National Fire Protection Association. 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA Phone: Fax:

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "National Fire Protection Association. 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA Phone: Fax:"

Austin Cain
5 years ago
Views:

National Fire Protection Association 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02169-7471 Phone: 617-770-3000 Fax: 617-770-0700 www.nfpa.

1 National Fire Protection Association 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA Phone: Fax: M E M O R A N D U M TO: FROM: NFPA Technical Committee on Means of Egress Linda MacKay DATE: November 9, 2010 SUBJECT: NFPA 5000 ROC TC Circulation Ballot (A2011 Cycle) The November 3 date for receipt of the NFPA 5000 ROC letter ballot has passed. The preliminary ROC ballot results are as follows: 27 Members Eligible to Vote 6 (Collins, Guest, McMahon, Stoll, Tapper, Tierney) In accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee Projects, attached are reasons for negative votes for review so you may change your ballot if you wish. Abstentions and affirmative comments are also included. Ballots received from alternate members are not included unless the ballot from the principal member was not received. If you wish to change your vote, the change must be received at NFPA on or before Tuesday, November 16, Members who have not returned a ballot may do so now. Such changes should be sent to Linda MacKay via either to lmackay@nfpa.org or via fax to You may also mail your ballot to the attention of Linda MacKay at NFPA, 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA The return of ballots is required by the Regulations Governing Committee Projects. Attachment: Circulation Explanation Report

2 Eligible To Vote:27 Affirmative: 20 Negative: 0 : 1 : 6 Chapter 11 (various) (Log # CC1 ) NFPA 101 Technical Committees (TCs) must also act on similar or identical Proposals and Comments for NFPA This action emphasizes the unnecessary redundancy of NFPA 5000 regarding established NFPA and International Code Council codes and standards and is not supported by the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB). NAHB therefore abstains on this NFPA 5000 action a Eligible To Vote:27 Affirmative: 20 Negative: 0 : 1 : (Log # CC50 ) Eligible To Vote:27 Affirmative: 20 Negative: 0 : 1 : (Log # 147 )

3 Eligible To Vote:27 Affirmative: 20 Negative: 0 : 1 : (Log # 174 ) Eligible To Vote:27 Affirmative: 20 Negative: 0 : 1 : x (New) (Log # 175 ) Eligible To Vote:27 Affirmative: 20 Negative: 0 : 1 : x (New) (Log # 176 )

4 Eligible To Vote:27 Affirmative: 20 Negative: 0 : 1 : (Log # 178 ) Eligible To Vote:27 Affirmative: 20 Negative: 0 : 1 : x (New) (Log # 177 ) Eligible To Vote:27 Affirmative: 20 Negative: 0 : 1 : (Log # 118 )

5 a Eligible To Vote:27 Affirmative: 20 Negative: 0 : 1 : (Log # CC51 ) Eligible To Vote:27 Affirmative: 20 Negative: 0 : 1 : x (New) (Log # 179 ) Eligible To Vote:27 Affirmative: 20 Negative: 0 : 1 : 6 Table (Log # 125b )

6 Eligible To Vote:27 Affirmative: 20 Negative: 0 : 1 : (Log # 148 ) Eligible To Vote:27 Affirmative: 20 Negative: 0 : 1 : (Log # 149 ) a Eligible To Vote:27 Affirmative: 19 Negative: 1 : 1 : (Log # CC52 ) Negative

7 6 Bush, K. This proposed amendment represents a major change to the provisions of the previous edition of the code, and should be held for the next code cycle in order to permit full proposal and comment review by the public. Under current code provisions, any arrangement for the interior discharge of an exit is limited to a single floor, that being the defined level of exit discharge. With the proposed changes, this interior discharge could occur on any, including multiple, levels of the building. This arrangement could also rely on multiple means of egress travel, including exterior means of egress components. These paths of travel could present a more confusing and complicated egress system for both building occupants, and for staff and emergency responders who may be responsible for occupant assistance, as well as means to provide access to the building for emergency operations. There has been no technical justification for this change to permit interior exit discharge on floor(s) other than the designated level of exit discharge to be completed at the Comment phase of the code cycle b Eligible To Vote:27 Affirmative: 20 Negative: 0 : 1 : (Log # CC53 ) Eligible To Vote:27 Affirmative: 20 Negative: 0 : 1 : x (New) (Log # 150 ) a Eligible To Vote:27 Affirmative: 19 Negative: 1 : 1 : (Log # CC54 )

8 7 Negative Bush, K. This proposed change to the Code eliminates some of the protection for hazards recognized in the current edition of the Code. Protection against water from entering the elevator hoistway is needed for water from sources other than sprinkler systems. The possibility of water entry into the hoistway from fire department hose lines and failures in domestic water piping has been eliminated as a result of this proposal. Although there is no objection to the methods of protection introduced by the new wording, it does nothing to eliminate other potential water hazards Eligible To Vote:27 Affirmative: 20 Negative: 0 : 1 : 6 A and Annex H (Log # 23a ) Eligible To Vote:27 Affirmative: 20 Negative: 0 : 1 : 6 A through Annex H (Log # 26a )

9 Eligible To Vote:27 Affirmative: 20 Negative: 0 : 1 : 6 A (Log # 119 ) Eligible To Vote:27 Affirmative: 16 Negative: 4 : 1 : 6 Annex E (Log # 141 ) Negative Bonisch, W. See my comments on Di Pilla, S. I believe the committee's decision to continue to allow these provisions in the code is ill-advised. Clearly, allowing technology and procedures that have not been well-vetted is at odds with the very nature of the consensus standards process itself. Doing so puts building occupants at unnecessary risk should failure occur. Having provisions for emergency use of elevators remain in the appendix allows that information to be shared adequately. Included with the committee's rationale is that "No group has come forward with funding for human factors analysis and such money is not promised for the near future." This amounts to a tacit admission that such evaluation is needed. And because required research may not be done any time soon is a poor reason for moving ahead without it. Nuschler, G. The committee should support the High Rise Building Safety Advisory Committee's recommendation to retain language as an annex of NFPA 101 until such time that the ASME task groups complete their recommendations regarding use of elevators in emergencies in highrise buildings. Pauls, J. As a member of the HRBSAC, I concur with the substantiation provided in its comment to reject Proposal , especially the next to last paragraph beginning "Elevators..." I helped to write this paragraph within the HRBSAC meeting in June 2010 and still agree with what it states. Affirmative with Comment Frable, D. I agree with the action taken by the Technical Committee on comment The subject code change will permit each occupancy technical committee to decide where elevators for occupant evacuation will be permitted to be installed.

10 Eligible To Vote:27 Affirmative: 20 Negative: 0 : 1 : 6 E (New) (Log # 172 ) Eligible To Vote:27 Affirmative: 20 Negative: 0 : 1 : 6 E.8.2 (Log # 142 )

National Fire Protection Association. 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA Phone: Fax:

National Fire Protection Association 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02169-7471 Phone: 617-770-3000 Fax: 617-770-0700 www.nfpa.org MEMORANDUM To: From: NFPA Technical Committee on Manuractured Housing