M E M O R A N D U M...National Fire Protection Association 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02169-7471 Phone: 617-770-3000 • Fax: 617-770-0700 • M E M O R A N D U M 1 Richard D

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

M E M O R A N D U M TO: NEC® Code-Making Panel 13 FROM: Kimberly Shea, Administrator, Technical Projects DATE: January 18, 2016 SUBJECT: NFPA 70 Second Draft TC Ballot Circulation (A2016)

The January 15, 2016 date for receipt of the NEC Second Draft Ballots has passed. The preliminary ballot results are shown on the attached report. 21 Members Eligible to Vote 2 Ballots Not Returned (Tobias, Jr. and Keenan)

In accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing the Development of NFPA Standards, 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 Friday, January 22, 2016. Members who have not returned a ballot may do so now. Changes must be submitted through the NFPA Vote.net Ballot site. The return of ballots is required by the Regulations Governing the Development of NFPA Standards.

Eligible to Vote: 21

Not Returned : 2

David Tobias, Jr.,Ronald A. Keenan

Vote Selection Votes Comments

Affirmative 17

Affirmative with Comment 2

Richard D. Currin, Jr. I am in agreement with this revision. The labeling requirements gives needed

information to installers and AHJs to insure a safe installation. Allowing the

information to be in manufacturer's instructions will prevent nameplates from

becoming excessive in size.

Daniel R. Neeser Item 5 should include "zero" as in item 1. This should be considered for the 2020

NEC.

Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 18


Richard D. Currin, Jr. This revision clarifies the statement to better meet its intent.

Negative 0

Abstain 0

Total Voted : 19

SR-3618, Section No. 445.13(B), See SR-3618

NFPA 70 Panel 13 Second Draft Ballot Circulation A2016

SR-3617, Section No. 445.11, See SR-3617

Total Voted : 19

Page 1 of 35

http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/FormLaunch?id=/TerraView/Content/70-2014.ditamap/2/C1447111048452.xml&viewmode=nfpa/xslt/nfpaviewmode.xsl



Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 18


Richard D. Currin, Jr. This was needed for correlation

Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 18


Richard D. Currin, Jr. This revision clarifies the statement.

Negative 0

Abstain 0

SR-3619, Section No. 445.18(A), See SR-3619

Total Voted : 19


Total Voted : 19

Page 2 of 35




Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 18


Richard D. Currin, Jr. This revision removed the term "weatherproof" since all generators are not

weatherproof. It clarifies the required disconnect location.

Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 14


Richard D. Currin, Jr. This revision addresses the fact that GFCI protection is required for bonded

125/250v generators. It allows an exception for generators with interlocking that

disables 125 v receptacles when the 125/250v receptacles are in use.


Total Voted : 19


Page 3 of 35



Linda J. Little This revision is primarily editorial and provides significant clarity. The only

substantive impact is that on bonded portable generators, the 125-volt

receptacles must be GFCI protected. It is imperative to note that small unbonded

generators that employ only 125-volt receptacles are not required to have GFCI

protection. That has been the concern of the generator manufacturers all along

and SR 3621 does not impact those unbonded generators. Rejection of SR 3621 by

CMP-13 would be an affirmation that bonded generators do not require GFCI

protection for 125-volt, 15/20-amp receptacles, which would directly conflict with

the requirements of section 210.8. CMP-13 has no justification to specifically

permit 125-volt, 15/20-amp receptacles to be applied without GFCI protection on

bonded generators. Why would a manufacturer build a bonded generator and not

provide GFCI protection, particularly when understanding that there is a path for

fault current inherent to the generator and shock hazards exist?

George M. Brandon The word "and" needs to be removed from two sentences. The sentences are

show below, first as they are in the standard and then with the unneeded "and"

removed. Original: Unbonded generators with both 125-volt and 125/250-volt

receptacle outlets shall have listed GFCI protection for personnel integral to the

generator or receptacle on all 125-volt and 15- and 20-ampere receptacle outlets.

Updated: Unbonded generators with both 125-volt and 125/250-volt receptacle

outlets shall have listed GFCI protection for personnel integral to the generator or

receptacle on all 125-volt 15- and 20-ampere receptacle outlets. Original Bonded

generators shall be provided with GFCI protection on all 125-volt and 15- and 20-

ampere receptacle outlets. Updated Bonded generators shall be provided with

GFCI protection on all 125-volt 15- and 20-ampere receptacle outlets.

Negative 2

James E. Degnan No substantiation was offered to justify the new text.

Page 4 of 35

Neil A. Czarnecki The intent of the public inputs on 445.20 were intended to clarify the existing

requirements of this section. The Panel action to create SR 3621 goes well beyond

clarification, and creates a new requirement that is unnecessarily restrictive and

not technically substantiated.

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 17


Richard D. Currin, Jr. This corrects and correlates with the documents while removing a specific edition.

Negative 1

Timothy M. Croushore Removal of the dates of the referenced documents within Second Revision 3628 is

inconsistent with NFPA Regulations Governing the Development of NFPA

Standards, Section 3.3.6.2 Reference to Other NFPA Standards or Other

Publications. In addition, this action is inconsistent with the action on SR #3643

where the dates are left in place on similar referenced standards.

Abstain 0


Total Voted : 19

Total Voted : 19

Page 5 of 35



Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 16


Richard D. Currin, Jr. Agree because listing is needed to insure products are safe. This provides AHJs and

installers assurance that the batteries installed are suitable for the application.

Linda J. Little This new requirement is necessary to ensure safe operation. Recent failures in the

Boeing 747 Dreamliner and hover-boards have shown that thermal runaway is a

serious fire hazard. The expansion of energy storage into facilities with occupants

mandates that these new battery technologies be tested and certified before

installation in accordance with the NEC.

Negative 1

Neil A. Czarnecki The current ANSI standard for storage batteries is battery chemistry independent,

and as such, does not take the differences in chemistry into consideration in the

safety design process. The addition of a listing requirement will therefore provide

limited benefit to the battery consumer and potentially restricts the

implementation of new technologies and solutions into the electrical industry.

Abstain 0

Total Voted : 19

SR-3629, New Section after 480.2, See SR-3629

Page 6 of 35



Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 18


Richard D. Currin, Jr. This makes the distinction from power batteries and batteries used to start prime

movers.

Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 18


Richard D. Currin, Jr. Agree, this is a change to correlate with the new 60 volt DC level.

Negative 0

Abstain 0


Total Voted : 19


Total Voted : 19

Page 7 of 35




Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 17


Richard D. Currin, Jr. Agree this change is appropriate.

Daniel R. Neeser An editorial change by the Correlating Committee or NFPA Staff is suggested. The

term “fault-current” in Informational Note No. 2 should be changed to “short-

circuit current” as this term is used in 480.7(D)(2). FR 3643 changed “short-circuit

current” to “fault-current” in 480.7(D)(2) and added Informational Note No. 2, so

there was correlation with the term. However, SR 3630 changed 480.7(D)(2) from

“fault-current” back to “short-circuit current” which is the 2014 NEC term used in

this section. However, the SR did not correspondingly change the term in

Informational Note No. 2 to “short-circuit current.” Since this is an Informational

Note editorial change, it should be permissible.

Negative 0

Abstain 0

Total Voted : 19

SR-3630, Section No. 480.6(D), See SR-3630

Page 8 of 35



Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 18


Richard D. Currin, Jr. This revision provides clarification.

Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 18


Negative 1

SR-3623, Section No. 695.6(A)(2), See SR-3623

SR-3622, Section No. 695.4(B)(3), See SR-3622

Total Voted : 19

Page 9 of 35



Richard D. Currin, Jr. There is no evidence to support that 2" of concrete provides a 2 hour rating. In

fact there is evidence that implies the contrary and that it would require 4" or

more of concrete encasement to provide a 2 hour fire rating. I would agree with

this revision if it were limited to the application of slab on grade (SOG) cases. Since

it is not specific to SOG that then ceilings and walls would be allowed as protection

for conductors. This is an area that needs lab test to be performed to determine

temperatures that conductors are exposed too under various levels of concrete

thicknesses as well as different concrete mixes. The test should include conductors

installed on grade, walls, and ceiling/floors.

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 18


Richard D. Currin, Jr. I agree with this although it does raise some concern over possible coordination

issues.

Negative 0

Abstain 0

Total Voted : 19

SR-3624, Section No. 695.6(G), See SR-3624

Total Voted : 19

Page 10 of 35



Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 18


Richard D. Currin, Jr. I agree with this revision as it adds EMT as an approved means for fire pump

control wiring.

Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 18


Richard D. Currin, Jr. The new statement is clearer and more concise.

Negative 0

Abstain 0

SR-3626, Section No. 695.14(F), See SR-3626

Total Voted : 19

SR-3625, Section No. 695.14(E), See SR-3625

Total Voted : 19

Page 11 of 35




Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 18


Richard D. Currin, Jr. Statement now includes luminaires that are not powered during normal operation.

Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 18


Richard D. Currin, Jr. This is needed for safety as facilities such as healthcare must have an emergency

power source available at all times.

Negative 0

Abstain 0

SR-3602, Section No. 700.3(F), See SR-3602

Total Voted : 19

Total Voted : 19

SR-3601, Definition: Luminaire, Directly Controlled., See SR-3601

Page 12 of 35




Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 18


Richard D. Currin, Jr. This revision will help inspectors.

Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 17


Negative 2

SR-3604, Section No. 700.10(D)(1), See SR-3604


Total Voted : 19

Page 13 of 35








for conductors. This is an area that needs lab testing to be performed to

determine temperatures that conductors are exposed too under various levels of

concrete thicknesses as well as different concrete mixes. The testing should

include conductors installed on grade, walls, and ceiling/floors.

Shawn Paulsen The term "not capable of self preservation" needs to be defined. An individual

could enter a health care occupancy being capable and for a portion of the stay

not being capable of self preservation. For example would a Dentist office be

considered. As written I believe this term will lead to inconsistent application of

the Rule.

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 15


Richard D. Currin, Jr. I agree with the addition of educational facilities with over 300 occupants being

added to 700.10(D) as these facilities may house occupants that require more

egress time than similar sized facilities with a different occupancy.

SR-3612, Section No. 700.10(D) [Excluding any Sub-Sections], See SR-3612

Total Voted : 19

Page 14 of 35


Shawn Paulsen The numbering layout is a bit confusing when reading the entire Rule. The Rule

states that (D)(1)through (D)(3)is to be followed and directly underneath there are

4 requirements. I realize these are not the requirements to be followed and

suggest these 4 additional requirements possibly be lettered in place of

numbering.

Negative 2

James E. Degnan Defining the extent of emergency system construction by building occupancy type

should not be within NFPA 70, instead it should be in the appropriate building

code. Building codes consider multiple aspects of life safety which cannot be

accounted for by an electrical code. Listing these items in NFPA 70 has the

potential to lead to conflicts with building codes, leaving AHJs in quandary. Instead

of expanded, this paragraph should be removed, otherwise it will subsequently

need to add other occupancy types to the list, with all of their corresponding

building code details.

Michael L. Savage, Sr. After much consideration and research I have not been able to locate where the

absence of this requirement has resulted in undo hardship or injury to the building

or inhabitants. The provision for automatic fire sprinklers is already mandated in

these structures as noted in the building and life safety codes, which will provide

not only life safety protection but property protection as well. The archived

materials and fire reports I have read state the sprinkler systems engaged fires

within their respective design times. I recently interviewed a Institutional Use

Construction Manager/Inspector, in preparation for the voting on this revision,

and I was informed they prepare for and practice fire evacuations for their facility

and were against the added cost this proposal would add to additional buildings in

their campus style installation. After researching the NFPA archives for additional

fire data I feel I need to vote negative without any quantitative or empirical

technical substantiation.

Abstain 0

Total Voted : 19

Page 15 of 35


Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 18


Richard D. Currin, Jr. I agree this change will enhance safety at a minimal cost by requiring generator

controls to fail in the start mode.

Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 17


Richard D. Currin, Jr. I agree with the addition of educational facilities with over 300 occupants being

added to 700.10(D) as these facilities may house occupants that require more

egress time than similar sized facilities with a different occupancy.

Negative 1

Shawn Paulsen The term "not capable of self preservation" needs to be defined. An individual

could enter a health care occupancy being capable and for a portion of the stay

not being capable of self preservation. For example would a Dentist office be

considered. As written I believe this term will lead to inconsistent application of

the Rule.

Abstain 0

Total Voted : 19

SR-3613, Section No. 700.12 [Excluding any Sub-Sections], See SR-3613

SR-3611, Section No. 700.10(D)(3), See SR-3611

Total Voted : 19

Page 16 of 35




Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 17


Richard D. Currin, Jr. This provides standardization of battery requirements.

Negative 1

James E. Degnan See my statement on SR 3612

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 18



Negative 0

Abstain 0

SR-3607, Section No. 700.12(F)(2), See SR-3607

Total Voted : 19


Total Voted : 19

Page 17 of 35




Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 18


Richard D. Currin, Jr. This is needed to correlate 700.6

Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 18



Negative 0

Abstain 0


Total Voted : 19

Total Voted : 19


Page 18 of 35




Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 18


Richard D. Currin, Jr. This provides standardization of battery requirements. Also the 87.5% value

matches UL standard 94.

Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 17


Richard D. Currin, Jr. The change is needed to correlate with the new 60 volts DC level that is

throughout the code.


SR-3610, Section No. 701.12(G), See SR-3610

Total Voted : 19

Page 19 of 35



Timothy M. Croushore The dates (editions) are included with the referenced material of Second Revision

3643 which is consistent with the requirements of the NFPA Regulations and

Procedures-Regulations Governing the Development of NFPA Standards-3.3.6.2

Reference to Other NFPA Standards or Other Publications. Please see my negative

comment on SR 3628.

Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 18


Richard D. Currin, Jr. This allows for clarity and allows the definition to match article 480.

Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 18

SR-3634, Definition: Electrochemical Battery., See SR-3634

SR-3633, Definition: Battery Terminal., See SR-3633

Total Voted : 19

Total Voted : 19

Page 20 of 35




Richard D. Currin, Jr. I agree with removing this definition as it was not needed.

Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 19


Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 19


Negative 0

Abstain 0

SR-3658, Definition: Energy Storage System, Self-contained., See SR-3658

Total Voted : 19

Total Voted : 19

SR-3635, Definition: Energy Storage System, Pre-engineered of Matche..., See SR-3635

Total Voted : 19

Page 21 of 35




Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 19


Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 18


Timothy M. Croushore I am in agreement with the additional sections and Part IV of Article 705

referenced in the text of 706.3 Other Articles. However, the action on Second

Revision 3939 needs to be correlated with the action on Second Revision 3645 and

have 705.40 added to the list of referenced sections in 706.3 Other Articles.

Section 706.3 should appear as follows: 706.3 Other Articles. Whenever the

requirements of other articles of this Code and Article 706 differ, the requirements

of Article 706 shall apply. If the ESS is capable of being operated in parallel with a

primary source(s) of electricity, the requirements in 705.6, 705.14, 705.16, 705.32,

705.40, 705.100, 705.143, and Part IV of Article 705 shall apply.


SR-3659, Definition: Flow Battery., See SR-3659

Total Voted : 19

Page 22 of 35



Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 19


Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 19


Negative 0

Abstain 0


Total Voted : 19


Total Voted : 19

Total Voted : 19

Page 23 of 35




Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 18


Negative 1

Shawn Paulsen 706.7(D)(3) makes reference to the label including Arc flash risk assessment

information at the disconnecting means meeting the requirements of 110.16. In

reviewing the proposed revisions to 110.16(B) it appear that information related

to the arc flash risk assessment such as: available incident energy, arc rating of

clothing and site specific PPE is being removed. If this proposed change is accepted

for 110.16(B) then 706.7(D)(3) will need to be revised.

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 19


Negative 0

Abstain 0

SR-3644, Section No. 706.7(E), See SR-3644

Total Voted : 19

Total Voted : 19


Page 24 of 35




Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 19


Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 18


Timothy M. Croushore I am in agreement with the deletion of the text of 706.8(C) describing the

requirements for Loss of Interactive System Power and including the reference to

705.40. However, this action needs to be correlated with the action on Second

Revision 3639 and added to the list of referenced sections in 706.3 Other Articles.

Negative 0

Abstain 0

Total Voted : 19

SR-3645, Section No. 706.8(C), See SR-3645


Total Voted : 19

Page 25 of 35




Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 19


Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 19


Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 2





Total Voted : 19


Total Voted : 19

Page 26 of 35




Affirmative 19


Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 19


Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 19


Negative 0

Abstain 0


Total Voted : 19


Total Voted : 19

Total Voted : 19

Page 27 of 35




Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 19


Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 19


Negative 0

Abstain 0


Total Voted : 19

Total Voted : 19

SR-3652, Section No. 706.34 [Excluding any Sub-Sections], See SR-3652

Page 28 of 35




Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 19


Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 19


Negative 0

Abstain 0

Total Voted : 19



Total Voted : 19

Page 29 of 35




Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 19


Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 19


Negative 0

Abstain 0


Total Voted : 19


Total Voted : 19

Page 30 of 35




Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 18


Negative 1






for conductors. This is an area that needs lab testing to be performed to

determine temperatures that conductors are exposed too under various levels of

concrete thicknesses as well as different concrete mixes. The testing should

include conductors installed on grade, walls, and ceiling/floors.

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 17


SR-3627, Article 712, See SR-3627

Total Voted : 19

SR-3605, Section No. 708.10(C)(2), See SR-3605

Page 31 of 35



Linda J. Little We are voting affirmative on SR 3627 with the following comment: It is imperative

that the title of this Article is reconsidered, and if changed, editorial revisions

made throughout. The use of the term “microgrid” may cause serious confusion in

the industry. The term “microgrid” infers utility owned conductors and equipment.

The systems addressed in this Article should be addressed by a term that more

appropriately captures the system itself. This Article could be retitled as

“Interconnected Direct Current (DC) Distribution Systems.” The NEC Correlating

Committee (CC) is well aware of previous issues created in 90.2 with references to

the NESC in informational notes, and the CC formed a task group to resolve those

issues. The CC must understand the significance of this issue and the serious

concerns presented by the electrical utilities represented in this revision stage

with respect to the use of the term “microgrid.” We, the NEC community, would

take serious exception if the National Electrical Safety Code (NESC) would begin to

use and apply the term “premises wiring” to utility owned conductors and

systems. This Article and the work within are important and should be in the 2017

NEC, which is why we are voting affirmative. The NEC CC should seriously consider

removal of the term “microgrid.”

Negative 1

Page 32 of 35

Timothy M. Croushore The term “Microgrid” is a jargon and non-specific term. The NEC process consistently encourages using

terminology that provides clarity. The term “Interconnected Direct Current (DC) Distribution System” provides this

clarity. To ensure that we maintain fundamental separation between utility wiring and premises wiring, we need to

use terminology that provides clear separation between the two systems (NEC and NESC). The electric utility type

microgrid systems are still in the R&D phase and still in development in other standards committees outside the

NFPA. Therefore, as this technology continues to emerge, we need to ensure that the lines do not become blurred

between the two systems. We are mixing two different systems, therefore keeping different terms in the NEC will

best serve the industry. To move forward with the technology of an interconnected DC system and revise the

jargon out of this new Article 712 to a specific term, the 14 following changes to Article 712 needs to be made.

Identifiable portion of the ballot. 1. Revise the title to Article 712 Interconnected Direct Current (DC) Distribution

Systems. 2. In 712.2 Definitions, remove the title, the definition and Information Note for Direct Current Microgrid

(DC Microgrid) and replace it with the following: Interconnected Direct Current (DC) Distribution System. An

interconnected direct current (DC) distribution system is a power distribution system consisting of more than one

parallel connected dc power source, supplying dc-dc converter(s), dc load(s)s, and/or ac load(s) powered by dc-ac

inverter(s). Informational Note: Direct current power sources include ac-dc converters (rectifiers), bidirectional dc-

ac inverters/converters, photovoltaic systems, wind generators, energy storage systems (including batteries), and

fuel cells. Interconnected Direct Current Distribution Systems are sometimes called DC microgrids. 3. In 712.

Definitions, revise the definition of Primary DC Source as follows: Primary DC Source. A source that supplies the

majority of the dc load in an interconnected dc distribution system. 4. In 712.3 Other Articles, remove the second

sentence and replace it with the following: DC distribution systems that are interconnected through an inverter or

bi-directional converter with ac electric power sources shall comply with Article 705. 5. In 712.4, remove the

following text “direct-current micro grid” and replace it with “interconnected direct current (DC) distribution

system”. 6. In 712.10, remove the term “dc microgrid” and replace it with “interconnected direct current (DC)

distribution system”. 7. In 712.25, remove the term “dc microgrid” and replace it with “interconnected direct

current (DC) distribution system”. 8. In 712.30, remove the term “dc microgrid” and replace it with

“interconnected direct current (DC) distribution system”. 9. In 712.52(A), remove the term “Direct-current

microgrids” and replace it with “interconnected direct current (DC) distribution systems”. 10. In 712.52(B), remove

the term “DC microgrids” and replace it with “interconnected direct current (DC) distribution systems”. 11. In

712.55, remove the term “dc microgrids” and replace it with “interconnected direct current (DC) distribution

systems”. 12. In 712.57, remove the term “DC microgrid” and replace it with “interconnected direct current (DC)

distribution system”. 13. In 712.65(A), remove the term “dc microgrid” and replace it with “interconnected direct

current (DC) distribution system”. 14. In 712.72, remove the term “dc microgrid system(s)” in the first sentence

and replace it with “interconnected direct current (DC) distribution system(s)” and remove the term “dc microgrid”

in the second sentence and replace it with “interconnected direct current (DC) distribution system”.

Abstain 0

Total Voted : 19

Page 33 of 35


Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 19


Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 19


Negative 0

Abstain 0

Total Voted : 19

SR-3631, Part III., See SR-3631

SR-3638, Definition: Energy Storage System (ESS). [Excluding any Sub..., See SR-3638

Total Voted : 19

Page 34 of 35




Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 19


Negative 0

Abstain 0


Not Returned : 2



Affirmative 19


Negative 0

Abstain 0

SR-3636, Definition: Intertier Connector., See SR-3636

Total Voted : 19

SR-3632, Part III., See SR-3632

Total Voted : 19

Page 35 of 35



Documents

M E M O R A N D U M...National Fire Protection Association 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02169-7471 Phone: 617-770-3000 • Fax: 617-770-0700 • M E M O R A N D U M 1 Richard D