+ All Categories
Home > Documents > National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee...

National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee...

Date post: 07-Aug-2020
Category:
Upload: others
View: 0 times
Download: 0 times
Share this document with a friend
486
Public Comment No. 102-NFPA 13-2014 [ Global Input ] Tables 17.2.1.4(a) through Table 17.2..1.4(l). Change the SRR to DRR for the rack shown against the wall. Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment We have a conflict between chap 16 and 17 on what a narrow rack against the wall is called. Chap 16 shows this rack arrangement in Figures 16.3.1.3.1.1 (A) (a) thru (j) with longitudinal in-rack sprinklers within the space between the rack and the wall. Section 16.3.1.3.1.1 is titled Double Row Racks. Combining this title with the definition (3.9.3.7.5) that states that single row racks do not have longitudinal flues confirms we intended for this to be called a double row rack. The definition of a double row rack is not a rack assembly greater than 6 ft and less than 12 ft. We now have Figures 17.2.1.4(a) through (l) identifying narrow racks against the wall as a single row rack. The committee statement confirmed that these are single row racks and that the space between the rack and the wall is a longitudinal flue despite the fact that it is an explicit conflict with the definition of a single row rack. To resolve this conflict, we can either change the definition and the figures in chap 16 or make this change to chap 17. Related Public Comments for This Document Related Comment Relationship Public Comment No. 103-NFPA 13-2014 [New Section after A.3.9.3.7] Related Item Public Input No. 119-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input] Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: Roland Huggins Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Assoc. Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Apr 04 16:56:30 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected Resolution: The proposed revision to the annex section addressing racks against a wall sufficiently addresses this issue. National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara... 1 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM
Transcript
Page 1: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 102-NFPA 13-2014 [ Global Input ]

Tables 17.2.1.4(a) through Table 17.2..1.4(l). Change the SRR to DRR for the rack shown against the wall.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

We have a conflict between chap 16 and 17 on what a narrow rack against the wall is called. Chap 16 shows this rack arrangement in Figures 16.3.1.3.1.1 (A) (a) thru (j) with longitudinal in-rack sprinklers within the space between the rack and the wall. Section 16.3.1.3.1.1 is titled Double Row Racks. Combining this title with the definition (3.9.3.7.5) that states that single row racks do not have longitudinal flues confirms we intended for this to be called a double row rack. The definition of a double row rack is not a rack assembly greater than 6 ft and less than 12 ft. We now have Figures 17.2.1.4(a) through (l) identifying narrow racks against the wall as a single row rack. The committee statement confirmed that these are single row racks and that the space between the rack and the wall is a longitudinal flue despite the fact that it is an explicit conflict with the definition of a single row rack. To resolve this conflict, we can either change the definition and the figures in chap 16 or make this change to chap 17.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 103-NFPA 13-2014 [New Section after A.3.9.3.7]

Related Item

Public Input No. 119-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Huggins

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Assoc.

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Apr 04 16:56:30 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected

Resolution: The proposed revision to the annex section addressing racks against a wall sufficiently addresses this issue.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

1 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 2: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 187-NFPA 13-2014 [ Global Input ]

See FR 175.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

CC NOTE: The following CC Note No. 4 appeared in the First Draft Report as First Revision No. 175.

FR 175 adds the word "open" in front of the word rack throughout portions of Ch 16 and 17. The SSD TC or a task group needs to review the term "open rack" for titles and tables of sections that also apply to solid shelf racks.

Related Item

First Revision No. 175-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: CC on AUT-AAC

Organization: CC on Automatic Sprinkler Systems

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Tue Apr 29 13:38:27 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-65-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The design criteria provided for ceiling sprinklers is based upon the assumption that the racks are open. Rather than adding the word open to several sectionheaders, adding a statement that clarifies the intent of the standard is a more direct way of establishing the way the standard has been written.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

2 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 3: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 261-NFPA 13-2014 [ Global Input ]

Add a new Section 12.1.5

12.1.5 Fire Protection of Steel Columns Within Storage

See Section C.10.

12.1.5.1 Where storage heights are in excess of 15 ft (4.6 m), protection of building columns located wholly or partially within the rack footprint inclusive of flue spaces orwithin 12 in. (305 mm) of the footprint shall be protected in accordance with one of the following:

(1) 1-hour fireproofing

(2) In-rack sprinklers

(3) Sidewall sprinklers at the 15 ft (4.6 m) elevation, pointed toward one side of the steel column

(4) Provision of ceiling sprinkler density for a minimum of 2000 ft2 (186 m2) with ordinary 165°F (74°C) or high-temperature 286°F (141°C) rated sprinklers as shown inTable 12.1.5.1 for storage heights above 15 ft (4.6 m), up to and including 20 ft (6.1 m)

(5) Provision of CMSA or ESFR ceiling sprinkler protection

Table 12.1.5.1 Ceiling Sprinkler Densities for Protection of Steel Building Columns

Commodity Classification

Aisle Width

4 ft (1.2 m) 8 ft (2.4 m)

gpm/ft2 (L/min)/m2 gpm/ft2 (L/min)/m2

Class I 0.37 15.1 0.33 13.5

Class II 0.44 17.9 0.37 15.1

Class III 0.49 20.0 0.42 17.1

Class IV and Group A Plastics 0.68 27.7 0.57 23.2

12.1.5.1.1 Columns within Palletized, Solid-Piled, Bin Box, Shelf, or Back-to-Back Shelf Storage of Class I through Class IV Commodities and Group A Plastics shall notrequire protection.

12.1.5.2 Where storage heights are in excess of 15 ft (4.6 m) and vertical rack members support the building structure, the vertical rack members shall be protected inaccordance with one of the options in 12.1.5.1.

12.1.5.2.1 Where rubber tire storage exceeds 20 ft (6.1 m) in height, the vertical rack members shall be protected by two sidewall sprinklers, one at the top of the columnand the other at a 15 ft (4.6 m) level, both directed to the side of the column

12.1.5.3 The flow from a column sprinkler(s) shall be permitted to be omitted from the sprinkler system hydraulic calculations.

12.1.5.4 Where pallets are stored in cut-off rooms, columns shall be protected in accordance with section 12.1.5.1 options (1) or (3).

Delete existing sections as follows:

12.12.2.2.4.1 (5)

14.3.6

16.1.4 and its subsections

17.1.4 and it's subsections

18.2 and it's subsections

.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This revision is proposed on behalf of the SSD redundancy task group and is considered editorial. Columns protection criteria is currently scattered in Chapters 12, 14, 16, 17 and 18 and all the chapters have essentially the same requirements and exemptions. This text is based off of section 16.1.4. The table requirements from that section were updated to include the requirements from Chapter 17 for Group A plastics and sections appropriate to pallet and rubber tire storage added. This new section consolidates all the requirements in a single section in Chapter 12 as a general requirement.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 262-NFPA 13-2014 [Chapter 14]

Public Comment No. 327-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 334-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 342-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 346-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 16.3]

Public Comment No. 355-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 356-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Related Item

Public Input No. 352-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 16.1.4]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Kenneth Linder

Organization: Swiss Re

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

3 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 4: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but held

Resolution: The concept of limiting the redundancy in chapters 12-21 of NFPA has been discussed throughout this revision cycle. While the TC is in general support of thisconcept, making these redundancy revisions at the Second Phase of the cycle is not appropriate. The reject but hold action for this item will allow the TC on DischargeCriteria to submit the concept to the correlating committee for review and refinement before proceeding into the 2019 edition revision cycle.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

4 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 5: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 275-NFPA 13-2014 [ Global Input ]

16.1.8.5 Sprinkler Clearance

16.1.8.5.1 Sprinklers shall be installed with a minimum 6 in. (152 mm) vertical clear space between the in-rack sprinkler deflectors and the top of a tier ofstorage.

16.1.8.5.2 16.1.8.6.3 Sprinkler discharge shall not be obstructed by horizontal rack members.

16.1.8.5.3 16.1.8.5.2 The elevation of in-rack sprinkler deflectors with respect to storage and horizontal rack members shall not be a consideration for CMDA insingle- or double-row rack storage up to and including 20 ft (6.1 m) high. (See Section C.16.)

16.1.8.6 Storage over 25 ft in height,

16.1.8.6.1 Face sprinklers shall be located within the rack a minimum of 3 in. (76 mm) from rack uprights and no more than 18 in. (460 mm) from the aisle face ofstorage.

16.1.8.6.2 Sprinklers shall be a minimum of 3 in. (76 mm) radially from the side of the rack uprights.

16.1.8.6.3 Sprinkler discharge shall not be obstructed by horizontal rack members.17.1.7.4.3 , In-rack sprinklers shall be installed with a minimum 6 in. (152 mm) vertical clear space between the in-rack sprinkler deflectors andthe top of a tier of storage.

17.1.7.4.4 In-rack sprinklers in longitudinal flues shall be installed with the deflector located at or below the bottom of horizontal load beams or above orbelow other adjacent horizontal rack members.

17.1.7.4.5 For storage over 25 ft in height

17.1.7.4.5.1 In-rack sprinklers in longitudinal flues shall be installed

(a) with the deflector located at or below the bottom of horizontal load beams or above or below other adjacent horizontal rack members, and

(b) a minimum of 3 in. (76 mm) radially from the side of the rack uprights.

17.1.7.4.5.2Face sprinklers in such racks shall be located within the rack a minimum of 3 in. (76 mm) from rack uprights and no more than 18 in. (460 mm) from the aisleface of storage.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The suggested wording is based on the suggested format from the redundancy task group on changes to chapters 16 and 17. This comment was NOT reviewed by that task group.

The concern for the in-rack sprinkler to be able to develop a pattern is focused on two separated components – one is the pallet load and the other is the horizontal frame members. We are explicit regarding the placement in regard to the pallet load but inconsistent regarding the structural members. In section 16.2.1.4.2.5 on CMDA sprinklers for storage up to 25 ft it is clear that where a vertical separation form the pallet load is required, separation from the frame members is also required. For CMSA and ESFR for storage up to 25 ft, a vertical separation is required but there is no mention on the horizontal frame members. Both requirements are explicated required for >25 ft storage but the vertical separation is all in-rack sprinklers whereas the horizontal members are addressed just on in-racks only in the longitudinal flues. This allows sprinklers in multiple row racks to completed obstructed by the horizontal rack member for storage heights over 25 ft for al sprinkler types, for CMSA and ESFR in all racks for storage less than 25 ft but for CMDA for storage between 20 ft and 25 ft the horizontal frame members can not obstruct the in-rack sprinklers.

Chapter 17 addresses this issue in a similar fashion and requires the horizontal member to be accounted for only for double row racks with storage greater than 25 ft.

Having a consistent requirement for both components impacting in-rack sprinkler discharge makes sense.

Related Item

Public Input No. 106-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Public Input No. 109-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Huggins

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Assoc.

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu May 15 17:06:54 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-144-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The suggested wording is based on the suggested format from the redundancy task group on changes to chapters 16 and 17.

The concern for the in-rack sprinkler to be able to develop a pattern is focused on two separated components – one is the pallet load and the other is the horizontalframe members. We are explicit regarding the placement in regard to the pallet load but inconsistent regarding the structural members. In section 16.2.1.4.2.5 on CMDAsprinklers for storage up to 25 ft it is clear that where a vertical separation form the pallet load is required, separation from the frame members is also required. ForCMSA and ESFR for storage up to 25 ft, a vertical separation is required but there is no mention on the horizontal frame members. Both requirements are explicatedrequired for >25 ft storage but the vertical separation is all in-rack sprinklers whereas the horizontal members are addressed just on in-racks only in the longitudinal flues.This allows sprinklers in multiple row racks to completed obstructed by the horizontal rack member for storage heights over 25 ft for al sprinkler types, for CMSA andESFR in all racks for storage less than 25 ft but for CMDA for storage between 20 ft and 25 ft the horizontal frame members can not obstruct the in-rack sprinklers.

Chapter 17 addresses this issue in a similar fashion and requires the horizontal member to be accounted for only for double row racks with storage greater than 25 ft.

Having a consistent requirement for both components impacting in-rack sprinkler discharge makes sense.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

5 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 6: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 325-NFPA 13-2014 [ Global Input ]

Replace existing Section 12.11 with the following:

12.11* High-Expansion Foam Systems.

12.11.1 General Requirements

12.11.1.1 High-expansion foam systems that are installed in addition to automatic sprinklers shall be installed in accordance with NFPA 11.

12.11.1.2. High-expansion foam systems shall be automatic in operation.

12.11.1.3 High-expansion foam systems shall be used in combination with ceiling sprinklers.

12.11.1.4 Detectors for High-Expansion Foam Systems.

12.11.1.4.1 Detectors shall be listed and shall be installed in one of the following configurations:

(1) At the ceiling only where installed at one-half the listed linear spacing [e.g., 15 ft × 15 ft (4.6 m × 4.6 m) rather than at 30 ft × 30 ft (9.1 m × 9.1 m)]; at the ceiling at thelisted spacing and in racks at alternate levels

(2) Where listed for rack storage installation and installed in accordance with the listing to provide response within 1 minute after ignition using an ignition source that isequivalent to that used in a rack storage testing program

12.11.1.4.2 Ceiling detectors alone shall not be used where the clearance to ceiling exceeds 10 ft (3.1 m) or the height of the storage exceeds 25 ft (7.6 m).

12.11.1.4.3 Detectors for preaction systems shall be installed in accordance with 12.11.1.4.

12.11.2 Palletized solid-piled, bin box, shelf, or back-to-back shelf storage

12.11.2.1 A reduction in ceiling density to one-half that required for storage of Class I through Class IV commodities, idle pallets, or plastics shall be permitted without

revising the design area, no less than 0.15 gpm/ft2 (6.1 mm/min).

12.11.2.2 High-expansion foam used to protect idle pallet storage shall have a maximum submergence time of 4 minutes.

12.11.3 Rack Storage

12.11.3.1 Storage up to 25 ft in hight

12.11.3.1.1 Where high-expansion foam systems are used in combination with ceiling sprinklers, the minimum ceiling sprinkler design density shall be 0.2 gpm/ft2 (8.1mm/min) for Class I, Class II, or Class III commodities or 0.25 gpm/ft2 (10.2 mm/min) for Class IV commodities for the most hydraulically remote 2000 ft2 (186 m2) operatingarea.

12.11.3.1.2 Where high-expansion foam systems are used in combination with ceiling sprinklers, the maximum submergence time shall be 7 minutes for Class I, Class II, orClass III commodities and 5 minutes for Class IV commodities.

12.11.3.2 Storage Over 25 Ft in Height and up to 35 ft in height.

12.11.3.2.1 The maximum submergence time for the high-expansion foam shall be 5 minutes for Class I, Class II, or Class III commodities and 4 minutes for Class IVcommodities.

12.11.3.2.2 In-rack sprinklers shall not be required where high-expansion foam systems are used in combination with ceiling sprinklers.

12.11.4 Rubber Tire Storage

12.11.4.1 A reduction in ceiling density to one-half the density specified in Table 18.4(a) shall be permitted without revising the design area but the density shall be no lessthan 0.24 gpm/ft2 (9.78 mm/min).

12.11.5 Roll Paper Storage

12.11.5.1 A reduction in ceiling density protecting heavyweight class and mediumweight class storage areas shall be permitted without revising the design area but the

density shall be no less than 0.24 gpm/ft2 (9.78 mm/min). with a minimum operating area of 2000 ft2 (186 m2)

12.11.5.2 The ceiling density protecting tissue storage areas shall not be reduced below those provided in Table 19.1.2.1.3(a) and Table 19.1.2.1.3(b).

Delete the following sections:

12.12.4

15.5

16.1.5 and subsections

16.3

18.6

19.1.2.1.6 and 19.1.2.1.7

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Submitted on behalf of the SSD Redundancy Task Group. The requirements for high-expansion foam systems protection storage in combination with sprinklers are currently scattered throughout the storage chapters, use inconsistent wording and vary in completeness. These changes consolidate all the requirements into one section, unifying the language and style. The existing Sections 12.11 and 16.1.5 was used as the basis for the format and style and other sections relocated. These changes are considered editorial.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 262-NFPA 13-2014 [Chapter 14] All apply to redundant and duplicate text

Public Comment No. 327-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 334-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 342-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 346-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 16.3]

Public Comment No. 355-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 356-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Related Item

Public Input No. 352-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 16.1.4]

Public Input No. 261-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 8.12.5.2]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Kenneth Linder

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

6 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 7: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Organization: Swiss Re

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 12:36:30 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but held

Resolution: The concept of limiting the redundancy in chapters 12-21 of NFPA has been discussed throughout this revision cycle. While the TC is in general support of thisconcept, making these redundancy revisions at the Second Phase of the cycle is not appropriate. The reject but hold action for this item will allow the TC on DischargeCriteria to submit the concept to the correlating committee for review and refinement before proceeding into the 2019 edition revision cycle.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

7 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 8: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 327-NFPA 13-2014 [ Global Input ]

Replace Chapter 15 First Draft Text with the following -- move and renumber existing annex material to match that below.

Chapter 15 Protection for Palletized, Solid-Piled, Bin Box, Shelf, or Back-to-Back Shelf Storage of Plastic and Rubber Commodities

15.1 General. This chapter shall apply to palletized, solid-piled, bin box, shelf, or back-to-back shelf storage of plastic and rubber commodities. Therequirements of Chapter 12 shall apply unless modified by this chapter.

15.1.1* Storage Conditions. The design of the sprinkler system shall be based on those conditions that routinely or periodically exist in a building and create thegreatest water demand, which include the following:

(1) Pile height

(2) Clearance to ceiling

(3) Pile stability

(4) Array

15.1.2 15.2.4 Group B plastics and free-flowing Group A plastics shall be protected in the same manner as a Class IV commodity. (See Chapter 14 forprotection of these storage commodities with spray sprinklers.)

15.1.3 15.2.5 Group C plastics shall be protected in the same manner as a Class III commodity. (See Chapter 14 for protection of these storage commoditieswith spray sprinklers.)

15.2 Protection Criteria for Group A Plastics

15.2.1* Control Mode Density/Area Sprinkler Protection Criteria for Palletized, Solid-Piled, Bin Box, Shelf, or Back-to-Back Shelf Storage of Plastic and RubberCommodities.

15.2.1.1 For the storage of Group A plastics stored 5 ft (1.5 m) or less in height, the sprinkler design criteria for miscellaneous storage specified in Chapter 13shall be used. The protection criteria in Chapter 13 shall be acceptable for storage of Group A plastic commodities up to and including 5 ft (1.5 m) in height. (SeeTable 13.2.1 for specific Group A plastic storage height protection criteria.)

15.2.1.2* Protection for plastic and rubber commodities shall be in accordance with Section 15.2. The decision tree shown in Figure 15.2.1.2 shall be used todetermine the protection criteriain each specific situation, subject to the following limitations:

(1) Commodities that are stored palletized, solid piled, or in bin boxes up to 25 ft (7.6 m) in height.

(2) Commodities that are stored in shelf storage up to 15 ft (4.6 m) in height.

(3) Commodities that are stored using back-to-back shelf storage up to 15 ft (4.6 m) in height. The minimum aisle width shall be 60 in. (1524 mm). The designcriteria shall be in accordance with Table 15.2.2. The back-to-back shelf shall have a full height solid vertical transverse barrier of 3⁄8 in. (9.5 mm) plywoodor particleboard, 22 gauge sheet metal, or equivalent, from face of aisle to face of aisle, spaced at a maximum 45 ft (13.7 m) interval. The transverse barriershall be permitted to terminate at the longitudinal barrier.

Table 15.2.1.2 Back-to-Back Shelf Storage of Cartoned Unexpanded Group A Plastics

Storage Height Ceiling HeightProtection

Ft M ft m

Over 5 up to 8 1.5/2.4 Up to 14 4.3 Ordinary Hazard Group 2

Up to 12 3.7 Up to 15 4.6 0.45 gpm/ft2 over 2500 ft2 18.3 mm/min/232 m2

Up to 12 3.7 Up to 30 9.1 0.6 gpm/ft2 over 2500 ft2 24.5 mm/min/232 m2

Up to 15 4.6 Up to 30 9.1 0.7 gpm/ft2 over 2500 ft2 28.5 mm/min/232 m2

Figure 15.2.1.2 Decision Tree. (Note: Use existing Figure 15.2.2 and change Table references from 15.2.6 to 15.2.1.4 (a) and (b))

15.2.1.3* Factors affecting protection requirements such as closed/open array, clearance to ceiling, and stable/unstable piles shall be applicable only to storageof Group A plastics. This decision tree also shall be used to determine protection for commodities that are not wholly Group A plastics but contain suchquantities and arrangements of the same that they are deemed more hazardous than Class IV commodities.

15.2.1.4 6* Design areas and densities for the appropriate storage configuration shall be selected from Table 15.2.1.4 6 (a) or Table 15.2.1.4 6 (b) as appropriate.

Table 15.2.1.4 6 (a) Design Densities for Palletized, Solid-Piled, Bin Box, or Shelf Storage of Group A Plastic Commodities (U.S. Customary Units)

Maximum Storage Height

.

(ft)

Roof/Ceiling Height (ft)Density (gpm/ft2)

A B C D E

>5 to ≤12

Up to 15 0.2 EH2 0.3 EH1 EH2

>15 to 20 0.3 0.6 0.5 EH2 EH2

>20 to 32 0.4 0.8 0.6 0.45 0.7

15

Up to 20 0.3 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.45

>20 to 25 0.4 0.8 0.6 0.45 0.7

>25 to 35 0.45 0.9 0.7 0.55 0.85

20

Up to 25 0.4 0.8 0.6 0.45 0.7

>25 to 30 0.45 0.9 0.7 0.55 0.85

>30 to 35 0.6 1.2 0.85 0.7 1.1

25Up to 30 0.45 0.9 0.7 0.55 0.85

>30 to 35 0.6 1.2 0.85 0.7 1.1

Notes:

(1) Minimum clearance between sprinkler deflector and top of storage shall be maintained as required.

(2) Column designations correspond to the configuration of plastics storage as follows:

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

8 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 9: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

 A: (1) Nonexpanded, unstable

  (2) Nonexpanded, stable, solid unit load

 B: Expanded, exposed, stable

 C: (1) Expanded, exposed, unstable

  (2) Nonexpanded, stable, cartoned

 D: Expanded, cartoned, unstable

 E: (1) Expanded, cartoned, stable

  (2) Nonexpanded, stable, exposed

(3) EH1 = Density required by Figure 13.2.1 for Curve EH1

 EH2 = Density required by Figure 13.2.1 for Curve EH2

(4) Roof/ceiling height >35 ft is not permitted.

Table 15.2.1.4 6 (b) Design Densities for Palletized, Solid-Piled, Bin Box, or Shelf Storage of Group A Plastic Commodities (S.I. Units)

Maximum Storage Height

.

(m)

Roof/Ceiling Height

.

(m)

Density

.

(mm/min)

A B C D E

Up to 4.6 8.2 EH2 12.2 EH1 EH2

>1.5 to ≤3.6 >4.6 to 6.1 12.2 24.4 20.4 EH2 EH2

>6.1 to 9.8 16.3 32.6 24.4 18.3 28.5

Up to 6.1 12.2 24.4 20.4 16.3 18.3

4.6 >6.1 to 7.6 16.3 32.6 24.4 18.3 28.5

>7.6 to 10.7 18.3 36.7 28.5 22.4 34.6

Up to 7.6 16.3 32.6 24.4 18.3 28.5

6.1 >7.6 to 9.1 18.3 36.7 28.5 22.4 34.6

>9.1 to 10.7 24.4 49.0 34.6 28.5 44.8

7.6Up to 9.1 18.3 36.7 28.5 22.4 34.6

>9.1 to 10.7 24.4 49.0 34.6 28.5 44.8

Notes:

(1) Minimum clearance between sprinkler deflector and top of storage shall be maintained as required.

(2) Column designations correspond to the configuration of plastics storage as follows:

 A: (1) Nonexpanded, unstable

  (2) Nonexpanded, stable, solid unit load

 B: Expanded, exposed, stable

 C: (1) Expanded, exposed, unstable

  (2) Nonexpanded, stable, cartoned

 D: Expanded, cartoned, unstable

 E: (1) Expanded, cartoned, stable

  (2) Nonexpanded, stable, exposed

(3) EH1 = Density required by Figure 13.2.1 for Curve EH1

 EH2 = Density required by Figure 13.2.1 for Curve EH2

(4) Roof/ceiling height >35 ft is not permitted.

15.2.1.5 7 The ceiling-only protection criteria specified in Chapter 17 for rack storage of Group A plastic commodities shall be permitted to be used forsolid-piled and palletized storage of the same commodity at the same height and clearance to ceiling.

15.2.1.6 8* For Table 15.2.1.4 6 (a) and Table 15.2.1.4 6 (b), the design areas shall be as follows:

(1) The area shall be a minimum of 2500 ft2 (232 m2).

(2) Where Table 15.2.1.4 6 (a) and Table 15.2.1.4 6 (b) allow densities and areas to be selected in accordance with Curve EH1 and Curve EH2 of Figure 13.2.1,any density/area from the curves in Figure 13.2.1 shall be permitted. When selecting a point from the EH1 or EH2 density/area curves of Figure 13.2.1, thefollowing area reductions shall be permitted:

(a) For K-8.0 (115) sprinklers used with Curve EH1, the design area shall be permitted to be reduced by 25 percent, but not below 2000 ft2 (186 m2), wherehigh temperature sprinklers are used.

(b) For K-11.2 (160) or larger sprinklers, the design area shall be permitted to be reduced by 25 percent, but not below 2000 ft2 (186 m2), regardless oftemperature rating.

(3) For closed arrays, the area shall be permitted to be reduced to 2000 ft2 (186 m2).

15.2.1.7 9* Interpolation of densities between storage heights shall be permitted.

15.2.1.7 9.1 Densities shall be based on the 2500 ft2 (232 m2) design area.

15.2.1.7 9.2 Interpolation of ceiling/roof heights shall not be permitted.

15.2.1.8 10 For storage of Group A plastics between 5 ft (1.5 m) and 12 ft (3.7 m) in height, the installation requirements for extra hazard systems shall apply.

15.2.2 3 Control Mode Specific Application (CMSA) Sprinklers for Palletized or Solid-Piled Storage of Group A Plastic Commodities.

15.2.2. 3.1 Protection unexpanded and expanded commodities shall be in accordance with Table 15.2.2 3.1.

Table 15.2.2.1 CMSA Sprinkler Design Criteria for Palletized and Solid-Piled Storage of Group A Plastic Commodities

StorageArrangement Commodity Class

MaximumStorage

MaximumCeiling/Roof K-Factor/Orientation Type of

SystemNumber of

DesignMinimumOperating

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

9 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 10: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Height HeightSprinklers

Pressure

ft m ft m psi bar

PalletizedCartoned unexpanded

plastics

20 6.1 30 9.1

11.2 (160)

.

Upright

Wet 25 25 1.7

16.8 (240)

.

Upright

Wet 15 22 1.5

19.6 (280)

.

Pendent

Wet 15 16 1.1

25 7.6 30 9.1

16.8 (240)

.

Upright

Wet 15 22 1.5

19.6 (280)

.

Pendent

Wet 15 16 1.1

30 9.1 35 10.7

19.6 (280)

.

Pendent

Wet 15 25 1.7

35 10.6 40 12.1

19.6 (280)

.

Pendent

Wet 15 30 2.1

Solid piledCartoned unexpanded

plastics

20 6.1 30 9.1

11.2 (160)

.

Upright

Wet 15 50 3.5

16.8 (240)

.

Upright

Wet 15 22 1.5

19.6 (280)

.

Pendent

Wet 15 16 1.1

25 7.6 30 9.1

16.8 (240)

.

Upright

Wet 15 22 1.5

19.6 (280)

.

Pendent

Wet 15 16 1.1

30 9.1 35 10.7

19.6 (280)

.

Pendent

Wet 15 25 1.7

35 10.6 40 12.1

19.6 (280)

.

Pendent

Wet 15 30 2.1

Palletized

Exposed unexpandedplastics

20 6.1 30 9.1

11.2 (160)

.

Upright

Wet 25 25 1.7

16.8 (240)

.

Upright

Wet 15 22 1.5

25 7.6 30 9.1

16.8 (240)

.

Upright

Wet 15 22 1.5

Cartoned or exposedexpanded plastics

18 5.5 26 7.9

11.2 (160)

.

Upright

Wet 15 50 3.5

16.8 (240)

.

Upright

Wet 15 22 1.5

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

10 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 11: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Solid piledCartoned or exposedunexpanded plastics

20 6.1 30 9.1

11.2 (160)

.

Upright

Wet 15 50 3.5

25 7.6 30 9.1

16.8 (240)

.

Upright

Wet 15 22 1.5

15.3.2 Protection shall be provided as specified in Table 15.2.23.1 or appropriate NFPA standards in terms of minimum operating pressure and the number ofsprinklers to be included in the design area.

15.2.2.2 3.3 Open Wood Joist Construction.

15.2.2 3.3.1 Where CMSA sprinklers are installed under open wood joist construction, their minimum operating pressure shall be 50 psi (3.4 bar) for a K-11.2(160) sprinkler or 22 psi (1.5 bar) for a K-16.8 (240) sprinkler.

15.2.2. 3.3.2 Where each joist channel of open wood joist construction is fully firestopped to its full depth at intervals not exceeding 20 ft (6.1 m), the lowerpressures specified in Table 15.2.2 3.1 shall be permitted to be used.

15.2.2.3.4 Preaction Systems. For the purpose of using Table 15.2.2 3.1, preaction systems shall be classified as dry pipe systems.

Note: Separate Comment to move 15.3.5 to Chapter 12.

15.3.5 Building steel shall not require special protection where Table 15.3.1 is applied as appropriate for the storage configuration.

15.2.2.4 Early Suppression Fast-Response (ESFR) Sprinklers for Palletized or Solid-Piled Storage of Group A Plastic Commodities.

15.2,2.4.1 Protection of palletized and solid-piled storage of cartoned or exposed, expanded or unexpanded plastic and cartoned expanded or exposedexpanded plastic shall be in accordance with Table 15.2.2.4.1.

Table 15.2.2.4.1 ESFR Protection of Palletized and Solid-Piled Storage of Group A Plastic Commodities

Storage Arrangement Commodity

MaximumStorage Height

MaximumCeiling/Roof Height Nominal

K-Factor Orientation

MinimumOperatingPressure

ft m ft m psi bar

Palletized and solid-piled storage(no open-top containers)

Cartonedunexpanded plastic

20 6.1

25 7.6

14.0

.

(200)

Upright/pendent

50 3.4

16.8

.

(240)

Upright/pendent

35 2.4

22.4

.

(320)

Pendent 25 1.7

25.2

.

(360)

Pendent 15 1.0

30 9.1

14.0

.

(200)

Upright/pendent

50 3.4

16.8

.

(240)

Upright/pendent

35 2.4

22.4

.

(320)

Pendent 25 1.7

25.2

.

(360)

Pendent 15 1.0

35 10.7

14.0

.

(200)

Upright/pendent

75 5.2

16.8

.

(240)

Upright/pendent

52 3.6

22.4

.

(320)

Pendent 35 2.4

25.2

.

(360)

Pendent 20 1.4

40 12.2

16.8

.

(240)

Pendent 52 3.6

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

11 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 12: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Storage Arrangement CommodityMaximum

Storage HeightMaximum

Ceiling/Roof Height NominalK-Factor Orientation

MinimumOperatingPressure

ft m ft m psi bar

22.4

.

(320)

Pendent 40 2.8

25.2

.

(360)

Pendent 25 1.7

45 13.7

22.4

.

(320)

Pendent 40 2.8

25.2

.

(360)

Pendent 40 2.8

25 7.6

30 9.1

14.0

.

(200)

Upright/pendent

50 3.4

16.8

.

(240)

Upright/pendent

35 2.4

22.4

.

(320)

Pendent 25 1.7

25.2

.

(360)

Pendent 15 1.0

32 9.8

14.0

.

(200)

Upright/pendent

60 4.1

16.8

.

(240)

Upright/pendent

42 2.9

35 10.7

14.0

.

(200)

Upright orpendent

75 5.2

16.8

.

(240)

Upright/pendent

52 3.6

22.4

.

(320)

Pendent 35 2.4

25.2

.

(360)

Pendent 20 1.4

40 12.2

16.8

.

(240)

Pendent 52 3.6

22.4

.

(320)

Pendent 40 2.8

25.2

.

(360)

Pendent 25 1.7

45 13.7

22.4

.

(320)

Pendent 40 2.8

25.2

.

(360)

Pendent 40 2.8

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

12 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 13: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Storage Arrangement CommodityMaximum

Storage HeightMaximum

Ceiling/Roof Height NominalK-Factor Orientation

MinimumOperatingPressure

ft m ft m psi bar

30 9.1

35 10.7

14.0

.

(200)

Upright/pendent

75 5.2

16.8

.

(240)

Upright/pendent

52 3.6

22.4

.

(320)

Pendent 35 2.4

25.2

.

(360)

Pendent 20 1.4

40 12.2

16.8

.

(240)

Pendent 52 3.6

22.4

.

(320)

Pendent 40 2.8

25.2

.

(360)

Pendent 25 1.7

45 13.7

22.4

.

(320)

Pendent 40 2.8

25.2

.

(360)

Pendent 40 2.8

35 10.7

40 12.2

16.8

.

(240)

Pendent 52 3.6

22.4

.

(320)

Pendent 40 2.8

25.2

.

(360)

Pendent 25 1.7

45 13.7

22.4

.

(320)

Pendent 40 2.8

25.2

.

(360)

Pendent 40 2.8

40 12.2 45 13.7

22.4

.

(320)

Pendent 40 2.8

25.2

.

(360)

Pendent 40 2.8

Exposedunexpanded plastic

20 6.1

25 7.6

14.0

.

(200)

Pendent 50 3.4

16.8

.

(240)

Pendent 35 2.4

30 9.1

14.0

.

(200)

Pendent 50 3.4

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

13 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 14: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Storage Arrangement CommodityMaximum

Storage HeightMaximum

Ceiling/Roof Height NominalK-Factor Orientation

MinimumOperatingPressure

ft m ft m psi bar

16.8

.

(240)

Pendent 35 2.4

35 10.7

14.0

.

(200)

Pendent 75 5.2

16.8

.

(240)

Pendent 52 3.6

40 12.2

16.8

.

(240)

Pendent 52 3.6

25 7.6

30 9.1

14.0

.

(200)

Pendent 50 3.4

16.8

.

(240)

Pendent 35 2.4

32 9.8

14.0

.

(200)

Pendent 60 4.1

16.8

.

(240)

Pendent 42 2.9

35 10.7

14.0

.

(200)

Pendent 75 5.2

16.8

.

(240)

Pendent 52 3.6

40 12.2

16.8

.

(240)

Pendent 52 3.6

22.4

.

(320)

Pendent 50 3.4

25.2

.

(360)

Pendent 50 3.4

30 9.1

35 10.7

14.0

.

(200)

Pendent 75 5.2

16.8

.

(240)

Pendent 52 3.6

40 12.2

16.8

.

(240)

Pendent 52 3.6

22.4

.

(320)

Pendent 50 3.4

25.2

.

(360)

Pendent 50 3.4

35 10.7 40 12.2

16.8

.

(240)

Pendent 52 3.6

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

14 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 15: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Storage Arrangement CommodityMaximum

Storage HeightMaximum

Ceiling/Roof Height NominalK-Factor Orientation

MinimumOperatingPressure

ft m ft m psi bar

22.4

.

(320)

Pendent 50 3.4

25.2

.

(360)

Pendent 50 3.4

Cartoned expandedplastic

20 6.1

25 7.6

14.0

.

(200)

Upright/pendent

50 3.4

16.8

.

(240)

Upright/pendent

35 2.4

30 9.1

14.0

.

(200)

Upright/pendent

50 3.4

16.8

.

(240)

Upright/pendent

35 2.4

25 7.6

30 9.1

14.0

.

(200)

Upright/pendent

50 3.4

16.8

.

(240)

Upright/pendent

35 2.4

32 9.8

14.0

.

(200)

Pendent 60 4.1

16.8

.

(240)

Upright/pendent

42 2.9

Exposed* expandedplastic

25 7.6 40 12.2

25.2

.

(360)

Pendent 60 4.1

*Applies to closed array storage only.

15.4.2 ESFR Sprinkler systems shall be designed such that the minimum operating pressure is not less than that indicated in Table 15.4.1 for type of storage,commodity, storage height, and building height involved.

15.4.3 The design area shall consist of the most hydraulically demanding area of 12 sprinklers, consisting of four sprinklers on each of three branch lines.

15.2.2.4.4 Special Designs for Palletized, Solid-Piled, Bin Box, or Shelf Storage of Group A Plastic Commodities. (Reserved)

Note: Separated Comment to Consolidate all high-exansion foam sections into Section 12.11.

15.5 High-Expansion Foam — Reduction in Ceiling Density. A reduction in ceiling density to one-half that required for Class I through Class IV commodities,

idle pallets, or plastics shall be permitted without revising the design area, but the density shall be no less than 0.15 gpm/ft2 (6.1 mm/min).

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Submitted on behalf of the SSD Redundancy Task Group. Location has meaning and context. Information from the Chapter Title and Section Headings does not need to be repeated throughout the Chapter There is no need to reference the sprinkler type. storage type or commodity unless the section only applies to a subset. Revised numbering to be consistent with the format of Chapters 16 and 17. Other changes to eliminate redundancy.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 261-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input] All apply to redundant and duplicate text

Public Comment No. 262-NFPA 13-2014 [Chapter 14]

Public Comment No. 325-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 334-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 342-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 346-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 16.3]

Public Comment No. 355-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 356-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Related Item

Public Input No. 352-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 16.1.4]

Submitter Information Verification

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

15 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 16: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Submitter Full Name: Kenneth Linder

Organization: Swiss Re

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 13:11:49 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but held

Resolution: The concept of limiting the redundancy in chapters 12-21 of NFPA has been discussed throughout this revision cycle. While the TC is in general support of thisconcept, making these redundancy revisions at the Second Phase of the cycle is not appropriate. The reject but hold action for this item will allow the TC on DischargeCriteria to submit the concept to the correlating committee for review and refinement before proceeding into the 2019 edition revision cycle.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

16 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 17: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 334-NFPA 13-2014 [ Global Input ]

Make the following revisions to Chapter 16, to eliminate redundancy and duplication of text renumbering sections as needed.

16.1 General.

16.1.1 This section shall apply to storage of materials representing the broad range of combustibles stored in racks. The requirements of Chapter 12 shall apply unlessmodified by this chapter. (See Section C.9 .)

16.1.2* Sprinkler Protection Criteria.

16.1.2.1

Sprinkler protection criteria for the storage of materials on racks shall be in accordance with Section 16.2 for storage up to 25 ft (7.6 m) and Section 16.3 for storage over 25ft (7.6 m).

16.1.2.2*

Protection criteria for Group A plastics shall be permitted for the protection of the same storage height and configuration of Class I, II, III, and IV commodities.

16.1.3 Movable Racks.

Rack storage in movable racks shall be protected in the same manner as multiple-row racks.

Delete 16.1.4 and Subsections (separate comment to consolidate the Column requirements into Chapter 12)

Delete 16.1.5 and Subsections (separate comment to consolidate the High expanskion foam requirements into Chapter 12)

16.1.7 Open-Top Containers.

The protection of open-top containers shall be considered outside the scope of Chapter 16. See Section C.12 .

16.1.8 In-Rack Sprinklers.

16.1.8.1

The number of sprinklers and the pipe sizing on a line of sprinklers in racks shall be restricted only by hydraulic calculations and not by any piping schedule.

16.1.8.2

When in-rack sprinklers are necessary to protect a higher-hazard commodity that occupies only a portion of the length of a rack, in-rack sprinklers shall be extended aminimum of 8 ft (2.44 m) or one bay, whichever is greater, in each direction along the rack on either side of the higher hazard. The in-rack sprinklers protecting the higherhazard shall not be required to extend across the aisle.

16.1.8.3

Where a storage rack, due to its length, requires less than the number of in-rack sprinklers specified, only those in-rack sprinklers in a single rack shall be included in thecalculation.

16.1.8.4*

In-rack Sprinklers shall be located at an intersection of transverse and longitudinal flues while not exceeding the maximum spacing rules.

(A)

Where distances between transverse flues exceed the maximum allowable distances, sprinklers shall be installed at the intersection of the transverse and longitudinal fluesand additional sprinklers shall be installed between transverse flues to meet the maximum distance rules.

(B)

Where no transverse flues exist, in-rack sprinklers shall not exceed the maximum spacing rules.

Remainder of Section 16.1 Remains as printed in the first draft

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Submitted on behalf of the SSD Redundancy Task Group. Eliminate redundant text from section 16.1. These changes are considered editorial.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 261-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input] All consolidate or eliminate redundant/duplicate text

Public Comment No. 262-NFPA 13-2014 [Chapter 14]

Public Comment No. 325-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 327-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 342-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 346-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 16.3]

Public Comment No. 355-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 356-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Related Item

Public Input No. 352-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 16.1.4]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Kenneth Linder

Organization: Swiss Re

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 13:46:48 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but held

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

17 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 18: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Resolution: The concept of limiting the redundancy in chapters 12-21 of NFPA has been discussed throughout this revision cycle. While the TC is in general support of thisconcept, making these redundancy revisions at the Second Phase of the cycle is not appropriate. The reject but hold action for this item will allow the TC on DischargeCriteria to submit the concept to the correlating committee for review and refinement before proceeding into the 2019 edition revision cycle.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

18 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 19: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 340-NFPA 13-2014 [ Global Input ]

The folloing changes consolidate in-rack requirements to section 16.1 and eliminate the redundant text.

16.1.8.4*

Where In-rack sprinklers are installed in longitudinal flues, they shall be located at an intersection of transverse and longitudinal flues while not exceeding themaximum spacing rules.

(A)

Where distances between transverse flues exceed the maximum allowable distances, sprinklers shall be installed at the intersection of the transverse andlongitudinal flues and additional sprinklers shall be installed between transverse flues to meet the maximum distance rules.

(B)

Where no transverse flues exist, in-rack sprinklers shall not exceed the maximum spacing rules.

16.1.8.5 Sprinkler Clearance

16.1.8.5.1 16.2.1.4.2.4 &16.1.11.2 Sprinklers shall be installed with a minimum 6 in. (152 mm) vertical clear space between the in-rack sprinkler deflectors andthe top of a tier of storage.

16.1.8.5.2 16.1.4.2.3 The elevation of in-rack sprinkler deflectors with respect to storage and horizontal rack members shall not be a consideration for CMDA insingle- or double-row rack storage up to and including 20 ft (6.1 m) high. (See Section C.16.)

16.1.8.6 16.1.11.2 Storage over 25 ft in height,

16.1.8.6.1 16.1.11.2.1

Face sprinklers in such racks shall be located within the rack a minimum of 3 in. (76 mm) from rack uprights and no more than 18 in. (460 mm) from the aisleface of storage.

16.1.8.6.2 16.1.11.2.3

Such in-rack Sprinklers shall be a minimum of 3 in. (76 mm) radially from the side of the rack uprights.

16.1.8.6.3 16.1.11.1.1

Sprinkler discharge shall not be obstructed by horizontal rack members.

16.1.11.2

In single-row, double-row, or multiple-row racks, a minimum 6 in. (152.4 mm) vertical clear space shall be maintained between the in-rack sprinkler deflectorsand the top of a tier of storage.

16.1.11.2.1

Face sprinklers in such racks shall be located within the rack a minimum of 3 in. (76 mm) from rack uprights and no more than 18 in. (460 mm) from the aisleface of storage.

16.1.11.2.2

Longitudinal flue in-rack sprinklers shall be located at the intersection with the transverse flue space and with the deflector located at or below the bottom ofhorizontal load beams or above or below other adjacent horizontal rack members.

16.1.11.2.3

Such in-rack sprinklers shall be a minimum of 3 in. (76 mm) radially from the side of the rack uprights.

16.2.1.4.2.3*

The elevation of in-rack sprinkler deflectors with respect to storage shall not be a consideration in single- or double-row rack storage up to and including 20 ft(6.1 m) high. (See Section C.16.)

16.2.1.4.2.4*

In single- or double-row racks without solid shelves with storage over 20 ft (6.1 m) high, or in multiple-row racks, or in single- or double-row racks with solidshelves and storage height up to and including 25 ft (7.6 m), a minimum of 6 in. (152 mm) vertical clear space shall be maintained between the in-rack sprinklerdeflectors and the top of a tier of storage.

(A)

Sprinkler discharge shall not be obstructed by horizontal rack members.

16.2.1.4.2.5

For multiple-row racks, a minimum of 6 in. (152 mm) shall be maintained between the in-rack sprinkler deflector and the top of a tier of storage.

16.2.1.4.2.6

Sprinklers installed in racks shall be spaced without regard to rack uprights. (See Section C.17.)

16.2.2.7.2

The minimum of 6 in. (152.4 mm) vertical clear space shall be maintained between the sprinkler deflectors and the top of a tier of storage.

16.2.2.7.3*

In-rack sprinklers shall be located at an intersection of transverse and longitudinal flues.

16.2.2.7.5

Where distances between transverse flues exceed the maximum allowable distances, sprinklers shall be installed at the intersection of the transverse andlongitudinal flues, and additional sprinklers shall be installed between transverse flues to meet the maximum distance rules.

16.2.2.7.6

Where no transverse flues exist, in-rack sprinklers shall not exceed the maximum spacing rules.

16.2.3.6.3

The minimum of 6 in. (152.4 mm) vertical clear space shall be maintained between the sprinkler deflectors and the top of a tier of storage.

16.2.3.6.5*

In-rack sprinklers shall be located at an intersection of transverse and longitudinal flues while not exceeding the maximum spacing rules.

16.2.3.6.6

Where distances between transverse flues exceed the maximum allowable distances, sprinklers shall be installed at the intersection of the transverse andlongitudinal flues, and additional sprinklers shall be installed between transverse flues to meet the maximum distance rules.

16.2.3.6.7

Where no transverse flues exist, in-rack sprinklers shall not exceed the maximum spacing rules.

16.3.1.3.2.4*

In-rack sprinklers shall be located at an intersection of transverse and longitudinal flues while not exceeding the maximum spacing rules.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

19 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 20: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

(A)

Where distances between transverse flues exceed the maximum allowable distances, sprinklers shall be installed at the intersection of the transverse andlongitudinal flues, and additional sprinklers shall be installed between transverse flues to meet the maximum distance rules.

(B)

Where no transverse flues exist, in-rack sprinklers shall not exceed the maximum spacing rules.

16.3.2.7.2

The minimum of 6 in. (152 mm) vertical clear space shall be maintained between the sprinkler deflectors and the top of a tier of storage.

16.3.2.7.3

In-rack sprinklers shall be located at an intersection of transverse and longitudinal flues.

16.3.2.7.5

Where distances between transverse flues exceed the maximum allowable distances, sprinklers shall be installed at the intersection of the transverse andlongitudinal flues, and additional sprinklers shall be installed between transverse flues to meet the maximum distance rules.

16.3.2.7.6

Where no transverse flues exist, in-rack sprinklers shall not exceed the maximum spacing rules.

16.3.3.5.2

In-rack sprinklers shall be located at the intersection of the longitudinal and transverse flue space.

16.3.3.5.4

The minimum of 6 in. (152 mm) vertical clear space shall be maintained between the sprinkler deflectors and the top of a tier of storage.

16.3.3.5.5

In-rack sprinklers shall be located at an intersection of transverse and longitudinal flues while not exceeding the maximum spacing rules.

16.3.3.5.6

Where distances between transverse flues exceed the maximum allowable distances, sprinklers shall be installed at the intersection of the transverse andlongitudinal flues, and additional sprinklers shall be installed between transverse flues to meet the maximum distance rules.

16.3.3.5.7

Where no transverse flues exist, in-rack sprinklers shall not exceed the maximum spacing rules.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Submitted on behalf of the SSD Redundancy Task Group. -- These changes consolidate in-rack requirements in 16.1 and eliminate duplicated text and are considered editorial. Changes in Chapter 16 match those made in Chapter 17 during the First Draft

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 342-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 346-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 16.3]

Public Comment No. 355-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 356-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Related Item

First Revision No. 317-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 17.1.7.4]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Kenneth Linder

Organization: Swiss Re

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 14:22:25 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but held

Resolution: The concept of limiting the redundancy in chapters 12-21 of NFPA has been discussed throughout this revision cycle. While the TC is in general support of thisconcept, making these redundancy revisions at the Second Phase of the cycle is not appropriate. The reject but hold action for this item will allow the TC on DischargeCriteria to submit the concept to the correlating committee for review and refinement before proceeding into the 2019 edition revision cycle.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

20 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 21: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 342-NFPA 13-2014 [ Global Input ]

Make the following changes to Section 16.2 to eliminate redundancy and duplicate text.

16.2 Protection Criteria for Open Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Up to and Including 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height.

16.2.1 Control Mode Density/Area Sprinkler Protection Criteria for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Up to andIncluding 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height.

16.2.1.1

The area and density for the hydraulically remote area and the water supply shall be determined as specified in 16.2.1.2 for storage up to 12 ft (3.7 m) and 16.2.1.3 to16.2.1.3.5 for storage over 12 ft (3.7 m).

16.2.1.2 Protection Criteria for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Storage Up to 12 ft (3.7 m) in Height.

16.2.1.2.1 The protection criteria for storage up to and including 12 ft (3.7 m) shall be the same as miscellaneous storage from Chapter 13.

16.2.1.2.2 The protection criteria in Chapter 13 shall be acceptable for storage of Class I through Class IV commodities up to and including 12 ft (3.7 m) in height. (SeeTable 13.2.1 for specific Class I through Class IV storage height protection criteria.)

16.2.1.2.3 For storage 12 ft (3.7 m) or less in height that does not meet the definition of Miscellaneous Storage that is on solid shelf racks, in-rack sprinklers shall beprovided in accordance with 16.1.6, and ceiling sprinkler protection shall be provided in accordance with Chapter 13.

16.2.1.3 Protection Criteria for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Storage Over 12 ft (3.7 m) in Height.

16.2.1.3.1*

Ceiling sprinkler water demand shall be determined in accordance with 16.2.1.3.2 for single- and double-row racks or 16.2.1.3.3 for multiple-row racks. (See Section C.14.)

16.2.1.3.2*

For single- or double-row racks for Class I, Class II, Class III, or Class IV commodities, encapsulated or nonencapsulated in single- or double-row racks , ceiling sprinkler

water demand in terms of density [gpm/ft2 (mm/min)] and area of sprinkler operation [ft2 (m2) of ceiling or roof] shall be selected from the density/area curves of Figure16.2.1.3.2(a) through Figure 16.2.1.3.2(g) that are appropriate for each commodity and configuration as shown in Table 16.2.1.3.2 and shall be modified as appropriate by16.2.1.3.4 . These requirements shall apply to portable racks arranged in the same manner as single- or double-row racks.

Table 16.2.1.3.2 Single- or Double-Row Racks — Storage Height Over 12 ft (3.7 m) Up to and Including 25 ft (7.6 m)

Height CommodityClass Encapsulated

SprinklersMandatory

In-Rack

Ceiling Sprinkler Water Demand

Aisles* With In-Rack Sprinklers Without In-Rack Sprinklers

ft m Figure Curves Apply Figure16.2.1.3.4.1 Figure Curves Apply Figure

16.2.1.3.4.1

Over 12 ft (3.7 m)up to and including20 ft (6.1 m)

I

No4 1.2

No 16.2.1.3.2(a)C and D

Yes

16.2.1.3.2(a)F and H

Yes8 2.4 A and B E and G

Yes4 1.2

No 16.2.1.3.2(e)C and D

16.2.1.3.2(e)G and H

Yes8 2.4 A and B E and F

II

No4 1.2

No 16.2.1.3.2(b)C and D

16.2.1.3.2(b)G and H

Yes8 2.4 A and B E and F

Yes4 1.2

No 16.2.1.3.2(e)C and D

16.2.1.3.2(e)G and H

Yes8 2.4 A and B E and F

III

No4 1.2

No 16.2.1.3.2(c)C and D

16.2.1.3.2(c)G and H

Yes8 2.4 A and B E and F

Yes4 1.2

1 level 16.2.1.3.2(f)C and D

— — —8 2.4 A and B

IV

No4 1.2

No 16.2.1.3.2(d)C and D

16.2.1.3.2(d)G and H

Yes8 2.4 A and B E and F

Yes4 1.2

1 level 16.2.1.3.2(g)C and D

— — —8 2.4 A and B

Over 20 ft (6.1 m)up to and including22 ft (6.7 m)

I

No4 1.2

No 16.2.1.3.2(a)C and D

No

16.2.1.3.2(a)F and H

Yes8 2.4 A and B E and G

Yes4 1.2

1 level 16.2.1.3.2(e)C and D

— — —8 2.4 A and B

II

No4 1.2

No 16.2.1.3.2(b)C and D

16.2.1.3.2(b)G and H

Yes8 2.4 A and B E and F

Yes4 1.2

1 level 16.2.1.3.2(e)C and D

— — —8 2.4 A and B

IIINo

4 1.2No 16.2.1.3.2(c)

C and D16.2.1.3.2(c)

G and HYes

8 2.4 A and B E and F

Yes 4 1.2 1 level 16.2.1.3.2(f) C and D — — —

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

21 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 22: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Height CommodityClass Encapsulated

SprinklersMandatory

In-Rack

Ceiling Sprinkler Water Demand

Aisles* With In-Rack Sprinklers Without In-Rack Sprinklers

ft m Figure Curves Apply Figure16.2.1.3.4.1 Figure Curves Apply Figure

16.2.1.3.4.1

8 2.4 A and B

IV

No4 1.2

No 16.2.1.3.2(d)C and D

16.2.1.3.2(d)G and H

Yes8 2.4 A and B E and F

Yes4 1.2

1 level 16.2.1.3.2(g)C and D

— — —8 2.4 A and B

Over 22 ft (6.7 m)up to and including25 ft (7.6 m)

I

No4 1.2

No 16.2.1.3.2(a)C and D

No

16.2.1.3.2(a)F and H

Yes8 2.4 A and B E and G

Yes4 1.2

1 level 16.2.1.3.2(e)C and D

— — —8 2.4 A and B

II

No4 1.2

No 16.2.1.3.2(b)C and D

16.2.1.3.2(b)G and H

Yes8 2.4 A and B E and F

Yes4 1.2

1 level 16.2.1.3.2(e)C and D

— — —8 2.4 A and B

III

No4 1.2

No 16.2.1.3.2(c)C and D

16.2.1.3.2(c)G and H

Yes8 2.4 A and B E and F

Yes4 1.2

1 level 16.2.1.3.2(f)C and D

— — —8 2.4 A and B

IV

No4 1.2

1 level

16.2.1.3.2(d)C and D

— — —8 2.4 A and B

Yes4 1.2

16.2.1.3.2(g)C and D

— — —8 2.4 A and B

*See 16.2.1.3.2.1 for interpolation of aisle widths.

Figure 16.2.1.3.2(a) Sprinkler System Design Curves — 20 ft (6.1 m) High Rack Storage — Class I Nonencapsulated Commodities — Conventional Pallets.

Figure 16.2.1.3.2(b) Sprinkler System Design Curves — 20 ft (6.1 m) High Rack Storage — Class II Nonencapsulated Commodities — Conventional Pallets.

Figure 16.2.1.3.2(c) Sprinkler System Design Curves — 20 ft (6.1 m) High Rack Storage — Class III Nonencapsulated Commodities — Conventional Pallets.

Figure 16.2.1.3.2(d) Sprinkler System Design Curves — 20 ft (6.1 m) High Rack Storage — Class IV Nonencapsulated Commodities — Conventional Pallets.

Figure 16.2.1.3.2(e) Single- or Double-Row Racks — 20 ft (6.1 m) High Rack Storage — Sprinkler System Design Curves — Class I and Class II EncapsulatedCommodities — Conventional Pallets.

Figure 16.2.1.3.2(f) Single- or Double-Row Racks — 20 ft (6.1 m) High Rack Storage — Sprinkler System Design Curves — Class III Encapsulated Commodities —Conventional Pallets.

Figure 16.2.1.3.2(g) Single- or Double-Row Racks — 20 ft (6.1 m) High Rack Storage — Sprinkler System Design Curves — Class IV Encapsulated Commodities —Conventional Pallets.

16.2.1.3.2.1*

Design densities for single- and double-row racks shall be selected to correspond to aisle width. (See Section C.15.)

(A) For aisle widths between 4 ft (1.2 m) and 8 ft (2.4 m), the rules for 4 ft (1.2 m) aisle width shall be used or direct linear interpolation between the densities shall bepermitted.

(B) The density given for 8 ft (2.4 m) wide aisles shall be applied to aisles wider than 8 ft (2.4 m).

(C) The density given for 4 ft (1.2 m) wide aisles shall be applied to aisles more narrow than 4 ft (1.2 m) down to 3 1⁄2 ft (1.07 m).

(D) Where aisles are more narrow than 3 1⁄2 ft (1.07 m), racks shall be considered to be multiple-row racks.

16.2.1.3.3 Multiple-Row Racks — Storage Height Over 12 ft (3.7 m) Up to and Including 25 ft (7.6 m).

16.2.1.3.3.1 Multiple-Row Racks — Rack Depth Up to and Including 16 ft (4.9 m) with Aisles 8 ft (2.4 m) or Wider.

For Class I, Class II, Class III, or Class IV commodities, encapsulated or nonencapsulated, c C eiling sprinkler water demand in terms of density [gpm/ft2 (mm/min)] and

area of sprinkler operation [ft2 (m2) of ceiling or roof] shall be selected from the density/area curves of Figure 16.2.1.3.2(a) through Figure 16.2.1.3.2(d) that areappropriate for each commodity and configuration as shown in Table 16.2.1.3.3.1 and shall be modified as appropriate by 16.2.1.3.4 . These requirements protectioncriteria shall apply to portable racks arranged in the same manner as multiple-row racks.

Table 16.2.1.3.3.1 Multiple-Row Racks — Rack Depth Up to and Including 16 ft (4.9 m), Aisles 8 ft (2.4 m) or Wider and Storage Height Over 12 ft (3.7 m) Up to 25 ft (7.6 m)

Height Commodity Encap- Sprinklers Ceiling Sprinkler Water Demand

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

22 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 23: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Class sulated MandatoryIn-Rack

With In-Rack Sprinklers Without In-Rack Sprinklers

Figure Curves Apply Figure16.2.1.3.4.1

1.25 ×Density Figure Curves Apply Figure

16.2.1.3.4.11.25 ×

Density

Over 12 ft (3.7m) up to andincluding 15 ft(4.6 m)

INo

No

16.2.1.3.2(a)

C and D

Yes

No 16.2.1.3.2(a) I and JYes

No

Yes 16.2.1.3.2(a) Yes 16.2.1.3.2(a) I and J Yes

IINo 16.2.1.3.2(b) No 16.2.1.3.2(b) I and J Yes No

Yes 16.2.1.3.2(b) Yes 16.2.1.3.2(b) I and J Yes

IIINo No 16.2.1.3.2(c) No 16.2.1.3.2(c) I and J Yes No

Yes 1 level 16.2.1.3.2(c) Yes NA NA NA

IV

No No 16.2.1.3.2(d) No 16.2.1.3.2(d) C and D No No

Yes 1 level 16.2.1.3.2(d) A and B1.50 ×density

NA NA NA

Over 15 ft (4.6m) up to andincluding 20 ft(6.1 m)

INo

No

16.2.1.3.2(a)

C and D

Yes

No 16.2.1.3.2(a) I and JYes

No

Yes 16.2.1.3.2(a) Yes 16.2.1.3.2(a) I and J Yes

IINo 16.2.1.3.2(b) No 16.2.1.3.2(b) I and J

YesNo

Yes 16.2.1.3.2(b) Yes 16.2.1.3.2(b) I and J Yes

IIINo No 16.2.1.3.2(c) No 16.2.1.3.2(c) I and J Yes No

Yes 1 level 16.2.1.3.2(c) Yes

NA NA NA NAIV

No

1 level

16.2.1.3.2(d) No

Yes 16.2.1.3.2(d) A nd B1.50 ×density

Over 20 ft (6.1m) up to andincluding 25 ft(7.6 m)

INo No 16.2.1.3.2(a)

C and D

No

No 16.2.1.3.2(a) I and J Yes No

Yes 1 level 16.2.1.3.2(a) Yes

NA NA NA NA

IINo

1 level

16.2.1.3.2(b) No

Yes 16.2.1.3.2(b) Yes

IIINo 16.2.1.3.2(c) No

Yes 16.2.1.3.2(c) Yes

IV

No

2 levels

16.2.1.3.2(d) No

Yes 16.2.1.3.2(d) A and B1.50 ×density

NA: Not applicable.

16.2.1.3.3.2 Multiple-Row Racks — Rack Depth Over 16 ft (4.9 m) or Aisles More Narrow Than 8 ft (2.4 m).

For Class I, Class II, Class III, or Class IV commodities, encapsulated or nonencapsulated, C c eiling sprinkler water demand in terms of density [gpm/ft2 (mm/min)] and

area of sprinkler operation [ft2 (m2) of ceiling or roof] shall be selected from the density/area curves of Figure 16.2.1.3.2(a) through Figure 16.2.1.3.2(g) that areappropriate for each commodity and configuration as shown in Table 16.2.1.3.3.2 and shall be modified as appropriate by 16.2.1.3.4. These requirements protectioncriteria shall apply to portable racks arranged in the same manner as multiple-row racks. (Move to 16.1 and delete from individual sections)

Table 16.2.1.3.3.2 Multiple-Row Racks — Rack Depth Over 16 ft (4.9 m) or Aisles Narrower Than 8 ft (2.4 m), Storage Height Over 12 ft (3.7 m) Up to and Including 25 ft(7.6 m)

Height CommodityClass

Encap-

sulated

SprinklersMandatory

In-Rack

Ceiling Sprinkler Water Demand

With In-Rack Sprinklers Without In-Rack Sprinklers

Figure Curves Apply Figure16.2.1.3.4.1

1.25 ×Density Figure Curves Apply Figure

16.2.1.3.4.11.25 ×

Density

Over 12 ft (3.7m) up to andincluding 15 ft(4.6 m)

INo

No

16.2.1.3.2(a)

C and D Yes

No 16.2.1.3.2(a) I and JYes

No

Yes 16.2.1.3.2(a) Yes 16.2.1.3.2(a) I and J Yes

IINo 16.2.1.3.2(b) No 16.2.1.3.2(b) I and J

YesNo

Yes 16.2.1.3.2(b) Yes 16.2.1.3.2(b) I and J Yes

IIINo 16.2.1.3.2(c) No 16.2.1.3.2(c) I and J Yes No

Yes 1 level 16.2.1.3.2(c) Yes

IV

No No 16.2.1.3.2(d) No 16.2.1.3.2(d) C and D No No

Yes 1 level 16.2.1.3.2(d)1.50 ×density

Over 15 ft (4.6m) up to andincluding 20 ft(6.1 m)

INo

1 level

16.2.1.3.2(a)

C and D Yes

No

NA NA NA NAYes 16.2.1.3.2(a) Yes

IINo 16.2.1.3.2(b) No

Yes 16.2.1.3.2(b) Yes

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

23 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 24: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Height CommodityClass

Encap-

sulated

SprinklersMandatory

In-Rack

Ceiling Sprinkler Water Demand

With In-Rack Sprinklers Without In-Rack Sprinklers

Figure Curves Apply Figure16.2.1.3.4.1

1.25 ×Density Figure Curves Apply Figure

16.2.1.3.4.11.25 ×

Density

IIINo 16.2.1.3.2(c) No

Yes 16.2.1.3.2(c) Yes

IV

No 16.2.1.3.2(d) No

Yes 16.2.1.3.2(d)1.50 ×density

Over 20 ft (6.1m) up to andincluding 25 ft(7.6 m)

INo

1 level

16.2.1.3.2(a)

C and D No

No

NA NA NA NA

Yes 16.2.1.3.2(a) Yes

IINo 16.2.1.3.2(b) No

Yes 16.2.1.3.2(b) Yes

IIINo 16.2.1.3.2(c) No

Yes 16.2.1.3.2(c) Yes

IV

No

2 levels

16.2.1.3.2(d) No

Yes 16.2.1.3.2(d)1.50 ×density

NA: Not applicable.

16.2.1.3.3.3 Where Class I, Class II, and Class III commodities are encapsulated, ceiling sprinkler density shall be 25 percent greater than for nonencapsulated.

16.2.1.3.3.4 Where Class IV commodities are encapsulated, ceiling sprinkler density shall be 50 percent greater than for nonencapsulated.

16.2.1.3.4 Ceiling Sprinkler Density Adjustments.

16.2.1.3.4.1 For storage height over 12 ft (3.7 m) up to and including 25 ft (7.6 m) protected with ceiling sprinklers only and for storage height over 12 ft (3.7 m) up to andincluding 20 ft (6.1 m) protected with ceiling sprinklers and minimum required in-rack sprinklers, densities obtained from design curves shall be adjusted in accordance withFigure 16.2.1.3.4.1.

Figure 16.2.1.3.4.1 Ceiling Sprinkler Density vs. Storage Height.

16.2.1.3.4.2 For storage height over 20 ft (6.1 m) up to and including 25 ft (7.6 m) protected with ceiling sprinklers and minimum required in-rack sprinklers, densitiesobtained from design curves shall be used. Densities shall not be adjusted in accordance with Figure 16.2.1.3.4.1.

16.2.1.3.4.3 For storage height over 12 ft (3.7 m) up to and including 20 ft (6.1 m) protected with ceiling sprinklers and with more than one level of in-rack sprinklers, but notin every tier, densities obtained from design curves and adjusted in accordance with Figure 16.2.1.3.4.1 shall be permitted to be reduced an additional 20 percent, asindicated in Table 16.2.1.3.4.3.

Table 16.2.1.3.4.3 Adjustment to Ceiling Sprinkler Density for Storage Height and In-Rack Sprinklers

Storage Height In-Rack Sprinklers Apply Figure 16.2.1.3.4.1 forStorage Height Adjustment

Permitted Ceiling Sprinklers Density AdjustmentsWhere In-Rack Sprinklers Are Installed

Over 12 ft (3.7 m) through25 ft (7.6 m)

None Yes None

Over 12 ft (3.7 m) through20 ft (6.1 m)

Minimum required Yes None

More than minimum, but notin every tier

Yes Reduce density 20% from that of minimum in-rack sprinklers

In every tier Yes Reduce density 40% from that of minimum in-rack sprinklers

Over 20 ft (6.1 m) through25 ft (7.5 m)

Minimum required No None

More than minimum, but notin every tier

No Reduce density 20% from that of minimum in-rack sprinklers

In every tier No Reduce density 40% from that of minimum in-rack sprinklers

16.2.1.3.4.4 For storage height over 20 ft (6.1 m) up to and including 25 ft (7.6 m) protected with ceiling sprinklers and with more than the minimum required level of in-racksprinklers, but not in every tier, densities obtained from design curves shall be permitted to be reduced 20 percent, as indicated in Table 16.2.1.3.4.3. Densities shall not beadjusted in accordance with Figure 16.2.1.3.4.1 for storage height.

16.2.1.3.4.5* For storage height over 12 ft (3.7 m) up to and including 20 ft (6.1 m) protected with ceiling sprinklers and in-rack sprinklers at each tier, densities obtainedfrom design curves and adjusted in accordance with Figure 16.2.1.3.4.1 shall be permitted to be reduced an additional 40 percent, as indicated in Table 16.2.1.3.4.3.

16.2.1.3.4.6* For storage height over 20 ft (6.1 m) up to and including 25 ft (7.6 m) protected with ceiling sprinklers and in-rack sprinklers at each tier, densities obtainedfrom design curves shall be permitted to be reduced 40 percent, as indicated in Table 16.2.1.3.4.3. Densities shall not be adjusted in accordance with Figure 16.2.1.3.4.1 forstorage height.

16.2.1.3.4.7 Where solid, flat-bottom, combustible pallets (slave pallets) are used with storage height up to and including 25 ft (7.6 m), the densities that are indicated in thedesign curves shown in Figure

16.2.1.3.2(a) through Figure 16.2.1.3.2(g), based on conventional pallets, shall be increased 20 percent for the given area.

(A) The percentage shall be applied to the density determined in accordance with 16.2.1.3.4.

(B) The increase in density shall not apply where in-rack sprinklers are utilized in the design.

16.2.1.3.5 Solid For solid shelf rack storage , Table 16.2.1.3.2 shall be used to establish the density/area criteria and in-rack sprinklers shall be installed inaccordance with 16.1.6. In-rack sprinkler rules consolidated in 16.1.8- check to see if this has been deleted.

16.2.1.4 In-Rack Sprinklers for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Up to and Including 25 ft (7.6 m) in HeightProtected with Control Mode Density/Area Sprinklers at Ceiling.

16.2.1.4.1 In-Rack Sprinkler Location for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Up to and Including 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height .

16.2.1.4.1.1 In single- or double-row racks, in-rack sprinklers shall be installed in accordance with Table 16.2.1.3.2.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

24 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 25: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

16.2.1.4.1.2 In multiple-row racks no deeper than 16 ft (4.9 m) with aisles 8 ft (2.4 m) or more in width, in-rack sprinklers shall be installed in accordance with Table16.2.1.3.3.1.

16.2.1.4.1.3 In multiple-row racks deeper than 16 ft (4.9 m) or with aisles less than 8 ft (2.4 m) wide, in-rack sprinklers shall be installed in accordance with Table16.2.1.3.3.2.

16.2.1.4.1.4 In-rack sprinklers at one level only for storage up to and including 25 ft (7.6 m) high shall be located at the first tier level at or above one-half of the storageheight.

16.2.1.4.1.5 In-rack sprinklers at two levels only for storage up to and including 25 ft (7.6 m) high shall be located at the first tier level at or above one-third and two-thirds ofthe storage height.

16.2.1.4.2 In-Rack Sprinkler Spacing for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Up to and Including 25 ft (7.6 m) inHeight Protected by Control Mode Density/Area Sprinklers at the Ceiling.

16.2.1.4.2.1* Maximum horizontal spacing of in-rack sprinklers in single- or double-row racks up to and including 25 ft (7.6 m) in height shall be in accordance with Table16.2.1.4.2.1.

Table 16.2.1.4.2.1 In-Rack Sprinkler Spacing for Class I, II, III, and IV Commodities Stored in Single- or Double-Row Racks Up to 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height Protected by ControlMode Density/Area Sprinklers at the Ceiling

Commodity Class

Aisle Widths I and II III IV

Encapsulated ft m ft m ft m ft m

No 8 2.4 12 3.7 12 3.7 10 3.0

No 4 1.2 12 3.7 10 3.0 10 3.0

Yes — — 8 2.4 8 2.4 8 2.4

16.2.1.4.2.2* Maximum horizontal spacing and maximum area of coverage of in-rack sprinklers on branch lines, in multiple-row racks with storage up to and including 25 ft(7.6 m) in height, shall be in accordance with Table 16.2.1.4.2.2.

Table 16.2.1.4.2.2 In-Rack Sprinkler Spacing for Class I, II, III, and IV Commodities Stored in Multi-Row Racks Up to 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height Protected by Control ModeDensity/Area Sprinklers at the Ceiling

Commodity Class

I, II, III IV

Spacing Area Spacing Area

ft m ft2 m2 ft m ft2 m2

12 3.7 100 9.3 8 2.4 80 7.4

(A) The rack plan view shall be considered in determining the area covered by each sprinkler.

(B) The aisles shall not be included in area calculations.

16.2.1.4.2.3* The elevation of in-rack sprinkler deflectors with respect to storage shall not be a consideration in single- or double-row rack storage up to and including 20 ft(6.1 m) high. (See Section C.16.)

16.2.1.4.2.4* In single- or double-row racks without solid shelves with storage over 20 ft (6.1 m) high, or in multiple-row racks, or in single- or double-row racks with solidshelves and storage height up to and including 25 ft (7.6 m), a minimum of 6 in. (152 mm) vertical clear space shall be maintained between the in-rack sprinkler deflectorsand the top of a tier of storage.

(A) Sprinkler discharge shall not be obstructed by horizontal rack members.

16.2.1.4.2.5 For multiple-row racks, a minimum of 6 in. (152 mm) shall be maintained between the in-rack sprinkler deflector and the top of a tier of storage.

16.2.1.4.2.6 Sprinklers installed in racks shall be spaced without regard to rack uprights. (See Section C.17.)

16.2.1.4.3 In-Rack Sprinkler Water Demand for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Up to and Including 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height Protected byControl Mode Density/Area Sprinklers in the Ceiling. See Section C.18.

16.2.1.4.3.1 The water demand for sprinklers installed in racks shall be based on simultaneous operation of the most hydraulically remote sprinklers as follows:

(1) Six sprinklers where only one level is installed in racks with Class I, Class II, or Class III commodities

(2) Eight sprinklers where only one level is installed in racks with Class IV commodities

(3) Ten sprinklers (five on each two top levels) where more than one level is installed in racks with Class I, Class II, or Class III commodities

(4) Fourteen sprinklers (seven on each two top levels) where more than one level is installed in racks with Class IV commodities

16.2.1.4.3.2 Where a storage rack, due to its length, requires less than the number of in-rack sprinklers specified in 16.2.1.4.3.1 (1) through 16.2.1.4.3.1 (4), only thosein-rack sprinklers in a single rack shall be included in the calculation.

16.2.1.4.4 In-Rack Sprinkler Discharge Pressure for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Up to and Including 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height Protectedby Control Mode Density/Area Sprinklers at the Ceiling. Sprinklers in racks shall discharge at not less than 15 psi (1 bar) for all classes of commodities. (See Section C.19.)

16.2.2 CMSA Sprinklers Protection Criteria for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Up to and Including 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height.

16.2.2.1 Protection of single-, double-, and multiple-row rack storage for Class I through Class IV commodities shall be in accordance with Table 16.2.2.1.

Table 16.2.2.1 CMSA Sprinkler Design Criteria for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities (Encapsulated and Nonencapsulated) Stored Up to and Including25 ft (7.6 m) in Height

Storage Arrangement CommodityClass

MaximumStorage Height

MaximumCeiling/Roof

HeightK-Factor/

OrientationType ofSystem

Number ofDesign

Sprinklers

MinimumOperatingPressure

ft m ft m psi bar

Single-, double-, and multiple-rowracks (no open-top containers)

Class I or II 20 6.1 30 9.1

11.2 (160)Upright

Wet 15 25 1.7

Dry 25 25 1.7

16.8 (240) Wet 15 10 0.7

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

25 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 26: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Storage Arrangement CommodityClass

MaximumStorage Height

MaximumCeiling/Roof

HeightK-Factor/

OrientationType ofSystem

Number ofDesign

Sprinklers

MinimumOperatingPressure

ft m ft m psi bar

Upright Dry 25 15 1.0

19.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 15 16 1.1

25 7.6 30 9.1

11.2 (160)Upright

Wet 20 25 1.7

Dry 30 25 1.7

16.8 (240)Upright

Wet 15 10 0.7

Dry 30 15 1.0

19.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 15 16 1.1

Class III

20 6.1 30 9.1

11.2 (160)Upright

Wet 15 25 1.7

Dry 25 25 1.7

16.8 (240)Upright

Wet 15 15 1.0

Dry 25 15 1.0

19.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 15 16 1.1

25 7.6

30 9.1

11.2 (160)Upright

Wet 15 1 level of in-rack 25 1.7

Dry 25 1 level of in-rack 25 1.7

16.8 (240)Upright

Wet 15 22 1.5

Dry 25 1 level of in-rack 15 1.0

19.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 15 16 1.1

35 10.6

11.2 (160)Upright

Wet 15 1 level of in-rack 25 1.7

Dry 25 1 level of in-rack 25 1.7

16.8 (240)Upright

Wet 15 1 level of in-rack 15 1.0

Dry 25 1 level of in-rack 15 1.0

19.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 15 25 1.7

40 12.119.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 15 30 2.1

Class IV

20 6.1

25 7.6

11.2 (160)Upright

Wet 15 50 3.5

16.8 (240)Upright

Wet 15 22 1.5

19.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 15 16 1.1

30 9.1

11.2 (160)Upright

Wet20 50 3.5

15 75 5.2

16.8 (240)Upright

Wet 15 22 1.5

19.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 15 16 1.1

25 7.6

30 9.1

11.2 (160)Upright

Wet 15 1 level of in-rack 50 3.5

16.8 (240)Upright

Wet 15 22 1.5

19.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 15 16 1.1

35 10.6

11.2 (160)Upright

Wet20 1 level of in-rack 50 3.5

15 1 level of in-rack 75 5.2

16.8 (240)Upright

Wet20 1 level of in-rack 22 1.5

15 1 level of in-rack 35 2.4

19.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 15 25 1.7

40 12.119.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 15 30 2.1

16.2.2.1.1 Protection of solid shelf racks with CMSA sprinklers at the ceiling shall be permitted where in-rack sprinklers are installed in accordance with 16.1.6. In-rack

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

26 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 27: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

sprinklers shall be installed in every level below the highest solid shelf.

16.2.2.2 Where in-rack sprinklers are required by Table 16.2.2.1, in In -rack sprinkler spacing, design pressure, and hydraulic calculation criteria shall be in accordancewith the requirements of 16.2.2.7 as applicable for the commodity .

16.2.2.3 Protection shall be provided as specified in Table 16.2.2.1 or appropriate NFPA standards in terms of minimum operating pressure and the number of sprinklers tobe included in the design area.

16.2.2.4 Open Wood Joist Construction.

16.2.2.4.1 Where CMSA sprinklers are installed under open wood joist construction, their minimum operating pressure shall be 50 psi (3.4 bar) for a K-11.2 (160) sprinkleror 22 psi (1.5 bar) for a K-16.8 (240) sprinkler.

16.2.2.4.2 Where each joist channel of open wood joist construction is fully firestopped to its full depth at intervals not exceeding 20 ft (6.1 m), the lower pressures specifiedin Table 16.2.2.1 shall be permitted to be used.

16.2.2.5 Preaction Systems.

For the purpose of using Table 16.2.2.1, preaction systems shall be classified as dry pipe systems.

16.2.2.6 Building steel shall not require special protection where Table 16.2.2.1 is applied as appropriate for the storage configuration.

16.2.2.7 In-Rack Sprinklers for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Up to and Including 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height Protected with Control ModeSpecific Application Sprinklers at the Ceiling.

16.2.2.7.1 Where in-rack sprinklers are required by Table 16.2.2.1, in In -rack sprinklers shall be installed at the first tier level at or above one-half of the storage height.

16.2.2.7.2 The minimum of 6 in. (152.4 mm) vertical clear space shall be maintained between the sprinkler deflectors and the top of a tier of storage.

16.2.2.7.3* In-rack sprinklers shall be located at an intersection of transverse and longitudinal flues.

16.2.2.7.4 The maximum horizontal distance between in-rack sprinklers shall be 8 ft (1.5 m).

16.2.2.7.5 Where distances between transverse flues exceed the maximum allowable distances, sprinklers shall be installed at the intersection of the transverse andlongitudinal flues, and additional sprinklers shall be installed between transverse flues to meet the maximum distance rules.

16.2.2.7.6 Where no transverse flues exist, in-rack sprinklers shall not exceed the maximum spacing rules.

16.2.2.7.7 In-Rack Sprinkler Water Demand.

The water demand for in-rack sprinklers shall be based on simultaneous operation of the most hydraulically remote eight sprinklers.

16.2.2.7.8 In-Rack Sprinkler Discharge Pressure.

In-rack sprinklers shall discharge at not less than 15 psi (1 bar) for all classes of commodities. (See Section C.19.)

16.2.3* Early Suppression Fast-Response (ESFR) Protection Criteria Sprinklers for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Up to and Including 25ft (7.6 m) in Height .

16.2.3.1 Protection of single-, double-, and multiple-row rack storage of Class I through Class IV commodities shall be in accordance with Table 16.2.3.1.

Table 16.2.3.1 ESFR Sprinkler Protection of Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Up to and Including 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height

Storage Arrangement Commodity

MaximumStorageHeight

MaximumCeiling/Roof

HeightNominalK-Factor Orientation

MinimumOperatingPressure

In-Rack SprinklerRequirements

ft m ft m psi bar

Single-row, double-row, andmultiple-row racks (noopen-top containers)

Class I, II, III, or IV,encapsulated or

nonencapsultated20 6.1

25 7.6

14.0

(200)

Upright/

pendent50 3.4 No

16.8

(240)

Upright/

pendent35 2.4 No

22.4

(320)pendent 25 1.7 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 15 1.0 No

30 9.1

14.0

(200)

Upright/

pendent50 3.4 No

16.8

(240)

Upright/

pendent35 2.4 No

22.4

(320)Pendent 25 1.7 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 15 1.0 No

35 10.7

14.0

(200)

Upright/

pendent75 5.2 No

16.8

(240)

Upright/

pendent52 3.6 No

22.4

(320)Pendent 35 2.4 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 20 1.4 No

40 12.2 or 12.1

16.8

(240)Pendent 52 3.6 No

22.4

(320)Pendent 40 2.8 No

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

27 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 28: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Storage Arrangement Commodity

MaximumStorageHeight

MaximumCeiling/Roof

HeightNominalK-Factor Orientation

MinimumOperatingPressure

In-Rack SprinklerRequirements

ft m ft m psi bar

25.2

(360)Pendent 25 1.7 No

45 13.7

14.0

(200)Pendent 90 6.2 Yes

16.8

(240)Pendent 63 4.4 Yes

22.4

(320)Pendent 40 2.8 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 40 2.8 No

25 7.6

30 9.1

14.0

(200)

Upright/

pendent50 3.4 No

16.8

(240)

Upright/

pendent35 2.4 No

22.4

(320)Pendent 25 1.7 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 15 1.0 No

32 9.8

14.0

(200)

Upright/

pendent60 4.1 No

16.8

(240)

Upright/

pendent42 2.9 No

35 10.7

14.0

(200)

Upright/

pendent75 5.2 No

16.8

(240)

Upright/

pendent52 3.6 No

22.4

(320)Pendent 35 2.4 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 20 1.4 No

40 12.2 or 12.1

16.8

(240)Pendent 52 3.6 No

22.4

(320)Pendent 40 2.8 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 25 1.7 No

45 13.7

14.0

(200)Pendent 90 6.2 Yes

16.8

(240)Pendent 63 4.4 Yes

22.4

(320)Pendent 40 2.8 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 40 2.8 No

16.2.3.2 ESFR s Sprinklers shall not be permitted to protect storage on solid shelf racks unless the solid shelf racks are protected with in-rack sprinklers in accordance with16.1.6.

16.2.3.2.1 Where solid shelves are used, in-rack sprinklers shall be installed in every level below the highest solid shelf.

16.2.3.3 ESFR sSprinklers shall not be permitted to protect storage with open top containers.

16.2.3.4 ESFR sSprinkler systems shall be designed such that the minimum operating pressure is not less than that indicated in Table 16.2.3.1 for type of storage,commodity, storage height, and building height involved.

16.2.3.5 The design area shall consist of the most hydraulically demanding area of 12 sprinklers, consisting of four sprinklers on each of three branch lines.

16.2.3.6 In-Rack Sprinkler Requirements for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Up to and Including 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height Where ESFRSprinklers Are Being Used at the Ceiling .

16.2.3.6.1 Where required by Table 16.2.3.1, in-rack sprinklers shall be installed at the first tier level at or above one-half of the storage height.

16.2.3.6.2 In-rack sprinklers shall be K-8.0 (115) or K-11.2 (160) quick-response, ordinary-temperature sprinklers.

16.2.3.6.3 The minimum of 6 in. (152.4 mm) vertical clear space shall be maintained between the sprinkler deflectors and the top of a tier of storage.

16.2.3.6.4 The maximum horizontal distance between in-rack sprinklers shall be 5 ft (1.5 m).

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

28 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 29: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

16.2.3.6.5* In-rack sprinklers shall be located at an intersection of transverse and longitudinal flues while not exceeding the maximum spacing rules.

16.2.3.6.6 Where distances between transverse flues exceed the maximum allowable distances, sprinklers shall be installed at the intersection of the transverse andlongitudinal flues, and additional sprinklers shall be installed between transverse flues to meet the maximum distance rules.

16.2.3.6.7 Where no transverse flues exist, in-rack sprinklers shall not exceed the maximum spacing rules.

16.2.3.6.8 The water demand for sprinklers installed in racks shall be based on simultaneous operation of the most hydraulically remote eight sprinklers.

16.2.3.6.9 Each of the in-rack sprinklers described in 16.2.3.6.8 shall discharge at a minimum of 60 gpm (227 L/min).

16.2.4 Special Design for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Up to and Including 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height .

16.2.4.1 Slatted Shelves.

16.2.4.1.1* Slatted rack shelves shall be considered equivalent to solid rack shelves where the shelving is not considered open rack shelving or where the requirements of16.2.4.1.2 are not met. (See Section C.20.)

16.2.4.1.2 A wet pipe system that is designed to provide a minimum of 0.6 gpm/ft2 (24.5 mm/min) density over a minimum area of 2000 ft2 (186 m2) or K-14.0 (200) ESFRsprinklers operating at a minimum of 50 psi (3.4 bar), K-16.8 (240) sprinklers operating at a minimum of 32 psi (2.2 bar), K-22.4 (320) ESFR sprinklers operating at aminimum of 25 psi (1.7 bar), or K-25.2 (360) ESFR sprinklers operating at a minimum of 15 psi (1 bar) shall be permitted to protect single-row and double-row racks withslatted rack shelving where all of the following conditions are met:

(1) Sprinklers shall be K-11.2 (160), K-14.0 (200), or K-16.8 (240) orifice spray sprinklers with a temperature rating of ordinary, intermediate, or high and shall be listed forstorage occupancies or shall be K-14.0 (200), K-16.8 (240), K-22.4 (320) ESFR, or K-25.2 (360) ESFR.

(2) The protected commodities shall be limited to Class I through Class IV, Group B plastics, Group C plastics, cartoned (expanded and unexpanded) Group A plastics,and exposed (unexpanded) Group A plastics.

(3) Slats in slatted rack shelving shall be a minimum nominal 2 in. (51 mm) thick by maximum nominal 6 in. (152 mm) wide, with the slats held in place by spacers thatmaintain a minimum 2 in. (51 mm) opening between each slat.

(4) Where K-11.2 (160), K-14.0 (200), or K-16.8 (240) orifice sprinklers are used, there shall be no slatted shelf levels in the rack above 12 ft (3.7 m). Open rack shelvingusing wire mesh shall be permitted for shelf levels above 12 ft (3.7 m).

(5) Transverse flue spaces at least 3 in. (76 mm) wide shall be provided at least every 10 ft (3.1 m) horizontally.

(6) Longitudinal flue spaces at least 6 in. (152 mm) wide shall be provided for double-row racks. Longitudinal flue spaces shall not be required where ESFR sprinklers areused.

(7) The aisle widths shall be at least 7 1⁄2 ft (2.3 m).

(8) The maximum roof height shall be 27 ft (8.2 m) or 30 ft (9.1 m) where ESFR sprinklers are used.

(9) The maximum storage height shall be 20 ft (6.1 m).

(10) Solid plywood or similar materials shall not be placed on the slatted shelves so that they block the 2 in. (51 mm) spaces between slats, nor shall they be placed on wiremesh shelves.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Submitted on behalf of the SSD Redundancy Task Group. Proposed text eliminates duplicate/redundant text and is considered editorial.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 261-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input] All consolidate or elminate duplicate or redundant text.

Public Comment No. 262-NFPA 13-2014 [Chapter 14]

Public Comment No. 325-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 327-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 334-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 340-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 346-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 16.3]

Public Comment No. 355-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 356-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Related Item

Public Input No. 352-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 16.1.4]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Kenneth Linder

Organization: Swiss Re

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 14:32:40 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but held

Resolution: The concept of limiting the redundancy in chapters 12-21 of NFPA has been discussed throughout this revision cycle. While the TC is in general support of thisconcept, making these redundancy revisions at the Second Phase of the cycle is not appropriate. The reject but hold action for this item will allow the TC on DischargeCriteria to submit the concept to the correlating committee for review and refinement before proceeding into the 2019 edition revision cycle.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

29 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 30: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 355-NFPA 13-2014 [ Global Input ]

Update the following sections of Chapter 17

17.1.1 This chapter shall apply to storage of plastic and rubber commodities stored in racks. The requirements of Chapter 12 shall apply unless modified bythis chapter. (See Section C.9.)

17.1.1.1 This chapter also shall be used to determine protection for commodities that are not entirely Group A plastics but contain such quantities andarrangements of Group A plastics that they are deemed more hazardous than Class IV commodities.

17.1.2.6 Sprinkler protection criteria for the storage of Group A plastic commodities on racks shall be in accordance with Section 17.2 for storage up to 25 ft (7.6m) and Section 17.3 for storage over 25 ft (7.6 m).

17.1.10.2.1

Face sprinklers in such racks shall be located within the rack a minimum of 3 in. (76 mm) from rack uprights and no more than 18 in. (460 mm) from the aisleface of storage.

17.2 Protection Criteria for Single-, Double-, and Multiple-Row Open Rack Storage of Group A Plastic Commodities Stored with Storage Up to and Including25 ft (7.6 m) in Height.

17.2.1 Control Mode Density/Area Sprinkler Protection Criteria for Single-, Double-, and Multiple-Row Racks for Plastics CommoditiesStored Up to and Including 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height, with a Clearance to Ceiling Up to and Including 10 ft (3.1 m).

17.2.1.2 Ceiling Sprinkler Water Demand Storage Over 5 Ft in Height

17.2.1.2.1

For Group A plastic commodities in cartons, encapsulated or nonencapsulated in single-, double-, and multiple-row racks and with a clearance to ceiling up to

and including 10 ft. (3.1 m), ceiling sprinkler water demand in terms of density [gpm/ft2 (mm/min)] and area of operation [ft2 (m2)] shall be selected from Figure17.2.1.2.1(a) through Figure 17.2.1.2.1(f).

17.2.1.2.4* An option shall be selected from the appropriate Figure 17.2.1.2.1(a) through Figure 17.2.1.2.1(f) given the storage height and clearance beingprotected. The density/area criteria at the top of each option shall be applied to the ceiling sprinklers and the in-rack sprinklers shown in the option (if any) shallbe provided. Options that do not show multiple-row racks in the figures shall not be permitted to protect multiple-row rack storage. Notes in each figure shall bepermitted to clarify options or to present additional options not shown in the figures.

17.2.1.3

For storage of Group A plastics between 5 ft and 12 ft (1.5 m and 3.7 m) in height, the installation requirements for extra hazard systems shall apply.

17.2.1.4* Exposed unexpanded Group A plastics protected with control mode density/area sprinklers shall be protected in accordance with one of thefollowing:

17.2.1.5 In-Rack Sprinkler Requirements Where Control Mode Density/Area Sprinklers Are Being Used at Ceiling.

17.2.1.5.6 In-Rack Sprinkler Water Demand.

The water demand for sprinklers installed in racks shall be based on simultaneous operation of the most hydraulically remote sprinklers as follows:

(1) Eight sprinklers where only one level is installed in racks

(2) Fourteen sprinklers (seven on each top two levels) where more than one level is installed in racks

17.2.1.5.7 In-Rack Sprinkler Discharge Pressure.

Sprinklers in racks shall discharge at not less than 15 psi (1 bar) for all classes of commodities. (See Section C.19.)

17.2.2 CMSA Sprinklers for Rack Storage of Plastics Commodities Stored Up to and Including 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height.

17.2.2.1

Protection of single-, double-, and multiple-row rack storage for unexpanded Group A plastic commodities shall be in accordance with Table 17.2.2.1.

17.2.2.2

Protection shall be provided as specified in Table 17.2.2.1 or appropriate NFPA standards in terms of minimum operating pressure and the number of sprinklersto be included in the design area.

17.2.2.5 Building steel shall not require special protection where Table 17.2.2.1 is applied as appropriate for the storage configuration.

17.2.2.6 In-Rack Sprinkler Requirements Where CMSA Sprinklers Are Used at Ceiling.

17.2.2.6.7 In-Rack Sprinkler Water Demand.

The water demand for sprinklers installed in racks shall be based on simultaneous operation of the most hydraulically remote eight sprinklers.

17.2.2.6.8 In-Rack Sprinkler Discharge Pressure.

Sprinklers in racks shall discharge at not less than 15 psi (1 bar) for all classes of commodities. (See Section C.19.)

17.2.3* Early Suppression Fast-Response (ESFR) Sprinklers for Rack Storage of Plastics Commodities Stored Up to and Including 25 ft (7.6m) in Height.

17.2.3.2 ESFR sprinkler systems shall be designed such that the minimum operating pressure is not less than that indicated in Table 17.2.3.1 for type ofstorage, commodity, storage height, and building height involved.

17.2.3.3 The design area shall consist of the most hydraulically demanding area of 12 sprinklers, consisting of four sprinklers on each of three branch lines.

17.2.3.4 In-Rack Sprinkler Requirements Where ESFR Sprinklers Are Used at Ceiling.

17.2.3.4.1 Where required by Table 17.2.3.1, in-rack sprinklers shall be installed at the first tier level at or above one-half of the storage height.

17.2.3.4.8

The water demand for sprinklers installed in racks shall be based on simultaneous operation of the most hydraulically remote eight sprinklers.

17.2.4 Special Design for Rack Storage of Plastics Commodities Stored Up to and Including 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height.

17.3 Protection Criteria for Single-, Double-, and Multiple-Row Open Rack Storage of Group A Plastic Commodities Stored with Storage Over 25 ft (7.6 m) inHeight.

17.3.1 Control Mode Density/Area Sprinkler Protection Criteria for Rack Storage of Plastics Commodities Stored Over 25 ft (7.6 m) in Heightfor Single-, Double-, and Multiple-Row Racks.

17.3.1.1

Protection of Group A plastics in cartons, expanded or unexpanded, whether encapsulated or nonencapsulated and with a clearance to ceiling up to andincluding 10 ft. (3.1 m), shall be permitted using control mode density/area sprinklers in accordance with 17.3.1.

17.3.1.3* Ceiling Sprinkler Water Demand.

For Group A plastic commodities, encapsulated or nonencapsulated, ceiling sprinkler water demand in terms of density [gpm/ft2 (mm/min)] and area of

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

30 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 31: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

operation [ft2 (m2)] shall be selected from Table 17.3.1.3.

17.3.1.13 In-Rack Sprinkler Water Demand.

The water demand for sprinklers installed in racks shall be based on simultaneous operation of the most hydraulically remote sprinklers as follows:

(1) Eight sprinklers where only one level is installed in racks

(2) Fourteen sprinklers (seven on each top two levels) where more than one level is installed in racks

17.3.1.14 In-Rack Sprinkler Discharge Pressure.

Sprinklers in racks shall discharge at not less than 30 gpm (113.6 L/min).

17.3.1.15 The minimum water supply requirements for a hydraulically designed occupancy hazard fire control sprinkler system shall be determined by addingthe hose stream allowance from Table 17.3.1.15 to the water supply for sprinklers determined in Section 17.3.

17.3.2 CMSA Sprinklers for Rack Storage of Plastics Commodities Stored Over 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height

17.3.2.1

Protection of single-, double-, and multiple-row rack storage for cartoned, unexpandedGroup A plastic commodities shall be in accordance with Table 17.3.2.1.

17.3.2.3 The design area shall be a rectangular area having a dimension parallel to the branch lines at least 1.2 times the square root of the area protected bythe number of sprinklers to be included in the design area. Any fractional sprinkler shall be included in the design area.

17.3.2.4 Building steel shall not require special protection where Table 17.3.2.1 is applied as appropriate for the storage configuration.

17.3.3* Early Suppression Fast-Response (ESFR) Sprinklers for Rack Storage of Plastics Commodities Stored Over 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height.

17.3.3.1

Protection of single-, double-, and multiple-row rack storage of cartoned or exposed, unexpandedGroup A plastic shall be in accordance with Table 17.3.3.1.

17.3.3.2

ESFR sprinkler systems shall be designed such that the minimum operating pressure is not less than that indicated in Table 17.3.3.1 for type of storage,commodity, storage height, and building height involved.

17.3.3.3 The design area shall consist of the most hydraulically demanding area of 12 sprinklers, consisting of four sprinklers on each of three branchlines.

17.3.3.4 Where required by Table 17.3.3.1, one level of K-8.0 (115) or K-11.2 (160) quick-response, ordinary-temperature in-rack sprinklers shall be installed atthe tier level closest to but not exceeding one-half of the maximum storage height.

17.3.3.5.1

Protection of single-, double-, and multiple-row rack storage of exposed expanded Group A plastics shall be permitted to be in accordance with 17.3.3.5.2through 17.3.3.5.9.

17.3.3.5.4

Sprinklers shall be intermediate temperature–rated ESFR pendent sprinklers with a nominal K-factor of K-25.2 (360).

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Submitted on behalf of the SSD Redundancy Task Group -- These changes are considered editorial and eliminate redundant and repeated text.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 261-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input] All address redundant and repeated text

Public Comment No. 262-NFPA 13-2014 [Chapter 14]

Public Comment No. 325-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 327-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 334-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 340-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 342-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 346-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 16.3]

Public Comment No. 356-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Related Item

Public Input No. 352-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 16.1.4]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Kenneth Linder

Organization: Swiss Re

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 16:19:34 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but held

Resolution: The concept of limiting the redundancy in chapters 12-21 of NFPA has been discussed throughout this revision cycle. While the TC is in general support of thisconcept, making these redundancy revisions at the Second Phase of the cycle is not appropriate. The reject but hold action for this item will allow the TC on DischargeCriteria to submit the concept to the correlating committee for review and refinement before proceeding into the 2019 edition revision cycle.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

31 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 32: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 356-NFPA 13-2014 [ Global Input ]

Make the following changes to Chapter 17 to consolidate in-rack requirements as in FR 317.

17.1.7 In-Rack Sprinklers.

17.1.7.1 The number of sprinklers and the pipe sizing on a line of sprinklers in racks shall be restricted only by hydraulic calculations and not by any pipingschedule.

17.1.7.2 When in-rack sprinklers are necessary to protect a higher hazard commodity that occupies only a portion of the length of a rack, in-rack sprinklersshall be extended a minimum of 8 ft (2.4 m) or one bay, whichever is greater, in each direction along the rack on either side of the higher hazard.

17.1.7.2.1 The in-rack sprinklers protecting the higher hazard shall not be required to be extended across the aisle.

17.1.7.3 Where a storage rack, due to its length, requires less than the number of in-rack sprinklers specified, only those in-rack sprinklers in a single rack needto be included in the calculation.

17.1.7.4 * In-rack Where in-rack sprinklers are installed in longitudinal flues, they shall be located at an intersection of transverse and longitudinal flues whilenot exceeding the maximum spacing rules.

17.1.7.4.1 Where distances between transverse flues exceed the maximum allowable distances, sprinklers shall be installed at the intersection of thetransverse and longitudinal flues, and additional sprinklers shall be installed between transverse flues to meet the maximum distance rules.

17.1.7.4.2 Where no transverse flues exist, in-rack sprinklers shall not exceed the maximum spacing rules.

17.1.7.4.3 , In-rack sprinklers shall be installed with a minimum 6 in. (152 mm) vertical clear space between the in-rack sprinkler deflectors and the top of a tierof storage.

.

17.1.7.4.3 17.1.7.4.4 For storage over 25 ft in height

17.1.7.4.4.1 In-rack sprinklers in longitudinal flues shall be installed

(a) with the deflector located at or below the bottom of horizontal load beams or above or below other adjacent horizontal rack members, and

(b) such in-rack sprinklers shall be a minimum of 3 in. (76 mm) radially from the side of the rack uprights.

17.1.7.4.4.2 17.1.10.2.1

Face sprinklers in such racks shall be located within the rack a minimum of 3 in. (76 mm) from rack uprights and no more than 18 in. (460 mm) from the aisleface of storage.

17.1.10.2 In single-, double-, or multiple-row racks, a minimum 6 in. (152 mm) vertical clear space shall be maintained between the in-rack sprinkler deflectorsand the top of a tier of storage.

17.1.10.2.1

Face sprinklers in such racks shall be located within the rack a minimum of 3 in. (76 mm) from rack uprights and no more than 18 in. (460 mm) from the aisleface of storage.

17.1.10.2.2 Such in-rack sprinklers shall be a minimum of 3 in. (76 mm) radially from the side of the rack uprights.

17.2.1.5.1 In-Rack Sprinkler Spacing Clearance. The minimum of 6 in. (152 mm) vertical clear space shall be maintained between the sprinkler deflectorsand the top of a tier of storage.

17.2.1.5.2 The spacing of in-rack sprinklers shall be in accordance with Figure 17.2.1.2.1(a) through Figure 17.2.1.2.1(f).

17.2.1.5.3* In-rack sprinklers shall be located at an intersection of transverse and longitudinal flues while not exceeding the maximum spacing rules.

Delete A.17.2.1.5.3

17.2.1.5.4 Where distances between transverse flues exceed the maximum allowable distances, sprinklers shall be installed at the intersection of thetransverse and longitudinal flues, and additional sprinklers shall be installed between transverse flues to meet the maximum distance rules.

17.2.1.5.5 Where no transverse flues exist, in-rack sprinklers shall not exceed the maximum spacing rules.

17.2.2.6 In-Rack Sprinkler Requirements Where CMSA Sprinklers Are Used at Ceiling.

17.2.2.6.1 In-rack sprinklers shall be installed at the first tier level at or above one-half of the storage height.

17.2.2.6.2 The minimum of 6 in. (152 mm) vertical clear space shall be maintained between the sprinkler deflectors and the top of a tier of storage.

17.2.2.6.3* In-rack sprinklers shall be located at an intersection of transverse and longitudinal flues.

Delete A.17.2.2.6.3

17.2.2.6.4 The maximum horizontal distance between in- rack sprinklers shall be 5 ft (1.5 m).

17.2.2.6.5 Where distances between transverse flues exceed the maximum allowable distances, sprinklers shall be installed at the intersection of thetransverse and longitudinal flues, and additional sprinklers shall be installed between transverse flues to meet the maximum distance rules.

17.2.2.6.6 Where no transverse flues exist, in-rack sprinklers shall not exceed the maximum spacing rules.

17.2.3.4.3 The minimum of 6 in. (152.4 mm) vertical clear space shall be maintained between the sprinkler deflectors and the top of a tier of storage.

17.2.3.4.4 The maximum horizontal distance between in- rack sprinklers shall be 5 ft (1.5 m).

17.2.3.4.5* In-rack sprinklers shall be located at an intersection of transverse and longitudinal flues while not exceeding the maximum spacing rules.

Delete A.17.2.3.4.5

17.2.3.4.6 Where distances between transverse flues exceed the maximum allowable distances, sprinklers shall be installed at the intersection of thetransverse and longitudinal flues, and additional sprinklers shall be installed between transverse flues to meet the maximum distance rules.

17.2.3.4.7 Where no transverse flues exist, in-rack sprinklers shall not exceed the maximum spacing rules.

17.3.1.9 The minimum of 6 in. (152 mm) vertical clear space shall be maintained between the in-rack sprinkler deflectors and the top of a tier of storage.

17.3.1.10* In-rack sprinklers shall be located at an intersection of transverse and longitudinal flues while not exceeding the maximum spacing rules.

Delete A.17.3.1.10

17.3.1.11 Where distances between transverse flues exceed the maximum allowable distances, sprinklers shall be installed at the intersection of thetransverse and longitudinal flues, and additional sprinklers shall be installed between transverse flues to meet the maximum distance rules.

17.3.1.12 Where no transverse flues exist, in-rack sprinklers shall not exceed the maximum spaci1.10.2ng rules.

17.3.3.4.2 In-rack sprinklers shall be located at the intersection of the longitudinal and transverse flue space.

17.3.3.4.3 Horizontal spacing shall not be permitted to exceed 5 ft (1.5 m) intervals.

17.3.3.4.4 The minimum of 6 in. (152 mm) vertical clear space shall be maintained between the sprinkler deflectors and the top of a tier of storage.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

32 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 33: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

17.3.3.4.5* In-rack sprinklers shall be located at an intersection of transverse and longitudinal flues while not exceeding the maximum spacing rules.

Delete A.17.3.3.4.5

17.3.3.4.6 Where distances between transverse flues exceed the maximum allowable distances, sprinklers shall be installed at the intersection of thetransverse and longitudinal flues, and additional sprinklers shall be installed between transverse flues to meet the maximum distance rules.

17.3.3.4.7 Where no transverse flues exist, in-rack sprinklers shall not exceed the maximum spacing rules.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Submitted on behalf of the SSD Redundancy Task Group. These changes are considered editorial and deletes the parts redundant with 17.1.7.4 (see Committee Statement on FR-317). Also added 6” clearance over top of load for all heights. That was not stated in 17.1.9 like it is in 17.1.10.2 but is in each section (17.2.1.5.1 / 17.2.2.6.2 / 17.2.3.4.3)

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 261-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 262-NFPA 13-2014 [Chapter 14]

Public Comment No. 325-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 327-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 334-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 340-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 342-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 346-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 16.3]

Public Comment No. 355-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Related Item

First Revision No. 317-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 17.1.7.4]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Kenneth Linder

Organization: Swiss Re

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 16:25:20 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but held

Resolution: The concept of limiting the redundancy in chapters 12-21 of NFPA has been discussed throughout this revision cycle. While the TC is in general support of thisconcept, making these redundancy revisions at the Second Phase of the cycle is not appropriate. The reject but hold action for this item will allow the TC on DischargeCriteria to submit the concept to the correlating committee for review and refinement before proceeding into the 2019 edition revision cycle.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

33 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 34: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 78-NFPA 13-2014 [ Global Input ]

16.1.6.7 When solid shelves obstruct only a portion of the rack, in-rack sprinklers shall be installed:

(a) horizontally, one flue beyond the end of the solid shelf

(b) vertically, all tiers beneath the solid shelves

16.2.2.1.1 Protection of solid shelf racks with CMSA sprinklers at the ceiling shall be permitted where in-rack sprinklers are installed in accordance with 16.1.6 . In-racksprinklers shall be installed in every level below the highest solid shelf.

16.2.3.2.1 Where solid shelves are used, in-rack sprinklers shall be installed in every level below the highest solid shelf.

16.3.2.1.1 Protection of solid shelf racks with CMSA sprinklers at the ceiling shall be permitted where in-rack sprinklers are installed in accordance with 16.1.6 . In-racksprinklers shall be installed in every level below the highest solid shelf.

16.3.3.2.1 Protection of solid shelf racks with ESFR sprinklers at the ceiling shall be permitted where in-rack sprinklers are installed in accordance with 16.1.6 . In-racksprinklers shall be installed in every level below the highest solid shelf.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

We have no guidance on this issue for spray sprinklers. Considering that it applies to all sprinkler types, it should go in only the general section. If not, it needs to be repeated in 16.2.1The guidance on vertical placement is current text. There is no guidance on where to stop the horizontal placement of in-rack sprinklers for racks with only portions of the assembly having solid shelving. There is guidance in 16.1.8.2 on racks with just a portion containing a higher hazard commodity. This criteria requires extending the in-racks a full bay or 8 ft. whereas this PC extends it only one flue. This seems sufficient to halt the horizontal fire extension caused by the solid shelf.

Since section 16.1.6 is growing, we should consider renumbering into subsections.

The redundancy task group agreed with this PC without any changes.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 80-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 93-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Related Item

Public Input No. 83-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Huggins

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Association

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Wed Mar 26 18:14:52 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-66-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: There is no guidance on where to stop the horizontal placement of in-rack sprinklers for racks with only portions of the assembly having solid shelving. There isguidance in 16.1.8.2 on racks with just a portion containing a higher hazard commodity. This criteria requires extending the in-racks a full bay or 8 ft. whereas this PCextends it only one flue. This seems sufficient to halt the horizontal fire extension caused by the solid shelf.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

34 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 35: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 80-NFPA 13-2014 [ Global Input ]

(PI-399) 16.2.2.1.1 Protection of solid shelf racks with CMSA sprinklers at the ceiling shall be permitted where in-rack sprinklers are installed in accordance with 16.1.6.In-rack sprinklers shall be installed in every level below the highest solid barrier.

(PI-400) 16.2.3.2 ESFR sprinklers shall not be permitted to protect storage on solid shelf racks unless the solid shelf racks are protected with in-rack sprinklers inaccordance with 16.1.6 . Where solid shelves are used, in-rack sprinklers shall be installed in every level below the highest solid barrier.

(PI-401) 16.3.2.1.1 Protection of solid shelf racks with CMSA sprinklers at the ceiling shall be permitted where in-rack sprinklers are installed in accordance with 16.1.6.In-rack sprinklers shall be installed in every level below the highest solid barrier.

(PI-402) 16.3.3.2.1 Protection of solid shelf racks with ESFR sprinklers at the ceiling shall be permitted where in-rack sprinklers are installed in accordance with 16.1.6.In-rack sprinklers shall be installed in every level below the highest solid barrier.

(FR-219) 17.2.2.1.1 Protection of solid shelf racks with CMSA sprinklers at the ceiling shall be permitted where in-rack sprinklers are installed in accordance with 17.1.5 .In-rack sprinklers shall be installed in every level below the highest solid shelf.

(FR0220) 17.2.3.1.2 Protection of solid shelf racks with ESFR sprinklers at the ceiling shall be permitted where in-rack sprinklers are installed in accordance with 17.1.5 .In-rack sprinklers shall be installed in every level below the highest solid shelf.

(FR-222) 17.3.2.1.1 Protection of solid shelf racks with CMSA sprinklers at the ceiling shall be permitted where in-rack sprinklers are installed in accordance with 17.1.5 .In-rack sprinklers shall be installed in every level below the highest solid shelf.

(FR-224) 17.3.3.1.1 ESFR sprinklers shall not be permitted to protect storage on solid shelf racks unless the solid shelf racks are protected with in-rack sprinklers inaccordance with 17.1.5. Where solid shelves are used, in-rack sprinklers shall be installed in every level below the highest solid shelf.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The redundancy task group agrees with this comment.

This comment addresses Correlating Committee Note 4 on the use of Open Rack and Note 11 on consistency

This comment simply deletes the offending text that conflicts with the classification of open criteria for section 16.2, 16.3, 17.2, and 17.3. This criteria addresses two issues. One is that CMSA and ESFR can be applied when solid shelving is present provided the criteria of 16.1.6 or 17.1.5 is also applied. This criteria is already stated for ESFR in 8.4.6.1.1. PC-81 will add this same text to 8.4.7 on CMSA. The second issue from the deleted criteria is that in-rack sprinklers shall be installed at every level below the highest level. This is addressed by PC 78 and 93 which puts this criteria in 16.1.6 and 17.1.5.Sections 16.2, 16.3, 17.2, and 17.3 are for open racks (synonymous to without solid shelving). In order to emphasis a change in philosophy or at least something never stated, one section (17.3.3.1.1) was added in the 2013 edition to clarify that ESFR could be used with solid shelving. We added it to 17.3 that historically has always been open rack criteria thinking what can it hurt. Now we’ve added similar criteria to all sections on CMSA and ESFR. This has rightly resulted in a challenge that 16.2, 16.3, 17.2, and 17.3 should no longer be called criteria for open racks. This is indeed a valid statement. Instead of throwing out what has always been known as open rack criteria, lets locate the miniscule amount of criteria that is not for open racks in section 8.4 and the general section for solid shelf racks where it rightly belongs.

When Solid shelving for any type of system appears, it’s addressed in the general sections 16.1.6 and 17.1.5. Although this section does not say for spray sprinklers, that is the current understanding since it wasn’t until the 2013 edition that it was identified that it also applies equally to ESFR and CMSA. This merits discussion as to whether additional text showing that 16.1.6 and 17.1.5 applies to CMSA and ESFR is warranted. Considering that this will be stated in 8.4.6 and 8.4.7 and that the suggested text on design criteria states all three types of sprinklers, that it is easily understood without any additional text.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 81-NFPA 13-2014 [New Section after 8.4.7.1]

Public Comment No. 82-NFPA 13-2014 [New Section after 16.1.6.6]

Public Comment No. 84-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 17.1.5.5]

Public Comment No. 78-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 93-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Related Item

Correlating Committee Note No. 4-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Huggins

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Association

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Wed Mar 26 18:55:18 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but held

Resolution: The concept of limiting the redundancy in chapters 12-21 of NFPA has been discussed throughout this revision cycle. While the TC is in general support of thisconcept, making these redundancy revisions at the Second Phase of the cycle is not appropriate. The reject but hold action for this item will allow the TC on DischargeCriteria to submit the concept to the correlating committee for review and refinement before proceeding into the 2019 edition revision cycle.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

35 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 36: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 86-NFPA 13-2014 [ Global Input ]

3.9.3.7.9 Solid Shelf Rack. A rack where shelves are fixed in place with a solid, slatted, or wire mesh barrier used as the shelf material and having limitedopenings in the shelf area.

16.1.6 Solid Shelf Rack Shelving

16.2.1.3.5 For solid shelf rack shelving storage, Table 16.2.1.3.2 shall be used to establish the density/area criteria and in-rack sprinklers shall be instead inaccordance with 16.1.6.

17.1.5 Solid Shelf Rack Shelving

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

As discussed in the Committee Statement, this term is currently used to differentiate an open rack arrangement from a solid shelf rack arrangement. That is exactly the problem since by definition of a solid shelf rack is an obstruction created ONLY by the rack itself (see 3.9.3.8). The references to this section and the title of this section use solid shelf rack. So the literal interpretation is that you go to 16.1.6 or 17.1.5 only when you have part of the rack construction creating an obstruction – period. It’s not until you get to this section that there is any discussion of solid shelving where the obstruction is created by the load. For many cycles the sprinkler industry addressed obstructions created by just the rack and great pains have been taken to point out that the obstructions includes that presented by the load. Why allow any possibility of confusion due to the old philosophy when the newer definition of Solid Shelving addresses all forms of obstructions and its use presents no ambiguity? This change greatly improves the fact that solid shelving and not just solid shelf racks are protected differently from that of open rack arrangements.

These are the only locations that use the phrase “solid shelf rack”. The all inclusive phrase solid shelving is far more prevalent.

Related Item

Public Input No. 80-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 16.1.6]

Public Input No. 81-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 16.2.1.3.5]

Public Input No. 82-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 17.1.5]

Public Input No. 77-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 3.9.3.7.9]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Huggins

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Assoc.

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu Mar 27 15:28:22 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-69-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The term solid shelf rack is being replaced with solid shelving as that is the type of arrangement being described in the subsequent sections.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

36 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 37: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 91-NFPA 13-2014 [ Global Input ]

14.2.3.1 The protection criteria for storage up to and including 12 ft (3.7 m), specified in shall be the same as for miscellaneous storage selected from Chapter 13 shall beused.

14.2.3.2 The protection criteria in Chapter 13 shall be acceptable for storage of Class I to Class IV commodities up to and including 12 ft (3.7 m) in height (see Table 13.2.1).

15.2.1 For the storage of Group A plastics stored 5 ft (1.5 m) or less in height, the sprinkler design protection criteria for miscellaneous storage specified in Chapter 13 shallbe used. The protection criteria in Chapter 13 shall be acceptable for storage of Group A plastic commodities up to and including 5 ft (1.5 m) in height. (See Table 13.2.1 forspecific Group A plastic storage height protection criteria.)

16.2.1.2.1 The protection criteria for storage up to and including 12 ft (3.7 m) specified in shall be the same as miscellaneous storage from Chapter 13 shall be used.

16.2.1.2.2 The protection criteria in Chapter 13 shall be acceptable for storage of Class I through Class IV commodities up to and including 12 ft (3.7 m) in height. (SeeTable 13.2.1 for specific Class I through Class IV storage height protection criteria.)

16.2.1.2.3 For storage 12 ft (3.7 m) or less in height that does not meet the definition of Miscellaneous Storage that is on solid shelf racks, in-rack sprinklers shall beprovided in accordance with 16.1.6 , and ceiling sprinkler protection shall be provided in accordance with specified in Chapter 13 shall be used.

17.2.1.1* Storage 5 ft (1.5 m) or Less in Height. For the storage of Group A plastics stored 5 ft (1.5 m) or less in height, the sprinkler design criteria for miscellaneousstorage The protection criteria specified in Chapter 13 shall be used.

17.2.1.1.1 For storage 5 ft (1.5 m) or less in height that does not meet the definition of Miscellaneous Storage that is on solid shelf racks, in-rack sprinklers shall be providedin accordance with 17.1.5 , and ceiling sprinkler protection shall be provided in accordance with specified in Chapter 13 shall be used.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Granted the criteria is technically accurate and not being aware of any confusion seems like a poor reason to reject providing a consistent format and terminology on how chapters 14, 15, 16, and 17 directs one on when to use chapter 13 for regular storage facilities. It’s never too late to improve the correlation of information within the standard and will only improve the efficiency of using the standard. Pick one template since all chapters are addressing the identical issue and use it throughout. This template is based on 17.2.1.1 except called it protection criteria instead of sprinkler design criteria as used in 14.2.3.1

Reference to the storage heights were deleted since that variable is identified in the title of each section. The new text from FR-296 and 297 was modified to correlate with the of the other related sections.

The redundancy task group made changes to the initial PC which resulted in the text shown here.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 90-NFPA 13-2014 [Chapter 13]

Related Item

Public Input No. 91-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Huggins

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Assoc.

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Mar 28 11:37:20 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: The concept of limiting the redundancy in chapters 12-21 of NFPA has been discussed throughout this revision cycle. While the TC is in general support of thisconcept, making these redundancy revisions at the Second Phase of the cycle is not appropriate. The reject but hold action for this item will allow the TC on DischargeCriteria to submit the concept to the correlating committee for review and refinement before proceeding into the 2019 edition revision cycle.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

37 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 38: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 92-NFPA 13-2014 [ Global Input ]

11.2.3.1.4(3) 11.2.3.1.5 Unsprinklered Combustible Concealed Spaces

11.2.3.1.5.1 Unless the requirements of 11.2.3.1.4(4) 11.2.3.1.5.3 are met for buildings having unsprinklered combustible concealed spaces, as described in 8.15.1.2 and8.15.6, the minimum area of sprinkler operation for that portion of the building shall be 3000 ft2 (279 m2).

11.2.3.1.5.2 The design area of 3000 ft2 (279 m2) shall be applied only to the sprinkler system or portions of the sprinkler system that are adjacent to the qualifyingcombustible concealed space.

11.2.3.1.5.3 The term adjacent shall apply to any sprinkler system protecting a space above, below, or next to the qualifying concealed space except where a barrier with afire resistance rating at least equivalent to the water supply duration completely separates the concealed space from the sprinklered area.

11.2.3.1.4 (4) 11.2.3.1.5.3 The following unsprinklered concealed spaces shall not ............

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

There were many parts to PI -114 and this issue was not addressed in the committee statement so don’t know if it was inadvertently overlooked. This corrects having multiple requirements in a single paragraph. Copied the format from 12.9. The issue of combustible concealed spaces is very common and having it's own title is much more user friendly verses the vague use of restrictions.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 88-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 12.9]

Related Item

Public Input No. 114-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Huggins

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Assoc.

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Mar 28 12:17:36 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-120-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: This revision corrects having multiple requirements in a single paragraph and employs the same structure as 12.9. The issue of combustible concealed spaces isvery common and having it's own title is much more user friendly verses the vague use of restrictions.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

38 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 39: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 93-NFPA 13-2014 [ Global Input ]

17.1.5.8 When solid shelves obstruct only a portion of the rack, in-rack sprinklers shall be installed:

(a) horizontally, one flue beyond the end of the solid shelf

(b) vertically, all tiers beneath the solid shelves

(FR-219) 17.2.2.1.1

Protection of solid shelf racks with CMSA sprinklers at the ceiling shall be permitted where in-rack sprinklers are installed in accordance with 17.1.5 . In-rack sprinklers shallbe installed in every level below the highest solid shelf.

(FR-220) 17.2.3.1.2

Protection of solid shelf racks with ESFR sprinklers at the ceiling shall be permitted where in-rack sprinklers are installed in accordance with 17.1.5 . In-rack sprinklers shallbe installed in every level below the highest solid shelf.

(FR-222) 17.3.2.1.1 Protection of solid shelf racks with CMSA sprinklers at the ceiling shall be permitted where in-rack sprinklers are installed in accordance with 17.1.5 .In-rack sprinklers shall be installed in every level below the highest solid shelf.

(FR-224) 17.3.3.1.1 ESFR sprinklers shall not be permitted to protect storage on solid shelf racks unless the solid shelf racks are protected with in-rack sprinklers inaccordance with 17.1.5. Where solid shelves are used, in-rack sprinklers shall be installed in every level below the highest solid shelf.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

We have no guidance on this issue for spray sprinklers. Considering that it applies to all sprinkler types, it should go in only the general section. If not, it needs to be repeated in 17.2.1 The guidance on vertical placement is current text. There is no guidance on where to stop the horizontal placement of in-rack sprinklers for racks with only portions of the assembly having solid shelving. There is guidance in 17.1.7.2 on racks with just a portion containing a higher hazard commodity. This criteria requires extending the in-racks a full bay or 8 ft. whereas this PC extends it only one flue. This seems sufficient to halt the horizontal fire extension caused by the solid shelf.

Since section 17.1.5 is growing, we should consider renumbering into subsections.

The redundancy task group agreed with this PC without any changes.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 78-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 80-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Related Item

Public Input No. 83-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Huggins

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Assoc.

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Mar 28 12:39:10 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-72-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: There is currently no guidance on this issue for spray sprinklers. Considering that it applies to all sprinkler types, it should go in only the general section. There is noguidance on where to stop the horizontal placement of in-rack sprinklers for racks with only portions of the assembly having solid shelving. There is guidance in 17.1.7.2on racks with just a portion containing a higher hazard commodity. This criteria requires extending the in-racks a full bay or 8 ft. whereas this PC extends it only one flue.This seems sufficient to halt the horizontal fire extension caused by the solid shelf. Editorial change to merge items a and b into a single requirement. The languagedescribing where in-racks should be located where solid shelves are used should be retained since it provides guidance to the user within the section providing theceiling criteria for ESFR and CMSA above and below 25 feet of storage.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

39 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 40: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 188-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 1.6 ]

1.6 Units and Symbols.

1.6.1 Units.

1.6.1.1

Metric units of measurement in this standard shall be in accordance with the modernized metric system known as the International System of Units (SI).

1.6.1.2

Two units (liter and bar), outside of but recognized by SI, are commonly used in international fire protection.

1.6.1.3

These units with conversion factors shall be used as listed in Table 1.6.1.3.

Table 1.6.1.3 Conversion Factors

Name of Unit Unit Symbol Conversion Factor

liter L 1 gal = 3.785 L

millimeter per minute mm/min1 gpm/ft2 = 40.746 mm/min =

40.746 (L/min)/m2

cubic decimeter dm3 1 gal = 3.785 dm3

pascal Pa 1 psi = 6894.757 Pa

bar bar 1 psi = 0.0689 bar

bar bar 1 bar = 105 Pa

Note: For additional conversions and information, see ASTM SI 10, Standard for Use of the International System of Units (SI): The Modern Metric System.

1.6.1.4

If a value for measurement as given in this standard is followed by an equivalent value in other units, the first stated shall be regarded as the requirement.

1.6.2 Hydraulic Symbols.

The standard abbreviations in Table 1.6.2 shall be used on the hydraulic calculation form discussed in Chapter 23.

Table 1.6.2 Hydraulic Symbols

Symbol orAbbreviation

Item

p Pressure in psi

gpm U.S. gallons per minute

q Flow increment in gpm to be added at a specific location

Q Summation of flow in gpm at a specific location

P t Total pressure in psi at a point in a pipe

P f Pressure loss due to friction between points indicated in location column

P ePressure due to elevation difference between indicated points. This can be a plus value or a minus value. If minus, the (-) shall be used; if plus,no sign is needed.

P v Velocity pressure in psi at a point in a pipe

P n Normal pressure in psi at a point in a pipe

E 90-degree ell

EE 45-degree ell

Lt.E Long-turn elbow

Cr Cross

T Tee-flow turned 90 degrees

GV Gate valve

BV Butterfly (wafer) check valve

Del V Deluge valve

ALV Alarm valve

DPV Dry pipe valve

CV Swing check valve

WCV Butterfly (wafer) check valve

St Strainer

psi Pounds per square inch

v Velocity of water in pipe in feet per second

K K-factor

C-factor Friction loss coefficient

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

CC NOTE: The following CC Note No. 1 appeared in the First Draft Report.

The 2016 edition is moving to a soft conversion approach for metric conversions. The "metric conversion task group" must look at section 1.6 and provide guidance to the users on the conversion rules and how the conversions are being made. The metric conversion task group must review the entire first draft and provide the metric conversion for each of the values in the standard (including tables and figures). Since soft conversions are being used, the hard conversion table in section 1.6 should be removed so that it does not provide confusion allowing people start mix and match soft and hard conversions. The methodology used for making the conversions should be added to the annex, with examples.

Related Item

Correlating Committee Note No. 1-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 1.6]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: CC on AUT-AAC

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

40 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 41: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Organization: CC on Automatic Sprinkler Systems

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Tue Apr 29 13:43:05 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-57-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: In general “soft” (approximate) conversions were used throughout the standard during the reassessment of metric values. As most of the values in NFPA 13 were notintended as precise values, “hard” (exact) conversions imply a greater degree of accuracy than was originally intended. For example, 40,000 sqft converts to 3716.12m2. The Metric Task Group felt that a soft conversion of 3720 m2 is in line with the original intent of the committee; it is not necessary to maintain a hard, or exact,conversion of 3716 m2. Several values in NFPA 13 were selected as they are round numbers. A pressure 175 psi is required, not because it is any more accurate than174 psi or 176 psi, but because it is an easier number to measure. Round values (most often approximated to the nearest 5 or 10) were used in the majority ofconversions as the Metric Task Group felt values any more exact implied a greater degree of accuracy than was originally intended by the Technical Committees. Theidea of soft conversions is most noticeable in the inch-mm conversions. The Metric Task Group elected to follow a policy of 1 in = 25 mm. Examples of inch-mmconversions, as used in this project, can be found in the table to the right.

Values under 1 meter (39.5 inches) were converted to mm; values over 1 meter were converted to m, regardless of the units originally in the document.

In general 3 digit conversions were rounded to the nearest 0 or 5 as a final digit and 4 digit numbers were rounded to the nearest 50 or 00 for the two final digits. Thereare many exceptions to this guideline due to the type of unit being used, however. As mentioned previously, 40,000 sqft was converted to 3720 m2 instead of the softvalue of 3700 m2.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

41 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 42: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 149-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 2.3.4 ]

2.3.4 ASTM Publications.

ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, P.O. Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959.

ANSI/ASTM A 53, Standard Specification for Pipe, Steel, Black and Hot-Dipped, Zinc-Coated, Welded and Seamless, 2001.

ASTM A 106, Standard Specification for Seamless Carbon Steel Pipe for High Temperature Service, 2008.

ASTM A 135, Standard Specification for Electric-Resistance-Welded Steel Pipe, 2001.

ASTM A 153A/153M, Standard Specification for Zinc Coating (Hot Dip) on Iron and Steel Hardware, 2004.

ASTM A 234, Standard Specification for Piping Fittings of Wrought-Carbon Steel and Alloy Steel for Moderate and High Temperature Service, 2001.

ASTM A 795, Standard Specification for Black and Hot-Dipped Zinc-Coated (Galvanized) Welded and Seamless Steel Pipe for Fire Protection Use, 2000.

ASTM B 16.15, Cast Bronze Threaded Fittings, 1985.

ASTM B 32, Standard Specification for Solder Metal, 2000.

ASTM B 43, Specification for Seamless Red Brass Pipe, 2009.

ASTM B 75, Standard Specification for Seamless Copper Tube, 1999.

ASTM B 88, Standard Specification for Seamless Copper Water Tube, 1999.

ASTM B 251, Standard Specification for General Requirements for Wrought Seamless Copper and Copper-Alloy Tube, 1997.

ASTM B 446, Standard Specification for Nickel-Chromium-Molybdenum-Columbium Alloy (UNSN 06625) and Nickel-Chromium-Molybdenum-Silicon Alloy (UNSN 06219)Rod and Bar, 2000.

ASTM B 813, Standard Specification for Liquid and Paste Fluxes for Soldering Applications of Copper and Copper-Alloy Tube, 2000.

ASTM B 828, Standard Practice for Making Capillary Joints by Soldering of Copper and Copper Alloy Tube and Fittings, 2000.

ASTM C 635, Standard Specification for the Manufacture, Performance, and Testing of Metal Suspension Systems for Acoustical Tile and Lay-In Panel Ceilings, 2012.

ASTM C 636, Standard Practice for Installation of Metal Ceiling Suspension Systems for Acoustical Tile and Lay-In Panels, 2008.

ASTM E 84, Standard Test Method for Surface Burning Characteristics of Building Materials, 2010 2014 .

ASTM E 119, Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, 2010 2012a .

ASTM E 136, Standard Test Method for Behavior of Materials in a Vertical Tube Furnace at 750°C, 1999 2012 .

ASTM F 437, Standard Specification for Threaded Chlorinated Poly (Vinyl Chloride) (CPVC) Plastic Pipe Fittings, Schedule 80, 1999.

ASTM F 438, Standard Specification for Socket-Type Chlorinated Poly (Vinyl Chloride) (CPVC) Plastic Pipe Fittings, Schedule 40, 2001.

ASTM F 439, Standard Specification for Socket-Type Chlorinated Poly (Vinyl Chloride) (CPVC) Plastic Pipe Fittings, Schedule 80, 2001.

ASTM F 442, Standard Specification for Chlorinated Poly (Vinyl Chloride) (CPVC) Plastic Pipe (SDR-PR), 2009.

ASTM F 1121, Standard Specification for International Shore Connections for Marine Fire Applications, 1998.

ASTM SI 10, Standard for Use of the International System of Units (SI): The Modern Metric System, 1997.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

standards date updates - the public input related to this was not found but the ASTM fire standards are out of date

Related Item

Public Input No. 1-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 11.3.1.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Marcelo Hirschler

Organization: GBH International

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Sun Apr 27 16:27:02 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-19-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: This revision updates the referenced publications based on the most current edition.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

42 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 43: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 271-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 2.3.4 ]

2.3.4 ASTM Publications.

ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, P.O. Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959.

ANSI/ASTM A 53/A 53M , Standard Specification for Pipe, Steel, Black and Hot-Dipped, Zinc-Coated, Welded and Seamless, 2001 2012 .

ASTM A 106/A106M , Standard Specification for Seamless Carbon Steel Pipe for High Temperature Service, 2008 2013 .

ASTM A 135/A 135M , Standard Specification for Electric-Resistance-Welded Steel Pipe, 2001 2009(2014) .

ASTM A 153A/153M, Standard Specification for Zinc Coating (Hot Dip) on Iron and Steel Hardware, 2004 2009 .

ASTM A 234/A234M , Standard Specification for Piping Fittings of Wrought-Carbon Steel and Alloy Steel for Moderate and High Temperature Service, 2001 2013e1 .

ASTM A 795/A 795M , Standard Specification for Black and Hot-Dipped Zinc-Coated (Galvanized) Welded and Seamless Steel Pipe for Fire Protection Use, 2000 201300 .

ASTM B 16.15, Cast Bronze Threaded Fittings, 1985.

ASTM B 32, Standard Specification for Solder Metal, 2000 2008 .

ASTM B 43, Specification for Seamless Red Brass Pipe, 2009.

ASTM B 75, Standard Specification for Seamless Copper Tube, 1999 2011 .

ASTM B 88, Standard Specification for Seamless Copper Water Tube, 1999 2009 .

ASTM B 251, Standard Specification for General Requirements for Wrought Seamless Copper and Copper-Alloy Tube, 1997 2010 .

ASTM B 446, Standard Specification for Nickel-Chromium-Molybdenum-Columbium Alloy (UNSN 06625) and Nickel-Chromium-Molybdenum-Silicon Alloy (UNSN 06219)Rod and Bar, 2000 2003(2008)e1 .

ASTM B 813, Standard Specification for Liquid and Paste Fluxes for Soldering Applications of Copper and Copper-Alloy Tube, 2000 2010 .

ASTM B 828, Standard Practice for Making Capillary Joints by Soldering of Copper and Copper Alloy Tube and Fittings, 2000 02(2010) .

ASTM C 635, Standard Specification for the Manufacture, Performance, and Testing of Metal Suspension Systems for Acoustical Tile and Lay-In Panel Ceilings,2012 2013a12 .

ASTM C 636, Standard Practice for Installation of Metal Ceiling Suspension Systems for Acoustical Tile and Lay-In Panels, 2008 2013 .

ASTM E 84, Standard Test Method for Surface Burning Characteristics of Building Materials, 2010 2014 .

ASTM E 119, Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, 2010 2012a .

ASTM E 136, Standard Test Method for Behavior of Materials in a Vertical Tube Furnace at 750°C, 1999 2012 .

ASTM F 437, Standard Specification for Threaded Chlorinated Poly (Vinyl Chloride) (CPVC) Plastic Pipe Fittings, Schedule 80, 1999 2009 .

ASTM F 438, Standard Specification for Socket-Type Chlorinated Poly (Vinyl Chloride) (CPVC) Plastic Pipe Fittings, Schedule 40, 2001 2009 .

ASTM F 439, Standard Specification for Socket-Type Chlorinated Poly (Vinyl Chloride) (CPVC) Plastic Pipe Fittings, Schedule 80, 2001 2013 .

ASTM F 442/F 442M , Standard Specification for Chlorinated Poly (Vinyl Chloride) (CPVC) Plastic Pipe (SDR-PR), 2009 2013e1 .

ASTM F 1121, Standard Specification for International Shore Connections for Marine Fire Applications, 1998 87(2010) .

ASTM SI 10, Standard for Use of the International System of Units (SI): The Modern Metric System, 1997 2010 .

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Updating year dates

Related Item

First Revision No. 271-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 6.4]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Steve Mawn

Organization: ASTM International

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu May 15 14:33:09 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-19-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: This revision updates the referenced publications based on the most current edition.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

43 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 44: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 371-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after 3.3.6 ]

3.3.6.2 Small Openings. Openings in the ceiling or construction features of a concealed space that allow limited amounts of heat to enter the concealed space. Smallopenings with any dimension greater than 4 feet may not have a least dimension greater than 8 inches. Small openings may not have a combined total area of more than20% of the ceiling, construction feature, or plane used to determine the boundaries of the concealed space.

A.3.3.6.2 A return air diffuser may be 4 feet by 2 feet and meet the definition of a small opening. A linear diffuser may be longer than 4 feet but is then limited to 8 inches inwidth (or least dimension). Spaces between ceiling panels of architectural features that create a concealed space must meet the same criteria.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Cloud Ceiling Task Group language.

Related Item

Committee Input No. 166-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Cecil Bilbo

Organization: Academy of Fire Sprinkler Tech

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Tue May 20 14:54:53 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-58-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: This second draft revision addresses the results of research performed by the Fire Protection Research Foundation and the Academy of Fire Sprinkler Technology. Itrefines the concept of cloud ceiling for NFPA 13 as a type of concealed space that does not require sprinklers within the concealed space. It more clearly defines smallopenings in concealed spaces. It defines the maximum sizes of small openings through maximum dimensions and overall percentages of open ceiling area. Thesequantities are based on the testing and research performed by the Fire Protection Research Foundation (FPRF) on cloud ceiling size.

The FPRF looked at sensitivity of sprinklers under various size cloud ceilings with various size gaps in between using fire dynamic simulator to model the tests. Theaccuracy of modeling methods used was validated by fire tests with thermocouples. After several phases of testing it was determined that sprinklers could activate in anacceptable period of time with an acceptable amount of heat increase above the clouds so long as the clouds were large enough, the spaces between them were smallenough, and the sprinklers were close enough together. These results can be seen in the proposed language

These tests were done using RTI values associated with QR sprinklers under smooth flat horizontal clouds with maximum height of 20 feet above the floor. As suchthese requirements are reflected in the requirements for installation of these systems. The requirements for irregular shapes are based on a worst case scenario as notesting was done on non rectilinear cloud spaces.

The suggested language to Chapter 11 is to compensation for the loss of response time from what would normally be expected from a QR sprinkler

Additionally, the revised language determines acceptable small openings in terms of real world equipment (such as return air diffusers) and common ceiling elevations(ie eight feet above the floor). Small openings are a factor in defining the space above a ceiling as concealed. Areas of openings were compared using a square roomhaving an eight foot high ceiling. The room had the permissible gap of one inch per foot of ceiling height between and surrounding four ceiling panels. In a 20’x20’ roomthe open area would be 19 percent and be acceptable as a small opening. The same gap in a 10’x10’ room would result in a 25% open area and would not beconsidered acceptable as a small opening.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

44 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 45: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 365-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after 3.3.7 ]

3.3.6.1 Concealed Space. An area of or space within a building that is not accessible for storage purposes and is not normally occupied by people but could beentered occasionally for brief periods. The space shall be considered a concealed space even with small openings as defined in 3.3.6.2.

A.3.3.6.1 The concealed space most commonly referred to in this context is the space above a ceiling.

This definition should not be limited to these spaces. Concealed spaces can be found inside buildings between rooms and between ceilings and floors. Theycan also be found outside buildings in eaves and overhangs.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The space of 1” should not be part of the definition and this language has been discussed by the Cloud Ceiling Task Group.

Related Item

First Revision No. 76-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 3.3.6]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Cecil Bilbo

Organization: Academy of Fire Sprinkler Tech

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon May 19 11:13:27 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-54-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The variations on concealed spaces are seemingly infinite, making it impossible to define a concealed space. The standard addresses specific concealed spacearrangements that do not require protection on a case by case basis. The language accepted in the first draft is limited to specific applications and does not capture allpossible configurations. Furthermore, the committee was concerned that adding a definition would in fact muddy the waters as opposed to providing more clarity.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

45 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 46: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 116-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 3.3.7 ]

3.3.7 Concealed Space.

That portion (s) of a building behind walls, over suspended ceilings, in pipe chases and attics, and whose size might normally range from 1 in. (44.45 mm) stud spaces andup to 8 ft (2.44 m) interstitial floor truss spaces and that might contain combustible materials such as building structural members, thermal and/or electrical insulation, andducting.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The current definition could be misinterpreted to limit attic spaces to 8'-0" max.

Related Item

First Revision No. 76-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 3.3.6]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Peter Schwab

Organization: Wayne Automatic Fire Sprinkler

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Apr 18 09:56:12 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-54-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The variations on concealed spaces are seemingly infinite, making it impossible to define a concealed space. The standard addresses specific concealed spacearrangements that do not require protection on a case by case basis. The language accepted in the first draft is limited to specific applications and does not capture allpossible configurations. Furthermore, the committee was concerned that adding a definition would in fact muddy the waters as opposed to providing more clarity.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

46 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 47: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 133-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 3.3.7 ]

Reconsider and do not accept the proposed definition. Delete the proposed Section 3.3.7

Concealed Space.

That portion (s) of a building behind walls, over suspended ceilings, in pipe chases and attics, and whose size might normally range from 1 in. (44.45 mm) stud spaces to 8ft (2.44 m) interstitial truss spaces and that might contain combustible materials such as building structural members, thermal and/or electrical insulation, and ducting.

in its entirety:

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_3-3-7.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

A definition for a concealed space should not contain dimensions or construction features, for example, many attic spaces can be higher than 8 ft to the peak. Those same AHJ's who did not consider an attic to be a concealed space could just as easily say that a 10 ft interstitial space would not be a concealed space either.

Related Item

Public Input No. 136-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 3.3.6]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Apr 25 13:46:50 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-54-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The variations on concealed spaces are seemingly infinite, making it impossible to define a concealed space. The standard addresses specific concealed spacearrangements that do not require protection on a case by case basis. The language accepted in the first draft is limited to specific applications and does not capture allpossible configurations. Furthermore, the committee was concerned that adding a definition would in fact muddy the waters as opposed to providing more clarity.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

47 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 48: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 267-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 3.3.7 ]

3.3.7 Concealed Space.

That portion (s) of a building behind walls, over suspended ceilings, in pipe chases and attics, and whose size might normally range from 1 in. (44.45 mm) stud spaces to 8ft (2.44 m) interstitial truss spaces and that might contain combustible materials such as building structural members, thermal and/or electrical insulation, and ducting.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

NFPA's Building Code Development Committee (BCDC) suggests to delete the new definition in Section 3.3.7, from FR 76. The definition adds confusion to the AHJ. This standard has worked well without the definition. As the negatie comment by Mr. Meehan points out, the standard already specifies where omissions are allowed. The definition as proposed introduces a laundry list that is limiting. The definition also introduces dimensions that are limiting. Ultimately, this is less useful to the AHJ in applying the omissions in Section 8.15.1.2. Section 3.1 indicates that terms not defined shall use their ordinarily accepted meaning, which suffices. Note that NFPA 96 only uses the term “concealed spaces” once, and its application is for lighting units on commercial cooking hoods. This is a very narrow scope for the application of this definition. This definition does not seem to be applicable for sprinkler requirements.

Related Item

First Revision No. 76-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 3.3.6]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Jim Muir

Organization: Building Safety Division, Clark County Washington

Affilliation: NFPA's Building Code Development Committee (BCDC)

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu May 15 11:58:12 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-54-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The variations on concealed spaces are seemingly infinite, making it impossible to define a concealed space. The standard addresses specific concealed spacearrangements that do not require protection on a case by case basis. The language accepted in the first draft is limited to specific applications and does not capture allpossible configurations. Furthermore, the committee was concerned that adding a definition would in fact muddy the waters as opposed to providing more clarity.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

48 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 49: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 338-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 3.3.7 ]

3.3.7 Concealed Space.

That portion (s) of a building behind walls, over suspended ceilings, in pipe chases and attics, and whose size might normally range from 1 in. (44.45 mm) stud spaces to 8ft (2.44 m) interstitial truss spaces and that might contain combustible materials such as building structural members, thermal and/or electrical insulation, and ductingAn area with limited or no access, not intended for building occupant use or storage, that is enclosed on all sides with 4% of the area of one side allowed to be open .

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

There are three concerns with the proposed language:

1) The language is unenforceable. It talks about the fact that the height of the space "might" be in a certain range and that certain things "might" be in the space. We should not be using such language in a definition.

2) The definition is too focused on the space above a drop ceiling and not the hundreds of other concealed spaces in a building such as the vertical spaces within wall stud cavities, crawl spaces, attics, soffits, etc.

3) There is no mention of the space being surrounded in order to be considered "concealed". The space is being defined as "concealed" if it is above a drop ceiling. What about non-continuous drop ceilings? Those spaces would be considered concealed, which is not the intent of the standard.

Our proposed definition solves these problems by forcing the space to be surrounded in order to be considered "concealed". The 4% opening limitation comes from the statement in section 8.15.1.2.1.1 that allows "small openings such as those used as return air for a plenum. Such openings tend to be 2 ft x 2 ft in a ceiling grid and tend to occur about every 100 sq ft, which puts them at about 4% of the area of one side of the concealed space.

Related Item

First Revision No. 76-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 3.3.6]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Kenneth Isman

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 14:20:22 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-54-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The variations on concealed spaces are seemingly infinite, making it impossible to define a concealed space. The standard addresses specific concealed spacearrangements that do not require protection on a case by case basis. The language accepted in the first draft is limited to specific applications and does not capture allpossible configurations. Furthermore, the committee was concerned that adding a definition would in fact muddy the waters as opposed to providing more clarity.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

49 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 50: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 269-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 3.4.1 [Excluding any Sub-Sections] ]

A wet pipe system using automatic sprinklers that contains a liquid solution to prevent freezing of the system, intended to discharge the solution upon sprinkler operation,followed immediately by water from a water supply .

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The statement "followed by water"is redundant should be deleted.

Related Item

Public Input No. 56-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. A.23.3.2]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Phillip Brown

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Associ

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu May 15 13:11:58 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: Antifreeze is required to be only in the portion of the piping subject to freezing and not in the entire system piping arrangement. The proposed language would allowantifreeze to fill the entire system and possibly a storage tank.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

50 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 51: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 237-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 3.5.13 ]

3.5.13 System Riser.

The aboveground horizontal or vertical pipe between the water supply and the mains (cross or feed) that contains a control valve (either directly or within its supply pipe),pressure gauge,main drain, and a waterflow alarm device.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Editorial change

Related Item

Public Input No. 487-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 3.3.22]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Phillip Brown

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Associ

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 09 12:19:48 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Accepted

Resolution: SR-20-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: This is an editorial change to reaffirm the fact that we are addressing the system main drain as opposed to auxiliary drains or all drains.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

51 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 52: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 134-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 3.9.1.17 ]

3.9.1.17 Low-Piled Storage.

Solid-piled, palletized, rack storage, bin box, and shelf storage of Class I through IV commodities up to and including 12 ft (3.7 m) in height and solid-piled, palletized, rackstorage, bin box, and shelf storage of Group A plastic commodities up to and including 5 ft in height .

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_3-9-1-17.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

As per the Committee Statement, this definition is intended to be used to reflect the contents of Chapter 13. Therefore it must be revised to better describe the types of commodities and the storage heights that Chapter 13 addresses. As it is currently proposed low-piled storage could easily be misinterpreted to apply to the storage of any products up to a height of 12 ft. However, except for the Miscellaneous storage provisions, it is only Class I through IV commodities that can be stored to 12 ft per Chapter 13. Group A plastics are only to 5 ft. Storage of Group A plastics above 5 ft are addressed in Chapters 15 and 17. Regardless of height, Rubber Tire storage is covered in Chapter 18 and Roll Paper storage is under Chapter 19.

Related Item

First Revision No. 311-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 3.9.1.17]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Apr 25 13:51:40 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: The definition is not intended to provide a requirement for the defined term. The definition is intended to provide a general description of how the term is usedthroughout the standard which is does as written.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

52 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 53: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 189-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 3.9.1.17 ]

3.9.1.17 Low-Piled Storage.

Solid-piled, palletized, rack storage, bin box, and shelf storage up to 12 ft (3.7 m) in height.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

CC NOTE: The following CC Note No. 6 appeared in the First Draft Report as Global First Revision No. 311.

The TC should consider adding annex language stating that the definition is intended to separate the concepts of low- and high-piled storage, and is not intended to address allowable design approaches and protection schemes.

Related Item

First Revision No. 311-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 3.9.1.17]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: CC on AUT-AAC

Organization: CC on Automatic Sprinkler Systems

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Tue Apr 29 13:46:01 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-111-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: In response to CC 6, this revision clarifies that the definition is not providing direction on allowable protocol, but rather simply making a distinction between highand low piled storage.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

53 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 54: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 276-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after 3.11.11 ]

AGRO INDUSTRIAL DEFINITIONS

3.12 Agro-Industrial Definitions

3.12.1 Agro-Industrial Facility. A facility, or portion thereof, housing operations involving the transformation of raw agricultural products into intermediate or consumablebyproducts.

3.12.2 Biomass. Plant or animal-based material of biological origin, excluding material embedded in geological formations or transformed into fossil.

3.12.3 Solid Biofuel. Densified biomass in the form of cubiform, polyhedral, polyhydric or cylindrical units, produced by compressing milled biomass.

3.12.4 Solid Biomass Feedstock. The basic materials from which biofuel is comprised, manufactured or made.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The proposed language facilitates the full characterization of agro-industrial biomass manufacturing operations for the NFPA 13 user as Occupancy Classification Ordinary Hazard – G2. It includes the assessment of fire control and the reduction of exposures to and from facilities storing and processing crop-residue and/or animal-based materials of biological origin as "solid biomass feedstock" for industrial-scale, biofuel production.

NOTE: The BIPCS believes the DEFINITIONS section to be the most appropriate location for the proposed Occupancy Classification as it relates to existing solid biomass feedstock (Class III Commodities), that are already and identified by name (below) in existing in Table A.5.6.3.3. These BIOMASS products already have been identified as Class III Commodities:1. Beans – Dried (e.g., packaged or cartoned)2. Cartons – Corrugates (e.g., unassembled in neat piles)3. Cereals (e.g., oats) – Packaged or cartoned4. Charcoal – Bagged (e.g., standard)5. Cloth – Cartoned and not cartoned (e.g., enatural fiber, viscose6. Cocoa Products – Packaged, cartoned 7. Coffee – Packaged, cartoned 8. Coffee Beans – Bagged9. Cotton – Packaged, cartoned10. Empty Containers – Wood, solid sided containers (e.g., crates, boxes or barrels) empty11. Grains — Packaged in Cartons (e.g., Barley, Rice, Oats)12. Nuts – Packaged, cartoned and Bagged13. Skis – Wood14. Textiles – Natural fiber clothing or textile products, Synthetics (except rayon and nylon), 50/50 blend or less (e.g., Thread, yarn on wood or paper spools, Fabrics)15. Tobacco Products – in paperboard cartons16. Wood Products – Spools (empty), Toothpicks, clothespins, hangers in cartons, Doors, windows, wood cabinets, and furniture

The Biomass Industry Panel on Codes & Standards (BIPCS), led by Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), is an initiative of the Department of Energy Biomass Technologies Office (BTO). As part of the BTO integrated biorefinery efforts, the BFICOCS was assembled to conduct analysis of existing fire and building codes and to prepare proposed code changes designed to facilitate the development of the commercial-scale biomass industry while maintaining a focus on safety. The committee is made up of managers, engineers and code officials from industry, government laboratories, consulting firms, and the American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers (ASABE).

Fire codes related to storage, handling, and pre-processing of biomass are based on industries that operate in a significantly different manner than the growing biomass-based energy industry. Applying current research on biomass properties and knowledge of conventional and emerging storage, handling, and pre-processing technologies, the BIPCS has submitted changes to both the NFPA and ICC development processes intent on benefiting both industry and the public.

Related Item

Public Input No. 488-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 3.11.11]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Darren Meyers

Organization: IECC LLC

Affilliation: Co-Chairman DOE Biomass Industry Panel on Codes & Standards (BIPCS)

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu May 15 20:36:42 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected

Resolution: These terms are not used in the standard.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

54 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 55: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 10-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 5.6.3.4.1 ]

5.6.3.4.1

A Class IV commodity shall be defined as a product, with or without pallets, that meets one of the following criteria:

(1) Constructed partially or totally of Group B plastics

(2) Consists of free-flowing Group A plastic materials

(3) Contains within itself or its packaging an appreciable amount of Group A plastics as indicated in Figure 5.6.3.4.1

Figure 5.6.3.4.1 Classification of Commodities Containing Group A or B Plastics.

Replace volue with volume in part 2

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Editorial coorect spelling replacing volue with volume.

Related Item

First Revision No. 274-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 5.6]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Mark Fessenden

Organization: Tyco Fire Protection Products

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Tue Mar 11 13:33:34 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-132-NFPA 13-2014

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

55 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 56: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Statement: The commodity classification definitions for Class III (Section 5.6.3.3.2) and Class IV (Section 5.6.3.4.1) definitions have been clarified to identify the permissibleamount of unexpanded vs. expanded plastics.

The standard Class IV test commodity contains approximately 15% by weight unexpanded plastic and additional expanded plastic in the commodity would bebeyond the protection scheme required for Class IV commodities in this standard.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

56 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 57: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 135-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 5.6.3.4.1 ]

5.6.3.4.1

A Class IV commodity shall be defined as a product, with or without pallets, that meets one of the following criteria:

(1) Constructed partially or totally of Group B plastics

(2) Consists of free-flowing Group A plastic materials

Contains within itself or its packaging an appreciable amount of Group A plastics as indicated in

Delete Figure 5.6.3.4.1

Figure 5

and return the text of 5 .6.3.4.

1 Classification of Commodities Containing Group A or B Plastics.

1(3) to that of the 2013 edition of NFPA 13, as follows:

(1) Contains within itself or its packaging an appreciable amount (5 percent to 15 percent by weight or 5 percent to 25 percent by volume) of Group A plastics.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_5-6-3-4-1.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The proposed Figure 5.6.3.4.1 should not be accepted. The reason to adopt this chart is not supported by any valid substantiation. The existing provision is that a product can have up to 25% by volume or 15% by weight of Group A plastics and still be considered to be a Class IV commodity. As per this proposed Figure 5.6.3.4.1 however, if a product had just 20% by volume and 10% by weight, it would be classified as a Group A plastic. This extreme change is unjustified and should not be accepted.

Related Item

First Revision No. 274-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 5.6]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

57 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 58: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Apr 25 13:54:12 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-132-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The commodity classification definitions for Class III (Section 5.6.3.3.2) and Class IV (Section 5.6.3.4.1) definitions have been clarified to identify the permissibleamount of unexpanded vs. expanded plastics.

The standard Class IV test commodity contains approximately 15% by weight unexpanded plastic and additional expanded plastic in the commodity would bebeyond the protection scheme required for Class IV commodities in this standard.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

58 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 59: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 344-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after 6.1.1.6 ]

Pre-Engineered Systems.

Where listed pre-engineered systems are installed, they shall be installed within the limitations that have been established by the testing laboratories.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Currently NFPA 13D allows pre-engineered systems to be installed as an acceptable alternative. Under the definition of pre-engineered, the systems must have been successfully tested to the appropriate hazard. Allowing alternate systems and new technologies through sections 1.4 and 1.6 of this standard, requires engineering proof that the alternative is equal or better protection than what is in the standard. Often obtaining engineering support or approval can be difficult and expensive. This would open it up to being approved under standard review from an engineer or authority having jurisdiction. I also believe that this is also a correlating issue from 13D.

Related Item

Public Input No. 441-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 6.1.1.6]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Daniel Wake

Organization: Victaulic Company

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 14:34:49 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected but held

Resolution: This is new material and should be held until the next revision cycle.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

59 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 60: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 136-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 6.2.1.1 ]

6.2.1. 1 * 1

When a sprinkler is removed from a fitting or welded outlet, it shall not be reinstalled except as permitted by 6 . 2.1.1.1.

6.2.1.1.1 *

Dry sprinklers shall be permitted to be reinstalled where they are not removed by applying torque at the point where the sprinkler is attached to the barrel.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_6-2-1-1.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The idea of removing a sprinkler and thinking that it won't be damaged is a fallacy. There are more ways to damage a sprinkler than by torque. Handling and storage is the critical issue. The need for caps and straps on new sprinklers came from damage during the handling of sprinklers from right out of the manufactures cartons, so it is not possible to assure similar damage won't occur to a dry pendent sprinkler that is removed from its installed location. See the images below as examples:

See uploaded file for Figures

Related Item

First Revision No. 66-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 6.2.1.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Apr 25 13:56:42 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-21-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: This language is being revised to correlate with the work done by NFPA 13R and 13D for replacing dry sprinklers.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

60 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 61: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 352-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after 6.3.2 ]

(NEW SECTION 6.3.2 ) Electric Resistance Welding. Horizontal pipe that is joined by welds with electric resistance methods shall be installed with theseam at the top of the pipe.

Type your content here ...

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

13-30_NFPA_13_FMDS0200_University_of_Michigan_David_King_data_from_Factory_Mutual_for_6.3.2-5.pdfTo support Mr. King's original proposal, a Data Sheet from FM Global is attached herewith.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Please accept Mr. King's original proposal. See supporting documentation. Alternatively, it could be installed as part of an Annex.

Related Item

Public Input No. 556-NFPA 13-2013 [Sections 6.3.2, 6.3.3]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Michael Anthony

Organization: University of Michigan

Affilliation: University of Michigan

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 15:40:46 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: The proposed language would be very difficult to enforce for many installations. Enforcing this language as proposed would add a significant cost to the project.There are other means to monitor corrosion in systems.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

61 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 62: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 190-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 6.3.7 ]

6.3.7* Nonmetallic Pipe.

Nonmetallic pipe in accordance with Table 6.3.1.1 shall be investigated for suitability in automatic sprinkler installations and listed for this service.

6.3.7.1

Listed nonmetallic pipe shall be installed in accordance with its listing limitations, including installation instructions.

6.3.7.1.1

Manufacturer's installation instructions shall include its listing limitations.

6.3.7.2

When nonmetallic pipe is used in systems utilizing steel piping internally coated with corrosion inhibitors, the steel pipe coating shall be listed for compatibility with thenonmetallic pipe materials.

6.3.7.3

When nonmetallic pipe is used in systems utilizing steel pipe that is not internally coated with corrosion inhibitors, no additional evaluations shall be required.

6.3.7.4*

When nonmetallic pipe is used in systems utilizing steel pipe, cutting oils and lubricants used for fabrication of the steel piping shall be compatible with the nonmetallic pipematerials in accordance with 6.1.1.6.

6.3.7.5

Fire-stopping materials intended for use on nonmetallic piping penetrations shall be compatible with the nonmetallic pipe materials in accordance with 6.1.1.6.

6.3.7.6

Nonmetallic pipe listed for light hazard occupancies shall be permitted to be installed in ordinary hazard rooms of otherwise light hazard occupancies where the room does

not exceed 400 ft2 (37 m2).

6.3.7.7

Nonmetallic pipe shall not be listed for portions of an occupancy classification.

6.3.7.8* Listed Pipe and Tubing.

6.3.7.8.1

Other types of pipe or tube investigated for suitability in automatic sprinkler installations and listed for this service, including but not limited to CPVC and steel, and differingfrom that provided in Table 6.3.1.1 shall be permitted where installed in accordance with their listing limitations, including installation instructions.

6.3.7.8.2

Pipe or tube listed for light hazard occupancies shall be permitted to be installed in ordinary hazard rooms of otherwise light hazard occupancies where the room does not

exceed 400 ft2 (37 m2).

6.3.7.8.2.1

Pipe or tube installed in accordance with 6.3.7.8.2 shall be permitted to be installed exposed, in accordance with the listing.

6.3.7.8.3

Pipe or tube shall not be listed for portions of an occupancy classification.

6.3.7.8.4

Bending of listed pipe and tubing shall be permitted as allowed by the listing.

6.3.7.9 Pipe and Tube Bending.

6.3.7.9.1

Bending of Schedule 10 steel pipe, or any steel pipe of wall thickness equal to or greater than Schedule 10 and Types K and L copper tube, shall be permitted when bendsare made with no kinks, ripples, distortions, or reductions in diameter or any noticeable deviations from round.

6.3.7.9.2

For Schedule 40 and copper tubing, the minimum radius of a bend shall be six pipe diameters for pipe sizes 2 in. (50 mm) and smaller and five pipe diameters for pipesizes 2 1⁄2 in. (65 mm) and larger.

6.3.7.9.3

For all other steel pipe, the minimum radius of a bend shall be 12 pipe diameters for all sizes.

6.3.7.9.4

Bending of listed pipe and tubing shall be permitted as allowed by the listing.

6.3.7.10 Pipe and Tube Identification.

6.3.7.10.1*

All pipe, including specially listed pipe allowed by 6.3.7.8, shall be marked along its length by the manufacturer in such a way as to properly identify the type of pipe.

6.3.7.10.2

The marking shall be visible on every piece of pipe over 2 ft (610 mm) long.

6.3.7.10.3

Pipe identification shall include the manufacturer's name, model designation, or schedule.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

CC NOTE: The following CC Note No. 3 appeared in the First Draft Report as First Revision No. 270.

The non-metallic pipe compatibility task group needs to review NFPA 13 and 13R to resolve the differences between these standards. This is a material issue that needs to be consistent in both standards.

Related Item

First Revision No. 270-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 6.3.7]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: CC on AUT-AAC

Organization: CC on Automatic Sprinkler Systems

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Tue Apr 29 13:53:16 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

62 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 63: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Resolution: SR-157-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: As currently worded, the nonmetallic pipe section includes language addressing metallic pipe. This reorganization is intended to move any requirements associatedwith metallic pipe out of the nonmetallic pipe section.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

63 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 64: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 240-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 6.3.7.6 ]

6.3.7.6

Nonmetallic pipe listed for light hazard occupancies shall be permitted to be installed exposed in ordinary hazard rooms of otherwise light hazard occupancies where the

room does not exceed 400 ft2 (37 m2).

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Clarification needs to be made that nonmetallic pipe can be ran exposed.

Related Item

Public Input No. 233-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 6.1.1.2]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Phillip Brown

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Associ

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 09 12:56:51 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected

Resolution: This changes the intended use within the standard and would be allowed if listed for such applications.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

64 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 65: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 11-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after 6.4.8 ]

Add new Annex.

Consideration of compatibility should be provided when connecting dissimilar materials, like brass extension fittings and copper piping systems.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Certain brass alloys have been known to corrodes from dezincification—a phenomenon where zinc is dissolved out of brass. This is more common in stagnant water systems connected to a copper piping network. Dezincification can cause leakage or failures in the fitting.

Related Item

First Revision No. 60-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 6.4.7.4]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Mark Fessenden

Organization: Tyco Fire Protection Products

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Tue Mar 11 14:21:37 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-23-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: Certain brass alloys have been known to corrodes from dezincification—a phenomenon where zinc is dissolved out of brass. This is more common in stagnant watersystems connected to a copper piping network. Dezincification can cause leakage or failures in the fitting.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

65 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 66: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 117-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 6.4.8 ]

6.4.8 Extension Fitting.

6.4.8.1

The outlet diameter of the extension fitting shall be equal to the inlet diameter of the sprinkler.

6.4.8.2

A single extension fitting up to a maximum of 2 in. (50 mm) in length shall be permitted to be installed with a sprinkler.

6.4.8.2.1

The extension fitting shall be Extension fittings longer than 2 in. (50 mm) shall be listed.

6.4.8.2.1.1

Extension fittings longer than 2 in (50 mm) shall be included in the hydraulic calculations.

6.4.8.2. 1. 2

The requirement of 6.4.8.2.1.1 shall not apply where the sprinkler is listed for use with the extension nipple.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Testing has been performed on sprinkler extensions and it has been proven that up to 2" extensions do not impact the K Factor of the attached sprinkler beyond the ranges found in Table 6.2.3.1. Greater than 2" in length should be listed and included in the hydraulic calculations.

Related Item

First Revision No. 60-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 6.4.7.4]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Peter Schwab

Organization: Wayne Automatic Fire Sprinkler

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Apr 18 11:02:43 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-137-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: Testing has been performed on sprinkler extensions and it has been proven that up to 2" extensions do not impact the K Factor of the attached sprinkler beyond theranges found in Table 6.2.3.1. Greater than 2" in length should be listed and included in the hydraulic calculations. NFPA 13 23.4.4.7.1 (9) allows the friction loss for thefitting directly connected to a sprinkler to be excluded from the hydraulic calculation. The fitting (tee, 90 or deducing coupling) that the extension fittings piece is attachedshould be included. If an extension fitting is added after hydraulic calculations have been performed, calculations should be redone adding in the friction loss at eachtee, 90, or reducing coupling that was originally omitted.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

66 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 67: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 366-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 6.4.8.1 ]

6.4.8.1

The outlet diameter of the extension fitting shall be equal to or greater than the inlet diameter of the sprinkler.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

None given.

Related Item

First Revision No. 60-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 6.4.7.4]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Cecil Bilbo

Organization: Academy of Fire Sprinkler Tech

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon May 19 12:31:59 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-137-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: Testing has been performed on sprinkler extensions and it has been proven that up to 2" extensions do not impact the K Factor of the attached sprinkler beyond theranges found in Table 6.2.3.1. Greater than 2" in length should be listed and included in the hydraulic calculations. NFPA 13 23.4.4.7.1 (9) allows the friction loss for thefitting directly connected to a sprinkler to be excluded from the hydraulic calculation. The fitting (tee, 90 or deducing coupling) that the extension fittings piece is attachedshould be included. If an extension fitting is added after hydraulic calculations have been performed, calculations should be redone adding in the friction loss at eachtee, 90, or reducing coupling that was originally omitted.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

67 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 68: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 12-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 6.4.8.2.1 ]

6.4.8.2.1

The extension fitting shall not be included in the hydraulic calculations.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

NFPA 13 23.4.4.7.1 (9) allows the friction loss for the fitting directly connected to a sprinkler to be excluded from the hydraulic calculation. The fitting (tee, 90 or deducing coupling) that the extension fittings piece is attached should be included. If an extension fitting is added after hydraulic calculations have been performed, calculations should be redone adding in the friction loss at each tee, 90, or reducing coupling that was originally omitted.

Related Item

First Revision No. 60-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 6.4.7.4]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Mark Fessenden

Organization: Tyco Fire Protection Products

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Tue Mar 11 14:25:18 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-137-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: Testing has been performed on sprinkler extensions and it has been proven that up to 2" extensions do not impact the K Factor of the attached sprinkler beyond theranges found in Table 6.2.3.1. Greater than 2" in length should be listed and included in the hydraulic calculations. NFPA 13 23.4.4.7.1 (9) allows the friction loss for thefitting directly connected to a sprinkler to be excluded from the hydraulic calculation. The fitting (tee, 90 or deducing coupling) that the extension fittings piece is attachedshould be included. If an extension fitting is added after hydraulic calculations have been performed, calculations should be redone adding in the friction loss at eachtee, 90, or reducing coupling that was originally omitted.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

68 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 69: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 137-NFPA 13-2014 [ Sections 6.4.8.2.1, 6.4.8.2.2 ]

Sections 6.4.8.2.1, 6.4.8.2.2

6.4.8.2.1

The extension fitting shall be included in the hydraulic calculations.

6.4.8.2.2

The requirement of 6.4.8.2.1 shall not apply where the sprinkler is listed for use with the extension nipple.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_6-4-8-2-1.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The requirement for hydraulic calculations is not necessary or practical. It is not needed because as per 23.4.4.7.1(9), friction loss can be excluded for the fitting directly connected to the sprinkler. It is not practical because no equivalent lengths have been provided for extension fittings. Also, these devices are often been referred to as "cheaters" because they are usually employed on site, as a stop gap, to make up for a short pipe length or other site condition, that was not contemplated during the design stages, when the hydraulic calculations were prepared.

Related Item

First Revision No. 60-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 6.4.7.4]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Apr 25 14:01:21 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-137-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: Testing has been performed on sprinkler extensions and it has been proven that up to 2" extensions do not impact the K Factor of the attached sprinkler beyond theranges found in Table 6.2.3.1. Greater than 2" in length should be listed and included in the hydraulic calculations. NFPA 13 23.4.4.7.1 (9) allows the friction loss for thefitting directly connected to a sprinkler to be excluded from the hydraulic calculation. The fitting (tee, 90 or deducing coupling) that the extension fittings piece is attachedshould be included. If an extension fitting is added after hydraulic calculations have been performed, calculations should be redone adding in the friction loss at eachtee, 90, or reducing coupling that was originally omitted.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

69 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 70: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 268-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 6.6.3 ]

6.6.3 Drain Valves and , Test Valves and Vent Valves .

Drain valves and , test valves shall and vent valves shall be approved.

6.6.3.1 Automatic air vents shall be listed.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The Technical Committee says that trapped air doesn’t affect the operation of the system. NFPA’s Building Code Development Committee (BCDC) disagrees. Operation of a sprinkler system would seem to mean more than just will it hold water or will the water flow through it. Problems experienced even during non-operational periods seem to have a negative impact on the system. The problems listed in the substantiation for Public Input #241 seem to be problems that would affect operation.

Related Item

Public Input No. 241-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 6.7.3]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Jim Muir

Organization: Building Safety Division, Clark County Washington

Affilliation: NFPA's Building Code Development Committee (BCDC)

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu May 15 12:11:42 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected

Resolution: This does not affect the systems ability to provide water to a fire event. The principle is to help reduce corrosion in a system.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

70 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 71: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 114-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after 6.7.3 ]

6.7.4 Fire department connections shall have an approved method to deter unauthorized removal of the FDC.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

NFPA 13 is a design and installation standard and as such does address the security, protection, and assurance that the various components of required sprinkler systems will function properly when needed. This is seen in various sections including: • Section 6.2.8 “Sprinklers subject to mechanical injury shall be protected with listed guards”,• Section 6.7.2 requiring approved plugs and caps to protect fire department connections from blockage and debris, • Section 6.2.6.4.1 “Sprinklers protecting spray areas and mixing rooms in resin application areas shall be protected against overspray residue so that they will operate in the event of fire”.In order to assure that fire department connections are present and operate properly in the event of fire they must be protected from theft or any unauthorized removal. Since the FDC is located outside of the protected structure they are more susceptible to theft than any other component. Theft of FDC’s has and is occurring nationwide and many times goes undetected until a fire when the fire department discovers they cannot pump into the system. This new section 6.7.4 would allow the AHJ to approve different methods of deterring unauthorized removal of the FDC ranging from the use of locking methods to warning signage.

Related Item

Public Input No. 108-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 6.8.3]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Bill Galloway

Organization: Southern Regional Fire Code De

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu Apr 17 12:50:48 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: No new data has been presented to substantiate the added cost that would be added with this proposal. This standard does not provide guidance on theftdeterrence.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

71 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 72: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 118-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 7.1.5 ]

7.1.5 Air Venting.

A single, air vent with a connection shall be provided on each wet pipe system utilizing black or galvanized steel pipe as a means for venting.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

There is no guidance on where this vent is to be installed, The purpose of venting is to reduce corrosion. Not all areas have shown issues with corrosion. The use of vents should be prescribed by the Engineer of Record or as required by the owner.

Related Item

First Revision No. 278-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 7.1.4]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Peter Schwab

Organization: Wayne Automatic Fire Sprinkler

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Apr 18 11:34:19 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: The standard provides guidance in 8.16.6 on how the vents are intended to be installed. The requirement for a PRV for all wet systems addresses the concern forproviding a cushion for pressure surges.

Statement: Revised for clarity – as it has currently been proposed, the term “air vent with a connection” does not describe the intent sufficiently. The reference to 8.16.6 was addedto add clarity as to the design guidance for venting installations. The reference to A.8.16.4.2.2 was added to direct the users of the standard to the place in the Annexwhere the purpose of the air vent is explained.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

72 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 73: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 138-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 7.1.5 ]

7.1.5 Air Venting.

A single, air vent with a connection connection conforming to 8.16.6 shall be provided on each wet pipe system utilizing black or galvanized steel pipe as a means forventing. (See A.8.16.4.2.2).

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_7-1-5.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Revised for clarity – as it has currently been proposed, the term “air vent with a connection” does not describe the intent sufficiently. The reference to A.8.16.4.2.2 was added to direct the users of the standard to the place in the Annex where the purpose of the air vent is explained.

Related Item

First Revision No. 278-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 7.1.4]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Apr 25 14:02:42 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: The standard provides guidance in 8.16.6 on how the vents are intended to be installed. The requirement for a PRV for all wet systems addresses the concern forproviding a cushion for pressure surges.

Statement: Revised for clarity – as it has currently been proposed, the term “air vent with a connection” does not describe the intent sufficiently. The reference to 8.16.6 was addedto add clarity as to the design guidance for venting installations. The reference to A.8.16.4.2.2 was added to direct the users of the standard to the place in the Annexwhere the purpose of the air vent is explained.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

73 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 74: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 216-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 7.1.5 ]

7.1.5 Air Venting.

A single, air vent with a connection shall be provided on each wet pipe system utilizing black or galvanized steel pipe as a means for venting.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This new section requiring air venting may cause unintended consequences. Some air in the sprinkler system is a positive thing. It acts as a cushion to pressure surges. Air is compressible, water is not. The more air we take out of sprinkler systems, the more problems we are going to have with pressure changes blowing apart systems, pegging gages, and causing other damage. Air acts as a cushion to deal with transient pressure surges. As we remove more air out of the sprinkler systems, we will have bigger problems with pressure and water hammer. Additional comments have been made to remove language for air venting from section 8.16.6, and 25.6.2. The Annex note A.8.16.4.2.2 (2013 edition) is to be preserved as it contains valuable information when air venting is deemed to be warranted.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 217-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 8.16.6]

Related Item

First Revision No. 278-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 7.1.4]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Asp

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA E&S Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Wed May 07 09:58:54 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: The standard provides guidance in 8.16.6 on how the vents are intended to be installed. The requirement for a PRV for all wet systems addresses the concern forproviding a cushion for pressure surges.

Statement: Revised for clarity – as it has currently been proposed, the term “air vent with a connection” does not describe the intent sufficiently. The reference to 8.16.6 was addedto add clarity as to the design guidance for venting installations. The reference to A.8.16.4.2.2 was added to direct the users of the standard to the place in the Annexwhere the purpose of the air vent is explained.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

74 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 75: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 367-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 7.1.5 ]

7.1.5 Air Venting.

A single, air vent with a connection shall be provided on each wet pipe system utilizing black or galvanized steel pipe as a means for venting.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

All systems should not require air venting.

Related Item

First Revision No. 278-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 7.1.4]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Cecil Bilbo

Organization: Academy of Fire Sprinkler Tech

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon May 19 12:39:54 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: The standard provides guidance in 8.16.6 on how the vents are intended to be installed. The requirement for a PRV for all wet systems addresses the concern forproviding a cushion for pressure surges.

Statement: Revised for clarity – as it has currently been proposed, the term “air vent with a connection” does not describe the intent sufficiently. The reference to 8.16.6 was addedto add clarity as to the design guidance for venting installations. The reference to A.8.16.4.2.2 was added to direct the users of the standard to the place in the Annexwhere the purpose of the air vent is explained.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

75 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 76: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 354-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 7.2.5.4.2 ]

7.2.5.4.2 Low Differential Dry Pipe Valve.

Protection against accumulation of water above the clapper shall be provided for low differential dry pipe valves in accordance with 7.2.5.4.3 .

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This requirement does not make sense. It takes less water pressure to lift the clapper with a water column in a low differential DPV than one with a higher differential. Any valve that is subject to a water column should have high level protection.

Related Item

Public Input No. 235-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 7.2.5.4.3]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Peter Thomas

Organization: Victaulic Company

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 15:56:54 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: Low Differential valves are required to comply with 7.2.5.4.3. No technical data has been submitted to the TC to justify removing low differential valves fromcomplying with this section.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

76 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 77: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 359-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 7.2.5.4.2 ]

7.2.5.4.2 Low Differential Dry Pipe Valve.

Protection against accumulation of water above the clapper shall be provided for low differential dry pipe valves in accordance with 7.2.5.4.3 .

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

A water column should be prevented for any type of dry valve. Paragraph 7.2.5.4.1 adequately covers the intent. What is the definition of a low differential valve? It is not found in the definitions so why have a section referring to something that is not defined.

Related Item

Public Input No. 433-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 7.2.5.4.2]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Daniel Wake

Organization: Victaulic Company

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 16:46:03 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: Low Differential valves are required to comply with 7.2.5.4.3. No technical data has been submitted to the TC to justify removing low differential valves fromcomplying with this section.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

77 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 78: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 119-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 7.2.6.6.3.1 ]

7.2.6.6.3.1

Each dry pipe system shall have an air a dedicated air maintenance device.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Changed the language to further clarify that each dry pipe valve/system needs to have its own dedicated AMD.

Related Item

First Revision No. 62-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 7.2.6.6.3]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Peter Schwab

Organization: Wayne Automatic Fire Sprinkler

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Apr 18 13:04:34 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Accepted

Resolution: SR-27-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: Changed the language to further clarify that each dry pipe valve/system needs to have its own dedicated AMD.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

78 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 79: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 139-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 7.6.3.4 ]

Reconsider the proposal and return Figure 7.6.3.4 to that of the 2013 edition of NFPA 13.

7.6.3.4

A listed 1⁄2 in. (12 mm) relief valve shall be permitted in lieu of the expansion chamber required in 7.6.3.3, and as illustrated in Figure 7.6.3.4, provided the antifreeze systemvolume does not exceed 40 gal (151 L).

Figure 7.6.3.4 Arrangement of Supply Piping with Relief Valve and Backflow Device.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_7-6-3-4.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The additional indicating control valve is not needed for this antifreeze loop configuration. In Figure 7.6.3.3 the control valve is needed to avoid the mixing of water and antifreeze solution during a forward flow test, because the piping is basically all on the same plane. In Figure 7.6.3.4 however, the loop separates the (lighter) water from the (heavier) antifreeze solution, so the backflow preventer and the test valve do not need to be isolated from the downstream piping. Also, the additional flow test valve is not needed. The antifreeze loop has a test valve “A” at the water/antifreeze interface that can be sized and utilized for the purpose.

Related Item

First Revision No. 63-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 7.6.3.4]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Apr 25 14:11:45 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Accepted

Resolution: SR-28-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The additional indicating control valve is not needed for this antifreeze loop configuration. In Figure 7.6.3.3 the control valve is needed to avoid the mixing of water andantifreeze solution during a forward flow test, because the piping is basically all on the same plane. In Figure 7.6.3.4 however, the loop separates the (lighter) water fromthe (heavier) antifreeze solution, so the backflow preventer and the test valve do not need to be isolated from the downstream piping. Also, the additional flow test valveis not needed. The antifreeze loop has a test valve “A” at the water/antifreeze interface that can be sized and utilized for the purpose.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

79 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 80: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 225-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 8.2.4.1 ]

8.2.4.1 *

Multistory buildings exceeding two stories in height shall be provided with a floor control valve, check valve, main drain valve, and flow switch for isolation, control, andannunciation of water flow on flow for each floor level.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This proposed change of "on each floor level" to "for each floor level" would allow the required floor control valve assemblies to be located on a level remote from the level being served. It is, at times, more practical to locate all sprinkler equipment in a central location such as a riser room or another area remote from the floor being served. This comment will not change the requirement that all floors in multistory building be equipped with a floor control valve but facilitate ease of installation and of inspection, test and maintenance of the systems.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 226-NFPA 13-2014 [New Section after 8.2.4.3]

Related Item

First Revision No. 153-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 8.16.1.5]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Asp

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA E&S Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu May 08 09:02:21 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-29-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: This proposed change of "on each floor level" to "for each floor level" would allow the required floor control valve assemblies to be located on a level remote from thelevel being served. It is, at times, more practical to locate all sprinkler equipment in a central location such as a riser room or another area remote from the floor beingserved. This revision will not change the requirement that all floors in multistory building be equipped with a floor control valve but facilitate ease of installation and ofinspection, test and maintenance of the systems.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

80 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 81: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 226-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after 8.2.4.3 ]

8.2.4.4

The requirements of 8.2.4 shall not apply to dry systems.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The requirements for floor control valve assemblies on each floor of a multi-level structure were intended for wet systems only but as the new language does not limit them to wet pipe systems only, they need to be applied to all systems, both wet and dry. This new section requires a floor control assembly (control valve, check valve, and drain) and a flow switch at each level (with an exception for certain small buildings ). This will make it difficult to protect unheated structures such as parking garages with a single dry-pipe valve and then separate control and check valves downstream.

Section 7.2.3.9 of NFPA 13 prohibits the use of check valves from being used to subdivide a dry-pipe system unless the check valves are in a heated enclosure. This would make it difficult for a single dry-pipe valve to serve a system arranged in accordance with 8.16.1.5. It would also be difficult to meet the requirement of 8.2.4 (8.16.1.5 in 2013 edition) for a flow switch on each level if you only had one dry-pipe valve. Paddle-type flow switches are not allowed on dry-pipe systems and It is unclear if a pressure switch can be used on a pipe that is not a part of the trim on a dry-pipe valve.

Section 8.2.4.3 (8.16.1.5.3 in the 2013 edition of NFPA 13) does provide an exception that lets you ignore the rules regarding the separate floor control assemblies and flow switches on each floor if the whole parking garage is less than 52,000 sq ft (assuming an ordinary hazard design). With six stories, you would have to average 8,667 sq ft per floor, which is only enough space to park about 30 cars, so that’s a pretty small parking garage.

As stated, I believe these requirements were not intended to be applied to dry systems and language needs to be added to the standard to specifically exempt them from the floor control valve requirements of section 8.2.4.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 225-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 8.2.4.1] Charging requirement

Related Item

First Revision No. 153-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 8.16.1.5]

Public Input No. 317-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 8.16.1.5]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Asp

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA E&S Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu May 08 09:22:21 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-30-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The requirements for floor control valve assemblies on each floor of a multi-level structure were intended for wet systems only but as the new language does not limitthem to wet pipe systems only, they need to be applied to all systems, both wet and dry. This new section requires a floor control assembly (control valve, check valve,and drain) and a flow switch at each level (with an exception for certain small buildings ). This will make it difficult to protect unheated parking garages with a singledry-pipe valve and then separate control and check valves downstream.

Section 7.2.3.9 of NFPA 13 prohibits the use of check valves from being used to subdivide a dry-pipe system unless the check valves are in a heated enclosure. Thiswould make it difficult for a single dry-pipe valve to serve a system arranged in accordance with 8.16.1.5. It would also be difficult to meet the requirement of 8.2.4(8.16.1.5 in 2013 edition) for a flow switch on each level if you only had one dry-pipe valve. Paddle-type flow switches are not allowed on dry-pipe systems and It isunclear if a pressure switch can be used on a pipe that is not a part of the trim on a dry-pipe valve.

Section 8.2.4.3 (8.16.1.5.3 in the 2013 edition of NFPA 13) does provide an exception that lets you ignore the rules regarding the separate floor control assemblies andflow switches on each floor if the whole parking garage is less than 52,000 sq ft (assuming an ordinary hazard design). With six stories, you would have to average8,667 sq ft per floor, which is only enough space to park about 30 cars, so that’s a pretty small parking garage.

As stated, I believe these requirements were not intended to be applied to dry systems and language needs to be added to the standard to specifically exempt themfrom the floor control valve requirements of section 8.2.4.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

81 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 82: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 232-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 8.4.3 ]

8.4.3 Extended Coverage Spray Sprinklers.

Extended coverage sprinklers shall only be installed as follows:

(1) In unobstructed construction consisting of flat, smooth ceilings with a slope not exceeding a pitch of 1 in 6 (a rise of 2 units in a run of 12 units, a roof slope of 16.7percent)

(2) In unobstructed or noncombustible obstructed construction, where specifically listed for such use

(3) Within trusses or bar joists having web members not greater than 1 in. (25.4 mm) maximum dimension or where trusses are spaced greater than 7 1⁄2 ft (2.3 m) oncenter and where the ceiling slope does not exceed a pitch of 1 in 6 (a rise of 2 units in a run of 12 units, a roof slope of 16.7 percent)

(4) Extended coverage upright and pendent sprinklers installed under smooth, flat ceilings that have slopes not exceeding a pitch of 1 in 3 (a rise of 4 units in a run of 12units, a roof slope of 33.3 percent), where specifically listed for such use

(5) Extended coverage sidewall sprinklers installed in accordance with 8.9.4.2.2 in slopes exceeding a ceiling pitch of 2 in 12

(6) In each bay of obstructed construction consisting of solid structural members that extend below the deflector of the sprinkler

(7) Extended coverage sprinklers installed to protect areas below a single overhead door(s)

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

clarify that that this is a "spray" sprinkler.

Related Item

Public Input No. 209-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 8.4.1.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Phillip Brown

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Associ

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu May 08 17:02:12 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected

Resolution: Based on the definition in chapter 3, these sprinklers are already identified as "spray" sprinklers.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

82 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 83: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 81-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after 8.4.7.1 ]

8.4.7.1.1 CMSA sprinklers shall not be permitted to protect storage on solid shelf racks unless the solid shelves are protected in accordance with 16.1.6 or 17.1.5 asapplicable to the type of storage.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The redundancy task group agrees with this comment.

The issue of CMSA and solid shelves is being cleaned up in the storage chapters. It is necessary that this section has this text. The text mimics that from 8.4.6.1.1 on ESFR.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 80-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Related Item

First Revision No. 208-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 16.2.2.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Huggins

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Association

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu Mar 27 13:49:32 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: This section does not belong in Chapter 8. This is a storage issue and belongs in the storage chapters (Ch 12 or in the storage tables). The similar language forESFRs in 8.4.6.1 is being deleted as it also does not belong.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

83 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 84: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 140-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after 8.5.5.3.1.2 ]

Copy the new 8.6.5.3.6 to create a new 8.5.5.3.1.2, to read as follows:

8.5.5.3.1.2 The deflector of automatic sprinklers installed under fixed obstructions shall be positioned no more than 12 in. (300 mm) below the bottom of theobstruction.

Renumber the remainder of Section 8.5.5.3.1 accordingly.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_8-5-5-3-1-2.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The new text of 8.6.5.3.6 was added to clarify the proper location for sprinklers below obstructions such as wide ducts and open grate flooring. The same text should be added into Section 8.5.5.3.1, which deals with the same types of issues.

Related Item

First Revision No. 107-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 8.6.5.3.5]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Apr 25 14:13:39 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Accepted

Resolution: SR-32-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The new text of 8.6.5.3.6 was added to clarify the proper location for sprinklers below obstructions such as wide ducts and open grate flooring. The same text isbeing added into Section 8.5.5.3.1, which deals with the same types of issues.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

84 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 85: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 368-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 8.5.5.3.1.3 ]

8.5.5.3.1.3

Sprinklers shall not be required under noncombustible obstructions over 4 ft (1.2 m) wide where the bottom of the obstruction is 24 in. (620 mm) or less above the floor ordeck.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

24 inches is far too restrictive. Tables can be up to 36” from the floor and do not require sprinkler beneath.

Related Item

First Revision No. 90-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 8.5.5.3.1.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Cecil Bilbo

Organization: Academy of Fire Sprinkler Tech

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon May 19 13:09:12 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: Guidance is needed to determine when sprinklers are needed below obstructions that are 4 feet wide. This issue is being interpreted in a variety of ways by AHJsand the language is needed to help develop consistent enforcement.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

85 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 86: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 13-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 8.5.5.3.3.1 ]

8.5.5.3.3.1

Quick-response spray Spray sprinklers shall be permitted to be utilized under overhead doors.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

There are situations wherestandard response sprinklers should be permited beneath overhead doors.

Related Item

First Revision No. 91-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 8.5.5.3.2]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Mark Fessenden

Organization: Tyco Fire Protection Products

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Tue Mar 11 15:00:25 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Accepted

Resolution: SR-33-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: There are situations wherestandard response sprinklers should be permited beneath overhead doors.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

86 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 87: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 266-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after 8.5.5.4 ]

8.5.5.4.1

In closets and compartments enclosed by walls and a door, including those housing mechanical equipment, that are smaller than 400 ft3 (11.3 m3), pendent, uprightand sidewall residential sprinklers shall be permitted to be installed within 18 inches of the ceiling to avoid obstructions near the ceiling.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

Computer_Modeling_of_Closet.pdf Computer modeling of residential sprinklers in closets

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Small closets, especially those housing mechanical equipment, frequently contain obstructions that make it difficult to place sprinklers within 12 inches of the ceiling. Allowing residential sprinklers to be located further down would allow adequate sprinkler protection of these small closets while avoiding ceiling level obstructions such as ducts and pipes. Based upon CFAST Computer Fire Model, an analysis was performed comparing the performance of sprinklers located 6 inches down from a ceiling in a small room to the performance of sprinklers 18 inches down from the ceiling in an even smaller closet. Based upon this analysis it appears that residential sprinklers 18 inches down from the ceiling in a closet up to 400 ft3 react to a fire at least as quickly as residential sprinklers 6 inches down from a ceiling in a small room. Using equivalency concepts, residential sprinklers could be allowed to be installed within 18 inches of the ceiling in small closets. This analysis is included in this public comment. This same comment has been submitted for NFPA 13R and NFPA 13D.

Related Item

First Revision No. 91-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 8.5.5.3.2]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Asp

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA E&S Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu May 15 10:16:56 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: Existing language provides adequate instruction on avoiding obstructions in small closets. NFPA 13R included similar language to what was proposed, howeverNFPA 13R is a life safety standard and can allow for greater flexibility in the installation of sprinklers in regards to ceilings in a closet.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

87 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 88: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Computer Modeling of Closet with

Residential Sprinkler 18 Inches from Ceiling

This analysis uses the CFAST Computer Fire Model to compare the performance of sprinklers 6

inches down from the ceiling in a small room to the performance of sprinklers 18 inches down

from the ceiling in an even smaller closet.

Baseline Room:

15 ft x 15 ft x 8 ft

3 sprinkler locations (see Figure 1)

o Sprinkler 1 – 4 ft from south and west walls

o Sprinkler 2 – Centered between east and west walls, 4 ft from south wall

o Sprinkler 3 – 4 inches from south and east walls

All sprinklers 6 inches from ceiling

All sprinklers RTI = 50 (metric units)

Closet:

7 ft x 7 ft x 8 ft (392 ft3)

3 sprinkler locations (see Figure 2)

o Sprinkler 1 – 2 ft from south and west walls

o Sprinkler 2 – Centered between east and west walls, 2 ft from south wall

o Sprinkler 3 – 4 inches from south and east walls

All sprinklers 18 inches down from ceiling

All sprinklers RTI = 50 (metric units)

Fire:

Fairly slow growing fire

Center of the room/closet

See Figure 3

1 2 3

Figure 1 – Baseline Room

1 2 3

Figure 2 – Closet 392 ft3

Page 89: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Figure 3 – Heat Release Rate for Fire

(Note that the first 600 seconds are the only

important parts of the heat release due to sprinkler activation time)

Results

The following table compares the activation time of the sprinklers in the small room to that of

the sprinklers in the even smaller closet:

Sprinkler

Activation Time in

Small Room

(Figure 1)

Activation Time

in Closet

(Figure 2)

1 510 seconds 500 seconds

2 530 seconds 500 seconds

3 510 seconds 500 seconds

Conclusions

Given this fire location and these three sprinkler locations, it would appear that residential

sprinklers 18 inches down from the ceiling in a closet up to 400 ft3 react to a fire at least as

quickly as residential sprinklers 6 inches down from a ceiling in a small room. Using

equivalency concepts, residential sprinklers could be allowed to be installed within 18 inches of

the ceiling in small closets.

Prior to making any final determination, other combinations of fire size, fire location, and

sprinkler location should be analyzed in the same manner.

Page 90: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 343-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 8.5.7.3 ]

8.5.7.3

A sprinkler installed directly beneath a skylight not exceeding 32 ft2 (3 m2) shall measure the distance to the ceiling to the highest horizontal plane of in the ceiling skylightand not to the top of the skylight.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

“The plane of the ceiling” will be interpreted as the lower ceiling elevation under the skylight, which will stop people from being able to actually put the sprinkler up into the skylight. We don’t want that sort of misinterpretation, so we are suggesting this change.

Related Item

First Revision No. 93-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 8.5.7.2]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Kenneth Isman

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 14:34:39 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-34-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The concept of PC 343 was used as the basis for this revision, however the verbiage was modified for clarity. The plane of the ceiling will be interpreted as the lowerceiling elevation under the skylight, which will stop people from being able to actually put the sprinkler up into the skylight. This interpretation would be incorrect,therefore the language is being revised to eliminate that potential interpretation. The section is being relocated to maintain the requirement for the 10 ft separationbetween skylights in 8.5.7.2.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

88 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 91: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 14-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after 8.6.4.1.4.3 ]

A.8.6.4.1.4.3

Attic width and sprinkler spacing should be measured from the point of intersection between the bottom of the top cord of the roof joist or truss and the top ofthe ceiling joist or non-combustible insulation. [See Fig. X.]

<Insert Figure>

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

Slope_intesection.png Slope Intersection

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The original submitter seeks to reduce the requirements on the sprinklers at the eaves, which would otherwise require three closely spaced branchlines to provide protection for a small attic. Clarification that sprinkler spacing and positioning can be made to non-combustible insulation could effectively reduce the width to the point where a single sprinkler at the ridge provides adequate protection.

Related Item

Public Input No. 16-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 8.6.4.1.4]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Mark Fessenden

Organization: Tyco Fire Protection Products

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Tue Mar 11 16:12:48 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-161-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The original submitter seeks to reduce the requirements on the sprinklers at the eaves, which would otherwise require three closely spaced branchlines to provideprotection for a small attic. Clarification that sprinkler spacing and positioning can be made to non-combustible insulation could effectively reduce the width to the pointwhere a single sprinkler at the ridge provides adequate protection.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

89 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 92: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting
Page 93: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 15-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 8.6.4.1.4.5 ]

8.6.4.1.4.5 *

8.6.4.1.4.5* The requirements of 8.6.4.1.4. 3 or 8.6. 4 .1.4.4 shall not apply to sprinklers installed at the corner of the eave of a hip type roof where located under the eavespaced in accordance with 8.6.3.2.3 or spaced on the slope plane not less than 5 ft (1.52 m) from the intersection of the upper and lower truss chords or the wood raftersand ceiling joists.

A.8.4.1.4.5* See Figure

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

Hip.png A.8.6.4.1.4.5

Eave_Location.doc Change and Substantiation

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Sprinkler protection at the eave continues to be problematic. There are currently two schools of thought: space to the eave (as if it were a wall and baffle between sprinklers) or position under the eave and protect opposing panes (in apparent violation of 8.6.4.2.1). < Fig 1>

Option 1 <Fig 2>

Option 2

From a fire protection standpoint, locating sprinklers on the eave protecting two planes, while aligning the sprinkler deflector with the pitch of the eave is the better option. The real question then, is just how far off the eave should we position our first sprinkler. In this case 8.6.3.2.3 can provide us with a lot of flexibility [See Option 3] and give the designer additional flexibility while providing better fire protection, which seems to meet the submitter’s intent. <Fig 3>

Option 3

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 16-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 8.6.4.2.1]

Related Item

First Revision No. 102-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 8.6.4.1.4.4]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Mark Fessenden

Organization: Tyco Fire Protection Products

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Tue Mar 11 17:51:02 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Accepted

Resolution: SR-36-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: Sprinkler protection at the eave continues to be problematic. There are currently two schools of thought: space to the eave (as if it were a wall and baffle betweensprinklers) or position under the eave and protect opposing panes (in apparent violation of 8.6.4.2.1).

From a fire protection standpoint, locating sprinklers on the eave protecting two planes, while aligning the sprinkler deflector with the pitch of the eave is the betteroption. The real question then, is just how far off the eave should we position our first sprinkler. In this case 8.6.3.2.3 can provide us with a lot of flexibility and give thedesigner additional flexibility while providing better fire protection.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

90 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 94: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

8.6.4.1.4.5* The requirements of 8.6.4.1.4.3 or 8.6.4.1.4.4 shall not apply to sprinklers installed at the

corner of the eave of a hip type roof where located under the eave spaced in accordance with 8.6.3.2.3

or spaced on the slope plane not less than 5 ft (1.52 m) from the intersection of the upper and lower

truss chords or the wood rafters and ceiling joists.

Annex: See Figure

Substantiation:

Sprinkler protection at the eave continues to be problematic. There are currently two schools of

thought: space to the eave (as if it were a wall and baffle between sprinklers) or position under the eave

and protect opposing panes (in apparent violation of 8.6.4.2.1).

Option 1

Page 95: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Option 2

From a fire protection standpoint, locating sprinklers on the eave protecting two planes, while aligning

the sprinkler deflector with the pitch of the eave is the better option. The real question then, is just how

far off the eave should we position our first sprinkler.

In this case 8.6.3.2.3 can provide us with a lot of flexibility [See Option 3] and give the designer

additional flexibility while providing better fire protection, which seems to meet the submitter’s intent.

Option 3

Page 96: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting
Page 97: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 273-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 8.6.4.1.4.6 ]

8.6.4.1.4.6

The special requirements of 8.6.2.2.1 and 8.6.4.1.4shall not apply when the exposed combustible sheathing in the roof or ceiling space are noncombustible, limited-combustibled, or constructed of pressure impregnated fire retardant–treated wood as defined by NFPA 703.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The requirements of this section apply when the sheathing is combustible and supported by wood joists or wood truss construction. This is a clarification to indicate that the exception also applies when the sheathing is noncombustible or limited combustible. The IBC also allows spray foam insulation (provided it meets fire test requirements) to be applied and covered with intumescent paint. This covers the combustible sheathing.

Related Item

First Revision No. 104-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 8.6.4.1.4.5]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Thomas Wellen

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Associ

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu May 15 16:04:30 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected

Resolution: Section 1.5 already allows these products to be used where acceptable to the AHJ.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

91 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 98: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 274-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 8.6.4.1.4.6 ]

8.6.4.1.4.6 1 (renumber remaining sections)

The special requirements of 8.6.2.2.1 and 8.6.4.1.4shall not apply when the exposed combustible sheathing in the roof or ceiling space are constructed of pressureimpregnated fire retardant–treated wood as defined by NFPA 703.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Editorial - Exceptions should be located right after the base requirement. If left as is, the user doesn’t see there is an exception to these requirements until the very end. This should be right up front before other criteria is specified.

Related Item

First Revision No. 104-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 8.6.4.1.4.5]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Thomas Wellen

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Associ

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu May 15 16:13:58 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: the proposed revision cannot be made since it is simply renumbering sections assuming that PC 273 would be accepted. PC 273 was rejected, therefore thisneeds to be rejected.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

92 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 99: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 16-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 8.6.4.2.1 ]

8.6.4.2.1

Unless the requirements of 8.6.4.2.2 or 8.6.4.2.3 are met, deflectors of sprinklers shall be aligned parallel to ceilings, roofs, eaves, or the incline of stairs.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This change clarifies that spray sprinklers are permissible under the eave, not just the slope plane.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 15-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 8.6.4.1.4.5]

Related Item

First Revision No. 102-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 8.6.4.1.4.4]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Mark Fessenden

Organization: Tyco Fire Protection Products

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Tue Mar 11 18:02:08 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-37-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: This change clarifies that spray sprinklers are permissible under the hip, not just the slope plane.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

93 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 100: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 243-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 8.6.5.2.1.3 ]

8.6.5.2.1.3 * Minimum Distance from Obstructions.

(A)

Unless the requirements of 8.6.5.2.1.4 through 8.6.5.2.1.9 are met, sprinklers shall be positioned away from obstructions a minimum distance of three times themaximum dimension of the obstruction (e.g., structural members, pipe, columns, and fixtures)

.

(B)

The maximum clear distance required shall be 24 in. (609 mm) in

, in accordance with Figure 8.6.5.2.1.3 .

(

B).

Figure 8.6.5.2.1.3(B) Minimum Distance from Obstruction (SSU/SSP).

A) The maximum clear distance required from obstructions in the horizontal orientation (e.g. light fixtures and truss chords), shall be 24 in. (609 mm).

(B) The maximum clear distance shall not be applied to obstructions in the vertical orientation (e.g. columns).

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

8.6.5.2.1.3.pdf New Figure 8.6.5.2.1.3

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Recent fire testing has shown that there is an issue with the maximum clear distance of 24 inch allowed by the "three times rule". This testing has shown that when this maximum clear distance allowance is used to located sprinklers from large obstructions, the fire may not be controlled. As this testing was limited to vertical columns and based upon the concerns of the committee, this public comment is limited to obstructions in the vertical orientation. (test report was submitted at First Draft meeting)

This proposed change does not change the base three times rule or four times rule but will remove the maximum clear distance to obstructions in the vertical orientation such as columns. This proposed change would only become applicable when applying this rule to large vertical obstructions in excess of 8 inches (or 9 inches for the four times rule). The three times or four times rule may be applied to these large columns without the utilizing the maximum clear distance allowance. For example, for a ten inch column, the sprinkler would need to be located a minimum distance of 30 inches from the column when applying the three times rule or 40 inches for the four times rule. Note that a new figure was added to replace existing figure.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 254-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 8.7.5.2.1.3]

Public Comment No. 255-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 8.8.5.2.1.3]

Public Comment No. 256-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 8.9.5.2.1.3]

Public Comment No. 257-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 8.10.6.2.1.3]

Public Comment No. 293-NFPA 13-2014 [Sections 8.10.7.2.1.3, 8.10.7.2.1.4]

Related Item

Public Input No. 331-NFPA 13-2013 [Sections 8.6.5.2.1.3(A), 8.6.5.2.1.3(B)]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Asp

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA E&S Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon May 12 11:00:20 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-38-NFPA 13-2014

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

94 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 101: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Statement: Recent fire testing has shown that there is an issue with the maximum clear distance of 24 inch allowed by the "three times rule". This testing has shown that when thismaximum clear distance allowance is used to located sprinklers from large obstructions, the fire may not be controlled. As this testing was limited to vertical columnsand based upon the concerns of the committee, this public comment is limited to obstructions in the vertical orientation. (test report was submitted at First Draft meeting)

This proposed change does not change the base three times rule or four times rule but will remove the maximum clear distance to obstructions in the vertical orientationsuch as columns. This proposed change would only become applicable when applying this rule to large vertical obstructions in excess of 8 inches (or 9 inches for thefour times rule). The three times or four times rule may be applied to these large columns without the utilizing the maximum clear distance allowance. For example, for aten inch column, the sprinkler would need to be located a minimum distance of 30 inches from the column when applying the three times rule or 40 inches for the fourtimes rule. Note that a new figure was added to replace existing figure.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

95 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 102: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

D

C

A

Plan View of Column

(Obstruction in Vertical Orientation)

A 3C or 3D

(Use dimension C or D, whichever is greater)

Ceiling

C

D

A

Open web steel

or wood truss

Elevation View of Truss

(Obstruction in Horizontal Orientation)

A 3C or 3D

A 24 in, (610 mm)

(Use dimension C or D, whichever is greater)

FIGURE 8.6.5.2.1.3 Minimum Distance from Obstruction (SSU/SSP)

Page 103: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 141-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 8.6.5.3.7 ]

8.6.5.3.7

Sprinklers installed under round ducts shall be of the intermediate level/rack storage type or otherwise shielded from the discharge of overhead sprinklers.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_8-6-5-3-7.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The substantiation offered with this proposal was that surface tension will cause the water to cling to the outside surface of the duct, but this is not correct. Water discharging on the top of a round duct will only flow to the equator and will fall down from there. That is the reason that in NFPA 15 Section 7.4.2.4 says that spherical or horizontal cylindrical surfaces below the vessel equator shall not be considered wettable from rundown.If surface tension could hold the water until it rolled to the bottom of round ducts there would be no need to position sprinklers below.

Related Item

First Revision No. 108-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 8.6.5.3.5]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Apr 25 14:15:09 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected

Resolution: Sprinklers below round ducts are subject to cold soldering based on water collecting and dripping from the bottom of the duct.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

96 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 104: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 254-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 8.7.5.2.1.3 ]

8.7.5.2.1.3 *

Unless the requirements of 8.7.5.2.1.4 or 8.7.5.2.1.5 are met, sprinklers shall be positioned away from obstructions a minimum distance of three times the maximumdimension of the obstruction (e.g., truss webs and chords, pipe, columns, and fixtures). The maximum clear distance required shall be 24 in. (610 mm) and shall bepositioned in , in accordance with Figure 8.7.5.2.1.3 where obstructions are present .

Figure 8.7.5.2.1.3 Minimum Distance from Obstruction (Standard Sidewall Spray Sprinkler).

(A) The maximum clear distance required to obstructions in the horizontal orientation (e.g., light fixtures and truss chords) shall be 24 in. (610 mm).

(B) The maximum clear distance shall not be applied to obstructions in the vertical orientation (e.g. columns).

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

8.7.5.2.1.3.pdf New Figure 8.7.5.2.1.3

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Recent fire testing has shown that there is an issue with the maximum clear distance of 24 inch allowed by the "three times rule". This testing has shown that when this maximum clear distance allowance is used to located sprinklers from large obstructions, the fire may not be controlled. As this testing was limited to vertical columns and based upon the concerns of the committee, this public comment is limited to obstructions in the vertical orientation. (test report was submitted at First Draft meeting)

This proposed change does not change the base three times rule or four times rule but will remove the maximum clear distance to obstructions in the vertical orientation such as columns. This proposed change would only become applicable when applying this rule to large vertical obstructions in excess of 8 inches (or 9 inches for the four times rule). The three times or four times rule may be applied to these large columns without the utilizing the maximum clear distance allowance. For example, for a ten inch column, the sprinkler would need to be located a minimum distance of 30 inches from the column when applying the three times rule or 40 inches for the four times rule. Note that a new figure was added to replace existing figure.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 243-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 8.6.5.2.1.3] same concept

Public Comment No. 255-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 8.8.5.2.1.3]

Public Comment No. 256-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 8.9.5.2.1.3]

Public Comment No. 257-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 8.10.6.2.1.3]

Public Comment No. 293-NFPA 13-2014 [Sections 8.10.7.2.1.3, 8.10.7.2.1.4]

Related Item

Public Input No. 335-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 8.7.5.2.1.3]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Asp

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA E&S Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Tue May 13 12:04:05 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-39-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: Recent fire testing has shown that there is an issue with the maximum clear distance of 24 inch allowed by the "three times rule". This testing has shown that when thismaximum clear distance allowance is used to located sprinklers from large obstructions, the fire may not be controlled. As this testing was limited to vertical columnsand based upon the concerns of the committee, this public comment is limited to obstructions in the vertical orientation. (test report was submitted at First Draft meeting)

This proposed change does not change the base three times rule or four times rule but will remove the maximum clear distance to obstructions in the vertical orientation

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

97 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 105: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

such as columns. This proposed change would only become applicable when applying this rule to large vertical obstructions in excess of 8 inches (or 9 inches for thefour times rule). The three times or four times rule may be applied to these large columns without the utilizing the maximum clear distance allowance. For example, for aten inch column, the sprinkler would need to be located a minimum distance of 30 inches from the column when applying the three times rule or 40 inches for the fourtimes rule. Note that a new figure was added to replace existing figure.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

98 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 106: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

D

C

A

Plan View of Column

(Obstruction in Vertical Orientation)

A 3C or 3D

(Use dimension C or D, whichever is greater)

C

Elevation View of Pipe Conduit or Light Fixture

(Obstruction in Horizontal Orientation)

A 3C or 3D

A 24 in, (610 mm)

(Use dimension C or D, whichever is greater)

FIGURE 8.7.5.2.1.3 Minimum Distance from Obstruction (Standard Sidewall Spray Sprinkler)

Wall

Ceiling

D

A

Wall

Page 107: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 255-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 8.8.5.2.1.3 ]

8.8.5.2.1.3 *

Unless the requirements of 8.8.5.2.1.4 through 8.8.5.2.1.8 are met, sprinklers shall be positioned away from obstructions a minimum distance of four times the maximumdimension of the obstruction (e.g., truss webs and chords, pipe, columns, and fixtures). The maximum clear distance required shall be 36 in. (914 mm) in , in accordancewith Figure 8.8.5.2.1.3.

Figure 8.8.5.2.1.3 Minimum Distance from Obstruction (Extended Coverage Upright and Pendent Spray Sprinklers).

(A) The maximum clear distance required to obsructions in the horizontal orientation (e.g., light fixtures and truss chords) shall be 36 in. (914 mm).

(B) The maximum clear distance shall not be applied to obstructions in the vertical orientation (e.g. columns).

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

8.8.5.2.1.3.pdf New Figure 8.8.5.2.1.3

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Recent fire testing has shown that there is an issue with the maximum clear distance of 24 inch allowed by the "three times rule". This testing has shown that when this maximum clear distance allowance is used to located sprinklers from large obstructions, the fire may not be controlled. As this testing was limited to vertical columns and based upon the concerns of the committee, this public comment is limited to obstructions in the vertical orientation. (test report was submitted at First Draft meeting)

This proposed change does not change the base three times rule or four times rule but will remove the maximum clear distance to obstructions in the vertical orientation such as columns. This proposed change would only become applicable when applying this rule to large vertical obstructions in excess of 8 inches (or 9 inches for the four times rule). The three times or four times rule may be applied to these large columns without the utilizing the maximum clear distance allowance. For example, for a ten inch column, the sprinkler would need to be located a minimum distance of 30 inches from the column when applying the three times rule or 40 inches for the four times rule. Note that a new figure was added to replace existing figure.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 254-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 8.7.5.2.1.3] same concept

Public Comment No. 243-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 8.6.5.2.1.3] same concept

Public Comment No. 256-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 8.9.5.2.1.3]

Public Comment No. 257-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 8.10.6.2.1.3]

Public Comment No. 293-NFPA 13-2014 [Sections 8.10.7.2.1.3, 8.10.7.2.1.4]

Related Item

Public Input No. 337-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 8.8.5.2.1.3]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Asp

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA E&S Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Tue May 13 13:32:57 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-40-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: Recent fire testing has shown that there is an issue with the maximum clear distance of 24 inch allowed by the "three times rule". This testing has shown that when thismaximum clear distance allowance is used to located sprinklers from large obstructions, the fire may not be controlled. As this testing was limited to vertical columnsand based upon the concerns of the committee, this public comment is limited to obstructions in the vertical orientation. (test report was submitted at First Draft meeting)

This proposed change does not change the base three times rule or four times rule but will remove the maximum clear distance to obstructions in the vertical orientationsuch as columns. This proposed change would only become applicable when applying this rule to large vertical obstructions in excess of 8 inches (or 9 inches for thefour times rule). The three times or four times rule may be applied to these large columns without the utilizing the maximum clear distance allowance. For example, for a

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

99 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 108: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

ten inch column, the sprinkler would need to be located a minimum distance of 30 inches from the column when applying the three times rule or 40 inches for the fourtimes rule. Note that a new figure was added to replace existing figure.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

100 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 109: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

D

C

A

Plan View of Column

(Obstruction in Vertical Orientation)

A 4C or 4D

(Use dimension C or D, whichever is greater)

Ceiling

C

D

A

Open web steel

or wood truss

Elevation View of Truss

(Obstruction in Horizontal Orientation)

A 4C or 4D

A 36 in, (914 mm)

(Use dimension C or D, whichever is greater)

FIGURE 8.8.5.2.1.3 Minimum Distance from Obstruction (Extended

Coverage Upright and Pendent Spray Sprinkler)

Page 110: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 142-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 8.8.5.3.6 ]

8.8.5.3.6

Sprinklers installed under round ducts shall be of the intermediate level/rack storage type or otherwise shielded from the discharge of overhead sprinklers.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_8-8-5-3-6.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The substantiation offered with this proposal was that surface tension will cause the water to cling to the outside surface of the duct, but this is not correct. Water discharging on the top of a round duct will only flow to the equator and will fall down from there. That is the reason that in NFPA 15 Section 7.4.2.4 says that spherical or horizontal cylindrical surfaces below the vessel equator shall not be considered wettable from rundown.If surface tension could hold the water until it rolled to the bottom of round ducts there would be no need to position sprinklers below.

Related Item

First Revision No. 117-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 8.8.5.3.4]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Apr 25 14:16:30 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected

Resolution: Sprinklers below round ducts are subject to cold soldering based on water collecting and dripping from the bottom of the duct.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

101 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 111: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 143-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 8.9.5.2.1.3 ]

Reconsider the proposal and return the text of 8.9.5.2.1.3 and 8.9.5.2.1.4 to that of the 2013 edition of NFPA 13. Also restore Figure 8.9.5.2.1.4.

8.9.5.2.1.3 *

Unless the requirements of 8.9.5.2.1.4 through 8.9.5.2.1.5 are met, sprinklers shall be positioned away from obstructions a minimum distance of four times the maximumdimension of the obstruction (e.g., truss webs and chords, pipe, columns, and fixtures)in accordance with Figure 8.9.5.2.1.3.

Figure 8.9.5.2.1.3 Minimum Distance from Obstruction (Extended Coverage Sidewall).

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_8-9-5-2-1-3.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The recent testing may have raised some issues concerning shadowed areas behind large building columns, but the "Four Times Rule" has more applications than that - as with the light fixture illustrated on the right side of Figure 8.9.5.2.1.3, where the 36 inch limit is still be a viable proposition. As currently proposed, a 2 ft wide fixture would need to be 8 ft from a sprinkler. There is no field evidence of any problems with obstructions that would support this drastic alteration. More consideration of this issue is needed, before any final decisions can be reached.

Related Item

First Revision No. 122-NFPA 13-2013 [Sections 8.9.5.2.1.3, 8.9.5.2.1.4]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Apr 25 14:17:55 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected

Resolution: Fire test results submitted by NFSA have shown the vertical pipe columns can be detrimentally impacted when sprinklers are not spaced more than 36 inches.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

102 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 112: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 256-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 8.9.5.2.1.3 ]

8.9.5.2.1.3 *

Unless the requirements of 8.9.5.2.1.4 through 8.9.5.2.1.5 are met, sprinklers shall be positioned away from obstructions a minimum distance of four times the maximumdimension of the obstruction (e.g., truss webs and chords, pipe, columns, and fixtures) in accordance with Figure 8.9.5.2.1.3.

Figure 8.9.5.2.1.3 Minimum Distance from Obstruction (Extended Coverage Sidewall).

(A) The maximum clear distance required to obstructions in the horizontal orientation (e.g., light fixtures and truss chords), shall be 36 in. (914 mm).

(B) The maximum clear distance shall not be applied to obstructions in the vertical orientation (e.g., columns).

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

8.9.5.2.1.4.pdf New Figure 8.9.5.2.1.4

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Recent fire testing has shown that there is an issue with the maximum clear distance of 24 inch allowed by the "three times rule". This testing has shown that when this maximum clear distance allowance is used to located sprinklers from large obstructions, the fire may not be controlled. As this testing was limited to vertical columns and based upon the concerns of the committee, this public comment is limited to obstructions in the vertical orientation. (test report was submitted at First Draft meeting)

This proposed change does not change the base three times rule or four times rule but will remove the maximum clear distance to obstructions in the vertical orientation such as columns. This proposed change would only become applicable when applying this rule to large vertical obstructions in excess of 8 inches (or 9 inches for the four times rule). The three times or four times rule may be applied to these large columns without the utilizing the maximum clear distance allowance. For example, for a ten inch column, the sprinkler would need to be located a minimum distance of 30 inches from the column when applying the three times rule or 40 inches for the four times rule. Note that a new figure was added to replace existing figure.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 255-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 8.8.5.2.1.3] same concept

Public Comment No. 254-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 8.7.5.2.1.3] same concept

Public Comment No. 243-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 8.6.5.2.1.3] same concept

Public Comment No. 257-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 8.10.6.2.1.3]

Public Comment No. 293-NFPA 13-2014 [Sections 8.10.7.2.1.3, 8.10.7.2.1.4]

Related Item

Public Input No. 339-NFPA 13-2013 [Sections 8.9.5.2.1.3, 8.9.5.2.1.4]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Asp

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA E&S Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Tue May 13 13:39:31 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-41-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: Recent fire testing has shown that there is an issue with the maximum clear distance of 24 inch allowed by the "three times rule". This testing has shown that when thismaximum clear distance allowance is used to located sprinklers from large obstructions, the fire may not be controlled. As this testing was limited to vertical columnsand based upon the concerns of the committee, this public comment is limited to obstructions in the vertical orientation. (test report was submitted at First Draft meeting)

This proposed change does not change the base three times rule or four times rule but will remove the maximum clear distance to obstructions in the vertical orientationsuch as columns. This proposed change would only become applicable when applying this rule to large vertical obstructions in excess of 8 inches (or 9 inches for thefour times rule). The three times or four times rule may be applied to these large columns without the utilizing the maximum clear distance allowance. For example, for aten inch column, the sprinkler would need to be located a minimum distance of 30 inches from the column when applying the three times rule or 40 inches for the four

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

103 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 113: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

times rule. Note that a new figure was added to replace existing figure.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

104 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 114: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

D

C

A

Plan View of Column

(Obstruction in Vertical Orientation)

A 4C or 4D

(Use dimension C or D, whichever is greater)

C

A 4C or 4D

A 36 in, (914 mm)

(Use dimension C or D, whichever is greater)

FIGURE 8.9.5.2.1.4 Minimum Distance from Obstruction (Extended Coverage Sidewall)

Wall

Ceiling

D

A

Wall

Elevation View of Pipe Conduit or Light Fixture

(Obstruction in Horizontal Orientation)

Page 115: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 257-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 8.10.6.2.1.3 ]

8.10.6.2.1.3 *

Unless the requirements of 8.10.6.2.1.4 through 8.10.6.2.1.8 are met, sprinklers shall be positioned away from obstructions a minimum distance of four times the maximumdimension of the obstruction (e.g., truss webs and chords, pipe, columns, and fixtures). The maximum clear distance required shall be 36 in. (914 mm) in accordance with , in accordance with Figure 8.10.6.2.1.3.

Figure 8.10.6.2.1.3 Minimum Distance from Obstruction (Residential Upright and Pendent Spray Sprinklers).

(A) The maximum clear distance required to obstructions in the horizontal orientation (e.g., light fixture and truss chords), shall be 36 in. (914 mm).

(B) The maximum clear distance shall not be applied to obstructions in the vertical orientation (e.g., Columns).

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

8.10.6.2.1.3.pdf New Figure 8.10.6.2.1.3

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Recent fire testing has shown that there is an issue with the maximum clear distance of 24 inch allowed by the "three times rule". This testing has shown that when this maximum clear distance allowance is used to located sprinklers from large obstructions, the fire may not be controlled. As this testing was limited to vertical columns and based upon the concerns of the committee, this public comment is limited to obstructions in the vertical orientation. (test report was submitted at First Draft meeting)

This proposed change does not change the base three times rule (or four times rule) but will remove the maximum clear distance to obstructions in the vertical orientation such as columns. This proposed change would only become applicable when applying this rule to large vertical obstructions in excess of 8 inches (or 9 inches for the four times rule). The three times or four times rule may be applied to these large columns without the utilizing the maximum clear distance allowance. For example, for a ten inch column, the sprinkler would need to be located a minimum distance of 30 inches from the column when applying the three times rule or 40 inches for the four times rule. Note that a new figure was added to replace existing figure.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 256-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 8.9.5.2.1.3]

Public Comment No. 255-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 8.8.5.2.1.3]

Public Comment No. 254-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 8.7.5.2.1.3]

Public Comment No. 243-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 8.6.5.2.1.3]

Public Comment No. 293-NFPA 13-2014 [Sections 8.10.7.2.1.3, 8.10.7.2.1.4]

Related Item

Public Input No. 340-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 8.10.6.2.1.3]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Asp

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA E&S Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Tue May 13 13:51:33 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-42-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: Recent fire testing has shown that there is an issue with the maximum clear distance of 24 inch allowed by the "three times rule". This testing has shown that when thismaximum clear distance allowance is used to located sprinklers from large obstructions, the fire may not be controlled. As this testing was limited to vertical columnsand based upon the concerns of the committee, this public comment is limited to obstructions in the vertical orientation. (test report was submitted at First Draft meeting)

This proposed change does not change the base three times rule (or four times rule) but will remove the maximum clear distance to obstructions in the verticalorientation such as columns. This proposed change would only become applicable when applying this rule to large vertical obstructions in excess of 8 inches (or 9inches for the four times rule). The three times or four times rule may be applied to these large columns without the utilizing the maximum clear distance allowance. For

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

105 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 116: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

example, for a ten inch column, the sprinkler would need to be located a minimum distance of 30 inches from the column when applying the three times rule or 40inches for the four times rule. Note that a new figure was added to replace existing figure.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

106 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 117: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 293-NFPA 13-2014 [ Sections 8.10.7.2.1.3, 8.10.7.2.1.4 ]

Sections 8.10.7.2.1.3, 8.10.7.2.1.4

8.10.7.2.1.3 *

Unless the requirements of 8.10.7.2.1.4 through 8.10.7.2.1.7 are met, sprinklers shall be positioned away from obstructions a minimum distance of four times the maximumdimension of the obstruction(e .g., truss webs and chords, pipe, columns, and fixtures). .

(A)

The

The maximum clear distance required from obstructions in the horizontal orientation,(e.g. light fixtures and truss chords), shall be 36 in. (

914

609 mm)

from the sprinkler

.

(B) The maximum clear distance shall not be applied to obstructions in the vertical orientation (e.g.

, truss webs and chords, pipe,

columns

, and fixtures

).

8.10.7.2.1.4

Sidewall sprinklers shall be positioned in accordance with Figure 8.10.7.2.1.4 when obstructions are present.

Figure 8.10.7.2.1.4 Minimum Distance from Obstruction (Residential Sidewall Sprinklers).

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

8.10.7.2.1.4.pdf New figure 8.10.7.2.1.4

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Recent fire testing has shown that there is an issue with the maximum clear distance of 24 inch allowed by the "three times rule". This testing has shown that when this maximum clear distance allowance is used to located sprinklers from large obstructions, the fire may not be controlled. As this testing was limited to vertical columns and based upon the concerns of the committee, this public comment is limited to obstructions in the vertical orientation. (test report was submitted at First Draft meeting)

This proposed change does not change the base three times rule or four times rule but will remove the maximum clear distance to obstructions in the vertical orientation such as columns. This proposed change would only become applicable when applying this rule to large vertical obstructions in excess of 8 inches (or 9 inches for the four times rule). The three times or four times rule may be applied to these large columns without the utilizing the maximum clear distance allowance. For example, for a ten inch column, the sprinkler would need to be located a minimum distance of 30 inches from the column when applying the three times rule or 40 inches for the four times rule. Note that a new figure was added to replace existing figure.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 257-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 8.10.6.2.1.3] same concept

Public Comment No. 256-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 8.9.5.2.1.3] same concept

Public Comment No. 255-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 8.8.5.2.1.3] same concept

Public Comment No. 254-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 8.7.5.2.1.3] same concept

Public Comment No. 243-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 8.6.5.2.1.3] same concept

Related Item

Public Input No. 341-NFPA 13-2013 [Sections 8.10.7.2.1.3, 8.10.7.2.1.4]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Asp

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 09:46:53 EDT 2014

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

107 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 118: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-43-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: Recent fire testing has shown that there is an issue with the maximum clear distance of 24 inch allowed by the "three times rule". This testing has shown that when thismaximum clear distance allowance is used to located sprinklers from large obstructions, the fire may not be controlled. As this testing was limited to vertical columnsand based upon the concerns of the committee, this public comment is limited to obstructions in the vertical orientation. (test report was submitted at First Draft meeting)

This proposed change does not change the base three times rule or four times rule but will remove the maximum clear distance to obstructions in the vertical orientationsuch as columns. This proposed change would only become applicable when applying this rule to large vertical obstructions in excess of 8 inches (or 9 inches for thefour times rule). The three times or four times rule may be applied to these large columns without the utilizing the maximum clear distance allowance. For example, for aten inch column, the sprinkler would need to be located a minimum distance of 30 inches from the column when applying the three times rule or 40 inches for the fourtimes rule. Note that a new figure was added to replace existing figure.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

108 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 119: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 144-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 8.10.7.3.6 ]

8.10.7.3.6

Sprinklers installed under round ducts shall be shielded from the discharge of overhead sprinklers.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_8-10-7-3-6.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The substantiation offered with this proposal was that surface tension will cause the water to cling to the outside surface of the duct, but this is not correct. Water discharging on the top of a round duct will only flow to the equator and will fall down from there. That is the reason that in NFPA 15 Section 7.4.2.4 says that spherical or horizontal cylindrical surfaces below the vessel equator shall not be considered wettable from rundown.If surface tension could hold the water until it rolled to the bottom of round ducts there would be no need to position sprinklers below.

Related Item

First Revision No. 128-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 8.10.7.3.4]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Apr 25 14:19:22 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected

Resolution: Sprinklers below round ducts are subject to cold soldering based on water collecting and dripping from the bottom of the duct.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

109 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 120: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 145-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 8.11.2.2.2 ]

8.11.2.2.2

In any case, the maximum area of coverage of any sprinkler shall not exceed 130 ft2 (12.9 1 m2).

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_8-11-2-2-2.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The Committee Statement appears to be in agreement with the submitter, but the change was not incorporated into the First Draft Report, so the error has not yet been corrected. The metric equivalent of 130 ft² (130 x 0.3048² = 12.08) should be shown as 12.1 m².

Related Item

First Revision No. 272-NFPA 13-2013 [Sections A.6.3.7, A.6.3.7.2, A.6.3.7.3]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Apr 25 14:20:34 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-56-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The conversions proposed for the 2016 edition will be based on a soft conversion scheme as opposed to the traditional hard conversion. The attached spreadsheetprovides the proposed conversion.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

110 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 121: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 132-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 8.15.5 ]

8.15.5.3

8.15.5 Elevator Hoistways

and

, Machine Rooms

.

, Machinery Spaces, Control Rooms, and Control Spaces

8.15.5.1

*

Sidewall spray sprinklers shall be installed at the bottom of each elevator hoistway not more than 2 ft (0.61 m) above the floor of the pit.

8.15.5.2

The sprinkler required at the bottom of the elevator hoistway by 8.15.5.1 shall not be required for enclosed, noncombustible elevator shafts that do not contain combustiblehydraulic fluids.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

111 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 122: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Automatic fire sprinklers shall not be required to be installed in elevator machine rooms, elevator machinery spaces, elevator control rooms, orelevator control spaces,

or hoistways

of traction elevators installed in accordance with the applicable provisions in NFPA 101 , or the applicable building code, where all of the followingconditions are met:

(1) The elevator machine room, machinery space, control room

, control

(1) or control space,

or hoistway

(1) of traction elevator is dedicated to elevator equipment only.

(2) The elevator machine room,

machine room,

(1) machinery space, control room

, control

(1) or control space,

or hoistway

(1) of traction

elevators are

(1) elevator is protected by smoke detectors, or other automatic fire detection, installed in accordance with NFPA 72 .

(2) The elevator machine room, machinery space, control room

, control

(1) or control space,

or hoistway

(1) of traction

elevators

(1) elevator is separated from the remainder of the building by walls and floor/ceiling or roof/ceiling assemblies having a fire resistance rating of not lessthan that specified by the applicable building code.

(2) No materials unrelated to elevator equipment are permitted to be stored in elevator machine

rooms

(1) room , machinery

spaces

(1) space , control

rooms, control spaces, or hoistways

(1) room or control space, of traction

elevators

(1) elevator .

(2) The elevator machinery is not of the hydraulic type.

8.15.5.

4

2 *

Automatic sprinklers in elevator machine

rooms or

room, machinery space, control room, control space, or at the tops of elevator hoistways , shall be of ordinary- or intermediate-temperature rating.

8.15.5.

5

3 *

Upright, pendent, or sidewall spray sprinklers shall be installed at the top of elevator hoistways.

8.15.5.

6

4

The sprinkler required at the top of the elevator hoistway by 8.15.5.

5

3 shall not be required where the hoistway for passenger elevators is noncombustible or limited-combustible and the car enclosure materials meet therequirements of ASME A17.1, Safety Code for Elevators and Escalators .

8.15.5.

7 Combustible Suspension in Elevators.

4.1

Upright, pendent, or sidewall spray sprinklers shall be installed at the top of traction freight elevator hoistways.

8.15.5.4.2

Upright, pendent, or sidewall spray sprinklers shall be installed at the top of hydraulic freight elevator hoistways.

8.15.5.5 Combustible Suspension Means and Combustible Elevator Equipmet in Elevator Hoistways

8.15.5.

7

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

112 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 123: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

5 .1

Sprinklers shall be installed at the top and bottom of elevator hoistways where the elevators utilize combustible suspension means such as noncircularelastomeric-coated or polyurethane-coated steel belts or where the hoisting machine, elevator motor, elevator controller, or other combustible elevator equipment isinstalled inside the elevator hoistway .

8.15.5.

7

5 .2

The

sprinklers in the elevator hoistway

sprinklers required at the top and bottom of the elevator hoistway by 8.15.5.5.1 shall not be required when the suspension means provide not less thanan FT-1 rating when tested to the vertical burn test requirements of UL 62, Flexible Cords and Cables , and UL 1581, Reference Standard for ElectricalWires, Cables, and Flexible Cords , and the top of the elevator hoistawy is protected by smoke detectors, or other automatic fire detection, installed inaccordance with NFPA 72 .

.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

I had originally submitted PI's 153-156 regarding sprinkler protection for elevators' associated spaces.The committee response was:

"Response Message: The technical committee agrees that this is an issue and the standard needs to further address this concept. At this time the technical committee has not agreed upon a revision to the standard, however this concept will be looked at by a task group prior to the Second Draft meeting. The task group needs to review other standards and identify potential conflicts. The submitter is encouraged to send any additional information during the comment stage."

I would like the task group to contact me, if possible, so I could better explain my proposal:

The additional information I would like the committee to consider is:

1) Current requirements in ASME A17.1-2013 and NFPA 72-2013 triggered by pit sprinklers2) Conduct or perform risk analysis and/or obtain empirical data on pit sprinklers activation due to hydraulic liquids fires in hydraulic elevator pits.

Since now NFPA 72-2013 includes specific requirements for fire alarm initiating devices in the pit triggered by the presence of pit sprinkler - this creates an enforcement problems:

Providing a pit FAID connected to the building’s FA system or a dedicated function FA system for elevator recall, especially where this FAID is required to be accessible from outside the hoistway, is a very costly requirement (both for the initial installation and for ongoing service and maintenace). Since NFPA 72-2013 is now repeating the ASME A17.1 requirement for a FAID (or waterflow switch) installation in elevator pits having sprinklers, this new NFPA 72 requirement is causing a major enforcement problem for AHJs for the following reason:

Anytime a FA system upgrade, or a FA system replacement is performed in existing buildings having existing elevators, the current NFPA 72-2013 code requirements apply to the upgraded/replaced FA system. In many cases I see as an AHJ, reviewing FA permit plans and system designs, the existing elevator is provided with an existing pit sprinkler, but without an associated pit FAID generating Phase I recall. Now, the FA designers who are basing their system design on NFPA 72-2013 are adding pit FAIDs with associated Phase I recall, to their design plans and sequence of operations, since this is the current applicable FA code. This creates a major problem since many of the existing elevators are not even capable of Phase I recall operation. In my jurisdiction, we are not enforcing this ASME A17.1 (and now NFPA 72-2013) requirement for existing elevators even if they are capable of Phase I recall, but it takes me a great deal of time, as an AHJ, to explain to FA designers why this specific code section is not enforced. Of course I am aware that this is an NFPA 72-2013 new requirement but it is based on the existing ASME A17.1 requirement for having pit FAIDs. If the wording “excluding the pit” will be added to item C per my proposal - this will eliminate the NFPA 72-2013 requirement which is based on ASME A17.1 and will prevent a great deal of confusion to both FA system designers and Fire AHJs.

Also, Per ASME A17.1-2013 -2.8.3.3.4 - The pit sprinkler generates the requirement for NEMA 250 protection for elevator equipment and wiring within 48" of the pit floor for new hydraulic elevators and for existing elevators, anytime the existing elevator is being upgraded or modernized or altered, and there is an existing pit sprinkler. This is a very costly requirement generated only by the presence of pit sprinkler required by NFPA 13.

My main concern is that the pit sprinkler required by NFPA 13 - generates significant unnecessary and very costly installation and maintenance requirements Both in ASME A17.1 -2013 and in NFPA 72-2013 - Where there is NO proven risk. If this requirement was based on a risk analysis or empirical data or known cases - I would be able to understand this requirement.

While I believe, that codes and means should be created and provided to increase life safety and to minimize potential risks and hazards, I also think that the codes should be reasonable and be based on research, empirical data, known cases, and probabilities of potential risks.

The ASME A17.1-2013 Code requirements generated by the pit sprinklers:

2.27.3.2.1 In jurisdictions not enforcing the NBCC, smoke detectors or other automatic fire detectors in environments not suitable for smoke detectors (fire alarm initiating devices) used to initiate Phase I Emergency Recall Operation shall be installed in conformance with the requirements of NFPA 72, and shall be located (a) at each elevator lobby served by the elevator(b) in the associated elevator machine room, machinery space containing a motor controller or driving machine, control space, or control room (c) in the elevator hoistway, when sprinklers are located in those hoistways,

AND

2.8.3.3.4 In jurisdictions not enforcing the NBCC, when sprinklers are installed not more than 600 mm (24 in.) above the pit floor, 2.8.3.3.4(a) and (b) apply to elevator electrical equipment and wiring in the hoistway located less than 1 200 mm (48 in.) above the pit floor,exceptearthquake protectivedevicesconform- ing to 8.4.10.1.2(d); and on the exterior of the car at the point where the car platform sill and the lowest landing hoistway door sill are in vertical alignment. (a) Elevator electrical equipment shall be weather- proof (Type 4 as specified in NEMA 250). (b) Elevator wiring, except traveling cables, shall be identified for use in wet locations in accordance with the requirements in NFPA 70.

The NFPA 72-2013 code requirements generated by the pit sprinkler are:

21.3.3 Unless otherwise required by the authority having jurisdiction,only the elevator lobby, elevator hoistway, and elevator machine room smoke detectors, or other automatic fire detection as permitted by 21.3.9, shall be used to recall elevators for fire fighters’ service.Exception: A waterflow switch shall be permitted to initiate elevatorrecall upon activation of a sprinkler installed at the bottom of the elevator hoistway (the elevator pit), provided the waterflow switch and pit sprinkler are installed on a separately valved sprinkler line dedicated solely for protecting the elevator pit, and the waterflow switch is provided without time-delay capability.

21.3.7* When sprinklers are installed in elevator pits, automatic

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

113 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 124: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

fire detection shall be installed to initiate elevator recall in accordance with 2.27.3.2.1(c) of ANSI/ASME A.17.1/CSA B44, Safety Code for Elevators and Escalators, and the following shall apply:(1) Where sprinklers are located above the lowest level of recall, the fire detection device shall be located at the top ofthe hoistway.(2) Where sprinklers are located in the bottom of the hoistway(the pit), fire detection device(s) shall be installed in the pit in accordance with Chapter 17.(3) Outputs to the elevator controller(s) shall comply with21.3.14.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 201-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. A.5.4.1]

Related Item

Public Input No. 153-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 8.15.5]

Public Input No. 154-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. A.8.15.5.1]

Public Input No. 155-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. A.8.15.5.4]

Public Input No. 156-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. A.8.15.5.5]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Sagiv Weiss-Ishai

Organization: San Francisco Fire Department

Affilliation: Fire Protection Engineer

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu Apr 24 00:24:10 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: The committee has reviewed the requirements and agrees that there is a potential basis for elimination. The current language provides multiple allowances foreliminating sprinklers in pits where the hazard is mitigated. Existing buildings with older elevator systems that were not installed to the modern elevator requirementsrequire a greater level of protection and should be protected with sprinklers in the pit (and should be protected where modifications or retrofits are made). Further, thereare concerns as elevators are the accessible egress route for the physically impaired and as such additional protection is warranted.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

114 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 125: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 191-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 8.15.8.2 ]

8.15.8.2* Closets and Pantries.

Sprinklers are not required in clothes closets, linen closets, and pantries within dwelling units in hotels and motels where the area of the space does not exceed 24 ft2 (2.2

m2), the least dimension does not exceed 3 ft (0.9 m), and the walls and ceilings are surfaced with noncombustible or limited-combustible materials.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

CC NOTE: The following CC Note No. 19 appeared in the First Draft Report as Global First Revision No. 145.

The TC should review the need for identifying a maximum least dimension since it does not change the size of the closet where sprinklers can be omitted. The fire doesn't know whether the closet 2x12 or 4x6. The requirement for a maximum 3' least dimension was removed from NFPA 13R at the First Draft Meeting.

Related Item

First Revision No. 145-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 8.15.1.6.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: CC on AUT-AAC

Organization: CC on Automatic Sprinkler Systems

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Tue Apr 29 13:59:24 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-47-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: This section was reviewed based on First Correlating Note #19. These modifications were made so that NFPA 13 and NFPA 13R would correlate when it comes tothe closet criteria.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

115 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 126: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 345-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after 8.15.11.2 ]

8.15.11.3

Hoods or shields installed to protect important electrical equipment from sprinkler discharge shall be noncombustible.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This used to be section 8.15.11.2 in the 2013 and previous editions. It was removed by FR 150, which does not show up in the First Draft Report, but this action was taken by the committee.

We believe that the section needs to be returned. The committee was in error in its substantiation. We do not want the public to have to put all of their electrical equipment into very expensive waterproof NEMA enclosures just because there is a sprinkler in the room. This will cause significant backlash with people wanting to remove the sprinklers to save money, which is contrary to the goal of NFPA 13.

This section is necessary to NFPA 13 because it establishes the concept that we don't add to the combustibility of the building with the sprinkler system. The rule needs to be in NFPA 13, not NFPA 70. There is already a rule in NFPA 70 regarding the protection of electrical equipment from direct water spray due to pipe or other devices carrying water that might break and allow water to spray in an electrical room. NFPA 70 does not state that the shield be noncombustible because many of these water pipes have nothing to do with fire protection and a combustible shield is permitted.

But NFPA 13 is concerned with fire protection. We don't want a fire growing underneath a combustible object that is preventing the water from getting to the fire.

It was wrong of the committee to tell people that they need to put all energized electrical equipment in waterproof NEMA enclosures. This statement will enflame a significant number of building owners, electricians, architects and engineers.

There is no reason for NFPA 13 to contain any other guidance on the shields. There are no minimum construction requirements. There are not minimum attachment requirements. We just want something to keep the water spray from the sprinkler from getting directly on the electrical equipment. It is a minor concession that has helped to keep the peace between the electrical industry and the sprinkler industry.

Related Item

First Revision No. 150-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 8.15.11.2]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Kenneth Isman

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 14:42:48 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: It is not within the scope of this document to address whether the enclosure carries a NEMA rating or whether the shield is combustible. The NEC or building codeshould create requirements for protection in their documents.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

116 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 127: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 120-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 8.15.11.2 ]

8.15.11.2

Sprinklers shall not be required in electrical equipment rooms where all of the following conditions are met:

(1) The room is dedicated to electrical equipment only.

(2) Only dry-type electrical equipment is used.

(3) Equipment is installed in a 2-hour fire-rated enclosure including protection for penetrations.

(4) No combustible storage No storage is permitted to be stored in the room.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Obviously non combustible storage will not burn. However, any storage should not be allowed as it may lead to storage of combustibles.

Related Item

Public Input No. 11-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 8.15.11.2]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Peter Schwab

Organization: Wayne Automatic Fire Sprinkler

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Apr 18 13:52:55 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected but held

Resolution: This concept is new material and was not addressed in the first draft via revision, CI or PI.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

117 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 128: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 146-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 8.15.11.2 ]

Reconsider and do not accept the proposal. Return the text of 8.15.11.2 to that of the 2013 edition of NFPA 13, as follows:

8.15.11.2 Hoods or shields installed to protect important electrical equipment from sprinkler discharge shall be noncombustible.

8.15.11.2

Sprinklers shall not be required in electrical equipment rooms where all of the following conditions are met:

(1) The room is dedicated to electrical equipment only.

(2) Only dry-type electrical equipment is used.

(3) Equipment is installed in a 2-hour fire-rated enclosure including protection for penetrations.

(4) No combustible storage is permitted to be stored in the room.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_8-15-11-2.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This requirement should not be deleted unless it can be replaced with some other provision. Otherwise the problems with putting sprinklers in electrical rooms will become worse than they are now. The Committee Statement said that the electrical equipment should be installed in NEMA rated enclosures, but if something like that isn't going to be put into the standard, then the current requirement to install hoods or shields should remain as is.

Related Item

First Revision No. 150-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 8.15.11.2]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Apr 25 14:22:11 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: This committee is not concerned with whether the enclosure carries a NEMA rating or whether the shield is combustible. The NEC or building code should createrequirements for protection in their documents.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

118 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 129: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 330-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 8.15.15 ]

8.15.15 Drop-Out Ceilings and Ceiling Materials .

8.15.15.1 *

Drop-out ceilings shall and ceiling materials shall be permitted to be installed beneath sprinklers where ceilings are where the ceiling panels or ceiling materilas are listedfor that service and are installed in accordance with their listings.

8.15.15.2

Drop-out ceilings shall and ceiling materials shall not be installed below quick-response or extended coverage sprinklers unless specifically listed for that application.

8.15.15.3

Drop-out ceilings shall and ceiling materials shall not be considered ceilings within the context of this standard.

8.15.15.4 *

Piping installed above drop-out ceilings shall and ceiling materials shall not be considered concealed piping.

8.15.15.5 *

Sprinklers shall not be installed beneath drop-out ceilings or ceiling materials .

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

A membrane product has been evaluated by UL using UL Subject 723S and is currently listed as being suitable for being installed beneath sprinklers. This particulare membrane product contains seams that will fail during a fire and as such, does not impact the ability of the water to reach the hazard being protected. The activation time for the sprinklers was minimally impacted during the UL test. The UL test acceptance criteria addresses the impact the product may have on the activation time of the sprinkler and the percent of material that needs to "drop out" so as not to significantly impact the ability of the water to reach the hazard being protected.

The NFPA Technical Committee on Finishing Processes (NFPA 33) has recommended the acceptance of the concept (involving membrane enclosures for indoor and outdoor spray applications) using the same criteria and based upon feedback from an NFPA 13 task group. At the time this Public Comment was submitted, the ballot results for the Second Draft Revision were not yet known. However, the vote during the Technical Committee meeting was unanimous.

Recognition in the Standard for such listed products offers a solution that addresses those instances in which a membrane needs to be installed between the sprinklers and the floor and potentially eliminating the use of other methods that have historically been used and that are more likely to adversely impact the performance of the sprinkler system.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 335-NFPA 13-2014 [New Section after A.8.15.14]

Related Item

Committee Input No. 155-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: William Koffel

Organization: Koffel Associates, Inc.

Affilliation: Representing TuffWrap

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 13:21:04 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-18-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: A membrane product has been evaluated by UL using UL Subject 723S and is currently listed as being suitable for being installed beneath sprinklers. This particularemembrane product contains seams that will fail during a fire and as such, does not impact the ability of the water to reach the hazard being protected. The activationtime for the sprinklers was minimally impacted during the UL test. The UL test acceptance criteria addresses the impact the product may have on the activation time ofthe sprinkler and the percent of material that needs to "drop out" so as not to significantly impact the ability of the water to reach the hazard being protected.

The NFPA Technical Committee on Finishing Processes (NFPA 33) has recommended the acceptance of the concept (involving membrane enclosures for indoor andoutdoor spray applications) using the same criteria and based upon feedback from an NFPA 13 task group.

Recognition in the Standard for such listed products offers a solution that addresses those instances in which a membrane needs to be installed between the sprinklersand the floor and potentially eliminating the use of other methods that have historically been used and that are more likely to adversely impact the performance of thesprinkler system.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

119 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 130: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 19-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after 8.15.23 ]

Sprinkler-Protected Glazing.

Where sprinklers are used in combination with glazing as an alternative to a required fire-rated wall or window assembly, the sprinkler-protected assemblyshall comply with the following:

(1) Sprinklers shall be listed as specific application window sprinklers.

(2) Sprinklers shall be supplied by a wet-pipe system.

(3) Glazing shall be heat-strengthened or tempered and shall be fixed.

(4) Where the assembly is required to be protected from both sides, sprinklers shall be installed on both sides of the glazing.

(5) The use of sprinkler-protected glazing shall be limited to non-load-bearing walls.

(6) The glazed wall assembly shall not have any horizontal members that would interfere with uniform distribution of water over the surface of the glazing, andthere shall be no obstructions between sprinklers and glazing that would obstruct water distribution.

Annex

It is not the intent of this section to apply to sprinkler protection of glass atrium enclosures, pedestrian walkways, which are permitted by NFPA 101, or modelbuilding codes to be protected by standard spray sprinklers installed in accordance with the special provisions set forth in those codes for atriumconstruction.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The proposed text and associated annex material was accepted by the residential committee for inclusion in NFPA 13R. The additional Annex material has been added to address the committees concerns.

Related Item

Public Input No. 585-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 8.15.23.3.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Mark Fessenden

Organization: Tyco Fire Protection Products

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Wed Mar 12 11:09:09 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-138-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: Sprinkler protected glazing has been permitted in atriums, exterior walls and other applications approved by code officials for more than 20 years. Recent actions inbuilding codes have attempted to diminish the permissible use of these assemblies, and by providing specific provisions in NFPA 13 or NFPA 13R (proposals have beensubmitted to both standards), questions regarding the lack of appropriate installation requirements would be resolved. The proposed provisions are consistent withlimitations currently in place in building codes and established by UL and ICC-ES.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

120 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 131: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 372-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after 8.15.23 ]

8.15.23 Cloud Ceilings

8.15.23.1* Cloud Ceilings. Except as provided in 8.15.23.2 or 8.15.23.3, sprinkler protection shall be required above and below cloud ceilings.

8.15.23.2* Sprinklers shall be permitted to be omitted from the above ceiling space when the ceiling openings meet the definition of small openings per 3.3.6.2.

8.15.23.3 Concealed spaces formed by cloud ceilings installed below noncombustible and limited combustible construction shall not require sprinkler protection.

8.15.23.4 A concealed space is formed above cloud ceilings when the ceiling panels are adjacent to another ceiling panel in the same plane or a wall and the ceiling panelsare located such that the opening is not more than one inch for each foot of elevation between the panel and the floor.

8.15.23.5 The space above cloud ceilings installed below noncombustible and limited combustible construction shall be considered concealed where the ceiling panels aremore than 20 feet above the floor.

A.8.15.23.3 An opening in the ceiling may be located along a wall or may occur between panels to give an architectural effect such as a floating ceiling. Fire modeling resultshave shown that there will be heat loss to the space above the ceiling when the openings are too large. The modeling results indicate that sprinklers should activate on thelower ceiling level when the opening dimension is no greater than one inch per foot of elevation above the floor. When an opening between ceiling panels, or a ceiling paneland a wall, are any larger, the space above the ceiling panels should not be considered a concealed space.

Figure A.8.15.23.3 - Examples of Cloud Ceiling Configurations

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Cloud Ceiling Task Group language.

Related Item

Committee Input No. 166-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Cecil Bilbo

Organization: Academy of Fire Sprinkler Tech

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Tue May 20 14:57:14 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-61-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: This second draft revision addresses the results of research performed by the Fire Protection Research Foundation and the Academy of Fire Sprinkler Technology. Itrefines the concept of cloud ceiling for NFPA 13 as a type of concealed space that does not require sprinklers within the concealed space. It more clearly defines smallopenings in concealed spaces. It defines the maximum sizes of small openings through maximum dimensions and overall percentages of open ceiling area. Thesequantities are based on the testing and research performed by the Fire Protection Research Foundation (FPRF) on cloud ceiling size.

The FPRF looked at sensitivity of sprinklers under various size cloud ceilings with various size gaps in between using fire dynamic simulator to model the tests. Theaccuracy of modeling methods used was validated by fire tests with thermocouples. After several phases of testing it was determined that sprinklers could activate in anacceptable period of time with an acceptable amount of heat increase above the clouds so long as the clouds were large enough, the spaces between them were smallenough, and the sprinklers were close enough together. These results can be seen in the proposed language

These tests were done using RTI values associated with QR sprinklers under smooth flat horizontal clouds with maximum height of 20 feet above the floor. As suchthese requirements are reflected in the requirements for installation of these systems. The requirements for irregular shapes are based on a worst case scenario as notesting was done on non rectilinear cloud spaces.

The suggested language to Chapter 11 is to compensation for the loss of response time from what would normally be expected from a QR sprinkler

Additionally, the revised language determines acceptable small openings in terms of real world equipment (such as return air diffusers) and common ceiling elevations(ie eight feet above the floor). Small openings are a factor in defining the space above a ceiling as concealed. Areas of openings were compared using a square roomhaving an eight foot high ceiling. The room had the permissible gap of one inch per foot of ceiling height between and surrounding four ceiling panels. In a 20’x20’ roomthe open area would be 19 percent and be acceptable as a small opening. The same gap in a 10’x10’ room would result in a 25% open area and would not beconsidered acceptable as a small opening.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

121 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 132: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 121-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 8.15.24.2 ]

8.15.24.2 Indoor Swimming Pools.

8.15.24.2.1

The area directly above indoor swimming pools shall not require sprinkler protection unless the requirements of 8.15.24.2.2 apply.

8.15.24.2.2

The area above indoor swimming pools equipped with moveable hard covers that allow the area to be used for athletic activities other than swimming and other watersports shall require sprinkler protection.

8.15.24.2.3

Sprinklers shall be installed in all areas adjacent to indoor swimming pools.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

There are too many possibilities for the pool to be covered and the area used for another activity. Also, there could be floors above the pool. It just makes sense to install the sprinklers.

Related Item

First Revision No. 132-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 8.15.23.3.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Peter Schwab

Organization: Wayne Automatic Fire Sprinkler

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Apr 18 13:55:53 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-48-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: This exemption should not be added to the standard. Not all indoor swimming pools are vacant of occupancies. Some installations include wooden bridges spanningthem, swim-up bars in the centre, couches and other combustibles immediately at the perimeters etc. Additionally, many indoor swimming pools enclosures are ofcombustible construction or have combustible finishes. Also, even if a pool is not originally fitted with a hard cover, one could easily be added afterwards. Therefore, if apool itself won't burn, the things that go in and around it most certainly can, and sprinklers should be required.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

122 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 133: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 147-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 8.15.24.2 ]

8.15.24.2 Indoor Swimming Pools.

8.15.24.2.1

The area directly above indoor swimming pools shall not require sprinkler protection unless the requirements of 8.15.24.2.2 apply.

8.15.24.2.2

The area above indoor swimming pools equipped with moveable hard covers that allow the area to be used for athletic activities other than swimming and other watersports shall require sprinkler protection.

Reconsider and do not accept the proposal. Delete the proposed Section 8.15.24.2

.3

Sprinklers shall be installed in all areas adjacent to indoor swimming pools.

in its entirety:

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_8-15-24-2.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This exemption should not be added to the standard. Not all indoor swimming pools are vacant of occupancies. I have seen wooden bridges spanning them, swim-up bars in the centre, couches and other combustibles immediately at the perimeters etc. Additionally, many indoor swimming pools enclosures are of combustible construction or have combustible finishes. Also, even if a pool is not originally fitted with a hard cover, one could easily be added afterwards. Therefore, if a pool itself won't burn, the things that go in and around it most certainly can, and sprinklers should be required.

Related Item

First Revision No. 132-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 8.15.23.3.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Apr 25 14:23:35 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-48-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: This exemption should not be added to the standard. Not all indoor swimming pools are vacant of occupancies. Some installations include wooden bridges spanningthem, swim-up bars in the centre, couches and other combustibles immediately at the perimeters etc. Additionally, many indoor swimming pools enclosures are ofcombustible construction or have combustible finishes. Also, even if a pool is not originally fitted with a hard cover, one could easily be added afterwards. Therefore, if apool itself won't burn, the things that go in and around it most certainly can, and sprinklers should be required.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

123 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 134: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 224-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 8.15.24.2 ]

8.15.24.2 Indoor Swimming Pools.

8.15.24.2.1

The area directly above indoor swimming pools shall not require sprinkler protection unless the requirements of 8.15.24.2.2 apply.

8.15.24.2.2

The area above indoor swimming pools equipped with moveable hard covers that allow the area to be used for athletic activities other than swimming and other watersports shall require sprinkler protection.

8.15.24.2.3

Sprinklers shall be installed in all areas adjacent to indoor swimming pools.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This public comment is to delete this entire section that allows the omission of sprinklers in indoor pools. It is not consistent with the goals of NFPA 13 to allow such a large indoor areas to be unprotected with sprinklers. Such areas can be quite large and while the pool and deck may be of noncombustible construction, indoor pool areas commonly contain combustibles such as lounge chairs and accessory structures such as bars and cabanas. Indoor pool areas are not always free of occupancy and even if the pool on its own won't burn, the combustible items on the perimeter of the pool can burn. Additionally, although this section does read that if the pool is equipped with a hard cover that would allow activities, then sprinklers would be required, such covers may be retrofitted to the pool at a later date and leave this area unprotected. The area above indoor swimming pools should be equipped with sprinkler protection and this general exception should not be in the standard.

Related Item

First Revision No. 132-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 8.15.23.3.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Asp

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA E&S Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu May 08 08:38:35 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-48-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: This exemption should not be added to the standard. Not all indoor swimming pools are vacant of occupancies. Some installations include wooden bridges spanningthem, swim-up bars in the centre, couches and other combustibles immediately at the perimeters etc. Additionally, many indoor swimming pools enclosures are ofcombustible construction or have combustible finishes. Also, even if a pool is not originally fitted with a hard cover, one could easily be added afterwards. Therefore, if apool itself won't burn, the things that go in and around it most certainly can, and sprinklers should be required.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

124 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 135: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 369-NFPA 13-2014 [ Sections 8.15.24.2.1, 8.15.24.2.2, 8.15.24.2.3 ]

Sections 8.15.24.2.1, 8.15.24.2.2, 8.15.24.2.3

8.15.24.2.1

The area directly above indoor swimming pools shall not require sprinkler protection unless the requirements of 8.15.24.2.2 apply.

8.15.24.2.2

The area above indoor swimming pools equipped with moveable hard covers that allow the area to be used for athletic activities other than swimming and other watersports shall require sprinkler protection.

8.15.24.2.3

Sprinklers shall be installed in all areas adjacent to indoor swimming pools.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The Committee did not hear any data regarding this omission. There have been fires over pool areas and these areas need to be protected.

Related Item

First Revision No. 132-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 8.15.23.3.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Cecil Bilbo

Organization: Academy of Fire Sprinkler Tech

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon May 19 13:10:55 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-48-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: This exemption should not be added to the standard. Not all indoor swimming pools are vacant of occupancies. Some installations include wooden bridges spanningthem, swim-up bars in the centre, couches and other combustibles immediately at the perimeters etc. Additionally, many indoor swimming pools enclosures are ofcombustible construction or have combustible finishes. Also, even if a pool is not originally fitted with a hard cover, one could easily be added afterwards. Therefore, if apool itself won't burn, the things that go in and around it most certainly can, and sprinklers should be required.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

125 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 136: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 148-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 8.16.1.1.3.4 ]

Please reconsider and revise Section 8.16.1.1.3.4 , to read as follows:

8.16.1.1.3.4

Check valves shall be installed in a vertical (flow upwards) or horizontal position in accordance with their listing.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_8-16-1-1-3-4.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

As noted in the Substantiation for PI 290, a common mistake in design and in installation is to install check valves in a vertical “flow downwards” orientation. See the image below as an example:

See the uploaded file for the Figure

Fire protection check valves are not listed for this “flow downwards” orientation, but many designers and installers do not seem to be aware of this and they do not routinely have or they do not check the listing criteria or manufacturer’s literature for this type of detail. This leads to installation errors in the field.Many such installation errors could be eliminated, simply by adding the two words “flow upwards” into the Section.

Related Item

Public Input No. 290-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 8.16.1.1.3.4]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Apr 25 14:26:23 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Accepted

Resolution: SR-49-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: As noted in the Substantiation for PI 290, a common mistake in design and in installation is to install check valves in a vertical “flow downwards” orientation. See theimage below as an example:

See the uploaded file for the Figure

Fire protection check valves are not listed for this “flow downwards” orientation, but many designers and installers do not seem to be aware of this and they do notroutinely have or they do not check the listing criteria or manufacturer’s literature for this type of detail. This leads to installation errors in the field.

Many such installation errors could be eliminated, simply by adding the two words “flow upwards” into the Section.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

126 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 137: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 150-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 8.16.1.5 ]

Reconsider the proposal and do not move the text concerning floor control valves to Section 8. 2. Leave it as 8. 16.1.5 , as it currently is in the 2013 edition ofNFPA 13.

8.16.1.5 * In-Rack Sprinkler System Control Valves.

8.16.1.5.1

Unless the requirements of 8.16.1.5.2 or 8.16.1.5.3 are met, where sprinklers are installed in racks, separate indicating control valves and drains shall be provided andarranged so that ceiling and in-rack sprinklers can be controlled independently.

8.16.1.5.2

Installation of 20 or fewer in-rack sprinklers supplied by any one ceiling sprinkler system shall not require a separate indicating control valve.

8.16.1.5.3

The separate indicating valves shall be permitted to be arranged as sectional control valves supplied from the ceiling sprinkler system where in-rack sprinklers are required

and the racks including the adjacent aisles occupy 8000 ft2 (750 m2) or less of the area protected by the ceiling sprinklers.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_8-16-1-5.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This information on Floor Control Assemblies should not be moved to Section 8.2 as proposed. The subject matter of 8.2 is Area Limitations, so it is not appropriate to move the information there. The text is better suited to remain as part of Section 8.16.1, where the subject matter is Control Valves.

Related Item

First Revision No. 153-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 8.16.1.5]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon Apr 28 08:35:40 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected

Resolution: The requirements are in the correct location based on the structure and use of the standard.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

127 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 138: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 151-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 8.16.4.1.4.2 ]

Reconsider the proposal and return the text of 8.16.4.1.4.2

Heat tracing systems shall be supervised by one of the following methods:

Central station, proprietary, or remote station signaling service

Local signaling service that will cause a signal at a constantly attended location

to that of the 2013 edition of NFPA 13, as follows:

8.16.4.1.4.2

Electric supervision of the heat-tracing system shall provide positive confirmation that the circuit is energized.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_8-16-4-1-4-2.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This proposal is not appropriate for NFPA 13, which is provides the minimum requirements, such that the waterflow alarm and the control valves do not require electrical supervision. The proposal for such severe electrical supervision for heat tracing is therefore beyond what can be reasonably asked for. The existing requirement to simply provide positive confirmation should stay in effect.

Related Item

First Revision No. 164-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 8.16.4.1.4.2]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon Apr 28 08:38:48 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Accepted

Resolution: SR-50-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: This proposal is not appropriate for NFPA 13, which is provides the minimum requirements, such that the waterflow alarm and the control valves do not requireelectrical supervision. The proposal for such severe electrical supervision for heat tracing is therefore beyond what can be reasonably asked for. The existingrequirement to simply provide positive confirmation should stay in effect.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

128 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 139: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 152-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 8.16.6 ]

8.16.6 * Air Venting.

The An vent shall be located near the highest a high point in the system to remove the majority of the air allow air to be removed from the system by one of the followingmethods:

(1) Manual valve, minimum 1 ⁄2 in. size

(2) Automatic air vent

(3) Other approved means

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_8-16-6.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This revision is suggested because a single air vent, even one located at the highest point of a system, cannot be expected to expel "the majority" of air from the system. All that should be asked for is that air be removed. The reference to A.8.16.4.2.2 was added to direct the users of the standard to the place in the Annex where the purpose of the air vent is explained.

Related Item

First Revision No. 294-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 8.16.5]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon Apr 28 08:40:47 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-44-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: This revision is suggested because a single air vent, even one located at the highest point of a system, cannot be expected to expel "the majority" of air from thesystem. All that should be asked for is that air be removed. The reference to A.8.16.4.2.2 was added to direct the users of the standard to the place in the Annexwhere the purpose of the air vent is explained.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

129 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 140: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 192-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 8.16.6 ]

8.16.6* Air Venting.

The vent shall be located near the highest point in the system to remove the majority of the air by one of the following methods:

(1) Manual valve, minimum 1 ⁄2 in. size

(2) Automatic air vent

(3) Other approved means

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

CC NOTE: The following CC Note No. 2 appeared in the First Draft Report as First Revision No. 294 and Global First Revision No. 280.

The CC encourages the SSI TC to review the new venting language. The new venting requirements require the vent to remove the “majority” of air. This language is unenforceable and may lead to a NITMAM eliminating what is otherwise a concept that was looked at favorably by the TC. Furthermore, the TC should review the concept of “ganged venting” to make sure that the proposed language adequately addresses this potential application.

Related Item

First Revision No. 294-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 8.16.5]

First Revision No. 280-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. A.8.16.4.2.2]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: CC on AUT-AAC

Organization: CC on Automatic Sprinkler Systems

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Tue Apr 29 14:08:02 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-44-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: This revision is suggested because a single air vent, even one located at the highest point of a system, cannot be expected to expel "the majority" of air from thesystem. All that should be asked for is that air be removed. The reference to A.8.16.4.2.2 was added to direct the users of the standard to the place in the Annexwhere the purpose of the air vent is explained.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

130 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 141: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 217-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 8.16.6 ]

8.16.6 * Air Venting.

The vent shall be located near the highest point in the system to remove the majority of the air by one of the following methods:

(1) Manual valve, minimum 1 ⁄ 2 in. size

(2) Automatic air vent

(3) Other approved means

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This public comment seeks to delete this section. Additional comment to delete section 7.1.5 which required air venting was also submitted with the substantiation that air venting may cause unintended consequences. Some air in the sprinkler system is a positive thing. It acts as a cushion to pressure surges. Air is compressible, water is not. The more air we take out of sprinkler systems, the more problems we are going to have with pressure changes blowing apart systems, pegging gages, and causing other damage. Air acts as a cushion to deal with transient pressure surges. As we remove more air out of the sprinkler systems, we will have bigger problems with pressure and water hammer.

Additionally the language of this section, specifically "located near the highest point" and "majority of air" is subjective and will cause will be difficult to enforce by AHJs and difficult to interpret by contractors.

Additional comments have been made to remove language for air venting from section 7.1.5 and 25.6.2. The Annex note A.16.4.2.2 (2013 edition) is to be preserved as it contains valuable information when air venting is deemed to be warranted.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 216-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 7.1.5]

Public Comment No. 218-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 25.6.2]

Related Item

First Revision No. 280-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. A.8.16.4.2.2]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Asp

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Associ

Affilliation: NFSA E&S Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Wed May 07 10:15:38 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected

Resolution: All systems are required to have listed relief valves on them per section 7.1.2.1 or ample air reservoir per 7.1.2.2.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

131 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 142: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 350-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 8.16.6 ]

8.16.6 * Air Venting.

The vent required by section 7.1.5 shall be located near the highest point in the system to remove the majority of the air by one of the following methods:

(1) Manual valve, minimum 1 ⁄2 in. size

(2) Automatic air vent

(3) Other approved means

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The NFSA is not in favor of venting all wet pipe systems and we are submitting proposals to remove those requirements. But in the event that they go forward, then need to be clarified.

Just saying “the vent” is not clear enough. This could easily be interpreted as a requirement for vents on all sprinkler systems. We think that the intent was to limit the vents in this section to those required by section 7.1.5. If so, this needs to be more clearly stated.

Related Item

First Revision No. 294-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 8.16.5]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Kenneth Isman

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 14:54:40 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-44-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: This revision is suggested because a single air vent, even one located at the highest point of a system, cannot be expected to expel "the majority" of air from thesystem. All that should be asked for is that air be removed. The reference to A.8.16.4.2.2 was added to direct the users of the standard to the place in the Annexwhere the purpose of the air vent is explained.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

132 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 143: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 153-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 8.17.2.6.1 ]

Revise the text to more closely match that of Section 5.9.4.2 of NFPA 24, as follows:

8.17.2.6.1

The automatic drain valve shall be installed in a location that permits inspection and testing as required by NFPA 25 and reduced the likelihood of freezing .

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_8-17-2-6-1.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Co-ordination with 5.9.4.2 of NFPA 24. In the Committee Statement for FR-157 it was stated that the same instruction for accessibility and freeze protection should be provided in NFPA 13, but the text about freeze protection was not included in the First Draft Report.

Related Item

First Revision No. 157-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 8.17.2.5.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon Apr 28 08:43:09 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: Many AHJ's require that fire department connections (FDC) are remote. NFPA suggests that the check valve for the FDC be located as close to the connection to thesystem as possible. This could leave long sections of underground piping with no pressure. This piping could get cut and one will not know about it until an NFPA 25inspection is performed or the fire department pumps into the connection. Many AHJ's want water brought as close to the FDC as possible to avoid this situation. Byrequiring access to the ball drip, this could require a vault or deep meter box costing hundreds of dollars. This new section gives the AHJ an allowance to require theautomatic drip close to the FDC and still have water on the underground piping for supervision. 5.9.5.4 Almost all the fire department connection plates indicating theconnection type (autosprinkler, standpipe or both) are bought directly from the fire department connection manufacturers. Engraving these with the required inletpressure is impractical. Also, since the sign referred to requires one inch high letters, it could be construed that the pressure information should also be the same size. Inthe fire sprinkler business, when a higher pressure requirement must be posted, we have custom made signs produced and placed on or at the FDC.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

133 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 144: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 154-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 8.18 ]

8.18 Electrical Bonding and Grounding.

8.18.

1 *

Fire sprinkler systems shall be permitted to be used for bonding in accordance with NFPA 70

1 In no case shall sprinkler system piping be used for the grounding of electrical systems .

8.18.2

Fire sprinkler systems shall not be used for grounding of electrical systems

* The requirement of 8.18.1 shall not preclude the bonding of the sprinkler system piping to the lightning protection grounding system as required by NFPA 780in those cases where lightning protection is provided for the structure .

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_8-18.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Editorial revision to co-ordinate the text with the similar provisions for grounding and bonding of NFPA 24.A sprinkler system is not "used for" bonding, it is "bonded to". Therefore, I would suggest that the wording of NFPA 24 should be followed more closely.

Related Item

First Revision No. 152-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 8.17]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon Apr 28 08:45:26 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Accepted

Resolution: SR-51-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: Editorial revision to co-ordinate the text with the similar provisions for grounding and bonding of NFPA 24.

A sprinkler system is not "used for" bonding, it is "bonded to". Therefore, the wording of NFPA 24 should be followed more closely.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

134 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 145: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 122-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 9.1.1.6.3 ]

9.1.1.6.3 *

Ferrous hanger rods shall be fabricated from steel that meets the requirements of ASTM A307, Standard Specification for Carbon Steel Bolts and Studs , 60 000 psi tensilestrength, Grade A or B, or the material, strength and fit requirements of other equivalent standards.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

There is no practical method to label or brand the ATR to prove that it was manufactured to meet the requirements of ASTM A307. There have not been documented failures of all thread rod. Delete this section.

Related Item

Public Input No. 45-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 9.1.1.6]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Peter Schwab

Organization: Wayne Automatic Fire Sprinkler

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Apr 18 14:08:46 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: A minimum requirement for hanger and rod material is needed in the standard. Illustrating which rod has been installed can be accomplished by having the contractordisplay written documentation of the material of the purchased (i.e. cut sheets). The AHJ could also ask for testing to confirm the rod meets the minimum requirement.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

135 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 146: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 244-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 9.1.1.6.3 ]

9.1.1.6.3 *

Ferrous hanger rods shall be fabricated from steel that meets the requirements of ASTM A307, Standard Specification for Carbon Steel Bolts and Studs , 60 000 psi tensilestrength, Grade A or B, or the material, strength and fit requirements of other equivalent standards.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Although it is recognized that hanger rods should be of good quality, this requirement is virtually unenforceable and therefore unreasonable to implement. There is no practical way to mark hanger rods in order to positively identify them as meeting this requirement.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 288-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. A.9.1.1.6.3]

Related Item

First Revision No. 38-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after A.9.1.1.5.3]

First Revision No. 5-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 9.1.1.6]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Robert Upson

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA Engineering and Standards Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon May 12 11:27:48 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: A minimum requirement for hanger and rod material is needed in the standard. Illustrating which rod has been installed can be accomplished by having the contractordisplay written documentation of the material of the purchased (i.e. cut sheets). The AHJ could also ask for testing to confirm the rod meets the minimum requirement.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

136 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 147: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 123-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 9.1.1.7.9 ]

9.1.1.7.9

Where angles are used for slotted holes are utilized with angle trapeze hangers, the slotted holes shall meet all of the following:

(1) The length of each slotted hole shall not exceed 3 in.

(2) The width of the slotted hole shall not exceed 1 ⁄16 in. greater than the bolt or rod diameter.

(3) The minimum distance between slotted holes shall be 3 in. edge to edge.

(4) The minimum distance from the end of the angle to the edge of the slotted hole shall be 3 in.

(5) The number of slots shall be limited to three per section of angle.

(6) The washer required by 9.1.1.7.8 shall have a minimum thickness of one-half the thickness of the angle.

(7) Multiple washers shall not be used.

(8) Washer and nuts required by 9.1.1.7.8 shall be provided on both the top and bottom of the angle.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

As currently written, this section mandates the use of slots when using angle iron for trapeze hangers.

Related Item

First Revision No. 39-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 9.1.1.7.8]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Peter Schwab

Organization: Wayne Automatic Fire Sprinkler

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Apr 18 14:17:09 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-2-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: As proposed in the first draft, this section mandates the use of slots when using angle iron for trapeze hangers It is not the intent to mandate slots, only to provide thisdesign guidance where slots are used.Using multiple washers is common practice and there is no indication that the use of multiple washers will cause a failure.Removing this language would have been overly conservative.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

137 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 148: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 124-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 9.1.1.7.9 ]

9.1.1.7.9

Where angles are used for trapeze hangers, slotted holes shall meet all of the following:

(1) The length of each slotted hole shall not exceed 3 in.

(2) The width of the slotted hole shall not exceed 1 ⁄16 in. greater than the bolt or rod diameter.

(3) The minimum distance between slotted holes shall be 3 in. edge to edge.

(4) The minimum distance from the end of the angle to the edge of the slotted hole shall be 3 in.

(5) The number of slots shall be limited to three per section of angle.

(6) The washer required by 9.1.1.7.8 shall have a minimum thickness of one-half the thickness of the angle.

(7) Multiple washers shall not be used.

(8) Washer and nuts required by 9.1.1.7.8 shall be provided on both the top and bottom of the angle.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Using multiple washers is common practice.

Related Item

First Revision No. 39-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 9.1.1.7.8]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Peter Schwab

Organization: Wayne Automatic Fire Sprinkler

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Apr 18 14:19:43 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-2-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: As proposed in the first draft, this section mandates the use of slots when using angle iron for trapeze hangers It is not the intent to mandate slots, only to provide thisdesign guidance where slots are used.Using multiple washers is common practice and there is no indication that the use of multiple washers will cause a failure.Removing this language would have been overly conservative.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

138 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 149: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 156-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 9.1.1.7.9 ]

9.1.1.7.9

Where angles are used for trapeze hangers, slotted holes shall meet all of the following:

(1) The length of each slotted hole shall not exceed 3 in.

(2) The width of the slotted hole shall not exceed 1 ⁄16 in. greater than the bolt or rod diameter.

(3) The minimum distance between slotted holes shall be 3 in. edge to edge.

(4) The minimum distance from the end of the angle to the edge of the slotted hole shall be 3 in.

(5) The number of slots shall be limited to three per section of angle.

(6) The washer required by 9.1.1.7.8 shall have a minimum thickness of one-half the thickness of the angle.

(7) Multiple washers shall not be used.

(6) Washer and nuts required by 9.1.1.7.8 shall be provided on both the top and bottom of the angle.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_9-1-1-7-9.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The steel angle sizes listed in Table 9.1.1.7.1 (b) range from ⅛ to 1 in in thickness, so the provision for washers one half the thickness of the angle would require washers up to ½ inches thick with different washers required for each different size of trapeze member. This is a totally impractical proposition. Standard washers come with only limited thickness ranges. For example the nominal thickness of a ½ In. SAE washer is only 0.074 inches and ½ in USS washers are just 0.086 inches. Extra thick washers are not commonly available in the marketplace and no substantiation has been provided to justify the need for such abnormally thick washers.

Related Item

First Revision No. 39-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 9.1.1.7.8]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon Apr 28 08:50:08 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-2-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: As proposed in the first draft, this section mandates the use of slots when using angle iron for trapeze hangers It is not the intent to mandate slots, only to provide thisdesign guidance where slots are used.Using multiple washers is common practice and there is no indication that the use of multiple washers will cause a failure.Removing this language would have been overly conservative.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

139 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 150: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 125-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 9.1.1.8.1 ]

9.1.1.8.1 *

Sprinkler piping or , sprinklers or hangers shall not be used to support non-system components.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Currently this section implies that you cannot hang from the sprinkler since it is connected to piping and the hangers. This section should explicitly state sprinklers cannot be used to hang to.

Related Item

Public Input No. 147-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 6.2.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Peter Schwab

Organization: Wayne Automatic Fire Sprinkler

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Apr 18 14:21:35 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected

Resolution: Accepting this would allow system components to be supported by the sprinkler itself.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

140 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 151: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 290-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 9.1.3.1 ]

9.1.3.1

CURRENT: Unless prohibited by 9.1.3.2 or 9.1.3.3, the use of listed inserts set in concrete and listed post-installed anchors to support hangers shall be permitted for mainsand branch lines.

PROPOSAL: Unless prohibited by 9.1.3.2 or 9.1.3.3 , the use of listed inserts set in concrete and listed post-installed anchors to support hangers shall be permitted formains and branch lines. Specialty concrete inserts and post-installed concrete anchors that meet the requirementes of ICC-ES AC446 Acceptance Criteria for Cast-InSpeciality Inserts , AC193 Acceptance Criteria for Mechanical Anchors in Concrete Elements or AC308 Acceptance Criteria for Adhesive Anchors in ConcreteElements are considered as listed for use with this standard.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The independent testing and follow up quality inspections provided by ICC-ES meet the definition of listing according to this standard. This revision is needed to support the proposed amendments for the anchoring requirements in seismic applications as well.

Related Item

First Revision No. 36-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after A.9.3.6.6]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Jake Olsen

Organization: STANLEY BLACK & DECKER

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 09:42:56 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: The determination of a product being listed is at the purview of the AHJ. The AHJ can determine that a product complying with one of these documents is acceptable.Putting this list in the standard would not be appropriate because it is not a complete list and may preclude other products that have been approved under other testprocedures.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

141 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 152: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 272-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after 9.2.1.3.1 ]

Add new annex:

A.9.2.1.3.1 The intent of this section is not to place the burden of verifying adequacy of structural design on the installing contractor. The weight of the water filled pipe plus250 lb (114 kg) are estimated loads for structural engineers to calculate structural elements in the building. Determining the actual weights of each utility system is notpractical and the structural design is based on a dead load allowance for these items. The actual weight of equipment to be installed is unknown during the design phase ofa building since the size and arrangement of the equipment has yet to be determined. Estimates by structural engineers of dead loads are typically greater than the actualdead loads so that the computations are conservative and a redesign of the structure will not be necessary when the actual weights become known. The loads for structuraldesigns are required to be approved by the building official. Thus verification by the structural engineer should not be necessary for branch lines but may be needed for theloads of feed mains and cross mains.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Contractors are being required to prove the connection can support the weight of the pipe plus 250 lbs. This is also being required for existing buildings where drops are being relocated. Some AHJs are rejecting plans since the steel structural member can handle the sprinkler piping and components but the loads are exceeded when the 250 lbs is added as a point load. Example - The steel data sheet will show it can support a point load of 180 lbs. A branch line is far below that weight but the 250 lbs. exceeds the permitted point load. Safety factors are already addressed by the design of the structural engineer.

References in A.9.2.1.3 may also be affected by this comment.

Related Item

First Revision No. 10-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 9.2.1.3.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Thomas Wellen

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Associ

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu May 15 14:38:12 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected

Resolution: The standard does not endeavor to determine responsibility for verification of adequacy of structural design.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

142 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 153: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 270-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 9.2.1.3.1 ]

9.2.1.3.1

Sprinkler piping shall be substantially supported from the building structure, which must support the added load of the water-filled pipe plus a minimum of 250 lb (114 kg)applied at the point of hanging, except where permitted by by 9.2.1.1.2 , 9.2.1.3.3 , and 9.2.1.4.1 .

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Structural engineers do not design for the weight of the water-filled pipe plus 250 lbs. The 250 lb reference is meaningless to structural engineers. Structural engineers have their own design guidelines and safety factors applied and do not match the requirement of NFPA 13.

Related Item

First Revision No. 10-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 9.2.1.3.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Thomas Wellen

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Associ

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu May 15 14:26:27 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected

Resolution: There is no data that supports removing the safety factor that has been in place in the standard for decades.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

143 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 154: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 328-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after 9.2.6.1.1 ]

9.2.6.1.1.1

The requirements of 9.2.6.1.1 shall not apply to short (4ft or less) pipe stands used for BFPs, Fire

Pump Piping and Test Headers.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

It is not the intent of the this section to be applied to short pipe stands of 4 ft or less as are commonly used to support components such as BFPs, Pump Piping and Test Headers. These components have been successfully supporting with short pipe stands in systems without a history of failure.

Related Item

First Revision No. 41-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 9.2.6]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Robert Upson

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA Engineering and Standards Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 13:13:11 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: The task group reviewing the sections on pipe stands agreed that the incorporation of short pipe stands should be considered it should take into account thecomponent materials, securing the base plate and attachment to the piping it is supporting. Other alternatives are still permitted under the certification of aprofessional engineer.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

144 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 155: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 289-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 9.3.4.10 ]

9.3.4.10 *

The installed horizontal and upward vertical clearance between horizontal sprinkler piping and equipment attached to the building structure or other systems’ piping shall beat least 2 in. (50 mm).

No clearance shall be required where piping is supported by holes through structural members as permitted by 9.1.1.6.3.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This is a return to the language of the 2013 edition. This requirement would place an unreasonable burden on sprinkler installers by requiring them to maintain clearances from equipment and systems that are not under their control.

Related Item

First Revision No. 16-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after A.9.3.4]

First Revision No. 45-NFPA 13-2013 [Sections 9.3.4.9, 9.3.4.10]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Robert Upson

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA Engineering and Standards Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 09:29:03 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Accepted

Resolution: SR-5-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: This is a return to the language of the 2013 edition. This requirement would place an unreasonable burden on sprinkler installers by requiring them to maintainclearances from equipment and systems that are not under their control.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

145 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 156: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 126-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 9.3.4.11 ]

9.3.4.11

The installed clearance between sprinklers (drops and sprigs) and structural members not used collectively or independently to support the sprinklers, or from equipmentattached to the building structure, or from other systems’ piping shall be at least 3 in. (75 mm) in all directions unless the requirements of 9.3.4.11.1 are met.

9.3.4.11.1

Where sprinklers are installed using flexible sprinkler hose, clearance for the sprinkler shall not be required.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This new section is too onerous and essentially impossible in certain installations where there are multiple additional trades (Hospitals). The use of a flexible hose does help to alleviate the issue but what about uprights and sprigs. Delete this section.

Related Item

First Revision No. 16-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after A.9.3.4]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Peter Schwab

Organization: Wayne Automatic Fire Sprinkler

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Apr 18 14:33:38 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-6-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The new section as approved at the first draft meeting is too onerous and essentially impossible in certain installations where there are multiple additional trades(Hospitals).

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

146 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 157: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 297-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 9.3.5.5.10 ]

9.3.5.5.10 *

The requirements of9.3.5.5.10*  The lateral sway bracing required by  9.3.5.5  shall be permi ed to be omi ed when

either9.3.5.5.10.1  for branch lines  or  9.3.5.5.10.2

arefor mains is met.

9.3.5.5.10.1

Branch lines shall comply with all of the following:

(1) * The branch lines shall be individually supported within 6 in

.

(1) (152 mm) of the structure, measured between the top of the pipe and the point of attachment to the building structure.

Seventy

(1) At least seventy -five percent of all the hangers on the branch line shall meet

, and not

(1) the requirements of 9.3.5.5.10.1(1).

(2) Not more than two consecutive hangers on the branch line shall be permitted to exceed

,

(1) the limitation in 9.3.5.5.10.1 (1).

9.3.5.5.10.2

Main piping

Mains shall comply with all of the following:

(1) * The main piping shall be individually supported within 6 in

.

(1) (152 mm) of the structure, measured between the top of the pipe and the point of attachment to the building structure.

Seismic

(1) At least seventy-five percent of all the hangers on the main shall meet the requirements of 9.3.5.5.10.2(1)

(2) Not more than two consecutive hangers on the main shall be permitted to exceed the limitation in 9.3.5.5.10.2(1).

(3) The seismic coefficient ( C p ) shall not exceed 1.0.

(4) The nominal pipe diameter shall not exceed 6 in

.

(1) (152 mm) for feed mains and 4 in

. Hangers are not

(1) (102 mm) for cross mains.

Seventy-five percent of all the hangers on the main shall meet, and not more than two consecutive hangers shall be permitted to exceed, the limitation in 9.3.5.5.10.2 (1).

(1) Hangers shall not be omitted in accordance with 9.2.4.3 , 9.2.4.4 , or 9.2.4.5 .

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

NFPA13-2016-FD-NFSA-FRs.pdf 6-inch Rod Rule Text

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The so-called “6 inch rod rule” is often misapplied. This proposal and accompanying drawings clarifies the intent and proper application of the rule.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 300-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. A.9.3.5.5.10.1(1)]

Public Comment No. 329-NFPA 13-2014 [New Section after 9.3.5.5.10.2]

Related Item

First Revision No. 46-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 9.3.5.5.10]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Robert Upson

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA Engineering and Standards Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

147 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 158: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 10:08:43 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-7-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: This section was revised to delete the limitation on two consecutive hangers in both sections 9.3.5.5.10.1 (3) and 9.3.5.5.10.2 (3). Furthermore the Cp value in9.3.5.5.10.2 (4) was reduced from cp=1.0 to Cp=0.5.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

148 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 159: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Action Items from Spring 2014 E & S Meeting for NFPA 13 (2016) FR (Upson) Closes 5/16/14 @ 1700 ET 

10  

Item10–6‐inchRodRule

Proposed:9.3.5.5.10* The lateral sway bracing required by 9.3.5.5 shall be permitted to be omitted when 9.3.5.5.10.1 for branch lines or 9.3.5.5.10.2 for mains is met.  9.3.5.5.10.1 Branch lines shall comply with all of the following:  (1) *  The branch lines shall be individually supported within 6 in (152 mm) of the structure, measured 

between the top of the pipe and the point of attachment to the building structure. (2) At least seventy‐five percent of all the hangers on the branch line shall meet the requirements of 

9.3.5.5.10.1(1). (3) Not more than two consecutive hangers on the branch line shall be permitted to exceed the 

limitation in 9.3.5.5.10.1(1).  9.3.5.5.10.2 Mains shall comply with all of the following:  (1) *  The main piping shall be individually supported within 6 in (152 mm) of the structure, measured 

between the top of the pipe and the point of attachment to the building structure. (2) At least seventy‐five percent of all the hangers on the main shall meet the requirements of 

9.3.5.5.10.2(1) (3) Not more than two consecutive hangers on the main shall be permitted to exceed the limitation in 

9.3.5.5.10.2(1). (4) The seismic coefficient (Cp) shall not exceed 1.0. (5) The nominal pipe diameter shall not exceed 6 in (152 mm) for feed mains and 4 in (102 mm) for 

cross mains. (6) Hangers shall not be omitted in accordance with 9.2.4.3, 9.2.4.4, or 9.2.4.5. 

 9.3.5.5.10.3 Branch lines permitted to omit lateral sway bracing by  9.3.5.5.10* shall not be omitted 

from load calculations for the mains serving them in 9.3.5.9.6*. 

A.9.3.5.5.10  This does not apply to piping supported by or suspended from trapeze hangers.     

Page 160: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 329-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after 9.3.5.5.10.2 ]

9.3.5.5.10.3

Branch lines permitted to omit lateral sway bracing by 9.3.5.5.10* shall not be omitted from load calculations for the mains serving them in 9.3.5.9.6*.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The so-called “6 inch rod rule” is often misapplied. This proposal and accompanying drawings clarifies the intent and proper application of the rule.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 297-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 9.3.5.5.10]

Related Item

First Revision No. 46-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 9.3.5.5.10]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Robert Upson

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA Engineering and Standards Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 13:19:34 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-7-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: This section was revised to delete the limitation on two consecutive hangers in both sections 9.3.5.5.10.1 (3) and 9.3.5.5.10.2 (3). Furthermore the Cp value in9.3.5.5.10.2 (4) was reduced from cp=1.0 to Cp=0.5.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

149 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 161: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 193-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 9.3.5.11.8 ]

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

150 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 162: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

9.3.5.11.8*

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

151 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 163: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

The loads determined in 9.3.5.9 shall not exceed the lesser of the maximum allowable loads provided in Table 9.3.5.11.8(a), Table 9.3.5.11.8(b), and Table 9.3.5.11.8(c) orthe manufacturer's certified maximum allowable horizontal loads for brace angles of 30 to 44 degrees, 45 to 59 degrees, 60 to 89 degrees, or 90 degrees.

Table 9.3.5.11.8(a) Maximum Horizontal Loads for Sway Braces with l/r = 100 for Steel Braces with Fy = 36 ksi

Area

(in.2)Least Radius of Gyration (r)

(in.)

Maximum Horizontal Load (lb)

Maximum Length for l / r =100

Brace Angle

Brace Shape and Size(in.)

ft in.30° to 44°

Angle fromVertical

45° to 59°

Angle fromVertical

60° to 90°

Angle fromVertical

Pipe

Schedule 40

1 0.494 0.421 3 6 3,150 4,455 5,456

1 1⁄4 0.669 0.540 4 6 4,266 6,033 7,389

1 1⁄2 0.799 0.623 5 2 5,095 7,206 8,825

2 1.07 0.787 6 6 6,823 9,650 11,818

Angles1 1⁄2 × 1 1⁄2 ×

1⁄40.688 0.292 2 5 4,387 6,205 7,599

2 × 2 × 1⁄4 0.938 0.391 3 3 5,982 8,459 10,360

2 1⁄2 × 2 × 1⁄4 1.06 0.424 3 6 6,760 9,560 11,708

2 1⁄2 × 2 1⁄2 ×1⁄4

1.19 0.491 4 1 7,589 10,732 13,144

3 × 2 1⁄2 × 1⁄4 1.31 0.528 4 4 8,354 11,814 14,469

3 × 3 × 1⁄4 1.44 0.592 4 11 9,183 12,987 15,905

Rods 3⁄8 0.07 0.075 0 7 446 631 773

 (all thread) 1⁄2 0.129 0.101 0 10 823 1,163 1,4255⁄8 0.207 0.128 1 0 1,320 1,867 2,2863⁄4 0.309 0.157 1 3 1,970 2,787 3,4137⁄8 0.429 0.185 1 6 2,736 3,869 4,738

Rods 3⁄8 0.11 0.094 0 9 701 992 1,215

 (threadedat

1⁄2 0.196 0.125 1 0 1,250 1,768 2,165

ends only) 5⁄8 0.307 0.156 1 3 1,958 2,769 3,3913⁄4 0.442 0.188 1 6 2,819 3,986 4,8827⁄8 0.601 0.219 1 9 3,833 5,420 6,638

Flats 1 1⁄2 × 1⁄4 0.375 0.0722 0 7 2,391 3,382 4,142

2 × 1⁄4 0.5 0.0722 0 7 3,189 4,509 5,523

2 × 3⁄8 0.75 0.1082 0 10 4,783 6,764 8,284

Table 9.3.5.11.8(b) Maximum Horizontal Loads for Sway Braces with l/r = 200 for Steel Braces with Fy = 36 ksi

Area (in.2) Least Radius of Gyration (r) (in.)

Maximum Horizontal Load (lb)

Maximum Length for

l / r = 200 Brace Angle

Brace Shape and Size (in.) ft in.

30° to 44°

Angle from Vertical

45° to 59°

Angle from Vertical

60° to 90°

Angle from Vertical

Pipe 1 0.494 0.421 7 0 926 1310 1604

 Schedule 40 1 1⁄4 0.669 0.540 9 0 1254 1774 2173

1 1⁄2 0.799 0.623 10 4 1498 2119 2595

2 1.07 0.787 13 1 2006 2837 3475

Angles 1 1⁄2 × 1 1⁄2 × 1⁄4 0.688 0.292 4 10 1290 1824 2234

2 × 2 × 1⁄4 0.938 0.391 6 6 1759 2487 3046

2 1⁄2 × 2 × 1⁄4 1.06 0.424 7 0 1988 2811 3442

2 1⁄2 × 2 1⁄2 × 1⁄4 1.19 0.491 8 2 2231 3155 3865

3 × 2 1⁄2 × 1⁄4 1.31 0.528 8 9 2456 3474 4254

3 × 3 × 1⁄4 1.44 0.592 9 10 2700 3818 4677

Rods 3⁄8 0.07 0.075 1 2 131 186 227

 (all thread) 1⁄2 0.129 0.101 1 8 242 342 4195⁄8 0.207 0.128 2 1 388 549 6723⁄4 0.309 0.157 2 7 579 819 10047⁄8 0.429 0.185 3 0 804 1138 1393

Rods 3⁄8 0.11 0.094 1 6 206 292 357

 (threaded at 1⁄2 0.196 0.125 2 0 368 520 637

 ends only) 5⁄8 0.307 0.156 2 7 576 814 9973⁄4 0.442 0.188 3 1 829 1172 14357⁄8 0.601 0.219 3 7 1127 1594 1952

Flats 1 1⁄2 × 1⁄4 0.375 0.0722 1 2 703 994 1218

2 × 1⁄4 0.5 0.0722 1 2 938 1326 1624

2 × 3⁄8 0.75 0.1082 1 9 1406 1989 2436

Table 9.3.5.11.8(c) Maximum Horizontal Loads for Sway Braces with l/r = 300 for Steel Braces with Fy = 36 ksi

Area (in.2) Least Radius of Gyration (r) (in.)

Maximum Horizontal Load (lb)

Maximum Length for

l / r = 300Brace Angle

Brace Shape and Size (in.) ft in.30° to 44°

Angle from Vertical

45° to 59°

Angle from Vertical

60° to 90°

Angle from Vertical

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

152 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 164: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Area (in.2) Least Radius of Gyration (r) (in.)

Maximum Horizontal Load (lb)

Maximum Length for

l / r = 300Brace Angle

Brace Shape and Size (in.) ft in.30° to 44°

Angle from Vertical

45° to 59°

Angle from Vertical

60° to 90°

Angle from Vertical

Pipe 1 0.494 0.421 10 6 412 582 713

 Schedule 40 1 1⁄4 0.669 0.540 13 6 558 788 966

1 1⁄2 0.799 0.623 15 6 666 942 1153

2 1.07 0.787 19 8 892 1261 1544

Angles 1 1⁄2 × 1 1⁄2 × 1⁄4 0.688 0.292 7 3 573 811 993

2 × 2 × 1⁄4 0.938 0.391 9 9 782 1105 1354

2 1⁄2 × 2 × 1⁄4 1.06 0.424 10 7 883 1249 1530

2 1⁄2 × 2 1⁄2 × 1⁄4 1.19 0.491 12 3 992 1402 1718

3 × 2 1⁄2 × 1⁄4 1.31 0.528 13 2 1092 1544 1891

3 × 3 × 1⁄4 1.44 0.592 14 9 1200 1697 2078

Rods 3⁄8 0.07 0.075 1 10 58 82 101

 (all thread) 1⁄2 0.129 0.101 2 6 108 152 1865⁄8 0.207 0.128 3 2 173 244 2993⁄4 0.309 0.157 3 11 258 364 4467⁄8 0.429 0.185 4 7 358 506 619

Rods 3⁄8 0.11 0.094 2 4 92 130 159

 (threaded at 1⁄2 0.196 0.125 3 1 163 231 283

 ends only) 5⁄8 0.307 0.156 3 10 256 362 4433⁄4 0.442 0.188 4 8 368 521 6387⁄8 0.601 0.219 5 5 501 708 867

Flats 1 1⁄2 × 1⁄4 0.375 0.0722 1 9 313 442 541

2 × 1⁄4 0.5 0.0722 1 9 417 589 722

2 × 3⁄8 0.75 0.1082 2 8 625 884 1083

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

CC NOTE: The following CC Note No. 18 appeared in the First Draft Report as Global First Revision No. 25.

The TC should review this language to confirm that the language adequately addresses the intent of the TC.

Related Item

First Revision No. 35-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after A.9.3.5.11]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: CC on AUT-AAC

Organization: CC on Automatic Sprinkler Systems

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Tue Apr 29 14:15:04 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-140-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: NFPA 13, per Section 9.3.5.4.3, specifies that the maximum allowable load for braces be established based on the weakest component. Depending upon the geometryof a particular brace fitting, this weakest component may result in an actual horizontal failure load at an angle other than 90 degrees that is less than would be found bydividing the failure load at 90 degrees by the factor given in Table 9.3.5.2.3. Testing a brace fitting at multiple angles is needed to confirm that the listed load rating at 90degrees is conservative.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

153 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 165: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 298-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 9.3.5.12.7.1 ]

9.3.5.12.7.1 *

CURRENT: Concrete anchors shall be prequalified for seismic applications in accordance with ACI 355.2, Qualification of Post-Installed Mechanical Anchors in Concreteand Commentary, and installed in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions.

PROPOSED: Concrete anchors shall be prequalified for seismic applications in accordance with ACI 355.2, Qualification of Post-Installed Mechanical Anchors in Concreteand Commentary, ACI355.4, Qualification of Post-Installed Adhesive Anchors in Concrete and Commentary, ICC-ES AC446 Acceptance Criteria for Cast-In SpecialtyInserts , AC193, Acceptance Criteria for Mechanical Anchors in Concrete Elements, or AC308, Acceptanc Criteria for Post-Installed Adhesive Anchors in ConcreteElements . Anchors must be installed in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

ACI355.2 does not cover all types of concrete anchors typically used by the fire-protection industry. The additional ICC-ES acceptance criteria listed all include seismic qualification tests in accordance with either 355.2 or 355.4, and Evaluation Reports and approvals according to these acceptance criteria have a higher level of recognition - both at the design level and jobsite inspector level.

Related Item

First Revision No. 36-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after A.9.3.6.6]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Jake Olsen

Organization: STANLEY BLACK & DECKER

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 10:09:00 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-15-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The building code references ASCE/SEI 7-10 Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures for structural design criteria. NFPA 13 is adopted as areference standard by ASCE/SEI 7-10, and the seismic design provisions of NFPA 13 have are deemed to comply with the requirements of ASCE/SEI 7-10. This is agreat advantage, because it means the designs per NFPA 13 may be accepted by building officials as completely code compliant. To maintain this status, the seismicprovisions of NFPA 13 must be periodically reexamined to verify that changes in ASCE/SEI 7 are accounted for in NFPA 13.

This proposal is the first significant revision to the NFPA 13 requirements for concrete anchors since the 2007 edition. It accounts for significant changes in the design ofattachment for nonstructural components that were adopted with Supplement 1 of ASCE/SEI 7-10 in 2013. The most significant change is the requirement that loads forattachment of nonstructural components to concrete or masonry be amplified by a factor of 2.5. In addition, the load factor used in NFPA 13 for converting from strengthdesign to allowable stress design forces required updating. Finally, the current allowable loads for concrete anchors do not correctly account for a load factor forattachments of 1.3 that was required in ASC/SEI 7-05, which has been increased to 2.5 as noted above.

Addressing these issues results in substantially lower allowable load carrying capacities of the concrete anchors in the Fig. 9.3.5.12.1 Tables but it must be done in orderto insure that NFPA 13 preserves its standing as a code-compliant Standard. To mitigate the effects of these changes, a more refined design approach is offered, thatallows the user to take advantage of connection hardware with favorable geometry, which reduces the prying factor applied to tension loads. In prior editions of NFPA13, a worst-case prying factor was assumed when generating the allowable loads in Figure 9.3.5.12.1. In this proposal, allowable anchor loads are provided for threeranges of prying factors. By selecting of efficient connection hardware, the allowable anchor loads can be substantially increased.

The proposal includes the following changes:

Section 2.3.2: Updates the references to the latest edition of ASCE 7.

Section 3.11: Adds a definition of prying factor.

Section 9.3.5.12.1: Specifically permits an engineer to come up with their own allowable anchor loads. Given that Fig. 9.3.5.12.1 uses lower bound assumptions for theallowable anchor tension and shear capacities and conservative assumptions regarding brace and connection geometry, an engineered design for the anchors may yieldsubstantially higher allowable loads.

Section 9.3.5.12.7: Adds procedures for using the revised Fig. 9.3.5.12.1.

Revisions to Figure 9.3.5.12.1 – New tables for wedge anchor allowable loads in different types of concrete conditions.

Revision to Annex A.9.3.5.12: Expanded and corrected coverage of the anchor allowable load provisions

New Annex E.7: Provides step by step procedures and examples for determining allowable loads for wedge anchors, shows how the generic Fig. 9.3.5.12.1 concreteanchor table values were calculated, and provides instruction to the user for performing specific calculations that may yield more beneficial results.

Revised Fig. 9.3.5.12.1 anchor tables and related annex information were unanimously passed at the 2016 NFPA-13 2nd Draft Meeting.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

154 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 166: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 222-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 10.1.1.1 ]

10.1.1.1

Piping manufactured in accordance with Table 10.1.1.1 shall be permitted to be used. [24:10.1.1.1]

Table 10.1.1.1 Manufacturing Standards for Underground Pipe

Materials and Dimensions Standard

Ductile Iron

Cement Mortar Lining for Ductile Iron Pipe and Fittings for Water AWWA C104

Polyethylene Encasement for Ductile Iron Pipe Systems AWWA C105

Rubber-Gasket Joints for Ductile Iron Pressure Pipe and Fittings AWWA C111

Flanged Ductile Iron Pipe with Ductile Iron or Gray Iron Threaded Flanges AWWA C115

Thickness Design of Ductile Iron Pipe AWWA C150

Ductile Iron Pipe, Centrifugally Cast for Water AWWA C151

Standard for the Installation of Ductile Iron Water Mains and Their Appurtenances AWWA C600

Steel

Steel Water Pipe 6 in. and Larger AWWA C200

Coal-Tar Protective Coatings and Linings for Steel Water Pipelines Enamel and Tape —Hot Applied AWWA C203

Cement-Mortar Protective Lining and Coating for Steel Water Pipe 4 in. and Larger — Shop Applied AWWA C205

Field Welding of Steel Water Pipe AWWA C206

Steel Pipe Flanges for Waterworks Service —Sizes 4 in. Through 144 in. AWWA C207

Dimensions for Fabricated Steel Water Pipe Fittings AWWA C208

A Guide for Steel Pipe Design and Installation AWWA M11

Concrete

Reinforced Concrete Pressure Pipe, Steel-Cylinder Type AWWA C300

Prestressed Concrete Pressure Pipe, Steel-Cylinder Type AWWA C301

Reinforced Concrete Pressure Pipe, Non-Cylinder Type AWWA C302

Reinforced Concrete Pressure Pipe, Steel-Cylinder Type, Pretensioned AWWA C303

Standard for Asbestos-Cement Distribution Pipe, 4 in. Through 16 in., for Water Distribution Systems AWWA C400

Cement-Mortar Lining of Water Pipe Lines 4 in. and Larger — in Place AWWA C602

Plastic

Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) Pressure Pipe, 4 in. Through 12 in., for Water Distribution AWWA C900

Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) Pressure Pipe, 14 in. Through 48 in., for Water Distribution AWWA C905

Polyethylene (PE) Pressure Pipe and Fittings, 4 in. (100 mm) Through 63 in. (1575 mm) for Water Distribution AWWA C906

Molecularly Oriented Polyvinyl Chloride (PVCO) 4-24 in. AWWA C909

Brass

Specification for Seamless Red Brass Pipe ASTM B43

Copper

Specification for Seamless Copper Tube ASTM B 75

Specification for Seamless Copper Water Tube ASTM B 88

Requirements for Wrought Seamless Copper and Copper-Alloy Tube ASTM B 251

[24:Table 10.1.1.1]

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Reference is made to First Revision No. 49-NFPA 13-2013 [ Global Input ]This proposal ensures correlation and identical requirements between NFPA 13 and NFPA 24 for underground private fire service mains.Reference is made to the statement of problem and substantiation of Public Comment No. 2-NFPA 24-2014.

Related Item

First Revision No. 49-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Ariel Carp

Organization: On my behalf

Affilliation: On my behalf

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Wed May 07 17:06:40 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: The document has required steel piping for general underground service to be listed for the last few editions. If steel piping is to be used, the manufacturersinstallations instructions would need to be followed. Including the proposed data in the table does not add any value since the installation guidelines will cover allessential installation practices. Table 10.1.1.3 sufficiently addresses the allowance for the steel piping to be used in the fire department connection piping.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

155 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 167: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 219-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after 10.1.4.1 ]

10.1.4.2 Where plastic underground piping is provided above grade or inside a building, piping shall be protected, as per manufacturer requirements, such asfrom direct rays of sunlight, incompatible materials, or the weight of the sprinkler riser on the piping.

10.1.4.2.1 One suitable protection method for this plastic piping is sleeving.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

It is my understanding that the TC intends to allow PVC underground piping to enter a building to supply the sprinkler system inside a building. My concerns include: 1. Weight of the spinkler riser on the PVC pipe - is it tested for vertical loading in this regard? 2. Incompatibility with various chemicals, including floor coatings - the Arrangement section in NFPA 13 no longer seems to adequately address that potential concern. 3. Potential to exposure from sunlight. I have not yet seen manufacturer information indicating that PVC piping is being tested for vertical loading, especially to hold a sprinkler riser plus backflow preventer. I have been told by UL that such arrangement would not violate the listing of the subject piping. I have made contact with manufacturers attempting to verify if the piping is tested for such installation, and if the warranty would not be voided. My intent with this proposal is simply to ensure that such plastic piping is sutiably protected from conditions that could damage or degrade the piping supplying water to the fire protection system(s).

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 242-NFPA 13-2014 [New Section after 24.1.6.1.2]

Related Item

First Revision No. 49-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Bob Morgan

Organization: Fort Worth Fire Department

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Wed May 07 14:48:32 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: This language is extracted from NFPA 24. The proposed changes should be submitted to NFPA 24 for inclusion in NFPA 13 via extract. This concept was added tothe annex of NFPA 24.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

156 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 168: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 85-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 11.1 [Excluding any Sub-Sections] ]

The requirements of Section 11.1 shall apply to all sprinkler systems unless modified by a specific section of Chapter 11 or Chapter 12 .

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This comment should be addressed after the redundancy task group comments are resolved (PC's 107 / 109 / 110 / 111 / 112 / 230 / 231)

The public input did not attempt to move sections to ch 11. It attempted to delete repeated criteria in ch 12 that was already covered by section 11.1. We initially identified section 11.1 as applying to all systems and then started repeating many parts in chap 12. I think we do not give enough credit to the users thinking that they will not understand that other sections apply to storage. Afterall, many other sections (like 8.5, 8.6, the obscure 8.13.2 on in-rack criteria, ch 23, and ch 24) all contain criteria that also applies to storage. As such, there is no need to say that 11.1 applies to all systems and lets state it applies to the systems in ch 11 as implied by the unnecessary redundancy of criteria.

Related Item

Public Input No. 114-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Huggins

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Assoc.

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu Mar 27 14:59:52 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but held

Resolution: The concept of limiting the redundancy in chapters 12-21 of NFPA has been discussed throughout this revision cycle. While the TC is in general support of thisconcept, making these redundancy revisions at the Second Phase of the cycle is not appropriate. The reject but hold action for this item will allow the TC on DischargeCriteria to submit the concept to the correlating committee for review and refinement before proceeding into the 2019 edition revision cycle.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

157 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 169: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 157-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 11.1.2 ]

11.1.2 * Adjacent Hazards or Design Methods.

For buildings with two or more adjacent hazards or design methods, the following shall apply:

(1) Where areas are not physically separated by a draft curtain, barrier, or partition capable of delaying heat from a fire in one area from fusing sprinklers in the adjacentarea, the required sprinkler protection for the more demanding design basis shall extend 15 ft (4.6 m) beyond its perimeter.

(2) The requirements of 11.1.2 (1) shall not apply where the areas are separated by a draft curtain, barrier ,or partition that is capable of delaying heat from a fire in onearea from fusing sprinklers in the adjacent area.

(3) The requirements of 11.1.2 (1) shall not apply to the extension of more demanding criteria from an upper ceiling level to beneath a lower ceiling level where thedifference in height between the ceiling levels is at least 2 ft (0.6 m).

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_11-1-2.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The addition of text referencing draft curtains was not requested in PI 192 and the Technical Committee has not provided any substantiation for the addition. Also, as per A.12.1.1.3, draft curtains have been shown to have a negative impact on sprinkler effectiveness and extreme care needs to be taken to minimize any potential impacts, so it is inappropriate to imply that they may be beneficial in the Section 11.1.2 discussion about adjacent hazards or design methods.

Related Item

First Revision No. 192-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 12.3]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon Apr 28 08:51:56 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected

Resolution: Draft curtains are an acceptable means of complying with 11.1.2.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

158 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 170: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 333-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after 11.1.6.3 ]

11.1.6.3.1

Where the system is a combined sprinkler/standpipe system and the building is fully sprinklered in accordance with NFPA 13, no inside hose demand is required at any ofthe standpipe outlets.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

In one edition of NFPA 13 (2007) the requirement for 50 gpm to be added at the two most remote standpipe outlets for combined sprinkler/standpipe systems was added to the annex (A.11.1.5.6). This caused problems for two reasons. The first problem is that it violated section 11.1.5.6 in the body of the standard, which stated that the standpipe and sprinkler demands were not required to be added together. The second problem was that the rule was in the annex, where it was not enforceable.

The committee reviewed the subject again in while writing the 2010 edition of the standard and agreed that the 50 gpm inside hose demand is not required at the standpipe outlets, so they took this annex note out of the standard. But no clarification was added to the standard and the question continues to come up. The situation needs to be clarified for the user that the flow for the standpipe system is calculated separately and is not required to be added, in whole or in part, to the sprinkler flow demand.

Related Item

Public Input No. 114-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Robert Upson

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA Engineering and Standards Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 13:45:52 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-121-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: In one edition of NFPA 13 (2007) the requirement for 50 gpm to be added at the two most remote standpipe outlets for combined sprinkler/standpipe systems wasadded to the annex (A.11.1.5.6). This caused problems for two reasons. The first problem is that it violated section 11.1.5.6 in the body of the standard, which statedthat the standpipe and sprinkler demands were not required to be added together. The second problem was that the rule was in the annex, where it was notenforceable.

The committee reviewed the subject again in while writing the 2010 edition of the standard and agreed that the 50 gpm inside hose demand is not required at thestandpipe outlets, so they took this annex note out of the standard. But no clarification was added to the standard and the question continues to come up. The situationneeds to be clarified for the user that the flow for the standpipe system is calculated separately and is not required to be added, in whole or in part, to the sprinkler flowdemand.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

159 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 171: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 112-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 11.2.3.1.4 ]

11.2.3.1.4 Restrictions.

When either the density/area method or room design method is used, the following shall apply:

(1)

(2) For areas of sprinkler operation less than 2500 ft2 (232 m2) for extra hazard occupancies, the density for 2500 ft2 (232 m2) shall be used.

(3)

(4) The following unsprinklered concealed spaces shall not require a minimum area of sprinkler operation of 3000 ft 2 (279 m 2 ):

(5) Noncombustible and limited-combustible concealed spaces with minimal combustible loading having no access. The space shall be considered a concealedspace even with small openings such as those used as return air for a plenum.

(6) Noncombustible and limited-combustible concealed spaces with limited access and not permitting occupancy or storage of combustibles. The space shall beconsidered a concealed space even with small openings such as those used as return air for a plenum.

(7) Combustible concealed spaces filled entirely with noncombustible insulation.

(8)

(9) Concealed spaces where rigid materials are used and the exposed surfaces have a flame spread index of 25 or less and the materials have been demonstratedto not propagate fire more than 10.5 ft (3.2 m) when tested in accordance with ASTM E 84, Standard Test Method of Surface Burning Characteristics of BuildingMaterials, or ANSI/UL 723, Standard for Test for Surface Burning Characteristics of Building Materials , extended for an additional 20 minutes in the form inwhich they are installed in the space.

(10) Concealed spaces in which the exposed materials are constructed entirely of fire-retardant treated wood as defined by NFPA 703.

(11) Concealed spaces over isolated small compartments not exceeding 55 ft 2 (5.1 m 2 ) in area.

(12) Vertical pipe chases under 10 ft 2 (0.93 m 2 ), provided that in multifloor buildings the chases are firestopped at each floor using materials equivalent to the floorconstruction, and where such pipe chases shall contain no sources of ignition, piping shall be noncombustible, and pipe penetrations at each floor shall beproperly sealed.

(13) Exterior columns under 10 ft 2 (0.93 m 2 ) in area formed by studs or wood joists, supporting exterior canopies that are fully protected with a sprinkler system.

(14)

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This criteria applies to all types of facilities using the density/area method so should be located in 11.1. Having this text in both section 11.2.3.1.4 and 12.9 is unnecessary redundancy. Although this comment shows this text as deleted, it was relocated using text from 12.9 in a separate comment. Note that the current text in 11.2.3.1.4(3) violates the format process on not having multiple criteria in a single paragraph.

The redundancy task group agrees with this PC

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 111-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 12.9]

Public Comment No. 204-NFPA 13-2014 [Sections A.11.2.3.1.4(3), A.11.2.3.1.4(4)(d), A.11.2.3.1.4(...]

Public Comment No. 205-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. A.12.9.1]

Related Item

Public Input No. 114-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Huggins

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Assoc.

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Apr 11 15:27:38 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but held

Resolution: The concept of limiting the redundancy in chapters 12-21 of NFPA has been discussed throughout this revision cycle. While the TC is in general support of thisconcept, making these redundancy revisions at the Second Phase of the cycle is not appropriate. The reject but hold action for this item will allow the TC on DischargeCriteria to submit the concept to the correlating committee for review and refinement before proceeding into the 2019 edition revision cycle.

* For areas of sprinkler operation less than 1500 ft2 (139 m2) used for light and ordinary hazard occupancies, the density for 1500 ft2 (139 m2) shall be used.

* Unless the requirements of 11.2.3.1.4 (4) are met for buildings having unsprinklered combustible concealed spaces, as described in 8.15.1.2 and 8.15.6 , the

minimum area of sprinkler operation for that portion of the building shall be 3000 ft 2 (279 m 2 ). The design area of 3000 ft 2 (279 m 2 ) shall be applied only to thesprinkler system or portions of the sprinkler system that are adjacent to the qualifying combustible concealed space. The term adjacent shall apply to any sprinklersystem protecting a space above, below, or next to the qualifying concealed space except where a barrier with a fire resistance rating at least equivalent to the watersupply duration completely separates the concealed space from the sprinklered area.

* Light or ordinary hazard occupancies where noncombustible or limited-combustible ceilings are directly attached to the bottom of solid wood joists or solid

limited-combustible construction or noncombustible construction so as to create enclosed joist spaces 160 ft 3 (4.5 m 3 ) or less in volume, including spacebelow insulation that is laid directly on top or within the ceiling joists in an otherwise sprinklered concealed space.

* Light or ordinary hazard occupancies where noncombustible or limited-combustible ceilings are attached to the bottom of composite wood joists either

directly or on to metal channels not exceeding 1 in. (25.4 mm) in depth, provided the adjacent joist channels are firestopped into volumes not exceeding 160 ft 3

(4.5 m 3 ) using materials equivalent to 1 ⁄ 2 in. (12.7 mm) gypsum board and at least 3 1 ⁄ 2 in. (90 mm) of batt insulation is installed at the bottom of thejoist channels when the ceiling is attached utilizing metal channels.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

160 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 172: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 337-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 11.3.1.3 ]

11.3.1.3

Unless the requirements of 11.3.1.4 are met, the minimum required discharge from each design area sprinkler shall be the greater of the following:

(1) In accordance with minimum flow rates indicated in the sprinkler listings

(2) In rooms or compartments greater than 800 ft² (74.3 m 2 ) protected with more than 4 sprinklers , calculated based on delivering a minimum of 0.1 gpm/ft2 (4.1mm/min) over the design area in accordance with the provisions of 8.5.2.1

(3) In rooms or compartments 800 ft 2 (74.3 m 2 ) or less calculated compartments protected with 4 or fewer sprinklers, calculated based on delivering a minimum of 0.1

gpm/ft2 (4.1 mm/min) over the room or the compartment using the area of the room divided by the number of sprinklers in the room

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

During the First Draft phase I questioned the validity of the 800 square foot area and the extension of the concept of the "small room rule" beyond upright and pendent sprinklers. While the latter point may not be a problem, the 800 square foot area can be problematic. It is conceivable that an 800 square foot room may be protected by more than 4 residential sprinklers and the design area is defined as four sprinklers. Therefore, using an average density over the room when more than 4 sprinklers are protecting the room is not appropriate.

Related Item

First Revision No. 261-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 11.3.1.3]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: William Koffel

Organization: Koffel Associates, Inc.

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 14:10:29 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected

Resolution: Defining area is a better qualifier than number of sprinklers so that this section correlates with the definition of a small room.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

161 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 173: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 228-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 11.3.1.4 ]

11.3.1.4

For modifications or additions to existing systems equipped with residential sprinklers, the listed discharge criteria less than 0.1 gpm/ft2 (4.1 mm/min) shall be permitted tobe used.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

CC NOTE: The following CC Note No. 20 appeared in the First Draft Report.

The TC should review the following language that was included as an FR in NFPA 13D. The SSI TC reviewed similar language and chose not to create an FR, however this language was modified to alleviate some of the concerns raised about the original proposed verbiage."Where replacing residential sprinklers manufactured prior to 2003 and installed using a design density less than 0.05 gpm/ft2 (204 mm/min), a residential sprinkler with an equivalent K-factor (± 5%) shall be permitted to be used provided the currently listed coverage area for the replacement sprinkler is not exceeded."

Related Item

Correlating Committee Note No. 20-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 11.3.1.4]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: CC on AUT-AAC

Organization: CC on Automatic Sprinkler Systems

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu May 08 13:03:39 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-122-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: This language was added in response to CC Note No. 20 appeared in the First Draft Report.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

162 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 174: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 326-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after 12.1.3.1.3.2 ]

12.1.3.1.4*

Where the building height changes within a compartment the sprinklers directly over the storage shall be capable of protecting storage directly beneath. In situations wherea barrier to heat and smoke in accordance with 12.3(2) or 12.3(3) are not present, the sprinkler criteria 15 feet into the perimeter of the lower ceiling area shall be the sameas the sprinkler protection for the high ceiling area.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This proposal clarifies the proper design height requirements for sprinklers under a roof with a pitch of 2:12 or less.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 332-NFPA 13-2014 [New Section after A.12.1.3]

Related Item

First Revision No. 190-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 12.1.3.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Robert Upson

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA Engineering and Standards Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 13:07:32 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-79-NFPA 13-2014. Modifications made to comply with the manual of style.

Statement: This revision clarifies the proper design height requirements for sprinklers under a roof with a pitch of 2:12 or less.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

163 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 175: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 75-NFPA 13-2014 [ Sections 12.1.3.4.2, 12.1.3.4.3, 12.1.3.4.4, 12.1.3.4.5, 12... ]

Sections 12.1.3.4.2, 12.1.3.4.3, 12.1.3.4.4, 12.1.3.4.5, 12.1.3.4.6, 12.1.3.4.7, 12.1.3.4.8

12.1.3.4.2

For spray sprinkler criteria where the clearance to ceiling exceeds those identified in this section, the requirements of 12.1.3.4.3 through 12.1.3.4.8 shall apply.

12.1.3.4.3

Where the clearance to ceiling exceeds 20 ft (6.1 m) for Chapters 14 and 15, protection shall be based upon the storage height that would result in a clearance to ceiling of20 ft (6.1 m).

Protection of Class I-IV commodities with excessive clearance from the top of storage to the ceiling sprinkler deflectors shall be in accordance with Table 12.1.3.4.

4

Where the clearance to ceiling exceeds 20 ft (6.1 m) for Section 16.2 , protection shall be based upon the storage height that would result in a clearance to ceiling of 20 ft(6.1 m) or providing one level of supplemental, quick-response in-rack sprinklers located directly below the top tier of storage and at every flue space intersection.

12.1.3.4.5

Where the clearance to ceiling exceeds 10 ft (3.1 m) for Section 16.3 or Section 17.2 , protection shall be based upon the storage height that would result in a clearanceto ceiling of 10 ft (3.1 m) or providing one level of supplemental, quick-response in-rack sprinklers located directly below the top tier of storage and at every flue spaceintersection.

12.1.3.4.6

Where the clearance exceeds 10 ft (3.1 m) for Section 17.3 , protection shall be based upon providing one level of supplemental, quick-response in-rack sprinklers locateddirectly below the top tier of storage and at every flue space intersection.

12.1.3.4.7

When applying the supplemental in-rack sprinkler option, the ceiling density shall be based upon the given storage height with an assumed acceptable clearance to ceiling.

2(a).

Protection of Plastic and Rubber commodities with excessive clearance from the top of storage to the ceiling sprinkler deflectors shall be in accordance with Table 12.1.3.4.

8

If in-rack sprinklers are required for the actual storage height with an acceptable clearance to ceiling, in-rack sprinklers shall be installed as indicated by that criteria

2(b) .

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

NFPA_13_Proposed_Tables_12.1.3.4.3_a_and_b_.docx Proposed Tables 12.1.3.4.3(a) and (b)

NFPA_13_Proposed_Tables_12.1.3.4.3_a_and_b_.pdf PDF version includes notations of the replaced section for each row

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Section 12.1.3.4 (Clearance to Ceiling) contains numerous criteria, in which critical protection criteria for excessive clearance is obscured in subsections 12.1.3.4.3 through 12.1.3.4.8. These are even less prominent than the 2010 edition in which Section 12.1.3.4 was entitled "Excessive Clearance." Furthermore, the narratives of the sections are cumbersome, referring to other chapter sections with no commodity description. The proposed Tables will draw attention to and define the various storage configurations. In addition to incorporation of this Table into Chapter 12, it is recommended that appropriate sections of Chapters 14, 15, 16, and 17 refer to these critical Tables in Chapter 12. Specifically, "maximum storage height" in the Tables in Chapter 14, 15, 16 and 17 should reference the minimum presumed heights mandated when excessive clearance occurs.

Related Item

First Revision No. 190-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 12.1.3.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Lisa Bossert

Organization: Naval Facilities Engineering Command - Fire Protection Engineering Department

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu Mar 20 11:52:15 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected but held

Resolution: This is new material and was not addressed at the First Draft Meeting. This concept should be held for the next revision cycle of the standard.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

164 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 176: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Table 12.1.3.4.2(a) Class I through Class IV Commodities

Storage Configuration

Where the clearance to

ceiling exceeds

Protection shall be based upon the storage height that would result in a clearance to ceiling of…

In-rack sprinklers (see Footnote 1)

Palletized, Solid-Piled, Bin Box, Shelf, or Back-to-Back Shelf Storage

20 ft

20 ft

N/A

Rack Storage Up to and Including 25 ft in Height

20 ft

20 ft

permitted

as alternative to presumed clearance of 20 ft

Rack Storage Over 25 ft in Height

10 ft

10 ft

permitted as alternative to presumed

clearance of 10 ft

Footnote 1: When applying the supplemental in-rack sprinkler option, the ceiling density shall be based

upon the given storage height with an assumed acceptable clearance to ceiling. Provide one level of

supplemental, quick response in-rack sprinklers located directly below the top tier of storage and at every

flue space intersection.

Table 12.1.3.4.2(b) Plastics and Rubber Commodities

Storage Configuration

Where the clearance to

ceiling exceeds

Protection shall be based upon the storage height that would result in a clearance to ceiling of…

In-rack sprinklers (see Footnote 1)

Palletized, Solid-Piled, Bin Box, Shelf, or Back-to-Back Shelf Storage

20 ft

20 ft

N/A

Rack Storage Up to and Including 25 ft in Height

10 ft

10 ft

permitted

as alternative to presumed clearance of 10 ft

Rack Storage Over 25 ft in Height

10 ft

N/A

required

Footnote 1: If in-rack sprinklers are required for the actual storage height with an acceptable clearance to

ceiling, in-rack sprinklers shall be installed as indicated by that criteria. Provide one level of supplemental,

quick response in-rack sprinklers located directly below the top tier of storage and at every flue space

intersection.

Page 177: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Table 12.1.3.4.2(a) Class I through Class IV Commodities Storage Configuration

Where the clearance to

ceiling exceeds

Protection shall be based upon the storage height that would result in a clearance to ceiling of…

In-rack sprinklers (see Footnote 1)

Palletized, Solid-Piled, Bin Box, Shelf, or Back-to-Back Shelf Storage

20 ft

20 ft

N/A

Rack Storage Up to and Including 25 ft in Height

20 ft

20 ft

permitted

as alternative to presumed clearance of 20 ft

Rack Storage Over 25 ft in Height

10 ft

10 ft

permitted as alternative to presumed

clearance of 10 ft

Footnote 1: When applying the supplemental in-rack sprinkler option, the ceiling density shall be based upon the given storage height with an assumed acceptable clearance to ceiling. Provide one level of supplemental, quick response in-rack sprinklers located directly below the top tier of storage and at every flue space intersection.

Table 12.1.3.4.2(b) Plastics and Rubber Commodities

Storage Configuration

Where the clearance to

ceiling exceeds

Protection shall be based upon the storage height that would result in a clearance to ceiling of…

In-rack sprinklers (see Footnote 1)

Palletized, Solid-Piled, Bin Box, Shelf, or Back-to-Back Shelf Storage

20 ft

20 ft

N/A

Rack Storage Up to and Including 25 ft in Height

10 ft

10 ft

permitted

as alternative to presumed clearance of 10 ft

Rack Storage Over 25 ft in Height

10 ft

N/A

required

Footnote 1: If in-rack sprinklers are required for the actual storage height with an acceptable clearance to ceiling, in-rack sprinklers shall be installed as indicated by that criteria. Provide one level of supplemental, quick response in-rack sprinklers located directly below the top tier of storage and at every flue space intersection.

lisa.bossert
Text Box
replaces 12.1.3.4.3
lisa.bossert
Text Box
replaces 12.1.3.4.4
lisa.bossert
Text Box
replaces 12.1.3.4.5
lisa.bossert
Text Box
replaces 12.1.3.4.3
lisa.bossert
Text Box
replaces 12.1.3.4.5
lisa.bossert
Text Box
replaces 12.1.3.4.6
Page 178: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 107-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 12.1.4 ]

12.1.4 * High Volume Low Speed (HVLS) Fans.

12.1.4.1

The installation of HVLS fans in buildings equipped with sprinklers, including ESFR sprinklers, shall comply with the following:

(1) The maximum fan diameter shall be 24 ft (7.3 m).

(2) The HVLS fan shall be centered approximately between four adjacent sprinklers.

(3) The vertical clearance from the HVLS fan to sprinkler deflector shall be a minimum of 3 ft (0.9 m).

(4) All HVLS fans shall be interlocked to shut down immediately upon receiving a waterflow signal from the alarm system in accordance with the requirements of NFPA72 .

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The redundancy task group agrees with this PC.

This is already addressed by 11.1.7.

There is significant redundancy in ch 12 that is already covered in 11.1. The reason for rejection of the PI was that moving criteria to ch 11 might confuse the users. First off, most of the suggested changes were already in 11.1 so it is not being moved. This change just emphasizes we do not need to repeat ourselves. The fact that a user has to go to a different section poses no great burden since they have to go to multiple chapters for every job (especially since we have in-rack criteria hidden in 8.13.2 and no one is losing sleep about that being confusing). Using 11.1 for criteria applicable to all systems is not a hurdle and it does provide better consistency. Keep in mind that if we repeat most but not all criteria, that implies the items not repeated do not apply. That’s a bigger problem than the perception that the users are not bright enough to realize that 11.1 also applies to all systems including storage as stated in 11.1. The bigger the document gets the more different it is to use. Additionally, chap 12 is criteria just for storage and unnecessary redundancy of criteria for all systems obscures the criteria that is truly unique to storage.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 199-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. A.12.1.4]

Related Item

Public Input No. 114-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Huggins

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Assoc.

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu Apr 10 18:19:04 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but held

Resolution: The concept of limiting the redundancy in chapters 12-21 of NFPA has been discussed throughout this revision cycle. While the TC is in general support of thisconcept, making these redundancy revisions at the Second Phase of the cycle is not appropriate. The reject but hold action for this item will allow the TC on DischargeCriteria to submit the concept to the correlating committee for review and refinement before proceeding into the 2019 edition revision cycle.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

165 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 179: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 158-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 12.3 ]

12.3 * Adjacent Hazards or Design Methods.

For buildings with two or more adjacent hazards or design methods, the following shall apply:

(1) Where areas are not physically separated by a barrier or partition capable of delaying heat from a fire in one area from fusing sprinklers in the adjacent area, therequired sprinkler protection for the more demanding design basis shall extend 15 ft (4.6 m) beyond its perimeter.

(2) The requirements of 12.3 (1) shall not apply where the areas are separated by a draft curtain, barrier ,or partition that is capable of delaying heat from a fire in onearea from fusing sprinklers in the adjacent area.

(3) The requirements of 12.3 (1) shall not apply to the extension of more demanding criteria from an upper ceiling level to beneath a lower ceiling level where thedifference in height between the ceiling levels is at least 2 ft (0.6 m).

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_12-3.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The addition of text referencing draft curtains was not requested in PI 193 and the Technical Committee has not provided any substantiation for the addition. Further since a draft curtain does not go from floor-to-ceiling, the reference to it is in conflict with the ideas expressed in the 4th paragraph of A.12.3. Also, as per A.12.1.1.3, draft curtains have been shown to have a negative impact on sprinkler effectiveness and extreme care needs to be taken to minimize any potential impacts, so it is inappropriate to imply that they may be beneficial in the Section 12.3 discussion about adjacent hazards or design methods.

Related Item

First Revision No. 193-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 12.4.3]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon Apr 28 08:53:37 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-73-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The concept of a partition, barrier and draft curtain were all considered to provide the same level of protection in the first draft language. Rather than deleting theallowance for a draft curtain as a means of separating adjacent hazards, the revised second draft language requires a clear aisle to be created beneath the draftcurtain or barrier. This provides an additional level of protection from sprinklers on the “wrong side” of the barrier from opening first.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

166 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 180: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 230-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 12.3 ]

12.3 * Adjacent Hazards or Design Methods.

For buildings with two or more adjacent hazards or design methods, the following shall apply:

(1) Where areas are not physically separated by a barrier or partition capable of delaying heat from a fire in one area from fusing sprinklers in the adjacent area, therequired sprinkler protection for the more demanding design basis shall extend 15 ft (4.6 m) beyond its perimeter.

(2) The requirements of 12.3 (1) shall not apply where the areas are separated by a draft curtain, barrier,or partition that is capable of delaying heat from a fire in onearea from fusing sprinklers in the adjacent area.

(3) The requirements of 12.3 (1) shall not apply to the extension of more demanding criteria from an upper ceiling level to beneath a lower ceiling level where thedifference in height between the ceiling levels is at least 2 ft (0.6 m).

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

redundancy task group agrees with this PC

Already addressed by 11.1.2

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 231-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. A.12.3]

Related Item

Public Input No. 114-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Huggins

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Assoc.

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu May 08 16:27:36 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but held

Resolution: The concept of limiting the redundancy in chapters 12-21 of NFPA has been discussed throughout this revision cycle. While the TC is in general support of thisconcept, making these redundancy revisions at the Second Phase of the cycle is not appropriate. The reject but hold action for this item will allow the TC on DischargeCriteria to submit the concept to the correlating committee for review and refinement before proceeding into the 2019 edition revision cycle.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

167 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 181: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 159-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 12.6.7.1 ]

12.6.7.1

ESFR sprinklers designed to meet any criteria in Chapter 12 or Chapter 14 through Chapter 20 shall be permitted to protect any of the following:

(1) Light hazard occupancies

(2) Ordinary hazard occupancies

(3) Any storage arrangement in Chapter 13 referencing OH1, OH2, EH1, and EH2 design criteria

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_12-6-7-1.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Chapter 12 contains ESFR criteria for protecting idle pallet storage, so that chapter should be referenced in this provision as well.

Related Item

Public Input No. 424-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 12.6.7.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon Apr 28 08:55:35 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Accepted

Resolution: SR-81-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: Chapter 12 contains ESFR criteria for protecting idle pallet storage, so that chapter should be referenced in this provision as well.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

168 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 182: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 160-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 12.6.7.2 ]

12.6.7.2

Quick-response CMSA sprinklers designed to meet any criteria in Chapter 12 or Chapter 14 through Chapter 20 shall be permitted to protect any of the following:

(1) Light hazard occupancies

(2) Ordinary hazard occupancies

(3) Any storage arrangement in Chapter 13 referencing OH1, OH2, EH1, and EH2 design criteria

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_12-6-7-2.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Chapter 12 contains CMSA criteria for protecting idle pallet storage, so that chapter should be referenced in this provision as well.

Related Item

Public Input No. 425-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 12.6.7.2]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon Apr 28 08:56:58 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Accepted

Resolution: SR-82-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: Chapter 12 contains CMSA criteria for protecting idle pallet storage, so that chapter should be referenced in this provision as well.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

169 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 183: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 161-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 12.6.7.3 ]

12.6.7.3

Standard-response CMSA sprinklers designed to meet any criteria in Chapter 12 or Chapter 14 through Chapter 20 shall be permitted to protect any of the following:

(1) Ordinary hazard occupancies

(2) Any storage arrangement in Chapter 13 referencing OH1, OH2, EH1, and EH2 design criteria

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_12-6-7-3.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Chapter 12 contains CMSA criteria for protecting idle pallet storage, so that chapter should be referenced in this provision as well.

Related Item

Public Input No. 426-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 12.6.7.3]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon Apr 28 08:58:03 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Accepted

Resolution: SR-83-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: Chapter 12 contains CMSA criteria for protecting idle pallet storage, so that chapter should be referenced in this provision as well.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

170 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 184: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 108-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 12.7.2 ]

12.7.2 * Systems with Multiple Hazard Classifications.

For systems with multiple hazard classifications, the hose stream allowance and water supply duration shall be in accordance with Section 12.8 as well as one of thefollowing:

(1) The water supply requirements for the highest hazard classification within the system shall be used.

(2) The water supply requirements for each individual hazard classification shall be used in the calculations for the design area for that hazard.

(3)

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The redundancy task group agrees with this PC.

This is addressed by 11.1.6.1

There is significant redundancy in ch 12 that is already covered in 11.1. The reason for rejection of the PI was that moving criteria to ch 11 might confuse the users. First off, most of the suggested changes were already in 11.1 so it is not being moved. This change just emphasizes we do not need to repeat ourselves. The fact that a user has to go to a different section poses no great burden since they have to go to multiple chapters for every job (especially since we have in-rack criteria hidden in 8.13.2 and no one is losing sleep about that being confusing). Using 11.1 for criteria applicable to all systems is not a hurdle and it does provide better consistency. Keep in mind that if we repeat most but not all criteria, that implies the items not repeated do not apply. That’s a bigger problem than the perception that the users are not bright enough to realize that 11.1 also applies to all systems including storage as stated in 11.1. The bigger the document gets the more different it is to use. Additionally, chap 12 is criteria just for storage and unnecessary redundancy of criteria for all systems obscures the criteria that is truly unique to storage.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 200-NFPA 13-2014 [Sections A.12.7.2, A.12.7.2(3)]

Related Item

Public Input No. 114-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Huggins

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Assoc.

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu Apr 10 18:26:08 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but held

Resolution: The concept of limiting the redundancy in chapters 12-21 of NFPA has been discussed throughout this revision cycle. While the TC is in general support of thisconcept, making these redundancy revisions at the Second Phase of the cycle is not appropriate. The reject but hold action for this item will allow the TC on DischargeCriteria to submit the concept to the correlating committee for review and refinement before proceeding into the 2019 edition revision cycle.

* For systems with multiple hazard classifications where the higher classification only lies within single rooms less than or equal to 400 ft 2 (37.2 m 2 ) in area withno such rooms adjacent, the water supply requirements for the principal occupancy shall be used for the remainder of the system.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

171 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 185: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 109-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 12.7.6 ]

12.7.6

Total system water supply requirements shall be determined in accordance with the hydraulic calculation procedures of Chapter 23.

12.7.6.1

When using the density/area method, the design area shall meet the requirements of 23.4.4.2.1 .

12.7.6.2

When using CMSA, the design area shall meet the requirements of 23.4.4.3.1 .

12.7.6.3

When using ESFR sprinklers, the design area shall consist of the most hydraulically demanding area of 12 sprinklers, consisting of four sprinklers on each of three branchlines, unless other specific numbers of design sprinklers are required in other sections of this standard.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This is adequately addressed by 11.1.3. including referencing section 23.4. The users are fully aware that only the sections applicable to the specific sprinkler type applies so no need to reference subsections of 23.4. There is certainly no value in repeating that ESFR is 12 sprinkler on 4 branch lines.

The redundancy task group agrees with this PC.

Related Item

Public Input No. 114-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Huggins

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Assoc.

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu Apr 10 18:33:45 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but held

Resolution: The concept of limiting the redundancy in chapters 12-21 of NFPA has been discussed throughout this revision cycle. While the TC is in general support of thisconcept, making these redundancy revisions at the Second Phase of the cycle is not appropriate. The reject but hold action for this item will allow the TC on DischargeCriteria to submit the concept to the correlating committee for review and refinement before proceeding into the 2019 edition revision cycle.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

172 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 186: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 110-NFPA 13-2014 [ Sections 12.8.1, 12.8.2, 12.8.3, 12.8.4, 12.8.5 ]

Sections 12.8.1, 12.8.2, 12.8.3, 12.8.4, 12.8.5

12.8.1 *

Tanks shall be sized to supply the equipment that they serve.

12.8.2 *

Pumps shall be sized to supply the equipment that they serve.

12.8.3

Water allowance for outside hose shall be added to the sprinkler requirement at the connection to the city main or a yard hydrant, whichever is closer to the system riser.

12.8.4

Where inside hose connections are planned or are required, the following shall apply:

(1) A total water allowance of 50 gpm (189 L/min) for a single hose connection installation shall be added to the sprinkler requirements.

(2) A total water allowance of 100 gpm (378 L/min) for a multiple hose connection installation shall be added to the sprinkler requirements.

(3) The water allowance shall be added in 50 gpm (189 L/min) increments beginning at the most remote hose connection, with each increment added at the pressurerequired by the sprinkler system design at that point.

12.8.5

When hose valves for fire department use are attached to wet pipe sprinkler system risers in accordance with 8.17.5.2 , the following shall apply:

(1) The water supply shall not be required to be added to standpipe demand as determined from NFPA 14.

(2) Where the combined sprinkler system demand and hose stream allowance of Chapter 12 and Chapters 14 through 20 exceeds the requirements of NFPA 14, thishigher demand shall be used.

(3) For partially sprinklered buildings, the sprinkler demand, not including hose stream allowance, as indicated in Chapter 12 and Chapters 14 through 20 shall be addedto the requirements given in NFPA 14.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The redundancy task group agrees with this PC

Already addressed by 11.1.5.2, 11.1.5.3, 11.1.6.2,11.1.6.3, and 11.1.6.4.

There is significant redundancy in ch 12 that is already covered in 11.1. The reason for rejection of the PI was that moving criteria to ch 11 might confuse the users. First off, most of the suggested changes were already in 11.1 so it is not being moved. This change just emphasizes we do not need to repeat ourselves. The fact that a user has to go to a different section poses no great burden since they have to go to multiple chapters for every job (especially since we have in-rack criteria hidden in 8.13.2 and no one is losing sleep about that being confusing). Using 11.1 for criteria applicable to all systems is not a hurdle and it does provide better consistency. Keep in mind that if we repeat most but not all criteria, that implies the items not repeated do not apply. That’s a bigger problem than the perception that the users are not bright enough to realize that 11.1 also applies to all systems including storage as stated in 11.1. The bigger the document gets the more different it is to use. Additionally, chap 12 is criteria just for storage and unnecessary redundancy of criteria for all systems obscures the criteria that is truly unique to storage.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 203-NFPA 13-2014 [Sections A.12.8.1, A.12.8.2]

Related Item

Public Input No. 114-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Huggins

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Assoc.

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu Apr 10 18:42:15 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but held

Resolution: The concept of limiting the redundancy in chapters 12-21 of NFPA has been discussed throughout this revision cycle. While the TC is in general support of thisconcept, making these redundancy revisions at the Second Phase of the cycle is not appropriate. The reject but hold action for this item will allow the TC on DischargeCriteria to submit the concept to the correlating committee for review and refinement before proceeding into the 2019 edition revision cycle.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

173 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 187: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 311-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 12.8.6 [Excluding any Sub-Sections] ]

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

174 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 188: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Unless indicated otherwise, the minimum water supply requirements for a hydraulically designed sprinkler system shall be determined by adding the hose stream allowancefrom Table 12.8.6 to the water demand for sprinklers.

Table 12Table 12 .8.

6 Hose6 Hose Stream Allowance and Water Supply Duration

CommoditySprinkler Type

SprinklerSpacingType

Number ofCeiling

Sprinklers inDesign Area

*

Size ofDesignArea at

Ceiling

Hose StreamAllowance

WaterSupply

Duration

(minutes)

gpm L/min

Control mode density/area Standard and extended-coverage

min

Class I-IVCommodities,

Group Aplastics, idlewood pallets,

idle plasticpallets and

miscellaneousstorage

Control ModeDensity/Area

(CMDA)

Standardand

ExtendedCoverage

NAUp to 1200

ft 2 (

111 m

111m 2 ) 250 950 60

Over 1200

ft 2 (

111 m

111m 2 ) up

to 1500 ft 2

(

139 m

139m 2 ) 500 1900 90

Over 1500

ft 2 (

139 m

139m 2 ) up

to 2600 ft 2

(

240 m

240m 2 ) 500 1900 120

Over 2600

ft 2 (

240 m

240m 2 ) 500 1900 150

Control ModeSpecific

Application( CMSA )

Standard

Up to 12 NA 250 950 60

Over 12 to 15 NA 500 1900 90

Over 15 to 25 NA 500 1900 120

Over 25 NA 500 1900 150

Extended

-coverage

CoverageUp to 6 NA 250 950 60

Up to 8 144

ft 2

ft2 (13.

4 m 2

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

175 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 189: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

4m2 ) maximum 250 950 60

Over 6 to 8 NA 500 1900 90

Over 8 to 12 NA 500 1900 120

Over 12 NA 500 1900 150

EarlySuppression

Fast Response( ESFR )

Standard

Up to 12 NA 250 950 60

Over 12 to 15 NA 500 1900 90

Over 15 to 25 NA 500 1900 120

Over 25 NA 500 1900 150

NA: Not applicable.

* For CSMA and ESFR sprinklers the additional sprinklers included in the design area for obstructions do not need to be considered in determining the total number ofsprinklers in this column

On-floorrubber tire

storage up to5 ft (1.5m) in

height

All

Standardand

ExtendedCoverage

Any Any 250 950 120

Rubber TireStorage

CMDA

Standardand

ExtendedCoverage

NA

Up to 5000

ft 2

(464m 2 )

750 2850 180

CMSA Standard Up to 15 NA 500 1900 180

ESFR StandardUp to 12 NA 250 950 60

Over 12 to 20 NA 500 1900 180

Roll Paper

CMDA Standard NA

Up to 4000

ft 2

(372m 2 )

500 1900 120

CMSA Standard Up to 25 NA 500 1900 120

ESFR Standard Up to 12 NA 250 950 60

NA: Not applicable .

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

NFPA13-2016-FD-NFSA-FRs-Water-Supply.pdf Table 12.8.6.1 Hose Stream Allowance and Water Supply Duration

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

These additions to Table 12.8.6 and related sections consolidate water supply information from chapters 18 and 19 into a single source in the general requirements for storage chapter for clarity.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 312-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 18.3]

Public Comment No. 313-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 18.4]

Public Comment No. 315-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 19.1.1.2]

Public Comment No. 316-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 19.1.1.3]

Related Item

Public Input No. 116-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 12.8.6]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Robert Upson

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA Engineering and Standards Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 11:35:34 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-143-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: These additions to Table 12.8.6 and related sections consolidate water supply information from chapters 18 and 19 into a single source in the general requirementsfor storage chapter for clarity.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

176 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 190: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Action Items from Spring 2014 E & S Meeting for NFPA 13 (2016) FR (Upson) Closes 5/16/14 @ 1700 ET 

15  

Item15–WaterSupplies

Proposed:Table 12.8.6.1 Hose Stream Allowance and Water Supply Duration 

Commodity  Sprinkler Type Sprinkler Spacing Type 

Number of Ceiling 

Sprinklers in Design Area 

Size of Design Area at Ceiling 

Hose Stream Allowance 

Water Supply Duration 

gpm  L/min  min

Class I‐IV Commodities, 

Group A plastics, idle wood pallets, idle plastic pallets and 

miscellaneous storage 

Control Mode Density/Area 

(CMDA) 

Standard and 

Extended Coverage 

NA 

Up to 1200 ft2 (111m2) 

250  950  60 

Over 1200 ft2 (111m2) 

up to 1500 ft2 (139m2) 

500  1900  90 

Over 1500 ft2 (139m2) 

up to 2600 ft2 (240m2) 

500  1900  120 

Over 2600 ft2 (240m2) 

500  1900  150 

Control Mode Specific 

Application (CMSA) 

Standard 

Up to 12  NA  250  950  60 

Over 12 to 15  NA  500  1900  90 

Over 15 to 25  NA  500  1900  120 

Over 25  NA  500  1900  150 

Extended Coverage 

Up to 6  NA  250  950  60 

Up to 8 144 ft2 (13.4m2) maximum 

250  950  60 

Over 6 to 8  NA  500  1900  90 

Over 8 to 12  NA  500  1900  120 

Over 12  NA  500  1900  150 

Early Suppression Fast Response 

(ESFR) Standard 

Up to 12  NA  250  950  60 

Over 12 to 15  NA  500  1900  90 

Over 15 to 25  NA  500  1900  120 

Over 25  NA  500  1900  150 

On‐floor rubber tire 

storage up to 5 ft (1.5m) in height 

All 

Standard and 

Extended Coverage 

Any  Any  250  950  120 

Rubber Tire Storage 

CMDA 

Standard and 

Extended Coverage 

NA Up to 5000 ft2 (464m2) 

750  2850  180 

CMSA  Standard  Up to 15  NA  500  1900  180 

ESFR  Standard Up to 12  NA  250  950  60 

Over 12 to 20  NA  500  1900  180 

Roll Paper 

CMDA  Standard  NA Up to 4000 ft2 (372m2) 

500  1900  120 

CMSA  Standard  Up to 25  NA  500  1900  120 

ESFR  Standard  Up to 12  NA  250  950  60 

  

Page 191: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 111-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 12.9 ]

12.9 11.1.8 Restrictions.

12 11 .9 1 .8. 1*

When using the density/area method or room design method, unless the requirements of 12.9.2 are met for buildings having unsprinklered combustible concealed spaces

as described in 8.15.1.2 and 8.15.6, the minimum area of sprinkler operation for that portion of the building shall be 3000 ft2 (279 m2).

12 11 .9 1 .8. 1.1

The design area of 3000 ft2 (279 m2) shall be applied only to the sprinkler system or portions of the sprinkler system that are adjacent to the qualifying combustibleconcealed space.

12 11 .9 1 .8. 1.2

The term adjacent shall apply to any sprinkler system protecting a space above, below, or next to the qualifying concealed space except where a barrier with a fireresistance rating at least equivalent to the water supply duration completely separates the concealed space from the sprinklered area.

12 11 .9 1 .8. 2

The following unsprinklered combustible concealed spaces shall not require a minimum design area of sprinkler operation of 3000 ft2 (279 m2):

(1) Noncombustible and limited-combustible concealed spaces with minimal combustible loading having no access. The space shall be considered a concealed spaceeven with small openings such as those used as return air for a plenum.

(2) Noncombustible and limited-combustible concealed spaces with limited access and not permitting occupancy or storage of combustibles. The space shall beconsidered a concealed space even with small openings such as those used as return air for a plenum.

(3) Combustible concealed spaces filled entirely with noncombustible insulation.

(4) Concealed spaces where rigid materials are used and the exposed surfaces have a flame spread index of 25 or less and the materials have been demonstrated to notpropagate fire more than 10.5 ft (3.2 m) when tested in accordance with ASTM E 84, Standard Test Method for Surface Burning Characteristics of Building Materials, orANSI/UL 723, Standard for Test for Surface Burning Characteristics of Building Materials, extended for an additional 20 minutes in the form in which they are installedin the space.

(5) Concealed spaces in which the exposed materials are constructed entirely of fire retardant–treated wood as defined by NFPA 703.

(6) Concealed spaces over isolated small compartments not exceeding 55 ft2 (5.1 m2) in area.

(7) Vertical pipe chases under 10 ft2 (0.93 m2), provided that in multifloor buildings the chases are firestopped at each floor using materials equivalent to the floorconstruction. Such pipe chases shall contain no sources of ignition, piping shall be noncombustible, and pipe penetrations at each floor shall be properly sealed.

(8) Exterior columns under 10 ft2 (0.93 m2) in area formed by studs or wood joists, supporting exterior canopies that are fully protected with a sprinkler system.

(9)

(9) *Light or ordinary hazard occupancies where noncombustible or limited-combustible ceilings are directly attached to the bottom of solid wood joists so as tocreate enclosed joist spaces 160 ft3 (4.5 m3) or less in volume, including space below insulation that is laid directly on top or within the ceiling joists in an otherwisesprinklered concealed space.

(10) *Light or ordinary hazard occupancies where noncombustible or limited-combustible ceilings are attached to the bottom of composite wood joists either directlyor on to metal channels not exceeding 1 in. (25.4 mm) in depth, provided the adjacent joist channels are firestopped into volumes not exceeding 160 ft3 (4.5 m3)using materials equivalent to 1⁄2 in. (12.7 mm) gypsum board and at least 31⁄2 in. (90 mm) of batt insulation is installed at the bottom of the joist channels when theceiling is attached utilizing metal channels.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This criteria is not unique to storage but applies to all types of facilities. It should be located in 11.1 so as to avoid unnecessary redundancy. The two sections that we removed at the first draft meeting that refer to an occupancy hazard classification needs to be returned. When located in 11.1, it presents no conflict to its application to storage since it is self evident that it applies only to the occupancy hazard approach..

The redundancy task group agrees with this PC

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 112-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 11.2.3.1.4]

Public Comment No. 204-NFPA 13-2014 [Sections A.11.2.3.1.4(3), A.11.2.3.1.4(4)(d), A.11.2.3.1.4(...]

Public Comment No. 205-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. A.12.9.1]

Related Item

Public Input No. 114-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Huggins

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Assoc.

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Apr 11 14:52:43 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but held

Resolution: The concept of limiting the redundancy in chapters 12-21 of NFPA has been discussed throughout this revision cycle. While the TC is in general support of thisconcept, making these redundancy revisions at the Second Phase of the cycle is not appropriate. The reject but hold action for this item will allow the TC on DischargeCriteria to submit the concept to the correlating committee for review and refinement before proceeding into the 2019 edition revision cycle.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

177 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 192: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 88-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 12.9 ]

12.9 Restrictions Unsprinklered Combustible Concealed Spaces .

12.9.1*

When using the density/area method or room design method, unless the requirements of 12.9.2 are met for buildings having unsprinklered combustible concealed spaces

as described in 8.15.1.2 and 8.15.6, the minimum area of sprinkler operation for that portion of the building shall be 3000 ft2 (279 m2).

12.9.1.1

The design area of 3000 ft2 (279 m2) shall be applied only to the sprinkler system or portions of the sprinkler system that are adjacent to the qualifying combustibleconcealed space.

12.9.1.2

The term adjacent shall apply to any sprinkler system protecting a space above, below, or next to the qualifying concealed space except where a barrier with a fireresistance rating at least equivalent to the water supply duration completely separates the concealed space from the sprinklered area.

12.9.2

The following unsprinklered combustible concealed spaces shall not require a minimum design area of sprinkler operation of 3000 ft2 (279 m2):

(1) Noncombustible and limited-combustible concealed spaces with minimal combustible loading having no access. The space shall be considered a concealed spaceeven with small openings such as those used as return air for a plenum.

(2) Noncombustible and limited-combustible concealed spaces with limited access and not permitting occupancy or storage of combustibles. The space shall beconsidered a concealed space even with small openings such as those used as return air for a plenum.

(3) Combustible concealed spaces filled entirely with noncombustible insulation.

(4) Concealed spaces where rigid materials are used and the exposed surfaces have a flame spread index of 25 or less and the materials have been demonstrated to notpropagate fire more than 10.5 ft (3.2 m) when tested in accordance with ASTM E 84, Standard Test Method for Surface Burning Characteristics of Building Materials, orANSI/UL 723, Standard for Test for Surface Burning Characteristics of Building Materials, extended for an additional 20 minutes in the form in which they are installedin the space.

(5) Concealed spaces in which the exposed materials are constructed entirely of fire retardant–treated wood as defined by NFPA 703.

(6) Concealed spaces over isolated small compartments not exceeding 55 ft2 (5.1 m2) in area.

(7) Vertical pipe chases under 10 ft2 (0.93 m2), provided that in multifloor buildings the chases are firestopped at each floor using materials equivalent to the floorconstruction. Such pipe chases shall contain no sources of ignition, piping shall be noncombustible, and pipe penetrations at each floor shall be properly sealed.

(8) Exterior columns under 10 ft2 (0.93 m2) in area formed by studs or wood joists, supporting exterior canopies that are fully protected with a sprinkler system.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This is a simple clarification. The only topic addressed by this section is combustible concealed spaces and restriction is a rather ambiguous title. There were many parts to PI 13-114 and this issue was not addressed in the committee statement so don’t know if it was inadvertently overlooked.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 92-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Related Item

Public Input No. 114-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Huggins

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Assoc.

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu Mar 27 18:17:43 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Accepted

Resolution: SR-84-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The only topic addressed by this section is combustible concealed spaces and restriction is a rather ambiguous title.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

178 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 193: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 90-NFPA 13-2014 [ Chapter 13 ]

Chapter 13 Protection of Miscellaneous and Low-Piled Storage

13.1 General.

13.1.1

This chapter shall apply to any of the following situations:

(1) Miscellaneous storage of Class I through Class IV commodities up to 12 ft (3.7 m) in height

(2) Miscellaneous storage of Group A plastics up to 12 ft (3.7 m) in height

(3) Miscellaneous storage of rubber tires up to 12 ft (3.7 m) in height

(4) Miscellaneous storage of rolled paper up to 12 ft (3.7 m) in height

(5) Storage of Class I through Class IV commodities up to 12 ft (3.7 m) in height as directed by 14.2.3.1 and 16.2.1.2.1

(6) Storage of Group A plastics up to 5 ft (1.5 m) in height as directed by 15.2.1 and 17.2.1.1

13.1.2 Hose Connections.

Hose connections shall not be required for the protection of miscellaneous storage.

13.2 Design Basis.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

179 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 194: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

13.2.1

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

180 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 195: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

The protection criteria shall be selected from Table 13.2.1 and Figure 13.2.1.

Table 13.2.1 Discharge Criteria for Miscellaneous Storage Up to 12 ft (3.7 m) in Height

Commodity Type of Storage

StorageHeight

MaximumCeilingHeight

DesignCurve

Figure13.2.1 Note

Inside Hose

Total CombinedInside and Outside

HoseDuration

(minutes)

ft m ft m gpm L/min gpm L/min

Class I to Class IV

Class I

Solid-piled, palletized, bin box, shelf,single-, double-, multiple-row rack,and back-to-back shelf storage

≤12 ≤3.7 — — OH10, 50,100

0, 189,379

250 946 90

Class II ≤10 ≤3.0 — — OH10, 50,100

0, 189,379

250 946 90

Class II>10to≤12

>3.0to

≤3.7— — OH2

0, 50,100

0, 189,379

250 946 90

Class III ≤12 ≤3.7 — — OH20, 50,100

0, 189,379

250 946 90

Class IV ≤10 ≤3.0 — — OH20, 50,100

0, 189,379

250 946 90

Class IVPalletized, bin box, shelf, andsolid-piled

>10to≤12

>3.0to

≤3.732 9.8 OH2

0, 50,100

0, 189,379

250 946 90

Single-, double-, multiple-row rackand back-to-back shelf storage

>10to≤12

>3.0to

≤3.732 9.8 EH1

0, 50,100

0, 189,379

500 1893 120

Group A Plastic Storage

CartonedUnexpanded

and expanded

Solid-piled, palletized, bin box, shelf,single-, double-, multiple-row rack,and back-to-back shelf storage

≤5 ≤1.5 — — OH20, 50,100

0, 189,379

250 946 90

>5 to≤10

>1.5to

≤3.015 4.6 EH1

0, 50,100

0, 189,379

500 1893 120

>5 to≤10

>1.5to

≤3.020 6.1 EH2

0, 50,100

0, 189,379

500 1893 120

>10to≤12

>3.0to

≤3.717 5.2 EH2

0, 50,100

0, 189,379

500 1893 120

Solid-piled, palletized, bin box, shelf,and back-to-back shelf storage

>10to≤12

>3.0to

≤3.732 9.8 EH2

0, 50,100

0, 189,379

500 1893 120

Single-, double-, multiple-row rack>10to≤12

>3.0to

≤3.732 9.8 OH2

+

1 level ofin-rack

0, 50, 100 0, 189, 379 250 946 90

Exposed

Unexpanded andexpanded

Solid-piled, palletized, bin box, shelf, single-, double-, multiple-rowrack, and back-to-back shelf storage

≤5 ≤1.5 — — OH20, 50,100

0, 189,379

250 946 90

Solid-piled, palletized, bin box, shelf, and back-to-back shelfstorage

>5 to≤8

>1.5 to≤2.4

28 8.5 EH20, 50,100

0, 189,379

500 1893 120

Solid-piled, palletized, bin box, shelf, single-, double-, multiple-rowrack, and back-to-back shelf storage

>5 to≤10

>1.5 to≤3.0

15 4.6 EH20, 50,100

0, 189,379

500 1893 120

UnexpandedSolid-piled, palletized, bin box, shelf, single-, double-, multiple-rowrack, and back-to-back shelf storage

>5 to≤10

>1.5 to≤3.0

20 6.1 EH20, 50,100

0, 189,379

500 1893 120

Expanded Single-, double-, multiple-row rack>5 to≤10

>1.5 to≤3.0

20 6.1 OH2

+

1 level of in-rack 0, 50, 1000, 189,

379250 946 90

Unexpanded andexpanded

Solid-piled, palletized, bin box, shelf, and back-to-back shelfstorage

>10 to ≤12>3.0 to≤3.7

17 5.2 EH20, 50,100

0, 189,379

500 1893 120

Single-, double-, multiple-row rack

>10 to ≤12>3.0 to≤3.7

17 5.2 EH20, 50,100

0, 189,379

500 1893 120

>10 to ≤12>3.0 to≤3.7

32 9.8 OH2

+

1 level of in-rack 0, 50, 100 0, 189, 379 250 946 90

Tire Storage

Tires

On floor, on side >5 to ≤12 >1.5 to ≤3.7 32 9.8 EH1 0, 50, 100 0, 189, 379 500 1893 120

On floor, on tread, or on side ≤5 ≤1.5 — — OH2 0, 50, 100 0, 189, 379 250 946 90

Single-, double-, or multiple-row racks on tread or on side ≤5 ≤1.5 — — OH2 0, 50, 100 0, 189, 379 250 946 90

Single-row rack, portable, on tread or on side >5 to ≤12 >1.5 to ≤3.7 32 9.8 EH1 0, 50, 100 0, 189, 379 500 1893 120

Single-row rack, fixed, on tread or on side>5 to ≤12 >1.5 to ≤3.7 32 9.8 EH1 0, 50, 100 0, 189, 379 500 1893 120

>5 to ≤12 >1.5 to ≤3.7 32 9.8 OH2

+

1 level of in-rack 0, 50, 100 0, 189, 379 250 946 90

Rolled Paper Storage

Heavyweight and mediumweight On end ≤10 ≤3.0 30 9.1 OH2 0, 50, 100 0, 189, 379 250 946 90

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

181 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 196: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Tissue and lightweight On end ≤10 ≤3.0 30 9.1 EH1 0, 50, 100 0, 189, 379 250 946 120

Figure 13.2.1 Miscellaneous Storage Up to 12 ft (3.7 m) in Height — Design Curves (see Table 13.2.1).

13.2.2

Installation criteria as permitted by NFPA 13 and design criteria and modifiers as permitted by the density/area method of Chapter 11 for ordinary hazard Group 1, ordinaryhazard Group 2, extra hazard Group 1, and extra hazard Group 2 occupancies shall be applicable.

13.2.3

Where K-11.2 (160) or larger sprinklers are used with EH1 or EH2 design curves from Figure 13.2.1, the design area shall be permitted to be reduced by 25 percent but not

below 2000 ft2 (186 m2), regardless of temperature rating.

13.3 In-Rack Sprinklers.

13.3.1 General.

In-rack sprinklers required by Table 13.2.1 shall meet the requirements of this section and the applicable storage protection and arrangement sections of this chapter.

13.3.2 Discharge Criteria.

In-rack sprinklers shall have a K-factor of 5.6 (80) or larger and operate at a minimum of 15 psi (1 bar).

13.3.3 Water Demand.

Where one level of in-rack sprinklers is installed for miscellaneous storage, water demand shall be based on simultaneous operation of the hydraulically most demandingfour adjacent sprinklers.

13.3.4 In-Rack Sprinkler Locations.

13.3.4.1

In-rack sprinklers for miscellaneous storage shall be located at the first tier level at or above one-half of the storage height.

13.3.4.2

Maximum horizontal spacing of in-rack sprinklers in single- or double-row racks with Class Ithrough IV commodities, Group A plastics, tires, and rolled paper shall be inaccordance with Table 13.3.4.2.

Table 13.3.4.2 In-Rack Sprinkler Spacing for Class I, II, III, and IV Commodities Stored in Single- or Double-Row Racks Up to 12 ft (3.7 m) in Height

Commodity Class

Aisle Widths I and II III IV Group A Plastics, Tires and Rolled Paper

Encapsulated ft m ft m ft m ft m ft m

No 8 2.4 12 3.7 12 3.7 10 3.0 8 2.4

No 4 1.2 12 3.7 10 3.0 10 3.0 8 2.4

Yes — — 8 2.4 8 2.4 8 2.4 8 2.4

13.3.4.3

In-rack sprinklers shall be located in the longitudinal flue at the intersection of the transverse flues while not exceeding the maximum spacing rules.

13.3.4.3.1

If no longitudinal flue is provided in single- and double-row racks, in-rack sprinklers shall be located within 12 in. (300 mm) of the center of the rack while not exceeding themaximum spacing.

13.3.4.4

Where distances between transverse flues exceed the maximum allowable distances, sprinklers shall be installed at the intersection of the transverse and longitudinal fluesand additional sprinklers shall be installed between transverse flues to meet the maximum distance rules.

13.3.4.5

Where no transverse flues exist, in-rack sprinklers shall not exceed the maximum spacing rules.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Correlates with the chapter titles for 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, & 19

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 91-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Related Item

First Revision No. 316-NFPA 13-2013 [Chapter 13 [Title Only]]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Huggins

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Assoc.

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu Mar 27 18:59:06 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-85-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: This revision correlates with the chapter titles for 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, & 19

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

182 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 197: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 249-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 13.3.4.2 ]

13.3.4.2

Maximum horizontal spacing of in-rack sprinklers in single- or double-row racks with Class Ithrough IV commodities, Group A plastics, tires, and rolled paper shall be inaccordance with Table 13.3.4.2 .

Table 13.3.4.2 In-Rack Sprinkler Spacing for Class I, II, III, and IV Commodities Stored in Single- or Double-Row Racks Up to 12 ft (3.7 m) in Height

Commodity Class Aisle Widths I and II III IV Group A Plastics, Tires and RolledPaper Encapsulated ft m ft m ft m ft m ft m No 8 2.4 12 3.7 12 3.7 10 3.0 8 2.4 No 4 1.2 12 3.7 10 3.0 10 3.0 8 2.4 Yes — — 8 2.4 8 2.4 8 2.4 8 2.4

shall not exceed 8 ft (2.4 m).

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The inclusion of criteria for the installation of in-rack sprinklers for protection of Class I, II, III, and IV Commodities and Rolled Paper is confusing to the user of hte standard when there is no requirement under Table 13.2.1 for in-rack sprinklers with these products. The installation of in-rack sprinklers with miscellaneous storage is only required for certain Group A plastic and tire arrangements.

Related Item

Public Input No. 330-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 13.3.4.2]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Tracey Bellamy

Organization: Telgian Corporation

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon May 12 23:05:26 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-74-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The inclusion of criteria for the installation of in-rack sprinklers for protection of Class I, II, III, and IV Commodities and Rolled Paper is confusing to the user of htestandard when there is no requirement under Table 13.2.1 for in-rack sprinklers with these products. The installation of in-rack sprinklers with miscellaneous storage isonly required for certain Group A plastic and tire arrangements.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

183 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 198: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 262-NFPA 13-2014 [ Chapter 14 ]

Chapter 14 Protection for Palletized, Solid-Piled, Bin Box, Shelf, or Back-to-Back Shelf Storage of Class I through Class IV Commodities

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

184 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 199: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

14.1 General.

14.1.1

This chapter shall apply to palletized, solid-piled, bin box, shelf, or back-to-back shelf storage for a broad range of combustibles.

14. 1. 2

The requirements of Chapter 12 shall apply unless modified by this chapter.

14.2 * Control Mode Density/Area Sprinkler Protection Criteria for Palletized, Solid-Piled, Bin Box, Shelf, or Back-to-Back Shelf Storage of Class I Through Class IVCommodities.

14.2.1

Protection for Class I through Class IV commodities in the following configurations shall be provided in accordance with this section:

(1) Nonencapsulated commodities that are solid-piled, palletized, or bin box storage up to 30 ft (9.1 m) in height

(2) Nonencapsulated commodities on shelf storage up to 15 ft (4.6 m) in height

(3)

(4) Back-to-back shelf storage up to 15 ft (4.6 m) in height

(5) Encapsulated storage of solid-piled and palletized Class I through IV commodities permitted in accordance with 14.2.5 for storage heights over 15 ft (4.6 m) up to andincluding 20 ft (6.1 m)

14.2.

14.2. 2

The area and density for the hydraulically remote area and the water supply shall be determined as specified in

3

for storage up to and including 12 ft (3.7 m) and 14.2.4 for storage over 12 ft (3.7 m).

14.2.3 Protection Criteria for Palletized, Solid-Piled, Bin Box, Shelf, or Back-to-Back Shelf Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Up to 12 ft (3.7 m) inHeight.

14.2.3.1

The protection criteria for storage up to and including 12 ft (3.7 m) shall be the same as for miscellaneous storage selected from Chapter 13.

14.2. 3.2

The protection criteria in Chapter 13 shall be acceptable for storage of Class I to Class IV commodities up to and including 12 ft (3.7 m) in height (see Table 13.2.1 ).

14.2. 4 Protection Criteria for Palletized, Solid-Piled, Bin Box, Shelf, or Back-to-Back Shelf Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Over 12 ft (3.7 m) inHeight.

14.2.4.1

Where using ordinary temperature–rated sprinklers, a single point shall be selected from the appropriate commodity curve on Figure 14.2.4.1.

Figure 14.2.4.1 Sprinkler System Design Curves for 20 ft

(6.1 m) High Storage — Ordinary Temperature–Rated Sprinklers.

14.2.4.2

Where using high temperature–rated sprinklers, a single point shall be selected from the appropriate commodity curve on Figure 14.2.4.2.

Figure 14.2.4.2 Sprinkler System Design Curves for 20 ft

(6.1 m) High Storage — High Temperature–Rated Sprinklers.

* Encapsulated commodities that are solid-piled, palletized, bin box, or shelf storage up to 15 ft (4.6 m) in height

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

185 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 200: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

14.2.4.3

The densities selected in accordance with 14.2.4.1 or 14.2.4.2 shall be modified in accordance with Figure 14.2.4.3 without revising the design area.

Figure 14.2.4.3 Ceiling Sprinkler Density vs. Storage Height.

14.2.4.4

In the case of metal bin boxes with face areas not exceeding 16 ft2 (1.5 m2) and metal closed shelves with face areas not exceeding 16 ft2 (1.5 m2), the area of applicationshall be permitted to be reduced by 33 percent, provided the minimum requirements of 14.2.4.5 and 14.2.4.6 are met.

14.2.4.5

For storage greater than 12 ft (3.7 m), the The design density shall not be less than 0.15 gpm/ft2 (6.1 mm/min), and the design area shall not be less than 2000 ft2 (186

m2) for wet systems or 2600 ft2 (242 m2) for dry systems for any commodity, class, or group.

14.2.4.6

For storage greater than 12 ft (3.7 m), the The sprinkler design density for any given area of operation for a Class III or Class IV commodity, calculated in accordance with14.2.4, shall not be less than the density for the corresponding area of operation for ordinary hazard Group 2.

14.2.4.7

For back-to-back shelf storage, the design density shall be taken from Figure 14.2.4.1 for storage greater than 12 ft (3.7 m) and up to 15 ft (4.6 m) with no reduction fordesign density referenced in Figure 14.2.4.3.

14.2.5 Encapsulated Storage Over 15 ft (4.6 m) in Height Up to and Including 20 ft (6.1 m) in Height.

14.2.5.1

Encapsulated storage over 15 ft (4.6 m) in height up to and including 20 ft (6.1 m) in height Storage shall be limited to solid-piled and palletized storage.

14.2.5.2

Encapsulated storage over 15 ft (4.6 m) in height up to and including 20 ft (6.1 m) in height Storage shall be protected by sprinklers with a K-factor of 11.2 (160) or larger.

14.2.5.3

Encapsulated storage over 15 ft (4.6 m) in height up to and including 20 ft (6.1 m) in height of Class I commodity shall be protected with a density/area of at least 0.46

gpm/ft2 over 2000 ft2 (18.7 mm/min over 186 m2).

14.2.5.4

Encapsulated storage over 15 ft (4.6 m) in height up to and including 20 ft (6.1 m) in height of Class II commodity shall be protected with a density/area of at least 0.53

gpm/ft2 over 2000 ft2 (21.7 mm/min over 186 m2).

14.2.5.5

Encapsulated storage over 15 ft (4.6 m) in height up to and including 20 ft (6.1 m) in height of Class III and Class IV commodity shall be protected with a density/area of at

least 0.6 gpm/ft2 over 2000 ft2 (24.5 mm/min over 186 m2).

14.3 CMSA Sprinklers for Palletized or Solid-Piled Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

186 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 201: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

14.3.1

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

187 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 202: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Protection of palletized and solid-piled storage of Class I through Class IV commodities shall be in accordance with Table 14.3.1.

Table 14.3.1 CMSA Sprinkler Design Criteria for Palletized and Solid-Piled Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities (Encapsulated and Nonencapsulated)

ConfigurationCommodity

Class

Maximum StorageHeight

Maximum Ceiling/RoofHeight K-Factor/

Orientation

Type ofSystem

Number of DesignSprinklers

Minimum OperatingPressure

ft m ft m psi bar

Palletized Class I or II

25 7.6

30 9.1

11.2 (160)Upright

Wet 15 25 1.7

Dry 25 25 1.7

16.8 (240)Upright

Wet 15 10 0.7

Dry 25 15 1.0

19.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 15 16 1.1

35 10.6

11.2 (160)Upright

Wet 15 25 1.7

Dry 25 25 1.7

16.8 (240)Upright

Wet 15 15 1.0

Dry 25 15 1.0

30 9.1 35 10.619.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 15 25 1.7

35 10.6 40 12.119.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 15 30 2.1

Class III

25 7.6

30 9.1

11.2 (160)Upright

Wet 15 25 1.7

Dry 25 25 1.7

16.8 (240)Upright

Wet 15 15 1.0

Dry 25 15 1.0

19.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 15 16 1.1

35 10.6

11.2 (160)Upright

Wet 15 25 1.7

Dry 25 25 1.7

16.8 (240)Upright

Wet 15 15 1.0

Dry 25 15 1.0

30 9.1 35 10.619.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 15 25 1.7

35 10.6 40 12.119.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 15 30 2.1

Class IV

20 6.1 30 9.1

11.2 (160)Upright Wet

20 25 1.7

15 50 3.5

16.8 (240)Upright

Wet20 15 1.0

15 22 1.5

19.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 15 16 1.1

25 7.6 30 9.1

16.8 (240)Upright

Wet 15 22 1.5

19.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 15 16 1.1

30 9.1 35 10.619.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 15 25 1.7

35 10.6 40 12.119.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 15 30 2.1

Solid piled Class I or II

20 6.1 30 9.1

11.2 (160)Upright

Wet 15 25 1.7

Dry 25 25 1.7

16.8 (240)Upright

Wet 15 10 0.7

Dry 25 15 1.0

19.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 15 16 1.1

25 7.6 30 9.1

16.8 (240)Upright

Wet 15 10 0.7

19.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 15 16 1.1

30 9.1 35 10.619.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 15 25 1.7

35 10.6 40 12.119.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 15 30 2.1

Class III

20 6.1 30 9.1

11.2 (160)Upright

Wet 15 25 1.7

Dry 25 25 1.7

16.8 (240)Upright

Wet 15 15 1.0

Dry 25 15 1.0

19.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 15 16 1.1

25 7.6 30 9.1

16.8 (240)Upright

Wet 15 22 1.5

19.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 15 16 1.1

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

188 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 203: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

ConfigurationCommodity

Class

Maximum StorageHeight

Maximum Ceiling/RoofHeight K-Factor/

Orientation

Type ofSystem

Number of DesignSprinklers

Minimum OperatingPressure

ft m ft m psi bar

30 9.1 35 10.619.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 15 25 1.7

35 10.6 40 12.119.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 15 30 2.1

Class IV

20 6.1 30 9.1

11.2 (160)Upright

Wet 15 50 3.5

16.8 (240)Upright

Wet 15 22 1.5

19.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 15 16 1.1

25 7.6 30 9.1

16.8 (240)Upright

Wet 15 22 1.5

19.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 15 16 1.1

30 9.1 35 10.619.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 15 25 1.7

35 10.6 40 12.119.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 15 30 2.1

14.3.2

Protection shall be provided as specified in Table 14.3.1 or appropriate NFPA standards in terms of minimum operating pressure and the number of sprinklers to beincluded in the design area.

14.3.3 Open Wood Joist Construction.

14.3.3.1

Where CMSA sprinklers are installed under open wood joist construction, their minimum operating pressure shall be 50 psi (3.4 bar) for a K-11.2 (160) sprinkler or 22 psi(1.5 bar) for a K-16.8 (240) sprinkler.

14.3.3.2

For CMSA sprinklers, where Where each joist channel of open wood joist construction is fully firestopped to its full depth at intervals not exceeding 20 ft (6.1 m), the lowerpressures specified in Table 14.3.1 shall be permitted to be used.

14.3.4

Hose stream allowance and water supply duration requirements shall be in accordance with Table 14.3.1.

14.3.5 Preaction Systems.

14.3.5.1

For the purpose of using Table 14.3.1, preaction systems shall be classified as dry pipe systems.

14

.

3.6

Building steel shall not require special protection where Table

14.

3.1 are applied as appropriate for the storage configuration.

14. 4 Early Suppression Fast-Response (ESFR) Sprinklers for Palletized or Solid-Piled Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

189 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 204: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

14.4.1

Protection of palletized and solid-piled storage of Class I through Class IV commodities shall be in accordance with Table 14.4.1.

Table 14.4.1 ESFR Protection of Palletized and Solid-Piled Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities

Commodity

Maximum StorageHeight

Maximum Ceiling/RoofHeight Nominal

K-FactorOrientation

Minimum OperatingPressure

ft m ft m psi bar

Class I, II, III, or IV, encapsulated and nonencapsulated(no open-top containers)

20 6.1 25 7.6

14.0

(200)

Upright/

pendent50 3.4

16.8

(240)

Upright/

pendent35 2.4

22.4

(320)Pendent 25 1.7

25.2

(360)Pendent 15 1.0

25 7.6

30 9.1

14.0

(200)

Upright/

pendent50 3.4

16.8

(240)

Upright/

pendent35 2.4

22.4

(320)Upright/pendent 25 1.7

25.2

(360)Upright/pendent 15 1.0

32 9.8

14.0

(200)

Upright/

pendent60 4.1

16.8

(240)Upright/pendent 42 2.9

30 9.1 35 10.7

14.0

(200)

Upright/

pendent75 5.2

16.8

(240)

Upright/

pendent52 3.6

22.4

(320)Pendent 35 2.4

25.2

(360)Pendent 20 1.4

35 10.7 40 12.2

16.8

(240)Pendent 52 3.6

22.4

(320)Pendent 40 2.8

25.2

(360)Pendent 25 1.7

35 10.7 45 13.7

22.4

(320)Pendent 40 2.8

25.2

(360)Pendent 40 2.8

40 12.2 45 13.7

22.4

(320)Pendent 40 2.8

25.2

(360)Pendent 40 2.8

14.4.2

ESFR sprinkler systems shall be designed such that the minimum operating pressure is not less than that indicated in Table 14.4.1 for commodity, storage height, andbuilding height involved.

14.4.3

The design area shall consist of the most hydraulically demanding area of 12 sprinklers, consisting of four sprinklers on each of three branch lines.

14.5 Special Design for Palletized, Solid-Piled, Bin Box, or Shelf Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities.

14.5.1 Bin Box and Shelf Storage.

14.5.1.1

Bin box and shelf storage Storage that is over 12 ft (3.7 m) but not in excess of the height limits of 14.2.1 and that is provided with walkways at vertical intervals of notover 12 ft (3.7 m) shall be protected with automatic sprinklers under the walkway(s).

14.5.1.2

Protection shall be as follows:

(1) Ceiling design density shall be based on the total height of storage within the building.

(2) Automatic sprinklers under walkways shall be designed to maintain a minimum discharge pressure of 15 psi (1 bar) for the most hydraulically demanding sixsprinklers on each level. Walkway sprinkler demand shall not be required to be added to the ceiling sprinkler demand. Sprinklers under walkways shall not be spacedmore than 8 ft (2.4 m) apart horizontally.

14.6 High-Expansion Foam — Reduction to Ceiling Density.

A reduction in ceiling density to one-half that required for Class I through Class IV commodities, idle pallets, or plastics shall be permitted without revising the design area,

but the density shall be no less than 0.15 gpm/ft2 (6.1 mm/min).

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Submitted on behalf of the SSD Redundancy Task Group. Location has meaning and context information from the Chapter Title and Section Headings does not need to be repeated throughout the Chapter. Chapter 14 is only for protection of Palletized, Solid-Piled, Bin Box, Shelf, or Back-to-Back Shelf Storage of Class Ithrough Class IV Commodities. There is no need to reference the storage type or commodity unless the section only applies to a subset. The same is true for the type of sprinkler. As

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

190 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 205: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

an example section 14.3 applies to CMSA sprinklers and there is no need to repeat "CSMA" in each subsection.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 261-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input] Both apply to redundant and duplicated text.

Public Comment No. 325-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 327-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 334-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 342-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 346-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 16.3]

Public Comment No. 355-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 356-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Related Item

Public Input No. 487-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 3.3.22]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Kenneth Linder

Organization: Swiss Re

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Wed May 14 16:04:14 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but held

Resolution: The concept of limiting the redundancy in chapters 12-21 of NFPA has been discussed throughout this revision cycle. While the TC is in general support of thisconcept, making these redundancy revisions at the Second Phase of the cycle is not appropriate. The reject but hold action for this item will allow the TC on DischargeCriteria to submit the concept to the correlating committee for review and refinement before proceeding into the 2019 edition revision cycle.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

191 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 206: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 246-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after 14.1.2 ]

14.1.3 Protection criteria for Group A plastics shall be permitted for the protection of the same storage height and configuration of Class I, II, III, and IVcommodities.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Contary to the Committee Statement for resolution of PI No. 94 the inclusion of the proposed section is needed since under the provisions of 14.2.5 for encapsualted storage can exceed that requried for Group A plastics storage as allowed in Chapter 16.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 247-NFPA 13-2014 [New Section after 15.1.1]

Related Item

Public Input No. 94-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Tracey Bellamy

Organization: Telgian Corporation

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon May 12 21:13:20 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-86-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: Contary to the Committee Statement for resolution of PI No. 94 the inclusion of the proposed section is needed since under the provisions of 14.2.5 for encapsualtedstorage can exceed that requried for Group A plastics storage as allowed in Chapter 16.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

192 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 207: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 194-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 14.4.1 ]

14.4.1

Protection of palletized and solid-piled storage of Class I through Class IV commodities shall be in accordance with Table 14.4.1.

Table 14.4.1 ESFR Protection of Palletized and Solid-Piled Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities

Commodity

Maximum StorageHeight

Maximum Ceiling/RoofHeight Nominal

K-FactorOrientation

Minimum OperatingPressure

ft m ft m psi bar

Class I, II, III, or IV, encapsulated and nonencapsulated (noopen-top containers)

20 6.1 25 7.6

14.0

(200)

Upright/

pendent50 3.4

16.8

(240)

Upright/

pendent35 2.4

22.4

(320)Pendent 25 1.7

25.2

(360)Pendent 15 1.0

25 7.6

30 9.1

14.0

(200)

Upright/

pendent50 3.4

16.8

(240)

Upright/

pendent35 2.4

22.4

(320)Upright/pendent 25 1.7

25.2

(360)Upright/pendent 15 1.0

32 9.8

14.0

(200)

Upright/

pendent60 4.1

16.8

(240)Upright/pendent 42 2.9

30 9.1 35 10.7

14.0

(200)

Upright/

pendent75 5.2

16.8

(240)

Upright/

pendent52 3.6

22.4

(320)Pendent 35 2.4

25.2

(360)Pendent 20 1.4

35 10.7 40 12.2

16.8

(240)Pendent 52 3.6

22.4

(320)Pendent 40 2.8

25.2

(360)Pendent 25 1.7

35 10.7 45 13.7

22.4

(320)Pendent 40 2.8

25.2

(360)Pendent 40 2.8

40 12.2 45 13.7

22.4

(320)Pendent 40 2.8

25.2

(360)Pendent 40 2.8

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

CC NOTE: The following CC Note No. 10 appeared in the First Draft Report as First Revision No. 298, and is also related to Public Input No. 574 and 575.

The TC should review the modifications to the table for the “upright orientation” for K 25.2, K22.4 and K 16.8 sprinklers at 32 ft ceiling height. These should not have been included.

Related Item

Public Input No. 574-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 14.4.1]

Public Input No. 575-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 14.4.1]

First Revision No. 298-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 14.4.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: CC on AUT-AAC

Organization: CC on Automatic Sprinkler Systems

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Tue Apr 29 14:19:59 EDT 2014

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

193 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 208: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-87-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: As directed by the Correlating Committee, the TC reviewed the modifications to the table for the “upright orientation” for K 25.2, K22.4 and K 16.8 sprinklers at 32 ftceiling height.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

194 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 209: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 247-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after 15.1.1 ]

15.1.2 Protection criteria for Group A plastics shall be permitted for the protection of the same storage height and configuration of Class I, II, III, and IVcommodities.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Contary to the Committee Statement for resolution of PI No. 94 the inclusion of the proposed section is needed since under the provisions of 14.2.5 for encapsualted storage can exceed that requried for Group A plastics storage as allowed in Chapter 16.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 246-NFPA 13-2014 [New Section after 14.1.2]

Related Item

Public Input No. 94-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Tracey Bellamy

Organization: Telgian Corporation

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon May 12 21:19:08 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-86-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: Contary to the Committee Statement for resolution of PI No. 94 the inclusion of the proposed section is needed since under the provisions of 14.2.5 for encapsualtedstorage can exceed that requried for Group A plastics storage as allowed in Chapter 16.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

195 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 210: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 100-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 15.2 ]

15.2* Control Mode Density/Area Sprinkler Protection Criteria for Palletized, Solid-Piled, Bin Box, Shelf, or Back-to-Back Shelf Storage of Plastic and RubberCommodities.

15.2.1 Storage Less than 5 ft (1.5 m) in Height

For the storage of Group A plastics stored 5 ft (1.5 m) or less in height, the sprinkler design criteria for miscellaneous storage specified in Chapter 13 shall be used. Theprotection criteria in Chapter 13 shall be acceptable for storage of Group A plastic commodities up to and including 5 ft (1.5 m) in height. (See Table 13.2.1 for specificGroup A plastic storage height protection criteria.)

15.2.2* Storage Over 5 ft (1.5 m) in Height

15.2.2.1 Protection for plastic and rubber commodities shall be in accordance with Section 15.2. The decision tree shown in Figure 15.2.2.1 shall be used to determine theprotection in each specific situation, subject to the following limitations:

(1) Commodities that are stored palletized, solid piled, or in bin boxes up to 25 ft (7.6 m) in height.

(2) Commodities that are stored in shelf storage up to 15 ft (4.6 m) in height.

(3) Commodities that are stored using back-to-back shelf storage up to 15 ft (4.6 m) in height. The minimum aisle width shall be 60 in. (1524 mm). The design criteria shallbe in accordance with Table 15.2.2. 1 . The back-to-back shelf shall have a full height solid vertical transverse barrier of 3⁄8 in. (9.5 mm) plywood or particleboard, 22gauge sheet metal, or equivalent, from face of aisle to face of aisle, spaced at a maximum 45 ft (13.7 m) interval. The transverse barrier shall be permitted to terminateat the longitudinal barrier.

Table 15 Table 15 .2.2 Back 2.1 Back -to-Back Shelf Storage of Cartoned Unexpanded Group A Plastics

Storage Height Ceiling HeightProtection

ft m ft m

Over 5 up to 8 1.5/2.4 Up to 14 4.3 Ordinary Hazard Group 2

Up to 12 3.7 Up to 15 4.6 0.45 gpm/ft 2 over 2500 ft 2 18.3 mm/min/232 m 2

Up to 12 3.7 Up to 30 9.1 0.6 gpm/ft 2 over 2500 ft 2 24.5 mm/min/232 m 2

Up to 15 4.6 Up to 30 9.1 0.7 gpm/ft 2 over 2500 ft 2 28.5 mm/min/232 m 2

Figure 15 Figure 15 .2.2 Decision 2.1 Decision Tree.

15.2.3 2.2 *

Factors affecting protection requirements such as closed/open array, clearance to ceiling, and stable/unstable piles shall be applicable only to storage of Group A plastics.This decision tree also shall be used to determine protection for commodities that are not wholly Group A plastics but contain such quantities and arrangements of the samethat they are deemed more hazardous than Class IV commodities.

15.2.4 2.3

Group B plastics and free-flowing Group A plastics shall be protected in the same manner as a Class IV commodity. (See Chapter 14 for protection of these storagecommodities with spray sprinklers.)

15.2.5 2.4

Group C plastics shall be protected in the same manner as a Class III commodity. (See Chapter 14 for protection of these storage commodities with spray sprinklers.)

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

196 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 211: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

15.2.6 2.5 *

Design areas and densities for the appropriate storage configuration shall be selected from Table 15.2.6 2.5 (a) or Table 15.2.6 2.5 (b) as appropriate.

Table 15 Table 15 .2.6 2.5 (a) Design Design Densities for Palletized, Solid-Piled, Bin Box, or Shelf Storage of Group A Plastic Commodities (U.S. Customary Units)

Maximum Storage Height

(ft)Roof/Ceiling Height (ft)

Density (gpm/ft 2 )

A B C D E

>5 to ≤12

Up to 15 0.2 EH2 0.3 EH1 EH2

>15 to 20 0.3 0.6 0.5 EH2 EH2

>20 to 32 0.4 0.8 0.6 0.45 0.7

15

Up to 20 0.3 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.45

>20 to 25 0.4 0.8 0.6 0.45 0.7

>25 to 35 0.45 0.9 0.7 0.55 0.85

20

Up to 25 0.4 0.8 0.6 0.45 0.7

>25 to 30 0.45 0.9 0.7 0.55 0.85

>30 to 35 0.6 1.2 0.85 0.7 1.1

25Up to 30 0.45 0.9 0.7 0.55 0.85

>30 to 35 0.6 1.2 0.85 0.7 1.1

Notes:

(1) Minimum clearance between sprinkler deflector and top of storage shall be maintained as required.

(2) Column designations correspond to the configuration of plastics storage as follows:

 A: (1) Nonexpanded, unstable

  (2) Nonexpanded, stable, solid unit load

 B: Expanded, exposed, stable

 C: (1) Expanded, exposed, unstable

  (2) Nonexpanded, stable, cartoned

 D: Expanded, cartoned, unstable

 E: (1) Expanded, cartoned, stable

  (2) Nonexpanded, stable, exposed

(3) EH1 = Density required by Figure 13.2.1 for Curve EH1

 EH2 = Density required by Figure 13.2.1 for Curve EH2

(4) Roof/ceiling height >35 ft is not permitted.

Table 15 Table 15 .2.6 2.5 (b) Design Design Densities for Palletized, Solid-Piled, Bin Box, or Shelf Storage of Group A Plastic Commodities (S.I. Units)

Maximum Storage Height

(m)

Roof/Ceiling Height

(m)

Density

(mm/min)

A B C D E

Up to 4.6 8.2 EH2 12.2 EH1 EH2

>1.5 to ≤3.6 >4.6 to 6.1 12.2 24.4 20.4 EH2 EH2

>6.1 to 9.8 16.3 32.6 24.4 18.3 28.5

Up to 6.1 12.2 24.4 20.4 16.3 18.3

4.6 >6.1 to 7.6 16.3 32.6 24.4 18.3 28.5

>7.6 to 10.7 18.3 36.7 28.5 22.4 34.6

Up to 7.6 16.3 32.6 24.4 18.3 28.5

6.1 >7.6 to 9.1 18.3 36.7 28.5 22.4 34.6

>9.1 to 10.7 24.4 49.0 34.6 28.5 44.8

7.6Up to 9.1 18.3 36.7 28.5 22.4 34.6

>9.1 to 10.7 24.4 49.0 34.6 28.5 44.8

Notes:

(1) Minimum clearance between sprinkler deflector and top of storage shall be maintained as required.

(2) Column designations correspond to the configuration of plastics storage as follows:

 A: (1) Nonexpanded, unstable

  (2) Nonexpanded, stable, solid unit load

 B: Expanded, exposed, stable

 C: (1) Expanded, exposed, unstable

  (2) Nonexpanded, stable, cartoned

 D: Expanded, cartoned, unstable

 E: (1) Expanded, cartoned, stable

  (2) Nonexpanded, stable, exposed

(3) EH1 = Density required by Figure 13.2.1 for Curve EH1

 EH2 = Density required by Figure 13.2.1 for Curve EH2

(4) Roof/ceiling height >35 ft is not permitted.

15.2.7 2.6

The ceiling-only protection criteria specified in Chapter 17 for rack storage of Group A plastic commodities shall be permitted to be used for solid-piled and palletized storageof the same commodity at the same height and clearance to ceiling.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

197 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 212: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

15.2.8 2.7 *

For Table 15.2.6 2.5 (a) and Table 15.2.6 2.5 (b), the design areas shall be as follows:

(1) The area shall be a minimum of 2500 ft2 (232 m2).

(2) Where Table 15.2.6 2.5 (a) and Table 15.2.6 2.5 (b) allow densities and areas to be selected in accordance with Curve EH1 and Curve EH2 of Figure 13.2.1, anydensity/area from the curves in Figure 13.2.1 shall be permitted. When selecting a point from the EH1 or EH2 density/area curves of Figure 13.2.1, the following areareductions shall be permitted:

(a) For K-8.0 (115) sprinklers used with Curve EH1, the design area shall be permitted to be reduced by 25 percent, but not below 2000 ft2 (186 m2), where hightemperature sprinklers are used.

(b) For K-11.2 (160) or larger sprinklers, the design area shall be permitted to be reduced by 25 percent, but not below 2000 ft2 (186 m2), regardless of temperaturerating.

(3) For closed arrays, the area shall be permitted to be reduced to 2000 ft2 (186 m2).

15.2.9 2.8 *

Interpolation of densities between storage heights shall be permitted.

15.2.9 2 .8. 1

Densities shall be based on the 2500 ft2 (232 m2) design area.

15.2.9 2 .8. 2

Interpolation of ceiling/roof heights shall not be permitted.

15.2.10 2.9

For storage of Group A plastics between 5 ft (1.5 m) and 12 ft (3.7 m) in height, the installation requirements for extra hazard systems shall apply.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Arguable this is not a significant issue but is added as an extension of the reformatting effort of ch 17. There is value in emphasizing impact of the 5 ft storage height. As for the renumbering, each digit has meaning and shows the grouping of the criteria. Everything from the old 15.2.3 through 15.2.10 applies to storage over 5 ft. This attention to the numbers correlates with that of ch 14 and 16 (section 14.2.4 is a good example). The smaller amount of criteria in ch 15 as allowed us to be casual about the numbering process without significant confusion but is not a reason to continue the practice. This is especially true with the current focus on the structure/redundancy and format of multiple chapters.

Related Item

Public Input No. 91-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Huggins

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Assoc.

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu Apr 03 13:49:04 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-75-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The terminology “5 ft or less” is used throughout the standard, therefore the revision was made to the proposed language for consistency with the rest of the storagechapters. There is value in emphasizing impact of the 5 ft storage height. As for the renumbering, each digit has meaning and shows the grouping of the criteria.Everything from the old 15.2.3 through 15.2.10 applies to storage over 5 ft. This attention to the numbers correlates with that of ch 14 and 16 (section 14.2.4 is a goodexample). The smaller amount of criteria in ch 15 as allowed us to be casual about the numbering process without significant confusion but is not a reason to continuethe practice. This is especially true with the current focus on the structure/redundancy and format of multiple chapters.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

198 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 213: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 162-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 15.2.2 ]

15.2.2 *

Protection for plastic and rubber commodities shall be in accordance with Section 15.2 . The decision tree shown in Figure 15.2.2 shall be used to determine theprotection in each specific situation .

15.2.2.1 For the storage of Group B and C plastics , the sprinkler design criteria specified in Chapter 14 shall beused.

15.2.2.2 Protection for Group A plastic commodities shall be subject to the following limitations:

(1) Commodities that are stored palletized, solid piled, or in bin boxes up to 25 ft (7.6 m) in height.

(2) Commodities that are stored in shelf storage up to 15 ft (4.6 m) in height.

(3) Commodities that are stored using back-to-back shelf storage up to 15 ft (4.6 m) in height. The minimum aisle width shall be 60 in. (1524 mm). The design criteria shallbe in accordance with Table 15.2.2. The back-to-back shelf shall have a full height solid vertical transverse barrier of 3⁄8 in. (9.5 mm) plywood or particleboard, 22gauge sheet metal, or equivalent, from face of aisle to face of aisle, spaced at a maximum 45 ft (13.7 m) interval. The transverse barrier shall be permitted to terminateat the longitudinal barrier.

Table 15.2.2 Back-to-Back Shelf Storage of Cartoned Unexpanded Group A Plastics

Storage Height Ceiling HeightProtection

ft m ft m

Over 5 up to 8 1.5/2.4 Up to 14 4.3 Ordinary Hazard Group 2

Up to 12 3.7 Up to 15 4.6 0.45 gpm/ft 2 over 2500 ft 2 18.3 mm/min/232 m 2

Up to 12 3.7 Up to 30 9.1 0.6 gpm/ft 2 over 2500 ft 2 24.5 mm/min/232 m 2

Up to 15 4.6 Up to 30 9.1 0.7 gpm/ft 2 over 2500 ft 2 28.5 mm/min/232 m 2

Figure 15.2.2 Decision Tree.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_15-2-2.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

As Section 15.2.2 is currently written in the 2013 edition of NFPA 13 and in the First Draft Report, it appears as if all plastic and rubber commodities are subject to the limitations of Sentences 1 to 3. However, Class B plastics are equated to Class IV commodities and Class C plastics are considered to be Class III. Therefore, these products are subject to the limitations of Sentences 1 to 5 of Section 14.2.1. The limitations in 15.2.2 are really just for Group A materials, and this needs to be better documented.

Related Item

Public Input No. 292-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 15.2.2]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon Apr 28 08:59:35 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: The subsequent sections already send Group B and C Plastics to Chapter 14. Furthermore, Chapter 5 addresses the fact that Group B and C Plastics should beconsidered Class III or IV commodities. The user should not be in chapters 15 or 17 when they are dealing with Group B and C Plastics.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

199 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 214: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 248-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after 16.1.2.2 ]

16.1.2.3 Scheme A Protection of CommoditiesThe protection of Class I, II, III, IV or Group A plastic commodities requiring a greater level of protection than is available from the overhead sprinkler systemshall be permitted to be protected in accordance with 16.1.2.3.1 through 16.1.2.3.9.

16.1.2.3.1 Where the storage rack will not be solely dedicated to the storage of commodities requiring a greater level of protection that is available from theoverhead sprinkler system then either of the following shall apply: (1) extend the protection prescribed by 16.1.2.3 horizontally one pallet load in all directionsbeyond the commoditiy storage area requiring the higher level of protection, or (2) install a vertical barrier to segregate the commodities requiring the higherlevel of protection from any adjacent commodities.

16.1.2.3.2 Commodities that can be protected by the ceiling-level sprinkler system shall be permitted to be stored vertically above as well as horizontallyadjacent to the portions of the storage rack equipped prescribed by 16.1.2.3.

16.1.2.3.3 Horizontal BarriersHorizontal barriers shall be installed at every tier level of the dedicated storage rack where the rack is equipped with solid shelves. Where the dedicatedstorage rack is open-frame, horizontal barriers shall be installed at vertical increments not exceeding 12 ft (3.6 m). The barriers shall span horizontally so thatall flue spaces within the rack bay are covered. A maximum 3 in. (75 mm) wide gap shall be permitted at rack uprights.

16.1.2.3.3.1 The solid barrier shall be installed on a horizontal plane within a rack, beneath which in-rack sprinklers shall be installed. The barrier shall beconstructed of minimum 22 ga (0.7 mm) sheet metal or minimum 3/8 in. (10 mm) plywood. The barrier shall extend to both ends and both aisle faces of theracks covering up both the longitudinal and transverse flue spaces of the rack bays in which they are installed. The barrier shall be fitted to within 3 in. (75mm) of any vertical rack member or other equipment that would create an opening, such as vertical in-rack sprinkler pipe drops.

16.1.2.3.4 In-Rack SprinklersMinimum K8.0 (K115), quick-response sprinklers (ceiling-level or in-rack) shall be installed beneath each horizontal barrier. The deflector of the sprinkler shallbe located as close to the underside of the horizontal barrier as possible.

16.1.2.3.4.1 For single-row racks, sprinklers shall be installed at each rack upright as well as at each rack mid-bay as shown in Figure 16.1.2.3.4.1. Themaximum linear spacing between sprinklers shall not exceed 5 ft (1.5 m).

16.1.2.3.4.2 For double-row racks, sprinklers shall be installed at each rack upright within the longitudinal flue space as well as at the face of the rack and atthe mid-bay face of each rack bay as shown in Figure 16.1.2.3.4.2. The maximum linear spacing between sprinklers shall not exceed 5 ft (1.5 m) at the rack faceand 10 ft (3.0 m) within the longitudinal flue space.

16.1.2.3.4.3 For multiple-row racks, an alternating sprinkler arrangement shall be installed within adjacent transverse flue spaces as shown in Figure16.1.2.3.4.3 with sprinklers at the face of each flue space. The maximum linear spacing between sprinklers at the face and each alternating bay shall notexceed 5 ft (1.5 m) and shall not exceed 10 ft (3.0 m) between sprinklers at every other bay.

16.1.2.3.5 The design of the an in-rack sprinkler system shall be based on a minimum flow of 60 gpm (230 L/min) from the most remote 6 sprinklers forsingle-row racks or the most remote 8 sprinklers for both double-row and multiple-row racks.

16.1.2.3.6 A hose demand allowance of 500 gpm (1,900 L/min) shall be included in the hydraulic design.

16.1.2.3.7 The demand duration shall provide for a minimum of 2 hours.

16.1.2.3.8 The in-rack sprinkler demand shall not be required to be hydraulically balanced with the ceiling-level sprinkler system..16.1.2.3.9 Ceiling Sprinkler SystemThe ceiling-level sprinkler system shall be designed based on the highest commodity hazard not protected by the criteria prescribed by 16.1.2.3.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

NFPA_13_PI_Scheme_A_Figure_16.1.2.3.4.X.docx

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The proposed Scheme A protection criteria was introduced during last cycle for certain solid shelf arrangements. This protection Scheme was originally developed and tested for protection of Class IIIB combustible liquids in plastic containers for NFPA 30 so as to allow of protection of pockets of such stored materials with the use of solid barriers and enhanced in-rack sprinkler arrays that provided a direct application of water within the storage array. Test references to support such criteria for Class IIIB liquids is provided by NFPA 30, Table D.2(e) 1 as P-21 to P-31 from the Directory of Fire Tests Involving Storage of Flammable and Combustible Liquids in Containers, 3rd edition. The adequacy of such protection for the higher hazard Class IIIB combustible liquids provides justification for protection of Class I, II, III, IV Commodities or Group A plastics.

Related Item

Public Input No. 354-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 16.1.2.2]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Tracey Bellamy

Organization: Telgian Corporation

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon May 12 22:05:12 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-88-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: This protection criteria was introduced during last cycle for certain solid shelf arrangements. This protection Scheme was originally developed and tested for protectionof Class IIIB combustible liquids in plastic containers for NFPA 30 so as to allow of protection of pockets of such stored materials with the use of solid barriers andenhanced in-rack sprinkler arrays that provided a direct application of water within the storage array. Test references to support such criteria for Class IIIB liquids isprovided by NFPA 30, Table D.2(e) 1 as P-21 to P-31 from the Directory of Fire Tests Involving Storage of Flammable and Combustible Liquids in Containers, 3rdedition. The adequacy of such protection for the higher hazard Class IIIB combustible liquids provides justification for protection of Class I, II, III, IV Commodities orGroup A plastics.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

200 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 215: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Figure 16.1.2.4.1

Page 216: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Figure 16.1.2.3.4.2

Page 217: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Figure 16.1.2.3.4.3

Page 218: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 163-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 16.1.4.1 ]

Reconsider the proposal and return the text of 16.1.4.1 to that of the 2013 edition of NFPA 13, as follows:

16.1.4.1 *

Where fireproofing of building columns is not provided and storage heights are in excess of 15 ft (4.6 m), protection of building columns located wholly or partially within therack footprint inclusive of flue spaces or within 12 in. (305 mm) of the footprint structure or vertical rack members supporting the building shall be protected in accordancewith one of the following:

(1) In-rack sprinklers

(2) Sidewall sprinklers at the 15 ft (4.6 m) elevation, pointed toward one side of the steel column

(3) Provision of ceiling sprinkler density for a minimum of 2000 ft2 (186 m2) with ordinary 165°F (74°C) or high-temperature 286°F (141°C) rated sprinklers as shown inTable 16.1.4.1 for storage heights above 15 ft (4.6 m), up to and including 20 ft (6.1 m)

(4) Provision of CMSA or ESFR ceiling sprinkler protection

Table 16.1.4.1 Ceiling Sprinkler Densities for Protection of Steel Building Columns

Commodity Classification

Aisle Width

4 ft (1.2 m) 8 ft (2.4 m)

gpm/ft 2 (L/min)/m 2 gpm/ft 2 (L/min)/m 2

Class I 0.37 15.1 0.33 13.5

Class II 0.44 17.9 0.37 15.1

Class III 0.49 20.0 0.42 17.1

Class IV 0.68 27.7 0.57 23.2

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_16-1-4-1.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The proposed text, speaking of “a rack footprint …” should not be adopted. A formal Interpretation FI 75-4 was written to the 1975 edition of NFPA 231C which clarified that the requirement for column sprinklers is not applicable when columns are located adjacent to the racks, whether at the building walls or otherwise. This interpretation has never been overturned and there has been no field experience or test data brought forward to discredit its conclusion. Therefore, there is no justification for inserting this new “within 12 inches of the footprint” criteria. The existing text of “within the rack structure” should remain in effect – as it has for almost 40 years.

Related Item

First Revision No. 202-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 16.1.4]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon Apr 28 09:07:36 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: Reverting back to 2013 edition text would eliminate the clarification that the flue space is part of the rack footprint. A column within 12 in of the rack footprint wouldhave a similar exposure of temperature to that of a column within the flue space of a rack structure.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

201 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 219: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 82-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after 16.1.6.6 ]

16.1.6.7 Design criteria for CMDA, CMSA, and ESFR sprinklers shall be any applicable option for open racks combined with the in-rack sprinklers installed in accordancewith 16.1.6.1 or 16.1.6.2.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The redundancy task group agrees with this comment.

There is a need for guidance on what system criteria to use when there are solid shelves. The 2010 edition said: 16.1.6.5 Design criteria for combined ceiling and in-rack sprinklers shall be used for the storage configurations in 16.1.6.1 and 16.1.6.2. This was deleted, inadvertently I believe, from the 2013 edition but only in chap. 16. Similar text exists in the 2013 ed. in 17.1.5.5. PI-13-83 attempted to reinsert it into ch 16 but was rejected with the statement that some tables do not provide combined options adding confusion to those requirement. This is certainly a concern, so this comment removed the reference to combined criteria. A separate comment also removed it from the current text in 17.1.5.5.

Due to the historical perspective that the General section on solid shelf racks applies only to spray sprinkler, identifying all sprinkler types corrects that misunderstanding. It also emphasizes that this section is indeed applicable to ESFR and CMSA system as already identified in 8.4.6.1.1. A new comment (PC-81) has been submitted to add it to 8.4.7.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 80-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 83-NFPA 13-2014 [New Section after A.16.1.4.1]

Public Comment No. 84-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 17.1.5.5]

Public Comment No. 258-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 16.2.1.3.5]

Related Item

Public Input No. 83-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Huggins

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Association

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu Mar 27 14:12:10 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-67-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: There is a need for guidance on what system criteria to use when there are solid shelves. The addition of the word ceiling provides clarity that the sprinkler technologybeing described is at the ceiling, and not the in-rack sprinklers.

Due to the historical perspective that the General section on solid shelf racks applies only to spray sprinkler, identifying all sprinkler types corrects thatmisunderstanding. It also emphasizes that this section is indeed applicable to ESFR and CMSA system as already identified in 8.4.6.1.1.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

202 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 220: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 294-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 16.2 ]

16.2 Protection Criteria for Open Rack for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Up to and Including 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height.

16.2.1 Control Mode Density/Area Sprinkler Protection Criteria for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Up to and Including 25 ft (7.6 m) inHeight.

16.2.1.1

The area and density for the hydraulically remote area and the water supply shall be determined as specified in 16.2.1.2 for storage up to 12 ft (3.7 m) and 16.2.1.3 to16.2.1.3.5 for storage over 12 ft (3.7 m).

16.2.1.2 Protection Criteria for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Up to 12 ft (3.7 m) in Height.

16.2.1.2.1

The protection criteria for storage up to and including 12 ft (3.7 m) shall be the same as miscellaneous storage from Chapter 13.

16.2.1.2.2

The protection criteria in Chapter 13 shall be acceptable for storage of Class I through Class IV commodities up to and including 12 ft (3.7 m) in height. (See Table 13.2.1 forspecific Class I through Class IV storage height protection criteria.)

16.2.1.2.3

For storage 12 ft (3.7 m) or less in height that does not meet the definition of Miscellaneous Storage that is on solid shelf racks, in-rack sprinklers shall be provided inaccordance with 16.1.6, and ceiling sprinkler protection shall be provided in accordance with Chapter 13.

16.2.1.3 Protection Criteria for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Over 12 ft (3.7 m) in Height.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

203 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 221: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

16.2.1.3.1 *

Ceiling sprinkler water demand shall be determined in accordance with 16.2.1.3.2 for single- and double-row racks or 16.2.1.3.3 for multiple-row racks. (See Section C.14.)

16.2.1.3.2 *

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

204 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 222: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

For single- or double-row racks for Class I, Class II, Class III, or Class IV commodities, encapsulated or nonencapsulated in single- or double-row racks, ceiling sprinkler

water demand in terms of density [gpm/ft2 (mm/min)] and area of sprinkler operation [ft2 (m2) of ceiling or roof] shall be selected from the density/area curves of Figure16.2.1.3.2(a) through Figure 16.2.1.3.2(g) that are appropriate for each commodity and configuration as shown in Table 16.2.1.3.2 and shall be modified as appropriate by16.2.1.3.4. These requirements shall apply to portable racks arranged in the same manner as single- or double-row racks.

Table 16.2.1.3.2 Single- or Double-Row Racks — Storage Height Over 12 ft (3.7 m) Up to and Including 25 ft (7.6 m)

HeightCommodity

Class Encapsulated

SprinklersMandatory

In-Rack

Ceiling Sprinkler Water Demand

Aisles* With In-Rack Sprinklers Without In-Rack Sprinklers

ft m Figure CurvesApply Figure16.2.1.3.4.1 Figure Curves

Apply Figure16.2.1.3.4.1

Over 12 ft (3.7 m) upto and including 20 ft(6.1 m)

I

No4 1.2

No 16.2.1.3.2(a)C and D

Yes

16.2.1.3.2(a)F and H

Yes8 2.4 A and B E and G

Yes4 1.2

No 16.2.1.3.2(e)C and D

16.2.1.3.2(e)G and H

Yes8 2.4 A and B E and F

II

No4 1.2

No 16.2.1.3.2(b)C and D

16.2.1.3.2(b)G and H

Yes8 2.4 A and B E and F

Yes4 1.2

No 16.2.1.3.2(e)C and D

16.2.1.3.2(e)G and H

Yes8 2.4 A and B E and F

III

No4 1.2

No 16.2.1.3.2(c)C and D

16.2.1.3.2(c)G and H

Yes8 2.4 A and B E and F

Yes4 1.2

1 level 16.2.1.3.2(f)C and D

— — —8 2.4 A and B

IV

No4 1.2

No 16.2.1.3.2(d)C and D

16.2.1.3.2(d)G and H

Yes8 2.4 A and B E and F

Yes4 1.2

1 level 16.2.1.3.2(g)C and D

— — —8 2.4 A and B

Over 20 ft (6.1 m) upto and including 22 ft(6.7 m)

I

No4 1.2

No 16.2.1.3.2(a)C and D

No

16.2.1.3.2(a)F and H

Yes8 2.4 A and B E and G

Yes4 1.2

1 level 16.2.1.3.2(e)C and D

— — —8 2.4 A and B

II

No4 1.2

No 16.2.1.3.2(b)C and D

16.2.1.3.2(b)G and H

Yes8 2.4 A and B E and F

Yes4 1.2

1 level 16.2.1.3.2(e)C and D

— — —8 2.4 A and B

III

No4 1.2

No 16.2.1.3.2(c)C and D

16.2.1.3.2(c)G and H

Yes8 2.4 A and B E and F

Yes4 1.2

1 level 16.2.1.3.2(f)C and D

— — —8 2.4 A and B

IV

No4 1.2

No 16.2.1.3.2(d)C and D

16.2.1.3.2(d)G and H

Yes8 2.4 A and B E and F

Yes4 1.2

1 level 16.2.1.3.2(g)C and D

— — —8 2.4 A and B

Over 22 ft (6.7 m) upto and including 25 ft(7.6 m)

I

No4 1.2

No 16.2.1.3.2(a)C and D

No

16.2.1.3.2(a)F and H

Yes8 2.4 A and B E and G

Yes4 1.2

1 level 16.2.1.3.2(e)C and D

— — —8 2.4 A and B

II

No4 1.2

No 16.2.1.3.2(b)C and D

16.2.1.3.2(b)G and H

Yes8 2.4 A and B E and F

Yes4 1.2

1 level 16.2.1.3.2(e)C and D

— — —8 2.4 A and B

III

No4 1.2

No 16.2.1.3.2(c)C and D

16.2.1.3.2(c)G and H

Yes8 2.4 A and B E and F

Yes4 1.2

1 level 16.2.1.3.2(f)C and D

— — —8 2.4 A and B

IV

No4 1.2

1 level

16.2.1.3.2(d)C and D

— — —8 2.4 A and B

Yes4 1.2

16.2.1.3.2(g)C and D

— — —8 2.4 A and B

*See 16.2.1.3.2.1 for interpolation of aisle widths.

Figure 16.2.1.3.2(a) Sprinkler System Design Curves — 20 ft (6.1 m) High Rack Storage — Class I Nonencapsulated Commodities — Conventional Pallets.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

205 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 223: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Figure 16.2.1.3.2(b) Sprinkler System Design Curves — 20 ft (6.1 m) High Rack Storage — Class II Nonencapsulated Commodities — Conventional Pallets.

Figure 16.2.1.3.2(c) Sprinkler System Design Curves — 20 ft (6.1 m) High Rack Storage — Class III Nonencapsulated Commodities — Conventional Pallets.

Figure 16.2.1.3.2(d) Sprinkler System Design Curves — 20 ft (6.1 m) High Rack Storage — Class IV Nonencapsulated Commodities — Conventional Pallets.

Figure 16.2.1.3.2(e) Single- or Double-Row Racks — 20 ft (6.1 m) High Rack Storage — Sprinkler System Design Curves — Class I and Class II EncapsulatedCommodities — Conventional Pallets.

Figure 16.2.1.3.2(f) Single- or Double-Row Racks — 20 ft (6.1 m) High Rack Storage — Sprinkler System Design Curves — Class III Encapsulated Commodities— Conventional Pallets.

Figure 16.2.1.3.2(g) Single- or Double-Row Racks — 20 ft (6.1 m) High Rack Storage — Sprinkler System Design Curves — Class IV EncapsulatedCommodities — Conventional Pallets.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

206 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 224: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

16.2.1.3.2.1 *

Design densities for single- and double-row racks shall be selected to correspond to aisle width. (See Section C.15.)

(A)

For aisle widths between 4 ft (1.2 m) and 8 ft (2.4 m), the rules for 4 ft (1.2 m) aisle width shall be used or direct linear interpolation between the densities shall be permitted.

(B)

The density given for 8 ft (2.4 m) wide aisles shall be applied to aisles wider than 8 ft (2.4 m).

(C)

The density given for 4 ft (1.2 m) wide aisles shall be applied to aisles more narrow than 4 ft (1.2 m) down to 3 1⁄2 ft (1.07 m).

(D)

Where aisles are more narrow than 3 1⁄2 ft (1.07 m), racks shall be considered to be multiple-row racks.

16.2.1.3.3 Multiple-Row Racks — Storage Height Over 12 ft (3.7 m) Up to and Including 25 ft (7.6 m).

16.2.1.3.3.1 Multiple-Row Racks — Rack Depth Up to and Including 16 ft (4.9 m) with Aisles 8 ft (2.4 m) or Wider.

For Class I, Class II, Class III, or Class IV commodities, encapsulated or nonencapsulated, ceiling sprinkler water demand in terms of density [gpm/ft2 (mm/min)] and area

of sprinkler operation [ft2 (m2) of ceiling or roof] shall be selected from the density/area curves of Figure 16.2.1.3.2(a) through Figure 16.2.1.3.2(d) that are appropriate foreach commodity and configuration as shown in Table 16.2.1.3.3.1 and shall be modified as appropriate by 16.2.1.3.4. The protection criteria shall apply to portable racksarranged in the same manner as multiple-row racks.

Table 16.2.1.3.3.1 Multiple-Row Racks — Rack Depth Up to and Including 16 ft (4.9 m), Aisles 8 ft (2.4 m) or Wider and Storage Height Over 12 ft (3.7 m) Up to 25 ft (7.6m)

HeightCommodity

Class

Encap-

sulated

SprinklersMandatory

In-Rack

Ceiling Sprinkler Water Demand

With In-Rack Sprinklers Without In-Rack Sprinklers

Figure CurvesApply Figure16.2.1.3.4.1

1.25 ×Density

Figure CurvesApply Figure16.2.1.3.4.1

1.25 ×Density

Over 12 ft (3.7 m)up to and including15 ft (4.6 m)

INo

No

16.2.1.3.2(a)

C and D

Yes

No 16.2.1.3.2(a) I and JYes

No

Yes 16.2.1.3.2(a) Yes 16.2.1.3.2(a) I and J Yes

IINo 16.2.1.3.2(b) No 16.2.1.3.2(b) I and J Yes No

Yes 16.2.1.3.2(b) Yes 16.2.1.3.2(b) I and J Yes

IIINo No 16.2.1.3.2(c) No 16.2.1.3.2(c) I and J Yes No

Yes 1 level 16.2.1.3.2(c) Yes NA NA NA

IV

No No 16.2.1.3.2(d) No 16.2.1.3.2(d) C and D No No

Yes 1 level 16.2.1.3.2(d) A and B1.50 ×density

NA NA NA

Over 15 ft (4.6 m)up to and including20 ft (6.1 m)

INo

No

16.2.1.3.2(a)

C and D

Yes

No 16.2.1.3.2(a) I and JYes

No

Yes 16.2.1.3.2(a) Yes 16.2.1.3.2(a) I and J Yes

IINo 16.2.1.3.2(b) No 16.2.1.3.2(b) I and J

YesNo

Yes 16.2.1.3.2(b) Yes 16.2.1.3.2(b) I and J Yes

IIINo No 16.2.1.3.2(c) No 16.2.1.3.2(c) I and J Yes No

Yes 1 level 16.2.1.3.2(c) Yes

NA NA NA NAIV

No

1 level

16.2.1.3.2(d) No

Yes 16.2.1.3.2(d) A nd B1.50 ×density

Over 20 ft (6.1 m)up to and including25 ft (7.6 m)

INo No 16.2.1.3.2(a)

C and D

No

No 16.2.1.3.2(a) I and J Yes No

Yes 1 level 16.2.1.3.2(a) Yes

NA NA NA NA

IINo

1 level

16.2.1.3.2(b) No

Yes 16.2.1.3.2(b) Yes

IIINo 16.2.1.3.2(c) No

Yes 16.2.1.3.2(c) Yes

IV

No

2 levels

16.2.1.3.2(d) No

Yes 16.2.1.3.2(d) A and B1.50 ×density

NA: Not applicable.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

207 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 225: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

16.2.1.3.3.2 Multiple-Row Racks — Rack Depth Over 16 ft (4.9 m) or Aisles More Narrow Than 8 ft (2.4 m).

For Class I, Class II, Class III, or Class IV commodities, encapsulated or nonencapsulated, ceiling sprinkler water demand in terms of density [gpm/ft2 (mm/min)] and area

of sprinkler operation [ft2 (m2) of ceiling or roof] shall be selected from the density/area curves of Figure 16.2.1.3.2(a) through Figure 16.2.1.3.2(g) that are appropriate foreach commodity and configuration as shown in Table 16.2.1.3.3.2 and shall be modified as appropriate by 16.2.1.3.4. The protection criteria shall apply to portable racksarranged in the same manner as multiple-row racks.

Table 16.2.1.3.3.2 Multiple-Row Racks — Rack Depth Over 16 ft (4.9 m) or Aisles Narrower Than 8 ft (2.4 m), Storage Height Over 12 ft (3.7 m) Up to and Including 25 ft(7.6 m)

HeightCommodity

Class

Encap-

sulated

SprinklersMandatory

In-Rack

Ceiling Sprinkler Water Demand

With In-Rack Sprinklers Without In-Rack Sprinklers

Figure CurvesApply Figure16.2.1.3.4.1

1.25 ×Density

Figure CurvesApply Figure16.2.1.3.4.1

1.25 ×Density

Over 12 ft (3.7 m)up to and including15 ft (4.6 m)

INo

No

16.2.1.3.2(a)

C and D Yes

No 16.2.1.3.2(a) I and JYes

No

Yes 16.2.1.3.2(a) Yes 16.2.1.3.2(a) I and J Yes

IINo 16.2.1.3.2(b) No 16.2.1.3.2(b) I and J

YesNo

Yes 16.2.1.3.2(b) Yes 16.2.1.3.2(b) I and J Yes

IIINo 16.2.1.3.2(c) No 16.2.1.3.2(c) I and J Yes No

Yes 1 level 16.2.1.3.2(c) Yes

IV

No No 16.2.1.3.2(d) No 16.2.1.3.2(d) C and D No No

Yes 1 level 16.2.1.3.2(d)1.50 ×

density

Over 15 ft (4.6 m)up to and including20 ft (6.1 m)

INo

1 level

16.2.1.3.2(a)

C and D Yes

No

NA NA NA NA

Yes 16.2.1.3.2(a) Yes

IINo 16.2.1.3.2(b) No

Yes 16.2.1.3.2(b) Yes

IIINo 16.2.1.3.2(c) No

Yes 16.2.1.3.2(c) Yes

IV

No 16.2.1.3.2(d) No

Yes 16.2.1.3.2(d)1.50 ×

density

Over 20 ft (6.1 m)up to and including25 ft (7.6 m)

INo

1 level

16.2.1.3.2(a)

C and D No

No

NA NA NA NA

Yes 16.2.1.3.2(a) Yes

IINo 16.2.1.3.2(b) No

Yes 16.2.1.3.2(b) Yes

IIINo 16.2.1.3.2(c) No

Yes 16.2.1.3.2(c) Yes

IV

No

2 levels

16.2.1.3.2(d) No

Yes 16.2.1.3.2(d)1.50 ×

density

NA: Not applicable.

16.2.1.3.3.3

Where Class I, Class II, and Class III commodities are encapsulated, ceiling sprinkler density shall be 25 percent greater than for nonencapsulated.

16.2.1.3.3.4

Where Class IV commodities are encapsulated, ceiling sprinkler density shall be 50 percent greater than for nonencapsulated.

16.2.1.3.4 Ceiling Sprinkler Density Adjustments.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

208 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 226: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

16.2.1.3.4.1

For storage height over 12 ft (3.7 m) up to and including 25 ft (7.6 m) protected with ceiling sprinklers only and for storage height over 12 ft (3.7 m) up to and including 20 ft(6.1 m) protected with ceiling sprinklers and minimum required in-rack sprinklers, densities obtained from design curves shall be adjusted in accordance with Figure16.2.1.3.4.1.

Figure 16.2.1.3.4.1 Ceiling Sprinkler Density vs. Storage Height.

16.2.1.3.4.2

For storage height over 20 ft (6.1 m) up to and including 25 ft (7.6 m) protected with ceiling sprinklers and minimum required in-rack sprinklers, densities obtained fromdesign curves shall be used. Densities shall not be adjusted in accordance with Figure 16.2.1.3.4.1.

16.2.1.3.4.3

For storage height over 12 ft (3.7 m) up to and including 20 ft (6.1 m) protected with ceiling sprinklers and with more than one level of in-rack sprinklers, but not in every tier,densities obtained from design curves and adjusted in accordance with Figure 16.2.1.3.4.1 shall be permitted to be reduced an additional 20 percent, as indicated in Table16.2.1.3.4.3.

Table 16.2.1.3.4.3 Adjustment to Ceiling Sprinkler Density for Storage Height and In-Rack Sprinklers

Storage Height In-Rack SprinklersApply Figure 16.2.1.3.4.1 for Storage

Height AdjustmentPermitted Ceiling Sprinklers Density Adjustments Where

In-Rack Sprinklers Are Installed

Over 12 ft (3.7 m) through25 ft (7.6 m)

None Yes None

Over 12 ft (3.7 m) through20 ft (6.1 m)

Minimum required Yes None

More than minimum, but notin every tier

Yes Reduce density 20% from that of minimum in-rack sprinklers

In every tier Yes Reduce density 40% from that of minimum in-rack sprinklers

Over 20 ft (6.1 m) through25 ft (7.5 m)

Minimum required No None

More than minimum, but notin every tier

No Reduce density 20% from that of minimum in-rack sprinklers

In every tier No Reduce density 40% from that of minimum in-rack sprinklers

16.2.1.3.4.4

For storage height over 20 ft (6.1 m) up to and including 25 ft (7.6 m) protected with ceiling sprinklers and with more than the minimum required level of in-rack sprinklers,but not in every tier, densities obtained from design curves shall be permitted to be reduced 20 percent, as indicated in Table 16.2.1.3.4.3. Densities shall not be adjusted inaccordance with Figure 16.2.1.3.4.1 for storage height.

16.2.1.3.4.5 *

For storage height over 12 ft (3.7 m) up to and including 20 ft (6.1 m) protected with ceiling sprinklers and in-rack sprinklers at each tier, densities obtained from designcurves and adjusted in accordance with Figure 16.2.1.3.4.1 shall be permitted to be reduced an additional 40 percent, as indicated in Table 16.2.1.3.4.3.

16.2.1.3.4.6 *

For storage height over 20 ft (6.1 m) up to and including 25 ft (7.6 m) protected with ceiling sprinklers and in-rack sprinklers at each tier, densities obtained from designcurves shall be permitted to be reduced 40 percent, as indicated in Table 16.2.1.3.4.3. Densities shall not be adjusted in accordance with Figure 16.2.1.3.4.1 for storageheight.

16.2.1.3.4.7

Where solid, flat-bottom, combustible pallets (slave pallets) are used with storage height up to and including 25 ft (7.6 m), the densities that are indicated in the designcurves shown in Figure 16.2.1.3.2(a) through Figure 16.2.1.3.2(g), based on conventional pallets, shall be increased 20 percent for the given area.

(A)

The percentage shall be applied to the density determined in accordance with 16.2.1.3.4.

(B)

The increase in density shall not apply where in-rack sprinklers are utilized in the design.

16.2.1.3.5

For solid shelf rack storage, Table 16.2.1.3.2 shall be used to establish the density/area criteria and in-rack sprinklers shall be installed in accordance with 16.1.6.

16.2.1.4 In-Rack Sprinklers for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Up to and Including 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height Protected with Control ModeDensity/Area Sprinklers at Ceiling.

16.2.1.4.1 In-Rack Sprinkler Location for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Up to and Including 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

209 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 227: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

16.2.1.4.1.1

In single- or double-row racks, in-rack sprinklers shall be installed in accordance with Table 16.2.1.3.2.

16.2.1.4.1.2

In multiple-row racks no deeper than 16 ft (4.9 m) with aisles 8 ft (2.4 m) or more in width, in-rack sprinklers shall be installed in accordance with Table 16.2.1.3.3.1.

16.2.1.4.1.3

In multiple-row racks deeper than 16 ft (4.9 m) or with aisles less than 8 ft (2.4 m) wide, in-rack sprinklers shall be installed in accordance with Table 16.2.1.3.3.2.

16.2.1.4.1.4

In-rack sprinklers at one level only for storage up to and including 25 ft (7.6 m) high shall be located at the first tier level at or above one-half of the storage height.

16.2.1.4.1.5

In-rack sprinklers at two levels only for storage up to and including 25 ft (7.6 m) high shall be located at the first tier level at or above one-third and two-thirds of the storageheight.

16.2.1.4.2 In-Rack Sprinkler Spacing for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Up to and Including 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height Protected by ControlMode Density/Area Sprinklers at the Ceiling.

16.2.1.4.2.1 *

Maximum horizontal spacing of in-rack sprinklers in single- or double-row racks up to and including 25 ft (7.6 m) in height shall be in accordance with Table 16.2.1.4.2.1.

Table 16.2.1.4.2.1 In-Rack Sprinkler Spacing for Class I, II, III, and IV Commodities Stored in Single- or Double-Row Racks Up to 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height Protected byControl Mode Density/Area Sprinklers at the Ceiling

Commodity Class

Aisle Widths I and II III IV

Encapsulated ft m ft m ft m ft m

No 8 2.4 12 3.7 12 3.7 10 3.0

No 4 1.2 12 3.7 10 3.0 10 3.0

Yes — — 8 2.4 8 2.4 8 2.4

16.2.1.4.2.2 *

Maximum horizontal spacing and maximum area of coverage of in-rack sprinklers on branch lines, in multiple-row racks with storage up to and including 25 ft (7.6 m) inheight, shall be in accordance with Table 16.2.1.4.2.2.

Table 16.2.1.4.2.2 In-Rack Sprinkler Spacing for Class I, II, III, and IV Commodities Stored in Multi-Row Racks Up to 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height Protected by Control ModeDensity/Area Sprinklers at the Ceiling

Commodity Class

I, II, III IV

Spacing Area Spacing Area

ft m ft 2 m 2 ft m ft 2 m 2

12 3.7 100 9.3 8 2.4 80 7.4

(A)

The rack plan view shall be considered in determining the area covered by each sprinkler.

(B)

The aisles shall not be included in area calculations.

16.2.1.4.2.3 *

The elevation of in-rack sprinkler deflectors with respect to storage shall not be a consideration in single- or double-row rack storage up to and including 20 ft (6.1 m) high.(See Section C.16.)

16.2.1.4.2.4 *

In single- or double-row racks without solid shelves with storage over 20 ft (6.1 m) high, or in multiple-row racks, or in single- or double-row racks with solid shelves andstorage height up to and including 25 ft (7.6 m), a minimum of 6 in. (152 mm) vertical clear space shall be maintained between the in-rack sprinkler deflectors and the top ofa tier of storage.

(A)

Sprinkler discharge shall not be obstructed by horizontal rack members.

16.2.1.4.2.5

For multiple-row racks, a minimum of 6 in. (152 mm) shall be maintained between the in-rack sprinkler deflector and the top of a tier of storage.

16.2.1.4.2.6

Sprinklers installed in racks shall be spaced without regard to rack uprights. (See Section C.17.)

16.2.1.4.3 In-Rack Sprinkler Water Demand for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Up to and Including 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height Protected byControl Mode Density/Area Sprinklers in the Ceiling.

See Section C.18.

16.2.1.4.3.1

The water demand for sprinklers installed in racks shall be based on simultaneous operation of the most hydraulically remote sprinklers as follows:

(1) Six sprinklers where only one level is installed in racks with Class I, Class II, or Class III commodities

(2) Eight sprinklers where only one level is installed in racks with Class IV commodities

(3) Ten sprinklers (five on each two top levels) where more than one level is installed in racks with Class I, Class II, or Class III commodities

(4) Fourteen sprinklers (seven on each two top levels) where more than one level is installed in racks with Class IV commodities

16.2.1.4.3.2

Where a storage rack, due to its length, requires less than the number of in-rack sprinklers specified in 16.2.1.4.3.1 (1) through 16.2.1.4.3.1 (4), only those in-racksprinklers in a single rack shall be included in the calculation.

16.2.1.4.4 In-Rack Sprinkler Discharge Pressure for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Up to and Including 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height Protectedby Control Mode Density/Area Sprinklers at the Ceiling.

Sprinklers in racks shall discharge at not less than 15 psi (1 bar) for all classes of commodities. (See Section C.19.)

16.2.2 CMSA Sprinklers for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Up to and Including 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height.

16.2.2.1

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

210 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 228: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Protection of single-, double-, and multiple-row rack storage for Class I through Class IV commodities shall be in accordance with Table 16.2.2.1.

Table 16.2.2.1 CMSA Sprinkler Design Criteria for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities (Encapsulated and Nonencapsulated) Stored Up to andIncluding 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height

Storage ArrangementCommodity

Class

MaximumStorage Height

MaximumCeiling/Roof Height K-Factor/

Orientation

Type ofSystem

Number of DesignSprinklers

MinimumOperatingPressure

ft m ft m psi bar

Single-, double-, and multiple-rowracks (no open-top containers)

Class I or II

20 6.1 30 9.1

11.2 (160)Upright

Wet 15 25 1.7

Dry 25 25 1.7

16.8 (240)Upright

Wet 15 10 0.7

Dry 25 15 1.0

19.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 15 16 1.1

25 7.6 30 9.1

11.2 (160)Upright

Wet 20 25 1.7

Dry 30 25 1.7

16.8 (240)Upright

Wet 15 10 0.7

Dry 30 15 1.0

19.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 15 16 1.1

Class III

20 6.1 30 9.1

11.2 (160)Upright

Wet 15 25 1.7

Dry 25 25 1.7

16.8 (240)Upright

Wet 15 15 1.0

Dry 25 15 1.0

19.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 15 16 1.1

25 7.6 30 9.111.2 (160)Upright

Wet 15

+

1 level of in-rack 25 1.7

Dry 25

+

1 level of in-rack 25 1.7

16.8 (240) UprightWet 15 22 1.5

Dry 25

+

1 level of in-rack 15 1.0

19.6 (280) Pendent Wet 15 16 1.1

35 10.6 11.2 (160) Upright Wet 15

+

1 level of in-rack 25 1.7

Dry 25

+

1 level of in-rack 25 1.7

16.8 (240) Upright Wet 15

+

1 level of in-rack 15 1.0

Dry 25

+

1 level of in-rack 15 1.0

19.6 (280) Pendent Wet 15 25 1.7

40 12.1 19.6 (280) Pendent Wet 15 30 2.1

Class IV

20 6.1

25 7.6

11.2 (160) Upright Wet 15 50 3.5

16.8 (240) Upright Wet 15 22 1.5

19.6 (280) Pendent Wet 15 16 1.1

30 9.1

11.2 (160) Upright Wet20 50 3.5

15 75 5.2

16.8 (240) Upright Wet 15 22 1.5

19.6 (280) Pendent Wet 15 16 1.1

25 7.6 30 9.1 11.2 (160) Upright Wet 15

+

1 level of in-rack 50 3.5

16.8 (240) Upright Wet 15 22 1.5

19.6 (280) Pendent Wet 15 16 1.1

35 10.6 11.2 (160) Upright Wet 20

+

1 level of in-rack 50 3.5

15

+

1 level of in-rack 75 5.2

16.8 (240) Upright Wet 20

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

211 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 229: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

+

1 level of in-rack 22 1.5

15

+

1 level of in-rack 35 2.4

19.6 (280) Pendent Wet 15 25 1.7

40 12.1 19.6 (280) Pendent Wet 15 30 2.1

16.2.2.1.1

Protection of solid shelf racks with CMSA sprinklers at the ceiling shall be permitted where in-rack sprinklers are installed in accordance with 16.1.6. In-rack sprinklers shallbe installed in every level below the highest solid shelf.

16.2.2.2

Where in-rack sprinklers are required by Table 16.2.2.1, in-rack sprinkler spacing, design pressure, and hydraulic calculation criteria shall be in accordance with therequirements of 16.2.2.7 as applicable for the commodity.

16.2.2.3

Protection shall be provided as specified in Table 16.2.2.1 or appropriate NFPA standards in terms of minimum operating pressure and the number of sprinklers to beincluded in the design area.

16.2.2.4 Open Wood Joist Construction.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

212 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 230: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

16.2.2.4.1

Where CMSA sprinklers are installed under open wood joist construction, their minimum operating pressure shall be 50 psi (3.4 bar) for a K-11.2 (160) sprinkler or 22 psi(1.5 bar) for a K-16.8 (240) sprinkler.

16.2.2.4.2

Where each joist channel of open wood joist construction is fully firestopped to its full depth at intervals not exceeding 20 ft (6.1 m), the lower pressures specified in Table16.2.2.1 shall be permitted to be used.

16.2.2.5 Preaction Systems.

For the purpose of using Table 16.2.2.1, preaction systems shall be classified as dry pipe systems.

16.2.2.6

Building steel shall not require special protection where Table 16.2.2.1 is applied as appropriate for the storage configuration.

16.2.2.7 In-Rack Sprinklers for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Up to and Including 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height Protected with Control ModeSpecific Application Sprinklers at the Ceiling.

16.2.2.7.1

Where in-rack sprinklers are required by Table 16.2.2.1, in-rack sprinklers shall be installed at the first tier level at or above one-half of the storage height.

16.2.2.7.2

The minimum of 6 in. (152.4 mm) vertical clear space shall be maintained between the sprinkler deflectors and the top of a tier of storage.

16.2.2.7.3 *

In-rack sprinklers shall be located at an intersection of transverse and longitudinal flues.

16.2.2.7.4

The maximum horizontal distance between in-rack sprinklers shall be 8 ft (1.5 m).

16.2.2.7.5

Where distances between transverse flues exceed the maximum allowable distances, sprinklers shall be installed at the intersection of the transverse and longitudinalflues, and additional sprinklers shall be installed between transverse flues to meet the maximum distance rules.

16.2.2.7.6

Where no transverse flues exist, in-rack sprinklers shall not exceed the maximum spacing rules.

16.2.2.7.7 In-Rack Sprinkler Water Demand.

The water demand for in-rack sprinklers shall be based on simultaneous operation of the most hydraulically remote eight sprinklers.

16.2.2.7.8 In-Rack Sprinkler Discharge Pressure.

In-rack sprinklers shall discharge at not less than 15 psi (1 bar) for all classes of commodities. (See Section C.19.)

16.2.3 * Early Suppression Fast-Response (ESFR) Sprinklers for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Up to and Including 25 ft (7.6 m) inHeight.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

213 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 231: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

16.2.3.1

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

214 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 232: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Protection of single-, double-, and multiple-row rack storage of Class I through Class IV commodities shall be in accordance with Table 16.2.3.1.

Table 16.2.3.1 ESFR Sprinkler Protection of Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Up to and Including 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height

Storage Arrangement Commodity

MaximumStorageHeight

MaximumCeiling/Roof

HeightNominalK-Factor Orientation

MinimumOperatingPressure

In-Rack SprinklerRequirementsft m ft m psi bar

Single-row, double-row, andmultiple-row racks (no open-topcontainers)

Class I, II, III, or IV,encapsulated or

nonencapsultated20 6.1

25 7.6

14.0

(200)

Upright/

pendent50 3.4 No

16.8

(240)

Upright/

pendent35 2.4 No

22.4

(320)pendent 25 1.7 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 15 1.0 No

30 9.1

14.0

(200)

Upright/

pendent50 3.4 No

16.8

(240)

Upright/

pendent35 2.4 No

22.4

(320)Pendent 25 1.7 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 15 1.0 No

35 10.7

14.0

(200)

Upright/

pendent75 5.2 No

16.8

(240)

Upright/

pendent52 3.6 No

22.4

(320)Pendent 35 2.4 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 20 1.4 No

40 12.2 or 12.1

16.8

(240)Pendent 52 3.6 No

22.4

(320)Pendent 40 2.8 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 25 1.7 No

45 13.7

14.0

(200)Pendent 90 6.2 Yes

16.8

(240)Pendent 63 4.4 Yes

22.4

(320)Pendent 40 2.8 No

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

215 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 233: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Storage Arrangement Commodity

MaximumStorageHeight

MaximumCeiling/Roof

HeightNominalK-Factor Orientation

MinimumOperatingPressure

In-Rack SprinklerRequirementsft m ft m psi bar

25.2

(360)Pendent 40 2.8 No

25 7.6

30 9.1

14.0

(200)

Upright/

pendent50 3.4 No

16.8

(240)

Upright/

pendent35 2.4 No

22.4

(320)Pendent 25 1.7 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 15 1.0 No

32 9.8

14.0

(200)

Upright/

pendent60 4.1 No

16.8

(240)

Upright/

pendent42 2.9 No

35 10.7

14.0

(200)

Upright/

pendent75 5.2 No

16.8

(240)

Upright/

pendent52 3.6 No

22.4

(320)Pendent 35 2.4 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 20 1.4 No

40 12.2 or 12.1

16.8

(240)Pendent 52 3.6 No

22.4

(320)Pendent 40 2.8 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 25 1.7 No

45 13.7

14.0

(200)Pendent 90 6.2 Yes

16.8

(240)Pendent 63 4.4 Yes

22.4

(320)Pendent 40 2.8 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 40 2.8 No

16.2.3.2

ESFR sprinklers shall not be permitted to protect storage on solid shelf racks unless the solid shelf racks are protected with in-rack sprinklers in accordance with 16.1.6.

16.2.3.2.1

Where solid shelves are used, in-rack sprinklers shall be installed in every level below the highest solid shelf.

16.2.3.3

ESFR sprinklers shall not be permitted to protect storage with open top containers.

16.2.3.4

ESFR sprinkler systems shall be designed such that the minimum operating pressure is not less than that indicated in Table 16.2.3.1 for type of storage, commodity,storage height, and building height involved.

16.2.3.5

The design area shall consist of the most hydraulically demanding area of 12 sprinklers, consisting of four sprinklers on each of three branch lines.

16.2.3.6 In-Rack Sprinkler Requirements for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Up to and Including 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height Where ESFRSprinklers Are Being Used at the Ceiling.

16.2.3.6.1

Where required by Table 16.2.3.1, in-rack sprinklers shall be installed at the first tier level at or above one-half of the storage height.

16.2.3.6.2

In-rack sprinklers shall be K-8.0 (115) or K-11.2 (160) quick-response, ordinary-temperature sprinklers.

16.2.3.6.3

The minimum of 6 in. (152.4 mm) vertical clear space shall be maintained between the sprinkler deflectors and the top of a tier of storage.

16.2.3.6.4

The maximum horizontal distance between in-rack sprinklers shall be 5 ft (1.5 m).

16.2.3.6.5 *

In-rack sprinklers shall be located at an intersection of transverse and longitudinal flues while not exceeding the maximum spacing rules.

16.2.3.6.6

Where distances between transverse flues exceed the maximum allowable distances, sprinklers shall be installed at the intersection of the transverse and longitudinalflues, and additional sprinklers shall be installed between transverse flues to meet the maximum distance rules.

16.2.3.6.7

Where no transverse flues exist, in-rack sprinklers shall not exceed the maximum spacing rules.

16.2.3.6.8

The water demand for sprinklers installed in racks shall be based on simultaneous operation of the most hydraulically remote eight sprinklers.

16.2.3.6.9

Each of the in-rack sprinklers described in 16.2.3.6.8 shall discharge at a minimum of 60 gpm (227 L/min).

16.2.4 Special Design for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Up to and Including 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height.

16.2.4.1 Slatted Shelves.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

216 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 234: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

16.2.4.1.1 *

Slatted rack shelves shall be considered equivalent to solid rack shelves where the shelving is not considered open rack shelving or where the requirements of 16.2.4.1.2are not met. (See Section C.20.)

16.2.4.1.2

A wet pipe system that is designed to provide a minimum of 0.6 gpm/ft2 (24.5 mm/min) density over a minimum area of 2000 ft2 (186 m2) or K-14.0 (200) ESFR sprinklersoperating at a minimum of 50 psi (3.4 bar), K-16.8 (240) sprinklers operating at a minimum of 32 psi (2.2 bar), K-22.4 (320) ESFR sprinklers operating at a minimum of 25psi (1.7 bar), or K-25.2 (360) ESFR sprinklers operating at a minimum of 15 psi (1 bar) shall be permitted to protect single-row and double-row racks with slatted rackshelving where all of the following conditions are met:

(1) Sprinklers shall be K-11.2 (160), K-14.0 (200), or K-16.8 (240) orifice spray sprinklers with a temperature rating of ordinary, intermediate, or high and shall be listed forstorage occupancies or shall be K-14.0 (200), K-16.8 (240), K-22.4 (320) ESFR, or K-25.2 (360) ESFR.

(2) The protected commodities shall be limited to Class I through Class IV, Group B plastics, Group C plastics, cartoned (expanded and unexpanded) Group A plastics,and exposed (unexpanded) Group A plastics.

(3) Slats in slatted rack shelving shall be a minimum nominal 2 in. (51 mm) thick by maximum nominal 6 in. (152 mm) wide, with the slats held in place by spacers thatmaintain a minimum 2 in. (51 mm) opening between each slat.

(4) Where K-11.2 (160), K-14.0 (200), or K-16.8 (240) orifice sprinklers are used, there shall be no slatted shelf levels in the rack above 12 ft (3.7 m). Open rack shelvingusing wire mesh shall be permitted for shelf levels above 12 ft (3.7 m).

(5) Transverse flue spaces at least 3 in. (76 mm) wide shall be provided at least every 10 ft (3.1 m) horizontally.

(6) Longitudinal flue spaces at least 6 in. (152 mm) wide shall be provided for double-row racks. Longitudinal flue spaces shall not be required where ESFR sprinklers areused.

(7) The aisle widths shall be at least 7 1⁄2 ft (2.3 m).

(8) The maximum roof height shall be 27 ft (8.2 m) or 30 ft (9.1 m) where ESFR sprinklers are used.

(9) The maximum storage height shall be 20 ft (6.1 m).

(10) Solid plywood or similar materials shall not be placed on the slatted shelves so that they block the 2 in. (51 mm) spaces between slats, nor shall they be placed onwire mesh shelves.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The rack storage arrangements addressed by these sections are not limited to “open rack” configurations.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 295-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 16.3]

Related Item

First Revision No. 175-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Robert Upson

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA Engineering and Standards Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 10:00:10 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-65-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The design criteria provided for ceiling sprinklers is based upon the assumption that the racks are open. Rather than adding the word open to several sectionheaders, adding a statement that clarifies the intent of the standard is a more direct way of establishing the way the standard has been written.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

217 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 235: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 361-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 16.2.1.2.3 ]

16.2.1.2.3

For storage 12 ft (3.7 m) or less in height that does not meet the definition of Miscellaneous Storage that is on solid shelf racks, in-rack sprinklers shall be provided inaccordance with 16.1.6 , and ceiling sprinkler protection shall be provided in accordance with Chapter 13.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

No substantiation has been given, including full scale testing and/or fire history, as to why the existing language needs to be changed to require in-rack sprinklers for Class I-IV Commodities storing products up to [and including] 12' in height. Additionally no substantiation is given, including full scale testing and/or fire history, as to why miscellaneous storage of Class I-IV Commodities storing products up to [and including] 12' in height are exempted out of this proposed requirement.

Additionally the location of this section is such that it will be missed by many since most users would use Chapter 13 directly.

Related Item

First Revision No. 296-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 16.2.1.2.2]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Elley Klausbruckner

Organization: Klausbruckner & Associates, Inc

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 21:02:02 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: This section is not addressing miscellaneous storage. This section is dealing with storage areas where the fire challenge is greater than that of miscellaneousstorage and in-rack sprinklers are required.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

218 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 236: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 336-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after 16.2.1.3.4.6 ]

16.2.1.3.4.6.1

It is not the intent that an in-rack sprinkler be installed above the top-tier of storage when utilizing “in-rack sprinklers in every tier”

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The annex note makes clear that the intent of the committee to require in rack sprinklers in every tier does not include an in-rack sprinkler above the top tier of storage, which is protected by the ceiling sprinklers. As an annex note cannot override the body of the standard, this wording should be in the body of the standard.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 305-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. A.16.2.1.3.4.6]

Related Item

First Revision No. 206-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after A.16.2.1.3.2.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Robert Upson

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA Engineering and Standards Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 13:50:18 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-76-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The annex note makes clear that the intent of the committee to require in rack sprinklers in every tier does not include an in-rack sprinkler above the top tier ofstorage, which is protected by the ceiling sprinklers. As an annex note cannot override the body of the standard, this wording should be in the body of the standard.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

219 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 237: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 258-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 16.2.1.3.5 ]

16.2.1.3.5

For solid shelf rack storage, Table 16.2.1.3.2 shall be used to establish the density/area criteria and in-rack sprinklers shall be installed in accordance with 16.1.6 .

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

more user friendly to have criteria located in section on solid shelves

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 82-NFPA 13-2014 [New Section after 16.1.6.6]

Related Item

Public Input No. 83-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Huggins

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Assoc.

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Tue May 13 14:49:19 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Accepted

Resolution: SR-91-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The modification makes the standard more user friendly by having the criteria located in section on solid shelves.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

220 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 238: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 362-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 16.2.1.4.1 ]

16.2.1.4.1 In-Rack Sprinkler Location for Rack Open Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Up to and Including 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height.

16.2.1.4.1.1

In single- or double-row racks, in-rack sprinklers shall be installed in accordance with Table 16.2.1.3.2.

16.2.1.4.1.2

In multiple-row racks no deeper than 16 ft (4.9 m) with aisles 8 ft (2.4 m) or more in width, in-rack sprinklers shall be installed in accordance with Table 16.2.1.3.3.1.

16.2.1.4.1.3

In multiple-row racks deeper than 16 ft (4.9 m) or with aisles less than 8 ft (2.4 m) wide, in-rack sprinklers shall be installed in accordance with Table 16.2.1.3.3.2.

16.2.1.4.1.4

In-rack sprinklers at one level only for storage up to and including 25 ft (7.6 m) high shall be located at the first tier level at or above one-half of the storage height.

16.2.1.4.1.5

In-rack sprinklers at two levels only for storage up to and including 25 ft (7.6 m) high shall be located at the first tier level at or above one-third and two-thirds of the storageheight.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Adding "open" to the title clarifies that the referenced tables 16.2.1.3.2, 16.2.1.3.3.1, and 16.2.1.3.3.2 are in reference to open racks and not solid shelf racks.

Related Item

First Revision No. 175-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Elley Klausbruckner

Organization: Klausbruckner & Associates, Inc

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 21:27:29 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-65-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The design criteria provided for ceiling sprinklers is based upon the assumption that the racks are open. Rather than adding the word open to several sectionheaders, adding a statement that clarifies the intent of the standard is a more direct way of establishing the way the standard has been written.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

221 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 239: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 79-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 16.2.1.4.3.2 ]

16.2.1.4.3.2

Where a storage rack, due to its length, requires less than the number of in-rack sprinklers specified in 16.2.1.4.3.1 (1) through 16.2.1.4.3.1 (4), only those in-racksprinklers in a single rack shall be included in the calculation.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The committee statement is that this section provides clarity. Since this requirement is clearly stated in 16.1.8.3 and it is only repeated in 16.2, it should either be repeated in 16.3, 17.2, and 17.3 or deleted.

The redundancy task group agreed with this PC without any changes.

Related Item

Public Input No. 95-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 16.2.1.4.3.2]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Huggins

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Association

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Wed Mar 26 18:44:50 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Accepted

Resolution: SR-110-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The committee statement is that this section provides clarity. Since this requirement is clearly stated in 16.1.8.3 and it is only repeated in 16.2, it should either berepeated in 16.3, 17.2, and 17.3 or deleted.

The redundancy task group agreed with this PC without any changes.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

222 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 240: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 164-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after 16.2.2.1 ]

16.2.2.1.1 CMSA sprinklers shall not be permitted to protect storage on solid shelf racks unless the solid shelf racks are protected with in-rack sprinklers inaccordance with 16.1.6.

16.2.2.1.1.1 Where solid shelves are used, the in-rack sprinklers shall be installed in every level below the highest solid shelf.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_16-2-2-1-1.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Editorial – to co-ordinate the text with the similar requirement of 16.2.3.2 (FR-210). Similar requirements should be worded similarly, for clarity and consistency.

Related Item

First Revision No. 208-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 16.2.2.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon Apr 28 09:12:21 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-68-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: Section 16.2.2.1.1 in the First Draft is being replaced by the two sections created in this Second Revision. There is no technical change, the original section is beingbroken into two requirements since it included 2 “shall” statements.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

223 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 241: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 317-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 16.2.2.1.1 ]

16.2.2.1.1

Protection of solid shelf racks with CMSA sprinklers at the ceiling shall be permitted where in-rack sprinklers are installed in accordance with 16.1.6. In-rack sprinklers shallbe installed in every level below the highest solid shelf or horizontal barrier .

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This language clarifies that in-rack protection must be installed below horizontal barriers as well as under solid shelves. In some sections editorial changes have been made for consistency in format.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 318-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 16.2.3.2]

Public Comment No. 319-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 16.3.2.1.1]

Public Comment No. 320-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 16.3.3.2.1]

Public Comment No. 321-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 17.2.2.1.1]

Public Comment No. 322-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 17.2.3.1.2]

Public Comment No. 323-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 17.3.2.1.1]

Public Comment No. 324-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 17.3.3.1.1]

Related Item

First Revision No. 208-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 16.2.2.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Robert Upson

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA Engineering and Standards Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 12:16:58 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: Horizontal barriers is the wrong term for generic object that obstruct the discharge of a sprinkler. They require their own in-rack protection scheme relative to thehorizontal barrier location.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

224 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 242: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 318-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 16.2.3.2 ]

16.2.3.2

Where solid shelves are used, in

Protection of solid shelf racks with ESFR sprinklers at the ceiling shall not be permitted to protect storage on solid shelf racks unless the solid shelf racks are protectedwith where in-rack sprinklers are installed in accordance with 16.1.6 .

16.2.3.2.1

In -rack sprinklers shall be installed in every level below the highest solid shelf or horizontal barrier .

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This language clarifies that in-rack protection must be installed below horizontal barriers as well as under solid shelves. In some sections editorial changes have been made for consistency in format.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 317-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 16.2.2.1.1]

Related Item

First Revision No. 208-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 16.2.2.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Robert Upson

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA Engineering and Standards Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 12:19:21 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: Horizontal barriers is the wrong term for generic object that obstruct the discharge of a sprinkler. They require their own in-rack protection scheme relative to thehorizontal barrier location.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

225 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 243: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 263-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 16.2.4.1.1 ]

16.2.4.1.1*

Slatted rack shelves shall be considered equivalent to solid rack shelves where the shelving is not considered open rack shelving or where the requirements of 16.2.4.1.2are not met. (See Section C.20.)

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The redundancy task group initiated this comment.

The title to 16.2 emphasizes that it provides criteria for open rack assemblies. The use of double negatives in 16.2.4.1.1 (it is NOT considered open when the requirements are NOT met) confuses the issue that this section is providing criteria for when slatted shelves are consider to be equivalent to an open rack.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 264-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 17.2.4.1.1]

Related Item

First Revision No. 175-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Huggins

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Assoc.

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Wed May 14 18:02:57 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected

Resolution: This section establishes that slatted shelves are essentially solid and the language being proposed to be deleted.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

226 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 244: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 295-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 16.3 ]

16.3 Protection Criteria for Open Rack for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Over 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height.

16.3.1 Control Mode Density/Area Sprinkler Protection Criteria for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Over 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height.

16.3.1.1 *

For single- and double-row racks, the water demand for nonencapsulated storage separated by aisles at least 4 ft (1.2 m) wide and with a clearance to ceiling up to andincluding 10 ft (3.1 m) shall be in accordance with Table 16.3.1.1.

Table 16.3.1.1 Single- or Double-Row Racks of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Over 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height with Aisles 4 ft (1.2 m) or More in Width

CommodityClass

In-Rack Sprinklers Approximate VerticalSpacing at Tier Nearest the VerticalDistance and Maximum Horizontal

Spacing a,b,c

Figure

MaximumStorageHeight Stagger

CeilingSprinklerOperating

Area

Ceiling Sprinkler Density Clearance to

Ceiling Up to 10 ft (3.1 m) g

OrdinaryTemperature High Temperature

Longitudinal Flue d Face e,f ft 2 m 2 gpm/ft 2 mm/min gpm/ft 2 mm/min

I

Vertical 20 ft (6.1 m)

Horizontal 10 ft (3.1 m) underhorizontal barriers

None 16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(a) 30 ft (9.1 m) No

2000 186

0.25 10.2 0.35 14.3

Vertical 20 ft (6.1 m)Horizontal 10 ft (3.1 m)

Vertical 20 ft(6.1 m)Horizontal 10 ft(3.1 m)

16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(b)Higher than25 ft (7.6 m)

Yes 0.25 10.2 0.35 14.3

I, II, III

Vertical 10 ft (3.1 m) or at 15 ft(4.6 m) and 25 ft (7.6 m)

None 16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(c) 30 ft (9.1 m) Yes

2000 186

0.3 12.2 0.4 16.3

Vertical 10 ft (3.1 m)

Horizontal 10 ft (3.1 m)

Vertical 30 ft(9.1 m)

Horizontal 10 ft(3.1 m)

16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(d)

Higher than25 ft (7.6 m)

Yes 0.3 12.2 0.4 16.3

Vertical 20 ft (6.1 m)

Horizontal 10 ft (3.1 m)

Vertical 20 ft(6.1 m)

Horizontal 5 ft(1.5 m)

16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(e) Yes 0.3 12.2 0.4 16.3

Vertical 25 ft (7.6 m)

Horizontal 5 ft (1.5 m)

Vertical 25 ft(7.6 m)

Horizontal 5 ft(1.5 m)

16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(f) No 0.3 12.2 0.4 16.3

Horizontal barriers at 20 ft (6.1m)

Vertical intervals — two linesof sprinklers under barriers —maximum horizontal spacing10 ft (3.1 m), staggered

16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(g) Yes 0.3 12.2 0.4 16.3

I, II, III, IV

Vertical 15 ft (4.6 m)

Horizontal 10 ft (3.1 m)

Vertical 20 ft(6.1 m)

Horizontal 10 ft(3.1 m)

16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(h)

Higher than25 ft (7.6 m)

Yes

2000 186

0.35 14.3 0.45 18.3

Vertical 20 ft (6.1 m)

Horizontal 5 ft (1.5 m)

Vertical 20 ft(6.1 m)

Horizontal 5 ft(1.5 m)

16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(i) No 0.35 14.3 0.45 18.3

Horizontal barriers at 15 ft (4.6m)

Vertical intervals — two linesof sprinklers under barriers —maximum horizontal spacing10 ft (3.1 m), staggered

16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(j) Yes 0.35 14.3 0.45 18.3

aMinimum in-rack sprinkler discharge, 30 gpm (114 L/min).

bWater shields required.

cAll in-rack sprinkler spacing dimensions start from the floor.

dInstall sprinklers at least 3 in. (76.2 mm) from uprights.

eFace sprinklers shall not be required for a Class I commodity consisting of noncombustible products on wood pallets (without combustible containers), except for arraysshown in Figure 16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(g) and Figure 16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(j).

fIn Figure 16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(a) through Figure 16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(j), each square represents a storage cube that measures 4 ft to 5 ft (1.2 m to 1.5 m) on a side. Actual loadheights can vary from approximately 18 in. to 10 ft (0.46 m to 3.1 m). Therefore, there can be one load to six or seven loads between in-rack sprinklers that are spaced 10 ft(3.1 m) apart vertically.

gFor encapsulated commodity, increase density 25 percent.

16.3.1.1.1

Where storage as described in 16.3.1.1 is encapsulated, ceiling sprinkler density shall be 25 percent greater than for nonencapsulated storage.

16.3.1.2

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

227 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 245: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

For multiple-row racks, the water demand for nonencapsulated storage separated by aisles at least 4 ft (1.2 m) wide and with a clearance to ceiling up to and including 10 ft(3.1 m) shall be in accordance with Table 16.3.1.2.

Table 16.3.1.2 Multiple-Row Racks of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Over 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height

CommodityClass Encapsulated

In-Rack Sprinklers a,b,c

HeightLimit(ft) Stagger Figure

MaximumSpacingfrom Top

ofStorage

to HighestIn-Rack

Sprinklers

CeilingSprinklerOperating

Area

Ceiling Sprinklers Density Clearanceto Ceiling Up to 10 ft

MaximumVertical

Spacing

MaximumHorizontalSpacing

in A Flue

MaximumHorizontalSpacingacrossFlue 165° Rating 286° Rating

ft m ft m ft m ft m ft 2 m 2 gpm/ft 2 mm/min gpm/ft 2 mm/min

INo

20 6.1 12 3.7 10 3.1

NoneBetweenadjacentflues

16.3.1.3.1.3(A)(a) 10 3.1

2000 186

0.25 10.2 0.35 14.3

Yes 0.31 0.44

I, II, and IIINo

15 4.6 10 3.1 10 3.1 16.3.1.3.1.3(A)(b) 10 3.10.30 12.2 0.40 16.3

Yes 0.37 0.50 20.4

I, II, III, andIV

No10 3.1 10 3.1 10 3.1 16.3.1.3.1.3(A)(c) 5 1.5

0.35 14.3 0.45 18.3

Yes 0.44 0.56

For SI units, °C = 5⁄9 (°F-32); 1 gpm/ft2 = 40.746 mm/min.

aAll four rack faces shall be protected by sprinklers located within the racks and no more than 18 in. (0.46 m) from the faces, as indicated in Figure 16.3.1.3.1.3(A)(a)through Figure 16.3.1.3.1.3(A)(c). It shall not be required for each sprinkler level to protect all faces.

bAll in-rack sprinkler spacing dimensions start from the floor.

cIn Figure 16.3.1.3.1.3(A)(a) through Figure 16.3.1.3.1.3(A)(c), each square represents a storage cube measuring 4 ft to 5 ft (1.2 m to 1.5 m) on a side. Actual load heightscan vary from approximately 18 in. to 10 ft (0.46 m to 3.1 m). Therefore, there could be as few as one load or as many as six or seven loads between in-rack sprinklers thatare spaced 10 ft (3.1 m) apart vertically.

16.3.1.2.1

Where such storage is encapsulated, ceiling sprinkler density shall be 25 percent greater than for nonencapsulated storage.

16.3.1.3 In-Rack Sprinklers for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Over 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height Protected with Control Mode Density/AreaSprinklers at Ceiling.

16.3.1.3.1 In-Rack Sprinkler Location for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Over 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height Protected with Control ModeDensity/Area Sprinklers at Ceiling.

16.3.1.3.1.1 * Double-Row Racks.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

228 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 246: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

(A)

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

229 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 247: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

In double-row racks and with a maximum of 10 ft (3.1 m) between the top of storage and the ceiling, in-rack sprinklers shall be installed in accordance with Table 16.3.1.1and Figure 16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(a) through Figure 16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(j) . The highest level of in-rack sprinklers shall be not more than 10 ft (3.1 m) below the top of storage. Where asingle-row rack is mixed with double-row racks, Table 16.3.1.1 and Figure 16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(a) through Figure 16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(j) shall be used.

Figure 16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(a) In-Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Class I Commodities, Storage Height 25 ft to Maximum 30 ft (7.6 m to Maximum 9.1 m).

Figure 16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(b) In-Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Class I Commodities, Storage Height Over 25 ft (7.6 m).

Figure 16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(c) In-Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Class I, II, or III Commodities, Storage Height 25 ft to Maximum 30 ft (7.6 m to Maximum 9.1 m).

Figure 16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(d) In-Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Class I, II, or III Commodities, Storage Height Over 25 ft (7.6 m) — Option 1.

Figure 16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(e) In-Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Class I, II, or III Commodities, Storage Height Over 25 ft (7.6 m) — Option 2.

Figure 16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(f) In-Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Class I, II, or III Commodities, Storage Height Over 25 ft (7.6 m) — Option 3.

Figure 16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(g) In-Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Class I, II, or III Commodities, Storage Height Over 25 ft (7.6 m) — Option 4.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

230 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 248: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Figure 16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(h) In-Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Class I, II, III, or IV Commodities, Storage Height Over 25 ft (7.6 m) — Option 1.

Figure 16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(i) In-Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Class I, II, III, or IV Commodities, Storage Height Over 25 ft (7.6 m) — Option 2.

Figure 16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(j) In-Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Class I, II, III, or IV Commodities, Storage Height Over 25 ft (7.6 m) — Option 3.

(B)

Figure 16.3.1.3.1.2(A)(a) through Figure 16.3.1.3.1.2(A)(c) shall be permitted to be used for the protection of the single-row racks.

16.3.1.3.1.2 * Single-Row Racks.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

231 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 249: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

(A)

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

232 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 250: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

In single-row racks with storage height over 25 ft (7.6 m) and a maximum of 10 ft (3.1 m) between the top of storage and the ceiling, sprinklers shall be installed inaccordance with Figure 16.3.1.3.1.2(A)(a) through Figure 16.3.1.3.1.2(A)(e).

Figure 16.3.1.3.1.2(A)(a) In-Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Class I, II, III, or IV Commodities, Single-Row Racks, Storage Height Over 25 ft (7.6 m) — Option 1.

Figure 16.3.1.3.1.2(A)(b) In-Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Class I, II, or III Commodities, Single-Row Racks, Storage Height Over 25 ft (7.6 m) — Option 1.

Figure 16.3.1.3.1.2(A)(c) In-Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Class I, II, or III Commodities, Single-Row Racks, Storage Height Over 25 ft (7.6 m) — Option 2.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

233 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 251: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Figure 16.3.1.3.1.2(A)(d) In-Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Class I, II, III, or IV Commodities, Single-Row Racks, Storage Height Over 25 ft (7.6 m) — Option 2.

Figure 16.3.1.3.1.2(A)(e) In-Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Class I, II, III, or IV Commodities, Single-Row Racks, Storage Height Over 25 ft (7.6 m) — Option 3.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

234 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 252: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

(B)

In single-row racks, where figures show in-rack sprinklers in transverse flue spaces centered between the rack faces, it shall be permitted to position these in-rack sprinklersin the transverse flue at any point between the load faces.

16.3.1.3.1.3 * In-Rack Sprinkler Location — Multiple-Row Racks for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Over 25 ft (7.6 m) in HeightProtected with Control Mode Density/Area Sprinklers at Ceiling.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

235 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 253: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

(A)

In multiple-row racks with a maximum of 10 ft (3.1 m) between the top of storage and the ceiling, protection shall be in accordance with Table 16.3.1.2 and in-rack sprinklersshall be installed as indicated in Figure 16.3.1.3.1.3(A)(a) through Figure 16.3.1.3.1.3(A)(c).

Figure 16.3.1.3.1.3(A)(a) In-Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Class I Commodities, Multiple-Row Racks, Storage Height Over 25 ft (7.6 m).

Figure 16.3.1.3.1.3(A)(b) In-Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Class I, II, or III Commodities, Multiple-Row Racks, Storage Height Over 25 ft (7.6 m).

Figure 16.3.1.3.1.3(A)(c) In-Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Class I, II, III, or IV Commodities, Multiple-Row Racks, Storage Height Over 25 ft (7.6 m).

(B)

The highest level of in-rack sprinklers shall be not more than 10 ft (3.1 m) below maximum storage height for Class I, Class II, or Class III commodities or 5 ft (1.5 m) belowthe top of storage for Class IV commodities.

16.3.1.3.2 In-Rack Sprinkler Spacing for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Over 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height Protected with Control ModeDensity/Area Sprinklers at Ceiling.

16.3.1.3.2.1 In-Rack Sprinkler Spacing.

In-rack sprinklers shall be staggered horizontally and vertically where installed in accordance with Table 16.3.1.1, Figure 16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(a) through Figure16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(j) , and Figure 16.3.1.3.1.2(A)(a) through Figure 16.3.1.3.1.2(A)(e) .

16.3.1.3.2.2

In-rack sprinklers for storage higher than 25 ft (7.6 m) in double-row racks shall be spaced horizontally and located in the horizontal space nearest the vertical intervalsspecified in Table 16.3.1.1 and Figure 16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(a) through Figure 16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(j) .

16.3.1.3.2.3 In-Rack Sprinkler Spacing.

Maximum horizontal spacing of sprinklers in multiple-row racks with storage higher than 25 ft (7.6 m) shall be in accordance with Figure 16.3.1.3.1.3(A)(a) through Figure16.3.1.3.1.3(A)(c).

16.3.1.3.2.4 *

In-rack sprinklers shall be located at an intersection of transverse and longitudinal flues while not exceeding the maximum spacing rules.

(A)

Where distances between transverse flues exceed the maximum allowable distances, sprinklers shall be installed at the intersection of the transverse and longitudinal flues,and additional sprinklers shall be installed between transverse flues to meet the maximum distance rules.

(B)

Where no transverse flues exist, in-rack sprinklers shall not exceed the maximum spacing rules.

16.3.1.3.3 In-Rack Sprinkler Water Demand for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Over 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height Protected with Control ModeDensity/Area Sprinklers at the Ceiling.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

236 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 254: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

The water demand for sprinklers installed in racks shall be based on simultaneous operation of the most hydraulically remote sprinklers as follows:

(1) Six sprinklers where only one level is installed in racks with Class I, Class II, or Class III commodities

(2) Eight sprinklers where only one level is installed in racks with Class IV commodities

(3) Ten sprinklers (five on each two top levels) where more than one level is installed in racks with Class I, Class II, or Class III commodities

(4) Fourteen sprinklers (seven on each two top levels) where more than one level is installed in racks with Class IV commodities

16.3.1.3.3.1 In-Rack Sprinkler Discharge for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Over 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height Protected with Control ModeDensity/Area Sprinklers at the Ceiling.

Sprinklers in racks shall discharge at a rate not less than 30 gpm (113.6 L/min) for all classes of commodities.

16.3.2 CMSA Sprinklers for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Over 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height.

16.3.2.1

Protection of single-, double-, and multiple-row rack storage Class I through Class IV commodities shall be in accordance with Table 16.3.2.1.

Table 16.3.2.1 CMSA Sprinkler Design Criteria for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Over 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height (Encapsulated andNonencapsulated)

Storage ArrangementCommodity

Class

MaximumStorage Height

MaximumCeiling/Roof Height K-Factor/

Orientation

Type ofSystem

Number of DesignSprinklers

MinimumOperatingPressure

ft m ft m psi bar

Single-, double-, and multiple-rowracks (no open-top containers)

Class I or II 30 9.1 35 10.611.2 (160)Upright

Wet 20

+

1 level of in-rack 25 1.7

Dry 30

+

1 level of in-rack 25 1.7

16.8 (240) Upright Wet 20

+

1 level of in-rack 15 1.0

Dry 30

+

1 level of in-rack 15 1.0

19.6 (280) Pendent Wet 15 25 1.7

35 10.6 40 12.1

11.2 (160) Upright Dry* 36 55 3.8

16.8 (240) Upright Dry* 36 22 1.5

19.6 (280) Pendent Wet 15 30 2.1

Class III or IV30 9.1 35 10.6 19.6 (280) Pendent Wet 15 25 1.7

35 10.6 40 12.1 19.6 (280) Pendent Wet 15 30 2.1

*High temperature–rated sprinklers shall be used. Dry system water delivery shall be determined in accordance with 7.2.3.6 with a maximum time of water delivery of 30seconds with four sprinklers initially open.

16.3.2.1.1

Protection of solid shelf racks with CMSA sprinklers at the ceiling shall be permitted where in-rack sprinklers are installed in accordance with 16.1.6. In-rack sprinklers shallbe installed in every level below the highest solid shelf.

16.3.2.2

Where in-rack sprinklers are required by Table 16.3.2.1, in-rack sprinkler spacing, design pressure, and hydraulic calculation criteria shall be in accordance with therequirements of 16.3.2.7 as applicable for the commodity.

16.3.2.3

Protection shall be provided as specified in Table 16.3.2.1 or appropriate NFPA standards in terms of minimum operating pressure and the number of sprinklers to beincluded in the design area.

16.3.2.4 Open Wood Joist Construction.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

237 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 255: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

16.3.2.4.1

Where CMSA sprinklers are installed under open wood joist construction, their minimum operating pressure shall be 50 psi (3.4 bar) for a K-11.2 (160) sprinkler or 22 psi(1.5 bar) for a K-16.8 (240) sprinkler.

16.3.2.4.2

Where each joist channel of open wood joist construction is fully firestopped to its full depth at intervals not exceeding 20 ft (6.1 m), the lower pressures specified in Table16.3.2.1 shall be permitted to be used.

16.3.2.5 Preaction Systems.

For the purpose of using Table 16.3.2.1, preaction systems shall be classified as dry pipe systems.

16.3.2.6

Building steel shall not require special protection where Table 16.3.2.1 are applied as appropriate for the storage configuration.

16.3.2.7 In-Rack Sprinklers for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Over 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height Protected with CMSA Sprinklers at the Ceiling.

16.3.2.7.1

Where in-rack sprinklers are required by Table 16.3.2.1 in-rack sprinklers shall be installed at the first tier level at or above one-half of the storage height.

16.3.2.7.2

The minimum of 6 in. (152 mm) vertical clear space shall be maintained between the sprinkler deflectors and the top of a tier of storage.

16.3.2.7.3

In-rack sprinklers shall be located at an intersection of transverse and longitudinal flues.

16.3.2.7.4

The maximum horizontal distance between in-rack sprinklers shall be 5 ft (1.5 m).

16.3.2.7.5

Where distances between transverse flues exceed the maximum allowable distances, sprinklers shall be installed at the intersection of the transverse and longitudinal flues,and additional sprinklers shall be installed between transverse flues to meet the maximum distance rules.

16.3.2.7.6

Where no transverse flues exist, in-rack sprinklers shall not exceed the maximum spacing rules.

16.3.2.7.7 In-Rack Sprinkler Water Demand.

The water demand for sprinklers installed in racks shall be based on simultaneous operation of the most hydraulically remote eight sprinklers.

16.3.2.7.8 In-Rack Sprinkler Discharge Pressure.

Sprinklers in racks shall discharge at not less than 15 psi (1 bar) for all classes of commodities. (See Section C.19.)

16.3.3 * Early Suppression Fast-Response (ESFR) Sprinklers for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Over 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

238 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 256: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

16.3.3.1

Protection of single-, double-, and multiple-row rack storage of Class I through Class IV commodities shall be in accordance with Table 16.3.3.1.

Table 16.3.3.1 ESFR Sprinkler Protection of Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Over 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height

StorageArrangement Commodity

MaximumStorageHeight

MaximumCeiling/

Roof HeightNominalK-Factor Orientation

MinimumOperatingPressure In-Rack

SprinklerRequirements

Hose StreamAllowance

WaterSupply

Duration

(hours)ft m ft m psi bar gpm L/min

Single-, double-, andmultiple-row rack (noopen-top containers)

Class I, II, III, or IV,encapsulated ornonencapsulated

30 9.1

35 10.7

14.0

(200)Upright/pendent 75 5.2 No

250 946 1

16.8 (240)Upright/

pendent52 3.6 No

22.4

(320)Pendent 35 2.4 No

25.2 (360) Pendent 20 1.4 No

40 12.2

16.8 (240) Pendent 52 3.6 No

22.4

(320)Pendent 40 2.8 No

25.2 (360) Pendent 25 1.7 No

45 13.7

14.0 (200) Pendent 90 6.2 Yes

16.8 (240) Pendent 63 4.3 Yes

22.4

(320)Pendent 40 2.8 No

25.2 (360) Pendent 40 2.8 No

35 10.7

40 12.2

16.8 (240) Pendent 52 3.6 No

22.4

(320)Pendent 40 2.8 No

25.2 (360) Pendent 25 1.7 No

45 13.7

14.0 (200) Pendent 90 6.2 Yes

16.8 (240) Pendent 63 4.3 Yes

22.4

(320)Pendent 40 2.8 No

25.2 (360) Pendent 40 2.8 No

40 12.2 45 13.7

16.8 (240) Pendent 63 4.3 Yes

22.4

(320)Pendent 40 2.8 No

25.2 (360) Pendent 40 2.8 No

16.3.3.2

ESFR protection as defined shall not apply to the following:

(1) Rack storage involving solid shelves, except for situations complying with 16.3.3.2.1

(2) Rack storage involving open-top cartons or containers

16.3.3.2.1

Protection of solid shelf racks with ESFR sprinklers at the ceiling shall be permitted where in-rack sprinklers are installed in accordance with 16.1.6. In-rack sprinklers shallbe installed in every level below the highest solid shelf.

16.3.3.3

ESFR sprinkler systems shall be designed such that the minimum operating pressure is not less than that indicated in Table 16.3.3.1 for type of storage, commodity,storage height, and building height involved.

16.3.3.4

The design area shall consist of the most hydraulically demanding area of 12 sprinklers, consisting of four sprinklers on each of three branch lines.

16.3.3.5

Where required by Table 16.3.3.1, one level of K-8.0 (115) or K-11.2 (160) quick-response, ordinary-temperature in-rack sprinklers shall be installed at the tier level closestto but not exceeding one-half of the maximum storage height.

16.3.3.5.1

In-rack sprinkler hydraulic design criteria shall be the most hydraulically remote eight sprinklers at 60 gpm (227 L/min).

16.3.3.5.2

In-rack sprinklers shall be located at the intersection of the longitudinal and transverse flue space.

16.3.3.5.3

Horizontal spacing shall not be permitted to exceed 5 ft (1.5 m) intervals.

16.3.3.5.4

The minimum of 6 in. (152 mm) vertical clear space shall be maintained between the sprinkler deflectors and the top of a tier of storage.

16.3.3.5.5

In-rack sprinklers shall be located at an intersection of transverse and longitudinal flues while not exceeding the maximum spacing rules.

16.3.3.5.6

Where distances between transverse flues exceed the maximum allowable distances, sprinklers shall be installed at the intersection of the transverse and longitudinalflues, and additional sprinklers shall be installed between transverse flues to meet the maximum distance rules.

16.3.3.5.7

Where no transverse flues exist, in-rack sprinklers shall not exceed the maximum spacing rules.

16.3.4 Special Design for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Over 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height.

16.3.4.1

Where high-expansion foam systems are used for storage over 25 ft (7.6 m) high up to and including 35 ft (10.7 m) high, they shall be used in combination with ceilingsprinklers.

16.3.4.2

The maximum submergence time for the high-expansion foam shall be 5 minutes for Class I, Class II, or Class III commodities and 4 minutes for Class IV commodities.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

239 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 257: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

The rack storage arrangements addressed by these sections are not limited to “open rack” configurations.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 294-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 16.2]

Related Item

First Revision No. 175-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Robert Upson

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA Engineering and Standards Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 10:03:04 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-65-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The design criteria provided for ceiling sprinklers is based upon the assumption that the racks are open. Rather than adding the word open to several sectionheaders, adding a statement that clarifies the intent of the standard is a more direct way of establishing the way the standard has been written.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

240 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 258: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 346-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 16.3 ]

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

241 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 259: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

16.3

Protection Criteria for Open Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Over 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height.

16.3.1

Control Mode Density/Area CMDA) Sprinkler Protection Criteria for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Over 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height.

16.3.1.1 *

For single- and double-row

racks

rack s storage , the water demand for nonencapsulated

storage

commodity separated by aisles ≥ at least 4 ft (1.2 m) wide and

with a

≤ 10 ft (3.1 m) clearance to ceiling up to and including 10 ft (3.1 m) shall be in accordance with Table 16.3.1.1 .

Table 16

Table 16 .3.1.

1 Single

1 Single - or Double-Row Racks of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Over 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height with Aisles 4 ft (1.2 m) or More in Width

Commodity ClassIn-Rack Sprinklers Approximate Vertical Spacing at Tier Nearest the Vertical Distance and Maximum Horizontal

.

Spacing a,b,cFigure Maximum

Storage Height Stagger

Ceiling SprinklerOperating Area

Ceiling Sprinkler Density Clearance to Ceiling Up

to 10 ft (3.1 m) g

Ordinary Temperature High Temperature

Longitudinal

Flue d Face e,f ft 2 m 2 gpm/ft 2 mm/min gpm/ft 2 mm/min

I

Vertical 20 ft(6.1 m)

.

Horizontal 10 ft (3.1 m) underhorizontal barriers

None 16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(a) 30 ft (9.1 m) No

2000 186

0.25 10.2 0.35 14.3

Vertical 20 ft (6.1 m) Horizontal10 ft (3.1 m)

Vertical 20 ft (6.1 m) Horizontal 10 ft(3.1 m)

16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(b)Higher than 25 ft (7.6m)

Yes 0.25 10.2 0.35 14.3

I, II, III

Vertical 10 ft (3.1 m) or at 15 ft (4.6m) and 25 ft (7.6 m)

None 16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(c)30 ft(9.1 m)

Yes

2000 186

0.3 12.2 0.4 16.3

Vertical 10 ft (3.1 m)

.

Horizontal 10 ft (3.1 m)

Vertical 30 ft (9.1 m)

.

Horizontal 10 ft (3.1 m)16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(d)

Higher than 25 ft (7.6 m)

Yes 0.3 12.2 0.4 16.3

Vertical 20 ft (6.1 m)

.

Horizontal 10 ft (3.1 m)

Vertical 20 ft (6.1 m)

.

Horizontal 5 ft (1.5 m)16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(e) Yes 0.3 12.2 0.4 16.3

Vertical 25 ft (7.6 m)

.

Horizontal 5 ft (1.5 m)

Vertical 25 ft (7.6 m)

.

Horizontal 5 ft (1.5 m)16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(f) No 0.3 12.2 0.4 16.3

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

242 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 260: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Horizontal barriers at 20 ft (6.1 m)

.

Vertical intervals — two lines of sprinklers under barriers — maximum horizontal spacing 10 ft (3.1 m),staggered

16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(g) Yes 0.3 12.2 0.4 16.3

I, II, III, IV

Vertical 15 ft (4.6m)

.

Horizontal 10 ft (3.1 m)

Vertical 20 ft (6.1 m)

.

Horizontal 10 ft (3.1 m)16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(h)

Higher than 25 ft (7.6 m)

Yes

2000 186

0.35 14.3 0.45 18.3

Vertical 20 ft (6.1 m)

.

Horizontal 5 ft (1.5 m)

Vertical 20 ft (6.1 m)

.

Horizontal 5 ft (1.5 m)16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(i) No 0.35 14.3 0.45 18.3

Horizontal barriers at 15 ft (4.6 m)

.

Vertical intervals — two lines of sprinklers under barriers — maximum horizontal spacing 10 ft (3.1 m), staggered16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(j) Yes 0.35 14.3 0.45 18.3

a Minimum in-rack sprinkler discharge, 30 gpm (114 L/min).

b Water shields required.

c All in-rack sprinkler spacing dimensions start from the floor.

d Install sprinklers at least 3 in. (76.2 mm) from uprights.

e Face sprinklers shall not be required for a Class I commodity consisting of noncombustible products on wood pallets (without combustible containers), except for arraysshown in Figure 16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(g) and Figure 16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(j).

f In Figure 16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(a) through Figure 16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(j), each square represents a storage cube that measures 4 ft to 5 ft (1.2 m to 1.5 m) on a side. Actual loadheights can vary from approximately 18 in. to 10 ft (0.46 m to 3.1 m). Therefore, there can be one load to six or seven loads between in-rack sprinklers that are spaced 10 ft(3.1 m) apart vertically.

g For encapsulated commodity, increase density 25 percent.

16.3.1.1.1

Where storage as described in 16.3.1.1 is encapsulated, ceiling sprinkler density shall be 25 percent greater than for nonencapsulated storage.

16.3.1.2

For multiple-row

racks

rack s storage , the water demand for nonencapsulated storage commodity separated by aisles ≥ at least 4 ft (1.2 m) wide and with a

clearance to ceiling up to and including

≤ 10 ft (3.1 m) clearance to ceiling up to and including shall be in accordance with Table 16.3.1.2 .

Table 16

Table 16 .3.1.

2 Multiple

2 Multiple -Row Racks of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Over 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height

CommodityClass

Encapsulated

In-Rack Sprinklers a,b,c

HeightLimit(ft)

Stagger Figure

MaximumSpacingfrom Top

ofStorage

toHighestIn-Rack

Sprinklers

CeilingSprinklerOperating

Area

Ceiling Sprinklers Density Clearanceto Ceiling Up to 10 ft

MaximumVertical

Spacing

MaximumHorizontalSpacing

in A Flue

MaximumHorizontalSpacingacrossFlue

165° Rating 286° Rating

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

243 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 261: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

ft m ft m ft m ft m ft 2 m 2 gpm/ft 2 mm/min gpm/ft 2 mm/min

INo

20 6.1 12 3.7 10 3.1

NoneBetweenadjacentflues

16.3.1.3.1.3(A)(a) 10 3.1

2000 186

0.25 10.2 0.35 14.3

Yes 0.31 0.44

I, II, and IIINo

15 4.6 10 3.1 10 3.1 16.3.1.3.1.3(A)(b) 10 3.10.30 12.2 0.40 16.3

Yes 0.37 0.50 20.4

I, II, III, andIV

No10 3.1 10 3.1 10 3.1 16.3.1.3.1.3(A)(c) 5 1.5

0.35 14.3 0.45 18.3

Yes 0.44 0.56

For SI units, °C = 5 ⁄ 9 (°F-32); 1 gpm/ft 2 = 40.746 mm/min.

a All four rack faces shall be protected by sprinklers located within the racks and no more than 18 in. (0.46 m) from the faces, as indicated in Figure 16.3.1.3.1.3(A)(a)through Figure 16.3.1.3.1.3(A)(c). It shall not be required for each sprinkler level to protect all faces.

b All in-rack sprinkler spacing dimensions start from the floor.

c In Figure 16.3.1.3.1.3(A)(a) through Figure 16.3.1.3.1.3(A)(c), each square represents a storage cube measuring 4 ft to 5 ft (1.2 m to 1.5 m) on a side. Actual load heightscan vary from approximately 18 in. to 10 ft (0.46 m to 3.1 m). Therefore, there could be as few as one load or as many as six or seven loads between in-rack sprinklers thatare spaced 10 ft (3.1 m) apart vertically.

16.3.1. 3 2.1

Where such single, double, or multiple-row rack storage is encapsulated, ceiling sprinkler

density shall be 25 percent

densit y ies from Tables 16.3.1.1 and 16.3.1.2 shall be increased by 25 percent. greater than for nonencapsulated storage.

16.3.1. 4 3

In-Rack Sprinklers for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Over 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height Protected with Control Mode Density/Area Sprinklers atCeiling.

16.3.1. 4 3 .1

In-Rack Sprinkler Location for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Over 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height Protected with Control Mode Density/AreaSprinklers at Ceiling.

Note: Change the order to single-row, double row then multiple row and renumber as necessary.

16.3.1.3.1.1 *

Double-Row Racks.

(A)

For the protection of In double-row racks and with a maximum of 10 ft (3.1 m) between the top of storage and the ceiling, in-rack sprinklers shall be installed inaccordance with Table 16.3.1.1 and an option shown in Figure 16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(a) through Figure 16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(j) shall be used . . The highest level of in-racksprinklers shall be not more than 10 ft (3.1 m) below the top of storage. Where a single-row rack is mixed with double-row racks, Table 16.3.1.1 and Figure16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(a) through Figure 16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(j) shall be used.

Figure 16

Figure 16 .3.1.3.1.1(A)(a)

In

In -Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Class I Commodities, Storage Height 25 ft to Maximum 30 ft (7.6 m to Maximum 9.1 m).

Figure 16

Figure 16 .3.1.3.1.1(A)(b)

In

In -Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Class I Commodities, Storage Height Over 25 ft (7.6 m).

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

244 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 262: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Figure 16

Figure 16 .3.1.3.1.1(A)(c)

In

In -Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Class I, II, or III Commodities, Storage Height 25 ft to Maximum 30 ft (7.6 m to Maximum 9.1 m).

Figure 16

Figure 16 .3.1.3.1.1(A)(d)

In

In -Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Class I, II, or III Commodities, Storage Height Over 25 ft (7.6 m) — Option 1.

Figure 16

Figure 16 .3.1.3.1.1(A)(e)

In

In -Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Class I, II, or III Commodities, Storage Height Over 25 ft (7.6 m) — Option 2.

Figure 16

Figure 16 .3.1.3.1.1(A)(f)

In

In -Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Class I, II, or III Commodities, Storage Height Over 25 ft (7.6 m) — Option 3.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

245 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 263: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Figure 16

Figure 16 .3.1.3.1.1(A)(g)

In

In -Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Class I, II, or III Commodities, Storage Height Over 25 ft (7.6 m) — Option 4.

Figure 16

Figure 16 .3.1.3.1.1(A)(h)

In

In -Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Class I, II, III, or IV Commodities, Storage Height Over 25 ft (7.6 m) — Option 1.

Figure 16

Figure 16 .3.1.3.1.1(A)(i)

In

In -Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Class I, II, III, or IV Commodities, Storage Height Over 25 ft (7.6 m) — Option 2.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

246 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 264: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Figure 16

Figure 16 .3.1.3.1.1(A)(j)

In

In -Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Class I, II, III, or IV Commodities, Storage Height Over 25 ft (7.6 m) — Option 3.

(B)

Figure 16.3.1.3.1.2(A)(a) through Figure 16.3.1.3.1.2(A)(c) shall be permitted to be used for the protection of the single-row racks. Where a single-row rack is mixedwith double-row racks an option shown in Figures 16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(a) through 16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(j) shall be used.

16.3.1.3.1.2 *

Single-Row Racks.

(A)

In single-row racks with storage height over 25 ft (7.6 m) and a maximum of 10 ft (3.1 m) between the top of storage and the ceiling, sprinklers shall be installed inaccordance with an option shown in Figure 16.3.1.3.1.2(A)(a) through Figure 16.3.1.3.1.2(A)(e) shall be used .

Figure 16

Figure 16 .3.1.3.1.2(A)(a)

In

In -Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Class I, II, III, or IV Commodities, Single-Row Racks, Storage Height Over 25 ft (7.6 m) — Option 1.

Figure 16

Figure 16 .3.1.3.1.2(A)(b)

In

In -Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Class I, II, or III Commodities, Single-Row Racks, Storage Height Over 25 ft (7.6 m) — Option 1.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

247 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 265: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Figure 16

Figure 16 .3.1.3.1.2(A)(c)

In

In -Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Class I, II, or III Commodities, Single-Row Racks, Storage Height Over 25 ft (7.6 m) — Option 2.

Figure 16

Figure 16 .3.1.3.1.2(A)(d)

In

In -Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Class I, II, III, or IV Commodities, Single-Row Racks, Storage Height Over 25 ft (7.6 m) — Option 2.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

248 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 266: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Figure 16

Figure 16 .3.1.3.1.2(A)(e)

In

In -Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Class I, II, III, or IV Commodities, Single-Row Racks, Storage Height Over 25 ft (7.6 m) — Option 3.

(B)

In single-row racks, where figures show in-rack sprinklers in transverse flue spaces centered between the rack faces, it shall be permitted to position these in-racksprinklers in the transverse flue at any point between the load faces.

16.3.1. 3 4 .1.3 *

In-Rack Sprinkler Location — Multiple-Row Racks for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Over 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height Protected with ControlMode Density/Area Sprinklers at Ceiling.

(A)

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

249 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 267: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

In multiple-row racks with a maximum of 10 ft (3.1 m) between the top of storage and the ceiling, protection shall be in accordance with Table 16.3.1.2 and in-racksprinklers shall be installed as indicated in Figure 16.3.1. 3 4 .1.3(A)(a) through Figure 16.3.1. 3 4 .1.3(A)(c) .

Figure 16

Figure 16 .3.1. 3 4 .1.3(A)(a)

In

In -Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Class I Commodities, Multiple-Row Racks, Storage Height Over 25 ft (7.6 m).

Figure 16

Figure 16 .3.1. 3 4 .1.3(A)(b)

In

In -Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Class I, II, or III Commodities, Multiple-Row Racks, Storage Height Over 25 ft (7.6 m).

Figure 16

Figure 16 .3.1. 3 4 .1.3(A)(c)

In

In -Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Class I, II, III, or IV Commodities, Multiple-Row Racks, Storage Height Over 25 ft (7.6 m).

(B)

The highest level of in-rack sprinklers shall be not more than 10 ft (3.1 m) below maximum storage height for Class I, Class II, or Class III commodities or 5 ft (1.5 m)

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

250 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 268: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

below the top of storage for Class IV commodities.

16.3.1. 3 4 .2

In-Rack Sprinkler Spacing for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Over 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height Protected with Control Mode Density/AreaSprinklers at Ceiling .

16.3.1. 3 4 .2.1

In-Rack Sprinkler Spacing.

In-rack

sprinklers

s S prinklers shall be staggered horizontally and vertically where installed in accordance with Table 16.3.1.1 , Figure 16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(a) through Figure16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(j) , and Figure 16.3.1.3.1.2(A)(a) through Figure 16.3.1.3.1.2(A)(e) .

16.3.1. 3 4 .2.2

Double Row Racks

In-rack

sprinklers

s prinklers for storage higher than 25 ft (7.6 m) in double-row racks shall be spaced horizontally and located in the horizontal space nearest the vertical intervals specifiedin Table 16.3.1.1 and Figure 16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(a) through Figure 16.3.1.3.1.1(A)(j) .

16.3.1.

3

4 .2.3

In-Rack Sprinkler Spacing. Multiple Row Racks

Maximum horizontal spacing of sprinklers in multiple-row racks with storage higher than 25 ft (7.6 m) shall be in accordance with Figure 16.3.1.3.1.3(A)(a) throughFigure 16.3.1.3.1.3(A)(c) .

16.3.1.3.2.4 *

In-rack sprinklers shall be located at an intersection of transverse and longitudinal flues while not exceeding the maximum spacing rules.

(A)

Where distances between transverse flues exceed the maximum allowable distances, sprinklers shall be installed at the intersection of the transverse and longitudinalflues, and additional sprinklers shall be installed between transverse flues to meet the maximum distance rules.

(B)

Where no transverse flues exist, in-rack sprinklers shall not exceed the maximum spacing rules.

16.3.1. 3 4 .3

In-Rack Sprinkler Water Demand for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Over 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height Protected with Control Mode Density/AreaSprinklers at the Ceiling.

The water demand for sprinklers installed in racks shall be based on simultaneous operation of the most hydraulically remote sprinklers as follows:

(1) Six sprinklers where only one level is installed in racks with Class I, Class II, or Class III commodities

(2) Eight sprinklers where only one level is installed in racks with Class IV commodities

(3) Ten sprinklers (five on each two top levels) where more than one level is installed in racks with Class I, Class II, or Class III commodities

(4) Fourteen sprinklers (seven on each two top levels) where more than one level is installed in racks with Class IV commodities

16.3.1. 3 4 .3.1

In-Rack Sprinkler Discharge for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Over 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height Protected with Control Mode Density/AreaSprinklers at the Ceiling.

Sprinklers in racks shall discharge at a rate not less than 30 gpm (113.6 L/min) for all classes of commodities.

16.3.2

Control Mode Specific Application ( CMSA ) Sprinklers for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Over 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height.

16.3.2.1

Protection of single-, double-, and multiple-row rack storage Class I through Class IV commodities shall be in accordance with Table 16.3.2.1 .

Table 16

Table 16 .3.2.

1 CMSA

1 CMSA Sprinkler Design Criteria for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Over 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height (Encapsulated and Nonencapsulated)

Storage Arrangement Commodity Class Maximum Storage Height Maximum Ceiling/Roof HeightK-Factor/

.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

251 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 269: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

OrientationType of

SystemNumber of Design

Sprinklers

Minimum OperatingPressure

ft m ft m psi bar

Single-, double-, and multiple-row racks (noopen-top containers)

Class I or II 30 9.1 35 10.611.2 (160)Upright

Wet 20

+

1 level of in-rack 25 1.7

Dry 30

+

1 level of in-rack 25 1.7

16.8 (240) Upright Wet 20

+

1 level of in-rack 15 1.0

Dry 30

+

1 level of in-rack 15 1.0

19.6 (280) Pendent Wet 15 25 1.7

35 10.6 40 12.1

11.2 (160) Upright Dry* 36 55 3.8

16.8 (240) Upright Dry* 36 22 1.5

19.6 (280) Pendent Wet 15 30 2.1

Class III or IV30 9.1 35 10.6 19.6 (280) Pendent Wet 15 25 1.7

35 10.6 40 12.1 19.6 (280) Pendent Wet 15 30 2.1

*High temperature–rated sprinklers shall be used. Dry system water delivery shall be determined in accordance with 7.2.3.6 with a maximum time of water delivery of 30seconds with four sprinklers initially open.

16.3.2.1.1

Protection of solid shelf racks with CMSA sprinklers at the ceiling shall be permitted where in-rack sprinklers are installed in accordance with 16.1.6 . In-rack sprinklersshall be installed in every level below the highest solid shelf.

16.3.2.2

Where in-rack sprinklers are required by Table 16.3.2.1 , in-rack sprinkler spacing, design pressure, and hydraulic calculation criteria shall be in accordance with therequirements of 16.3.2.7 as applicable for the commodity.

16.3.2.3

Protection shall be provided as specified in Table 16.3.2.1 or appropriate NFPA standards in terms of minimum operating pressure and the number of sprinklers to beincluded in the design area.

16.3.2. 3 4

Open Wood Joist Construction.

16.3.2. 3 4 .1

Where CMSA sprinklers are installed under open wood joist construction, their minimum operating pressure shall be 50 psi (3.4 bar) for a K-11.2 (160) sprinkler or 22 psi(1.5 bar) for a K-16.8 (240) sprinkler.

16.3.2. 3 4 .2

Where each joist channel of open wood joist construction is fully firestopped to its full depth at intervals not exceeding 20 ft (6.1 m), the lower pressures specified in Table16.3.2.1 shall be permitted to be used.

16.3.2. 4 5

Preaction Systems.

For the purpose of using Table 16.3.2.1 , preaction systems shall be classified as dry pipe systems.

16.3.2.6

Building steel shall not require special protection where Table 16.3.2.1 are applied as appropriate for the storage configuration.

16.3.2. 5 7

In-Rack Sprinklers for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Over 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height Protected with CMSA Sprinklers at the Ceiling.

16.3.2. 5 7 .1

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

252 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 270: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Where in-rack sprinklers are required by Table 16.3.2.1 in-rack sprinklers they shall be installed at the first tier level at or above one-half of the storage height.

16.3.2. 5 7.2

The minimum of 6 in. (152 mm) vertical clear space shall be maintained between the sprinkler deflectors and the top of a tier of storage.

16.3.2.7.3

In-rack sprinklers shall be located at an intersection of transverse and longitudinal flues.

16.3.2. 5.2 7.4

The maximum horizontal distance between in-rack sprinklers shall be 5 ft (1.5 m).

16.3.2.7.5

Where distances between transverse flues exceed the maximum allowable distances, sprinklers shall be installed at the intersection of the transverse and longitudinalflues, and additional sprinklers shall be installed between transverse flues to meet the maximum distance rules.

16.3.2.7.6

Where no transverse flues exist, in-rack sprinklers shall not exceed the maximum spacing rules.

16.3.2. 5.3 7.7

In-Rack Sprinkler Water Demand.

The water demand for sprinklers installed in racks shall be based on simultaneous operation of the most hydraulically remote eight sprinklers.

16.3.2. 5.4 7.8

In-Rack Sprinkler Discharge Pressure.

Sprinklers in racks shall discharge at not less than 15 psi (1 bar) for all classes of commodities . (See Section C.19 .)

16.3.3 *

Early Suppression Fast-Response (ESFR)

Sprinklers

Sprinkler Protection s for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Over 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height.

16.3.3.1

Protection of single-, double-, and multiple-row rack storage of Class I through Class IV commodities shall be in accordance with Table 16.3.3.1 .

Table 16

Table 16 .3.3.

1 ESFR

1 ESFR Sprinkler Protection of Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Over 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height

StorageArrangement Commodity

MaximumStorageHeight

MaximumCeiling/ Roof

Height

NominalK-Factor Orientation

MinimumOperatingPressure

In-RackSprinkler

Requirements

HoseStream

Allowance

WaterSupply

Duration

.

(hours) ft m ft m psi bar gpm L/min

Single-, double-, and multiple-row rack (no open-top containers) Class I, II, III, or IV, encapsulated or nonencapsulated 30 9.1 35 10.714.0

.

(200)Upright/pendent 75 5.2 No

250 946 1

16.8 (240)Upright/

.

pendent52 3.6 No

22.4

.

(320)Pendent 35 2.4 No

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

253 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 271: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

25.2 (360) Pendent 20 1.4 No

40 12.2

16.8 (240) Pendent 52 3.6 No

22.4

.

(320)Pendent 40 2.8 No

25.2 (360) Pendent 25 1.7 No

45 13.7

14.0 (200) Pendent 90 6.2 Yes

16.8 (240) Pendent 63 4.3 Yes

22.4

.

(320)Pendent 40 2.8 No

25.2 (360) Pendent 40 2.8 No

35 10.7 40 12.2

16.8 (240) Pendent 52 3.6 No

22.4

.

(320)Pendent 40 2.8 No

25.2 (360) Pendent 25 1.7 No

45 13.7

14.0 (200) Pendent 90 6.2 Yes

16.8 (240) Pendent 63 4.3 Yes

22.4

.

(320)Pendent 40 2.8 No

25.2 (360) Pendent 40 2.8 No

40 12.2 45 13.7

16.8 (240) Pendent 63 4.3 Yes

22.4

.

(320)Pendent 40 2.8 No

25.2 (360) Pendent 40 2.8 No

16.3.3.2

ESFR protection as defined shall not apply to the following:

(1) Rack storage involving solid shelves, except for situations complying with 16.3.3.2.1

(2) Rack storage involving open-top cartons or containers

16.3.3.2 .1

Protection of solid shelf racks with ESFR sprinklers at the ceiling shall be permitted where in-rack sprinklers are installed in accordance with 16.1.6 . In-rack sprinklers shallbe installed in every level below the highest solid shelf.

16.3.3.3

ESFR sprinkler systems shall be designed such that the minimum operating pressure is not less than that indicated in Table 16.3.3.1 for type of storage, commodity,storage height, and building height involved .

16.3.3.4

The design area shall consist of the most hydraulically demanding area of 12 sprinklers, consisting of four sprinklers on each of three branch lines.

16.3.3. 3 5

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

254 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 272: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Where required by Table 16.3.3.1 , one level of K-8.0 (115) or K-11.2 (160) quick-response, ordinary-temperature in-rack sprinklers shall be installed at the tier level closestto but not exceeding one-half of the maximum storage height.

16.3.3. 3 5 .1

In-rack sprinkler hydraulic design criteria shall be the most hydraulically remote eight sprinklers at 60 gpm (227 L/min).

16.3.3.5.2

In-rack sprinklers shall be located at the intersection of the longitudinal and transverse flue space.

16.3.3. 3.2 5.3

Horizontal spacing shall not be permitted to exceed 5 ft (1.5 m) intervals.

16.3.3. 3.3 5.4

The minimum of 6 in. (152 mm) vertical clear space shall be maintained between the sprinkler deflectors and the top of a tier of storage.

16.3.3.5.5

In-rack sprinklers shall be located at an intersection of transverse and longitudinal flues while not exceeding the maximum spacing rules.

16.3.3.5.6

Where distances between transverse flues exceed the maximum allowable distances, sprinklers shall be installed at the intersection of the transverse and longitudinalflues, and additional sprinklers shall be installed between transverse flues to meet the maximum distance rules.

16.3.3.5.7

Where no transverse flues exist, in-rack sprinklers shall not exceed the maximum spacing rules.

16.3.4

Special Design for Rack Storage of Class I Through Class IV Commodities Stored Over 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height.

16.3.4.1

Where high-expansion foam systems are used for storage over 25 ft (7.6 m) high up to and including 35 ft (10.7 m) high, they shall be used in combination with ceilingsprinklers.

16.3.4.2

The maximum submergence time for the high-expansion foam shall be 5 minutes for Class I, Class II, or Class III commodities and 4 minutes for Class IV commodities.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Submitted on behalf of the SSD Redundancy Task Group. These changes are considered editorial and include consolidation, and deletion of redundant/repeated text and rearrangement of the text to promote consistency with the other storage chapters.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 261-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 262-NFPA 13-2014 [Chapter 14]

Public Comment No. 325-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 327-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 334-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 340-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 342-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 355-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Public Comment No. 356-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Related Item

Public Input No. 352-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 16.1.4]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Kenneth Linder

Organization: Swiss Re

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

255 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 273: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 14:44:00 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but held

Resolution: The concept of limiting the redundancy in chapters 12-21 of NFPA has been discussed throughout this revision cycle. While the TC is in general support of thisconcept, making these redundancy revisions at the Second Phase of the cycle is not appropriate. The reject but hold action for this item will allow the TC on DischargeCriteria to submit the concept to the correlating committee for review and refinement before proceeding into the 2019 edition revision cycle.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

256 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 274: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 165-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after 16.3.2.1 ]

16.3.2.1.1 CMSA sprinklers shall not be permitted to protect storage on solid shelf racks unless the solid shelf racks are protected with in-rack sprinklers inaccordance with 16.1.6.

16.3.2.1.1.1 Where solid shelves are used, the in-rack sprinklers shall be installed in every level below the highest solid shelf.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_16-3-2-1-1.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Editorial – to co-ordinate the text with the similar requirement of 16.2.3.2 (FR-210). Similar requirements should be worded similarly, for clarity and consistency.

Related Item

First Revision No. 211-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 16.3.2.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon Apr 28 09:21:48 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-92-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: Editorial – to co-ordinate the text with the similar requirement of 16.2.3.2 (FR-210). Similar requirements should be worded similarly, for clarity and consistency.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

257 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 275: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 319-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 16.3.2.1.1 ]

16.3.2.1.1

Protection of solid shelf racks with CMSA sprinklers at the ceiling shall be permitted where in-rack sprinklers are installed in accordance with 16.1.6. In-rack sprinklers shallbe installed in every level below the highest solid shelf or horizontal barrier .

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This language clarifies that in-rack protection must be installed below horizontal barriers as well as under solid shelves. In some sections editorial changes have been made for consistency in format.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 317-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 16.2.2.1.1]

Related Item

First Revision No. 208-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 16.2.2.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Robert Upson

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA Engineering and Standards Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 12:21:59 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: Horizontal barriers is the wrong term for generic object that obstruct the discharge of a sprinkler. They require their own in-rack protection scheme relative to thehorizontal barrier location.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

258 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 276: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 166-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after 16.3.3.2 ]

16.3.3.2.1 ESFR sprinklers shall not be permitted to protect storage on solid shelf racks unless the solid shelf racks are protected with in-rack sprinklers inaccordance with 16.1.6.

16.3.3.2.1.1 Where solid shelves are used, the in-rack sprinklers shall be installed in every level below the highest solid shelf.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_16-3-3-2-1.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Editorial – to co-ordinate the text with the similar requirement of 16.2.3.2 (FR-210). Similar requirements should be worded similarly, for clarity and consistency.

Related Item

First Revision No. 214-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 16.3.3.2]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon Apr 28 09:23:44 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-93-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: Editorial revision intended to co-ordinate the text with the similar requirement of 16.2.3.2 (FR-210). Similar requirements should be worded similarly, for clarity andconsistency.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

259 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 277: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 94-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 16.3.3.2 [Excluding any Sub-Sections] ]

ESFR protection as defined shall not apply to the following:

(1)

(2) Rack storage involving

solid shelves, except for situations complying with 16.3.3.2.1

(3) Rack storage involving open-top cartons or containers

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

FR-175 deleted all references to “without solid shelves” and used “open rack” in its place. Two sections were missed in FR-175. This restriction is also stated in 8.4.6.1.1 and the redundancy is not needed. The issue of how to address solid shelving is addressed in a separate comment. It should be noted that this format is used in only two of the four applicable locations that prompts a question on needed consistency. Whether we continue to refer to these sections as open rack is also addressed in a separate comment (PC-80) in response to Correlating Comment Note 4.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 95-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 17.2.3.1.1]

Related Item

First Revision No. 175-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Huggins

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Assoc.

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Mar 28 13:06:21 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-93-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: Editorial revision intended to co-ordinate the text with the similar requirement of 16.2.3.2 (FR-210). Similar requirements should be worded similarly, for clarity andconsistency.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

260 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 278: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 320-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 16.3.3.2.1 ]

16.3.3.2.1

Protection of solid shelf racks with ESFR sprinklers at the ceiling shall be permitted where in-rack sprinklers are installed in accordance with 16.1.6. In-rack sprinklers shallbe installed in every level below the highest solid shelf or horizontal barrier .

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This language clarifies that in-rack protection must be installed below horizontal barriers as well as under solid shelves. In some sections editorial changes have been made for consistency in format.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 317-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 16.2.2.1.1]

Related Item

First Revision No. 208-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 16.2.2.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Robert Upson

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA Engineering and Standards Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 12:23:51 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: Horizontal barriers is the wrong term for generic object that obstruct the discharge of a sprinkler. They require their own in-rack protection scheme relative to thehorizontal barrier location.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

261 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 279: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 250-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after 17.1.2.7 ]

17.1.2.8 Scheme A Protection of CommoditiesThe protection of Class I, II, III, IV or Group A plastic commodities requiring a greater level of protection than is available from the overhead sprinkler systemshall be permitted to be protected in accordance with 17.1.2.8.1 through 17.1.2.8.9.

17.1.2.8.1 Where the storage rack will not be solely dedicated to the storage of commodities requiring a greater level of protection that is available from theoverhead sprinkler system then either of the following shall apply: (1) extend the protection prescribed by 17.1.2.8 horizontally one pallet load in all directionsbeyond the commodity storage area requiring the higher level of protection, or (2) install a vertical barrier to segregate the commodities requiring the higherlevel of protection from any adjacent commodities.

17.1.2.8.2 Commodities that can be protected by the ceiling-level sprinkler system shall be permitted to be stored vertically above as well as horizontallyadjacent to the portions of the storage rack equipped prescribed by 17.1.2.8.

17.1.2.8.3 Horizontal BarriersHorizontal barriers shall be installed at every tier level of the dedicated storage rack where the rack is equipped with solid shelves. Where the dedicatedstorage rack is open-frame, horizontal barriers shall be installed at vertical increments not exceeding 12 ft (3.6 m). The barriers shall span horizontally so thatall flue spaces within the rack bay are covered. A maximum 3 in. (75 mm) wide gap shall be permitted at rack uprights.

17.1.2.8.3.1 The solid barrier shall be installed on a horizontal plane within a rack, beneath which in-rack sprinklers shall be installed. The barrier shall beconstructed of minimum 22 ga (0.7 mm) sheet metal or minimum 3/8 in. (10 mm) plywood. The barrier shall extend to both ends and both aisle faces of theracks covering up both the longitudinal and transverse flue spaces of the rack bays in which they are installed. The barrier shall be fitted to within 3 in. (75mm) of any vertical rack member or other equipment that would create an opening, such as vertical in-rack sprinkler pipe drops.

17.1.2.8.4 In-Rack SprinklersMinimum K8.0 (K115), quick-response sprinklers (ceiling-level or in-rack) shall be installed beneath each horizontal barrier. The deflector of the sprinkler shallbe located as close to the underside of the horizontal barrier as possible.

17.1.2.8.4.1 For single-row racks, sprinklers shall be installed at each rack upright as well as at each rack mid-bay as shown in Figure 17.1.2.8.4.1 Themaximum linear spacing between sprinklers shall not exceed 5 ft (1.5 m).

17.1.2.8.4.2 For double-row racks, sprinklers shall be installed at each rack upright within the longitudinal flue space as well as at the face of the rack and atthe mid-bay face of each rack bay as shown in Figure 17.1.2.8.4.2. The maximum linear spacing between sprinklers shall not exceed 5 ft (1.5 m) at the rack faceand 10 ft (3.0 m) within the longitudinal flue space.

17.1.2.8.4.3 For multiple-row racks, an alternating sprinkler arrangement shall be installed within adjacent transverse flue spaces as shown in Figure17.1.2.8.4.3 with sprinklers at the face of each flue space. The maximum linear spacing between sprinklers at the face and each alternating bay shall notexceed 5 ft (1.5 m) and shall not exceed 10 ft (3.0 m) between sprinklers at every other bay.

17.1.2.8.5 The design of the an in-rack sprinkler system shall be based on a minimum flow of 60 gpm (230 L/min) from the most remote 6 sprinklers forsingle-row racks or the most remote 8 sprinklers for both double-row and multiple-row racks.

17.1.2.8.6 A hose demand allowance of 500 gpm (1,900 L/min) shall be included in the hydraulic design.

17.1.2.8.7 The demand duration shall provide for a minimum of 2 hours.

17.1.2.8.8 The in-rack sprinkler demand shall not be required to be hydraulically balanced with the ceiling-level sprinkler system..17.1.2.8.9 Ceiling Sprinkler SystemThe ceiling-level sprinkler system shall be designed based on the highest commodity hazard not protected by the criteria prescribed by 17.1.2.8.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The proposed Scheme A protection criteria was introduced during last cycle for certain solid shelf arrangements. This protection Scheme was originally developed and tested for protection of Class IIIB combustible liquids in plastic containers for NFPA 30 so as to allow of protection of pockets of such stored materials with the use of solid barriers and enhanced in-rack sprinkler arrays that provided a direct application of water within the storage array. Test references to support such criteria for Class IIIB liquids is provided by NFPA 30, Table D.2(e) 1 as P-21 to P-31 from the Directory of Fire Tests Involving Storage of Flammable and Combustible Liquids in Containers, 3rd edition. The adequacy of such protection for the higher hazard Class IIIB combustible liquids provides justification for protection of Class I, II, III, IV Commodities or Group A plastics.

Related Item

Public Input No. 368-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 17.1.2.7]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Tracey Bellamy

Organization: Telgian Corporation

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon May 12 23:18:45 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-89-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: This protection criteria was introduced during last cycle for certain solid shelf arrangements. This protection Scheme was originally developed and tested for protectionof Class IIIB combustible liquids in plastic containers for NFPA 30 so as to allow of protection of pockets of such stored materials with the use of solid barriers andenhanced in-rack sprinkler arrays that provided a direct application of water within the storage array. Test references to support such criteria for Class IIIB liquids isprovided by NFPA 30, Table D.2(e) 1 as P-21 to P-31 from the Directory of Fire Tests Involving Storage of Flammable and Combustible Liquids in Containers, 3rdedition. The adequacy of such protection for the higher hazard Class IIIB combustible liquids provides justification for protection of Class I, II, III, IV Commodities orGroup A plastics.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

262 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 280: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 167-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 17.1.4.1 ]

Reconsider the proposal and return the text of 17.1.4.1 to that of the 2013 edition of NFPA 13, as follows:

17.1.4.1 *

Where fireproofing of building columns is not provided and storage heights are in excess of 15 ft (4.6 m), protection of building columns located wholly or partially within therack footprint inclusive of flue space or within 12 in. (305 mm) of the footprint structure or vertical rack members supporting the building shall be protected in accordancewith one of the following:

(1) In-rack sprinklers

(2) Sidewall sprinklers at the 15 ft (4.6 m) elevation, pointed toward one side of the steel column

(3) Provision of ceiling sprinkler density for a minimum of 2000 ft2 (186 m2) with ordinary temperature– or high temperature–rated sprinklers as shown in Table 17.1.4.1for storage heights above 15 ft (4.6 m) up to and including 20 ft (6.1 m)

(4) Provision of CMSA or ESFR ceiling sprinkler protection

Table 17.1.4.1 Ceiling Sprinkler Densities for Protection of Steel Building Columns

Commodity Classification

Aisle Width

4 ft (1.2 m) 8 ft (2.4 m)

gpm/ft 2 (L/min)/m 2 gpm/ft 2 (L/min)/m 2

Group A plastics 0.68 27.7 0.57 23.2

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_17-1-4-1.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The proposed text, speaking of “a rack footprint …” should not be adopted. A formal Interpretation FI 75-4 was written to the 1975 edition of NFPA 231C which clarified that the requirement for column sprinklers is not applicable when columns are located adjacent to the racks, whether at the building walls or otherwise. This interpretation has never been overturned and there has been no field experience or test data brought forward to discredit its conclusion. Therefore, there is no justification for inserting this new “within 12 inches of the footprint” criteria. The existing text of “within the rack structure” should remain in effect – as it has for almost 40 years.

Related Item

First Revision No. 299-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 17.1.4]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon Apr 28 09:25:15 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: Reverting back to 2013 edition text would eliminate the clarification that the flue space is part of the rack footprint. A column within 12 in of the rack footprint wouldhave a similar exposure of temperature to that of a column within the flue space of a rack structure.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

263 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 281: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 84-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 17.1.5.5 ]

17.1.5.5

Design criteria for combined ceiling and in-rack CMDA, CMSA, and ESFR sprinklers shall be used for the storage configurations in any applicable option for open rackscombined with the in-rack sprinklers installed in accordance with 17.1.5.1 and 17.1.5.2.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The redundancy task group agrees with this comment.

Due to the historical perspective that the General section on solid shelf racks applies only to spray sprinkler, identifying all sprinkler types corrects that misunderstanding. It also emphasizes that this section is indeed applicable to ESFR and CMSA system as already identified in 8.4.6.1.1. A new comment (PC-81) has been submitted to add it to 8.4.7.

PI-84 attempted to insert this information but rejected on the basis that some tables do not provide combined options. Since this was existing text I left it in the PI but agree this is a concern. As such, the reference to combined has been removed.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 82-NFPA 13-2014 [New Section after 16.1.6.6]

Public Comment No. 80-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Related Item

Public Input No. 84-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Huggins

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Assoc.

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu Mar 27 14:41:55 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-70-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: Due to the historical perspective that the General section on solid shelf racks applies only to spray sprinkler, identifying all sprinkler types corrects thatmisunderstanding. It also emphasizes that this section is indeed applicable to ESFR and CMSA system as already identified in 8.4.6.1.1.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

264 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 282: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 363-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 17.2.1.1.1 ]

17.2.1.1.1

For storage 5 ft (1.5 m) or less in height that does not meet the definition of Miscellaneous Storage that is on solid shelf racks, in-rack sprinklers shall be provided inaccordance with 17.1.5 , and ceiling sprinkler protection shall be provided in accordance with Chapter 13.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

No substantiation has been given, including full scale testing and/or fire history, as to why the existing language needs to be changed to require in-rack sprinklers for Group A Plastic Commodities storing products up to [and including] 5' in height. Additionally no substantiation is given, including full scale testing and/or fire history, as to why miscellaneous storage of Group A Plastic Commodities storing products up to [and including] 5' in height are exempted out of this proposed requirement. Additionally it is illogical to require in-rack sprinklers fro 5' high storage when most loads are 4-5 ft high.

Additionally the location of this section is such that it will be missed by many since most users would use Chapter 13 directly.

Related Item

First Revision No. 297-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 17.2.1.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Elley Klausbruckner

Organization: Klausbruckner & Associates, Inc

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Sat May 17 00:49:00 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: This section is not addressing miscellaneous storage. This section is dealing with storage areas where the fire challenge is greater than that of miscellaneousstorage and in-rack sprinklers are required.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

265 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 283: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 168-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after 17.2.2.1 ]

17.2.2.1.1 CMSA sprinklers shall not be permitted to protect storage on solid shelf racks unless the solid shelf racks are protected with in-rack sprinklers inaccordance with 17.1.5.

17.2.2.1.1.1 Where solid shelves are used, the in-rack sprinklers shall be installed in every level below the highest solid shelf.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_17-2-2-1-1.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Editorial – to co-ordinate the text with the similar requirement of 16.2.3.2 (FR-210). Similar requirements should be worded similarly, for clarity and consistency.

Related Item

First Revision No. 219-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 17.2.2.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon Apr 28 09:27:31 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-94-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: Editorial revision to co-ordinate the text with the similar requirement of 16.2.3.2 (FR-210). Similar requirements should be worded similarly, for clarity andconsistency.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

266 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 284: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 301-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 17.2.2.1 [Excluding any Sub-Sections] ]

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

267 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 285: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Protection of single-, double-, and multiple-row rack storage for unexpanded Group A plastic commodities shall be in accordance with Table 17.2.2.1.

Table 17.2.2.1 CMSA Sprinkler Design Criteria for Single-, Double-, and Multiple-Row Racks of Group A Plastic Commodities Stored Up and Including 25 ft (7.6 m) inHeight

Storage Arrangement Commodity Class

MaximumStorage Height

MaximumCeiling/Roof

HeightK-Factor/

Orientation

Type ofSystem

Number ofDesign Sprinklers

MinimumOperatingPressure

ft m ft m psi bar

Single-, double-, and multiple-rowracks (no open-top containers)

Cartonedunexpanded

plastics

20 6.1

25 7.6

11.2 (160)Upright

Wet 15 50 3.5

16.8 (240)Upright

Wet 15 22 1.5

19.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 15 16 1.1

30 9.1

11.2 (160)Upright

Wet 30 50 3.5

Wet 20 75 5.2

16.8 (240)Upright

Wet 15* 22 1.5

19.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 15 16 1.1

25 7.6 30 9.111.2 (160)Upright

Wet 15

+

1 level of in-rack 50 3.5

16.8 (240) Upright Wet 15* 22 1.5

19.6 (280) Pendent Wet 15 16 1.1

25 7.6 35 10.6 11.2 (160) Upright Wet 30

+

1 level of in-rack 50 3.5

Wet 20

+

1 level of in-rack 75 5.2

16.8 (240) Upright Wet 30

+

1 level of in-rack 22 1.5

Wet 20

+

1 level of in-rack 35 2.4

19.6 (280) Pendent Wet 15 25 1.7

Exposed unexpanded plastics

20 6.1 25 7.611.2 (160) Upright Wet 15 50 3.5

16.8 (240) Upright Wet 15 22 1.5

20 6.1 30 9.111.2 (160) Upright

Wet 30 50 3.5

Wet 20 75 5.2

16.8 (240) Upright Wet 15* 22 1.5

25 7.6 30 9.1 11.2 (160) Upright Wet 15

+

1 level of in-rack 50 3.5

16.8 (240) Upright Wet 15* 22 1.5

25 7.6 35 10.6 11.2 (160) Upright Wet 30

+

1 level of in-rack 50 3.5

Wet 20

+

1 level of in-rack 75 5.2

16.8 (240) Upright Wet 30

+

1 level of in-rack 22 1.5

Wet 20

+

1 level of in-rack 35 2.4

StorageArrangement

CommodityClass

MaximumStorageHeight

MaximumCeiling/Roof

HeightK-Factor/

Orientation

Type ofSystem

Number ofDesign

Sprinklers

MinimumOperatingPressure

ft m ft m psi bar

ExposedExpanded

4.5 1.4 8 2.4

11.2 (160)Upright/

Pendent

Wet 20 16 1.1

11.2 (160)Upright

Dry 25 16 1.1

16.8 (240) Wet 20 7 0.5

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

268 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 286: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Upright Dry 25 7 0.5

19.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 20 16 1.1

19.6 (280)Upright

Dry 25 30 2.1

5 1.5 10 3.0

11.2 (160)Upright/

Pendent

Wet 20 30 2.1

11.2 (160)Upright

Dry 25 30 2.1

16.8 (240)Upright

Wet 20 13 0.9

Dry 25 13 0.9

19.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 20 16 1.1

19.6 (280)Upright

Dry 25 30 2.1

7 2.1 12 3.6

11.2 (160)Upright/

Pendent

Wet 20 50 3.5

11.2 (160)Upright

Dry 25 50 3.5

16.8 (240)Upright

Wet 20 25 1.7

Dry 25 25 1.7

19.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 20 16 1.1

19.6 (280)Upright

Dry 25 30 2.1

10 3.0 15 4.5

11.2 (160)Upright/

Pendent

Wet 20 50 3.5

11.2 (160)Upright

Dry 35 50 3.5

16.8 (240)Upright

Wet 25 25 1.7

Dry 25 35 1.7

19.6 (280)Pendent

Wet 25 16 1.1

19.6 (280)Upright

Dry 35 30 2.1

*Minimum 8 ft (2.4 m) aisle.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This proposal integrates the current requirements for “uncartoned expanded plastics” from FM Global Property Loss Prevention Data Sheets 8-9, Table 11. Ceiling-Level Protection Guidelines for Uncartoned Expanded Plastic Commodities in Open-Frame Rack Storage Arrangements into the NFPA 13 standard format. This will provide permissible protection schema for Exposed Expanded plastic commodities within the NFPA 13 installation standard.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 302-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 17.2.3.1 [Excluding any Sub-Sections]]

Related Item

First Revision No. 175-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Robert Upson

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA Engineering and Standards Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 10:27:09 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected

Resolution: The test data to support this design criteria has not been provided to the technical committee.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

269 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 287: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 321-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 17.2.2.1.1 ]

17.2.2.1.1

Protection of solid shelf racks with CMSA sprinklers at the ceiling shall be permitted where in-rack sprinklers are installed in accordance with 17.1.5. In-rack sprinklers shallbe installed in every level below the highest solid shelf or horizontal barrier .

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This language clarifies that in-rack protection must be installed below horizontal barriers as well as under solid shelves. In some sections editorial changes have been made for consistency in format.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 317-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 16.2.2.1.1]

Related Item

First Revision No. 208-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 16.2.2.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Robert Upson

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA Engineering and Standards Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 12:25:30 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: Horizontal barriers is the wrong term for generic object that obstruct the discharge of a sprinkler. They require their own in-rack protection scheme relative to thehorizontal barrier location.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

270 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 288: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 196-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 17.2.3 ]

17.2.3* Early Suppression Fast-Response (ESFR) Sprinklers for Rack Storage of Group A Plastic Commodities Stored Up to and Including 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

271 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 289: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

17.2.3.1

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

272 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 290: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Protection of single-, double-, and multiple-row rack storage of cartoned or exposed unexpandedGroup A plastic and cartoned expanded Group A plastic shall be inaccordance with Table 17.2.3.1.

Table 17.2.3.1 ESFR Protection of Rack Storage of Group A Plastic Commodities Stored Up to and Including 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height

Storage Arrangement Commodity

MaximumStorage Height

MaximumCeiling/Roof

HeightNominalK-Factor Orientation

MinimumOperatingPressure

In-Rack SprinklerRequirementsft m ft m psi bar

Single-, double-, and multiple-rowracks (no open-top containers)

Cartonedunexpanded

20 6.1

25 7.622.4

(320)Pendent 25 1.7 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 15 1.0 No

30 9.1

14.0

(200)

Upright/

pendent50 3.4 No

16.8

(240)

Upright/

pendent35 2.4 No

22.4

(320)Pendent 25 1.7 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 15 1.0 No

35 10.7

14.0

(200)

Upright/

pendent75 5.2 No

16.8

(240)

Upright/

pendent52 3.6 No

22.4

(320)Pendent 35 2.4 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 20 1.4 No

40 12.2

16.8

(240)Pendent 52 3.6 No

22.4

(320)Pendent 40 2.8 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 25 1.7 No

45 13.7

14.0

(200)Pendent 90 6.2 Yes

16.8

(240)Pendent 63 4.3 Yes

22.4

(320)Pendent 40 2.8 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 40 2.8 No

25 7.6

30 9.1

14.0

(200)Upright/pendent 50 3.4 No

16.8

(240)

Upright/

pendent35 2.4 No

22.4

(320)Pendent 25 1.7 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 15 1.0 No

32 9.8

14.0

(200)

Upright/

pendent60 4.1 No

16.8

(240)

Upright/

pendent42 2.9 No

35 10.7

14.0

(200)

Upright/

pendent75 5.2 No

16.8

(240)

Upright/

pendent52 3.6 No

22.4

(320)Pendent 35 2.4 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 20 1.4 No

40 12.2

16.8

(240)Pendent 52 3.6 No

22.4

(320)Pendent 40 2.8 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 25 1.7 No

45 13.714.0

(200)Pendent 90 6.2 Yes

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

273 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 291: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

16.8

(240)Pendent 63 4.3 Yes

22.4

(320)Pendent 40 2.8 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 40 2.8 No

Exposedunexpanded

20 6.1

25 7.6

14.0

(200)Pendent 50 3.4 No

16.8

(240)Pendent 35 2.4 No

30 9.1

14.0

(200)Pendent 50 3.4 No

16.8

(240)Pendent 35 2.4 No

35 10.7

14.0

(200)Pendent 75 5.2 No

16.8

(240)Pendent 52 3.6 No

40 12.216.8

(240)Pendent 52 3.6 No

45 13.7

14.0

(200)Pendent 90 6.2 Yes

16.8

(240)Pendent 63 4.3 Yes

25 7.6

30 9.1

14.0

(200)Pendent 50 3.4 No

16.8

(240)Pendent 35 2.4 No

32 9.8

14.0

(200)Pendent 60 4.1 No

16.8

(240)Pendent 42 2.9 No

35 10.7

14.0

(200)Pendent 75 5.2 No

16.8

(240)Pendent 52 3.6 No

40 12.2

16.8

(240)Pendent 52 3.6 No

22.4

(320)Pendent 50 3.4 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 50 3.4 No

45 13.7

14.0

(200)Pendent 90 6.2 Yes

16.8

(240)Pendent 63 4.3 Yes

Cartonedexpanded

20 6.1

25 7.6

14.0

(200)

Upright/

pendent50 3.4 No

16.8

(240)

Upright/

pendent35 2.4 No

30 9.1

14.0

(200)

Upright/

pendent50 3.4 No

16.8

(240)

Upright/

pendent35 2.4 No

25 7.6

30 9.1

14.0

(200)

Upright/

pendent50 3.4 No

16.8

(240)

Upright/

pendent35 2.4 No

32 9.8

14.0

(200)Pendent 60 4.1 No

16.8

(240)

Upright/

pendent42 2.9 No

Storage Arrangement Commodity

MaximumStorage Height

MaximumCeiling/Roof Height

NominalK-Factor Orientation

MinimumOperatingPressure

In-Rack SprinklerRequirementsft m ft m psi bar

17.2.3.1.1

ESFR protection as defined shall not apply to the following:

(1) Rack storage involving solid shelves, except for the situation permitted by 17.2.3.1.2

(2) Rack storage involving open-top cartons or containers

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

274 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 292: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

17.2.3.1.2

Protection of solid shelf racks with ESFR sprinklers at the ceiling shall be permitted where in-rack sprinklers are installed in accordance with 17.1.5. In-rack sprinklers shallbe installed in every level below the highest solid shelf.

17.2.3.2

ESFR sprinkler systems shall be designed such that the minimum operating pressure is not less than that indicated in Table 17.2.3.1 for type of storage, commodity,storage height, and building height involved.

17.2.3.3

The design area shall consist of the most hydraulically demanding area of 12 sprinklers, consisting of four sprinklers on each of three branch lines.

17.2.3.4 In-Rack Sprinkler Requirements Where ESFR Sprinklers Are Used at Ceiling.

17.2.3.4.1

Where required by Table 17.2.3.1, in-rack sprinklers shall be installed at the first tier level at or above one-half of the storage height.

17.2.3.4.2

In-rack sprinklers shall be K-8.0 (115) or K-11.2 (160) quick-response, ordinary-temperature sprinklers.

17.2.3.4.3

The minimum of 6 in. (152.4 mm) vertical clear space shall be maintained between the sprinkler deflectors and the top of a tier of storage.

17.2.3.4.4

The maximum horizontal distance between in-rack sprinklers shall be 5 ft (1.5 m).

17.2.3.4.5*

In-rack sprinklers shall be located at an intersection of transverse and longitudinal flues while not exceeding the maximum spacing rules.

17.2.3.4.6

Where distances between transverse flues exceed the maximum allowable distances, sprinklers shall be installed at the intersection of the transverse and longitudinalflues, and additional sprinklers shall be installed between transverse flues to meet the maximum distance rules.

17.2.3.4.7

Where no transverse flues exist, in-rack sprinklers shall not exceed the maximum spacing rules.

17.2.3.4.8

The water demand for sprinklers installed in racks shall be based on simultaneous operation of the most hydraulically remote eight sprinklers.

17.2.3.4.9

Each of the in-rack sprinklers described in 17.2.3.4.8 shall discharge at a minimum of 60 gpm (227 L/min).

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

CC NOTE: The following CC Note No. 13 appeared in the First Draft Report as Global First Revision No. 181, 177, and 175,

The TC should review the deletion of the K14 and K16.8 for the 25 ft ceiling height, which should not have been made to this table.

Related Item

First Revision No. 181-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

First Revision No. 177-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

First Revision No. 175-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: CC on AUT-AAC

Organization: CC on Automatic Sprinkler Systems

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Wed Apr 30 07:33:44 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-147-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The K14 and K 16.8 rows for the 25 ft ceiling height were inadvertently deleted during the first draft. This is an editorial correction to reinsert them.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

275 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 293: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 302-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 17.2.3.1 [Excluding any Sub-Sections] ]

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

276 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 294: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Protection of single-, double-, and multiple-row rack storage of cartoned or exposed unexpandedGroup A plastic and cartoned expanded Group A plastic shall be inaccordance with Table 17.2.3.1.

Table 17.2.3.1 ESFR Protection of Rack Storage of Group A Plastic Commodities Stored Up to and Including 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height

Storage Arrangement Commodity

MaximumStorage Height

MaximumCeiling/Roof

HeightNominalK-Factor Orientation

MinimumOperatingPressure

In-Rack SprinklerRequirementsft m ft m psi bar

Single-, double-, and multiple-rowracks (no open-top containers)

Cartonedunexpanded

20 6.1

25 7.622.4

(320)Pendent 25 1.7 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 15 1.0 No

30 9.1

14.0

(200)

Upright/

pendent50 3.4 No

16.8

(240)

Upright/

pendent35 2.4 No

22.4

(320)Pendent 25 1.7 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 15 1.0 No

35 10.7

14.0

(200)

Upright/

pendent75 5.2 No

16.8

(240)

Upright/

pendent52 3.6 No

22.4

(320)Pendent 35 2.4 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 20 1.4 No

40 12.2

16.8

(240)Pendent 52 3.6 No

22.4

(320)Pendent 40 2.8 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 25 1.7 No

45 13.7

14.0

(200)Pendent 90 6.2 Yes

16.8

(240)Pendent 63 4.3 Yes

22.4

(320)Pendent 40 2.8 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 40 2.8 No

25 7.6

30 9.1

14.0

(200)Upright/pendent 50 3.4 No

16.8

(240)

Upright/

pendent35 2.4 No

22.4

(320)Pendent 25 1.7 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 15 1.0 No

32 9.8

14.0

(200)

Upright/

pendent60 4.1 No

16.8

(240)

Upright/

pendent42 2.9 No

35 10.7

14.0

(200)

Upright/

pendent75 5.2 No

16.8

(240)

Upright/

pendent52 3.6 No

22.4

(320)Pendent 35 2.4 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 20 1.4 No

40 12.2

16.8

(240)Pendent 52 3.6 No

22.4

(320)Pendent 40 2.8 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 25 1.7 No

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

277 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 295: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Storage Arrangement Commodity

MaximumStorage Height

MaximumCeiling/Roof

HeightNominalK-Factor Orientation

MinimumOperatingPressure

In-Rack SprinklerRequirementsft m ft m psi bar

45 13.7

14.0

(200)Pendent 90 6.2 Yes

16.8

(240)Pendent 63 4.3 Yes

22.4

(320)Pendent 40 2.8 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 40 2.8 No

Exposedunexpanded

20 6.1

25 7.6

14.0

(200)Pendent 50 3.4 No

16.8

(240)Pendent 35 2.4 No

30 9.1

14.0

(200)Pendent 50 3.4 No

16.8

(240)Pendent 35 2.4 No

35 10.7

14.0

(200)Pendent 75 5.2 No

16.8

(240)Pendent 52 3.6 No

40 12.216.8

(240)Pendent 52 3.6 No

45 13.7

14.0

(200)Pendent 90 6.2 Yes

16.8

(240)Pendent 63 4.3 Yes

25 7.6

30 9.1

14.0

(200)Pendent 50 3.4 No

16.8

(240)Pendent 35 2.4 No

32 9.8

14.0

(200)Pendent 60 4.1 No

16.8

(240)Pendent 42 2.9 No

35 10.7

14.0

(200)Pendent 75 5.2 No

16.8

(240)Pendent 52 3.6 No

40 12.2

16.8

(240)Pendent 52 3.6 No

22.4

(320)Pendent 50 3.4 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 50 3.4 No

45 13.7

14.0

(200)Pendent 90 6.2 Yes

16.8

(240)Pendent 63 4.3 Yes

Cartonedexpanded

20 6.1

25 7.6

14.0

(200)

Upright/

pendent50 3.4 No

16.8

(240)

Upright/

pendent35 2.4 No

30 9.1

14.0

(200)

Upright/

pendent50 3.4 No

16.8

(240)

Upright/

pendent35 2.4 No

25 7.6

30 9.1

14.0

(200)

Upright/

pendent50 3.4 No

16.8

(240)

Upright/

pendent35 2.4 No

32 9.8

14.0

(200)Pendent 60 4.1 No

16.8

(240)

Upright/

pendent42 2.9 No

Storage Commodity Maximum Maximum Nominal Orientation Minimum In-Rack

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

278 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 296: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Arrangement

StorageHeight

Ceiling/RoofHeight K-Factor

OperatingPressure Sprinkler

Requirementsft m ft m psi bar

ExposedExpanded

15 4.6 20 6.125.2

(360)Pendent 30 2.1 No

20 6.1 25 7.5

14.0(200)

Pendent 75 5.2 No

16.8(240)

Pendent 50 3.5 No

22.4(320)

Pendent 50 3.5 No

25.2(360)

Pendent 50* 3.5* No

25 7.5 30 9.0

14.0(200)

Pendent 100 6.9 No

16.8(240)

Pendent 70 4.8 No

22.4(320)

Pendent 70 4.8 No

25.2(360)

Pendent 70* 4.8* No

*Some manufacturers have a special listing for lower pressure. See manufacturer’s literature for more information.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This proposal integrates the current requirements for “uncartoned expanded plastics” from FM Global Property Loss Prevention Data Sheets 8-9, Table 11. Ceiling-Level Protection Guidelines for Uncartoned Expanded Plastic Commodities in Open-Frame Rack Storage Arrangements into the NFPA 13 standard format. This will provide permissible protection schema for Exposed Expanded plastic commodities within the NFPA 13 installation standard.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 301-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 17.2.2.1 [Excluding any Sub-Sections]]

Related Item

First Revision No. 175-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Robert Upson

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA Engineering and Standards Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 10:31:47 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected

Resolution: The test data to support this design criteria has not been provided to the technical committee.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

279 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 297: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 169-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after 17.2.3.1.1 ]

17.2.3.1.2 ESFR sprinklers shall not be permitted to protect storage on solid shelf racks unless the solid shelf racks are protected with in-rack sprinklers inaccordance with 17.1.5.

17.2.3.1.2.1 Where solid shelves are used, the in-rack sprinklers shall be installed in every level below the highest solid shelf.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_17-2-3-1-2.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Editorial – to co-ordinate the text with the similar requirement of 16.2.3.2 (FR-210). Similar requirements should be worded similarly, for clarity and consistency.

Related Item

First Revision No. 220-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 17.2.3.1.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon Apr 28 09:29:02 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-95-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: Editorial revision to co-ordinate the text with the similar requirement of 16.2.3.2 (FR-210). Similar requirements should be worded similarly, for clarity andconsistency.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

280 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 298: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 364-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 17.2.3.1.1 ]

17.2.3.1.1

ESFR protection as defined shall not apply to the following:

(1) Rack storage involving solid shelves, except for the situation as permitted by 17.2.3.1.2

(2) Rack storage involving open-top cartons or containers

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Minor editorial language.

Related Item

First Correlating Revision No. 12-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 17.2.3.1.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Elley Klausbruckner

Organization: Klausbruckner & Associates, Inc

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Sat May 17 01:21:38 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Accepted

Resolution: SR-96-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: This revision is an editorial correction to make the language consistent with similar sections.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

281 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 299: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 95-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 17.2.3.1.1 ]

17.2.3.1.1

ESFR protection as defined shall not apply to the following:

(1)

(2) Rack storage involving

solid shelves, except for the situation permitted by 17.2.3.1.2

(3) Rack storage involving open-top cartons or containers

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

FR-175 deleted all references to “without solid shelves” and used “open rack” in its place. Two sections were missed in FR-175. This restriction is also stated in 8.4.6.1.1 and the redundancy is not needed. The issue of how to address solid shelving is addressed in a separate comment. It should be noted that this format is used in only two of the four applicable locations that prompts a question on needed consistency. Whether we continue to refer to these sections as open rack is also addressed in a separate comment (PC-80) in response to Correlating Comment Note 4.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 94-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 16.3.3.2 [Excluding any Sub-Sections]]

Related Item

First Revision No. 175-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Huggins

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Assoc.

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Mar 28 13:14:07 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected

Resolution: The proposed revision deletes common allowances for the use of ESFR design criteria.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

282 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 300: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 322-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 17.2.3.1.2 ]

17.2.3.1.2

Protection of solid shelf racks with ESFR sprinklers at the ceiling shall be permitted where in-rack sprinklers are installed in accordance with 17.1.5. In-rack sprinklers shallbe installed in every level below the highest solid shelf or horizontal barrier .

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This language clarifies that in-rack protection must be installed below horizontal barriers as well as under solid shelves. In some sections editorial changes have been made for consistency in format.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 317-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 16.2.2.1.1]

Related Item

First Revision No. 208-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 16.2.2.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Robert Upson

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA Engineering and Standards Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 12:26:50 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: Horizontal barriers is the wrong term for generic object that obstruct the discharge of a sprinkler. They require their own in-rack protection scheme relative to thehorizontal barrier location.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

283 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 301: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 264-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 17.2.4.1.1 ]

17.2.4.1.1*

Slatted rack shelves shall be considered equivalent to solid rack shelves where the shelving is not considered to open rack shelving or where the requirements of17.2.4.1 are not met. (See Section C.20 .)

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The redundancy task group initiated this comment.

The title to 17.2 emphasizes that it provides criteria for open rack assemblies. The use of double negatives in 17.2.4.1.1 (it is NOT considered open when the requirements are NOT met) confuses the issue that this section is providing criteria for when slatted shelves are consider to be equivalent to an open rack.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 263-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 16.2.4.1.1]

Related Item

First Revision No. 175-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Huggins

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Assoc.

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Wed May 14 18:28:05 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected

Resolution: This section establishes that slatted shelves are essentially solid and the language being proposed to be deleted.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

284 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 302: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 170-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 17.3.1.8 ]

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

285 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 303: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Revise Figure 17.3.1.8 (a), Figure 17.3.1.8 (b), Figure 17.3.1.8 (c) and Figure 17.3.1.8 (e) to delete the longitudinal flue spaces, as per the original PI.

17.3.1.8 *

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

286 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 304: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

For protection of storage of exposed unexpanded Group A plastics, whether encapsulated or nonencapsulated, or cartoned Group A plastics, expanded or unexpanded,whether encapsulated or nonencapsulated, on multiple-row racks, in-rack sprinklers shall be arranged in accordance with one of the options in Figure 17.3.1.8(a) throughFigure 17.3.1.8(f) . The highest level of in-rack sprinklers shall be not more than 10 ft (3.1 m) below the top of storage.

Figure 17.3.1.8(a) In-Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Cartoned Group A Plastic and Exposed Nonexpanded Group A Plastic, Multiple-Row Racks, Storage HeightOver 25 ft (7.6 m) — Option 1 [10 ft (3.1 m) Maximum Spacing].

Figure 17.3.1.8(b) In-Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Cartoned Group A Plastic and Exposed Nonexpanded Group A Plastic, Multiple-Row Racks, Storage HeightOver 25 ft (7.6 m) — Option 2 [10 ft (3.1 m) Maximum Spacing].

Figure 17.3.1.8(c) In-Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Cartoned Group A Plastic and Exposed Nonexpanded Group A Plastic, Multiple-Row Racks, Storage HeightOver 25 ft (7.6 m) — Option 1 [5 ft (1.5 m) Maximum Spacing].

Figure 17.3.1.8(d) In-Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Cartoned Group A Plastic and Uncartoned Unexpanded Group A Plastic, Multiple-Row Racks, StorageHeight Over 25 ft (7.6 m) — Option 2 [5 ft (1.5 m) Maximum Spacing].

Figure 17.3.1.8(e) In-Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Cartoned Group A Plastic and Exposed Nonexpanded Group A Plastic, Multiple-Row Racks, Storage HeightOver 25 ft (7.6 m) — Option 3 [5 ft (1.5 m) Maximum Spacing].

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

287 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 305: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Figure 17.3.1.8(f) In-Rack Sprinkler Arrangement, Cartoned Group A Plastic and Exposed Nonexpanded Group A Plastic, Multiple-Row Racks, Storage HeightOver 25 ft (7.6 m) — Option 4 [5 ft (1.5 m) Maximum Spacing].

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_17-3-1-8.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

As per the Committee Statement, the longitudinal flues were to be eliminated to create consistency between the figures in the section. However, the First Draft Report does not reflect the revision.

Related Item

Public Input No. 124-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon Apr 28 09:30:30 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Accepted

Resolution: SR-97-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: As per the Committee Statement, the longitudinal flues were to be eliminated to create consistency between the figures in the section. However, the First DraftReport does not reflect the revision.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

288 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 306: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 171-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after 17.3.2.1.1 ]

17.3.2.1.1 CMSA sprinklers shall not be permitted to protect storage on solid shelf racks unless the solid shelf racks are protected with in-rack sprinklers inaccordance with 17.1.5.

17.3.2.1.1.1 Where solid shelves are used, the in-rack sprinklers shall be installed in every level below the highest solid shelf.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_17-3-2-1-1.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Editorial – to co-ordinate the text with the similar requirement of 16.2.3.2 (FR-210). Similar requirements should be worded similarly, for clarity and consistency.

Related Item

First Revision No. 222-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 17.3.2.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon Apr 28 09:32:01 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-98-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: Editorial revision to co-ordinate the text with the similar requirement of 16.2.3.2 (FR-210). Similar requirements should be worded similarly, for clarity andconsistency.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

289 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 307: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 323-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 17.3.2.1.1 ]

17.3.2.1.1

Protection of solid shelf racks with CMSA sprinklers at the ceiling shall be permitted where in-rack sprinklers are installed in accordance with 17.1.5. In-rack sprinklers shallbe installed in every level below the highest solid shelf or horizontal barrier .

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This language clarifies that in-rack protection must be installed below horizontal barriers as well as under solid shelves. In some sections editorial changes have been made for consistency in format.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 317-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 16.2.2.1.1]

Related Item

First Revision No. 208-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 16.2.2.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Robert Upson

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA Engineering and Standards Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 12:29:15 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: Horizontal barriers is the wrong term for generic object that obstruct the discharge of a sprinkler. They require their own in-rack protection scheme relative to thehorizontal barrier location.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

290 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 308: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 173-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after 17.3.3.1 ]

17.3.3.1.1 ESFR sprinklers shall not be permitted to protect storage on solid shelf racks unless the solid shelf racks are protected with in-rack sprinklers inaccordance with 17.1.5.

17.3.3.1.1.1 Where solid shelves are used, the in-rack sprinklers shall be installed in every level below the highest solid shelf.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_17-3-3-1-1.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Editorial – to co-ordinate the text with the similar requirement of 16.2.3.2 (FR-210). Similar requirements should be worded similarly, for clarity and consistency.

Related Item

First Revision No. 224-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 17.3.3.1.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon Apr 28 09:34:57 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-99-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: Editorial revision to co-ordinate the text with the similar requirement of 16.2.3.2 (FR-210). Similar requirements should be worded similarly, for clarity andconsistency.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

291 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 309: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 172-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 17.3.3.1 ]

Revise Table 17.3.3.1 in the line for cartoned, unexpanded plastics, 35 ft storage, 45 ft ceiling height, to change the metric equivalent for a K 25.2 sprinkler from 320 to360.

17.3.3.1

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

292 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 310: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Protection of single-, double-, and multiple-row rack storage of cartoned or exposed, unexpandedGroup A plastic shall be in accordance with Table 17.3.3.1.

Table 17.3.3.1 ESFR Protection of Rack Storage of Group A Plastic Commodities Stored Over 25 ft (7.6 m) in Height

Storage Arrangement Commodity

MaximumStorage Height

MaximumCeiling/Roof Height

NominalK-Factor Orientation

MinimumOperatingPressure

In-RackSprinkler

Requirementsft m ft m psi bar

Single-, double-, and multiple-rowracks (no open-top containers)

Cartonedunexpanded

30 9.1

35 10.7

14.0

(200)

Upright/

pendent75 5.2 No

16.8

(240)

Upright/

pendent52 3.6 No

22.4

(320)Pendent 35 2.4 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 20 1.4 No

40 12.2

16.8

(240)Pendent 52 3.6 No

22.4

(320)Pendent 40 2.8 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 25 1.7 No

45 13.7

14.0

(200)Pendent 90 6.2 Yes

16.8

(240)Pendent 63 4.3 Yes

22.4

(320)Pendent 40 2.8 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 40 2.8 No

35 10.7

40 12.2

16.8

(240)Pendent 52 3.6 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 25 1.7 No

45 13.7

14.0

(200)Pendent 90 6.2 Yes

16.8

(240)Pendent 63 4.3 Yes

22.4

(320)Pendent 40 2.8 No

25.2

(320)Pendent 40 2.8 No

40 12.2 45 13.7

14.0

(200)Pendent 90 6.2 Yes

16.8

(240)Pendent 63 4.3 Yes

22.4

(320)Pendent 40 2.8 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 40 2.8 No

Exposedunexpanded

30 9.1

35 10.7

14.0

(200)Pendent 75 5.2 No

16.8

(240)Pendent 52 3.6 No

40 12.2

16.8

(240)Pendent 52 3.6 No

22.4

(320)Pendent 50 3.4 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 50 3.4 No

45 13.7

14.0

(200)Pendent 90 6.2 Yes

16.8

(240)Pendent 63 4.3 Yes

35 10.7 40 12.2

16.8

(240)Pendent 52 3.6 No

22.4

(320)Pendent 50 3.4 No

25.2

(360)Pendent 50 3.4 No

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

293 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 311: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

45 13.7

14.0

(200)Pendent 90 6.2 Yes

16.8

(240)Pendent 63 4.3 Yes

40 12.2 45 13.7

14.0

(200)Pendent 90 6.2 Yes

16.8

(240)Pendent 63 4.3 Yes

Storage Arrangement Commodity

MaximumStorage Height

MaximumCeiling/Roof Height

NominalK-Factor Orientation

MinimumOperatingPressure

In-RackSprinkler

Requirementsft m ft m psi bar

17.3.3.1.1

ESFR sprinklers shall not be permitted to protect storage on solid shelf racks unless the solid shelf racks are protected with in-rack sprinklers in accordance with 17.1.5.Where solid shelves are used, in-rack sprinklers shall be installed in every level below the highest solid shelf.

17.3.3.1.2

ESFR sprinklers shall not be permitted to protect storage with open-top containers.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_17-3-3-1.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Editorial – This correction seems to have been missed when the other corrections were applied.

Related Item

Public Input No. 274-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 17.3.3.1 [Excluding any Sub-Sections]]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon Apr 28 09:33:17 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-78-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The conversions proposed for the 2016 edition will be based on a soft conversion scheme as opposed to the traditional hard conversion. The attached spreadsheetprovides the proposed conversion.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

294 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 312: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 324-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 17.3.3.1.1 ]

17.3.3.1.1

Protection of solid shelf racks with ESFR sprinklers at the ceiling shall not be permitted to protect storage on solid shelf racks unless the solid shelf racks are protectedwith where in-rack sprinklers are installed in accordance with 17.1.5 . Where solid shelves are used, in In -rack sprinklers shall be installed in every level below thehighest solid shelf or horizontal barrier .

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This language clarifies that in-rack protection must be installed below horizontal barriers as well as under solid shelves. In some sections editorial changes have been made for consistency in format.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 317-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 16.2.2.1.1]

Related Item

First Revision No. 208-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 16.2.2.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Robert Upson

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA Engineering and Standards Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 12:31:26 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: Horizontal barriers is the wrong term for generic object that obstruct the discharge of a sprinkler. They require their own in-rack protection scheme relative to thehorizontal barrier location.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

295 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 313: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 101-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 17.3.3.5 ]

17.3.3.5 20.8 * Protection of Furniture classified as Exposed Expanded Group A Plastics. 17

20 . 3 8 . 3.5. 1

Protection of single-, double-, and multiple-row rack storage of exposed expanded Group A plastics shall be permitted to be in accordance with 17 20 .3 8 .3.5. 2 through17 20 .3 8 .3.5. 9.

17 20 . 3 8 . 3.5. 2

The maximum storage height shall be 35 ft (10.6 m).

17 20 . 3 8 .3 .5.3

The maximum ceiling height shall be 40 ft (12.2 m).

17 20 . 3 8 . 3.5. 4

Sprinklers shall be intermediate temperature–rated ESFR pendent sprinklers with a nominal K-factor of K-25.2 (360).

17 20 . 3 8 . 3. 5 .5

The design area shall consist of the most hydraulically demanding area of 15 12 sprinklers consisting of five sprinklers on each of three branch lines.

17 20 . 3 8 . 3.5. 6

The minimum operating pressure shall be 60 psi (4.1 bar).

17 20 . 3 8 . 3.5. 7

The hose stream allowance shall be 250 gpm (950) and the water supply duration shall be 60 minutes.

17 20 . 3 8 . 3.5. 8

The minimum aisle width shall be 8 ft (2.4 m).

17 20 . 3 8 . 3.5. 9

The rack shall have a solid vertical barrier of 3 ⁄8 in. (9.5 mm) plywood or particleboard, 22 gauge sheet metal, or equivalent, from face of rack to face of rack, spaced at amaximum 16.5 ft (5.0 m) interval.

17 20 . 3 8 . 3.5. 9.1

The vertical barrier shall extend from a maximum of 4 in. (102 mm) above the floor to the maximum storage height.

17 20 . 3 8 . 3.5. 9.2

The plan area of storage between vertical barriers and aisles shall not exceed 124 ft2 (11.52 m2)

17 20 . 3 8 . 3.5. 9.3

The vertical barrier shall extend across the longitudinal flue.

17 20 . 3 8 . 3.5. 9.4

Commodity shall be permitted to extend a nominal 4 in. (102 mm) beyond the vertical barrier at the aisle.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Duplicating the new information on Exposed Expanded Plastic into Chapter 20 for furniture storage will give greater flexibility to add criteria specific to furniture storage in the future. Due to the nature of furniture storage vs. general storage this will be easier to handle the specifics of furniture without having to have multiple asterisks and notes defining this in Chapter 17.

Also, for furniture vs. the expanded plastic test commoddity, the 12 sprinkler demand is justified based on the testing and the conservative blocked flue arrangements during the test that opened 10 sprinklers.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 265-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 17.3.3.5]

Related Item

First Revision No. 301-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 17.3.3.4.7]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: James Golinveaux

Organization: Tyco Fire Protection Products

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Apr 04 09:27:54 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected but held

Resolution: The concept of having a specific section dealing with furniture design protocol is new material.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

296 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 314: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 265-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 17.3.3.5 ]

17. 3 2 .3.5 * Protection of Exposed Expanded Group A Plastics.

17. 3 2 .3.5.1

Protection of single-, double-, and multiple-row rack storage of exposed expanded Group A plastics shall be permitted to be in accordance with 17.3 2 .3.5.2 through17.3 2 .3.5.9.

17. 3 2 .3.5.2

The maximum storage height shall be 35 be 25 ft (10 9 .6 1 m).

17. 3 2 .3.5.3

The maximum ceiling height shall be 40 ft (12.2 m).

17. 3 2 .3.5.4

Sprinklers shall be intermediate temperature–rated ESFR pendent sprinklers with a nominal K-factor of K-25.2 (360).

17. 3 2 .3.5.5

The design area shall consist of the most hydraulically demanding area of 15 sprinklers consisting of five sprinklers on each of three branch lines.

17. 3 2 .3.5.6

The minimum operating pressure shall be 60 psi (4.1 bar).

17. 3 2 .3.5.7

The hose stream allowance shall be 250 gpm (950) and the water supply duration shall be 60 minutes.

17. 3 2 .3.5.8

The minimum aisle width shall be 8 ft (2.4 m).

17. 3 2 .3.5.9

The rack shall have a solid vertical barrier of 3 ⁄8 in. (9.5 mm) plywood or particleboard, 22 gauge sheet metal, or equivalent, from face of rack to face of rack, spaced at amaximum 16.5 ft (5.0 m) interval.

17. 3 2 .3.5.9.1

The vertical barrier shall extend from a maximum of 4 in. (102 mm) above the floor to the maximum storage height.

17. 3 2 .3.5.9.2

The plan area of storage between vertical barriers and aisles shall not exceed 124 ft2 (11.52 m2)

17. 3 2 .3.5.9.3

The vertical barrier shall extend across the longitudinal flue.

17. 3 2 .3.5.9.4

Commodity shall be permitted to extend a nominal 4 in. (102 mm) beyond the vertical barrier at the aisle.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

duplicate the protection for above 25 ft storage to 17.2 for storagr 25 ft or less.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 101-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 17.3.3.5] expanded plastic protection

Related Item

First Revision No. 101-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 8.6.4.1.4.3]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: James Golinveaux

Organization: Tyco Fire Protection Products

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu May 15 08:56:43 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-102-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The design protocol established in the first draft for storage over 25 feet is appropriate for storage less than 25 feet.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

297 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 315: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 312-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 18.3 ]

18.3 Water Supplies.

Total water supplies shall be in accordance with the following options:

A minimum of not less than 750 gpm (2835 L/min) for hose streams in addition to that required for automatic sprinklers and foam systems. Water supplies shall be capableof supplying the demand for sprinkler systems and hose streams for not less than 3 hours.

For on-floor storage up to and including 5 ft (1.5 m) in height, hose stream requirements shall be permitted to be 250 gpm (946 L/min) with a water supply duration of notless than 2 hours.

For ESFR and CMSA sprinkler systems approved for rubber tire storage, duration and hose allowance shall be in accordance with Table 18.4(c) and Table 18.4(d)capable of providing flow for automa c sprinklers, hose streams and foam systems (if provided) for the dura on required in Table 12.8.6 .

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

These additions to Table 12.8.6.1 consolidate water supply information from chapters 18 and 19 into a single source in the general requirements for storage chapter for clarity.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 311-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 12.8.6 [Excluding any Sub-Sections]]

Related Item

Public Input No. 116-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 12.8.6]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Robert Upson

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA Engineering and Standards Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 11:48:22 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Accepted

Resolution: SR-106-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: These additions to Table 12.8.6.1 consolidate water supply information from chapters 18 and 19 into a single source in the general requirements for storagechapter for clarity.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

298 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 316: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 313-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 18.4 ]

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

299 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 317: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

18.4 * Ceiling Systems.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

300 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 318: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Sprinkler discharge and area of application shall be in accordance with one of the following:

(1) Table 18.4(a) or Table 18.4(b) for standard spray sprinklers

(2) Table 18.4(c) for CMSA sprinklers

(3) Table 18.4(d) for ESFR sprinklers

Table 18.4(a) Protection Criteria for Rubber Tire Storage Using Control Mode Density/Area Sprinklers

Piling MethodPile Height

(ft)

Sprinkler Discharge Density (gpm/ft 2

over ft 2 )

(see Note 1)

Areas of Application (ft 2 )

(see Note 1)

OrdinaryTemperature

HighTemperature

(see Note 1)

(1) On-floor storage Up to 5 0.19 2000 2000

(a) Pyramid piles, on-side Over 5 to 12 0.30 2500 2500

(b) Other arrangements such that no horizontal channels are formed(see Note 2)

Over 12 to18

0.60 Not allowed 2500

(2) On-floor storage Up to 5 0.19 2000 2000

Tires, on-tread Over 5 to 12 0.30 2500 2500

(3) Palletized portable rack storage Up to 5 0.19 2000 2000

On-side or on-tread

Over 5 to 20 See Table 18.4(b) — —

Over 20 to30

0.30 plus high-expansion foam 3000 3000

(4) Palletized portable rack storage, on-side

Up to 5 0.19 2000 2000

Over 5 to 20 See Table 18.4(b) — —

Over 20 to25

0.60 and Not allowed 5000

0.90 (see Note 3) or Not allowed 3000

0.75 with 1-hour fire-resistive rating of roofand ceiling assembly

Not allowed 4000

(5) Open portable rack storage, on-side or on-tread

Up to 5 0.19 2000 2000

Over 5 to 12 0.60 5000 3000

Over 12 to20

0.60 and Not allowed 5000

0.90 (see Note 3) or Not allowed 3000

0.30 plus high-expansion foam 3000 3000

(6) Open portable rack storage, lacedOver 12 to20

0.60 and Not allowed 5000

0.90 (see notes 3 and 5) Not allowed 3000

(7) Single-, double-, and multiple-row fixed rack storage on pallets,on-side, or on-tread without shelves

Up to 5 0.19 2000 2000

Over 5 to 20

See Table 18.4(b) or 0.40 plus one levelin-rack sprinklers or

3000 3000

0.30 plus high-expansion foam 3000 3000

Over 20 to30

0.30 plus high-expansion foam Not allowed 3000

(8) Single-, double-, and multiple-row fixed rack storage withoutpallets or shelves, on-side or on-tread

Up to 5 0.19 2000 2000

Over 5 to 12 0.60 5000 3000

0.40 plus one level in-rack sprinklers 3000 3000

Over 12 to20

0.60 and Not allowed 5000

0.90 (see Note 3) or Not allowed 3000

0.40 plus one level in-rack sprinklers or 3000 3000

0.30 plus high-expansion foam 3000 3000

Over 20 to30

0.30 plus high-expansion foam Not allowed 3000

For SI units, 1 ft = 0.3048 m; 1 ft2 = 0.0929 m2; 1 gpm/ft2 = 40.746 mm/min.

Notes:

(1) Sprinkler discharge densities and areas of application are based on a maximum clearance to ceiling of 10 ft (3.1 m) with the maximum height of storage anticipated.

(2) Laced tires on-floor, vertical stacking on-side (typical truck tires), and off-road tires. Laced tires are not stored to a significant height by this method due to the damageinflicted on the tire (i.e., bead).

(3) Water supply shall fulfill both requirements.

(4) Shelf storage of rubber tires shall be protected as solid rack shelving.

(5) This protection scheme is for use with K-16.8 (240) or larger control mode sprinklers only. Maximum clearance to ceiling can be increased to 14 ft (4.25 m) with thisscheme.

Table 18.4(b) Control Mode Density/Area Sprinklers System Density (gpm/ft2 over ft2) for Palletized Portable Rack Storage and Fixed Rack Storage of Rubber Tires withPallets Over 5 ft (1.5 m) to 20 ft (6.1 m) in Height

Storage Height

(ft)

Sprinkler Temperature

High Temperature Ordinary Temperature

>5 to 10 0.32/2000 0.32/2000

>10 to 12 0.39/2000 0.39/2600

>12 to 14 0.45/2000 0.45/3200

>14 to 16 0.5/2300 0.5/3700

>16 to 18 0.55/2600 0.55/4400

>18 to 20 0.6/3000 0.6/5000

Table 18.4(c) Control Mode Specific Application (CMSA) Protection for Rubber Tires

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

301 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 319: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Piling Method Maximum Storage Height Maximum Ceiling/Roof Height K-Factor Type of System Number of Sprinklers Operating Pressure

Hose Stream Allowance Water Supply Duration (hours)

ft m ft m

Rubber tire storage, on-side or on-tread, in palletized portable racks, or open portable racks, or fixed racks without solidshelves 25 7.6 32 9.8

11.2(160) Wet 15

75 psi

(5.2bar)

500 gpm

(1900 L/min) 3

25 7.6 32 9.8 16.8 (240) Wet 15

35 psi

(2.4 bar)

500 gpm (1900 L/min) 3

Table 18.4(d) Early Suppression Fast-Response (ESFR) Sprinklers for Protection of Rubber Tires (see Note 1)

Piling Method Pile Height Maximum Building Height Nominal K-factor Orientation Number of SprinklersMinimum Operating Pressure

(see Note 2)

Duration (hours) Hose Allowance

ft m psi bar

gpm L/min

Rubber tire storage, on-side or on-tread, in palletized portable racks, open portable racks, or fixed racks withoutsolid shelves

Up to 25ft

(7.6 m)

30 9.114.0

(200)

Upright/

pendent

12

(see Note2)

50 3.5

1 250 946

16.8

(240)

Upright/

pendent

12

(see Note 2)35 2.4

1 250 946

22.4

(320)Pendent

12

(see Note 2)25 1.7

1 250 946

25.2 (360) Pendent12

(see Note 2)15 1.0

1 250 946

Rubber tire storage, on-side, in palletized portable racks, open portable racks, or fixed racks without solidshelves

Up to 25 ft (7.6m)

35 10.714.0

(200)

Upright/

pendent

12

(see Note2)

75 5.2

1 250 946

16.8

(240)Pendent

12

(see Note 2)52 3.6

1 250 946

22.4

(320)Pendent

12

(see Note 2)35 2.4

1 250 946

25.2 (360) Pendent12

(see Note 2)25 1.7

1 250 946

On-tread, on-side, and laced tires in open portable steel racks or palletized portable racks Up to 25 ft (7.6 m) 30 9.114.0

(200)Pendent

20

(see Notes 3 and 4)75 5.2

3 500 1900

16.8

(240)Pendent

20

(see Notes 3 and 4)52 3.6

Rubber tire storage, on-side, in palletized portable racks Up to 25 ft (7.6 m) 40 12.2

1 250 946

16.8

(240)Pendent 12 52 3.6

Rubber tire storage, on-tread, or laced in open portable steel racks Up to 25 ft (7.6 m) 40 12.225.2

(360)Pendent 12 40 2.8

1 250 946

On-tread, on-side, and laced tires in open portable steel racks or palletized portable racks Up to 30 ft (9.1 m) 40 12.225.2

(360)Pendent 12 75 5.2

1 250 946

Notes:

(1) Wet systems only.

(2) The shape of the design area shall be in accordance with 14.4.3 and 14.4.4.

(3) Where used in this application, ESFR protection is expected to control rather than to suppress the fire.

(4) The design area shall consist of the most hydraulically demanding area of 20 sprinklers, consisting of five sprinklers on each of four branch lines. The design shall

include a minimum operating area of 1600 ft2 (149 m2).

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

302 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 320: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

These additions to Table 12.8.6.1 consolidate water supply information from chapters 18 and 19 into a single source in the general requirements for storage chapter for clarity.

(Last two columns of Table 18.4(c) and last three columns of Table 18.4.(d) deleted -- moved to Table 12.8.6)

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 311-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 12.8.6 [Excluding any Sub-Sections]]

Related Item

Public Input No. 116-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 12.8.6]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Robert Upson

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA Engineering and Standards Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 11:51:38 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Accepted

Resolution: SR-146-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: These additions to Table 12.8.6.1 consolidate water supply information from chapters 18 and 19 into a single source in the general requirements for storagechapter for clarity.

(Last two columns of Table 18.4(c) and last three columns of Table 18.4.(d) deleted -- moved to Table 12.8.6)

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

303 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 321: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 314-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 19.1.1.1 ]

19.1.1.1

The water supply system for automatic fire protection systems shall be designed for a minimum duration of 2 hours.

19.1.1.1.1

For ESFR sprinklers, the water supply duration shall be 1 hour.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

These additions to Table 12.8.6.1 consolidate water supply information from chapters 18 and 19 into a single source in the general requirements for storage chapter for clarity.

Related Item

Public Input No. 116-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 12.8.6]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Robert Upson

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA Engineering and Standards Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 11:58:45 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Accepted

Resolution: SR-105-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: These additions to Table 12.8.6.1 consolidate water supply information from chapters 18 and 19 into a single source in the general requirements for storagechapter for clarity.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

304 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 322: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 315-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 19.1.1.2 ]

19.1.1.2

At least 500 gpm (1900 L/min) shall be added to the sprinkler demand for large and small hose stream allowance.

19.1.1.2.1

For ESFR sprinklers, the hose stream allowance shall be for 250 gpm (946 L/min).

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

These additions to Table 12.8.6.1 consolidate water supply information from chapters 18 and 19 into a single source in the general requirements for storage chapter for clarity.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 311-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 12.8.6 [Excluding any Sub-Sections]]

Related Item

Public Input No. 116-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 12.8.6]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Robert Upson

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA Engineering and Standards Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 12:00:09 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Accepted

Resolution: SR-104-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: These additions to Table 12.8.6.1 consolidate water supply information from chapters 18 and 19 into a single source in the general requirements for storagechapter for clarity.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

305 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 323: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 316-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 19.1.1.3 ]

19.1.1.3

The water supply design shall include the demand of the automatic sprinkler system plus the hose stream allowance plus, where provided, the high-expansion foam systemfor the dura on specified in Table 12 . 8.6   .

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

These additions to Table 12.8.6.1 consolidate water supply information from chapters 18 and 19 into a single source in the general requirements for storage chapter for clarity.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 311-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 12.8.6 [Excluding any Sub-Sections]]

Related Item

Public Input No. 116-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 12.8.6]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Robert Upson

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA Engineering and Standards Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 12:01:57 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Accepted

Resolution: SR-103-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: These additions to Table 12.8.6.1 consolidate water supply information from chapters 18 and 19 into a single source in the general requirements for storagechapter for clarity.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

306 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 324: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 174-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 20.5.6.4 ]

Reconsider the proposal and return the text of Section 20.5.6.4 to that of the 2013 edition of NFPA 13.

20.5.6.4

Sprinklers shall be provided in transverse flue spaces in accordance with 20.5.6.4.1 through 20.5.6.4.3.1 and Figure 20.5.6.4.

Figure 20.5.6.4 Sprinkler Location and Spacing in Transverse Flues.

20.5.6.4.1

For double- and multiple-row racks, in-rack sprinklers shall be installed in the transverse flues at each catwalk level and shall be staggered vertically. For single-row racks,in-rack sprinklers shall be installed in the transverse flue at each catwalk level.

20.5.6.4.2

For double- and multiple-row racks sprinklers installed in the transverse flues shall be located not less than 18 in. (0.46 m) but not greater than 24 in. (0.61 m) from the faceof the rack on the catwalk side.

20.5.6.4.3

For single-row racks, sprinklers installed in the transverse flues shall be staggered horizontally such that the sprinkler at first level is not less than 18 in. (0.46 m) but notgreater than 24 in. (0.61 m) from the face of the rack on the catwalk side.

20.5.6.4.3.1

At the next level the sprinkler in the transverse flue shall be located not less than 6 in. (0.15 m) but not greater than 12 in. (0.30 m) from the back face of the rack. Thisstaggering shall be repeated throughout all catwalk levels.

20.5.6.4.4

In-rack sprinklers shall be installed a minimum 6 in. (150 mm) above the top of storage.

20.5.6.4.5

Transverse flue sprinklers shall be quick-response, ordinary temperature, nominal K-5.6 (80), K-8.0 (115), or K-11.2 (160) and installed in accordance with FigureA.20.5.6.3.5(a) and Figure A.20.5.6.3.5(b).

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_20-5-6-4.pdf PC Form

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

307 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 325: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The proposed text, and the corresponding Figure are intended to clarify how to install sprinklers in a single row rack protecting record storage, but unfortunately, the submission does not clarify the issue. The Figure is not understandable; it seems to be missing some detail, such as an outline of the racks and the aisles. All that is evident is an exterior wall and a pattern of X and ∆ symbols.Additionally, from the text it appears the levels of sprinklers are being staggered between the front and the back of single row racks, but the substantiation did not provide any technical detail to explain what advantage this configuration might have.

Related Item

Public Input No. 478-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 20.5.6.4 [Excluding any Sub-Sections]]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon Apr 28 09:36:32 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-129-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The lines on the rack drawing shown in the first draft do not show up as shown in FR 226.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

308 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 326: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 251-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 21.2.1 ]

21.2.1

Protection of palletized and solid-piled storage of Class I through Class IV and cartoned unexpanded plastic commodities shall be permitted to be protected in accordancewith Table 21.2.1.

Table 21.2.1 Extended Coverage, CMSA [K-factor 25.2 (360)] Sprinkler Design Criteria for Palletized and Solid-Piled Storage of Class I Through Class IV and CartonedUnexpanded Plastic Commodities

StorageArrangement

Commodity Class

MaximumStorageHeight

MaximumCeiling/Roof

HeightK-Factor/

OrientationType ofSystem

Number ofDesign

Sprinklers

MinimumOperatingPressure

MaximumCoverage

Areaft m ft m

Palletized andsolid-piled

Class I through Class IV,encapsulated and nonencapsulated,and cartoned nonexpanded plastics

20 6.1 30 9.1

25.2 (360)Upright/

pendent

Wet 6 30 psi

.

(2

1 bar)12 ft × 12 ft .

(

3.7 m × 3.7 m) 144 ft

2

(13

.

4 m 2 ) 20 6.

1

30 9.1 25.2 (360) Upright/

pendent Wet 6 30 psi

(2.1

bar)14 ft × 14 ft

(4.3 m × 4.3 m) 196 ft 2 (18.2 m 2 )

25 7.6 30 9.125.2 (360) Upright/

pendentWet 6 30 psi

.

(2

1 bar)12 ft × 12 ft .

(

3.7 m × 3.7 m) 25 7.6 30 9.1 25.

2

(360) Upright/

.

pendent Wet 6 30 psi

(2.

1 bar)14 ft × 14 ft

(4.3 m × 4.3 m) 196 ft 2 (18.2 m 2 )

25 7.6 35 11 25.2 (360)

Upright/

pendent

Pendent Wet 840 psi

(2.8 bar)

12 ft × 12 ft

(3.7 m × 3.7 m) 144 ft 2 (13.4 m 2 )

25 7.6 35 11 25.2 (360) Upright Wet 840 psi

(2.8 bar)

14 ft × 14 ft

(4.3 m × 4.3 m) 196 ft 2 (18.2 m 2 )

30 9.1 35 11 25.2 (360)

Upright/

pendent

Pendent Wet 840 psi

(2.8 bar)

12 ft × 12 ft

(3.7 m × 3.7 m) 144 ft 2 (13.4 m 2 )

30 9.1 35 11 25.2 (360) Upright Wet 840 psi

(2.8 bar)

14 ft × 14 ft

(4.3 m × 4.3 m) 196 ft 2 (18.2 m 2 )

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Duplicate entries are eliminated where the same protection criteria is provided for the same type of sprinkler (upright/pendent) at a spacing of both 12 ft x 12 ft and 14 ft x 14 ft maximum. It makes no sense to have different allowable maximum area per sprinkler for the exact same design criteria.

Related Item

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

309 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 327: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Input No. 510-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 21.2.2]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Tracey Bellamy

Organization: Telgian Corporation

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon May 12 23:45:21 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-143-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: These additions to Table 12.8.6 and related sections consolidate water supply information from chapters 18 and 19 into a single source in the general requirementsfor storage chapter for clarity.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

310 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 328: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 353-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after 21.3.1 ]

TITLE OF NEW CONTENT

Add Table 21.3.2 as attached to include CMSA Upright K25.2 Upright Sprinkler

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LP46_upright.xlsx Chart to included in the referenced table

V4603_upright_reports.pdf Report to substantiate chart

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

New sprinkler design criteria to be included in NFPA 13. See attached report

Related Item

Public Input No. 502-NFPA 13-2013 [New Table]]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Peter Thomas

Organization: Victaulic Company

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 15:50:36 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-149-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: New sprinkler design criteria to be included in the alternative storage design chapter of NFPA 13. This data has been added based on the testing conducted andsummarized in PC 353.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

311 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 329: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Table 21.3.x CMSA K 25.2 Upright Standard Coverage Sprinkler Design Criteria for Single-, double-, and multiple-row racks without solid shelves;

and solid-piled, palletized, shelf, or bin-box storage arrangementof Class I Through Class IV and Cartoned Unexpanded Plastic Commodities

Number of Minimum

K-factor Type of Design Operating

Orientation System Sprinklers Pressure

ft m ft m min. max. min. max.

10 3.0 15 4.5 20 7 psi (0.5 bar) 8 (2.4) 12 (3.6) 80 (7.5) 100 (9.0)

solid-piled, palletized, Class I through IV 15 4.5 20 6.1 25.2 (360) Dry 20 7 psi (0.5 bar) 8 (2.4) 12 (3.6) 80 (7.5) 100 (9.0)

shelf, or bin-box encapsulated and 20 6.1 25 7.6 Upright 20 10 psi (0.7 bar) 8 (2.4) 12 (3.6) 80 (2.4) 100 (9.0)

and nonencapsulated, 25 7.6 30 9.1 30 15 psi (1.0 bar) 8 (2.4) 12 (3.6) 80 (2.4) 100 (9.0)

Single-, double-, and and cartoned nonexpanded

multiple- row racks plastics

without solid shelves

(no open top containers) Class III encapsulated and 35 10.7 40 12.2 25.2 (360) Dry 24* 15 psi (1.0 bar) 8 (2.4) 10 (9.0) 8 (2.4) 100 (9.0)

nonencapsulated 40 12.2 45 13.7 Upright 12** 50 psi (3.5 bar) 8 (2.4) 10 (9.0) 8 (2.4) 100 (9.0)

* Based on Maximum water delivery time of 25 seconds

** Based on Maximum water delivery time of 20 seconds

solid-piled, palletized, Class I through IV 10 3.0 15 4.5 12 20 (1.4) 8 (2.4) 12 (3.6) 80 (7.5) 100 (9.0)

shelf, or bin-box encapsulated and 15 4.5 20 6.1 25.2 (360) Wet 12 20 (1.4) 8 (2.4) 12 (3.6) 80 (7.5) 100 (9.0)

and nonencapsulated, 20 6.1 25 7.6 Upright 12 20 (1.4) 8 (2.4) 12 (3.6) 80 (7.5) 100 (9.0)

Single-, double-, and and cartoned nonexpanded 25 7.6 30 9.1 12 20 (1.4) 8 (2.4) 12 (3.6) 80 (7.5) 100 (9.0)

multiple- row racks plastics

without solid shelves

(no open top containers)

Spacing

Area

SprinklerMaximum

Ceiling/Roof

Height Spacing

Linear

Sprinkler

Arrangement

Storage

Commodity Class

Maximum

Storage

Height

Page 330: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 358-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after 21.3.1 ]

TITLE OF NEW CONTENT

Add Table after 21.3.1 to include CMSA Pendent K25.2 (360) sprinkler as shown

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LP46_pendent.xlsx Table to be included in standard

V4601_test_reports.pdf substantiating reports

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Add new K 25, pendent standard coverage sprinkler into special design section in Chapter 21

Related Item

Public Input No. 502-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 21.3.2]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Peter Thomas

Organization: Victaulic Company

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 16:33:39 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-149-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: New sprinkler design criteria to be included in the alternative storage design chapter of NFPA 13. This data has been added based on the testing conducted andsummarized in PC 358.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

312 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 331: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Table 21.3.x CMSA K 25.2 Pendent Standard Coverage Sprinkler Design Criteria for Single-, double-, and multiple-row racks without solid shelves;

and solid-piled, palletized, shelf, or bin-box storage arrangementof Class I Through Class IV and Cartoned Unexpanded Plastic Commodities

Number of Minimum

K-factor Type of Design Operating

Orientation System Sprinklers Pressure

ft m ft m min. max. min. max.

10 3.0 15 4.5 12 7 psi (0.5 bar) 8 (2.4) 12 (3.6) 80 (7.5) 100 (9.0)

solid-piled, palletized, Class I through IV 15 4.5 20 6.1 25.2 (360) Wet 12 7 psi (0.5 bar) 8 (2.4) 12 (3.6) 80 (7.5) 100 (9.0)

shelf, or bin-box encapsulated and 20 6.1 25 7.6 Pendent 12 10 psi (0.7 bar) 8 (2.4) 12 (3.6) 80 (2.4) 100 (9.0)

and nonencapsulated, 25 7.6 30 9.1 12 10 psi (0.7 bar) 8 (2.4) 12 (3.6) 80 (2.4) 100 (9.0)

Single-, double-, and and cartoned nonexpanded 30 9.1 35 10.7 12 30 psi (2.1 bar) 8 (2.4) 10 (3.0) 80 (7.5) 100 (9.0)

multiple- row racks plastics 35 10.7 40 12.2 12 30 psi (2.1 bar) 8 (2.4) 10 (3.0) 80 (7.5) 100 (9.0)

without solid shelves

(no open top containers)

Spacing

Area

SprinklerMaximum

Ceiling/Roof

Height Spacing

Linear

Sprinkler

Arrangement

Storage

Commodity Class

Maximum

Storage

Height

Page 332: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 252-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 21.3.1 ]

21.3.1

Protection of single-, double-, and multiple-row racks without solid shelves of Class I through Class IV and cartoned unexpanded plastic commodities shall be permitted tobe protected in accordance with Table 21.3.1.

Table 21.3.1 Extended Coverage, CMSA [K-Factor 25.2 (360)] Sprinkler Design Criteria for Single-, Double-, and Multiple-Row Racks Without Solid Shelves of Class IThrough Class IV and Cartoned Unexpanded Plastic Commodities

Storage Arrangement Commodity Class

MaximumStorageHeight

MaximumCeiling/Roof

HeightK-Factor/

OrientationType ofSystem

Number ofDesign

Sprinklers

MinimumOperatingPressure

MaximumCoverage

Areaft m ft m

Single-, double-, andmultiple-row racks withoutsolid shelves (no open-topcontainers)

Class I through Class IV,encapsulated andnonencapsulated, and cartonednonexpanded plastics

20 6.1 30 9.125.2 (360)Upright/

.

pendent Wet 6 30 psi (2

1 bar)12 ft × 12 ft .

(3.7 m × 3.7 m) 144 ft 2 (13.4 m 2 ) 20 6.1 30 9.1 25.2 (360) Upright/

pendent Wet 6 30 psi (2.1 bar)14 ft × 14 ft

(4.3 m × 4.3 m) 196 ft 2 (18.2 m 2 )

25 7.6 30 9.1 25.2 (360) Upright/

.

pendent Wet 6 30 psi (2

1 bar)12 ft × 12 ft .

(3.7 m × 3.7 m) 144 ft 2 (13.4 m 2 ) 25 7.6 30 9.1 25.2 (360) Upright/

pendent Wet 6 30 psi (2.1 bar)14 ft × 14 ft

(4.3 m × 4.3 m) 196 ft 2 (18.2 m 2 )

25 7.6 35 11 25.2 (360)

Upright/

.

pendent

Wet 8 40 psi (2.6 bar)12 ft × 12 ft

(3.7 m × 3.7 m) 144 ft 2 (13.4 m 2 )

25 7.6 35 11 25.2 (360) Upright Wet 8 40 psi (2.6 bar)14 ft × 14 ft

(4.3 m × 4.3 m) 196 ft 2 (18.2 m 2 )

30 9.1 35 11 25.2 (360)

Upright/

.

pendent

Wet 8 40 psi (2.6 bar)12 ft × 12 ft

(3.7 m × 3.7 m) 144 ft 2 (13.4 m 2 )

30 9.1 35 11 25.2 (360) Upright Wet 8 40 psi (2.6 bar)14 ft × 14 ft

(4.3 m × 4.3 m) 196 ft 2 (18.2 m 2 )

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Duplicate entries are eliminated where the same protection criteria is provided for the same type of sprinkler (upright/pendent) at a spacing of both 12 ft x 12 ft and 14 ft x 14 ft maximum. It makes no sense to have different allowable maximum area per sprinkler for the exact same design criteria.

Related Item

Public Input No. 378-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 21.3]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Tracey Bellamy

Organization: Telgian Corporation

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon May 12 23:51:42 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

313 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 333: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-143-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: These additions to Table 12.8.6 and related sections consolidate water supply information from chapters 18 and 19 into a single source in the general requirementsfor storage chapter for clarity.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

314 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 334: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 229-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 21.5.1 ]

21.5.1 General.

The installation guidelines for obstructions to ceiling-level sprinklers shall be in accordance with the requirements of Section 21.5 for sprinkler system designs obtainedfrom this chapter.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

CC NOTE: The following CC Note No. 17 appeared in the First Draft Report.

The TC should review section 21.5 to address the following concerns:At the present time, Section 21.5.2.1 indicates that if a design from Chapter 21 is 20 sprinklers or less and is applicable to a standard-coverage type sprinkler, then the obstruction guidelines in Section 8.12.5 shall be used for the sprinkler’s installation. Section 8.12.5 is the obstruction guidelines for ESFR sprinklers.At the present time, Section 21.5.3.1 indicates that if a design from Chapter 21 is 10 sprinklers or less and is applicable to an extended-coverage type sprinkler, then the obstruction guidelines in Sections 8.8.5.1, 8.12.5.2 and 8.12.5.3 shall be used for the sprinkler’s installation. Section 8.8.5.1 is the umbrella pattern obstruction guidelines for an extended-coverage sprinkler whereas Sections 8.12.5.2 and 8.12.5.3 are obstruction guidelines for ESFR sprinklers in the presence of either isolated or continuous obstructions located below an ESFR sprinkler.The intent of these guidelines was to help ensure that potential obstructions in the protected area would not compromise the suppression-like performance of the sprinkler listed in Chapter 21. It should be noted that there are several other sections within NFPA 13 that provide guidance for ESFR sprinklers that also try to ensure that the sprinkler’s performance is not compromised; they include: 8.4.6.1.2 (no open-top containers), 8.4.6.2 (max. roof slope of 2 in 12), 8.4.6.3 (can be used under obstructed ceiling construction), 8.4.6.3.1 (needed in every channel if depth of solid structural member greater than 12 in.), 8.4.6.4.1 (draft curtain needed to separate QR from SR sprinkler areas), 8.4.6.4.2 (clear aisle of 4 ft needed under draft curtain), 12.1.1 (heat/smoke vents should not be installed), and 12.6.7 (able to protect light and ordinary hazard occupancies).

Related Item

Correlating Committee Note No. 17-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 21.5.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: CC on AUT-AAC

Organization: CC on Automatic Sprinkler Systems

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu May 08 13:07:54 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-109-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: This revision is in response to the request from the correlating to address th eother design requirements and their applicability to the design protocol in Ch 21.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

315 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 335: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 197-NFPA 13-2014 [ Chapter 22 ]

Chapter 22 Special Occupancy Requirements

22.1 General.

22.1.1 Application.

22.1.1.1

In addition to the requirements of Chapter 8, Chapters 11 through 22, and Chapter 23, the following special occupancy requirements shall apply.

22.1.1.1.1

All provisions of design criteria in this standard, including design area increases and reductions, shall also apply to these special occupancy requirements.

22.1.1.2

Where the requirements of the reference standard differ from the requirements of this standard, the reference standard shall take precedence.

22.1.2 Definitions.

For terms not defined in Chapter 3, the definitions of the reference standard shall apply.

22.2 Flammable and Combustible Liquids.

22.2.1 Design Requirements.

Sprinkler system discharge criteria for the protection of flammable and combustible liquids shall comply with NFPA 30.

22.2.2 Installation Requirements. (Reserved)

22.3 Aerosol Products.

22.3.1 Design Requirements.

Sprinkler system discharge criteria for the protection of aerosol products shall comply with NFPA 30B.

22.3.2 Installation Requirements.

(Reserved)

22.4 Spray Application Using Flammable or Combustible Materials.

22.4.1 Design Requirements.

22.4.1.1*

The automatic sprinkler system shall be a wet pipe system, a dry pipe system, a preaction system, or an open-head deluge system, whichever is most appropriate for theportion of the spray operation being protected. [33:9.4.1]

22.4.1.2

The automatic sprinkler system shall be designed for Extra Hazard (Group 2) occupancies as defined in NFPA 13.

Exception No. 1: For spray application of styrene cross-link thermoset resins, Section 17.3 of NFPA 33 shall apply.

Exception No. 2: Automatic sprinkler systems for powder coating operations shall be designed for Ordinary Hazard (Group 2), as defined in NFPA 13. [ 33: 9.4.2]

22.4.1.3

The water supply shall be sufficient to supply all sprinklers likely to open in any one fire incident without depleting the available water for use in hose streams. [33:9.4.3]

22.4.1.4

Where sprinklers are installed to protect spray areas and mixing rooms only, water shall be permitted to be supplied from domestic water systems, provided the domesticsupply can meet the design criteria of 22.4.1.2. [33:9.4.4]

22.4.1.5

The sprinkler system shall be controlled by a separate, listed indicating valve(s), operable from floor level. [33:9.4.5]

22.4.1.6

Automated liquid electrostatic spray application equipment that is unlisted shall be protected further by the following:

(1) In addition to meeting the requirements in 9.8.1 of NFPA 33, the optical flame detection system shall also activate one of the following over each zone in which fire hasbeen detected:

(a) An open head deluge system designed to discharge a minimum density of 24.4 mm/min (0.6 gpm/ft2)

(b) A carbon dioxide extinguishing system

(c) A dry chemical extinguishing system

(d) A gaseous agent extinguishing system

[33:9.8.2(1)]

22.4.1.7

A wet pipe sprinkler system shall also be provided throughout the spray booth. This system shall meet all the applicable requirements of NFPA 13 for Extra Hazard (Group2) occupancies. [33:9.8.2(3)]

22.4.2* Installation Requirements.

22.4.2.1*

Sprinkler systems protecting stacks or ducts shall meet all of the following requirements:

(1) Sprinklers shall be spaced no more than 3.7 m (12 ft) apart.

(2) If exhaust ducts are manifolded, a sprinkler shall be located in the manifold at the junction of each exhaust duct with the manifold.

(3) Sprinklers shall provide a minimum flow of 114 L/min (30 gpm) per head at a minimum of 1 bar (15 psi) pressure.

(4) Sprinklers shall be ordinary temperature rated, unless required to be higher due to operating temperatures measured in the ducts, in which case the operatingtemperature shall be at least 28°C (50°F) above the inside temperature of the duct.

[33:9.4.6]

22.4.2.1.1

Stacks and exhaust ducts shall be provided with access openings for inspection and cleaning of sprinklers. [33:9.4.6.1]

22.4.2.1.2

Sprinkler systems protecting stacks and ducts that are subject to freezing shall be of a nonfreezing type or be a manually controlled open-head system. [33:9.4.6.2]

22.4.2.2

Sprinklers shall be protected against overspray residue, either by location or covering, so that they will operate quickly in event of fire. [33:9.4.7]

22.4.2.2.1

Sprinklers shall be permitted to be covered only by cellophane bags having a thickness of 0.08 mm (0.003 in.) or less or by thin paper bags. These coverings shall bereplaced frequently so that heavy deposits of residue do not accumulate. [33:9.4.7.1]

22.4.2.2.2

Sprinklers that have been painted or coated by overspray or residues shall be replaced with new sprinklers. [33:9.4.7.2]

22.5 Solvent Extraction Plants. [NFPA 36]

22.5.1* Design Requirements.

22.5.2 Installation Requirements. (Reserved)

22.6 Installation and Use of Stationary Combustion Engines and Gas Turbines.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

316 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 336: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

22.6.1* Design Requirements.

Automatic sprinkler systems shall be designed to provide for a density of 0.3 gpm/ft2 (12.2 mm/min) over the most remote 2500 ft2 (230 m2). [37:11.4.5.1]

22.6.2 Installation Requirements.

22.6.2.1

Sprinklers and spray nozzles shall be spaced at a 100 ft2 (9 m2) maximum area of coverage per sprinker or spray nozzle. [37:11.4.5.1.1]

22.6.2.2

Sprinkler and water spray system coverage shall be provided to all areas within the enclosure located within 20 ft (6 m) of the following:

(1) The engine

(2) The lubricating oil system

(3) The fuel system

[37:11.4.5.1.2]

22.6.2.3

Sprinklers and water spray nozzles shall not be directed at engine components that are susceptible to thermal shock or deformation. [37:11.4.5.2]

22.7 Nitrate Film.

22.7.1 Design Requirements.

22.7.1.1

Every room, except projection booths and rewinding rooms, where nitrate film is stored or handled in quantities greater than 51 lb (23 kg), or 10 standard rolls, shall beprotected by an automatic sprinkler system that is installed in accordance with the requirements for Group II extra hazard occupancies. [40:5.1.2]

22.7.1.2

Water supplies for automatic sprinklers shall be based on 20 gpm (1.26 L/sec) per sprinkler for 20 minutes for the total number of sprinklers in one vault plus 25 percent ofthe sprinklers in the communicating fire area. [40:5.2.2]

22.7.1.3* Vaults Other Than Extended Term Storage Vaults.

[40:6.3] (See Figure A.22.7.1.3.) Fire protection in vaults shall be provided by a deluge system with directional nozzles meeting the criteria in 22.7.1.4. [40:6.3.7]

22.7.1.4

For extended term storage vaults in accordance with Section 6.5.5 of NFPA 40, fire protection shall be provided by a deluge system with directional nozzles installed inaccordance with NFPA 15 and meeting the criteria in 22.7.1.5 through 22.7.1.11. [40:6.5.6]

22.7.1.5

Sprinkler systems in existing extended term storage vaults that were in compliance with the provisions of this standard at the time of installation shall be permitted to becontinued in use. [40:6.5.6.1]

22.7.1.6

High-velocity open head nozzles each capable of providing a discharge rate of 1.26 L/sec (20 gpm) at a gauge pressure of 345 kPa (50 psi) shall be installed. [40:6.5.6.2]

22.7.1.7

The design shall be based on a discharge density of 28 mm/min (0.68 gpm/ft2) over each face of storage racks. [40:6.5.6.3]

22.7.1.8*

The nozzles shall have a combined spray pattern capable of covering the face of the film storage racks. [40:6.5.6.4]

22.7.1.9

The nozzles shall be installed at the top of the storage shelf array, aimed at the opposite shelf array. [40:6.5.6.5]

22.7.1.10*

Nozzles shall be installed on opposite faces of the storage shelf array in a staggered pattern such that no nozzles are directly opposite one another. [40: 6.5.6.6]

22.7.1.11

The water supply duration shall be a minimum of 20 minutes. [40:6.5.6.7]

22.7.1.12

The deluge system shall be activated by a signal from one of the following: [40:6.5.6.8]

(1) An air sampling–type smoke detection system

(2) A fixed temperature heat sensitive cable

22.7.2 Installation Requirements.

22.7.2.1

In areas or rooms where nitrate film is handled, the area that is protected per sprinkler head shall not exceed 64 ft2 (6 m2) with sprinklers not being more than 8 ft (2.4 m)apart. [40:5.1.4]

22.7.2.2 Cabinet Protection.

[40:6.2.5]

22.7.2.2.1

Cabinets having a capacity of more than 34 kg (75 lb), or 15 standard rolls, of film shall be provided with at least one automatic sprinkler head. [40:6.2.5.1]

22.7.2.2.2

Where cans are stored on more than one shelf, as shown in Figure 22.7.2.2.2 and as described in 6.2.6.2 or 6.2.6.3 of NFPA 40, one sprinkler shall be provided for eachshelf. [40:6.2.5.2]

Figure 22.7.2.2.2 Standard Film Cabinet for Other Than Extended Term Storage Film. [40:Figure 6.2.1]

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

317 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 337: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

22.7.2.3 Motion Picture Film Laboratories.

In all cases, sprinklers shall be arranged so that not more than two machines are protected by any one sprinkler head. [40:9.2.5.2]

22.8 Laboratories Using Chemicals.

22.8.1 Design Requirements.

Automatic sprinkler system protection shall be required for all new laboratories in accordance with the following:

(1) Automatic sprinkler system protection for Class A and Class B laboratories shall be in accordance with NFPA 13 for ordinary hazard (Group 2) occupancies.

(2) Automatic sprinkler system protection for Class C and Class D laboratories shall be in accordance with NFPA 13 for ordinary hazard (Group 1) occupancies.

[45:6.2.1.1]

22.8.2 Installation Requirements.

Fire sprinklers in laboratory units shall be the quick response (QR) sprinkler type installed in accordance with NFPA 13. [45:6.2.1.2]

22.9 Oxygen-Fuel Gas Systems for Welding, Cutting, and Allied Processes.

22.9.1 Design Requirements.

22.9.1.1

The total gas capacity of nonliquefied flammable gas (e.g., acetylene) shall be permitted to be increased to 56.6 m3 (2000 ft3) per control area under one of the followingconditions:

(1) In cylinder storage areas that are protected by an automatic sprinkler system and water supply designed in accordance with NFPA 13, furnishing a sprinkler discharge

density of at least (10 L/min)/m2 [(0.25 gal/min)/ft2] over a minimum operating area of at least 279 m2 (3000 ft2) with sprinklers located not more than 6.1 m (20 ft)above the floor where the cylinders are stored.

(2) In cylinder storage areas that are protected by an automatic water spray fixed system of equal density, designed in accordance with NFPA 15

22.9.1.2

Oxygen cylinders connected to one manifold shall be limited to a total gas capacity of 42.5 m3 (1500 ft3). Two such manifolds with connected cylinders shall be permitted tobe located in the same room, provided the building is protected throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system designed in accordance with NFPA 13, furnishing a

sprinkler discharge density of at least (10 L/min)/m2 [(0.25 gal/min)/ft2] over a minimum operating area of at least 279 m2 (3000 ft2) with sprinklers located not more than6.1 m (20 ft) above the floor where the manifolds are located.

22.9.2 Installation Requirements.

22.9.2.1

In buildings protected by an automatic sprinkler system and water supply designed in accordance with NFPA 13 for an ordinary hazard or more hazardous occupancy,where the occupancy other than the cylinder storage is not more hazardous than ordinary hazard as defined in NFPA 13, the distance between designated storage areasshall be permitted to be reduced to 15.2 m (50 ft). If the occupancy in such protected buildings between the designated storage areas is free of combustible material, thedistance shall be permitted to be reduced to 7.6 m (25 ft).

22.10 Acetylene Cylinder Charging Plants.

22.10.1 Design Requirements.

22.10.1.1

When sprinkler protection is provided, the area in which flammable compressed gases are stored or used shall be protected with a sprinkler system designed to be not less

than that required by NFPA 13 for Extra Hazard Group 1 with a minimum design area of 2500 ft2 (232.26 m2). [51A:11.2.1.2]

22.10.2 Installation Requirements. (Reserved)

22.11 Compressed Gases and Cryogenic Fluids Code.

22.11.1 Design Criteria.

22.11.1.1

When sprinkler protection is required, the area in which compressed gases or cryogenic fluids are stored or used shall be protected with a sprinkler system designed to benot less than that required by NFPA 13 for Ordinary Hazard Group 2. [55:6.10.2.1]

22.11.1.2

When sprinkler protection is required, the area in which the flammable or pyrophoric compressed gases or cryogenic fluids are stored or used shall be protected with asprinkler system designed to be not less than that required by NFPA 13 for Extra Hazard Group 1. [55:6.10.2.2]

22.11.2 Installation Requirements. (Reserved)

22.12 Utility LP-Gas Plants.

22.12.1 Design Requirements.

22.12.1.1

The design of fire water supply and distribution systems, where used, shall provide for the simultaneous supply of those fixed fire protection systems involved in themaximum single incident expected in the plant, including monitor nozzles, at their design flow and pressure. [59:13.4.2]

22.12.1.2

An additional supply of 1000 gal/min (63 L/sec) shall be available for hand hose streams for a period of not less than 2 hours. [59:13.4.2.1]

22.12.1.3

Manually actuated monitors shall be permitted to be used to augment hand hose streams. [59:13.4.2.2]

22.12.2 Installation Requirements. (Reserved)

22.13 Production, Storage, and Handling of Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG).

22.13.1 Design Requirements.

The fire water supply and distribution systems, if provided, shall simultaneously supply water to fixed fire protection systems, including monitor nozzles, at their design flowand pressure, involved in the maximum single incident expected in the plant plus an allowance of 1000 gpm (63 L/sec) for hand hose streams for not less than 2 hours.[59A:12.5.2]

22.13.2 Installation Requirements. (Reserved)

22.14 Protection of Information Technology Equipment.

22.14.1 Design Requirements. (Reserved)

22.14.2 Installation Requirements.

22.14.2.1*

Information technology equipment rooms and information technology equipment areas located in a sprinklered building shall be provided with an automatic sprinklersystem. [75:8.1.1]

22.14.2.2

Sprinkler systems protecting information technology equipment areas shall be valved separately from other sprinkler systems. [75:8.1.3]

22.14.2.3*

An automatic sprinkler system or a gaseous fire extinguishing system shall be provided for the protection of the area below a raised floor in an information technologyequipment room or information technology equipment area when one or more of the following exist:

(1) There is a critical need to protect data in the process, reduce equipment damage, and facilitate return to service.

(2) The area below the raised floor contains combustible material.

[75:8.1.1.2]

22.15 Standard on Incinerators, and Waste and Linen Handling Systems and Equipment.

22.15.1 Design Requirements. (Reserved)

22.15.2 Installation Requirements.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

318 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 338: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

22.15.2.1

Automatic sprinklers shall be provided in incinerator rooms. [82:4.2.7.3]

22.15.2.2* Waste and Linen Chutes and Transport Systems.

[82:5]

22.15.2.2.1 Gravity Waste or Linen Chutes.

[82:5.2]

22.15.2.2.1.1

Gravity chutes shall be protected internally by automatic sprinklers unless they are lined in accordance with 5.2.2.6.1 in NFPA 82. [82:5.2.2.6.2; 82:5.2.6.1.1]

22.15.2.2.1.2

This protection requires that a sprinkler be installed at or above the top service opening of the chute. [82:5.2.6.1.2]

22.15.2.2.1.3 Chute Sprinkler Protection.

Automatic sprinklers installed in gravity chute service openings shall be recessed out of the chute area through which the material travels. [82:5.2.6.1.3]

22.15.2.2.1.4

In addition, a sprinkler shall be installed within the chute at alternate floor levels in buildings over two stories in height, with a mandatory sprinkler located at the lowestservice level. [82:5.2.6.1.4]

22.15.2.2.1.5 Chute Room Automatic Sprinklers.

Automatic sprinklers shall be installed in chute terminal rooms. [82:5.2.6.2.1]

22.15.2.2.2 Full Pneumatic Waste and Linen Conveying Systems.

[82:5.3]

22.15.2.2.2.1

Full pneumatic-type risers shall be protected internally by automatic sprinklers. [82:5.3.4.1]

22.15.2.2.2.2

A sprinkler shall be required at or above the top loading station and at alternate floor levels in buildings over two stories in height, with a mandatory sprinkler located at thelowest loading station. [82:5.3.4.2]

22.15.2.2.2.3

Sprinklers shall be recessed out of the station area through which the material travels. [82:5.3.4.3]

22.15.2.2.3 Gravity Pneumatic Trash or Linen Conveying Systems.

[82:5.4]

22.15.2.2.3.1 Chute Automatic Sprinklers.

Where material is to be stored at the bottom of the chute and above the riser discharge damper (above the transport tee), automatic sprinklers shall be installed below thelast service door on the chute. [82:5.4.2.3]

22.15.2.2.3.2

Automatic sprinklers shall be installed in chute discharge rooms. [82:5.4.2.4.3]

22.15.2.3 Waste Handling Systems.

22.15.2.3.1

Automatic sprinklers shall be installed in rooms where waste handling systems and equipment are used to transport waste from interim storage areas to waste processingequipment, such as incinerators. [82:6.4.1]

22.15.2.3.2

In locations or rooms where waste handling systems and equipment are used for interim storage of waste only, the rooms shall be sprinklered in accordance withrequirements specified in 22.15.2.4. [82:6.4.2]

22.15.2.4 Waste Compactors.

[82:7]

22.15.2.4.1

All chute-fed compactors shall have an automatic sprinkler with a minimum 13 mm ( 1⁄2 in.) orifice installed in the hopper of the compactor. [82:7.2.1]

22.15.2.4.2

Sprinklers shall be ordinary temperature-rated sprinklers. [82:7.2.1.1]

22.15.2.4.3

Sprinklers shall be supplied by a minimum of 1 in. (25.4 mm) ferrous piping or 3⁄4 in. (19 mm) copper tubing line from the domestic cold water supply or by the building firesprinkler system. [82:7.2.1.2]

22.15.2.4.4

Sprinkler water pipe shall be protected from freezing in outdoor installations. [82:7.2.1.3]

22.15.2.4.5

Hand-fed compactors located within a building and not operated in conjunction with a chute shall not require installation of an automatic sprinkler in the hopper. [82:7.2.2]

22.15.2.5

Waste and recyclables storage rooms shall be provided with automatic sprinklers. [82:8.3]

22.15.2.6

Rooms in which waste processing equipment is located shall be installed with automatic sprinklers. [82:9.4.1]

22.16 Standard for Ovens and Furnaces.

22.16.1 Design Requirements. (Reserved)

22.16.2 Installation Requirements.

22.16.2.1*

Where automatic sprinklers are provided, they shall be installed in accordance with NFPA 13, unless otherwise permitted by 22.16.2.2. [86:9.2.1]

22.16.2.2

Where sprinklers that protect only ovens are installed and connection to a reliable fire protection water supply is not feasible, a domestic water supply connection shall bepermitted to supply these sprinklers subject to the approval of the authority having jurisdiction. [86:9.2.2]

22.16.2.3

Where sprinklers are selected for the protection of ovens, furnaces, or related equipment, the use of closed-head sprinkler systems shall be prohibited and only delugesprinkler systems shall be used where the following conditions exist:

(1) In equipment where temperatures can exceed 625°F (329°C)

(2) Where flash fire conditions can occur

[86:9.3.3]

22.16.2.4

Furnaces shall be located so as to minimize exposure to power equipment, process equipment, and sprinkler risers. [86:5.1.3.1]

22.16.2.5

Where water from a fixed protection system could come in contact with molten materials, such as molten salt or molten metal, shielding shall be provided to prevent waterfrom contacting the molten material. [86:9.3.1]

22.16.2.6*

Galvanized pipe shall not be used in sprinkler or water spray systems in ovens, furnaces, or related equipment. [86:9.3.2]

22.17 Health Care Facilities Code, Hyperbaric Chambers.

22.17.1 Design Requirements.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

319 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 339: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

22.17.1.1

A fixed water deluge extinguishing system shall be installed in all chamber compartments that are designed for manned operations. [99:14.2.5.2]

22.17.1.2

In chambers that consist of more than one chamber compartment (lock), the design of the deluge system shall meet the requirements of 22.17.1.1 when the chambercompartments are at different depths (pressures). [99:14.2.5.2.1]

22.17.1.3

The deluge system in different compartments (locks) shall operate independently or simultaneously. [99:14.2.5.2.2]

22.17.1.4

Fixed deluge systems shall not be required in chamber compartments that are used strictly as personnel transfer compartments (locks) and for no other purposes.[99:14.2.5.2.3]

22.17.1.5*

Manual activation and deactivation deluge controls shall be located at the operator's console and in each chamber compartment (lock) containing a deluge system.[99:14.2.5.2.4]

22.17.1.6

Controls shall be designed to prevent unintended activation. [99:14.2.5.2.4.1]

22.17.1.7

Water shall be delivered from the fixed discharge nozzles as specified in 22.17.1.9 within 3 seconds of activation of any affiliated deluge control. [99:14.2.5.2.5]

22.17.1.8*

Average spray density at floor level shall be not less than 2 gpm/ft2 (81.5 L/min/m2), with no floor area larger than 10.76 ft2 (1 m2) receiving less than 1 gpm/ft2 (40.75

L/min/m2). [99:14.2.5.2.6]

22.17.1.9

Water shall be available in the deluge system to maintain the flow specified in 22.17.1.8 simultaneously in each chamber compartment (lock) containing the deluge systemfor 1 minute. [99:14.2.5.2.7]

22.17.1.10

The limit on maximum extinguishment duration shall be governed by the chamber capacity (bilge capacity also, if so equipped) or its drainage system, or both.[99:14.2.5.2.7.1]

22.17.1.11

The deluge system shall have stored pressure to operate for at least 15 seconds without electrical branch power. [99:14.2.5.2.8]

22.17.2 Installation Requirements. (Reserved)

22.18 Fixed Guideway Transit and Passenger Rail Systems.

22.18.1 Design Requirements.

22.18.1.1

Other fire suppression systems, if approved, shall be permitted to be substituted for automatic sprinkler systems in the areas listed in 22.18.2.1. [130:5.7.3.4]

22.18.2 Installation Requirements.

22.18.2.1

An automatic sprinkler protection system shall be provided in areas of stations used for concessions, in storage areas, in trash rooms, and in the steel truss area of allescalators and other similar areas with combustible loadings, except trainways. [130:5.7.3.1]

22.18.2.2

Sprinkler protection shall be permitted to be omitted in areas of open stations remotely located from public spaces. [130:5.7.3.1.1]

22.18.2.3

Installation of sprinkler systems shall comply with NFPA 13 or applicable local codes as required. [130:5.7.3.2]

22.18.2.4

A sprinkler system waterflow alarm and supervisory signal service shall be installed. [130:5.7.3.3]

22.19 Motion Picture and Television Production Studio Soundstages, Approved Production Facilities, and Production Locations.

22.19.1

The requirements of NFPA 13 prohibiting obstructions to sprinkler discharge shall not be applicable if approved mitigation is employed. [140:4.11.1.3.1]

22.19.2

The requirements of NFPA 13 prohibiting obstructions to sprinkler discharge shall not be applicable if the building sprinkler system meets the design criteria for ExtraHazard, Group 2. [140:4.11.1.3.2]

22.19.3

In any production location building protected by an existing automatic sprinkler system, where solid- or hard-ceiling sets or platforms are introduced and create anobstruction to sprinkler discharge, the provisions of 22.19.4 or 22.19.5 shall be met. [140:5.11.3]

22.19.4*

The requirements of NFPA 13 prohibiting obstructions to sprinkler discharge shall not be applicable if approved mitigation is employed. [140:5.11.4]

22.19.5*

The requirements of NFPA 13 prohibiting obstructions to sprinkler discharge shall not be applicable if the building sprinkler system meets the design criteria for ExtraHazard, Group 2. [140:5.11.5]

22.20 Animal Housing Facilities.

22.20.1 Design Requirements.

22.20.1.1 (Reserved)

22.20.2 Installation Requirements. (Reserved)

22.20.2.1

Quick-response sprinklers shall be utilized in animal housing facilities. [150:9.2.3]

22.21 Water Cooling Towers.

22.21.1 Design Requirements.

22.21.1.1 Types of Systems.

22.21.1.1.1*

Because the counterflow tower design lends itself to either closed- or open-head systems, the following systems shall be permitted to be used:

(1) Wet-pipe

(2) Dry-pipe

(3) Preaction

(4) Deluge

[214:5.2.2.1]

22.21.1.1.2*

The open-head deluge system shall be used in crossflow towers to maximize the water distribution and heat detection activation. [214:5.2.2.2]

22.21.1.2 Minimum Rate of Application.

[214:5.2.3]

22.21.1.2.1

Under the fan decks of counterflow towers, the rate of application of water shall be 0.5 gpm/ft2 (20.4 mm/min), including fan opening. [214:5.2.3.1]

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

320 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 340: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

22.21.1.2.2

Under the fan decks of crossflow towers, the rate of application of water shall be 0.33 gpm/ft2 (13.45 mm/min), including fan opening. [214:5.2.3.2]

22.21.1.2.3

Over the fill areas of crossflow towers, the rate of application of water shall be 0.5 gpm/ft2 (20.4 mm/min). [214:5.2.3.3]

22.21.1.3 Extended Fan Decks.

On towers having extended fan decks that completely enclose the distribution basin, the discharge outlets protecting the fill area shall be located over the basin, under theextension of the fan deck. [214:5.2.4.3]

22.21.1.3.1

These discharge outlets shall be open directional spray nozzles or other approved spray devices arranged to discharge 0.35 gpm/ft2 (14.26 mm/min) directly on the

distribution basin and 0.15 gpm/ft2 (6.11 mm/min) on the underside of the fan deck extension. [214:5.2.4.3.1]

22.21.1.3.2

On towers having extended fan decks that do not completely enclose the hot-water basin, outlets protecting the fill shall be located under the distribution basin inaccordance with 5.2.4.2.2 of NFPA 214. [214:5.2.4.3.2]

22.21.1.4 Combustible Fan Decks.

For deluge systems using directional spray nozzles in the pendant position, provisions shall be made to protect the underside of a combustible fan deck at a minimum of

0.15 gpm/ft2 (6.11 mm/min), which shall be included as part of the application rate specified in 5.2.3 of NFPA 214. [214:5.2.4.4]

22.21.1.5* Water Basin Covers.

On film-filled towers that have solid, hot-water basin covers over the complete basin, the discharge outlets protecting the fill area shall be permitted to be located under thebasin covers. [214:5.2.4.5]

22.21.1.5.1

These discharge outlets shall be open directional spray nozzles or other approved devices arranged to discharge 0.50 gpm/ft2 (20.4 mm/min) into the distribution basinhorizontally, with some of the spray splashing up and on the underside of the water basin covers. [214:5.2.4.5.1]

22.21.1.6 Exterior Protection.

[214:5.2.10]

22.21.1.6.1

Where any combustible exterior surfaces of a tower, including the fan deck and distribution basins, are less than 100 ft (30.5 m) from significant concentrations ofcombustibles such as structures or piled material, the combustible exposed surfaces of the tower shall be protected by an automatic water spray system. [214:5.2.10.1]

22.21.1.6.2

Systems for exterior protection shall be designed with the same attention and care as interior systems. [214:5.2.10.2]

22.21.1.6.2.1

Pipe sizing shall be based on hydraulic calculations. [214:5.2.10.2.1]

22.21.1.6.2.2

Water supply and discharge rate shall be based on a minimum 0.15 gpm/ft2 (6.11 mm/min) for all protected surfaces. [214:5.2.10.2.2]

22.21.1.7 Sprinkler System Water Supply.

22.21.1.7.1 Deluge Systems.

22.21.1.7.1.1*

Where all cells of a cooling tower are protected by a single deluge system, the water supply shall be adequate to supply all discharge outlets on that system. [214:5.6.1.1]

22.21.1.7.1.2

Where two or more deluge systems are used to protect a cooling tower and fire-resistant partitions are not provided between the deluge systems, the water supply shall beadequate to supply all discharge outlets in the two most hydraulically demanding adjacent systems. [214:5.6.1.2]

22.21.1.7.1.3*

Where two or more deluge systems are separated by fire-resistant partitions, the water supply shall be adequate to supply all discharge outlets in the single mosthydraulically demanding system. [214:5.6.1.3]

22.21.1.7.2 Wet, Dry, and Preaction Systems.

22.21.1.7.2.1*

Where each cell of the cooling tower is separated by a fire-resistant partition, the water supply shall be adequate to supply all discharge outlets in the hydraulically mostdemanding single cell. [214:5.6.2.1]

22.21.1.7.2.2*

Where fire-resistant partitions are not provided between each cell of a cooling tower, the water supply shall be adequate to supply all discharge outlets in the two mosthydraulically demanding adjoining cells. [214:5.6.2.2]

22.21.1.7.3 Hose Streams.

Water supplies shall be sufficient to include a minimum of 500 gpm (1892.5 L/min) for hose streams in addition to the sprinkler requirements. [214:5.6.3]

22.21.1.7.4 Duration.

A water supply adequate for at least a 2-hour duration shall be provided for the combination of the water supply specified in 5.6.1 or 5.6.2 of NFPA 214, plus the hosestream demand specified in 22.21.1.7.3. [214:5.6.4]

22.21.2 Installation Requirements.

22.21.2.1* Counterflow Towers.

[214:5.2.4.1]

22.21.2.1.1

The discharge outlets shall be located under the fan deck and fan opening. [214:5.2.4.1.1]

22.21.2.1.2

Except under the fan opening, all discharge outlets shall have deflector distances installed in accordance with Section 8.5 of NFPA 13. [214:5.2.4.1.2]

22.21.2.1.3

Closed-head discharge outlets for dry-pipe and preaction systems shall be installed in the upright position only. [214:5.2.4.1.3]

22.21.2.2* Crossflow Towers.

[214:5.2.4.2]

22.21.2.2.1

The discharge outlets protecting the plenum area shall be located under the fan deck and in the fan opening. [214:5.2.4.2.1]

22.21.2.2.2

Discharge outlets protecting the fill shall be located under the distribution basin on either the louver or drift eliminator side, discharging horizontally through the joistchannels. [214:5.2.4.2.2]

22.21.2.2.3

Towers with an air travel dimension longer than the maximum allowable for the discharge device being used shall have discharge devices placed on both sides of the fillarea in each joist channel. [214:5.2.4.2.3.1]

22.21.2.2.4

The pressure at each discharge device shall be adequate to provide protection for half of the length of the fill measured along the air travel. [214:5.2.4.2.3.2]

22.21.2.2.5

Where joist channels are wider than 2 ft (0.6 m), more than one discharge device shall be required per joist channel. [214:5.2.4.2.4.1]

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

321 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 341: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

22.21.2.2.6

If the discharge device being used is listed for the width of the joist channel being protected, one discharge device per joist channel shall be permitted to be used.[214:5.2.4.2.4.2]

22.21.2.3* Extended Fan Decks.

On towers having extended fan decks that completely enclose the distribution basin, the discharge outlets protecting the fill area shall be located over the basin, under theextension of the fan deck. [214:5.2.4.3]

22.21.2.4 Combustible Fan Decks.

For deluge systems using directional spray nozzles in the pendant position, provisions shall be made to protect the underside of a combustible fan deck at a minimum rate

of 0.15 gpm/ft2 (6.11 mm/min), which shall be included as part of the application rate specified in 22.21.1.2. [214:5.2.4.4]

22.21.2.5* Water Basin Covers.

On film-filled towers that have solid, hot-water basin covers over the complete basin, the discharge outlets protecting the fill area shall be permitted to be located under thebasin covers. [214:5.2.4.5]

22.21.2.5.1

These discharge outlets shall be open directional spray nozzles or other approved devices arranged to discharge 0.50 gpm/ft2 (20.4 mm/min) into the distribution basinhorizontally, with some of the spray splashing up and on the underside of the water basin covers. [214:5.2.4.5.1]

22.21.2.6 Valves.

[214:5.2.6]

22.21.2.6.1

Shutoff valves and automatically operated water control valves, if provided, shall be located as follows:

(1) Outside the fire-exposed area

(2) As close to the cooling tower as possible to minimize the amount of pipe to the discharge device

(3) Where they will be accessible during a fire emergency

[214:5.2.6.1.2]

22.21.2.6.2 Manual Release Valve.

[214:5.2.6.2]

22.21.2.6.2.1

Remote manual release valves, where required, shall be conspicuously located and accessible during a fire emergency. [214:5.2.6.2.1]

22.21.2.6.2.2

Where remote manual release valves are not required, an inspector's test valve shall be provided for each pilot-head-operated system. [214:5.2.6.2.2]

22.21.2.7 Strainers.

Strainers shall be required for systems utilizing discharge devices with waterways of less than 3⁄8 in. (9.5 mm) diameter. [214:5.2.7]

22.21.2.8 Heat Detectors.

Where deluge or preaction systems are used, heat detectors shall be installed and shall be selected from either of the types in 5.2.8.1 or 5.2.8.2 of NFPA 214. [214:5.2.8]

22.21.2.8.1

In mechanical-draft towers, pilot line detectors shall be located under the fan deck at the circumference of the fan opening and under the fan opening where necessary tocomply with the spacing requirements in 22.21.2.8.1.1. (For extended fan decks, see 5.2.8.2.3 in NFPA 214.) [214:5.2.8.1.2.1(A)]

22.21.2.8.1.1

Pilot line detectors shall be spaced not more than 8 ft (2.4 m) apart in any direction including the fan opening. Temperature ratings shall be selected in accordance withoperating conditions, but shall be no less than intermediate. [214:5.2.8.1.2.1(B)]

22.21.2.8.2

On towers having extended fan decks that completely enclose the distribution basin, electrical heat detectors shall be located under the fan deck extension in accordancewith standard, indoor-spacing rules for the type detectors used in accordance with NFPA 72. [214:5.2.8.2.3]

22.21.2.8.2.1

Where the fan deck extension is 16 ft (4.9 m) or less and this dimension is the length of the joist channel, then only one row of detectors centered on and at right angles tothe joist channels shall be required. Spacing between detectors shall be in accordance with NFPA 72. [214:5.2.8.2.3.1]

22.21.2.8.2.2

On towers having extended fan decks that do not completely enclose the hot-water basin, electrical heat detectors shall not be required under the fan deck extension.[214:5.2.8.2.3.2]

22.21.2.8.3

Where electrical heat detectors are inaccessible during tower operation, an accessible test detector shall be provided for each detection zone. [214:5.2.8.3]

22.21.2.8.4

Electrical heat detector components exposed to corrosive vapors or liquids shall be protected by materials of construction or by protective coatings applied by theequipment manufacturer. [214:5.2.8.4]

22.21.2.9 Protection for Fan Drive Motor.

[214:5.2.9]

22.21.2.9.1

A sprinkler or spray nozzle shall be provided over each fan drive motor where the motor is located so that it is not within the protected area of the tower. [214:5.2.9.1]

22.21.2.9.2

Where a preaction or deluge system is used, the detection system shall be extended to cover the motor. [214:5.2.9.2]

22.21.2.9.3

Provision shall be made to interlock the fan motors with the fire protection system so that the cooling tower fan motors are stopped in the cell(s) for which the system isactuated. [214:5.2.9.3]

22.21.2.9.4

Where the continued operation of the fans is vital to the process, a manual override switch shall be permitted to be provided to reactivate the fan when it is determined thatthere is no fire. [214:5.2.9.4]

22.21.2.10 Corrosion Protection.

[214:5.3]

22.21.2.10.1

Piping, fittings, hangers, braces, and attachment hardware including fasteners shall be hot-dipped galvanized steel in accordance with ASTM A 153A/153M, StandardSpecification for Zinc Coating (Hot Dip) on Iron and Steel Hardware, or other materials having a superior corrosion resistance. [214:5.3.1]

22.21.2.10.1.1

Exposed pipe threads and bolts on fittings shall be protected against corrosion. [214:5.3.1.1]

22.21.2.10.1.2

All other components shall be corrosion resistant or protected against corrosion by a coating. [214:5.3.1.2]

22.21.2.10.2*

Wax-type coatings shall not be used on devices without fusible elements. [214:5.3.2]

22.21.2.10.3*

Special care shall be taken in the handling and installation of wax-coated or similar sprinklers to avoid damaging the coating. [214:5.3.3]

22.21.2.10.3.1

Corrosion-resistant coatings shall not be applied to the sprinklers by anyone other than the manufacturer of the sprinklers. [214:5.3.3.1]

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

322 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 342: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

22.21.2.10.3.2

In all cases, any damage to the protective coating occurring at the time of installation shall be repaired at once using only the coating of the manufacturer of the sprinkler inan approved manner, so that no part of the sprinkler will be exposed after the installation has been completed. [214:5.3.3.2]

22.22 Standard for the Construction and Fire Protection of Marine Terminals, Piers, and Wharves.

22.22.1 Design Requirements.

22.22.1.1*

Unless the requirements of 22.22.1.2 apply, automatic sprinkler systems shall be designed based upon the design criteria for the protection of Group A plastics.[307:5.4.2.1]

22.22.1.2

With the approval of the authority having jurisdiction, the requirements of 22.22.1.1 shall not apply to buildings used exclusively for the handling or storage of specificcargoes and commodities that are defined as commodity classes less than Group A plastics by this standard. [307:5.4.2.2]

22.22.1.3

Buildings consistent with 22.22.1.2 shall be protected in accordance with the design criteria for the applicable commodity as required by this standard. [307:5.4.2.3]

22.22.1.4

Buildings used for the storage of hazardous materials shall be protected in accordance with this standard and the applicable codes and standards for the type of hazardousmaterial being stored. [307:5.4.2.4]

22.22.2 Installation Requirements.

22.22.2.1 Piers and Wharves with Combustible Substructure.

22.22.2.1.1

Where there is danger of damage to sprinkler equipment by floating objects, physical barriers shall be provided to exclude such objects. [307:4.3.3.1.2.2]

22.22.2.1.2

The installation requirements in 22.22.2.1.2.1, 22.22.2.1.2.1(A) , and 22.22.2.1.2.1(B) are also required.

22.22.2.1.2.1* Upward Projecting Sprinklers.

Where narrow horizontal channels or spaces are caused by caps, stringers, ties, and other structural members and where the standard upright sprinkler does not projectsufficient water upward to extinguish or control fires on the underside of the pier or wharf deck, a sprinkler that projects water upward to wet the overhead shall be used.[307:4.3.3.1.3.1]

(A)

Location, spacing, and deflector position shall be governed by the discharge pattern of the sprinkler and the structure being protected. [307:4.3.3.1.3.1(A)]

(B)

The following design and installation guides shall apply where pendent sprinklers in the upright position or old-style sprinklers are to be utilized:

(1) The maximum coverage per sprinkler head shall be limited to 80 ft2 (7.5 m2).

(2) Where spacing or arrangement of stringers constitutes typical open-joist construction directly supporting the deck, sprinkler branch lines shall be installed between thebents at right angles to the stringers and shall meet the following requirements:

(a) Spacing between branch lines shall not exceed 10 ft (3 m).

(b) Sprinklers on branch lines shall be staggered and spaced not to exceed 8 ft (2.5 m) on center.

(3)

(4) The deflectors of sprinklers on lines under stringers shall be located not less than 4 in. (100 mm) nor more than 10 in. (250 mm) below the bottom plane of the stringer,and not more than 18 in. (450 mm) below the underside of the pier or wharf deck.

(5)

(6) The temperature rating of the sprinkler shall not exceed 165°F (74°C).

(7) The maximum area to be protected by any one system shall be limited to 25,000 ft2 (2325 m2).

[307:4.3.3.1.3.1(B)]

22.23 Semiconductor Fabrication Facilities.

22.23.1 Design Requirements.

22.23.1.1*

Automatic sprinklers for cleanrooms or clean zones shall be installed in accordance with NFPA 13 and shall be hydraulically designed for a density of 0.20 gpm/ft2 (8.15

L/min·m2) over a design area of 3000 ft2 (278.8 m2). [318:4.1.2.1]

22.23.1.2

Automatic sprinkler protection shall be designed and installed in the plenum and interstitial space above cleanrooms in accordance with NFPA 13, for a density of 0.20

gpm/ft2 (8.15 L/min·m2) over a design area of 3000 ft2 (278.8 m2). [318:4.1.2.5]

22.23.1.2.1*

Automatic sprinklers shall be permitted to be omitted if the construction and occupancy of these spaces are noncombustible. [318:4.1.2.5.1]

22.23.1.3*

Sprinklers installed in duct systems shall be hydraulically designed to provide 0.5 gpm (1.9 L/min) over an area derived by multiplying the distance between the sprinklersin a horizontal duct by the width of the duct. [318:4.1.2.6.2]

22.23.1.3.1*

Minimum discharge shall be 20 gpm (76 L/min) per sprinkler from the five hydraulically most remote sprinklers. [318:4.1.2.6.2.1]

22.23.2 Installation Requirements.

22.23.2.1*

Wet pipe automatic sprinkler protection shall be provided throughout facilities containing cleanrooms and clean zones. [318:4.1.1]

22.23.2.2*

Approved quick-response sprinklers shall be utilized for sprinkler installations within down-flow airstreams in cleanrooms and clean zones. [318:4.1.2.2]

22.23.2.3*

Sprinklers shall be spaced a maximum of 20 ft (6.1 m) apart horizontally and 12 ft (3.7 m) apart vertically. [318:4.1.2.6.2.2]

22.23.2.4

A separate indicating control valve shall be provided for sprinklers installed in ductwork. [318:4.1.2.6.3]

22.23.2.5

The sprinklers shall be accessible for periodic inspection and maintenance. [318:4.1.2.6.6]

22.24 Aircraft Hangars.

22.24.1 Design Requirements.

Sprinkler systems installed in aircraft hangars shall comply with NFPA 409.

22.24.2 Installation Requirements.

Sprinkler systems installed in aircraft hangars shall comply with NFPA 409.

* Where crisscross construction is involved, closer spacing of sprinklers shall be permitted as necessary to provide wetting of the entire structure.

* The sprinkler system shall be hydraulically designed in accordance with the requirements of this standard and shall meet the following requirements:

(a) Sprinkler orifice shall be 1⁄2 in. (12.7 mm) and shall discharge at a minimum pressure of 12.5 psi (85 kPa).

(b) Design area shall be based upon the largest area between firestops plus an additional area embracing at least two branch lines on opposite sides of the firestop.

(c) Minimum design area shall be not less than 5000 ft2 (465 m2).

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

323 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 343: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

22.25 Airport Terminal Buildings, Fueling Ramp Drainage, and Loading Walkways.

22.25.1 Design Requirements.

22.25.1.1

Passenger-handling areas shall be classified as Ordinary Hazard Group 1 Occupancy for the purpose of sprinkler system design. [415:4.5.1.3]

22.25.1.2*

Baggage, package, and mail-handling areas shall be classified as Ordinary Hazard Group 2 Occupancy for the purpose of sprinkler system design. [415:4.5.1.4]

22.25.1.3*

Other areas of the airport terminal building shall be classified based on the occupancy of the area. [415:4.5.1.5]

22.25.2 Installation Requirements. (Reserved)

22.26 Aircraft Engine Test Facilities.

22.26.1 Design Requirements.

22.26.1.1*

In engine test cells, the minimum design discharge density shall be 0.50 gpm/ft2 (0.34 L/sec/m2) of protected area. [423:7.6.3]

22.26.1.2

In engine test cells, water supplies shall be capable of meeting the largest demand at the design rate plus hose stream demand for a period of 30 minutes. [423:7.6.4]

22.26.1.2.1

Hose stream demand shall be a minimum of 250 gpm (16 L/sec). [423:7.6.4.1]

22.26.1.2.2

The hydraulic calculation and the water supply shall be based on the assumption that all sprinklers in the test cell are operating simultaneously. [423:7.6.4.2]

22.26.2 Installation Requirements. (Reserved)

22.27 Advanced Light Water Reactor Electric Generating Plants.

22.27.1 Design Requirements.

22.27.1.1* Sprinkler System Water Supply.

The fire water supply shall be calculated on the basis of the largest expected flow rate for a period of 2 hours but shall not be less than 300,000 gal (1,135,500 L), and thefollowing criteria also shall apply:

(1) The flow rate shall be based on 500 gpm (1892.5 L/min) for manual hose streams plus the largest design demand of any sprinkler or fixed water spray system asdetermined in accordance with this standard, with NFPA 15, or with NFPA 804.

(2) The fire water supply shall be capable of delivering the design demand specified in 22.27.1.1 (1) with the hydraulically least demanding portion of fire main loop out ofservice.

[804:9.2.1]

22.27.1.2 Yard Mains.

The underground yard fire main loop shall be installed to furnish anticipated water requirements, and the following criteria also shall be met:

(1) The type of pipe and water treatment shall be design considerations, with tuberculation as one of the parameters.

(2) Means for inspecting and flushing the systems shall be provided.

[804:9.4.1]

22.27.1.3 Cable Tunnels.

[804:10.4.2]

22.27.1.3.1

Automatic sprinkler systems shall be designed for a density of 0.30 gpm/ft2 (12.2 L/min·m2) for the most remote 100 linear ft (30.5 m) of cable tunnel up to the most remote

2500 ft2 (232.2 m2). [804:10.4.2.2.2]

22.27.1.3.2

Deluge sprinkler systems or deluge spray systems shall meet the following criteria:

(1) They shall be zoned to limit the area of protection to that which the drainage system can handle with any two adjacent systems actuated.

(2) They shall be hydraulically designed with each zone calculated with the largest adjacent zone flowing.

[804:10.4.2.2.4]

22.27.1.4 Cable Spreading Room.

The cable spreading room shall have an automatic fixed water-based suppression system, and the following criteria also shall be met:

(1) The location of sprinklers or spray nozzles shall protect cable tray arrangements to ensure water coverage for areas that could present exposure fire hazards to thecable raceways.

(2) Automatic sprinkler systems shall be designed for a density of 0.30 gpm/ft2 (12.2 L/min·m2) over the most remote 2500 ft2 (232.2 m2).

[804:10.4.1.1]

22.27.1.5* Beneath Turbine Generator Operating Floor.

All areas beneath the turbine generator operating floor shall be protected by an automatic sprinkler or foam-water sprinkler system meeting the following criteria:

(1) The sprinkler system beneath the turbine generator shall be designed around obstructions from structural members and piping.

(2) The sprinkler system shall be designed to a minimum density of 0.30 gpm/ft2 (12.2 L/min·m2) over a minimum application of 5000 ft2 (464.5 m2).

[804:10.8.2.1]

22.27.1.6* Turbine Generator Bearings.

[804:10.8.3]

22.27.1.6.1

Lubricating oil lines above the turbine operating floor shall be protected with an automatic sprinkler system to a minimum density of 0.30 gpm/ft2 (12.2 L/min·m2) thatcovers those areas subject to oil accumulation, including the area within the turbine lagging (skirt). [804:10.8.4]

22.27.1.6.2

Where shaft-driven ventilation systems are used, an automatic preaction sprinkler system providing a density of 0.30 gpm/ft2 (12.2 L/min·m2) over the entire area shall beprovided. [804:10.8.7(2)]

22.27.1.7 Standby Emergency Diesel Generators and Combustion Turbines.

The sprinkler and water spray protection systems shall be designed for a 0.25 gpm/ft2 (10.19 L/min·m2) density over the entire area. [804:10.9.3(2)]

22.27.1.8 Fire Pump Room/House.

If sprinkler and water spray systems are provided for fire pump houses, they shall be designed for a minimum density of 0.25 gpm/ft2 (10.19 L/min·m2) over the entire firearea. [804:10.22.2]

22.27.1.9 Auxiliary Boilers.

Sprinkler and water spray systems shall be designed for a minimum density of 0.25 gpm/ft2 (10.19 L/min·m2) over the entire area. [804:10.24.3]

22.27.2 Installation Requirements.

22.27.2.1 Yard Mains, Hydrants, and Building Standpipes.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

324 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 344: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

[804:9.4]

22.27.2.1.1

Approved visually indicating sectional control valves such as postindicator valves shall be provided to isolate portions of the main for maintenance or repair withoutsimultaneously shutting off the supply to both primary and backup fire suppression systems. [804:9.4.2]

22.27.2.1.2*

Sectional control valves shall allow maintaining independence of the individual loop around each unit, and the following also shall apply:

(1) For such installations, common water supplies shall also be permitted to be utilized.

(2) For multiple-reactor sites with widely separated plants [approaching 1 mi (1.6 km) or more], separate yard fire main loops shall be used.

[804:9.4.4]

22.27.2.1.3

Sprinkler systems and manual hose station standpipes shall have connections to the plant underground water main so that a single active failure or a crack in a moderate-energy line can be isolated so as not to impair both the primary and the backup fire suppression systems unless otherwise permitted by the following:

(1) Alternatively, headers fed from each end shall be permitted inside buildings to supply both sprinkler and standpipe systems, provided steel piping and fittings meetingthe requirements of ASME B31.1, Code for Power Piping, are used for the headers (up to and including the first valve) supplying the sprinkler systems where suchheaders are part of the seismically analyzed hose standpipe system.

(2) Where provided, such headers shall be considered an extension of the yard main system.

(3) Each sprinkler and standpipe system shall be equipped with an outside screw and yoke (OS&Y) gate valve or other approved shutoff valve.

[804:9.4.7]

22.27.2.2 Cable Concentrations.

The location of sprinklers or spray nozzles shall protect cable tray arrangements and possible transient combustibles to ensure water coverage for areas that could presentexposure fire hazards to the cable raceways. [804:10.4.2.2.3]

22.27.2.3 Turbine Building.

Deluge sprinkler systems or deluge spray systems shall meet the following criteria:

(1) They shall be zoned to limit the area of protection to that which the drainage system can handle with any two adjacent systems actuated.

(2) They shall be hydraulically designed with each zone calculated with the largest adjacent zone flowing.

[804:10.4.2.2.4]

22.28 Light Water Nuclear Power Plants.

22.28.1 Design Requirements.

A fire protection water supply of reliability, quantity, and duration shall be provided by one of the two following methods:

(1) A fire protection water supply of not less than two separate 300,000 gal (1,135,500 L) supplies shall be provided.

(2) The 2-hour fire flow rate for 2 hours shall be calculated, and the following criteria shall be met:

(a) The flow rate shall be based on 500 gpm (1892.5 L/min) for manual hose streams plus the largest design demand of any sprinkler or fixed water spray system(s)in the power block as determined in accordance with NFPA 13 or NFPA 15.

(b) The fire water supply shall be capable of delivering this design demand with the hydraulically least demanding portion of fire main loop out of service.

[805:5.5.1]

22.28.2 Installation Requirements.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

325 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 345: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

22.28.2.1

Each sprinkler and standpipe system shall be equipped with an outside screw and yoke (OS&Y) gate valve or other approved shutoff valve. [805:5.5.17]

22.28.2.2

Sprinkler systems and manual hose station standpipes shall be connected to the plant fire protection water main so that a single active failure or a crack to the watersupply piping to these systems can be isolated so as not to impair both the primary and backup fire suppression systems. [805:5.5.12]

22.29 Hydroelectric Generating Plants. [NFPA 851]

22.29.1 Design Requirements.

22.29.1.1 Hydraulic Control Systems.

Fixed fire protection for this equipment, where provided, should be as follows:

(1) Automatic wet pipe sprinkler systems utilizing a design density of 0.25 gpm/ft2 (10.2 mm/min) for the entire hazard area.

(2) Automatic foam-water sprinkler systems providing a density of 0.16 gpm/ft2 (6.5 mm/min).

[851:7.2.4]

22.29.1.2 Cable Concentrations.

Sprinkler or water spray systems should be designed for a density of 0.30 gpm/ft2 (12.2 mm/min) over 2500 ft2 (232 m2). This coverage is for area protection. Individualcable tray tier coverage could be required based on the fire risk evaluation. [851:7.5.3]

22.29.1.3 Cable Tunnels.

Where protection is required by the fire risk evaluation, cable tunnels should be protected by automatic water spray, automatic wet pipe sprinkler, or foam-water spray

systems. Automatic sprinkler systems should be designed for a density of 0.30 gpm/ft2 (12.2 mm/min) over 2500 ft2 (232 m2) or the most remote 100 linear ft (30.5 m) of

cable tunnel up to 2500 ft2 (232 m2). [851:7.6.1]

22.29.1.4 Emergency Generators.

Emergency generators located within main plant structures should be protected by automatic sprinkler, water spray, foam-water sprinkler, compressed air foam, or

gaseous-type extinguishing systems. Sprinkler and water spray protection systems should be designed for a 0.25 gpm/ft2 (10.2 mm/ min) density over the fire area.[851:7.11.2]

22.29.1.5 Air Compressors.

Automatic sprinkler protection designed for a density of 0.25 gpm/ft2 (10.2 mm/min) over the postulated oil spill or compressed air foam should be considered for aircompressors containing a large quantity of oil. [851:7.12]

22.29.1.6 Hydraulic Systems for Gate and Valve Operators.

Hydraulic control systems should use a listed fire-resistant fluid. Automatic sprinkler protection designed for a density of 0.25 gpm/ ft2 (10.2 mm/min) over the fire area orcompressed air foam systems should be considered for hydraulic systems not using a listed fire-resistant fluid. [851:7.13]

22.29.1.7 Fire Pumps.

Rooms housing diesel-driven fire pumps should be protected by automatic sprinkler, water spray, foamwater sprinkler, or compressed air foam systems. If sprinkler and

water spray protection systems are provided, they should be designed for a density of 0.25 gpm/ft2 (10.2 mm/min) over the fire area. For automatic foam-water sprinkler

systems, a density of 0.16 gpm/ft2 (6.5 mm/min) should be provided. [851:7.14]

22.29.2 Installation Requirements.

22.29.2.1 Hydraulic Control Systems.

Fire extinguishing systems, where installed for lube oil systems employing combustible-type oil, should include protection for the reservoirs, pumps, and all oil lines,especially where unions exist on piping and beneath any shielded area where flowing oil can collect. Facilities not provided with curbs or drains should extend coverage fora distance of 20 ft (6 m) from the oil lines, when measured from the outermost oil line. [851:7.2.7]

22.30 Code for the Protection of Cultural Resource Properties — Museums, Libraries, and Places of Worship. [NFPA 909]

22.30.1 Design Requirements.

22.30.1.1*

Standard-response sprinklers shall be permitted for use in light-hazard areas. [909:12.4.4.2]

22.30.1.2*

Preaction and dry pipe systems shall be designed to minimize the risk of corrosion in accordance with the requirements of 9.12.12.3.1 through 9.12.12.3.5 of NFPA 909.[909:9.12.12.3]

22.30.1.3 System Design for Museums, Libraries, and Their Collections in Compact Storage.

22.30.1.3.1*

The design shall recognize the nature of the potential threat of a fire that originates in a compact mobile storage unit, where fuel loads are invariably large and fire growth issignificantly different from that in other kinds of storage. [909:9.12.23.4.1.3]

22.30.1.3.2*

The automatic fire suppression system, the compact storage system, and the storage compartmentalization features shall be designed to limit fire damage in accordancewith the facility’s fire safety objectives. [909:9.12.23.4.1.4(A)]

22.30.1.3.3

Design calculations shall include the number and size of the storage modules, the separation provided between the modules end-to-end and back-to-back, and the type ofmaterial being stored. [909:9.12.23.4.1.4(B)]

22.30.1.3.4

Where the automatic fire suppression is provided by automatic fire sprinkler systems, the systems shall be wet pipe, single interlock pre-action, or single non-interlockpre-action systems. [909:9.12.23.4.1.4(C)]

22.30.1.3.5

Dry pipe or double-interlock pre-action systems shall not be installed in compact storage areas. [909:9.12.23.4.1.4(D)]

22.30.1.3.6

Where compact storage is installed in an existing storage area, the existing automatic fire detection and fire suppression systems shall be modified as required toaccommodate the increased fire loading. [909:9.12.23.4.1.4(E)]

22.30.2 Installation Requirements.

22.30.2.1*

Branch lines shall be pitched at least 1⁄2 in. per 10 ft (4 mm/m), and mains shall be pitched at least 1⁄4 in. per 10 ft (2 mm/m). [909:9.12.12.3.1]

22.30.2.2*

Auxiliary drains shall be provided at all low points in accordance with NFPA 13 requirements for dry pipe systems and preaction systems subject to freezing.[909:9.12.12.3.2.1]

22.30.2.3*

Where steel pipe is used in dry pipe and preaction systems, the provisions of NFPA 13 shall be applied assuming water supplies and environmental conditions thatcontribute to unusual corrosive properties, and a plan shall be developed to treat the system using one of the following methods:

(1) Install a water pipe that is corrosion resistant

(2) Treat all water that enters the system using an approved corrosion inhibitor

(3) Implement an approved plan for monitoring the interior conditions of the pipe at established intervals and locations.

[909:9.12.12.3.3]

22.31 National Electrical Code.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

326 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 346: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

22.31.1 Design Requirements. (Reserved)

22.31.2 Installation Requirements.

22.31.2.1 Dedicated Electrical Space.

The space equal to the width and depth of the equipment and extending from the floor to a height of 6 ft (1.8 m) above the equipment or to the structural ceiling, whicheveris lower, shall be dedicated to the electrical installation. No piping, ducts, leak protection apparatus, or other equipment foreign to the electrical installation shall be locatedin this zone.

Exception: Suspended ceilings with removable panels shall be permitted within the 1.8-m (6-ft) zone. [70:110.26(E)(1)(a)]

22.31.2.2

The area above the dedicated space required by 22.31.2.1 shall be permitted to contain foreign systems, provided protection is installed to avoid damage to the electricalequipment from condensation, leaks, or breaks in such foreign systems. [70:110.26(E)(1)(b)]

22.31.2.3*

Sprinkler protection shall be permitted for the dedicated space where the piping complies with this section. [70:110.26(E)(1)(c)]

22.32 Fire Protection of Telecommunication Facilities.

22.32.1 Design Requirements. (Reserved)

22.32.2 Installation Requirements.

22.32.2.1

All piping for dry pipe and pre-action sprinkler systems shall be installed with a pitch in accordance with NFPA 13 whether or not the piping is subjected to freezingconditions. [76:8.6.2.2.2]

22.33 Exhaust Systems for Air Conveying of Vapors, Gases, Mists, and Noncombustible Particulate Solids.

22.33.1 Design Requirements.

22.33.1.1

When a sprinkler system is installed, means shall be provided to prevent water accumulation in the duct or flow of water back to a process subject that could be damagedby water. [91:9.2]

22.33.2 Installation Requirements. (Reserved)

22.34 Hypobaric Facilities.

22.34.1 Design Requirements.

22.34.1.1

A fire suppression system consisting of independently supplied and operating handline and fixed deluge-type water spray systems shall be installed. [99B:4.5.1.5]

22.34.1.2

Design of the fire suppression system shall be such that failure of components in either the handline or deluge system will not render the other system inoperative.[99B:4.5.1.6]

22.34.1.3

System design shall be such that activation of either the handline or the deluge system shall automatically cause the following:

(1) Visual and audio alarm indicators shall be activated at the chamber operator's console.

(2) All ungrounded electrical leads for power and lighting circuits contained inside the chamber shall be disconnected.

(3) Emergency lighting and communication, where used, shall be activated.

[99B:4.5.1.7]

22.34.1.4

Intrinsically safe circuits, including sound-powered communications, shall be permitted to remain connected when either the handline or deluge system is activated.[99B:4.5.1.8]

22.34.1.5

Control circuitry and other electrical equipment involved in the fire detection and suppression system shall be powered from the critical branch of the emergency electricalsystem and connected to the uninterruptible power supply (UPS). [99B:4.5.1.11]

22.34.1.6

In chambers that consist of more than one compartment, the deluge system shall operate independently or simultaneously even if the compartments are at differentpressures (altitudes). [99B:4.5.2.2]

22.34.1.7

Fixed deluge systems shall not be required in chamber compartments that are used strictly as personnel transfer compartments and for no other purpose. [99B:4.5.2.3]

22.34.1.8

Manual activation and deactivation deluge controls shall be located at the operator's console and in each chamber compartment containing a deluge system. [99B:4.5.2.4]

22.34.1.9

Controls shall be designed to prevent unintended activation. [99B:4.5.2.4.1]

22.34.1.10

Water shall be delivered from the fixed discharge nozzles of the deluge system within 3 seconds of activation of any affiliated deluge control. [99B:4.5.2.5]

22.34.1.11*

Total water demand shall be determined by multiplying the total chamber floor area by 7.5 gpm/ft2 (305.6 L/min/m2). [99B:4.5.2.5.1]

22.34.1.12

The minimum operating pressure at the nozzle shall be 30 psi (206 kPa). [99B:4.5.2.5.2]

22.34.1.13

The water supply shall be constantly and fully charged. [99B:4.5.2.6]

22.34.1.14

The water supply pressure shall be constantly monitored and an interlock shall prevent chamber operation if water supply pressure has fallen 10 percent below normaloperating charge pressure. [99B:4.5.2.7]

22.34.1.15

There shall be water in the deluge system to maintain the flow specified in 22.34.1.11 simultaneously in each chamber containing the deluge system for 1 minute.[99B:4.5.2.8]

22.34.1.16

The limit on maximum extinguishment duration shall be governed by the chamber capacity (bilge capacity also, if so equipped) and/or its drainage system. [99B:4.5.2.9]

22.34.1.17

The deluge system shall have stored pressure to operate for at least 15 seconds without electrical branch power. [99B:4.5.2.10]

22.34.2 Installation Requirements. (Reserved)

22.35 Coal Mines.

22.35.1 Design Requirements.

22.35.1.1 Underground Mining Operations.

22.35.1.1.1*

Fire sprinkler systems for underground mining operations shall be designed and installed in accordance with NFPA 120.

22.35.1.2 Coal Preparation Plants and Crusher Buildings.

22.35.1.2.1

When automatic sprinkler systems are to be supplied through the standpipe system, hydraulic calculations shall be used to ensure that the piping and the water supplymeet the hose and automatic sprinkler demands simultaneously. [120:6.3.2.3.2]

22.35.1.3 Underground Conveyors.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

327 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 347: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

22.35.1.3.1

The application rate shall not be less than 10.2 L/min/m2 (0.25 gpm/ft2) of the top surface of the top belt. [120:9.4.6.4]

22.35.1.3.2

The water supply shall be free of excessive sediment and corrosives and provide the required flow for not less than 10 minutes. A strainer with a flush-out connection andmanual shutoff valve shall be provided. [120:9.4.6.6]

22.35.1.3.3

The system shall be interlocked to shut down the conveyor and provide an audible and a visual alarm. [120:9.4.6.8]

22.35.1.3.4

Fire suppression systems shall also comply with 22.35.1.1.1. [120:9.4.6.10]

22.35.1.3.5

Sprinkler systems shall meet the following requirements:

(1) The sprinklers shall be installed in accordance with NFPA 13 as far as practical, and shall have components that have been listed.

(2) The water supply shall be capable of supplying a constant flow of water with all heads functioning for a period of 10 minutes.

(3) The sprinkler head activation temperature shall not be less than 65.6°C (150°F) or greater than 148.9°C (300°F).

[120:9.4.6.13]

22.35.2 Installation Requirements.

22.35.2.1 Underground Conveyors.

22.35.2.1.1

Deluge water spray systems, foam systems, closed-head sprinkler systems, or dry-chemical systems automatically actuated by rise in temperature shall be installed atmain and secondary belt conveyor drives. [120:9.4.6.1]

22.35.2.1.2

Fire suppression systems shall extend to the drive areas of belt conveyors, including drive motor(s), reducer, head pulley, and belt storage unit (takeup), including anyhydraulic power unit; its electrical controls; and the top and bottom of the first 15.2 m (50 ft) of belt from the drive on the downwind side. [120:9.4.6.2]

22.35.2.1.3

Piping for the deluge, foam, or closed-head sprinkler system shall be metal and listed for sprinkler applications. [120:9.4.6.3]

22.35.2.1.4

The discharge shall be directed at both the upper and the bottom surface of the top belt and the upper surface of the bottom belt. [120:9.4.6.5]

22.35.2.1.5

Maximum distance between nozzles on a branch line shall not exceed 2.4 m (8 ft). [120:9.4.6.7]

22.35.2.1.6

The components of the system shall be located so as to minimize the possibility of damage by roof fall or by the moving belt and its load. [120:9.4.6.9]

22.35.2.1.7

Deluge water spray systems shall meet the requirements of 22.35.2.1.7.1 through 22.35.2.1.7.5. [120:9.4.6.11]

22.35.2.1.7.1

The system shall be activated by heat detectors. [120:9.4.6.11.1]

22.35.2.1.7.2

Heat detectors shall be located at the belt drive, hydraulic takeup unit (unless fire-resistive fluid is used), discharge roller, and the roof above the conveyor.[120:9.4.6.11.1.1]

22.35.2.1.7.3

Heat detectors at the roof line should be spaced 2.4 m to 3.0 m (8 ft to 10 ft) apart along the entire length of the protected area of the belt. [120:9.4.6.11.1.2]

22.35.2.1.7.4

The nozzles shall be full cone, corrosion resistant, and provided with blow-off dust covers. [120:9.4.6.11.2]

22.35.2.1.7.5

A closed sprinkler head shall be used over the electrical controls. [120:9.4.6.11.3]

22.35.2.2 Mine Surface Buildings.

22.35.2.2.1

If sprinklers are installed, waterflow, valve tamper, and low building temperature alarms shall be provided. [120:8.6.1.2]

22.36 Metal/Nonmetal Mining and Metal Mineral Processing Facilities.

22.36.1 Design Requirements.

22.36.1.1 Water Supplies.

22.36.1.1.1

When automatic sprinkler systems are supplied through the hand hose line standpipe system, hydraulic calculations shall be used to ensure that the piping and watersupply will supply the hose and automatic sprinkler demands simultaneously. [122:6.2.3]

22.36.1.1.2

Where a fire water supply [for a surface mineral processing plant] is required by the risk assessment, capacity and availability shall provide the water demand forfire-fighting purposes, including hose and sprinkler systems, for a minimum duration of 2 hours. [122:13.7.2]

22.36.1.2*

Where provided, automatic sprinkler systems installed for the protection of flammable liquid or diesel fuel storage areas shall be of the foam-water type. [122:11.3.1]

22.36.1.3 New Solvent Extraction (SX) Facilities.

22.36.1.3.1

Fixed fire suppression shall be provided for the following SX facility areas and equipment:

(1) Buildings housing SX processes

(2) Interior of all mixer-settler vessels/cells

(3) Crud tanks that include treatment filters and centrifuges

(4) Coalescers

(5) Along launders and weirs outside of mixer-settler vessels

(6) Inside pipe trenches carrying solvents

(7) Inside organic solvent and diluent tanks

(8) Inside dikes enclosing organic solvent storage tanks

(9) Over organic solvent pumps

(10) Over elevated pipe racks carrying organic solvents in plastic pipes

(11) Other areas handling, processing, or exposed to flammable or combustible liquids

[122:13.19.1]

22.36.1.3.2*

Fire suppression for applications in 22.36.1.3.1 shall be water, foam, dry chemical, or water mist. [122:13.19.1.1]

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

328 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 348: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

22.36.1.3.3*

Design of fire suppression systems in 22.36.1.3.1 shall be based on criteria set forth in NFPA 11; NFPA 15; NFPA 16; and NFPA 17. [122:13.19.1.2]

22.36.1.3.4*

Actuation of fire suppression systems in 22.36.1.3.1 shall be automatic. [122:13.19.1.3]

22.36.1.3.5

As exposure protection, automatic water-only deluge (open-head) sprinkler systems shall be provided between mixer-settler trains if spaced closer than 15.24 m (50 ft)from each other. [122:13.19.2]

22.36.1.3.6

As exposure protection, automatic water-only deluge sprinkler systems shall be provided around the exterior perimeter of organic solvent tanks if spaced closer than 15.24m (50 ft) from each other. [122:13.19.3]

22.36.1.3.7

As exposure protection, automatic fire suppression shall be provided over other critical equipment (i.e., transformers) or outside along important building walls [i.e., motorcontrol center (MCC) rooms] that are within 15.24 m (50 ft) of a solvent fire area. [122:13.19.4]

22.36.1.3.8

Hydraulic design of automatic fire suppression systems in 22.36.1.3.1 shall include the simultaneous operation of all fire protection systems associated with a single(multi-cell) train. [122:13.19.5]

22.36.1.3.9

The total flow rate of foam application and water associated with the discharge of automatic fire extinguishing systems, fixed monitors, and hydrants shall determine thetotal volume of fire water required. [122:13.19.6]

22.36.2 Installation Requirements. (Reserved)

22.37 Hazardous Materials Code.

22.37.1 Design Requirements.

Sprinkler system discharge criteria for the protection of hazardous materials shall comply with NFPA 400.

22.37.1.1 Requirements for Occupancies Storing Quantities of Hazardous Materials Exceeding the Maximum Allowable Quantities per Control Area for High HazardContents.

The design of the sprinkler system shall be not less than ordinary hazard Group 2 in accordance with NFPA 13, except as follows:

(1) Where different requirements are specified in Chapters 11 through 21 of NFPA 400

(2) Where the materials or storage arrangement requires a higher level of sprinkler system protection in accordance with nationally recognized standards

(3) Where approved alternative automatic fire extinguishing systems are permitted

[400:6.2.1.1.1]

22.37.1.2 General Requirements for Storage of Ammonium Nitrate Solids and Liquids.

Sprinkler systems shall be of the approved type and designed and installed in accordance with NFPA 13, and the following:

(1) Ammonium nitrate in noncombustible or combustible containers (paper bags or noncombustible containers with removable combustible liners) shall be designated asa Class I commodity.

(2) Where contained in plastic containers, ammonium nitrate shall be designated as a Class II commodity.

(3) Where contained in fiber packs or noncombustible containers in combustible packaging, ammonium nitrate shall be designated as a Class III commodity.

[400:11.2.6.1.3 ]

22.37.1.3 General Requirements for Storage of Organic Peroxide Formulations.

22.37.1.3.1

Where required by other provisions of this code, automatic sprinklers and water spray systems shall be designed and installed according to the requirements of NFPA 13and NFPA 15 and shall provide the following discharge densities:

(1) Class I — 0.50 gpm/ft2 (20.4 L/min/m2)

(2) Class II — 0.40 gpm/ft2 (16.3 L/min/m2)

(3) Class III — 0.30 gpm/ft2 (12.2 L/min/m2)

(4) Class IV — 0.25 gpm/ft2 (10.2 L/min/m2)

[400:14.2.6.1]

22.37.1.3.2

The system shall be designed as follows:

(1) It shall provide the required density over a 3000 ft2 (280 m2) area for areas protected by a wet pipe sprinkler system or 3900 ft2 (360 m2) for areas protected by a drypipe sprinkler system.

(2) The entire area of any building of less than 3000 ft2 (280 m2) shall be used as the area of application.

[400:14.2.6.2]

22.37.1.3.3

Where required for detached storage buildings containing Class I organic peroxide formulations in quantities exceeding 2000 lb (907 kg), automatic sprinkler protectionshall be open-head deluge-type, designed and installed in accordance with NFPA 13. [400:14.2.6.3]

22.37.1.4 Indoor Storage of Oxidizer Solids and Liquids.

22.37.1.4.1

Sprinkler protection for Class 2 oxidizers shall be designed in accordance with Table 22.37.1.4.1. [400:15.3.2.3.4.1 ]

Table 22.37.1.4.1 Ceiling Sprinkler Protection for Class 2 Oxidizers in Palletized or Bulk and Rack Storage Areas

Type of Storage

Ceiling Sprinklers

In-Rack Sprinklers

Storage Height Density Area of Application

ft m gpm/ft2 L/min/m2 ft2 m2

Palletized or bulk 8 2.4 0.20 8 3750 348 —

Palletized or bulk 12 3.7 0.35 14 3750 348 —

Rack 12 3.7 0.20 8 3750 348 One line above each level of storage, except the top level

Rack 16 4.9 0.30 12 2000 186 One line above each level of storage, except the top level

[400: Table 15.3.2.3.2.10(B)]

22.37.1.4.2

Ceiling sprinklers shall be high-temperature sprinklers. [400:15.3.2.3.4.2]

22.37.1.4.3 Storage Protection for Class 2 Oxidizers with In-Rack Sprinklers.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

329 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 349: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

(A)

In-rack sprinklers shall be quick-response sprinklers with an ordinary-temperature rating and have a K-factor of not less than K = 8.0. [400:15.3.2.3.4.3(A)]

(B)

In-rack sprinklers shall be designed to provide 25 psi (172 kPa) for the six most hydraulically remote sprinklers on each level. [400:15.3.2.3.4.3(B)]

(C)

The in-rack sprinklers shall be 8 ft to 10 ft (2.4 m to 3.0 m) spacings in the longitudinal flue space at the intersection of the transverse flue spaces. [400:15.3.2.3.4.3(C)]

22.37.1.4.4 Sprinkler Criteria for Class 3 Oxidizers.

22.37.1.4.4.1 Class 3 Oxidizers Less than 2300 lb (1043 kg).

(A)

Sprinkler design criteria for buildings that require sprinkler protection and contain total quantities of Class 3 oxidizers less than 2300 lb (1043 kg) shall be in accordancewith the requirements of 22.37.1.4.4.1(B). [400:15.3.2.4.13.1(A)]

(B)

Facilities that require sprinkler protection and contain total quantities of Class 3 oxidizers greater than 200 lb (91 kg), but less than 2300 lb (1043 kg), shall follow thesprinkler design criteria in Table 22.37.1.4.4.1(B). [400:15.3.2.4.13.1(B)]

Table 22.37.1.4.4.1(B) Sprinkler Protection of Class 3 Oxidizers Stored in Total Quantities Greater than 200 lb (91 kg) but Less than 2300 lb (1043 kg)

Storage Parameters Shelf Bulk or Pile Bulk or Pile Rack

Maximum storageheight

6 ft (1.8 m) 5 ft (1.5 m) 10 ft (3 m) 10 ft (3 m)

Maximum ceiling height 25 ft (7.6 m) 25 ft (7.6 m) 25 ft (7.6 m) NA

Aisles — pile separation4 ft (1.2 m) min. clearaisles

4 ft (1.2 m) min. clear aisles8 ft (2.4 m) min. clearaisles

8 ft (2.4 m) min. clear aisles

Ceiling design criteria 0.45 gpm/ft2/2000 ft20.35 gpm/ft2/or 5000 ft2 or 0.6 gpm/2000

ft20.65 gpm/ft2/5000 ft2

0.35 gpm/ft2/or 5000 ft2 or 0.6 gpm/ft2/2000

ft2

In-rack sprinklers NP NP NA See 15.3.2.4.12.2.

Hose stream demand 500 gpm 500 gpm 500 gpm 500 gpm

Duration 120 minutes 120 minutes 120 minutes 120 minutes

For SI units, 1 gal = 3.79 L. NA: Not applicable. NP: Not permitted.

[400: Table 15.3.2.4.12.1(B)]

22.37.1.4.4.2 Storage Protection for Class 3 Oxidizers In-Rack Sprinkler Criteria.

(A)

Where required by Table 22.37.1.4.4.1(B), in-rack sprinkler protection shall be as follows:

(1) In-rack sprinklers shall be installed above every level of oxidizer storage.

(2) In-rack sprinklers shall be spaced at maximum 4 ft (1.2 m) intervals to provide one sprinkler in each flue space.

(3) In-rack sprinklers shall be quick-response sprinklers with an ordinary-temperature rating and have a K-factor of not less than K = 8.0.

(4) In-rack sprinklers shall be designed to provide 25 psi (172 kPa) for the six most hydraulically remote sprinklers on each level.

[400:15.3.2.4.13.3(A)]

22.37.1.4.4.3 Class 3 Oxidizers Greater than or Equal to 2300 lb (1043 kg).

The sprinkler protection shall be in accordance with Table 22.37.1.4.4.3. [400:15.3.2.4.13.4(B)]

Table 22.37.1.4.4.3 Sprinkler Protection of Class 3 Oxidizers Stored in Total Quantities of Greater than or Equal to 2300 lb (1043 kg)

Storage Parameters Bulk or Pile Rack

Maximum storage height 5 ft (1.5 m) 10 ft (3 m)

Maximum ceiling height 25 ft (7.6 m) NP

Aisles — pile separation 8 ft (2.4 m) min. clear aisles 8 ft (2.4 m) min. clear aisles

Ceiling design criteria 0.35 gpm/ft2/5000 ft2 (1.32 L/min/m2/464.5 m2) Predominant for other commodities but not less than ordinary hazard Group II

In-rack sprinklers NP See 15.3.2.4.12.4

Hose stream demand 500 gpm (1893 L/min) 500 gpm (1893 L/min)

Duration 120 minutes 120 minutes

NP: Not permitted.

[400: Table 15.3.2.4.12.3(B)]

22.37.1.4.4.4 Special In-Rack Sprinkler Protection for Class 3 Oxidizers.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

330 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 350: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

(A)

Where required by Table 22.37.1.4.4.3, special in-rack sprinkler protection shall be as shown in Figure 22.37.1.4.4.4(A). [400:15.3.2.4.13.5(A)]

Figure 22.37.1.4.4.4(A) Arrangement of Barriers and In-Rack Sprinklers for Special Fire Protection Provisions. [400: Figure 15.3.2.4.13.5(A)]

(B)

In-rack automatic sprinklers shall be provided under each horizontal barrier and arranged in accordance with 22.37.1.4.4.4(C) through 22.37.1.4.4.4(I) .[400:15.3.2.4.13.5(K)]

(C)

For double-row racks, two lines of in-rack sprinklers shall be provided between the face of the rack and the longitudinal vertical barrier located in the center of the rack.[400:15.3.2.4.13.5(L)]

(D)

For single-row racks, two lines of in-rack sprinklers shall be provided between each rack face. [400:15.3.2.4.13.5(M)]

(E)

Three in-rack sprinklers shall be provided on each in-rack sprinkler line as follows:

(1) Two sprinklers on each line shall be spaced approximately 1 1⁄2 in. (38.1 mm) from each transverse vertical barrier.

(2) One in-rack sprinkler on each in-rack sprinkler line shall be located approximately equidistant between the transverse vertical barriers.

[400:15.3.2.4.13.5(N)]

(F)

In-rack sprinklers shall be of the upright or pendent type, with the fusible element located no more than 6 in. (152.4 mm) from the horizontal barrier. [400:15.3.2.4.13.5(O)]

(G)

In-rack sprinklers shall be K = 8.0, quick-response, ordinary-temperature-rated sprinklers. [400:15.3.2.4.13.5(Q)]

(H)

The in-rack sprinkler system shall be designed to supply 6 sprinklers on each line, with a total of 12 sprinklers operating at gauge pressure of 25 psi (172 kPa).[400:15.3.2.4.13.5(R)]

(I)

The design of the in-rack sprinkler system shall be independent of, and shall not be required to be balanced with, ceiling sprinkler systems. [400:15.3.2.4.13.5(S)]

22.37.1.4.4.5 Sprinkler Criteria for Class 4 Oxidizers.

(A)

Sprinkler protection for Class 4 oxidizers shall be installed on a deluge sprinkler system to provide water density of 0.35 gpm/ft2 (14.4 L/min/m2) over the entire storagearea. [400:15.3.2.5.4.6(A)]

(B)

Sprinkler protection shall be installed in accordance with NFPA 13. [400:15.3.2.5.4.6(B)]

22.37.2 Installation Requirements.

(Reserved)

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

CC NOTE: The following CC Note No. 16 appeared in the First Draft Report as Public Input No. 58 and Committee Input No. 263.

The extract task group and SSD TC should look at the the extracted information and determine if the requirements should be applied irrespective of the extracted information is

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

331 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 351: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

applicable in that jurisdiction. This may include a review of the language under the "application" section of NFPA 22.Each section should be reviewed for the individual application of the language within the framework of NFPA 13.

Related Item

Public Input No. 58-NFPA 13-2013 [Chapter 22]

Committee Input No. 263-NFPA 13-2013 [Chapter 22]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: CC on AUT-AAC

Organization: CC on Automatic Sprinkler Systems

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Wed Apr 30 07:52:44 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but held

Resolution: The technical committee will seek guidance from the correlating committee and the standards council prior to the next cycle. The Discharge Committee was chargedwith bringing this language into the standard and may ned clarification on the original request from the standards council.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

332 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 352: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 303-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 23.3.5 ]

23.3.5 Computer-Generated Hydraulic Reports.

23.3.5.1 * General.

23.3.5.1.1

Hydraulic calculations shall be prepared on form sheets that include a summary sheet, a graph sheet, a water supply analysis, a node analysis, and detailed worksheets.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

333 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 353: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

23.3.5.1.2

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

334 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 354: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

The data shall be presented in the order shown in Figure 23.3.5.1.2(a) through Figure 23.3.5.1.2(d).

Figure 23.3.5.1.2(a) Summary Sheet.

Figure 23.3.5.1.2(b) Graph Sheet.

Figure 23.3.5.1.2(c) Supply and Node Analysis Sheet.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

335 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 355: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Figure 23.3.5.1.2(d) Detailed Worksheet.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

336 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 356: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

23.3.5.2 Summary Sheet.

The summary sheet as shown in Figure 23.3.5.1.2(a) shall contain the following information, where applicable:

(1) Project name and date

(2) Location (including street address)

(3) Owner or expected occupant of space being designed

(4) Name, address, and phone number of installing contractor

(5) Name and phone number of designer

(6) Authority having jurisdiction

(7) Standard or document system is being designed to, including the edition of the document

(8) Design area number and location

(9) Drawing or sheet number where design area is located

(10) Occupancy or commodity classification and information

(11) For storage applications (including miscellaneous), additional information including storage height, ceiling height, storage configuration, aisle width, orientation ofupright or pendent, sprinkler K-factor and sprinkler temperature, and the table and or curve utilized in the design

(12) System type, including the system volume with type of protection system indicated in the notes

(13) Sprinkler type, including coverage and response type.

(14) Slope of roof or ceiling within the design area

(15) System design requirements, as follows:

(a) Design area of application, ft2 (m2)

(b) Minimum rate of water application (density), gpm/ft2 (mm/min)

(c) Area per sprinkler, ft2 (m2)

(d) Number of sprinklers calculated

(16) Total water requirements as calculated, including allowance for inside hose, outside hydrants, water curtain, and exposure sprinklers, and allowance for in-racksprinklers, gpm (L/min)

(17) Ceiling height if used for quick response sprinkler reduction

(18) Elevation of highest calculated sprinkler

(19) Water supply information, including the following:

(a) Date and time of test

(b) Location of the test and flow hydrant(s)

(c) Source of the water for the flow test

(d) Elevation of the test hydrant relative to the finished floor

(e) Size of fire pump, gpm @ psi

(f) Size of on-site water tank

(20) Notes that include peaking information for calculations performed by a computer program, type of preaction system, limitations (dimension, flow, and pressure) onextended-coverage or other listed special sprinklers, system type, including the system volume

23.3.5.3 Graph Sheet.

A graphic representation of the complete hydraulic calculation shall be plotted on semiexponential graph paper (Q 1.85) as shown in Figure 23.3.5.1.2(b) and shall includethe following:

(1) Water supply curve

(2) Sprinkler system demand

(3) Hose demand (where applicable)

(4) In-rack sprinkler demand (where applicable)

(5) Additional pressures supplied by a fire pump or other source (when applicable)

23.3.5.4 Supply Analysis.

Information summarized from the graph sheet as shown in Figure 23.3.5.1.2(c) shall include the following:

(1) Node tag at the source

(2) Static pressure [psi (bar)] available at the source

(3) Residual pressure [psi (bar)] available at the source

(4) Total flow [gpm (L/min)] available at the source

(5) Available pressure [psi (bar)] at the source when the total calculated demand is flowing

(6) Total calculated demand [gpm (L/min)] at the source

(7) Required pressure [psi (bar)] when flowing total calculated demand

23.3.5.5 Node Analysis.

Organized information as shown in Figure 23.3.5.1.2(c) regarding the node tags given to each hydraulic reference point on the system as indicated on the shop drawingsshall include the following information:

(1) Node tag for each specific point on the system used in the hydraulic calculations

(2) Elevation in ft (m) of each node tag

(3) K-factor of flowing nodes (such as sprinklers)

(4) Hose allowance in gpm (L/min) requirements for the node tag

(5) Pressure in psi (bar) at the node

(6) Discharge in gpm (L/min) calculated at the node

(7) Notes that indicate any special requirements for the node

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

337 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 357: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

23.3.5.6 Detailed Worksheets.

Detailed worksheets as shown in Figure 23.3.5.1.2(d) or computer printout sheets shall contain the following information:

(1) Sheet number

(2) Hydraulic reference points used in each step

(3) Elevation in ft (m) at each hydraulic reference point

(4) Sprinkler description and discharge constant (K) for the flowing reference point

(5) Flow in gpm (L/min) for the flowing reference point (when applicable)

(6) Total flow in gpm (L/min) through each step

(7) Nominal pipe size in in. (mm)

(8) Actual internal diameter of pipe in in. (mm)

(9) Quantity and length in ft (m) of each type of fitting and device

(10) Pipe lengths in ft (m), center-to-center of fittings

(11) Equivalent pipe lengths in ft (m) of fittings and devices for the step

(12) Total equivalent length in ft (m) of pipes and fitting for the step

(13) C-factor used in each step

(14) Friction loss in psi/ft (bar/m) of pipe

(15) Sum of the pressures from the previous step (starting pressure at beginning)

(16) Elevation head in psi (bar) between reference points

(17) Total friction loss in psi (bar) between reference points

(18) Required pressure in psi (bar) at each reference point

(19) Notes and other information shall include the following:

(a) Velocity pressure and normal pressure if included in calculations

(b) In-rack sprinkler demand balanced to ceiling demand

(c) Notes to indicate starting points or reference to other sheets or to clarify data shown

(d) Diagram to accompany gridded system calculations to indicate flow quantities and directions for lines with sprinklers operating in the remote area

(e) Combined K-factor calculations for sprinklers on drops, armovers, or sprigs where calculations do not begin at the sprinkler

(f) The pressure [psi/(bar)] loss assigned the backflow device when included on a system

(g) Friction factor and Reynold's number when the Darcy–Weisbach equation is used

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The standard forms for manual calculations and computer generated forms should be combined. There is no need to have separate reports for hand calculations versus computer generated calculations.

Related Item

First Revision No. 308-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 23.3.5.1.2]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Robert Upson

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA Engineering and Standards Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 10:35:36 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Accepted

Resolution: SR-112-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The standard forms for manual calculations and computer generated forms should be combined. There is no need to have separate reports for hand calculationsversus computer generated calculations.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

338 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 358: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 175-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 23.4.1.2 ]

23.4.1.2

Pipe sizes shall be no less than 1 in. (25 mm) nominal for ferrous black or galvanized steel piping and 3⁄4 in. (20 mm) nominal for copper tubing or brass, stainless steelpiping or nonmetallic piping listed for fire sprinkler service unless permitted by 8.15.20.4 and 8.15.20.5.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_23-4-1-2.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

As per Section 6.3, brass and stainless steel piping is now recognized in the standard. Therefore, this section should be further modified to indicate the minimum allowable pipe sizes for those materials as well.

Related Item

First Revision No. 248-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 23.4.1.2]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon Apr 28 09:38:05 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Accepted

Resolution: SR-113-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: As per Section 6.3, brass and stainless steel piping is now recognized in the standard. Therefore, this section should be further modified to indicate the minimumallowable pipe sizes for those materials as well.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

339 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 359: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 339-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 23.4.1.4 ]

23.4.1.4 Velocity Limitations.

Unless

Unless required by other NFPA standards, the velocity of water flow shall not be limited when hydraulic calculations are performed using the Hazen Williams

and/

or Darcy Weisbach formulas.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Editorial deleting the "and/or". Also, a title should not be provided for this paragraph unless it titles are provided for the other paragraphs at this same level in the numbering system.

Related Item

First Revision No. 246-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 23.4.1.3]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: William Koffel

Organization: Koffel Associates, Inc.

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 14:21:24 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Accepted

Resolution: SR-114-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: Editorial deleting the "and/or". Also, a title should not be provided for this paragraph unless it titles are provided for the other paragraphs at this same level in thenumbering system.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

340 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 360: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 89-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 23.4.4.8.1 ]

23.4.4.8.1

Pipe friction loss shall be calculated in accordance with the Hazen–Williams formula with C values from Table 23.4.4.8.1, as follows:

(1) Pipe, fittings, and devices such as valves, meters, flow switches in pipes 2 in. or less in size, and strainers shall be included, and elevation changes that affect thesprinkler discharge shall be calculated.

(2) Tie-in drain piping shall not be included in the hydraulic calculations.

(3) The loss for a tee or a cross shall be calculated where flow direction change occurs based on the equivalent pipe length of the piping segment in which the fitting isincluded.

(4) The tee at the top of a riser nipple shall be included in the branch line, the tee at the base of a riser nipple shall be included in the riser nipple, and the tee or cross at across main–feed main junction shall be included in the cross main.

(5) Fitting loss for straight-through flow in a tee or cross shall not be included.

(6) The loss of reducing elbows based on the equivalent feet value of the smallest outlet shall be calculated.

(7) The equivalent feet value for the standard elbow on any abrupt 90-degree turn, such as the screw-type pattern shall be used.

(8) The equivalent feet value for the long-turn elbow on any sweeping 90-degree turn, such as a flanged, welded, or mechanical joint-elbow typeshall be used. (See Table23.4.3.1.1.)

(9) Friction loss shall be excluded for the fitting directly connected to a sprinkler.

(10) Losses through a pressure-reducing valve shall be included based on the normal inlet pressure condition. Pressure loss data from the manufacturer's literature shall beused.

Table 23.4.4.8.1 Hazen–Williams C Values

Pipe or Tube C Value*

Unlined cast or ductile iron 100

Black steel (dry systems including preaction) 100

Black steel (wet systems including deluge) 120

Galvanized steel (

dry

all systems including

preaction) 100 Galvanized steel (wet systems including

deluge) 120

Plastic (listed) all 150

Cement-lined cast- or ductile iron 140

Copper tube, Brass or stainless steel 150

Asbestos cement 140

Concrete 140

*The authority having jurisdiction is permitted to allow other C values.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The reason for rejection was that no supporting data was submitted. The same data was submitted on this public input as submitted with the proposal to the 2013 edition. As stated in the PI, it is inappropriate to attempt to discourage the use of galvanized by changing the C-factor. I agree with the concerns about integrity issues caused by LOCALIZED corrosion in galvanized pipe. That’s why I submitted pubic input that would not allow its use in dry-pipe and preaction systems (PI’s 111 and 112). They were rejected. Since the Installation TC continues to allow the use of galvanized pipe and there is no data showing that galvanized pipe does not provide a hydraulic benefit, the C-factor should be restored to 120.

Related Item

Public Input No. 152-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Huggins

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Assoc.

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu Mar 27 18:37:54 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected

Resolution: The committee has seen evidence where galvanized pipe performs similar to black steel.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

341 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 361: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 176-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 23.7.2.6 ]

23.7.2.6 *

Where the total number of sprinklers above and below a ceiling exceeds the number specified in Table 23.7.2.4 for 2 . 1 for 2 1 ⁄2 in. (64 mm) pipe, the pipe supplyingsuch sprinklers shall be increased to 3 in. (76 mm) and sized thereafter according to the schedule shown in Table 23 Table 23 .7.2.2.1 for the number of sprinklers above orbelow a ceiling, whichever is larger.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_23-7-2-6.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

As noted in the Committee Statement, the existing code section incorrectly references Table 23.5.2.2.1 instead of Table 23.5.2.4. However, the agreed to change to the text was not implemented into the First Draft Report. Since Section 23.5 was moved to 23.7, the text should now be revised to reference Table 23.7.2.4.

Related Item

Public Input No. 39-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 23.5.2.6]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon Apr 28 09:39:57 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Accepted

Resolution: SR-115-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: As noted in the Committee Statement, the existing code section incorrectly references Table 23.5.2.2.1 instead of Table 23.5.2.4. However, the agreed to change tothe text was not implemented into the First Draft Report. Since Section 23.5 was moved to 23.7, the text should now be revised to reference Table 23.7.2.4.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

342 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 362: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 177-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 23.7.3.9 ]

23.7.3.9 *

Where the total number of sprinklers above and below a ceiling exceeds the number specified in Table 23.7.3.7 for 3 in. (76 mm) pipe, the pipe supplying such sprinklersshall be increased to 3 1⁄2 in. (89 mm) and sized thereafter according to the schedule shown in Table 23 Table 23 .7.3 2 .5 2.1 or Table 23.7.3.4 for the number of sprinklersabove or below a ceiling, whichever is larger.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_23-7-3-9.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The intention of this revision was to correct a supposedly incorrect reference to Table 23.5.2.2.1 but the reference is actually correct in the first place. As pointed out by the submitter of TCR proposal 13-42 and TCD comment 13-41, leading to the 1987 edition of NFPA 13, the reference to the light hazard pipe size table is the correct one, because the spaces above the ceiling are considered to be light hazard. The Technical Committee of that time agreed, and the reference to the light hazard table has been in this clause ever since and should remain so now.

Related Item

Public Input No. 40-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 23.5.3.9]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon Apr 28 09:45:29 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected

Resolution: The task group reviewed the data provided by the submitter and believes it is inaccurate and does not support the need for the proposed change.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

343 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 363: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 178-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 24.1.3.3 ]

24.1.3.3

For new systems to be supplied by When a single main less than 4 in. (100 mm) in diameter , which will serve serves both domestic and fire systems, the domesticdemand shall be added to the hydraulic calculations for the fire system at the point of connection unless provisions have been made to isolate the domestic demand.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_24-1-3-3.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This revision is not necessary. Since NFPA 13 is an installation standard, all installations that are done in accordance with the latest edition should be considered to be new. As per the Retroactivity Clause of 1.4.1, the provisions of this standard do not apply to existing facilities.

Related Item

First Revision No. 257-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 24.1.3.3]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon Apr 28 09:47:31 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-116-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: This language simplifies the distinction between fire system water demand and all other water demands served by a single main.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

344 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 364: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 296-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 24.1.3.3 ]

24.1.3.3

For new systems to be supplied by a single main less than 4 in. (100 mm) in diameter, which will serve both domestic both non-fire and fire systems, the domesticthe non-fire demand shall be added to the hydraulic calculations for the fire system at the point of connection unless provisions have been made to isolate the domesticthe non-fire demand.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This language simplifies the distinction between fire system water demand and all other water demands served by a single main.

Related Item

First Revision No. 257-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 24.1.3.3]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Robert Upson

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA Engineering and Standards Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 10:06:03 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-116-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: This language simplifies the distinction between fire system water demand and all other water demands served by a single main.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

345 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 365: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 98-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 24.1.3.3 ]

24.1.3.3

For new systems to be supplied by a single combined main less than 4 in. (100 mm) in diameter, which will serve both domestic and fire systems and other uses , thedomestic demand for other uses shall be added to the hydraulic calculations for the fire system at the point of connection unless provisions have been made to isolate thedomestic other demand.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

In addressing combined mains, NFPA 13 only references domestic demands. One could readily interpret this to mean that combined mains can only be used for supplying fire protection and domestic demands. The question remains can a combined main be used for supplying other demands such as for manufacturing. The suggested change comes from NFPA 24: 1.1.2 where it states - This standard shall apply to combined service mains used to carry water for fire service and other uses.

Related Item

Public Input No. 151-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Huggins

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Assoc.

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Wed Apr 02 13:51:43 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-116-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: This language simplifies the distinction between fire system water demand and all other water demands served by a single main.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

346 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 366: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 242-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after 24.1.6.1.2 ]

24.1.6.1.3 Where plastic underground piping is provided above grade or inside a building, piping shall be protected, as per manufacturer requirements, suchas from direct rays of sunlight, incompatible materials, or the weight of the sprinkler riser on the piping.

24.1.6.1.3.1 One suitable protection method for this plastic piping is sleeving.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

It is my understanding that the TC intends to allow PVC underground piping to enter a building to supply the sprinkler system inside a building. My concerns include: 1. Weight of the spinkler riser on the PVC pipe - is it tested for vertical loading in this regard? 2. Incompatibility with various chemicals, including floor coatings - the Arrangement section in NFPA 13 no longer seems to adequately address that potential concern. 3. Potential to exposure from sunlight. I have not yet seen manufacturer information indicating that PVC piping is being tested for vertical loading, especially to hold a sprinkler riser plus backflow preventer. I have been told by UL that such arrangement would not violate the listing of the subject piping. I have made contact with manufacturers attempting to verify if the piping is tested for such installation, and if the warranty would not be voided. My intent with this proposal is simply to ensure that such plastic piping is sutiably protected from conditions that could damage or degrade the piping supplying water to the fire protection system(s).

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 219-NFPA 13-2014 [New Section after 10.1.4.1] same proposal - different section

Related Item

First Revision No. 49-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Bob Morgan

Organization: Fort Worth Fire Department

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon May 12 10:49:49 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected

Resolution: This concept was added to the annex of Chapter 10. This concept was added through SR-11 in NFPA 24 which is extracted into NFPA 13.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

347 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 367: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 233-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after 24.2.2.2 ]

24.2.2.2.1* Where a waterflow test was conducted, the volume and pressure available for use for a fire protection system shall be determined from the following formula:

P = (P1 - P2)(Q/Q1)1.85 P2

24.2.2.1.1 The pressure P shall be what is considered available from the water supply to use for a fire protection system that will be calculated for a given flow demand of Q.

24.2.2.1.2 The flow Q shall be demand flow of the fire protection system that will be used to calculate the available pressure from the water supply (P).

24.2.2.1.3* The variable P1 shall be the residual pressure measured during the waterflow test while the flow Q1 was discharging from the water supply reduced by the

specifying engineer or the water utility for daily and seasonal fluctuations. The reduction shall not be based on 100 year droughts or other extreme conditions.

24.2.2.1.4* The variable P2 shall be the static pressure measured during the waterflow test reduced by the specifying engineer or the water utility for daily and seasonal

fluctuations. The reduction shall not be based on 100 year droughts or other extreme conditions.

24.2.2.1.5 The variable Q1 shall be the flow associated with P1.

24.2.2.1.6* Where the specifying engineer or the water utility does not provide the value for P1 and P2, see 24.2.2.2.2.

24.2.2.2.2* Where a waterflow test has been conducted and the specifying engineer or the water authority does not provide a value for P1 and P2, the value of for P1 and

P2 shall be calculated by taking the static pressure and residual pressure results from the flow test and reducing them by 5%.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

Water_Supply_Adjustment_Proposal-E_S-13.pdf Whole file with equations and figures

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This is one of a series of proposals to make the adjustment to the data from a waterflow test required instead of recommended. If the adjustment is not required, contractors that do the right thing and adjust the data from tests are at a disadvantage from contractors that don't make any adjustment. It is fundamentally wrong to not make an adjustment to the data due to daily and seasonal fluctuations. This proposal makes a simple and easy to understand adjustment that is standardized so that there is no argument over what is supposed to happen. It is the intent to have this be the only adjustment. If the water utility has already performed the adjustment, or if the AHJ has already mandated a safety margin or safety factor to the waterflow data obtained from the test, this adjustment would not apply.

Related Item

Public Input No. 231-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 24.2.2.2]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Kenneth Isman

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA E&S Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu May 08 18:22:40 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but held

Resolution: The subject has been held due to the anticipated FPRF report on water supply adjustments. The proposed 5% adjustment is not substantiated with technicalinformation, and the TC is anticipating that the FPRF project will yield technical data that substantiates any proposed adjustment factor.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

348 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 368: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

NFSA Comment to NFPA 13 on Waterflow Test Adjustments

1) Delete A.24.2.2.2 A.24.2.2.2 An adjustment to the waterflow test data to account for daily and seasonal fluctuations, possible interruption by flood or ice conditions, large simultaneous industrial use, future demand on the water supply system, or any other condition that could affect the water supply should be made as appropriate.

2) Insert a new 24.2.2.2.1, 24.2.2.2.2 and annex notes as follows: 24.2.2.2.1* Where a waterflow test was conducted, the volume and pressure available for use for a fire protection system shall be determined from the following formula:

( ) 2

85.1

121 P

QQPPP +

−=

24.2.2.1.1 The pressure P shall be what is considered available from the water supply to use for a fire protection system that will be calculated for a given flow demand of Q. 24.2.2.1.2 The flow Q shall be demand flow of the fire protection system that will be used to calculate the available pressure from the water supply (P). 24.2.2.1.3* The variable P1 shall be the residual pressure measured during the waterflow test while the flow Q1 was discharging from the water supply reduced by the specifying engineer or the water utility for daily and seasonal fluctuations. The reduction shall not be based on 100 year droughts or other extreme conditions. 24.2.2.1.4* The variable P2 shall be the static pressure measured during the waterflow test reduced by the specifying engineer or the water utility for daily and seasonal fluctuations. The reduction shall not be based on 100 year droughts or other extreme conditions. 24.2.2.1.5 The variable Q1 shall be the flow associated with P1. 24.2.2.1.6* Where the specifying engineer or the water utility does not provide the value for P1

and P2, see 24.2.2.2.2. 24.2.2.2.2* Where a waterflow test has been conducted and the specifying engineer or the water authority does not provide a value for P1 and P2, the value of for P1 and P2 shall be calculated by taking the static pressure and residual pressure results from the flow test and reducing them by 5%. A.24.2.2.2.1 Consider the following example. A waterflow test is conducted at a location where a city water main is going to be tapped for a new sprinkler system. During the test, the static pressure is measured at 70 psi, the residual pressure is measured at 50 psi while 1300 gpm was

Page 369: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

discharging from a nearby hydrant. The water utility is contacted and they indicate that a reasonable low static pressure accounting for typical daily and seasonal fluctuations in this area is 55 psi and that a reasonable low residual pressure accounting for typical daily and seasonal fluctuations in this area at a flow of 1300 gpm is 35 psi. The equation that describes the water supply available for a fire sprinkler system would be:

( ) 551300

553585.1

+

−=

QP

There are two ways to use this formula. One would be to assume two different values for Q, calculate P and then draw a graph on log 1.85 paper. Any fire sprinkler system demand falling on or below the line on this graph would be acceptable in accordance with NFPA 13 to work with this water supply. In this case, the two easiest flows to pick for Q would be 0 and 1300 gpm. When Q = 0, P is simply 55 psi. When Q = 1300 gpm, P = 35 psi. These two points can be plotted on log 1.85 paper as shown in Figure A.24.2.2.2.1. The second way to use this formula would be to calculate the fire protection system and determine the flow necessary to make the system work. Plug this flow into the formula above and see what the available pressure from the water supply will be at that flow. For example, if a sprinkler system connected to this water supply had a demand of 580 gpm, the available pressure from the water supply would be:

( ) 551300

5805535

85.1

+

−=P

P = (-20)(0.225) + 55

P = 50.5 psi

So, as long as the sprinkler system has a pressure demand less than or equal to 50.5 psi, it will work with this water supply.

Page 370: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Figure A.24.2.2.2.1 Available Water Supply Curve for Example in Section A.24.2.2.2.1

A.24.2.2.1.3 The purpose of the adjustment required by this section is to take into account reasonable fluctuations that occur on a daily and seasonal basis, but not to burden the building owner with extreme conditions. During an extreme condition such as a water main break or a severe drought, the impaired system provisions of NFPA 25 can be employed to mitigate the circumstances of the extreme condition. The intent of this section is to apply the adjustment to the raw data obtained by the flow test and not to apply adjustments to values that have already been adjusted by water utilities. If a water utility has already provided flow and pressure data for use in the design of fire protection systems that already includes adjustments for daily and seasonal water usage, there is no need to make any additional adjustments to this data. A.24.2.2.1.4 See annex note A.24.2.2.1.3. A.24.2.2.1.6 Water utilities are the entities that know their own supplies the best and know what appropriate adjustments need to be made to flow test data to provide reasonable fire protection. In the potential situation where the water utility will not make a definitive statement with regard to an adjustment, the fire protection engineer is the person that would need to make a statement with respect to adjustments to the raw data from a flow test. Due to the judgment involved in making such a decision, the licensing laws in most states within the United States would require the fire protection engineer to make this determination rather than the fire protection system contractor. It is expected that the engineer would make these statements in the specifications provided to the fire protection system contractor. In the absence of any information from any authority on the subject, section 24.2.2.2.2 provides a standardized method of making a decision. A.24.2.2.2.2 Section 24.2.2.2.2 provides a standardized method of making a decision regarding the reduction of the results from a waterflow test to determine what pressure and flow are available from a water supply when the specifying engineer and the water utility have not provided adjustment information. An example of how to use this standardized method follows.

Page 371: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

If a waterflow test is conducted at a location where a city water main is going to be tapped for a new sprinkler system and the static pressure is measured at 70 psi, with the residual pressure measured at 50 psi while 1300 gpm was discharging from a nearby hydrant. If there is no information from the specifying engineer or water utility regarding appropriate adjustments, the value of the static pressure and residual pressure need to be reduced by 5%. The static pressure would be adjusted from 70 psi to 66.5 psi (70 x 0.95 = 66.5). The residual pressure at 1300 gpm would be reduced from 50 psi to 47.5 psi (70 x 0.95 = 47.5). The results would be plotted on log 1.85 graph paper as shown in the lower curve on Figure A.24.2.2.2.2 and that curve would represent what the fire protection system contractor could use for a fire protection system.

Figure A.24.2.2.2.2 Available Water Supply Curve for Example in Section A.24.2.2.2.2

Page 372: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 212-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 24.2.2.2 ]

24.2.2.2 *

The volume and pressure of a public water supply shall be determined from waterflow test data or other approved method. Daily and seasonal flow and pressure fluctuationdata shall be provided by the water purveyor, and the fireprotection design must account for both high and low variations. Where this data is not available, design shall be based on the available water flow data.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Some version of the requirement to identify and adjust for pressure fluctuations has been in the body of the NFPA 13 standard for many years. Below is the text from the 1996 edition: "7-2 Types.7-2.1" Connections to Water Works Systems. A connection to a reliable water works system shall be an acceptable water supply source. The volume and pressure of a public water supply shall be determined from waterflow test data.(See NFPA 24, Standard for the Installation of Private Fire Service Mains and Their Appurtenances.) The authority having jurisdiction shall be permitted to require an adjustment to the waterflow test data to account for daily and seasonal fluctuations,possible interruption by flood or iceconditions, large simultaneous industrial use, future demand on the water supply system, or any other condition that could affect the water supply."

Moving the requirement to account for pressure fluctuations into the Appendix in the 2010 edition of the standard removes a great deal of the authority of local enforcers to require that fire hydrant flow test data be adjusted to account for such pressure fluctuation. As an enforcer, I have already encountered this argument. After the first revisions meeting, my proposal to the 2015 edition of the International Fire Code was heard and aproved. Such will now that water flow tests be adjusted to account for such fluctuations in the 2015 IFC. Further, my similar proposal to NFPA 14 was debated significantly, but we finally agreed on the revised text that I have submitted with this proposal as a first revision. Most public water supply systems fluctuate significantly throughout the day as well as seasonally. The result can be a very inadequate fire sprinkler design, or potentially a system that fluctuates over the 100 psi mark necessitating surge clips and hanger changes, or if provided with afire pump, a system that fluctuates over 175 psi. This is a critical issue that was located in the body of the standard for many years, and in my opinion, adequate substantiation was not provided to move it to the Appendix, which again, in most jurisdictions, is not enforceable. This is not an advisory statement or commentary and is not always an engineering decision, and even if it is, it still must be a requirement for adequate fire protection design. The reason statements that I have been told in the various committees for not doing this is that the information can be difficult to acquire from the jurisdiction. That is not acceptable in my opinion. I do not know how one can ethically design a water-based fire protection system without at least attempting to acquire this fluctuation information.I will further note that the FPRF has begun a project to investigate more specifically water models utilized by water authorities and how to accommodate fluctuation issues, in general - that is not a very good description I am sure, but I believe such was in response to an NFPA 13 committee request regarding these proposals.

Related Item

Public Input No. 231-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 24.2.2.2]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Bob Morgan

Organization: Fort Worth Fire Department

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Tue May 06 15:21:01 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but held

Resolution: The subject has been held due to the anticipated FPRF report on water supply adjustments. The proposed 5% adjustment is not substantiated with technicalinformation, and the TC is anticipating that the FPRF project will yield technical data that substantiates any proposed adjustment factor.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

349 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 373: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 213-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 25.2.1.4 ]

25.2.1.4 *

Modifications to existing piping systems affecting 20 or fewer sprinklers shall not require testing in excess of system working pressure.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This proposed change is to return this section to the language of the 2013 edition. There is no justification that large modifications to existing systems should not be required to be tested for integrity with a 200 psi hydrostatic test. The first revision would allow an modifications affecting an unlimited number of sprinklers and their associated piping to be put into service without ensuring that this pipe is leak-free with a 200 psi hydrostatic test. Such large modifications should be held to the same standard as new systems. The previous edition requirements to isolate these large modifications and test at 200 psi is a reasonable measure and should remain as a requirement of the standard.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 214-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 25.2.1.5]

Public Comment No. 215-NFPA 13-2014 [New Section after 25.2.1.5]

Related Item

First Revision No. 286-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 25.2.1.4]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Asp

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA E&S Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Wed May 07 08:48:52 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-45-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The proposed revision should not be accepted. As it is now proposed, any new addition to a sprinkler system, such as one sprinkler for a new washroom or twosprinklers for a new office will require a minimum 200 psi hydrostatic test. Such small installations cannot be easily isolated; to do so would be an impractical andexpensive undertaking. No documentation has been offered as to why the exemption for 20 sprinklers is being deleted. This will cause problems and undue expense inthe field if this new wording is adopted.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

350 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 374: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 370-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 25.2.1.4 ]

25.2.1.4 *

Modifications to existing piping systems shall not require testing in excess of 20 psi above system working pressure.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

It is irresponsible to not require testing at some pressure above working pressure to ensure system integrity.

Related Item

First Revision No. 288-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 25.2.1.6]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Cecil Bilbo

Organization: Academy of Fire Sprinkler Tech

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon May 19 13:11:51 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-45-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The proposed revision should not be accepted. As it is now proposed, any new addition to a sprinkler system, such as one sprinkler for a new washroom or twosprinklers for a new office will require a minimum 200 psi hydrostatic test. Such small installations cannot be easily isolated; to do so would be an impractical andexpensive undertaking. No documentation has been offered as to why the exemption for 20 sprinklers is being deleted. This will cause problems and undue expense inthe field if this new wording is adopted.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

351 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 375: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 179-NFPA 13-2014 [ Sections 25.2.1.4, 25.2.1.5, 25.2.1.6 ]

Reconsider the proposals and return the text of 25.2.1.4 through 25.2.1.6 to that of the 2013 edition of NFPA 13, as follows:

25.2.1.4 Modifications affecting 20 or fewer sprinklers shall not require testing in excess of system working pressure.

25.2.1.5 Where addition or modification is made to an existing system affecting more than 20 sprinklers, the new portion shall be isolated and tested at not lessthan 200 psi (13.8 bar) for 2 hours.

25.2.1.6 Modifications that cannot be isolated, such as relocated drops, shall not require testing in excess of system working pressure.

Sections 25.2.1.4, 25.2.1.5, 25.2.1.6

25.2.1.4 *

Modifications to existing piping systems shall not require testing in excess of system working pressure.

25.2.1.5

Where additions are made to an existing system, the new portion shall be isolated and tested at not less than 200 psi (13.8 bar) for 2 hours.

25.2.1.6

Loss shall be determined by a drop in gauge pressure or visual leakage.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_25-2-1-4.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The proposed revision should not be accepted. As it is now proposed, any new addition to a sprinkler system, such as one sprinkler for a new washroom or two sprinklers for a new office will require a minimum 200 psi hydrostatic test. Such small installations cannot be easily isolated; to do so would be an impractical and expensive undertaking. No documentation has been offered as to why the exemption for 20 sprinklers is being deleted. This will cause problems and undue expense in the field if this new wording is adopted.

Related Item

Public Input No. 247-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 25.2.1.4]

Public Input No. 248-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 25.2.1.5]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon Apr 28 09:49:32 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-45-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The proposed revision should not be accepted. As it is now proposed, any new addition to a sprinkler system, such as one sprinkler for a new washroom or twosprinklers for a new office will require a minimum 200 psi hydrostatic test. Such small installations cannot be easily isolated; to do so would be an impractical andexpensive undertaking. No documentation has been offered as to why the exemption for 20 sprinklers is being deleted. This will cause problems and undue expense inthe field if this new wording is adopted.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

352 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 376: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 215-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after 25.2.1.5 ]

25.2.1.6Modifications that cannot be isolated, such as relocated drops, shall not require testing in excess of system working pressure.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This public comment is to return to the language of section 25.2.1.6 from the 2013 edition of NFPA 13. This section was deleted in the first draft report. As public comment #213 and #214 seek to return to the previous edition language, this section is necessary to clarify that modifications such as relocated drops are not required to be tested in excess of system working pressure.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 213-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 25.2.1.4]

Public Comment No. 214-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 25.2.1.5]

Related Item

First Revision No. 287-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 25.2.1.5]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Asp

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA E&S Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Wed May 07 09:54:37 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-45-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The proposed revision should not be accepted. As it is now proposed, any new addition to a sprinkler system, such as one sprinkler for a new washroom or twosprinklers for a new office will require a minimum 200 psi hydrostatic test. Such small installations cannot be easily isolated; to do so would be an impractical andexpensive undertaking. No documentation has been offered as to why the exemption for 20 sprinklers is being deleted. This will cause problems and undue expense inthe field if this new wording is adopted.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

353 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 377: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 127-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 25.2.1.5 ]

25.2.1.5

Where additions of more than 10 sprinklers are made to an existing system, the new portion shall be isolated and tested at not less than 200 psi (13.8 bar) for 2 hours.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

As written, iy I add a single sprinkler, I have to isolate it and test it at 200 PSI.

Related Item

First Revision No. 287-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 25.2.1.5]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Peter Schwab

Organization: Wayne Automatic Fire Sprinkler

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Apr 18 15:42:03 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-45-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The proposed revision should not be accepted. As it is now proposed, any new addition to a sprinkler system, such as one sprinkler for a new washroom or twosprinklers for a new office will require a minimum 200 psi hydrostatic test. Such small installations cannot be easily isolated; to do so would be an impractical andexpensive undertaking. No documentation has been offered as to why the exemption for 20 sprinklers is being deleted. This will cause problems and undue expense inthe field if this new wording is adopted.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

354 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 378: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 18-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 25.2.1.5 ]

25.2.1.5

Where additions are made to an existing system, the new portion shall be isolated and tested at not less than 200 psi (13.8 bar) for 2 hours.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

25.2.1.4 is in conflict with 25.2.1.5

Related Item

First Revision No. 286-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 25.2.1.4]

First Revision No. 287-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 25.2.1.5]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Mark Fessenden

Organization: Tyco Fire Protection Products

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Wed Mar 12 09:30:43 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-45-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The proposed revision should not be accepted. As it is now proposed, any new addition to a sprinkler system, such as one sprinkler for a new washroom or twosprinklers for a new office will require a minimum 200 psi hydrostatic test. Such small installations cannot be easily isolated; to do so would be an impractical andexpensive undertaking. No documentation has been offered as to why the exemption for 20 sprinklers is being deleted. This will cause problems and undue expense inthe field if this new wording is adopted.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

355 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 379: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 214-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 25.2.1.5 ]

25.2.1.5

Where additions are addition or modification is made to an existing system affecting more than 20 sprinklers , the new portion shall be isolated and tested at not less than200 psi (13.8 bar) for 2 hours.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This proposed change is to return this section to the language of the 2013 edition. There is no justification that large modifications to existing systems should not be required to be tested for integrity with a 200 psi hydrostatic test. The first revision would allow an modifications affecting an unlimited number of sprinklers and their associated piping to be put into service without ensuring that this pipe is leak-free with a 200 psi hydrostatic test. Such large modifications should be held to the same standard as new systems and additions to new systems. The previous edition requirements to isolate these large modifications and test at 200 psi is a reasonable measure and should remain as a requirement of the standard.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 213-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 25.2.1.4]

Public Comment No. 215-NFPA 13-2014 [New Section after 25.2.1.5]

Related Item

Public Input No. 248-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 25.2.1.5]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Asp

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA E&S Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Wed May 07 09:29:53 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-45-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The proposed revision should not be accepted. As it is now proposed, any new addition to a sprinkler system, such as one sprinkler for a new washroom or twosprinklers for a new office will require a minimum 200 psi hydrostatic test. Such small installations cannot be easily isolated; to do so would be an impractical andexpensive undertaking. No documentation has been offered as to why the exemption for 20 sprinklers is being deleted. This will cause problems and undue expense inthe field if this new wording is adopted.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

356 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 380: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 260-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after 25.2.2 ]

Add new text:

25.2.2.3 Modifications affecting 20 or fewer sprinklers shall not require an air or nitrogen pressure leakage test.

25.2.2.4 Where an addition or modification is made to an existing system affecting more than 20 sprinklers, the new portion shall be isolated and tested.

25.2.2.5 Modifications that cannot be isolated, such as relocated drops, shall not require an air or nitrogen pressure leakage test.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The committee statement referring to the hydrostatic test makes no sense. My comment is addressing the air leakage test. NFPA 25 allows air leakage for existing systems. New systems installed do not generally have a problem with the air or gas leakage tests. The issue with air leakage occurs when an existing dry pipe or preaction system is modified where the installing contractor of the modified portion of the system is now responsible for repairing air or gas leaks in the entire system where modifications were not made. The piping at times is located in concealed spaces that are not accessible. Contractors cannot get their piping modifications accepted since the existing system cannot pass the NFPA 13 air or gas pressure leakage test.

Related Item

Public Input No. 485-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 25.2.2]

First Revision No. 286-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 25.2.1.4]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Thomas Wellen

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Associ

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Wed May 14 11:02:03 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-139-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: Modification to dry and preaction systems are required to be air tested. New language gives direction for testing modifications to dry and double interlocked systemsutilizing the test language from NFPA 25 for existing systems.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

357 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 381: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 218-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. 25.6.2 ]

25.6.2

The sign shall include the following information:

(1) Name and location of the facility protected

(2) Occupancy classification

(3) Commodity classification

(4) Presence of high-piled and/or rack storage

(5) Maximum height of storage planned

(6) Aisle width planned

(7) Encapsulation of pallet loads

(8) Presence of solid shelving

(9) Flow test data

(10) Presence of flammable/combustible liquids

(11) Presence of hazardous materials

(12) Presence of other special storage

(13) Location of venting valve

(14) Location of auxiliary drains and low point drains on dry pipe and preaction systems

(15) Original results of main drain flow test

(16) Original results of dry pipe and double interlock preaction valve test

(17) Name of installing contractor or designer

(18) Indication of presence and location of antifreeze or other auxiliary systems

(19) Where injection systems are installed to treat MIC or corrosion, the type of chemical, concentration of the chemical, and where information can be found as to theproper disposal of the chemical

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Public comments to remove the requirement for air venting has been submitted and if accepted, the general information sign should not require the location of the air vent.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 217-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 8.16.6]

Related Item

First Revision No. 136-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 25.6.2]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Asp

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA E&S Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Wed May 07 10:31:03 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected

Resolution: The concept of venting has been retained in the second draft, therefore it would not be appropriate to remove language.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

358 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 382: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 180-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. A.3.3.4 ]

A.3.3.4 Ceiling Pocket.

It is not the intent of this definition to be applied to structural and/or framing members otherwise used to define obstructed or unobstructed construction. Ceiling pockets canbe protected or unprotected. A ceiling pocket where the upper ceiling is within the allowable vertical distance from the sprinkler deflector should be considered a protectedceiling pocket. Buildings with protected ceiling pockets are permitted to use the quick-response reduction of 11.2.3.2.3. Buildings with unprotected ceiling pockets greater

than 32 ft2 (9.8 m2) are not allowed to use the quick-response reduction of 11.2.3.2.3. An architectural ceiling feature that consists of a bounded area of ceiling located at ahigher elevation than the attached lower ceiling, and where the depth of the pocket is greater than the allowable distance, a sprinkler deflector can be located from thehigher ceiling elevation.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_A-3-3-4.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The proposed new sentence is obscure, the sentence structure is poor and it does not add any value to the section, in fact it is contradictory. The Committee Statement says that the additional verbiage is to clarify that where a sprinkler can be located in the lower ceiling and still meet the deflector distance rule; the upper ceiling should not be considered a ceiling pocket. However, this is contrary to the actual 3.3.4 definition and to the 2nd sentence of A.3.3.4, which says that a ceiling pocket where the upper ceiling is within the allowable vertical distance from the sprinkler deflector should be considered a protected ceiling pocket.

Related Item

First Revision No. 75-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. A.3.3.4]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon Apr 28 09:52:49 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Accepted

Resolution: SR-46-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The proposed new sentence is obscure, the sentence structure is poor and it does not add any value to the section, in fact it is contradictory. The Committee Statementsays that the additional verbiage is to clarify that where a sprinkler can be located in the lower ceiling and still meet the deflector distance rule; the upper ceiling shouldnot be considered a ceiling pocket. However, this is contrary to the actual 3.3.4 definition and to the 2nd sentence of A.3.3.4, which says that a ceiling pocket where theupper ceiling is within the allowable vertical distance from the sprinkler deflector should be considered a protected ceiling pocket.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

359 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 383: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 103-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after A.3.9.3.7 ]

A.3.9.3.7.5 When a narrow rack with a depth up to 6 ft is located within 24 inches of a wall, it is consider to have a longitudinal flue and is treated as a double-row rack.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The committee statement is that in-rack sprinklers are clear in the associated figures. That answer does not address the issue. This text supports the change submitted on chapter 17 (PI-119) which incorrectly calls a narrow rack against the wall a single row rack which conflicts with ch 16 identifying them as a double row rack. The committee statement on PI-119 states that the narrow rack against the wall is a single row rack AND that the space between the rack and the wall is a longitudinal flue. The definition of a single row rack (3.9.3.7.5) explicitly states that it is a rack of up to 6 ft with no longitudinal flue space. This issue is obviously not well understood and some clarifying text is warranted.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 102-NFPA 13-2014 [Global Input]

Related Item

Public Input No. 86-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after A.3.9.4.4]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Huggins

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Assoc.

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Apr 04 17:02:07 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-118-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: This text supports the change submitted on chapter 17 (PI-119) which incorrectly calls a narrow rack against the wall a single row rack which conflicts with ch 16identifying them as a double row rack. The committee statement on PI-119 states that the narrow rack against the wall is a single row rack AND that the space betweenthe rack and the wall is a longitudinal flue. The definition of a single row rack (3.9.3.7.5) explicitly states that it is a rack of up to 6 ft with no longitudinal flue space. Thisissue is obviously not well understood and some clarifying text is warranted.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

360 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 384: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 253-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. A.3.9.3.8 ]

A.3.9.3.8 Solid Shelving.

The placement of loads affects the calculated area of the shelf. It is the intent to apply this definition to loads on the rack where 6 in. (150 mm) nominal flues are not providedon all four sides, regardless of whether shelving materials are present. See 16.1.6.3 and 17.1.5.3 for additional allowances for double-row racks up 25 ft and multi-row ofany height without a longitudinal flue space.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Sections 16.1.6.3 and 17.1.5.3 provide allowances for double-row racks up to 25 ft without a longitudinal flue and multi-row racks of any height without longitudinal flues to not be considered as solid shelving provided transverse flues are provided every 5 ft maximum. This shoud be recoginize when trying to apply the definition of solid shelf in Chapter 3.

Related Item

Public Input No. 313-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after A.3.9.3.7]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Tracey Bellamy

Organization: Telgian Corporation

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Tue May 13 00:15:03 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Accepted

Resolution: SR-119-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: Sections 16.1.6.3 and 17.1.5.3 provide allowances for double-row racks up to 25 ft without a longitudinal flue and multi-row racks of any height without longitudinalflues to not be considered as solid shelving provided transverse flues are provided every 5 ft maximum. This shoud be recoginize when trying to apply the definition ofsolid shelf in Chapter 3.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

361 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 385: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 181-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. A.5.3.1 ]

A.5.3.1

Ordinary hazard (Group 1) occupancies include occupancies having uses and conditions similar to the following:

(1) Automobile parking and showrooms

(2) Bakeries

(3) Beverage manufacturing

(4) Canneries

(5) Dairy products manufacturing and processing

(6) Electronic plants

(7) Glass and glass products manufacturing

(8) Laundries

(9) Restaurant service areas

(10) Porte cocheres

(11) Mechanical rooms with stockpiles up to 8 ft (2.4 m)

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_A-5-3-1.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

As proposed, new Sentence (11) says "Mechanical rooms with stockpiles up to 8 ft (2.4 m)", but as per the NFPA 1 Fire Code, Section 10.19.5.1, "Combustible material shall not be stored in boiler rooms, mechanical rooms, or electrical rooms". Therefore, the reference to 8 ft stockpiles must be deleted. NFPA 13 should not be implying that it may be alright to put storage into any such service rooms.

Related Item

First Revision No. 262-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. A.5.3.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon Apr 28 09:57:24 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Accepted

Resolution: SR-126-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: As proposed, new Sentence (11) says "Mechanical rooms with stockpiles up to 8 ft (2.4 m)", but as per the NFPA 1 Fire Code, Section 10.19.5.1, "Combustiblematerial shall not be stored in boiler rooms, mechanical rooms, or electrical rooms". Therefore, the reference to 8 ft stockpiles must be deleted. NFPA 13 should not beimplying that it may be alright to put storage into any such service rooms.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

362 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 386: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 347-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. A.5.3.1 ]

A.5.3.1

Ordinary hazard (Group 1) occupancies include occupancies having uses and conditions similar to the following:

(1) Automobile parking and showrooms

(2) Bakeries

(3) Beverage manufacturing

(4) Canneries

(5) Dairy products manufacturing and processing

(6) Electronic plants

(7) Glass and glass products manufacturing

(8) Laundries

(9) Restaurant service areas

(10) Porte cocheres

(11)

(12) Mechanical rooms with stockpiles up to 8 ft (2.4 m)

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Not all porte cocheres need to be treated as Ordinary Hazard Group 1. In fact, not all porte cocheres are required to be protected with a sprinkler system. Many porte cocheres are typically used for protecting someone while they are getting in or out of a vehicle. If vehicles are not left under the porte cochere is OH 1 necessary?

The submitted of the Public Input upon which the First Revision was based provided no technical substantiation for requiring all porte cocheres to be protected as OH 1 other than guidance is necessary.

Related Item

First Revision No. 262-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. A.5.3.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: William Koffel

Organization: Koffel Associates, Inc.

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 14:44:11 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: A car fire is a significant fire and would exceed what would be expected for a light hazard occupancy. For smaller porte cocheres the designer could request anequivalency in accordance with section 1.5.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

363 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 387: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 245-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. A.5.3.2 ]

A.5.3.2

Ordinary hazard (Group 2) occupancies include occupancies having uses and conditions similar to the following:

(1) Agricultural facilities

(2) Barns and stables

(3) Cereal mills

(4) Chemical plants — ordinary

(5) Confectionery products

(6) Distilleries

(7) Dry cleaners

(8) Exterior loading docks (Note that exterior loading docks only used for loading and unloading of ordinary combustibles should be classified as OH2. For the handling offlammable and combustible liquids, hazardous materials, or where utilized for storage, exterior loading docks and all interior loading docks should be protected basedupon the actual occupancy and the materials handled on the dock, as if the materials were actually stored in that configuration.)

(9) Feed mills

(10) Horse stables

(11) Leather goods manufacturing

(12) Libraries — large stack room areas

(13) Machine shops

(14) Metal working

(15) Mercantile

(16) Paper and pulp mills

(17) Paper process plants

(18) Piers and wharves

(19) Plastics fabrication, including blow molding, extruding, and machining; excluding operations using combustible hydraulic fluids

(20) Post offices

(21) Printing and publishing

(22) Racetrack stable/kennel areas, including those stable/kennel areas, barns, and associated buildings at state, county, and local fairgrounds

(23) Repair garages

(24) Resin application area

(25) Stages

(26) Textile manufacturing

(27) Tire manufacturing

(28) Tobacco products manufacturing

(29) Wood machining

(30) Wood product assembly

(31) Car Stackers/ Car Lift Systems with 2 cars stacked vertically

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Per the committee response to PI 367, two cars stacked vertically may have Ordinary Hazard classification. It is very important to HAJs to have code indication (even in the annex) for such common design issue.

Related Item

Public Input No. 367-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. A.5.4.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Sagiv Weiss-Ishai

Organization: San Francisco Fire Department

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon May 12 19:36:21 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-127-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The parking garage can be reasonably protected with sprinklers only at the ceiling if the hazard classification is increased to Extra Hazard Group 2. The definition ofExtra Hazard Group 2 includes, “occupancies where shielding of combustibles is extensive” (Section 5.4.2 of the 2013 edition of NFPA 13). The basic concept in thissection is that hazards that would normally be classified as Ordinary Hazard can be protected with sprinklers only at the ceiling by increasing the density and area ofcoverage, and by decreasing the sprinkler spacing, in accordance with the Extra Hazard rules. Examples of such situations include factories where manufactured homesare built. During the process of building a manufactured home, sprinkler protection is not extended down inside the manufactured home, but sprinklers at the roof of thefactory are expected to control any fire, including one starting inside a home being manufactured. By upgrading the design basis of the sprinkler system to Extra HazardGroup 2 (increasing the density by 167% and increasing the area of operation by 67%) the sprinkler system is expected to handle the additional challenge of a shieldedfire (see A.5.4.2 of the 2013 edition), and should be sufficient to handle the fuel load of two cars (one above another), preventing the fire from spreading to the adjacentcars while maintaining acceptable conditions for the structural members within the structure.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

364 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 388: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 277-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. A.5.3.2 ]

A.5.3.2

Ordinary hazard (Group 2) occupancies include occupancies having uses and conditions similar to the following:

(1) Agricultural facilities

(2) Agro-Industrial facilities

(3) Barns and stables

(4) Cereal mills

(5) Chemical plants — ordinary

(6) Confectionery products

(7) Distilleries

(8) Dry cleaners

(9) Exterior loading docks (Note that exterior loading docks only used for loading and unloading of ordinary combustibles should be classified as OH2. For the handling offlammable and combustible liquids, hazardous materials, or where utilized for storage, exterior loading docks and all interior loading docks should be protected basedupon the actual occupancy and the materials handled on the dock, as if the materials were actually stored in that configuration.)

(10) Feed mills

(11) Horse stables

(12) Leather goods manufacturing

(13) Libraries — large stack room areas

(14) Machine shops

(15) Metal working

(16) Mercantile

(17) Paper and pulp mills

(18) Paper process plants

(19) Piers and wharves

(20) Plastics fabrication, including blow molding, extruding, and machining; excluding operations using combustible hydraulic fluids

(21) Post offices

(22) Printing and publishing

(23) Racetrack stable/kennel areas, including those stable/kennel areas, barns, and associated buildings at state, county, and local fairgrounds

(24) Repair garages

(25) Resin application area

(26) Stages

(27) Textile manufacturing

(28) Tire manufacturing

(29) Tobacco products manufacturing

(30) Wood machining

(31) Wood product assembly

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The addition of the term, "Agro-Industrial facility, clarifies the level of protection provided to agro-industrial facilities processing “crop-residue”--as solid, biomass feedstock--into solid biofuel (densified plant or animal-based material of biological origin, often pelletized into cubiform, polyhedral, polyhedric or cylindrical units).

Accordingly, the BIPCS recommends a Commodity Hazard Classification of III and an Occupancy Classification of Ordinary hazard (Group 2). The Biomass Industry Panel on Codes and Standards (BPICS), led by Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), is an initiative of the Department of Energy Biomass Technologies Office (BTO). As part of the BTO integrated biorefinery efforts, the BFICOCS was assembled to conduct analysis of existing fire and building codes and to prepare proposed code changes designed to facilitate the development of the commercial-scale biomass industry while maintaining a focus on safety. The committee is made up of managers, engineers and code officials from industry, government laboratories, consulting firms, and the American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers (ASABE).

Fire codes related to storage, handling, and pre-processing of biomass are based on industries that operate in a significantly different manner than the growing biomass-based energy industry. Applying current research on biomass properties and knowledge of conventional and emerging storage, handling, and pre-processing technologies, the BFICOCS has submitted changes to both the NFPA and ICC development processes intent on benefiting both industry and the public.

Related Item

Public Input No. 483-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. A.5.3.2]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Darren Meyers

Organization: IECC LLC

Affilliation: Co-Chair, DOE Biomass Industry Panel on Codes & Standards

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu May 15 20:53:21 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

365 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 389: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Resolution: There are many potential arrangements, sizes and shapes of agro-industry facilities, so lumping them into a single category may not be appropriate. Further more,these goods may more accurately fall into the commodity storage portions of the standard.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

366 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 390: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 201-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. A.5.4.1 ]

A.5.4.1

Extra hazard (Group 1) occupancies include occupancies having uses and conditions similar to the following:

(1) Aircraft hangars (except as governed by NFPA 409)

(2) Combustible hydraulic fluid use areas

(3) Die casting

(4) Metal extruding

(5) Plywood and particleboard manufacturing

(6) Printing [using inks having flash points below 100°F (38°C)]

(7) Rubber reclaiming, compounding, drying, milling, vulcanizing

(8) Saw mills

(9) Textile picking, opening, blending, garnetting, or carding, combining of cotton, synthetics, wool shoddy, or burlap

(10) Upholstering with plastic foams

(11) Car Stackers/ Car Lift Systems with more the 2 cars stacked vertically

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Per the comittee's response (Resolution) to PI No.367, It seems that 2 cars stacked vertically are less hazardous that 3 or more cars stacked vertically; and therefore, this public comment addresses and clarifies the requirment for Extra Hazard Group 1 protection for 3 or more cars stacked vertically.It is very important for AHJs to have a clear code reference/design criteria for car stackars protection.

Please contact FPE Fred Stumpp and/or FPE Sagiv Weiss-Ishai from SFFD, for more specific clarifications.at 415-558-6173 or 415-558-6421 and email address: [email protected] or [email protected]

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Related Item

Public Input No. 367-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. A.5.4.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Sagiv Weiss-Ishai

Organization: San Francisco Fire Department

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu May 01 14:11:57 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-127-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The parking garage can be reasonably protected with sprinklers only at the ceiling if the hazard classification is increased to Extra Hazard Group 2. The definition ofExtra Hazard Group 2 includes, “occupancies where shielding of combustibles is extensive” (Section 5.4.2 of the 2013 edition of NFPA 13). The basic concept in thissection is that hazards that would normally be classified as Ordinary Hazard can be protected with sprinklers only at the ceiling by increasing the density and area ofcoverage, and by decreasing the sprinkler spacing, in accordance with the Extra Hazard rules. Examples of such situations include factories where manufactured homesare built. During the process of building a manufactured home, sprinkler protection is not extended down inside the manufactured home, but sprinklers at the roof of thefactory are expected to control any fire, including one starting inside a home being manufactured. By upgrading the design basis of the sprinkler system to Extra HazardGroup 2 (increasing the density by 167% and increasing the area of operation by 67%) the sprinkler system is expected to handle the additional challenge of a shieldedfire (see A.5.4.2 of the 2013 edition), and should be sufficient to handle the fuel load of two cars (one above another), preventing the fire from spreading to the adjacentcars while maintaining acceptable conditions for the structural members within the structure.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

367 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 391: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 310-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. A.5.4.2 ]

A.5.4.2

Extra hazard (Group 2) occupancies include occupancies having uses and conditions similar to the following:

(1) Asphalt saturating

(2) Flammable liquids spraying

(3) Flow coating

(4) Manufactured home or modular building assemblies (where finished enclosure is present and has combustible interiors)

(5) Open oil quenching

(6) Plastics manufacturing

(7) Solvent cleaning

(8) Varnish and paint dipping

(9) Double layer car storage

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The parking garage can be reasonably protected with sprinklers only at the ceiling if the hazard classification is increased to Extra Hazard Group 2. The definition of Extra Hazard Group 2 includes, “occupancies where shielding of combustibles is extensive” (Section 5.4.2 of the 2013 edition of NFPA 13). The basic concept in this section is that hazards that would normally be classified as Ordinary Hazard can be protected with sprinklers only at the ceiling by increasing the density and area of coverage, and by decreasing the sprinkler spacing, in accordance with the Extra Hazard rules. Examples of such situations include factories where manufactured homes are built. During the process of building a manufactured home, sprinkler protection is not extended down inside the manufactured home, but sprinklers at the roof of the factory are expected to control any fire, including one starting inside a home being manufactured. By upgrading the design basis of the sprinkler system to Extra Hazard Group 2 (increasing the density by 167% and increasing the area of operation by 67%) the sprinkler system is expected to handle the additional challenge of a shielded fire (see A.5.4.2 of the 2013 edition), and should be sufficient to handle the fuel load of two cars (one above another), preventing the fire from spreading to the adjacent cars while maintaining acceptable conditions for the structural members within the structure.

Related Item

First Revision No. 239-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after A.3.9.3.6]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Robert Upson

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA Engineering and Standards Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 11:09:33 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-127-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The parking garage can be reasonably protected with sprinklers only at the ceiling if the hazard classification is increased to Extra Hazard Group 2. The definition ofExtra Hazard Group 2 includes, “occupancies where shielding of combustibles is extensive” (Section 5.4.2 of the 2013 edition of NFPA 13). The basic concept in thissection is that hazards that would normally be classified as Ordinary Hazard can be protected with sprinklers only at the ceiling by increasing the density and area ofcoverage, and by decreasing the sprinkler spacing, in accordance with the Extra Hazard rules. Examples of such situations include factories where manufactured homesare built. During the process of building a manufactured home, sprinkler protection is not extended down inside the manufactured home, but sprinklers at the roof of thefactory are expected to control any fire, including one starting inside a home being manufactured. By upgrading the design basis of the sprinkler system to Extra HazardGroup 2 (increasing the density by 167% and increasing the area of operation by 67%) the sprinkler system is expected to handle the additional challenge of a shieldedfire (see A.5.4.2 of the 2013 edition), and should be sufficient to handle the fuel load of two cars (one above another), preventing the fire from spreading to the adjacentcars while maintaining acceptable conditions for the structural members within the structure.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

368 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 392: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 198-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. A.5.6 ]

A.5.6

Specification of the type, amount, and arrangement of combustibles for any commodity classification is essentially an attempt to define the potential fire severity, based onits burning characteristics, so the fire can be successfully controlled by the prescribed sprinkler protection for the commodity class. In actual storage situations, however,many storage arrays do not fit precisely into one of the fundamental classifications; therefore, the user needs to make judgments after comparing each classification to theexisting storage conditions. Storage arrays consist of thousands of products, which makes it impossible to specify all the acceptable variations for any class. As analternative, a variety of common products are classified in this annex based on judgment, loss experience, and fire test results.

Table A.5.6 provides examples of commodities not addressed by the classifications in Section 5.6. The commodities listed in Table A.5.6 are outside of the scope of NFPA13 protection.

Table A.5.6.3 is an alphabetized list of commodities with corresponding classifications.

Table A.5.6.3.1 through Table A.5.6.3.4 and Table A.5.6.4.1 provide examples of commodities within a specific class.

Table A.5.6 Examples of Commodities Not Addressed by Classifications in Section 5.6

Ammunition components  - Bulk Primers and powder

Boat Storage

 - Stored on racks

Boxes, Crates

 - Empty, wood slatted*

Carpet Rolls

Combustible Metals

Compressed or liquified flammable gases other than Level 1 aerosols

Explosives

Fireworks

Flammable and combustible liquids under the scope of NFPA 30

Hanging garments, bulk storage

Lighters (butane)

 - Loose in large containers (Level 3 aerosol)

Storage Container

 - Large container storage of household goods

*Should be treated as idle pallets.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

CC NOTE: The following CC Note No. 7 appeared in the First Draft Report as First Revision No. 290.

The TC must look into annex language to describe the different conditions where PET is considered a group A plastic (pure PET) and a class IV commodity (packaged bottles) . This should include an explanation of each of these conditions.

Related Item

First Revision No. 290-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. A.5.6]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: CC on AUT-AAC

Organization: CC on Automatic Sprinkler Systems

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Wed Apr 30 07:58:54 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-134-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: Table A.5.6.1.1 has been revised to correlate with the changes made to Table A.5.6.3

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

369 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 393: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 182-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. A.5.6.1.1 ]

A.5.6.1.1

Commodity classification is governed by the types and amounts of materials (e.g., metal, paper, wood, plastics) that are a part of a product and its primary packaging.Consideration of all characteristics of the individual storage units, not just the product, is critical to identify the appropriate commodity classification. Refer to Table A.5.6.1.1for general guidance for classifying commodities. For situations where it is difficult to determine the appropriate classification, testing should be considered to appropriatelycharacterize the commodity.

Table A.5.6.1.1 General Guide to Identifying the Commodity Class

Characteristics of Unit Load Commodity Class 1 Material Used to Construct Product Packaging Material Pallet Material Noncombustible Product Entirelynoncombustible None or single layer corrugated cartons None, metal or wood Class I Entirely noncombustible Multiple-layered corrugated cartons, wooden crates or woodboxes None, metal or wood Class II Noncombustible with Group A plastic components None or single layer corrugated cartons None, metal or wood See Figure5.6.3.4.1 Entirely noncombustible or noncombustible with plastic components Corrugated cartons, wooden crates or wood boxes, with plastic packaging None, metal orwood See Figure

Delete Table A. 5.6.

3.4.

1

Entirely noncombustible or noncombustible with plastic components Any type Plastic See 5

.

6.2 and Figure 5.6.3.4.

1

Wood, Paper, Natural Fibers or Group C Plastics Entirely wood, paper, natural fibers or Group C plastics None, corrugated cartons, wooden crates or woodboxes None, metal or wood Class III Entirely wood, paper, natural fibers or Group C plastics Corrugated cartons, wooden crates or wood boxes, with plasticpackaging None, metal or wood See Figure 5.6.3.4.1 Wood, paper, natural fibers or Group C plastics, with Group A plastic components None, corrugated cartons, woodencrates or wood boxes with or without plastic packaging None, metal or wood See Figure 5.6.3.4.1 Wood, paper, natural fibers or Group C plastics, with or without Group Aplastic components Any type Plastic See 5.6.2 and Figure 5.6.3.4.1 Group B Plastics Entirely Group B plastics or free flowing plastic materials None, corrugatedcartons, wooden crates or wood boxes None, metal or wood Class IV Entirely Group B plastics or free flowing plastic materials Corrugated cartons, wooden crates or woodboxes, with plastic packaging None, metal or wood See Figure 5.6.3.4.1 Group B plastics with Group A plastic components None, corrugated cartons, wooden crates orwood boxes, with or without plastic packaging None, metal or wood See Figure 5.6.3.4.1 Entirely Group B plastics or free flowing plastic materials, or Group B plastics andGroup A plastic components Any type Plastic See 5.6.2 and Figure 5.6.3.4.1 Group A Plastics Entirely unexpanded Group A plastic Corrugated cartons, wooden cratesor wood boxes, without expanded Group A plastic packaging None, metal, wood or plastic Cartoned unexpanded Group A Plastic Entirely unexpanded Group Aplastic None None, metal, wood or plastic Exposed unexpanded Group A Plastic Entirely unexpanded Group A plastic Corrugated cartons, wooden crates or wood boxes,with expanded Group A plastic packaging None, metal, wood or plastic See Figure 5.6.3.4.1 Unexpanded Group A plastic with expanded Group A plasticcomponents Corrugated cartons, wooden crates or wood boxes, with or without expanded Group A plastic packaging None, metal, wood or plastic See Figure5.6.3.4.1 Expanded Group A plastic Corrugated cartons, wooden crates or wood boxes, with or without expanded Group A plastic packaging None, metal, wood orplastic Cartoned expanded Group A Plastic Expanded Group A plastic None None, metal, wood or plastic Exposed expanded Group A Plastic

Note: This table provides guidance for the general characteristics to be considered in classifying a commodity. The additional commodity classification information includedin this standard as well as any relevant test data that is available should be considered in identifying the appropriate classification.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_A-5-6-1-1.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The proposed Table A.5.6.1.1 should not be accepted, because it makes numerous references to the proposed new Figure 5.6.3.4.1 and that proposed Figure 5.6.3.4.1 should not be accepted. The reason to adopt Figure 5.6.3.4.1 is not supported by any valid substantiation. The existing provision is that a product can have up to 25% by volume or 15% by weight of Group A plastics and still be considered to be a Class IV commodity. As per the proposed Figure 5.6.3.4.1 however, if a product had just 20% by volume and 10% by weight, it would be classified as a Group A plastic. This extreme change is unjustified and should not be accepted.

Related Item

First Revision No. 291-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. A.5.6.1.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon Apr 28 09:58:49 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-134-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: Table A.5.6.1.1 has been revised to correlate with the changes made to Table A.5.6.3

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

370 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 394: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 278-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. A.5.6.3.3 ]

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

371 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 395: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

A.5.6.3.3

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

372 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 396: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

See Table A.5.6.3.3.

Table A.5.6.3.3 Examples of Class III Commodities

Aerosols

 Cartoned or exposed

 - Level 1

Baked Goods

 Cookies, cakes, pies

 - Packaged, in cartons

Beans

 Dried

 - Packaged, cartoned

Biomass briquettes and pellets - Neat- and loose-piles

Bread

 Wrapped, cartoned

Butter

 Whipped spread

Candy

 Packaged, cartoned

Cartons

 Corrugated

 - Unassembled (neat piles)

Cereals

 Packaged, cartoned

Charcoal

 Bagged

 - Standard

Cheese

 - Packaged, cartoned

 - Wheels, cartoned

Chewing Gum

 Packaged, cartoned

Chocolate

 Packaged, cartoned

Cloth

 Cartoned and not cartoned

 - Natural fiber, viscose

Cocoa Products

 Packaged, cartoned

Coffee

 Packaged, cartoned

Coffee Beans

 Bagged

Cotton

 Packaged, cartoned

Diapers

 Cotton, linen

Dried Foods

 Packaged, cartoned

Fish or Fish Products

 Frozen

 - Plastic trays, cartoned

Frozen Foods

 Plastic trays

Furniture

 Wood

 - No plastic coverings or foam plastic cushioning

Grains — Packaged in Cartons

 - Barley

 - Rice

 - Oats

Margarine

 Up to 50 percent oil (in paper or plastic containers)

Mattresses

 Standard (box spring)

Nuts

 - Packaged, cartoned

 - Bagged

Paper Products

 Books, magazines, stationery, plastic-coated paper food containers, newspapers, cardboard games, cartoned tissue products

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

373 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 397: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Paper, Rolled

 In racks or on side

 - Medium- or heavyweight

Photographic Film

 - 35 mm in metal film cartridges in polyethylene cans in cardboard boxes

 - Paper, in sheets, bagged in polyethylene, in cardboard boxes

PVC (polyvinyl chloride)

 - Flexible (e.g., cable jackets, plasticized sheets)

 - Rigid (e.g., pipe, pipe fittings)

 - Bagged resins

Rags

 Baled

 - Natural fibers

Shingles

 Asphalt-coated fiberglass

Shock Absorbers

 Plastic dust cover

Skis

 Wood

Textiles

 Natural fiber clothing or textile products

 Synthetics (except rayon and nylon) —

 50/50 blend or less

 - Thread, yarn on wood or paper spools

 - Fabrics

Tobacco Products

 In paperboard cartons

Wood Products

 - Spools (empty)

 - Toothpicks, clothespins, hangers in cartons

 - Doors, windows, wood cabinets, and furniture

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Department of Energy projected feedstock costs—including grower payment, grinding, and feeding into the throat of the conversion process—are in the range of $85/dry ton by 2017. Packaging and storage of peletized and ground corn stover in supersacks adds $53 per dry-metric-ton (dmt) to the cost for packaging alone; there are additional equipment and labor costs for the bagging and debagging operations. The sheer logistics of moving containerized biomass and the additional cost for the packaging essentially eliminate the viability of the approach.

Upon recognizing this commercialization limitation, the BPICS has reconsidered its approach, thereby proposing only "static" and "loose-pile" configurations (minus the “bagged-supersak” and standard "collapsible shipping tote" categories.

Once again, The solid biomass materials submitted to NFPA13 are intended to clarify the level of protection provided to certain “crop-residue” is to be identified as a Class III commodity.

The supplementary material in the form of file, "HHV_INL_draft_002.xlsx" was prepared by Idaho National Laboratory to provide the NFPA13 Committee with 1) Results for heat of combustion performed at INL using the standard test methods of ASTM D5865-10a, Standard Test Method for Gross Calorific Value of Coal and Coke Using Either an Isoperibol or Adiabatic Bomb Calorimeter, 2) Results that the Laboratory has drawn from the literature, and 3) A simple spreadsheet from the publicly available "Engineering Toolbox" website showing values for a range of cellulosic biomass.

This comparative and peer-reviewed literature review demonstrates that the heating values for a select set of biomass feedstock are less than those for the two grades of Coal (Bituminous and Sub Bituminous), Charcoal, and Wood [Douglas fir wood and Douglas fir bark (i.e., Furniture)] identified in Table A.5.6.3.3 for Class III Commodities.

A comparative table (below) shows heating values for a select set of biomass feedstock relative to two grades of coal. http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/biomass-fuels-hhv-d_1818.html

Material HHV (GJ Mg-1) HHV (Btu/lb) Bituminous Coal 31.7 13,629 Sub Bituminous Coal 32.9 14,144 Charcoal 31.0 13,328 Douglas fir 21.0 9,028 Douglas fir bark 22.0 9,458 Eucalyptus grandis 19.4 8,340 Beech 20.3 8,727 Sugar cane bagasse 17.3 7,438 Wheat straw 17.5 7,524 Poplar 20.7 8,899 Rice hulls 15.3 6,578 Rice straw 15.8 6,793

The Biomass Industry Panel on Codes and Standards (BPICS), led by Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), is an initiative of the Department of Energy Biomass Technologies Office (BTO). As part of the BTO integrated biorefinery efforts, the BIPCS was assembled to conduct analysis of existing fire and building codes and to prepare proposed code changes designed to facilitate the development of the commercial-scale biomass industry while maintaining a focus on safety. The committee is made up of managers, engineers and code officials from industry, government laboratories, consulting firms, and the American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers (ASABE).

Fire codes related to storage, handling, and pre-processing of biomass are based on industries that operate in a significantly different manner than the growing biomass-based energy industry. Applying current research on biomass properties and knowledge of conventional and emerging storage, handling, and pre-processing technologies, the BIPCS has submitted changes to both the NFPA and ICC development processes intent on benefiting both industry and the public.

Related Item

Public Input No. 464-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. A.5.6.3.3]

Submitter Information Verification

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

374 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 398: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Submitter Full Name: Darren Meyers

Organization: IECC LLC

Affilliation: Co-Chair, DOE Biomass Industry Panel on Codes & Standards

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu May 15 21:05:03 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: The commodity classification task group had multiple conference calls with members of the BFICOCS addressing this issue. Given the lack of commodity classificationtesting, the committee is not comfortable in determining the classification (i.e. Class III vs. IV) for all the items listed in the submission. This cannot be determined basedonly on the heat of combustion. The committee has also identified a larger issue dealing with bulk commodities stored in large sac containers, typically woven plastic(PP).

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

375 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 399: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 280-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. A.5.6.3.3 ]

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

376 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 400: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

A.5.6.3.3

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

377 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 401: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

See Table A.5.6.3.3.

Table A.5.6.3.3 Examples of Class III Commodities

Aerosols

 Cartoned or exposed

 - Level 1

Baked Goods

 Cookies, cakes, pies

 - Packaged, in cartons

Beans

 Dried

 - Packaged, cartoned

Bread

 Wrapped, cartoned

Butter

 Whipped spread

Candy

 Packaged, cartoned

Cartons

 Corrugated

 - Unassembled (neat piles)

Cereals

 Packaged, cartoned

Charcoal

 Bagged

 - Standard

Cheese

 - Packaged, cartoned

 - Wheels, cartoned

Chewing Gum

 Packaged, cartoned

Chocolate

 Packaged, cartoned

Cloth

 Cartoned and not cartoned

 - Natural fiber, viscose

Cocoa Products

 Packaged, cartoned

Coffee

 Packaged, cartoned

Coffee Beans

 Bagged

Corn cobs - Neat- and loose-piles

Cotton

 Packaged, cartoned

Diapers

 Cotton, linen

Dried Foods

 Packaged, cartoned

Fish or Fish Products

 Frozen

 - Plastic trays, cartoned

Frozen Foods

 Plastic trays

Furniture

 Wood

 - No plastic coverings or foam plastic cushioning

Grains — Packaged in Cartons

 - Barley

 - Rice

 - Oats

Margarine

 Up to 50 percent oil (in paper or plastic containers)

Mattresses

 Standard (box spring)

Nuts

 - Packaged, cartoned

 - Bagged

Paper Products

 Books, magazines, stationery, plastic-coated paper food containers, newspapers, cardboard games, cartoned tissue products

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

378 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 402: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Paper, Rolled

 In racks or on side

 - Medium- or heavyweight

Photographic Film

 - 35 mm in metal film cartridges in polyethylene cans in cardboard boxes

 - Paper, in sheets, bagged in polyethylene, in cardboard boxes

PVC (polyvinyl chloride)

 - Flexible (e.g., cable jackets, plasticized sheets)

 - Rigid (e.g., pipe, pipe fittings)

 - Bagged resins

Rags

 Baled

 - Natural fibers

Shingles

 Asphalt-coated fiberglass

Shock Absorbers

 Plastic dust cover

Skis

 Wood

Textiles

 Natural fiber clothing or textile products

 Synthetics (except rayon and nylon) —

 50/50 blend or less

 - Thread, yarn on wood or paper spools

 - Fabrics

Tobacco Products

 In paperboard cartons

Wood Products

 - Spools (empty)

 - Toothpicks, clothespins, hangers in cartons

 - Doors, windows, wood cabinets, and furniture

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Department of Energy projected feedstock costs—including grower payment, grinding, and feeding into the throat of the conversion process—are in the range of $85/dry ton by 2017. Packaging and storage of peletized and ground corn stover in supersacks adds $53 per dry-metric-ton (dmt) to the cost for packaging alone; there are additional equipment and labor costs for the bagging and debagging operations. The sheer logistics of moving containerized biomass and the additional cost for the packaging essentially eliminate the viability of the approach.

Upon recognizing this commercialization limitation, the BPICS has reconsidered its approach, thereby proposing only "static" and "loose-pile" configurations (minus the “bagged-supersak” and standard "collapsible shipping tote" categories.

Once again, The solid biomass materials submitted to NFPA13 are intended to clarify the level of protection provided to certain “crop-residue” is to be identified as a Class III commodity.

The supplementary material in the form of file, "HHV_INL_draft_002.xlsx" was prepared by Idaho National Laboratory to provide the NFPA13 Committee with 1) Results for heat of combustion performed at INL using the standard test methods of ASTM D5865-10a, Standard Test Method for Gross Calorific Value of Coal and Coke Using Either an Isoperibol or Adiabatic Bomb Calorimeter, 2) Results that the Laboratory has drawn from the literature, and 3) A simple spreadsheet from the publicly available "Engineering Toolbox" website showing values for a range of cellulosic biomass.

This comparative and peer-reviewed literature review demonstrates that the heating values for a select set of biomass feedstock are less than those for the two grades of Coal (Bituminous and Sub Bituminous), Charcoal, and Wood [Douglas fir wood and Douglas fir bark (i.e., Furniture)] identified in Table A.5.6.3.3 for Class III Commodities.

A comparative table (below) shows heating values for a select set of biomass feedstock relative to two grades of coal. http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/biomass-fuels-hhv-d_1818.html

Material HHV (GJ Mg-1) HHV (Btu/lb) Bituminous Coal 31.7 13,629 Sub Bituminous Coal 32.9 14,144 Charcoal 31.0 13,328 Douglas fir 21.0 9,028 Douglas fir bark 22.0 9,458 Eucalyptus grandis 19.4 8,340 Beech 20.3 8,727 Sugar cane bagasse 17.3 7,438 Wheat straw 17.5 7,524 Poplar 20.7 8,899 Rice hulls 15.3 6,578 Rice straw 15.8 6,793

The Biomass Industry Panel on Codes and Standards (BPICS), led by Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), is an initiative of the Department of Energy Biomass Technologies Office (BTO). As part of the BTO integrated biorefinery efforts, the BIPCS was assembled to conduct analysis of existing fire and building codes and to prepare proposed code changes designed to facilitate the development of the commercial-scale biomass industry while maintaining a focus on safety. The committee is made up of managers, engineers and code officials from industry, government laboratories, consulting firms, and the American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers (ASABE).

Fire codes related to storage, handling, and pre-processing of biomass are based on industries that operate in a significantly different manner than the growing biomass-based energy industry. Applying current research on biomass properties and knowledge of conventional and emerging storage, handling, and pre-processing technologies, the BIPCS has submitted changes to both the NFPA and ICC development processes intent on benefiting both industry and the public.

Related Item

Public Input No. 464-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. A.5.6.3.3]

Submitter Information Verification

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

379 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 403: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Submitter Full Name: Darren Meyers

Organization: IECC LLC

Affilliation: Co-Chair, Biomass Industry Panel on Codes & Standards

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu May 15 21:19:48 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: The commodity classification task group had multiple conference calls with members of the BFICOCS addressing this issue. Given the lack of commodity classificationtesting, the committee is not comfortable in determining the classification (i.e. Class III vs. IV) for all the items listed in the submission. This cannot be determined basedonly on the heat of combustion. The committee has also identified a larger issue dealing with bulk commodities stored in large sac containers, typically woven plastic(PP).

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

380 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 404: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 281-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. A.5.6.3.3 ]

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

381 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 405: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

A.5.6.3.3

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

382 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 406: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

See Table A.5.6.3.3.

Table A.5.6.3.3 Examples of Class III Commodities

Aerosols

 Cartoned or exposed

 - Level 1

Baked Goods

 Cookies, cakes, pies

 - Packaged, in cartons

Beans

 Dried

 - Packaged, cartoned

Bread

 Wrapped, cartoned

Butter

 Whipped spread

Candy

 Packaged, cartoned

Cartons

 Corrugated

 - Unassembled (neat piles)

Cereals

 Packaged, cartoned

Charcoal

 Bagged

 - Standard

Cheese

 - Packaged, cartoned

 - Wheels, cartoned

Chewing Gum

 Packaged, cartoned

Chocolate

 Packaged, cartoned

Cloth

 Cartoned and not cartoned

 - Natural fiber, viscose

Cocoa Products

 Packaged, cartoned

Coffee

 Packaged, cartoned

Coffee Beans

 Bagged

Corn stover - Baled and chopped (Neat- or static-piles)

Cotton

 Packaged, cartoned

Diapers

 Cotton, linen

Dried Foods

 Packaged, cartoned

Fish or Fish Products

 Frozen

 - Plastic trays, cartoned

Frozen Foods

 Plastic trays

Furniture

 Wood

 - No plastic coverings or foam plastic cushioning

Grains — Packaged in Cartons

 - Barley

 - Rice

 - Oats

Margarine

 Up to 50 percent oil (in paper or plastic containers)

Mattresses

 Standard (box spring)

Nuts

 - Packaged, cartoned

 - Bagged

Paper Products

 Books, magazines, stationery, plastic-coated paper food containers, newspapers, cardboard games, cartoned tissue products

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

383 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 407: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Paper, Rolled

 In racks or on side

 - Medium- or heavyweight

Photographic Film

 - 35 mm in metal film cartridges in polyethylene cans in cardboard boxes

 - Paper, in sheets, bagged in polyethylene, in cardboard boxes

PVC (polyvinyl chloride)

 - Flexible (e.g., cable jackets, plasticized sheets)

 - Rigid (e.g., pipe, pipe fittings)

 - Bagged resins

Rags

 Baled

 - Natural fibers

Shingles

 Asphalt-coated fiberglass

Shock Absorbers

 Plastic dust cover

Skis

 Wood

Textiles

 Natural fiber clothing or textile products

 Synthetics (except rayon and nylon) —

 50/50 blend or less

 - Thread, yarn on wood or paper spools

 - Fabrics

Tobacco Products

 In paperboard cartons

Wood Products

 - Spools (empty)

 - Toothpicks, clothespins, hangers in cartons

 - Doors, windows, wood cabinets, and furniture

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Department of Energy projected feedstock costs—including grower payment, grinding, and feeding into the throat of the conversion process—are in the range of $85/dry ton by 2017. Packaging and storage of peletized and ground corn stover in supersacks adds $53 per dry-metric-ton (dmt) to the cost for packaging alone; there are additional equipment and labor costs for the bagging and debagging operations. The sheer logistics of moving containerized biomass and the additional cost for the packaging essentially eliminate the viability of the approach.

Upon recognizing this commercialization limitation, the BPICS has reconsidered its approach, thereby proposing only "static" and "loose-pile" configurations (minus the “bagged-supersak” and standard "collapsible shipping tote" categories.

Once again, The solid biomass materials submitted to NFPA13 are intended to clarify the level of protection provided to certain “crop-residue” is to be identified as a Class III commodity. The supplementary material in the form of file, "HHV_INL_draft_002.xlsx" was prepared by Idaho National Laboratory to provide the NFPA13 Committee with 1) Results for heat of combustion performed at INL using the standard test methods of ASTM D5865-10a, Standard Test Method for Gross Calorific Value of Coal and Coke Using Either an Isoperibol or Adiabatic Bomb Calorimeter, 2) Results that the Laboratory has drawn from the literature, and 3) A simple spreadsheet from the publicly available "Engineering Toolbox" website showing values for a range of cellulosic biomass.

This comparative and peer-reviewed literature review demonstrates that the heating values for a select set of biomass feedstock are less than those for the two grades of Coal (Bituminous and Sub Bituminous), Charcoal, and Wood [Douglas fir wood and Douglas fir bark (i.e., Furniture)] identified in Table A.5.6.3.3 for Class III Commodities.

A comparative table (below) shows heating values for a select set of biomass feedstock relative to two grades of coal. http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/biomass-fuels-hhv-d_1818.html

Material HHV (GJ Mg-1) HHV (Btu/lb) Bituminous Coal 31.7 13,629 Sub Bituminous Coal 32.9 14,144 Charcoal 31.0 13,328 Douglas fir 21.0 9,028 Douglas fir bark 22.0 9,458 Eucalyptus grandis 19.4 8,340 Beech 20.3 8,727 Sugar cane bagasse 17.3 7,438 Wheat straw 17.5 7,524 Poplar 20.7 8,899 Rice hulls 15.3 6,578 Rice straw 15.8 6,793

The Biomass Industry Panel on Codes and Standards (BPICS), led by Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), is an initiative of the Department of Energy Biomass Technologies Office (BTO). As part of the BTO integrated biorefinery efforts, the BIPCS was assembled to conduct analysis of existing fire and building codes and to prepare proposed code changes designed to facilitate the development of the commercial-scale biomass industry while maintaining a focus on safety. The committee is made up of managers, engineers and code officials from industry, government laboratories, consulting firms, and the American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers (ASABE).

Fire codes related to storage, handling, and pre-processing of biomass are based on industries that operate in a significantly different manner than the growing biomass-based energy industry. Applying current research on biomass properties and knowledge of conventional and emerging storage, handling, and pre-processing technologies, the BIPCS has submitted changes to both the NFPA and ICC development processes intent on benefiting both industry and the public.

Related Item

Public Input No. 464-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. A.5.6.3.3]

Submitter Information Verification

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

384 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 408: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Submitter Full Name: Darren Meyers

Organization: IECC LLC

Affilliation: Co-Chair, Biomass Industry Panel on Codes & Standards

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu May 15 21:25:21 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: The commodity classification task group had multiple conference calls with members of the BFICOCS addressing this issue. Given the lack of commodity classificationtesting, the committee is not comfortable in determining the classification (i.e. Class III vs. IV) for all the items listed in the submission. This cannot be determined basedonly on the heat of combustion. The committee has also identified a larger issue dealing with bulk commodities stored in large sac containers, typically woven plastic(PP).

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

385 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 409: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 282-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. A.5.6.3.3 ]

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

386 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 410: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

A.5.6.3.3

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

387 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 411: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

See Table A.5.6.3.3.

Table A.5.6.3.3 Examples of Class III Commodities

Aerosols

 Cartoned or exposed

 - Level 1

Baked Goods

 Cookies, cakes, pies

 - Packaged, in cartons

Beans

 Dried

 - Packaged, cartoned

Bread

 Wrapped, cartoned

Butter

 Whipped spread

Candy

 Packaged, cartoned

Cartons

 Corrugated

 - Unassembled (neat piles)

Cereals

 Packaged, cartoned

Charcoal

 Bagged

 - Standard

Cheese

 - Packaged, cartoned

 - Wheels, cartoned

Chewing Gum

 Packaged, cartoned

Chocolate

 Packaged, cartoned

Cloth

 Cartoned and not cartoned

 - Natural fiber, viscose

Cocoa Products

 Packaged, cartoned

Coffee

 Packaged, cartoned

Coffee Beans

 Bagged

Cotton

 Packaged, cartoned

Diapers

 Cotton, linen

Dried Foods

 Packaged, cartoned

Fish or Fish Products

 Frozen

 - Plastic trays, cartoned

Forest residue, round wood, or chips - Branches, bark, cross-cut ends, edgings and treetops

Frozen Foods

 Plastic trays

Furniture

 Wood

 - No plastic coverings or foam plastic cushioning

Grains — Packaged in Cartons

 - Barley

 - Rice

 - Oats

Margarine

 Up to 50 percent oil (in paper or plastic containers)

Mattresses

 Standard (box spring)

Nuts

 - Packaged, cartoned

 - Bagged

Paper Products

 Books, magazines, stationery, plastic-coated paper food containers, newspapers, cardboard games, cartoned tissue products

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

388 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 412: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Paper, Rolled

 In racks or on side

 - Medium- or heavyweight

Photographic Film

 - 35 mm in metal film cartridges in polyethylene cans in cardboard boxes

 - Paper, in sheets, bagged in polyethylene, in cardboard boxes

PVC (polyvinyl chloride)

 - Flexible (e.g., cable jackets, plasticized sheets)

 - Rigid (e.g., pipe, pipe fittings)

 - Bagged resins

Rags

 Baled

 - Natural fibers

Shingles

 Asphalt-coated fiberglass

Shock Absorbers

 Plastic dust cover

Skis

 Wood

Textiles

 Natural fiber clothing or textile products

 Synthetics (except rayon and nylon) —

 50/50 blend or less

 - Thread, yarn on wood or paper spools

 - Fabrics

Tobacco Products

 In paperboard cartons

Wood Products

 - Spools (empty)

 - Toothpicks, clothespins, hangers in cartons

 - Doors, windows, wood cabinets, and furniture

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Department of Energy projected feedstock costs—including grower payment, grinding, and feeding into the throat of the conversion process—are in the range of $85/dry ton by 2017. Packaging and storage of peletized and ground corn stover in supersacks adds $53 per dry-metric-ton (dmt) to the cost for packaging alone; there are additional equipment and labor costs for the bagging and debagging operations. The sheer logistics of moving containerized biomass and the additional cost for the packaging essentially eliminate the viability of the approach.

Upon recognizing this commercialization limitation, the BPICS has reconsidered its approach, thereby proposing only "static" and "loose-pile" configurations (minus the “bagged-supersak” and standard "collapsible shipping tote" categories.

Once again, The solid biomass materials submitted to NFPA13 are intended to clarify the level of protection provided to certain “crop-residue” is to be identified as a Class III commodity.

The supplementary material in the form of file, "HHV_INL_draft_002.xlsx" was prepared by Idaho National Laboratory to provide the NFPA13 Committee with 1) Results for heat of combustion performed at INL using the standard test methods of ASTM D5865-10a, Standard Test Method for Gross Calorific Value of Coal and Coke Using Either an Isoperibol or Adiabatic Bomb Calorimeter, 2) Results that the Laboratory has drawn from the literature, and 3) A simple spreadsheet from the publicly available "Engineering Toolbox" website showing values for a range of cellulosic biomass.

This comparative and peer-reviewed literature review demonstrates that the heating values for a select set of biomass feedstock are less than those for the two grades of Coal (Bituminous and Sub Bituminous), Charcoal, and Wood [Douglas fir wood and Douglas fir bark (i.e., Furniture)] identified in Table A.5.6.3.3 for Class III Commodities.

A comparative table (below) shows heating values for a select set of biomass feedstock relative to two grades of coal. http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/biomass-fuels-hhv-d_1818.html

Material HHV (GJ Mg-1) HHV (Btu/lb) Bituminous Coal 31.7 13,629 Sub Bituminous Coal 32.9 14,144 Charcoal 31.0 13,328 Douglas fir 21.0 9,028 Douglas fir bark 22.0 9,458 Eucalyptus grandis 19.4 8,340 Beech 20.3 8,727 Sugar cane bagasse 17.3 7,438 Wheat straw 17.5 7,524 Poplar 20.7 8,899 Rice hulls 15.3 6,578 Rice straw 15.8 6,793

The Biomass Industry Panel on Codes and Standards (BPICS), led by Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), is an initiative of the Department of Energy Biomass Technologies Office (BTO). As part of the BTO integrated biorefinery efforts, the BIPCS was assembled to conduct analysis of existing fire and building codes and to prepare proposed code changes designed to facilitate the development of the commercial-scale biomass industry while maintaining a focus on safety. The committee is made up of managers, engineers and code officials from industry, government laboratories, consulting firms, and the American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers (ASABE).

Fire codes related to storage, handling, and pre-processing of biomass are based on industries that operate in a significantly different manner than the growing biomass-based energy industry. Applying current research on biomass properties and knowledge of conventional and emerging storage, handling, and pre-processing technologies, the BIPCS has submitted changes to both the NFPA and ICC development processes intent on benefiting both industry and the public.

Related Item

Public Input No. 464-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. A.5.6.3.3]

Submitter Information Verification

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

389 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 413: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Submitter Full Name: Darren Meyers

Organization: IECC LLC

Affilliation: Co-Chair, Biomass Industry Panel on Codes & Standards

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu May 15 21:30:37 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: The commodity classification task group had multiple conference calls with members of the BFICOCS addressing this issue. Given the lack of commodity classificationtesting, the committee is not comfortable in determining the classification (i.e. Class III vs. IV) for all the items listed in the submission. This cannot be determined basedonly on the heat of combustion. The committee has also identified a larger issue dealing with bulk commodities stored in large sac containers, typically woven plastic(PP).

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

390 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 414: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 283-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. A.5.6.3.3 ]

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

391 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 415: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

A.5.6.3.3

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

392 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 416: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

See Table A.5.6.3.3.

Table A.5.6.3.3 Examples of Class III Commodities

Aerosols

 Cartoned or exposed

 - Level 1

Baked Goods

 Cookies, cakes, pies

 - Packaged, in cartons

Beans

 Dried

 - Packaged, cartoned

Bread

 Wrapped, cartoned

Butter

 Whipped spread

Candy

 Packaged, cartoned

Cartons

 Corrugated

 - Unassembled (neat piles)

Cereals

 Packaged, cartoned

Charcoal

 Bagged

 - Standard

Cheese

 - Packaged, cartoned

 - Wheels, cartoned

Chewing Gum

 Packaged, cartoned

Chocolate

 Packaged, cartoned

Cloth

 Cartoned and not cartoned

 - Natural fiber, viscose

Cocoa Products

 Packaged, cartoned

Coffee

 Packaged, cartoned

Coffee Beans

 Bagged

Cotton

 Packaged, cartoned

Diapers

 Cotton, linen

Dried Foods

 Packaged, cartoned

Fish or Fish Products

 Frozen

 - Plastic trays, cartoned

Frozen Foods

 Plastic trays

Furniture

 Wood

 - No plastic coverings or foam plastic cushioning

Grains — Packaged in Cartons

 - Barley

 - Rice

 - Oats

Margarine

 Up to 50 percent oil (in paper or plastic containers)

Mattresses

 Standard (box spring)

Nuts

 - Packaged, cartoned

 - Bagged

Paper Products

 Books, magazines, stationery, plastic-coated paper food containers, newspapers, cardboard games, cartoned tissue products

Paper, Rolled

 In racks or on side

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

393 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 417: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

 - Medium- or heavyweight

Peanut hulls - Neat- and loose-piles

Photographic Film

 - 35 mm in metal film cartridges in polyethylene cans in cardboard boxes

 - Paper, in sheets, bagged in polyethylene, in cardboard boxes

PVC (polyvinyl chloride)

 - Flexible (e.g., cable jackets, plasticized sheets)

 - Rigid (e.g., pipe, pipe fittings)

 - Bagged resins

Rags

 Baled

 - Natural fibers

Shingles

 Asphalt-coated fiberglass

Shock Absorbers

 Plastic dust cover

Skis

 Wood

Textiles

 Natural fiber clothing or textile products

 Synthetics (except rayon and nylon) —

 50/50 blend or less

 - Thread, yarn on wood or paper spools

 - Fabrics

Tobacco Products

 In paperboard cartons

Wood Products

 - Spools (empty)

 - Toothpicks, clothespins, hangers in cartons

 - Doors, windows, wood cabinets, and furniture

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Department of Energy projected feedstock costs—including grower payment, grinding, and feeding into the throat of the conversion process—are in the range of $85/dry ton by 2017. Packaging and storage of peletized and ground corn stover in supersacks adds $53 per dry-metric-ton (dmt) to the cost for packaging alone; there are additional equipment and labor costs for the bagging and debagging operations. The sheer logistics of moving containerized biomass and the additional cost for the packaging essentially eliminate the viability of the approach. Upon recognizing this commercialization limitation, the BPICS has reconsidered its approach, thereby proposing only "static" and "loose-pile" configurations (minus the “bagged-supersak” and standard "collapsible shipping tote" categories.Once again, The solid biomass materials submitted to NFPA13 are intended to clarify the level of protection provided to certain “crop-residue” is to be identified as a Class III commodity. The supplementary material in the form of file, "HHV_INL_draft_002.xlsx" was prepared by Idaho National Laboratory to provide the NFPA13 Committee with 1) Results for heat of combustion performed at INL using the standard test methods of ASTM D5865-10a, Standard Test Method for Gross Calorific Value of Coal and Coke Using Either an Isoperibol or Adiabatic Bomb Calorimeter, 2) Results that the Laboratory has drawn from the literature, and 3) A simple spreadsheet from the publicly available "Engineering Toolbox" website showing values for a range of cellulosic biomass. This comparative and peer-reviewed literature review demonstrates that the heating values for a select set of biomass feedstock are less than those for the two grades of Coal (Bituminous and Sub Bituminous), Charcoal, and Wood [Douglas fir wood and Douglas fir bark (i.e., Furniture)] identified in Table A.5.6.3.3 for Class III Commodities. A comparative table (below) shows heating values for a select set of biomass feedstock relative to two grades of coal. http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/biomass-fuels-hhv-d_1818.html

Material HHV (GJ Mg-1) HHV (Btu/lb) Bituminous Coal 31.7 13,629 Sub Bituminous Coal 32.9 14,144 Charcoal 31.0 13,328 Douglas fir 21.0 9,028 Douglas fir bark 22.0 9,458 Eucalyptus grandis 19.4 8,340 Beech 20.3 8,727 Sugar cane bagasse 17.3 7,438 Wheat straw 17.5 7,524 Poplar 20.7 8,899 Rice hulls 15.3 6,578 Rice straw 15.8 6,793

The Biomass Industry Panel on Codes and Standards (BPICS), led by Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), is an initiative of the Department of Energy Biomass Technologies Office (BTO). As part of the BTO integrated biorefinery efforts, the BIPCS was assembled to conduct analysis of existing fire and building codes and to prepare proposed code changes designed to facilitate the development of the commercial-scale biomass industry while maintaining a focus on safety. The committee is made up of managers, engineers and code officials from industry, government laboratories, consulting firms, and the American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers (ASABE). Fire codes related to storage, handling, and pre-processing of biomass are based on industries that operate in a significantly different manner than the growing biomass-based energy industry. Applying current research on biomass properties and knowledge of conventional and emerging storage, handling, and pre-processing technologies, the BIPCS has submitted changes to both the NFPA and ICC development processes intent on benefiting both industry and the public.

Related Item

Public Input No. 464-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. A.5.6.3.3]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Darren Meyers

Organization: IECC LLC

Affilliation: Co-Chair, Biomass Industry Panel on Codes & Standards

Street Address:

City:

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

394 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 418: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu May 15 21:35:55 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: The commodity classification task group had multiple conference calls with members of the BFICOCS addressing this issue. Given the lack of commodity classificationtesting, the committee is not comfortable in determining the classification (i.e. Class III vs. IV) for all the items listed in the submission. This cannot be determined basedonly on the heat of combustion. The committee has also identified a larger issue dealing with bulk commodities stored in large sac containers, typically woven plastic(PP).

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

395 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 419: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 284-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. A.5.6.3.3 ]

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

396 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 420: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

A.5.6.3.3

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

397 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 421: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

See Table A.5.6.3.3.

Table A.5.6.3.3 Examples of Class III Commodities

Aerosols

 Cartoned or exposed

 - Level 1

Baked Goods

 Cookies, cakes, pies

 - Packaged, in cartons

Beans

 Dried

 - Packaged, cartoned

Bread

 Wrapped, cartoned

Butter

 Whipped spread

Candy

 Packaged, cartoned

Cartons

 Corrugated

 - Unassembled (neat piles)

Cereals

 Packaged, cartoned

Charcoal

 Bagged

 - Standard

Cheese

 - Packaged, cartoned

 - Wheels, cartoned

Chewing Gum

 Packaged, cartoned

Chocolate

 Packaged, cartoned

Cloth

 Cartoned and not cartoned

 - Natural fiber, viscose

Cocoa Products

 Packaged, cartoned

Coffee

 Packaged, cartoned

Coffee Beans

 Bagged

Cotton

 Packaged, cartoned

Diapers

 Cotton, linen

Dried Foods

 Packaged, cartoned

Fish or Fish Products

 Frozen

 - Plastic trays, cartoned

Frozen Foods

 Plastic trays

Furniture

 Wood

 - No plastic coverings or foam plastic cushioning

Grains — Packaged in Cartons

 - Barley

 - Rice

 - Oats

Margarine

 Up to 50 percent oil (in paper or plastic containers)

Mattresses

 Standard (box spring)

Nuts

 - Packaged, cartoned

 - Bagged

Paper Products

 Books, magazines, stationery, plastic-coated paper food containers, newspapers, cardboard games, cartoned tissue products

Paper, Rolled

 In racks or on side

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

398 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 422: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

 - Medium- or heavyweight

Photographic Film

 - 35 mm in metal film cartridges in polyethylene cans in cardboard boxes

 - Paper, in sheets, bagged in polyethylene, in cardboard boxes

PVC (polyvinyl chloride)

 - Flexible (e.g., cable jackets, plasticized sheets)

 - Rigid (e.g., pipe, pipe fittings)

 - Bagged resins

Recovered construction wood - No plastic coverings or foam plastic cushioning

Rags

 Baled

 - Natural fibers

Shingles

 Asphalt-coated fiberglass

Shock Absorbers

 Plastic dust cover

Skis

 Wood

Textiles

 Natural fiber clothing or textile products

 Synthetics (except rayon and nylon) —

 50/50 blend or less

 - Thread, yarn on wood or paper spools

 - Fabrics

Tobacco Products

 In paperboard cartons

Wood Products

 - Spools (empty)

 - Toothpicks, clothespins, hangers in cartons

 - Doors, windows, wood cabinets, and furniture

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Department of Energy projected feedstock costs—including grower payment, grinding, and feeding into the throat of the conversion process—are in the range of $85/dry ton by 2017. Packaging and storage of peletized and ground corn stover in supersacks adds $53 per dry-metric-ton (dmt) to the cost for packaging alone; there are additional equipment and labor costs for the bagging and debagging operations. The sheer logistics of moving containerized biomass and the additional cost for the packaging essentially eliminate the viability of the approach. Upon recognizing this commercialization limitation, the BPICS has reconsidered its approach, thereby proposing only "static" and "loose-pile" configurations (minus the “bagged-supersak” and standard "collapsible shipping tote" categories.Once again, The solid biomass materials submitted to NFPA13 are intended to clarify the level of protection provided to certain “crop-residue” is to be identified as a Class III commodity. The supplementary material in the form of file, "HHV_INL_draft_002.xlsx" was prepared by Idaho National Laboratory to provide the NFPA13 Committee with 1) Results for heat of combustion performed at INL using the standard test methods of ASTM D5865-10a, Standard Test Method for Gross Calorific Value of Coal and Coke Using Either an Isoperibol or Adiabatic Bomb Calorimeter, 2) Results that the Laboratory has drawn from the literature, and 3) A simple spreadsheet from the publicly available "Engineering Toolbox" website showing values for a range of cellulosic biomass. This comparative and peer-reviewed literature review demonstrates that the heating values for a select set of biomass feedstock are less than those for the two grades of Coal (Bituminous and Sub Bituminous), Charcoal, and Wood [Douglas fir wood and Douglas fir bark (i.e., Furniture)] identified in Table A.5.6.3.3 for Class III Commodities. A comparative table (below) shows heating values for a select set of biomass feedstock relative to two grades of coal. http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/biomass-fuels-hhv-d_1818.html

Material HHV (GJ Mg-1) HHV (Btu/lb) Bituminous Coal 31.7 13,629 Sub Bituminous Coal 32.9 14,144 Charcoal 31.0 13,328 Douglas fir 21.0 9,028 Douglas fir bark 22.0 9,458 Eucalyptus grandis 19.4 8,340 Beech 20.3 8,727 Sugar cane bagasse 17.3 7,438 Wheat straw 17.5 7,524 Poplar 20.7 8,899 Rice hulls 15.3 6,578 Rice straw 15.8 6,793

The Biomass Industry Panel on Codes and Standards (BPICS), led by Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), is an initiative of the Department of Energy Biomass Technologies Office (BTO). As part of the BTO integrated biorefinery efforts, the BIPCS was assembled to conduct analysis of existing fire and building codes and to prepare proposed code changes designed to facilitate the development of the commercial-scale biomass industry while maintaining a focus on safety. The committee is made up of managers, engineers and code officials from industry, government laboratories, consulting firms, and the American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers (ASABE). Fire codes related to storage, handling, and pre-processing of biomass are based on industries that operate in a significantly different manner than the growing biomass-based energy industry. Applying current research on biomass properties and knowledge of conventional and emerging storage, handling, and pre-processing technologies, the BIPCS has submitted changes to both the NFPA and ICC development processes intent on benefiting both industry and the public.

Related Item

Public Input No. 464-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. A.5.6.3.3]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Darren Meyers

Organization: IECC LLC

Affilliation: Co-Chair, Biomass Industry Panel on Codes and Standards

Street Address:

City:

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

399 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 423: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu May 15 21:38:44 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: The commodity classification task group had multiple conference calls with members of the BFICOCS addressing this issue. Given the lack of commodity classificationtesting, the committee is not comfortable in determining the classification (i.e. Class III vs. IV) for all the items listed in the submission. This cannot be determined basedonly on the heat of combustion. The committee has also identified a larger issue dealing with bulk commodities stored in large sac containers, typically woven plastic(PP).

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

400 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 424: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 285-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. A.5.6.3.3 ]

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

401 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 425: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

A.5.6.3.3

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

402 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 426: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

See Table A.5.6.3.3.

Table A.5.6.3.3 Examples of Class III Commodities

Aerosols

 Cartoned or exposed

 - Level 1

Baked Goods

 Cookies, cakes, pies

 - Packaged, in cartons

Beans

 Dried

 - Packaged, cartoned

Bread

 Wrapped, cartoned

Butter

 Whipped spread

Candy

 Packaged, cartoned

Cartons

 Corrugated

 - Unassembled (neat piles)

Cereals

 Packaged, cartoned

Charcoal

 Bagged

 - Standard

Cheese

 - Packaged, cartoned

 - Wheels, cartoned

Chewing Gum

 Packaged, cartoned

Chocolate

 Packaged, cartoned

Cloth

 Cartoned and not cartoned

 - Natural fiber, viscose

Cocoa Products

 Packaged, cartoned

Coffee

 Packaged, cartoned

Coffee Beans

 Bagged

Cotton

 Packaged, cartoned

Diapers

 Cotton, linen

Dried Foods

 Packaged, cartoned

Fish or Fish Products

 Frozen

 - Plastic trays, cartoned

Frozen Foods

 Plastic trays

Furniture

 Wood

 - No plastic coverings or foam plastic cushioning

Grains — Packaged in Cartons

 - Barley

 - Rice

 - Oats

Margarine

 Up to 50 percent oil (in paper or plastic containers)

Mattresses

 Standard (box spring)

Nuts

 - Packaged, cartoned

 - Bagged

Paper Products

 Books, magazines, stationery, plastic-coated paper food containers, newspapers, cardboard games, cartoned tissue products

Paper, Rolled

 In racks or on side

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

403 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 427: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

 - Medium- or heavyweight

Photographic Film

 - 35 mm in metal film cartridges in polyethylene cans in cardboard boxes

 - Paper, in sheets, bagged in polyethylene, in cardboard boxes

PVC (polyvinyl chloride)

 - Flexible (e.g., cable jackets, plasticized sheets)

 - Rigid (e.g., pipe, pipe fittings)

 - Bagged resins

Rags

 Baled

 - Natural fibers

Shingles

 Asphalt-coated fiberglass

Shock Absorbers

 Plastic dust cover

Straw - Baled and chopped

Skis

 Wood

Textiles

 Natural fiber clothing or textile products

 Synthetics (except rayon and nylon) —

 50/50 blend or less

 - Thread, yarn on wood or paper spools

 - Fabrics

Tobacco Products

 In paperboard cartons

Wood Products

 - Spools (empty)

 - Toothpicks, clothespins, hangers in cartons

 - Doors, windows, wood cabinets, and furniture

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Department of Energy projected feedstock costs—including grower payment, grinding, and feeding into the throat of the conversion process—are in the range of $85/dry ton by 2017. Packaging and storage of peletized and ground corn stover in supersacks adds $53 per dry-metric-ton (dmt) to the cost for packaging alone; there are additional equipment and labor costs for the bagging and debagging operations. The sheer logistics of moving containerized biomass and the additional cost for the packaging essentially eliminate the viability of the approach. Upon recognizing this commercialization limitation, the BPICS has reconsidered its approach, thereby proposing only "static" and "loose-pile" configurations (minus the “bagged-supersak” and standard "collapsible shipping tote" categories.Once again, The solid biomass materials submitted to NFPA13 are intended to clarify the level of protection provided to certain “crop-residue” is to be identified as a Class III commodity. The supplementary material in the form of file, "HHV_INL_draft_002.xlsx" was prepared by Idaho National Laboratory to provide the NFPA13 Committee with 1) Results for heat of combustion performed at INL using the standard test methods of ASTM D5865-10a, Standard Test Method for Gross Calorific Value of Coal and Coke Using Either an Isoperibol or Adiabatic Bomb Calorimeter, 2) Results that the Laboratory has drawn from the literature, and 3) A simple spreadsheet from the publicly available "Engineering Toolbox" website showing values for a range of cellulosic biomass. This comparative and peer-reviewed literature review demonstrates that the heating values for a select set of biomass feedstock are less than those for the two grades of Coal (Bituminous and Sub Bituminous), Charcoal, and Wood [Douglas fir wood and Douglas fir bark (i.e., Furniture)] identified in Table A.5.6.3.3 for Class III Commodities. A comparative table (below) shows heating values for a select set of biomass feedstock relative to two grades of coal. http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/biomass-fuels-hhv-d_1818.html

Material HHV (GJ Mg-1) HHV (Btu/lb) Bituminous Coal 31.7 13,629 Sub Bituminous Coal 32.9 14,144 Charcoal 31.0 13,328 Douglas fir 21.0 9,028 Douglas fir bark 22.0 9,458 Eucalyptus grandis 19.4 8,340 Beech 20.3 8,727 Sugar cane bagasse 17.3 7,438 Wheat straw 17.5 7,524 Poplar 20.7 8,899 Rice hulls 15.3 6,578 Rice straw 15.8 6,793

The Biomass Industry Panel on Codes and Standards (BPICS), led by Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), is an initiative of the Department of Energy Biomass Technologies Office (BTO). As part of the BTO integrated biorefinery efforts, the BIPCS was assembled to conduct analysis of existing fire and building codes and to prepare proposed code changes designed to facilitate the development of the commercial-scale biomass industry while maintaining a focus on safety. The committee is made up of managers, engineers and code officials from industry, government laboratories, consulting firms, and the American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers (ASABE). Fire codes related to storage, handling, and pre-processing of biomass are based on industries that operate in a significantly different manner than the growing biomass-based energy industry. Applying current research on biomass properties and knowledge of conventional and emerging storage, handling, and pre-processing technologies, the BIPCS has submitted changes to both the NFPA and ICC development processes intent on benefiting both industry and the public.

Related Item

Public Input No. 464-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. A.5.6.3.3]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Darren Meyers

Organization: IECC LLC

Affilliation: Co-Chair, Biomass Industry Panel on Codes and Standards

Street Address:

City:

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

404 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 428: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu May 15 21:41:47 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: The commodity classification task group had multiple conference calls with members of the BFICOCS addressing this issue. Given the lack of commodity classificationtesting, the committee is not comfortable in determining the classification (i.e. Class III vs. IV) for all the items listed in the submission. This cannot be determined basedonly on the heat of combustion. The committee has also identified a larger issue dealing with bulk commodities stored in large sac containers, typically woven plastic(PP).

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

405 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 429: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 286-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. A.5.6.3.3 ]

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

406 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 430: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

A.5.6.3.3

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

407 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 431: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

See Table A.5.6.3.3.

Table A.5.6.3.3 Examples of Class III Commodities

Aerosols

 Cartoned or exposed

 - Level 1

Baked Goods

 Cookies, cakes, pies

 - Packaged, in cartons

Beans

 Dried

 - Packaged, cartoned

Bread

 Wrapped, cartoned

Butter

 Whipped spread

Candy

 Packaged, cartoned

Cartons

 Corrugated

 - Unassembled (neat piles)

Cereals

 Packaged, cartoned

Charcoal

 Bagged

 - Standard

Cheese

 - Packaged, cartoned

 - Wheels, cartoned

Chewing Gum

 Packaged, cartoned

Chocolate

 Packaged, cartoned

Cloth

 Cartoned and not cartoned

 - Natural fiber, viscose

Cocoa Products

 Packaged, cartoned

Coffee

 Packaged, cartoned

Coffee Beans

 Bagged

Cotton

 Packaged, cartoned

Diapers

 Cotton, linen

Dried Foods

 Packaged, cartoned

Fish or Fish Products

 Frozen

 - Plastic trays, cartoned

Frozen Foods

 Plastic trays

Furniture

 Wood

 - No plastic coverings or foam plastic cushioning

Grains — Packaged in Cartons

 - Barley

 - Rice

 - Oats

Margarine

 Up to 50 percent oil (in paper or plastic containers)

Mattresses

 Standard (box spring)

Nuts

 - Packaged, cartoned

 - Bagged

Paper Products

 Books, magazines, stationery, plastic-coated paper food containers, newspapers, cardboard games, cartoned tissue products

Paper, Rolled

 In racks or on side

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

408 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 432: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

 - Medium- or heavyweight

Photographic Film

 - 35 mm in metal film cartridges in polyethylene cans in cardboard boxes

 - Paper, in sheets, bagged in polyethylene, in cardboard boxes

PVC (polyvinyl chloride)

 - Flexible (e.g., cable jackets, plasticized sheets)

 - Rigid (e.g., pipe, pipe fittings)

 - Bagged resins

Rags

 Baled

 - Natural fibers

Shingles

 Asphalt-coated fiberglass

Shock Absorbers

 Plastic dust cover

Skis

 Wood

Textiles

 Natural fiber clothing or textile products

 Synthetics (except rayon and nylon) —

 50/50 blend or less

 - Thread, yarn on wood or paper spools

 - Fabrics

Tobacco Products

 In paperboard cartons

Wood chips - Neat- and loose-piles

Wood pellets - Neat- and loose piles

Wood Products

 - Spools (empty)

 - Toothpicks, clothespins, hangers in cartons

 - Doors, windows, wood cabinets, and furniture

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Department of Energy projected feedstock costs—including grower payment, grinding, and feeding into the throat of the conversion process—are in the range of $85/dry ton by 2017. Packaging and storage of peletized and ground corn stover in supersacks adds $53 per dry-metric-ton (dmt) to the cost for packaging alone; there are additional equipment and labor costs for the bagging and debagging operations. The sheer logistics of moving containerized biomass and the additional cost for the packaging essentially eliminate the viability of the approach. Upon recognizing this commercialization limitation, the BPICS has reconsidered its approach, thereby proposing only "static" and "loose-pile" configurations (minus the “bagged-supersak” and standard "collapsible shipping tote" categories.Once again, The solid biomass materials submitted to NFPA13 are intended to clarify the level of protection provided to certain “crop-residue” is to be identified as a Class III commodity. The supplementary material in the form of file, "HHV_INL_draft_002.xlsx" was prepared by Idaho National Laboratory to provide the NFPA13 Committee with 1) Results for heat of combustion performed at INL using the standard test methods of ASTM D5865-10a, Standard Test Method for Gross Calorific Value of Coal and Coke Using Either an Isoperibol or Adiabatic Bomb Calorimeter, 2) Results that the Laboratory has drawn from the literature, and 3) A simple spreadsheet from the publicly available "Engineering Toolbox" website showing values for a range of cellulosic biomass. This comparative and peer-reviewed literature review demonstrates that the heating values for a select set of biomass feedstock are less than those for the two grades of Coal (Bituminous and Sub Bituminous), Charcoal, and Wood [Douglas fir wood and Douglas fir bark (i.e., Furniture)] identified in Table A.5.6.3.3 for Class III Commodities. A comparative table (below) shows heating values for a select set of biomass feedstock relative to two grades of coal. http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/biomass-fuels-hhv-d_1818.html

Material HHV (GJ Mg-1) HHV (Btu/lb) Bituminous Coal 31.7 13,629 Sub Bituminous Coal 32.9 14,144 Charcoal 31.0 13,328 Douglas fir 21.0 9,028 Douglas fir bark 22.0 9,458 Eucalyptus grandis 19.4 8,340 Beech 20.3 8,727 Sugar cane bagasse 17.3 7,438 Wheat straw 17.5 7,524 Poplar 20.7 8,899 Rice hulls 15.3 6,578 Rice straw 15.8 6,793

The Biomass Industry Panel on Codes and Standards (BPICS), led by Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), is an initiative of the Department of Energy Biomass Technologies Office (BTO). As part of the BTO integrated biorefinery efforts, the BIPCS was assembled to conduct analysis of existing fire and building codes and to prepare proposed code changes designed to facilitate the development of the commercial-scale biomass industry while maintaining a focus on safety. The committee is made up of managers, engineers and code officials from industry, government laboratories, consulting firms, and the American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers (ASABE). Fire codes related to storage, handling, and pre-processing of biomass are based on industries that operate in a significantly different manner than the growing biomass-based energy industry. Applying current research on biomass properties and knowledge of conventional and emerging storage, handling, and pre-processing technologies, the BIPCS has submitted changes to both the NFPA and ICC development processes intent on benefiting both industry and the public.

Related Item

Public Input No. 464-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. A.5.6.3.3]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Darren Meyers

Organization: IECC LLC

Affilliation: Co-Chair, Biomass Industry Panel on Codes & Standards

Street Address:

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

409 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 433: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu May 15 21:46:08 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: The commodity classification task group had multiple conference calls with members of the BFICOCS addressing this issue. Given the lack of commodity classificationtesting, the committee is not comfortable in determining the classification (i.e. Class III vs. IV) for all the items listed in the submission. This cannot be determined basedonly on the heat of combustion. The committee has also identified a larger issue dealing with bulk commodities stored in large sac containers, typically woven plastic(PP).

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

410 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 434: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 287-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. A.5.6.3.3 ]

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

411 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 435: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

A.5.6.3.3

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

412 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 436: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

See Table A.5.6.3.3.

Table A.5.6.3.3 Examples of Class III Commodities

Aerosols

 Cartoned or exposed

 - Level 1

Baked Goods

 Cookies, cakes, pies

 - Packaged, in cartons

Beans

 Dried

 - Packaged, cartoned

Bread

 Wrapped, cartoned

Butter

 Whipped spread

Candy

 Packaged, cartoned

Cartons

 Corrugated

 - Unassembled (neat piles)

Cereals

 Packaged, cartoned

Charcoal

 Bagged

 - Standard

Cheese

 - Packaged, cartoned

 - Wheels, cartoned

Chewing Gum

 Packaged, cartoned

Chocolate

 Packaged, cartoned

Cloth

 Cartoned and not cartoned

 - Natural fiber, viscose

Cocoa Products

 Packaged, cartoned

Coffee

 Packaged, cartoned

Coffee Beans

 Bagged

Cotton

 Packaged, cartoned

Diapers

 Cotton, linen

Dried Foods

 Packaged, cartoned

Fish or Fish Products

 Frozen

 - Plastic trays, cartoned

Frozen Foods

 Plastic trays

Furniture

 Wood

 - No plastic coverings or foam plastic cushioning

Grains — Packaged in Cartons

 - Barley

 - Rice

 - Oats

Margarine

 Up to 50 percent oil (in paper or plastic containers)

Mattresses

 Standard (box spring)

Nuts

 - Packaged, cartoned

 - Bagged

Paper Products

 Books, magazines, stationery, plastic-coated paper food containers, newspapers, cardboard games, cartoned tissue products

Paper, Rolled

 In racks or on side

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

413 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 437: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

 - Medium- or heavyweight

Photographic Film

 - 35 mm in metal film cartridges in polyethylene cans in cardboard boxes

 - Paper, in sheets, bagged in polyethylene, in cardboard boxes

PVC (polyvinyl chloride)

 - Flexible (e.g., cable jackets, plasticized sheets)

 - Rigid (e.g., pipe, pipe fittings)

 - Bagged resins

Rags

 Baled

 - Natural fibers

Shingles

 Asphalt-coated fiberglass

Shock Absorbers

 Plastic dust cover

Skis

 Wood

Textiles

 Natural fiber clothing or textile products

 Synthetics (except rayon and nylon) —

 50/50 blend or less

 - Thread, yarn on wood or paper spools

 - Fabrics

Tobacco Products

 In paperboard cartons

Wood Products

 - Spools (empty)

 - Toothpicks, clothespins, hangers in cartons

 - Doors, windows, wood cabinets, and furniture

Woody biomass, round wood or chipped - Vase-shaped bushes, bamboo, willows, branches, bark and stem-wood

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Department of Energy projected feedstock costs—including grower payment, grinding, and feeding into the throat of the conversion process—are in the range of $85/dry ton by 2017. Packaging and storage of peletized and ground corn stover in supersacks adds $53 per dry-metric-ton (dmt) to the cost for packaging alone; there are additional equipment and labor costs for the bagging and debagging operations. The sheer logistics of moving containerized biomass and the additional cost for the packaging essentially eliminate the viability of the approach. Upon recognizing this commercialization limitation, the BPICS has reconsidered its approach, thereby proposing only "static" and "loose-pile" configurations (minus the “bagged-supersak” and standard "collapsible shipping tote" categories.Once again, The solid biomass materials submitted to NFPA13 are intended to clarify the level of protection provided to certain “crop-residue” is to be identified as a Class III commodity. The supplementary material in the form of file, "HHV_INL_draft_002.xlsx" was prepared by Idaho National Laboratory to provide the NFPA13 Committee with 1) Results for heat of combustion performed at INL using the standard test methods of ASTM D5865-10a, Standard Test Method for Gross Calorific Value of Coal and Coke Using Either an Isoperibol or Adiabatic Bomb Calorimeter, 2) Results that the Laboratory has drawn from the literature, and 3) A simple spreadsheet from the publicly available "Engineering Toolbox" website showing values for a range of cellulosic biomass. This comparative and peer-reviewed literature review demonstrates that the heating values for a select set of biomass feedstock are less than those for the two grades of Coal (Bituminous and Sub Bituminous), Charcoal, and Wood [Douglas fir wood and Douglas fir bark (i.e., Furniture)] identified in Table A.5.6.3.3 for Class III Commodities. A comparative table (below) shows heating values for a select set of biomass feedstock relative to two grades of coal. http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/biomass-fuels-hhv-d_1818.html

Material HHV (GJ Mg-1) HHV (Btu/lb) Bituminous Coal 31.7 13,629 Sub Bituminous Coal 32.9 14,144 Charcoal 31.0 13,328 Douglas fir 21.0 9,028 Douglas fir bark 22.0 9,458 Eucalyptus grandis 19.4 8,340 Beech 20.3 8,727 Sugar cane bagasse 17.3 7,438 Wheat straw 17.5 7,524 Poplar 20.7 8,899 Rice hulls 15.3 6,578 Rice straw 15.8 6,793

The Biomass Industry Panel on Codes and Standards (BPICS), led by Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), is an initiative of the Department of Energy Biomass Technologies Office (BTO). As part of the BTO integrated biorefinery efforts, the BIPCS was assembled to conduct analysis of existing fire and building codes and to prepare proposed code changes designed to facilitate the development of the commercial-scale biomass industry while maintaining a focus on safety. The committee is made up of managers, engineers and code officials from industry, government laboratories, consulting firms, and the American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers (ASABE). Fire codes related to storage, handling, and pre-processing of biomass are based on industries that operate in a significantly different manner than the growing biomass-based energy industry. Applying current research on biomass properties and knowledge of conventional and emerging storage, handling, and pre-processing technologies, the BIPCS has submitted changes to both the NFPA and ICC development processes intent on benefiting both industry and the public.

Related Item

Public Input No. 464-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. A.5.6.3.3]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Darren Meyers

Organization: IECC LLC

Affilliation: Co-Chair, DOE Biomass Industry Panel on Codes and Standards

Street Address:

City:

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

414 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 438: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu May 15 21:50:19 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: The commodity classification task group had multiple conference calls with members of the BFICOCS addressing this issue. Given the lack of commodity classificationtesting, the committee is not comfortable in determining the classification (i.e. Class III vs. IV) for all the items listed in the submission. This cannot be determined basedonly on the heat of combustion. The committee has also identified a larger issue dealing with bulk commodities stored in large sac containers, typically woven plastic(PP).

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

415 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 439: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 308-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. A.5.6.3.4 ]

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

416 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 440: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

A.5.6.3.4

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

417 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 441: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

See Table A.5.6.3.4.

Table A.5.6.3.4 Examples of Class IV Commodities

Ammunition

 Small arms, shotgun

 - Packaged, cartoned

Bottles, Jars

 Empty, cartoned

- Plastic PET (polyethylene terephthalate)

 Filled noncombustible powders

 - Plastic, cartoned [less than 1 gal (3.8 L)]

Cartons

 Corrugated

 - Partially assembled

Cloth

 Cartoned and not cartoned

 - Synthetic a

Diapers

 Disposable with plastics and nonwoven fabric (in cartons)

Fiberglass Insulation

 - Paper-backed rolls, bagged or unbagged

Furniture

 Wood

 - With plastic coverings

Liquor

 100 proof or less, 1 gal (3.8 L) or less, cartoned

 - Glass (palletized) b

 - Plastic bottles

Matches

 Packaged, cartoned

 - Paper

Nail Polish

 1 oz to 2 oz (29.6 mL to 59.1 mL) glass, cartoned

Paints

 Friction-top cans, cartoned

 - Oil based

Paper, Rolled

 In racks

 - Lightweight

Paper, Waxed

 Packaged in cartons

Pharmaceuticals

 Pills, powders

 - Plastic bottles, cartoned

Photographic Film

 - Rolls in polycarbonate plastic cassettes, bulk wrapped in cardboard boxes

PVA (polyvinyl alcohol) Resins

 Bagged

Rags

 Baled

 - Synthetic fibers

Rubber

 Natural, blocks in cartons

Shingles

 Asphalt-impregnated felt

Skis

 Foam core

Textiles

 Synthetics (except rayon and nylon) —

 50/50 blend or less

 - Thread, yarn on plastic spools

 Synthetics (except rayon and nylon) — greater than 50/50 blend

 - Thread, yarn on wood or paper spools

 - Fabrics

 Rayon and nylon

 - Baled fiber

 - Thread, yarn on wood or paper spools

 - Fabrics

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

418 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 442: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Vinyl Floor Coverings

 Tiles in cartons

Wax-Coated Paper

 Cups, plates

 - Boxed or packaged inside cartons (emphasis is on packaging)

Wire

 - Bare wire on plastic spools in cardboard boxes on wood skids

 - Single- or multiple-layer PVC-covered wire on plastic spools in cardboard boxes on wood skids

 - Single, multiple, or power cables (PVC) on large plastic spools

Wood Products

 Patterns

a Tests clearly indicate that a synthetic or synthetic blend is considered greater than Class III.

b Where liquor is stored in glass containers in racks, it should be considered a Class III commodity; where it is palletized, it should be considered a Class IV commodity.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Listing PET as a Class IV commodity in A.5.6.3.4 and excluding it in A.5.6.4.1 conflicts with PET being defined as a Group A plastic in 5.6.4.1(9).

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 309-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. A.5.6.4.1]

Related Item

First Revision No. 290-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. A.5.6]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Robert Upson

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA Engineering and Standards Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 10:59:40 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-155-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: As part of the commodity classification task groups review of the table A.5.6.3, all of the individual commodity tables are being updated as well. This table isintended to correlate with the revised Table A.5.6.3.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

419 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 443: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 309-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. A.5.6.4.1 ]

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

420 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 444: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

A.5.6.4.1

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

421 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 445: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

See Table A.5.6.4.1.

Table A.5.6.4.1 Examples of Group A Plastic Commodities

Batteries

 Truck or larger

 - Empty or filled a

Bottles, Jars

 Empty, cartoned

 - Plastic

(other than PET)

, any size

 Filled noncombustible liquids

 - Plastic, open or solid plastic crates b

 Filled noncombustible powders

 - Plastic, cartoned or exposed [greater than 1 gal (3.8 L)]

 - Plastic, solid plastic crates

 - Plastic, open plastic crates

Candles

 Packaged, cartoned

 - Treat as expanded plastic

Carpet Tiles

 Cartoned

Cartons

 Wax coated, single walled

Diapers

 Disposable with plastics and nonwoven fabric (exposed), plastic wrapped

Furniture

 Wood

 - With foam plastic cushioning

Lighters

 Butane

 - Blister-packed, cartoned

Margarine

 Between 50 percent and 80 percent oil (in any packaging)

Matches

 Packaged, cartoned

 - Wood

Mattresses

 Foam (in finished form)

Milk

 Containers in plastic crates

Nail Polish

 1 oz to 2 oz (29.6 mL to 59.1 mL) plastic bottles, cartoned

Paper Products

 Tissue products, exposed and plastic wrapped

Plastic Containers

 - Combustible or noncombustible solids in plastic containers and empty plastic containers

 - Noncombustible liquids or semiliquids (such as ketchup) in plastic containers with nominal wall thickness greater than 1 ⁄ 4 in. (6.4 mm) and larger than 5 gal (18.9 L)capacity

Polyurethane

 Cartoned or exposed expanded

Rubber

 Synthetic

Stuffed Toys

 Foam or synthetic

Textiles

 Synthetics (except rayon and nylon) —

 50/50 blend or less

 - Baled fiber

 Synthetics (except rayon and nylon) — greater than 50/50 blend

 - Baled fiber

 - Thread, yarn on plastic spools

 Rayon and nylon

 - Thread, yarn on plastic spools

Vinyl-Coated Fabric

 Cartoned

Vinyl Floor Coverings

 Rolled

Wax-Coated Paper

 Cups, plates

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

422 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 446: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

 - Loose inside large cartons

Wax

 Paraffin/petroleum wax, blocks, cartoned

Wire

 Bulk storage of empty plastic spools

a Most batteries have a polypropylene case and, if stored empty, should be treated as a Group A plastic. Truck batteries, even where filled, should be considered a Group Aplastic because of their thicker walls.

b As the openings in plastic crates become larger, the product behaves more like Class III. Conversely, as the openings become smaller, the product makeup behaves morelike a plastic.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Listing PET as a Class IV commodity in A.5.6.3.4 and excluding it in A.5.6.4.1 conflicts with PET being defined as a Group A plastic in 5.6.4.1(9).

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 308-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. A.5.6.3.4]

Related Item

First Revision No. 290-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. A.5.6]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Robert Upson

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA Engineering and Standards Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 11:03:52 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-156-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: As part of the commodity classification task groups review of the table A.5.6.3, all of the individual commodity tables are being updated as well. This table isintended to correlate with the revised Table A.5.6.3.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

423 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 447: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 183-NFPA 13-2014 [ Sections A.6.2.1.1, A.6.2.1.1.1 ]

Sections A.6.2.1.1, A.6.2.1.1.1

A.6.2.1.1

Sprinklers should be permitted to be reinstalled when the sprinkler being removed from the system remains attached to the original fitting or welded outlet, provided carehas been taken to ensure the sprinkler has not been damaged. Flexible hose connections are considered a fitting.

In new installations, where sprinklers are installed on pendent drop nipples or sidewall sprinklers prior to final cut-back, protective caps and/or straps should remain in placeuntil after the drop nipple has been cut to fit to the final ceiling elevation.

A.6.2.1.1.1

Provided dry sprinklers are removed by utilizing a pipe wrench on the barrel, where permitted by the manufacturer, they can be reinstalled. If a dry sprinkler is removed byutilizing the sprinkler wrench on the boss of the sprinkler, the dry sprinkler should not be reinstalled.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_A-6-2-1-1.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The idea of removing a sprinkler and thinking that it won't be damaged is a fallacy. There are more ways to damage a sprinkler than by torque. Handling and storage is the critical issue. The need for caps and straps on new sprinklers came from damage during the handling of sprinklers from right out of the manufactures cartons, so it is not possible to assure similar damage won't occur to a dry pendent sprinkler or to a sprinkler attached to a drop nipple that is removed from its installed location. See the images below as examples:

See the uploaded file for Figures

Related Item

First Revision No. 67-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after A.6.1.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon Apr 28 10:01:43 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: A.6.2.1.1 was not deleted because it provides necessary guidance where sprinklers are installed on drops. The drops can be removed with the sprinkler inaccordance with this section.

Statement: The removal of this section is intended to correlate with SR 22.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

424 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 448: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 259-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. A.8.15.1.3 ]

A.8.15.1.3

Utilities and other building services can be located within the concealed spaces. There are many variables that need to be taken into account when determing the density for anyspecific scenario. Most utilities and other building services are sources of ignition and do not significantly add to fuel load where the light hazard density can be applied.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

AHJs are requiring an ordinary hazard density simply from the presence of an air handling unit or heater that is located within a concealed space. The fuel loading is not significantly increased - it's just an ignition source. Wording is needed that the light hazard density is sufficient for these scenarios. The only reason there is ordinary hazard designs for most mechanical rooms is that the room can be used for storage. This is a concealed space where no storage is permitted.

Related Item

First Revision No. 143-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after A.8.15.1.2.17]

Public Input No. 513-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 8.15.1.3]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Thomas Wellen

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Association

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Wed May 14 09:32:43 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected

Resolution: Section A.8.15.1.2.1. already addresses minor quantities of combustible material in concealed spaces. Attics are commonly considered light hazard occupancies asnoted in A.5, including those that contain unit heaters. The presence of the unit heater would not change the occupancy.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

425 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 449: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 335-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after A.8.15.14 ]

A.8.15.15

A.8.15.15.1 There are ceiling panels and ceiling materials that have been investigated as a ceiling material in accordance with UL Subject 723S, Outline of Investigation forDrop-Out Ceilings Installed Beneath Automatic Sprinklers or as FM Class Number 4651, Plastic Suspended Ceiling Panels. Such ceiling panels and ceiling materials aredesigned such that the activation of the sprinkler and the ability of the sprinkler discharge to reach the hazard being protected are not adversely impacted.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This is a companion change to Public Comment 330 and provides the criteria by which drop out ceilings and ceiling materials are to be listed.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 330-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 8.15.15] Annex note associated with Public Comment text.

Related Item

Committee Input No. 155-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: William Koffel

Organization: Koffel Associates, Inc.

Affilliation: Representing TuffWrap

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 13:49:29 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-18-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: A membrane product has been evaluated by UL using UL Subject 723S and is currently listed as being suitable for being installed beneath sprinklers. This particularemembrane product contains seams that will fail during a fire and as such, does not impact the ability of the water to reach the hazard being protected. The activationtime for the sprinklers was minimally impacted during the UL test. The UL test acceptance criteria addresses the impact the product may have on the activation time ofthe sprinkler and the percent of material that needs to "drop out" so as not to significantly impact the ability of the water to reach the hazard being protected.

The NFPA Technical Committee on Finishing Processes (NFPA 33) has recommended the acceptance of the concept (involving membrane enclosures for indoor andoutdoor spray applications) using the same criteria and based upon feedback from an NFPA 13 task group.

Recognition in the Standard for such listed products offers a solution that addresses those instances in which a membrane needs to be installed between the sprinklersand the floor and potentially eliminating the use of other methods that have historically been used and that are more likely to adversely impact the performance of thesprinkler system.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

426 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 450: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 184-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. A.8.16.2.4.2 ]

A.8.16.2.4.2

This is a very Sizing the main drain connection so that it can flow the sprinkler system demand flow rate provides a practical means for performing the forward flow test ofthe backflow device as required by 8.17.4.5.1.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_A-8-16-2-4-2.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Editorial revision for clarity.

Related Item

First Revision No. 154-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 8.16.2.4.2]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon Apr 28 10:04:05 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Accepted

Resolution: SR-52-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: Editorial revision for clarity.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

427 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 451: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 155-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. A.8.18.1 ]

A.8.18. 1 2

While the use of the sprinkler system piping as the grounding electrode for the building is prohibited, NFPA 70 requires that all metallic piping systems be bonded to dispersestray electrical currents. Therefore, the sprinkler system piping should be bonded to other metallic systems.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_8-18.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Editorial revision to co-ordinate the text with the similar provisions for grounding and bonding of NFPA 24.A sprinkler system is not "used for" bonding, it is "bonded to". Therefore, I would suggest that the wording of NFPA 24 should be followed more closely.

Related Item

First Revision No. 152-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 8.17]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon Apr 28 08:48:33 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-53-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: Editorial revision to co-ordinate the text with the similar provisions for grounding and bonding of NFPA 24.

A sprinkler system is not "used for" bonding, it is "bonded to". Therefore, the wording of NFPA 24 should be followed more closely.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

428 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 452: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 288-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. A.9.1.1.6.3 ]

A.9.1.1.6.3

Other standards equivalent to ASTM A307 grades A or B include SAE J429 Grades 1 or 2. Both fasteners are fabricated from low or medium carbon steel, andrequirements have a minimum tensile strength of 60 ksi.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Although it is recognized that hanger rods should be of good quality, this requirement is virtually unenforceable and therefore unreasonable to implement. There is no practical way to mark hanger rods in order to positively identify them as meeting this requirement.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 244-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 9.1.1.6.3]

Related Item

First Revision No. 38-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after A.9.1.1.5.3]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Robert Upson

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA Engineering and Standards Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 09:24:23 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected

Resolution: This section must be retained to correlate with the action taken on PC-122.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

429 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 453: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 300-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. A.9.3.5.5.10.1(1) ]

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

430 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 454: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

A.9.3.5.5.10.1(1)

Figure A.9.3.5.5.10.1(1)(a) and Figure A.9.3.5.5.10.1(1)(b) are examples of how to measure the distance between the top of pipe and the point of attachment.

Figure A.9.3.5.5.10.1(1)(a) Measurement for Distance Between Top of Pipe and Point of Attachment (Example 1).

[NEW DRAWING SUBMITTED]

Figure A.9.3.5.5.10.1(1)(b) Measurement for Distance Between Top of Pipe and Point of Attachment (Example 2).

[NEW DRAWING SUBMITTED]

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

431 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 455: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

rod_rule_revised-steel.pdf Figure A.9.3.5.5.10.1(1)(a) Measurement for Distance Between Top of Pipe and Point of Attachment (Example 1).

rod_rule_revised-wood.pdf Figure A.9.3.5.5.10.1(1)(b) Measurement for Distance Between Top of Pipe and Point of Attachment (Example 2).

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The so-called “6 inch rod rule” is often misapplied. This proposal and accompanying drawings clarifies the intent and proper application of the rule.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 297-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 9.3.5.5.10]

Related Item

First Revision No. 46-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 9.3.5.5.10]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Robert Upson

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA Engineering and Standards Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 10:20:44 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Accepted

Resolution: SR-151-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The so-called “6 inch rod rule” is often misapplied. This proposal and accompanying drawings clarifies the intent and proper application of the rule.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

432 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 456: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

6 inch max.

Page 457: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Wood Beam

6 inch max.

Page 458: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 292-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. A.9.3.5.9.6.1 ]

A.9.3.5.9.6.1

Where the C p is 1.0 or greater, the calculation should be done for any length riser nipple. The loads in this condition can rapidly exceed the yield strength. Where

steel Schedule 10 and Schedule 40 pipe are used, the section modulus can be found in Table 9.1.1.7.1(b) .

Seismic Coefficient

C p ≤ 0.50 C p ≤ 0.67 C p ≤ 1.0 C p > 1.0

Riser

Nipple

Length

> 4ft (1.2 m) X X X X

≤ 4 ft (1.2 m) X X X

≤ 3 ft (915 mm) X X

≤ 2 ft (610 mm) X

Note: Conditions marked X are required to satisfy the equation provided in 9.3.5.9.6.1.

TABLE A.9.3.5.9.6.1

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This table clarifies the circumstances under which the allowable yield strength (Fy) must be calculated using the equation provided in 9.3.5.9.6.1 and the conditions under which it is deemed to comply without calculation according to the three combinations of riser nipple length and seismic coefficient provided in that section.

Related Item

First Revision No. 48-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 9.3.5.9.6.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Robert Upson

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA Engineering and Standards Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 09:43:38 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Accepted

Resolution: SR-9-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: This table clarifies the circumstances under which the allowable yield strength (Fy) must be calculated using the equation provided in 9.3.5.9.6.1 and the conditionsunder which it is deemed to comply without calculation according to the three combinations of riser nipple length and seismic coefficient provided in that section.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

433 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 459: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 204-NFPA 13-2014 [ Sections A.11.2.3.1.4(3), A.11.2.3.1.4(4)(d), A.11.2.3.1.4(... ]

Sections A.11.2.3.1.4(3), A.11.2.3.1.4(4)(d), A.11.2.3.1.4(4)(j)

A.11.2 1 .3 8 .1.4(3)

This section is included to compensate for possible delay in operation of sprinklers from fires in combustible concealed spaces found in wood frame, brick veneer, andordinary construction.

In order for the minimum 3000 ft2 (279 m2) requirement for the size of the remote area to not be extended to the adjacent area, the qualifying concealed space must beseparated by the entire fire-rated assembly. Such assemblies often have combustible structural members separating the exterior membranes that can create a concealedcombustible space that can qualify for omitting sprinkler protection. If the fire-rated assembly is the qualifying concealed space, an interior fire would greatly reduce theassigned fire-rated duration.

A.11.2 1 .3 8 .1.4 2 (4 9 )(d)

Composite wood joists are not considered solid wood joists for the purposes of this section. Their web members are too thin and easily penetrated to adequatelycompartment a fire in an unsprinklered space. Application of this item is not affected by the depth of the joist channel except in determining the volume. The concealedspace above the insulation can be an attic, roof space, or floor space within a floor assembly.

A.11.2 1 .3 8 .1.4 2 (4 10 )(j)

The gypsum board (or equivalent material) used as the firestopping will compartment the concealed space and restrict the ability for fire to spread beyond 160 ft3 (4.5 m3)zones covering multiple joist channels.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The redundancy task group agrees with this PC.

Moved location of annex text to correlate with relocation of text to section 11.1. The format is hard to read but the new locations are: A.11.1.8.1 / A.11.1.8.2(9) / A/11.1.8.2(10)

The text between A.11.2.3.1.4(3) / A.11.2.3.1.4(4)(d) / A.11.2.3.1.4(4)(j) and A.12.9.1 / A.12.9.2(4) / A.12.9.2(10) are identical except that chap 12 is missing the first paragraph of ch 11 explaining why a larger area is needed.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 111-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 12.9]

Public Comment No. 112-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 11.2.3.1.4]

Public Comment No. 205-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. A.12.9.1]

Related Item

Public Input No. 114-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Huggins

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Assoc.

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 02 18:36:29 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but held

Resolution: The concept of limiting the redundancy in chapters 12-21 of NFPA has been discussed throughout this revision cycle. While the TC is in general support of thisconcept, making these redundancy revisions at the Second Phase of the cycle is not appropriate. The reject but hold action for this item will allow the TC on DischargeCriteria to submit the concept to the correlating committee for review and refinement before proceeding into the 2019 edition revision cycle.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

434 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 460: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 332-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after A.12.1.3 ]

A.12.1.3.1.4

In the example shown in Figure A.12.1.3.1.4, the maximum ceiling height shown is 30 feet. Sprinkler protection under the highest part of the ceiling must be designed forthat height to a point at least 15 feet beyond where the ceiling height drops to 25 feet. Sprinkler protection beyond that point may be designed for a 25 foot ceiling.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

SlopedRoofHeight.jpg Figure A.12.1.3.1.4

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This proposal clarifies the proper design height requirements for sprinklers under a roof with a pitch of 2:12 or less.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 326-NFPA 13-2014 [New Section after 12.1.3.1.3.2]

Related Item

First Revision No. 190-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 12.1.3.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Robert Upson

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA Engineering and Standards Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 13:38:06 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected but see related SR

Resolution: SR-80-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: This revision clarifies the proper design height requirements for sprinklers under a roof with a pitch of 2:12 or less.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

435 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 461: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting
Page 462: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 199-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. A.12.1.4 ]

A.12.1.4

A series of 10 full-scale fire tests and limited-scale testing were conducted to determine the impact of HVLS fan operation on the performance of sprinkler systems. Theproject, sponsored by the Property Insurance Research Group (PIRG) and other industry groups, was coordinated by the Fire Protection Research Foundation (FPRF). Thecomplete test report, High Volume/Low Speed Fan and Sprinkler Operation — Ph. 2 Final Report (2011) , is available from the FPRF. Both control mode density area andearly suppression fast response sprinklers were tested. Successful results were obtained when the HVLS fan was shut down upon the activation of the first sprinklerfollowed by a 90-second delay. Other methods of fan shutdown were also tested including shutdown by activation of air sampling–type detection and ionization-type smokedetectors. Earlier fan shutdown resulted in less commodity damage.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Correlates with deleting 12.1.4

Redundancy task group initiated this PC

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 107-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 12.1.4]

Related Item

Public Input No. 114-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Huggins

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Assoc.

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu May 01 12:20:11 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but held

Resolution: The concept of limiting the redundancy in chapters 12-21 of NFPA has been discussed throughout this revision cycle. While the TC is in general support of thisconcept, making these redundancy revisions at the Second Phase of the cycle is not appropriate. The reject but hold action for this item will allow the TC on DischargeCriteria to submit the concept to the correlating committee for review and refinement before proceeding into the 2019 edition revision cycle.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

436 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 463: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 185-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. A.12.3 ]

A.12.3

The situation frequently arises where a small area of a higher hazard is surrounded by a lesser hazard. For example, consider a 600 ft2 (55.7 m2) area consisting of 10 ft(3.05 m) high on-floor storage of cartoned unexpanded plastic commodities surrounded by a plastic extruding operation in a 15 ft (4.57 m) high building. In accordance withChapter 12, the density required for the plastic storage must meet the requirements for extra hazard (Group 1) occupancies. The plastic extruding operation should be

considered an ordinary hazard (Group 2) occupancy. In accordance with Chapter 11, the corresponding discharge densities should be 0.3 gpm/ft2 (12.2 mm/min) over 2500

ft2 (232 m2) for the storage and 0.2 gpm/ft2 (8.1 mm/min) over 1500 ft2 (139 m2) for the remainder of the area. (Also see Chapter 11 for the required minimum areas ofoperation.)

If the storage area is not separated from the surrounding area by a wall or partition (see 11.1.2), the size of the operating area is determined by the higher hazard storage.

For example, the operating area is 2500 ft2 (232 m2). The system must be able to provide the 0.3 gpm/ft2 (12.2 mm/min) density over the storage area and 15 ft (4.57 m)

beyond. If part of the remote area is outside the 600 ft2 (55.7 m2) plus the 15 ft (4.57 m) overlap, only 0.2 gpm/ft2 (8.1 mm/min) is needed for that portion.

If the storage is separated from the surrounding area by a floor-to-ceiling/roof partition that is capable of delaying heat from a fire on one side from fusing sprinklers on the

other side, the size of the operating area is determined by the occupancy of the surrounding area. In this example, the design area is 1500 ft2 (139 m2). A 0.3 gpm/ft2 (12.2

mm/min) density is needed within the separated area with 0.2 gpm/ft2 (8.1 mm/min) in the remainder of the remote area.

Where high temperature–rated sprinklers are installed at the ceiling, high temperature–rated sprinklers also should extend beyond storage in accordance with Table A.12.3.

When the small higher hazard area is larger than the required minimum area dictated by the surrounding occupancy, even when separated by draft curtains, barriers, orpartitions capable of delaying heat, the size of the operating area is determined by the higher hazard storage.

Table A.12.3 Extension of Installation of High-Temperature Sprinklers over Storage

Design Area for High Temperature–Rated SprinklersDistance Beyond Perimeter of High Hazard

Occupancy for High Temperature–Rated Sprinklers

ft 2 m 2 ft m

2000 185.8 30 9.14

3000 278.7 40 12.2

4000 371.6 45 13.72

5000 464.5 50 15.24

6000 557.4 55 16.76

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_A-12-3.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The addition of text referencing draft curtains was not requested in PI 349 and the Technical Committee has not provided any substantiation for the addition. Further since a draft curtain does not go from floor-to-ceiling, the reference to it is in conflict with the ideas expressed in the 4th paragraph of A.12.3. Also, as per A.12.1.1.3, draft curtains have been shown to have a negative impact on sprinkler effectiveness and extreme care needs to be taken to minimize any potential impacts, so it is inappropriate to imply that they may be beneficial in the Section A.12.3 discussion about the size of design areas.

Related Item

Public Input No. 349-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. A.12.3]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon Apr 28 10:06:35 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Rejected

Resolution: The barrier/draft curtain language was retained and a minimum aisle requirement was added. Accepting this language would conflict with the body of the standard.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

437 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 464: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 231-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. A.12.3 ]

A.12.3

The situation frequently arises where a small area of a higher hazard is surrounded by a lesser hazard. For example, consider a 600 ft 2 (55.7 m 2 ) area consisting of 10 ft(3.05 m) high on-floor storage of cartoned unexpanded plastic commodities surrounded by a plastic extruding operation in a 15 ft (4.57 m) high building. In accordance withChapter 12, the density required for the plastic storage must meet the requirements for extra hazard (Group 1) occupancies. The plastic extruding operation should beconsidered an ordinary hazard (Group 2) occupancy. In accordance with Chapter

11

, the corresponding discharge densities should be 0

.

3 gpm/ft 2 (12.2 mm/min) over 2500 ft 2 (232 m 2 ) for the storage and 0.2 gpm/ft 2 (8.

1

mm/min) over 1500 ft 2 (139 m 2 ) for the remainder of the area

.

(Also see Chapter 11 for the required minimum areas of operation.)

If the storage area is not separated from the surrounding area by a wall or partition (see 11.1.2 ), the size of the operating area is determined by the higher hazard storage.

For example, the operating area is 2500 ft 2 (232 m 2 ). The system must be able to provide the 0.3 gpm/ft 2 (12.2 mm/min) density over the storage area and 15 ft (4.57 m)

beyond. If part of the remote area is outside the 600 ft 2 (55.7 m 2 ) plus the 15 ft (4.57 m) overlap, only 0.2 gpm/ft 2 (8.1 mm/min) is needed for that portion.

If the storage is separated from the surrounding area by a floor-to-ceiling/roof partition that is capable of delaying heat from a fire on one side from fusing sprinklers on the

other side, the size of the operating area is determined by the occupancy of the surrounding area. In this example, the design area is 1500 ft 2 (139 m 2 ). A 0.3 gpm/ft 2

(12.2 mm/min) density is needed within the separated area with 0.2 gpm/ft 2 (8.1 mm/min) in the remainder of the remote area.

2

Where high temperature–rated sprinklers are installed at the ceiling, high temperature–rated sprinklers also should extend beyond storage in accordance with Table A.12.3.

When the small higher hazard area is larger than the required minimum area dictated by the surrounding occupancy, even when separated by draft curtains, barriers, orpartitions capable of delaying heat, the size of the operating area is determined by the higher hazard storage.

Table A.12.3 Extension 11.1.2 Extension of Installation of High-Temperature Sprinklers over Storage

Design Area for High Temperature–Rated SprinklersDistance Beyond Perimeter of High Hazard

Occupancy or Storage for High Temperature–Rated Sprinklers

ft2 m2 ft m

2000 185.8 30 9.14

3000 278.7 40 12.2

4000 371.6 45 13.72

5000 464.5 50 15.24

6000 557.4 55 16.76

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Redundancy task group initiated this PC

Text identical to A.11.1.2 except last paragraph and Table. Note that the Table refer to an occupancy verses storage.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 230-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 12.3]

Related Item

Public Input No. 114-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Huggins

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Assoc.

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu May 08 16:45:43 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but held

Resolution: The concept of limiting the redundancy in chapters 12-21 of NFPA has been discussed throughout this revision cycle. While the TC is in general support of thisconcept, making these redundancy revisions at the Second Phase of the cycle is not appropriate. The reject but hold action for this item will allow the TC on DischargeCriteria to submit the concept to the correlating committee for review and refinement before proceeding into the 2019 edition revision cycle.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

438 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 465: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 200-NFPA 13-2014 [ Sections A.12.7.2, A.12.7.2(3) ]

Sections A.12.7.2, A.12.7.2(3)

A.12.7.2

When a light hazard occupancy, such as a school, contains separate ordinary hazard storage rooms no more than 400 ft 2 (37.2 m 2 ), the hose stream demand would bethat required for a light hazard occupancy.

A.12.7.2(3)

When a light hazard occupancy, such as a school, contains separate ordinary hazard rooms no more than 400 ft 2 (37.2 m 2 ), the hose stream allowance and water supplyduration would be that required for a light hazard occupancy.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This PC was initiated by the redundancy task group

These sections were deleted to correlate with deleting 12.7.2 Additionally A.12.7.2 is a repeat of A.12.7.2(3) plus it is an example using light hazard occupancy.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 108-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 12.7.2]

Related Item

Public Input No. 114-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Huggins

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Assoc.

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu May 01 13:15:40 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but held

Resolution: The concept of limiting the redundancy in chapters 12-21 of NFPA has been discussed throughout this revision cycle. While the TC is in general support of thisconcept, making these redundancy revisions at the Second Phase of the cycle is not appropriate. The reject but hold action for this item will allow the TC on DischargeCriteria to submit the concept to the correlating committee for review and refinement before proceeding into the 2019 edition revision cycle.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

439 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 466: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 203-NFPA 13-2014 [ Sections A.12.8.1, A.12.8.2 ]

Sections A.12.8.1, A.12.8.2

A.12.8.1

Where tanks serve sprinklers only, they can be sized to provide the duration required for the sprinkler system, ignoring any hose stream demands. Where tanks serve somecombination of sprinklers, inside hose stations, outside hose stations, or domestic/process use, the tank needs to be capable of providing the duration for the equipmentthat is fed from the tank, but the demands of equipment not connected to the tank can be ignored. Where a tank is used for both domestic/process water and fire protection,the entire duration demand of the domestic/process water does not need to be included in the tank if provisions are made to segregate the tank so that adequate fireprotection water is always present or if provisions are made to automatically cut off the simultaneous use in the event of fire.

A.12.8.2

Where pumps serve sprinklers only, they can be sized to provide the flow required for the sprinkler system, ignoring any hose stream demands. Where pumps serve somecombination of sprinklers, inside hose stations, or outside hose stations, the pump needs to be capable of providing the flow for the equipment that is fed from the pump, butthe demands of equipment not connected to the pump can be ignored.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This PC was initiated by the redundancy task group

Deletion of annex correlates with deleting 12.8.1 and 12.8.2. This text is identical to A.11.1.5.2 and A.11.1.5.3 except A.12.8.2 is missing a portion of the last sentence in A.11.1.5.3: ....except for evaluating their impact on the available water supply to the pump."

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 110-NFPA 13-2014 [Sections 12.8.1, 12.8.2, 12.8.3, 12.8.4, 12.8.5]

Related Item

Public Input No. 114-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Huggins

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Assoc.

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu May 01 16:20:43 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but held

Resolution: The concept of limiting the redundancy in chapters 12-21 of NFPA has been discussed throughout this revision cycle. While the TC is in general support of thisconcept, making these redundancy revisions at the Second Phase of the cycle is not appropriate. The reject but hold action for this item will allow the TC on DischargeCriteria to submit the concept to the correlating committee for review and refinement before proceeding into the 2019 edition revision cycle.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

440 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 467: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 205-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. A.12.9.1 ]

A.12.9.1

In order for the minimum 3000 ft 2 (279 m 2 ) requirement for the size of the remote area to not be extended to the adjacent area, the qualifying concealed space must beseparated by the entire fire-rated assembly. Such assemblies often have combustible structural members separating the exterior membranes that can create a concealedcombustible space that can qualify for omitting sprinkler protection. If the fire-rated assembly is the qualifying concealed space, an interior fire would greatly reduce theassigned fire-rated duration.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The redundancy task group initiated this PC.

Correlates with moving 12.9.1 to section 11.1

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 111-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 12.9]

Public Comment No. 112-NFPA 13-2014 [Section No. 11.2.3.1.4]

Public Comment No. 204-NFPA 13-2014 [Sections A.11.2.3.1.4(3), A.11.2.3.1.4(4)(d), A.11.2.3.1.4(...]

Related Item

Public Input No. 114-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Huggins

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Assoc.

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 02 18:45:38 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but held

Resolution: The concept of limiting the redundancy in chapters 12-21 of NFPA has been discussed throughout this revision cycle. While the TC is in general support of thisconcept, making these redundancy revisions at the Second Phase of the cycle is not appropriate. The reject but hold action for this item will allow the TC on DischargeCriteria to submit the concept to the correlating committee for review and refinement before proceeding into the 2019 edition revision cycle.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

441 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 468: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 83-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after A.16.1.4.1 ]

A.16.1.6.7 The adjustments in 16.2.1.3.4 apply to solid shelves when exceeding the minimum required level of in-rack sprinklers from an open rack option.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This clarifies that although additional sprinklers are required due to the solid shelving, the reduction to ceiling density allowed in 16.2.1.3.4 for additional in-rack sprinklers still applies.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 82-NFPA 13-2014 [New Section after 16.1.6.6]

Related Item

Public Input No. 83-NFPA 13-2013 [Global Input]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Roland Huggins

Organization: American Fire Sprinkler Assoc.

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu Mar 27 14:19:45 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Accepted

Resolution: SR-107-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: This clarifies that although additional sprinklers are required due to the solid shelving, the reduction to ceiling density allowed in 16.2.1.3.4 for additional in-racksprinklers still applies.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

442 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 469: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 305-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. A.16.2.1.3.4.6 ]

A.16.2.1.3.4.6

It is not the intent that an in-rack sprinkler be installed above the top-tier of storage when utilizing “in-rack sprinklers in every tier.”

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The annex note makes clear that the intent of the committee to require in rack sprinklers in every tier does not include an in-rack sprinkler above the top tier of storage, which is protected by the ceiling sprinklers. As an annex note cannot override the body of the standard, this wording should be in the body of the standard

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 336-NFPA 13-2014 [New Section after 16.2.1.3.4.6]

Related Item

First Revision No. 206-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after A.16.2.1.3.2.1]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Robert Upson

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA Engineering and Standards Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 10:43:05 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Accepted

Resolution: SR-108-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The annex note makes clear that the intent of the committee to require in rack sprinklers in every tier does not include an in-rack sprinkler above the top tier ofstorage, which is protected by the ceiling sprinklers. As an annex note cannot override the body of the standard, this wording should be in the body of the standard

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

443 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 470: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 186-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. A.23.3.2 ]

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

444 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 471: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Delete the note that was added following Figure A.23.3.2 (d) and revise Figure A.23.3.2 (c) as originally proposed.

A.23.3.2

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

445 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 472: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

See Figure A.23.3.2(a) through Figure A.23.3.2(d).

Figure A.23.3.2(a) Summary Sheet.

Figure A.23.3.2(b) Hydraulic Calculation Example (Plan View and Elevation View).

Figure A.23.3.2(c) Hydraulic Calculations.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

446 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 473: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Figure A.23.3.2(d) Hydraulic Graph.

Node 4 includes tee at top and bottom of riser nipple included with branch line due to consistent pipe size from the pervious node.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

LGK_NFPA_13-2013_Comment_A-23-3-2.pdf PC Form

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

As per the Committee Statement a new line was to be added to the Hydraulic Calculation illustrated in Figure A.23.3.2(c). Instead, a Note was inserted into the First Draft Report following Figure A.23.3.2 (d). This Note makes references to "Node 4" whereas Figure A.23.3.2 (c) lists "Steps". Therefore, the message is both obscure and improperly located. The Note should be deleted and Figure A.23.3.2 (c) should be revised as originally proposed.

Related Item

First Revision No. 251-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. A.23.3.2]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Larry Keeping

Organization: Professional Loss Control

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon Apr 28 10:09:27 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but see related SR

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

447 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 474: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Resolution: SR-130-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: In lieu of providing the note at the bottom of the figures as was provided during the first draft meeting, Figure A.23.3.2(C) was revised to more accurately outline thecalculations for the system shown in Fig A.23.3.2(b) and described in Fig A.23.3.2(a).

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

448 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 475: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 341-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after A.23.4.1 ]

A.23.4.1.4

NFPA 13 does not provide a specific velocity limitation for the use of the Hazen-Williams formula. This is, in part, due to an expectation that excessive friction loss valueswill result in increasing pipe sizes, thereby serving as an inherent limit on velocity. However, the fact that NFPA 13 does not provice a specific limit should not be taken asan endorsement that the formula may be used for any velocity of water flow. The formula was empirically determined using "normal" conditions. When the velocity in thepipe exceeds that which was used to determine the formula, the formula may no longer be valid. There has been some research performed (Huggins: 1996) in which resultsusing the Hazen Williams formula and Darcy-Weisbach formula were compared and the conclusion was that a specific velocity limit applied to all pipe sizes is notappropriate.

Huggins, Roland, "Water Velocity: Its Impact on the Accuracy of Hydraulic Calculations", September, 1996

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

The current text could be read to say that there is no reason to limit the velocity when using the Hazen-Williams formula.

Related Item

First Revision No. 246-NFPA 13-2013 [New Section after 23.4.1.3]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: William Koffel

Organization: Koffel Associates, Inc.

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri May 16 14:30:50 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

Committee Action: Accepted

Resolution: SR-117-NFPA 13-2014

Statement: The current text could be read to say that there is no reason to limit the velocity when using the Hazen-Williams formula.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

449 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 476: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 235-NFPA 13-2014 [ New Section after A.24.2.2.2 ]

A.24.2.2.2.1 Consider the following example. A waterflow test is conducted at a location where a city water main is going to be tapped for a new sprinkler system. Duringthe test, the static pressure is measured at 70 psi, the residual pressure is measured at 50 psi while 1300 gpm was discharging from a nearby hydrant. The water utility iscontacted and they indicate that a reasonable low static pressure accounting for typical daily and seasonal fluctuations in this area is 55 psi and that a reasonable lowresidual pressure accounting for typical daily and seasonal fluctuations in this area at a flow of 1300 gpm is 35 psi. The equation that describes the water supply availablefor a fire sprinkler system would be:

There are two ways to use this formula. One would be to assume two different values for Q, calculate P and then draw a graph on log 1.85 paper. Any fire sprinkler systemdemand falling on or below the line on this graph would be acceptable in accordance with NFPA 13 to work with this water supply. In this case, the two easiest flows to pickfor Q would be 0 and 1300 gpm. When Q = 0, P is simply 55 psi. When Q = 1300 gpm, P = 35 psi. These two points can be plotted on log 1.85 paper as shown in FigureA.24.2.2.2.1.

The second way to use this formula would be to calculate the fire protection system and determine the flow necessary to make the system work. Plug this flow into theformula above and see what the available pressure from the water supply will be at that flow. For example, if a sprinkler system connected to this water supply had ademand of 580 gpm, the available pressure from the water supply would be:

P = (-20)(0.225) 55

P = 50.5 psi

So, as long as the sprinkler system has a pressure demand less than or equal to 50.5 psi, it will work with this water supply.

Figure A.24.2.2.2.1 Available Water Supply Curve for Example in Section A.24.2.2.2.1

A.24.2.2.1.3 The purpose of the adjustment required by this section is to take into account reasonable fluctuations that occur on a daily and seasonal basis, but not toburden the building owner with extreme conditions. During an extreme condition such as a water main break or a severe drought, the impaired system provisions of NFPA25 can be employed to mitigate the circumstances of the extreme condition.

The intent of this section is to apply the adjustment to the raw data obtained by the flow test and not to apply adjustments to values that have already been adjusted by waterutilities. If a water utility has already provided flow and pressure data for use in the design of fire protection systems that already includes adjustments for daily and seasonalwater usage, there is no need to make any additional adjustments to this data.

A.24.2.2.1.4 See annex note A.24.2.2.1.3.

A.24.2.2.1.6 Water utilities are the entities that know their own supplies the best and know what appropriate adjustments need to be made to flow test data to providereasonable fire protection. In the potential situation where the water utility will not make a definitive statement with regard to an adjustment, the fire protection engineer isthe person that would need to make a statement with respect to adjustments to the raw data from a flow test. Due to the judgment involved in making such a decision, thelicensing laws in most states within the United States would require the fire protection engineer to make this determination rather than the fire protection system contractor. It is expected that the engineer would make these statements in the specifications provided to the fire protection system contractor. In the absence of any information fromany authority on the subject, section 24.2.2.2.2 provides a standardized method of making a decision.

A.24.2.2.2.2 Section 24.2.2.2.2 provides a standardized method of making a decision regarding the reduction of the results from a waterflow test to determine what pressureand flow are available from a water supply when the specifying engineer and the water utility have not provided adjustment information. An example of how to use thisstandardized method follows.

If a waterflow test is conducted at a location where a city water main is going to be tapped for a new sprinkler system and the static pressure is measured at 70 psi, with theresidual pressure measured at 50 psi while 1300 gpm was discharging from a nearby hydrant. If there is no information from the specifying engineer or water utilityregarding appropriate adjustments, the value of the static pressure and residual pressure need to be reduced by 5%.

The static pressure would be adjusted from 70 psi to 66.5 psi (70 x 0.95 = 66.5).

The residual pressure at 1300 gpm would be reduced from 50 psi to 47.5 psi (70 x 0.95 = 47.5).

The results would be plotted on log 1.85 graph paper as shown in the lower curve on Figure A.24.2.2.2.2 and that curve would represent what the fire protection systemcontractor could use for a fire protection system.

Figure A.24.2.2.2.2 Available Water Supply Curve for Example in Section A.24.2.2.2.2

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

Water_Supply_Adjustment_Proposal-E_S-13.pdf The whole comment with figures and equations

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This is one of a series of proposals to make the adjustment to the data from a waterflow test required instead of recommended. If the adjustment is not required, contractors that do the right thing and adjust the data from tests are at a disadvantage from contractors that don't make any adjustment. It is fundamentally wrong to not make an adjustment to the data due to daily and seasonal fluctuations. This proposal makes a simple and easy to understand adjustment that is standardized so that there is no argument over what is supposed to happen. It is the intent to have this be the only adjustment. If the water utility has already performed the adjustment, or if the AHJ has already mandated a safety margin or safety factor to the waterflow data obtained from the test, this adjustment would not apply.

Related Item

Public Input No. 231-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 24.2.2.2]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Kenneth Isman

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA E&S Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu May 08 18:30:27 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

450 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 477: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but held

Resolution: The subject has been held due to the anticipated FPRF report on water supply adjustments. The proposed 5% adjustment is not substantiated with technicalinformation, and the TC is anticipating that the FPRF project will yield technical data that substantiates any proposed adjustment factor.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

451 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 478: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

NFSA Comment to NFPA 13 on Waterflow Test Adjustments

1) Delete A.24.2.2.2 A.24.2.2.2 An adjustment to the waterflow test data to account for daily and seasonal fluctuations, possible interruption by flood or ice conditions, large simultaneous industrial use, future demand on the water supply system, or any other condition that could affect the water supply should be made as appropriate.

2) Insert a new 24.2.2.2.1, 24.2.2.2.2 and annex notes as follows: 24.2.2.2.1* Where a waterflow test was conducted, the volume and pressure available for use for a fire protection system shall be determined from the following formula:

( ) 2

85.1

121 P

QQPPP +

−=

24.2.2.1.1 The pressure P shall be what is considered available from the water supply to use for a fire protection system that will be calculated for a given flow demand of Q. 24.2.2.1.2 The flow Q shall be demand flow of the fire protection system that will be used to calculate the available pressure from the water supply (P). 24.2.2.1.3* The variable P1 shall be the residual pressure measured during the waterflow test while the flow Q1 was discharging from the water supply reduced by the specifying engineer or the water utility for daily and seasonal fluctuations. The reduction shall not be based on 100 year droughts or other extreme conditions. 24.2.2.1.4* The variable P2 shall be the static pressure measured during the waterflow test reduced by the specifying engineer or the water utility for daily and seasonal fluctuations. The reduction shall not be based on 100 year droughts or other extreme conditions. 24.2.2.1.5 The variable Q1 shall be the flow associated with P1. 24.2.2.1.6* Where the specifying engineer or the water utility does not provide the value for P1

and P2, see 24.2.2.2.2. 24.2.2.2.2* Where a waterflow test has been conducted and the specifying engineer or the water authority does not provide a value for P1 and P2, the value of for P1 and P2 shall be calculated by taking the static pressure and residual pressure results from the flow test and reducing them by 5%. A.24.2.2.2.1 Consider the following example. A waterflow test is conducted at a location where a city water main is going to be tapped for a new sprinkler system. During the test, the static pressure is measured at 70 psi, the residual pressure is measured at 50 psi while 1300 gpm was

Page 479: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

discharging from a nearby hydrant. The water utility is contacted and they indicate that a reasonable low static pressure accounting for typical daily and seasonal fluctuations in this area is 55 psi and that a reasonable low residual pressure accounting for typical daily and seasonal fluctuations in this area at a flow of 1300 gpm is 35 psi. The equation that describes the water supply available for a fire sprinkler system would be:

( ) 551300

553585.1

+

−=

QP

There are two ways to use this formula. One would be to assume two different values for Q, calculate P and then draw a graph on log 1.85 paper. Any fire sprinkler system demand falling on or below the line on this graph would be acceptable in accordance with NFPA 13 to work with this water supply. In this case, the two easiest flows to pick for Q would be 0 and 1300 gpm. When Q = 0, P is simply 55 psi. When Q = 1300 gpm, P = 35 psi. These two points can be plotted on log 1.85 paper as shown in Figure A.24.2.2.2.1. The second way to use this formula would be to calculate the fire protection system and determine the flow necessary to make the system work. Plug this flow into the formula above and see what the available pressure from the water supply will be at that flow. For example, if a sprinkler system connected to this water supply had a demand of 580 gpm, the available pressure from the water supply would be:

( ) 551300

5805535

85.1

+

−=P

P = (-20)(0.225) + 55

P = 50.5 psi

So, as long as the sprinkler system has a pressure demand less than or equal to 50.5 psi, it will work with this water supply.

Page 480: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Figure A.24.2.2.2.1 Available Water Supply Curve for Example in Section A.24.2.2.2.1

A.24.2.2.1.3 The purpose of the adjustment required by this section is to take into account reasonable fluctuations that occur on a daily and seasonal basis, but not to burden the building owner with extreme conditions. During an extreme condition such as a water main break or a severe drought, the impaired system provisions of NFPA 25 can be employed to mitigate the circumstances of the extreme condition. The intent of this section is to apply the adjustment to the raw data obtained by the flow test and not to apply adjustments to values that have already been adjusted by water utilities. If a water utility has already provided flow and pressure data for use in the design of fire protection systems that already includes adjustments for daily and seasonal water usage, there is no need to make any additional adjustments to this data. A.24.2.2.1.4 See annex note A.24.2.2.1.3. A.24.2.2.1.6 Water utilities are the entities that know their own supplies the best and know what appropriate adjustments need to be made to flow test data to provide reasonable fire protection. In the potential situation where the water utility will not make a definitive statement with regard to an adjustment, the fire protection engineer is the person that would need to make a statement with respect to adjustments to the raw data from a flow test. Due to the judgment involved in making such a decision, the licensing laws in most states within the United States would require the fire protection engineer to make this determination rather than the fire protection system contractor. It is expected that the engineer would make these statements in the specifications provided to the fire protection system contractor. In the absence of any information from any authority on the subject, section 24.2.2.2.2 provides a standardized method of making a decision. A.24.2.2.2.2 Section 24.2.2.2.2 provides a standardized method of making a decision regarding the reduction of the results from a waterflow test to determine what pressure and flow are available from a water supply when the specifying engineer and the water utility have not provided adjustment information. An example of how to use this standardized method follows.

Page 481: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

If a waterflow test is conducted at a location where a city water main is going to be tapped for a new sprinkler system and the static pressure is measured at 70 psi, with the residual pressure measured at 50 psi while 1300 gpm was discharging from a nearby hydrant. If there is no information from the specifying engineer or water utility regarding appropriate adjustments, the value of the static pressure and residual pressure need to be reduced by 5%. The static pressure would be adjusted from 70 psi to 66.5 psi (70 x 0.95 = 66.5). The residual pressure at 1300 gpm would be reduced from 50 psi to 47.5 psi (70 x 0.95 = 47.5). The results would be plotted on log 1.85 graph paper as shown in the lower curve on Figure A.24.2.2.2.2 and that curve would represent what the fire protection system contractor could use for a fire protection system.

Figure A.24.2.2.2.2 Available Water Supply Curve for Example in Section A.24.2.2.2.2

Page 482: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Public Comment No. 234-NFPA 13-2014 [ Section No. A.24.2.2.2 ]

A.24.2.2.2

An adjustment to the waterflow test data to account for daily and seasonal fluctuations, possible interruption by flood or ice conditions, large simultaneous industrial use,future demand on the water supply system, or any other condition that could affect the water supply should be made as appropriate.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

Water_Supply_Adjustment_Proposal-E_S-13.pdf This is the whole proposal with figures and equations

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

This is one of a series of proposals to make the adjustment to the data from a waterflow test required instead of recommended. If the adjustment is not required, contractors that do the right thing and adjust the data from tests are at a disadvantage from contractors that don't make any adjustment. It is fundamentally wrong to not make an adjustment to the data due to daily and seasonal fluctuations. This proposal makes a simple and easy to understand adjustment that is standardized so that there is no argument over what is supposed to happen. It is the intent to have this be the only adjustment. If the water utility has already performed the adjustment, or if the AHJ has already mandated a safety margin or safety factor to the waterflow data obtained from the test, this adjustment would not apply.

Related Item

Public Input No. 231-NFPA 13-2013 [Section No. 24.2.2.2]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Kenneth Isman

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Association

Affilliation: NFSA E&S Committee

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu May 08 18:28:36 EDT 2014

Committee Statement

CommitteeAction:

Rejected but held

Resolution: The subject has been held due to the anticipated FPRF report on water supply adjustments. The proposed 5% adjustment is not substantiated with technicalinformation, and the TC is anticipating that the FPRF project will yield technical data that substantiates any proposed adjustment factor.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

452 of 452 10/7/2014 11:20 AM

Page 483: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

NFSA Comment to NFPA 13 on Waterflow Test Adjustments

1) Delete A.24.2.2.2 A.24.2.2.2 An adjustment to the waterflow test data to account for daily and seasonal fluctuations, possible interruption by flood or ice conditions, large simultaneous industrial use, future demand on the water supply system, or any other condition that could affect the water supply should be made as appropriate.

2) Insert a new 24.2.2.2.1, 24.2.2.2.2 and annex notes as follows: 24.2.2.2.1* Where a waterflow test was conducted, the volume and pressure available for use for a fire protection system shall be determined from the following formula:

( ) 2

85.1

121 P

QQPPP +

−=

24.2.2.1.1 The pressure P shall be what is considered available from the water supply to use for a fire protection system that will be calculated for a given flow demand of Q. 24.2.2.1.2 The flow Q shall be demand flow of the fire protection system that will be used to calculate the available pressure from the water supply (P). 24.2.2.1.3* The variable P1 shall be the residual pressure measured during the waterflow test while the flow Q1 was discharging from the water supply reduced by the specifying engineer or the water utility for daily and seasonal fluctuations. The reduction shall not be based on 100 year droughts or other extreme conditions. 24.2.2.1.4* The variable P2 shall be the static pressure measured during the waterflow test reduced by the specifying engineer or the water utility for daily and seasonal fluctuations. The reduction shall not be based on 100 year droughts or other extreme conditions. 24.2.2.1.5 The variable Q1 shall be the flow associated with P1. 24.2.2.1.6* Where the specifying engineer or the water utility does not provide the value for P1

and P2, see 24.2.2.2.2. 24.2.2.2.2* Where a waterflow test has been conducted and the specifying engineer or the water authority does not provide a value for P1 and P2, the value of for P1 and P2 shall be calculated by taking the static pressure and residual pressure results from the flow test and reducing them by 5%. A.24.2.2.2.1 Consider the following example. A waterflow test is conducted at a location where a city water main is going to be tapped for a new sprinkler system. During the test, the static pressure is measured at 70 psi, the residual pressure is measured at 50 psi while 1300 gpm was

Page 484: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

discharging from a nearby hydrant. The water utility is contacted and they indicate that a reasonable low static pressure accounting for typical daily and seasonal fluctuations in this area is 55 psi and that a reasonable low residual pressure accounting for typical daily and seasonal fluctuations in this area at a flow of 1300 gpm is 35 psi. The equation that describes the water supply available for a fire sprinkler system would be:

( ) 551300

553585.1

+

−=

QP

There are two ways to use this formula. One would be to assume two different values for Q, calculate P and then draw a graph on log 1.85 paper. Any fire sprinkler system demand falling on or below the line on this graph would be acceptable in accordance with NFPA 13 to work with this water supply. In this case, the two easiest flows to pick for Q would be 0 and 1300 gpm. When Q = 0, P is simply 55 psi. When Q = 1300 gpm, P = 35 psi. These two points can be plotted on log 1.85 paper as shown in Figure A.24.2.2.2.1. The second way to use this formula would be to calculate the fire protection system and determine the flow necessary to make the system work. Plug this flow into the formula above and see what the available pressure from the water supply will be at that flow. For example, if a sprinkler system connected to this water supply had a demand of 580 gpm, the available pressure from the water supply would be:

( ) 551300

5805535

85.1

+

−=P

P = (-20)(0.225) + 55

P = 50.5 psi

So, as long as the sprinkler system has a pressure demand less than or equal to 50.5 psi, it will work with this water supply.

Page 485: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

Figure A.24.2.2.2.1 Available Water Supply Curve for Example in Section A.24.2.2.2.1

A.24.2.2.1.3 The purpose of the adjustment required by this section is to take into account reasonable fluctuations that occur on a daily and seasonal basis, but not to burden the building owner with extreme conditions. During an extreme condition such as a water main break or a severe drought, the impaired system provisions of NFPA 25 can be employed to mitigate the circumstances of the extreme condition. The intent of this section is to apply the adjustment to the raw data obtained by the flow test and not to apply adjustments to values that have already been adjusted by water utilities. If a water utility has already provided flow and pressure data for use in the design of fire protection systems that already includes adjustments for daily and seasonal water usage, there is no need to make any additional adjustments to this data. A.24.2.2.1.4 See annex note A.24.2.2.1.3. A.24.2.2.1.6 Water utilities are the entities that know their own supplies the best and know what appropriate adjustments need to be made to flow test data to provide reasonable fire protection. In the potential situation where the water utility will not make a definitive statement with regard to an adjustment, the fire protection engineer is the person that would need to make a statement with respect to adjustments to the raw data from a flow test. Due to the judgment involved in making such a decision, the licensing laws in most states within the United States would require the fire protection engineer to make this determination rather than the fire protection system contractor. It is expected that the engineer would make these statements in the specifications provided to the fire protection system contractor. In the absence of any information from any authority on the subject, section 24.2.2.2.2 provides a standardized method of making a decision. A.24.2.2.2.2 Section 24.2.2.2.2 provides a standardized method of making a decision regarding the reduction of the results from a waterflow test to determine what pressure and flow are available from a water supply when the specifying engineer and the water utility have not provided adjustment information. An example of how to use this standardized method follows.

Page 486: National Fire Protection Association Report...Submittal Date: Wed May 14 15:26:20 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Action: Rejected but held Resolution: The concept of limiting

If a waterflow test is conducted at a location where a city water main is going to be tapped for a new sprinkler system and the static pressure is measured at 70 psi, with the residual pressure measured at 50 psi while 1300 gpm was discharging from a nearby hydrant. If there is no information from the specifying engineer or water utility regarding appropriate adjustments, the value of the static pressure and residual pressure need to be reduced by 5%. The static pressure would be adjusted from 70 psi to 66.5 psi (70 x 0.95 = 66.5). The residual pressure at 1300 gpm would be reduced from 50 psi to 47.5 psi (70 x 0.95 = 47.5). The results would be plotted on log 1.85 graph paper as shown in the lower curve on Figure A.24.2.2.2.2 and that curve would represent what the fire protection system contractor could use for a fire protection system.

Figure A.24.2.2.2.2 Available Water Supply Curve for Example in Section A.24.2.2.2.2


Recommended