first draft meeting of the correlating committee on fire ... · fae-aac james s. johnson principal...

First Draft Meeting of the Correlating Committee on Fire and Emergency Services

Protective Clothing and Equipment July 7th, 2016

Adobe Connect/Teleconference Agenda

Introduction: Bill Haskell, Chair – 11:30 a.m.

Introductions by Members and Guests

Chairman’s Remarks – Bill Haskell

NFPA Staff Liaison Report – Chris Farrell

Approval of Minutes from the May 16, 2016 Meeting

PPE Project Reorganization

NFPA 1855, 1858, 1981, 1982 First Draft Review

Firefighter Hazard Environment Task Group Update – Dan Rossos, TG Chair

Product Label Font Sized – Christina Baxter & TC Chairs

Eye and Face Protection across PC&E Standards and NFPA 1500 – Robert Tutterow

Technical Data Package Requirements in PC&E Standards Chapter 4 – Group Discussion

Product Certification Testing Results Reporting Format and Requirements – Jeff Stull/ALL

Need for Protective Ensemble Standard for other than Structural Fire Fighting – Group Discussion

ISO Committee Updates – Dave Mathews & Russ Shepard

Technical Committee Chair Reports

o TC on ELS: R. Athanas

o TC on EMS: T. Hock

o TC on HAZ: C. Baxter

o TC on RPE: D. Rossos

o TC on SCE: J. Metz

o TC on SPF: S. King

o TC on TTO: B. Montgomery

o TC on WFF: R Swan

Old Business

New Business

Next Correlating Committee Meeting, dates and location

Planned Adjourn – 3:30pm

Address List No PhoneFire and Emergency Services Protective Clothing and Equipment FAE-AAC

Chris Farrell06/28/2016

FAE-AACWilliam E. Haskell, IIIChairNational Institute for Occupational Safety & HealthNational Personal Protective Technology Laboratory8 Ivanhoe LaneAndover, MA 01810Alternate: Jonathan V. Szalajda

E 10/6/2000FAE-AAC

Jason L. AllenPrincipalIntertek Testing Services3933 US Route 11 Cortland, NY 13045-9715Alternate: Pamela A. Kavalesky

RT 9/30/2004

FAE-AACJames B. AreaPrincipalChimera Enterprises International20th CBRNE CommandPO Box 299Charlestown, MD 21914

SE 04/05/2016FAE-AAC

Joseph ArringtonPrincipalSan Antonio Fire DepartmentTexas Task Force 11443 Clementson DriveSan Antonio, TX 78260-6279

U 03/07/2013

FAE-AACRoger L. BarkerPrincipalNorth Carolina State UniversityCollege of Textiles2401 Research Drive, Box 8301Raleigh, NC 27695-8301Alternate: Donald B. Thompson

SE 1/15/2004FAE-AAC

James E. BrinkleyPrincipalInternational Association of Fire Fighters1750 New York Avenue, NWWashington, DC 20006-5395International Association of Fire Fighters

L 07/29/2013

FAE-AACSteven D. CorradoPrincipalUL LLC12 Laboratory Drive PO Box 13995Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-3995Alternate: Amanda H. Newsom

RT 1/15/2004FAE-AAC

Cristine Z. FargoPrincipalInternational Safety Equipment Association1901 North Moore Street, Suite 808Arliington, VA 22209Alternate: Tim J. Gardner

M 10/27/2009

FAE-AACRobert A. FreesePrincipalGlobe Manufacturing Company37 Loudon RoadPO Box 128Pittsfield, NH 03263-0128Alternate: Patricia A. Freeman

M 10/1/1994FAE-AAC

Patricia A. GleasonPrincipalASTM/Safety Equipment Institute (SEI)1307 Dolley Madison Boulevard., Suite 3AMcLean, VA 22101Alternate: Stephen R. Sanders

RT 7/1/1995

FAE-AACDavid V. HastonPrincipalUS Department of AgricultureForest ServiceNational Interagency Fire Center3833 South Development Avenue Boise, ID 83705-5354Alternate: Anthony Petrilli

E 3/4/2008FAE-AAC

Diane B. HessPrincipalPBI Performance Products, Inc.9800D Southern Pine BoulevardCharlotte, NC 28273-5522Alternate: Jian Xiang

M 04/08/2015

1



FAE-AACThomas M. HoseaPrincipalUS Department of the NavyNaval Surface Warfare Center-Panama City Division110 Vernon Avenue, Code E14Panama City, FL 32407

RT 08/09/2012FAE-AAC

James S. JohnsonPrincipalLawrence Livermore National Laboratory7867 Cypress Creek CourtPleasanton, CA 94588

RT 10/1/1994

FAE-AACJeff LegendrePrincipalNorthborough Fire Department10 Juniper Brook RoadNorthborough, MA 01532

U 10/29/2012FAE-AAC

Karen E. LehtonenPrincipalLion Group, Inc.7200 Poe Avenue, Suite 400Dayton, OH 45414

M 7/26/2007

FAE-AACDavid G. MatthewsPrincipalFire & Industrial (P.P.E) Ltd.Rose Farm, Chapel RoadNecton Norfolk , PE37 8JA United KingdomInternational Standards OrganizationAlternate: Russell Shephard

SE 10/1/1994FAE-AAC

Michael F. McKennaPrincipalMichael McKenna & Associates, LLC8511 St. Germaine CourtRoseville, CA 95747-6342Alternate: David P. Stoddard

SE 10/18/2011

FAE-AACJack E. ReallPrincipalColumbus (OH) Division of Fire12191 North Old 3C RoadSunbury, OH 43074-9720Columbus Firefighters Union

L 08/09/2012FAE-AAC

Jeffrey O. StullPrincipalInternational Personnel Protection, Inc.PO Box 92493Austin, TX 78709-2493Alternate: Grace G. Stull

M 1/1/1995

FAE-AACTim W. TomlinsonPrincipalAddison Fire DepartmentGear Cleaning Solutions, LLC2221 Manana Drive, Suite 190Dallas, TX 75220-7118

C 10/29/2012FAE-AAC

Robert D. Tutterow, Jr.PrincipalFire Industry Equipment Research Organization (FIERO)1029 Lansdowne RoadCharlotte, NC 28270NFPA Fire Service SectionAlternate: Gary L. Neilson

U 10/06/1995

FAE-AACWilliam A. Van LentPrincipalVeridian Ltd., Inc.3710 West Milwaukee StreetSpencer, IA 51301Fire & Emergency Manufacturers & Services AssociationAlternate: Louis Carpentier

M 3/2/2010FAE-AAC

Bruce H. VarnerPrincipalBHVarner & Associates14175 W. Indian School, Suite B4-419Goodyear, AZ 85395International Fire Service Training Association

M 1/1/1994

FAE-AACSteven H. WeinsteinPrincipalHoneywell Safety Products3001 South Susan StreetSanta Ana, CA 92704-6434

M 04/05/2016FAE-AAC

Richard WeisePrincipalLos Angeles County Fire Department19175 Vista De Montanas Murrieta, CA 92562-9105

U 04/05/2016

2



FAE-AACHarry P. WinerPrincipalHIP Consulting LLCPO Box 344Ashland, MA 01721


Benjamin MautiVoting AlternateMine Safety Appliances Company1100 Cranberry Woods Drive Cranberry Twp, PA 16066-5208Compressed Gas Association

M 08/17/2015

FAE-AACJudge W. MorganVoting AlternateTyco/Scott Safety4320 Goldmine RoadMonroe, CA 28110-7355

M 04/08/2015FAE-AAC

Louis CarpentierAlternateInnotex Inc.275, Gouin StreetRichmond, QC J0B 2H0 CanadaFire & Emergency Manufacturers & Services AssociationPrincipal: William A. Van Lent

M 3/2/2010

FAE-AACPatricia A. FreemanAlternateGlobe Manufacturing Company, LLC37 Loudon RoadPittsfield, NH 03263Principal: Robert A. Freese

M 1/1/1996FAE-AAC

Tim J. GardnerAlternate3M CompanyPersonal Safety Division3M Center, 235-2E-91St. Paul, MN 55144-1000International Safety Equipment AssociationPrincipal: Cristine Z. Fargo

M 07/29/2013

FAE-AACPamela A. KavaleskyAlternateIntertek Testing Services3933 US Route 11 Cortland, NY 13045-9717Principal: Jason L. Allen


Gary L. NeilsonAlternate40 Martell PlaceSparks, NV 89441NFPA Fire Service SectionPrincipal: Robert D. Tutterow, Jr.

U 3/21/2006

FAE-AACAmanda H. NewsomAlternateUL LLC12 Laboratory DrivePO Box 13995Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-3995Principal: Steven D. Corrado


Anthony PetrilliAlternateUS Department of AgricultureForest ServiceTechnology & Development Center5785 West BroadwayMissoula, MT 59808Principal: David V. Haston

E 08/09/2012

FAE-AACStephen R. SandersAlternateASTM/Safety Equipment Institute (SEI)1307 Dolley Madison Blvd., Suite 3A McLean, VA 22101Principal: Patricia A. Gleason

RT 4/5/2001FAE-AAC

Russell ShephardAlternateAustralasian Fire & Emergency Service Authorities Council9 Reid Place, KambahCanberra, ACT, 2902 AustraliaInternational Standards OrganizationPrincipal: David G. Matthews

SE 03/07/2013

3



FAE-AACDavid P. StoddardAlternateMichael McKenna & Associates, LLC4650 Riverview RoadPlacerville, CA 95667Principal: Michael F. McKenna


Grace G. StullAlternateInternational Personnel Protection, Inc.PO Box 92493Austin, TX 78709-2493Principal: Jeffrey O. Stull

M 10/28/2008

FAE-AACJonathan V. SzalajdaAlternateNational Institute for Occupational Safety & HealthNational Personal Protective Technology Laboratory626 Cochrans Mill RoadPO Box 18070Pittsburgh, PA 15236Principal: William E. Haskell, III

E 03/07/2013FAE-AAC

Donald B. ThompsonAlternateNorth Carolina State UniversityCollege of TextilesTextile Protection & Comfort Center2401 Research Drive, Box 8301, NCSURaleigh, NC 27695-8301Principal: Roger L. Barker

SE 3/15/2007

FAE-AACJian XiangAlternateThe DuPont Company, Inc.5401 Jefferson Davis HighwayRichmond, VA 23234-2257Principal: Diane B. Hess

M 04/08/2015FAE-AAC

Robert J. AthanasNonvoting MemberFDNY/SAFE-IR, Incorporated110 Jefferson RoadMontgomery, NY 12549TC on Electronic Safety Equipment

U 08/09/2012

FAE-AACChristina M. BaxterNonvoting MemberUS Department of DefenseCTTSO/TSWG4800 Mark Center Arlington, VA 22350-2600TC on Hazardous Materials PC&E

E 10/20/2010FAE-AAC

Tricia L. HockNonvoting MemberASTM/Safety Equipment Institute (SEI)1307 Dolley Madison Blvd., Suite 3A McLean, VA 22101TC on Emergency Medical Services PC&E

RT 10/23/2013

FAE-AACStephen J. KingNonvoting Member37 Lucinda DriveBabylon, NY 11702-3703TC on Structural and Proximity Fire Fighting PC&E

SE 7/28/2006FAE-AAC

Jeremy MetzNonvoting MemberWest Metro Fire Rescue433 South Allison ParkwayLakewood, CO 80226TC on Special Operations PC&E

U 03/03/2014

FAE-AACBrian MontgomeryNonvoting MemberUS Department of JusticeNational Institute of Justice810 7th Street NWWashington, DC 20531

E 03/07/2013FAE-AAC

Daniel N. RossosNonvoting MemberOregon Department of Public Safety Standards & Training40640 SE George RoadEstacada, OR 97023-8731TC on Respiratory Protection Equipment

E 03/15/2007

4



FAE-AACRick L. SwanNonvoting MemberIAFF Local 2881/CDF Fire Fighters979 Powhatan StreetAlexandria, VA 22314-1360TC on Wildland Fire Fighting PC&E

L 11/14/2006FAE-AAC

Chris FarrellStaff LiaisonNational Fire Protection Association1 Batterymarch ParkQuincy, MA 02169-7471

03/26/2015

5

1

MINUTES OF THE MEETING

NFPA CORRELATING COMMITTEE ON FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES

PROTECTIVE CLOTHING AND EQUIPMENT

1983, 1986, 1992 & 1994 CC SECOND DRAFT MEETING

ADOBE CONNECT / TELECONFERENCE MAY 16, 2016

16 May 2016 Agenda Items 1, 2 and 3: Call to Order, Roll Call of Members and Guests, Chairman’s Remarks Correlating Committee Chairman Bill Haskell called the meeting to order at 11:30 a.m. and a roll call of members was conducted. Guests were asked to identify themselves. The following members and guests were present: Principal Members, Alternates (A), and Non-voting (NV) members present:

Bill Haskell, Chairman NIOSH-NPPTL Ben Mauti, Acting Secretary MSA Safety / Compressed Gas Association Chris Farrell, Staff Liaison NFPA Jason Allen Intertek Testing Services Joseph Arrington San Antonio Fire Department James Brinkley International Association of Firefighters Cristine Fargo International Safety Equipment Association Robert Freese Globe Manufacturing Company Tim Gardner 3M Company Patricia Gleason Safety Equipment Institute Diane Hess PBI Performance Products, Inc. Stephen King (NV) TC on Structural and Proximity Fire PC&E Karen Lehtonen Lion Apparel, Inc. Brian Montgomery (NV) TC on Tactical and Technical Operations RPE Amanda Newsom Underwriters Laboratory, LLC Jack Reall Columbus Division of Fire Dan Rossos (NV) TC on Respiratory Protective Equipment Jeffrey Stull International Personal Protection, Inc. Rick Swan (NV) TC on Wildland Fire Fighting PC&E Donald Thompson North Carolina State University Tim Tomlinson Addison Fire Department, Gear Cleaning Solutions Robert Tutterow Fire Industry Equipment Research Organization Bruce Varner BH Varner & Associates Harry Winer HIP Consulting, LLC

Guests Present:

John Morris Scott Health & Safety

2

Marni Schmid Fortunes Collide Marketing Cedric Smith CMC Rescue, Inc. Beverly Stutts Underwriters Laboratory, LLC

Chairman Haskell welcomed the committee and provided opening remarks. The committee discussed public access to presentations made during Correlating Committee meetings. Presentations are copyrighted, and NFPA does not own those copyrights. The NFPA can only publish presentations if the presenter signs a copyright permission form. Chairman Haskell noted that the Correlating Committee would seek to have a copyright permission form signed in advance of a presentation, so that there is increased transparency. It was also noted that if anyone disagrees with presentation materials they must rebut the presentation during the meeting, or wait until the next Correlating Committee meeting. There is no ability for a formal rebuttal in between Correlating Committee meetings.

Agenda Item 4: Approval of the January 7-8, 2016 New Orleans CC Meeting The Minutes of the CC meeting held on January 7-8 were approved without changes by unanimous consent.

MOTION BY BRUCE VARNER, SECOND BY JOSEPH ARRINGTON

To approve the minutes of the January 7-8, 2016 CC Meeting Minutes.

MOTION CARRIED

Agenda Item 5: NFPA Staff Liaison Report Chris Farrell provided the NFPA Staff Liaison Report.

Agenda Item 6: PPE Project Reorganization: Next Steps in the Process Chris Farrell provided an update on this project. The plan was shared with the Correlating Committee via email, and shows the plan through the year 2025. Chris requested the Committee review this plan prior to the July 7 Committee meeting.

Agenda Item 7: NFPA 1983 – Second Draft Review The second draft and ballot results were reviewed by Chairman Metz and discussed by the committee. The document will move forward to a ballot of the Correlating Committee.

MOTION BY KAREN LEHTONEN, SECOND BY PAT GLEASON

To make a second correlating revision to Section 2.3.4: add ISO 9001, 2015 Edition

MOTION CARRIED

3

Agenda Item 8: NFPA 1986 – Second Draft Review The second draft and ballot results were reviewed by Chairman Montgomery and discussed by the committee. The document will move forward to a ballot of the Correlating Committee.

MOTION BY BRIAN MONTGOMERY SECOND BY PAT GLEASON

To make an editorial second correlating revision to Section 7.3.1: Replace “3 1/1 inches” with “3 ½ inches”

MOTION CARRIED

MOTION BY BRIAN MONTGOMERY SECOND BY PAT GLEASON

To make a second correlating revision to Section 7.2.2.1: Change the period to a comma, and add: “and the EOSTI shall operate as specified in 6.2.2 and shall continue to operate throughout the remainder of

the test.”

MOTION CARRIED

Agenda Item 9: NFPA 1992 & 1994 - Second Draft Review The second draft and ballot results were reviewed by Jeff Stull on behalf of Chairwoman Baxter and discussed by the committee. The documents will move forward to a ballot of the Correlating Committee.

Agenda Item 10: ISO Committee Update No update provided. An update will be provided at the July 7 Correlating Committee meeting.

Agenda Item 11: ISO 9001, 2008 Edition – 2015 Edition; Compliance No update provided. An update will be provided at the July 7 Correlating Committee meeting.

Agenda Item 12: Firefighter Hazard Environment Task Group Update Task Group Chair Dan Rossos provided an update of the TG work. Additional updates will be provided as needed at future Correlating Committee meetings.

Agenda Item 13: NFPA TC on Fire Hose & Operational Environment Task Group No update provided. An update will be provided at the July 7 Correlating Committee meeting.

Agenda Item 14: Project Definitions Task Group Update

4

Task Group Chair Karen Lehtonen provided an update of the TG work. Additional updates will be provided as needed at future Correlating Committee meetings.

Agenda Item 15: Technical Committee Chair Reports

TC on ELS: R. Athanas: TC has an upcoming meeting to discuss 1801 and to continue development of the handheld radio standard. The TC has also been working on the PASS sound in 1982. There will be a proposal ready for public comment in the fall.

TC on EMS: T. Hock: Public comments closing today, over 70 received. Second draft will be reviewed at upcoming meeting in Quincy.

TC on HAZ: C. Baxter: No additional update.

TC on RPE: D. Rossos: TC had a productive 1981 first draft meeting in March. Working through some topics, including NIOSH EOSTI time consistency, regulator pull out test, data logging, and universal fitting for buddy breather.

TC on SCE: J. Metz: Update provided by Chairman Metz.

TC on SPF: S. King: Bill Haskell provided an update on behalf of Chairman King. The TC is discussing the possibility of particulate barrier hoods as a new category of PPE. These new hoods are being developed in response to concerns over carcinogen exposure.

TC on TTO: B. Montgomery: Update provided by Chairman Montgomery

TC on WFF: R. Swan: 1977 published, along with the previously discussed TIA. 1877 is out and open for public input, closing 6/28/17.

Agenda Items 16 and 17: Old Business and New Business There was discussion around the practice of manufacturers selling a non-compliant product into the market when compliance is available (example was non-compliant SCBA OEM accessory). There are examples of this throughout the FESPCE project. The committee agreed that additional marketplace education was needed on the importance of NFPA compliance. The committee also agreed that the most impactful education would be from fire service industry organizations, and not only from manufacturers themselves. The next Correlating Committee meeting will be a web and teleconference on July 7, 2016. The next in person Correlating Committee meeting will be tentatively November 2-3, 2016.

Agenda Item 18: Adjournment Having no further business, the Chairman sought a motion to adjourn.

MOTION BY DIANE HESS, SECOND BY BRUCE VARNER

To Adjourn

MOTION CARRIED Chairman Haskell adjourned the meeting at 1530 on 16 May 2016. Respectfully submitted, Benjamin A. Mauti, Secretary CC on FESPCE

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

M E M O R A N D U M

TO: Technical Committee on Special Operations Protective Clothing and Equipment

FROM: Yvonne Smith, Project Administrator DATE: May 3, 2016

SUBJECT: NFPA 1855 First Draft Technical Committee FINAL Ballot Results (F2017)

According to the final ballot results, all ballot items received the necessary affirmative votes to pass ballot.

25 Members Eligible to Vote

5 Members Not Returned (Allen, Hess, Legros, McCurley, Stanhope) 20 Members Voted Affirmative on All Revisions (1 w/ comment: Lehtonen) 0 Members Voted Negative on one or more Revisions 0 Members Abstained on one or more Revisions The attached report shows the number of affirmative, negative, and abstaining votes as well as the explanation of the vote for each revision.

To pass ballot, each revision requires: (1) a simple majority of those eligible to vote and (2) an affirmative vote of 2/3 of ballots returned. See Sections 3.3.4.3.(c) and First Draft reference 4.3.10.1 of the Regulations Governing the Development of NFPA Standards.

First Revision No. 1-NFPA 1855-2016 [ Chapter 2 ]

Chapter 2 Referenced Publications

2.1 General.

The documents or portions thereof listed in this chapter are referenced within this standard and shall beconsidered part of the requirements of this document.

2.2 NFPA Publications.

National Fire Protection Association, 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02169-7471.

NFPA 70E®, Standard for Electrical Safety in the Workplace®, 2012 2018 edition.

NFPA 1500, Standard on Fire Department Occupational Safety and Health Program, 2013 2018 edition.

NFPA 1670, Standard on Operations and Training for Technical Search and Rescue Incidents, 2009 2017edition.

NFPA 1951, Standard on Protective Ensembles for Technical Rescue Incidents, 2013 2018 edition.

NFPA 1971, Standard on Protective Ensembles for Structural Fire Fighting and Proximity Fire Fighting,2013 2018 edition.

NFPA 1977, Standard on Protective Clothing and Equipment for Wildland Fire Fighting, 2011 2016edition.

NFPA 1981, Standard on Open-Circuit Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) for EmergencyServices, 2013 2018 edition.

NFPA 1991, Standard on Vapor-Protective Ensembles for Hazardous Materials Emergencies, 2005 2016edition.

NFPA 1992, Standard on Liquid Splash-Protective Ensembles and Clothing for Hazardous MaterialsEmergencies, 2012 2017 edition.

NFPA 1994, Standard on Protective Ensembles for First Responders to CBRN Terrorism Incidents,2012 2017 edition.

NFPA 1999, Standard on Protective Clothing for Emergency Medical Operations, 2013 2018 edition.

2.3 Other Publications.

2.3.1 ACGIH Publications.

American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists, 1330 Kemper Meadow Drive, Cincinnati, OH45240-1634 .

ACGIH Publication No. 0112 0115 , 2012 2015 TLVs and BEIs.

2.3.2 ISO Publications.

International Organization for Standardization, 1, rue de Varembé, Case postale 56, CH-1211 Geneve 20,Switzerland ISO Central Secretariat, BIBC II, Chemin de Blandonnet 8, CP 401, 1214 Vernier, Geneva .

ISO 17011, Conformity assessment — General requirements for accreditation bodies accreditingconformity assessment bodies, 2004.

ISO/IEC Guide 65, General requirements for bodies operating product certification systems , 1996.

ISO/IEC 17025, General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories, 2005.

ISO/IEC 17065, Conformity assessment — Requirements for bodies certifying products, processes, andservices , 2012.

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

1 of 9 5/3/2016 1:03 PM

2.3.3 U.S. Government Publications.

U.S. Government Printing Publishing Office, 732 North Capitol Street NW, Washington, DC20402-9325 20401-0001 .

NIOSH Publication No 2005-149, NIOSH Pocket Guide to Chemical Hazards, September 2005.

USFA, Protective Clothing and Equipment Need of Emergency Responders to US & R Missions, 1993.

2.3.4 Other Publications.

Lewis, R., Hazardous Chemicals Desk Reference, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2002.

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

2.4 References for Extracts in Mandatory Sections. (Reserved)

Supplemental Information

File Name Description

1855-2013_Chapter_2_SR.docx For staff use

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Chris Farrell

Organization: [ Not Specified ]

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu Mar 03 09:15:47 EST 2016

Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Updating references and edition dates.

Response Message:

Public Input No. 1-NFPA 1855-2015 [Chapter 2]

Ballot Results

This item has passed ballot

25 Eligible Voters

5 Not Returned

19 Affirmative All

1 Affirmative with Comments

0 Negative with Comments

0 Abstention

Not Returned

Allen, Jason L.

Hess, Diane B.

Legros, Stephen

McCurley, Loui


2 of 9 5/3/2016 1:03 PM

Stanhope, Michael T.

Affirmative All

Arrington, Joseph

Beechner, Brian J.

Brads, Jamey B.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Geraghty, Stephen J.

Haskell, III, William E.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim

Krause, II, George R.

Metz, Jeremy

Mignogno, Craig P.

Nelson, Robert G.

Smith, Cedric

Stephenson, R. Douglas

Stinton, Robert

Affirmative with Comment

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Updates to referenced publications in sections 11.2.3 and A.5.1.1(10) were not made as part of the editorialchanges. The Correlating Committee and the Technical Committee should review these in second revision toensure the updates are made.


3 of 9 5/3/2016 1:03 PM

First Revision No. 3-NFPA 1855-2016 [ Section No. 7.3.8 ]

7.3.8*

The following procedures shall be used for machine washing:

(1)

(2)

(3) All closures, including pocket closures, hooks and loops, snaps, zippers, and hooks and dees shallbe fastened.

(4) All garments and separable barriers shall be placed into a mesh laundry bag for machine cleaning.

(5)

(6) A mild detergent with a pH range of not less than 6.0 pH and not greater than 10.5 pH as indicatedon the product MSDS or original product container shall be used.

(7) All tools and accessories shall be removed and not machine washed.

(8)

(9)

(10) The element shall be inspected and rewashed if necessary.

(11) All tools and accessories shall be removed and not machine dried.

(12)

(13) Cleaning and soaking agents shall not leave any residue or cause any degrading of the ensemble orensemble elements.



1855_A_7_3_8_8_Revised.docx




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

Regardless if machines are adjustable or not the maximum g limit should be 100g to limitdamage to ensemble elements.

* The machine shall not be overloaded.

* Heavily soiled or spotted areas shall be pretreated. Chlorine bleach, chlorinated solvents, active-ingredient cleaning agents, or solvents shall not be used without the ensemble or ensemble elementmanufacturer’s approval.

* Water temperature shall not exceed 40°C (105°F).

* Washing machines with the capability of drum RPM adjustment shall be adjusted so the g-forcedoes not exceed 100 g for all elements.

* Machine manufacturer’s instructions shall be followed for proper setting or program selection for thespecific element being washed.

* Where the machine is also used to wash items other than protective ensemble elements, it shall berinsed out by running the machine without a laundry load through a complete cycle with detergentand filled to the maximum level with water at a temperature of 49°C to 52°C (120°F to 125°F).


4 of 9 5/3/2016 1:03 PM

ResponseMessage:

Public Input No. 3-NFPA 1855-2016 [Section No. 7.3.8]

Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

5 Not Returned

20 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Allen, Jason L.

Hess, Diane B.

Legros, Stephen

McCurley, Loui


Affirmative All

Arrington, Joseph

Beechner, Brian J.

Brads, Jamey B.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.



Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Lehtonen, Karen E.

Metz, Jeremy

Mignogno, Craig P.

Nelson, Robert G.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


5 of 9 5/3/2016 1:03 PM

A.7.3.8(8) Preliminary research suggests excessive g forces created by washing machine drums that spin at high RPMs can damage protective garments. Extracting at high RPMs creates very high g forces. The type and severity of damage will depend on the g forces created, exposure time, the number of exposures, condition of the ensemble or ensemble element, and the materials used to construct the ensemble or element. Barrier materials are the most vulnerable. . Barrier materials and seams by their very nature are designed to impede the flow of water. Extraction at excessively high RPMs can severely damage barrier materials and barrier material seams as water pushes against the barriers in an attempt to escape toward the outer perimeter of the drum. A vast majority of ISPs are monitoring extraction RPMs and have adjusted their commercial machines to create less than 100 g force when cleaning all protective ensembles and ensemble elements. Controlling the RPM of laundering machines used for protective ensemble and ensemble element laundering preserves the integrity and increases the longevity of PPE elements.

Extractor g forces can be calculated using the following formula Gforce = (RPM2 x Diameter in inches)/75,500

First Revision No. 2-NFPA 1855-2016 [ Chapter B ]

Annex B Informational References

B.1 Referenced Publications.

The documents or portions thereof listed in this annex are referenced within the informational sections ofthis standard and are not part of the requirements of this document unless also listed in Chapter 2 forother reasons.

B.1.1 NFPA Publications.



NFPA 1521, Standard for Fire Department Safety Officer, 2008 2015 edition.

NFPA 1581, Standard on Fire Department Infection Control Program, 2010 2015 edition.

NFPA 1951, Standard on Protective Ensembles for Technical Rescue Incidents, 2013 2018 edition.


NFPA 1991, Standard on Vapor-Protective Ensembles for Hazardous Materials Emergencies, 2005 2016edition.

NFPA 1994, Standard on Protective Ensembles for First Responders to CBRN Terrorism Incidents,2012 2017 edition.

NFPA 1999, Standard on Protective Clothing for Emergency Medical Operations, 2013 2018 edition.

B.1.2 Other Publications.

B.1.2.1 AATCC Publications.

American Association of Textile Chemists and Colorists, P.O. Box 12215, Research Triangle Park, NC27709-2215.

AATCC 127, Water Resistance: Hydrostatic Pressure Test, 2003 2014 .

B.1.2.2 ANSI Publications.

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

ANSI/ISEA Z87.1, Occupational and Educational Eye and Face Protection Devices, 2010 2015 .

B.1.2.3 ASTM Publications.

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

ASTM F 1731 F1731 , Standard Practice for Body Measurements and Sizing of Fire and Rescue ServicesUniforms and Other Thermal Hazard Protective Clothing, 1996 (2008) 2013 edition.

ASTM F 1930 F1930 , Standard Test Method for Evaluation of Flame Resistant Clothing for ProtectionAgainst Flash Fire Simulations Using an Instrumented Manikin, 2011 2015 .

ASTM STP 1237, Performance of Protective Clothing, 5th Volume, 1996.


6 of 9 5/3/2016 1:03 PM

B.1.2.4 EPA Publications.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Government Printing Office, Superintendent ofDocuments William Jefferson Clinton East Building, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW , Washington, DC20402-9325 20460 .

EPA SW-846, Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods (The specificmethods cited can be downloaded at http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/test/SW846.htm): Method3015, “Microwave Assisted Acid Digestion of Aqueous Samples and Extracts,” September 1994; Method3540, “Soxhlet Extraction,” Revision 3, December 1996; Method 6010, “Inductively Coupled Plasma-Atomic Emission Spectrometry,” Revision 2, December 1996; and Method 8270, “Semivolatile OrganicCompounds by Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS),” Revision 3, December 1996.

B.1.2.5 IAFC Publications.

International Association of Fire Chiefs, 4025 Fair Ridge Drive, Suite 300, Fairfax, VA 22033-2868.

www.iafc.org. LODD Response Plan (downloadable from IAFC website; click on Resources, DownloadDocuments, Health & Safety, Line of Duty Deaths, Investigation).

B.1.2.6 IAFF Publications.

International Association of Fire Fighters, 1750 New York Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20006-5395.

Line of Duty Notification, Assistance, and Investigation Policy, 2010. Available at www.iaff.org/safe/lodd.html www.iaff.org/safe/lodd.html .

http://www.iaff.org/HS/LODD/Uploads/Notification%20and%20Investigation%20Policy.pdf

B.1.2.7 ISO Publications.

International Organization for Standardization, 1, rue de Varembé, Case postale 56, CH-1211 Geneve 20,Switzerland ISO Central Secretariat, BIBC II, Chemin de Blandonnet 8, CP 401, 1214 Vernier, Geneva .

ISO/IEC Guide 65, General requirements for bodies operating product certification systems , 1996edition.

ISO 9000, Quality management systems — Fundamentals and vocabulary, 2005 2015 .

B.1.2.8 USFA Publications.

U.S. Fire Administration, 16825 South Seton Avenue, Emmitsburg, MD 21727.

Research, Testing, and Analysis on the Decontamination of Fire Fighting Protective Clothing andEquipment.

B.1.2.9 U.S. Government Publications.

U.S. Government Printing Publishing Office, Superintendent of Documents, Washington, DC20402-9325. Phone: 202-512-1800 732 North Capitol St NW, Washington DC, 20401-0001 . www.gpo.gov

Title 29, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 1910.120, “Hazardous Waste Operations and EmergencyResponse,” August 22, 1994 July 1, 2013 .

B.2 Informational References. (Reserved)

ISO/IEC 17065 , Conformity assessment – Requirements for bodies certifying products, processes, andservices, 2012.

ISO 9001, Quality management systems – requirements , 2008.

ISO 9001, Quality management systems – requirements , 2015.

B.3 References for Extracts in Informational Sections. (Reserved)



1855-2013_Annex_B_SR.docx For staff use



7 of 9 5/3/2016 1:03 PM



Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Updating references and edition dates.

Response Message:

Public Input No. 2-NFPA 1855-2015 [Chapter B]

Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

5 Not Returned

20 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Allen, Jason L.

Hess, Diane B.

Legros, Stephen

McCurley, Loui


Affirmative All

Arrington, Joseph

Beechner, Brian J.

Brads, Jamey B.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.



Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


8 of 9 5/3/2016 1:03 PM


Lehtonen, Karen E.

Metz, Jeremy

Mignogno, Craig P.

Nelson, Robert G.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


9 of 9 5/3/2016 1:03 PM


M E M O R A N D U M

TO: Technical Committee on Special Operations Protective Clothing and Equipment

FROM: Yvonne Smith, Project Administrator DATE: May 16, 2016

SUBJECT: NFPA 1858 First Draft Technical Committee FINAL Ballot Results (F2017)



4 Members Not Returned (Arrington, McCurley, Metz, Paderick) 21 Members Voted Affirmative on All Revisions (0 w/ comment) 0 Members Voted Negative on one or more Revisions 0 Members Abstained on one or more Revisions The attached report shows the number of affirmative, negative, and abstaining votes as well as the explanation of the vote for each revision.


First Revision No. 3-NFPA 1858-2016 [ Global Input ]

6.2.5.1, 6.2.5.2, 6.2.5.3, 6.2.5.4, 6.2.5.5, 6.2.5.6, 6.2.5.7, 6.2.5.8, 6.2.5.9, 6.2.5.10, 6.2.5.11,6.2.5.12, 6.2.5.13, 6.2.5.14, 6.2.5.15

Change first sentence in all cases after the word "service" to read "if inspection revealsdamage resulting in a performance deficiency due to:"




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

Better describes when a piece of equipment shall be taken out of service. The word "defect" is usedmost accurately to refer to an inherent fault or imperfection. While these are important, what we arereally looking for in ongoing inspections are "deficiencies"...which may be due to an inherent defect,or it may be due to damage, wear, degradation over time, contamination, or any number of factors.

ResponseMessage:

Public Input No. 29-NFPA 1858-2016 [Global Input]


Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui


1 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


2 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

First Revision No. 37-NFPA 1858-2016 [ Global Input ]

Replace the word "textile" with "software" throughout the document.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Replacing textile with software to remain consistent with rest of project.

Response Message:

Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.


3 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


4 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

First Revision No. 67-NFPA 1858-2016 [ Detail ]

Make the following changes to the title of Section 6.2:

6.2 Periodic Inspection Procedures.


Submitter Full Name: Sonia Barbosa


Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Mar 18 15:39:30 EDT 2016

Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Better defines the inspection intervals and procedures.

Response Message:

Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.


5 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


6 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


1.1.1

This standard shall specify the minimum selection, care, and maintenance requirements for life safetyrope, escape rope and webbing, water rescue throwlines, moderate elongation laid life saving rope, lifesafety harnesses, belts, auxiliary equipment, litters, and victim extrication devices for emergency servicespersonnel and associated equipment that are compliant with NFPA 1983.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

Ease of cross reference between 1858 and 1983. Will also minimize errors if, and when,changes are made to categories in 1983

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.


7 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


8 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


1.1.2

This standard shall also specify minimum selection, care, and maintenance requirements for life safetyrope, escape rope and webbing, water rescue throwlines, moderate elongation laid life saving rope, lifesafety harnesses, belts, auxiliary equipment, litters, and victim extrication devices for emergency servicespersonnel and associated equipment that are compliant with the previous editions of NFPA 1983.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Ease of cross reference between 1858 and 1983.

Response Message:


Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.


9 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


10 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


1.1.3

This standard shall not specify selection, care, and maintenance requirements for any accessories thatcould be attached to the certified product and are not necessary for the certified product to meet therequirements of this standard.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: The scope of the document does not specify requirements for accessories.

Response Message:


Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.


11 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


12 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


1.1.4

This standard shall not specify requirements for any utility rope.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Document scope does not cover use of utility rope.

Response Message:


Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul


13 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


14 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


1.1.5

This standard shall not specify requirements for any rope or associated equipment designed formountain rescue, cave rescue, lead climbing operations, or where expected hazards and situationsdictate other performance requirements.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

Text is not necessary for this document. The document should stay focused on selection, careand maintenance of 1983 equipment. Furthermore, 1983 items are commonly used in theseenvironments, with many agencies mandating items be 1983 compliant.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.


15 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


16 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


1.1.4

This standard shall not specify selection, care, and maintenance requirements for any rope or equipmentfor fall protection or coworker-assisted rescue pertaining to employees of general industry or theconstruction and demolition industry.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Adding co-worker assisted rescue as addressed in ANSI Z359.4.

Response Message:



Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.


17 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


18 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


1.2.2

The purpose of this standard shall also be to establish basic criteria for selection, inspection, cleaning,decontamination, repair, storage, and retirement of life safety rope, escape rope and webbing, waterrescue throwlines, moderate elongation laid life saving rope, life safety harnesses, belts, auxiliaryequipment, litters, and victim extrication devices for emergency services personnel elements andassociated equipment that are compliant with NFPA 1983 .




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

Ease of cross reference between 1858 and 1983. Will also minimize errors if, and when,changes are made to categories in 1983

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All


19 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


20 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM



2.1 General.




NFPA 1006, Standard for Technical Rescuer Personnel Professional Qualifications, 2008 2017 edition.




NFPA 1983, Standard on Life Safety Rope and Equipment for Emergency Services, 2012 2017 edition.


2.3.1 ASTM Publications.

ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959.

ASTM F 1740 F1740 , Standard Guide for Inspection of Nylon, Polyester, or Nylon/Polyester Blend, orBoth Kernmantle Rope, 2007 2012 .

2.3.2 Cordage Institute Publications.

Cordage Institute, 994 Old Eagle School, Wayne, PA 19087-1866.

CI 1202, Terminology for Fiber Rope, February 2003 2013 .

CI 1801, Low Stretch/ and Static Kernmantle Life Safety Rope, 2007.

2.3.3 Other Publications .


2.4 References for Extracts in Mandatory Sections.

NFPA 1855, Standard on Selection, Care, and Maintenance of Protective Ensembles for TechnicalRescue Incidents, 2013 edition.

NFPA 1983, Standard on Life Safety Rope and Equipment for Emergency Services, 2017 edition.



1858-proposed_Chapter_2_SR.docx For staff use




Street Address:

City:

State:


21 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Zip:

Submittal Date: Sat Mar 05 11:34:50 EST 2016

Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Updating references

Response Message:

Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.


22 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


23 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

First Revision No. 40-NFPA 1858-2016 [ Section No. 3.3.29.1 ]

3.3.30.1* Design Load.

The load for which a given piece of equipment or manufactured system was engineered for under normalstatic conditions.



1858_A.3.3.29.1_FR_40.docx




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: New annex material for design loads

Response Message:

Public Input No. 58-NFPA 1858-2016 [New Section after A.3.3.20]

Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All


24 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


25 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

A.3.3.29.1

Design loads are used as a reference load for testing of products.

This does not constitute any endorsement on behalf of NFPA that

a product cannot or should not exceed this load. The designation

of a 1 person or 2 person load was removed from the standard

due to the misconception that items were not to exceed a single

person or two person load, dependent on the items designation.

Some items are tested with a 300 lb or 600 lb load, but the test

method results in forces being generated far exceeding the base

load. The AHJ must determine the equipment capability based on

manufacturer information, the intended use of the product and

the team capability in load or force calculations.

First Revision No. 1-NFPA 1858-2016 [ New Section after 3.3.40 ]

3.3.35 Organization.

The entity that provides the direct management and supervision for the emergency services personnel.[ 1855, 201 3 ]




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

Keep definition of organization consistent throughout the project. AHJ is a broaderreaching term.

Response Message:


Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.


26 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


27 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


3.3.39 Routine Inspection.

An inspection performed at least prior to using an item.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Tue Mar 08 07:32:33 EST 2016

Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Added new definition for clarity.

Response Message:

Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.


28 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


29 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


3.3.44 Thorough Inspection.

An in-depth inspection performed at intervals.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement


Response Message:

Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.


30 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


31 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


3.3.36 Predeployment inspection.

An inspection performed prior to making the item available for service.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement


Response Message:

Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.


32 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


33 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


3.3.10 Contamination/Contaminated.

The process by which life safety rope and equipment are exposed to hazardous materials, body fluids,or CBRN terrorism agents.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement


Response Message:

Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.


34 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


35 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


3.3.43 Soiled/Soiling.

The accumulation of materials that are not considered hazardous materials, body fluids, or CBRNterrorism agents but that could degrade the performance of the life safety rope and equipment.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement


Response Message:

Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.


36 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


37 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


3.3.42 Software.

A type of auxiliary equipment that includes, but is not limited to, anchor straps, pick-off straps, andrigging slings. [ 1983, 2017]




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Added definition from 1983 for clarity.

Response Message:

Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.


38 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


39 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


4.4.3

The organization shall retain and make accessible to organization personnel end users for referencepurposes a copy of the manufacturers’ instructions regarding the care, use, and maintenance of the lifesafety rope and equipment for reference purposes .




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Better defines who needs to have accessible documentation.

Response Message:


Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.


40 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


41 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


5.1.2

The organization shall refer to its risk and hazard assessment of the response area to determine the typesof incidents requiring life safety rope and equipment that could be encountered, including but not limitedto the following:

(1)

(2) Type of technical rescue incidents to which the organization plans to respond

(3) Frequency of each of these types of incidents

(4) Level of operational capability that the organization intends to maintain for each type of for technicalrescue incidents incident : awareness, operational, technician

(5) Maximizing response capabilities through cooperation with other response organizations,departments, or agencies

(6)

(7)



FR-22_A.5.1.2_6_.docx Annex (3) renumbered to (6)




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

Expand upon the factors needed to consider for a risk assessment. Added language to theannex to clarify that NFPA does not endorse a particular safety factor or ratio.

ResponseMessage:


Public Input No. 33-NFPA 1858-2016 [Section No. A.5.1.2(3)]

Public Input No. 54-NFPA 1858-2016 [Section No. A.5.1.2(3)]

Ballot Results


* Type of technical rescue incidents likely to occur in the response area to which the organizationplans to respond

* The organization’s established acceptable safety factors for technical rescue operations

* Geographic location and conditions


42 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


43 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

FR-22, annex material changes

A.5.1.2(6)—renumbered

NFPA 1983 divides life safety rope and equipment into two designations: general use and technical use.

NFPA does not establish or endorse a particular safety factor or ratio. Rescue organizations can elect to

use either technical use– or general use–labeled equipment based on the anticipated loads of the

incident; training/skill level of responders; and the AHJ’s established acceptable safety factors. What

safety factor(s) is deemed appropriate may vary based on the acceptable level of risk, severity of

consequences of a potential failure, types of technical rescues and the corresponding level of

operational capability of the organization. The AHJ should compile and evaluate information on the

comparative advantages and disadvantages of the life safety rope and equipment under consideration.

For example, an organization at the operational level performing a simple rescue might require the

higher strengths offered by general-use equipment. A highly trained or specialized organization

performing more complicated rescues might benefit from the lighter weight of technical-use equipment

but, due to the level of training, can maintain an acceptable safety factor while increasing the efficiency

of its operations. General-use equipment can provide greater durability and possibly an advantage for

incidents in which the anticipated system loads are difficult to estimate


5.1.4*

The organization shall ensure that elements under consideration are certified as being compliant with thecurrent edition of NFPA 1983, where applicable.



FR-23_A.5.1.4.docx




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

Providing additional text to clarify that NFPA 1983 equipment may not fit all functions of use.Added language to the annex clarifying NFPA or manufacturer does not certify products.

ResponseMessage:


Public Input No. 57-NFPA 1858-2016 [Section No. A.5.1.4]

Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean


44 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


45 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

FR-23 , annex material changes

A.5.1.4

NFPA DOES NOT CERTIFY PRODUCTS. A third party certification organization conducts the necessary evaluation and testing to constitute certification to the applicable NFPA standard. Manufacturers cannot make a self-declaration of products meeting the standard. From time to time, NFPA receives complaints that certain items of fire and emergency services protective clothing or protective equipment could be carrying labels falsely identifying them as compliant with an NFPA standard. The requirement for placing the certification organization's mark on or next to the product label is to help ensure that the purchaser can readily determine compliance of the respective product through independent third-party certification. NFPA advises those purchasing life safety rope or equipment to be aware that for life safety rope or equipment items to meet the requirements of NFPA 1983, they must be certified by an independent third-party certification organization. In addition, the item must carry the label, symbol, or other identifying mark of that certification organization.

A life safety rope or equipment item that does not bear the mark of an independent third-

party certification organization is not compliant with NFPA 1983, even if the product label

states that the item is compliant. For further information about certification and product labeling, see Chapters 4 and 5 of NFPA 1983. Also, the definitions for certification organization, certified, labeled, and listed in Chapter 3 of this standard should be reviewed. Third-party certification is an important means of ensuring the quality of emergency services protective clothing and equipment. To be certain that an item is properly certified, labeled, and listed, NFPA recommends that prospective purchasers require appropriate evidence of certification for the specific product and model from the manufacturer before purchasing. Prospective purchasers should also contact the certification organizations and request copies of the certification organization's list of products certified to the appropriate NFPA standard. Such a “listing” is a requirement of third-party certification by this standard and is a service performed by the certification organization. All NFPA standards on fire and emergency services protective clothing and equipment require that the item be certified by an independent third-party certification organization, and all items of fire and emergency services protective clothing and equipment must carry the label, symbol, or other identifying mark of that certification organization.

Any item of protective clothing or protective equipment covered by an NFPA standard that

does not bear the mark of an independent third-party certification organization is not

compliant with the appropriate NFPA standard, even if the product label states that the

item is compliant.


5.1.9

Upon receipt, Prior to placing life safety rope and equipment in service, the organization shallinspect designate an individual to inspect purchased life safety rope and equipment to determine that theproducts meet the organization’s specifications and were not damaged during shipment. The organizationshall also verify the quantity and sizes of the life safety rope and equipment received.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Clarifies when inspection is completed and who completes it.

Response Message:


Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.


46 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


47 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


5.2.7*

The total weight to be carried shall be considered since it determines the necessary length, as it isdetermined by length, diameter, and material of the rope.



FR-25_A.5.2.7.docx




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

Clarification on how weight is derived.

Annex: Commodity rope test methods sometimes do not actually test MBS but instead makeassumptions about strength based on weight per unit length. This has been known to be a problemwhen less than scrupulous manufacturers have "stuffed" material (such as paper) into the core of arope's construction.

ResponseMessage:



Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph


48 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


49 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

FR-25, annex material changes

A.5.2.7

The weight per unit length of a rope is one indicator of the amount of material used to produce a rope when comparing one rope construction to another. Generally speaking, a rope with a higher per meter weight will be stronger than a rope weighing less per meter when both are made from the same material. However, care should be taken with such an assumption because rope may also be “weighted” by other material. Consideration needs to be given to the length and the diameter of a rope and the weight of a given rope length for deployment and transportation to the site. Bigger is not necessarily better if a rope has to be carried long distances and an adequate safety factor could be provided with a smaller diameter rope.


5.11.3*

The organization’s selection of pulleys shall be based on the intended use, and the following criteria shallbe considered:

(1) Efficiency

(2) Single or double

(3) Ratchet

(4) Size Overall dimensions

(5) Sheave width Sheave width

(6) Sheave diameter

(7) Strength

(8) Compatibility with rope



1858_A.5.11.3_FR_26.docx




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Added elements to consider for selection.

Response Message:


Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention


50 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


51 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

A.5.11.3

The selection of the pulley for an intended application requires a consideration of several design features: efficiency, single or double sheaves, ratchet, and size.

(1) Efficiency. Pulley efficiency is essentially the rolling resistance of the sheave and the rope. Many factors affect efficiency, including sheave size, bearings, and side plate interaction. For most applications, a pulley with ball-bearing provides the highest efficiency and the differences efficiency between the ball-bearing pulleys are virtually insignificant.

(2) Single or Double Sheaves. Single-sheave pulleys are the most common and are used in most applications. Double pulleys allow a simpler way to rig a higher mechanical advantage and are often seen in pre-rigged pulley systems. Double pulleys can have a becket or attachment point at the bottom. In a mechanical advantage system using double pulleys, one of them usually requires a becket. NFPA 1983 has performance requirements for beckets.

(3) Ratchet. A ratchet is a means of holding the life safety rope when the operator releases it. A ratchet can be internal on a self-tending pulley or an independent device rigged with the pulley. Self-tending pulleys should be evaluated on the ratchet’s ability to support the load and the pulley's ability to be released remotely. Some require the load to be lifted first, others do not. If a Prusik hitch or similar knot is used as an independent ratchet, a flat-bottomed, or “Prusik minding,” pulley might be needed to prevent the knot from jamming between the sheaves.

(4) Overall dimensions. Manufacturers generally recommend that the minimum pulley sheave size be no less than four times the diameter of the rope, to reduce the loss of strength from compression and elongation of the rope fibers. For example, if a 1⁄2 in. life safety rope is used, a minimum of a 2 in. pulley should be selected. Smaller pulleys are lighter and more compact, and the strength loss down to a 1 in. pulley is minimal. A pulley with a larger sheave has a slightly higher efficiency than a smaller pulley with the same type bearing, but it is heavier and bulkier to store and transport.

(5) Sheave Width. Proper sheave width is necessary to prevent the life safety rope from dragging on the sideplates and reducing the pulley’s efficiency. Most pulleys accommodate 12.5 mm life safety rope and can also be used for 11 mm rope. Consideration should be given if a pulley is sized for 11 mm rope and the organization also uses 12.5 mm rope. If the organization uses 16 mm life safety rope, a wider sheave pulley will be required.


5.12.2*

The organization shall select a maximum impact load and arrest distance for its belay system.



1858_A.5.12.2_FR_28.docx




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Impact load was removed as that is a performance requirement for NFPA 1983.

Response Message:

Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.


52 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


53 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

A.5.12.2

The total stopping distance is the total distance traveled

after the belay device engages. To prevent injury to the

load, the total stopping distance should be minimized to

avoid impact with objects below.


5.12.3*

The organization shall Organizations shall determine set the maximum allowable static load for the belaydevice. system capacity, given system configuration and methods used, so as to not exceed thecapabilities of the belay device.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Better defines belay loads and belay device capacity.

Response Message:


Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.


54 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


55 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


5.13.3*

The organization shall evaluate the performance of end-to-end and multiple configuration straps in themanner of intended use as specified by the manufacturer .




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Added missing multi-configuration straps and specified manufacturer use.

Response Message:


Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul


56 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


57 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

First Revision No. 30-NFPA 1858-2016 [ New Section after 5.15 ]

5.15.3

The organization shall evaluate the system for prevention of removal of components.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

The removal of components from a system may not be desirable to the organization, so theseshould be evaluated as part of the selection process.

ResponseMessage:

Public Input No. 46-NFPA 1858-2016 [New Section after 5.15]

Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.


58 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


59 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


5.16.14

The organization shall evaluate the escape or fire escape system for prevention of removal ofcomponents.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

The removal of components from a system may not be desirable to the organization, so theseshould be evaluated as part of the selection process.

ResponseMessage:

Public Input No. 47-NFPA 1858-2016 [New Section after 5.16]

Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.


60 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


61 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

First Revision No. 12-NFPA 1858-2016 [ Section No. 6.1 ]

6.1 General.

6.1.1

The AHJ shall specify minimum requirements for training and experience necessary for a person to be acompetent equipment inspector.

6.1.2

The AHJ shall develop guidance for equipment inspection, based on Chapter 6, industry best practice,manufacturer’s instructions, and other relevant information.

6.1.3

Manufacturer’s instructions shall be followed for all inspection, care, and maintenance.

6.1.4

Universal precautions shall be observed, as appropriate, in the handling of life safety rope and equipmentthat was exposed to contamination during use.

6.1.5*

Any life safety rope and equipment that is found to be soiled or contaminated shall be cleaned ordecontaminated before any additional inspection is initiated. If decontamination is not possible orwarranted, contaminated life safety rope and equipment shall be retired.

6.1.6

The organization shall establish guidelines for its members to follow in determining if an element is soiledto an extent that cleaning is necessary.

6.1.7

The organization shall determine appropriate actions to be taken if life safety rope and equipment is foundto be in need of cleaning, decontamination, or repair.

6.1.7.1

As a minimum, any necessary cleaning or decontamination shall be done in accordance with therequirements specified in Chapter 7.

6.1.7.2

As a minimum, any necessary repairs shall be made in accordance with the requirements specified inChapter 8.

6.1.8*

Age of equipment shall be taken into consideration as part of the inspection process.

6.1.8.1*

The maximum lifetime of software shall be no more than 10 years from the date of manufacture.



1858_6.1.docx For staff use





62 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Adding AHJ requirements for qualified inspectors and defining end of product lifetime.

Response Message:



Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim



63 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


64 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


6.2.1*

Life safety rope and equipment shall be inspected periodically according to the organization’s policy forinspecting life safety rope and equipment.

6.2.1.1 Predeployment Inspection.

Prior to making the item available for service, the user shall perform a predeployment inspection asfollows:

(1) A visual check shall be performed in a manner sufficient to ensure that all the components arepresent and none of them are compromised.

(2) Where the equipment is assigned to an individual, the predeployment inspection shall beperformed prior to a duty shift.

(3) Where the equipment is not assigned to an individual, the AHJ shall determine the appropriateinterval.

(4) Any deficient components shall be removed from service and subjected to a thorough inspection.

6.2.1.2 Routine Inspection.

The user shall perform a routine inspection before and after each use as follows:

(1) Routine inspection shall be performed in a manner sufficient to ensure that the product is safe foruse.

(2) Routine inspection shall include, at a minimum, visual and tactile inspection for mildew, wear,damage, and other deterioration.

(3) Any deficient components shall be removed from service and subjected to a thorough inspection.

6.2.1.3 Thorough Inspection.

The organization shall determine at what intervals a thorough inspection is needed as follows:

(1)

(2) Thorough inspections shall be performed at least once each year and shall include a morein-depth evaluation of equipment condition, including visual and tactile, and information including,but not limited to, age, date of purchase, and usage log review.

(3) This inspection shall be documented.



1858_6.2.1_FR_48.docx For staff use




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Mar 04 10:06:11 EST 2016

* Thorough inspections shall be scheduled based on use of the equipment.


65 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Better defines the inspection intervals and procedures.

Response Message:


Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric



66 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Stinton, Robert


67 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


6.2.2

After each use, life Life safety rope and equipment shall be inspected by an inspector meeting theorganization’s requirements for the type of inspection conducted of life safety rope and equipment.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Clarified organization's responsibility for who conducts inspections.

Response Message:


Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul


68 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


69 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


6.2.4

Each user shall be trained to conduct a safety predeployment and serviceability inspection of life safetyrope and equipment immediately prior to use routine inspection .




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Explains the user's responsibility for pre-deployment and routine inspections.

Response Message:

Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.


70 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


71 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


6.2.5.1*

Life safety rope shall be retired from service if any of the following defects is found if inspection revealsdamage resulting in a performance deficiency due to the following :

(1) Soiling

(2) Contamination

(3) Physical damage, including but not limited to the following:

(a) Cuts, chaffing, broken fibers, or soft or hard spots on the sheath

(b) Thermal or chemical damage that can be detected by sight, feel, or smell, such as meltedfibers, glazed surfaces, or discoloration

(c) Any variation in the rope diameter

A history in the rope log of shock load, fall load, or static load in excess of the design load

(4) A history in the rope log of shock load, fall load, static load, or excessive loading

(5) Excessive age



1858_6.2.5.1_FR_4.docx For staff use




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

Better defines physical damage elements and excessive age will be moved to a newsection.

Response Message:

Public Input No. 22-NFPA 1858-2016 [Section No. 6.2.5.1]

Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All


72 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


73 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


6.2.5.2*

Escape and fire escape rope shall be retired from service if any of the following defects is found ifinspection reveals damage resulting in a performance deficiency due to the following :

(1) Soiling

(2) Contamination



(b) Thermal or chemical damage on the sheath that can be detected by sight, feel, or smell , suchas melted fibers, glazed surfaces, or discoloration


A history in the rope log of shock load, fall load, or static load in excess of the design load

(4) A history in the rope log of shock load, fall load, or static load in excess of the design load orexcessive loading

(5) Excessive age







Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

Better define physical damage elements and excessive age will be moved to a newsection.

Response Message:


Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned


74 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


75 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


6.2.5.3

Life safety harnesses, ladder belts, and escape belts shall be repaired or retired from service if any of thefollowing defects is found if inspection reveals damage resulting in a performance deficiency due to thefollowing :

(1) Soiling

(2) Contamination

(3) Physical damage to the webbing components, including but not limited to the following:

(a) Cuts, worn or frayed areas, broken fibers, or soft or hard spots

(b) Thermal or chemical damage such as melted fibers, glazed surfaces, or discoloration

(c) Pulled threads, abrasions, or breaks in the stitching

(4) Physical damage to the hardware components, including but not limited to the following:

(a) Damage, sharp edges, or missing components

(b) Improper operation Failure to operate properly

(5) Excessive age







Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Better description of physcal damage and removed excessive age to new section.

Response Message:


Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned


76 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


77 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


6.2.5.4

Carabiners and snap links shall be repaired or retired from service if any of the following defects isfound if inspection reveals damage resulting in a performance deficiency due to the following :

(1) Soiling

(2) Contamination

(3) Excessive wear


(a) Damage, sharp Sharp edges, missing components

(b) Missing components

(c) Misalignment

(d) Cracks

(e) Deformation

(f) Corrosion or pitting

Improper operation of the gate or locking mechanism

(5) Improper operation of the gate or locking mechanism







Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Better define physical damage elements and criteria.

Response Message:


Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters


78 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


79 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


6.2.5.5

End-to-end and multiple-configuration straps shall be repaired or retired from service if any of thefollowing defects is found if inspection reveals damage resulting in a performance deficiency due to thefollowing :

(1) Soiling

(2) Contamination

(3) Physical damage to the webbing components, including but not limited to the following:

(a) Cuts, worn or frayed areas, broken fibers, or soft or hard spots

(b) Thermal or chemical damage, such as melted fibers, glazed surfaces, or discoloration

(c) Pulled threads, abrasions, or breaks in the stitching

(4) Physical damage to the hardware components, including but not limited to the following:

(a) Damage, sharp edges, or missing components

(b) Improper operation Failure to operate properly

(5) History of shock load, fall load, or static load in excess of the design load

(6) Excessive age







Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Better description of physcal damage and removed excessive age to new section.

Response Message:


Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters


80 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


81 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


6.2.5.6

Rope grabs and ascending devices shall be repaired or retired from service if any of the following defectsis found if inspection reveals damage resulting in a performance deficiency due to the following :

(1) Soiling

(2) Contamination

(3) Excessive wear




(c) Misalignment

(d) Cracks

(e) Deformation


Improper operation of the cam or rope gripping component

(5) Improper operation of the cam or rope gripping component







Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement


Response Message:


Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters


82 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


83 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


6.2.5.7

Throwlines shall be repaired or retired from service if any of the following defects is found if inspectionreveals damage resulting in a performance deficiency due to the following :

(1) Soiling

(2) Contamination



(b) Thermal or chemical damage to the sheath that can be detected by sight, feel, or smell , suchas melted fibers, glazed surface surfaces, or discoloration


History in the rope log of shock load, fall load, or static load in excess of the design load

(4) History A history in the rope log of shock load, fall load, or static load, in excess of the designload or excessive loading

(5) Loss of floatability

Excessive age







Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:


Response Message:


Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters


84 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


85 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


6.2.5.8

Descent control devices and belay devices shall be repaired or retired from service if any of the followingdefects is found if inspection reveals damage resulting in a performance deficiency due to the following :

(1) Soiling

(2) Contamination

(3) Excessive wear




(c) Misalignment

(d) Cracks

(e) Deformation


Improper operation of any moving component

Improper operation of any self-locking system








Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Keep consistency of inspection practices throughout the document.

Response Message:

Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters


86 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


87 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


6.2.5.9

Portable anchors shall be repaired or retired from service if any of the following defects is found ifinspection reveals damage resulting in a performance deficiency due to the following :

(1) Soiling

(2) Contamination

(3) Excessive wear


(a) Damage, sharp Sharp edges missing components


(c) Misalignment

(d) Cracks

(e) Deformation


Damaged or cracked attachment points

Damaged or inoperable leg assemblies








Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement


Response Message:

Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters


88 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


89 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


6.2.5.10

Pulleys shall be repaired or retired from service if any of the following defects is found if inspectionreveals damage resulting in a performance deficiency due to the following :

(1) Soiling

(2) Contamination

(3) Excessive wear




(c) Misalignment

(d) Cracks

(e) Deformation


Improper operation of any moving component

Improper operation of any self-locking system








Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Wed Mar 09 14:24:14 EST 2016

Committee Statement


Response Message:

Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters


90 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


91 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


6.2.5.11

Litters and victim extrication devices shall be repaired or retired from service if any of the followingdefects is found if inspection reveals damage resulting in a performance deficiency due to the following :

(1) Soiling

(2) Contamination

(3) Excessive wear


(a) Damage, sharp Sharp edges, broken welds, fabric or plastic tears


(c) Misalignment

(d) Cracks

(e) Deformation


Damaged or cracked attachment points

Damaged or unsafe inserts, patient straps, or patient surfaces








Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement


Response Message:

Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters


92 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


93 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


6.2.5.12

Escape and fire escape webbing shall be retired from service if any of the following defects is found ifinspection reveals damage resulting in a performance deficiency due to the following :

(1) Soiling

(2) Contamination

(3) Physical damage, including but not limited to the following: webbing components

(a) Cuts, worn or frayed areas chaffing , broken fibers, or soft or hard spots on the sheath

(b) Thermal or chemical damage that can be detected by sight, feel, or smell , such as meltedfibers, glazed surfaces, or discoloration


(4) History A history in the rope log of shock load, fall load, or static load in excess of the design load ,or excessive loading

Excessive age







Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Wed Mar 16 07:33:01 EDT 2016

Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:


Response Message:

Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



94 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


95 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


6.2.5.13

Escape anchor devices shall be repaired or retired from service if any of the following defects is found ifinspection reveals damage resulting in a performance deficiency due to the following:

(1) Soiling

(2) Contamination

(3) Excessive wear


(a) Damage, cracks, sharp Sharp edges, missing components


(c) Misalignment

(d) Cracks

(e) Deformation


Improper operation of any moving parts

Dulling of any points required to be sharp








Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement


Response Message:

Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters


96 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


97 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


6.2.5.14

Moderate elongation laid life saving rope shall be repaired or retired from service if any of the followingdefects is found if inspection reveals damage resulting in a performance deficiency due to the following :

(1) Soiling

(2) Contamination


(a) Cuts, chaffing, broken fibers, or soft or hard spots on the surface sheath

(b) Thermal or chemical damage on the surface that can be detected by sight, feel, or smell , suchas melted fibers, glazed surfaces, or discoloration


(4) History A history in the rope log of shock load, fall load, or static load in excess of the design load ,or excessive loading

Excessive age







Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Wed Mar 16 07:43:36 EDT 2016

Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:


Response Message:

Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



98 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


99 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


6.2.5.15

Manufactured systems and escape systems shall be repaired or retired from service if any of the followingdefects is found if inspection reveals damage resulting in a performance deficiency due to the following :

(1) Soiling

(2) Contamination

(3) Any component defect deficiency as described in 6.2.5.1 through 6.2.5.14 as applicable

(4) Incompatibility of subcomponents

(5) Missing or improperly assembled components




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Added a section to evaluate removal or improperly assembled components.

Response Message:

Public Input No. 48-NFPA 1858-2016 [New Section after 6.2.5.15]

Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean


100 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


101 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


7.1.1.1

Where possible, organizations shall refer to the manufacturer's recommendations for cleaning of lifesafety rope and equipment.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Manufacturer recommendations shall be followed when feasible.

Response Message:

Public Input No. 50-NFPA 1858-2016 [New Section after 7.1.1]

Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul


102 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


103 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


7.2.1

The end users organization shall be responsible for the routine cleaning of their issued life safety ropeand equipment.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Defines that it's the organization's responsibility for cleaning.

Response Message:

Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.


104 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


105 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


7.2.3.2

The cleaning procedure shall be as follows:

(1) Remove as much debris, dirt, and mud as possible at the scene.

(2) Rinse off any excess dirt with a hose.

(3) Soak the rope or webbing for about 30 minutes in a plastic tub of water with nondetergent soapadded.

(4) Rinse the rope or webbing by pulling it through a rope washing rope washing device twice.

(5) Hang the rope or webbing in a cool, shady place to dry.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Add webbing to the cleaning process as it is covered in the title.

Response Message:


Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean


106 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


107 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


8.2 Rope and Webbing.

When damage to rope or webbing is detected, the rope or webbing shall be removed from service anddestroyed or relegated to non-life safety duty.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

There are other duties that are appropriate for rope that is no longer suitable for life safety.Examples are knot tying and utility work.

ResponseMessage:

Public Input No. 51-NFPA 1858-2016 [Section No. 8.1]

Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.


108 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


109 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


8.1 General.

Equipment shall not be modified, repaired, or otherwise altered without explicit authorization from themanufacturer.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: States the requirement from the manufacturers authorization to modify or alter equipment.

Response Message:


Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul


110 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


111 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


8.3 Other Equipment.

Equipment other than rope or webbing that appears repairable shall be returned to The organization shallconsult the manufacturer for other equipment repair.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

Some components may not be able to be sent back to the manufacturer for repair or themanufacturer may not do repairs.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.


112 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


113 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

First Revision No. 38-NFPA 1858-2016 [ Section No. A.3.3.20 ]


114 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

A.3.3.20 Fall Factor.

Fall factors (see Figure A.3.3.20) are calculated by dividing the distance the person attached to the ropewill fall by the length of the rope between the person and the rope anchor or belay. Thus, a 305 mm (1 ft)fall on a 150 mm (1⁄2 ft) rope would be a fall factor of 2.0; a 305 mm (1 ft) fall on a 305 mm (1 ft) ropewould be a 1.0 fall factor; a 305 mm (1 ft) fall on a 1.12 m (4 ft) rope would be a 0.25 fall factor; and a305 mm (1 ft) fall on a 12.2 m (40 ft) rope would be a 0.025 fall factor. Note as well that a 7.6 m (25 ft) fallon a 30.5 m (100 ft) rope is also a 0.25 fall factor. This formula assumes the fall takes place in free airwithout rope drag across building edges or through intermediate equipment.

Figure A.3.3.20 Fall factors Factors .

When fall factors of greater than 0.25 are anticipated, such as are possible in lead climbing, dynamicropes specifically designed for climbing should be considered. Only ropes certified to appropriate climbingrope standards [e.g., the International Mountaineering and Climbing Federation (UIAA) and EuropeanCommunity (CE)] are appropriate for this use. Dynamic climbing ropes should be stored, maintained,inspected, and use-logged in a manner similar to that required for static/low-stretch rope. Such operationsare outside the scope of this document. A fall factor of 0.25 is the maximum considered for NFPA 1983.

Recent testing Research indicates that the formula for calculating fall factors may not translate perfectlyfrom dynamic ropes to the more static design ropes used for fire service operations. the "fall factor"method of estimating the effects of a fall on an anchor or a load does not translate equally betweendynamic ropes and the static and low-stretch type ropes used for fire service.rescue operations. Othermethods of force calculation can be used as needed.



115 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM



Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Added language to further clarify forces experienced in a fall.

Response Message:



Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas


116 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


117 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


A.5.2.1

Typically the intended application of life safety rope is for protection of a person from fall or for actualaccess to or from height. While design for these applications might seem to be close, specific choices oflife safety rope should be made for specific applications. Choices that the AHJ might make include, butare not limited to, material, construction, elongation, strength, diameter, weight, hand, color, and length.For example, a dynamic rope that has the ability to absorb energy safely might be more important thanother qualities for protecting someone at risk of falling from height, while in a rope lowering or raisingoperation, a less elastic rope might be a better operational efficiency choice.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

Using the term "dynamic" puts the discussion more into context with the remainder of thesentence, which refers to elongation in a rope.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean


118 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


119 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM



120 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

A.5.2.3


121 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Rope construction is the method of assembling the yarn bundles into ropes. Different assembly typeshave various properties, making some constructions better than others for a particularapplication.NFPA 1983 does not specify any one particular rope construction type or material but providesperformance requirements for a certified rope. Typical constructions found in emergency services are laidrope, double braid, and kernmantle (see Figure A.5.2.3 )

Figure A.5.2.3 Typical emergency services rope constructions.

Braid. A rope or textile structure formed by a braiding process. [CI 1202, used with permission]

There are many subcategories of braids, each having its own advantages and disadvantages for use inrescue.

Braid Pattern. A description of the manner in which the strands of a braided rope are intertwined. A plain(diamond) pattern is when one strand (or multiple strand) of one direction of rotation about the axis passesover one strand in the opposite direction and it in turn passes under the next strand of the oppositedirection. A twill pattern is when one strand (or multiple strand) of one direction of rotation about the axispasses over two strands of the opposite direction and it in turn passes under the next two strands of theopposite direction. [CI 1202, used with permission]

The diamond braid pattern is more common in life safety rope applications, but either pattern is permittedby NFPA 1983.

Hollow Braid. A single braided rope having a hollow center consisting of multiple strands which may bebraided in a plain or twill pattern. A 12-strand braid is commonly used. [CI 1202, used with permission]

Hollow braids are the simplest of all braids to make. Their low strength compared to other constructionsand soft hand make them seldom used in life safety rope applications, but they are found in utility fireservice applications such as ladder halyards. Hollow braids lack the protective feature of a load-bearingcore protected by an outer braid.

Double Braid. A rope constructed from an inner hollow braided rope (core) surrounded by another hollowbraided rope (cover). Also called Braid-on-Braid, 2 in 1 Braid. [CI 1202, used with permission]

Double braids were popular with some fire rescue operations in the past. Their typical easy hand runs wellin rigging gear such as pulley systems. Because the generally looser construction is easier to snag andabrade on rough surfaces, the double braids are no longer a selected as a life safety rope for fire groundor remote rescue operations.

Solid Braid. A cylindrical braid in which each strand alternately passes under and over one or more of theother strands of the rope while all strands are rotating around the axis with the same direction of rotation.On the surface, all strands appear to be parallel to the axis. [CI 1202, used with permission]

Solid braid is one of the more economical methods of manufacturing ropes, and many utility ropes insmaller diameters can be found in this construction style. They are often seen in water rescue ropes andhardware store general-duty small ropes.


122 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Laid. Ropes made by twisting of three or more strands together with the twist direction opposite that of thestrands. [CI 1202, used with permission]

Laid ropes are probably one of the earliest tools known. First made of natural plant fibers such as grass,they are now available in modern fibers like nylon and polyester. It is important to note any wear on theoutside fibers because they are all twisted together without an independent inside core, unlike kernmantleand double braid constructions. Laid ropes are higher elongation than many other construction types.Elongation provides energy absorption in a fall but also makes for more work in haul and lower systemsdue to the same stretch. The built-in twist in laid ropes can also be a management problem for the user infire rescue operations.

Kernmantle. A rope design consisting of two elements: an interior core (kern) and an outer sheath(mantle). The core supports the major portion of the load; and may be of parallel strands, braided strandsor braided. The sheath serves primarily to protect the core and also supports a portion of the load. Thereare three types: static, low stretch and dynamic. [CI 1202, used with permission]

Typical rescue kernmantle construction is a braided sheath over a continuous parallel core. This designprovides relatively low elongation due to the parallel core strands and excellent protection of the corefibers from the covering sheath. Various models are available with thicker or thinner sheaths, tighter orlooser sheaths, and low or high twist parallel core strands. Additionally, many different choices of materialsand blends of materials are available. Most life safety ropes today are of kernmantle construction.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Removed figure to eliminate confusion.

Response Message:


Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy


123 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


124 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


A.5.2.4

Elongation is the ratio of the extension of a rope, under an applied load, to the length of the rope prior tothe application of the load expressed as a percentage. Rope increases in length as the load on the ropeincreases. [CI 1202, used with permission]

A rope’s ability to elongate is important in that elongation can be a critical part of reducing the impactforces on the user and the system in a fall. Fall factors are a means of describing the relationship of thelength of a fall to the amount (length) of rope available to absorb the fall’s energy. Should a user fall fromhis or her position, rope anchored high above the user will provide a much lower fall factor than a rope ofthe same length anchored below the user.

NFPA 1983 requires manufacturers to provide users with the elongation of certified ropes at 1.35 kN (300lbf), 2.7 kN (600 lbf), and 4.4 kN (1000 lbf). This information can provide a good comparison between onerope and another as to their elongation to load curves for typical working loads. The more a ropeelongates, the more energy it will absorb in a fall. Too much elongation can cause problems such as ropebounce when lowering, excess resets in haul systems, and loss of control in mid-face loading in a pick-offrescue. Typical fire-rescue applications choose ropes classified by the Cordage Institute as either static orlow stretch.

Static Rope. A rope with a maximum elongation of 6% at 10% of its minimum breaking strength. [CI 1202,used with permission]

Static life safety rope is usually selected when rope stretch will be a problem. This can occur with highlines, guiding lines, long rappels, or rope systems with a long length of rope involved. Static ropes allow amore efficient mechanical advantage haul system because less stretch must be removed from the ropeafter each reset of the system.

Low Stretch Rope. A rope with an elongation greater than 6% and less than 10% at 10% of its minimumbreaking strength. [CI 1202, used with permission]

Low stretch life safety rope provides a balance between not too much stretch during use and someelongation to absorb energy should a shock load occur to the system. There is always a trade-off inarresting a falling rescuer or litter — the less distance the fall, the higher the impact force but also the lesschance of hitting something on the way down.

Moderate Stretch Rope. A rope with elongation greater than 10% and less than 25% of the rope’sminimum breaking strength. [CI 1805, used with permission]

Moderate stretch rope is not classified as life safety rope according to NFPA 1983 because of the greateramount of elongation. Moderate stretch rope is classified as a special-use rope defined by NFPA 1983 asmoderate elongation life saving rope. The greater elongation allows for a lower impact force, but there ismore movement when the rope is loaded.

High Stretch Rope. A rope with an elongation greater than 25% at 10% of the MBS. [CI 1805, used withpermission]

High stretch Dynamic rope Rope .is A very high elongation rope compared to static and low stretchropes. Requirements for this rope are based on the UIAA climbing rope standard for mountaineers andare typically outside the scope of NFPA 1983. Dynamic ropes are used to lower the impact load on aclimber’s body, the anchors, and the equipment in a roped fall. One use in the fire service is for belaying arescuer approaching a person who is threatening suicide by jumping from a height.




Street Address:


125 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

High stretch ropes are not addressed by UIAA. Dynamic ropes are. This seems to have beena typo from the previous line.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim



126 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


127 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


A.5.2.6

For NFPA 1983, the actual diameter of a certified rope is determined according to Section 9.1 of CI 1801,Low Stretch and Static Kernmantle Life Safety Rope, and then rounding to the nearest 0.5 mm (1/64 in.).

Equipment such as pulleys, ascenders, and descent control devices often work correctly only whenmatched with the correct diameter rope. In some combinations, a very small difference in rope diameterswill change the performance of the other devices. The organization must take care to make sure the ropespurchased match the other devices in service or expected to be purchased in the future.

Larger diameter ropes are easier to grip by hand , but they also are heavier.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

Clarification, given that modern equipment technology has rendered hand grip not nearly asessential as it was previously.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean


128 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


129 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


A.5.6.2

Carabiner gates have several different methods of preventing the carabiner from accidently openingduring use.

The simplest design does not have a locking system and is usually referred to as a nonlocking carabiner.While having a long history of use for life support in the recreational field, nonlocking carabiners are notconsidered adequate for industrial or fire service use. See 6.5.5 of NFPA 1983.

Manual lock designs require a physical movement to activate the locking mechanism, which can be eithera sleeve that screws the gate over the nose or a sleeve that, once activated, snaps into place. A physicalmovement is required to move the sleeve down to unlock the carabiner. Common names for this type ofcarabiner lock design include screw gate and manual lock.

An automatic locking gate is designed so that when the gate closes, a spring moves the sleeve up thegate and over the nose. Two or three physical movements are required to unlock the gate. This type ofcarabiner is usually referred to as auto-locking.

Auto-locking carabiners might be preferred for life safety use because the user does not have toremember to activate the gate-locking mechanism. Manual-lock carabiners have the advantage of easierremoval from their storage location because they do not need to be unlocked first. Before relying on thecarabiner for life support, the user must verify for both types that they are locked; while the gate mightclose automatically on the auto-locking model, if webbing or clothing blocks the gate from closing, thecarabiner will be unlocked and could even remain open.

Some jurisdictions and activities require the use of ANSI-rated connectors, which have additional design,strength, and rating requirements. The AHJ needs to determine if all applicable regulatory requirementshave been addressed while conducting a safety analysis for both incident and training environments.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

Addresses the use of ANSI connectors, especially in the training envioroment and calls toattention that such requirements may apply depending on the jurisdiction and nature of the task.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters


130 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


131 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

First Revision No. 53-NFPA 1858-2016 [ Chapter B ]

Annex B Informational References

B.1 Referenced Publications.

The documents or portions thereof listed in this annex are referenced within the informational sections ofthis standard and are not part of the requirements of this document unless also listed in 2 for otherreasons.

B.1.1 NFPA Publications.


NFPA 1006, Standard for Technical Rescue Personnel Professional Qualifications , 2017 edition.

NFPA 1407, Standard for Training Fire Service Rapid Intervention Crews , 2015 edition.



NFPA 1983, Standard on Life Safety Rope and Equipment for Emergency Services , 2012 2017 edition.

B.1.2 Other Publications.

B.1.2.1 ASSE Publications.

American Society of Safety Engineers, 1800 E. Oakton Street, Des Plaines, 520 N. Northwest Hwy, ParkRidge IL 60018 60068 .

ANSI/ASSE Z359, Fall Protection Code, Version 3.0, 2012.

B.1.2.2 ASTM Publications.

ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959.

ASTM E 794 E794 Standard Test Method for Melting and Crystallization Temperatures by ThermalAnalysis, 2012.

ASTM F 1740 F1740 , Standard Guide for Inspection of Nylon, Polyester, or Nylon/Polyester Blend, orBoth Kernmantle Rope, 1996 (reapproved 2007) 2012 .

B.1.2.3 Cordage Institute Publications.

Cordage Institute, 994 Old Eagle School, Wayne, PA 19087-1866.

CI 1202, Terminology for Fiber Rope, February 2003 2013 .

CI 1801, Low Stretch and / Static Kernmantle Life Safety Rope, 2007 .

CI 1805, Standard: 3-Strand Life Safety Rope Moderate Stretch, 2008.



1858-proposed_Annex_B_SR.docx For staff use




Street Address:

City:


132 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Updating references

Response Message:

Ballot Results


25 Eligible Voters

4 Not Returned

21 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Arrington, Joseph

McCurley, Loui

Metz, Jeremy

Paderick, H. Dean

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Beechner, Brian J.

Corrado, Steven D.

Dacey, Paul

Dempsey, Keith B.

Dunn, Charles S.



Hess, Diane B.

Hock, Tricia L.

Horn, Gavin P.

Howard, Thomas

Klaren, Kim


Legros, Stephen

Lehtonen, Karen E.

Nelson, Robert G.


133 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM

Reall, Jack E.

Smith, Cedric


Stinton, Robert


134 of 134 5/16/2016 2:45 PM


M E M O R A N D U M

TO: Technical Committee on Respiratory Protection Equipment

FROM: Yvonne Smith, Project Administrator DATE: June 2, 2016

SUBJECT: NFPA 1981 First Draft Technical Committee FINAL Ballot Results (F2017 Cycle)



6 Members Not Returned (Anaya, Colton, Dickson, Kaller, Martin, Szalajda) 26 Members Voted Affirmative on All Revisions (2 w/ comment: Kuhn, Profit) 2 Members Voted Negative on one or more Revisions (Hayes, Morgan) 0 Members Abstained on one or more Revisions The attached report shows the number of affirmative, negative, and abstaining votes as well as the explanation of the vote for each revision.



1.1.2

This edition of the standard shall also specify the minimum requirements for the design, performance andtesting, and certification of replacement parts, components, and add-on accessories for SCBA andcombination SCBA/SARs certified as compliant to specific earlier editions of this standard.


Submitter Full Name: Dave Trebisacci


Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon Mar 07 13:35:07 EST 2016

Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

It seems out of place to go back and test to an earlier standard when product to the current standardis in field use and users of SCBAs to earlier editions will want. An example is the communicationstest. It would be better to give a user a comms device, which compiles to the current standard (STI).The testing to old standard (speech recognition) and compliance to the old standard does notsupport the user desire to get components, which perform, to new current requirements. It alsoallows manufactures to use current product without change and additional testing to support olderproduct in the field.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

27 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint


1 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

Martin, Craig

Szalajda, Jonathan V.

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.

Szymanski, Michael E.

Trudgeon, Mark

Weinstein, Steven H.


Profit, Bryan

looks good


2 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


1.3.2

This edition of the standard shall apply to the design, manufacturing, and certification of new open-circuitSCBA and combination SCBA/SARs and shall apply to replacement parts, components, and add-onaccessories for such respirators certified as compliant to specific earlier editions of this standard.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

It seems out of place to go back and test to an earlier standard when product to the current standardis in field use and users of SCBAs to earlier editions will want. An example is the communicationstest. It would be better to give a user a comms device, which compiles to the current standard (STI).The testing to old standard (speech recognition) and compliance to the old standard does notsupport the user desire to get components, which perform, to new current requirements. It alsoallows manufactures to use current product without change and additional testing to support olderproduct in the field.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

27 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint


3 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

Martin, Craig


Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Profit, Bryan

easier wording


4 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM



2.1 General.





NFPA 1852, Standard on Selection, Care, and Maintenance of Open-Circuit Self-Contained BreathingApparatus (SCBA), 2013 edition.


NFPA 1989, Standard on Breathing Air Quality for Emergency Services Respiratory Protection, 2013edition.


2.3.1 AATCC Publications.

American Association of Textile Chemists and Colorists, P.O. Box 12215, Research Triangle Park, NC27709.

AATCC 135, Dimensional Changes of Fabrics After Home Laundering, 2004 2014 .

2.3.2 ANSI Publications.

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

ANSI B46.1, Surface Texture , 1978.

ANSI/ASA S3.2, American National Standard Method for Measuring the Intelligibility of Speech overCommunication Systems,1989 2009, reaffirmed 2014 .

ANSI Y1.1, Abbreviations for Use on Drawings and Text , 1972.

ANSI Y14.SM, Dimensioning and Tolerancing , 1982.

2.3.3 ASTM Publications.

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

ASTM B16/B16M , Standard Specification for Free-Cutting Brass Rod, Bar and Shapes for Use in ScrewMachines, 2000 2010, reapproved 2015 .

ASTM B117, Standard Test Method for Practice for Operating Salt Spray (Fog) Testing Apparatus ,2003 2011 .

ASTM D1003, Standard Test Method for Haze and Luminous Transmittance of Transparent Plastics,2000 2013 .

ASTM D6413/D6413M , Standard Test Method for Flame Resistance of Textiles (Vertical Test),1999 2015 .

ASTM E162, Standard Test Method for Surface Flammability of Materials Using Radiant Heat EnergySource, 2012 2015 .


5 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

2.3.4 CENELEC Publications.

CENELEC, European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardization, CEN-CENELEC ManagementCentre, Avenue Marnix 17, B-1000, Brussels, Belgium.

BS EN 136, Respiratory protective devices — Full face masks — Requirements, testing, marking ,1998, Corrigendum, 2004.

2.3.5 EBU Publications.

EBU (European Broadcasting Union) Department of Technology & Innovation, L’Ancienne-Route 17A,CH-1218 Postal Box 45, 1218 Le Grand-Saconnex, Geneva, Switzerland.

EBU Technical Recommendation R68 R 068 , Alignment level in digital audio production equipment and indigital audio recorders, 2000.

2.3.6 EN Publications (CEN).

European Committee for Standardization Central Secretariat, rue de Stassart 36, B 1050 Brussels,Belgium.

EN 136, Respiratory protective devices — Full face masks — Requirements, testing, marking , 1998.

2.3.6 IEC Publications.

International Electrotechnical Commission, 3, rue de Varembé, P.O. Box 131, CH-1211 Geneva 20,Switzerland.

IEC 60268-16 , Sound System Equipment — Part 16: Objective Rating of Speech Intelligibility by SpeechTransmission Index, 2003 2011 .


International Organization for Standardization, 1, rue de Varembé, Case postale 56, CH-1211 Genéve20 ISO Central Secretariat, BIBC II, 8, Chemin de Blandonnet, CP 401, 1214 Vernier, Geneva ,Switzerland.

ISO 9001, Quality management systems — Requirements,2000 2015 .

ISO 17021, Conformity assessment — Requirements for bodies providing audit and certification ofmanagement systems, 2006 2011 .

ISO Guide 27, Guidelines for corrective action to be taken by a certification body in the event of misuse ofits mark of conformity, 1983.

ISO/IEC Guide 62, General requirements for bodies operating assessment and certification/registrationof quality systems , 1996.

ISO/IEC Guide 62, General requirements for bodies operating assessment and certification/registrationof quality systems , 1996.

ISO/IEC 17011, Conformity assessment — General requirements for accreditation bodies accreditingconformity assessment bodies, 2004.

ISO/IEC 17025, General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories, 2005,Technical Corrigendum, 2006 .

ISO/IEC Guide 65 17065 , General requirements for bodies operating product certificationsystems Conformity Assessment — Requirements for Bodies Certifiying Products, Processes andServices , 1996 2012 .

2.3.8 UL Publications.

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

ANSI/ UL 913, Standard for Intrinsically Safe Apparatus and Associated Apparatus for Use in Class I, II,and III, Division 1 Hazardous (Classified) Locations, Sixth edition, 2002 .


6 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


U.S. Government Printing Publishing Office, Washington, DC 20402 732 North Capitol Street, NW,Washington DC, 20401-0001 .

Statement of Standard for NIOSH CBRN SCBA Testing, 2002.

Title 42, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 84, “Respiratory Protective Devices, Tests for Permissibility,”8 June 1995. .”







Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

The technical committee created this First Revision based on the Public Input, but also furtherupdated edition dates and titles.

The TC also decided to retain the reference to the sixth edition of UL 913, because the eighthedition contains changes not suitable for this standard.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

27 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig


7 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Profit, Bryan

yes


8 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


4.1.10

The certification organization shall not issue any new certifications for any SCBA to the 2007 2013 editionof this standard on or after the NFPA effective date for the 2013 2018 edition, which is 17 December2012 [to be determined by the Standards Council] .




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: The TC is updating the effective date of the standard.

Response Message:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

27 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig


Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.


9 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Profit, Bryan

looks good


10 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


4.1.11

The certification organization shall not permit any manufacturer to label any SCBA as compliant with the2007 2013 edition of this standard on or after 31 August 2013 2018 , except when replacement labels orreplacement components that bear the certification organization’s label are required.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

The technical committee reviewed the TIA and made appropriate revisions and updates.

Note: This public input originates from Tentative Interim Amendment No. 13-1, Log #1111 issued bythe Standards Council on August 26, 2013 and per the NFPA Regs., needs to be reconsidered by theTechnical Committee for the next edition of the Document.

Submitter’s Substantiation: The purpose of this TIA is in response to a letter received from theNational Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, National Personal Protective TechnologyLaboratory (NIOSH/NPPTL) dated 29 November 2013. This letter notified the Chair of the TechnicalCommittee on Respiratory Protection Equipment of additional delays in chemical warfare agent(CWA) testing being conducted by the U.S. Army Edgewood Chemical Biological Command (ECBC)that are negatively impacting the timeliness of completion of NIOSH SCBA approvals. This new delaywill in turn impact approval and certification of SCBAs by the relevant certification organization (SEI)to the 2013 edition of NFPA 1981.

TIA 13-1 (Issue Date: 26 August 2013) to the 2013 edition of NFPA 1981 had changed the datespecified in 4.1.11 and 4.1.12 from 31 August 2013 to 28 February 2014. The new 30 June 2014 daterequested by this TIA is required to provide sufficient time for manufacturers’ new designs to havesuccessfully completed the evaluations, and for the certification authorities to be able to issueapprovals and certifications for compliance to NIOSH and NFPA standards by that date. This will alsoassure that SCBA units certified to the 2007 edition of NFPA 1981 will be available for procurement incase of a national emergency or catastrophic event while the 2013 edition approvals andcertifications are completed. This substantiation would apply equally to both 4.1.11 and 4.1.12 byrequiring this new date. Paragraph 4.1.11 identifies what is not permitted on that effective date, while

4.1.12 requires what will be required on that effective date.

Emergency Nature: NIOSH testing to the Statement of Standard for Self Contained BreathingApparatus (SCBA) with Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear (CBRN) Protection used toProtect Emergency Responders Against CBRN Agents in Terrorist Attacks in conjunction with theNational Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Standard 1981 on Open- Circuit Self-ContainedBreathing Apparatus for Emergency Services contain three interlocked activities. One is NIOSHcertification under 42 CFR Part 84, Subpart H; two is compliance with National Fire ProtectionAssociation (NFPA) Standard


11 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

1981 for Open-Circuit Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus for Emergency Services, current edition;and three is special tests under NIOSH 42 CFR 84.63(c): Chemical Agent Permeation andPenetration Resistance Against Distilled Sulfur Mustard (HD) and Sarin (GB), performed by the U.S.Army Edgewood Chemical Biological Center (ECBC) Testing Center and Laboratory RespiratorProtection Level (LRPL), performed by NPPTL. To minimize the total time for CBRN approvals,NIOSH and SEI have a simultaneous test and approval protocol.

To expedite the testing, the National Personal Protective Technology Laboratory (NPPTL) hasprovided funding to ECBC to setup additional CWA testing chambers. ECBC will be conducting theCWA testing using an extended work day schedule in an effort to complete the testing of SCBAssubmitted for NFPA 1981, 2013 edition approval and certification by 1 April 2014.

This additional delay past the 28 February 2014 date poses a significant impact on fire departmentsor first responder organizations planning the procurement of NFPA 1981, 2013 edition SCBAs. Itwould also prevent them from procuring 2007 edition units if needed by their departments ororganizations. Either of these situations will impact firefighter and first responder safety, by requiringadditional training and creating a mixed inventory of SCBA with compromised interoperability ofSCBA units. Departments may be faced with either an inadequate number of compliant SCBAs.

Additionally, there is concern that without this compliance date extension, products compliant to the2007 edition of NFPA

1981 will no longer be available after 28 February 2014.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

27 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig


Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.


12 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Profit, Bryan

yes


13 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


4.1.12

The certification organization shall require manufacturers to remove all certification labels and productlabels indicating compliance with the 2007 2013 edition of this standard from all SCBA that are under thecontrol of the manufacturer on 31 August 2013 2018 . The certification organization shall verify that thisaction is taken.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

The technical committee reviewed the TIA and made appropriate revisions and updates.

Note: This public input originates from Tentative Interim Amendment No. 13-1, Log No. 1111 issued bythe Standards Council on August 26, 2013 and per the NFPA Regs., needs to be reconsidered by theTechnical Committee for the next edition of the Document.

Submitter's Substantiation: The purpose of this TIA is to update on the National Institute forOccupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) testing of CBRN SCBAs. Some unanticipated delays havethe potential to negatively impact the timeliness of completion of NIOSH SCBA approvals. Thesedelays could in turn impact approvals and certification of SCBAs by the relevant certificationorganization (SEI) to the NFPA 1981 standard, 2013 edition. That standard states in paragraph 4.1.11 that "The certification organizations shall not permit any manufacturer to label any SCBA ascompliant with the 2007 edition of this standard on or after 31 August 2013, except when replacementlabels or replacement components that bear the certification organization's label are required."

The presumption in the Technical Committee choosing this date was that it would provide sufficienttime for manufacturers' new designs to have successfully completed the evaluations for thecertification authorities to be able to issue certifications for compliance to the NIOSH and NFPAstandards by that date.

Emergency Nature: NIOSH testing to the Statement of Standard for Self Contained BreathingApparatus (SCBA) with Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear (CBRN) Protection used toProtect Emergency Responders Against CBRN Agents in Terrorist Attacks in conjunction with theNational Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Standard 1981 for Open-Circuit Self-Contained BreathingApparatus for Fire Fighters contain three interlocked activities. One is NIOSH certification under 42CFR Part 84, Subpart H; two is compliance with National Fire Protection Association (NFPA)Standard 1981 for Open-Circuit Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus for Fire Fighters, current edition;and three is special tests under NIOSH 42 CFR 84.63(c): Chemical Agent Permeation andPenetration Resistance Against Distilled Sulfur Mustard (HD) and Sarin (GB), performed by The USArmy Edgewood Chemical Biological Center (ECBC) Testing Center and Laboratory RespiratorProtection Level (LRPL), performed by NPPTL. To minimize the total time for CBRN approvals,NIOSH and SEI have a simultaneous test and approval protocol.


14 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

The National Personal Protective Technology Laboratory (NPPTL) has allocated its resources providefor the completion of all 9 internally-conducted tests, evaluations and issuance of approvals for SCBAmanufacturer applications submitted prior to I June 2013 by September 1st. SEI has also allocatedresources to provide for completion of the NFPA 1981 compliance testing for apparatus received bythe same date.

However, the availability ofECBC testing resources to complete the HD and GB testing has beennegatively impacted by the Federal Government Budget Sequestration. Consequently, delays areanticipated. Representatives from NPPTL and ECBC are working closely to develop a projectedtesting schedule.

A delay past the August 31st date poses a significant impact on flre departments or first responderorganizations that planned 4th quarter of20 13 purchases or need an emergency purchase ofcompliant SCBA. These organizations may not have access to the manufacturer of their currentinventory SCBA, posing the dilemma of purchasing another manufacturers product or foregoingpurchase until compliant product is available. Either of these approaches will impact firefighter safety,by requiring additional training and creating a mixed inventory of SCBA with compromisedinteroperability of SCBA units. Departments may be faced with either an inadequate number ofcompliant SCBAs for operations or sending responders into a hazardous situation with safetyequipment that is no longer compliant with NFPA 1981. Additionally, there is concern that without thiscompliance date extension, products compliant to the 2007 edition ofNFPA 1981 will no longer beavailable after August 31, 2013.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

27 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig


Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.


15 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Profit, Bryan

yes


16 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

First Revision No. 7-NFPA 1981-2016 [ Section No. 4.2.8 [Excluding any Sub-Sections] ]

The certification organization and the manufacturer shall evaluate any changes affecting the form, fit, orfunction of the compliant product to determine its continued certification to the 2013 2018 edition ofNFPA 1981.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: The TC is updating the reference.

Response Message:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

27 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig


Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.


17 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Profit, Bryan

looks good


18 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


4.2.8.1

The certification organization and the manufacturer shall evaluate replacement parts, components, andadd-on accessories to determine any changes affecting the form, fit, or function for SCBA certified to the2002 2007 edition or the 2007 2013 edition of NFPA 1981 to permit revisions to the originalcertification in order for those certifications to accept replacement parts, components, and add-onaccessories tested and certified as compliant to the 2018 edition of this standard .




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

The TC is updating the referenced editions of the standard. Also, it seems out of place to go backand test to an earlier standard when product to the current standard is in field use and users ofSCBAs to earlier editions will want. An example is the communications test. It would be better to givea user a comms device, which compiles to the current standard (STI). The testing to old standard(speech recognition) and compliance to the old standard does not support the user desire to getcomponents, which perform, to new current requirements. It also allows manufactures to use currentproduct without change and additional testing to support older product in the field.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

27 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William


19 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig


Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Profit, Bryan

covering repairs, good


20 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


4.2.8.2

Replacement parts, components, and add-on accessories for SCBAs certified to the 2002 2007 edition orthe 2007 2013 edition of NFPA 1981 shall be approved by NIOSH in accordance with 42 CFR 84,“Respiratory Protective Devices, Tests for Permissibility.”




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: The TC is updating the edition dates.

Response Message:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

27 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig


Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Almqvist, Hans O.


21 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Profit, Bryan

yes


22 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


4.5.3.2

Where the registar specified in 4.5.3.1 is currently accredited for personal protective equipment inaccordance with ISO/IEC Guide 62 17065 , General requirements for bodies operating assessment andcertification/registration of quality systems Conformity assessment — Requirements for bodies certifyingproducts, processes and services , that accreditation shall be permitted until 14 September 2008.


Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci

Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu Apr 14 11:42:39 EDT 2016

Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Guide 62 has been replaced by ISO/IEC 17065.

Response Message:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

27 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig


Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.


23 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Profit, Bryan

looks good


24 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


5.1.6

The SCBA product label shall bear the following compliance statement legibly printed, and all letters andnumbers shall be at least 2 mm ( 5 ⁄64 in.) in height:

THIS SCBA MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF NFPA 1981, STANDARD ON OPEN-CIRCUIT SELF-CONTA

2013 2018 EDITION.

DO NOT REMOVE THIS LABEL




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: The TC is updating the label requirements with respect to the edition date.

Response Message:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

27 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig


Affirmative All


25 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

Allen, Jason L.

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Profit, Bryan

good


26 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


5.2.8

Information or training materials regarding retirement in accordance with NFPA 1852 shall be provided atleast on replacement/retirement considerations .




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

This revision is being made because the retirement requirements change on a regular basis.

The Technical Committee believes that it would not be appropriate for manufacturers to specifyretirement dates in materials included with the SCBA.

The user should instead consult the current edition of NFPA 1852.

ResponseMessage:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

27 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig



27 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Profit, Bryan

good


28 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

First Revision No. 19-NFPA 1981-2016 [ New Section after 6.1.10.6 ]

6.1.11

If the SCBA incorporates a removable regulator, two distinct actions for disconnection shall be requiredprior to withdrawal of the regulator from the facepiece.

6.1.11.1

Withdrawal of the regulator shall not be considered one of the two distinct actions.

6.1.11.2

Where a double-release mechanism is utilized, actuation of a single-release mechanism shall not causedisconnection of the regulator.

6.1.12*

The SCBA shall incorporate data logging in nonvolatile memory and, at a minimum, the following eventsand data points shall be identified and recorded with the data log and shall also have a date and timestamp for each event and data point in the data log:

(1) Initial activation pressure

(2) Pressure when the HUD deactivates

(3) SCBA pressure on the high pressure side of the first stage pressure reducer

(4) Transmission of visual information signals for breathing air cylinder content specified in 6.3.9.5.1

6.1.12.1

After initial activation, the SCBA shall record pressure as specified in 6.1.12(2) at data loggingintervals of no more than 30 seconds.

6.1.12.2

The SCBA data logging shall incorporate a pressure resolution of no more than 0.7 bar (10 psi)increments.

6.1.12.3

The SCBA shall retain a minimum of 36 hours of data collection before data points are overwritten.

6.1.12.4

SCBA data logging shall be permitted to cease when the HUD deactivates.

6.1.12.5

The data logging information shall be downloadable by the emergency services organization.

6.1.12.6

The SCBA wearer’s breathing rate in liters per minute (lpm) shall be reported at least every 30 secondswith a minimum of 5 lpm resolution.

6.1.12.7

The SCBA manufacturer shall provide data logging software that shall be capable of creating andexporting a CSV file format that provides, at a minimum, the data points specified in 6.1.12(1) through6.1.12(4) .



FR-19_A.6.1.12.docx


29 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

The Technical Committee is adding a new performance requirement for strength of connection tominimize the possibility of inadvertent disengagement of the second stage regulator.

The Technical Committee, at the recommendation of the task group on pneumatic data logging, isalso adding new minimum requirements for pneumatic data logging to the 2018 edition of NFPA1981.

Health and safety benefits are the primary reason for pneumatic data logging. Technologies arecurrently available that make pneumatic data logging for all SCBA a reasonable and necessaryminimum feature.

Pneumatic data logging records various data points related to the performance and mechanics ofSCBA. Both users of SCBA and agencies can derive large benefit from the recorded pneumaticdata logging events. These range from training agencies for the evaluation of air management toresource management agencies that have to substantiate changes in SCBA such as breathing airvolume.

After event review agencies will derive substantial benefit when reviewing post SCBA incidents.These agencies will be much better equipped with knowledge of likely air events before and afterany review. Since pneumatic data logging can be used to assist in evaluating a respiratoryprotection program, both mechanical and user performance can be better understood and improved.

The Technical Committee is adding explanatory Annex text to various paragraphs for pneumaticdata logging.

ResponseMessage:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

27 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.


30 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig


Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Profit, Bryan

I like the breathing rate lpm reporting at least every 30 seconds wondering if the program can do breaths perminute


31 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

FR-19, new annex material

A.6.1.12 Health and safety benefits are the primary reason for pneumatic data logging. Technologies are currently available that make pneumatic data logging for all SCBA a reasonable and necessary minimum feature.

Pneumatic data logging records various data points related to the performance and mechanics of SCBA. Both users of SCBA and agencies can derive large benefit from the recorded pneumatic data logging events. These range from training agencies for the evaluation of air management to resource management agencies that have to substantiate changes in SCBA such as breathing air volume.

After event review agencies will derive substantial benefit when reviewing post SCBA incidents. These agencies will be much better equipped with knowledge of likely air events before and after any review. Since pneumatic data logging can be used to assist in evaluating a respiratory protection program, both mechanical and user performance can be better understood and improved.


6.2.6

The EOSTI alarm shall activate at 33 percent, +5/–0 35 percent, ±2 percent of full cylinder pressure.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

The Technical Committee is making this change to correlate with new NIOSH EOSTIrequirements.

Response Message:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

25 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig


Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.


32 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Johnson, James S.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Kuhn, John F.

When revising the EOSTI alarm activation pressure from 33 percent, +5/0 percent, to 35 percent +/-2 percent, it isrecommended that the HUD visual information signals requirement be revised to align with the newly specifiednominal pressure. It is recommended that section 6.3.9.5.1 be revised to state: HUD visual information signals forbreathing air cylinder content shall display 100 percent, 75 percent, 50 percent, and 35 percent. Thisrecommended revision has applicability to the new data logging requirement specified in section 6.1.12 (4).

Profit, Bryan

Easier to read

Negative with Comment

Hayes, Kenneth

I feel that this increase in EOSTI will continue to be pushed and increased going forward by NIOSH. The currentpercentage allows most end users the ability to gauge the estimated exit time-considering many end users haveeither recently transitioned to the higher(33.3%) standard or in the process of.


33 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


6.6 Emergency Breathing Safety System (EBSS) Design Requirements.

6.6.1

If an SCBA is equipped with an EBSS, it shall meet the performance requirements of Sections 7.20 and8.27.

6.6.2

Each EBSS shall operate off the pressure after the first stage pressure reducer of the SCBA.

6.6.3

The EBSS shall have an operating pressure of at least range between 5.5 bar (80 psi) and 10.3 bar (150psi) .

6.6.4

The EBSS shall have a bi-directional male and female connections with a check valve feature to preventinward contaminants.

6.6.4.1

The EBSS male fitting shall be designed as specified in Figure 6.6.4.1 .

Figure 6.6.4.1 EBSS Male Fitting.

6.6.4.2

The EBSS female fitting shall be designed as specified in Figure 6.6.4.2 .

Figure 6.6.4.2 EBSS Female Fitting.

6.6.5

The EBSS pressure hose assembly shall be have a minimum length of 20 in. long 0.51 m (20 in.) .


34 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

6.6.6

The EBSS shall be accessible deployable by the wearer using a single hand in a one-directional pull .

6.6.7

The EBSS shall require only one action for connection of the donor’s fitting to the receiving SCBA’s fitting.

6.6.8

The EBSS shall require two distinctive actions to disconnect the fitting between the donor SCBA andreceiving SCBA.

6.6.9

The EBSS fitting(s) shall be equipped with a dust cap or sealing plug to prevent dust, dirt, and debris fromentering the fitting(s).

6.6.10

The connection of two EBSS shall be independent of the facepieces.

6.6.11

Identification of the EBSS access location shall be readily visible to an assisting firefighter.



NFPA_1981_FR_18_Figures_6.6.4.1_and_6.6.4.2.doc




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

The Technical Committee is complying with a Correlating Committee request to create auniversal fitting for the EBSS.

ResponseMessage:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

26 Affirmative All



0 Abstention


35 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig


Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Profit, Bryan

good working pressure 80-150 psi and 20 in minimum hose length


Morgan, Judge W.


36 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

Change from: 6.6.3 The EBSS shall have an operating pressure range between 5.5 bar (80 psi) and 10.3 bar(150 psi). Change to: 6.6.3 The EBSS shall have an operating pressure range between 5.5 bar (80 psi) and 12.1bar (175 psi). 1) There is no evidence of why we can’t meet the 80-175 psi. 2) There has not been any validationtesting completed to prove or disprove that the systems are interchangeable if connected to the mismatchedSCBA systems.


37 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

NFPA 1981 FR 18, Figures 6.6.4.1 and 6.6.4.2

Figure 6.6.4.1 EBSS Male Fitting

Figure 6.6.4.2

EBSS Female Fitting


7.2.1.1

SCBA shall be tested for cold environment as specified in 8.2.5.5, Test 1, and the SCBA facepiecepressure shall not be less than 0.0 mm (0.0 in.) water column and from the time the test begins until thetime the test is concluded, the SCBA facepiece pressure shall not be greater than 89 mm (31⁄2 in.) watercolumn above ambient pressure from the time the test begins until the time the test is concluded, and thedata logging functions specified in 6.1.12(1) through 6.1.12(4) shall be operating properly .




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:




The Technical Committee, at the recommendation of the task group on pneumatic data logging, isadding minimum requirements for pneumatic data logging to the 2018 edition of NFPA 1981.

ResponseMessage:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

27 Affirmative All



38 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


0 Abstention

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig


Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Profit, Bryan


39 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

looks good


40 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


7.2.1.2

SCBA shall be tested for hot environment as specified in 8.2.5.6, Test 2, and the SCBA facepiecepressure shall not be less than 0.0 mm (0.0 in.) water column and from the time the test begins until thetime the test is concluded, the SCBA facepiece pressure shall not be greater than 89 mm (31⁄2 in.) watercolumn above ambient pressure from the time the test begins until the time the test is concluded, and thedata logging functions specified in 6.1.12(1) through 6.1.12(4) shall be operating properly .




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:





ResponseMessage:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

27 Affirmative All



41 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


0 Abstention

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig


Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Profit, Bryan


42 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

good


43 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


7.2.1.3

SCBA shall be tested for hot-to-cold environment as specified in 8.2.5.7, Test 3, and the SCBA facepiecepressure shall not be less than 0.0 mm (0.0 in.) water column and from the time the test begins until thetime the test is concluded, the SCBA facepiece pressure shall not be greater than 89 mm (31⁄2 in.) watercolumn above ambient pressure from the time the test begins until the time the test is concluded, and thedata logging functions specified in 6.1.12(1) through 6.1.12(4) shall be operating properly .




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:





ResponseMessage:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

27 Affirmative All



44 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


0 Abstention

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig


Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Profit, Bryan


45 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

yes


46 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


7.2.1.4

SCBA shall be tested for cold-to-hot environment as specified in 8.2.5.8, Test 4, and the SCBA facepiecepressure shall not be less than 0.0 mm (0.0 in.) water column and from the time the test begins until thetime the test is concluded, the SCBA facepiece pressure shall not be greater than 89 mm (31⁄2 in.) watercolumn above ambient pressure from the time the test begins until the time the test is concluded, and thedata logging functions specified in 6.1.12(1) through 6.1.12(4) shall be operating properly .




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:





ResponseMessage:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

27 Affirmative All



47 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


0 Abstention

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig


Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Profit, Bryan


48 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

yes


49 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


7.3.1

SCBA shall be tested for vibration resistance as specified in Section 8.3, Vibration Test, and the SCBAfacepiece pressure shall not be less than 0.0 mm (0.0 in.) water column and from the time the test beginsuntil the time the test is concluded, the SCBA facepiece pressure shall not be greater than 89 mm (31⁄2in.) water column above ambient pressure from the time the test begins until the time the test isconcluded, and the SCBA shall not have movement of the CGA fittings causing a break of any width inthe line, and the data logging functions specified in 6.1.12(1) through 6.1.12(4) shall be operatingproperly .




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:





ResponseMessage:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

27 Affirmative All


50 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig


Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark




51 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

Profit, Bryan

yes


52 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


7.7.2

SCBA shall be tested for corrosion resistance as specified in Section 8.7, Accelerated Corrosion Test, andthe SCBA facepiece pressure shall not be less than 0.0 mm (0.0 in.) water column and from the time thetest begins until the time the test is concluded, the SCBA facepiece pressure shall not be greater than89 mm (31⁄2 in.) water column above ambient pressure from the time the test begins until the time the testis concluded, and the data logging functions specified in 6.1.12(1) through 6.1.12(4) shall be operatingproperly .




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:





ResponseMessage:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

27 Affirmative All



53 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


0 Abstention

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig


Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Profit, Bryan


54 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

yes


55 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


7.11.1

SCBA shall be tested for heat and flame resistance as specified in Section 8.11, Heat and Flame Test,and the SCBA facepiece pressure shall not be less than 0.0 mm (0.0 in.) water column and from the timethe test begins until the time the test is concluded, the SCBA facepiece pressure shall not be greater than89 mm (31⁄2 in.) water column above ambient pressure from the time the test begins until the time the testis concluded, and the data logging functions specified in 6.1.12(1) through 6.1.12(4) shall be operatingproperly .




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:





ResponseMessage:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

27 Affirmative All



56 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


0 Abstention

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig


Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Profit, Bryan


57 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

yes


58 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


7.18 Heat and Immersion Leakage Performance Requirements.

SCBA electronics shall be tested for resistance to heat and water ingress as specified in Section 8.24,Heat and Immersion Leakage Test, and the electronics shall function properly in accordance with theSCBA manufacturer’s instructions for normal use, and all power source compartments or enclosures shallremain dry, and the data logging functions specified in 6.1.12(1) through 6.1.12(4) shall be operatingproperly .




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:





ResponseMessage:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

27 Affirmative All



59 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


0 Abstention

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig


Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Profit, Bryan


60 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

ok


61 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


7.21.2

The duration of the test as specified in Section 8.28, Lens Radiant Heat Test, shall not be 24 minutes,+2/–0 minutes less than 80 percent of the NIOSH-rated duration for the lowest volume cylinder offeredfor the SCBA .




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

The intent of this section is intended to limit compromise to the facepiece by controlling theduration of the test through a limited air duration. The test method should specify the air volume forthe test. The lens performance should be based on the 'worst case' scenario. The worst casescenario would be the lowest cylinder volume offered with the facepiece.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

27 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig



62 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Profit, Bryan

% seems better than minutes


63 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


7.22.2

The duration of the test as specified in Section 8.29, Elevated Temperature Heat and Flame ResistanceTest, shall not be 24 minutes, +2/–0 minutes less than 80 percent of the NIOSH-rated duration for thelowest volume cylinder offered for the SCBA .




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

The intent of this section is intended to limit compromise to the facepiece by controlling theduration of the test through a limited air duration. The test method should specify the air volume forthe test. The lens performance should be based on the 'worst case' scenario. The worst casescenario would be the lowest cylinder volume offered with the facepiece.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

27 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig



64 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Profit, Bryan

% seems better than minutes


65 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

First Revision No. 29-NFPA 1981-2016 [ New Section after 8.2.5.5.2 ]

8.2.5.5.3

The SCBA shall be operated according to the manufacturer’s instructions to test the data loggingfunction as specified in 6.1.12 to determine pass or fail performance.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:





ResponseMessage:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

27 Affirmative All



0 Abstention


66 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig


Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Profit, Bryan

pass/fail


67 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


8.2.5.6.3





Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:





ResponseMessage:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

27 Affirmative All



0 Abstention


68 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig


Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Profit, Bryan

pass/fail


69 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


8.2.5.7.5





Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:





ResponseMessage:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

27 Affirmative All



0 Abstention


70 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig


Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Profit, Bryan

pass/fail


71 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


8.2.5.8.5





Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:





ResponseMessage:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

27 Affirmative All



0 Abstention


72 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig


Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Profit, Bryan

pass/fail


73 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


8.2.6.4

The functioning of the data logging shall be recorded and reported.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:





ResponseMessage:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

27 Affirmative All



0 Abstention


74 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig


Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Profit, Bryan

pass/fail


75 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


8.3.5.7





Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:





ResponseMessage:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

27 Affirmative All



0 Abstention


76 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig


Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Profit, Bryan

pass/fail


77 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


8.3.6.5





Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:





ResponseMessage:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

27 Affirmative All



0 Abstention


78 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig


Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Profit, Bryan

pass/fail


79 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


8.3.7.6

Failure of the data logging function shall constitute failing performance.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:





ResponseMessage:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

27 Affirmative All



0 Abstention


80 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig


Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Profit, Bryan

pass/fail


81 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


8.7.5.12





Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:





ResponseMessage:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

27 Affirmative All



0 Abstention


82 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig


Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Profit, Bryan

pass/fail


83 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


8.7.6.4





Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:





ResponseMessage:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

27 Affirmative All



0 Abstention


84 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig


Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Profit, Bryan

pass/fail


85 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


8.7.7.5

Failure of the data logging function shall constitute failing performance.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:





ResponseMessage:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

27 Affirmative All



0 Abstention


86 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig


Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Profit, Bryan

sounds good


87 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


8.11.5.22





Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:





ResponseMessage:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

27 Affirmative All



0 Abstention


88 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig


Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Profit, Bryan

yes


89 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


8.11.6.6





Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:





ResponseMessage:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

27 Affirmative All



0 Abstention


90 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig


Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Profit, Bryan

pass/fail


91 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


8.24.5.10





Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:





ResponseMessage:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

27 Affirmative All



0 Abstention


92 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig


Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Profit, Bryan

pass/fail


93 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


8.24.5.9

The electronic compartment(s) of the specimen shall be opened and inspected for water leakage todetermine pass or fail, and the functioning of the data logging shall be recorded and reported todetermine pass or fail .




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:





ResponseMessage:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

27 Affirmative All



0 Abstention


94 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig


Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Profit, Bryan

pass/fail


95 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


8.25.1 Application.

This test method shall apply to the complete SCBA facepiece(s) and , second stage regulator(s), andSupplementary Voice Communications System(s) .




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: The TC is adding the requirement for Supplementary Voice Communications System.

The current edition does not include this in 8.25.1.

Response Message:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

27 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig


Affirmative All


96 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

Allen, Jason L.

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Profit, Bryan

pass/fail


97 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

First Revision No. 17-NFPA 1981-2016 [ Section No. 8.25.4.1 [Excluding any

Sub-Sections] ]

Testing shall be conducted in a chamber having the following minimum characteristics:

(1) Minimum room dimensions: 4.6 m long × 3.1 m wide × 2.7 m high (15 ft long × 10 ft wide × 9 ft high)

(2) Construction: hemi-anechoic

(3) Ambient noise level inside chamber: NC-25

(4) Walls and ceiling: ≥90 percent absorptive for 100 Hz< f<10000 Hz




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: This TC is adding the word "minimum" to match 8.10.4.1.

Response Message:

Public Input No. 3-NFPA 1981-2015 [Section No. 8.25.4.1 [Excluding any Sub-Sections]]

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

27 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig



98 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Profit, Bryan

pass/fail


99 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


8.30 Strength of Interface Between Facepiece and Second Stage Regulator Test.

8.30.1 Application.

This test method shall apply to the facepiece and second stage regulator assembly.

8.30.2 Samples.

8.30.2.1

Samples shall be a facepiece and a second stage regulator assembly.

8.30.2.2

Each sample to be tested shall be as specified in 4.3.9 .

8.30.3 Specimens.

One specimen shall be tested.

8.30.4 Specimen Preparation.

Prior to testing, specimens shall be conditioned for a minimum of 4 hours at an ambient temperature of22°C, ±3°C (72°F, ±5°F), with RH of 50 percent, ±25 percent.

8.30.5 Apparatus.

8.30.5.1

The facepiece shall be mounted to a test head, and the facepiece shall be clamped to the head in asecure fashion to prevent the facepiece from pulling away from the head.

8.30.5.2

Measurements shall be taken with a calibrated measuring device having a resolution of better than ±5 N(±1.1 lbf).

8.30.6 Procedure.

8.30.6.1

A static load of 250 N, +10 N/−0 N (56.2 lbf, +2.2 lbf/−0 lbf) shall be applied at a rate of 25.4 mm/min,+2.54 mm/min/−0 mm/min (1 in/min, +1 in/min/−0 in/min) to the second stage regulator mediumpressure supply hose at a point 250 mm to 300 mm (9.8 in. to 11.8 in.) from the point at which the hoseenters the second stage regulator.


100 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

8.30.6.2

The load shall be applied for 10 seconds, +1/−0 seconds in the 5 directions shown in Figure 8.30.6.2 .

Figure 8.30.6.2 Directions of Force Applied for Strength of Interface Testing.

8.30.6.3

Each load applied shall commence with the second stage regulator in an “as worn” position.

8.30.6.4

The center point of the applied loads shall be the entry point of the pressure hose to the second stageregulator.

8.30.6.5

The loads shall be applied perpendicular and normal to the test head face.

8.30.7 Report.

Any disconnection or partial disconnection of the regulator interface with the facepiece shall be recordedand reported.

8.30.8 Interpretation.

8.30.8.1

Disconnection or partial disconnection of the regulator interface with the facepiece shall constitute failingperformance.

8.30.8.2

Disconnection or partial disconnection of wiring components shall not constitute failing performance.



NFPA_1981_FR_20_Figure_8.30.6.2.doc




Street Address:


101 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

The technical committee is providing a method to test the integrity of the interface between thesecond stage regulator and the facepiece under extreme stress.

The test is a variation of the EN 137, section 7.9 test.

ResponseMessage:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

26 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig


Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.


102 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Kuhn, John F.

There are no Chapter 7 performance requirements specified for the Chapter 8 test methods pertaining to Strengthof Interface Between Facepiece and Second Stage Regulator Test. Recommend that we add section 7.23 thatstates: The SCBA facepiece and second stage regulator be tested as specified in Section 8.30, and the regulatorshall not disconnect from the facepiece.

Profit, Bryan

where did 10 sec time frame come from?


103 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

1

NFPA 1981 FR 20 Figure 8.30.6.2

FIGURE 8.30.6.2 Directions of Force Applied for Strength of Interface Testing

First Revision No. 3-NFPA 1981-2016 [ Chapter C ]

Annex C Informational References

C.1 Referenced Publications.

The documents or portions thereof listed in this annex are referenced within the informational sections ofthis standard and are not part of the requirements of this document unless also listed in Chapter 2 forother reasons.

C.1.1 NFPA Publications .


NFPA 1500, Standard on Fire Department Occupational Safety and Health Program, 2013 edition.

NFPA 1852, Standard on Selection, Care, and Maintenance of Open-Circuit Self-Contained BreathingApparatus (SCBA), 2013 edition.

NFPA 1989, Standard on Breathing Air Quality for Emergency Services Respiratory Protection, 2013edition.

C.1.2 Other Publications.

C.1.2.1 ANSI Publications.

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

ANSI Z88.2, Practices for Respiratory Protection,1992 2015 .

ANSI Z88.6, Respiratory Protection — Respirator Use — Physical Qualifications forPersonnel,1984 2006 .

ANSI Z88.10, Respirator Fit Test Methods, 2001 2010 .

C.1.2.2 ASTM Publications .

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

ASTM B16/B16M , Standard Specification for Free-Cutting Brass Rod, Bar and Shapes for Use in ScrewMachines, 2000 2010, reapproved 2015 .

C.1.2.3 ISO Publications.

International Organization for Standardization, 1, rue de Varembé, Case postale 56, CH-1211 Genève20 ISO Central Secretariat, BIBC II, 8, Chemin de Blandonnet, CP 401, 1214 Vernier, Geneva ,Switzerland.

ISO Guide 27, Guidelines for corrective action to be taken by a certification body in the event of misuse ofits mark of conformity, 1983.


ISO/IEC 17065, Conformity Assessment — Requirements for Bodies Certifiying Products, Processesand Services , 1st edition, 2012.

C.1.2.4 U.S. Government Publications.

U.S. Government Printing Publishing Office, 732 North Capitol Street, NW, Washington, DC20402 20401-0001 .

Title 29, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 1910.1 34, “Respiratory Protection,” 8 January 1998 1 July2013 .

Title 42, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 84, “Respiratory Protective Devices, Tests for Permissibility,”8 June 1995.

C.2 Informational References. (Reserved)


104 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

C.2.1 ASME Publications.

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

ASME B46.1, Surface Texture (Surface Roughness, Waviness, and Lay) , 2009.

ASME Y14.38, Abbreviations and Acronyms for Use on Drawings and Related Documents , 2007,reaffirmed 2013.

ASME Y14.5, Dimensioning and Tolerancing , 2009.

C.3 References for Extracts in Informational Sections. (Reserved)




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

The technical committee created this First Revision based in part on the Public Input provided,but also further updated edition dates and titles.

ResponseMessage:

Public Input No. 2-NFPA 1981-2015 [Chapter C]

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

6 Not Returned

27 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Anaya, Christopher

Colton, Craig E.

Dickson, William

Kaller, Clint

Martin, Craig


Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.


105 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM

Almqvist, Hans O.

Berning, Steven K.

Bernzweig, David T.

Brubaker, Ryan

Colbert, Rodney V.

Gainey, Robin R.

Golla, Ed

Harkness, A. Ira

Haston, David V.

Hayes, Kenneth

Johnson, James S.

Kuhn, John F.

Lancaster, Beth C.

Lentz, Kevin D.

Miles, Stephen T.

Morgan, Judge W.

Mundy, William T.

Ochoa, Ruby

Radtke, Timothy M.

Rossos, Daniel N.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sell, Robert

Steedman, Trevor L.


Trudgeon, Mark



Profit, Bryan

looks good


106 of 106 6/1/2016 2:12 PM


M E M O R A N D U M

TO: Technical Committee on Electronic Safety Equipment

FROM: Yvonne Smith, Project Administrator DATE: June 16, 2016 SUBJECT: NFPA 1982 First Draft Technical Committee FINAL Ballot Results (F2017)



1 Members Not Returned (Agi) 31 Members Voted Affirmative on All Revisions (1 w/ comment: Hogg ) 2 Members Voted Negative on one or more Revisions (Facella, Haase) 0 Members Abstained on one or more Revisions The attached report shows the number of affirmative, negative, and abstaining votes as well as the explanation of the vote for each revision.

To pass ballot, each revision requires: (1) a simple majority of those eligible to vote and (2) an affirmative vote of 2/3 of ballots returned. See Sections 3.3.4.3.(c) and First Draft reference 4.3.10. of the Regulations Governing the Development of NFPA Standards.


1.1.3*

This standard shall also not specify the minimum requirements for any manufactured to previous editions ofthis standard the design, performance, testing, and certification of PASS or RF PASS devices certified to anearlier edition of this standard that incorporate parts, components, and/or software to meet this edition of thestandard .



FR-77_A.1.1.3.docx




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

It is often desired by end users and owners of PASS and RF-PASS certified to earlier editions of thisstandard to receive updated parts, components and software that have been certified to the latest edition ofthis standard. To allow this in an open manner and to optimize the approval application process, this clausehas been added such that the latest revision of the standard will be used for the certification of the newparts to certify their use on earlier edition PASS devices. Example: New firmware for sound to be installedinto the processor of earlier PASS devices so that they can be updated accordingly. For this to occur, thelatest edition of the standard is to be used for the testing and modification to the previous certification.

The Technical Committee is adding Annex material included in the document for 1.1.3 proposed changes.

ResponseMessage:



Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention


1 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.

Makky, Sr., Steven J.

Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Interpretation of the wording requested in order to confirm that desired result for the committee to accept allowingexisting customer base with approvals to earlier revisions to accept newly approved elements.


2 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

8.1.X Wet Conditioning Procedure 2 for Glove Composites

8.1.X.1 Samples shall be conditioned by being subjected to a water spray that evenly deposits a mist of water on the thermal barrier layer of the composite using the apparatus and procedures described in 8.1.X.2 through 8.1.X.7. 8.1.X.2* A means of spraying water at a rate of 0.22 g/s ± 0.5 g/s uniformly over a 150 mm x 150 mm (6 in. x 6 in.) sample while measuring the weight of the sample shall be employed. 8.1.X.2.1 The nozzle shall be positioned directly over the sample. 8.1.X.2.2 The nozzle for applying the water spray shall be design not to drip onto the sample at the onset or completion of the designated water spray. 8.1.X.2.3 The spraying shall be conducted in a closed chamber that limits disturbance of the mist deposition of the sample from air currents. 8.1.X.2.4 The sample shall be positioned on a balance that is capable of measuring the sample weight to the nearest 0.1 g. The balance pan shall have a minimum pan dimension of 150 mm x 150 mm (6 in. x 6 in.) 8.1.X.2.5 The uniformity of the water spray shall be determined (calibration) by measuring the mass of water deposited into 9 square cup that measure 50 mm x 50 mm (2 in. x 2 in.) square that are positioned where water collected on the sample. Uniformity of the spray pattern shall be determined by measuring the weight of each dry cup prior to the calibration and then measuring the weight of the cup following the application of the spray for a period of 20 seconds where the wet cup weights are within 20% of each other. 8.1.X.3 Samples for conditioning shall be the innermost layer of the glove composite that are cut to 150 mm x 150 mm (6 in. x 6 in.). 8.1.X.4 The dry weight of the glove composite innermost layer sample to be wetted shall be measured on a spray chamber balance to the nearest 0.1 g. 8.1.X.5 A mass of 2.5 g ± 0.1 g of water shall be sprayed on the innermost layer of the glove composite as confirmed by the measurement of its weight on the balance. 8.1.X.6 Following the application of the water spray, the innermost layer of the glove shall be handled by the edges and assembled in a composite sample representative of the glove’s construction for the area of the glove to evaluated. 8.1.X.7 Samples subjected to this conditioning shall be evaluated within 5 minutes following the wetting. **New Annex Material** A.8.1.X.2 A test apparatus that can provide this method of wetting consists of a chamber in which a specialized nozzle directs flow downward onto a horizontally positioned specimen that is placed on a balance. An apparatus meeting the requirement in this section consists of a Plexiglas chamber with piping that supports a full cone brass misting nozzle that is positioned at a distance of 560 mm (22 in.) above a specimen on top of a balance protected in a plastic bag that uses a Plexiglas 150 mm x 150 mm (6 in. x 6 in.) square as the balance pan in lieu of the original. Pressure to the nozzle is provided by a ¾ horsepower clear water pump with a capacity of 650 gallons per hour, a maximum pressure of 43 psi, and a 1 in. NPT outlet. A gate valve is positioned to control flow of water from a 5 gallon bucket reservoir into the pipe with a 200 mesh water filter installed prior to the nozzle. The system is also equipped with an overflow value and ventura valve to eliminate dripping from the nozzle during starting and ending of the

water flow. The entire assembly is mounted to a movable cart. The specific instructions for the operation of this system are provided below. Fill the 5 gallon bucket at least 1/2 full of tap water (see Figure A.8.1.X.2(1)). The bucket cannot be removed from the cart, but this can be achieved by pouring water from inside the chamber through the red funnel or pumping in from the side into the top of the bucket.

Always maintain a few inches of water in the bucket. If the bucket is empty, the pump will lose its prime. To reprime the pump, remove the brass screw on the prime valve located on the top/back of the pump. Pour water into the pump until it is full and replace the screw.

Plug in the pump (black cord) into the outlet box/switch which is located underneath the front left side of the unit.

Plug in the outlet box/switch (red cord) into a standard 220v outlet. This cord is located on the right side of the cart.

Fully open the main flow valve. For the open position the handle should be “in line” with the pipe.

Attach the bottom end of the overflow tube into the bucket to continuously drain the water back into the system.

Turn blue handle to fully open the overflow valve.

Remove blue rubber cap from nozzle.

Remove the plastic and metal sections on top of balance, as these items are not needed.

Place the scale in a clear plastic bag and seal.

NOTE: Scale is balance with a plexiglass elevated platform to allow drainage.

Place scale and 150 mm x 150 mm (6 in. x 6 in.) Plexiglas square on top of the scale, both centered in the chamber.

Turn balance on and make sure the reading is 0.0g Place sample on the Plexiglas balance pan.

Multiply the weight of the sample times the % of the weight gain that you want to achieve. This will give the ending weight value to stop the timer. Close the chamber door for even air flow. Turn on the pump switch and timer until desired weight is met (calculated above) Turn off pump switch and timer. NOTE: Periodically the water filter should be cleaned. This the black elbow on the top of the main flow pipe. Unscrew the top cap, remove the filter, rinse under water and replace.

5 Gallon Bucket

Pump

Outlet Box/Switch

Power Cord

Main Flow Valve

Overflow Valve

Nozzle

Scale and Sample

Water Filter FRONT VIEW

Chamber Front Door Handle

5 Gallon Bucket

BACK VIEW

Overflow Tube

Pump Prime Valve

Overflow Tube

Attachment


1.1.4

This standard shall not specify requirements for any accessories that could be attached to the PASS but thatare not necessary for the PASS to meet the requirements of this standard.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Editorial correction.

Response Message:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


3 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


4 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


1.3.1

This standard shall not apply to any PASS manufactured to previous editions of this standard the design,performance, testing, and certification of PASS or RF PASS devices certified to an earlier edition of thisstandard that incorporate replacement parts, components, and/or software to be certified to this edition of thestandard .




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

It is often desired by end users and owners of PASS and RF-PASS certified to earlier editions of thisstandard to receive updated parts, components and software that have been certified to the latest edition ofthis standard. To allow this in an open manner and to optimize the approval application process, this clausehas been added such that the latest revision of the standard will be used for the certification of the newparts to certify their use on earlier edition PASS devices. Example: New firmware for sound to be installedinto the processor of earlier PASS devices so that they can be updated accordingly. For this to occur, thelatest edition of the standard is to be used for the testing and modification to the previous certification.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.


5 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Interpretation of the wording requested in order to confirm that desired result for the committee to accept allowingexisting customer base with approvals to earlier revisions to accept newly approved elements.


6 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM



2.1 General.






NFPA 1981, Standard on Open-Circuit Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) for Emergency Services,2013 2018 edition.


2.3.1 ANSI Publications.

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

ANSI/UL 913, Standard for Intrinsically Safe Apparatus and Associated Apparatus for Use in Class I, II, III,Division 1, Hazardous (Classified) Locations, Sixth edition.

ANSI B46.1, Surface Texture , 1978 S1.4, Specification for Sound Level Meters, 1983, reaffirmed 2006.

ANSI/ASA S1.13, Methods for Measurement of Sound Pressure Level ® Levels in Air, , 2005, reaffirmed 2010 .

ANSI Y1.1, Abbreviations for Use on Drawings and Text , 1972.

ANSI Y14.SM, Dimensioning and Tolerancing , 1982.

2.3.2 ASME Publications.

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

ASME B46.1, Surface Texture (Surface Roughness, Waviness & Lay), 2009.

ASME Y14.38, Abbreviations and Acronyms for Use on Drawings and Related Documents, 2007, reaffirmed2013.

ASME Y14.5, Dimensioning and Tolerancing, 2009.

2.3.3 ASTM Publications .

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

ASTM B 117 B117 , Standard Practice for Operating Salt Spray (Fog) Apparatus, 2003 , 2011 .


7 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


International Organization for Standardization, 1, rue de Varembé, Case postale 56, CH-1211 Geneve 20, ISOCentral Secretariat, BIBC II, Chemin de Blandonnet 8, CP 401, 1214 Vernier, Geneva, Switzerland.

ISO 9001, Quality management systems — Requirements,2000 2015 .

ISO/IEC 17011, Conformity assessment — General requirements for accreditation bodies accrediting conformityassessment bodies, 2004.

ISO/IEC 17021-1 , Conformity assessment — Requirements for bodies providing audit and certification ofmanagement systems, 2006 2015 .

ISO/IEC 17025, General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories, 2005,Technical Corrigendum 1, 2006 .

ISO/IEC Guide 17065, Conformity assessment — Requirements for bodies certifying products, processes andservices , 2012.

ISO 17493, Clothing and equipment for protection against heat — Test method for convective heat resistanceusing a hot air circulating oven, 2000.

ISO Guide 27, Guidelines for corrective action to be taken by a certification body in the event of misuse of itsmark of conformity, 1983.

ISO Guide 62, General requirements for bodies operating assessment and certification/registration of qualitysystems , 1996.



U.S. Government Printing Publishing Office, 732 North Capitol Street, NW, Washington, DC20402 20401-0001 .

Title 47, Code of Federal Regulations, Subchapter A, General, Telecommunications, Chapter I, FederalCommunications Commission, Part 15, Radio Frequency Devices.







Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: The Technical Committee is updating document dates, titles and publication addresses.

Response Message:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All


8 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted.


9 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


3.3.1.2 Loss-of-Signal Alarm.

An audible or A visual signal that is initiated automatically when the RF communication between a base stationand RF PASS is lost. The loss-of-signal alarm warns emergency services personnel that their RF PASS is nolonger in radio communication with the base station.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

Firefighters advised that having an audible alarm for out of range would be a distraction from the other"more urgent" alarms, and hence requested to change the wording to indicate a visual alarm only for out ofrange. There was discussion about an optional audible out of range alarm that could be muted, but that wasalso struck as indicated by log #20 (1982-23 Log #20 FAE-ELS) The log was accepted in principal andimplemented for 6.4.5.1 and 6.4.5.2 (the audible requirement was removed). The reference to the audiblealarm should have also been removed from the definition in 3.3.1.2 (this Public Input) and corrected in8.2.5.5 (another Public Input submitted). The strike out of the second sentence was done by the TechnicalCommittee to eliminate redundancy.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.


10 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


11 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

First Revision No. 7-NFPA 1982-2016 [ Section No. 3.3.14.2.1 ]

3.3.14.2.1 Base Station.

An RF transceiver used in conjunction with an RF PASS that monitors for an alarm signal and emits an audibleand a visual signal when this alarm is received. The base station is capable of sending an evacuation alarm tothe RF PASS.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

The committee intended to delete the audible alarm requirement for base stations in the previousedition of the standard. See committee action to logs 20 &21 of the ROC for the 2013 cycle.

ResponseMessage:

Public Input No. 12-NFPA 1982-2015 [Section No. 3.3.14.2.1]

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle


12 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


13 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


4.1.3

All certification shall be performed by a certification organization that meets at least the requirementsspecified personal protective equipment (PPE) requirements specified in Section 4.2, Certification Program,and that is accredited for personal protective equipment (PPE) PPE in accordance with ISO/IEC Guide 65,General requirements for bodies operating product certification systems 17065, Conformity assessment —Requirements for bodies certifying products, processes and services . The accreditation shall be issued by anaccreditation body operating in accordance with ISO/IEC 17011, Conformity assessment — Generalrequirements for accreditation bodies accrediting conformity assessment bodies.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Updates document number to current document number and title.

Response Message:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David


14 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


15 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


4.1.7

The certification organization shall not certify any PASS to the 2007 2013 edition of this standard on or after theNFPA effective date for the 2013 2018 edition, which is December 17, 2012 [insert date to be determined by theNFPA Standards Council] .




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

The Technical Committee is updating the PASS certification date and the document effectivedate.

Response Message:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.


16 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

To simplify, 12 months after publication date was discussed at previous committee meetings. Seek clarification.


17 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


4.1.8

The certification organization shall not permit any manufacturer to label any PASS as compliant with the2007 2013 edition of this standard on or after August 31, 2013 2018 .




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

The Technical Committee is resolving this Public Input by updating the PASS labeling compliance date.

Note: This public input originates from Tentative Interim Amendment No. 1982-13-1, Log 1112 issued by theStandards Councils on August 26, 2013 and per the NFPA Regulations, needs to be reconsidered by theTechnical Committee for the next edition of the Document.

Submitter's Substantiation: This TIA is related to a similar TIA being submitted to NFPA 1981. The testingand certification of an integrated PASS device is directly related to the testing and certification of the SCBA.The submitters emphasize the importance of the two documents continuing to have the same compliancedates.

The purpose of this TI A is to update on the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)testing of CBRN SCBAs. Some unanticipated delays have the potential to negatively impact the timelinessof completion of NIOSH SCBA approvals. These delays could in turn impact approvals and certification ofSCBAs by the relevant certification organization (SEI) to the NFPA 1981 standard, 2013 edition. Thatstandard states in paragraph 4.1 .11 that "The certification organizations shall not permit any manufacturerto label any SCBA as compliant with the 2007 edition of this standard on or after 31 August 2013, exceptwhen replacement labels or replacement components that bear the certification organization's label arerequired." The presumption in the Technical Committee choosing t his date was that it would providesufficient time for manufacturers' new designs to have successfully completed the evaluations for thecertification authorities to be able to issue certifications for compliance to the NIOSH and NFPA standardsby that date.

Emergency Nature: NIOSH testing to the Statement of Standard for Self Contained Breathing Apparatus(SCBA) with Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear (CBRN) Protection used to Protect EmergencyResponders Against CBRN Agents in Terrorist Attacks in conjunction with the National Fi re ProtectionAssociation (NFPA) Standard 1981 for Open-Circuit Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus for Fire Fighterscontain three interlocked activities. One is NIOSH certification under 42 CFR Part 84, Subpart H; two iscompliance with National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Standard 1981 for Open-Circuit Self-ContainedBreathing Apparatus for Fire Fighters, current edition; and three is special tests under NIOSH 42 CFR84.63(c): Chemical Agent Permeation and Penetration Resistance Against Distilled Su lfur Mustard (HD)and Sarin (GB), performed by The U S Army Edgewood Chemical Biological Center (ECBC) Testing Centerand Laboratory Respirator Protection Level (LRPL), performed by NPPTL. To minimize

the total time for CBRN approvals, NIOSH and SE I have a simultaneous test and approval protocol.

The National Personal Protective Technology Laboratory (NPPTL) has allocated its resources provide forthe completion of all 9 internally-conducted tests, evaluations and issuance of approvals for SCBA


18 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

manufacturer applications submitted prior to I June 2013 by 1 September 2013. SEI has also allocatedresources to provide for completion of the NFPA 1981 compliance testing for apparatus received by thesame date.

However, the availability of ECBC testing resources to complete the HD and GB testing has been negativelyimpacted by the Federal Government Budget Sequestration. Consequently, delays are anticipated.Representatives from NPPTL and ECBC are working closely to develop a projected testing schedule.

A delay past the August 31 st date poses a significant impact on fire departments or first responderorganizations that planned 4th quarter of 2013 purchases or need an emergency purchase of compliantSCBA with integrated PASS. These organizations may not have access to the manufacturer of their currentinventory SCBA, posing the dilemma of purchasing another manufacturers product or foregoing purchaseuntil compliant product is available. Either of these approaches will impact firefighter safety, by requiringadditional training and creating a mixed inventory of SCBA with compromised interoperability of SCBA units.Departments may be faced with either an inadequate number of compliant SCBAs for operations or sendingresponders into a hazardous situation with safety equipment that is no longer compliant with NFPA 1981.Additionally, there is concern that without this compliance date extension, products compliant to the 2007edition of NFPA 1981 will no longer be availabl e after August 31, 2013.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.


19 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

See FR-3 comment


20 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


4.1.9

The certification organization shall require manufacturers to remove all certification labels and product labelsindicating compliance with the 2007 2013 edition of this standard from all PASS that are under the control of themanufacturer on August 31, 2013 2018 . The certification organization shall verify this action is taken.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

The Technical Committee is resolving this public input and updating the label removal date.

Note: This public input originates from Tentative Interim Amendment No 1982-13-1, Log No. 1112 issued bythe Standards Council on August 26, 2013 and per the NFPA Regulations needs to be reconsidered by theTechnical Committee for the next edition of the Document.

Submitter's Substantiation: This TIA is related to a similar TIA being submitted to NFPA 1981 . The testingand certification of an integrated PASS device is directly related to the testing and certification of the SCBA.The submitters emphasize the importance of the two documents continuing to have the same compliancedates.

The purpose of this TIA is to update on the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)testing of CBRN SCBAs. Some unanticipated delays have the potential to negatively impact the timelinessof completion of NIOSH SCBA approvals. These delays could in turn impact approvals and certification ofSCBAs by the relevant certification organization (SEI) to the NFPA 1981 standard, 2013 edition. Thatstandard states in paragraph 4.1 .11 that "The certification organizations shall not permit any manufacturerto label any SCBA as compliant with the 2007 edition of this standard on or after 31 August 2013, exceptwhen replacement labels or replacement components that bear the certification organization's label arerequired." The presumption in the Technical Committee choosing this date was that it would providesufficient time for manufacturers' new designs to have successfully completed the evaluations for thecertification authorities to be able to issue certifications for compliance to the NIOSH and NFPA standardsby that date.

Emergency Nature: NIOSH testing to the Statement of Standard for Self Contained Breathing Apparatus(SCBA) with Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear (CBRN) Protection used to Protect EmergencyResponders Against CBRN Agents in Terrorist Attacks in conjunction with the National Fire ProtectionAssociation (NFPA) Standard 1981 for Open-Circuit Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus for Fire Fighterscontain three interlocked activities. One is NIOSH certification under 42 CFR Part 84, Subpart H; two iscompliance with National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Standard 1981 for Open-Circuit Self-ContainedBreathing Apparatus for Fire Fighters, current edition; and three is special tests under NIOSH 42 CFR84.63(c): Chemical Agent Permeation and Penetration Resistance Against Distilled Sulfur Mustard (HD) andSarin (GB), performed by The U S Army Edgewood Chemical Biological Center (ECBC) Testing Center andLaboratory Respirator Protection Level (LRPL), performed by NPPTL. To minimize the total time for CBRNapprovals, NIOSH and SEI have a simultaneous test and approval protocol.

The National Personal Protective Technology Laboratory (NPPTL) has allocated its resources provide forthe completion of all 9 internally-conducted tests, evaluations and issuance of approvals for SCBA


21 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

manufacturer applications submitted prior to I June 2013 by 1 September 2013. SEI has also allocatedresources to provide for completion of the NFPA 1981 compliance testing for apparatus received by thesame date.

However, the availability of ECBC testing resources to complete the HD and GB testing has been negativelyimpacted by the Federal Government Budget Sequestration. Consequently, delays are anticipated.Representatives from NPPTL and ECBC are working closely to develop a projected testing schedule.

A delay past the August 31st date poses a significant impact on fire departments or first responderorganizations that planned 4th quarter of 2013 purchases or need an emergency purchase of compliantSCBA with integrated PASS. These organizations may not have access to the manufacturer of their currentinventory SCBA, posing the dilemma of purchasing another manufacturers product or foregoing purchaseuntil compliant product is available. Either of these approaches will impact firefighter safety, by requiringadditional training and creating a mixed inventory of SCBA with compromised interoperability of SCBA units.Departments may be faced with either an inadequate number of compliant SCBAs for operations or sendingresponders into a hazardous situation with safety equipment that is no longer compliant with NFPA 1981.Additionally, there is concern that without this compliance date extension, products compliant to the 2007edition of NFPA 1981 will no longer be available after August 3 1, 2013.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.


22 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

See FR-3 comment


23 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


4.2.3

The certification organization shall be accredited for PPE in accordance with ISO/IEC Guide 65, Generalrequirements for bodies operating product certification systems 17065, Conformity assessment —Requirements for bodies certifying products, processes and services . The accreditation shall be issued by anaccreditation body operating in accordance with ISO/IEC 17011, Conformity assessment — Generalrequirements for accreditation bodies accrediting conformity assessment bodies.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Updates document number to current document number and title.

Response Message:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle


24 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


25 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


4.2.8.1

The certification organization and the manufacturers manufacturer shall evaluate replacement parts,components, and software to determine any changes affecting the form, fit, or function for of PASS or RF PASSdevices certified to the 2007 edition of NFPA 1982 to permit revisions to the original certification earlier editionsof this standard to permit incorporation of replacement parts, components, or software, leading to certification ofdevices to this edition of the standard .




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Allows PASS manufacturers to upgrade devices.

This sets in place a process for upgrading previously certified devices to the new standard.

Response Message:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David


26 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

See FR-77 comment


27 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


4.3.9.1

The point-to-point RF attenuation test and RF interference test shall be performed with the RF PASS and thebase station connected together as described in Section 8.19 , Radio System Tests for RF PASS — Point-to-Point RF Attenuation Test, and Section 8.21 , Radio System Tests for RF PASS — RF Interference Test,respectively.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: The TC is deleting this paragraph because it duplicates what is already covered in Chapter 7.

Response Message:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.


28 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


29 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


4.3.9.2

The loss-of-signal alarm test shall be performed with the RF PASS and the base station set up as described inSection 8.20 , Radio System Tests for Optional RF PASS — Loss-of-Signal Alarm Test.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

The TC is deleting this paragraph because it is duplicative of what is already covered in Chapter7.

Response Message:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William


30 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


31 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


4.3.10


32 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

PASS shall be tested for initial certification to this edition of NFPA 1982 and shall meet the performancerequirements of the test series specified in the test matrix in Table 4.3.10(a) and Table 4.3.10(b) as applicable,for the type of PASS being certified.

Table 4.3.10(a) Test Matrix for Stand-Alone PASS and Removable Integrated PASS

Test

Order

Specimens

1–3

Specimens

4–6

Specimens

7–9

Specimens

10–12

Specimens

13–15

Specimens

16–18

Specimens

19–21

Sp

1

Soundpressure(Section 8.2),specimens1–3

Shocksensitivity(Section 8.7),specimens4–6

Electronictemperaturestress —elevated(8.3.5),specimens7–9

Waterdrainage(Section 8.11),specimens10–12

Case integrity(Section 8.6),specimens13–15

Vibration test(Section 8.9),specimens16–18

Tumblevibration(Section 8.17),specimens19–21

Signafreque(Secti 8.14specim

2

Alarm signalmuffle(Section 8.18),specimens1–3

Impactacceleration— ambient(Section 8.8),specimen 4

Electronictemperaturestress — low(8.3.6),specimens7–9

Corrosion(Section 8.4),specimens10–12

Retentionsystem(Section 8.10),specimens13–15

Point-to-pointRFattenuationtest(Section 8.19),specimens19–21

3

Impactacceleration— cold(Section 8.8),specimen 5

Electronictemperaturestress —shock (8.3.7),specimens7–9

Product labeldurability(Section 8.16),specimens10–12

Hightemperaturefunctionality(Section 8.12),specimens13–15

Loss-of-signalalarm test(Section 8.20),specimens19–21

4

Heat/flametest 1(8.13.5.8),specimen 1

Impactacceleration— elevated(Section 8.8),specimen 6


RFinterferencetest(Section 8.21),specimens19–21

5


Heat andimmersionleakage(Section 8.5),specimens7–9

RF MultipathTest (Section8.22)specimens19–21

6



RF Multi-hopTest (Section8.23)specimens19–21

Table 4.3.10(b) Test Matrix for Nonremovable Integrated PASS

Test

Order

Specimens

1–3

Specimens

4–6

Specimens

7–9

Specimens

10–12

Specimens

13–15

Specimens

16–18

Specimens

19–21

1

Soundpressure(Section 8.2),specimens1–3

Shocksensitivity(Section 8.7),specimens4–6

Electronictemperaturestress —elevated(8.3.5),specimens7–9

Waterdrainage(Section 8.11),specimens10–12

Case integrity(Section 8.6),specimens13–15

Tumblevibration(Section 8.17),specimens16–18

Signal frequencies(Section Sections 8and 8.15 ), specime19–21

2

Alarm signalmuffle(Section 8.18),specimens1–3

Vibration test(Section 8.9),specimens4–6

Electronictemperaturestress — low(8.3.6),specimens

Corrosion(Section 8.4),specimens10–12

Hightemperaturefunctionality(Section 8.12),specimens

Point-to-pointRFattenuationtest(Section 8.19),


33 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

7–9 13–15specimens16–18

3

Electronictemperaturestress —shock (8.3.7,specimens7–9


Loss-of-signalalarm test(Section 8.20),specimens16–18

4



RFinterferencetest(Section 8.21),specimens16–18

5


Heat andimmersionleakage(Section 8.5),specimens7–9

RF MultipathTest (Section8.22)specimens16–18

6



RF Multi-hopTest (Section8.23)specimens16–18

Test

Order

Specimens

1–3

Specimens

4–6

Specimens

7–9

Specimens

10–12

Specimens

13–15

Specimens

16–18

Specimens

19–21

4.3.10.1

Where there is more than one test for a single test specimen required by Table 4.3.10(a) or Table 4.3.10(b) , theorder of testing shall be from top to bottom of the test specimen column as shown in the table.

4.3.10.2

When testing removable integrated PASS, test specimens 1, 2, and 3, as identified in Table 4.3.10(a), shall be inthe integrated PASS configuration.

4.3.10.3

When testing specimen PASS in accordance with Section 8.3, Electronic Temperature Stress Test; Section 8.4,Corrosion Resistance Test; Section 8.5, Heat Immersion/Leakage Resistance Test; Section 8.6, Case IntegrityTest; Section 8.8, Impact Acceleration Resistance Test; and Section 8.13, Heat and Flame Test, one specimenPASS, instead of all three specimens tested in each test series, shall be selected to be used for evaluation of therequirements of 7.1.2. The one specimen PASS that is selected shall be chosen at random from each of therespective series of three specimens for each test.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

The Technical Committee is adding a missing reference and adding the new tests for multipathand multi-hop.


34 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Response Message:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.


35 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


36 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


4.5.3.2

Where the registrar specified in 4.5.3.1 is currently accredited for PPE in accordance with the 1996 edition ofISO Guide 62, General requirements for bodies operating assessment and certification/registration of qualitysystems , that accreditation shall be permitted until September 14, 2008.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: The Technical Committee is deleting this reference due to the expiration of Guide 62.

Response Message:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William


37 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


38 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


4.5.3.2

Not later than September 14, 2008, registrars Registrars specified in 4.5.3.1 shall be accredited for PPE inaccordance with the 2006 edition of ISO/IEC 17021-1 , Conformity assessment — Requirements for bodiesproviding audit and certification of management systems.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: The Technical Committee is updating the document title and revision date.

Response Message:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William


39 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


40 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


4.5.3.3

Any new accreditations for registrars specified in 4.5.3.1 for PPE shall only be in accordance with the 2006edition of ISO/IEC 17021-1 , Conformity assessment — Requirements for bodies providing audit andcertification of management systems.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement


Response Message:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William


41 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


42 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


5.1.6

The following statement One of the following statements, as applicable, shall be legibly printed on the productlabel(s) and placed in a conspicuous location. All letters shall be at least 2 mm (1⁄16 in.) in height.

5.1.6.1

For PASS devices without RF capability, the label shall read:

“THIS THIS PASS MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF NFPA 1982, STANDARD ON PERSONAL ALERT SAFETY S

5.1.6.2

For PASS devices with RF capability, the label shall read:

THIS RF PASS MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF NFPA 1982, STANDARD ON PERSONAL ALERT SAFETY SYS

5.1.6.3

For RF PASS with repeating capability, the label shall read:

THIS RF PASS (RPT) MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF NFPA 1982, STANDARD ON PERSONAL ALERT SAFET

5.1.6.4

PASS or RF PASS devices certified to previous editions of this standard that have been upgraded to meetthis edition shall have the following statement legibly printed. All letters shall be at least 2 mm ( 1 ⁄16 in.) inheight. The label is not restricted to one line. The original NFPA required labeling shall not be removed orcovered by the upgrade label.

UPGRADED TO NFPA 1982, 2018 EDITION.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

The Technical Committee is updating the labeling requirements to clearly identify PASS, RF PASSand RF PASS with repeating capability and adding an upgrade label requirement.

ResponseMessage:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All




43 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


44 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


5.2.4

The PASS manufacturer shall provide at least the following instructions and information with each PASS:

(1) Pre-use information as follows:

(a) Safety considerations

(b) Limitations of PASS

(c) Marking recommendations and restrictions

(d) Warranty information

(2) Preparation for use as follows:

(a) Preferred mounting position and orientation for optimal performance

(b) Training instructions

(c) Recommended storage practices

For RF PASS systems that utilize a portable computer as part of the base station, the danger ofmuting the computer’s speaker, in which case, the base station operator would not receive the alarmsignal or loss-of-signal alarm from the RF PASS.

(3) Inspection frequency and details

(4) Proper use

(5) Maintenance and cleaning as follows:

(a) Cleaning instructions and precautions

(b) Power source testing and replacement

(c) Adjustments, if applicable

(d) Maintenance criteria

(e) Painting

(f) Decontamination procedures

(6) Retirement criteria and considerations

(7) Procedure for reporting PASS problems to the manufacturer and to the certification organization



NFPA_1982_Clean_Text_5.2.4.docx For staff use




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement


45 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

CommitteeStatement:

Delete subparagraph 5.2.4.2(d) completely. The Technical Committee intended to delete the audiblealarm requirement for base stations in the 2013 edition. See committee action to logs 20 & 21 of the 2013ROC. As a result, this requirement is not needed since the audible alarm requirement for base stations isto be removed.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.


46 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


47 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


6.1.2.5.1

The base station shall be designed to emit an audible and a visual signal alarm when the alarm signaldescribed in 6.4.3 is activated by the RF PASS unit, when the evacuation alarm is initiated, and/or when theloss-of-signal alarm is triggered.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

The Committee intended to delete the audible alarm requirement for base stations in the 2013 edition.See Committee Action to Logs 20 & 21 of the2013 ROC. Additionally, as written, section 6.1.2.5.1 is indirect conflict with sections 6.4.3.2.1 and 6.54.5.1 which requjre that both the base station and the RFPASS emit a recurrent visual loss of signal alarm.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David


48 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


49 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


6.2.7.3

Base station units for RF PASS shall sound an audible alarm and indicate on a visual display the presence of allRF PASS units that are in alarm mode.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

The Committee intended to delete the audible alarm requirement for base stations in the 2013 editionof the standard. See Committee Action to Logs 20 & 21 of the 2013 ROC.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle


50 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


51 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


6.4.2.3

PASS shall sound the pre-alarm signal(s) 10 12 seconds +/−2 seconds prior to the sounding of the alarm signal.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

The current duration of the pre-alarm is actually 12 seconds, not 10. There should be a toleranceon the 12 seconds.

Note: The tolerance should be written as "+/- 2" but the plus sign will not show in the track changesview.

Response Message:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis


52 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


53 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


6.4.2.8.1

The total duration of the three steps shall comply with the time window for the pre-alert alarm specified in 6.3.3.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

The term "pre-alert" should be revised to "pre-alarm" as the term "pre-alert" is not used anywhereelse in NFPA 1982-2013

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.


54 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


55 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


6.4.3.2.1

For RF PASS, when loss of RF communication is detected, the base station shall emit a recurrent visualloss-of-signal alarm and the RF PASS unit shall emit a recurrent visual loss-of-signal alarm within 60 secondsof loss of RF communication. The visual alarm shall recur at a period of no more than 20 seconds. Loss ofcommunication could be due to, but not limited to, the portable unit being out of range or the presence of anRF interferer.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

Section 6.4.5.1 (under 6.5.4 Loss-of-Signal Alarm (RF PASS)) is identical to Section 6.4.3.2.1 (under6.4.3 Alarm Signal). Section 6.4.3.2.1 should be deleted.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David


56 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


57 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


6.4.3.2.1

For RF PASS, while in the sensing mode, the PASS shall sound an audible evacuation or other alarm within30 seconds of the evacuation or other alarm being sent by the base station, unless the RF PASS is in alarmmode or the unit is out of range. Upon resetting the alarm condition, the RF PASS shall sound the evacuation orother alarm within 30 seconds. While the RF PASS is in alarm mode, no other audible alarms shall override orimpede the alarm signal. For RF PASS with integrated repeating capability, the alarm shall be received within 30seconds after two repeater hops, as specified by Section 8.23 , Multi-hop RF Test.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

The Technical Committee is adding an additional requirement because it sets the parameters for themulti-hop test and associates the test for an RF PASS instead of all PASS devices.

ResponseMessage:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis


58 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


59 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

First Revision No. 19-NFPA 1982-2016 [ Section No. 6.4.3.9 [Excluding any Sub-Sections] ]

The PASS annunciator shall be driven by an alarm sequence consisting of the following six eight steps:

(1) A Type 1 chirp sweep

(2) A silent interval of 400.0 300 ms ± 10 100 ms

(3) A Type 2 chirp sweep , repeated a total of 4 times with a silent interval gap of 10 ms ± 0. 5 ms betweeneach chirp sweep

(4) A silent interval of 200.0 300 ms ± 10 100 ms

(5) A Type 1 warble A Type 3 chirp, repeated a total of 8 times with a gap of 10 ms ± 0.001 ms between eachchirp

(6) A Type 2 warble A silent interval of 1500.0 ms ± 50 ms

(7) A Type 1 warble

(8) A silent interval of 600 ms ± 30 ms



NFPA_1982_6.4.3.9_FR_19.docx For staff use




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

The Technical Committee is adding a new PASS alarm. There has been dissatisfaction with the 2013PASS alarm. This PASS alarm definition is the "proposed 2018 PASS Alarm" that the PASS alarmTechnical Committee has created. All tests have shown that the proposed PASS alarm is much louderand easier to identify.

ResponseMessage:

Public Input No. 58-NFPA 1982-2015 [Section No. 6.4.3.9 [Excluding any Sub-Sections]]

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

31 Affirmative All




60 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


Haase, Wayne C.


61 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

After adoption of the Fifth (2007) Edition of the NFPA 1982 PASS Standard, the Correlating Committee mandated that,in the future, the PASS alarm should sound the same for all manufacturers’ PASS Devices; to accomplish this, the alarmsound was tightly defined in Section 6.4.3.9 of the 2013 Edition of NFPA 1982. After adoption of the 2013 Edition andcertified units were tested in the field, the sound level was found to be unacceptably low by numerous user groupscompared to PASS devices certified to the Fourth (1998) and Fifth (2007) Editions of the Standard. Ultimately the lowsound level problem was traced to the sound pressure level testing method defined in Section 8.2.5.3 and not to theactual sound pattern; for the 2018 Edition of the Standard, the testing method section has been changed from apeak-response method to a fast-response-time method. In addition, at the recommendation of the PASS manufacturers,the alarm sequence, as defined in Section 6.4.3.9, was changed from that of the 2013 alarm sound; these changesreduced the frequency sweep range of the signals and also reduced the frequency accuracy requirements, allowing thealarm sound for PASS devices of one manufacturer to be different from the alarm sound of other manufacturers. Thesound pressure level requirement in Section 7.1.2.1 was actually reduced from 95 dBA to 92 dBA but measured at ashorter distance (1 m vs. 3 m) for a net increase of 6.5 dB. There are two serious problems resulting from the change inalarm sound for the 2018 Edition of the Standard. The first problem is that the alarm sound can be different for differentmanufacturers; as a result, the Correlating Committee requirement is not met, and firefighters may not quickly recognizePASS alarms from other departments. The second problem with the 2018 alarm sound definition relates to firefighterlocation and navigation systems, which have been in development for over 20 years by individual manufacturers andgovernment agencies, including NIST and the Department of Homeland Security. To date, despite development costs inthe tens of millions of dollars, all attempts to produce a universal firefighter locator system have had very limitedsuccess. Prior to the adoption of the 2013 Edition of the Standard, the use of the PASS alarm sound was not considereda viable method for electronically locating a downed firefighter. The 2013 Edition—particularly the tight definition forfrequency sweep range and tolerances—finally allowed the alarm sound to be used for detection and navigation/locationsystems; such systems are currently under development and have shown to have significant life-saving potential overother technologies for indoor navigation/location systems. Unfortunately, the 2018 alarm sound definition virtuallyeliminates the use of the PASS device for navigation/location systems for several reasons. The relaxing of the frequencysweep range and tolerance requirements eliminates the use of the actual alarm sounds for navigation/location. Inaddition, the alarm-sound definition of Section 6.4.3.9 further specifies that intervals between sounds must be silent,eliminating the possibility of adding specially-coded sounds during the silent intervals for use as a navigation/locationsource. At a bare minimum, the “silent” intervals between alarm sounds should be allowed to contain additional audiblesounds to enable use in navigation/location systems.


62 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


6.4.3.9.1

Following Step 6 8 , the alarm sound shall repeat beginning immediately with Step 1.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: The proposed 2018 PASS alarm has 8 steps, not 6

Response Message:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

31 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William


63 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


Haase, Wayne C.

After adoption of the Fifth (2007) Edition of the NFPA 1982 PASS Standard, the Correlating Committee mandated that,in the future, the PASS alarm should sound the same for all manufacturers’ PASS Devices; to accomplish this, the alarmsound was tightly defined in Section 6.4.3.9 of the 2013 Edition of NFPA 1982. After adoption of the 2013 Edition andcertified units were tested in the field, the sound level was found to be unacceptably low by numerous user groupscompared to PASS devices certified to the Fourth (1998) and Fifth (2007) Editions of the Standard. Ultimately the lowsound level problem was traced to the sound pressure level testing method defined in Section 8.2.5.3 and not to theactual sound pattern; for the 2018 Edition of the Standard, the testing method section has been changed from apeak-response method to a fast-response-time method. In addition, at the recommendation of the PASS manufacturers,the alarm sequence, as defined in Section 6.4.3.9, was changed from that of the 2013 alarm sound; these changesreduced the frequency sweep range of the signals and also reduced the frequency accuracy requirements, allowing thealarm sound for PASS devices of one manufacturer to be different from the alarm sound of other manufacturers. Thesound pressure level requirement in Section 7.1.2.1 was actually reduced from 95 dBA to 92 dBA but measured at ashorter distance (1 m vs. 3 m) for a net increase of 6.5 dB. There are two serious problems resulting from the change inalarm sound for the 2018 Edition of the Standard. The first problem is that the alarm sound can be different for differentmanufacturers; as a result, the Correlating Committee requirement is not met, and firefighters may not quickly recognizePASS alarms from other departments. The second problem with the 2018 alarm sound definition relates to firefighterlocation and navigation systems, which have been in development for over 20 years by individual manufacturers andgovernment agencies, including NIST and the Department of Homeland Security. To date, despite development costs inthe tens of millions of dollars, all attempts to produce a universal firefighter locator system have had very limitedsuccess. Prior to the adoption of the 2013 Edition of the Standard, the use of the PASS alarm sound was not considereda viable method for electronically locating a downed firefighter. The 2013 Edition—particularly the tight definition forfrequency sweep range and tolerances—finally allowed the alarm sound to be used for detection and navigation/location


64 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

systems; such systems are currently under development and have shown to have significant life-saving potential overother technologies for indoor navigation/location systems. Unfortunately, the 2018 alarm sound definition virtuallyeliminates the use of the PASS device for navigation/location systems for several reasons. The relaxing of the frequencysweep range and tolerance requirements eliminates the use of the actual alarm sounds for navigation/location. Inaddition, the alarm-sound definition of Section 6.4.3.9 further specifies that intervals between sounds must be silent,eliminating the possibility of adding specially-coded sounds during the silent intervals for use as a navigation/locationsource. At a bare minimum, the “silent” intervals between alarm sounds should be allowed to contain additional audiblesounds to enable use in navigation/location systems.


65 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


6.4.3.9.2 Type 1 Chirp Sweep .

The Type 1 chirp shall begin with a frequency of 4.000 kHz ± 0.02 kHz and shall sweep to a frequency of 2.000kHz ± 0.01 kHz using the following method: The Type 1 chirp shall be a binary (on/off) pulse wave consisting ofsequential cycles whose period changes on a cycle-to-cycle basis. The first cycle shall have a period of 250 μs± 1.25 μs. The second cycle shall have a period of 250.4 μs ± 1.252 μs. The period for each succeeding cycleshall continue to be increased by 0.4 μs ± 0.002 µs until the last cycle, which shall have a period of 500 μs ±2.50 μs. The Type 1 sweep is a 1 second ± 50 ms frequency sweep with a minimum of 100 increasingfrequency steps. The start frequency and end frequency shall be in the range of 2000 Hz to 4000 Hz and theend frequency must be a minimum of 500 Hz greater than the start frequency.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

The Technical Committee is eliminating the definition of the Type 1 Chirp and replacing with thedefinition of the Type 1 Sweep. The Type 1 Sweep is a component of the proposed 2018 PASS alarmsound

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

31 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.


66 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted in principle as this specification is being tested and validated to be fit for purpose. Until the completion of testsand the acceptance of the results, this specification is open to change. I request that the Fire-fighter committee membersare fully involved in the user acceptance of the new sound and specification to avoid the repeat of this work asexperienced by the release of the 2013 alarm sound.


Haase, Wayne C.

After adoption of the Fifth (2007) Edition of the NFPA 1982 PASS Standard, the Correlating Committee mandated that,in the future, the PASS alarm should sound the same for all manufacturers’ PASS Devices; to accomplish this, the alarmsound was tightly defined in Section 6.4.3.9 of the 2013 Edition of NFPA 1982. After adoption of the 2013 Edition andcertified units were tested in the field, the sound level was found to be unacceptably low by numerous user groupscompared to PASS devices certified to the Fourth (1998) and Fifth (2007) Editions of the Standard. Ultimately the lowsound level problem was traced to the sound pressure level testing method defined in Section 8.2.5.3 and not to theactual sound pattern; for the 2018 Edition of the Standard, the testing method section has been changed from apeak-response method to a fast-response-time method. In addition, at the recommendation of the PASS manufacturers,the alarm sequence, as defined in Section 6.4.3.9, was changed from that of the 2013 alarm sound; these changesreduced the frequency sweep range of the signals and also reduced the frequency accuracy requirements, allowing the


67 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

alarm sound for PASS devices of one manufacturer to be different from the alarm sound of other manufacturers. Thesound pressure level requirement in Section 7.1.2.1 was actually reduced from 95 dBA to 92 dBA but measured at ashorter distance (1 m vs. 3 m) for a net increase of 6.5 dB. There are two serious problems resulting from the change inalarm sound for the 2018 Edition of the Standard. The first problem is that the alarm sound can be different for differentmanufacturers; as a result, the Correlating Committee requirement is not met, and firefighters may not quickly recognizePASS alarms from other departments. The second problem with the 2018 alarm sound definition relates to firefighterlocation and navigation systems, which have been in development for over 20 years by individual manufacturers andgovernment agencies, including NIST and the Department of Homeland Security. To date, despite development costs inthe tens of millions of dollars, all attempts to produce a universal firefighter locator system have had very limitedsuccess. Prior to the adoption of the 2013 Edition of the Standard, the use of the PASS alarm sound was not considereda viable method for electronically locating a downed firefighter. The 2013 Edition—particularly the tight definition forfrequency sweep range and tolerances—finally allowed the alarm sound to be used for detection and navigation/locationsystems; such systems are currently under development and have shown to have significant life-saving potential overother technologies for indoor navigation/location systems. Unfortunately, the 2018 alarm sound definition virtuallyeliminates the use of the PASS device for navigation/location systems for several reasons. The relaxing of the frequencysweep range and tolerance requirements eliminates the use of the actual alarm sounds for navigation/location. Inaddition, the alarm-sound definition of Section 6.4.3.9 further specifies that intervals between sounds must be silent,eliminating the possibility of adding specially-coded sounds during the silent intervals for use as a navigation/locationsource. At a bare minimum, the “silent” intervals between alarm sounds should be allowed to contain additional audiblesounds to enable use in navigation/location systems.


68 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


6.4.3.9.3* Type 2 Chirp Sweep .

Starting at a lower frequency of 2.0 kHz ± 0.1 kHz, the frequency shall rise in a sweeping manner, by aminimum number of 100 equal or near equal frequency steps, to an upper frequency of 4.0 kHz ± 0.1 kHz in234 ms ± 1.17 ms. The sweeping chirps are to be kept close to linear rising frequency steps from the lower tothe upper frequency to maintain the consistent audible sound pattern. It shall be permitted to change from linearfrequency steps to nonlinear steps to allow a particular frequency or frequencies to be held for up to 50+5 msbefore returning as quickly as practicable to a normal linear rate to finish at the upper frequency. At higherfrequencies (e.g., above 3.5 kHz) it might be necessary to increase the frequency step rate just before startingto hold a peak frequency. The Type 2 sweep is a 250 ms ± 12.5 ms frequency sweep with a minimum of 25increasing frequency steps. The start frequency and end frequency shall be in the range of 2000 Hz to 4000 Hzand the end frequency must a minimum of 500 Hz greater than the start frequency.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: The Type 2 Sweep is a part of the proposed 2018 PASS alarm sound.

Response Message:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

31 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.


69 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon



Haase, Wayne C.

After adoption of the Fifth (2007) Edition of the NFPA 1982 PASS Standard, the Correlating Committee mandated that,in the future, the PASS alarm should sound the same for all manufacturers’ PASS Devices; to accomplish this, the alarmsound was tightly defined in Section 6.4.3.9 of the 2013 Edition of NFPA 1982. After adoption of the 2013 Edition andcertified units were tested in the field, the sound level was found to be unacceptably low by numerous user groupscompared to PASS devices certified to the Fourth (1998) and Fifth (2007) Editions of the Standard. Ultimately the lowsound level problem was traced to the sound pressure level testing method defined in Section 8.2.5.3 and not to theactual sound pattern; for the 2018 Edition of the Standard, the testing method section has been changed from apeak-response method to a fast-response-time method. In addition, at the recommendation of the PASS manufacturers,the alarm sequence, as defined in Section 6.4.3.9, was changed from that of the 2013 alarm sound; these changesreduced the frequency sweep range of the signals and also reduced the frequency accuracy requirements, allowing the


70 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

alarm sound for PASS devices of one manufacturer to be different from the alarm sound of other manufacturers. Thesound pressure level requirement in Section 7.1.2.1 was actually reduced from 95 dBA to 92 dBA but measured at ashorter distance (1 m vs. 3 m) for a net increase of 6.5 dB. There are two serious problems resulting from the change inalarm sound for the 2018 Edition of the Standard. The first problem is that the alarm sound can be different for differentmanufacturers; as a result, the Correlating Committee requirement is not met, and firefighters may not quickly recognizePASS alarms from other departments. The second problem with the 2018 alarm sound definition relates to firefighterlocation and navigation systems, which have been in development for over 20 years by individual manufacturers andgovernment agencies, including NIST and the Department of Homeland Security. To date, despite development costs inthe tens of millions of dollars, all attempts to produce a universal firefighter locator system have had very limitedsuccess. Prior to the adoption of the 2013 Edition of the Standard, the use of the PASS alarm sound was not considereda viable method for electronically locating a downed firefighter. The 2013 Edition—particularly the tight definition forfrequency sweep range and tolerances—finally allowed the alarm sound to be used for detection and navigation/locationsystems; such systems are currently under development and have shown to have significant life-saving potential overother technologies for indoor navigation/location systems. Unfortunately, the 2018 alarm sound definition virtuallyeliminates the use of the PASS device for navigation/location systems for several reasons. The relaxing of the frequencysweep range and tolerance requirements eliminates the use of the actual alarm sounds for navigation/location. Inaddition, the alarm-sound definition of Section 6.4.3.9 further specifies that intervals between sounds must be silent,eliminating the possibility of adding specially-coded sounds during the silent intervals for use as a navigation/locationsource. At a bare minimum, the “silent” intervals between alarm sounds should be allowed to contain additional audiblesounds to enable use in navigation/location systems.


71 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


6.4.3.9.5 Type 2 Warble.

The Type 2 warble is a 200 ms ± 10 ms sound that alternates between Tone B and Tone C every 10 ms ± 5ms.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: The Type 2 Warble is a part of the proposed 2018 PASS alarm sound

Response Message:

Public Input No. 63-NFPA 1982-2015 [New Section after 6.4.3.9.4]

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

31 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William


72 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon



Haase, Wayne C.

After adoption of the Fifth (2007) Edition of the NFPA 1982 PASS Standard, the Correlating Committee mandated that,in the future, the PASS alarm should sound the same for all manufacturers’ PASS Devices; to accomplish this, the alarmsound was tightly defined in Section 6.4.3.9 of the 2013 Edition of NFPA 1982. After adoption of the 2013 Edition andcertified units were tested in the field, the sound level was found to be unacceptably low by numerous user groupscompared to PASS devices certified to the Fourth (1998) and Fifth (2007) Editions of the Standard. Ultimately the lowsound level problem was traced to the sound pressure level testing method defined in Section 8.2.5.3 and not to theactual sound pattern; for the 2018 Edition of the Standard, the testing method section has been changed from apeak-response method to a fast-response-time method. In addition, at the recommendation of the PASS manufacturers,the alarm sequence, as defined in Section 6.4.3.9, was changed from that of the 2013 alarm sound; these changesreduced the frequency sweep range of the signals and also reduced the frequency accuracy requirements, allowing thealarm sound for PASS devices of one manufacturer to be different from the alarm sound of other manufacturers. Thesound pressure level requirement in Section 7.1.2.1 was actually reduced from 95 dBA to 92 dBA but measured at ashorter distance (1 m vs. 3 m) for a net increase of 6.5 dB. There are two serious problems resulting from the change inalarm sound for the 2018 Edition of the Standard. The first problem is that the alarm sound can be different for differentmanufacturers; as a result, the Correlating Committee requirement is not met, and firefighters may not quickly recognizePASS alarms from other departments. The second problem with the 2018 alarm sound definition relates to firefighterlocation and navigation systems, which have been in development for over 20 years by individual manufacturers andgovernment agencies, including NIST and the Department of Homeland Security. To date, despite development costs inthe tens of millions of dollars, all attempts to produce a universal firefighter locator system have had very limited


73 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

success. Prior to the adoption of the 2013 Edition of the Standard, the use of the PASS alarm sound was not considereda viable method for electronically locating a downed firefighter. The 2013 Edition—particularly the tight definition forfrequency sweep range and tolerances—finally allowed the alarm sound to be used for detection and navigation/locationsystems; such systems are currently under development and have shown to have significant life-saving potential overother technologies for indoor navigation/location systems. Unfortunately, the 2018 alarm sound definition virtuallyeliminates the use of the PASS device for navigation/location systems for several reasons. The relaxing of the frequencysweep range and tolerance requirements eliminates the use of the actual alarm sounds for navigation/location. Inaddition, the alarm-sound definition of Section 6.4.3.9 further specifies that intervals between sounds must be silent,eliminating the possibility of adding specially-coded sounds during the silent intervals for use as a navigation/locationsource. At a bare minimum, the “silent” intervals between alarm sounds should be allowed to contain additional audiblesounds to enable use in navigation/location systems.


74 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


6.4.3.9.6

Tones A, B, and C shall be between 2000 Hz and 4000 Hz.

6.4.3.9.6.1 Tone A.

Tone A is a frequency between 2300 Hz and 4000 Hz.

6.4.3.9.6.2 Tone B.

Tone B is a frequency 100 Hz to 200 Hz below Tone A.

6.4.3.9.6.3 Tone C.

Tone C is a frequency 200 Hz to 300 Hz below Tone B.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Part of the definition for the proposed 2018 PASS alarm sounds.

Response Message:





Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

31 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All


75 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon



Haase, Wayne C.

After adoption of the Fifth (2007) Edition of the NFPA 1982 PASS Standard, the Correlating Committee mandated that,in the future, the PASS alarm should sound the same for all manufacturers’ PASS Devices; to accomplish this, the alarmsound was tightly defined in Section 6.4.3.9 of the 2013 Edition of NFPA 1982. After adoption of the 2013 Edition andcertified units were tested in the field, the sound level was found to be unacceptably low by numerous user groupscompared to PASS devices certified to the Fourth (1998) and Fifth (2007) Editions of the Standard. Ultimately the low


76 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

sound level problem was traced to the sound pressure level testing method defined in Section 8.2.5.3 and not to theactual sound pattern; for the 2018 Edition of the Standard, the testing method section has been changed from apeak-response method to a fast-response-time method. In addition, at the recommendation of the PASS manufacturers,the alarm sequence, as defined in Section 6.4.3.9, was changed from that of the 2013 alarm sound; these changesreduced the frequency sweep range of the signals and also reduced the frequency accuracy requirements, allowing thealarm sound for PASS devices of one manufacturer to be different from the alarm sound of other manufacturers. Thesound pressure level requirement in Section 7.1.2.1 was actually reduced from 95 dBA to 92 dBA but measured at ashorter distance (1 m vs. 3 m) for a net increase of 6.5 dB. There are two serious problems resulting from the change inalarm sound for the 2018 Edition of the Standard. The first problem is that the alarm sound can be different for differentmanufacturers; as a result, the Correlating Committee requirement is not met, and firefighters may not quickly recognizePASS alarms from other departments. The second problem with the 2018 alarm sound definition relates to firefighterlocation and navigation systems, which have been in development for over 20 years by individual manufacturers andgovernment agencies, including NIST and the Department of Homeland Security. To date, despite development costs inthe tens of millions of dollars, all attempts to produce a universal firefighter locator system have had very limitedsuccess. Prior to the adoption of the 2013 Edition of the Standard, the use of the PASS alarm sound was not considereda viable method for electronically locating a downed firefighter. The 2013 Edition—particularly the tight definition forfrequency sweep range and tolerances—finally allowed the alarm sound to be used for detection and navigation/locationsystems; such systems are currently under development and have shown to have significant life-saving potential overother technologies for indoor navigation/location systems. Unfortunately, the 2018 alarm sound definition virtuallyeliminates the use of the PASS device for navigation/location systems for several reasons. The relaxing of the frequencysweep range and tolerance requirements eliminates the use of the actual alarm sounds for navigation/location. Inaddition, the alarm-sound definition of Section 6.4.3.9 further specifies that intervals between sounds must be silent,eliminating the possibility of adding specially-coded sounds during the silent intervals for use as a navigation/locationsource. At a bare minimum, the “silent” intervals between alarm sounds should be allowed to contain additional audiblesounds to enable use in navigation/location systems.


77 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


6.4.3.9.4 Type 3 Chirp 1 Warble .

The Type-3 chirp shall begin with a frequency of 2.000 kHz ± 0.01 kHz and shall sweep to a frequency of 4.000± 0.02 kHz using the following method. The Type 3 chirp shall be a binary (on/off) pulse wave consisting ofsequential cycles whose period changes on a cycle-to-cycle basis. The first cycle shall have a period of 500 μs± 2.50 µs. The second cycle shall have a period of 499.2 μs ± 2.496 µs. The period for each succeeding cycleshall continue to be decreased by 0.8 μs ± 0.004 µs until the last cycle, which shall have a period of 249.6 μs ±1.248 µs. The Type 1 warble is a 400 ms ± 20 ms sound that alternates between Tone A and Tone B every 10ms ± 5 ms.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: The Type 1 Warble is a part of the proposed 2018 PASS Alarm sound

Response Message:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

31 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David


78 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon



Haase, Wayne C.

After adoption of the Fifth (2007) Edition of the NFPA 1982 PASS Standard, the Correlating Committee mandated that,in the future, the PASS alarm should sound the same for all manufacturers’ PASS Devices; to accomplish this, the alarmsound was tightly defined in Section 6.4.3.9 of the 2013 Edition of NFPA 1982. After adoption of the 2013 Edition andcertified units were tested in the field, the sound level was found to be unacceptably low by numerous user groupscompared to PASS devices certified to the Fourth (1998) and Fifth (2007) Editions of the Standard. Ultimately the lowsound level problem was traced to the sound pressure level testing method defined in Section 8.2.5.3 and not to theactual sound pattern; for the 2018 Edition of the Standard, the testing method section has been changed from apeak-response method to a fast-response-time method. In addition, at the recommendation of the PASS manufacturers,the alarm sequence, as defined in Section 6.4.3.9, was changed from that of the 2013 alarm sound; these changesreduced the frequency sweep range of the signals and also reduced the frequency accuracy requirements, allowing thealarm sound for PASS devices of one manufacturer to be different from the alarm sound of other manufacturers. Thesound pressure level requirement in Section 7.1.2.1 was actually reduced from 95 dBA to 92 dBA but measured at ashorter distance (1 m vs. 3 m) for a net increase of 6.5 dB. There are two serious problems resulting from the change in


79 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

alarm sound for the 2018 Edition of the Standard. The first problem is that the alarm sound can be different for differentmanufacturers; as a result, the Correlating Committee requirement is not met, and firefighters may not quickly recognizePASS alarms from other departments. The second problem with the 2018 alarm sound definition relates to firefighterlocation and navigation systems, which have been in development for over 20 years by individual manufacturers andgovernment agencies, including NIST and the Department of Homeland Security. To date, despite development costs inthe tens of millions of dollars, all attempts to produce a universal firefighter locator system have had very limitedsuccess. Prior to the adoption of the 2013 Edition of the Standard, the use of the PASS alarm sound was not considereda viable method for electronically locating a downed firefighter. The 2013 Edition—particularly the tight definition forfrequency sweep range and tolerances—finally allowed the alarm sound to be used for detection and navigation/locationsystems; such systems are currently under development and have shown to have significant life-saving potential overother technologies for indoor navigation/location systems. Unfortunately, the 2018 alarm sound definition virtuallyeliminates the use of the PASS device for navigation/location systems for several reasons. The relaxing of the frequencysweep range and tolerance requirements eliminates the use of the actual alarm sounds for navigation/location. Inaddition, the alarm-sound definition of Section 6.4.3.9 further specifies that intervals between sounds must be silent,eliminating the possibility of adding specially-coded sounds during the silent intervals for use as a navigation/locationsource. At a bare minimum, the “silent” intervals between alarm sounds should be allowed to contain additional audiblesounds to enable use in navigation/location systems.


80 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


6.4.5.2

The loss-of-signal alarm shall consist of an audible and a visual alarm distinct from the alarm and theevacuation signal.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

The Committee intended to delete the audible alarm requirement for base stations in the 2013edition. See Committee Action to Logs 20 & 21 of the 2013 ROC.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle


81 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


82 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


6.4.5.4

The loss-of-signal alarm shall have an interval not to exceed 60 seconds.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

Section 6.4.5.4 says that the Loss-of-Signal alarm interval is 60 seconds. This contradicts Section6.4.5.1, which says 20 seconds. Section 6.4.5.4 is being deleted entirely to resolve this.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.


83 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


84 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


7.1.2.1

PASS shall be tested for the sound pressure level of the alarm signal as specified in Section 8.2, SoundPressure Level Tests, and shall not have the alarm signal, once activated, be deactivated by the motiondetector; shall have the alarm signal sound pressure level not be less than 95 dBA for an uninterrupted durationof not less than 1 hour, 92 dBA; and shall have PASS function properly as specified in 6.4.3.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

Changes to the sound pressure level measurement method has an impact on the SPL valuerecorded for the PASS.

Response Message:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

31 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle


85 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon



Haase, Wayne C.

After adoption of the Fifth (2007) Edition of the NFPA 1982 PASS Standard, the Correlating Committee mandated that,in the future, the PASS alarm should sound the same for all manufacturers’ PASS Devices; to accomplish this, the alarmsound was tightly defined in Section 6.4.3.9 of the 2013 Edition of NFPA 1982. After adoption of the 2013 Edition andcertified units were tested in the field, the sound level was found to be unacceptably low by numerous user groupscompared to PASS devices certified to the Fourth (1998) and Fifth (2007) Editions of the Standard. Ultimately the lowsound level problem was traced to the sound pressure level testing method defined in Section 8.2.5.3 and not to theactual sound pattern; for the 2018 Edition of the Standard, the testing method section has been changed from apeak-response method to a fast-response-time method. In addition, at the recommendation of the PASS manufacturers,the alarm sequence, as defined in Section 6.4.3.9, was changed from that of the 2013 alarm sound; these changesreduced the frequency sweep range of the signals and also reduced the frequency accuracy requirements, allowing thealarm sound for PASS devices of one manufacturer to be different from the alarm sound of other manufacturers. Thesound pressure level requirement in Section 7.1.2.1 was actually reduced from 95 dBA to 92 dBA but measured at ashorter distance (1 m vs. 3 m) for a net increase of 6.5 dB. There are two serious problems resulting from the change inalarm sound for the 2018 Edition of the Standard. The first problem is that the alarm sound can be different for differentmanufacturers; as a result, the Correlating Committee requirement is not met, and firefighters may not quickly recognizePASS alarms from other departments. The second problem with the 2018 alarm sound definition relates to firefighter


86 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

location and navigation systems, which have been in development for over 20 years by individual manufacturers andgovernment agencies, including NIST and the Department of Homeland Security. To date, despite development costs inthe tens of millions of dollars, all attempts to produce a universal firefighter locator system have had very limitedsuccess. Prior to the adoption of the 2013 Edition of the Standard, the use of the PASS alarm sound was not considereda viable method for electronically locating a downed firefighter. The 2013 Edition—particularly the tight definition forfrequency sweep range and tolerances—finally allowed the alarm sound to be used for detection and navigation/locationsystems; such systems are currently under development and have shown to have significant life-saving potential overother technologies for indoor navigation/location systems. Unfortunately, the 2018 alarm sound definition virtuallyeliminates the use of the PASS device for navigation/location systems for several reasons. The relaxing of the frequencysweep range and tolerance requirements eliminates the use of the actual alarm sounds for navigation/location. Inaddition, the alarm-sound definition of Section 6.4.3.9 further specifies that intervals between sounds must be silent,eliminating the possibility of adding specially-coded sounds during the silent intervals for use as a navigation/locationsource. At a bare minimum, the “silent” intervals between alarm sounds should be allowed to contain additional audiblesounds to enable use in navigation/location systems.


87 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


7.1.2.2

PASS shall be tested for frequency content as specified in Section 8.158.14 and shall have the alarmsignal signals as specified in 6.4.3.9.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

The reference to 8.14 is for the pre-alarm signal covered by 7.1.1.2. The correct test procedurereference for the alarm signal is section 8.15

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

31 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle


88 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


Haase, Wayne C.

After adoption of the Fifth (2007) Edition of the NFPA 1982 PASS Standard, the Correlating Committee mandated that,in the future, the PASS alarm should sound the same for all manufacturers’ PASS Devices; to accomplish this, the alarmsound was tightly defined in Section 6.4.3.9 of the 2013 Edition of NFPA 1982. After adoption of the 2013 Edition andcertified units were tested in the field, the sound level was found to be unacceptably low by numerous user groupscompared to PASS devices certified to the Fourth (1998) and Fifth (2007) Editions of the Standard. Ultimately the lowsound level problem was traced to the sound pressure level testing method defined in Section 8.2.5.3 and not to theactual sound pattern; for the 2018 Edition of the Standard, the testing method section has been changed from apeak-response method to a fast-response-time method. In addition, at the recommendation of the PASS manufacturers,the alarm sequence, as defined in Section 6.4.3.9, was changed from that of the 2013 alarm sound; these changesreduced the frequency sweep range of the signals and also reduced the frequency accuracy requirements, allowing thealarm sound for PASS devices of one manufacturer to be different from the alarm sound of other manufacturers. Thesound pressure level requirement in Section 7.1.2.1 was actually reduced from 95 dBA to 92 dBA but measured at ashorter distance (1 m vs. 3 m) for a net increase of 6.5 dB. There are two serious problems resulting from the change inalarm sound for the 2018 Edition of the Standard. The first problem is that the alarm sound can be different for differentmanufacturers; as a result, the Correlating Committee requirement is not met, and firefighters may not quickly recognizePASS alarms from other departments. The second problem with the 2018 alarm sound definition relates to firefighterlocation and navigation systems, which have been in development for over 20 years by individual manufacturers andgovernment agencies, including NIST and the Department of Homeland Security. To date, despite development costs inthe tens of millions of dollars, all attempts to produce a universal firefighter locator system have had very limited


89 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

success. Prior to the adoption of the 2013 Edition of the Standard, the use of the PASS alarm sound was not considereda viable method for electronically locating a downed firefighter. The 2013 Edition—particularly the tight definition forfrequency sweep range and tolerances—finally allowed the alarm sound to be used for detection and navigation/locationsystems; such systems are currently under development and have shown to have significant life-saving potential overother technologies for indoor navigation/location systems. Unfortunately, the 2018 alarm sound definition virtuallyeliminates the use of the PASS device for navigation/location systems for several reasons. The relaxing of the frequencysweep range and tolerance requirements eliminates the use of the actual alarm sounds for navigation/location. Inaddition, the alarm-sound definition of Section 6.4.3.9 further specifies that intervals between sounds must be silent,eliminating the possibility of adding specially-coded sounds during the silent intervals for use as a navigation/locationsource. At a bare minimum, the “silent” intervals between alarm sounds should be allowed to contain additional audiblesounds to enable use in navigation/location systems.


90 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


7.1.3 PASS Low Power Source Warning Signal.

PASS shall be tested for the sound pressure level of the low power source warning signal as specified inSection 8.2, Sound Pressure Level Tests, and shall have a sound pressure level between 70 and 100 75 dBAand 95 dBA; shall have the low power source warning signal continue to sound for not less than 1 hour; andshall have the PASS function properly as specified in 6.4.4.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:


Response Message:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle


91 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


92 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


7.6 Intrinsic Safety.

PASS shall be tested certified for intrinsic safety as specified in ANSI/UL 913, Standard for Intrinsically SafeApparatus and Associated Apparatus for Use in Class I, II, and III, Division 1 Hazardous (Classified) Locations,and shall meet the requirements for Class I, Groups C and D, and Class II, Groups E, F, and G, Division 1hazardous locations.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

The requirement is being changed form "tested" to "certified" to ensure continued compliance forannual re-certification. Simply stating "tested" could imply a one time initial requirement vs. ongoingcompliance.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

31 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David


93 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


Facella, John A.

This appears to require annual re-certification of the PASS for IS. I am not aware of this having been needed in the pastand this will place undue cost upon fire agencies. As an example I have never heard of IS rated portable radios having tobe re-tested for IS certification.


94 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


7.10 Water Drainage.

PASS shall be tested for water drainage as specified in Section 8.11, Water Drainage Test, and the alarm signalsound pressure level shall be at least 95 92 dBA.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:


Response Message:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

31 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.


95 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Forsyth, William


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

User acceptance requested


Haase, Wayne C.

After adoption of the Fifth (2007) Edition of the NFPA 1982 PASS Standard, the Correlating Committee mandated that,in the future, the PASS alarm should sound the same for all manufacturers’ PASS Devices; to accomplish this, the alarmsound was tightly defined in Section 6.4.3.9 of the 2013 Edition of NFPA 1982. After adoption of the 2013 Edition andcertified units were tested in the field, the sound level was found to be unacceptably low by numerous user groupscompared to PASS devices certified to the Fourth (1998) and Fifth (2007) Editions of the Standard. Ultimately the lowsound level problem was traced to the sound pressure level testing method defined in Section 8.2.5.3 and not to theactual sound pattern; for the 2018 Edition of the Standard, the testing method section has been changed from apeak-response method to a fast-response-time method. In addition, at the recommendation of the PASS manufacturers,the alarm sequence, as defined in Section 6.4.3.9, was changed from that of the 2013 alarm sound; these changesreduced the frequency sweep range of the signals and also reduced the frequency accuracy requirements, allowing thealarm sound for PASS devices of one manufacturer to be different from the alarm sound of other manufacturers. Thesound pressure level requirement in Section 7.1.2.1 was actually reduced from 95 dBA to 92 dBA but measured at ashorter distance (1 m vs. 3 m) for a net increase of 6.5 dB. There are two serious problems resulting from the change inalarm sound for the 2018 Edition of the Standard. The first problem is that the alarm sound can be different for differentmanufacturers; as a result, the Correlating Committee requirement is not met, and firefighters may not quickly recognizePASS alarms from other departments. The second problem with the 2018 alarm sound definition relates to firefighterlocation and navigation systems, which have been in development for over 20 years by individual manufacturers andgovernment agencies, including NIST and the Department of Homeland Security. To date, despite development costs inthe tens of millions of dollars, all attempts to produce a universal firefighter locator system have had very limitedsuccess. Prior to the adoption of the 2013 Edition of the Standard, the use of the PASS alarm sound was not considered


96 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

a viable method for electronically locating a downed firefighter. The 2013 Edition—particularly the tight definition forfrequency sweep range and tolerances—finally allowed the alarm sound to be used for detection and navigation/locationsystems; such systems are currently under development and have shown to have significant life-saving potential overother technologies for indoor navigation/location systems. Unfortunately, the 2018 alarm sound definition virtuallyeliminates the use of the PASS device for navigation/location systems for several reasons. The relaxing of the frequencysweep range and tolerance requirements eliminates the use of the actual alarm sounds for navigation/location. Inaddition, the alarm-sound definition of Section 6.4.3.9 further specifies that intervals between sounds must be silent,eliminating the possibility of adding specially-coded sounds during the silent intervals for use as a navigation/locationsource. At a bare minimum, the “silent” intervals between alarm sounds should be allowed to contain additional audiblesounds to enable use in navigation/location systems.


97 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


7.11 Heat Resistance.

PASS shall be tested for resistance to heat as specified in Section 8.12, High Temperature Functionality Test,and shall not melt, drip, or ignite .

7.11.1

PASS shall be evaluated for proper functioning of signals as specified in 6.4.2.3 and 6.4.3.2, shall have the .

7.11.2

The sound pressure level shall not be less than 95 dBAshall have the 92 dBA .

7.11.3

The data logging functions specified in 6.1.3(1) through 6.1.3(5)operating properly, and shall not melt, drip, orignite shall operate properly.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:


Response Message:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.


98 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


99 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


7.14 Alarm Signal Muffle Test.

PASS shall be tested for resistance to sound pressure level deadening or muffling as specified in Section 8.18,PASS Alarm Signal Muffle Test, and shall have the sound pressure level shall not be less than 95 92 dBA.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:


Response Message:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

31 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.


100 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Forsyth, William


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

User acceptance requested


Haase, Wayne C.

After adoption of the Fifth (2007) Edition of the NFPA 1982 PASS Standard, the Correlating Committee mandated that,in the future, the PASS alarm should sound the same for all manufacturers’ PASS Devices; to accomplish this, the alarmsound was tightly defined in Section 6.4.3.9 of the 2013 Edition of NFPA 1982. After adoption of the 2013 Edition andcertified units were tested in the field, the sound level was found to be unacceptably low by numerous user groupscompared to PASS devices certified to the Fourth (1998) and Fifth (2007) Editions of the Standard. Ultimately the lowsound level problem was traced to the sound pressure level testing method defined in Section 8.2.5.3 and not to theactual sound pattern; for the 2018 Edition of the Standard, the testing method section has been changed from apeak-response method to a fast-response-time method. In addition, at the recommendation of the PASS manufacturers,the alarm sequence, as defined in Section 6.4.3.9, was changed from that of the 2013 alarm sound; these changesreduced the frequency sweep range of the signals and also reduced the frequency accuracy requirements, allowing thealarm sound for PASS devices of one manufacturer to be different from the alarm sound of other manufacturers. Thesound pressure level requirement in Section 7.1.2.1 was actually reduced from 95 dBA to 92 dBA but measured at ashorter distance (1 m vs. 3 m) for a net increase of 6.5 dB. There are two serious problems resulting from the change inalarm sound for the 2018 Edition of the Standard. The first problem is that the alarm sound can be different for differentmanufacturers; as a result, the Correlating Committee requirement is not met, and firefighters may not quickly recognizePASS alarms from other departments. The second problem with the 2018 alarm sound definition relates to firefighterlocation and navigation systems, which have been in development for over 20 years by individual manufacturers andgovernment agencies, including NIST and the Department of Homeland Security. To date, despite development costs inthe tens of millions of dollars, all attempts to produce a universal firefighter locator system have had very limitedsuccess. Prior to the adoption of the 2013 Edition of the Standard, the use of the PASS alarm sound was not considered


101 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

a viable method for electronically locating a downed firefighter. The 2013 Edition—particularly the tight definition forfrequency sweep range and tolerances—finally allowed the alarm sound to be used for detection and navigation/locationsystems; such systems are currently under development and have shown to have significant life-saving potential overother technologies for indoor navigation/location systems. Unfortunately, the 2018 alarm sound definition virtuallyeliminates the use of the PASS device for navigation/location systems for several reasons. The relaxing of the frequencysweep range and tolerance requirements eliminates the use of the actual alarm sounds for navigation/location. Inaddition, the alarm-sound definition of Section 6.4.3.9 further specifies that intervals between sounds must be silent,eliminating the possibility of adding specially-coded sounds during the silent intervals for use as a navigation/locationsource. At a bare minimum, the “silent” intervals between alarm sounds should be allowed to contain additional audiblesounds to enable use in navigation/location systems.


102 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


7.15.1

The base station shall automatically emit an audible a visual alarm in response to an alarm signal received fromthe RF PASS within 30 seconds of alarm activation under the radio channel conditions specified in Section 8.19,Radio System Tests for RF PASS — Point-to-Point RF Attenuation Test.

7.15.2

The RF PASS shall automatically emit an audible alarm within 30 seconds of evacuation alarm transmission bythe base station under the radio channel conditions specified in Section 8.19.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

The Technical Committee intended to delete the audible alarm requirement for base stations in the2013 edition. See Committee Action to Logs 20 & 21 of the 2013 ROC.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.


103 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


104 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


7.15.2

The point-to-point RF attenuation test shall be conducted to determine whether the RF PASS will operate in anRF propagation channel having a specified level of path loss.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: This paragraph is redundant.

Response Message:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


105 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


106 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

First Revision No. 42-NFPA 1982-2016 [ Section No. 7.16 [Excluding any Sub-Sections] ]

RF PASS shall be tested for initiation of audible or a visual alarm signals signal when RF communication is lostas specified in Section 8.20, Radio System Tests for RF PASS — Loss-of-Signal Alarm Test.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

The Technical Committee intended to delete the audible alarm requirement for base stations in the 2013edition. See Committee Action to Logs 20 & 21 of the 2013 ROC. As a result section 7.16 is in directconflict with sections 6.4.3.2.1 and 6.4.5.1 which require that the RF PASS emit a recurrent loss of signalalarm. Based on the wording requiring that the pass be tested for an audible alarm is being deleted..

ResponseMessage:

Public Input No. 22-NFPA 1982-2015 [Section No. 7.16 [Excluding any Sub-Sections]]

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle


107 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


108 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


7.16.1

The base station shall automatically initiate the loss-of-signal alarm in response to loss of RF communicationwith the RF PASS within 60 seconds under the radio channel conditions specified in Section 8.20, RadioSystem Tests for RF PASS — Loss-of-Signal Alarm Test.

7.16.2

The RF PASS shall automatically initiate the loss-of-signal alarm within 60 seconds of loss of RF communicationwith the base station under the radio channel conditions specified in Section 8.20.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

Break 7.16.1 into two sections as is done in Sections 7.17.1 (base station alarm) and 7.17.2 (RFPASS alarm).

Response Message:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David


109 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


110 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


7.17.1

The base station shall automatically emit an audible a visual alarm in response to an alarm signal received fromthe RF PASS within 30 seconds of alarm activation under the radio channel conditions specified in Section 8.21,Radio System Tests for RF PASS — RF Interference Test.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

The Technical Committee intended to delete the audible alarm requirement for base stations in the2013 edition. See Committee Action to Logs 20 & 21 of the 2013 ROC.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle


111 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


112 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


7.18 Radio System Tests—Multipath Test.

RF PASS shall be tested for reliable wireless transmission and reception of alarm signals under a statisticalcondition of multipath reflections as specified in Section 8.22 , Radio System Tests for RF PASS — MultipathTest.

7.18.1

The base station shall automatically emit an audible alarm in response to an alarm signal received from theRF PASS within the time specified in 6.3.2.1 of alarm activation under the radio channel conditions specifiedin Section 8.22 , Radio System Tests for RF PASS — Multipath Test. The RF PASS shall automatically emitan audible alarm within the time specified in 6.3.6 of evacuation alarm transmission by the base stationunder the radio channel conditions specified in Section 8.22 .

7.18.2

The multipath test shall be conducted to determine whether the RF PASS system will operate in an RFenvironment having multipath reflections as characterized in a reverberation chamber.

7.19 Radio System Tests for RF PASS — Multi-hop RF Test.

RF PASS with repeating capability shall be tested for reliable wireless transmission and reception of alarmsignals under a fixed amount of path loss (attenuation) and through two repeaters as specified in Section8.23 , Radio System Tests for RF PASS — Multi-hop RF Test.

7.19.1

The RF PASS shall automatically emit an audible alarm within the time specified in 6.3.2.1 of alarmactivation under the radio channel conditions specified in Section 8.23 , Radio System Tests for RF PASS —Multi-hop RF Test.

7.19.2

The Multi-hop test shall be conducted to determine whether the RF PASS system will operate in an RFenvironment having multipath reflections as characterized in a reverberation chamber as specified in8.22.4.4 .




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

The Technical Committee is adding performance requirements for the Multipath and Multi-hoptests.

Response Message:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned


113 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon


114 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Accepted


115 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


8.2.4.1

Where the audio test mannequin is specified, the test mannequin shall be a Central Display, Inc., ModelMA32 medium-size mannequin or equivalent as shown in Figure 8.2.4.1 .

Figure 8.2.4.1 Audio Test Mannequin.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Tue Mar 29 13:38:05 EDT 2016

Committee Statement

Committee Statement: The TC is adding a reference to the requirement.

Response Message:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil


116 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


117 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


8.2.4.2

The audio test mannequin shall have the sound level meter microphone mounted at the left ear, as shown inFigure 8.2.4.2 .

Figure 8.2.4.2 Audio Test Mannequin.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

Changing PASS Pre Alarm and PASS Low Battery warning SPL measurements to be made in the samewas as the PASS Alarm measurement (1 m spherical distance from the annunciator) would eliminate theneed to show where the sound meter microphone should be positioned. Tests that involve placing themicrophone around the ear are not repeatable or reproducible due to the acoustics of the room, where themic is inserted into the ear, the position of the body of the person holding the meter, etc. Moving to the testwe have specified for the PASS should prove to be more repeatable.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



118 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


119 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


8.2.4.3

The sound level meter shall meet the requirements of ANSI S1.4 Type 1.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

There were no requirements for the sound meter used for the tests, so the TC is adding them inthis paragraph.

Response Message:

Public Input No. 74-NFPA 1982-2015 [New Section after 8.2.4.3]

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William


120 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


121 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


8.2.4.2

The test chamber shall be as specified in ANSI/ASA S1.13, Methods for Measurement of Sound Pressure Levelin Air .




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: The TC is making this change to update the document title and effective date.

Response Message:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


122 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


123 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


8.2.5.1

Specimens shall be tested for sound pressure levels of the signals in accordance with ANSI/ASA S1.13,Methods for Measurement of Sound Pressure Level in Air .




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: The Technical Committee is making this change to update the document title and edition date.

Response Message:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


124 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


125 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


8.2.5.2

The laboratory measurement defined in ANSI/ASA S1.13, Methods for Measurement of Sound Pressure Levelin Air , shall be used for these tests.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: The Technical Committee is making this change to update the document title and edition date.

Response Message:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


126 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


127 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


8.2.5.3

All sound pressure level measurements shall be made with the sound level meter ballistics set to the peakresponse setting. A-weighting with a fast response time (LAF). The max-hold function (if available) shall bepermitted to be used to hold the maximum value observed by the meter for the specified period of time.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

Revised measurement method for the PASS Alarm, PASS Pre-Alarm and PASS low battery warningalarms. This method has proven to correlate with the subjective evaluation of the proposed 2018 PASSalarm. The sound pressure level is integrated over a short period of time rather than just aninstantaneous peak.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David


128 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted in principle as the sound specification is being tested and validated to be fit for purpose. Until the completionof tests and the acceptance of the results, this section is open to change. I request that the Fire-fighter committeemembers are fully involved in the user acceptance of the new sound and specification to avoid the repeat of this work asexperienced by the release of the 2013 alarm sound.


129 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


8.2.8.1

The sound pressure level for the alarm signal shall be measured in a spherical radius at a distance of 3 m + 0.3/-0 m (9.9 ft + 0.9/-0 ft) 1 m +2.5 /−0 cm (3.3 ft +1/−0 in.) in from the specimen's annunciator.

8.2.8.2

The specimen shall be mounted on the audio test mannequin in the preferred mounting position andorientation as specified by the manufacturer.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

Reducing the SPL measurement sphere from 3m to 1m should help to eliminate some of the variability inthe measurements by making the distance from the PASS to the mic significantly smaller than thedimensions of the room. Constructive and destructive wave interference should also be lessened. TheSPL targets for all the tests have been adjusted in other comments to take the reduced distance intoaccount.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.


130 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon



131 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


8.2.8.5

The sound pressure level for the alarm signal shall be measured for 60 minutes +5/-0 minutes. at 60 minutes+1/−0 minutes after the start of the test. Five measurements, each for a minimum duration of 6 seconds, shallbe taken. The maximum sound pressure value shall be recorded for each measurement. The lowest of the fivemeasurements shall be discarded and the remaining four shall be the sound pressure values.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

We only care about SPL at the end of the test (the last minute) when the batteries are at their lowest point.It does not make sense (nor is it practical) to measure the SPL over the entire one hour period. Themeasurement method has been revised to be a series of measurements, taken in the last minute,according to the new method described in 8.2.5.3 (comment #75). One of the measurements is discardedin case there is an error in taking the measurement. The process to deplete the batteries and then wait 59minutes to take the readings is long and tedious. Throwing out one reading will prevent one reading takenin error from ruining the entire test.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.


132 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


133 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


8.2.8.6

The alarm signal sound pressure level shall sound pressure values for the PASS alarm signal shall be recorded,evaluated, and reported for the entire duration to determine pass or fail performance.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

Updating the wording to reflect the one minute measurement time as opposed to the "entireduration" that was suggested.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle


134 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


135 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


8.2.9.4

The sound pressure level for the pre-alarm signal shall be measured at the left ear of the mannequin in aspherical radius at a distance of 1 m +2.5/−0 cm (3.3 ft +1/−0 in.) from the specimen's annunciator for theduration of the pre-alarm.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

Changing the test method for the PASS Pre alarm to match the test method for the PASS fullalarm.

Response Message:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle


136 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


137 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


8.2.10.4

The sound pressure level for the low power source warning signal shall be measured at the left ear of themannequin for 60 minutes +5/-0 minutes 60 minutes +1/−0 minutes after the start of the test. Fivemeasurements, each for a minimum duration of 6 seconds, shall be taken. The maximum sound pressure valueshall be recorded for each measurement. The lowest of the five measurements shall be discarded and theremaining four shall be the sound pressure values .




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

Modifying the test to measure the PASS Low battery warning alarm to use the same procedure as usedfor the PASS Alarm. This method is only measuring the SPL in the last minute of the 60 minute test(where the batteries will be at their lowest). The distance has also been reduced to 1m to help minimizetest variability.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.


138 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


139 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


8.4.4.1

Specimens shall be tested in accordance with ASTM B 117 B117 , Standard Practice for Operating Salt Spray(Fog) Apparatus, the salt spray shall be 5 percent saline solution, and the test exposure shall be for 48 hours+30/−0 minutes.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: The Technical Committee is making this change to update the document number.

Response Message:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William


140 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


141 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


8.12.4.6

The sound test chamber shall be as specified in ANSI/ASA S1.13, Methods for Measurement of SoundPressure Level in Air .




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: The Technical Committee is making this change to update the document title and issuance date.

Response Message:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


142 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


143 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


8.12.5.11

The specimen shall remain motionless and be allowed to cycle from sensing mode to alarm mode. When thePASS cycles into the alarm mode, within 30 seconds the sound pressure level value for the alarm signal shallbe measured in a spherical radius at a distance of 3 m +1/-0 m (9.9 ft +3.3/-0 ft) 1 m +2.5/−0 cm (3.3 ft +1/−0in.) from the specimen’s annunciator.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

Changing the measurement method to be the same as that used for the other PASS alarmmeasurements (at 1m instead of 3m). This will help to reduce measurement variability.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis


144 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon



145 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


8.13.4.1

A calibration mannequin meeting the requirements specified in Figure 8.13.4.1 shall be provided.

Figure 8.13.4.1 Calibration Mannequin.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement


146 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

CommitteeStatement:

The Technical Committee is making these changes to the Figure to update the document titlesand revision dates.

Response Message:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.


147 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


148 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


8.13.4.2

A heat and flame test mannequin meeting the requirements specified in Figure 8.13.4.2 shall be provided.

Figure 8.13.4.2 Heat and Flame Test Mannequin.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

The Technical Committee is making this change to update the document titles and revisiondates.

Response Message:

Ballot Results



149 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


150 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


151 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM



152 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

8.13.4.6

The heat and flame test apparatus shall be as specified in Figure 8.13.4.6(a) and Figure 8.13.4.6(b) .

Figure 8.13.4.6(a) Heat and Flame Test Apparatus: Top View.

Figure 8.13.4.6(b) Heat and Flame Test Apparatus: Side View.



153 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM



Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

The Technical Committee is making these changes to update the document titles and revisiondates.

Response Message:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


154 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


155 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


8.14.4.3

A sampling digital oscilloscope connected to a microphone shall be used to measure the frequencies of thealarm signal.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

Section 8.14.4.3 refers to the alarm signal which is not covered in section 8.14, so it should be deleted.Section 8.14.1 indicates that this test applies to the pre-alarm signal. Measurement equipment for thepre-alarm signal is already specified previously.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle


156 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


157 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


8.14.5.2

The pre-alarm or alarm signal shall be activated, and the signal frequency shall be measured.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

A portion of section 8.14.5.2 refers to the alarm signal which is not covered in section 8.14. Section8.14.1 indicates that this test applies to the pre -alarm signal.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.


158 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


159 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


8.14.6.2

The alarm signal shall be recorded at a minimum of 5 mega-samples/second, verified that it meets therequirements of 6.4.3.9 , and reported.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

Section 8.14.6.2 refers to the alarm signal which is not covered in section 8.14k so it should bedeleted. Section 8.14.1 indicates that this test applies to the pre-alarm signal.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle


160 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


161 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


8.14.7.1

Pass or fail performance shall be determined for each specimen for both the pre-alarm and the alarmsignals signal, verified that it meets the requirements of 6.4.2.8 , and reported .




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

A portion of Section 8.14.7.1 refers to the alarm signal, which is not covered in Section 8.14k so itshould be deleted here. Section 8.14.1. indicates that this test applies to the pre-alarm signal.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle


162 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


163 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


8.18.4.1

The test chamber shall be as specified in ANSI/ASA S1.13, Methods for Measurement of Sound Pressure Levelin Air .




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement


Response Message:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


164 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


165 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


8.18.5.2

Specimens shall be tested for sound pressure levels of the primary alarm signals in accordance with ANSI/ASAS1.13, Methods for Measurement of Sound Pressure Level in Air .




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: The Technical Committee is updating the document titles and revision dates.

Response Message:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


166 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


167 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


8.18.5.3

All sound pressure level measurements shall be made with the sound level meter ballistics set to the peakresponse setting, and the A-weighting with a fast response time (LAF). The maximum-hold function (if available)shall be permitted to be used to hold the maximum value observed by the meter for the specified period of time.The test subject shall don the following:

(1) The protective ensemble specified in 8.18.4.3

(2) The specimen PASS per the manufacturers’ instructions




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

Changing the way that the PASS alarm is measured during the Signal Muffle Test to match theother PASS alarm signal tests.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.


168 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon



169 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


8.18.5.5

The sound pressure level value for the alarm signal shall be measured in a spherical radius at a distance of3 m +1/-0 m (9.9 ft +3.3/-0 ft) in 1 m +2.5/−0 cm (3.3 ft +1/−0 in.) from the waist of the test subject specimen'sannunciator .




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Changing the measurement process to match that of the other PASS alarm tests.

Response Message:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.


170 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon



171 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


8.19.4.1*

The point-to-point RF attenuation test shall be conducted as shown in Figure 8.19.4.1 in the following twoconfigurations:

(1) With the base station acting as the receiver and the RF PASS transmitting an alarm signal

(2) With the RF PASS acting as a receiver and the base station transmitting an evacuation alarm

Figure 8.19.4.1 Apparatus Used for Point-to-Point RF Attenuation Test. Two anechoic chambersprovide shielding between the RF PASS and the base station. The chambers are linked by a knownamount of attenuation, representing a specified path loss.



FR-61_A.8.19.4.1.docx Moved text from figure caption as annex material




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement


172 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Committee Statement: Correction of "SCBU" to "SCBA" in Figure 8.19.4.1.

Response Message:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.


173 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


174 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

FR-61, Moved text to new annex [should appear as a move with legislative changes, not as a new

section]

A.8.19.4.1

Two anechoic chambers providing shielding between the RF PASS and the base station are shown in

Figure 8.19.4.1. The chambers are linked by a known amount of attenuation, representing a specified

path loss.


8.19.4.2

For both configurations, the total attenuation (including cables, connectors, free-space path loss, antenna loss,and external added attenuation) between the base station and the RF PASS shall correspond to 100 dB ± 3dB 3dB . The total attenuation shall be calculated using the methods described in 8.19.5.2.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Insert space between value and unit in “3 dB.”

Response Message:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.


175 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


176 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


8.19.4.4.1*

Overall usable interior height of an anechocic anechoic chamber shall be no less than 40 in. (102 cm) betweenthe antenna and tabletop or 55 in. (140 cm) total. 1.0 m = 3 wavelengths at 900 MHz. These specifications shallnot preclude the use of a larger anechoic chamber, including one large enough to contain operation personnel ifthe RF isolation conditions in 8.19.4.4.2 and field uniformity conditions in 8.19.5.2.1 are satisfied.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Typo. Should be “anechoic.” Also correcting a reference.

Response Message:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle


177 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


178 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


8.19.4.4.6

Each chamber shall include an antenna mount.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

Section 8.19.4.4.6 is essentially repeated in Section 8.19.4.4.7. Section 8.19.4.4.6 should bedeleted.

Response Message:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William


179 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


180 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


8.19.4.4.6

Each chamber shall include a nonconducting antenna mount that shall ensure the usable interior heightspecified in 8.19.4.4.1 8.19.4.4 .




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Incorrect section is specified. “8.19.4.4” should be “8.19.4.4.1”.

Response Message:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William


181 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


182 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


8.19.5.1 Procedure for Field Uniformity Calibration.

8.19.5.1.1

Each anechoic chamber shall be calibrated individually, using the same antenna and interior coaxial cables thatshall be used in 8.19.5.1.5 during the RF PASS test . The configuration shall be as shown in Figure 8.19.5.1.1.

Figure 8.19.5.1.1 Configuration for Testing the Electric Field Uniformity Using a Signal Generator and aThree-Axis Electric Field Probe.

8.19.5.1.2

The antenna used for the point-to-point attenuation RF PASS test shall be mounted to the antenna mountspecified in 8.19.4.4.6 8.19.4.4.7 . A coaxial cable shall connect the antenna to the interior bulkhead adapter ofthe chamber.

8.19.5.1.3

A coaxial cable shall connect the exterior side of the bulkhead adapter of the chamber to a signal generator. Thesignal generator shall be set to the frequency of operation of the RF PASS. The power level setting shall providea reading on the field probe.


183 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

8.19.5.1.4

The field probe shall be connected to its receiver through a chamber bulkhead.

8.19.5.1.5

The total electric field shall be sequentially measured and recorded at the 13 25 points specified in Figure8.19.5.1.5.

Figure 8.19.5.1.5 The Measurement Pattern for Checking the Electric Field Uniformity on the TableSurface.

8.19.5.1.6*

Contour lines of equal power levels, determined from the measured electric field results, E x , E y , and E z ,

shall be plotted. These power levels shall be plotted The power level at each of the 25 points shall be calculatedrelative to the minimum total power measured at one of the 13 25 points. The minimum total power, P, shall bedetermined by calculating the total power at each of the measurement points, and then selecting the minimumvalue of those calculations as follows:

[8.19.5.1.6a]

where:

i = 1, 2, 3 ... 13 25 (the measured points),

k = x, y, z, or “total,” and

[8.19.5.1.6b]

8.19.5.1.7

The variation in the total power over the center 30 cm × 30 cm portion of the surface shall not exceed 3 dB ofvariation in the received signal strength over the center 30 cm × 30 cm of the surface. Seventy five percent ofthe measured points in 8.19.5.1.5 shall not exceed the minimum measured total power results by more than 3dB.



Figure_8.19.5.1.1_Configuration_for_Testing_the_Electric_Field_Uniformity_Using_a_Signal_Generator_and_a_Three-Axis_Electric_Field_Probe..jpg


184 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Figure_8.19.5.1.5_The_Measurement_Pattern_for_Checking_the_Electric_Field_Uniformity_on_the_Table_Surface.jpg




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

This revised text supports the introduction of new test methods for multi-hop operation. Updating the fielduniformity test in the Point-to-Point Attenuation Test as proposed will allow the same field uniformity test tobe used for the existing test methods and for the new Multi-Hop Test. This will save time for the test labswithout increasing uncertainty.

Currently, no standardized methods exist to test the operation of RF-based PASS systems that utilizerepeaters. The rationale for developing the Multi-Hop test method is to fill this gap.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


185 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


186 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


8.20.3.3

The RF PASS shall be tested in conjunction with the model of base station with which it is intended to bedeployed.

8.20.3.3.1

If a portable computer is utilized in the base station, radio system tests shall be conducted using themanufacturer's supplied portable computer.The portable computer, if used,

8.20.3.3.1.1

The radiating element of the base station (i.e., the antenna) shall be placed into the test chamber. with

8.20.3.3.2

If the base station is placed outside the test chamber, a coaxial cable shall connect the antenna to the basestation through either a bulkhead connector or through the bulkhead feed-through.

8.20.3.3.3

If the base station is placed inside the test chamber, the base station shall connect to the host computer usinga shielded data cable via the bulkhead feed-through.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

Conducting these tests as currently written is difficult. Testing with the PC outside of the chamber should bepermissible because the isolation requirements for both the chambers and the interconnection coaxialcables are >100dB, which is the same number for the link budget tests. In addition, the base station (andassociated computer) are assumed to pass FCC regulations, which implies that any high-power emission islimited to the radiating element (i.e., the antenna),of the base station. Therefore, any signal emanating fromthe base station has already been attenuated to FCC Part 15 levels, far below the 1W allowed at theantenna. Also, these FCC tests were conducted with the appropriate cables connected to the base station,which ensures that the long range radio signal is not received by any peripheral cables and re-radiated intothe environment.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All


187 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


188 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


8.20.5.5

Upon closing the second door, the duration until the loss-of-signal alarm sounds from each of the RF PASS andthe base station shall be noted.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

Firefighters advised that having an audible alarm for out of range would be a distraction from the other"more urgent" alarms, and hence requested to change the working to indicate a visual alarm only for out ofrange. There was discussion about an optional audible out of range alarm that could be muted, but thatwas also struck as indicated by log #20 (1982-23 Log #20 FAE-ELS) The log was accepted in principal andimplemented for 6.4.5.1 and 6.4.5.2 (the audible requirement was removed). The TC intended for thisreference to the audible alarm be removed from the definition in 3.3.1.2 (another comment) and 6.4.5.2.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David


189 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


190 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


8.21.4.1

The RF interference test shall be conducted with apparatus that meets the guidelines in 8.21.2 through8.21.4.4, as illustrated in Figure 8.21.4.1.

Figure 8.21.4.1 Apparatus Used for RF Interference Test. Two anechoic chambers provide shieldingbetween the RF PASS and the base station. The chambers are linked by a known amount ofattenuation, representing a specified path loss. An interfering RF signal is introduced into the testchambers by use of a power combiner.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Correction of "SCBU" to "SCBA".

Response Message:


Ballot Results



191 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


192 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


193 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


8.21.4.3 Power Combiner.

A power combiner shall be used to combine the signal from the base station with the interfering signal, as shownin Figure 8.21.4.1. The power combiner shall have two input ports and one output port, shall use Type N orSMA connectors, and shall have a minimum isolation between the input ports of 20 dB.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: The power combiner can also have SMA connectors.

Response Message:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.


194 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


195 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


8.21.4.4.1

The 900 MHz interferer shall be a programmable signal generator or a wireless development board controlled bya computer as illustrated in Figure 8.21.4.4.1. The interferer shall be capable of producing the equivalentchannel usage requirements in Table 8.21.4.4. The interferer shall hop over 51 channels in the 902 MHz to 928MHz band, at a hop duration of 40 ms ± 2 ms. The interferer shall utilize an RF data rate of 38 kB/sec ± 2 kB/secand a serial data rate of 38 kB/sec ± 2 kB/sec. Data are transmitted with filtered non-return-to-zero (NRZ)encoding modulated onto a carrier with binary frequency shift keying (FSK).

Figure 8.21.4.4.1 Apparatus Used for Creating the 900 MHz and 2.46 GHz Band Interference.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Correct "SCBU" to read "SCBA"

Response Message:


Ballot Results



196 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


197 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


198 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


8.21.4.4.3

The physical distance between the transmit antenna and the center of the testing platform supporting theSCBA PASS shall be 1.25 m ± 0.1 m.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

Currently, Section 8.21.4.4.3 references a distance between an antenna and a platform supporting anSCBA, which covers PASS which is integrated with an SCBA. However, since this standard also coversstand alone PASS, the wording in Section 8.21.4.4.3 also needs to anticipate testing stand alone PASS.As a result, the word "SCBA" should be revised to "PASS".

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis


199 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


200 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


8.21.4.4.4

The interference signal path loss in dB shall be calculated as cable losses + plus power combiner insertionlosses + plus external attenuator losses - minus interference signal amplification minus antenna gain in the testchamber. The value shall be 0 dB ± 2 dB, the interference shall be either attenuated or amplified so that thecalculated value equals 0 dB ± 2 dB.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

CommitteeStatement:

Language was not transcribed properly. Section should read: “The interference signal path loss in dBshall be calculated as cable losses + power combiner insertion losses + external attenuator losses –interference signal amplification – antenna gain in the test chamber.” Note that the “minus” sign is missingin the second half of the sentence.

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David


201 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


202 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


8.22 Radio System Tests for RF PASS — Multipath Test.

8.22.1 Application.

This test method shall apply to all RF PASS systems.

8.22.1.1

The RF PASS shall be tested in conjunction with the model of base station with which it is intended to bedeployed. If a portable computer is utilized in the base station, radio system tests shall be conducted using themanufacturer’s supplied portable computer. The portable computer, if used, shall be placed into the testchamber with the base station.

8.22.1.2

The base station, base station computer, and any other electronic equipment associated with the RF PASSsystem shall operate on battery power for the duration of the RF system tests.

8.22.2 Samples.

8.22.2.1

Samples shall be complete RF PASS systems.

8.22.2.2

Samples shall be conditioned as specified in 8.1.2 .

8.22.3 Specimens.

8.22.3.1

Specimens for testing shall be complete RF PASS systems consisting of an RF PASS and the base stationdesigned for use with it, provided by the manufacturer.

8.22.3.2

A single RF PASS and a single base station shall be used in each test. Three different sets of units (portablebase station) shall be tested.

8.22.3.3

All multipath tests shall be conducted using specimens 19–21 in Table 4.3.10(a) if the specimens arestand-alone or removable integrated PASS and specimens 16–18 in Table 4.3.10(b) if the specimens arenon-removable integrated PASS.

8.22.4 Test Apparatus.

8.22.4.1

The multipath test shall be conducted as shown in Figure 8.22.4.1 in the following two configurations:

(1) With the base station acting as the receiver and the RF PASS transmitting an alarm signal

(2) With the RF PASS acting as a receiver and the base station transmitting an evacuation alarm

Figure 8.22.4.1 Setup for the Multipath Test.


203 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

8.22.4.2

For both configurations, the total attenuation (including cables, connectors, free-space path loss, antenna loss,and external added attenuation) between the base station and the RF PASS shall correspond to 100 dB ± 3dB. The total attenuation shall be calculated using the method specified in 8.22.5.3 .

8.22.4.3* Anechoic Chamber.

This test chamber shall be configured as the base station chamber shown in Figure 8.19.4.1 .

8.22.4.4 Reverberation Chamber.

8.22.4.4.1

Overall usable interior dimensions of the reverberation chamber shall be such that the distance between theantenna and the DUT is a minimum of one-half the free space wavelength, and the distance between the DUTand any chamber wall surface is a minimum of one-half the free space wavelength. The free spacewavelength shall be computed at the lowest intended frequency of DUT operation. These specifications shallnot preclude the use of a larger reverberation chamber.

8.22.4.4.2

To isolate the device and base station from each other, the reverberation chamber shall provide at least 100dB shielding from the test platform tabletop to the outside of the chamber at the frequency of operation of theRF PASS, with the bulkhead ports specified in 8.19.4.4.8 in place.

8.22.4.4.3

The reverberation chamber shall meet specifications as specified in IEC 61000-4-21, Testing andmeasurement techniques — Reverberation chamber test methods. Performance specifications provided bythe manufacturer shall satisfy this requirement.

8.22.4.4.4

Minimum reverberation chamber door size shall be 18 in. (46 cm) × 12 in. (30.5 cm).

8.22.4.4.5

The width and depth of the reverberation chamber shall be large enough to allow insertion, placement, androtation of complete SCBAs. Usable space shall be a minimum of 24 in. (61 cm) width × 24 in. (61 cm) depth ×10 in. (30.5 cm) height at the height of the table. Usable interior width and depth shall be permitted to besmaller at other heights within the chamber.

8.22.4.4.6

The reverberation chamber shall include a non-conducting antenna mount that shall ensure the usable interiorheight specified in 8.22.4.4.1 .

8.22.4.4.7

The reverberation chamber shall include a non-conducting tabletop with minimum dimensions of 12 in. (30.5cm) square, 15 in. (38 cm) high.

8.22.4.5 Antennas.

The antennas shall be as specified in 8.19.4.5 .

8.22.4.6 Cables.

The cables shall be as specified in 8.19.4.6 .

8.22.4.7 Test Equipment.

The test equipment shall be as specified in 8.19.4.7 .

8.22.5 Procedure.

8.22.5.1 Procedure for Field Uniformity Calibration in Anechoic Chamber.

The procedure specified in 8.19.5.1 shall be followed to calibrate the field uniformity in the anechoicchamber.

8.22.5.2 Procedure for Field Calibration in Reverberation Chamber.

The procedure specified in IEC 61000-4-21, clause 8, and IEC 61000-4-21, annex B, shall be followed tocalibrate the field uniformity and verify the loading in the reverberation chamber. The field uniformity shall be±3 dB standard deviation for frequencies above 400 MHz.

8.22.5.3 Procedure for Configuring Chambers with Target Attenuation.


204 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

This procedure shall be carried out for each set of chambers, antennas, and cables. An average value shall beobtained using independent tuner paddle locations as specified in 8.22.5.3.2 .

8.22.5.3.1

The chambers shall be configured as shown in Figure 8.22.5.3.1 .

Figure 8.22.5.3.1 Configuration for Calibration of System Path Loss.

8.22.5.3.2

The procedure specified in 8.19.5.2 shall be followed to obtain a sample value for the final average. Thepaddle shall be stationary in the reverberation chamber for each sample measurement. The paddle shall bemoved to a unique location for each sample measurement. One hundred (100) samples shall be obtained andaveraged to determine the system path loss.

8.22.5.3.3

The procedure specified in 8.22.5.3.2 shall be used to obtain a total attenuation value of 100 dB ± 3 dB forthe multipath test.

8.22.5.4 Procedure for Multipath Test.

8.22.5.4.1 Alarm Signal Test.

The test shall be conducted with the base station acting as the receiver and the RF PASS transmitting analarm signal upon initiation of the alarm signal.

8.22.5.4.1.1

The total attenuation, including cables, connectors, free-space path loss, antenna loss, and external addedattenuation, between the base station and the RF PASS shall correspond to 100 dB ± 3 dB using thecalibration procedure specified in 8.22.5.3 .

8.22.5.4.1.2

A wireless link shall be established between the base station and the RF PASS before closing the chambers’doors.

8.22.5.4.1.3

The alarm signal test shall be conducted twice, once in the configuration specified in 8.22.5.4.1.3(A) andonce in the configuration specified in 8.22.5.4.1.3(B) .

(A)

The RF PASS system shall be tested with the RF PASS perpendicular to the surface of the tabletop and thebase station antenna parallel to the surface of the tabletop.

(B)

The RF PASS system shall be tested with the RF PASS parallel to the surface of the tabletop and the basestation antenna parallel to the surface of the tabletop.

8.22.5.4.1.4

The paddle in the reverberation chamber shall continuously spin at 3 RPM.

8.22.5.4.1.5

For each test, the chamber doors shall be closed and the duration of time between the initiation of the alarmsignal and the reception of the alarm signal shall be recorded.

8.22.5.4.2 Evacuation Alarm Test.

The test shall be conducted with the RF PASS acting as a receiver and the base station transmitting anevacuation alarm.


205 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

8.22.5.4.2.1

The total attenuation, including cables, connectors, free-space path loss, antenna loss, and external addedattenuation, between the base station and the RF PASS shall correspond to 100 dB ± 3 dB using thecalibration procedure specified in 8.22.5.2 .

8.22.5.4.2.2

A wireless link shall be established between the base station and RF PASS before closing the chambers’doors.

8.22.5.4.2.3

The RF PASS shall be kept in motion so that the motion-sensing device shall not trigger the alarm signal. Amechanism to move the RF PASS shall be permitted to be used. Any mechanism employed to move the RFPASS shall not disturb the field uniformity of the anechoic chamber more than 3 dB as specified in 8.22.5.1 .

8.22.5.4.2.4

The evacuation alarm test shall be conducted twice, once in the configuration specified in 8.22.5.4.2.4(A)and once in the configuration specified in 8.22.5.4.2.4(B) .

(A)

The RF PASS system shall be tested with the RF PASS placed perpendicular to the surface of the tabletopand the base station antenna placed parallel to the surface of the tabletop.

(B)

The RF PASS system shall be tested with the RF PASS placed parallel to the surface of the tabletop and thebase station antenna placed parallel to the surface of the tabletop.

8.22.5.4.2.5

The paddle in the reverberation chamber shall continuously spin at 3 RPM.

8.22.5.4.2.6

For each test, the chamber doors shall be closed and the evacuation alarm shall be initiated. A mechanism toinitiate the evacuation alarm shall be permitted to be used. Any mechanism employed to initiate theevacuation alarm shall not disturb the field uniformity of the anechoic chamber by more than 3 dB as specifiedin 8.22.5.1 .

8.22.5.4.2.7

For each test, the duration of time between the initiation of the evacuation alarm and the reception of the alarmRF PASS shall be recorded.

8.22.6 Report.

8.22.6.1

All quantities shall be reported to the nearest decibel.

8.22.6.2

The operator shall record and report the results of all the tests and test parameters specified in 8.22.5 ,including the values of the following:

(1) Total attenuation associated with the test environment

(2) Maximum difference in field uniformity within an area covering the center 30 cm × 30 cm (12 in. × 12 in.)of the anechoic chamber, as measured in 8.22.5.1

(3) Value of reverberation chamber loss, including the number of samples upon which the estimated loss isbased

(4) Value of measured path loss when the external attenuator is set to 0 dB denoted as calibrated path loss,0 dB, in 8.22.5.3

(5) Value of external attenuators used

(6) Frequency of operation (the minimum and maximum operating frequencies utilized)


8.22.7.1

Pass or fail performance shall be determined for each specimen.


206 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

8.22.7.2

One or more specimens failing this test shall constitute failing performance.

8.23 Radio System Tests for RF PASS — Multi-hop RF Test.

8.23.1 Application.

This test method shall apply to all RF PASS with integrated repeating capability.

8.23.2 Samples.

8.23.2.1

Samples shall be complete RF PASS with integrated repeating capability.

8.23.2.2

Samples shall be conditioned as specified in 8.1.2 .

8.23.3 Specimens.

8.23.3.1

Specimens for testing shall be complete RF PASS consisting of three RF PASS devices capable of relaying anRF PASS signal and a base station designed for use with them, provided by the manufacturer.

8.23.3.2

Two of the three RF PASS devices shall serve as repeater units capable of relaying an RF PASS signal, andone shall originate or terminate the alarm signal.

8.23.3.3

All multi-hop RF tests shall be conducted using specimens 19–21 in Table 4.3.10(a) if the specimens arestand-alone or removable integrated PASS and specimens 16–18 in Table 4.3.10(b) if the specimens arenon-removable integrated PASS.

8.23.4 Test Apparatus.

8.23.4.1

The multi-hop RF test shall be conducted as shown in Figure 8.23.4.1 in the following two configurations:

(1) With the base station acting as the receiver and the RF PASS under test transmitting an alarm signal

(2) With the RF PASS under test acting as a receiver and the base station transmitting an evacuation alarm

Figure 8.23.4.1 Apparatus Used for Multi-hop RF Test.

8.23.4.2

For both configurations, the total attenuation (including cables, connectors, free-space path loss, antenna loss,and external added attenuation) between two anechoic chambers shall correspond to 100 dB. The totalattenuation between the anechoic and reverberation chamber shall correspond to 80 dB.

8.23.4.3 Anechoic Chambers.

The anechoic chambers shall be as specified in 8.19.4.4 .

8.23.4.4 Reverberation Chamber.

The reverberation chamber shall be as specified in 8.22.4.4 .

8.23.4.5 Antennas.


207 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

8.23.4.5.1

Circularly polarized antennas shall be used to minimize the dependence of the test on the orientation withinthe chamber of the RF PASS under test and base station.

8.23.4.5.2

Five circularly polarized antennas and one linearly polarized horn antenna shall be used during the calibrationsteps. Five circularly polarized antennas shall be used during the test.

8.23.4.5.3

Cables permanently connected to any antenna shall be no longer than 24 in. (61 cm) to minimize errors inestimating the antennas gain during the calibration step, unless a three-antenna calibration is used todetermine the antenna gain, in which case the cable shall be the same as that used during the three-antennacalibration.

8.23.4.6 Cables.

The cables shall be as specified in 8.19.4.6 .

8.23.4.7

Test Equipment. The test equipment shall be as specified in 8.19.4.7 .

8.23.5 Procedure.

8.23.5.1 Procedure for Field Uniformity Calibration in Anechoic Chamber.

The procedure for field uniformity calibration shall be as specified in 8.19.5.1 .

8.23.5.2 Procedure for Field Calibration in Reverberation Chamber.

The procedure for field calibration in the reverberation chamber shall be as specified in 8.22.5.2 .

8.23.5.3 Procedure for Configuring one Anechoic Chamber Connected to one Reverberation Chamber withTarget Attenuation.

This procedure shall be carried out for the connection between an anechoic chamber and a reverberationchamber, antennas, and cables.

8.23.5.3.1


Figure 8.23.5.3.1 Configuration for Calibration of Target Path Loss Between Anechoic Chamber andReverberation Chamber.

8.23.5.3.2

Two circularly polarized antennas shall be inserted into the reverberation chamber as shown in Figure8.23.5.3.1 . One dual ridged horn antenna as shown in Figure 8.23.5.3.1 shall be inserted into the anechoicchamber on the same tabletops where the RF PASS components shall be placed during the attenuation test.The gain of these antennas shall be obtained from the manufacturer’s specifications or by use of a techniquesuch as a three-antenna method.

8.23.5.3.3

One calibration antenna shall be connected to the signal generator, and the other to the spectrum analyzerthrough bulkhead adapters in the body of the test chambers. The cables connecting the antennas to thebulkhead adapters shall be of a length that limits power loss to less than 2 dB.

8.23.5.3.4

The power loss in the cables connecting the signal generator and spectrum analyzer to the bulkheads of thechambers shall be determined through measurement.


208 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

8.23.5.3.5

The reverberation chamber paddle shall be on and operating at 0.2 RPM and path loss measurements shallbe collected every 3 seconds.

8.23.5.3.6

The path loss measurements shall be averaged. This value shall be regarded as the total path loss betweenthe tabletop of the anechoic chamber and the reverberation chamber.

8.23.5.3.7

The system path loss shall be measured between the reference plane within the anechoic chamber and thereverberation chamber specified in Figure 8.23.5.3.1 with the external attenuator set to 0 dB. The power lossbetween the measurement reference planes shall be a positive quantity that is measured and recorded as“measured path loss, 0 dB.” Measurements shall be collected over the frequency of operation of the RF PASSunder test. The resolution bandwidth of the spectrum analyzer shall be less than or equal to 1 kHz.

8.23.5.3.8

The calibrated path loss, 0 dB shall be calculated as measured path loss, 0 dB gain of calibration antennas,where gain of calibration antennas is the sum of the specified gain of each calibration antenna in decibels.

8.23.5.3.9

The external attenuator to achieve the total attenuation from table to table shall be calculated as totalattenuation — calibrated path loss, 0 dB, where total attenuation is 80 dB between the anechoic chamber andreverberation chamber for the multi-hop RF test.

8.23.5.4 Procedure for Configuring one Reverberation Chamber Connected to one Anechoic Chamber withTarget Attenuation.

This procedure shall be carried out for the connection between reverberation chamber and anechoic chamber,antennas, and cables.

8.23.5.4.1


Figure 8.23.5.4.1 Configuration for Calibration of Target Path Loss Between Reverberation Chamberand Anechoic Chamber.

8.23.5.4.2

Two circularly polarized antennas shall be inserted into the reverberation chamber as shown in Figure8.23.5.3.1 . One dual ridged horn antenna as shown in Figure 8.23.5.4.1 shall be inserted into the anechoicchamber on the same tabletops where the RF PASS components shall be placed during the attenuation test.The gain of these antennas shall be obtained from the manufacturer’s specifications or by use of a techniquesuch as a three-antenna method.

8.23.5.4.3


8.23.5.4.4



209 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

8.23.5.4.5

The reverberation chamber paddle shall be on and operating at 0.2 RPM and path loss measurements shallbe collected every 3 seconds.

8.23.5.4.6

The path loss measurements shall be averaged. This value shall be regarded as the total path loss betweenthe reverberation chamber and the tabletop of the anechoic chamber.

8.23.5.4.7

The system path loss shall be measured between the reverberation chamber and the reference plane withinthe anechoic chamber specified in Figure 8.23.5.4.1 with the external attenuator set to 0 dB. The power lossbetween the measurement reference planes shall be a positive quantity that is measured and recorded as“measured path loss, 0 dB.” Measurements shall be collected over the frequency of operation of the RF PASSunder test. The resolution bandwidth of the spectrum analyzer shall be less than or equal to 1 kHz.

8.23.5.4.8


8.23.5.4.9

The external attenuator to achieve the total attenuation from table to table shall be calculated as totalattenuation — calibrated path loss, 0 dB, where total attenuation is 80 dB between the anechoic chamber andreverberation chamber for the multi-hop RF test.

8.23.5.5 Procedure for Configuring Two Anechoic Chambers with Target Attenuation.

This procedure shall be carried out for the pair of anechoic chambers, antennas, and cables.

8.23.5.5.1


Figure 8.23.5.5.1 Configuration for Calibration of Target Path Loss Between Two AnechoicChambers.

8.23.5.5.2

Two dual ridged horn antennas, as shown in Figure 8.23.5.5.1 shall be inserted into the anechoic chamberson the same tabletops where the RF PASS components shall be placed during the attenuation test. The gainof these antennas shall be obtained from the manufacturer’s specifications or by use of a technique such as athree-antenna method.

8.23.5.5.3


8.23.5.5.4


8.23.5.5.5

The system path loss shall be measured between the two measurement reference planes specified in Figure8.23.5.5.1 . The power loss between the measurement reference planes shall be a positive quantity that ismeasured and recorded as “measured path loss, 0 dB.” Measurements shall be collected over the frequencyof operation of the RF PASS under test. The resolution bandwidth of the spectrum analyzer shall be less thanor equal to 1 kHz.


210 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

8.23.5.5.6


8.23.5.5.7

The external attenuator to achieve the total attenuation from table to table shall be calculated as totalattenuation — calibrated path loss, 0 dB, where total attenuation is 100 dB between two anechoic chambers.

8.23.5.6 Procedure for Multi-hop RF Test.

8.23.5.6.1 Alarm Signal Test.

The test shall be conducted with the base station acting as the receiver and the RF PASS under testtransmitting an alarm signal upon initiation of the alarm signal.

8.23.5.6.1.1

The total attenuation, including cables, connectors, free-space path loss, antenna loss, and external addedattenuation between the two anechoic chambers shall correspond to 100 dB. The total attenuation betweenthe reverberation chamber and anechoic chamber shall correspond to 80 dB.

8.23.5.6.1.2

The total attenuation, including cables, connectors, free-space path loss, antenna loss, and external addedattenuation, between the base station and the RF PASS under test shall correspond to 260 dB using thecalibration procedure specified in 8.23.5.2 .

8.23.5.6.1.3

The reverberation chamber paddle shall be turned on and shall rotate at 3 RPM ± 2 RPM.

8.23.5.6.1.4

A wireless link shall be established between the base station and the RF PASS under test before closing thechambers’ doors.

8.23.5.6.1.5

The chambers’ doors shall be closed for 1 minute before proceeding.

8.23.5.6.1.6

The RF PASS with the largest amount of attenuation between it and the base station shall be the device undertest. The duration of time between the initiation of the alarm signal until the reception of the alarm signal shallbe recorded. This test shall be repeated three times.

8.23.5.6.1.7

The alarm signal test shall be conducted twice for each of the three trials.

(A)


(B)


8.23.5.6.2 Evacuation Alarm Test.

The test shall be conducted with the RF PASS under test acting as a receiver and the base station transmittingan evacuation alarm.

8.23.5.6.2.1

The total attenuation, including cables, connectors, free-space path loss, antenna loss, and external addedattenuation between the two anechoic chambers shall correspond to 100 dB. The total attenuation betweenthe reverberation chamber and anechoic chamber shall correspond to 80 dB.

8.23.5.6.2.2

The total attenuation, including cables, connectors, free-space path loss, antenna loss, and external addedattenuation, between the base station and the RF PASS under test shall correspond to 260 dB using thecalibration procedure specified in 8.23.5.2 .


211 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

8.23.5.6.2.3

The reverberation chamber paddle shall be turned on and shall rotate at 3 RPM ± 2 RPM.

8.23.5.6.2.4

A wireless link shall be established between the base station and RF PASS under test before closing thechambers’ doors.

8.23.5.6.2.5

An alarm shall be sent from the base station without opening the anechoic doors, using any necessaryadditional software or method. The alarm shall be sent 1.5 minutes after activating the automated clicksoftware.

8.23.5.6.2.6

The RF PASS under test shall be kept in motion so that the motion-sensing device shall not trigger the alarmsignal. A mechanism to move the RF PASS under test shall be permitted to be used. Any mechanismemployed to move the RF PASS under test shall not disturb the field uniformity of the chamber more than 3 dBas specified in 8.19.5.1 .

8.23.5.6.2.7

The RF PASS with the highest total attenuation between it and the base station shall be the device under test.The duration of time between the initiation of the evacuation alarm and the reception of the alarm for the RFPASS under test shall be recorded.

8.23.5.6.2.8

The evacuation alarm test shall be conducted twice.

(A)


(B)


8.23.6 Report.

The report shall be as specified in 8.19.6 .


8.23.7.1

Pass or fail performance shall be determined for each specimen. A signal that is not received from either testwithin 30 seconds shall constitute failing performance.

8.23.7.2

One or more specimens failing this test shall constitute failing performance.



CC_Validation_for_1982_MultiHopTest_Diagrams_and_IntraLab_Results.pptx

CC_Validation_for_1982_Multipath_Test_Diagrams_and_IntraLab_Results.pptx

Validation_MultiHop_Test_R2.docx

Validation_Multipath_Test.docx

FIGURE_8.22.4.1_Setup_for_the_Multipath_Test..jpg

Figure_8.22.5.3.1.jpg

Figure_8.23.4.1.jpg






212 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM



Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: The Technical Committee is providing new RF PASS tests for Multipath and Multi-hop.

Response Message:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.



213 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


214 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

RF PASS: Test Methods Proposed NFPA 1982 rev2018

Multi‐Hop Test Method

NFPA ESE CommitteeRF PASS Task GroupGordon Sletmoe, Chair ([email protected])Technical Contact: Kate Remley ([email protected])

1

Background:Complete Suite of Test Methods for RF PASS

DHS Office of Standards: NIST funding to support NFPA for RF‐based PASS test methods:

Path Loss (Attenuation) and RF PASS Low path loss (below 100 dB, point‐to‐point, 2012)

Multi‐Hop (260 dB, 2014‐15)

Reflections and RF PASSMultipath (2013)

Interference and RF PASS In‐band, low power (coexistence, 2012)

High power (jamming, TBD)

2

Background (cont.)

Each method evaluates:Motion Alarm: from RF PASS to Base StationEvacuation Alarm: from Base Station to RF PASS

Multipath TestVerifies wireless link in a highly reflective environmentAchieved through use of a reverberation chamber

Multi‐Hop TestVerifies wireless link through multiple hopsAssumes a multiple repeater system

3

4

Systems are tested to simulate a high‐loss environmentTest includes systems that use repeaters

Multi‐Hop Test Method

Subways

High‐Rise Buildings

NIST 2011 Tests in NYC Subway• Subway data suggests a path loss value greater than 230 dB• Proposed Multi‐Hop Test exposes RF PASS with repeaters to 260 dB

Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

Level 4

430 MHz

Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

Level 4

745 MHz

Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

Level 4

905 MHz

50 70 90 110 130 150 170 190 210 230 250

Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

Level 4

Path loss(dB)

2405 MHz

Origin

al high

path

loss th

reshold

Proposed

high

path

loss th

reshold

Low path

loss th

reshold

5

Diagram of Multi‐Hop Test Method Set‐up

Total path loss between the base station and the RF PASS is 260 dB. Between chambers:

1 ↔ 2, 2 ↔ 3: path loss = 80 dB 3↔ 4: path loss = 100 dB

Tests two repeater capability of system

Tests two repeater capability of system 6

NIST Intra‐Lab Multi‐Hop Results

7

90 110 130 150 170 190 210 230 250 270 290 310 330 3500

5

10 100

dB

260

dB

Tria

ls

Motion Alarm Test Results Manufacturer 2

302 dB PassFail

90 110 130 150 170 190 210 230 250 270 290 310 330 3500

5

10

15

20

25

100

dB

260

dB

Total Path Loss (dB)

Tria

ls

Motion Alarm Test Results Manufacturer 3

271 dB PassFail

These two RF PASS systems pass the test in multiple trials• Total path loss exceeds 260 dB before connection lost• Alarm signals received within 30 seconds

RF PASS: Test Methods Proposed NFPA 1982 rev2018

Multipath Test Method

NFPA ESE CommitteeRF PASS Task GroupGordon Sletmoe, Chair ([email protected])Technical Contact: Kate Remley ([email protected])

1

Background:Complete Suite of Test Methods for RF PASS

DHS Office of Standards: NIST funding to support NFPA for RF‐based PASS test methods:

Path Loss (Attenuation) and RF PASS Low path loss (below 100 dB, point‐to‐point, 2012)

Multi‐Hop (260 dB, 2014‐15)

Reflections and RF PASSMultipath (2013)

Interference and RF PASS In‐band, low power (coexistence, 2012)

High power (jamming, TBD)

2

Background (cont.)

Each method evaluates:Motion Alarm: from RF PASS to Base StationEvacuation Alarm: from Base Station to RF PASS

Multipath TestVerifies wireless link in a highly reflective environmentAchieved through use of a reverberation chamber

Multi‐Hop TestVerifies wireless link through multiple hopsAssumes a multiple repeater system

3

Multipath Test MethodSystems are tested to simulate a highly reflective RF environmentTest includes path loss + reflectivity (multipath)

Factories, refineries, warehouses, etc.4

Multipath Test MethodSimilar test procedure as the Low Attenuation Test in 1982 r.2013Two chambers, linked by 100 dB attenuation: One chamber anechoic, one chamber reflective

Test Threshold 100 dB

Current RF PASS systems successfully complete this test 5

Representative NIST Intra‐Lab Results:Compare Low Attenuation (current) and Multipath (proposed) Motion Alarm TestsThis system passes with attenuation less than 105 dB (exceeds threshold by 5 dB)

The system still passes when multipath is present(exceeds threshold by 9 dB)

6

Low Attenuation Test (NFPA 1982 rev2013)

Multipath Test (NFPA 1982 rev2018, proposed)

Representative NIST Intra‐Lab Results:Multipath Results (Evacuation Alarm test)

7

This RF PASS system passes the test in multiple trials• Total path loss exceeds 100 dB before connection lost• Alarm received within 30 seconds

80 90 100 110 120 130 140 1500

1

2

3

4

Total Path Loss (dB)

rep

eat

s

Manufacturer 1 Multipath Evacuation Alarm

109 dB

passdelayfail

Multipath Test (NFPA 1982 rev2018, proposed)

Validation of the need for a new test method for NFPA 1982 regarding the use of RF PASS

with repeaters in high-path-loss environments such as large buildings or underground

subways

Submitted by the NFPA ESE Committee RF PASS Task Group

March 9, 2016

1. Provide a rationale with supporting evidence that substantiates the need or the rationale for

establishing new test methods or criteria or for revising existing test methods or criteria in terms of field

relevance, fire service needs, safety concerns, recognition of new product technology, accounting for

advances in testing technology, or accomplishing other clearly stated objectives.

Examples of supporting evidence can include the documentation of specific safety issues that have been

identified by end user or other groups, which may include statistics on the number of incidents or

highlight specific cases where the issues have arisen. Other forms of supporting evidence can include

aspects of existing requirements that unduly prevent the proper testing or consideration of new product

technologies because the existing test methods or criteria are found to be design-restrictive, or

information that shows that new test methods have become available that provide more reliable or

relevant forms of evaluation for the specific product property or attribute under consideration. The

provision of scientific papers, test data, or statistics provides a more robust justification for supporting

evidence.

Response:

Rationale for new test method: RF-based PASS is a relatively new product technology that can

potentially extend the reach of the PASS beacon to the incident command outside a structure. For

companies that choose to use RF-based PASS, test methods to assess performance under representative

environmental conditions provides confidence in their use. Two test methods were incorporated into the

2013 revision of 1982 to test the operation of RF PASS under representative point-to-point attenuation

(path loss) conditions and in the presence of in-band RF interference (coexistence). However, some

manufacturers also provide RF-based PASS technology capable of using of repeaters to allow signals to

penetrate deeper within structures. Currently, no standardized methods exist to test the operation of RF-

based PASS systems that utilize repeaters. The rationale for developing the Multi-Hop test method is to

fill this gap.

Supporting evidence: Since 2008, the Department of Homeland Security has funded researchers from the

National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to support the development of technically sound

test methods for RF-based PASS systems. NIST researchers performed several field tests to characterize

RF propagation channels in representative firefighting conditions where RF-based PASS communication

was expected to be poor (e.g., point-to-point signal penetration into and out of medium- and large-sized

structures). The researchers conducted side-by-side tests of the RF channel characteristics (path loss and

reflectivity) and RF-based PASS in order to determine parameters and metrics for laboratory-based tests.

Such tests have been under development for several years now.

NIST Technical Note 1792 summarizes NIST studies that showed loss of communication unless repeaters

were used between the incident command and portable RF PASS in very large building structures and

subways. The Multi-Hop Test proposed here is intended to assess the over-the-air performance of RF-

based PASS in highly lossy environments in which repeater operation is required. Over-the-air

performance tests (as opposed to cabled tests) are necessary because system-level verification is

required and antennas may be integrated into the PASS or SCBA.

2. Conduct an assessment to determine the potential impact of the new or significantly revised test

methods or criteria on products that have already been certified or fielded.

The nature of this requirement is to have the TC assess what the anticipated impact of the new or

modified requirements are relative to specific products. It is not the intent to identify specific products

that might be excluded by a new or modified requirement, but rather for the submitter to provide an

analysis for the types of products that might be affected, with an indication as to why the affected

products do not provide adequate performance.

Response: The potential impact of the new test method on products that have already been certified or

fielded should be negligible. First, we have not seen any evidence that RF PASS testing affects the

performance of non-RF-based PASS devices. Second, all RF-based PASS systems that utilize repeaters

have been subjected to the proposed test method in the NIST laboratories and all have passed.

3. Establish Intra-laboratory repeatability and inter-laboratory reproducibility for new or significantly

revised test methods. Where possible, test methods shall include procedures for their calibration. The

principal certification organizations and their laboratories shall formally affirm to the TC that the tests

can be conducted reliably as proposed at least by the time of the second draft.

An essential part of the validation process is to include an assessment of the repeatability (intra-

laboratory precision) and reproducibility (inter-laboratory precision) of any new test method or

significant modification of an existing test method. This information is important for establishing the

reliability of the test method and should, as a minimum, include those laboratories that provide

certification services for the relevant product standard. This information may also be useful in setting

specific criteria to account for expected test method variability.

Response: NIST has conducted several intra-laboratory repeatability studies of this test method, which

are discussed in NIST Tech Note {In Process}. Inter-laboratory comparisons have not been carried out.

However, when the first two test methods for RF PASS were published in the 2013 revision of NFPA 1982,

the tests carried out at the test laboratory had satisfactorily similar results to those from the NIST lab

where the tests were developed. We anticipate similar agreement for this new test method.

4. Establish the relevance of test methods and any associated criteria through a determination of how

proposed or significantly revised test methods identify meaningful differences in product performance

consistent with field performance.

Attempts should be made to determine the degree to which new or significantly revised test methods

identify meaningful differences in product performance or relate to the field performance of products.

One recommended approach is to identify product types that are considered to be unsuitable based on

end user field experience and evaluate those products alongside other products to determine if the test

method suitably identifies meaningful differences in performance consistent with observed field

performance. Another approach is to demonstrate the impact and relevance of test results for products

through carefully designed experiments carried out in the field. Lastly, one additional approach is to

relate proposed criteria to specific safety levels that can be documented through scientific or other

reasonably based field investigative work.

Response: NIST Technical Note 1559 describes measurements in which RF PASS were deployed in seven

environments: an urban canyon (downtown Denver, CO), a 12-story apartment building, three one-story

office buildings, a high-rise office building, and a convention center. This study showed that in the larger

environments, especially the high-rise and the convention center, the RF PASS systems that utilize

repeaters were able to penetrate deeper into the structures than those without repeaters. NIST Technical

Note 1792 details additional studies where RF PASS were deployed in a subway and in the Empire State

Building in New York City. Again, the RF PASS systems that utilized repeaters were able to penetrate

deeper.

Thus, it is anticipated that RF PASS systems with repeaters will be used in certain environments and it is

the intent of the proposed test method to verify the performance of these systems under representative

conditions. These conditions include a total path loss of approximately 260 dB (a value which is on the

order of the path loss values measured in the subway) and with reflective conditions that are

representative of an enclosed room or other space.

5. Provide test data and any other supporting documentation to the members of the respective TC and

the CC, or any individuals who may request this information.

Access to the information on which new or significantly revised test methods and criteria are based

should be available to all parties seeking this information, including TC members, CC members, and

individuals outside the committee process (through the NFPA). Supporting documentation that includes,

but is not limited to, proposed new or modified methodology/criteria with justification statements,

supporting evidence, test data, references to published papers or statistics, inter-laboratory test results,

and other information should be maintained by the TC as part of meeting minutes or made available

elsewhere on the NFPA TC website page.

Response: All field tests have been documented in NIST Technical Notes 1559 and 1792. All laboratory

tests have been presented to the NFPA Electronic Safety Equipment Committee and are part of the

minutes from meetings on 3/13, 8/13, 12/13, 7/15, and 10/15. The intra-laboratory test data are

included in NIST Technical Note [in process]. Representative results are included in the attached

document “CC Validation for 1982 MultiHopTest Diagrams and IntraLab Results.”

6. Provide at least one of the following visual illustrations of the proposed test equipment and test

material(s) to the respective TC and CC:

a. Video(s)

b. Photo(s)

c. Drawing (s): Response: drawings and illustrations are provided in the attached document “CC

Validation for 1982 MultiHopTest Diagrams and IntraLab Results”

The visual illustrations shall be provided along with the submittal.

Visual illustrations help TC and CC members better understand the proposed new test or modified test.

Validation of the need for a new test method for NFPA 1982 regarding the use of RF PASS in

highly reflective environments such as factories, refineries, and warehouses

by the NFPA ESE Committee RF PASS Task Group

March 9, 2016

1. Provide a rationale with supporting evidence that substantiates the need or the rationale for

establishing new test methods or criteria or for revising existing test methods or criteria in terms of field

relevance, fire service needs, safety concerns, recognition of new product technology, accounting for

advances in testing technology, or accomplishing other clearly stated objectives.

Examples of supporting evidence can include the documentation of specific safety issues that have been

identified by end user or other groups, which may include statistics on the number of incidents or

highlight specific cases where the issues have arisen. Other forms of supporting evidence can include

aspects of existing requirements that unduly prevent the proper testing or consideration of new product

technologies because the existing test methods or criteria are found to be design-restrictive, or

information that shows that new test methods have become available that provide more reliable or

relevant forms of evaluation for the specific product property or attribute under consideration. The

provision of scientific papers, test data, or statistics provides a more robust justification for supporting

evidence.

Response:

Rationale for new test method: RF-based PASS is a relatively new product technology that can

potentially extend the reach of the PASS beacon from the firefighter to the incident command outside a

structure. For companies that choose to use RF-based PASS, test methods to assess performance under

representative environmental conditions provide confidence in their use. Two test methods were

incorporated into the 2013 revision of 1982 to test the operation of RF PASS under representative point-

to-point attenuation (path loss) conditions and in the presence of in-band RF interference (coexistence).

However, currently, no standardized methods exist to test the operation of RF-based PASS systems that

in highly reflective “multipath” environments such as factories, refineries, and warehouses. The metallic

structural materials and objects in these environments can create reflections that cause the RF PASS

signal to interfere with itself. The rationale for developing the Multipath test method is to fill this gap.

Supporting evidence: Since 2008, the Department of Homeland Security has funded researchers from the

National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to support the development of technically sound

test methods for RF-based PASS systems. NIST researchers performed several field tests to characterize

RF propagation channels in representative firefighting conditions where RF-based PASS communication

was expected to be poor (e.g., point-to-point signal penetration into and out of medium- and large-sized

structures). The researchers conducted side-by-side tests of the RF channel characteristics (path loss and

reflectivity) and RF-based PASS in order to determine parameters and metrics for laboratory-based tests.

The laboratory-based tests have been under development for several years now and the Electronic Safety

Equipment Committee would like to see them included in NFPA 1982.

NIST Technical Note 1559 “Analysis of Radio-Propagation Environments to Support Standards

Development for RF-Based Electronic Safety Equipment” summarizes NIST studies that showed the

expected level of multipath, given by the metric “root-mean-square (RMS) delay spread” between the

incident command and portable RF PASS in reflective building structures. The Multipath Test proposed

here is intended to the RMS delay spread of such environments and assess the over-the-air performance

of RF-based PASS in them. Over-the-air performance tests (as opposed to cabled tests) are necessary

because system-level verification is required and antennas may be integrated into the PASS or SCBA.

2. Conduct an assessment to determine the potential impact of the new or significantly revised test

methods or criteria on products that have already been certified or fielded.

The nature of this requirement is to have the TC assess what the anticipated impact of the new or

modified requirements are relative to specific products. It is not the intent to identify specific products

that might be excluded by a new or modified requirement, but rather for the submitter to provide an

analysis for the types of products that might be affected, with an indication as to why the affected

products do not provide adequate performance.

Response: The potential impact of the new test method on products that have already been certified or

fielded should be negligible. First, we have not seen any evidence that RF PASS testing affects the

performance of non-RF-based PASS devices. Second, all currently available RF-based PASS systems have

been subjected to the proposed test method in the NIST laboratories and all have passed.

3. Establish Intra-laboratory repeatability and inter-laboratory reproducibility for new or significantly

revised test methods. Where possible, test methods shall include procedures for their calibration. The

principal certification organizations and their laboratories shall formally affirm to the TC that the tests

can be conducted reliably as proposed at least by the time of the second draft.

An essential part of the validation process is to include an assessment of the repeatability (intra-

laboratory precision) and reproducibility (inter-laboratory precision) of any new test method or

significant modification of an existing test method. This information is important for establishing the

reliability of the test method and should, as a minimum, include those laboratories that provide

certification services for the relevant product standard. This information may also be useful in setting

specific criteria to account for expected test method variability.

Response: NIST has conducted several intra-laboratory repeatability studies of this test method, which

are discussed in NIST Tech Note {In Process}. Inter-laboratory comparisons have not been carried out.

However, when the first two test methods for RF PASS were published in the 2013 revision of NFPA 1982,

the tests carried out at the test laboratory had satisfactorily similar results to those from the NIST lab

where the tests were developed. We anticipate similar agreement for this new test method.

4. Establish the relevance of test methods and any associated criteria through a determination of how

proposed or significantly revised test methods identify meaningful differences in product performance

consistent with field performance.

Attempts should be made to determine the degree to which new or significantly revised test methods

identify meaningful differences in product performance or relate to the field performance of products.

One recommended approach is to identify product types that are considered to be unsuitable based on

end user field experience and evaluate those products alongside other products to determine if the test

method suitably identifies meaningful differences in performance consistent with observed field

performance. Another approach is to demonstrate the impact and relevance of test results for products

through carefully designed experiments carried out in the field. Lastly, one additional approach is to

relate proposed criteria to specific safety levels that can be documented through scientific or other

reasonably based field investigative work.

Response: NIST Technical Note 1546 “Measurements to Support Modulated-Signal Radio Transmissions

for the Public-Safety Sector” describes measurements in which the level of multipath measured in three

environments: an office corridor, an oil refinery, and a subterranean tunnel. Values of RMS delay spread

(a metric that describes the severity of multipath) ranged from tens to over 200 ns. NIST Technical Note

1559 describes measurements in seven environments: an urban canyon (downtown Denver, CO), a 12-

story apartment building, three one-story office buildings, a high-rise office building, and a convention

center. This study measured values of RMS delay spread ranging from tens of ns to over 400 ns. NIST

Technical Note 1559 also showed that all RF PASS systems that were commercially available at that time

were able to transmit under such conditions.

It is the intent of the proposed test method to verify the performance of NFPA certified systems under

representative conditions. These conditions include a total path loss of approximately 100 dB (as found in

the existing Point-to-Point Attenuation Test in NFPA 1982) and with reflective conditions that are a

minimum of 400 ns. The anechoic/reverberation chamber set-up in the proposed test method meets

these requirements.

5. Provide test data and any other supporting documentation to the members of the respective TC and

the CC, or any individuals who may request this information.

Access to the information on which new or significantly revised test methods and criteria are based

should be available to all parties seeking this information, including TC members, CC members, and

individuals outside the committee process (through the NFPA). Supporting documentation that includes,

but is not limited to, proposed new or modified methodology/criteria with justification statements,

supporting evidence, test data, references to published papers or statistics, inter-laboratory test results,

and other information should be maintained by the TC as part of meeting minutes or made available

elsewhere on the NFPA TC website page.

Response: All field tests performed on RF PASS have been documented in NIST Technical Notes 1559 and

1792. All laboratory tests have been presented to the NFPA Electronic Safety Equipment Committee and

are part of the minutes from meetings on [dates]. The intra-laboratory test data shall be included in NIST

Technical Note [in process].

6. Provide at least one of the following visual illustrations of the proposed test equipment and test

material(s) to the respective TC and CC:

a. Video(s)

b. Photo(s)

c. Drawing (s): Response: drawings and illustrations are provided in NIST Technical Note [in process]

The visual illustrations shall be provided along with the submittal.

Visual illustrations help TC and CC members better understand the proposed new test or modified test.


A.4.6.1

ISO Guide 27, Guidelines for corrective action to be taken by a certification body in the event of misuse of itsmark of conformity, is a component of accreditation of certification organizations specified in 4.1.3 and 4.2.3 ofthis standard. Those subsections contain a mandatory reference to ISO/IEC Guide 65, General requirementsfor bodies operating product certification systems, in which ISO Guide 27 is referenced 17065, Conformityassessment – Requirements for bodies certifying products, processes and services .




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: The Technical Committee is updating document titles and revision dates.

Response Message:

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.


215 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


216 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

First Revision No. 74-NFPA 1982-2016 [ Section No. B.3 ]

B.3 Measurement System Set-Up Setup .

Figure B.3 shows a typical point-to-point RF attenuation test set-up setup . Two anechoic chambers provideshielding between the portable unit and the base station. The total path loss (or gain) associated with theenvironmental elements marked in Figure B.3 simulates the path loss experienced by personnel carrying RFPASS within a building or structure when the base station is located outside. The value of the external attenuatoris adjusted in a calibration step described below to match the target attenuation.

The chambers are shielded so that the RF PASS and base station are isolated from each other. This allowstesting of RF attenuation alone. RF interference should be tested in a separate test method. The anechoicmaterial in the chamber simulates a reflection-free environment. Multipath reflections should be tested with aseparate test method.

Figure B.3 Test Set-Up Setup and Sources of Path Loss (and Gain) in the Point-to-Point RF AttenuationTest.

Antennas are mounted in the top of each chamber to receive the signal emitted by the device under test andcouple it to the exterior of the chamber. The total system attenuation includes the gain (if any) in these antennas,the free space path loss between the PASS or base station and these antennas, the cables connecting thechambers, and external attenuators that are added to achieve the desired amount of path loss. The point-to-point test method requires that the RF PASS system is able to send and receive alarms when the sum ofthese components of attenuation corresponds to that specified in the standard.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


217 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Correction of "SCBU" to "SCBA".

Response Message:

Public Input No. 87-NFPA 1982-2016 [Section No. B.3]

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.


218 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


219 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

First Revision No. 75-NFPA 1982-2016 [ Section No. C.2 ]

C.2 The Target Value of Interference.

The RF interference test is designed to introduce into the RF propagation channel the types of interference thatmight be found in environments where fire fighters are deployed. This test focuses on replicating conditions forstructures where radio communication is typically difficult, for example, large building structures such as officebuildings, factories, convention centers, and apartment buildings. Certain wireless transmissions that couldcause interference are commonly found within these structures. For example, in offices and apartment buildings,the use of wireless local-area networks (WLAN) or wireless personal-area networks (WPAN) is common. Inwarehouses and factories, the use of RFID technology is common.

Wireless systems such as WPAN and RFID operate in the unlicensed “Industrial, Medical, and Scientific”frequency bands, with frequencies and power levels specified by the FCC. Because many RF PASS units alsooperate within these unlicensed frequency bands, in-band interference is possible. Consequently, the RFinterference test is designed to test systems that operate in similar frequency bands using commonlyencountered transmission protocols.

The set of interference tests described in this annex focus on two primary frequency bands and transmissionformats. These target values of interference are detailed in Table 8.21.4.4. The transmission formats used inthis test (including power level, modulation and encoding schemes, and signal bandwidth) have been designedto replicate commonly found wireless devices. The channel usage percentage is measured with a spectrumanalyzer. Software that controls the spectrum analyzer is set to sample the spectrum occupied by the RF PASSsignal for a duration of 225 milliseconds ± 50 milliseconds. As designed, the interference source should beactive 50 percent 25 percent of the time in either the specified frequency band (e.g., over the 902 to 928 MHzband), or the initial channel of operation (e.g., over one of the six IEEE 802.11b/g 20 MHz channels). Thespectrum analyzer should sweep across the frequency band or channel of interest in less than 3 milliseconds;the controlling software should capture the spectrum at the rate above. Processing software should search forthe maximum value within the captured spectrum. Only the interference source is active when determining theinterference activity percentage, that is, there should be no RF PASS communication activity. To compute thestatistics on interference 500 samples , a minimum of 500 millisecond × 225 millisecond samples each of 225millisecond duration are collected, resulting in approximately 2 minutes of data. The ratio of the interferencesignal samples to the acquired noise samples provides the channel occupancy percentage. As indicated inTable 8.21.4.4, a 25 percent channel usage percentage over a 30-second time period is required, but thatchannel usage might vary in any 5-second interval between 15 percent and 35 percent.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: ROC 1982-43 Log #26 (p. 36) shows that the committee changed the value to 25 percent.

Add substantiation from Kate's second PI to this paragraph.

Response Message:

Public Input No. 53-NFPA 1982-2015 [Section No. C.2]

Ballot Results



220 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


221 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


222 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

First Revision No. 76-NFPA 1982-2016 [ Chapter D ]

Annex D Informational References

D.1 Referenced Publications.

The documents or portions thereof listed in this annex are referenced within the informational sections of thisstandard and are not part of the requirements of this document unless also listed in Chapter 2 for other reasons.

D.1.1 NFPA Publications.



NFPA 1561, Standard on Emergency Services Incident Management System and Command Safety , 2008 2014edition.

NFPA 5000®, Building Construction and Safety Code®, 2012 2018 edition.

D.1.2 Other Publications.

D.1.2.1 ISO Publications.

International Organization for Standardization, 1, rue de Varembé, Case postale 56, GH-1211 Genève 20,Switzerland ISO Central Secretariat, BIBC II, Chemin de Blandonnet 8, CP 401, 1214 Vernier, Geneva,Switzerland .

ISO Guide 27, Guidelines for corrective action to be taken by a certification body in the event of misuse of itsmark of conformity, 1983.


ISO/IEC 17065, Conformity Assessment - Requirments for Bodies Certifying Products, Processes, andServices , 2012.


223 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

D.1.2.2 NIST Publications.

National Institute of Standards and Technology, 100 Bureau Drive, Stop 1070, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-1070.

NIST Note 1540: C.L. Holloway, G. Koepke, D. Camell, K.A. Remley, D.F. Williams, S.A. Schima, S. Canales,and D.T. Tamura, “Propagation and Detection of Radio Signals Before, During, and After the Implosion of a13-Story Apartment Building,” Natl. Inst. Stand. Technol. May 2005.

NIST Note 1541: C.L. Holloway, G. Koepke, D. Camell, K.A. Remley, D.F. Williams, S.A. Schima, S. Canales,and D.T. Tamura, “Propagation and Detection of Radio Signals Before, During, and After the Implosion of aLarge Sports Stadium (Veterans' Stadium in Philadelphia),” Natl. Inst. Stand. Technol. October 2005.

NIST Note 1542: C.L. Holloway, G. Koepke, D. Camell, K.A. Remley, S.A. Schima, M. McKinley, and R.T. Johnk,“Propagation and Detection of Radio Signals Before, During, and After the Implosion of a Large ConventionCenter,” Natl. Inst. Stand. Technol. June 2006.

NIST Note 1545: C.L. Holloway, W.F. Young, G. Koepke, K.A. Remley, D. Camell, and Y. Becquet, “Attenuationof Radio Wave Signals Coupled into Twelve Large Building Structures,” Natl. Inst. Stand. Technol. April 2008.

NIST Note 1546: K.A. Remley, G. Koepke, C.L. Holloway, C. Grosvenor, D. Camell, J. Ladbury, D. Novotny, W.F.Young, G. Hough, M.D. McKinley, Y. Becquet, and J. Korsnes, “Measurements to Support BroadbandModulated-Signal Radio Transmissions for the Public-Safety Sector,” Natl. Inst. Stand. Technol. April 2008.

NIST Note 1550: K.A. Remley, G. Koepke, C. Grosvenor, R.T. Johnk, J. Ladbury, D. Camell, and J. Coder, “NISTTests of the Wireless Environment in Automobile Manufacturing Facilities,” Natl. Inst. Stand. Technol. October2008.

NIST Note 1552: W.F. Young, K.A. Remley, J. Ladbury, C.L. Holloway, C. Grosvenor, G. Koepke, D. Camell, S.Floris, W. Numan, and A. Garuti, “Measurements to Support Public Safety Communications: Attenuation andVariability of 750 MHz Radio Wave Signals in Four Large Building Structures,” Natl. Inst. Stand. Technol. August2009.

NIST Note 1557: W.F. Young, K.A. Remley, D.W. Matolak, Q. Zhang, C.L. Holloway, C. Grosvenor, C. Gentile, G.Koepke, and Q. Wu, “Measurements and Models for the Wireless Channel in a Ground-Based Urban Setting inTwo Public-Safety Frequency Bands,” Natl. Inst. Stand. Technol. May 2011.

K.A. Remley, G. Koepke, C.L. Holloway, C. Grosvenor, D. Camell, J. Ladbury, R.T. Johnk, and W.F. Young,“Radio Wave Propagation into Large Building Structures; Part 2, Characterization of Multipath,” IEEE Trans. Ant.Propagat., vol. 58, no. 4, April 2010, pp. 1290-1301.

M.R. Souryal, D.R. Novotny, D.G. Kuester, J.R. Guerrieri, and K.A. Remley, “Impact of RF Interference Betweena Passive RFID System and a Frequency Hopping Communications System in the 900 MHz ISM Band,” IEEEElectromagnetic Compatibility Society Symposium Digest, July 2010, pp. 495-500.

K.A. Remley, M.R. Souryal, W.F. Young, D.G. Kuester, D.R. Novotny, and J.R. Guerrieri, “Interference Tests for900 MHz Frequency-Hopping Public-Safety Wireless Devices,” IEEE Electromagnetic Compatibility SocietySymposium Digest, August 2011.

G. Moore, “Simplifying FCC Compliance for 802.15.4 2.4 GHz Devices,” National Technical Systems WhitePaper. Available at http://www.nts.com

D.1.2.3 U.S. Government Publications.

U.S. Government Printing Publishing Office, Washington, DC 20402. 732 North Capitol Street, NW, WashingtonDC, 20401-0001

Title 21, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 7, Subpart C, “Enforcement Policy,” April 1, 1995.

Title 42, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 84, “Respiratory Protective Devices,” 1995.

D.2 Informational References. (Reserved)

M.R. Souryal, D.R. Novotny, D.G. Kuester, J.R. Guerrieri, and K.A. Remley, “Impact of RF InterferenceBetween a Passive RFID System and a Frequency Hopping Communications System in the 900 MHz ISMBand,” IEEE Electromagnetic Compatibility Society Symposium Digest , July 2010, pp. 495-500.

K.A. Remley, M.R. Souryal, W.F. Young, D.G. Kuester, D.R. Novotny, and J.R. Guerrieri, “Interference Tests for900 MHz Frequency-Hopping Public-Safety Wireless Devices,” IEEE Electromagnetic Compatibility SocietySymposium Digest , August 2011.

G. Moore, “Simplifying FCC Compliance for 802.15.4 2.4 GHz Devices,” National Technical Systems WhitePaper . Available at http://www.nts.com

D.3 References for Extracts in Informational Sections. (Reserved)


224 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: Referenced current SDO names, addresses, standard, names, numbers, and editions.

Response Message:

Public Input No. 2-NFPA 1982-2015 [Chapter D]

Ballot Results


34 Eligible Voters

1 Not Returned

32 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Agi, Kamil

Affirmative All

Allen, Jason L.

Athanas, Robert J.

Berger, Joel E.

Bowyer, Matt E.

Busa, Matthew David

Chavez, Louis

Donnelly, Michelle

Facella, John A.

Forsyth, William

Haase, Wayne C.


Helvin, Jeff

Hull, Jeffrey L.

Hussey, Michael C.

Katz, Richard

Lasa, Santiago

Lentz, Kevin D.


225 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM

Little, David A.


Martens, Brian A.

McKenna, Michael F.

Morris, John H.

Sanders, Stephen R.

Sletmoe, Gordon R.

Spoons, Christina

Tarver, Gerry W.

Townsend, Steven D.

Varner, Bruce H.

Velo, Jose L.


Wolf, Timothy W.

Worrell, Mike G.


Hogg, Simon

Accepted


226 of 226 6/15/2016 2:34 PM