Technical Committee on Road Tunnel and Highway Fire ... · Technical Committee on Road Tunnel and Highway Fire Protection ROC Meeting Minutes . Hilton Downtown Miami . Miami, FL

Page 1 of 5

Technical Committee on Road Tunnel and Highway Fire

Protection (ROA-AAA)

M E M O R A N D U M

DATE: November 13, 2014

TO: Principal and Alternate Members of the Technical Committee on Road Tunnel

and Highway Fire Protection (ROA-AAA)

FROM: Chad Duffy, NFPA Staff Liaison

Office: (617) 984-7562 Email: [email protected]

SUBJECT: AGENDA – NFPA 502 First Draft Meeting (Annual 2016)

Enclosed is the agenda for the First Draft meeting for NFPA 502, Standard for Road Tunnels,

Bridges, and Other Limited Access Highways, which will be held at the Hilton Walt Disney World

Resort – Lake Buena Vista, FL 8:15am to 8:30pm on Tuesday, December 2, 2014, Wednesday,

December 3, 2014 and Thursday, December 4, 2014 from 8:15am to 3:00pm.

Please submit requests for additional agenda items to the chair at least seven days prior to the

meeting, and notify the chair and staff liaison as soon as possible if you plan to introduce any

first revisions at the meeting.

All NFPA Technical Committee meetings are open to the public. Please contact me for

information on attending a meeting as a guest. Read NFPA's Regulations Governing the

Development of NFPA Standards (Section 3.3.3.3) for further information.

Additional Meeting Information:

See the Meeting Notice on the Document Information Page (www.nfpa.org/502next) for meeting

location details. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Elena Carroll, Project

Administrator at 617-984-7952 or by email [email protected].

C. Standards Administration

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.nfpa.org/codes-and-standards/standards-development-process/regulations-directory-and-forms

http://www.nfpa.org/codes-and-standards/standards-development-process/regulations-directory-and-forms

http://www.nfpa.org/502next

http://www.nfpa.org/502next

mailto:[email protected]

Technical Committee on Road Tunnel and highway Fire Protection (ROA-AAA)

NFPA 502 First Draft Meeting (Annual 2016) Tuesday, Dec.2, 2014, Wednesday, Dec. 3, 2014, 8:15am – 5:30pm EST

and Wednesday Dec. 4, 2014, 8:15am – 3:00pm EST Hilton Walt Disney World Resort – Lake Buena Vista, FL

Page 2 of 5

AGENDA

Tuesday, December 2, 2014

1. Call to Order – 8:15 AM

2. Committee Role Call/Introduction of Guests

3. Review Proposed Agenda

4. Committee Member Status

5. NFPA Staff Liaison Review of Process and Procedures and Key Dates in A2016 Cycle

6. Chairman Comments

7. Approval of Previous Meeting Minutes (A2013 ROC) (Attachment)

8. Act on Public Input for NFPA 502 (Attachment)

9. Adjourn – 5:30 PM

Wednesday, December 3, 2014


2. Continue Action on Public Input for NFPA 502

3. Presentation by David Plotkin – Basis of Public Inputs 16 – No. 20

4. Complete Action on Public Input

5. Presentation by Haukur Ingason – New handbook of Tunnel fire Dynamics

6. Act on Committee Generated Input for NFPA 502

7. Adjourn – 5:30 PM

Thursday, December 4, 2014


2. Complete Action on Committee Generated Input for NFPA 502

3. Other Business

4. Select dates and location for Second Draft Meeting (NLT 10/30/2015)

5. Adjourn Meeting – 3:00 PM




Page 3 of 5

Please submit requests for additional agenda items to the chair at least seven days prior to the meeting. Please notify the chair and staff liaison as soon as possible if you plan to introduce any first revisions or committee input at the meeting. Key Dates for the Annual 2016 Revision Cycle

Proposal Closing Date July 7, 2014

Final Date for First Draft Meeting December 12, 2014

Posting of First Draft and TC Ballot January 30, 2015

Ballots Returned By February 20, 2015

Post Final First Draft March 6, 2015

Comment Closing Date May 15, 2015

Final Date for Second Draft Meeting October 30, 2015

Posting of Second Draft and TC Ballot December 11, 2015

Ballots Returned By January 4, 2016

Posting Final Second Draft January 18, 2016

Closing Date for Notice of Intent to Make a Motion (NITMAM) February 19, 2016

Issuance of Consent Document (No NITMAMs) May 13, 2016

NFPA Annual Meeting June 13-16, 2016

Issuance of Document with NITMAM August 4, 2016

Technical Committee deadlines are in bold.




Page 4 of 5

Meeting Preparation Committee members are strongly encouraged to review the published input prior to the meeting and to be prepared to act on each item. Handout materials should be submitted to the chair at least seven days prior to the meeting. Only one posting of the input will be made; it will be arranged in section/order and will be pre-numbered. This will be posted to the NFPA Document information pages located at www.nfpa.org/502. If you have trouble accessing the website please contact Elena Carroll at [email protected].

Mandatory Materials:

Last edition of the standard

Meeting agenda

Public input/comments

Committee Officers' Guide (Chairs)

Roberts’ Rules of Order (Chairs; An abbreviated version may be found in the Committee Officer’s Guide)

Optional Materials: NFPA Annual Directory

NFPA Manual of Style

Prepared committee input/comments (If applicable)

Regulations and Guiding Documents All committee members are expected to behave in accordance with the Guide for the Conduct of Participants in the NFPA Codes and Standards Development Process. All actions during and following the committee meetings will be governed in accordance with the Regulations Governing the Development of NFPA Standards. Failure to comply with these regulations could result in challenges to the standards-making process. A successful challenge on procedural grounds could prevent or delay publication of the document. The style of the document must comply with the Manual of Style for NFPA Technical Committee Documents.




Page 5 of 5

General Procedures for Meetings Use of tape recorders or other means capable of producing verbatim transcriptions of any

NFPA Committee Meeting is not permitted.

Attendance at all NFPA Committee Meetings is open. All guests must sign in and identify their affiliation.

Participation in NFPA Committee Meetings is generally limited to committee members and NFPA staff. Participation by guests is limited to individuals, who have received prior approval from the chair to address the committee on a particular item, or who wish to speak regarding public input or comments that they submitted.

The chairman reserves the right to limit the amount of time available for any presentation.

No interviews will be allowed in the meeting room at any time, including breaks.

All attendees are reminded that formal votes of committee members will be secured by letter ballot. Voting at this meeting is used to establish a sense of agreement, but only the results of the formal letter ballot will determine the official action of the committee.

Note to Special Experts: Particular attention is called to Section 3.3(e) of the NFPA Guide for the Conduct of Participants in the NFPA Codes and Standards Development Process in the NFPA Directory. This section requires committee members to declare any interest they may represent, other than their official designation as shown on the committee roster. This typically occurs when a special expert is retained by and represents another interest category on a particular subject. If such a situation exists on a specific issue or issues, the committee member shall declare those interests to the committee and refrain from voting on any action relating to those issues.

Smoking is not permitted at NFPA Committee Meetings.

Attachment #1:

Previous Meeting Minutes

Page 1 of 7

Technical Committee on Road Tunnel and Highway Fire Protection ROC Meeting Minutes

Hilton Downtown Miami

Miami, FL October 1, 2, & 3, 2012

1. Commencement

Meeting was called to order at 8:00AM on Monday October 1, 2012.

2. Technical Committee Roll Call/ Introduction of Guests The following members and guests were in attendance: Name: Principal Members Present Representing Bill Connell, Chair Parsons Brinckerhoff, Inc. Ian Barry IEB Consulting Ltd Arthur Bendelius A&G Consultants, Inc James Conrad RSCC Wire & Cable Alexandre Debs Ministry of Transport of Quebec Arnold Dix Lawyer/Scientist/Adj. Prof. Engineering Jason Huczek Southwest Research Institute Haukur Ingason SP Technical Research Institute of Joseph Kroboth, III Washington County Division of PublicWorks Igor Maevski Jacobs Engineering Tony Marino Port Authority of New York & New Jersey Maurice Pilette (10/1, 10/2) Mechanical Designs Ltd. David Plotkin AECOM Dirk Sprakel FOGTEC Fire Protection GmbH & Co. KG Anthony Tedesco Fire Dept. City of New York Rene van den Bosch Promat BV the Netherlands Cheong Adrian Wah Onn Land Transport Authority, Singapore Sandra Stanek NFPA Staff Liason Rich Bielen NFPA Alternates Present Daniel Dirgins Parsons Brinckerhoff, Inc. Gary English City of Seattle Fire Department

Page 2 of 7

Guests Present Max Lakkouen FOGTEC Norman Rhodes Parsons Brinckerhoff, Inc James Lake (10/1) NFSA (IFSA) Kees Both PRTC Belgium Leander Noordijh Efectis Nederland Gilles Klein (10/1) One Seven, Germany Dirk Schmitz One Seven International Eric Cheong Mun kit Land Transport Authority, Singapore Fred Fernandez (10/3) City of Miami Fire Rescue Michael Long (10/3) Florida State Fire Marshall’s Office Jim Eriksen (10/3) HNTB Elvira Pita-Mejia (10/3) BCWF – Port of Miami Tunnel Project Todd Rogers Waterous Company Members not present Alan Brinson International Fire Sprinkler Association John Dalton WR Grace Michael Fitzpatrick Massachusetts Department of Transportation Ahmed Kashef National Research Council of Canada David LeBlanc Tyco Fire Suppression & Building Products John Nelson City of Seattle Fire Department Jesus Rohena US Department of Transportation Russell Fleming International Fire Sprinkler Association Kevin Harrison Fire Department City of New York Marc Janssens Southwest Research Institute Stefan Kratzmeir FOGTEC Fire Protection Nader Shahcheraghi AECOM Paul Sparrow Promat UK Leong Kwok Weng Land Transport Authority - Singapore

Page 3 of 7

3. Proposed Agenda / Committee Member Status (Chairman) a. Meeting Agenda- The proposed meeting agenda was reviewed and accepted

without comment. b. The Chairman noted that the goal of the meeting is to review and act upon all

comments received during the ROC public comment period ending 8/31/2012 and to consider Task Group Reports on committee comments.

c. The Chairman provided an update regarding membership of the committee, introduced a new voting member (Tedesco) and new alternates (Harrison and Sparrow). The resignation of voting member Rhodes was also announced.

d. The Chair also announced the notice of resignation of Art Bendelius effective at the end of the current cycle. Art’s 20 years of service on this committee was acknowledged by the entire membership who thanked him for his loyal commitment and contributions. He has been appointed to the honorary position of Member Emeritus.

4. NFPA Staff Liaison Comments (Sandra Stanek)

Sandra Stanek discussed various administrative issues including: a. Reminded members to check their contact info and update if necessary. b. Reminded members of the NFPA meeting for rules and protocols. c. Reviewing the timeline of milestones for the A2013 Revision Cycle which will

result in the publishing of a 2014 edition of the Standard. d. She also advised all members that the resulting ballots of this ROC meeting

will be due to NFPA by close of business on 11/26/12.

Page 4 of 7

Page 5 of 7

5. Approval of Meeting Minutes from ROP Meeting held on January 16-19,

2012 in Tempe AZ. Meeting minutes were unanimously approved without comment.

6. Review of Public Comments The committee reviewed and acted on public comments Lunch 12:30 to 1:30PM Meeting adjourned @ 5:40 PM on October 1, 2012 **************************************************************

7. Meeting resumed @ 8:15AM on October 2, 2012 The committee reviewed and acted on Public Comments & Committee Comments Presentation - Maurice Pilette provided the committee with an overview on the status of NFPA 3, Recommended Practice on Commissioning and Integrated Testing of Fire Protection and Life Safety Systems, and NFPA 4, Standard for Integrated Fire Protection and Life Safety System Testing. .

Lunch 12:15 to 1:15PM Presentation - Land Transport Authority (LTA) Fire Testing Program -- Eric Cheung Mun Kit, of Land Transport Authority (LTA) of Singapore gave a presentation of the results of LTA’s recent fire testing program which included full scale fire tests of fixed fire fighting systems using various water application rates. The presentation included an overview of LTA tunnel operating policy, video footage of some tests, and an overview of the results of the tests conducted with different water application rates. Resume review of Committee Comments Meeting adjourned @ 5:30PM on October 2, 2012 **************************************************************

Page 6 of 7

8. Meeting resumed @ 8:00AM on October 3, 2012 The committee reviewed and acted on Public Comments and Committee Comments: Presentation - Port Of Miami Tunnel - Chief Fred Fernandez, City of Miami Fire and Rescue & Mike Long, State of Florida Fire Marshals Office. Chief Fernandez gave an overview of the Port of Miami Tunnel project including his experiences with the project Fire Life Safety Committee and the issues addressed by the committee which include design of fire life safety systems, communications, drills, exercises during construction. Mike Long gave a presentation that included an overview of the Port of Miami Tunnel from his perspective as the Authority Having Jurisdiction, which started with the adoption of NFPA 502 by the state of Florida, participation in the Fire Life Safety Committee, the plan review process and commencement of construction. The project currently is under construction and is anticipated to open in 2014. Lunch 12:00 to 1:00PM Resume Review of Committee Comments Suspension of UL 2196 Certification of Fire Resistive Cables- Jim Conrad of RSCC Wire and Cable gave a presentation regarding the suspension of Underwriters Laboratories (UL) certification for fire resistive cables that were tested in accordance with UL 2196. The presentation included a description of the events that led to the UL actions. The presentation included a discussion of alternative testing, methods, including available international standards, which could be used to establish an equivalent fire resistive cable rating. The issue is evolving rapidly and identification of equivalent alternative standards or testing programs is the next step for the committee. NFPA 502 committee action will be required to address the current language in Chapter 12 (12.1) for the A2013 revision cycle and to prepare a Tentative Interim Amendment to address the current version of NFPA 502 (2011 edition). The committee reserved Committee Comment #11 for this issue and agreed to have a web/teleconference at a later date so the latest information could be used in the development of the Committee Comment. Resume Review of Committee Comments

Page 7 of 7

9. Miami, FL ROC Meeting Closing Remarks (Chairman Connell) a. All of the comments were acted upon. b. A web/teleconference will be scheduled to address the UL 2196 issue. Meeting Adjourned @ 6:15 PM on October 3, 2012

**************************************************************

NFPA 502

Conference Call on Committee Comment #11

October 31, 2012

9:30 am-12:45 pm

Principal Members Present Representing

Bill Connell, Chair Parsons Brinckerhoff, Inc.

Arthur Bendelius A&G Consultants, Inc

Alan Brinson International Fire Sprinkler Association

James Conrad RSCC Wire & Cable

John Dalton WR Grace

Arnold Dix Lawyer/Scientist/Adj. Prof. Engineering

Jason Huczek Southwest Research Institute

Joseph Kroboth, III Washington County Division of PublicWorks

Igor Maevski Jacobs Engineering

David Plotkin AECOM

Cheong Adrian Wah Onn Land Transport Authority, Singapore

Sandra Stanek NFPA Staff Liaison

Rich Bielen NFPA

Alternates Present

Daniel Dirgins Parsons Brinckerhoff, Inc

Gary English City of Seattle Fire Department

Nader Shahcheraghi AECOM

Guests Present

Mark Early NFPA/NEC Secretary

Al Ramirez Underwriters Laboratories

Jeff Walsh Parsons Brinckerhoff, Inc

Mike Brennan RSCC Wire and Cable

Steve Eichenger Jacobs Engineering

1. Bill Connell (chairman) started the meeting and roll call was taken. 2. Bill Connell asked Mr. Ramirez (UL) to update the committee on the status of UL 2196

and a summary of the October 24, 2012 UL/ULC meeting. Mr. Ramirez stated the interim process is still being used. It does require more samples and must be retested after 6 months. Materials manufactured before September 12, 2012 are still valid. The UL STP is working to fix UL 2196. There is no time frame given for a resolution.

3. The TC and guests then reviewed and revised committee comment #11. 4. The TC members voted all affirmative on the revised wording to committee comment

#11. 5. The next steps are to send the revised committee comment to the entire committee

and to pick a date to complete the development of the TIA to the current edition. The TIA deadline is TBD.

6. The meeting adjourned at 12:45 pm.

Respectfully submitted by,

Richard Bielen

Division Manager, Fire Protection Systems

Attachment #2: Public Input/502

Public Input No. 30-NFPA 502-2014 [ Section No. 1.5 [Excluding any Sub-Sections] ]

Nothing in this standard is intended to prevent the use of systems, methods, or devices of equivalent orsuperior quality, strength, fire resistance, effectiveness, durability, and safety over those prescribed by thisstandard, provided sufficient technical data demonstrates that the applied method material or device isequivalent in terms of reliability and technological readiness status, to, or superior to, the requirements ofthis standard with respect to fire performance and safety.

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Input

Equivalence should be accepted only if the proposed alternative has been assessed related to its reliability and/or proven track record.

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Cornelis Both

Organization: PRTC Fire Laboratory

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon Jul 07 07:50:52 EDT 2014

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

1 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

Public Input No. 11-NFPA 502-2014 [ Section No. 2.3 ]

2.3 Other Publications.

2.3.1 ASTM Publications.

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

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

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

ASTM E 2652, Standard Test Method for Behavior of Materials in a Tube Furnace with a Cone-shapedAirflow Stabilizer, at 750°C, 2009a 2012 .

2.3.2 BSI Publications.

British Standards Institute, 389 Chiswick High Road, London, W4 4AL, United Kingdom.

BS 476-4, Fire Tests on Building Materials and Structures, 1970.

2.3.3 CSA Publications.

Canadian Standards Associations, 178 Rexdale Boulevard, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M9W 1R3.

CSA C22.2 No. 0.3, Test Methods for Electrical Wires and Cables, 2009, includes Update No. 1 (2010).

2.3.4 Efectis Publications.

Efectis Group, http://www.efectis.com.

Efectis-R0695, “Fire Testing Procedure for Concrete Tunnel Linings,” 2008.

2.3.5 FHWA Publications.

Federal Highway Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE, Washington, DC 20590.

Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), 2009 2012 .

2.3.6 IEEE Publications.

Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Three Park Avenue, 17th Floor, New York, NY10016-5997.

FT4/IEEE 1202, Standard for Flame-Propagation Testing of Wire and Cable, 2006.

2.3.7 ISO Publications.

International Organization for Standardization, 1, ch. de la Voie-Creuse, Case postale 56, CH-1211 Geneva20, Switzerland.

ISO 1182, Reaction to fire tests for building and transport products — Non-combustibility test, 2010.

2.3.8 Military Specifications.

Department of Defense Single Stock Point, Document Automation and Production Service, Building 4/D,700 Robbins Avenue, Philadelphia, PA 19111-5094.

MIL-C DTL -24643, General Specification for Cable and Cords Cables , Electrical Electric , Low SmokeHalogen-Free , for Shipboard Use, 1996 Revison C .

2.3.9 OSHA Publications.

Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20210.

Code of Federal Regulations Standard, Part 1910.146, “Permit-Required Confined Spaces.”

2.3.10 UL Publications.

Underwriters Laboratories Inc., 333 Pfingsten Road, Northbrook, IL 60062-2096.

ANSI/UL 1685, Vertical-Tray Fire-Propagation and Smoke-Release Test for Electrical and Optical-FiberCables, 2007, Revised 2010.

UL Subject 1724, Outline of Investigation for Fire Tests for Electrical Circuit Protective Systems, 2004.

ANSI/UL 2196, Tests for Fire Resistive Cables, 2012.


2 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

2.3.11 Other Publications.

Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, 11th edition, Merriam-Webster, Inc., Springfield, MA, 2003.


Updated to current editions and titles.


Submitter Full Name: Aaron Adamczyk

Organization: [ Not Specified ]

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Sat Jun 07 23:31:08 EDT 2014


3 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

Public Input No. 58-NFPA 502-2014 [ Section No. 2.3.1 ]

2.3.1 ASTM Publications.


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


ASTM E 2652, Standard Test Method for Behavior of Materials in a Tube Furnace with a Cone-shapedAirflow Stabilizer, at 750°C, 2009a 2012 .


Update the year date for standard(s)


Submitter Full Name: Steve Mawn

Organization: ASTM International

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



4 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM


3.3 General Definitions.

3.3. xx A-weighted Decibel (dBA). Decibel values with weighting applied over the frequency rangeof 20Hz to 20kHz to reflect human hearing.

3.3. 1 Agency.

The organization legally established and authorized to operate a facility.

3.3.2 Alteration.

For road tunnels, bridges, and limited access highways, a modification, replacement, or other physicalchange to an existing facility.

3.3.3 Alternative Fuel.

A motor vehicle fuel other than gasoline and diesel.

3.3.4 Ancillary Facility.

A structure, space, or area that supports the operation of limited access highways, depressed highways,bridges, elevated highways, road tunnels, and the roadway under air-right structures that are usually usedto house or contain operating, maintenance, or support equipment and functions.

3.3.5 * Backlayering.

The movement of smoke and hot gases counter to the direction of the ventilation airflow.

3.3.6 * Basis of Design (BOD).

A document that shows the concepts and decisions used to meet the owner’s project requirements andapplicable standards, laws, and regulations. [3, 2012]

3.3.7 Bridge.

A structure spanning and providing a highway across an obstacle such as a waterway, railroad, or anotherhighway.

3.3.8 * Building.

Any structure used or intended for supporting or sheltering any use or occupancy.

3.3.9 Cable Tray System.

A unit or assembly of units or sections and associated fittings forming a structural system used to securelyfasten or support cables and raceways. [70:392.2]

3.3.10 Combustible.

Capable of undergoing combustion.

3.3.11 Command Post (CP).

The location at the scene of an emergency where the incident commander is located and where command,coordination, control, and communications are centralized. [402, 2013]

3.3.12 Commissioning.

A systematic process that provides documented confirmation that specific and interconnected fireprotection, life safety, and emergency systems function according to the intended design criteria set forth inthe project documents and satisfy the owner’s operational needs, including compliance requirements of anylaws, regulations, codes, and standards requiring fire protection, life safety, and emergency systems.

3.3. xx Common Intelligibility Scale (CIS). See NFPA 72-2013 Annex D.2.4.5.

3.3. 13 Critical Velocity.

The minimum steady-state velocity of the ventilation airflow moving toward the fire, within a tunnel orpassageway, that is required to prevent backlayering at the fire site.

3.3. xx Decibel. The logarithmic units associated with sound pressure level.

3.3. 14 Deluge System.

An open fixed fire suppression system activated either manually or automatically.

3.3.15 Dry Standpipe.

A standpipe system designed to have piping contain water only when the system is being utilized.

3.3.16 Dynamic Vehicle Envelope.

The space within the tunnel roadway that is allocated for maximum vehicle movement.


5 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

3.3.17 * Emergency Communications.

Radio and telephone systems located throughout the facility dedicated to provide the ability for directcommunications during an emergency.

3.3.18 Emergency Exits.

Doors, egress stairs, or egress corridors leading to a point of safety, such as cross-passages leading to anadjacent nonincident tunnel and portals.

3.3.19 Emergency Response Plan.

A plan developed by an agency, with the cooperation of all participating agencies, that details specificactions to be performed by all personnel who are expected to respond during an emergency.

3.3.20 * Engineering Analysis.

An analysis that evaluates all factors that affect the fire safety of a facility or a component of a facility.

3.3.21 Equivalency.

An alternative means of providing an equal or greater level of safety than that afforded by strictconformance to prescribed codes and standards.

3.3.22 Facility.

A limited access highway, road tunnel, roadway beneath an air-right structure, bridge, or elevated highway.

3.3.23 Fire Apparatus.

A vehicle designed to be used under emergency conditions to transport personnel and equipment, and tosupport the suppression of fires and mitigation of other hazardous situations. [1901, 2009]

3.3.24 Fire Department Connection.

A connection through which the fire department can pump supplemental water into the fixed water-basedfire-fighting system, sprinkler system, standpipe system, or other systems furnishing water for firesuppression and extinguishment to supplement existing water supplies.

3.3.25 Fire Emergency.

The existence of, or threat of, fire or the development of smoke or fumes, or any combination thereof, thatdemands immediate action to mitigate the condition or situation.

3.3.26 Fire Growth Rate.

Rate of change of the fire's heat release expressed as Btu/sec2 or MW/min.

3.3.27 Fire Heat Release Rate.

The rate at which heat energy is generated by burning expressed as Btu/sec or megawatts (MW).

3.3.28 Fire Smoke Release Rate.

Rate of smoke release for a given fire scenario expressed as a function of time.

3.3.29 Fire Suppression.

The application of an extinguishing agent to a fire at a level such that open flaming is arrested; however, adeep-seated fire will require additional steps to assure total extinguishment.

3.3.30 * Fixed Water-Based Fire-Fighting System.

A system permanently attached to the tunnel that is able to spread a water-based extinguishing agent in allor part of the tunnel.

3.3.31 Highway.

Any paved facility on which motor vehicles travel.

3.3.31.1 * Depressed Highway.

An uncovered, below-grade highway or boat section where walls rise to the grade surface and whereemergency response access is usually limited.

3.3.31.2 Elevated Highway.

A highway that is constructed on a structure that is above the surface but that does not cross over anobstacle as in the case of a bridge.

3.3.31.3 Limited Access Highway.

A highway where preference is given to through-traffic by providing access connections that use onlyselected public roads and by prohibiting crossings at grade and at direct private driveways.

3.3.32 Hose Connection.

A combination of equipment provided for the connection of a hose to a standpipe system that includes ahose valve with a threaded outlet.

3.3.33 Hose Valve.

The valve to an individual hose connection.


6 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

3.3.34 Incident Commander (IC).

The individual responsible for all incident activities, including the development of strategies and tactics andthe ordering and the release of resources. [472, 2013]

3.3.35 * Length of Bridge or Elevated Highway.

The linear distance measured along the centerline of a bridge or elevated highway structure from abutmentto abutment.

3.3.36 Length of Tunnel.

The length from face of portal to face of portal that is measured using the centerline alignment along thetunnel roadway.

3.3. xx L eq . Level equivalent, the average sound level over time on an acoustical energy basis

3.3. 37 Mandatory Requirement.

A requirement prefaced by the word “shall” within the standard.

3.3.37.1 Conditionally Mandatory Requirement.

A requirement that is based on the results of an engineering analysis.

3.3.37.2 Nonmandatory Requirement.

A requirement that is not prefaced by the word “shall” and most likely contained in an annex, a footnote, orInformational Note of the standard.

3.3.38 Motorist.

A vehicle occupant, including the driver and passenger(s).

3.3.39 * Noncombustible Material.

See Section 4.8.

3.3.40 Operations Control Center.

A dedicated operations center where the agency controls and coordinates the facility operations and fromwhich communication is maintained with the agency’s supervisory and operating personnel and withparticipating agencies where required.

3.3.41 Participating Agency.

A public, quasi-public, or private agency that has agreed to cooperate with and assist the authority duringan emergency.

3.3.42 * Point of Safety.

For road tunnels, bridges, and limited access highways, an exit enclosure that leads to a public way or safelocation outside the structure, or an at-grade point beyond any enclosing structure, or another area thataffords adequate protection for motorists.

3.3.43 Portable Fire Extinguisher.

A portable device, carried or on wheels and operated by hand, containing an extinguishing agent that canbe expelled under pressure for the purpose of suppressing or extinguishing fire. [10, 2013]

3.3.44 Portal.

The interface between a tunnel and the atmosphere through which vehicles pass; a connection point to anadjacent structure.

3.3.45 Queue.

A line of non-moving vehicles.

3.3.46 Raceway.

An enclosed channel of metal or nonmetallic materials designed expressly for holding wires, cables, orbusbars, with additional functions as permitted in NFPA 70. Raceways include, but are not limited to, rigidmetal conduit, rigid nonmetallic conduit, intermediate metal conduit, liquidtight flexible conduit, flexiblemetallic tubing, flexible metal conduit, electrical nonmetallic tubing, electrical metallic tubing, underfloorraceways, cellular concrete floor raceways, cellular metal floor raceways, surface raceways, wireways, andbusways.

3.3.47 Road Tunnel.

An enclosed roadway for motor vehicle traffic with vehicle access that is limited to portals.

3.3.48 Roadway.

The volume of space that is located above the pavement surface through which motor vehicles travel.

3.3.49 Rural.

Those areas that are not unsettled wilderness or uninhabitable territory but are sparsely populated withdensities below 500 persons per square mile. [1142, 2012]


7 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

3.3.50 RWS (Rijkswaterstaat) Time-Temperature Curve.

The fire test and time-temperature curve described in report, Efectis-R0695, 2008.

3.3.51 Self-Rescue.

People leaving the hazardous area or dangerous situation without any professional (fire fighters, rescuepersonnel, etc.) help.

3.3. xx ‘Slow’ . The response time of a sound level meter’s RMS detector corresponding to a rise timeconstant of 1 second per ANSI S1.4 and IEC 61672.

3.3.xx Sound Pressure Level. The logarithmic ratio of the root-mean squared sound pressure to the

reference sound pressure (2.0 × 10 -5 Pascals).

3.3.xx Speech Interference Level (SIL). A calculated quantity providing a guide to the interferingeffect of noise on speech intelligibility. One-fourth of the sum of the band sound pressure levels foroctave-bands with normal mid-band frequencies of 500, 1000, 2000, and 4000 Hz. Unit, decibel;abbreviation, SIL.

3.3.xx Speech Transmission Index (STI). See NFPA 72-2013 Annex D.2.1.1.

3.3. 52 Structure.

That which is built or constructed and limited to buildings and non-building structures as defined herein.[5000, 2012]

3.3.52.1 * Air-Right Structure.

A structure other than a skywalk bridge that is built over a roadway using the roadway’s air rights. [5000,2012]

3.3.53 Tenable Environment.

In a road tunnel, an environment that permits evacuation or rescue, or both, of occupants for a specificperiod of time.

3.3.xx Time Weighted Average (TWA). The Time Weighted Average sound level is a continuoussound level which, over a defined period, would produce the same noise dose as the varying sound level.

3.3.xx Unweighted Decibel (dBZ). Decibel values without weighting applied.

3.3.xx Voice Communication System. An amplified paging system for speech communication,including emergency notifications and announcements.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

Change_Proposal_7-16-2_2014-07-03_D01_DMP.docx

Related changes for Annex B.2.6, consisting of 3.3 additions, 7.16.2 changes, A.7.16.2 changes, Annex M additions


For 7.16.2, the Standard’s current mandatory text lacks a requirement to establish project tenability and time-of-tenability criteria for approval.

For A.7.16.2, the Standard’s current advisory text is focused on time-of-tenability, and both overall tenability and the breadth of other tenability considerations addressed in Annex B should be mentioned in the Annex A referral to Annex B. The proposed modifications will strengthen connection between Annex B.2 and mandatory text, to assure that tenability criteria are established to address acoustic concerns not addressed in the current Standard.

For B.2.6, the Standard’s current advisory text contains undocumented maximum noise exposure limits and insufficient guidance for communication with and protection of occupants during the emergency evacuation scenario.

The proposed changes add guidance and related values for consideration in fixing project criteria that are found in other established Standards and adapted for the specific environment of this Standard, clarified with noise metrics and measurement parameters, and supported with relevant definitions added in Chapter 3 and references added in Annex M.


8 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

Related Public Inputs for This Document

Related Input Relationship

Public Input No. 17-NFPA 502-2014 [Section No. 7.16.2]

Public Input No. 18-NFPA 502-2014 [Section No. A.7.16.2]

Public Input No. 19-NFPA 502-2014 [Section No. B.2.6]

Public Input No. 20-NFPA 502-2014 [Section No. M.1.2]


Submitter Full Name: DAVID PLOTKIN

Organization: AECOM

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu Jul 03 12:53:14 EDT 2014


9 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

NFPA 502 Change Proposal

File: Change_Proposal_7-16-2_2014-07-03_D01_DMP.1404406565335 Page 1 of 3 Print: 2014-08-07 09:38:00

3.3.xx Decibel. The logarithmic units associated with sound pressure level.


3.3.xx A-weighted Decibel (dBA). Decibel values with weighting applied over the frequency

range of 20Hz to 20kHz to reflect human hearing.

3.3.xx Sound Pressure Level. The logarithmic ratio of the root-mean squared sound pressure to

the reference sound pressure (2.0 × 10-5 Pascals).

3.3.xx Common Intelligibility Scale (CIS). See NFPA 72-2013 Annex D.2.4.5.

3.3.xx Speech Interference Level (SIL). A calculated quantity providing a guide to the

interfering effect of noise on speech intelligibility. One-fourth of the sum of the band sound

pressure levels for octave-bands with normal mid-band frequencies of 500, 1000, 2000, and 4000

Hz. Unit, decibel; abbreviation, SIL.


3.3.xx Voice Communication System. An amplified paging system for speech communication,

including emergency notifications and announcements.

3.3.xx Time Weighted Average (TWA). The Time Weighted Average sound level is a

continuous sound level which, over a defined period, would produce the same noise dose as the

varying sound level.

3.3.xx Leq. Level equivalent, the average sound level over time on an acoustical energy basis

3.3.xx ‘Slow’. The response time of a sound level meter’s RMS detector corresponding to a rise

time constant of 1 second per ANSI S1.4 and IEC 61672.

7.16.2* Tenable Environment. A tenable environment shall be provided in the means of egress

during the evacuation phase in accordance with the emergency response plan for a specific

incident. The tenability and time-of-tenability criteria shall be established and approved.

A.7.16.2 Tenability criteria should consider a number of environmental conditions. The duration

of the evacuation phase may be affected by travel distances to emergency exits. For additional

information on tenable environments in road tunnels, see Annex B.

B.2.6 Noise Levels. Criteria for noise levels should be established for the various situations and

potential exposures particular to the environments addressed by this Standard.a maximum of 115

dBA for a few seconds and a maximum of 92 dBA for the remainder of the exposure. The intent

of the recommended criteria is to maintain at least a minimal level of speech intelligibility along

emergency evacuation routes. This may require additional noise control measures and acoustical

treatment to achieve. Exceptions taken to the recommended noise levels for reasons of cost and

feasibility should be as few and as slight as reasonably possible. For example, local area

exceptions to the recommended acoustic criteria may be required to be applied for defined

limited distances along the evacuation path that are near active noise sources. Other means of

providing emergency evacuation guidance using acoustic, non-acoustic or combined methods

may be considered.

(a) Noise levels should not exceed the following:

The sound pressure level from all active systems measured inside a tunnel along the path of

evacuation during the emergency response at any point five (5) feet above the walking surface,

should not exceed 94 dBA Leq 'slow' for a period of 1-hour, and should at no time exceed 140



dBZ Peak. [ref: ISO 1999:2013 and EU Directive 2003/10/EC, Canada Occupational Safety and

Health Regulations, (SOR/86-304) Part VII )]

The sound pressure level from all active systems measured where staff would be present for

maintenance and testing and where hearing protection is not available should not exceed 85 dBA

TWA ‘slow’ for a period of 8-hours, and should at no time exceed 140 dBZ Peak. [ref: 29 CFR

1910.95 (OSHA)]

(b) For intelligible communication between emergency evacuation responders and the public

where reliance upon unamplified speech is used as part of the emergency response:

The speech interference level (SIL) from all active systems measured inside a tunnel along the

path of evacuation during the emergency response at any point five (5) feet above the walking

surface should not exceed 78 dBZ Leq 'slow' over any period of 1 minute, using the arithmetic

average of unweighted sound pressure level in the 500, 1000, 2000 and 4000 Hz octave bands.

(c) For intelligible communication between emergency evacuation responders and the public

where reliance upon amplified speech is used as part of the emergency response:

Where a voice communication system is intended to be used within a tunnel, the sound pressure

level from all active systems measured inside a tunnel along the path of evacuation during the

emergency response at any point five (5) feet above the walking surface should not exceed

85 dBA Leq 'slow' measured over any period of 1 minute.

The speech intelligibility of fixed voice communication systems under the same conditions and

for the same spaces, should achieve a measured STI of not less than 0.45 (0.65 CIS), and an

average STI of not less than 0.5 (0.7 CIS) as per NFPA 72-2013 Annex D.2.4.1. Refer to NFPA

72-2013 Annex D for further information on Speech Intelligibility for voice communication

systems.

The STI criterion is more stringent than the noise level limit and may require additional noise

control measures and acoustical treatment to achieve.

M.1.2.10 ISO Publications

ISO 1999, Acoustics – Estimation of noise-induced hearing loss, International Organization for

Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland, 2013.

M.1.2.14 OSHA Publications [and renumber]

29 CFR 1910.95, “Occupational noise exposure,” Occupational Safety & Health Administration,

U.S. Department of Labor, Washington, DC, 2008.

M.1.2.18 Other Publications

ANSI/ASA S3.5, American National Standard Methods for Calculation of the Speech

Intelligibility Index, American National Standards Institute, Inc., New York, NY, 1997 (R2007).

ANSI S12.65, American National Standard For Rating Noise with Respect to Speech

Interference, American National Standards Institute, Inc., New York, NY, 2006 (R2011).

SOR/86-304, Part VII, “Levels of Sound,” Canada Occupational Health and Safety Regulations,

Government of Canada, 2013.

EU Directive 2003/10/EC, “Directive 2003/10/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council

of 6 February 2003 on the minimum health and safety requirements regarding the exposure of

workers to the risks arising from physical agents (noise)", European Parliament, Council of the

European Union, 2008.



Substantiation

For 7.16.2, the Standard’s current mandatory text lacks a requirement to establish project

tenability and time-of-tenability criteria for approval.

For A.7.16.2, the Standard’s current advisory text is focused on time-of-tenability, and both

overall tenability and the breadth of other tenability considerations addressed in Annex B should

be mentioned in the Annex A referral to Annex B. The proposed modifications will strengthen

connection between Annex B.2 and mandatory text, to assure that tenability criteria are

established to address acoustic concerns not addressed in the current Standard.

For B.2.6, the Standard’s current advisory text contains undocumented maximum noise exposure

limits and insufficient guidance for communication with and protection of occupants during the

emergency evacuation scenario.

The proposed changes add guidance and related values for consideration in fixing project criteria

that are found in other established Standards and adapted for the specific environment of this

Standard, clarified with noise metrics and measurement parameters, and supported with relevant

definitions added in Chapter 3 and references added in Annex M.


3.3.21 Equivalency.

An alternative means of providing an equal or greater level of safety and reliability than that afforded bystrict conformance to prescribed codes and standards.


Equivalency should be accepted only if the alternative can provide a thrustworthy level of safety, in other words: provides a reliable safety level.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



10 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM


3.3.27 Fire Heat Release Rate. The rate at which heat energy is generated by burning expressed asBtu/sec or megawatts (MW).

Rate of energy release for a given fire scenario or fire test, expressed as a function of time; it can beexpressed in absolute terms (in large scale fire tests or in fire modeling, typically in W or Btu/s) ] or inrelative terms, per unit area (in small scale fire tests, typically in kW/m2)


The concept of heat release rate is the same whether it is used for a fire test or a fire modeling project. Typically small scale fire tests, such as ASTM E1354, cone calorimeter, require measurements of heat release rate per unit area and large scale fire tests or fire modeling require absolute measurements, in Wor BTU/s. The term is being defined in exactly the same way as the proposed definition for NFPA 130, for consistency in definitions.





Submitter Full Name: Marcelo Hirschler

Organization: GBH International

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Tue Jul 01 13:03:40 EDT 2014


11 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM


3.3.28 Fire Smoke Release Rate.

Rate of smoke release for associated with a given fire scenario or a given fire test; it is expressed interms of a surface area as a function of time [in m2/sec (ft2/sec)] .


Note that the integral of the smoke release rate is the total smoke released and that is a requirement contained in several locations in the standard, including wherever UL 1685 is the firetest mentioned, in 12.2.1.3. This also makes it consistent with the proposed change in NFPA 130 and allows consistency in definitions.







Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



12 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM


3.3.45 Queue.

A line of non-moving vehicles, including stopping traffic, and traffic over significant length with reducedspeed .


The risk of a queue comprises also vehicles that are slowing down (not only those that have come to a complete standstill). A definition for a queue adopted by the Ministry of Public Transport in the Netherlands, comprises the following categories:1.slow moving traffic: traffic, with speeds below 50 km/h2.non moving traffic: traffic with speed below 25 km/h http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_(verkeer)




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



13 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

Public Input No. 33-NFPA 502-2014 [ Section No. 4.2.1.1.1 ]

4.2.1.1.1

A standpipe system shall be installed before the enclosed tunnel has exceeded a length of 61 m (200 ft)beyond any access shaft or portal. Comment:enclosed is undefined?


"Enclosed" should be defined, to avoid confusion.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



14 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

Public Input No. 34-NFPA 502-2014 [ Section No. 4.3 [Excluding any Sub-Sections] ]

The requirements under this standard for life safety and those required to achieve structural protectiondiffer. The requirements for ensuring human safety during the evacuation and rescue phases are , as wellas during repair and possibly demolition, are substantially different from the requirements to protect thestructural components of the facility.


With a view to address also safe working conditions during repair, or possibly demolition phases, these phases during which life safety should also be considered, should be mentioned explicitely.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



15 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM


4.3.1

Regardless of length of the facility, as a minimum, the following factors shall be fully considered as part ofan engineering analysis of the fire protection and life safety requirements for the facilities covered by thisstandard for the protection of life in the facility, for the intended life cycle of the facility :

(1) Users of the facility

(2) Restricted vehicle access and egress

(3) Fire emergencies ranging from minor incidents to major catastrophes

(4) Fire emergencies occurring at one or more locations inside or in close proximity to the facility

(5) Fire emergencies occurring in remote locations at a long distance from emergency response facilities

(6) Exposure of emergency systems and structures to elevated temperatures

(7) Traffic congestion and control during emergencies

(8) Built-in fire protection features, such as the following:

(9) Fire alarm and detection systems

(10) Standpipe systems

(11) Water-based fire-fighting systems

(12) Ventilation systems

(13) Emergency communications systems

(14) Facility components, including emergency systems

(15) Evacuation and rescue requirements

(16) Emergency response time

(17) Emergency vehicle access points

(18) Emergency communications to appropriate agencies

(19) Vehicles and property being transported

(20) Facility location, such as urban or rural (risk level and response capacity)

(21) Physical dimensions and configuration, including roadway profile

(22) Natural factors, including prevailing wind, and pressure conditions

(23) Anticipated cargo

(24) Impact to buildings or landmarks near the facility

(25) Impacts to facility from external operations and/or incidents

(26) Traffic operating mode unidirectional, bidirectional, switchable, or reversible

(27) Reasonable worst case scenarios, combining above factors


Article 4.3.1. applies for all life cycle phases of the facility,in engineering analyses, these phases should be addressed, appreciating that the listed items might differ significantly from one phase to another. By mentioning the life cycle phases prior to listing the items that should be addressed, the directions for the engineering analyses are more clear.

Also in intem 22, pressure conditions are added, since they may also significantly influence (natural) ventilation


16 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

conditions.

Finally, it is worthwhile pointing the reader and user towards the need to address a set of (reasonable) worst case scenarios, rather than a single scenario, which e.g. might be decisive for smoke spread, but not for heat load on the (critical load bearing members of the) structure of the facility.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



17 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM


4.5 Emergency Communications.

Emergency communications, where required by the authority having jurisdiction, shall be provided by theinstallation of outdoor-type telephone boxes, coded alarm telegraph stations, radio transmitters, or otherapproved devices that meet the following requirements:

(1) They shall be made conspicuous by means of indicating lights or other approved markers (includingaudible devices) .

(2) They shall be identified by a readily visible number plate or other approved device.

(3) They shall be posted with instructions for use by motorists.

(4) They shall be located in approved locations so that motorists can park vehicles clear of the travellanes.

(5) Emergency communication devices shall be protected from physical damage from vehicle impact.

(6) Emergency communication devices shall be connected to an approved constantly attended location.


International research has shown that spoken messages and audio signals may contribute to the evacuation process. By mentioning them explicitely, adequate attention may be drawn to this aspect.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



18 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM


6.2.1

For bridges or elevated highways less than 300 m (1000 ft) in length, the provisions of this standard shallnot apply are CMR and subject to engineering analysis .


The length of 300 m seems arbitrary, and may depending of the traffic and economic consequences lead to underestimating of the risk. It is proposed, similar to tunnels, to introduce at least engineering analyses.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



19 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM


6.3.2

Critical structural members shall be protected from collision and high-temperature exposure that can resultin dangerous weakening or complete collapse of the bridge or elevated highway.

COMMENT: include scenarios/fire curves from fire scenarios (e.g. vehicles) on the bridge/elevated highwayand from the surroundings (e.g. ships below the bridge) to the bridge/elevated highway


There are not much details yet on which fire curves should be used up to what height etc. In order to prevent 'unsafe' chosen fire curves and fire scenarios, it might be better to specify which fire curves/fire scenarios should be evaluated to 'protect' the structure. It is important then to include the effects of fire scenarios with objects on the bridge/elevated highway (vehicles) and effects of fire scenarios with objects around around the bridge/elevated highway (e.g. fire on tanker ship below a bridge).


Submitter Full Name: Leendert Marinu Noordijk

Organization: Efectis Nederland BV

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Sun Jul 06 10:57:14 EDT 2014


20 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

Public Input No. 39-NFPA 502-2014 [ New Section after 6.3.3 ]

TITLE OF NEW CONTENT

6.3.4

Critical structural elements, such as cable (stays), shall be tested to withstand a hydrocarbon fire, andprotected to citical steel temperature levels of 300 degrees Celsius.


Especially cable stays and cables of stay bridges and suspension bridges, but also the columns anchoring these cables, are suspect to severe (HGV) fires, and flame imingement, with temperature levels easily reaching 1000-1100 C. It is proposed to add a limiting criterium of 300 C for steel (above which plastic deformations might cause (progressive) collapse and/or permanent deformations/damage yielding extremely costly repairs.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



21 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM


6.3.3

For through truss and , cable stay and suspension bridges or elevated highways, an engineering analysisshall be prepared to determine acceptable risk due to fire, including possible collapse scenarios.


In bridge engineering, a suspension bridge (cables span between the towers, and the deck is suspended from these main cables, using secondary cables) is a different bridge type from a cable stay bridge (main cables connect the towers directly to the bridge deck).




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



22 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM


7.3.1

Regardless of tunnel length, acceptable means shall be included within the design of the tunnel to protectall primary structural concrete and steel , masonry and steel or (cast-)iron elements in accordance withthis standard to achieve the following:

(1) Support fire fighter accessibility

(2) Mitigate structural damage (loss of strength and stiffness, and loss of durability due to cracking) andprevent progressive structural collapse

(3) Minimize economic impact


Some tunnels in Europe are made out of masonry, and also need an assessment of the load bearing capacity in fire.

Structural damage can and should be expressed in terms of:- loss of strength (causing failure due to breaking / yielding)- loss of stiffness (causing large and plastic deformations)- development of (irrepairable) cracks and consequent durability / sustainability issues




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



23 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM


7.3.3

During a 120-minute period of fire exposure, the following failure criteria shall be satisfied:

(1)

(2) Steel or cast iron tunnel structural linings shall be protected in order to prevent loss of strength of theelement and structural collapse.


The (in principle quite correct) specific requirements in 7.3.4 (aimed to prevent irreversible damage and structural collapse) only apply when structural fire protection is applied. These should always apply, and therefore the structure of 7.3.3 and 7.3.4 should possibly be changed to incorporate this or part of the text of 7.3.4. should be moved/copied to 7.3.3. The modification made in this Public Input is only modification of the text to incorporate the main goals: prevent structural collapse, prevent irreversible damage and irreversible deformations.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


* Tunnels with concrete structural elements shall be designed such that fire-induced progressivespalling is , irreversible damage to the concrete or reinforcement, irreversible deformations andstructural collapse is prevented.


24 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM


7.3.4

Structural fire protection material, where provided, shall satisfy the following performance criteria:

(1) Tunnel structural elements shall be protected to achieve the following:

(2) The temperature of the cast in-situ concrete surface does not exceed 380°C (716°F).

(3) Pre-cast concrete is protected such that fire-induced progressive spalling is prevented.

(4) Steel or cast iron tunnel structural linings are protected such that the lining temperature will notexceed 300°C (572°F).

(5) The temperature of the steel reinforcement within the concrete [assuming a minimum cover of25 mm (1 in.)] does not exceed 250°C (482°F).

(6) The temperature of concrete located up to 25mm from the steel reinforcement within theconcrete does not exceed 380°C (716°F).

(7) The material shall be noncombustible in accordance with ASTM E 136, Standard Test Method forBehavior of Materials in a Vertical Tube Furnace at 750°C, or by complying with internationallyaccepted criteria acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction when tested in accordance with ASTME 2652, Standard Test Method for Behavior of Materials in a Tube Furnace with a Cone-shapedAirflow Stabilizer at 750ºC ; ISO 1182, Reaction to fire tests for building and transport products —Non-combustibility test; or BS 476-4, Fire tests on building materials and structures.Non-combustibility test for materials.

(8) The material shall have a minimum melting temperature of 1350ºC (2462ºF).

(9) The material shall meet the fire protection requirements with less than 5 percent humidity by weightand also when fully saturated with water, in accordance with the approved time–temperature curve.


(1)(e) is added. The maximum temperature of the reinforcement is only part of the requirements that have to be fulfilled. The concrete around the reinforcement should stay cold enough (no loss of properties) to ensure the connection between reinforcement steel and concrete. It is quite common to require therefore a maximum temperature of 380°C at 25mm from the reinforcement. This requirement is automatically fulfilled when 7.3.4 (1) (a) applies, but is relevant for pre-cast concrete as mentioned in 7.3.4.(1)(b)




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



25 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM


7.3.4

Structural fire protection material, where provided, shall satisfy the following performance criteria:

(1) Tunnel structural elements shall be protected to achieve the following:

(2) The temperature of the cast in-situ concrete surface does not exceed 380°C (716°F).

(3) Pre-cast concrete is protected such that fire-

induced progressive spalling

(a) induced spalling is prevented , such that the lining temperature will not exceed 250°C (482°F) .

(b) Steel or cast iron tunnel structural linings are protected such that the lining temperature will notexceed 300°C (572°F).

(c) The temperature of the steel reinforcement within the concrete [assuming a minimum cover of25 mm (1 in.)] does not exceed 250°C (482°F).

(4) The material shall be noncombustible in accordance with ASTM E 136, Standard Test Method forBehavior of Materials in a Vertical Tube Furnace at 750°C, or by complying with internationallyaccepted criteria acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction when tested in accordance with ASTME 2652, Standard Test Method for Behavior of Materials in a Tube Furnace with a Cone-shapedAirflow Stabilizer at 750ºC ; ISO 1182, Reaction to fire tests for building and transport products —Non-combustibility test; or BS 476-4, Fire tests on building materials and structures.Non-combustibility test for materials.

(5) The material shall have a minimum melting temperature of 1350ºC (2462ºF).

(6) The material shall meet the fire protection requirements with less than 5 percent humidity by weightand also when fully saturated with water, in accordance with the approved time–temperature curve.


Because of the unpredictable nature of concrete spalling, and the lack of an international definition on progressive spalling, it is less confusing to only use the term "spalling" (rather than "progressive spalling").Internationally published fire test results have shown that modern grade concretes have a tendency to spall at temperature levels of appr. 200-250 C.In case spalling does not occur, the temperature levels of the concrete interface, regardless of the dimension of the concrete cover to the reinformecent, should be limited to 380 C, to avoid loss of strength and stiffness, and avoid irrepairable cracks. If cocnrete cover is more than 25 mm, the 380 C criterium on the concrete interface is decisive (rather than the 250 C criterium on the reinforcement). Note that the RWS procedure is based on the assumption that practical application and construction practice have shown that despite a required 50 mm cover, there is a significant risk that due to missing cover-elements, and point loads prior to casting, concrete cover is only 25 mm.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



26 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM


7.4.1

Tunnels described in categories B, C, and D shall have at least one manual means of identifying andlocating a fire locating fires in accordance with the requirements of 7.4.6.


It is recommended to use the plural, since there may be scenarios involving multiple fires.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



27 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

Public Input No. 43-NFPA 502-2014 [ Section No. 7.4.7.4 ]

7.4.7.4

Automatic fire detection systems shall be capable of identifying the location of the fire within 15 m (50 ft).Remark: add also a time constraint?


The 15 m appears unreferenced, and especially if so, it may at least be considered to add a(n abritrary) time constraint.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



28 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

Public Input No. 44-NFPA 502-2014 [ Section No. 7.14.1 [Excluding any Sub-Sections] ]

Fire size, growth rate, and smoke generated shall be permitted to be reduced where a design anengineering analysis can show that the pool size of the combustible or flammable liquid can be limited byproper design of the roadway cross slope, the roadway grade, the drainage inlets, and the drainageconveyance pipe or trough. Note: as a consequence of the incident, debris might block effluent flowing intodisposal channels, this should be addressed in the engineering analysis.


A design analysis is undefined, so better perhaps to address an "engineering analysis".

A critical remarks is made concerning the proposed solutions involving roadway slope and drainage, since practice has shown such solutions to be vulnarable to debris, either as a direct result of the incident, or from normal every day use (falling parts, dirt, ...).




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



29 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

Public Input No. 2-NFPA 502-2014 [ New Section after 7.15 ]

TITLE OF NEW CONTENT: Fire Protection paint

Type your content here ...

Specify fire protection paint fire rating (2 hours, 3 hours or 4 hours) requirement on the tunnelstructures/elements: wall, ceiling, beams, diaphragms, vent duct, and utilities.


It is unclear the fire rating of the paint shall be applies inside the tunnel on the code standard for each tunnel element.


Submitter Full Name: Catherine Chen

Organization: MassDOT

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu Mar 06 10:31:38 EST 2014


30 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM


7.16.2 * Tenable Environment.

A tenable environment shall be provided in the means of egress during the evacuation phase in accordancewith the emergency response plan for a specific incident. The tenability and time-of-tenability criteria shall be

established and approved.












Public Input No. 16-NFPA 502-2014 [Section No. 3.3] Changes proposed to B.2.6

Public Input No. 18-NFPA 502-2014 [Section No. A.7.16.2]





Organization: AECOM

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



31 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM







































may be considered.












1910.95 (OSHA)]

















systems.






















Substantiation
















7.16.7 Acceptance Test.

Remark: Acceptance testing appears a genaral part (like 8.10) - move to Chapter 4?

7.16.7.1

Acceptance tests for fire alarm and detection systems shall be performed in accordance with NFPA 72 orother equivalent international standards, including performance requirements specified in the basis ofdesign.

7.16.7.2

Acceptance tests for standpipe systems shall be performed in accordance with NFPA 14 or other equivalentinternational standards and performance specified in Chapter 10.

7.16.7.3

Acceptance tests for water-based fire-fighting systems shall be performed in accordance with NFPA 11,NFPA 13, NFPA 15, NFPA 16, NFPA 18, and NFPA 750 or other equivalent international standards asapplicable to the system(s) installed, including performance requirements specified in the basis of design.

7.16.7.4

Acceptance tests for fire hydrants, water mains, and water supply systems shall be performed inaccordance with NFPA 22, NFPA 24, or other equivalent international standards as applicable to thesystem(s) installed and performance specified in Chapter 10.

7.16.7.5

Acceptance tests for emergency ventilation systems shall be performed in accordance with the basis ofdesign criteria, equipment manufacturers' specifications, agreed-upon methods acceptable to the authorityhaving jurisdiction, and performance requirements specified in Chapter 11.

7.16.7.6

Acceptance tests for electrical systems (emergency power, emergency lighting, exit signs, etc.) shall beperformed in accordance with NFPA 70, NFPA 110, basis of design criteria, equipment manufacturers'specifications, and performance requirements specified in Chapter 12.

7.16.7.7

Acceptance tests for communication systems and traffic control systems shall be performed in accordancewith the basis of design, equipment manufacturers' specifications, and agreed-upon methods acceptable tothe authority having jurisdiction.


Acceptance testing appears a general part (like 8.10) - it may be considered to move this paragraph to Chapter 4, to facilitate reading.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



32 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM


8.2 Application.

Where required by the authority having jurisdiction, the requirements of Chapter 4 shall apply.

Remark: consider a length above which requirements of Chapter 4 are (C)MR, facilitating AHJ's decisions

8.2.1

The limits that an air-right structure imposes on the emergency accessibility and function of the roadwaythat is located beneath the structure shall be assessed.

8.2.2

Where an air-right structure encloses both sides of a roadway, it shall be considered a road tunnel for fireprotection purposes and shall comply with the requirements of Chapter 7.

8.2.3

Where an air-right structure does not fully enclose the roadway on both sides, the decision to consider it asa road tunnel shall be made by the authority having jurisdiction after an engineering analysis in accordancewith 4.3.1.


IT is felt that there a critical length above which some requirements should also be (C)MR, following an engineering analysis, and/or subject to AHJ approval.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



33 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM


8.4 Protection of Structure.

Why is this different from 6.3 and 7.3?

8.4.1

All structural elements that support air-right structures over roadways and all components that provideseparation between air-right structures and roadways shall have a minimum 2-hour fire resistance rating inaccordance with Section 7.3.

8.4.1.1 *

An engineering analysis shall be prepared to determine acceptable risk to include possible collapsescenarios of the air-right structure(s).

8.4.2

Structural members shall be protected from physical damage from vehicle impact. An inspection and repairprogram shall be kept in force to monitor and maintain the structure and its protection.

8.4.3

Maintenance of the structure shall be considered in the design.

8.4.4

Structural support elements shall not be within the dynamic vehicle envelope.

8.4.5

Buildings that are located above roadways shall be designed with consideration of the roadway below anair-right structure as a potential source of heat, smoke, and vehicle emissions.

8.4.6

The structural elements shall be designed to shield the air-right structure and its inhabitants from thesepotential hazards.

8.4.7

The design of the air-right structure shall neither increase risk nor create any risk to those who use theroadway below.


Protection of structural members appears missing, without justification. Relevant parts of sections 6.3 and 7.3 might be adopted, possibly conditionally, following an engineering analysis, and/or AHJ approval.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



34 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM


9.2.2.1 * Fire Suppression System.

Fire suppression is the reduction in the heat release rate of a fire by a sufficient application of water. A firesuppression system shall reduce the heat release rate by at least 70% from its theoretical peak. Fire sizeshall remain reduced over the design discharge duration.


The definition of a fire suppression system presently only calls for such a system to reduce the heat release rate of a fire but does not give an indication of by how much. Without a target it is difficult to be clear whether a proposed system can be called a fire suppression system. If a target is set, this can read across to a reduction in the design fire size for the emergency ventilation systems as set out in Chapter 11.


Submitter Full Name: Alan Brinson

Organization: European Fire Sprinkler Network

Affilliation: International Fire Sprinkler Association

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu Apr 17 10:03:07 EDT 2014


35 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM


9.2.2.2 * Fire Control System.

Fire control systems shall be designed to stop or significantly slow the growth of a fire within a reasonableperiod from system activation such that the peak heat release rate is significantly is 30% less than wouldbe expected without a fixed fire-fighting system.


Without a performance target it is difficult to be clear whether a fixed water-based fire-fighting system can be considered to be a fire control system. Setting a target guides to what extent the design fire size may be reduced for the sizing of the emergency ventilation system in Chapter 11.





Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



36 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM


9.4.3 Ventilation.

Ventilation considerations shall include natural and fire-induced forced ventilation parameters, includingday-night, seasonal or other frequent changes in (local) climate conditions .


Natural ventilation conditions may differ significantly from day and night, or depending on seasons. Not necessarily, conditions can be found to be decisive / conservative for all different scenarios that need to be addressed (position of vehicles involved in the fire incident in the tunnel, evacuation analysis, structural integrity assessment, ...).




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



37 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM


9.6.1 *

When a fixed water-based fire-fighting system is included as part of the overall design of a road tunnel, theimpact of this system on other measures being part of the overall safety concept shall be evaluated. At aminimum, this evaluation shall address the following:

(1) Impact on drainage requirements

(2) Impact on tenability, including the following:

(3) Increase in humidity

(4) Reduction (if any) in stratification and visibility

(5) Integration with other tunnel systems, including the following:

(6) Fire detection and alarm system

(7) Tunnel ventilation system

(8) Traffic control and monitoring systems

(9) Visible emergency alarm notification

(10) Incident command structure and procedures, including the following:

(11) Procedures for tunnel operators

(12) Procedures for first responders

(13) Tactical fire-fighting procedures

(14) Protection and reliability of the fixed water-based fire-fighting system, including the following:

(15) Impact events

(16) Seismic events

(17) Redundancy requirements

(18) Effect of full or partial failure of the fixed water-based fire-fighting system

(19) Ongoing system maintenance, periodic testing, and service requirements


In Chapter 9 the effect of full or partial system failure is not taken into account. However, it can not be excluded that the system will not fail on demand when there is a fire some years after the design and installation. Therefore one should at least consider the consequences of system failure on demand (which can be full system failure or e.g. delayed activation).




Street Address:

City:


38 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

State:

Zip:



39 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM


9.6.1 *

When a fixed water-based fire-fighting system is included as part of the overall design of a road tunnel, theimpact of this system on other measures being part of the overall safety concept shall be evaluated. At aminimum, this evaluation shall address the following:

(1) Impact on drainage requirements

(2) Impact on tenability, including the following:

(3) Increase in humidity

(4) Reduction (if any) in stratification and visibility

(5) Integration with other tunnel systems, including the following:

(6) Fire detection and alarm system

(7) Tunnel ventilation system

(8) Traffic control and monitoring systems

(9) Visible emergency alarm notification

(10) Incident command structure and procedures, including the following:

(11) Procedures for tunnel operators

(12) Procedures for first responders

(13) Tactical fire-fighting procedures

(14) Protection and reliability of the fixed water-based fire-fighting system, including the following:

(15) Impact events

(16) Seismic events

(17) Redundancy requirements

(18) Ongoing system maintenance, periodic testing, and service requirements

9.6.2

The engineering design shall also address late detection, and moving fires.

9.7

Failure or loss of availability of the equipment shall be considered.


Engineering analyses should address the (timely and reliable) detection of moving fires, and/or moving vehicles on fire, multiple (potential) fires, as well as, similar to ventilation systems, the issue of failure or loss of equipment.




Street Address:


40 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

City:

State:

Zip:



41 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM


11.4.2 *

The selection of the design fire size (heat release rate) shall consider the types of vehicles that areexpected to use the tunnel and, where present, the effect on fire size of a fixed water-based fire-fightingsystem .


A fixed water-based fire-fighting system classed as a fire suppression system or a fire control system in Chapter 9 will reduce the peak heat release rate by at least 70% and 30% respectively. This performance benefit should be considered when sizing the emergency ventilation system.





Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



42 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM


11.5.7

Where separation is not possible, intake openings shall be protected by other approved means or devicesto prevent smoke from re-entering the system.

11.5.8

Suspension and/or fixing of fans should not adversely affect passive fire protection. Alternatively, thepassive fire protection shall be designed such that the suspension and/or fixing of the fans is adequatelyaddressed.


In recent fire testing, it has become evident that large diameter fixings might cause heat sinks and consequently introduce concrete spalling risks. The influence on the performance of the passive fire proteciton systems should be assessed.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



43 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM


12.1.2

Emergency circuits installed in a road tunnel and ancillary areas shall remain functional for a period of notless than 1 hour, for the anticipated fire condition, by one of the following methods:

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5) Using circuits embedded in concrete that are protected by a 2-hour fire barrier system in accordancewith UL 1724, Outline of Investigation for Fire Tests for Electrical Circuit Protective Systems (Theinsulation for cables or conductors shall be thermoset and shall be suitable to maintain functionality atthe temperature within the embedded conduit or fire barrier system.)

(6) By the routing of the cable system external to the roadway

(7) Using diversity in system routing as approved, such as separate redundant or multiple circuitsseparated by a 1-hour fire barrier, so that a single fire or emergency event will not lead to a failure ofthe system.

(8) A fire rated cable duct.


The addition allows tor the application of a special/dedicated fire rated (possibly also ventilated) duct, besides the other presented solutions involving fire rated cables, embedding the cables in the concrete, or behind a compartmentation wall.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


* Fire-resistive cables shall be certified or listed as having been tested in a totally enclosed furnaceusing the ASTM E 119, Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials,time-temperature curve and which demonstrate functionality for no less than 2 hours as described inthe ANSI/UL 2196, Standard for Tests for Fire Resistive Cables, test standard and as follows:

Fire-resistive cables are tested as a complete system of conductors, cables, and raceways asapplicable, using a sample no shorter than 3.0 m (9.84 ft).

Fire-resistive cables intended for installation in a raceway are tested in the type of raceway inwhich they are intended to be installed.

Each fire-resistive cable system has installation instructions that outline the test procedure,and only the components stated in the test report are acceptable for actual installations.


44 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

Public Input No. 54-NFPA 502-2014 [ Section No. A.1.6.1 ]

A.1.6.1

SI units have been converted by multiplying the U.S. unit value by the conversion factor and rounding theresult to the appropriate number of significant digits (see Table A.1.6.1). See IEEE/ANSI SI 10, Standardfor the Use of the International System of Units (SI): The Modern Metric System.

Remark: facilitate using the document by adding a table with the conversion from SI to Imperial (throughoutthe document, SI numbers are given)?

Table A.1.6.1 Conversion Factors

U.S. Units SI Conversions

1 inch (in.) 25.4 millimeters (mm)

1 foot (ft) 0.3048006 meter (m)

1 square foot (ft 2 ) 0.09290304 square meter (m 2 )

1 foot per minute (fpm) 0.00508 meter per second (m/sec)

1 foot per second squared (ft/sec 2 ) 0.3048 meter per second squared (m/sec 2 )

1 footlambert (ft) 3.415457 candela/square meter (cd/m 2 )

1 cubic foot per minute (ft 3 /min) 0.000471947 cubic meter per second (m 3 /sec)

1 gallon per minute (gpm) 0.06309020 liter per second (L/sec)

1 pound (lb) 0.45359237 kilogram (kg)

1 pound per cubic foot (lb/ft 3 ) 16.01846 kilograms per cubic meter (kg/m 3 )

1 inch water gauge (in. wg) 0.249089 kilopascal (kPa)

1 pound per square inch (psi) 6.894757 kilopascals (kPa)

1 degree Fahrenheit (°F) (°F - 32)/1.8 degrees Celsius (°C)

1 degree Rankine (°R) 1/1.8 Kelvin (K)

1 Btu per second (Btu/sec) 1.05505 watts (W)

1 Btu per second (Btu/sec) 0.001 055 853 megawatts (MW)

1 Btu per pound degree Rankine (Btu/lb°R) 4.1868 joules per kilogram Kelvin (J/kg K)

1 footcandle (fc) 10.76391 lux (lx)

1 pound-force (lbf) 4.448 222 newtons (N)

1 gallon (gal) 3.785411784 liters (L)

1 cubic foot per minute per lane foot

(ft 3 /min·lf)

0.001 55 cubic meters per second per lane meter

(m 3 /sec·lm)

1 Btu per hour square foot (Btu/hr·ft 2 ) 3.154 591 watts per square meter (W/m 2 )


The majority of the users will be oriented towards imperial units, where as the main numbers in the standard are given in SI units, so the conversion table should perhaps also present the values starting from 1.0 SI units, rather than from 1.0 imperial units.




Street Address:


45 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

City:

State:

Zip:



46 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM


A.3.3.5 Backlayering.

See Figure A.3.3.5(a) through Figure A.3.3.5(c).

Figure A.3.3.5(a) Tunnel Fire Under Natural Fire Without Ventilation and Zero Percent Grade.

Figure A.3.3.5(b) Underventilated Tunnel Fire Causing Backlayering.

Figure A.3.3.5(c) Tunnel Fire Sufficiently Ventilated to Prevent Backlayering.


Figure A 3.3.5.(a) appears to give a situation without any ventilation. Natural ventilation encompasses situations without any draught, but normally there will be at least some wind speed/pressure difference between portals. The subscript therefore seems misleading and should be reconsidered.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



47 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM



48 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

A.7.3.2

Any passive fire protection material should satisfy the following performance criteria:

(1) Be resistant to freezing and thawing

(2) Withstand dynamic suction and pressure loads

(3) Withstand both hot and cold thermal shock from fire exposure and hose streams

(4) Meet all applicable health and safety standards

(5) Not itself become a hazard during a fire

(6) Be resistant to water ingress

The time-temperature development is shown in Table A.7.3.2(a) and in Figure A.7.3.2(a) .

Table A.7.3.2(a) Furnace Temperatures

Time

(min)

Temperature

ºC ºF

0 20 68

3 890 1634

5 1140 2084

10 1200 2192

30 1300 2372

60 1350 2462

90 1300 2372

120 1200 2192

An engineering analysis for the purposes of determining the appropriate time-temperature curve shouldconsider the following:

(1) Tunnel geometry

(2) Types of vehicles anticipated

(3) Types of cargoes

(4) Any additional fire mitigation measures

(5) Expected traffic conditions

Figure A.7.3.2(a) RWS Time–Temperature Curve.

The RWS fire curve is representative of actual tunnel fires for various combustibles, not necessarily


49 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

hazardous materials or flammable liquids. This fire curve was initially developed during extensive testingconducted by the Dutch Ministry of Transport (Rijkswaterstaat, RWS) in cooperation with the NetherlandsOrganization for Applied Scientific Research (TNO) in the late 1970s, and later proven in full-scale fire testsin the Runehamar tunnel tests in Norway in September 2003, conducted as part of the European Union(EU)–funded research project, Cost-effective Sustainable and Innovative Upgrading Methods for FireSafety in Existing Tunnels (UPTUN), in association with SP Technical Research Institute of Sweden and theNorwegian Fire Research Laboratory (SINTEF/NBL).

As shown in Table A.7.3.2(b) , four tests were carried out on fire loads of nonhazardous materials usingtimber or plastic, furniture, mattresses, and cardboard cartons containing plastic cups.

Table A.7.3.2(b) Fire Test Data

Timefrom

Ignitionto

PeakHRR

Linear Fire Growth Rate (R-Linear RegressionCoefficient)

Peak HRR

Estimated HRRfrom

Laboratory Tests

(No Target /

Inclusive Target)

Test (min) (MW/min) (MW) (MW)

1 18.5 20.5 (0.997)200(average) 186/217

2 14.3 29.0 (0.991)158(average) 167/195

3 10.4 17.0 (0.998) 124.9 —

4 7.75–70

17.7 (0.996)70.5 79/95

All tests produced time-temperature developments in line with the RWS curve as shown in FigureA.7.3.2(b) .

Figure A.7.3.2(b) Test Fire Curves.

All fires produced heat release rates of between 70 MW for cardboard cartons containing plastic cups and203 MW for timber/plastic pallets.

Figure A.7.3.2(c) depicts the T1 Fire Test curve in comparison to various accepted time-temperaturecurves.

Figure A.7.3.2(c) Various Time-Temperature Curves and Fire Test Curve.


50 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

The RWS requirements are adopted internationally as a realistic design fire curve that is representative oftypical tunnel fires.

The level of fire resistance of structures and equipment should be proven by testing or reference toprevious testing.

Fire test reports are based on the following requirements:

(1) Concrete slabs used for the application of passive fire protection materials for fire testing purposeshave dimensions of at least 1400 mm × 1400 mm (55 in. × 55 in.) and a nominal thickness of 150 mm(6 in.).

(2) The exposed surface is approximately 1200 mm × 1200 mm (47 in. × 47 in.).

(3) The passive fire protection material is fixed to the concrete slab using the same fixation material(anchors, wire mesh, etc.) as will be used during the actual installation in the tunnel.

(4) In the case of board protection, a minimum of one joint in between two panels should be created, tojudge if any thermal leaks will occur in a real fire in the tunnel.

(5) In the case of spray materials, the number of applications (number of layers) should be registeredwhen preparing the test specimen. This number of layers should be considered when the spraymaterial is applied in a real tunnel.

(6) Temperatures are recorded by thermocouples in the following locations:

(7) At the interface between the concrete and the passive fire protection material

(8) At the bottom of the reinforcement

(9) On the nonexposed face of the concrete slab

The installation of passive fire protection materials should be done with anchors having the followingproperties:

(1) The diameter should be limited to a maximum of M6, to reduce the heat sink effect through the steelanchor into the concrete. It has been reported that thicker anchors can create a local spalling effect ofthe concrete. This local effect is only temporary because the spalling spreads over the surface once asmall part of the concrete is directly exposed to fire.

(2) The use of stainless steel anchors is recommended. Types that can be used are A4, 316, 1.4401,and 1.4571. In some countries, even higher requirements are applied, such as 1.4529.

(3) If necessary, a washer should be used to avoid a pull-through effect when the system is exposed todynamic loads.

(4) The anchors should be suitable for use in the tension zone of concrete (cracked concrete).


51 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

(5) The anchors should be suitable for use under dynamic loads.

ADD how a representative spalling test should look like. The fire test above is not a suitable test to assessthe occurence of spalling


The fire test specification mentioned is not appropriate for a spalling test. The requirements for a spalling test (dimensions of the test specimen, loading, reproducability etc.) should be added. These requirements/This description can be found in the Efectis/RWS fire test procedure for concrete tunnel linings, used and written by the Dutch Ministry of Public Works (Rijkswaterstaat).




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



52 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

Public Input No. 56-NFPA 502-2014 [ Section No. A.7.3.3(1) ]

A.7.3.3(1)

Fire-induced progressive spalling is the result of a combination of rising pore pressures and thermalgradients in the concrete. At the front of heat penetration, a “moisture clog” (area with high pore pressure)develops inside the concrete. Part of the moisture is pushed further into the colder part of the concrete dueto the pressure gradient at the back of the clog. If the heated surface is under additional compression dueto a thermal gradient, pre-stressing, design load, or other factors, the complete heated surface can spall.

This type of spalling is especially likely to occur on structural members heated from more than one side,such as columns and beams. When “moisture clogs” are advancing into the concrete from all heated sides,at some point in time the “moisture clogs” will meet in the center of the cross-section, resulting in a suddenrise in pore pressure, which can cause large parts to spall.

Some factors that can influence concrete susceptibility, which are time frame, explosiveness, andprogressiveness of the spalling, can include material properties, concrete mix, reinforcing, castingconditions, curing conditions, finishing methods, geometry, dimensions, moisture content, structural loadingand supports, pre-stressing, and fire exposure.


Refer to substantiation to proposed change in language for the main text in par. 7.3.3.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



53 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM


A.7.16.2

Tenability criteria should consider a number of environmental conditions. The duration of the evacuation phasemay be affected by travel distances to emergency exits. For additional information on tenable environmentsin road tunnels, see Annex B.













Public Input No. 17-NFPA 502-2014 [Section No. 7.16.2] Changes proposed to B.2.6





Organization: AECOM

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



54 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM







































may be considered.












1910.95 (OSHA)]

















systems.






















Substantiation

















55 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

A.11.4.1


56 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

Experimental fire heat release rates (HRR) and representative HRR that correspond to the various vehicletypes are provided in Table A.11.4.1. Experimental HRR are given in the first column, obtained form firetests carried out in various full-scale tunnels or fire laboratories. The representative HRR given in thesecond column are suggested as typical design fire sizes.

Table A.11.4.1 Fire Data for Typical Vehicles with and without FFFS.

Vehicles

Experimental HRR Representative HRR

Peak HRR

Time to

PeakHRR

PeakHRR

Time to

PeakHRR

(MW) (min) (MW) (min)

Passenger car 5–10 0–54 a 5 10

Multiple passenger cars 10–20 10–55 b 15 20

Bus 25–34 c 7–14 30 15

Heavy goods truck 20–200 d 7–48 e 150 15

Flammable/

combustible liquid tankers200–300 — 300 —

Heavy goods trucks with FFFS installed 20 – 40 f — 50 —

Flammable/combustible liquid tanker with FFFSinstalled

30 – 100 g— 50 —

Notes:

(1) The designer should consider the rate of fire development (peak heat release rates may be reachedwithin 10 minutes), the number of vehicles that could be involved in the fire, and the potential for the fire tospread from one vehicle to another.

(2) Temperatures directly above the fire can be expected to be as high as 1000°C to 1400°C (1832°F to2552°F).

(3) The heat release rate may be greater than in the table if more than one vehicle is involved.

(4) A design fire curve should be developed in order to satisfy each specific engineering objective in thedesign process (e.g., fire and life safety, structural protection, etc.).

(5) A catastrophic fire event within the tunnel can result in a fire size with a larger heat release rate thanthat shown in the table.

(6) If an FFFS is installed in accordance with Chapter 9, the AHJ can reduce values for HRR for designpurposes based on an engineering analysis. Items to consider in doing this are the following:

(a) Activation time

(b) Resilience

(c) Reliability

aExperiments show that 60 percent of the tested individual passenger cars reach peak HRR within 20minutes and 83 percent within 30 minutes.

bExperiments show that 70 percent of the tested multiple passenger cars reach peak HRR within 30minutes.

cVery few tests have been done with buses, but real fires indicate that these experimental values can behigher.

dThe range of peak HRR and the rate of fire growth are affected by the type and amount of cargo and thecontainer type protecting the cargo. All types of covers of the cargo will delay the fire growth rate. The peakheat release rate is determined by the fire exposed surface area of the cargo. For most solid cargo

materials it varies from 0.1 MW/m2 for wood to 0.5 MW/m2 for plastics. In experiments involving 14 tests, in85 percent of the tested cases the peak heat release rate was equal to or less than 130 MW, and in 70percent of the tested cases the peak heat release rate was equal to or less than 70 MW.


57 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

eExperiments show that 85 percent of the tested truck loads reached peak HRR within 20 minutes.

f Experiment show that the gas temperatures can be reduced to values in the range of 400 - 800 o C,shortly after activation.

g If foam additives are inserted into the water, the efficiency of the system in reducing the HRR isincreased considerably.

Source: Ingason and Lönnermark, “Heat Release in Tunnel Fires: A Summary,” Handbook of Tunnel FireSafety, 2nd edition, 2012 andIngason et al . Fire Dynamics in Tunnels, Handbook, Springer 2014.

.

Each engineering objective should have an appropriate design fire curve adapted to take into accountproject-specific factors directly relating to the engineering objective to be achieved, and these may includethe following:

(1) Tunnel geometry, including aspect ratio (height, width, and cross-sectional profile)

(2) Traffic and vehicle type characteristics such as percentage of heavy goods vehicles, fire load, fuelcontainment, and fuel type, geometric configuration of the vehicle, body material type, existence ofvehicle fire suppression system, and vehicle mix

(3) Tunnel operational philosophy such as bidirectional flow and congestion management

(4) Fire protection systems

(5) Fire properties and characteristics

(6) Environmental conditions

The design fire is not necessarily the worst fire that may occur. Engineering judgment should be used toestablish the probability of occurrence and the ability to achieve practical solutions. Therefore, differentdesign scenarios are often used for various safety systems.



Table_A_11.4.1_-_Fire_Data_for_Typical_Vehicles_Public_Inquiry_Haukur_Ingason.docx

Additions to Table A.11.4.1


The annex table A11.4.1 should be recognized as providing experimental results of heat release rate data and guidelines in choosing appropriate design values for emergency ventilation and/or in the presence of a fixed water-based fire-fighting system (FFFS). Some numbers have been updated based on recent full-scale test results.


Submitter Full Name: Haukur Ingason

Organization: SP Technical Research Institut

Affilliation: SP Fire Research

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



58 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

New Proposal (Table A.11.4.1 – including fixed fire-fighting systems (FFFS)):

Retitle Table A.11.4.1 as “Fire Data for Typical Vehicles” and revise to read as follows “Fire Data for

Typical Vehicles with and without FFFS”:


Vehicles Peak HRR Time to

Peak HRR

Peak HRR Time to Peak HRR


Passenger car 5 - 10 0 - 54a) 5 10

Multiple passenger

cars

10 – 20

10 – 55b)

15

20

Bus 25 – 34c) 7 – 14 20 15

Heavy goods truck 20 – 200d) 7 – 48e) 150 10

Flammable/combustible

liquid tanker

200 - 300

-

300

-

Heavy goods trucks with

FFFS installed

20 – 40f)

-

50

10

Flammable/combustible

liquid tanker with FFFS

installed

30 – 100g)

-

50

-

f) Experiment show that the gas temperatures can be reduced to values in the range of 400 - 800 oC,

shortly after activation.

g) If foam additives are inserted into the water, the efficiency of the system in reducing the HRR is

increased considerably.

Add to Source: Ingason et al. Fire Dynamics in Tunnels, Handbook, Springer 2014.

Motivation:

The annex table A11.4.1 should be recognized as providing experimental results of heat release rate

data and guidelines in choosing appropriate design values for emergency ventilation and/or in the

presence of a fixed water-based fire-fighting system (FFFS). Some numbers have been updated based

on recent full-scale test results.



59 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

A.11.4.1


60 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

Experimental fire heat release rates (HRR) and representative HRR that correspond to the various vehicletypes are provided in Table A.11.4.1. Experimental HRR are given in the first column, obtained form firetests carried out in various full-scale tunnels or fire laboratories. The representative HRR given in thesecond column are suggested as typical design fire sizes.

Table A.11.4.1 Fire Data for Typical Vehicles

Vehicles


Peak HRRTime to

Peak HRRPeak HRR

Time to

Peak HRR


Passenger car 5–10 0–54 a 5 10

Multiple passenger cars 10–20 10–55 b 15 20

Bus 25–34 c 7–14 30 15

Heavy goods truck 20–200 d 7–48 e 150 15

Flammable/

combustible liquid tankers200–300 — 300 —

Notes:

(1) The designer should consider the rate of fire development (peak heat release rates may be reachedwithin 10 minutes), the number of vehicles that could be involved in the fire, and the potential for the fire tospread from one vehicle to another.

(2) Temperatures directly above the fire can be expected to be as high as 1000°C to 1400°C (1832°F to2552°F).

(3) The heat release rate may be greater than in the table if more than one vehicle is involved.

(4) A design fire curve should be developed in order to satisfy each specific engineering objective in thedesign process (e.g., fire and life safety, structural protection, etc.).

(5) A catastrophic fire event within the tunnel can result in a fire size with a larger heat release rate thanthat shown in the table.

(6) If an FFFS a fixed water-based fire-fighting system is installed in accordance with Chapter 9, the AHJcan reduce values for HRR for design purposes based on an engineering analysis by 70% for firesuppression systems and by 30% for fire control systems . Items to consider in before doing this are thefollowing:

(a) Activation time

(b) Resilience

(c) Reliability

aExperiments show that 60 percent of the tested individual passenger cars reach peak HRR within 20minutes and 83 percent within 30 minutes.

bExperiments show that 70 percent of the tested multiple passenger cars reach peak HRR within 30minutes.

cVery few tests have been done with buses, but real fires indicate that these experimental values can behigher.

dThe range of peak HRR and the rate of fire growth are affected by the type and amount of cargo and thecontainer type protecting the cargo. All types of covers of the cargo will delay the fire growth rate. The peakheat release rate is determined by the fire exposed surface area of the cargo. For most solid cargo

materials it varies from 0.1 MW/m2 for wood to 0.5 MW/m2 for plastics. In experiments involving 14 tests, in85 percent of the tested cases the peak heat release rate was equal to or less than 130 MW, and in 70percent of the tested cases the peak heat release rate was equal to or less than 70 MW.

eExperiments show that 85 percent of the tested truck loads reached peak HRR within 20 minutes.

Source: Ingason and Lönnermark, “Heat Release in Tunnel Fires: A Summary,” Handbook of Tunnel Fire


61 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

Safety, 2nd edition, 2012.

Each engineering objective should have an appropriate design fire curve adapted to take into accountproject-specific factors directly relating to the engineering objective to be achieved, and these may includethe following:

(1) Tunnel geometry, including aspect ratio (height, width, and cross-sectional profile)

(2) Traffic and vehicle type characteristics such as percentage of heavy goods vehicles, fire load, fuelcontainment, and fuel type, geometric configuration of the vehicle, body material type, existence ofvehicle fire suppression system, and vehicle mix

(3) Tunnel operational philosophy such as bidirectional flow and congestion management

(4) Fire protection systems

(5) Fire properties and characteristics

(6) Environmental conditions

The design fire is not necessarily the worst fire that may occur. Engineering judgment should be used toestablish the probability of occurrence and the ability to achieve practical solutions. Therefore, differentdesign scenarios are often used for various safety systems.


This change introduces guidance to what extent the heat release rate may be reduced for emergency ventilation design purposes if a fixed water-based fire-fighting system is installed. It also brings consistency with the performance definitions proposed in Chapter 9 for fire suppression systems and fire control systems.





Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



62 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

Public Input No. 19-NFPA 502-2014 [ Section No. B.2.6 ]

B.2.6 Noise Levels.

Noise Criteria for n oise levels should be a maximum of 115 dBA for a few seconds and a maximum of 92dBA for the remainder of the exposure. established for the various situations and potential exposures particular to

the environments addressed by this Standard. The intent of the recommended criteria is to maintain at least aminimal level of speech intelligibility along emergency evacuation routes. This may require additional noise control

measures and acoustical treatment to achieve. Exceptions taken to the recommended noise levels for reasons of costand feasibility should be as few and as slight as reasonably possible. For example, local area exceptions to the

recommended acoustic criteria may be required to be applied for defined limited distances along the evacuation paththat are near active noise sources. Other means of providing emergency evacuation guidance using acoustic,

non-acoustic or combined methods may be considered.


The sound pressure level from all active systems measured inside a tunnel along the path of evacuation during theemergency response at any point five (5) feet above the walking surface, should not exceed 94 dBA L eq 'slow' for a

period of 1-hour, and should at no time exceed 140 dBZ Peak. [ref: ISO 1999:2013 and EU Directive 2003/10/EC,Canada Occupational Safety and Health Regulations, (SOR/86-304) Part VII )]

The sound pressure level from all active systems measured where staff would be present for maintenance and testing

and where hearing protection is not available should not exceed 85 dBA TWA ‘slow’ for a period of 8-hours, andshould at no time exceed 140 dBZ Peak. [ref: 29 CFR 1910.95 (OSHA)]

(b) For intelligible communication between emergency evacuation responders and the public where reliance uponunamplified speech is used as part of the emergency response:

The speech interference level (SIL) from all active systems measured inside a tunnel along the path of evacuation

during the emergency response at any point five (5) feet above the walking surface should not exceed 78 dBZ L eq'slow' over any period of 1 minute, using the arithmetic average of unweighted sound pressure level in the 500, 1000,2000 and 4000 Hz octave bands.

(c) For intelligible communication between emergency evacuation responders and the public where reliance uponamplified speech is used as part of the emergency response:

Where a voice communication system is intended to be used within a tunnel, the sound pressure level from all active

systems measured inside a tunnel along the path of evacuation during the emergency response at any point five (5)feet above the walking surface should not exceed 85 dBA L eq 'slow' measured over any period of 1 minute.

The speech intelligibility of fixed voice communication systems under the same conditions and for the same spaces,

should achieve a measured STI of not less than 0.45 (0.65 CIS), and an average STI of not less than 0.5 (0.7 CIS) asper NFPA 72-2013 Annex D.2.4.1. Refer to NFPA 72-2013 Annex D for further information on Speech Intelligibility

for voice communication systems.

The STI criterion is more stringent than the noise level limit and may require additional noise control measures andacoustical treatment to achieve.






For 7.16.2, the Standard’s current mandatory text lacks a requirement to establish project tenability and time-of-


63 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

tenability criteria for approval.








Public Input No. 18-NFPA 502-2014 [Section No. A.7.16.2] Changes proposed to B.2.6




Organization: AECOM

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



64 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM







































may be considered.












1910.95 (OSHA)]

















systems.






















Substantiation















Public Input No. 8-NFPA 502-2014 [ Section No. E.3 [Excluding any Sub-Sections] ]


65 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

NFPA 502 has included material regarding water-based fixed fire-fighting systems (formerly called sprinklersystems) since the 1998 edition. This material had been contained in a separate annex in each edition sincethen.

The World Road Association, PIARC, addressed the subject of fixed fire-fighting systems (formerly calledsprinkler systems) in road tunnels in the reports presented at the World Road Congresses held in Sydney(1983), Brussels (1987), and Montreal (1995). In addition, the subject of fixed fire-fighting systems wasaddressed in PIARC’s technical reports titled Fire and Smoke Control in Road Tunnels, Systems andEquipment for Fire and Smoke Control in Road Tunnels, and Road Tunnels: An Assessment of FixedFire-Fighting Systems.

No European country currently installs fixed fire-fighting systems in road tunnels on a regular basis. In someroad tunnels in Europe, fixed fire suppression systems have been used for special purposes. Catastrophicroad tunnel fires have encouraged a re-evaluation of these systems for use in future road tunnels in Europe.Below is a list of tunnels in Europe that currently have fixed water-based fire-fighting systems installed:

(1) Austria

(a) Mona Lisa Tunnel

(b) Felbertauern Tunnel

(2) France: A86 Tunnel

(3) Italy: Brennero Tunnel

(4) The Netherlands: Roermond Tunnel

(5) Norway

(a) Válreng Tunnel

(b) Fløyfjell Tunnel

(6) Spain

(a) M30 Tunnels

(b) Vielha Tunnel

(7) Sweden:

(a) Stockholm Ringroad Tunnels

(b) Tegelbacken Tunnel

(1) United Kingdom

(a) Dartford Tunnels

(b) Heathrow Tunnel

(c) New Tyne Crossing

Tests on fixed fire-fighting systems have recently been conducted by France, the Netherlands, and UPTUNand SOLIT.

In Australia, deluge-type fixed water-based fire-fighting systems are installed in all major urban road tunnels.It is the Australian view that it is more likely that small fires could — if not suppressed — develop more ofteninto large (and uncontrollable) fires, particularly since this type of fire development is more typical than theoccurrence of instantaneously large fires. Below is a list of road tunnels in Australia that have fixedwater-based fire-fighting systems installed:

(1) Sydney Harbour Tunnel

(2) M5 East Tunnel

(3) Lanecove Tunnel

(4) Eastern Distributor

(5) City Link Tunnel

(6) Graham Farmer Tunnel


66 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

(7) M4 Tunnel

(8) Adelaide Hills Tunnel

(9) Mitchham/Frankstone Tunnel

(10) North/South Busway Tunnel

(11) North/South Tunnel

Fixed water-based fire-fighting systems have been installed in road tunnels for more than four decades inJapan. The decision for a specific tunnel project has to be based on the Japanese safety standards. InJapan, fixed fire suppression systems are required in all tunnels longer than 10,000 m (32,808 ft) and inshorter tunnels longer than 3000 m (9843 ft) with heavy traffic.

Six road tunnels in North America are equipped with water-based fixed fire-fighting systems: the BatteryStreet Tunnel, the I-90 First Hill Mercer Island Tunnel, the Mt. Baker Ridge Tunnel, and the I-5 Tunnel, all inSeattle, Washington; the Central Artery North Area (CANA) Route 1 Tunnel in Boston, Massachusetts; andthe George Massey Tunnel in Vancouver, British Columbia.

The decision to provide water-based fixed fire-fighting systems in these tunnels was motivated primarily bythe fact that these tunnels were planned to be operated to allow the unescorted passage of vehiclescarrying hazardous materials as cargo. See Table E.3.

Table E.3 Road Tunnel Fixed Fire-Fighting Systems in North America

Tunnel Location Route

Openedto

Traffic

Length Bores/

Lanes

Fixed FireSuppressionSystem Type

SystemZonesm ft

Battery StreetSeattle,

WashingtonSR99 1952 671 2200 2/4 Deluge water 14

I-90 First HillMercer Island

Seattle,Washington I-90 1989 914 3000 3/8 Deluge foam 37

Mt. BakerRidge

Seattle,Washington I-90 1989 1067 3500 3/8 Deluge foam 50

CANANorthbound

Boston,Massachusetts U.S. 1 1990 470 1540 1/3 Deluge foam 15

CANASouthbound

Boston,Massachusetts U.S. 1 1990 275 900 1/3 Deluge foam 9

I-5 TunnelSeattle,

Washington I-5 1988 167 547 1/12 Deluge foam 9

George MasseyTunnel

Vancouver,British

Columbia

99 1959 630 2067 2/4Sprinkler

systemN/A


The list is incomplete. Two tunnels have been added to it that are protected with fixed water-based fire-fighting systems. There will be more.





Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


67 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM



68 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

Public Input No. 9-NFPA 502-2014 [ Section No. E.3.2 ]

E.3.2

There is general agreement that, in many cases, the inclusion of water-based fire-fighting systems can actas a valuable component of the overall fire and life safety system in a tunnel. Some of the benefits andcapabilities of water-based fire-fighting systems include the following:

(1) Minimizing fire spread. Water-based fire-fighting suppression or control systems prevent fire spread toother vehicles so that the fire does not grow to a size that cannot be attacked by the fire service.

(2) Fire suppression and cooling. If designed accordingly, a water-based fire-fighting suppression systemsuppresses the fire and cools the tunnel environment to provide more time for evacuation and enablefire fighters to access the fire. Early operation of a water-based fire-fighting system is important inachieving this objective. For example, a heavy goods vehicle fire needs only 10 minutes to exceed100 MW and 1200°C (2192°F), which are fatal conditions.

(3) Improved conditions for first responders. The cooling and radiation-shielding effects of water spraysaid in manual fire-fighting and rescue operations by reducing the thermal exposure.

(4) Improved performance of ventilation systems. The With a smaller fire, the ventilation system is betterable to remove smoke from the tunnel. Furthermore, the cooling of hot products of combustionprovided by properly designed water-based fire suppression systems may increase the actual capacityof ventilation systems due to the higher density of cooled products of combustion.

(5) Reduced fire exposure to structure. When a fixed fire-fighting system is operated, it is possible tointerrupt the fire growth rate, as a result reducing the peak temperatures and their duration occurringat the surface of any exposed structure.


Fixed water-based fire-fighting systems limit the heat release rate in a tunnel fire. This means that the ventilation system can more effectively clear the tunnel of smoke. This benefit should be mentioned here.





Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



69 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

Public Input No. 10-NFPA 502-2014 [ Section No. E.5.4 ]

E.5.4

In

In 2013 the Swedish government ran a series of live fire suppression tests in the Runehamar tunnel inNorway. A specially-designed sidewall sprinkler was tested in a 30m long zone on a fire in a test rigrepresentative of a heavy goods vehicle (HGV) carrying wood pallets. Without operation of the sprinklersystem the heat release rate reached 100 MW. By operating the sprinkler system within eight minutes ofthe ceiling reaching 141°C, the heat release rate was prevented from exceeding 20 MW.

E.5.5 In an examination of the effectiveness of sprinklers during fire suppression in tunnel incidents, theauthorities in the Netherlands conducted a series of fire tests with sprinklers in the Benelux tunnel. The testtunnel was an operating road tunnel, 9.8 m (32 ft) wide and 5.1 m (17 ft) high. Various fire scenarios wereused to simulate stationary vehicle fires, including a van loaded with wood cribs, a high goods vehicle (HGV ) fire loaded with wood pallets, and an aluminum truck cabin loaded with wood cribs. No liquid fuel firewas used in the tests. The fire size in the test program ranged from 15 MW to 40 MW. Two sprinkler zoneswere installed in the test tunnel. The length of Zone I was 17.5 m (57.4 ft) and Zone II was 20 m (66 ft) long.The discharged water quantity was 12.5 mm/min (.5 in./min). Activation time of the sprinklers in the testsranged from 6 min to 22 min after ignition of the fire source. In order to focus on the study of the air coolingand steam formation generated by sprinklers, the mechanical longitudinal ventilation in the tunnel was notactivated during tests. The air speed in the tunnel was approximately 0–1 m/s (0–197 fpm) in three tests,and approximately 3 m/s (590 fpm) in one test.

For all tests, the air temperature upstream and downstream of the fire decreased from approximately250–350°C (482–662°F) to 20–30°C (68–86°F) in a very short period of time after sprinkler activation,which prevented the fire spread from one vehicle to others. The smoke layer was disturbed with theactivation of the sprinklers, and visibility was almost entirely obstructed. It took 5 to 15 min to improvevisibility. No significant steam formation and no deflagration were observed in the test program.


The most recent government-sponsored fire tests provide important new evidence for the performance benefits of fixed water-based fire-fighting systems and should be mentioned here.





Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



70 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

Public Input No. 21-NFPA 502-2014 [ New Section after E.5.7 ]

Add section: E.5.8

In 2011, the Efectis Netherlands performed a fire suppression test programme on the assignment of LandTransport Authority (LTA) Singapore. The aim of the test programme was to investigate the effect of firesuppression on the HRR and tunnel ventilation, to reduce the risk of vehicular fire spread, and to acquireinformation on the appropriate design parameters to adopt. A total of 7 large scale fire tests wereconducted in the San Pedro de Anes test tunnel. The fire sources consisted of 228 wooden (80 %) andplastic (20 %) pallets. The HGV mock-up was 2 m wide, 3 m high and 7.5 m long covered by a tarpaulin.The tunnel had a ventilation velocity of around 3 m/s. Two piles of pallets were placed 5 m behind the edgeof the HGV mock-up to investigate the possibility of fire spread to adjacent targets. The water spraysystems was a deluge system with nozzles using K-factor of 80 and an operating pressure of 1 to 2 bar.Two 25 m long and 7.2 m wide sections were applied, in total of 50 m. The water flow rate was 8 mm in onetest and 12 mm/min in five tests. The system was activated 4 min after the “fire detection”, corresponding to

60 oC gas temperature measured below the ceiling. The test data showed that the peak HRRs were below40 MW if the deluge system was activated 4 min after detection. The free burn test had a peak HRR of 115MW for a period of 5 minutes and a new peak of 150 MW for a short period (2 min) most likely when thepiles collapsed. If the deluge system was activated 8 min after detection, the HRR was as high as 100 MW.

The ceiling gas temperature in test 1 was reduced to 300 oC, compared to 1200 oC in the free-burn test.

Add Section E.5.9

In 2013, SP Fire Research Sweden carried out a series of fire suppression tests in the Runehamar tunnelon assignment of the Swedish Transport Administration (STA). A total of 6 tests were carried out. Woodpallets were used as fuel with an estimated free burn peak HRR of 100 MW. A total length of 30 m wascovered by the fire suppression system equipped with TN (Tunnel Nozzle)-25 manufactured by TYCO

(Prior to the notation it was called T-Rex). A 1.1 bar water pressure at the nozzles with K-360 (l/min/bar1/2)

yielded a water flow rate of 375 l/min. The coverage area was 37.5 m2, which corresponds to a water

density of 10 mm/min. The criterion for the “fire detection” was a ceiling gas temperature of 141 oC. Theactivation of the fire suppression system was delayed by 2 min to 12 min after the “fire detection”. Theresults showed that the HRR upon activation ranged from approximately 10 MW to 30 MW. The HRR wascontrolled after activation for a period of 10 – 20 minutes. After that the fire was suppressed over a periodof 10 - 30 minutes, which means that the system prevented further fire spread inside the fuel. The FFFSresulted in peak HRRs lower than 50 MW in all five cases, which was one of the original questions

postulated by the LTA. The maximum temperatures at the ceiling were never higher than 400 oC to 800 oCafter activation. In all experiments the fire was controlled in the first period after activation and thensuppressed with a considerable amount of fuel still remaining. A target consisting of a pile of pallets stood 5m from one end of the fire.


This is an update of the research work done on large scale FFFS testing since 2011. These tests have been documented well and are found in the literature. Although they are comissioned by road authorities, they provide new data and research and should therefore qualify to be listed in the Annex E.





Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


71 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM



72 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

Public Input No. 60-NFPA 502-2014 [ New Section after E.6 ]

Replace E6 with new text:

E.6 Fire test protocol for a fixed water-based fire fighting system in a road tunnel

The fixed water-based fire fighting system shall be tested in a full-scale tunnel to establish its performanceclassification as per 9.2.2. The fire scenario should be defined in such a way that it represents a reasonableworst case fire in the tunnel. There are four main items the test protocol needs to consider:

Fuel type and size

Tunnel geometry

Ventilation conditions

System activation

For each of these items, the test protocol shall be fulfilled and conditions stated and documented. Thedesign of the fixed water-based fire fighting system is based on engineering analysis and manufacturerinstallation guidelines in liaison with the AHJ.

E.6.1 Fuel type and size

The types of fires that have occurred in road tunnels include passenger cars, buses, light goods vehicles,heavy goods trucks and tankers. Experience from large scale testing with fixed water spray systemsindicate two types of fuels that represent not necessarily the worst case but a conscious choice betweenthe probability that it may arise and the ability to achieve practical test results. The following two types offuel should be used:

Fuel type I : Diesel pool fire with a free-burn heat release rate of 50 MW, 50% shielded as per figureXX

Fuel type II: Test with solid fuel on an open platform with a free-burn heat release of 130 MW (woodpallets with a maximum moisture content of 20% are recommended) as per figure XY. This testshould be run without a cover, with a tarpaulin cover and with a plywood cover on the top torepresent a solid aluminium truck with the sides burnt away. In each of these tests the front and rear

of the truck should be shielded. The ignition source should be a small liquid pan fire of 0.1m2.

Fuel type I is representative of the spill from the fuel tank of a heavy goods truck (trailer trucks) with part ofthe fuel under the truck. Fuel type II is a reasonable worst case scenario that has evolved from severalseries of international research programmes. For a tunnel that does not accept heavy goods trucks a fueltype should be agreed with the AHJ.

For fuel type II a target to simulate a truck is included 5m downstream of the rear end of the fuel package.The target comprises two piles of pallets, as in Figure XY.

E6.2 Tunnel geometry and ventilation

The tunnel geometry must be at least 40 m2 with a tunnel height of at least 4.5 m. Other geometries mustbe decided in accordance with the specific use of the system in the future.

The longitudinal ventilation should achieve a velocity of 3 m/s during the test.

The experimental setup should reflect the delay for the detection system to respond and the system tobegin discharge. In the fire test the fixed water-based fire-fighting system is activated manually after apredetermined detection time. For fuel type I this is at least 2 minutes and for fuel type II it is at least 4minutes.

E.6.3 Performance evaluation

The system to be evaluated with this fire test protocol is described in 9.2.2.1 (Fire Suppression System),9.2.2.2 (Fire Control System) and 9.2.2.3 (Volume Cooling System).

For the Fuel Type I the fire should be suppressed within 2 minutes for all systems.

For the system described in 9.2.2.1 the heat release rate using fuel type II should start to decreasesteadily one minute after activation until termination of the test (30 minutes). For the system


73 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

described in 9.2.2.2, within 2 minutes after the activation of the system the heat release rate shouldno longer increase. The heat release rate should not be higher than 50 MW during the test durationof 30 minutes. For the system described in 9.2.2.3, no limitations are given for the heat release rate.

After 30 minutes of activation at least 50% of the fuel type II should remain for the system describedin 9.2.2.1, and 25 % for the system described in 9.2.2.2. For the system described in 9.2.2.3 the fuelcan be completely consumed.

For all the systems the target positioned at a horizontal distance of 5 m downstream side of the rearend of the fuel type II should not ignite.

The ceiling surface temperatures measured at any location outside the flame zone should notexceed 380°C for longer than 10 minutes for the system described in 9.2.2.1 and the systemdescribed in 9.2.2.2. For the systems described in 9.2.2.3 the surface temperature should not

exceed 800 oC for 10 minutes and the gas temperature should not exceed 1,000 oC.

The heat radiation level measured at a horizontal distance of 5 m downstream of the fire at the top

of the target shall not exceed 15 kW/m2 after the activation of the system.

The AHJ may propose other criteria dependent upon the specific conditions of the tunnel.

E.6.4 Measurements

The heat release rate should be determined by using oxygen consumption calorimetery. Themeasuring station should be located at a minimum distance of 10 tunnel heights from the rear of thefire source and consist of at least 5 vertical centreline velocity probes, 5 thermocouples and 5 gasanalysers for oxygen (O2), carbon dioxide (CO2) and carbon monoxide (CO). The centreline heights

should be 0.1H, 0.25H, 0.5H, 0.75H and 0.9H, where H is the centreline tunnel height.

Gas temperatures should be measured with thermocouples type K at 0.15 m below the ceiling. Thetemperatures should be measured at the centreline directly above the centre of the fuel load (0 m), 5m (16.4 ft), 10 m (32.1 ft), 20 m (65.6 ft) and 40 m (131.2 ft) both on the upstream and downstreamside. Distances are measured from the end of the fire load.

Surface temperature at the ceiling should be measured by using thermocouples welded to the backof a 2 mm (0.08in.) thick steel plate measuring 100 mm x 100 mm (4in. x 4in.).

Radiation at 5 m (16.4 ft) from the fire should be measured by a plate thermometer shielded fromwater.

Total water flow rate and pressures should be recorded.

Sample nozzles should be taken by the AHJ after each test.

E6.5 Documentation

A test report should be provided to the AHJ. The report should include:

Description of test-setup and system components

Description of fire load and target

Description of ignition

Activation and pre-burn times

Position of the system in the tunnel

Geometry of the tunnel

Ventilation conditions

Layout of instrumentation

Temperatures, water flow rates and pressures

Calculated heat release rate and heat fluxes

Observations of smoke stratification and nozzle spray characteristics

Comparison of measured data to criteria set

Categorization of the system


74 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

The tests shall be monitored and documented by an accredited third-party body.


The E6 section in NFPA2014 needs to be updated in accordance to latest large scale testing experience.





Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



75 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

Public Input No. 57-NFPA 502-2014 [ Section No. G.2.1 ]

G.2.1 Compressed Natural Gas.

CNG has some excellent physical and chemical properties that make it a safer automotive fuel thangasoline or LP-Gas, provided well-designed carrier systems and operational procedures are followed.Although CNG has a relatively high flammability limit, its flammability range is relatively narrow compared tothe ranges for other fuels.

In air at ambient conditions, a CNG volume of at least 5 percent is necessary to support continuous flamepropagation, compared to approximately 2 percent for LP-Gas and 1 percent for gasoline vapor. Therefore,considerable fuel leakage is necessary in order to render the mixture combustible. Furthermore, firesinvolving combustible mixtures of CNG are relatively easy to contain and extinguish.

Since natural gas is lighter than air, it normally dissipates harmlessly into the atmosphere instead of poolingwhen a leak occurs. However, in a tunnel environment, such dissipation can lead to pockets of gas thatcollect in the overhead structure. In addition, since natural gas can ignite only in the range of 5 percent to15 percent volume of natural gas in air, leaks are not likely to ignite due to insufficient oxygen.

Another advantage of CNG is that its fueling system is one of the safest in existence. The rigorous storagerequirements and greater strength of CNG cylinders compared to those of gasoline contribute to thesuperior safety record of CNG automobiles.

A recent incident with a CNG propelled bus in the Netherlands (OCt. 2012) highlighted the issue andassociated risk of possible jet-fires as a consequence of the pressure release valves operation.


A recent fire in a city bus with CNG tanks on the roof, revealed the risk of 20m+ jet fires, after the safety valves opening. The risk of such fires is likely to increase given the popularity of this alternative fuel (at least in Europe) for buses, mini-vans and even HGV trucks. It may be even be considered to (optionally) add a jet fire testing method in the Annex for the critical members of the facility.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



76 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

Public Input No. 20-NFPA 502-2014 [ Section No. M.1.2 ]

M.1.2 Other Publications.

M.1.2. 10 ISO Publications

ISO 1999, Acoustics – Estimation of noise-induced hearing loss , International Organization forStandardization, Geneva, Switzerland, 2013.

M. 1 .2.14 OSHA Publications [and renumber]

29 CFR 1910.95, “Occupational noise exposure,” Occupational Safety & Health Administration, U.S.Department of Labor, Washington, DC, 2008.


ANSI/ASA S3.5, American National Standard Methods for Calculation of the Speech Intelligibility Index, American National Standards Institute, Inc., New York, NY, 1997 (R2007).

ANSI S12.65, American National Standard For Rating Noise with Respect to Speech Interference ,American National Standards Institute, Inc., New York, NY, 2006 (R2011).

SOR/86-304, Part VII, “Levels of Sound,” Canada Occupational Health and Safety Regulations,Government of Canada, 2013.

EU Directive 2003/10/EC, “ Directive 2003/10/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6February 2003 on the minimum health and safety requirements regarding the exposure of workers to therisks arising from physical agents (noise)", European Parliament, Council of the European Union, 2008.

M.1.2.1 AISC Publications.

American Institute of Steel Construction, One East Wacker Drive, Suite 700, Chicago, IL 60601-1802.

AISC 325, LRFD Manual of Steel Construction, 2005.

M.1.2.2 ANSI Publications.

American National Standards Institute, Inc., 25 West 43rd Street, 4th Floor, New York, NY 10036.

ANSI NGV2, American National Standard for Natural Gas Vehicle Containers, 2007.

IEEE/ANSI SI 10, Standard for Use of the International System of Units (SI): the Modern Metric System,2002.

M.1.2.3 ASCE Publications.

American Society of Civil Engineers, 1801 Alexander Bell Drive, Reston, VA 20191-4400.

ASCE/SEI 7, Minimum Design Load for Buildings and Other Structures, 2005.

M.1.2.4 ASME Publications.

American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Three Park Avenue, New York, NY 10016-5990.

Harris, K. J., “A Basis for Determining Fill Times for Dry Fire Lines in Highway Tunnels,” in F. J. Mintz, ed.,Safety Engineering and Risk Analysis, SERA Vol. 6, Book No. G01033, 1996.

M.1.2.5 ASTM Publications.



ASTM E 580, Application of Ceiling Suspension Systems for Acoustical Tile and Lay-in Panels in AreasRequiring Moderate Seismic Restraint, 2006.

ASTM E 2652, Standard Test Method for Behavior of Materials in a Vertical Tube Furnace at 750°C with aCone-Shaped Airflow Stabilizer, 2012.

M.1.2.6 EN Publications.

European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardization (CENELEC), 35, Rue de Stassartstraat, B-1050Brussels, Belgium.

EN 61508-1, Functional Safety of Electrical/Electronic/Programmable Electronic Safety-Related Systems,2002 edition.


77 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

M.1.2.7 FEMA Publications.

Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW, Washington, DC 20472.

FEMA 141, “Emergency Management Guide for Business and Industry,” October 1993.

“Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program (HSEEP),” April 2013.

“National Exercise Program,” March 2011.

M.1.2.8 IEEE Publications.

Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Three Park Avenue, 17th Floor, New York, NY10016-5997.

IEEE 693, Recommended Practices for Seismic Design of Substations, 2005.

IEEE 1402, IEEE Guide for Electric Power Substation Physical and Electrical Security, 2000.

M.1.2.9 IESNA Publications.

Illuminating Engineering Society of North America, 120 Wall Street, Floor 17, New York, NY 10005.

IESNA DG4, Design Guide for Roadway Lighting Maintenance, 2003.

NECA/IESNA 502, Recommended Practice for Installing Industrial Lighting Systems, 1999.

M.1.2.10 ISO Publications.

International Organization for Standardization, 1, ch. De la Voie-Creuse, Case postale 56, CH-1211 Geneva20, Switzerland.

ISO 1182, Reaction to Fire Tests for Building Products — Non-Combustibility Test, 2002 edition.

M.1.2.11 Massachusetts Highway Department Publications.

Massachusetts Highway Department, 10 Park Plaza, Suite 3170, Boston, MA 02116.

“Memorial Tunnel Fire Ventilation Test Program Test Report,” Bechtel/Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade andDouglas, Inc., November 1995.

M.1.2.12 NHTSA Publications.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE, Washington, DC 20590.

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 304, Compressed Natural Gas Fuel Container Integrity.

M.1.2.13 NIOSH Publications.

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Centers for Disease Control, 1600 Clifton Road,Atlanta, GA 30333.

NIOSH 136, “Guidance for Filtration and Air-Cleaning Systems to Protect Building Environments fromAirborne Chemical, Biological, or Radiological Attacks,” 2003.

M.1.2.14 PIARC Publications.

AIPCR/PIARC, La Grande Arche, Paroi North, Level 5, 92055 LA DEFENSE Cedex, France.

Design Fire Characteristics for Road Tunnels, 2011.

Fire and Smoke Control in Road Tunnels, 1999.

Road Tunnels: An Assessment of Fixed Fire-Fighting Systems, 2004.

Systems and Equipment for Fire and Smoke Control in Road Tunnels, 2004.

M.1.2.15 SAE Publications.

Society of Automotive Engineers, 400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096.

SAE J2344, Guidelines for Electric Vehicle Safety, 2010 edition.

M.1.2.16 UL Publications.

Underwriters Laboratories Inc., 333 Pfingsten Road, Northbrook, IL 60062-2096.

ANSI/UL 1598, Luminaires, 2008, revised 2010.

M.1.2.17 USACE Publications.

United States Army Corps of Engineers, USACE Publications Depot, ATTN: CEHEC-IM-PD, 2803 52ndAvenue, Hyattsville, MD 20781-1102.

USACE TI 809, Seismic design for buildings, 2004, revised 2010.


78 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

M.1.2.18 Other Publications.

Balke, K.N. et al., “Incident Management Performance Measures,” Texas A&M University, TexasTransportation Institute, November 2002.

British Standard (BS) 476-4, Fire Tests on Building Materials and Structures Non-Combustibility Test forMaterials, 1970.

Fire in Tunnels Thematic Network, Technical Report 3: “Fire Response Management,” 2004.

Ingason, H., and Anders Lönnermark, “Heat release in tunnel fires: a summary,” in Handbook of Tunnel FireSafety, 2nd edition, ed. Alan Beard and Richard Carvel, UK: Telford, Thomas Limiter, 2011.














Public Input No. 18-NFPA 502-2014 [Section No. A.7.16.2] Changes proposed to B.2.6

Public Input No. 19-NFPA 502-2014 [Section No. B.2.6] Changes proposed to B.2.6



Organization: AECOM

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



79 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM







































may be considered.












1910.95 (OSHA)]

















systems.






















Substantiation















Public Input No. 13-NFPA 502-2014 [ Section No. M.1.2.5 ]



ASTM E 136 E136 , Standard Test Method for Behavior of Materials in a Vertical Tube Furnace at 750°C,2012.

ASTM E 580 E580/E580M14 , Application of Ceiling Suspension Systems for Acoustical Tile and Lay-inPanels in Areas Requiring Moderate Seismic Restraint, 2006 2014 .

ASTM E 2652 E2652 , Standard Test Method for Behavior of Materials in a Vertical Tube Furnace at 750°Cwith a Cone-Shaped Airflow Stabilizer, 2012.


update




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



80 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

Public Input No. 59-NFPA 502-2014 [ Section No. M.1.2.5 ]




ASTM E 580/E580M , Application of Ceiling Suspension Systems for Acoustical Tile and Lay-in Panels inAreas Requiring Moderate Seismic Restraint, 2006 2014 .

ASTM E 2652, Standard Test Method for Behavior of Materials in a Vertical Tube Furnace at 750°C with aCone-Shaped Airflow Stabilizer, 2012.


Update the year date for standard(s)


Submitter Full Name: Steve Mawn

Organization: ASTM International

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



81 of 81 10/28/2014 8:23 AM

Attachment #3: Committee Roster

Address List No PhoneRoad Tunnel and Highway Fire Protection ROA-AAA

Chad Duffy11/13/2014

ROA-AAA

William G. Connell

ChairPB Americas, Inc.75 Arlington StreetBoston, MA 02116Alternate: Daniel T. Dirgins

SE 10/10/1997ROA-AAA

Jarrod Alston

PrincipalArup955 Massachusetts AvenueCambridge, MA 02139

SE 10/23/2013

ROA-AAA

Ian E. Barry

PrincipalIEB Consulting Ltd.25 Abbeycroft CloseAstley, Manchester, M29 7TJ United Kingdom

SE 4/3/2003ROA-AAA

Cornelis Kees Both

PrincipalPRTC Fire LaboratoryBormstraat 24Tisselt, 2830 Belgium

RT 10/29/2012

ROA-AAA

Francesco Colella

PrincipalExponent, Inc.9 Strathmore RoadNatick, MA 01760-2418Alternate: Nicolas Ponchaut


James S. Conrad

PrincipalRSCC Wire & Cable66 Mountain Laurel DriveTolland, CT 06084

M 3/15/2007

ROA-AAA

John A. Dalton

PrincipalW.R. Grace62 Whittemore AvenueCambridge, MA 02140

M 8/9/2011ROA-AAA

Alexandre Debs

PrincipalMinistere Des Transports Du Quebec380, rue Saint-Antoine OuestBureau W-206Montreal, QC H2Y 3X7 Canada

E 10/20/2010

ROA-AAA

Arnold Dix

PrincipalSchool Medicine, UWSLawyer/Scientist16 Sherman CourtBerwick, VIC 3806 Australia

C 3/21/2006ROA-AAA

Michael F. Fitzpatrick

PrincipalMassachusetts Department of Transportion6 Tracy CircleWilmington, MA 01887

E 10/20/2010

ROA-AAA

Norris Harvey

PrincipalHatch Mott MacDonald50 Oneida AvenueSelden, NY 11784-3736Alternate: Iain N. R. Bowman


Jason P. Huczek

PrincipalSouthwest Research Institute6220 Culebra Road, Building 143San Antonio, TX 78238-5166Alternate: Marc L. Janssens

RT 7/23/2008

ROA-AAA

Haukur Ingason

PrincipalSP Technical Research Institute of SwedenBrinellgatan 4Boras, SE-50115 SwedenAlternate: Anders Lönnermark

RT 8/5/2009ROA-AAA

Ahmed Kashef

PrincipalNational Research Council of Canada1200 Montreal Road, Building M59Ottawa, ON K1A 0R6 Canada

RT 7/23/2008

1



ROA-AAA

Joseph Kroboth, III

PrincipalLoudoun County VA801 Sycolin Road, Suite 310Leesburg, VA 20175

U 4/5/2001ROA-AAA

James D. Lake

PrincipalNational Fire Sprinkler Association, Inc.12 Clearwater DrivePlymouth, MA 02360-1567International Fire Sprinkler Association, Ltd.Alternate: Alan Brinson

M 08/11/2014

ROA-AAA

Igor Y. Maevski

PrincipalJacobs EngineeringTwo Penn Plaza, Suite 0603New York, NY 10121

SE 4/15/2004ROA-AAA

Zachary L. Magnone

PrincipalTyco Fire Protection Products1467 Elmwood AvenueCranston, RI 02910Alternate: Luke S. Connery

M 07/29/2013

ROA-AAA

Antonino Marino

PrincipalPort Authority of New York & New Jersey2 Gateway Center, 14th FloorNewark, NJ 07102

U 10/27/2009ROA-AAA

John Nelsen

PrincipalSeattle Fire DepartmentFire Prevention Division220 Third Avenue South, Floor 2Seattle, WA 98104-2608Alternate: Gary L. English

E 10/3/2002

ROA-AAA

Leendert Marinus Noordijk

PrincipalEfectis Nederland BVPO Box 554Bleiswijk, Zuid-Holland, 2665 ZN The NetherlandsAlternate: Tim Gian van der Waart van Gulik

RT 10/23/2013ROA-AAA

Maurice M. Pilette

PrincipalMechanical Designs Ltd.19 Erie DrivePO Box 2188Natick, MA 01760

SE 1/1/1991

ROA-AAA

David M. Plotkin

PrincipalAECOMTunnel Ventilation Group125 Broad Street, Suite 1500New York, NY 10004-2400Alternate: Nader Shahcheraghi

SE 8/9/2011ROA-AAA

Jesus M. Rohena

PrincipalUS Department of TransportationFederal Highway Administration1200 New Jersey Avenue, SEWashington, DC 20590

E 10/27/2005

ROA-AAA

Ana Ruiz

PrincipalTD&T LLCC/ Ríos Rosas, 44AMadrid, 28010 SpainMetro Malaga

U 10/29/2012ROA-AAA

Blake M. Shugarman

PrincipalUL LLC333 Pfingsten RoadNorthbrook, IL 60062-2096Alternate: Luke C. Woods

RT 10/28/2014

2



ROA-AAA

Dirk K. Sprakel

PrincipalFOGTEC Fire Protection GmbH & Co KGSchanzenstrasse 19AKoln, 51063 GermanyAlternate: Max Lakkonen

M 3/15/2007ROA-AAA

Peter J. Sturm

PrincipalGraz University of TechnologyInffeldgasse 21AGraz, 8010 Austria

SE 10/29/2012

ROA-AAA

Anthony Tedesco

PrincipalFire Department City of New York9 MetroTech CenterBrooklyn, NY 11201Alternate: Kevin P. Harrison

E 08/09/2012ROA-AAA

Rene van den Bosch

PrincipalPromat BV The NetherlandsBinnenhof 10Krimpen aan den IJssel, 2926RA The NetherlandsAlternate: Paul W. Sparrow

M 4/15/2004

ROA-AAA

Adrian Cheong Wah Onn

PrincipalLand Transport Authority, Singapore1 Hampshire Road, Block 10, Level 3Singapore, S219428 SingaporeAlternate: Leong Kwok Weng

U 10/18/2011ROA-AAA

Iain N. R. Bowman

AlternateHatch Mott MacDonald1010-1066 West Hastings StreetVancouver, BC V6E 3X2 CanadaPrincipal: Norris Harvey

SE 08/11/2014

ROA-AAA

Alan Brinson

AlternateEuropean Fire Sprinkler Network70 Upper Richmond RoadLondon, SW15 2RP United KingdomInternational Fire Sprinkler Association, Ltd.Principal: James D. Lake

M 4/14/2005ROA-AAA

Luke S. Connery

AlternateTyco Fire Protection Products1467 Elmwood AvenueCranston, RI 02910-3849Principal: Zachary L. Magnone

M 08/11/2014

ROA-AAA

Daniel T. Dirgins

AlternatePB Americas, Inc.75 Arlington Street, 9th FloorBoston, MA 02116Principal: William G. Connell

SE 3/15/2007ROA-AAA

Gary L. English

AlternateSeattle Fire Department220 Third Avenue SouthSeattle, WA 98104Principal: John Nelsen

E 10/28/2008

ROA-AAA

Kevin P. Harrison

AlternateFire Department City of New York71 Mount Salem RoadPort Jervis, NY 12771Principal: Anthony Tedesco

E 08/09/2012ROA-AAA

Marc L. Janssens

AlternateSouthwest Research InstituteFire Technology6220 Culebra Road, Building 143San Antonio, TX 78238-5166Principal: Jason P. Huczek

RT 7/23/2008

ROA-AAA

Max Lakkonen

AlternateFOGTEC Fire Protection GmbH & Co KGSchanzenstrasse 19ACologne, 51063 GermanyPrincipal: Dirk K. Sprakel

M 03/07/2013

3



ROA-AAA

Anders Lönnermark

AlternateSP Fire TechnologyBox 857Brinellgatan 4Borås, SE-50115 SwedenPrincipal: Haukur Ingason


Nicolas Ponchaut

AlternateExponent, Inc.9 Strathmore RoadNatick, MA 01760-2418Principal: Francesco Colella

SE 08/11/2014

ROA-AAA

Nader Shahcheraghi

AlternateAECOM2101 Webster Street, Suite 1000Oakland, CA 94612-3060Principal: David M. Plotkin

SE 8/9/2011ROA-AAA

Paul W. Sparrow

AlternatePromat UKSterling Centre, Eastern RoadBracknell, Berkshire, RG12 2TD United KingdomPrincipal: Rene van den Bosch

M 03/05/2012

ROA-AAA

Tim Gian van der Waart van Gulik

AlternateEffectis Nederland BVPO Box 554BleiswijkZuid-Holland, 2665 ZN The NetherlandsPrincipal: Leendert Marinus Noordijk


Leong Kwok Weng

AlternateLand Transport Authority, Singapore1 Hampshire Road, Block 10, Level 3Singapore, S219429 SingaporePrincipal: Adrian Cheong Wah Onn

U 7/23/2008

ROA-AAA

Luke C. Woods

AlternateUL LLC146 Nathaniel DriveWhitinsville, MA 01588-1070Principal: Blake M. Shugarman


Arthur G. Bendelius

Member EmeritusA&G Consultants, Inc.11391 Big CanoeBig Canoe, GA 30143-5108

SE 4/1/1993

ROA-AAA

Chad Duffy

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

02/04/2017

4