear, sign in, and make the motion as prescribed in the Convention Rules).
PLEASE USE A SEPARATE NITMAM FORM FOR EACH AMENDING MOTION YOU WISH TO MAKE.
Mail to: Secretary, Standards Council, National Fire Protection Association, 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02169-7471 NFPA Fax: (617) 770-3500 • Email: [email protected]
x
xi
Sequence of Events Leading to Issuance of an NFPA Committee Document
Step 1 Call for Proposals
▼ Proposed new document or new edition of an existing document is entered into one of two yearly revision cycles, and a Call for Proposals is published.
Step 2 Report on Proposals (ROP)
▼ Committee meets to act on Proposals, to develop its own Proposals, and to prepare its Report.
▼ Committee votes by written ballot on Proposals. If two-thirds approve, Report goes forward. Lacking two-thirds approval, Report returns to Committee.
▼ Report on Proposals (ROP) is published for public review and comment.
Step 3 Report on Comments (ROC)
▼ Committee meets to act on Public Comments to develop its own Comments, and to prepare its report.
▼ Committee votes by written ballot on Comments. If two-thirds approve, Report goes forward. Lacking two-thirds approval, Report returns to Committee.
▼ Report on Comments (ROC) is published for public review.
Step 4 Association Technical Meeting
▼ “Notices of intent to make a motion” are filed, are reviewed, and valid motions are certified for presentation at the Association Technical Meeting. (“Consent Documents” that have no certified motions bypass the Association Technical Meeting and proceed to the Standards Council for issuance.)
▼ NFPA membership meets each June at the Association Technical Meeting and acts on Technical Committee Reports (ROP and ROC) for documents with “certified amending motions.”
▼ Committee(s) vote on any amendments to Report approved at NFPA Annual Membership Meeting.
Step 5 Standards Council Issuance
▼ Notification of intent to file an appeal to the Standards Council on Association action must be filed within 20 days of the NFPA Annual Membership Meeting.
▼ Standards Council decides, based on all evidence, whether or not to issue document or to take other action, including hearing any appeals.
xii
The Association Technical Meeting
The process of public input and review does not end with the publication of the ROP and ROC. Following the completion of the Proposal and Comment periods, there is yet a further opportunity for debate and discussion through the Association Technical Meeting that takes place at the NFPA Annual Meeting.
The Association Technical Meeting provides an opportunity for the final Technical Committee Report (i.e., the ROP and ROC) on each proposed new or revised code or standard to be presented to the NFPA membership for the debate and consideration of motions to amend the Report. The specific rules for the types of motions that can be made and who can make them are set forth in NFPA’s rules, which should always be consulted by those wishing to bring an issue before the membership at an Association Technical Meeting. The following presents some of the main features of how a Report is handled.
The Filing of a Notice of Intent to Make a Motion. Before making an allowable motion at an Association Technical Meeting, the intended maker of the motion must file, in advance of the session, and within the published deadline, a Notice of Intent to Make a Motion. A Motions Committee appointed by the Standards Council then reviews all notices and certifies all amending motions that are proper. The Motions Committee can also, in consultation with the makers of the motions, clarify the intent of the motions and, in certain circumstances, combine motions that are dependent on each other together so that they can be made in one single motion. A Motions Committee report is then made available in advance of the meeting listing all certified motions. Only these Certified Amending Motions, together with certain allowable Follow-Up Motions (that is, motions that have become necessary as a result of previous successful amending motions) will be allowed at the Association Technical Meeting.
Consent Documents. Often there are codes and standards up for consideration by the membership that will be noncontroversial and no proper Notices of Intent to Make a Motion will be filed. These “Consent Documents” will bypass the Association Technical Meeting and head straight to the Standards Council for issuance. The remaining documents are then forwarded to the Association Technical Meeting for consideration of the NFPA membership.
What Amending Motions Are Allowed. The Technical Committee Reports contain many Proposals and Comments that the Technical Committee has rejected or revised in whole or in part. Actions of the Technical Committee published in the ROP may also eventually be rejected or revised by the Technical Committee during the development of its ROC. The motions allowed by NFPA rules provide the opportunity to propose amendments to the text of a proposed code or standard based on these published Proposals, Comments, and Committee actions. Thus, the list of allowable motions include motions to accept Proposals and Comments in whole or in part as submitted or as modified by a Technical Committee action. Motions are also available to reject an accepted Comment in whole or part. In addition, Motions can be made to return an entire Technical Committee Report or a portion of the Report to the Technical Committee for further study.
The NFPA Annual Meeting, also known as the NFPA Conference & Expo, takes place in June of each year. A second Fall membership meeting was discontinued in 2004, so the NFPA Technical Committee Report Session now runs once each year at the Annual Meeting in June.
Who Can Make Amending Motions. NFPA rules also define those authorized to make amending motions. In many cases, the maker of the motion is limited by NFPA rules to the original submitter of the Proposal or Comment or his or her duly authorized representative. In other cases, such as a Motion to Reject an accepted Comment, or to Return a Technical Committee Report or a portion of a Technical Committee Report for Further Study, anyone can make these motions. For a complete explanation, the NFPA Regs should be consulted.
xiii
Action on Motions at the Association Technical Meeting. In order to actually make a Certified Amending Motion at the Association Technical Meeting, the maker of the motion must sign in at least an hour before the session begins. In this way a final list of motions can be set in advance of the session. At the session, each proposed document up for consideration is presented by a motion to adopt the Technical Committee Report on the document. Following each such motion, the presiding officer in charge of the session opens the floor to motions on the document from the final list of Certified Amending Motions followed by any permissible Follow-Up Motions. Debate and voting on each motion proceeds in accordance with NFPA rules. NFPA membership is not required in order to make or speak to a motion, but voting is limited to NFPA members who have joined at least 180 days prior to the Association Technical Meeting and have registered for the meeting. At the close of debate on each motion, voting takes place, and the motion requires a majority vote to carry. In order to amend a Technical Committee Report, successful amending motions must be confirmed by the responsible Technical Committee, which conducts a written ballot on all successful amending motions following the meeting and prior to the document being forwarded to the Standards Council for issuance.
Standards Council Issuance
One of the primary responsibilities of the NFPA Standards Council, as the overseer of the NFPA codes and standards development process, is to act as the official issuer of all NFPA codes and standards. When it convenes to issue NFPA documents, it also hears any appeals related to the document. Appeals are an important part of assuring that all NFPA rules have been followed and that due process and fairness have been upheld throughout the codes and standards development process. The Council considers appeals both in writing and through the conduct of hearings at which all interested parties can participate. It decides appeals based on the entire record of the process as well as all submissions on the appeal. After deciding all appeals related to a document before it, the Council, if appropriate, proceeds to issue the document as an official NFPA code or standard. Subject only to limited review by the NFPA Board of Directors, the decision of the Standards Council is final, and the new NFPA code or standard becomes effective twenty days after Standards Council issuance.
791-1
Report on Comments A2011 — Copyright, NFPA NFPA 791
Report of the Technical Correlating Committee on
National Electrical Code® (NEC-AAC)
Michael J. Johnston, ChairNational Electrical Contractors Association, MD [IM]
Mark W. Earley, Secretary (Staff-Nonvoting) National Fire Protection Association, MA
Jean A. O’Connor, Recording Secretary (NV)National Fire Protection Association, MA
James E. Brunssen, Telcordia, NJ [UT] Rep. Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions Merton W. Bunker, Jr., US Department of State, VA [U] (VL to NFPA 110, NFPA 111, NFPA 70, NFPA 70B, NFPA 70E, NFPA 79, NFPA 790, NFPA 791) James M. Daly, General Cable Corporation, NJ [M] Rep. National Electrical Manufacturers AssociationWilliam R. Drake, Actuant Electrical, CA [M] William T. Fiske, Intertek Testing Services, NY [RT] Palmer L. Hickman, National Joint Apprentice & Training Committee, MD [L] Rep. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers David L. Hittinger, Independent Electrical Contractors of Greater Cincinnati, OH [IM] Rep. Independent Electrical Contractors, Inc. John R. Kovacik, Underwriters Laboratories Inc., IL [RT] Neil F. LaBrake, Jr., National Grid, NY [UT] Rep. Electric Light & Power Group/EEI Danny Liggett, The DuPont Company, Inc., TX [U] Rep. American Chemistry Council Richard P. Owen, Oakdale, MN [E] Rep. International Association of Electrical Inspectors
Alternates
Thomas L. Adams, Engineering Consultant, IL [UT] (Alt. to Neil F. LaBrake, Jr.)Lawrence S. Ayer, Biz Com Electric, Inc., OH [IM] (Alt. to David L. Hittinger) James T. Dollard, Jr., IBEW Local Union 98, PA [L] (Alt. to Palmer L. Hickman)Stanley J. Folz, Morse Electric Company, NV [IM] (Alt. to Michael J. Johnston)Ernest J. Gallo, Telcordia Technologies, Inc., NJ [UT] (Alt. to James E. Brunssen)Daniel J. Kissane, Legrand/Pass & Seymour, NY [M] (Alt. to James M. Daly) Robert A. McCullough, Tuckerton, NJ [E] (Alt. to Richard P. Owen)Michael E. McNeil, FMC Bio Polymer, ME [U] (Alt. to Danny Liggett) Rep. American Chemistry Council Mark C. Ode, Underwriters Laboratories Inc., AZ [RT] (Alt. to John R. Kovacik)
Nonvoting
Richard G. Biermann, Biermann Electric Company, Inc., IA [IM] (Member Emeritus) D. Harold Ware, Libra Electric Company, OK [IM] (Member Emeritus)
Staff Liaison: Mark W. Earley
Committee Scope: This Committee shall have primary responsibility for documents on minimizing the risk of electricity as a source of electric shock and as a potential ignition source of fires and explosions. It shall also be responsible for text to minimize the propagation of fire and explosions due to electrical installations.
Report of the Committee on
Electrical Equipment Evaluation (EEE-AAA)
Tim McClintock, ChairWayne County, Ohio, OH [E]
Rep. International Association of Electrical Inspectors
William E. Anderson, The Procter & Gamble Company, OH [U] Rep. American Chemistry Council Julian R. Burns, Quality Power Solutions, Inc., NC [IM] Rep. Independent Electrical Contractors, Inc.
William Burr, Canadian Standards Association, Canada [RT] Keith D. Gershon, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, CA [U] Gordon Gillerman, National Institute of Standards & Technology, MD [C] Nancy W. Gunderson, Square D Company/Schneider Electric, NC [M] Joseph P. Halferty, Jr., United Inspection Agency, Inc., PA [L] Rep. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Edward Karl, Applied Materials, CA [M] Charles F. Mello, Underwriters Laboratories Inc., WA [RT] Russell J. Nichols, SGS US Testing Company Inc., NJ [RT] Kenneth J. Rempe, Siemens Industry Inc., GA [M] Rep. National Electrical Manufacturers Association John E. Staires, City of Tulsa, Oklahoma, OK [E] Lawrence E. Todd, Intertek Testing Services, OR [RT]Richard S. Trainor, TUV Rheinland of North America, Inc., MA [RT]
Alternates
Peter E. Bowers, Satellite Electric Company, Inc., MD [IM] (Alt. to Julian R. Burns)Ron B. Chilton, North Carolina Department of Insurance, NC [E] (Alt. to Tim McClintock) Michael J. Farrell, III, Lucas County Building Regulations, MI [L] (Alt. to Joseph P. Halferty, Jr.)Jeff Hamilton, Applied Materials, CA [M] (Alt. to Edward Karl) Mark L. Lewandowski, The Procter & Gamble Company, OH [U] (Alt. to William E. Anderson)
Staff Liaison: Richard J. Roux
Committee Scope: This committee shall have primary responsibility for documents covering the performance of field evaluations of electrical equipment. This committee shall also have primary responsibility for documents on the competency of companies and individuals within those companies conducting field evaluations. This committee shall have primary jurisdiction, but shall report to the Association through the National Electrical Code Technical Correlating Committee.
These lists represent 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. A key to classifications is found at the front of this book.
The Committee on Electrical Equipment Evaluation is presenting two Reports for adoption, as follows:
Report I of this Report on Comments was prepared by the Technical Committee on Electrical Equipment Evaluation, and documents its action on the comments received on its Report on Proposals on NFPA 790, Standard for Competency of Third Party Field Evaluation Bodies, 2012 edition, as published in the Report on Proposals for the 2011 Annual Revision Cycle.
The report on NFPA 790 has been submitted to letter ballot of the Technical Committee on Electrical Equipment Evaluation, which consists of 15 voting members. The results of the balloting, after circulation of any negative votes, can be found in the report.
This Report on Comments has also been submitted to the Technical Correlating Committee on the National Electrical Code (TCC) in two Parts. Part 1 is a letter ballot on the TCC Actions, if any; and Part II is a letter ballot on the Report as a whole. The TCC, which consists of 12 voting members, voted as follows:
Part 1: 12 voted affirmatively. Part 2: 12 voted affirmatively.
Report II of this Report on Comments was prepared by the Technical Committee on Electrical Equipment Evaluation, and documents its action on the comments received on its Report on Proposals on NFPA 791, Recommended Practice and Procedures for Unlabeled Electrical Equipment Evaluation, 2012 edition, as published in the Report on Proposals for the 2011 Annual Revision Cycle.
The report on NFPA 791 has been submitted to letter ballot of the Technical Committee on Electrical Equipment Evaluation, which consists of 15 voting members. The results of the balloting, after circulation of any negative votes, can be found in the report.
This Report on Comments has also been submitted to the Technical Correlating Committee on the National Electrical Code (TCC) in two Parts. Part 1 is a letter ballot on the TCC Actions, if any; and Part II is a letter ballot on the Report as a whole. The TCC, which consists of 12 voting members, voted as follows:
Part 1: 12 voted affirmatively. Part 2: 12 voted affirmatively.
791-2
Report on Comments A2011 — Copyright, NFPA NFPA 791______________________________________________________________ 791-1 Log #1 EEE-AAA Final Action: Accept(Entire Document)______________________________________________________________ TCC Action: The Technical Correlating Committee advises that scope statements are the responsibility of the Technical Correlating Committee and the Technical Correlating Committee Accepts the committee action.Submitter: Technical Correlating Committee on National Electrical Code®, Comment on Proposal No: 791-1Recommendation: The Technical Correlating Committee advises that Chapter Scope statements are the responsibility of the Technical Correlating Committee and the Technical Correlating Committee Accepts the 791 Technical Committee actions. In addition, the Technical Correlating Committee directs that the Technical Committee consider the following actions within this proposal: 1) Review the entire document and revise it to comply with 1.8.1 of the NFPA Manual of Style which states that subdivisions shall contain at least two subdivisions (example, 1.1.1 should be followed by 1.1.2). 2) Revise section 2.1, General, to comply with 2.4.1.4.1 of the NFPA Style Manual to remove mandatory requirements. 3) Revise section 3.1, General, to include subsections 3.1.1 and 3.1.2 in accordance with the NFPA Style Manual, section 2.4.1.5.1. 4) In 3.3.5, the Technical Correlating Committee requests that the Technical Committee consider using the 2011 NEC definition of “Equipment”. Substantiation: This is a direction from the Technical Correlating Committee on National Electrical Code® in accordance with 3.4.2 and 3.4.3 of the Regulations Governing Committee Projects. Committee Meeting Action: Accept Revise 2.1 to read as follows: 2.1 General. The documents or portions thereof listed in this chapter are referenced within this document recommended practice and shall should be considered part of the requirements recommendations of this document. Revise the text of 3.1 to read as follows: 3.1 General. 3.1.1 The definitions contained in this chapter apply to the terms used in this recommended practice. 3.1.2 Where terms are not defined in this chapter or within another chapter, they should be defined using their ordinarily accepted meanings within the context in which they are used. Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, 11th edition, is the source for the ordinarily accepted meaning. Committee Statement: The Technical Committee accepts the direction of the TCC to consider the actions identified by TCC Comment 791-1 (Log #1): 1) the TC has reviewed the entire document and has determined the editorial numbering changes included in the public ROP Draft are acceptable. Also see action on Comments 791-23 (Log #19) and 791-25 (Log # 20). 2) the TC edits 2.1 as per the recommendation to comply with MOS 2.4.1.4.1. 3) the TC edits 3.1 to comply with MOS 2.4.1.5.1. 4) see action and statement on Comment 791-7 (Log 16). Number Eligible to Vote: 15 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 13 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Burr, W., Karl, E.______________________________________________________________ 791-2 Log #15 EEE-AAA Final Action: Accept(1.2.3 (New) )______________________________________________________________ Submitter: Chuck Mello, Vacouver, WAComment on Proposal No: 791-6Recommendation: Add relocated text from 1.3.1 as new section 1.2.3 to read as follows: 1.2.3 The purpose of the evaluation is to assist regulating authorities who make product and related installation approval decisions.Substantiation: The last sentence in 1.3.1 of the NPFA 791 ROP Draft does not fit the style or set a recommendation for application of the document. Since it states a “purpose” this sentence fits into Section 1.2 as one of the purposes for the document. The deletion of the text for 1.3.1 is completed in a companion comment. This comment was the result of the work of a Technical Committee task group to address several items arising from the editorial review. The TG consisted of Tim McClintock, Ron Chilton and Chuck Mello and this comment was unanimously agreed to by the Task Group. Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 15 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 13 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Burr, W., Karl, E.______________________________________________________________ 791-3 Log #21 EEE-AAA Final Action: Accept(1.2.3 (New) )______________________________________________________________ Submitter: Chuck Mello, Vacouver, WAComment on Proposal No: 791-6Recommendation: Add relocated text from 1.3.1 as new section 1.2.3 to read as follows: 1.2.3 The purpose of the evaluation is to assist regulating authorities who make product and related installation approval decisions.
Substantiation: The last sentence in 1.3.1 of the NFPA 791 ROP Draft does not fit the style or set a recommendation for application of the document. Since it states a “purpose” this sentence fits into Section 1.2 as one of the purposes for the document. The deletion of the text for 1.3.1 is completed in a companion comment. This comment was the result of the work of a Technical Committee task group to address several items arising from the editorial review. The TG consisted of Tim McClintock, Ron Chilton and Chuck Mello and this comment was unanimously agreed to by the Task Group. Committee Meeting Action: AcceptCommittee Statement: The Technical Committee notes that this comment is identical to Comment 791-2 (Log #15). Number Eligible to Vote: 15 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 13 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Burr, W., Karl, E.______________________________________________________________ 791-4 Log #4 EEE-AAA Final Action: Accept(1.3.1)______________________________________________________________ Submitter: Chuck Mello, Vacouver, WAComment on Proposal No: 791-6Recommendation: Delete the last sentence of 1.3.1 in the ROP Draft and relocate to a new section 1.2.3 so Section 1.3.1 reads as follows: 1.3.1 New or used electrical equipment not listed or labeled as a complete unit or assembly is considered to be unevaluated by a third party and will be subject to an evaluation as required by the AHJ. The purpose of the evaluation is to assist regulating authorities who make product and related installation approval decisions.Substantiation: The last sentence in 1.3.1 of the NPFA 791 ROP Draft does not fit the style or set a recommendation for application of the document. Since it states a “purpose” this sentence fits into Section 1.2 as one of the purpose statements for the document. The addition of the text as new section 1.2.3 is completed in a companion comment. This comment was the result of the work of a Technical Committee task group to address several items arising from the editorial review. The TG consisted of Tim McClintock, Ron Chilton and Chuck Mello and this comment was unanimously agreed to by the Task Group. Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 15 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 13 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Burr, W., Karl, E.______________________________________________________________ 791-5 Log #3 EEE-AAA Final Action: Accept in Principle(3.3.1 Creepage Distance)______________________________________________________________ Submitter: Nancy W. Gunderson, Square D Company/Schneider ElectricComment on Proposal No: 791-9Recommendation: Revise text to read as follows: 3.3 [new] Clearance Distance. Shortest distance through air between two conductive parts. 3.3.1 Creepage Distance. Shortest distance along the surface of the insulating material between two conductive parts. Substantiation: Action on Proposal 791-9a removed the definition for creepage distance when section 4.2 was deleted in response to Proposal 791-11, and there was no longer a reference to the term. Accompanying comment requests to add creepage and clearance requirements into Construction Inspection which was section 6, and thus a definition, would be appropriate. Additionally, definition for clearance distance should be added to assist in distinguishing the terms. Committee Meeting Action: Accept in Principle Revise text to read as follows: 3.3.x Clearance Distance. Shortest distance through air between two conductive parts. 3.3.y Creepage Distance. Shortest distance along the surface of the insulating material between two conductive parts. Renumber remaining sections. Committee Statement: The Technical Committee accepts the submitter’s text and renumbers and adds to 3.3 in alphabetical order. See Comment 791-22 (Log #2). Number Eligible to Vote: 15 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 13 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Burr, W., Karl, E.______________________________________________________________ 791-6 Log #22 EEE-AAA Final Action: Reject(3.3.3 Electrical Equipment)______________________________________________________________ Submitter: Kenneth J. Rempe, Siemens Industry Inc.Comment on Proposal No: 791-1Recommendation: Delete the following definition: 3.3.3 Electrical Equipment. Any device, appliance, or machine that generates, conducts, or utilizes electrical energy.Substantiation: The TCC recommended consideration of this Definition from the 2011 NEC. The term Electrical is an adjective intended to describe or modify a specific kind of equipment. Delete the Definition of 3.3.3 and renumber remaining definitions.
791-3
Report on Comments A2011 — Copyright, NFPA NFPA 791 Definition in 3.3.5 “Equipment” is the Definition of Equipment in the 2011 NEC, and is the same as proposed for NFPA 790 (paragraph 3.3.1). The terms equipment and electrical equipment are used many times in the NEC and NFPA 79, with only the definition in 3.3.5 in both documents. Committee Meeting Action: RejectCommittee Statement: Both terms “equipment” and “electrical equipment” are used in this document. In comment 791-1 (Log #1), the TCC did not indicate that the term “electrical equipment” was incorrect or not needed, only that the definition of “equipment” should be correlated with the NEC. See action on Comment 791-7 (Log #16). See committee comment 791-27a (Log #CC1). Number Eligible to Vote: 15 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 13 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Burr, W., Karl, E.______________________________________________________________ 791-7 Log #16 EEE-AAA Final Action: Accept in Part(3.3.4 Equipment)______________________________________________________________ Submitter: Chuck Mello, Underwriters LaboratoriesComment on Proposal No: 791-1Recommendation: Replace the definition of Electrical Equipment from the ROP Draft to read as follows: 3.3.4 Equipment. A general term, including fittings, devices, appliances, luminaires, apparatus, machinery, and the like used as a part of, or in connection with, an electrical installation. Substantiation: This is the definition from the 2008 NEC with the accepted change that will appear in the 2011 NEC. The change in the NEC is the deletion of the term “material” which is vague and generally speaking field evaluations cannot be completed on materials. The use of this definition aligns this document with the NEC. Acceptance of this comment may require moving to Section 3.2 and renumbering all succeeding definitions. Committee Meeting Action: Accept in PartSection 3.3.4 to read as follows: 3.3.4 Equipment. A general term, including fittings, devices, appliances, luminaires, apparatus, machinery, and the like used as a part of, or in connection with, an electrical installation. [70:2011] Renumber remaining sections. Committee Statement: The Technical Committee accepts the submitter’s definition of “equipment.” The TC does not accept deletion of the term “electrical equipment” as both terms “equipment” and “electrical equipment” are used in this document. In Comment 791-1 (Log #1), the TCC did not indicate that the term “electrical equipment” was incorrect or not needed, only that the definition of “equipment” should be correlated with the NEC. Number Eligible to Vote: 15 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 13 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Burr, W., Karl, E.______________________________________________________________ 791-8 Log #17 EEE-AAA Final Action: Accept in Principle(3.3.8 Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory (NRTL))______________________________________________________________ Submitter: Chuck Mello, Underwriters LaboratoriesComment on Proposal No: 791-1Recommendation: Revise Section 3.3.8 from the ROP Draft to read as follows: 3.3.8 Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory (NRTL). An identifier used A recognition issued by the United States Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Fed OSHA) of laboratories that perform testing per nationally recognized standards and certify products as stipulated in the Federal Register.Substantiation: Federal OSHA does not use the term “identifier” when referring to Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratories. OSHA “recognizes” NRTLs with as suitable to provide testing and certification services to specified standards. The term “identifier” has a different application within OSHA and if OSHA were to use or adopt this document, this term could create confusion as to how it is intended to be applied in this document. Committee Meeting Action: Accept in Principle Revise Section 3.3.8 from the ROP Draft to read as follows: 3.3.8 Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory (NRTL). A laboratory that performs testing per nationally recognized standards and certifies products as stipulated in the Code of Federal Regulations and is recognized by the United States Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Fed OSHA). Committee Statement: The Technical Committee accepts the submitter’s text and edits for clarity. Number Eligible to Vote: 15 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 13 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Burr, W., Karl, E.______________________________________________________________ 791-9 Log #18 EEE-AAA Final Action: Accept(4.1.1)______________________________________________________________ Submitter: Chuck Mello, Underwriters LaboratoriesComment on Proposal No: 791-1Recommendation: Revise the text of Section 4.1.1 in the ROP Draft to read as follows: 4.1.1 General. The following information should be provided for all inspections evaluations:
Items 1 to 4 in the list below this section are not intended to be changed by action on this comment. Substantiation: The revised text is to be consistent with the use of the general term “evaluation” in both NFPA 790 and NFPA 791. Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 15 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 13 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Burr, W., Karl, E.______________________________________________________________ 791-10 Log #9 EEE-AAA Final Action: Accept(4.2)______________________________________________________________ Submitter: Chuck Mello, Vacouver, WAComment on Proposal No: 791-1Recommendation: Revise to read as follows: 4.2 Used Equipment. Evaluating used equipment involves should include additional considerations and preparation. Normal wear, intentional modification, and abnormal events that can cause mechanical and electrical changes that affect conformity should be considered.Substantiation: The ROP Draft text does not comply with the NFPA Manual of Style Sections 2.4.1.1 and 2.4.1.2 because there are no recommendations stated. As published there are only explanatory materials which can only be in an Annex. The revised text provides the language necessary to provide this information as recommendations. This comment was the result of the work of a Technical Committee task group to address several items arising from the editorial review. The TG consisted of Tim McClintock, Ron Chilton and Chuck Mello and this comment was unanimously agreed to by the Task Group. Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 15 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 13 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Burr, W., Karl, E.______________________________________________________________ 791-11 Log #5 EEE-AAA Final Action: Accept in Principle(4.2.2(1))______________________________________________________________ Submitter: Chuck Mello, Vacouver, WAComment on Proposal No: 791-19Recommendation: Revise to read as follows: (1) Damaged Components. Inspection of Mmechanical components, such as enclosures, conduit, and fittings, and electrical devices should be completed to identify any that are visibly damaged or deformed which often render a product noncompliant andor require replacement. Those items known to be damaged should be reviewed with the evaluating body in advance when possible. Substantiation: The ROP Draft text does not comply with the NFPA Manual of Style Sections 2.4.1.1 and 2.4.1.2 because only the last sentence has a recommendation stated. As published the first sentence only provide explanatory material which can only be in an Annex. The revised text provides the language necessary to provide this information as a recommendation. This comment was the result of the work of a Technical Committee task group to address several items arising from the editorial review. The TG consisted of Tim McClintock, Ron Chilton and Chuck Mello and this comment was unanimously agreed to by the Task Group. Committee Meeting Action: Accept in Principle Revise to read as follows: (1) Damaged Components. Inspection of Mmechanical components, such as enclosures, conduit, and fittings, and electrical devices should be completed to identify any that are visible visibly damaged or deformity deformed which often could render a product noncompliant and or require replacement. Those items known to be damaged should be reviewed with the evaluating body in advance, when possible.Committee Statement: The Technical Committee accepts the submitter’s text and edits for clarity. Number Eligible to Vote: 15 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 13 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Burr, W., Karl, E.______________________________________________________________ 791-12 Log #6 EEE-AAA Final Action: Accept in Principle(4.2.2(2))______________________________________________________________ Submitter: Chuck Mello, Vacouver, WAComment on Proposal No: 791-19Recommendation: Revise to read as follows: (2) Equipment Not Suitable for Use. An assessment of Tthe environment surrounding equipment should be completed to observe often changes that have occurred over time. Changes to building construction, moving the equipment, and installing other equipment close by should be reviewed for any by can affect on compliance in the changed environment. Enclosure ratings, devices that penetrate enclosures, and the environment surrounding the equipment should be reviewed in advance when possible. Substantiation: The ROP Draft text does not comply with the NFPA Manual of Style Sections 2.4.1.1 and 2.4.1.2 because only the last sentence has a recommendation stated. As published the first two sentences only provide explanatory material which can only be in an Annex. The revised text provides the language necessary to provide this information as recommendations.
791-4
Report on Comments A2011 — Copyright, NFPA NFPA 791 This comment was the result of the work of a Technical Committee task group to address several items arising from the editorial review. The TG consisted of Tim McClintock, Ron Chilton and Chuck Mello and this comment was unanimously agreed to by the Task Group. Committee Meeting Action: Accept in Principle Revise to read as follows: (2) Suitability for Use Equipment Not Suitable for Use. An assessment of Tthe environment surrounding equipment should be completed to observe often changes that have occurred over time. Changes to building construction, moving the equipment, and installing other equipment close by should be reviewed for any by can affect on compliance in the changed environment. Enclosure ratings, devices that penetrate enclosures, and the environment surrounding the equipment should be reviewed in advance when possible. Committee Statement: The Technical Committee accepts the submitter’s text and changes the title from “Equipment Not Suitable for Use” to “Suitability for Use”. The revised title better represents the text that follows. Number Eligible to Vote: 15 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 13 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Burr, W., Karl, E.______________________________________________________________ 791-13 Log #7 EEE-AAA Final Action: Accept in Principle(4.2.2(3))______________________________________________________________ Submitter: Chuck Mello, Vacouver, WAComment on Proposal No: 791-19Recommendation: Revise to read as follows: (3) Absence of Drawings. Availability of technical drawing or schematics should be ensured in advance when possible. A lack of technical drawings or schematics may increase the complexity or greatly hinder an evaluation until and accurate drawings should be produced.Substantiation: The ROP Draft text does not comply with the NFPA Manual of Style Sections 2.4.1.1 and 2.4.1.2 because the one sentence did not have a recommendation stated. The revised text provides the language necessary to provide this information as recommendations. This comment was the result of the work of a Technical Committee task group to address several items arising from the editorial review. The TG consisted of Tim McClintock, Ron Chilton and Chuck Mello and this comment was unanimously agreed to by the Task Group. Committee Meeting Action: Accept in Principle Revise to read as follows: (3) Availability Absence of Drawings. Availability of technical drawings or schematics should be ensured in advance when possible. A lack of technical drawings or schematics may increase the complexity or greatly hinder an evaluation until and accurate drawings should be produced.Committee Statement: The Technical Committee accepts the submitter’s text and changes “Absence” to “Availability” and “drawing” to “drawings.” Number Eligible to Vote: 15 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 13 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Burr, W., Karl, E.______________________________________________________________ 791-14 Log #8 EEE-AAA Final Action: Accept in Principle in Part(4.2.2(4) and A.4.2.2(4) (New) )______________________________________________________________ Submitter: Chuck Mello, Vacouver, WAComment on Proposal No: 791-19Recommendation: Revise to read as follows: (4)* Absence of Manufacturer or Technical Support. Access to the original equipment manufacturers technical information or technical support should be ensured in advance where possible. Add new annex item as follows: A.4.2.2(4) Access to the original equipment manufacturer data simplifies the evaluation process. At times the manufacturer can supply information needed to determine conformance, which is not necessarily commonly known to others. Without the original manufacturer’s support, extra time and testing could be necessary to complete an evaluation.Substantiation: The ROP Draft text does not comply with the NFPA Manual of Style Sections 2.4.1.1 and 2.4.1.2 because the text did not have a recommendation stated. The revised text provides the language necessary to provide this information as recommendations. The original text was relocated to a new Annex items as A.4.2.2(4) so that information is captured for use. This comment was the result of the work of a Technical Committee task group to address several items arising from the editorial review. The TG consisted of Tim McClintock, Ron Chilton and Chuck Mello and this comment was unanimously agreed to by the Task Group. Committee Meeting Action: Accept in Principle in Part Revise to read as follows: (4)* Availability Absence of Manufacturer or Technical Support. Availability of Access to the original equipment the manufacturer’s technical information or technical support should be ensured in advance where possible. Add new annex item as follows: A.4.2.2(4) Availability of Access to the original equipment manufacturer’s data simplifies the evaluation process. At times the manufacturer can supply information needed to determine conformance. which is not necessarily commonly known to others. Without the original manufacturer’s support, extra time and testing could be necessary to complete an evaluation.
Committee Statement: The Technical Committee accepts the submitter’s text and edits for clarity. The TC does not accept “which is not necessarily commonly known to others” as it does not add clarity. Number Eligible to Vote: 15 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 13 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Burr, W., Karl, E.______________________________________________________________ 791-15 Log #10 EEE-AAA Final Action: Accept in Principle(4.3.2 and A.4.3.2 (New) )______________________________________________________________ Submitter: Chuck Mello, Vacouver, WAComment on Proposal No: 791-1Recommendation: Revise to read as follows: 4.3.2* Primary Standard. The primary standard to be used should be a nationally recognized product safety standard written and maintained by a standards development organization that issues product safety standards such as Underwriters Laboratories, Factory Mutual Research Corporation, and Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers. These standards are generally adopted by the American National Standards Institute. Supplementary standards can include ones from manufacturing organizations such as the National Electrical Manufacturers Association or general safety bodies such as the National Fire Protection Association. Add new annex item as follows: A.4.3.2 These primary standards are generally adopted by the American National Standards Institute. Supplementary standards can include ones from manufacturing organizations such as the National Electrical Manufacturers Association or general safety bodies such as the National Fire Protection Association.Substantiation: The ROP Draft text does not comply with the NFPA Manual of Style Sections 2.4.1.1 and 2.4.1.2 because the second and third sentences in the text did not have a recommendation stated. The explanatory text was relocated to a new Annex item as A4.3.2 with an editorial change for clarity so that information is captured for use. This comment was the result of the work of a Technical Committee task group to address several items arising from the editorial review. The TG consisted of Tim McClintock, Ron Chilton and Chuck Mello and this comment was unanimously agreed to by the Task Group. Committee Meeting Action: Accept in Principle Add new annex item as follows: A.4.3.2 The primary standards are generally adopted by the American National Standards Institute. Supplementary standards can include ones from manufacturing organizations such as the National Electrical Manufacturers Association or general safety bodies such as the National Fire Protection Association.Committee Statement: The Technical Committee accepts the submitter’s text and changes “these” to “the” for clarity and continuity from 4.3.2. Number Eligible to Vote: 15 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 13 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Burr, W., Karl, E.Comment on Affirmative: GILLERMAN, G.: References to specific standards development organizations and ANSI are not necessary for the clarity of this clause and associated annexes. This standard may have greater applicability, if these specific organizational references are deleted. ______________________________________________________________ 791-16 Log #11 EEE-AAA Final Action: Accept(5.1)______________________________________________________________ Submitter: Chuck Mello, Vacouver, WAComment on Proposal No: 791-1Recommendation: Revise to read as follows: 5.1 General. This chapter provides an overview of typical construction requirements that should be considered in the evaluation.Substantiation: The ROP Draft text does not comply with the NFPA Manual of Style Sections 2.4.1.1 and 2.4.1.2 because the sentence does not have a recommendation stated. The revised text now provides this information in the form of a recommendation. This comment was the result of the work of a Technical Committee task group to address several items arising from the editorial review. The TG consisted of Tim McClintock, Ron Chilton and Chuck Mello and this comment was unanimously agreed to by the Task Group. Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 15 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 13 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Burr, W., Karl, E.______________________________________________________________ 791-17 Log #12 EEE-AAA Final Action: Accept(5.10(1))______________________________________________________________ Submitter: Chuck Mello, Vacouver, WAComment on Proposal No: 791-1Recommendation: Revise to read as follows: (1) Correct color code or other identification used [Where color is used, the grounded (neutral) and grounding (equipment grounding and bonding) conductors have specified colors.]
791-5
Report on Comments A2011 — Copyright, NFPA NFPA 791Substantiation: The ROP Draft text does not comply with the NFPA Manual of Style Sections 2.4.1.1 and 2.4.1.2 because the sentence in brackets does not have a recommendation stated. The revised text deletes this information since it is commonly published in the applicable product standards and the NEC. The revised text provides the necessary information to alert the user that there may be color coding requirements to consider. This comment was the result of the work of a Technical Committee task group to address several items arising from the editorial review. The TG consisted of Tim McClintock, Ron Chilton and Chuck Mello and this comment was unanimously agreed to by the Task Group. Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 15 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 13 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Burr, W., Karl, E.______________________________________________________________ 791-18 Log #13 EEE-AAA Final Action: Accept in Principle(6.1)______________________________________________________________ Submitter: Chuck Mello, Vacouver, WAComment on Proposal No: 791-1Recommendation: Revise to read as follows: 6.1 Application. The electrical testing program should follow the applicable standards as closely as practical considering the limits of a nonlaboratory setting and the need for the equipment to perform its needed function after the test. The following typical tests and measurements on complete units or subassemblies should be completed as specified in the applicable standard are often performed on complete units or subassemblies: (1) Insulation resistance test on power circuit with all sensitive electronic components such as line filters and Rf filters disconnected (2) Ground continuity of bonded parts to supply equipment grounding conductor termination point (3) Measurement of the input voltage while under maximum design load (4) Measurement of the input full load current while at the maximum design load normal operation (5) Temperature rise testing of terminals and heat producing devices (transformers, power supplies, coils, heaters) and components that could be affected by an elevated ambient caused by other heat producing components (6) Safety interlock circuit function testing (6) Safety interlock circuit function testing (7) Emergency stop Substantiation: The ROP Draft text does not comply with the NFPA Manual of Style Sections 2.4.1.1 and 2.4.1.2 because the second sentence does not have a recommendation stated. The revised text provides that each sentence includes a recommendation as required by the NFPA Manual of Style. This comment was the result of the work of a Technical Committee task group to address several items arising from the editorial review. The TG consisted of Tim McClintock, Ron Chilton and Chuck Mello and this comment was unanimously agreed to by the Task Group. Committee Meeting Action: Accept in Principle Revise to read as follows: 6.1 Application. The electrical testing program should follow the applicable standards as closely as practical considering the limits of a nonlaboratory setting and the need for the equipment to perform its needed all required functions after the test. The following typical tests and measurements on complete units or subassemblies should be completed as specified in the applicable standard are often performed on complete units or subassemblies: (1) Insulation resistance test on power circuit with all sensitive electronic components such as line filters and Rf filters disconnected (2) Ground continuity of bonded parts to supply equipment grounding conductor termination point (3) Measurement of the input voltage while under maximum design load (4) Measurement of the input full load current while at the maximum design load normal operation (5) Temperature rise testing of terminals and heat producing devices (transformers, power supplies, coils, heaters) and components that could be affected by an elevated ambient caused by other heat producing components (6) Safety interlock circuit function testing (6) Safety interlock circuit function testing (7) Emergency stop Committee Statement: The Technical Committee accepts the submitter’s text and edits for clarity. Number Eligible to Vote: 15 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 13 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Burr, W., Karl, E.______________________________________________________________ 791-19 Log #23 EEE-AAA Final Action: Reject(6.1)______________________________________________________________Submitter: Wendell Whistler, Intertek Testing ServiceComment on Proposal No: 791-23Recommendation: Revise text to read as follows: Ensuring the product can be installed in accordance with the electrical code including but not limited to the following: (1) Verifying presence of complete equipment nameplate(s). Nameplate is complete including the applicable information based on the standard and the NEC
(2) Verifying that equipment construction provides for a compliant code installation. according to Provisions for mounting in accordance with the NEC (3) Verifying iInstallation instructions include sufficient detail (showing raceway entry points, supply conductor wiring methods, supply conductor types, field wiring torque values, and installer supplied overcurrent protection) (4) Verifying adequate wire bending space is provided for all field wiring terminals in accordance with the standard and the NEC.Substantiation: The AHJ is used to verifying information in accordance with the NEC and this is the gold standard used by the jurisdictions Committee Meeting Action: RejectCommittee Statement: The document is set to be generally applied and the NEC is not adopted universally in all jurisdictions. For example we expect FEBs to possibly be recognized in a Canadian Province and in Canada the Canadian Electrical Code, Part 1 applies. In addition, the text for 6.1(2) is now adding a limitation to this item for only one of many considerations for proper installation. The additional references do not add any clarity and may imply an unwanted limitation. Number Eligible to Vote: 15 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 13 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Burr, W., Karl, E.______________________________________________________________ 791-20 Log #24 EEE-AAA Final Action: Reject(6.4)______________________________________________________________ Submitter: Wendell Whistler, Intertek Testing ServiceComment on Proposal No: 791-27Recommendation: Revise text to read as follows: 6.4 Main Overcurrent Protection Device (OCPD). Main overcurrent protection supplied by the manufacturer or field installed should be verified as suitable for the loads involved, voltage, and interrupting rating. either supplied internally or specified by the installation instructions. Main overcurrent protection that is field installed and specified by the installation instructions should be verified as suitable for the loads involved, voltage, and interrupting rating.Substantiation: This would allow for field installed MAINS overcurrent devices to be evaluated as part of the equipment installation. Committee Meeting Action: RejectCommittee Statement: The revised text is taken from a previous document and does not reflect the text from the ROP Draft. The proposed revisions would require the FEB to conduct an installation inspection of devices that are not part of the equipment contracted for the Field Evaluation. If the installation instructions are present, as indicated in the text, then the AHJs should be completing the inspection of these field installed devices for conformance to the installation instructions and equipment markings. Number Eligible to Vote: 15 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 13 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Burr, W., Karl, E.______________________________________________________________ 791-21 Log #25 EEE-AAA Final Action: Accept(6.9(8))______________________________________________________________ Submitter: Wendell Whistler, Intertek Testing ServiceComment on Proposal No: 791-32Recommendation: Revise text as follows: (8) Separation of low voltage, Class 2 or Class 3 conductors circuit from power conductorsSubstantiation: The word conductor needed to be made pluralCommittee Meeting Action: AcceptCommittee Statement: The Technical Committee notes that the submitter intends to reference to 5.10(8) of the ROP Draft. Number Eligible to Vote: 15 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 13 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Burr, W., Karl, E.______________________________________________________________ 791-22 Log #2 EEE-AAA Final Action: Accept in Principle(6.12 (New) )______________________________________________________________ Submitter: Nancy W. Gunderson, Square D Company/Schneider ElectricComment on Proposal No: 791-11Recommendation: Add new text to read as follows: 6.12 Distances between exposed energized parts. Inspect distances between exposed energized parts for adequate creepage and clearance distances for the voltage involved.Substantiation: Action on Proposal 791-11 deleted Chapter 4 as most all was redundant to material in Chapter 6, Construction Inspection. However, the requirement to inspect the clearance and creepage distances was not in the chapter 6 material. Add new item to the Construction Inspection section to retain requirement to inspect the adequacy of basic spacings. Committee Meeting Action: Accept in Principle Add new text to read as follows: 5.13 Distances between exposed energized parts. Inspect distances between exposed energized parts for adequate creepage distance and clearance distance for the voltage involved.Committee Statement: The Technical Committee accepts the submitter’s text and relocates the text to 5.13 of the ROP Draft. Also, the committee changes
791-6
Report on Comments A2011 — Copyright, NFPA NFPA 791“creepage and clearance distances” to “creepage distance” and “clearance distance.” to correlate with the definitions in 3.3.x and 3.3.y. See Comment 791-5 (Log #3) Number Eligible to Vote: 15 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 13 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Burr, W., Karl, E.______________________________________________________________ 791-23 Log #19 EEE-AAA Final Action: Accept(Chapter 7)______________________________________________________________ Submitter: Chuck Mello, Underwriters LaboratoriesComment on Proposal No: 791-1Recommendation: Revise the text numbering from the ROP Draft of Chapter 7 to read as follows: Chapter 7 Reporting and Documentation 7.1 Report. Each evaluation should result in a complete report detailing the results of the evaluation and a statement of conformity made from the results. 7.1.12 Discrepancies and Nonconformities. 7.2.11.1.1 Discrepancies and nonconformities that have to be resolved in order to comply with requirements should be promptly brought to the client’s attention. 7.2.21.1.2 Where successful correction of nonconformance occurs, the report should include detail of the corrective action. 7.2.31.1.3 Discrepancies and nonconformities brought to the client’s attention, per Section 7.1.1, should be brought to the AHJ’s attention. 7.2.41.1.4 A copy of the report, per Section 7.1, should also be provided to the AHJ. 7.31.2 Engineering Report Documentation. The title page should include the following items: (1) The identification of the company performing the evaluation (2) A general description of the equipment that was evaluated (3) The identity and location of the site where the evaluated equipment is or will be installed (4) The identity and location of the AHJ where the evaluated equipment is or will be installed (5) A report date (6) The project number or identifier (7) The identity of the person preparing the report, typically the evaluator 7.41.3 Summary. The report contents should include a summary containing the following information: (1) The individual that initiated the project and company affiliation (2) The location of the preliminary inspection (3) The location of the final inspection and testing if different from the preliminary site location (4) Name(s) of the evaluator(s) (5) The date(s) of the preliminary inspection (6) The date of the final inspection, testing, evaluation, and application of the label (7) A summary statement of the findings (8) The name of the AHJ responsible for the final approval 7.51.4* Conditions of Acceptability. A statement or series of statements establishing specific conditions of acceptability to be adhered to in order to maintain the label as valid should be included. 7.61.5 Standards. 7.6.11.5.1 The complete citations of the primary and any contributing support standards used to complete the evaluation should be included. 7.6.21.5.2 The citation should be complete that any subsequent audit can clearly identify the exact edition and revision of the standard(s) used. 7.71.6 Equipment Identification and Nameplate. The equipment nameplate information should be documented for each manufactured unit that was evaluated as follows: (1) Product name (2) Product manufacturer’s name (3) Model identification (4) Serial number for each unit evaluated (5) Electrical ratings (6) Mechanical ratings as applicable (7) FEB label serial number 7.81.7 Evaluation Procedures. 7.8.11.7.1 The detailed procedures used to inspect, test, and evaluate the product should be documented. 7.8.21.7.2 The evaluation procedures should be separated into the major category areas as detailed in Chapters 6 and 7 with sufficient explanation for clear understanding to all parties involved including client, AHJ, and the end user. 7.91.8 Evaluation. The evaluation section should include the following: (1) A brief product description of the equipment function and its intended operation (2) Construction evaluation results found acceptable from Chapter 6 (3) Electrical testing results found acceptable from Chapter 7 (4) Discrepancies for each item found nonconforming including a description of the nonconformance, explanation of the hazards, the standards citation, the remedial action to resolve the nonconformance, and final resolution (5) Test instrumentation calibration information
7.101.9 Appendices or Attachments. The following details should be included as appendices or attachments to the report: (1) Reference drawings used for the evaluation (2) Data sheet(s) documenting the test results from each of the electrical tests (3) The bill of material (critical components list) (4) Photographs of the discrepancies found, the resolution, and the overall equipment (5) Field notes, checklists, or other supporting data that would benefit the client Renumber A.7.1.4 as A.7.5. Substantiation: The revised text provides for renumbering so the text in this Chapter is in compliance with Section 1.8.1 of the NFPA Manual of Style. The text as published in the ROP Draft did not have a second section correlating with Section 7.1 as required. No technical changes were intended by this comment. It is noted that any correlating annex text may require reference paragraph number changes also. Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 15 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 13 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Burr, W., Karl, E.______________________________________________________________ 791-24 Log #14 EEE-AAA Final Action: Accept in Principle(7.1.8)______________________________________________________________ Submitter: Chuck Mello, Vacouver, WAComment on Proposal No: 791-1Recommendation: Revise to read as follows: 7.1.8 Evaluation. The evaluation section should include the following: (1) A brief product description of the equipment function and its intended operation (2) Construction evaluation results found acceptable from Chapter 6 (3) Electrical testing results found acceptable from Chapter 7 (4) Discrepancies for each item found nonconforming including a description of the nonconformance, explanation of the hazards, the standards citation, the remedial action to resolve the nonconformance, and final resolution (5) Test instrumentation calibration information Substantiation: The NFPA Manual of Style indicates the cross references should be to specific sections and not complete chapters. For the purposes of this Recommended Practice, the construction evaluation and electrical testing items identified are typical and not meant to be an inclusive list. By removing the cross references altogether, the text is now clear that all construction points checked as well as all electrical tests completed with acceptable results should be indicated in the report. This comment was the result of the work of a Technical Committee task group to address several items arising from the editorial review. The TG consisted of Tim McClintock, Ron Chilton and Chuck Mello and this comment was unanimously agreed to by the Task Group. Committee Meeting Action: Accept in Principle Revise to read as follows: 7.9 Evaluation. The evaluation section should include the following: (1) A brief product description of the equipment function and its intended operation (2) Construction evaluation results found acceptable from Chapter 6 (3) Electrical testing results found acceptable from Chapter 7 (4) Discrepancies for each item found nonconforming including a description of the nonconformance, explanation of the hazards, the standards citation, the remedial action to resolve the nonconformance, and final resolution (5) Test instrumentation calibration information Committee Statement: The Technical Committee accepts the submitter’s text and relocates to 7.9 to correlate with Comment 791-23 (Log #19). Number Eligible to Vote: 15 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 13 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Burr, W., Karl, E.______________________________________________________________ 791-25 Log #20 EEE-AAA Final Action: Accept(Chapter 8)______________________________________________________________ Submitter: Chuck Mello, Underwriters LaboratoriesComment on Proposal No: 791-1Recommendation: Revise the text numbering from the ROP Draft of Chapter 8 to read as follows: Chapter 8 FEB Label 8.1 Label Application. 8.1.1 When all identified issues are fully resolved, all electrical testing is satisfactorily completed, and the evaluation has determined the equipment meets the applicable requirements of the standard(s), then a label should be affixed to the equipment. 8.21.2 Label Contents. 8.2.11.2.1 The label should contain the registration mark of the evaluation company. 8.2.21.2.2 The label should have some means of unique identification or serialization. 8.2.31.2.3 The label should have a means to identify if the equipment has more than one major assembly and therefore has more than one serialized label applied.
791-7
Report on Comments A2011 — Copyright, NFPA NFPA 791 8.2.41.2.4 The label used should clearly differentiate the field evaluation from the “listing” or “recognition” of components. 8.31.3 Label Location. 8.3.11.3.1 The evaluation label should be in the area of the equipment nameplate. 8.3.21.3.2 Consideration should be given if expected environmental or operating conditions could cause deterioration of the label. 8.41.4 Label Control. 8.4.11.4.1 The label should be applied exclusively by the FEB. 8.4.21.4.2 The label should not be handled by anyone other than the FEB. 8.4.31.4.3 In no case should a label be applied to a product that has not been evaluated by the FEB. (See Annex B for information on how multiple units can be handled.) 8.4.41.4.4 The evaluator should enter the label serial number(s) into the field data work sheets. 8.4.51.4.5 The label information should be recorded in the report and into a label control system set up by the FEB. Substantiation: The revised text provides for renumbering so the text in this Chapter is in compliance with Section 1.8.1 of the NFPA Manual of Style. The text as published in the ROP Draft did not have a second section correlating with Section 8.1 as required. No technical changes were intended by this comment. It is noted that any correlating annex text may require reference paragraph number changes also. Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 15 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 13 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Burr, W., Karl, E.______________________________________________________________ 791-26 Log #26 EEE-AAA Final Action: Reject(8.1)______________________________________________________________ Submitter: Wendell Whistler, Intertek Testing ServiceComment on Proposal No: 791-34Recommendation: Revise text to read as follows: 8.1 Report. Each project should have a complete engineering report written that documents the evaluation process and the evaluation results. evaluation should result in a complete report detailing the results of the evaluation and a statement of conformity or non-conformity made from the results.Substantiation: If the evaluation is completed and a non-conformity results you will need to issue a letter of non-conformity Committee Meeting Action: RejectCommittee Statement: The present statement is adequate for the report to document both those items that conform to the applicable standard and to document all instances of non-conformities. Throughout the document the “Statement of Conformity” is used and nowhere is there the use of the term “Statement of Non-conformity”. The additional text does not add clarity. Number Eligible to Vote: 15 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 13 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Burr, W., Karl, E.______________________________________________________________ 791-27 Log #27 EEE-AAA Final Action: Reject(8.1.2)______________________________________________________________ Submitter: Wendell Whistler, Intertek Testing ServiceComment on Proposal No: 791-36Recommendation: Revise text to read as follows: 8.1.2 Discrepancies and nonconformities brought to the client’s attention, per 8.1.1, should be brought to the Authority Having Jurisdiction’s attention in the final report. A copy of the final report, per 8.1, should also be provided to the Authority Having Jurisdiction upon completion of the project when the field label has been affixed to the equipment.Substantiation: In many cases the client does not want the AHJ notified of the deficiencies until after they have been corrected and give specific instructions to the FEB not to release this information Committee Meeting Action: RejectCommittee Statement: A field evaluation must include the AHJ at all stages of the project. Providing only a final report potentially leaves the AHJ without any communication on the status of the equipment under evaluation. Many times, the AHJ is requested to authorize connection or to allow temporary energization. Without suitable information from the FEB, the AHJ is being asked to make a decision on suitability without adequate information. Sections 8.1.1 and 8.1.2 were purposefully revised in the ROP, Proposals 791-35 and 791-36, to remove the references to a preliminary findings report and a subsequent final report, preferring to identify providing the report as applicable but always including the AHJ in that distribution. Many jurisdictions with local rules require FEBs to provide all technical reports for the reasons stated above. Number Eligible to Vote: 15 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 13 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Burr, W., Karl, E.
______________________________________________________________ 791-27a Log #CC1 EEE-AAA Final Action: Accept(A.3.3.3 Electrical Equipment)______________________________________________________________ Submitter: Technical Committee on Electrical Equipment Evaluation, Comment on Proposal No: 791-1Recommendation: Add * following 3.3.3* Electrical Equipment. A.3.3.3 to read as follows: A.3.3.3 The term electrical equipment is used in this document to clearly indicate that the coverage for a field evaluation is inclusive of products that generate, transmit, distribute, control, or utilize electrical energy. Substantiation: The Technical Committee adds text to clarify and distinguish “electrical equipment” from “equipment”. Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 15 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 13 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Burr, W., Karl, E.______________________________________________________________ 791-28 Log #28 EEE-AAA Final Action: Accept in Principle(B.1.2.2)______________________________________________________________ Submitter: Wendell Whistler, Intertek Testing ServiceComment on Proposal No: 791-38Recommendation: Revise text to read as follows: B.1.1.2 With prior AHJ approval, the process has the first unit evaluated as per this Recommended Practice, then a representative sampling of additional units are inspected to determine with a reasonable degree of assurance that all the remaining units are constructed the same as the “accepted” prototype production line samples.Substantiation: The term prototype describes a product that is not in production and would normally be used in a full listing instead of a field label Committee Meeting Action: Accept in Principle B.1.1.2 to read as follows: B.1.1.2 With prior AHJ approval, the process has the first unit evaluated asper this Recommended Practice, then a representative sampling of additional units are inspected to determine with a reasonable degree of assurance that all the remaining units are constructed the same as the “accepted” prototype production line sample(s).Committee Statement: The Technical Committee accepts the submitter’s text and changes “sample” to “sample(s)” and deletes “production line”. The revised text correlates to the earlier term “sampling” and provides better clarity than the proposed text. This case may not always apply to “production line” produced products. Number Eligible to Vote: 15 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 13 Ballot Not Returned: 2 Burr, W., Karl, E.
