ROC MEETING AGENDA Building Construction – Life Safety ......1 Bethel Valley Road, MS6424 PO Box...

ROC MEETING AGENDA Building Construction – Life Safety Technical Committee on

Mercantile and Business Occupancies Monday, October 18, 2010

Hotel Monteleone

New Orleans, LA

1. Call to Order. Call meeting to order by Chair Kenneth Bush at 8:00 a.m. on

Monday, October 18, 2010, at the Hotel Monteleone, New Orleans, LA.

2. Introduction of Attendees. For a committee roster, see pg. 02.

3. Approval of Minutes. Approve the December 8, 2009 meeting minutes. See pg. 05.

4. TC Meeting Presentation (K. Collette). See pg. 08.

5. Discussion of NFPA 101/5000 Core Chapter Changes.

6. NFPA 101 ROC Preparation. For Comments, see pg. 14.

7. NFPA 5000 ROC Preparation. For Comments, see pg. 26.

8. Other Business.

9. Future Meetings.

10. Adjournment. Adjourn by 5:00 p.m.

Attachments

of 28

Address List No PhoneMercantile and Business Occupancies BLD-MER

Building Code

Kristin Collette9/21/2010

BLD-MER

Kenneth E. Bush

ChairMaryland State Fire Marshals Office301 Bay Street, Lower LevelEaston, MD 21601International Fire Marshals Association

E 1/1/1991BLD-MER

Kristin Collette

Secretary (Staff-Nonvoting)National Fire Protection Association1 Batterymarch ParkQuincy, MA 02169-7471

6/29/2007

BLD-MER

Mark T. Bedell

PrincipalThe Taubman Company200 East Long Lake RoadBloomfield Hills, MI 48304Alternate: William Hiotaky

U 3/4/2009BLD-MER

Tracey D. Bellamy

PrincipalTelgian Corporation900 Circle 75 Parkway, Suite 680Atlanta, GA 30339The Home DepotAlternate: William J. Tomes

U 10/4/2001

BLD-MER

William J. Burrus

PrincipalAon/Schirmer Engineering Corporation700 East Sonterra Blvd., Suite 1212San Antonio, TX 78258Alternate: Mark Budzinski

I 10/27/2009BLD-MER

David A. Dodge

PrincipalSafety and Forensic ConsultingPO Box 600Standish, ME 04084American Society of Safety Engineers

SE 4/17/2002

BLD-MER

David W. Frable

PrincipalUS General Services AdministrationPublic Buildings Service665 Green Meadow LaneGenera, IL 60134Alternate: Joshua W. Elvove

U 10/27/2009BLD-MER

Sam W. Francis

PrincipalAmerican Forest & Paper Association1 Dutton Farm LaneWest Grove, PA 19390American Forest & Paper AssociationAlternate: Dennis L. Pitts

M 7/1/1996

BLD-MER

Douglas R. Freels

PrincipalUT-Batelle at Oak Ridge National Lab1 Bethel Valley Road, MS6424PO Box 2008Oak Ridge, TN 37831

U 1/1/1996BLD-MER

Daniel J. Gauvin

PrincipalTyco/SimplexGrinnell50 Technology DriveWestminster, MA 01441

M 1/15/1999

BLD-MER

Anthony C. Gumkowski

PrincipalTravelers Insurance CompanyOne Tower Square, 11CRHartford, CT 06183-4073Alternate: Brian L. Marburger

I 1/10/2008BLD-MER

Wayne D. Holmes

PrincipalHSB Professional Loss Control508 Parkview DriveBurlington, NC 27215

I 10/1/1996

BLD-MER

Jonathan Humble

PrincipalAmerican Iron and Steel Institute45 South Main Street, Suite 312West Hartford, CT 06107-2402Alternate: Farid Alfawakhiri

M 7/1/1996BLD-MER

Scott Jacobs

PrincipalISC Electronic Systems, Inc.Electronic Buildings Group, LLC18115 LaSalle AvenueGardena, CA 90248

IM 8/2/2010

1

of 28


Building Code


BLD-MER

Jeff Martin

PrincipalElite Fire Protection33605 Maclure Road, Unit #1Abbotsford, BC V2S 7W2 CanadaNational Association of Fire Equipment Distributors

IM 7/14/2004BLD-MER

Terry Schultz

PrincipalCode Consultants, Inc.1804 Borman Circle DriveSt. Louis, MO 63146-4136Alternate: Amy J. Murdock

SE 7/12/2001

BLD-MER

David C. Tabar

PrincipalThe Sherwin-Williams Company333 Republic Building101 Prospect AvenueCleveland, OH 44115Alternate: Patrick A. McLaughlin

U 1/18/2001BLD-MER

Rick Thornberry

PrincipalThe Code Consortium, Inc.2724 Elks WayNapa, CA 94558

SE 7/20/2000

BLD-MER

J. L. (Jim) Tidwell

PrincipalTidwell Code Consulting11712 Wind Creek CourtAledo, TX 76008Fire Equipment Manufacturers' AssociationAlternate: Jim Widmer

M 8/5/2009BLD-MER

Raymond W. Lonabaugh

Voting AlternateNational Fire Sprinkler Association, Inc.PO Box 126Ridley Park, PA 19078Voting Alt. to NFSA Rep.

M 10/23/2003

BLD-MER

Farid Alfawakhiri

AlternateAmerican Iron and Steel Institute594 Windham LaneNaperville, IL 60563Principal: Jonathan Humble

M 7/23/2008BLD-MER

Mark Budzinski

AlternateAon/Schirmer Engineering Corporation21221 South Western Avenue, Suite 100Torrance, CA 90501Principal: William J. Burrus

I 10/27/2009

BLD-MER

Joshua W. Elvove

AlternateUS General Services AdministrationPublic Buildings Service3478 South Cimarron WayAurora, CO 80014-3912Principal: David W. Frable

U 10/27/2009BLD-MER

William Hiotaky

AlternateThe Taubman Company31430 Fromm DriveBingham Farms, MI 48025Principal: Mark T. Bedell

U 1/18/2001

BLD-MER

Brian L. Marburger

AlternateTravelers Insurance CompanyOne Tower Square 7GS-BHartford, CT 06183Principal: Anthony C. Gumkowski

I 4/1/1996BLD-MER

Patrick A. McLaughlin

AlternateMcLaughlin & Associates186 Shawomet AvenueWarwick, RI 02889Principal: David C. Tabar

U 10/4/2001

2

of 28


Building Code


BLD-MER

Amy J. Murdock

AlternateCode Consultants, Inc.1804 Borman Circle DriveSt. Louis, MO 63146-4136Principal: Terry Schultz

SE 3/4/2009BLD-MER

Dennis L. Pitts

AlternateAmerican Forest & Paper AssociationAmerican Wood Council1721 West Plano Parkway, #224Plano, TX 75075American Forest & Paper AssociationPrincipal: Sam W. Francis

M 5/15/2000

BLD-MER

William J. Tomes

AlternateTelgian Corporation900 Circle 75 Parkway, Suite 680Atlanta, GA 30339The Home DepotPrincipal: Tracey D. Bellamy

U 7/1/1993BLD-MER

Jim Widmer

AlternatePotter Roemer, LLC4103 Tench Road, Suite 100Suwanee, GA 30024Fire Equipment Manufacturers' AssociationPrincipal: J. L. (Jim) TidwellVoting Alt. to FEMA Rep.

M 1/14/2005

BLD-MER

Kristin Collette

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

6/29/2007

3

of 28

BLD/SAF-MER 8 December 2009 Meeting Minutes

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

ROP Meeting Minutes

Building Code – Life Safety Technical Committee

on Mercantile and Business Occupancies Tuesday, December 8, 2009

Embassy Suites Hotel Cleveland - Downtown Cleveland, OH

1. Call to Order. The meeting was called to order by Chair Kenneth Bush at 8:00 a.m. on

Tuesday, December 8, 2009 at the Embassy Suites Hotel Cleveland – Downtown, Cleveland, OH. Chair Bush announced that agenda item #7 regarding consistency of list based options will be addressed after item #3. In addition, Chair Bush announced that agenda items #6, #8, and #9 had been completed by other committees or were not applicable and therefore no action needed to be taken.

2. Introduction of Members and Guests. The following committee members and guests were

in attendance.

TECHNICAL COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT

NAME REPRESENTING Kenneth Bush, Chair Maryland State Fire Marshals Office

Rep. International Fire Marshals Association Kristin Collette, Staff Liaison National Fire Protection Association Mark Bedell, Principal The Taubman Company Tracey Bellamy Alternate to R. Tomes

Telgian Corporation Rep. The Home Depot

William Burrus, Principal Aon/Schirmer Engineering Corporation David Dodge, Principal Safety and Forensic Consulting

Rep. American Society of Safety Engineers Joshua Elvove Alternate to D. Frable

US General Services Administration

David Frable, Principal US General Services Administration Sam Francis, Principal American Forest & Paper Association Douglas Freels, Principal UT-Batelle at Oak Ridge National Lab Daniel Gauvin, Principal Tyco/SimplexGrinnell Anthony Gumkowski, Principal Travelers Insurance Company Wayne Holmes, Principal HSB Professional Loss Control

of 28

BLD/SAF-MER 8 December 2009 Meeting Minutes

Raymond Lonabaugh Alternate to S. Randall

National Fire Sprinkler Association

Jeff Martin, Principal Elite Fire Protection Rep. National Assn. of Fire Equipment Distributors

Patrick McLaughlin, Alternate to D. Tabar

McLaughlin & Associates

Amy Murdock Alternate to E. Schultz

Code Consultants, Inc.

Dennis Pitts Alternate to S. Francis

American Forest & Paper Association

Terry Schultz, Principal Code Consultants, Inc. Rick Thornberry, Principal The Code Consortium, Inc. J. L. Tidwell Tidwell Code Consulting

Rep. Fire Equipment Manufacturers’ Association

GUESTS

NAME REPRESENTING Joe Versteeg Versteeg Associates Marko Saric Sherwin Williams

TECHNICAL COMMITTEE MEMBERS NOT PRESENT

NAME REPRESENTING Jonathan Humble, Principal American Iron and Steel Institute Lawrence Perry, Principal Building Owners & Managers Association International

3. Approval of Minutes from 2007 October 22 Meeting. The minutes of the October 2007

meeting were approved without any modification. 4. Discussion of NFPA 101/ 5000 Core Chapter Changes. The committee addressed changes

made during the core chapter technical committee meetings and generated committee proposals where appropriate.

5. Consistency of List Based Options. A task group was formed and addressed the sections in NFPA 101 and NFPA 5000 where a list based option was used. To clarify these sections, the task group and committee developed committee proposals where appropriate.

6. Preparation of NFPA 101 ROP. All public proposals included in the agenda package were

addressed. See NFPA 101 letter ballots and the Annual 2011 Report on Proposals (ROP) for committee actions on these proposals. Committee proposals were developed as appropriate.

of 28

BLD/SAF-MER 8 December 2009 Meeting Minutes 7. Preparation of NFPA 5000 ROP. All public proposals included in the agenda package were

addressed. See NFPA 5000 letter ballots and the Annual 2011 Report on Proposals (ROP) for committee actions on these comments. Committee proposals were developed as appropriate.

8. Other Business. No other business was discussed.

9. Scheduling of Next Meeting. The next meeting of the Technical Committee on Mercantile

and Business Occupancies will be in the fall of 2010. The occupancy committees will meet the week of October 18, 2010.

10. Adjournment. The meeting was adjourned by Chair Bush at 5:30 pm. Meeting minutes prepared by:

Kristin Collette, NFPA Staff Liaison

of 28

BLD/SAF CommitteesReport on Comments (ROC) Meetings

NFPA 101 and NFPA 5000 ROC Meetings

1

Meetings

October 2010

Monteleone Hotel

New Orleans, LA


NFPA is concerned with your Safety

If the fire alarm sounds, we will evacuate

2

,

Exiting…exits are ……..


OverviewGeneral Procedures for Meeting

Timeline for Processing the Code

3

Committee Actions

Committee Statements

Balloting


Participation in NFPA Committee Meetings is generally limited to Committee Members and NFPA Staff

4

Participation by guests is usually granted by the Chair

The Chair may limit the time of any presentation (member or guest)


All guests are requested to sign-in and identify their affiliation

Members please verify/update your contact

5

Members, please verify/update your contact information on pages attached to sign-in

Use of tape recorders or other means of reproducing verbatim transcriptions of the meeting are prohibited


Formal voting Secured by post-meeting letter ballot (2/3

majority agreement)

V ti d i ti i i l

6

Voting during meeting requires simple majority vote and is used to establish a sense of agreement that can be letter balloted

Only the results of the letter ballot determine the official position of the Committee on any Comment

of 28


Reminder to Members in Special Expert (SE) Category: If representing a non-SE interest (such as a consultant representing a manufacturer or an association of

7

a manufacturer or an association of users), this must be declared. The member should refrain from voting on the issue.


Remaining timeline for processing the 2012 edition of NFPA 101 and NFPA 5000

Comment Closing Date: September 3, 2010 TC ROC meetings:

8

g Core Chapters October 4-8; balloting follows Occupancy Chapters October 18-22; balloting follows

TCCs meet: January 5-6, 2011 NITMAM Closing Date: April 8, 2011 NFPA Annual Meeting: June 12-15, 2011 Amendment ballots: mid to late June (TCC – July) Standards Council Issuance: August 11, 2011


Report on Comments (ROC) preparation - today

9


General Procedures Follow Robert’s Rules of Order

Prior to discussion, a motion is

10

o to d scuss o , a ot o srequired


Committee Member participation:

Member addresses the Chair

Member receives recognition from the

11

e be ece es ecog t o o t eChair

Member speaks to the Chair

Member poses questions to others through the Chair

Member answers questions through the Chair


Committee Chair Actions:

States the Motion

Calls for discussion

12

Ca s o d scuss o

Ensures all issues have been heard

Takes the Vote

Announces the result of the Vote

of 28


Committee Actions on Comments:

Accept

Accept In Principle

13

Accept In Principle

Accept In Part

Accept In Principle In Part

Reject

Hold


Accept: The Comment is accepted by the Committee

without change

No Committee Statement is required for an

14

No Committee Statement is required for an Accept, but one is permitted to be provided for clarification


Accept in Principle: The Committee agrees with the change in

principle, and accepts the Comment but with change in wording

15

change in wording

Committee must indicate change in Committee Action and rationale in Committee Statement


Accept in Part: Only part of the Comment is accepted

Committee must indicate accepted part in Committee Action and address rejected part and

16

Committee Action and address rejected part and rationale for rejection in Committee Statement


Accept in Principle in Part: A combination of Accept in Principle and Accept

in Part

Committee must indicate accepted and changed

17

Committee must indicate accepted and changed parts in Committee Action

Committee must indicate rejected parts and rationale for changed/rejected parts in Committee Statement


Reject: The Committee rejects the Comment in entirety

Committee must indicate reasons for rejection in Committee Statement

18

Committee Statement

of 28


Hold:The Committee holds for processing as a proposal for next cycle, a Comment that:

19

introduces concept that has not had public review

changes text to point TC would have to restudy ROP or other affected parts of document

proposes something that can’t be handled within time frame for processing the ROC


Committee Statements (Explaining the Committee Action): Action of “Accept” requires no

20

Committee Statement

All other actions require a Committee Statement to explain the action of the Committee


Committee Statement must include a valid reason for the action

The reason should be technical where li bl

21

applicable

Must explain why the Comment was not accepted

Acceptance of another Comment is not an adequate reason to reject a Comment


Committee Statements (continued)

Should not reference a Comment with opposing action unless the referenced C t ti f t il l i th

22

Comment satisfactorily explains the rejection

Should not make a vague reference to intent

Should explain how submitter’s substantiation is inadequate


Letter ballots are on the Committee Action

The Ballot form allows you to vote

Affirmative on all actions

23

Affirmative on all actions except those specifically noted

The Ballot form provides a column for affirmative with comment

Note: This box only needs to be checked if there is an accompanying comment


Your ballot form is electronically submit-ableYou can save a copy f lf

24

for yourself

You can also print and fax/mail it to NFPA

All you need is (free) Adobe Reader

of 28


Alternates are encouraged to return ballots (insurance if Principal’s ballot not received)

B ll ti P

25

Balloting Process: Initial letter ballot

Circulation of Negatives, if any received

Circulation serves as second ballot to allow change of vote

Final vote reported


Questions?

26

Questions?

of 28

ANNUAL 2011 REVISION CYCLE

NFPA 101 AND NFPA 5000

PROCESS STAGE PROCESS STEP

DATES FOR TC

DATES FOR TCC

1 PRELIMINARY 1.0 Notification of intent to enter cycle

2 REPORT ON PROPOSALS

(ROP)

2.1 Proposal closing date 7/31/09 7/31/09 2.2 Final date for ROP meeting 12/11/09 2.3 Final date for mailing TC ballots 12/18/09 2.4 Receipt of (TC) ballots by staff liaison 1/8/10 2.5 Receipt of TC recirculation ballots 1/22/10 2.6 Final date for TCC meeting 3/31/10 2.7 Final date for mailing TCC ballots 4/6/10 2.8 Receipt of TCC ballots 4/27/10 2.9 Receipt of TCC recirculation ballots 5/14/10 2.10 Final copy (w/ ballot statements) to Secretary, Standards Council 5/18/10 2.11 Completion of Reports 6/4/10 2.12 ROP Published and Posted 6/25/10

3 REPORT ON COMMENTS

(ROC)

3.1 Comment closing date 9/3/10 9/3/10 3.2 Final date for ROC meeting 10/22/10 3.3 Final date for mailing TC ballots 10/29/10 3.4 Receipt of (TC) ballots by staff liaison 11/12/10 3.5 Receipt of TC recirculation ballots 11/26/10 3.6 Final date for TCC meeting 1/6/11 3.7 Final date for mailing TCC ballots 1/11/11 3.8 Receipt of TCC ballots 1/21/11 3.9 Receipt of TCC recirculation ballots 2/1/11 3.10 Final copy (w/ ballot statements) to Secretary, Standards Council 2/10/11 3.11 Completion of Reports 2/17/11 3.12 ROC Published and Posted 2/25/11

4

TECH SESSION PREPARATION

ON & ISSUANCE OF

CONSENT DOCUMENTS

4.1 Notice of Intent to Make a Motion (NITMAM) Closing Date 4/8/11 4/8/11 4.2 Posting of Filed NITMAM 5/6/11 5/6/11 4.3 Council Issuance Date for Consent Documents 5/31/11 5/31/11

4.4 Appeal Closing Date for Consent Documents 6/15/11 6/15/11

5 TECHNICAL SESSION

5.0 Association Meeting for Documents with Certified Amending Motions 6/12-16/11 6/12-16/11

6

APPEALS & ISSUANCE OF DOCUMENTS

W/CAMS

6.1 Appeal closing date for Documents with Certified Amending Motions 7/6/11 7/6/11

6.2 Council issuance for Documents with Certified Amending Motions 8/11/11 8/11/11

Schedules for Revision Cycles may change. Please check the NFPA website (www.nfpa.org) for the most up-to-date information on schedules. March 2009 REVISED: September, 2010

of 28

http://www.nfpa.org/�

Report on Comments – June 2011 NFPA 101_______________________________________________________________________________________________101-8 Log #14 SAF-MER

_______________________________________________________________________________________________Technical Correlating Committee on Safety to Life,

101-12Make any needed editorial changes to assure that the moved and renumbered text is correlated

with the remainder of the chapter.The action taken at the ROP stage by SAF-HEA will provide correlation among occupancy chapters,

but may need to be correlated within each occupancy chapter.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________101-20 Log #18 SAF-MER


101-36aRevise the definition of Gross Leasable Area to read:

The total floor area Fifty percent of major tenant areas, and one-hundred percent of all otherfloor areas designated for tenant occupancy and exclusive use, including storage areas. The area of tenant occupancyis measured from the centerlines of joint partitions to the outside of the tenant walls. All tenant areas, including areasused for storage, are part of the gross leasable area.

The last sentence of the definition currently starts with the words “all tenant areas” which include“major tenants” and then the newly added text adds in 50 percent of the major tenant areas so as to create a conflict inlanguage.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________101-51 Log #23 SAF-MER


101-134Develop an occupant load factor specific to “high density” call centers.

The Comment on Affirmative submitted by SAF-MER member Frable correctly identifies the need toaddress non-typical, commercial office building work settings such as high-density call centers now that the occupantload factor for business occupancies is being changed from 100 sq ft per person to 150 sq ft per person.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________101-52 Log #199a SAF-MER

_______________________________________________________________________________________________Dave Frable, U.S. General Services Administration

101-133Revise text to read as follows:

Portions of Table 7.3.1.2 not shown remain unchangedBusiness Use (other than below) 150 (ft2 per person) 13.9 (m2 per person)Concentrated usef - 100 (ft2 per person) 9.3 (m2 per person)fFor example, telephone call centers

Several Technical Committee members raised a concern that revising the occupant load factor forbusiness occupancies from 100 ft2 per person to 150 ft2 per person has not take into consideration non-typicalcommercial office building work settings such as "concentrated use" call centers. Therefore, I have attempted to addressthis concern by including a separate condition for determining the occupant load factor for non-typical commercial officebuilding work settings (i.e., "concentrated use") that will remain at 100 ft2 per person. The term "concentrated use" hasbeen taken from the assembly use occupancy.

1Printed on 9/23/2010

of 28

Report on Comments – June 2011 NFPA 101_______________________________________________________________________________________________101-54 Log #203a SAF-MER



Portions of Table 7.3.1.2 not shown remain unchangedBusiness Use (other than below) 150 (ft2 per person) 13.9 (m2 per person)Concentrated usef - 100 ft2 per person) 9.3 (m2 per person)fFor example, telephone call centers

Several Technical Committee members raised a concern that revising the occupant load factor forbusiness occupancies from 100 ft2 per person to 150 ft2 per person has not take into consideration non-typicalcommercial office building work settings such as "concentrated use" call centers. Therefore, I have attempted to addressthis concern by including a separate condition for determining the occupant load factor for non-typical commercial officebuilding work settings (i.e., "concentrated use") that will remain at 100 ft2 per person. The term "concentrated use" hasbeen taken from the assembly use occupancy.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________101-56 Log #239a SAF-MER

_______________________________________________________________________________________________Ignatius Kapalczynski, CT Office of State Fire Marshal

101-133Reconsider to Reject.

The substantiation is limited, US centric, and a statistically small sample. It will also requirereconsideration of single exit, common path, travel distance, and fire alarm thresholds based on occupant load.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________101-58 Log #240a SAF-MER



The substantiation is limited, US centric and a statistically small sample. It will also requirereconsideration of single exit, common path, travel distance, and fire alarm thresholds based on occupant load.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________101-60 Log #276a SAF-MER





of 28





_______________________________________________________________________________________________101-64 Log #281a SAF-MER




_______________________________________________________________________________________________101-66 Log #295a SAF-MER




_______________________________________________________________________________________________101-68 Log #296a SAF-MER



The substantiation is limited, US centric and a statistically small sample. It will also requirereconsideration of single exit, common path, travel distance, and fire alarm thresholds based on occupant load.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________101-107 Log #30 SAF-MER


101-177cReview the TC’s occupancy chapter provisions applicable to smoke barriers and, if it is the TC’s

desire, revise text so as to specifically exempt latching in the appropriate locations.The occupancy chapters might need to be correlated with the change made to 8.5.4.


of 28



101-380Reconsider to Accept In Part..

Interior wall finish materials complying with 10.2 shall be Class A, B, or C and interior ceiling finish materials complyingwith 10.2 shall be Class A or B.

Substantiation is based on wall finishes. The ceiling finish should remain unchanged.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________101-280 Log #138 SAF-MER

_______________________________________________________________________________________________James K. Lathrop, Koffel Associates, Inc.

101-381bReject Proposal 101-381b.

Although jockey pumps and air compressors serving dry pipe and pre-action systems are “secondary”as noted by the TC, lack of power to these devices during a power failure can result in tripping a dry pipe orunnecessary activation of a fire pump. Both are undesirable and both could lead to failures that could lead touncontrolled fires. This is only for new construction and only in a high rise building. If the generator can handle the firepump it can easily handle these devices.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________101-281 Log #42 SAF-MER


101-381bDo one of the following:

(1) Delete proposed 36.4.2.2, or(2) Coordinate through SAF-FUN the placement of correlative text in 11.8.5.2.4 [as revised by Proposal 101-230a] that

will recognize exemptions from its rule where such exemption appears in an occupancy chapter.The procedures for the life safety committees do not permit an occupancy chapter to allow a leniency

to a core chapter provision without the placement of correlative text in the core chapter to recognize such exemption.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________101-282 Log #44 SAF-MER


101-381cMake changes to address the issues raised in member Thornberry’s and Gumkowski’s Comment

on Affirmative.The text as revised is confusing and incorrect. It can be fixed by addressing the issues raised by

members Thornberry and Gumkowski.


of 28


_______________________________________________________________________________________________Rick Thornberry, The Code Consortium, Inc. / Rep. 3A Composites USA, Inc.

101-381aReinstate the current text proposed to be deleted by Proposal 101-381a in 36.4.4.8 (1) (b) and

37.4.4.8 (1) (b) so that they read as follows:Kiosks and similar structures (temporary or permanent) shall not be considered as tenant spaces and

shall meet the following requirements:(1) Combustible kiosks and similar structures shall be constructed of any of the following materials:(b) Light-transmitting plastics complying with Chapter 48 of NFPA 5000, Building Construction and Safety Code

Kiosks and similar structures (temporary or permanent) shall not be considered as tenant spaces andshall meet the following requirements:

(1) Combustible kiosks and similar structures shall be constructed of any of the following materials:(b) Light-transmitting plastics complying with Chapter 48 of NFPA 5000, Building Construction and Safety Code

Without the specific references to Chapter 48 of the NFPA 5000 Building Construction and SafetyCode in Section 36.4.4.8 Kiosks and 37.4.4.8 Kiosks, there is no way to determine what exactly light-transmittingplastics would have to comply with if a different building code were adopted by the jurisdiction enforcing NFPA 101. It isvery important that the specific requirements in Section 48.7 of Chapter 48 of NFPA 5000 which are applicable tolight-transmitting plastics be applied for proper enforcement of these requirements for kiosks. Otherwise, another optionavailable to assure compliance would be to extract the specific text from Section 48.7 of Chapter 48 of NFPA 5000 andincorporate it into this section. A less desirable approach would be to include Annex A notes to Sections 36.4.4.8 and37.4.4.8 to indicate that the specific requirements can be found in Section 48.7 of Chapter 48 of NFPA 5000 forlight-transmitting plastics.


of 28

Report on Comments – June 2011 NFPA 101_______________________________________________________________________________________________101-284 Log #CC5 SAF-MER

_______________________________________________________________________________________________Technical Committee on Fundamentals,

101-10Revise text as follows:

The storage, arrangement,protection, and quantities of hazardous commodities shall be in accordance with the applicable provisions of thefollowing:(1) NFPA 1,(2) NFPA 13,(3) NFPA 30,(4) NFPA 30B,(5) (6) NFPA 400, , Chapter 14 for organic peroxide formulations NFPA 432,

(6) (5) NFPA 400, , Chapter 15 for oxidizer solids and liquidsNFPA 430,

(7) NFPA 400, , various chapters depending on characteristics of a particular pesticide NFPA434,(8) NFPA 1124,


(6) (5) NFPA 400, , Chapter 15 for oxidizer solids and liquids NFPA 430,


NFPA 430, 432 and 434 were withdrawn and incorporated into new NFPA 400. NFPA 400 replaces thewithdrawn documents and should serve as the mandatory referenced publication for the three categories of productsaddressed in 36/37.4.5.3(5) through (7).


of 28


_______________________________________________________________________________________________Marcelo M. Hirschler, GBH International / Rep. American Fire Safety Council


The provisions of 10.3.2 shall not apply to new upholstered furnitureand mattresses.

Upholstered furniture items that meet the heat release criteria specified in 10.3.3 will exhibit improved fireperformance. Mattresses that meet the heat release criteria specified in 10.3.4 will exhibit improved fire performance.

This comment changes the requirement in 36.7.5 from “newly introduced” to “new” and it will thereforeaffect only upholstered furniture items and mattresses purchased new after the new edition of NFPA 101 goes intoeffect. It therefore does not apply to antique furniture or mattresses.

As explained in the proposal, very few “new” upholstered furniture items are not resistant to smoldering ignition sinceUFAC and BIFMA have required for some 30 years that the upholstered furniture be smolder-resistant. Moreover,mattresses have been required by CPSC in the United States to be smolder resistant since the 1970s.

Therefore, what this action does is eliminate the permission for stores to go out in a search for upholstered furnitureitems or mattresses that do smolder as opposed to the normal ones that do not. Moreover, it is an important messagethat NFPA 101 recognizes the potential problem of smoldering ignition and requires upholstered furniture to be smolderresistant.

The annex note is information and does not incorporate requirements.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________101-286 Log #41 SAF-MER


101-380Make the same change to 37.3.3.2.

The change to only 36.3.3.2 makes the requirements for existing interior finish stricter than that fornew. The provisions of 37.3.3.2 must be correlated with those of 36.3.3.2.


of 28








Therefore, what this action does is eliminate the permission for stores to go out in a search for upholstered furnitureitems or mattresses that do smolder as opposed to the normal ones that do not. Moreover, it is an important messagethat NFPA 101 recognizes the potential problem of smoldering ignition and requires upholstered furniture to be smolderresistant.


_______________________________________________________________________________________________101-288 Log #193 SAF-MER

_______________________________________________________________________________________________Masoud Sabounchi, Advanced Consulting Engineers, Inc.

101-185Add new sections:

An atrium design and separation meeting the requirements of 8.6.7 shall be permitted to serve as anoccupancy separation.

An atrium design and separation meeting the requirements of 8.6.7 shall be permitted to serve as anoccupancy separation.

Where separation is provided between the atrium and an adjacent area where the adjacent areahas a different occupancy, the separation in conjunction with the smoke control system provides separation equivalentto that required for occupancy separation. Where atrium is open to the adjacent area as permitted by 8.6.7 (b), there isno separation between the atrium and adjacent area and occupancy of both is considered to be the same. The notedprovision would not be applicable where Provisions of 8.6.7 (b) are implemented.

Atriums enclosures are permitted to serve in lieu of vertical opening protection when provisions of8.6.7 are met. Provisions of 8.6.7 outline how an atrium separation is constructed; it requires the building to be protectedby an automatic sprinkler system throughout, smoke control system, etc. As such, the collection of the safety and fireprotection features required to allow an atrium are equivalent to that of a shaft enclosure. Even though NFPA does notexplicitly allow the atrium separations to be considered as occupancy separation, it considers the separation and theassociated safety provisions equivalent to shaft enclosures. Otherwise, construction of an atrium would be construed asless safe than a shaft which is definitely not the case. The collection of the required safety features in construction of anatrium would be equivalent to a fire resistance rated shaft enclosure and should also be accepted as an occupancyseparation.

In many cases the occupancy that needs separation from the atrium occurs on one level of the atrium and typically thisseparation is required at the first floor of the atrium. Regardless of the location of the occupancy that requires occupancyseparation from the atrium, if the area containing that occupancy is separated from the atrium, other floors that have thesame occupancy as the atrium should be regulated as required by 8.6.7.


of 28


_______________________________________________________________________________________________Joshua Elvove, U.S. General Services Administration

101-185Add the following text to the end of the existing annex as follows:

An atrium separation meeting the requirements of 8.6.7 shall be permitted to serve as an occupancyseparation provided the atrium is separated from the adjacent spaces by fire barriers with not less than a 1-hour fireresistance rating with opening protectives, penetrations, joints and air transfer openings as required for smoke partitions(see Section 8.4).

Glass walls and inoperable windows shall be permitted in lieu of fire barriers provided all the provisions of8.6.7(1)(c) are met.

An atrium shall not be permitted to be used as an occupancy separation where any of the followingconditions exist

(1) where adjacent spaces are directly open to the atrium(2) where an engineering analysis has not been performed to demonstrate that the building is designed to keep the

smoke layer interface 6 feet above the highest floor level of exit access open to the atrium for a period equal to 1.5 timesthe calculated egress time or 20 minutes, whichever is less

(3) where an engineering smoke control system, installed to meet the requirements of 38.1.2.3.2(2), has not beenequipped with a means to be independently activated by a required automatic sprinkler system and manual controls thatare accessible to the fire department.

Atriums need to be separated from adjacent occupancies so there is a defined location for measuringtravel distance to the occupancy separation. Similar to the provisions of 8.6.7(5), an atrium should not be proposed asan occupancy separation unless safe egress can be demonstrated by an engineering analysis. Similar to 8.6.7(6),should the analysis reveal the need for a smoke control system, the smoke control system would need to be equippedwith both an automatic and manual means of operation.

An atrium separation meeting the requirements of 8.6.7 shall be permitted to serve as an occupancyseparation provided the atrium is separated from the adjacent occupancy by fire barriers with not less than a 1-hour fireresistance rating with opening protectives, penetrations, joints and air transfer openings as required for smoke partitions(see Section 8.4).

Glass walls and inoperable windows shall be permitted in lieu of fire barriers provided all the provisions of8.6.7(1)(c) are met.

An atrium separation shall not be permitted to be used as an occupancy separation where any of thefollowing conditions exist

(1) where adjacent spaces are directly open to the atrium(2) where an engineering analysis has not been performed to demonstrate that the building is designed to keep the

smoke layer interface 6 feet above the highest floor level of exit access open to the atrium for a period equal to 1.5 timesthe calculated egress time or 20 minutes, whichever is less

(3) where an engineering smoke control system, installed to meet the requirements of 39.1.2.3.2(2), has not beenequipped with a means to be independently activated by a required automatic sprinkler system and manual controls thatare accessible to the fire department.

Atriums need to be separated from adjacent occupancies so there is a defined location for measuringtravel distance to the occupancy separation. Similar to the provisions of 8.6.7(5), an atrium should not be proposed asan occupancy separation unless safe egress can be demonstrated by an engineering analysis. Similar to 8.6.7(6),should the analysis reveal the need for a smoke control system, the smoke control system would need to be equippedwith both an automatic and manual means of operation.

101-185 introduces a new concept which permits atriums to be used as an occupancy separation,should an occupancy so choose, provided as a minimum, the atrium is designed in accordance with 8.6.7. Since atriumshave always permitted to serve in lieu of up to 2 hr vertical openings protection when the all the provisions of 8.6.7 aremet, it seems logical that an atrium should also be used as an occupancy separation.

Though ROP-185 establishes the base provisions, in order for atriums to be used as occupancy separations inbusiness occupancies, the base provisions need to be further enhanced so the dangers associated with multiple flooropenings are mitigated. That is why this provision can only be used if the atrium is completely separated from adjacentspaces (as opposed to what’s permitted for atriums by 8.6.7(1)(b), an engineering analysis is performed thatdemonstrates egress is safeguarded (per 8.6.7(5)) and that smoke control systems, if required to be provided based


of 28

Report on Comments – June 2011 NFPA 101upon the engineering analysis, can be activated both automatically and manually (per 8.6.7(6). The applicableprovisions from Section 8.4 have been added to ensure opening protectives, penetrations, joints and air transferopening requirements are applied. Though a one hour fire barrier is the based requirement, an atrium that is separatedfrom adjacent spaces by glass walls in conjunction with all seven requirements of 8.6.7(1)(c) should also suffice as anoccupancy separation, since they already suffice for vertical opening protection.

Business occupancies should have the option to use this provision. Similar proposals have been submitted forAssembly, Day Care, Educational, Health Care and Ambulatory Health Care occupancies.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________101-291 Log #45 SAF-MER


101-385dReconsider the proposal so as not to make the change.

The current text was written specifically to address two-story townhouse-type office buildings whereeach tenant has a two-story space that abuts its neighbor’s two-story space. The change made by the proposal will nolonger permit a single means of egress [with an unenclosed stair as permitted by 38.3.1.1(2)] within such tenant space.The change was made without technical substantiation as to why the arrangement does not provide adequate lifesafety.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________101-292 Log #139 SAF-MER

_______________________________________________________________________________________________James K. Lathrop, Koffel Associates, Inc.

101-387aReject Proposal 101-387a.

Although jockey pumps and air compressors serving dry pipe and pre-action systems are “secondary”as noted by the TC, lack of power to these devices during a power failure can result in tripping a dry pipe orunnecessary activation of a fire pump. Both are undesirable and both could lead to failures that could lead touncontrolled fires. This is only for new construction and only in a high rise building. If the generator can handle the firepump it can easily handle these devices.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________101-293 Log #46 SAF-MER


101-387aDo one of the following:

(1) Delete proposed 38.4.2.2, or(2) Coordinate through SAF-FUN the placement of correlative text in 11.8.5.2.4 [as revised by Proposal 101-230a] that

will recognize exemptions from its rule where such exemption appears in an occupancy chapter.The procedures for the life safety committees do not permit an occupancy chapter to allow a leniency

to a core chapter provision without the placement of correlative text in the core chapter to recognize such exemption.


of 28








Therefore, what this action does is eliminate the permission for businesses to go out in a search for upholsteredfurniture items or mattresses that do smolder as opposed to the normal ones that do not. Moreover, it is an importantmessage that NFPA 101 recognizes the potential problem of smoldering ignition and requires upholstered furniture to besmolder resistant.


_______________________________________________________________________________________________101-295 Log #48 SAF-MER


101-390Reconsider the proposal in light of the Committee Statement [first paragraph that mentions

sprinklers and detection, not sprinklers or detection] and member Thornberry’s Explanation of Negative in which hecontends that the committee acted in its ROP meeting so that the text of 39.2.4.7(1) would require BOTH automaticsprinklers and smoke detection, yet the text balloted connected the two items with the word “or.”

The Committee Statement [first paragraph that mentions sprinklers and detection, not sprinklers ordetection] and member Thornberry’s point relative to “sprinklers and detectors” raises the issue of whether membersvoted for what they thought the action was rather than what was balloted. Was consensus reached on the subject?

_______________________________________________________________________________________________101-296 Log #49 SAF-MER


101-391Reconsider the action so as to add the recommended text by using the word “replaced” in lieu of

“updated or replaced” for correlation with the action by SAF-END on Proposal 101-250.The action by SAF-END on Proposal 101-250 addresses SAF-MER’s concern with the term “updated.”


of 28



101-391Reconsider to Accept as revised by SAF-END.

Emergency forces notification shall be accomplished in accordance with 9.6.4 when the existing fire alarm system isreplaced.

The revised text addresses Committee’s concerns. It requires emergency forces notification in existingoccupancy just as in a new occupancy. The basis of necessity is the same. It allows the occupancy to be improved torequirements of new but not until the system is replaced so as not to be retroactive. The emergency forces notificationrequirement of replacement systems needs to be explicitly stated.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________101-298 Log #80 SAF-MER







Therefore, what this action does is eliminate the permission for businesses to go out in a search for upholsteredfurniture items or mattresses that do smolder as opposed to the normal ones that do not. Moreover, it is an importantmessage that NFPA 101 recognizes the potential problem of smoldering ignition and requires upholstered furniture to besmolder resistant.



of 28

Report on Comments – June 2011 NFPA 5000_______________________________________________________________________________________________5000-17 Log #34 BLD-MER

_______________________________________________________________________________________________Technical Correlating Committee on Building Code,

5000-34cRevise the definition to read as follows: Fifty percent of all major tenant areas and one hundred

percent of all other floor areas designated for tenant occupancy and exclusive use including storage areas. The area oftenant occupancy is measured from the centerline of joint partitions to the outside of the tenant walls. All tenant areasincluding areas used for storage, are part of the gross leasable area.

The last sentence of the definition currently starts with the words “all tenant areas” which include“major tenants” and then the newly added text adds in 50 percent of the major tenant areas so as to create a conflict inlanguage. The suggested revision above clarifies these points.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________5000-70 Log #54 BLD-MER


5000-88Review the action taken by BLD-BLC on proposal 5000-88.

Proposal 5000-88 considers removal of the story height limits and area criteria from Chapter 7. Nocorrelative action was considered as to how the allowable construction types for the occupancy chapters would behandled (in the__.1.5.1 Section) without such content.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________5000-92 Log #66 BLD-MER


5000-97aReconsider the action on this proposal to determine if latching is required or not. Section 8.11.4.2

(3) appears to not require the latching hardware but implies that the occupancy chapters can offer a different option.The Occupancy Chapter TCs should review their chapter provisions applicable to smoke barriers and, if it is the TC’sdesire, revise text so as to specifically require latching in the appropriate locations.

The occupancy chapters might need to be correlated with the change made to 8.11.4.2(3).

_______________________________________________________________________________________________5000-117 Log #77 BLD-MER


5000-141The committee is asked to develop an occupant load factor specific to “high density” call centers.

The Comment on Affirmative correctly identifies the need to address non-typical, commercial officebuilding work settings such as high-density call centers now that the occupant load factor for business occupancies isbeing changed from 100 sq ft per person to 150 sq ft per person.


of 28

Report on Comments – June 2011 NFPA 5000_______________________________________________________________________________________________5000-118 Log #125a BLD-MER


5000-141Portions of Table 11.3.1.2 not shown remain unchanged

Business Use (other than below) 150 (ft2 per person) 13.9 (m2 per person)Concentrated usef – 100 (ft2 per person) 9.3 (m2 per person)

f For example, telephone call centersSeveral Technical Committee members raised a concern that revising the occupant load factor for

business occupancies from 100 ft2 per person to 150 ft2 per person has not take into consideration non-typicalcommercial office building work settings such as “concentrated use” call centers. Therefore, I have attempted to addressthis concern by including a separate condition for determining the occupant load factor for non-typical commercial officebuilding work settings (i.e., “concentrated use”) that will remain at 100 ft2 per person. The term “concentrated use” hasbeen taken from the assembly use occupancy.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________5000-120 Log #180 BLD-MER


5000-140Delete text to read as follows:

Reconsider to Reject.The substantiation is limited, US centric and a statistically small sample. It will also require

reconsideration of single exit, common path, travel distance, and fire alarm thresholds based on occupant load.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________5000-121 Log #181 BLD-MER


5000-141Deleted text to read as follows:

Reconsider to Reject.The substantiation is limited, US centric and a statistically small sample. It will also require

reconsideration of single exit, common path, travel distance, and fire alarm thresholds based on occupant load.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________5000-143 Log #168 BLD-MER


5000-174nRevised/New text to read as follows:

Reconsider to Accept In Part.Interior wall finish materials complying with 10.2 shall be Class A, B, or C and interior ceiling finish materials complying

with 10.2 shall be Class A or B.The proponents substantiation is based on wall finishes. The ceiling finish should remain unchanged.


of 28

Report on Comments – June 2011 NFPA 5000_______________________________________________________________________________________________5000-144 Log #CC6 BLD-MER

_______________________________________________________________________________________________Technical Committee on Fundamentals,

5000-6Revise text as follows:


(6) (5) NFPA 400, , Chapter 15 for oxidizer solids and liquids NFPA 430,


NFPA 430, 432 and 434 were withdrawn and incorporated into new NFPA 400. NFPA 400 replaces thewithdrawn documents and should serve as the mandatory referenced publication for the three categories of productsaddressed in 27.4.5.3(5) through (7).

_______________________________________________________________________________________________5000-145 Log #80 BLD-MER


5000-177dReconsider the proposal so as not to make the change.

The current text was written specifically to address two-story townhouse-type office buildings whereeach tenant has a two story space that abuts its neighbor’s two story space. The change made by the proposal will nolonger permit a single means of egress [with an unenclosed stair as permitted by 28.3.1.1.2)] within such tenant space.The change was made without technical substantiation as to why the arrangement does not provide adequate lifesafety.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________5000-155 Log #84 BLD-MER


5000-204aMake changes to address the issues raised in the Comment on Affirmative ballots.

The text as revised is confusing and incorrect. It can be fixed by addressing the issues raised.


of 28

ROC MEETING AGENDA Building Construction – Life Safety ......1 Bethel Valley Road, MS6424 PO Box...

Documents

Transcript of ROC MEETING AGENDA Building Construction – Life Safety ......1 Bethel Valley Road, MS6424 PO Box...