NFPA CORRELATING COMMITTEE ON FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES PROTECTIVE CLOTHING AND EQUIPMENT AGENDA JUNE 24-25, 2014 BLOOMINGTON, MN

Transcription

1 NFPA CORRELATING COMMITTEE ON FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES PROTECTIVE CLOTHING AND EQUIPMENT AGENDA JUNE 24-25, 2014 BLOOMINGTON, MN 1. 9:00 AM - Call to Order - Chair Bill Haskell 2. Members and guests self-introductions 3. Chair Remarks Bill Haskell 4. Approval of the CC Minutes of the March 26, 2014 web conference (Attachment 1) 5. NFPA Staff Liaison Report Dave Trebisacci Correlating Committee actions on First Draft Reports 6. Review of Draft Correlating Committee Note for Test Method Validation (Attachment 2) 7. Requirements for Task Group Reports/Documentation 8. NFPA 1977, Standard on Protective Clothing and Equipment for Wildland Fire Fighting (First Draft Report - attached) 9. NFPA 1984, Standard on Respirators for Wildland Fire Fighting Operations (First Draft Report - attached) 10. NFPA 1991, Standard on Vapor-Protective Ensembles for Hazardous Materials Emergencies (First Draft Report - attached) 11. Update on Fire Shelters Tony Petrilli 12. Certification Data Ownership 13. Minimum Qualifications for Certification Listings and Accessibility 14. Task Group Reports 15. TC Chair Reports 16. Old Business 17. New Business 1. Future Project Organization Rick Swan TC on ELS R. Athanas TC on EMS T. Hock TC on HAZ C. Baxter TC on RPE D. Rossos TC on SCE J. Metz TC on SPF S. King TC on TTO B. Montgomery TC on WFF R. Swan Next meeting conference call NFPA 1953 Second Draft Report [Oct. 10- Nov. 21] 18. Adjourn at close of business, June 25, 2014

2 MINUTES OF THE MEETING CORRELATING COMMITTEE ON FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES PROTECTIVE CLOTHING AND EQUIPMENT CONFERENCE CALL 2:30 p.m. 26 March March 2014 Agenda Items 1, 2 and 3: Call to Order, Roll Call of Members and Guests, NFPA Staff Liaison Report Correlating Committee Chairman Bill Haskell called the meeting to order at 2:00 p.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 Ben Mauti, Acting Secretary David Trebisacci, Staff Liaison Jason Allen Joseph Arrington Robert Athanas (NV) James Brinkley Louis Carpentier (A) Brandi Chestang Cristine Fargo Tim Gardner (A) Pat Gleason Beverly Gulledge David Haston Kim Henry (A) Tricia Hock (NV) Thomas Hosea James Johnson Stephen King (NV) Karen Lehtonen Mike McKenna Jeremy Metz (NV) Amanda Newsom (A) Dan Rossos (NV) Anthony Petrilli (A) Anthony Purtorti Dan Rossos (NV) Steve Sanders (A) Jeff Stull Rick Swan (NV) Donald Thompson (A) Tim Tomlinson Robert Tutterow William Van Lent Harry Winer Rich Young (A) NIOSH-NPPTL MSA / Compressed Gas Association NFPA Intertek San Antonio Fire Department FDNY/SAFE-IR Inc. IAFF FEMSA US Dept. of the Navy ISEA 3M Company SEI Tyco/Scott USDA PBI Performance Products SEI US Dept. of the Navy Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory TC on Structural and Proximity Fire PC&E Lion Apparel, Inc. Michael McKenna & Associates, LLC West Metro Fire Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. TC on Respiratory Protection Equipment U.S. Dept. of Agriculture Forest Service NIST OR Dept. of Public Safety and Training SEI International Personal Protection, Inc. TC on Wildland Fire Fighting PC&E North Carolina State University Addison Fire Department FIERO FEMSA HIP Consulting LLC DuPont Protection Technologies 1

3 Guests Present: Susan Lovasic Ben Mauti Steve Weinstein Ken Willette The Du Pont Company MSA Honeywell NFPA Public Fire Protection Division David Trebisacci then provided the NFPA Staff Liaison report. David informed the committee of the schedule of voting for NFPA David then reviewed the procedure for reviewing and creating second correlating revisions to standards. David updated on those projects that are currently open for public input. Lastly, David updated on the status of recent TIAs to NFPA 1981 and NFPA Agenda Item 4: Approval of the Previous CC Conference Call Minutes The Minutes of the conference call held on November 25, 2013 were approved without changes by unanimous consent. Agenda Item 5: Chairman s Remarks and IAB Update Chairman Haskell provided the CC with an update on NIOSH activities and SCBA testing status. Agenda Item 6: Update on Supplementary Operating Procedures for Test Method Validation Ken Willette reported on Standards Administration input regarding the use and distribution of the document created by the Task Group on Supplementary Operating Procedures for Test Method Validation. Ken thanked the task group for its work, and presented a flow chart showing an overview of the process going forward (see Attachment A). Ken indicated that this process would involve the CC providing Correlating Committee Notes to be provided if necessary at the Correlating Committee First Draft meeting for each document. The CC note would include requirements and detailed information for a Technical Committee to consider during the Public Comment period and at its Second Draft meeting when the TC is introducing new test methods or significant changes to existing test methods. The CC note could essentially include the contents of Chapter 2 of the task group document and the associated Annex items. Chairman Haskell noted that a draft of the CC note would be included with the agenda and will be discussed at the next CC meeting. Agenda Item 7: Review of NFPA 1952 Second Draft Report The CC reviewed the Second Draft Report of NFPA 1952, Standard on Surface Water Operations Protective Clothing and Equipment. The CC created no Second Correlating Committee Revisions or Correlating Committee Notes. Agenda Item 8: Task Group Report Future Project Organization Task Group Chair Rick Swan provided an update on the progress of this task group, which continues to review and develop recommendations for the future organization of the project structure and project documents. 2

4 Agenda Item 9: Technical Committee Chair Reports TC Chairs Bob Athanas (FAE-ELS), Tricia Hock (FAE-EMS), Steve King (FAE-SPF), Jeremy Metz (FAE-SCE), Dan Rossos (FAE-RPE) and Rick Swan (FAE-WFF) provided updates on the activities and standards development of their respective documents. Agenda Items 11 and 12: Old Business and New Business There was no old business discussed. Under new business, the CC plans to discuss several administrative functions, including task groups and presentation availability, at its next meeting. The CC is planning an inperson meeting for June 2014 to review the First Draft Reports for NFPA 1977, NFPA 1984 and NFPA [Note: the next meeting date and location has been confirmed for June 24-25, 2014 in Bloomington, MN. A meeting notice has been sent separately, with agenda to follow in early June]. Agenda Item 13: Adjournment The conference call was adjourned at 4:00 p.m. in March 26,

5 Test Method Validation How to include criteria within the NFPA Process. Test Method Validation Requirements [Technical Committee (TC) creates First Revisions on a new test method] Correlating Committee (CC) First Draft meeting CC may provide guidance through Correlating Notes (CNs), including test method validation requirements. TC Second Draft meeting CC Second Draft meeting CC may develop changes/revise Second Revisions (SRs) through Second Correlating Revisions (SCRs). This can be based on test method validation requirements. Note: Based on the findings of the Task Group Report on Test Method Validation. 3/18/2014

6 DRAFT CORRELATING COMMITTEE NOTE The Correlating Committee directs the Technical Committee on to validate the new [or significantly revised] test method through the following: 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. 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. 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 (intralaboratory 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. 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.

7 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. 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. 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. Drawings(s) 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.

8 Page 1 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 98-NFPA [ Global Input ] Please delete all section/chapter titles (and surrounding commas) following all cross refs. throughout the document. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: Michael Beady Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu Feb 13 16:59:43 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Update per style Response Message: Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent

9 Page 2 of 220 6/2/2014 Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

10 Page 3 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 1-NFPA [ Section No ] ANSI/ISEA Publications. American National Standards Institute, 25 West 43rd Street, 4th Floor, New York, NY 10036, ANSI/ISEA Z87.1, Occupational and Educational Personal Eye and Face Protection Devices, ANSI/ISEA Z89.1, Industrial Head Protection, Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Mon Feb 03 17:47:05 EST 2014 Committee Statement

11 Page 4 of 220 6/2/2014 Committee Statement: ANSI/ISEA Z87.1 is routinely being updated based upon the latest technology as well as considerations that are brought forward by three main groups (users, manufacturers, technical/experts). To have NFPA 1977 continue to improve through new editions it is beneficial for the end user to also require eyewear be compliant with the latest edition of Z87.1. Changes: High Mass Impact 2003 to current edition (2010) Headform is updated from an Alderson 50th percentile form to an EN 168:2001 form allows us to better harmonize with international requirements; The conical tip was blunted from 1mm to 3.175mm High Velocity Impact 2003 to current edition (2010) Headform is updated from an Alderson 50th percentile form to an EN 168:2001 form allows us to better harmonize with international requirements; The number of impacts was reduced from 20 to 6. This is more consistent with EN 168 and CSA Z94.3 requirements. Penetration 2003 to current edition (2010) Headform is updated from an Alderson 50th percentile form to an EN 168:2001 form allows us to better harmonize with international requirements; No other changes were made to this test. A new edition of ANSI/ISEA Z87.1 is expected to be publish in This means that without updating the edition referenced in NFPA 1977, the standard would reference requirements that have been revised/updated twice. Response Message: Public Input No. 2-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E.

12 Page 5 of 220 6/2/2014 Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

13 Page 6 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 2-NFPA [ Section No ] ASTM Publications. ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, P.O. Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA , ASTM B 117, Standard Practice for Operating Salt Spray (Fog) Apparatus, ASTM B 152/B 152M, Standard Specification for Copper Sheet, Strip, Plate, and Rolled Bar, ASTM D 1424, Standard Test Method for the Tear Resistance of Woven Fabrics by Falling Pendulum (Elmendorf-Type) Apparatus, ASTM D 1630, Standard Test Method for Rubber Property Abrasion Resistance (Footwear Abrader), ASTM D 1683, Standard Test Method for Failure in Sewn Seams of Woven Fabrics, ASTM D 1776, Standard Practice for Conditioning Textiles for Testing, ASTM D 3787, Standard Test Method for Bursting Strength of Textiles Constant- Rate-of-Traverse (CRT) Ball Burst Test, ASTM D 4966, Standard Test Method for Abrasion Resistance of Textile Fabrics (Martindale Abrasion Tester Method), ASTM D 6413, Standard Test Method for Flame Resistance of Textiles (Vertical Test), ASTM E 809, Standard Test Method for Measuring Photometric Characteristics of Retroreflectors, ASTM E 810, Standard Test Method for Coefficient of Retroreflection of Retroreflective Sheeting Utilizing the Coplanar Method Geometry, ASTM F 489, Standard Test Method for Static Coefficient of Friction of Shoe Sole and Heel Materials as Measured by the James Machine, ASTM F 1060, Standard Test Method for Thermal Protective Performance of Materials for Protective Clothing for Hot Surface Contact, ASTM F 1342, Standard Test Method for Protective Clothing Material Resistance to Puncture, E1. ASTM F 1414, Standard Test Method for Measurement of Cut Resistance to Chain Saw in Lower Body (Legs) Protective Clothing, ASTM F 1790, Standard Test Method for Measuring Cut Resistance of Materials Used in Protective Clothing, ASTM F 1868, Standard Test Method for Thermal and Evaporative Resistance of Clothing Materials Using a Sweating Hot Plate, ASTM F 1897, Standard Specification for Leg Protection for Chain Saw Users, ASTM F 1939, Standard Test Method for Radiant Heat Resistance of Flame Resistant Clothing Materials with Continuous Heating, 2008.

14 Page 7 of 220 6/2/2014 ASTM F 2010, Standard Test Method for Evaluation of Glove Effects on Wearer Hand Dexterity Using Modified Pegboard Test, ASTM F 2894, Standard Test Method for Evaluation of Materials, Protective Clothing and Equipment for Heat Resistance Using a Hot Air Circulating Oven, 2012b. ASTM F 2913, Standard Test Method for Measuring the Coefficient of Friction for Evaluation of Slip Performance of Footwear and Test Surfaces/Flooring Using a Whole Shoe Tester, Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Tue Feb 04 17:03:26 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: 1. Updates referenced ASTM standards to the current edition. 2. Removes James Machine Slip Test (see related proposals to switch from James machine to SATRA machine). 3. Changes Footwear Abrasion method (see related proposals on footwear abrasion)/ Response Message: Public Input No. 24-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A.

15 Page 8 of 220 6/2/2014 Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

16 Page 9 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 3-NFPA [ Section No ] ISO Publications. International Organization for Standardization, 1, rue de Varembé, Case postale 56, CH 1211 Geneve 20, Switzerland. ISO 27, Guidelines for corrective action to be taken by a certification body in the event of misuse of its mark of conformity, ISO 62, General requirements for bodies operating assessment and certification/registration of quality systems, ISO 65, General requirements for bodies operating product certification systems, ISO 4649, Rubber vulcanized or thermoplastic Determination of abrasion resistance using a rotating cyclindrical drum device, ISO 9001, Quality management systems requirements, ISO 17011, General requirements for accreditation bodies accrediting conformity assessment bodies, ISO 17025, General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories, ISO 17492, Clothing for protection against heat and flame determination of heat transmission on exposure to both flame and radiant heat, Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Tue Feb 04 17:14:12 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: Adds new proposed footwear abrasion method. See related footwear abrasion proposals. Public Input No. 26-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot

17 Page 10 of 220 6/2/ Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

18 Page 11 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 4-NFPA [ New Section after ] * Gusset. The relatively flexible material in protective footwear that joins the upper quarter and the tongue to provide expansion when donned. Supplemental Information File Name NFPA_1977_Annex_Item_to_Gusset_3.3.X_edited.docx Description Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Tue Feb 04 17:21:38 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: New Annex A material will also be added Response Message: Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C.

19 Page 12 of 220 6/2/2014 Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

20 Page 13 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 97-NFPA [ New Section after ] Peak. The part of the helmet extending forward over the wearer's forehead. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Tue Feb 11 10:17:06 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention The technical committee is defining peak as the term is used in the standard. Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P.

21 Page 14 of 220 6/2/2014 Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

22 Page 15 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 5-NFPA [ Section No ] * Minor Seam. Remaining seam assemblies that are not classified as Major, Major A, or Major B major seams. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Tue Feb 04 17:53:01 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: The terms Major A and Major B are not utilized in this standard. Response Message: Public Input No. 3-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D.

23 Page 16 of 220 6/2/2014 Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

24 Page 17 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 6-NFPA [ New Section after ] * Tongue. The part of the protective footwear that is provided for lace up protective footwear with a closure that extends from the vamp to the top line of the footwear between sides of the footwear upper and is exposed to the exterior environment when the footwear is correctly donned Top Line. The top edge of protective footwear that includes the tongue, gusset, quarter, collar, and shaft. Supplemental Information File Name NFPA_1977_Annex_A_3.3.X_Tongue_edited.docx Description Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Tue Feb 04 18:00:41 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: New Annex A material will also be added. Response Message: Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E.

25 Page 18 of 220 6/2/2014 Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

26 Page 19 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 7-NFPA [ Section No ] Wrist Crease. The transverse crease of the wrist located adjacent to the palm and measured at the point closest to the palm. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Tue Feb 04 18:09:03 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: Definition is replaced with a procedure to determine the wrist crease in Ch. 6. See related proposal. Public Input No. 30-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard

27 Page 20 of 220 6/2/2014 Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

28 Page 21 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 8-NFPA [ Section No ] The certification organization shall not issue any new certifications to the edition of this standard on or after the NFPA effective date for the edition, which is January 3, 2011 (DATE). Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Tue Feb 04 18:27:33 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: Revises dates to reflect new edition. Standards Council will determine the effective date of the standard. Public Input No. 32-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All

29 Page 22 of 220 6/2/2014 Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

30 Page 23 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 9-NFPA [ Section No ] The certification organization shall not permit any manufacturer to continue to label any protective clothing and equipment certified as compliant with the edition of this standard on or after September 1, 2011 (ISSUE DATE PLUS 12 MONTHS). Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Tue Feb 04 18:30:14 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: Revised dates to reflect new edition. Standards Council will determine issuance date. Public Input No. 33-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C.

31 Page 24 of 220 6/2/2014 Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

32 Page 25 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 10-NFPA [ Section No ] The certification organization shall require manufacturers to remove all certification labels and product labels indicating compliance with the edition of this standard from all protective clothing and equipment that are under the control of the manufacturer on September 1, 2011 (ISSUE DATE PLUS 12 MONTHS), and the certification organization shall verify that this action is taken. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Tue Feb 04 18:35:11 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Revised dates to reflect current edition. Allows for 12 months for manufacturers to certify to new edition. Standards Council will determine issuance date. Response Message: Public Input No. 34-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C.

33 Page 26 of 220 6/2/2014 Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

34 Page 27 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 11-NFPA [ Section No ] All protective clothing and equipment labeled as being compliant with this standard shall undergo recertification on an annual basis. This recertification shall include the following: (1) Inspection and evaluation to all design requirements as required by this standard on all manufacturer models and components (2) Testing to all performance requirements as required by this standard on all manufacturer models and components with the following protocol: (a) (b) (c) (d) Where a test method incorporates testing both before and after the laundering preconditioning specified in and the test generates quantitative results, recertification testing shall be limited to the conditioning that yielded the worst-case test result during the initial certification for the model or component. Where a test method incorporates testing both before and after laundering preconditioning specified in and the test generates nonquantitative results (e.g., pass/fail for melt/drip), recertification shall be limited to a single conditioning procedure in any given year. Subsequent annual recertifications shall cycle through the remaining conditioning procedures to ensure that all required conditionings are included over time. Where a test method requires the testing of three specimens, a minimum of one specimen shall be tested for annual recertification. For conductive heat resistance testing of gloves, three specimens shall be tested. Where a test method requires the testing of five or more specimens, a minimum of two specimens shall be tested for annual recertification. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Tue Feb 04 18:38:17 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: The technical committee has determined that it is necessary to increase the number of specimens tested to account for material variability. Ballot Results

35 Page 28 of 220 6/2/2014 This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 13 Affirmative All 1 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard Affirmative with Comment Mousseau, Marc Vote Yes pending that the current certified gloves pass this requirement.

36 Page 29 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 12-NFPA [ Section No. 4.5 ] 4.5 Manufacturer s Quality Assurance Program The manufacturer shall provide and operate a quality assurance program that meets the requirements of this section and that includes a product recall system as specified in and Section 4.8, Manufacturer s Safety Alert and Product Recall Systems The operation of the quality assurance program shall evaluate and test compliant product production against this standard to ensure that production remains in compliance The manufacturer shall be registered to ISO 9001, Quality management systems requirements Registration to the requirements of ISO 9001, Quality management systems requirements, shall be conducted by a registrar that is accredited for personal protective equipment in accordance with ISO 62, General requirements for bodies operating assessment and certification/registration of quality systems. The registrar shall affix the accreditation mark on the ISO registration certificate The scope of the ISO registration shall include at least the design and manufacturing systems management for the type of personal protective equipment being certified The operation of the quality assurance program shall evaluate and test compliant product production against this standard to ensure that production remains in compliance * Any entity that meets the definition of manufacturer as specified in Section 3.3, and therefore is considered to be the manufacturer, but does not manufacture or assemble the compliant product, shall meet the requirements specified in Section * Where the manufacturer uses subcontractors in the construction or assembly of the compliant product, the locations and names of all subcontractor facilities shall be documented and the documentation shall be provided to the manufacturer s ISO registrar and the certification organization Where manufacturers make custom-sized or specially fitted gloves for accommodating the special needs of individual firefighters, the manufacturer shall employ the same manufacturing methods as used for making required glove sizes The manufacturer shall notify the certification organization as required in and shall obtain written approval from the certification organization prior to proceeding with any modifications to an existing certified glove design

37 Page 30 of 220 6/2/2014 Where gloves are provided with a moisture barrier, custom-fitting gloves shall be individually evaluated to verify the integrity of the glove moisture barrier using air or other similar method to ensure that the glove is constructed in a leak-free manner. Supplemental Information File Name NFPA_1977_FR_12_Annex_edited.docx Description Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Tue Feb 04 18:43:26 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Updated language to be consistent with other NFPA standards in this project (e g 1971). Allows for the compliance of gloves for special needs users (also in NFPA 1971). A Word Document with the Annex items is attached. Response Message: Public Input No. 35-NFPA [Section No. 4.5] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All

38 Page 31 of 220 6/2/2014 Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

39 Page 32 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 13-NFPA [ Section No ] At least the following information shall also be printed legibly on the product label, with all letters at least mm ( 1 16 in.) high: (1) Manufacturer's name, identification, or designation (2) Manufacturer's address (3) Country of manufacture (4) Manufacturer's garment identification number, lot number, or serial number (5) Month and year of manufacture (not coded) (6) Model or style name, number, or design (7) Size, using the garment sizes specified in (8) Garment materials and percent content (9) Cleaning precautions Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Tue Feb 04 18:52:42 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: The change of 2.0mm to 1.6mm will bring consistency between NFPA 1977 and NFPA 1951, This will aid with the labeling of elements certified to multiple standards. 1/16 inch is equivalent to 1.58mm. Response Message: Public Input No. 4-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot

40 Page 33 of 220 6/2/ Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

41 Page 34 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 14-NFPA [ Section No ] At least the following information shall also be printed legibly on the product label, with all letters at least mm ( 1 16 in.) high: (1) Manufacturer's name, identification, or designation (2) Manufacturer's address (3) Country of manufacture (4) Manufacturer's helmet identification number, lot number, or serial number (5) Month and year of manufacture (not coded) (6) Model or style name, number, or design (7) Helmet size or size range (8) Nominal weight of helmet (9) Cleaning precautions Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Tue Feb 04 18:53:36 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: The change of 2.0mm to 1.6mm will bring consistency between NFPA 1977 and NFPA 1951, This will aid with the labeling of elements certified to multiple standards. 1/16 inch is equivalent to 1.58mm. Response Message: Public Input No. 5-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot

42 Page 35 of 220 6/2/ Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

43 Page 36 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 15-NFPA [ Section No ] At least the following information shall also be printed legibly on the work glove product label, with all letters at least mm ( 1 16 in.) high: (1) Manufacturer's name, identification, or designation (2) Manufacturer's address (3) Country of manufacture (4) Manufacturer's glove identification number, lot number, or serial number (5) Month and year of manufacture (not coded) (6) Model or style name, number, or design (7) Glove size or size range (8) Cleaning precautions Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Tue Feb 04 18:54:16 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: The change of 2.0mm to 1.6mm will bring consistency between NFPA 1977 and NFPA 1951, This will aid with the labeling of elements certified to multiple standards. 1/16 inch is equivalent to 1.58mm. Response Message: Public Input No. 6-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention

44 Page 37 of 220 6/2/2014 Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

45 Page 38 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 16-NFPA [ Section No ] At least the following information shall also be printed legibly on the product label, with all letters at least mm ( 1 16 in.) high: (1) Manufacturer's name, identification, or designation (2) Manufacturer's address (3) Country of manufacture (4) Manufacturer's footwear identification number, lot number, or serial number (5) Month and year of manufacture (not coded) (6) Model or style name, number, or design (7) Footwear size and width (8) Cleaning precautions Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Tue Feb 04 18:55:00 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: The change of 2.0mm to 1.6mm will bring consistency between NFPA 1977 and NFPA 1951, This will aid with the labeling of elements certified to multiple standards. 1/16 inch is equivalent to 1.58mm. Response Message: Public Input No. 7-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention

46 Page 39 of 220 6/2/2014 Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

47 Page 40 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 17-NFPA [ Section No ] At least the following information shall also be printed legibly on the product label, with all letters at least mm ( 1 16 in.) high: (1) Manufacturer's name (2) Manufacturer's address (3) Country of manufacture (4) Manufacturer's number, lot, or serial number (5) Month and year of manufacture (not coded) (6) Model or style name, number, or design (7) Identification of the compliant helmet(s) with which the face/neck shroud was certified Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Tue Feb 04 18:55:35 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: The change of 2.0mm to 1.6mm will bring consistency between NFPA 1977 and NFPA 1951, This will aid with the labeling of elements certified to multiple standards. 1/16 inch is equivalent to 1.58mm. Response Message: Public Input No. 8-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention

48 Page 41 of 220 6/2/2014 Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

49 Page 42 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 18-NFPA [ Section No ] At least the following information shall also be printed legibly on the product label, with all letters at least mm ( 1 16 in.) high: (1) Manufacturer's name (2) Manufacturer's address (3) Country of manufacture (4) Manufacturer's number, lot, or serial number (5) Month and year of manufacture (6) Model or style name, number, or design Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Tue Feb 04 18:56:09 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: The change of 2.0mm to 1.6mm will bring consistency between NFPA 1977 and NFPA 1951, This will aid with the labeling of elements certified to multiple standards. 1/16 inch is equivalent to 1.58mm. Response Message: Public Input No. 9-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y.

50 Page 43 of 220 6/2/2014 Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

51 Page 44 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 19-NFPA [ Section No ] At least the following information shall also be printed legibly on the product label, with all letters at least mm ( 1 16 in.) high: (1) Manufacturer's name, identification, or designation (2) Manufacturer's address (3) Country of manufacture (4) Manufacturer's lot number, or serial number (5) Month and year of manufacture (not coded) (6) Model or style name, number, or design (7) Size (8) Cleaning precautions Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Tue Feb 04 18:56:41 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: The change of 2.0mm to 1.6mm will bring consistency between NFPA 1977 and NFPA 1951, This will aid with the labeling of elements certified to multiple standards. 1/16 inch is equivalent to 1.58mm. Response Message: Public Input No. 10-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention

52 Page 45 of 220 6/2/2014 Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

53 Page 46 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 20-NFPA [ Section No ] At least the following information shall also be printed legibly on the driving glove product label, with all letters at least mm ( 1 16 in.) high: (1) Manufacturer's name, identification, or designation (2) Manufacturer's address (3) Country of manufacture (4) Manufacturer's glove identification number, lot number, or serial number (5) Month and year of manufacture (not coded) (6) Model or style name, number, or design (7) Glove size or size range (8) Cleaning precautions Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Tue Feb 04 18:57:06 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: The change of 2.0mm to 1.6mm will bring consistency between NFPA 1977 and NFPA 1951, This will aid with the labeling of elements certified to multiple standards. 1/16 inch is equivalent to 1.58mm. Response Message: Public Input No. 11-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention

54 Page 47 of 220 6/2/2014 Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

55 Page 48 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 21-NFPA [ Section No ] At least the following information shall also be printed legibly on the product label, with all letters at least mm ( 1 16 in.) high: (1) Manufacturer's name, identification, or designation (2) Manufacturer's address (3) Country of manufacture (4) Manufacturer's identification number, lot number, or serial number (5) Month and year of manufacture (not coded) (6) Model or style name, number, or design (7) Size (8) Cleaning precautions Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Tue Feb 04 18:57:45 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: The change of 2.0mm to 1.6mm will bring consistency between NFPA 1977 and NFPA 1951, This will aid with the labeling of elements certified to multiple standards. 1/16 inch is equivalent to 1.58mm. Response Message: Public Input No. 12-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention

56 Page 49 of 220 6/2/2014 Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

57 Page 50 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 22-NFPA [ Section No ] All snaps shall meet the requirements of NASM 27980, Fastener, Snap, Style 2 (Regular Wire Spring Clamp Type), and MIL-DTL-10884H, Fastener, Snap. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Tue Feb 04 18:58:52 EST 2014 Committee Statement

58 Page 51 of 220 6/2/2014 Committee FROM NFPA ROP: Statement: Log #91 FAE-SPF Final Action: Accept in Principle ( ) Submitter: Jeffrey O. Stull, International Personnel Protection, Inc. Recommendation: Where possible, specific criteria that are part of the design and construction requirements of MIL-F should be specified and listed in order to assess conformity of snaps. Substantiation: The general reference to a hardware standard is insufficient to specify the intended design and performance of this item. Committee Meeting Action: Accept in Principle Delete existing Section , and renumber section accordingly. Committee Statement: The technical committee agrees that specific requirements should be referenced for snaps in lieu of the current specified MIL standard in its entirety. Therefore the technical committee is deleting the existing Section and will utilize the existing performance requirements for hardware (which includes snaps) to establish performance requirements. The current performance requirements in NFPA 1971 mandate corrosion resistance, heat resistance and functionality after heat resistance. These are the desirable characteristics for snaps. Number Eligible to Vote: 30 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 27 Ballot Not Returned: 3 Davis, R., Doan, S., Scianna, M. Response Message: Public Input No. 13-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot

59 Page 52 of 220 6/2/ Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

60 Page 53 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 23-NFPA [ Section No. 6.3 ] 6.3 Protective Work Glove Item Design Requirements Protective work glove items shall have at least the applicable design requirements specified in this section where inspected by the certification organization as specified in Section Gloves shall consist of a composite meeting the performance requirements of Section The composite shall be permitted to be configured as a continuous or joined single layer or as continuous or joined multiple layers Where a glove is made up of multiple layers, all layers shall be individually graded per size The glove shall consist of a glove body. Protective work glove bodies gloves shall be designed so they closely conform to the wrist or shall be are adjustable at the wrist, and shall extend a minimum of 25 mm (1 in.) past the wrist crease. See Figure Figure Locating Wrist Crease The glove shall extend from the tip of the fingers to at least 25 mm (1 in.) beyond the wrist crease The portion of the glove that extends from the tip of the fingers to 25 mm (1 in.) beyond the wrist crease shall be considered the glove body and shall meet the glove body requirements in Section Where present, the portion of the glove that extends from 25 mm (1 in.) beyond the wrist crease up to the end of the entire glove shall be considered the glove interface component and shall meet the glove interface component requirements in Section

61 Page 54 of 220 6/2/2014 The location of the wrist crease shall be determined by first placing the glove on a measurement board palm down and securing (locking) the fingertips to the board A 1 lb weight shall be attached to the end of the glove body or glove interface component. The weight shall not be attached to a knitted wristlet glove interface component. The weight shall be applied evenly across the glove * Two points shall be marked on the back side of the glove. The location of the points shall be determined by measuring down the following distances, which are provided according to glove size, from the finger crotch of digit two and from the finger crotch of digit three: (1) XS: 9.46 cm (3.72 in.) (2) S: cm (3.95 in.) (3) M: cm (4.20 in.) (4) L: cm (4.42 in.) (5) XL: cm (4.62 in.) A straight line shall be drawn on the back side of the glove using the two points. This line shall be drawn around the side edges of the glove The glove shall be removed from the measurement board. A line shall be drawn on the palm side of the glove by connecting the lines from the side edges of the glove The resulting straight line around the circumference of the glove shall be the location of the wrist crease All thread used to manufacture protective work gloves shall be made of inherently flame-resistant fiber Protective Work Glove Sizing In order to label or otherwise indicate that a work glove complies with the requirements of this standard, the manufacturer shall provide work gloves in not less than five separate and distinct sizes. For selection of proper glove size, the dimensions for hand circumference and the hand length shall be measured as shown in Figure Figure Method of Measuring Hand Dimensions for Selection of Proper Glove.

62 Page 55 of 220 6/2/ Hand circumference shall be measured by placing a measuring tape on a table or other flat surface with the numerals facing downward The subject shall place the right hand, palm down and fingers together, in the middle of the tape so that the tape can pass straight across the metacarpal knuckles The circumference shall be measured to the nearest 3 mm (1 8 in.) as shown in Figure To label or otherwise indicate that a work glove complies with the requirements of this standard, the manufacturer shall provide work gloves in not less than five separate and distinct sizes specified in Table (a) through Table (e). The manufacturer shall provide gloves in each size that at least fit the hand dimension ranges specified in the tables. Table (a) Sizing for Extra Small (XS) Glove

63 Page 56 of 220 6/2/2014 cm in. Range for hand length: Range for hand circumference: Mid-Size Value Range to Be Accommodated cm. in. cm in. Digit 1 circumference Digit 2 circumference Digit 3 circumference Digit 4 circumference Digit 5 circumference Digit 1 length Digit 2 length Digit 3 length Digit 4 length Digit 5 length Hand circumference Hand length Table (b) Sizing for Small (S) Glove Range for hand length: Range for hand circumference: Mid-Size Value cm in Range to Be Accommodated cm in. cm. in. Digit 1 circumference Digit 2 circumference Digit 3 circumference Digit 4 circumference Digit 5 circumference Digit 1 length Digit 2 length Digit 3 length Digit 4 length Digit 5 length Hand circumference Hand length Table (c) Sizing for Medium (M) Glove

64 Page 57 of 220 6/2/2014 cm in. Range for hand length: Range for hand circumference: Mid-Size Value Range to Be Accommodated cm in. cm in. Digit 1 circumference Digit 2 circumference Digit 3 circumference Digit 4 circumference Digit 5 circumference Digit 1 length Digit 2 length Digit 3 length Digit 4 length Digit 5 length Hand circumference Hand length Table (d) Sizing for Large (L) Glove Range for hand length: Range for hand circumference: Mid-Size Value cm in Range to Be Accommodated cm in. cm in. Digit 1 circumference Digit 2 circumference Digit 3 circumference Digit 4 circumference Digit 5 circumference Digit 1 length Digit 2 length Digit 3 length Digit 4 length Digit 5 length Hand circumference Hand length Table (e) Sizing for Extra-Large (XL) Glove

65 Page 58 of 220 6/2/2014 cm in. Range for hand length: Range for hand circumference: Mid-Size Value Range to Be Accommodated cm in. cm in. Digit 1 circumference Digit 2 circumference Digit 3 circumference Digit 4 circumference Digit 5 circumference Digit 1 length Digit 2 length Digit 3 length Digit 4 length Digit 5 length Hand circumference Hand length The manufacturer shall provide the purchaser with the hand dimension ranges for protective work gloves specified in The glove size indicated on the label shall be determined by the hand dimensions given in Table (a) through Table (e) Custom-sized work gloves outside the ranges specified in this section shall be permitted in addition to the required five sizes Manufacturers shall be permitted to provide deviations in glove design from the indicated sizing tables for accommodating the special needs of individual fire fighters with specific sizing and fit issues, such as missing fingers. Where customsized or specially fitted gloves are provided, these gloves shall be subject to the quality assurance evaluation established in Where custom-sized or specially fitted gloves are provided, the glove size indicated on the label shall be determined by the closest hand dimensions given in Table (a) through Table (e), followed by the word Custom The protective work glove size indicated on the product label shall be determined by the hand dimensions given in Table Table Ranges of Hand Dimensions to be Accommodated by Protective Work Glove Sizes

66 Page 59 of 220 6/2/2014 Hand Length Hand Circumference Size mm in. mm in. Extra small (XS) (size 8) Small (S) (size 9) Medium (M) (size 10) Large (L) (size 11) Extra large (XL) (size 12) Supplemental Information File Name NFPA_1977_FR_23_Annex_edited.docx FR_23_-_1971_2013_tables.docx Description Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Tue Feb 04 19:00:32 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Add wording already used in other standards to clarify glove areas, wrist crease location, and glove sizing details. Glove size details will be consistent with NFPA Allows for custom gloves for special needs users. Word Document with Annex item to attached. Response Message: Public Input No. 36-NFPA [Section No. 6.3] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L.

67 Page 60 of 220 6/2/2014 Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

68 Page 61 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 24-NFPA [ Section No ] Footwear items shall consist of a sole with heel, upper, and insole, and shank. The quarter section of the boot shall be designed to provide an adjustable, snug fit for support around the ankle and lower leg. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Tue Feb 04 19:07:24 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: There is no performance requriement associated with the shank. The mfr. can call basically anything a shank. Public Input No. 68-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All

69 Page 62 of 220 6/2/2014 Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

70 Page 63 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 25-NFPA [ Section No ] The heel breast shall not be less than 13 mm ( 1 2 in.). To determine heel breast height, the boot shall be placed on a flat surface and the heel breast shall be measured from where the heel breast intersects with the sole to where the heel breast intersects with the flat surface. The heel breasting angle shall not be less than 90 degrees nor more than 135 degrees relative to the sole and, as shown in Figure Figure Footwear Terms. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Tue Feb 04 19:08:06 EST 2014 Committee Statement

71 Page 64 of 220 6/2/2014 Committee Statement: Response Message: Clarifies how breast height is to be measured. This can be confusing when the footwear contains deep treads. Public Input No. 69-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

72 Page 65 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 26-NFPA [ Section No ] The Footwear height shall be determined by measuring inside the boot footwear from the center of the insole at the heel up to a perpendicular reference line extending across the width of the boot footwear at the lowest point of the top line,. The top line shall be the uppermost edge of the protective footwear that includes the quarter, collar, and shaft, but excluding the tongue and gusset. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Tue Feb 04 19:09:32 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: Standardized footwear height measurement procedure throughout the project. This does not change the height. Public Input No. 70-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C.

73 Page 66 of 220 6/2/2014 Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

74 Page 67 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 27-NFPA [ New Section after ] Physical protection shall be continuous circumferentially to within 50 mm (2 in.) of the footwear top line at all locations, with the exception of the tongue, gusset, and the area inside of and within 13 mm ( 1 2 in.) around pull-up holes that fully penetrate the footwear from outside to inside. The height of physical protection at all locations of the boot, with the exception of the tongue and gusset, shall be no less than 200 mm (8 in.) when measured as described in Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Tue Feb 04 19:10:13 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Modifying language to correlate with the corresponding text in three other documents within the project. No changes are being made to the way the height determination is made. Should the footwear height be greater than 8 inches, this will ensure that the required protection extends to within 2 inches of the top of the footwear. Response Message: Public Input No. 71-NFPA [New Section after ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A.

75 Page 68 of 220 6/2/2014 Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

76 Page 69 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 28-NFPA [ Section No ] Where used, there shall be a minimum of four metal stud hooks on each side of the eyerow, and they shall meet the requirements of and Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Tue Feb 04 19:11:14 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Stud hooks are not required, therefore discussion is warranted as to whether or not the number of stud hooks required when used is necessary. Response Message: Public Input No. 72-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All

77 Page 70 of 220 6/2/2014 Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

78 Page 71 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 29-NFPA [ Section No ] Eyelets shall be constructed of coated steel, solid brass, brass-coated nickel, or nickel. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Tue Feb 04 19:12:05 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: All metal hardware is required to meet the Corrosion Resistance Test, all eyelets in the footwear are required to meet the Eyelet and Stud Post Attachment Test, and all hardware is required to remain functional following the Heat and Thermal Shrinkage Resistance Test. The type of hardware used should not be restricted as long as it meets the applicable requirements. If only metal eyelets are preferred, then the limitation should be to metal rather than the type of metal. Also, if metal eyelets are preferred, then shouldn t this requirement also apply to stud hooks, stud posts, and lacing loops? Response Message: Public Input No. 73-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A.

79 Page 72 of 220 6/2/2014 Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

80 Page 73 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 30-NFPA [ Section No ] Goggles Goggle items shall meet the respective requirements for high impact protection of goggles and be marked "Z87 " in accordance with ANSI Z87.1, Occupational and Educational Personal Eye and Face Protection Devices. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Tue Feb 04 19:15:04 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: Updates language to correlate with verbiage in new edition of Z87.1. "Z87+" is high impact protection. Public Input No. 66-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All

81 Page 74 of 220 6/2/2014 Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

82 Page 75 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 31-NFPA [ Section No. 6.8 ] 6.8 Protective Driving Glove Item Design Requirements Protective driving glove items shall have at least the applicable design requirements specified in this section where inspected by the certification organization as specified in Section Protective driving glove bodies shall be designed so they closely conform to the wrist or shall be adjustable at the wrist, and shall extend a minimum of 25 mm (1 in.) past the wrist crease. (See Figure ) All thread used to manufacture protective driving gloves shall be made of inherently flame-resistant fiber Sizing In order to label or otherwise indicate that a protective driving glove complies with the requirements of this standard, the manufacturer shall provide driving gloves in not less than five separate and distinct sizes The manufacturer shall provide the purchaser with the hand dimension ranges specified in Additional protective driving glove sizes outside the ranges specified in this section shall be permitted in addition to the required five sizes The protective driving glove size indicated on the product label shall be determined by the hand dimensions given in Table Table Ranges of Hand Dimensions to be Accommodated by Protective Driving Glove Sizes Hand Length Hand Circumference Size mm in. mm in. Extra small (XS) (size 8) Small (S) (size 9) Medium (M) (size 10) Large (L) (size 11) Extra large (XL) (size 12) Gloves shall consist of a composite meeting the performance requirements of Section The composite shall be permitted to be configured as a continuous or joined single layer or as continuous or joined multiple layers Where a glove is made up of multiple layers, all layers shall be individually graded per size

83 Page 76 of 220 6/2/2014 The glove shall consist of a glove body. Protective driving gloves shall be designed so they closely conform to the wrist or are adjustable at the wrist The glove shall extend from the tip of the fingers to at least 25 mm (1 in.) beyond the wrist crease The portion of the glove that extends from the tip of the fingers to 25 mm (1 in.) beyond the wrist crease shall be considered the glove body and shall meet the glove body requirements in Section Where present, the portion of the glove that extends from 25 mm (1 in.) beyond the wrist crease up to the end of the entire glove shall be considered the glove interface component and shall meet the glove interface component requirements in Section The location of the wrist crease shall be determined as specified in All thread used to manufacture protective driving gloves shall be made of inherently flame-resistant fiber Glove sizing shall be in accordance with Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Tue Feb 04 19:16:42 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: Adds wording already in use in NFPA 1971 to clarify glove areas, location of wrist crease, and glove sizing details. Public Input No. 37-NFPA [Section No. 6.8] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 13 Affirmative All 1 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention

84 Page 77 of 220 6/2/2014 Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard Affirmative with Comment Mousseau, Marc Vote Yes pending that the current certified gloves pass this requirement.

85 Page 78 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 32-NFPA [ Section No ] Zippers Garment zippers shall be tested for the crosswise breaking strength of chain; crosswise breaking strength of separating unit; holding strength of stops, retainers, and separating units; operating force; and slider lock strength requirements of Commercial Item Description as specified in A-A-55634A, Zippers (Fasteners, Slide Interlocking), and shall have the crosswise breaking strength of chain meet or exceed the crosswise breaking strength of chain requirements specified in A-A-55634A. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 07:41:30 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Replaces the individual zipper requirements with the requirement in NFPA Also adds the slider lock strength requirement. This will clarify the requirements and maintain consistency between documents. Response Message: Public Input No. 14-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J.

86 Page 79 of 220 6/2/2014 Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

87 Page 80 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 33-NFPA [ Section No ] Zippers shall be tested for the crosswise breaking strength of separating unit as specified in A-A-55634A, Zippers (Fasteners, Slide Interlocking), and shall have the breaking strength of separating unit meet or exceed the crosswise breaking strength of separating unit requirements specified in A-A-55634A. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 07:43:06 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: See FR 32. Response Message: Public Input No. 15-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard

88 Page 81 of 220 6/2/2014 Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

89 Page 82 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 34-NFPA [ Sections , ] Zippers shall be tested for the holding strengths of stops, retainers, and separating units as specified in A-A-55634A, Zippers (Fasteners, Slide Interlocking), and shall have the holding strengths of stops, retainers, and separating units meet or exceed the holding strengths of stops, retainers, and separating units requirements specified in A-A-55634A Zippers shall be tested for the operating force as specified in A-A-55634A, Zippers (Fasteners, Slide Interlocking), and shall have the operating force meet or exceed the operating force requirements specified in A-A-55634A. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 07:46:10 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: See FR 32. Response Message: Public Input No. 16-NFPA [Sections , ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J.

90 Page 83 of 220 6/2/2014 Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

91 Page 84 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 35-NFPA [ Section No ] Helmets shall be tested for heat resistance as specified in Section 8.4, Heat and Thermal Shrinkage Resistance Test, and shall not have any deformation of the brim or peak exceed exceeding 25 percent of its original length. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 07:50:31 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention The technical committee wanted to clarify the current text in paragraph Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D.

92 Page 85 of 220 6/2/2014 Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

93 Page 86 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 36-NFPA [ Section No ] Protective work gloves, glove body composites and glove interface component composites, including, but not limited to, trim, external labels, and external tags, but excluding hook and loop fasteners where not in direct contact with the skin, shall be tested for flame resistance as specified in Section 8.20, Protective Glove Flame Resistance Test, shall not melt or drip, shall not have any afterflame of more than 2 seconds, and shall not have any char length in excess of 100 mm (4 in.), and the consumed materials shall not exceed 5.0 percent of the specimen's original weight. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 07:53:40 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Clarifies the parts of the glove that shall be tested. Response Message: Public Input No. 38-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C.

94 Page 87 of 220 6/2/2014 Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

95 Page 88 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 37-NFPA [ Section No ] Protective work glove body composites shall be tested for resistance to cutting as specified in Section 8.23, Cut Resistance Test, and shall have a distance of blade travel greater than mm ( in.). Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 08:02:57 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Correlating the cut resistance requirements in NFPA 1977 to all other standards in the project. In the last revision cycle of NFPA 1977, the ASTM F 1790 test method was updated to the 2005 edition, but at that time it was not realized that the method was changed in a manner to make it more severe. As a result, a TIA was submitted to reduce the weight used in the test for gloves. No other adjustment was made. Since that time, this same change was made in other standards within the project either through TIA s or during revision cycles. However, along with the weight reductions, the requirement was also reduces from 25 mm to 20 mm. Response Message: Public Input No. 39-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E.

96 Page 89 of 220 6/2/2014 Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

97 Page 90 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 38-NFPA [ Section No ] Protective work glove body composites shall be tested for resistance to puncture as specified in Section 8.24, Puncture Resistance Test, and shall have a puncture force of not less than 40 N (8.8 lbf). Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 08:05:05 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: Clarifies that the glove body is the portion of the glove to be tested. Public Input No. 40-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard

98 Page 91 of 220 6/2/2014 Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

99 Page 92 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 39-NFPA [ Section No ] Protective work gloves shall be tested for grip, as specified in Section 8.26, Grip Test, and shall not have a percentage drop of barehanded control value of not less than 90 force of more than 30 percent in any 0.2-second interval. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 08:06:47 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Aligns grip test with NFPA and NFPA and aligns wetting method with NFPA and NFPA The current rope grip test is variable and subjective. The proposed test method provides a more consistent way of identifying gloves that have very slippery surfaces that when wet may cause a complete loss of gripping ability. Response Message: Public Input No. 90-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 13 Affirmative All 1 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C.

100 Page 93 of 220 6/2/2014 Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard Affirmative with Comment Mousseau, Marc Vote Yes pending that the current certified gloves pass this requirement.

101 Page 94 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 40-NFPA [ New Section after ] Protective work gloves shall be tested using the torque test specified in Section 8.34, and shall have an average percent of bare-handed control not less than 80 percent. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 08:07:36 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: The torque test which is used in NFPA and NFPA provides a less variable subjective of grip strength than the current grip test. Response Message: Public Input No. 95-NFPA [New Section after ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 13 Affirmative All 1 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C.

102 Page 95 of 220 6/2/2014 Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard Affirmative with Comment Mousseau, Marc Vote Yes pending that the current certified gloves pass this requirement.

103 Page 96 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 41-NFPA [ Section No ] Protective footwear shall be tested for resistance to heat as specified in Section 8.4, Heat and Thermal Shrinkage Resistance Test, and, excluding laces, shall have no part of the footwear melt, shall have no delamination separation of any part of the footwear, and shall have all hardware remain functional. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 08:08:26 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Separation is the term and criteria used for evaluation in the test method. Also, this is the term and criteria used for heat resistance in other standards (NFPA 1971, 1951). Response Message: Public Input No. 75-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C.

104 Page 97 of 220 6/2/2014 Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

105 Page 98 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 42-NFPA [ Section No ] Protective footwear shall be tested for resistance to cut cutting as specified in Section 8.23, Cut Resistance Test, and shall have a distance of blade travel greater than mm ( in.). Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 08:09:17 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Correlating the cut resistance requirements in NFPA 1977 to all other standards in the project. In the last revision cycle of NFPA 1977, the ASTM F 1790 test method was updated to the 2005 edition, but at that time it was not realized that the method was changed in a manner to make it more severe. As a result, a TIA was submitted to reduce the weight used in the test for gloves. No other adjustment was made. Since that time, this same change was made in other standards within the project either through TIA s or during revision cycles. However, along with the weight reductions, the requirement was also reduces from 25 mm to 20 mm. NFPA 1977 is the only standard within the project where this change was not incorporated. Response Message: Public Input No. 62-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L.

106 Page 99 of 220 6/2/2014 Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

107 Page 100 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 43-NFPA [ Section No ] Protective footwear sole and heel composites, excluding the sole and heel composites of caulked boots, shall be tested for resistance to abrasion as specified in Section 8.18, Protective Footwear Abrasion Test, and shall have an abrasion resistance rating of not less than 100 NBS index and the relative volume loss shall not be greater than 250 mm 3. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 08:11:34 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Aligning with footwear abrasion test in NFPA and NFPA With the current abrasion test, the drum with sandpaper rotates and the sample remains stationary. This creates some issues because the rubber leaves residue on the paper for successive runs. With the proposed method, the drum rotates and the sample traverses across the drum providing a cleaner sandpaper surface throughout the test run. Further, the data collected for the current test involves a height measurement gauge that is difficult to read where the proposed test involves a weight and density measurement on a scale which is less subject to user error. Response Message: Public Input No. 79-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y.

108 Page 101 of 220 6/2/2014 Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

109 Page 102 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 44-NFPA [ Section No ] Footwear soles and heels Protective footwear, excluding caulked footwear, shall be tested for slip resistance as specified in Section 8.33, Slip Resistance Test, and shall have a minimum static coefficient of friction value of or greater. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 08:13:33 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Proposing full footwear slip test instead of slip testing of sole and heel portions. Also aligning with footwear slip test in NFPA , NFPA , NFPA , and NFPA except that in this proposal the newly published ASTM F 2913 method has been referenced directly whereas in the other standards the method is a variation of ISO to reflect the draft ASTM F 2913 (because at that time ASTM F2913 was not yet published). This method will be slightly different from what went into the other standards in that: 1) preconditioning of the specimen and test surface is slightly different (scrub brush and detergent (ASTM) vs. light sanding and alcohol (ISO)) 2) the actual reading is 0.1ms (ASTM) vs. avg ms 3) lasts are slightly different (SATRA vs. EN) the above differences are minor and it was the intent to reference the ASTM in the other documents - but it was not published in time. Also, the current standard has been withdrawn by ASTM. Response Message: Public Input No. 82-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot

110 Page 103 of 220 6/2/ Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

111 Page 104 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 45-NFPA [ Section No ] Footwear Protective footwear shall be tested for resistance to flame as specified in Section 8.14, Flame Resistance Test for Protective Footwear, and shall not have an afterflame greater than 2 seconds, shall not melt or drip, and shall not exhibit any burn-through. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 08:14:32 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Aligning with footwear flame test in NFPA and NFPA This flame test allows all materials of the footwear (excluding laces) to be evaluated. This also reduces the amount of variability that is seen when using a burner to test different portions of the outsole. Laces are being excluded as they are in the Heat Resistance test of NFPA Response Message: Public Input No. 84-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 13 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 1 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A.

112 Page 105 of 220 6/2/2014 Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard Negative with Comment Corrado, Steven D. Original input recommended changing the after flame requirement from 2.0 to 5.0 seconds. This will align the requirement with NFPA 1971 and 1951.

113 Page 106 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 46-NFPA [ Section No ] Zippers shall be tested for the crosswise breaking strength of chain as specified in A-A-55634A, Zippers (Fasteners, Slide Interlocking), and shall have the crosswise breaking strength of chain meet or exceed the crosswise breaking strength of chain requirements specified in A-A-55634A ; crosswise breaking strength of separating unit; holding strength of stops, retainers, and separating units; operating force; and slider lock strength requirements of Commercial Item Description, A-A-55634A, Zippers (Fasteners, Slide Interlocking) Zippers shall be tested for the crosswise breaking strength of separating unit as specified in A-A-55634A, Zippers (Fasteners, Slide Interlocking), and shall have the breaking strength of separating unit meet or exceed the crosswise breaking strength of separating unit requirements specified in A-A-55634A Zippers shall be tested for the holding strengths of stops, retainers, and separating units as specified in A-A-55634A, Zippers (Fasteners, Slide Interlocking), and shall have the holding strengths of stops, retainers, and separating units meet or exceed the holding strengths of stops, retainers, and separating units requirements specified in A-A-55634A. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 08:15:36 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: See FR 32 Response Message: Public Input No. 17-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention

114 Page 107 of 220 6/2/2014 Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

115 Page 108 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 47-NFPA [ Section No ] Protective driving gloves, excluding glove body composites and glove interface component composites, including, but not limited to, trim, external labels, and external tags, but excluding hook and loop fasteners where not in direct contact with the skin, shall be tested for flame resistance as specified in Section 8.20, Protective Glove Flame Resistance Test, shall not melt or drip, shall not have any afterflame of more than 2 seconds, and shall not have any char length in excess of 100 mm (4 in.), and the consumed materials shall not exceed percent of the specimen's original weight. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 08:18:18 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Clarifies the part of the glove to be tested. Response Message: Public Input No. 41-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C.

116 Page 109 of 220 6/2/2014 Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

117 Page 110 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 48-NFPA [ Section No ] Protective driving glove body composites shall be tested for resistance to cutting as specified in Section 8.23, Cut Resistance Test, and shall have a distance of blade travel greater than mm ( in.). Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 08:19:07 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Correlating the cut resistance requirements in NFPA 1977 to all other standards in the project. In the last revision cycle of NFPA 1977, the ASTM F 1790 test method was updated to the 2005 edition, but at that time it was not realized that the method was changed in a manner to make it more severe. As a result, a TIA was submitted to reduce the weight used in the test for gloves. No other adjustment was made. Since that time, this same change was made in other standards within the project either through TIA s or during revision cycles. However, along with the weight reductions, the requirement was also reduces from 25 mm to 20 mm. NFPA 1977 is the only standard within the project where this change was not incorporated. Response Message: Public Input No. 42-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned

118 Page 111 of 220 6/2/2014 Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

119 Page 112 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 49-NFPA [ Section No ] Protective driving gloves shall be tested for grip as specified in Section 8.26, Grip Test, and shall not have a percentage drop of barehanded control value of not less than 110 force of more than 30 percent in any 0.2-second interval. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 08:19:55 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Aligns grip test with NFPA and NFPA and aligns wetting method with NFPA and NFPA The current rope grip test is variable and subjective. The proposed test method provides a more consistent way of identifying gloves that have very slippery surfaces that when wet may cause a complete loss of gripping ability. Response Message: Public Input No. 91-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C.

120 Page 113 of 220 6/2/2014 Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

121 Page 114 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 50-NFPA [ New Section after ] Protective driving gloves shall be tested using the torque test specified in Section 8.34, and shall have an average percent of bare-handed control not less than 80 percent. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 08:20:42 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: The torque test which is used in NFPA and NFPA provides a less variable subjective of grip strength than the current grip test. Response Message: Public Input No. 96-NFPA [New Section after 7.8.8] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C.

122 Page 115 of 220 6/2/2014 Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

123 Page 116 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 51-NFPA [ Section No ] Load-carrying equipment hardware and closure systems shall be tested for resistance to heat as specified in Section 8.4, ; Heat and Thermal Shrinkage Resistance Test, shall not melt, drip, separate, or ignite, ; and shall have hardware and closure systems that release the item from the as worn position shall remain functional ; and fire shelter attachment hardware shall remain functional. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 08:23:00 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: The technical committee wanted to clarify the performance requirements of the load carrying equipment and to clarify which hardware is to be evaluated. Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C.

124 Page 117 of 220 6/2/2014 Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

125 Page 118 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 52-NFPA [ Section No ] Where visibility markings are used on load-carrying equipment, visibility markings shall be tested for retroreflectivity as specified in Section 8.16, Retroreflectivity Test and shall have a coefficient of retroreflection (R A ) of not less than 100 cd/lux/m 2 (100 cd/fc/ft 2 ). Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 08:28:04 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: There is currently no performance requriement contained in the standard. This requirement is the same as the helmet visibility marking. Public Input No. 65-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C.

126 Page 119 of 220 6/2/2014 Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

127 Page 120 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 53-NFPA [ Section No ] Room Temperature Conditioning Procedure for Protective Garments, Helmets, Gloves, Footwear, Goggles, and Chain Saw Protectors Leg Protector Specimens ;, Load-Carrying Equipment ;, and Visibility Markings Protective garments, helmets, gloves, footwear, goggles, and chain saw leg protector specimens, and load-carrying equipment, and visibility marking specimens shall be conditioned at a temperature of 21 C, ±3 C (70 F, ±5 F), and a relative humidity of 65 percent, ±5 percent, until equilibrium is reached, as determined in accordance with ASTM D 1776, Standard Practice for Conditioning Textiles for Testing, or for at least 24 hours, whichever is shorter Protective helmets and goggles shall be conditioned at a temperature of 21 C, ± 3 C (70 F, ± 5 F), and a relative humidity of 25 percent to 50 percent for at least 4 hours Specimens shall be tested within 5 minutes after removal from conditioning. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 08:32:10 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Aligns the preconditioning of helmets and goggles with NFPA The 65% RH requiements is generally for textiles. ANSI Z89.1 requries 55 +/- 5 % RH. Response Message: Public Input No. 63-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot

128 Page 121 of 220 6/2/ Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

129 Page 122 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 54-NFPA [ Section No ] Laundering Preconditioning for Textile Fabrics and Glove Wristlet Materials * Textile fabrics Fabrics specified to be laundered shall be laundered and dried for testing in accordance with the procedures specified in Machine Cycle 1, Wash Temperature V, and Drying Procedure Ai, of AATCC 135, Dimensional Changes of Fabrics after Home Laundering A 1.8 kg ±0.1 ± 0.1 kg (4 lb ±0.2 ± 0.2 lb) load shall be used. A laundry bag shall not be used Washing and Drying Procedure for Gloves, Glove Pouches, and Glove Swatches A front-loading washer/extractor shall be used. The capacity shall be 16 kg (35 lb) or 22.6 kg (50 lb) The wash cycle procedure and water levels specified in Table (a) and Table (b) shall be followed. The G force shall not exceed 100 G throughout the wash cycle. Table (a) Wash Cycle Procedure for Gloves, Glove Pouches, and Glove Swatches. Operation Time (min) Temperature ±3 ±5 F Suds using AATCC detergent #1993, 1.0 g/gal water Low* Drain 1 Carry-over Low* Drain 1 Rinse High* Drain 1 Rinse High* Drain 1 Rinse High* Drain 1 Extract 5 *See Table (b) for high and low water levels. Water Level Table (b) Water Level for Gloves, Glove Pouches, and Glove Swatches Wash Cycle Procedure. Low Water Level 1 cm ( 3 8 in.) High Water Level 1 cm ( 3 8 in.) cm in. cm in

130 Page 123 of 220 6/2/ Samples shall be washed and dried for a total of five cycles The wash load shall be at two-thirds the rated capacity of the washer and not exceeded Samples shall be dried using a tumble dryer with a stack temperature of 38 C to 49 C (100 F to 120 F) when measured on an empty load 20 minutes into the drying cycle Gloves, glove pouches, and glove swatches shall be tumbled for 60 minutes and removed immediately at the end of the drying cycle. At the conclusion of the final drying cycle, gloves and glove pouches shall be dried on a forced-air, non tumble drying mechanism operated at 10ºC ± 5 C above current room temperature until dry but not for less than 8 hours. Glove swatches that are not dry at the conclusion of the fifth drying cycle shall be hung until fully dry. Supplemental Information File Name NFPA_1977_FR54_Table_ _a_.docx Description Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 08:41:40 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: This proposal aligns the glove wash/dry preconditioning method with other standards in the project (1971, 1951, 1999). This changes the machine from residential to commercial front load washer/extractor. This method is thought to be more appropriate for leather. Response Message: Public Input No. 43-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention

131 Page 124 of 220 6/2/2014 Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

132 Page 125 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 56-NFPA [ New Section after ] Pouch or Swatch Construction for Glove Composite Samples Swatches shall be used for single-layer composites. Pouches shall be used for multilayer composites. The swatch or pouch shall be 200 mm 200 mm (8 in. 8 in.). A smaller swatch or pouch size shall be permitted provided that the resulting test specimens are of sufficient size for the test; however, the pouch size shall not be reduced for the test specified in Section Glove composite swatches shall be constructed to simulate the actual layers of the glove body or glove interface component, arranged in proper order The glove composite swatches shall be stitched on all four sides using the same thread as used in the glove construction Pouches shall be made of two glove composite swatches The two glove composite swatches shall be of the same materials and construction The two glove composite swatches shall then be sewn together, inner liner to inner liner, on three sides using the same thread as used in the glove construction Glove composite swatches and pouches shall be permitted to not be stitched or to have reduced stitching if laundering preconditioning is not required on the composite samples. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 09:09:25 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: Provides clear instruction on the preparation of glove samples. Correlates with other docucuments in the project. Public Input No. 45-NFPA [New Section after 8.1.4] Ballot Results

133 Page 126 of 220 6/2/2014 This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

134 Page 127 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 57-NFPA [ New Section after ] Wet Conditioning Procedure for Whole Gloves Test subjects shall be selected so that their hand dimensions are as close as possible to the midrange for hand length and hand circumference for size small and size large gloves as specified in Table (b) and Table (d) The wrist crease location shall be marked as described in through on each specimen around the entire glove 0/ 3 mm ( 0/ 0.25 in.). In the same manner, the water height line shall then be marked on each specimen 25 mm 0/ 3 mm (1 in. 0/ 0.25 in.) below (toward the fingers) the location of the wrist crease around the entire glove The test subject shall don the test specimen gloves The test subject shall immerse the donned specimens straight down into two containers of water at a temperature of 21 C ± 3 C (70 F ± 5 F) to the water height line for 15 seconds 1.5/ 0 seconds The glove specimens shall then be tested within 1 minute. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 09:10:53 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Aligns grip test with NFPA and NFPA and aligns wetting method with NFPA and NFPA The current rope grip test is variable and subjective. The proposed test method provides a more consistent way of identifying gloves that have very slippery surfaces that when wet may cause a complete loss of gripping ability. Response Message: Public Input No. 92-NFPA [New Section after 8.1.4] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot

135 Page 128 of 220 6/2/ Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 13 Affirmative All 1 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard Affirmative with Comment Mousseau, Marc Vote Yes pending that the current certified gloves pass this requirement.

136 Page 129 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 55-NFPA [ New Section after ] 8.1.6* Glove Test Areas. The glove test areas shall be as described in this subsection and as shown in Figure 8.1.6, with the glove test area abbreviations designated as follows: (1) P: palm; B: back; S: side (2) A-P: Palm side of hand from finger crotch line to 1 3 of the way down (grasp area) (3) B-P: Palm side of hand from 1 3 of the way down (grasp area) to the wrist crease (4) C-P: Palm side of hand from the wrist crease to 25 mm (1 in.) past the wrist crease (5) D-P: Palm side of thumb (6) E-P: Palm side of tip of thumb (7) F-P: Palm side of index finger (8) G-P: Palm side of fingertip of index finger (9) H-P: Palm side of nonindex fingers (10) I-P: Palm side of fingertip of nonindex fingers (11) A-PS: Sides of hand adjacent to area A-P (12) B-PS: Outside of hand adjacent to area B-P (13) C-PS: Sides of hand adjacent to area C-P (14) D-PS: Outside of thumb adjacent to area D-P (15) E-PS: Inside of thumb adjacent to area D-P (16) F-PS: Outside of index finger adjacent to area F-P (17) H-PS: Between fingers adjacent to areas F-P and H-P (18) I-PS: Outside of and adjacent to the smallest finger (19) A-B: Back side of hand from finger crotch line to 1 3 of the way down (knuckle area) (20) B-B: Back side of hand from 1 3 of the way down (knuckle area) to the wrist crease (21) C-B: Back side of hand from the wrist crease to 25 mm (1 in.) past the wrist crease (22) D-B: Back side of thumb (23) E-B: Back side of tip of thumb (24) F-B: Back side of index finger (25) G-B: Back side of fingertip of index finger (26) H-B: Back side of nonindex fingers (27) I-B: Back side of fingertip of nonindex fingers (28) A-BS: Sides of hand adjacent to area A-B

137 Page 130 of 220 6/2/2014 (29) B-BS: Outside of hand adjacent to area B-B (30) C-BS: Sides of hand adjacent to area C-B (31) D-BS: Outside of thumb adjacent to area D-B (32) E-BS: Inside of thumb adjacent to area D-B (33) F-BS: Outside of index finger adjacent to area F-B (34) H-BS: Between fingers adjacent to areas F-B and H-B (35) I-BS: Outside of and adjacent to the smallest finger Figure Glove Test Areas. Supplemental Information File Name NFPA_1977_Annex_A_Item_8.1.X_Glove_Test_Areas_edited.docx Description Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 08:56:19 EST 2014 Committee Statement

138 Page 131 of 220 6/2/2014 Committee Statement: Providing chart to determine glove test areas in testing. This is the same basic chart that is now used in NFPA , NFPA , and NFPA Adding specimen instructions for Conductive Heat which is the only test that defines that only certain areas of the glove be tested. All other glove composite tests apply to all areas of the glove. Additional specimen instructions align with other standards in the project and provides uniform wording for instructions. Figure from the 2013 edition of NFPA 1971 needs to be added and renumbered accordingly.an Annex item associated with glove test areas is also to be added. Response Message: Public Input No. 46-NFPA [New Section after ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

139 Page 132 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 58-NFPA [ Section No ] Samples shall be conditioned as tested before and after five laundering cycles as specified in 8.1.2, then preconditioned as specified in Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 09:14:18 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: The proposed text is identical to that of Section in NFPA I recall the TC making a change in the 2011 edition to bring the laundering conditions in NFPA 1977 in line with those found in NFPA That change was affected in Section which addresses laundering conditions (wash temps, etc.). However, I believe the number of required cycles was inadvertently dropped from the 2011 edition and should be reinstated to five cycles in the next edition to reflect the likely actual testing protocol being used today. Response Message: Public Input No. 99-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J.

140 Page 133 of 220 6/2/2014 Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

141 Page 134 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 59-NFPA [ Section No ] Modifications to this test method for testing woven textile materials shall be as specified in Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 16:16:09 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Editorial correction. Response Message: Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P.

142 Page 135 of 220 6/2/2014 Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

143 Page 136 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 60-NFPA [ Section No ] Modifications to this test method for testing knit textile materials shall be as specified in Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 16:18:01 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Editorial correction. Response Message: Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P.

144 Page 137 of 220 6/2/2014 Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

145 Page 138 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 61-NFPA [ Section No ] Modifications to this test method for testing nonwoven textile materials shall be as specified in Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 16:19:17 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Editorial correction. Response Message: Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P.

146 Page 139 of 220 6/2/2014 Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

147 Page 140 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 62-NFPA [ Section No ] Modifications to this test method for testing visibility marking materials shall be as specified in Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 16:20:12 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Editorial correction. Response Message: Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P.

148 Page 141 of 220 6/2/2014 Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

149 Page 142 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 63-NFPA [ Section No ] Modifications to this test method for testing lettering, including transfer film, shall be as specified in Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 16:21:03 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Editorial correction. Response Message: Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P.

150 Page 143 of 220 6/2/2014 Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

151 Page 144 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 64-NFPA [ Section No ] Modifications to this test method for testing small specimens not meeting the specimen size requirements of shall be as specified in Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 16:22:13 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Editorial correction. Response Message: Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P.

152 Page 145 of 220 6/2/2014 Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

153 Page 146 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 65-NFPA [ Section No ] Apparatus. The test oven shall be as specified in ASTM F2894, Standard Test Method for Evaluation of Materials, Protective Clothing and Equipment for Heat Resistance Using a Hot Air Circulating Oven The test oven shall be a horizontal-flow circulating oven with minimum interior dimensions so that the specimens can be suspended and are at least 50 mm (2 in.) from any interior oven surface and other test specimens The test oven shall have an airflow rate of 38 m/min to 76 m/min (125 ft/min to 250 ft/min) at the standard temperature and pressure of 21 C (70 F) at 1 atmosphere, measured at the center point of the oven A test thermocouple shall be positioned so that it is level with the horizontal centerline of a mounted sample specimen The thermocouple shall be equidistant between the vertical centerline of a mounted specimen placed in the middle of the oven and the oven wall where the airflow enters the test chamber The thermocouple shall be an exposed bead, Type J or Type K, No. 30 AWG thermocouple Unless otherwise specified for the specific item, the test oven shall be heated and the test thermocouple stabilized at 260 C, +6 /-0 C (500 F, +10 /-0 F) for a period of not less than 30 minutes. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 16:28:46 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: ASTM Committee F23 has developed F2894 to be similar to ISO 17493, but with improved calibration and testing protocol (as was previously described in detail by this section). As a reference, NFPA has wholly adopted this proposed verbiage as the entire Apparatus section for Heat and Thermal Shrinkage testing. ASTM F2894 achieves the same end that the previous multi-part Section achieved.

154 Page 147 of 220 6/2/2014 Public Input No. 101-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

155 Page 148 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 66-NFPA [ Section No ] Procedure. Testing shall be performed in accordance with ASTM F2894, Standard Test Method for Evaluation of Materials, Protective Clothing and Equipment for Heat Resistance Using a Hot Air Circulating Oven, using the following parameters: (1) The test temperature shall be 260 C, 6/ 0 C (500 F, 10/ 0 F). (2) The optional stretching frame shall be used when evaluating knit materials Specimen marking and measurements shall be conducted in accordance with the procedure specified in AATCC 135, Dimensional Changes of Fabrics After Home Laundering The specimen shall be suspended at the top and centered in the oven so that the entire specimen is not less than 50 mm (2 in.) from any oven surface or other specimen, and airflow is parallel to the plane of the material The oven door shall not remain open more than 15 seconds. The air circulation shall be shut off while the door is open and turned on when the door is closed. The total oven recovery time after the door is closed shall not exceed 30 seconds The specimen, mounted as specified, shall be exposed in the test oven for 5 minutes, +15/-0 seconds. The test exposure time shall begin when the test thermocouple recovers to a temperature of 260 C, +6 /-0 C (500 F, +10 /-0 F) or other temperature specific to the item as specified Immediately after the specified exposure, the specimen shall be removed and examined for evidence of ignition, melting, dripping, or separation After the specified exposure, the specimen also shall be measured to determine pass/fail. Knit fabric shall be pulled to its original dimensions and shall be allowed to relax for 1 minute prior to measurement to determine pass/fail. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 16:29:47 EST 2014 Committee Statement

156 Page 149 of 220 6/2/2014 Committee Statement: ASTM F2894 was developed to address many of the calibration and procedural issues found in ISO 17493, and previously described by this section in detail. ASTM F2894 addresses all the subparts of the previous section 8.4.6, including the stretching of the knit specimens to their original dimensions (although optional in F2894, thus the modification to require it for knit specimens). Response Message: Public Input No. 102-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

157 Page 150 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 67-NFPA [ New Section after ] The length of the brim or peak shall be the shortest distance from each point to the center of the radius on the top side of the brim or peak where they intersect the dome of the helmet. These distances shall be measured and recorded as the original lengths. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 16:34:38 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention This additional language clarifies the conduct and intent of the test method. Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard

158 Page 151 of 220 6/2/2014 Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

159 Page 152 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 68-NFPA [ Section No ] The vertical distance from the marked points to the base plane shall be measured, recorded, and compared with the measurements recorded in and to determine pass/fail. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 16:38:31 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: This additional text provides the correct paragraph references. Response Message: Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent

160 Page 153 of 220 6/2/2014 Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

161 Page 154 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 69-NFPA [ New Section after ] Specimen gloves shall be in size small and size large. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 16:44:04 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Glove size is not currently provided. Response Message: Public Input No. 47-NFPA [New Section after ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P.

162 Page 155 of 220 6/2/2014 Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

163 Page 156 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 70-NFPA [ Section No ] The opening of the glove shall be clamped together, and the specimen shall be suspended by the clamp in the oven so that the entire glove is not less than 50 mm (2 in.) from any oven surface or other specimen and airflow is parallel to the plane of the material. One to three glove specimens shall be placed in the test oven at one time. The glove specimens shall be suspended such that each specimen is the same distance from the airflow source, so that no glove sample is blocking the airflow to other glove samples. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 16:45:28 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Adding specifications for how many gloves can be tested at one time and the orientation of the specimens inside of the oven. This correlates with the glove test methodology in NFPA Response Message: Public Input No. 48-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J.

164 Page 157 of 220 6/2/2014 Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

165 Page 158 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 71-NFPA [ Section No ] Specific Testing Requirement for Protective Footwear Samples for conditioning shall be whole boots. Footwear specimens shall include a sole, a heel, and an upper Conditioning shall be performed as specified in The footwear specimen shall be size Footwear specimens shall be filled with 4 mm ( 3 16 in.) perforated soda-lime glass beads. Any and any closures shall be fastened The test thermocouple shall be positioned so that it is level with the horizontal centerline of a footwear test specimen. The thermocouple shall be equidistant between the vertical centerline of a footwear test specimen placed in the middle of the oven and the oven wall where the airflow enters the test chamber The minimum dimensions for the test oven specified in shall be 610 mm 610 mm 610 mm (24 in. 24 in. 24 in.) The protective footwear test specimen shall be placed in the center of the test oven with the centerline of the front of the specimen facing the airflow Following removal from the oven, the specimen shall be allowed to cool at room temperature for not less than 5 minutes, +15/ - 0 seconds Within 10 minutes, 15/ 0 seconds, after removal from the oven, the inside and outside of the test specimen shall be examined for evidence of melting, separation, and functionality of hardware on the footwear. Footwear separation of 1.4 mm 18 mm (0.55 in in.) or more in any orientation shall be recorded and reported Each tested specimen shall be reconditioned as specified in and then reexamined the inside and outside re-examined for melting, separation, and functionality of hardware on the footwear. The functionality of each part of the footwear shall be reported as pass or fail. Failure of any one part shall constitute failure for the entire sample The functionality of each part of the footwear shall be reported as pass or fail. Failure of any one part shall constitute failure for the entire sample Testing shall be performed as specified in through Thermal shrinkage shall not be measured. Submitter Information Verification

166 Page 159 of 220 6/2/2014 Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 16:48:32 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: Clarifies procedure and the determination of separation. This is consistent with the language in NFPA 1971, Public Input No. 76-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L.

167 Page 160 of 220 6/2/2014 Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

168 Page 161 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 72-NFPA [ Section No ] The functionality of fire shelter attachment hardware and the hardware that releases the item from the "as worn" position shall be reported as pass or fail. Failure of any one of these hardware item items shall constitute failure for the entire sample. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 16:51:33 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: This change makes the specific requirements in the test method consistent with the performance requirement of See also FR 51. Public Input No. 20-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C.

169 Page 162 of 220 6/2/2014 Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

170 Page 163 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 73-NFPA [ Section No ] Specimens shall be tested using five cycles of Machine Cycle I, Wash Temperature IV V, and Drying Procedure Aiii Ai of AATCC 135, Dimensional Changes of Fabrics After Home Laundering. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 16:54:22 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Makes the wash and dry method for cleaning shrinkage consistent with the method specified for flame, heat and thermal shrinkage, label legibility, THL, etc. This changes the wash temp from 49 to 60C and the drying setting from Perm Press to Cotton Sturdy (Normal). This makes this test consistent with NFPA 1971, and NFPA Response Message: Public Input No. 18-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C.

171 Page 164 of 220 6/2/2014 Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

172 Page 165 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 74-NFPA [ Section No ] 8.14 Flame Resistance Test for Protective Footwear Application. This test method shall apply to protective footwear Samples Samples for conditioning shall be whole boots with laces in place complete footwear Samples shall be conditioned as specified in Specimens Specimens for testing shall be the same as samples for conditioning Testing shall be conducted on three specimens of complete footwear items Apparatus The test apparatus shall consist of a burner, crucible tongs, support stand, utility clamp, stopwatch, butane gas, gas regulator valve system, and measuring scale and meet the following specifications: fuel pan, movable shutter(s), specimen holder, n-heptane, ignition source, and timing device. The burner shall be a high-temperature, liquefied-type Fisher burner. The stopwatch or other timing device shall measure the burning time to the nearest 0.1 second. The butane shall be of commercial grade, 99.0 percent pure or better. The gas regulator system shall consist of a control valve system with a delivery rate designed to furnish gas to the burner under a pressure of 17.3 kpa, ±1.7 kpa (2.5 psi, ±0.25 psi) at the reducing valve. The flame height shall be adjusted at the reducing valve to produce a pressure of 0.7 kpa, ±0.07 kpa (0.1 psi, ±0.01 psi) The fuel pan shall be 305 mm 457 mm 63.5 mm (12 in. 18 in. 2.5 in.) The movable shutter(s) shall be located at a height of 255 mm (10 in.), ± 13 mm ( 1 2 in.), above the surface of the water and n-heptane fluid as measured before ignition. The shutter(s) shall be of a size sufficient to cover the surface area of the fuel pan and shall be capable of being fully retracted or fully extended within 1 second The specimen holder shall be capable of suspending the specimen over the flame in a manner such that the holder does not impede the flames A stopwatch or other device shall measure the burning time to the nearest 0.1 second

173 Page 166 of 220 6/2/2014 A freestanding flame height indicator shall be used to assist in adjusting the burner flame height. The indicator shall mark a flame height of 75 mm (3 in.) above the top of the burner A specimen support assembly shall be used to support the footwear specimen above the burner flame Procedure The burner shall be ignited, and the test flame shall be adjusted to a height of 75 mm (3 in.) with the gas on/off valve fully open and the air supply completely and permanently off, so that the flame height is closely controlled. The test shall be conducted in a draft-free area The 75 mm (3 in.) flame height shall be obtained by adjusting the orifice in the bottom of the burner so that the top of the flame is level with the marked flame height indicator. The fuel pan shall be level With the specimen mounted in the support assembly, the burner shall be moved so that the flame contacts the specimen at a distance of 38 mm (1 1 2 in.) at the angles in the areas shown in Figure All materials on the exterior of the specimen that were not exposed to the burner flame in the five test sites specified in Figure shall be exposed to the burner flame, and the requirements specified in , , and shall apply. Water shall be placed in the fuel pan to a height of 13 mm ( 1 2 in.). Figure Test Areas The burner flame shall be applied to the specimen for 12 seconds. After 12 seconds, the burner shall be removed. A sufficient amount of n-heptane shall be added to the fuel pan such that it will burn freely for 1.5 to 2 minutes The afterflame time shall be measured as the time, in seconds to the nearest 0.2 second, that the specimen continues to flame after the burner is removed from the flame. The specimen shall be mounted in the specimen holder as follows: (1) The toe shall be at an angle of 7.5 degrees, ± 2.5 degrees, above the heel. (2) The height of the lowest edge of the specimen shall be 305 mm (12 in.), 0/ 25 mm (0/ 1 in.), from the surface of the water and n-heptane fluid as measured before ignition. (3) The heel-toe axis of the specimen shall be parallel with the 457 mm (18 in.) side of the fuel pan

174 Page 167 of 220 6/2/2014 Following the flame exposure, the specimen shall be removed and examined for burn-through. With the shutter retracted, the n-heptane shall be ignited using a suitable ignition source Where paper or other material is used to ignite the n-heptane, it shall not be left in the fuel pan, where it can disturb the flame pattern Each layer of the specimen shall be examined for melting or dripping. The n- heptane shall burn freely for 1 minute, ± 5 seconds The shutter(s) shall be positioned above the flame The specimen shall be positioned above the shutter(s) over the approximate center of the flame area The shutter(s) shall be retracted and specimen flame exposure shall commence not longer than 1 minute 15 seconds from ignition The specimen shall be exposed to the flame for 12 seconds ± 0.2 second Following flame exposure, the shutter(s) shall be repositioned above the flame Water shall be placed in the fuel pan to a height of 13 mm ( 1 2 in.) Report The afterflame time shall be recorded and reported for each specimen The average afterflame time shall be recorded and reported The afterflame time shall be reported to the nearest 0.2 second Observations of burn-through, melting, or dripping for each specimen shall be recorded and reported Interpretation Pass or fail performance shall be based on average afterflame time Any observed burn-through, melting, or dripping shall constitute failure of the test sample. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 16:58:31 EST 2014 Committee Statement

175 Page 168 of 220 6/2/2014 Committee Statement: Aligning with footwear flame test in NFPA and NFPA This flame test allows all materials of the footwear to be evaluated. This also reduces the amount of variability that is seen when using a burner to test different portions of the outsole. Laces are being excluded as they are in the Heat Resistance test of NFPA Response Message: Public Input No. 85-NFPA [Section No. 8.14] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

176 Page 169 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 75-NFPA [ Section No ] Specimens of visibility markings used on helmets shall be tested for retroreflectivity only after the convective heat exposure as specified in Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 17:00:44 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Incorrect reference. Editorial. Response Message: Public Input No. 19-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent

177 Page 170 of 220 6/2/2014 Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

178 Page 171 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 76-NFPA [ New Section after ] * The force applied to the retention system shall be slowly increased to 225 N ± 5 N (50 lbf ± 1 lbf). The force shall be increased smoothly from 45 N to 225 N (10 lbf to 50 lbf) at a rate between 9 N/sec and 45 N/sec (2 lbf/sec and 10 lbf/sec). Supplemental Information File Name NFPA_1977_Annex_A _FR_76_edited.docx Description Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 17:01:47 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: Correlates language with NFPA Provides further explanation on the conduct of the test. Related Annex A text will be added. Public Input No. 98-NFPA [New Section after ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A.

179 Page 172 of 220 6/2/2014 Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

180 Page 173 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 77-NFPA [ Section No ] 8.18 Protective Footwear Abrasion Test This test shall apply to protective footwear sole/heel compounds Samples Samples for conditioning shall be complete footwear soles with heel as specified in ISO 4649, Rubber, vulcanized or thermoplastic Determination of abrasion resistance using a rotating cylindrical drum device Samples shall be conditioned as specified in Specimens Specimens for testing shall be the same as samples for conditioning Testing shall be conducted on a minimum of three specimens of footwear soles with heels sole/heel compound specimens Procedure. Abrasion resistance tests of the footwear soles and heels shall be performed in accordance with ASTM D 1630, Standard Test Method for Rubber Property Abrasion Resistance (Footwear Abrader) ISO 4649, Rubber, vulcanized or thermoplastic Determination of abrasion resistance using a rotating cylindrical drum device, Method A, with a vertical force of 10 N over an abrasion distance of 40 m Report. The abrasion resistance rating relative volume loss of each specimen shall be recorded and reported Interpretation. One or more footwear specimens failing this test shall constitute failing performance. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 17:06:55 EST 2014 Committee Statement

181 Page 174 of 220 6/2/2014 Committee Statement: Aligning with footwear abrasion test in NFPA and NFPA With the current abrasion test, the drum with sandpaper rotates and the sample remains stationary. This creates some issues because the rubber leaves residue on the paper for successive runs. With the proposed method, the drum rotates and the sample traverses across the drum providing a cleaner sandpaper surface throughout the test run. Further, the data collected for the current test involves a height measurement gauge that is difficult to read where the proposed test involves a weight measurement on a scale which is less subject to user error. Response Message: Public Input No. 80-NFPA [Section No. 8.18] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

182 Page 175 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 78-NFPA [ Section No ] Samples Samples to be conditioned shall be the composite used in actual glove construction consisting of each single layer, with all layers arranged in proper order and stitched along the edges using the same thread as used in the construction of the glove wristlet material or a pouch or swatch as described in Samples Three samples shall be conditioned as specified in Three additional samples shall be conditioned as specified in for glove body pouch or swatch specimens or for glove interface composite wristlet specimens, followed by conditioning as specified in Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 17:09:21 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Clarifies configuration and number of samples to be conditioned. Response Message: Public Input No. 49-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E.

183 Page 176 of 220 6/2/2014 Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

184 Page 177 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 79-NFPA [ Section No ] Specimens Each specimen to be tested shall be a rectangle at least 50 mm (2 in.) wide by 150 mm (6 in.) long. Specimens shall be the composite used in actual glove construction consisting of each single layer, with all layers arranged in proper order. In each test, the specimen s normal outer surface shall be exposed to the flame Specimens Three specimens shall be tested both before and after being subjected to five laundering cycles as specified in following the conditioning specified in Testing shall be conducted on three specimens for each material. Three additional specimens shall be tested following the conditioning specified in Where glove construction or a proposed glove construction has stitched-through seams, testing shall be conducted on three additional specimens containing these seams. The seam seams shall be in the direction of the 150 mm (6 in.) dimension. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 05 17:10:18 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Clarifying number of specimens to be tested. Response Message: Public Input No. 50-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention

185 Page 178 of 220 6/2/2014 Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

186 Page 179 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 80-NFPA [ Section No ] Samples Samples for conditioning shall consist of the composite used be in the actual glove body construction at the palm of the hand and at the palm side of the fingers, with the layers arranged in the proper order form of a pouch or swatch as described in Samples shall be permitted to be stitched around the perimeter where multiple layers exist Three samples shall be conditioned as specified in Three additional samples shall be conditioned by being subjected to 5 laundering cycles as specified in , followed by conditioning as specified in Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 07 16:20:41 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: Clarifies instructions on sample configuration. Aligns with other documents in project. Public Input No. 51-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention

187 Page 180 of 220 6/2/2014 Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

188 Page 181 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 81-NFPA [ Section No ] Specimens Specimens for testing shall be the same as taken from the samples for conditioning. Specimens shall not include seams in the test area Specimens for testing shall be representative of the glove body composite construction at glove areas A-B, B-B, C-B, D-P, E-P, F-P, G-P, H-P, and I-P as described in All variations in composite construction and the order of layering of composite materials shall constitute a new composite and shall be tested separately. Where a composite is identical to another composite except for additional reinforcement layer(s), the composite with no reinforcement layers shall be representative of the composite with reinforcement layer(s). Specimens shall not include seams except in the following cases: (1) Ridged or similar areas where stitching is used to create specific performance characteristics rather than for glove assembly (2) Where there are size constraints of a material, making it necessary to allow stitching to create the sample size required Stitching shall be of the same type as is used in the actual glove construction Testing shall be conducted on three specimens following the conditioning specified in Testing shall be conducted on three additional specimens following the conditioning specified in After conditioning, the pouch and necessary stitching shall be cut to form specimens for testing. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 07 16:26:48 EST 2014 Committee Statement

189 Page 182 of 220 6/2/2014 Committee Statement:. Adding specimen instructions for Conductive Heat which is the only test that defines that only certain areas of the glove be tested. All other glove composite tests apply to all areas of the glove. Additional specimen instructions align with other standards in the project and provides uniform wording for instructions Response Message: Public Input No. 52-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

190 Page 183 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 82-NFPA [ Section No ] Specimens shall be tested in accordance with ASTM F 1060, Standard Test Method for Thermal Protective Performance of Materials for Protective Clothing for Hot Surface Contact, with the following modifications: (1) Specimens shall be tested using an exposure temperature of 280 C (536 F). The and the pressure applied during the test shall be 3 kpa (0.5 psi). (2) The time in seconds to pain and to second-degree burn (blister) as predicted by the Stoll Human Tissue Burn Tolerance Criteria shall be recorded and reported. The time to thermal end point shall be determined graphically from the recorder chart of the sensor response and the criterion overlay prepared according to paragraph 10.5 of ASTM F 1060, Standard Test Method for Thermal Protective Performance of Materials for Protective Clothing for Hot Surface Contact. The overlay shall be positioned on the recorder chart, matching the zero of the overlay with the point on the recorder chart corresponding to the time at which the sensor and specimen were placed in direct contact with the hot plate. The horizontal (time) axis shall be placed in line with the initial trace of the pen. The overlay shall be kept square with the recorder chart. Exposure time shall be read to the nearest 0.1 second from the overlay chart at the point where the sensor response and the tissue tolerance curves cross. (3) The section of the apparatus lowering the specimen, sensor, and weighed system shall travel at a constant rate of speed. (4) The specimen shall be lowered parallel to the hotplate. (5) The recorder/computer shall be activated automatically by a mechanical or electrical contact when the specimen contacts the hotplate. (6) Specimen size shall be permitted to be larger than 100 mm 150 mm (4 in. 6 in.) to accommodate the test apparatus. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 07 16:28:16 EST 2014 Committee Statement

191 Page 184 of 220 6/2/2014 Committee Statement: Proposal automates this test to reduce variability. Also removes the requirement to use a chart recorder as test results are often generated via a computer program. Also adding specifications that test specimen size can be larger to better accommodate certain test equipment specimen holder devices, etc. Aligns with other standards in the project. Response Message: Public Input No. 57-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

192 Page 185 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 83-NFPA [ Section No ] Interpretation Pass or fail determinations shall be based on the average time to pain and the average time to second-degree burn of all specimens tested If an individual result from any test set varies more than ±8 percent from the other individual results of that test series, the results from the test series shall be discarded and another set of specimens shall be tested. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 07 16:29:01 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: The TPP and Conductive Heat Resistance variability requirement was removed in NFPA for glove composites due to the variable nature of leather which is commonly used in gloves. The composite value may well exceed the requirements but show too high a variation to meet these requirements. If values are under the requirement the average will likely be failing. The current variability requirements are too restrictive for leather composites. Response Message: Public Input No. 58-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y.

193 Page 186 of 220 6/2/2014 Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

194 Page 187 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 84-NFPA [ Section No ] Samples Samples for conditioning shall consist of the actual glove body composite construction, with the layers arranged in proper order be in the form of a pouch or swatch as described in Samples for conditioning shall be a minimum of 200 mm, ±12 mm (8 in., ± 1 2 in.) square. Samples shall be permitted to be stitched around the perimeter where multiple layers exist Three samples shall be conditioned as specified in Three additional samples shall be conditioned by being subjected to five laundering cycles as specified in , followed by conditioning as specified in Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 07 16:29:45 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Clarifies sample configuration to be tested. Response Message: Public Input No. 53-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y.

195 Page 188 of 220 6/2/2014 Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

196 Page 189 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 85-NFPA [ Section No ] Specimens Specimens for testing shall be taken from the same as samples for conditioning. Specimens shall not include seams in the test area. Specimens shall not be stitched to hold individual layers together during testing Specimens for testing shall be representative of each glove body composite construction. All variations in composite construction and the order of layering of composite materials shall constitute a new composite and shall be tested separately. Where a composite is identical to another composite except for additional reinforcement layer(s), the composite with no reinforcement layers shall be representative of the composite with reinforcement layer(s). Specimens shall not include seams except in the following cases: (1) Ridged or similar areas where stitching is used to create specific performance characteristics rather than for glove assembly (2) Where there are size constraints of a material, making it necessary to allow stitching to create the sample size required Stitching shall be of the same type as is used in the actual glove construction Three specimens shall be tested following the conditioning specified in Three additional specimens shall be tested following the conditioning specified in Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 07 16:33:13 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Clarifies specimen configuration to be tested. Response Message: Public Input No. 54-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot

197 Page 190 of 220 6/2/ Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

198 Page 191 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 86-NFPA [ Section No ] Interpretation Pass or fail determinations shall be separately based on the average reported TPP rating of all specimens If an individual result from any test set varies more than ±10 percent from the average result, the results from the test set shall be discarded and another set of specimens shall be tested. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 07 16:33:53 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: The TPP and Conductive Heat Resistance variability requirement was removed in NFPA for glove composites due to the variable nature of leather which is commonly used in gloves. The composite value may well exceed the requirements but show too high a variation to meet these requirements. If values are under the requirement the average will likely be failing. The current variability requirements are too restrictive for leather composites. Response Message: Public Input No. 59-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y.

199 Page 192 of 220 6/2/2014 Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

200 Page 193 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 87-NFPA [ Section No ] Specific Requirements for Testing Gloves Samples for conditioning shall consist of the actual glove body composite construction with the layers arranged in proper order be in the form of a pouch or swatch as described in Samples Specimens for testing shall be permitted to be stitched around the perimeter where multiple layers exist taken from the samples for conditioning Specimens for testing shall be the same as samples for conditioning representative of each glove body composite construction. All variations in composite construction and the order of layering of composite materials shall constitute a new composite and shall be tested separately. Where a composite is identical to another composite except for additional reinforcement layer(s), the composite with no reinforcement layers shall be representative of the composite with reinforcement layer(s). Specimens shall not include seams except in the following cases. (1) Ridged or similar areas where stitching is used to create specific performance characteristics rather than for glove assembly (2) Where there are size constraints of a material, making it necessary to allow stitching to create the sample size required Stitching shall be of the same type as is used in the actual glove construction Cut resistance shall be performed under a load of 100 g (3.5 oz. ). Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 07 16:34:36 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Clarifies sample configuration and specimens for testing. Response Message: Public Input No. 55-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot

201 Page 194 of 220 6/2/ Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

202 Page 195 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 88-NFPA [ Section No ] Specific Requirements for Testing Footwear Uppers Samples for conditioning shall consist of either whole footwear items, footwear uppers, or representative composites of the thinnest part of the footwear upper construction, excluding the gusset, with the layers arranged in proper order materials Samples shall be permitted to be stitched around the perimeter where multiple layers exist Specimens for testing taken from whole footwear items or footwear uppers shall be the thinnest part of the footwear upper shall consist of each composite of footwear upper used in the actual footwear construction, excluding the tongue and gusset, with all the layers arranged in proper order. Where a composite is identical to another composite except for additional reinforcement layer(s), the composite with no reinforcement layers shall be tested Cut resistance shall be performed under a load of 400 g (14 oz. ). Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 07 16:35:19 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: Clarifies the composition of the specimens are to be tested. This language is consistent with NFPA 1971, 1951 Public Input No. 77-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot

203 Page 196 of 220 6/2/ Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

204 Page 197 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 89-NFPA [ Section No ] Specific Requirements for Testing Gloves Samples for conditioning shall consist of the actual glove body composite construction with the layers arranged in proper order be in the form of a pouch or swatch as described in Samples Specimens for testing shall be permitted to be stitched around the perimeter where multiple layers exist taken from the samples for conditioning Specimens for testing shall be the same as samples for conditioning representative of each glove body composite construction. All variations in composite construction and the order of layering of composite materials shall constitute a new composite and shall be tested separately. Where a composite is identical to another composite except for additional reinforcement layer(s), the composite with no reinforcement layers shall be representative of the composite with reinforcement layer(s). Specimens shall not include seams except in the following cases:. (1) Ridged or similar areas where stitching is used to create specific performance characteristics rather than for glove assembly (2) Where there are size constraints of a material, making it necessary to allow stitching to create the sample size required Stitching shall be of the same type as is used in the actual glove construction. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 07 16:35:54 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Clarifies the configuration of samples and specimens to be tested. Response Message: Public Input No. 56-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot

205 Page 198 of 220 6/2/ Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

206 Page 199 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 90-NFPA [ Section No ] Specific Requirements for Testing Footwear Uppers Samples for conditioning shall consist of either whole footwear items, footwear uppers, or representative composites of the thinnest part of the footwear upper construction, excluding the gusset, with the layers arranged in proper order materials Samples shall be permitted to be stitched around the perimeter where multiple layers exist Specimens for testing taken from whole footwear items or footwear uppers shall be the thinnest part of the footwear upper shall consist of each composite of footwear upper used in the actual footwear construction, excluding the tongue and gusset, with all the layers arranged in proper order. Where a composite is identical to another composite except for additional reinforcement layer(s), the composite with no reinforcement layers shall be tested. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 07 16:36:29 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: Clarifies the composition of the specimens to be tested. Language will be consistent with NFPA 1971, Public Input No. 78-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention

207 Page 200 of 220 6/2/2014 Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

208 Page 201 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 91-NFPA [ Section No ] Samples shall be preconditioned for five laundering cycles conditioned as specified in Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 07 16:37:11 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: This proposal aligns the preconditioning of dexterity specimens with other standards in this project. As received specimens are considered to be the worst case condition for this particular test. Response Message: Public Input No. 60-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All

209 Page 202 of 220 6/2/2014 Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

210 Page 203 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 92-NFPA [ Section No ] Procedures. Testing shall be conducted in accordance with ASTM F 2010, Standard Test Method for Evaluation of Glove Effects on Wearer Hand Dexterity Using Modified Pegboard Test Testing shall be conducted in accordance with ASTM F 2010, Standard Test Method for Evaluation of Glove Effects on Wearer Hand Dexterity Using Modified Pegboard Test Test subjects shall be selected so that their hand dimensions are as close as possible to the midrange for hand length and hand circumference for size small and size large gloves as specified in Table (b) and Table (d). At least three test subjects shall be selected for both size small and size large. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 07 16:37:59 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: This proposal clarifies that test subjects should have the appropriate hand size and that three test subjects should be selected. Public Input No. 61-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y.

211 Page 204 of 220 6/2/2014 Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

212 Page 205 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 93-NFPA [ Section No ] 8.26 Grip Test Application This test method shall apply to protective gloves This test method shall apply to each protective glove material and construction combination Samples Samples for conditioning shall be whole gloves glove pairs, in new, as distributed condition Sample glove pairs shall be preconditioned for five laundering cycles as specified in 8.1.2, followed by conditioning as specified in Sample glove pairs shall not receive special softening treatment Specimens Specimens for testing shall be the same as samples for conditioning Testing shall occur on a minimum of three glove pair specimens each for size small and size large Specimen glove pairs shall be tested after wet conditioning as specified in Apparatus. Grip testing shall be evaluated with the use of a 10 mm ( 3 8 in.) diameter, threestrand, prestretched polyester rope attached to a calibrated force measuring device. The apparatus shall consist of a pulling device that is a 3.2 cm (1 1 4 in.) diameter fiberglass pole attached to an overhead calibrated force measuring device in such a fashion that pulls on the pole will be perpendicular to the ground and downward in direction. This pole shall be used until surface degradation occurs. The force measuring system shall provide a graphical plot of force vs. time Procedure Test subjects shall be selected so that their hand dimensions are as close as possible to the middle of the mid range for hand length and hand circumference for size small and size large gloves as specified in the tables provided for Table (b) and Table (d). At least three test subjects shall be selected for both size small and size large gloves in Each test subject shall make three successive attempts to exert as much horizontal pulling force as possible using the dry rope and force measuring device, using both hands, one in front of the other. Thumbs shall not overlap the fingers, and both feet shall be firmly planted on the ground. The average horizontal pulling force over the three attempts shall be the barehanded control value. The gloves shall be conditioned by the wetting procedure specified in before each set of three pulls by the test subject as described in

213 Page 206 of 220 6/2/ Conditioned sample gloves shall be tested on a dry rope and then on a wet rope. For the wet rope testing, the rope shall be subjected to wet conditioning by immersion in room temperature water at 21 C, ±3 C (70 F, ±5 F) for 2 minutes, followed by horizontal drip-drying for 5 minutes. The pulling device shall be wet conditioned before each individual pull by wiping with a damp rag Each test subject shall test a minimum of three pairs of sample gloves using the method specified in Test subjects shall attempt one trial with each pair of gloves. A trial shall consist of three successive attempts. The average horizontal pulling force over the three attempts shall be the pulling force with gloves. The average horizontal pulling force shall be calculated, recorded, and reported for each glove pair. The test subject and the test subject s hand shall be positioned as shown in Figure (a) and Figure Figure (b), and as described in and Figure (a) Position of Test Subject Body, Arms, and Hands with Respect to Pole. (Courtesy of Intertek Testing Services.) Figure (b) Close-up of Position of Test Subject's Hands on Pole. (Courtesy of Intertek Testing Services.)

214 Page 207 of 220 6/2/ The test subject shall stand facing the pole with feet shoulder-width apart While wearing specimen gloves, the test subject shall grasp the pole with the bottom of the bottom hand at a height equal to the height of the subject The test subject's hands shall be stacked on each other and the thumbs shall not overlap the fingers The test subject's body shall be distanced from the pole so that the forearms are approaching vertical and in plane with the pole The test subject's elbows shall be shoulder-width apart, rotated neither fully in (arms parallel to the pole) nor fully out (arms perpendicular to the pole) The average pulling force with gloves over the three trials for each size and each rope condition shall be calculated, recorded, and reported. The average pulling force with gloves for each size and each rope condition shall be compared with the barehanded control value. The test subject shall pull the pole with as much pulling force as possible in a smooth, steady, swift, and nonjerking action for 5 1/ 0 seconds. The test subject shall minimize forward or backward movement during the pull as much as possible. The test subject shall not bend the knees or pull down with body weight during the pull. The test subject shall continue to pull until the test facilitator instructs the test subject to end the pull at 5 1/ 0 seconds The percentage of barehanded control value shall be calculated as follows: The test subject shall repeat the pull described in for a total of three pulls. where: PF g CV b = average pulling force with gloves = barehanded control value

215 Page 208 of 220 6/2/ Report. The percentage of barehanded control value shall be recorded and reported for each specimen glove size and each rope condition. Any drop in force greater than 30% in any 0.2-second interval, as measured in the force-vs.-time graphical plot, shall be recorded and reported Interpretation The percentage of barehanded control value for each size and each rope condition shall be used to determine pass or fail performance. Any drop in force greater than 30% in any 0.2-second interval shall constitute failing performance Failure of either size or rope condition during any pull shall constitute failure of the test. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 07 16:38:49 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Aligns grip test with NFPA and NFPA and aligns wetting method with NFPA and NFPA The current rope grip test is variable and subjective. The proposed test method provides a more consistent way of identifying gloves that have very slippery surfaces that when wet may cause a complete loss of gripping ability. Will need to add Figures (A) and (B) from NFPA edition following Response Message: Public Input No. 93-NFPA [Section No. 8.26] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E.

216 Page 209 of 220 6/2/2014 Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

217 Page 210 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 94-NFPA [ Section No ] 8.28 Footwear Conductive Heat Resistance Test Application. This test method shall apply to protective footwear Samples Samples for conditioning shall be whole footwear with removable insoles in place Samples shall be conditioned as specified in Specimens Specimens for testing shall be the same as samples for conditioning Testing shall be conducted on a minimum of three specimens Apparatus The apparatus shall consist of an iron plate electric hotplate measuring 25 mm 150 mm 460 mm (1 in. 6 in. 18 in.) 305 mm 305 mm (12 in. 12 in.) and an oven capable of heating the plateto maintaining a temperature of 500 C (932 F), a Type J or Type K thermocouple thermocouples, and a meter to read the thermocouple temperature temperatures Procedure The thermocouple thermocouples shall be affixed taped to the insole surface of the specimen next to the foot, directly above the ball of the foot. The thermocouple shall be taped to the surface with electrical tape to hold it onto the insole surface in the following locations, as shown in Figure :. (1) Directly above the center of the ball of the footwear (2) Directly above the center of the heel of the footwear (3) Directly above the toe-to-heel center of the arch of the footwear, at the inside junction between the upper and the sole Figure Thermocouple Locations.

218 Page 211 of 220 6/2/ The plate shall be heated to a temperature of 500 C, ±10 C (932 F, ±18 F) and shall maintain this temperature throughout the test period The specimen shall be filled with 4.55 kg (10 lb) of 10 mm ( 3 8 in.) steel balls. The weight of the steel balls shall be evenly distributed inside the boot. The specimen shall be placed on the plate in the upright position for 30 seconds, 2/ 0 seconds The thermocouple temperature shall be recorded 30 seconds, +2/ - 0 seconds, after the specimen is placed on the heated metal plate hotplate.

219 Page 212 of 220 6/2/ Report The temperature at 30 seconds of exposure shall be recorded and reported for each area of the footwear insole for each specimen The average temperature at 30 seconds of exposure for each area of the footwear insole for all specimens shall also be calculated, recorded, and reported Interpretation The average temperature at 30 seconds of exposure for each area of the insole for all specimens shall be used to determine pass or fail performance. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 07 17:07:05 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Aligning with footwear conductive heat test in NFPA The technical committee decided that the current time and temperature requirements should remain as written. Will need to add Figure from NFPA Edition and insert following Response Message: Public Input No. 81-NFPA [Section No. 8.28] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A.

220 Page 213 of 220 6/2/2014 Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

221 Page 214 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 95-NFPA [ New Section after ] For the drying cycles of the laundering durability test specified in , gloves shall be tumble dried for 60 minutes and shall be removed immediately at the end of the drying cycle. At the conclusion of the final drying cycle, the gloves shall be dried on a forced-air, non tumble drying mechanism operated at 10ºC, ± 5 C, above current room temperature for 8 hours, ± 45 minutes. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 07 17:24:38 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: This proposal aligns the glove drying method with other standards in the project (1971, 1951, 1999) to allow for the use of the Williams dryer. Public Input No. 89-NFPA [New Section after ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 14 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C.

222 Page 215 of 220 6/2/2014 Affirmative All Brown, Richard Corrado, Steven D. Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P. Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard

223 Page 216 of 220 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 96-NFPA [ Section No ] 8.33 Slip Resistance Test Application. This test method shall apply to the footwear sole and heel section Samples Samples shall be footwear sole and heel sections whole footwear items in men's size 9D, medium width Samples shall be conditioned as specified in ASTM F 2913, Standard Test Method for Measuring the Coefficient of Friction for Evaluation of Slip Performance of Footwear and Test Surfaces/Flooring Using a Whole Shoe Tester Specimens. A minimum of three sole specimens and three heel specimens and shall be tested Specimens shall be the whole footwear in men s size 9D, medium width At least three specimens shall be tested Procedure. Slip resistance testing shall be performed in accordance with ASTM F 489, Standard Test Method for Static Coefficient of Friction of Shoe Sole and Heel Materials as Measured by the James Machine, in a dry condition. ASTM F 2913, Standard Test Method for Measuring the Coefficient of Friction for Evaluation of Slip Performance of Footwear and Test Surfaces/Flooring Using a Whole Shoe Tester, in the following configurations (references to any other flooring and/or contaminate within ASTM F 2913 shall not apply): (1) Footwear shall be tested both in the forepart and heel positions (2) Footwear shall be tested in the wet condition. (3) Footwear shall be tested on a quarry tile surface that meets the specifications of ASTM F 2913 and shall be calibrated in accordance with ASTM F The calibration frequency of 10 tests specified in ASTM F 2913 shall be equivalent to 50 test runs Report The static coefficient of friction of each specimen under dry conditions shall be recorded and reported The average static coefficient of friction of each specimen under dry conditions all specimens for each configuration shall be calculated, recorded, and reported Interpretation. One or more footwear specimens failing this test shall constitute failing performance. The average coefficient of friction for each configuration shall be used to determine pass/fail performance Torque Test Application. This test method shall apply to protective gloves Samples.

224 Page 217 of 220 6/2/ Samples for conditioning shall be whole gloves Sample glove pairs shall be preconditioned as specified in Specimens A minimum of three glove specimens each for size small and size large shall be used for testing Right-hand specimen gloves shall be used for right-hand dominant test subjects while left-hand specimen gloves shall be used for left-hand dominant test subjects Each specimen glove shall be tested in new, "as distributed" condition Specimen gloves shall be tested for each material and construction combination Apparatus. Torque testing shall be evaluated with the use of a in. diameter solid acrylic cylinder securely centered on a calibrated digital torque meter capable of measuring up to 10.0 N-m (88.5 in. lbf) Procedure Test subjects shall be selected so that their hand dimensions are as close as possible to the midrange for hand length and hand circumference for size small and size large gloves as specified in Table (b) and Table (d). At least three test subjects shall be selected for both size small and size large While standing, each test subject shall grasp the cylinder so that the wrist creates a straight line with the hand. The elbow shall be against the side of the body, creating a right angle, throughout the duration of the test For right-hand-dominant test subjects, the direction mode on the torque device shall be set to open, or counterclockwise, and set to close, or clockwise, for left-hand-dominant test subjects Each test subject shall make five successive attempts to twist the cylinder in the appropriate direction exerting as much force as possible. The range of motion of the subject's wrist shall indicate the end of the twisting cycle. The average maximum force over the five attempts shall be the bare-handed control value Each test subject shall test one sample glove using the method specified in through Test subjects shall attempt one trial with the glove. A trial shall consist of five successive attempts. The average maximum twisting force over the five attempts shall be the twisting force with the glove. The average twisting force shall be calculated, recorded, and reported The average twisting force shall be compared with the bare-handed control value for each glove The percentage of bare-handed control value shall be calculated as follows: [ ]

225 Page 218 of 220 6/2/2014 where: TF a = average twisting force with gloves CV b = bare-handed control value The average maximum twisting force with gloves over the three trials for each size shall be calculated, recorded, and reported Report. The percentage of bare-handed control value shall be recorded and reported for each specimen glove size Interpretation The percentage of bare-handed control value for size small and size large shall be used to determine pass or fail performance Failure of either size shall constitute failure of the test. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: David Trebisacci Organization: National Fire Protection Assoc Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 07 17:26:17 EST 2014 Committee Statement

226 Page 219 of 220 6/2/2014 Committee Statement: Proposing full footwear slip test instead of slip testing of sole and heel portions. Also aligning with footwear slip test in NFPA , NFPA , NFPA , and NFPA except that in this proposal the newly published ASTM F 2913 method has been referenced directly whereas in the other standards the method is a variation of ISO to reflect the draft ASTM F 2913 (because at that time ASTM F2913 was not yet published). This method will be slightly different from what went into the other standards in that: 1) preconditioning of the specimen and test surface is slightly different (scrub brush and detergent (ASTM) vs. light sanding and alcohol (ISO)) 2) the actual reading is 0.1ms (ASTM) vs. avg ms 3) lasts are slightly different (SATRA vs. EN) the above differences are minor and it was the intent to reference the ASTM in the other documents - but it was not published in time. Also, the current standard has been withdrawn by ASTM. The torque test which is used in NFPA and NFPA provides a less variable subjective of grip strength than the current grip test. Response Message: Public Input No. 83-NFPA [Section No. 8.33] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 21 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 13 Affirmative All 1 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Ackerman, Mark Y. Allen, Jason L. Haskell, III, William E. Hicks, William A. Johnson, R. J. Laton, Michael A. Wood, Gary C. Affirmative All Brown, Richard Diaz, Vincent Fanning, David P.

227 Page 220 of 220 6/2/2014 Hock, Tricia L. Kushen, Kirk S. Moore, Jr., David A. Mousseau, Marc Petrilli, Anthony Rihn, John F. Shiels, Brian P. Swan, Rick L. Teter, David L. Weise, Richard Affirmative with Comment Corrado, Steven D. This FR combines the revised Slip Resistance Test with the new glove Torque Test. DELETED DELETED DELETED

228 Page 1 of 22 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 6-NFPA [ Global Input ] Please delete all section/chapter titles (and surrounding commas) following all cross refs. throughout the document. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: Michael Beady Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Tue Feb 18 10:21:10 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Editorial update per style Response Message: Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 32 Eligible Voters 13 Not Returned 19 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Anaya, Christopher Bernzweig, David T. Bull, A. Paul Colbert, Rodney V. Cox, Brian H. Dickson, William Gaudet, Deborah L. Harkness, A. Ira Kaller, Clint Keathley, Todd Martin, Craig Radtke, Timothy M.

229 Page 2 of 22 6/2/2014 Tobin, Jr., Richard S. Affirmative All Allen, Jason L. Gainey, Robin R. Goe, Orion S. Golla, Ed Haston, David V. Jarboe, John Johnson, James S. Kuhn, John F. Lancaster, Beth C. Maxwell, Ian Miles, Stephen T. Ochoa, Ruby Phifer, Jerry Rossos, Daniel N. Sanders, Stephen R. Sell, Robert Szalajda, Jonathan V. Warner, Kenton D. Weinstein, Steven H.

230 Page 3 of 22 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 1-NFPA [ Section No ] 4.1.2* Prior to certification of wildland fire-fighting respirators to this standard, respirators shall be certified by NIOSH in accordance with 42 CFR 84 as a wildland firefighting as an air-purifying respirator, or as a wildland fire-fighting powered airpurifying respirator. Supplemental Information File Name Description NFPA_1984_FR_1.docx Legislative text for FR 1. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Tue Feb 11 15:08:14 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: NFPA 1984, as-written, requires NIOSH certification as a wildland firefighting air-purifying respirator or as a wildland firefighting powered airpurifying respirator. This NIOSH certification requirement is based on performance requirements and protections specifically developed by the wildland fire fighting task group. The present requirements contained in 42 C.F.R. Part 84 gives NIOSH the authority to approve respirators for protection against the combination of gas and vapor with particulates identified by NFPA for the protection of wildland fire fighters. In order to certify respirators using these existing authorities, test requirements must be added to NFPA Emergency Nature: The collective protection approval for a wildland fire fighting respirator standard would require NIOSH to go through their formal rulemaking process. Although initiated approximately 12 months ago, it is anticipated to take at least another two years before a final rule would be completed. Manufacturers will not be able to submit products for approval until the effective date of the final rule. This means that NFPA/NIOSHcompliant wildland respirators will not be available to wildland fire fighters for several years. However, on the effective date of the TIA, manufacturers would be able to submit products to NIOSH for certification. Response Message: Public Input No. 1-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results

231 Page 4 of 22 6/2/2014 This item has passed ballot 32 Eligible Voters 13 Not Returned 17 Affirmative All 2 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Anaya, Christopher Bernzweig, David T. Bull, A. Paul Colbert, Rodney V. Cox, Brian H. Dickson, William Gaudet, Deborah L. Harkness, A. Ira Kaller, Clint Keathley, Todd Martin, Craig Radtke, Timothy M. Tobin, Jr., Richard S. Affirmative All Allen, Jason L. Gainey, Robin R. Goe, Orion S. Golla, Ed Jarboe, John Johnson, James S. Kuhn, John F. Lancaster, Beth C. Maxwell, Ian Miles, Stephen T. Ochoa, Ruby Phifer, Jerry Rossos, Daniel N. Sanders, Stephen R. Sell, Robert Warner, Kenton D. Weinstein, Steven H. Affirmative with Comment Haston, David V. Gas and vapor testing is now specified in chapters 7 and 8 but there are no requirements listed for particulate filter testing other than in the annex (A4.1.2). During public comment the TC should consider modifying to indicate that NIOSH will certify these respirators "with collective protections for wildland firefighting operations" (which includes particulate filter efficiency). Szalajda, Jonathan V.

232 Page 5 of 22 6/2/2014 Agree with the comment offered By D. Haston

233 Page 6 of 22 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 7-NFPA [ Section No ] The wildland fire-fighting respirator product label shall bear the following compliance statement legibly printed, and all letters and numbers shall be at least 2.5 mm ( 3 32 in.) in height: CERTIFIED COMPLIANT WITH NFPA 1984, ED. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: Michael Beady Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu Feb 27 12:22:01 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Updated edition year in 'label' text Response Message: Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 32 Eligible Voters 13 Not Returned 19 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Anaya, Christopher Bernzweig, David T. Bull, A. Paul Colbert, Rodney V. Cox, Brian H. Dickson, William Gaudet, Deborah L. Harkness, A. Ira Kaller, Clint Keathley, Todd Martin, Craig

234 Page 7 of 22 6/2/2014 Radtke, Timothy M. Tobin, Jr., Richard S. Affirmative All Allen, Jason L. Gainey, Robin R. Goe, Orion S. Golla, Ed Haston, David V. Jarboe, John Johnson, James S. Kuhn, John F. Lancaster, Beth C. Maxwell, Ian Miles, Stephen T. Ochoa, Ruby Phifer, Jerry Rossos, Daniel N. Sanders, Stephen R. Sell, Robert Szalajda, Jonathan V. Warner, Kenton D. Weinstein, Steven H.

235 Page 8 of 22 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 8-NFPA [ Section No ] The wildland fire-fighting respirator protective package product label shall bear the following compliance statement, legibly printed, and all letters and numbers shall be at least 6 mm ( 1 4 in.) in height: THIS RESPIRATOR MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF NFPA 1984, STANDARD ON RESPIRATORS FOR WILDLAND FIRE-FIGHTING OPERATIONS, EDITION. DO NOT REMOVE THIS LABEL! Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: Michael Beady Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu Feb 27 12:22:41 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Updated edition year in 'label' text Response Message: Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 32 Eligible Voters 13 Not Returned 19 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Anaya, Christopher Bernzweig, David T. Bull, A. Paul Colbert, Rodney V. Cox, Brian H. Dickson, William Gaudet, Deborah L. Harkness, A. Ira

236 Page 9 of 22 6/2/2014 Kaller, Clint Keathley, Todd Martin, Craig Radtke, Timothy M. Tobin, Jr., Richard S. Affirmative All Allen, Jason L. Gainey, Robin R. Goe, Orion S. Golla, Ed Haston, David V. Jarboe, John Johnson, James S. Kuhn, John F. Lancaster, Beth C. Maxwell, Ian Miles, Stephen T. Ochoa, Ruby Phifer, Jerry Rossos, Daniel N. Sanders, Stephen R. Sell, Robert Szalajda, Jonathan V. Warner, Kenton D. Weinstein, Steven H.

237 Page 10 of 22 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 9-NFPA [ Section No ] Wildland fire-fighting respirators that are certified with replaceable air purification component(s) shall have a product label affixed to each air purification component, and shall also have a product label affixed to each air purification component protective package. The product label shall bear the following compliance statement, legibly printed, and all letters and numbers shall be at least 2.5 mm ( 3 32 in.) in height: CERTIFIED COMPLIANT WITH NFPA 1984, ED. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: Michael Beady Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu Feb 27 12:23:32 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Updated edition year in 'label' text Response Message: Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 32 Eligible Voters 13 Not Returned 19 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Anaya, Christopher Bernzweig, David T. Bull, A. Paul Colbert, Rodney V. Cox, Brian H. Dickson, William Gaudet, Deborah L. Harkness, A. Ira

238 Page 11 of 22 6/2/2014 Kaller, Clint Keathley, Todd Martin, Craig Radtke, Timothy M. Tobin, Jr., Richard S. Affirmative All Allen, Jason L. Gainey, Robin R. Goe, Orion S. Golla, Ed Haston, David V. Jarboe, John Johnson, James S. Kuhn, John F. Lancaster, Beth C. Maxwell, Ian Miles, Stephen T. Ochoa, Ruby Phifer, Jerry Rossos, Daniel N. Sanders, Stephen R. Sell, Robert Szalajda, Jonathan V. Warner, Kenton D. Weinstein, Steven H.

239 Page 12 of 22 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 3-NFPA [ Section No ] Prior to certification of wildland fire-fighting respirators to the requirements of this standard, all respirators shall first be certified by NIOSH as either a wildland firefighting APR or as a wildland fire-fighting PAPR, in accordance with 42 CFR 84. Supplemental Information File Name Description NFPA_1984_FR_3.docx Legislative version of paragraph 6.1.2, NFPA 1984 FR 3. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Tue Feb 11 15:18:34 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: NFPA 1984, as-written, requires NIOSH certification as a wildland firefighting air-purifying respirator or as a wildland firefighting powered airpurifying respirator. This NIOSH certification requirement is based on performance requirements and protections specifically developed by the wildland fire fighting task group. The present requirements contained in 42 C.F.R. Part 84 gives NIOSH the authority to approve respirators for protection against the combination of gas and vapor with particulates identified by NFPA for the protection of wildland fire fighters. In order to certify respirators using these existing authorities, test requirements must be added to NFPA Emergency Nature: The collective protection approval for a wildland fire fighting respirator standard would require NIOSH to go through their formal rulemaking process. Although initiated approximately 12 months ago, it is anticipated to take at least another two years before a final rule would be completed. Manufacturers will not be able to submit products for approval until the effective date of the final rule. This means that NFPA/NIOSHcompliant wildland respirators will not be available to wildland fire fighters for several years. However, on the effective date of the TIA, manufacturers would be able to submit products to NIOSH for certification. Response Message: Public Input No. 3-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results

240 Page 13 of 22 6/2/2014 This item has passed ballot 32 Eligible Voters 13 Not Returned 17 Affirmative All 2 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Anaya, Christopher Bernzweig, David T. Bull, A. Paul Colbert, Rodney V. Cox, Brian H. Dickson, William Gaudet, Deborah L. Harkness, A. Ira Kaller, Clint Keathley, Todd Martin, Craig Radtke, Timothy M. Tobin, Jr., Richard S. Affirmative All Allen, Jason L. Gainey, Robin R. Goe, Orion S. Golla, Ed Jarboe, John Johnson, James S. Kuhn, John F. Lancaster, Beth C. Maxwell, Ian Miles, Stephen T. Ochoa, Ruby Phifer, Jerry Rossos, Daniel N. Sanders, Stephen R. Sell, Robert Warner, Kenton D. Weinstein, Steven H. Affirmative with Comment Haston, David V. During public comment the TC should consider modifying to indicate that NIOSH will certify these respirators "with collective protections for wildland firefighting operations" (which includes particulate filter efficiency). Szalajda, Jonathan V. Agree with the comment offered by D. Haston

241 Page 14 of 22 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 4-NFPA [ New Section after ] All wildland fire-fighting respirators with a tight-fitting facepiece shall be tested for breathing resistance as specified in Section 8.8, and, when tested at 150 lpm, the inhalation resistance shall not exceed 80 mm water column and the exhalation resistance shall not exceed 25 mm water column. 7.2 Requirements for Air-Purifying Respirators (APR). Air-purifying respirator (APR) air purification components shall be tested for gas and vapor capacity as specified in the applicable test methods in Section 8.9, and the breakthrough concentration for each test representative agent shall not exceed the applicable values specified in Table 8.9.4(a) and Table 8.9.4(b). 7.3 Requirements for Powered Air-Purifying Respirators (PAPR). Powered air-purifying respirator (PAPR) air purification components shall be tested for gas and vapor capacity as specified in the applicable test methods in Section 8.10, and the breakthrough concentration for each test representative agent shall not exceed the applicable values specified in Table Supplemental Information File Name NFPA_1984_FR_4.docx Description New paragraphs to be added to Chapter 7 following existing text in (FR 4) Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Tue Feb 11 15:20:36 EST 2014 Committee Statement

242 Page 15 of 22 6/2/2014 Committee Statement: NFPA 1984, as-written, requires NIOSH certification as a wildland firefighting air-purifying respirator or as a wildland firefighting powered airpurifying respirator. This NIOSH certification requirement is based on performance requirements and protections specifically developed by the wildland fire fighting task group. The present requirements contained in 42 C.F.R. Part 84 gives NIOSH the authority to approve respirators for protection against the combination of gas and vapor with particulates identified by NFPA for the protection of wildland fire fighters. In order to certify respirators using these existing authorities, test requirements must be added to NFPA Emergency Nature: The collective protection approval for a wildland fire fighting respirator standard would require NIOSH to go through their formal rulemaking process. Although initiated approximately 12 months ago, it is anticipated to take at least another two years before a final rule would be completed. Manufacturers will not be able to submit products for approval until the effective date of the final rule. This means that NFPA/NIOSHcompliant wildland respirators will not be available to wildland fire fighters for several years. However, on the effective date of the TIA, manufacturers would be able to submit products to NIOSH for certification. Response Message: Public Input No. 4-NFPA [New Section after 7.1.7] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 32 Eligible Voters 13 Not Returned 18 Affirmative All 1 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Anaya, Christopher Bernzweig, David T. Bull, A. Paul Colbert, Rodney V. Cox, Brian H. Dickson, William Gaudet, Deborah L. Harkness, A. Ira Kaller, Clint Keathley, Todd Martin, Craig Radtke, Timothy M. Tobin, Jr., Richard S. Affirmative All Allen, Jason L. Gainey, Robin R. Goe, Orion S.

243 Page 16 of 22 6/2/2014 Golla, Ed Jarboe, John Johnson, James S. Kuhn, John F. Lancaster, Beth C. Maxwell, Ian Miles, Stephen T. Ochoa, Ruby Phifer, Jerry Rossos, Daniel N. Sanders, Stephen R. Sell, Robert Szalajda, Jonathan V. Warner, Kenton D. Weinstein, Steven H. Affirmative with Comment Haston, David V. During public comment the TC should consider adding particulate filter performance requirements to chapter 7.

244 Page 17 of 22 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 5-NFPA [ New Section after ] 8.8 Breathing Resistance Test Application. This test method shall apply to all wildland fire-fighting respirators with a tightfitting facepiece Samples Samples shall be complete wildland fire-fighting respirators Samples shall be conditioned as specified in the applicable NIOSH test procedure Specimens Specimens shall be complete respirators At least three specimens shall be tested Procedure Testing shall be performed as specified in the applicable NIOSH test procedure PAPRs shall be tested with the blower turned off Report. Inhalation and exhalation resistance shall be recorded and reported for each test specimen Interpretation Inhalation and exhalation resistance shall be used to determine pass or fail performance One or more specimens failing this test shall constitute failing performance. Supplemental Information File Name NFPA_1984_FR_5_proofed_tables.docx Description Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Tue Feb 11 15:22:19 EST 2014

245 Page 18 of 22 6/2/2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: NFPA 1984, as-written, requires NIOSH certification as a wildland firefighting air-purifying respirator or as a wildland firefighting powered airpurifying respirator. This NIOSH certification requirement is based on performance requirements and protections specifically developed by the wildland fire fighting task group. The present requirements contained in 42 C.F.R. Part 84 gives NIOSH the authority to approve respirators for protection against the combination of gas and vapor with particulates identified by NFPA for the protection of wildland fire fighters. In order to certify respirators using these existing authorities, test requirements must be added to NFPA Emergency Nature: The collective protection approval for a wildland fire fighting respirator standard would require NIOSH to go through their formal rulemaking process. Although initiated approximately 12 months ago, it is anticipated to take at least another two years before a final rule would be completed. Manufacturers will not be able to submit products for approval until the effective date of the final rule. This means that NFPA/NIOSHcompliant wildland respirators will not be available to wildland fire fighters for several years. However, on the effective date of the TIA, manufacturers would be able to submit products to NIOSH for certification. Response Message: Public Input No. 5-NFPA [New Section after 8.7.6] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 32 Eligible Voters 13 Not Returned 18 Affirmative All 1 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Anaya, Christopher Bernzweig, David T. Bull, A. Paul Colbert, Rodney V. Cox, Brian H. Dickson, William Gaudet, Deborah L. Harkness, A. Ira Kaller, Clint Keathley, Todd Martin, Craig Radtke, Timothy M. Tobin, Jr., Richard S. Affirmative All Allen, Jason L.

246 Page 19 of 22 6/2/2014 Gainey, Robin R. Goe, Orion S. Golla, Ed Jarboe, John Johnson, James S. Kuhn, John F. Lancaster, Beth C. Maxwell, Ian Miles, Stephen T. Ochoa, Ruby Phifer, Jerry Rossos, Daniel N. Sanders, Stephen R. Sell, Robert Szalajda, Jonathan V. Warner, Kenton D. Weinstein, Steven H. Affirmative with Comment Haston, David V. During public comment the TC should consider adding particulate filter test requirements to chapter 8.

247 Page 20 of 22 6/2/2014 First Revision No. 2-NFPA [ Section No. A ] A Respirators certified by NIOSH in accordance with 42 CFR 84 as a wildland firefighting air-purifying respirator (APR), or as a wildland fire-fighting powered airpurifying respirator (PAPR) will be approved under a collective protection approval. NIOSH testing includes the following: In addition to the breathing resistance and gas and vapor performance requirements specified in through 7.3, NIOSH testing includes the following: Breathing resistance (APR and Tight-Fitting PAPR only): Inhalation and exhalation resistance at 150 lpm constant flow with a maximum inhalation resistance of 80 mm water column and a maximum exhalation resistance of 25 mm water column, with the PAPR blower turned off during testing. Note: NIOSH does not test breathing resistance on loose-fitting PAPRs. (1) Facepiece Carbon Dioxide Concentration carbon dioxide concentration : Verification that the respiratory inlet covering carbon dioxide concentration does not exceed 1.0 percent. (2) Particulate filter efficiency: Minimum NIOSH-certified R95 particulate filter efficiency level. A filter medium that removes at least 95 percent of an aerosol of dioctylphthalate (DOP) having a mass median aerodynamic diameter of 0.3 μm, at a maximum challenge loading of 200 mg are R95 filters. (3) Powered air-purifying respirator power supply life: Verification that the power source provides at least 8 hours of continuous use without recharging or replacement. Supplemental Information File Name NFPA_1984_FR_2.docx Description Legislative text version of Annex A Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Tue Feb 11 15:15:32 EST 2014 Committee Statement

248 Page 21 of 22 6/2/2014 Committee Statement: NFPA 1984, as-written, requires NIOSH certification as a wildland firefighting air-purifying respirator or as a wildland firefighting powered airpurifying respirator. This NIOSH certification requirement is based on performance requirements and protections specifically developed by the wildland fire fighting task group. The present requirements contained in 42 C.F.R. Part 84 gives NIOSH the authority to approve respirators for protection against the combination of gas and vapor with particulates identified by NFPA for the protection of wildland fire fighters. In order to certify respirators using these existing authorities, test requirements must be added to NFPA Emergency Nature: The collective protection approval for a wildland fire fighting respirator standard would require NIOSH to go through their formal rulemaking process. Although initiated approximately 12 months ago, it is anticipated to take at least another two years before a final rule would be completed. Manufacturers will not be able to submit products for approval until the effective date of the final rule. This means that NFPA/NIOSHcompliant wildland respirators will not be available to wildland fire fighters for several years. However, on the effective date of the TIA, manufacturers would be able to submit products to NIOSH for certification. Response Message: Public Input No. 2-NFPA [Section No. A.4.1.2] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 32 Eligible Voters 13 Not Returned 19 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Anaya, Christopher Bernzweig, David T. Bull, A. Paul Colbert, Rodney V. Cox, Brian H. Dickson, William Gaudet, Deborah L. Harkness, A. Ira Kaller, Clint Keathley, Todd Martin, Craig Radtke, Timothy M. Tobin, Jr., Richard S. Affirmative All Allen, Jason L. Gainey, Robin R. Goe, Orion S.

249 Page 22 of 22 6/2/2014 Golla, Ed Haston, David V. Jarboe, John Johnson, James S. Kuhn, John F. Lancaster, Beth C. Maxwell, Ian Miles, Stephen T. Ochoa, Ruby Phifer, Jerry Rossos, Daniel N. Sanders, Stephen R. Sell, Robert Szalajda, Jonathan V. Warner, Kenton D. Weinstein, Steven H.

250 Page 1 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 73-NFPA [ Global Input ] Change title to: "Standard on Vapor-Protective Ensembles for Hazardous Materials Emergencies and CBRN Terrorism Incidents" Also, make change wherever the title appears in the standard. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 21 10:47:48 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: The title of this standard should be changed based on the transfer of Class 1 requirements from NFPA and the reorganization of NFPA Response Message: Public Input No. 106-NFPA [Global Input] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M.

251 Page 2 of 238 6/6/2014 Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is.

252 Page 3 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 74-NFPA [ Global Input ] Replace TPP with HTP. Replace 'thermal protective performance' with 'heat transfer performance'. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 21 11:57:28 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: The technical committee is making this change to reflect the new acronym and test name. Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J.

253 Page 4 of 238 6/6/2014 Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is.

254 Page 5 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 90-NFPA [ Global Input ] Please delete all section/chapter titles (and surrounding commas) following all cross refs. throughout the document. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: Michael Beady Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Mon Mar 17 16:25:12 EDT 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Update per style Response Message: Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 20 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 1 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D.

255 Page 6 of 238 6/6/2014 Daly, Jr., Richard P. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Keep Section #'s & Commas, OK to delete Titles Lovasic, Susan L. Unclear what exact changes are to be made to the document. Negative with Comment Fithian, William A. Deleting all Section/Chapter titles following all cross references is a highly undesirable action. If accepted, the proposed change will require the user of the document to waste an incredible amount of time and effort to refer from one chapter (for instance Chapter 7) to another chapter (for instance Chapter 8) to obtain relevant information. Including the section/chapter titles also provides a double check when revisions to the standard are necessary, to ensure the revised section numbers match the appropriate performance or testing criteria. This proposed change will impose an incredible amount of undue burden and add a substantial amount of time for end users to review and evaluate the standard. It will also result in losing the ability to maintain each section or chapter as a stand-alone system.

256 Page 7 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 1-NFPA [ Section No ] 1.1.1* This standard shall specify minimum requirements for the design, performance, testing, documentation, and certification of vapor-protective ensembles and ensemble elements used by emergency response personnel during hazardous materials incidents and chemical for protection from chemicals, biological agents, or radiological terrorism incidents. and radiological particulates (CBRN) encountered as terrorism agents. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 19 09:50:44 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: The chemical/biological/radiological protection terminology should be harmonized with the work in NFPA 1994 to establish CBRN protection. CBRN is a term that is used throughout the project on Fire and Emergency Services Protective Clothing and Equipment. Specific parts of the term CBRN are also further defined in the definitions section and have related Annex items that provide clarification of the limitations of the intended protection. Response Message: Public Input No. 109-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W.

257 Page 8 of 238 6/6/2014 Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is.

258 Page 9 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 2-NFPA [ Section No ] This standard shall also specify criteria for chemical agents, biological agents, and radioactive particulates encountered during terrorism incidents. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 19 10:19:45 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: The paragraph is redundant with the proposed modification of Paragraph Response Message: Public Input No. 155-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J.

259 Page 10 of 238 6/6/2014 Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is.

260 Page 11 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 3-NFPA [ Section No ] This standard shall not specify requirements for the respiratory protection that is necessary for proper protection with the protective ensemble. Respiratory protection for hazardous materials emergencies and CBRN terrorism incidents is a critical part of the overall protection and shall be specified and provided by the authority having jurisdiction. Supplemental Information File Name NFPA_1991_FR_3_Text.docx Description shows correct legislative tracking Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 19 10:33:16 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: The technical committee is clarifying the intent of the requirement. Also delete annex A text for A Response Message: Public Input No. 108-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 19 Affirmative All 2 Affirmative with Comments 3 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S.

261 Page 12 of 238 6/6/2014 North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Wisner, Jr., John E. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Stull, Jeffrey O. Additional language is needed in the appendix to indicate how the standard is currently predicated on the use of NFPA 1981-compliant SCBA. Negative with Comment Beggs, Dale Gregory Per TI/Rob West: Concur with other Negative vote, dissenting comments & justifications. Do not support allowing non-encapsulating in Lovasic, Susan L. (1) Respiratory protection is not "provided" by the authority having jurisdiction. That text needs to be removed. (2) Do not support removing Annex A as that text is relevant to the intent of the standard. Zeigler, James P. If it is the intent to the committee to allow non-encapsulating garment designs in NFPA 1991, then the non-encapsulating ensembles will have to be tested with each model of respirator specified by the manufacturer as appropriate with the garment As such, the standard is restricting and hence specifying aspects of the respirator as is done in NFPA IN addition, proposed restricts the choice of respirators.

262 Page 13 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 4-NFPA [ Section No [Excluding any Sub-Sections] ] The purpose of this standard shall be to establish a minimum level of protection for emergency response personnel against adverse vapor, liquid-splash, and particulate environments during hazardous materials incidents, and from specified chemical and biological terrorism agents in vapor, liquid splash, and particulate environments during chemical and biological CBRN terrorism incidents. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 19 10:58:11 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: The chemical/biological/radiological protection terminology should be harmonized with the work in NFPA 1994 to establish CBRN protection. Public Input No. 157-NFPA [Section No [Excluding any Sub-Sections]] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M.

263 Page 14 of 238 6/6/2014 Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is.

264 Page 15 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 5-NFPA [ New Section after ] 1.3.6* Requirements of this standard shall not apply to the use of closed-circuit SCBA. Supplemental Information File Name NFPA_1991_FR_5_Annex_edited.docx Description Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 19 11:05:40 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: The standard does not currently evaluate the ensemble with a closed circuit SCBA. Public Input No. 158-NFPA [New Section after 1.3.5] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E.

265 Page 16 of 238 6/6/2014 Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is.

266 Page 17 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 6-NFPA [ Section No. 2.2 ] 2.2 NFPA Publications. National Fire Protection Association, 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA NFPA 1500, Standard on Fire Department Occupational Safety and Health Program, edition. NFPA 1981, Standard on Open-Circuit Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) for Fire and Emergency Services, edition. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 19 11:31:45 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Update of NFPA references to current edition Response Message: Public Input No. 28-NFPA [Section No. 2.2] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M.

267 Page 18 of 238 6/6/2014 Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is.

268 Page 19 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 7-NFPA [ Section No ] ANSI Publications. American National Standards Institute, Inc., 25 West 43rd Street, 4th floor, New York, NY ANSI Z41 Z87.1, Standard for Personal Protection Protective Footwear American National Standard for Occupational and Educational Personal Eye and Face Protective Devices,, ANSI Z89.1, Standard for Industrial Head Protection, Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 19 11:33:36 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: ANSI Z41 is not longer referenced because it has been replaced by ASTM F2413. Reference to ANSI Z89.1 has been updated to most current edition. Response Message: Public Input No. 30-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A.

269 Page 20 of 238 6/6/2014 Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is.

270 Page 21 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 8-NFPA [ Section No ] ASTM Publications. American Society for Testing and Materials, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken, PA ASTM D 747, Standard Test Method for Apparent Bending Modulus of Plastics by Means of a Cantilever Beam, ASTM D 751, Standard Methods of Testing Coated Fabrics, (2011). ASTM D 1630, Standard Test Method for Rubber Property Abrasion Resistance (NBS Abrader), ASTM D 1776, Standard Practice for Conditioning and Testing Textiles, 2008e1. ASTM D 2136, Standard Test Method for Coated Fabrics Low Temperature Bend Test, ASTM D 2582, Standard Test Method for Puncture Propagation Tear Resistance of Plastic Film and Thin Sheeting, ASTM D 4157, Standard Test Method for Abrasion Resistance of Textile Fabrics (Oscillatory Cylinder Method), ASTM D 6413, Standard Test Method for Flame Resistance of Textiles (Vertical Test), 2013b. ASTM F 392, Standard Test Method for Flex Durability of Flexible Barrier Materials Flex Durability of Flexible Barrier Materials, ASTM F 489, Standard Test Method for Static Coefficient of Friction of Shoe Sole and Heel Materials as Measured by the James Machine, ASTM F 739, Standard Test Method for Resistance of Protective Clothing Materials to Permeation by Liquids or Gases Under Conditions of Continuous Contact, 1999a ASTM F 903, Standard Test Method for Resistance of Protective Clothing Materials to Penetration by Liquids, ASTM F 1052, Standard Test Method for Pressure Testing of Vapor-Protective Ensembles, ASTM F 1154, Standard Practice for Qualitatively Evaluating the Comfort, Fit, Function, and Integrity of Chemical Protective Suit Ensembles, ASTM F 1301, Standard Practice for Labeling Chemical Protective Clothing, e1. ASTM F 1342, Standard Test Method for Resistance of Protective Clothing Materials to Puncture, (2013) e1. ASTM F 1358, Standard Test Method for Resistance of Protective Clothing Materials to Flame Impingement Effects of Flame Impingement on Materials Used in Protective Clothing Not Designated Primarily for Flame Resistance, ASTM F 1359, Standard Test Method for Measuring the Liquid Penetration Resistance of Protective Clothing or Protective Ensembles Using a Shower Spray While on a Mannequin, ASTM F 1790, Standard Test Methods for Measuring Cut Resistance of Materials Used in Protective Clothing,

271 Page 22 of 238 6/6/2014 ASTM F 1930, Test Method for Evaluation of Flame Resistant Clothing for Protection Against Flash Fire Simulations Using an Instrumented Manikin, ASTM F 2010, Standard Test Method for Evaluation of Glove Effects on Wearer Hand Dexterity Using a Modified Pegboard Test, ASTM F 2413, Standard Specification for Performance Requirements for Protective (Safety) Toe Cap Footwear, ASTM F 2700, Standard Test Method for Unsteady-State Heat Transfer Evaluation of Flame Resistance Materials for Clothing with Continuous Heating, Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 19 11:41:20 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: Changes to reference update standards to current editions and account for changes in selected or new test methods. Public Input No. 31-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All

272 Page 23 of 238 6/6/2014 Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is.

273 Page 24 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 9-NFPA [ Section No ] ISO Publications. International Organization for Standardization, 1, rue de Varembé, Case postale 56, CH-1211 Geneve 20, Switzerland. ISO 27, Guidelines for corrective action to be taken by a certification body in the event of misuse of its mark of conformity, ISO 65, General requirements for bodies operating product certification systems, ISO 4649, Rubber vulcanized or thermoplastic Determination of abrasion resistance using a rotating cylindrical drum device, ISO 9001, Quality Management Systems Requirements, ISO 13287, Personal protective equipment Footwear test method for slip resistance, ISO 17011, General requirements for accreditation bodies accrediting conformity assessment bodies, ISO 17021, Conformity assessment Requirements for bodies providing audit and certification of management systems, ISO 17025, General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories, ISO 17492, Clothing for protection against heat and flame Determination of heat transmission on exposure to both flame and radiant heat, ISO 17065, Conformity assessment Requirements for bodies certifying products, processes and services, Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 19 11:53:53 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Changes update reference to current edition; additional references added to address changes in test methods and certification requirements. Response Message: Public Input No. 32-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results

274 Page 25 of 238 6/6/2014 This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is.

275 Page 26 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 33-NFPA [ New Section after ] Agents Biological Terrorism Agents. Liquid or particulate agents that can consist of a biologically derived toxin or pathogen used to inflict lethal or incapacitating casualties, generally on a civilian population as a result of a terrorist attack CBRN Terrorism Agents. The term used to refer to chemical terrorism agents, including chemical warfare agents and toxic industrial chemicals, biological terrorism agents, and radiological particulate terrorism agents. (See also , , and ) Chemical Terrorism Agents. Liquid, solid, gaseous, and vapor chemical warfare agents and toxic industrial chemicals used to inflict lethal or incapacitating casualties, generally on a civilian population as a result of a terrorist attack * Chemical Warfare (CW) Agents. Liquid, solid, and gas chemical agents (most are liquid) traditionally used during warfare or armed conflict to kill or incapacitate an enemy. (See also and ) Radiological Particulate Terrorism Agents. Particles that emit ionizing radiation in excess of normal background levels used to inflict lethal or incapacitating casualties, generally on a civilian population as the result of a terrorist attack Toxic Industrial Chemicals. Highly toxic solid, liquid, or gaseous chemicals that have been identified as mass casualty threats that could be used as weapons of terrorism to inflict casualties, generally on a civilian population during a terrorist attack. (See also and ) Supplemental Information File Name NFPA_1991_FR_33_Annex_edited.docx Description Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 19 19:11:14 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: The TC is aligning the CBRN definitions with NFPA Response Message:

276 Page 27 of 238 6/6/2014 Ballot Results

277 Page 28 of 238 6/6/2014 This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is.

278 Page 29 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 29-NFPA [ Sections 3.3.2, ] Biological Agents. Biological materials that are capable of causing an acute disease or long-term damage to the human body Biological Warfare Agent. A biological substance intended to kill, seriously injure, or incapacitate humans through physiological effects. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 19 19:06:17 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention The TC is moving these definitions as subsets under the definition of agents. Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All

279 Page 30 of 238 6/6/2014 Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is.

280 Page 31 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 10-NFPA [ New Section after ] CBRN. Chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 19 12:03:09 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: This change provides consistency within the project. Response Message: Public Input No. 159-NFPA [New Section after 3.3.7] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P.

281 Page 32 of 238 6/6/2014 Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is.

282 Page 33 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 30-NFPA [ Section No ] Chemical Warfare Agent. A chemical substance intended to kill, seriously injure, or incapacitate humans through physiological effects. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 19 19:07:28 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: The TC is moving this definition as a subset under the definition of Agents. Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D.

283 Page 34 of 238 6/6/2014 Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is.

284 Page 35 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 75-NFPA [ New Section after ] Encapsulating. A type of ensemble that provides vapor- or gastight protection, or liquidtight protection, or both, and completely covers the wearer and the wearer s respiratory equipment. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 21 13:08:24 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: The technical committee's intent is to allow for non-encapsulating ensembles to be certified. Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 18 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 2 Negative with Comments 1 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William

285 Page 36 of 238 6/6/2014 Clifford, Brian J. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Corrado, Steven D. Recommend deleting the term "gas-tight". Gas tight protection is not specified in the Scope (1.1.1), Purpose (1.2.1), or Application (1.3.1) of this document. Stull, Jeffrey O. This definition should be updated to indicate that encapsulating suits provide both vapor and liquid protection. Negative with Comment Beggs, Dale Gregory Per TI/Rob West: Concur with other Negative vote, dissenting comments & justifications. Do not support allowing non-encapsulating in Lovasic, Susan L. No objection to the defintion listed, however I do not support allowing non-encapsulating suit designs to be permitted in NFPA See supporting rationale in file "Negative - non -encapsulating". Abstention Nystrom, Ulf Whereas there may be a point in making the standard less design restrictive I choose to abstain because I am not convinced that allowing non-encapsulating ensembles for the top level protection only means improvements for the users. There may be disadvantages for example concerning decontamination of the respiratory protective devices.

286 Page 37 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 76-NFPA [ Section No ] * Exhaust Valve. One-way vent that releases exhaust to the outside environment and prevents entry of outside environment. Supplemental Information File Name NFPA_1991_FR_76_Associated_Annex_edited.docx Description Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 21 13:11:52 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: The technical committee's intent is to allow for non-encapsulating ensembles to be certified. Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 0 Affirmative with Comments 3 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E.

287 Page 38 of 238 6/6/2014 Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Negative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. The requirements for a non-encapsulating vapor-protective ensemble have further implications to respiratory protection systems that have not been addressed. Beggs, Dale Gregory Per TI/Rob West: Concur with other Negative vote, dissenting comments & justifications. Do not support allowing non-encapsulating in Affirmative for definition, but disagree with supplemental information & intent to allow non-encapsulating in 1991.: A Exhaust Valve. Nonencapsulating vapor-protective suits cannot have exhaust valves. Lovasic, Susan L. I do not support allowing non-encapsulating suit designs to be permitted in NFPA See supporting rationale in file "Negative - non-encapsulating".

288 Page 39 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 11-NFPA [ Section No ] * External Fittings. Any component that allows the passage of gases, liquids, or electrical current from the outside to the inside of the element or item. Any as well as any fitting externally located on, and part of, the ensemble which that is not part of the garment material, visor material, gloves, footwear, seams, or closure assembly. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 19 12:05:59 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: Editorial change to make definition consistent with more recently updated NFPA 1992 and NFPA Public Input No. 33-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M.

289 Page 40 of 238 6/6/2014 Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is.

290 Page 41 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 12-NFPA [ Section No ] Ladder Shank. See , Shank. Reinforcement to the midsole area of protective footwear designed to provide additional support to the instep when standing on a ladder rung. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 19 12:07:26 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: The TC is changing the definition to add clarification. Response Message: Public Input No. 34-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J.

291 Page 42 of 238 6/6/2014 Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is.

292 Page 43 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 13-NFPA [ Section No ] Manufacturer. The entity that assumes the liability, provides the warranty for the compliant product, or obtains the product certification. The entity that directs and controls any of the following: compliant product design, compliant product manufacturing, or compliant product quality assurance; or the entity that assumes the liability or provides the warranty for the compliant product Melt. A response to heat by a material resulting in evidence of flowing or dripping. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 19 12:21:14 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: The TC is updating the definitions to make them consistent with other standards in the project. Also added is a new definition of "melt" which is used in the standard. Response Message: Public Input No. 70-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 2 Affirmative with Comments 1 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W.

293 Page 44 of 238 6/6/2014 Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Negative with Comment Lovasic, Susan L. (1) As revised with the use of "or", there could be up to 4 different entities that could qualify as the "manufacturer". (2) Keep the current definition

294 Page 45 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 77-NFPA [ New Section after ] Nonencapsulating. A type of ensemble that provides liquid splash protection, but does not provide vapor- or gastight protection or liquidtight protection and does not cover the wearer s respiratory equipment. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 21 13:16:14 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: The technical committee is providing this definition to support allowing non-encapsulating suits to be certified. Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 17 Affirmative All 1 Affirmative with Comments 5 Negative with Comments 1 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William

295 Page 46 of 238 6/6/2014 Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Wisner, Jr., John E. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Stull, Jeffrey O. This definition, taken from NFPA 1992 and NFPA 1994, requires modification to indicate the basis for providing vapor and liquid protection. Negative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. This statement does not appear to make sense: A type of ensemble that provides liquid splash protection, but does not provide vapor- or gastight protection or liquidtight protection and does not cover the wearer s respiratory equipment...i would challenge that there are systems out there that are liquid tight and vapor tight but are NOT fully encapsulated. Beggs, Dale Gregory Per TI/Rob West: Concur with other Negative vote, dissenting comments & justifications. Do not support allowing non-encapsulating in Lovasic, Susan L. No objection to the defintion listed, however I do not support allowing non-encapsulating suit designs to be permitted in NFPA See supporting rationale in file "Negative - non -encapsulating". Mann, Philip C. The definition is contradictory, in that it says the ensemble provides liquid splash protection but not liquid tight protection. Zeigler, James P. There is a clear conflict between this definition of nonencapsulaitng and the purpose of this standard. This definition indicates on This defines nonencapsulating as providing liquid splash protection, but does not provide vapor- or gastight protection but the purpose of the standard?(1.2.1) states that the purpose of the standard is to provide vapor and particle protection. Abstention Nystrom, Ulf Whereas there may be a point in making the standard less design restrictive I choose to abstain because I am not convinced that allowing non-encapsulating ensembles for the top level protection only means improvements for the users. There may be disadvantages for example concerning decontamination of the respiratory protective devices.

296 Page 47 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 78-NFPA [ Section No ] Normalized Breakthrough Detection Time. The time at which the permeation rate of a chemical through a material reaches 0.1 μg/cm 2 /min. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 21 13:21:36 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: The term is no longer used in the standard. Response Message: Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 20 Affirmative All 1 Affirmative with Comments 3 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P.

297 Page 48 of 238 6/6/2014 Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Negative with Comment Beggs, Dale Gregory Per TI/Rob West, do not support switching from current Normalized Breakthrough Time 1um/cm2 to Cumulative Breakthrough. Concur with other Negative vote, dissenting comments & justification, including Zeigler support documentation in 1991_F2015_FAE- HAZ_FD_ballotcirc.pdf. Lovasic, Susan L. Keep original text. Do not support changing from current normalized breakthrough time as the permeation test procedure. See supporting rationale in file "Negative - cumulative permeation". Nystrom, Ulf It has not been shown that replacing permeation breakthrough time with cumulative permeation means any advantages to the users in terms of a concept that is easier to understand or to apply e.g. in hazmat response. Further, the suggested use of cumulative data does not solve the potential problem of permeation spikes being missed. Some problems could perhaps be overcome by reporting both cumulative and breakthrough time and/or increasing sampling frequency but the current revision does not do this.

298 Page 49 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 14-NFPA [ Section No ] * Particulates. Solid matter that is dispersed in air as a mixture. For the purpose of this standard, particulates do not include aerosol, or suspended liquid droplets in air. Aerosols are considered liquids. Supplemental Information File Name NFPA_1991_FR_14_Annex_edited.docx Description Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 19 12:37:07 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: The proposed change provides consistency with project definitions. Public Input No. 161-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A.

299 Page 50 of 238 6/6/2014 Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is.

300 Page 51 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 28-NFPA [ New Section after ] Puncture Resistant Device. A reinforcement to the bottom of protective footwear that is designed to provide puncture resistance. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 19 19:02:26 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: The TC is adding this definition for consistency within the project. Response Message: Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P.

301 Page 52 of 238 6/6/2014 Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is.

302 Page 53 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 31-NFPA [ Section No ] * Radioactive Particulate. Finely divided solids, such as powders and dusts, which emit ionizing radiation in excess of background radiation levels. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 19 19:08:39 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: The TC is moving this definition as a subset to the definition of Agents. Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D.

303 Page 54 of 238 6/6/2014 Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is.

304 Page 55 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 45-NFPA [ Section No ] Respiratory Equipment. A positive - pressure, self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) or combination SCBA/supplied-air breathing apparatus certified by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) and certified as compliant with NFPA 1981, Standard on Open-Circuit Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus for Fire and Emergency Services. Supplemental Information File Name NFPA_1991_FR_45_Formatting.docx Description Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu Feb 20 12:11:45 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: The change to the definition for respiratory equipment removes the current criteria, which are addressed in a design requirement. See attached Word document for correct formatting. Response Message: Public Input No. 37-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 20 Affirmative All 2 Affirmative with Comments 2 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S.

305 Page 56 of 238 6/6/2014 Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Stull, Jeffrey O. The referenced section number is wrong. In addition, an appendix section is needed to explain the type of respiratory equipment considered acceptable for use with vaporprotective ensembles. Negative with Comment Beggs, Dale Gregory Per TI/Rob West, concur with other Negative vote, dissenting comments & justifications. Lovasic, Susan L. I believe that the current text should be retained as it is relevant to this standard.

306 Page 57 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 15-NFPA [ Section No ] Shank. The component of footwear that provides additional support to the instep. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 19 12:52:01 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: Definition is no longer needed; change provide consistency with more recently revised NFPA 1992 and NFPA Public Input No. 38-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J.

307 Page 58 of 238 6/6/2014 Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is.

308 Page 59 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 79-NFPA [ Section No ] * Vapor-Protective Suit. The ensemble garment element of the protective ensemble that provides chemical protection to the upper and lower torso, head, arms, and legs. Supplemental Information File Name NFPA_1991_FR_79_Annex_edited.docx Description Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 21 13:23:50 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 19 Affirmative All 1 Affirmative with Comments 3 Negative with Comments 1 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. The technical committee intends to allow non-encapsulating suits to be certified.

309 Page 60 of 238 6/6/2014 Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Negative with Comment Beggs, Dale Gregory Per TI/Rob West: Concur with other Negative vote, dissenting comments & justifications. Do not support allowing non-encapsulating in Corrado, Steven D. This new Annex item is contradictory to FI77 where the definition of non-encapsulating specifically excludes vapor protection. Lovasic, Susan L. I do not support allowing non-encapsulating suit designs to be permitted in NFPA See supporting rationale in file "Negative - non-encapsulating". Abstention Nystrom, Ulf Whereas there may be a point in making the standard less design restrictive I choose to abstain because I am not convinced that allowing non-encapsulating ensembles for the top level protection only means improvements for the users. There may be disadvantages for example concerning decontamination of the respiratory protective devices.

310 Page 61 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 80-NFPA [ Section No ] * Visor Material. The transparent chemical-protective material that allows the wearer to see outside the protective ensemble hood. Supplemental Information File Name NFPA_1991_FR_80_Annex_edited.docx Description Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 21 13:28:43 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: The technical committee intends to allow the certification of nonencapsulating suits. Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 1 Affirmative with Comments 2 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E.

311 Page 62 of 238 6/6/2014 Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Negative with Comment Beggs, Dale Gregory Per TI/Rob West: Concur with other Negative vote, dissenting comments & justifications. Do not support allowing non-encapsulating in Definition is acceptable, but not with supporting Annex clarification & intent. Lovasic, Susan L. I do not support allowing non-encapsulating suit designs to be permitted in NFPA See supporting rationale in file "Negative - non-encapsulating".

312 Page 63 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 25-NFPA [ Section No ] Global FR-90 Hide Deleted All certification shall be performed by a certification organization that meets at least the requirements specified in Section 4.2, Certification Program, and that is accredited for personal protective equipment in accordance with ISO , General requirements for bodies operating product certification systems Conformity assessment requirements for bodies certifying products, processes and services. The accreditation shall be issued by an accreditation body operating in accordance with ISO 17011, General requirements for accreditation bodies accrediting conformity assessment bodies. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 19 18:40:56 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: The TC is incorporating the revised ISO standard. Response Message: Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 20 Affirmative All 4 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E.

313 Page 64 of 238 6/6/2014 Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Fithian, William A. As noted in FR-90 above, Section/chapter titles need to be included. Specifically, "Certification Program" after Section 4.2 should not be deleted. Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is.

314 Page 65 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 34-NFPA [ Section No ] The certification organization shall not issue any new certifications to the edition of this standard on or after the NFPA effective date for the edition, which is {Insert effective date once determined by Standards Council.} 7 February Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu Feb 20 08:09:35 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: The technical committee is updating this paragraph to reflect the effective date of the 2015 edition. Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All

315 Page 66 of 238 6/6/2014 Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is.

316 Page 67 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 35-NFPA [ Section No ] The certification organization shall not permit any manufacturer to continue to label any ensembles or ensemble elements that are certified as compliant with the edition of this standard on or after [Enter effective date of the 2015 edition plus 12 months} 1 September Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu Feb 20 08:17:30 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: The technical committee wants to provide adequate time for orderly transition to the new standard. Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All

317 Page 68 of 238 6/6/2014 Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is.

318 Page 69 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 36-NFPA [ Section No ] The certification organization shall require manufacturers to remove all certification labels and product labels indicating compliance with the edition of this standard from all ensembles and ensemble elements that are under the control of the manufacturer on {Enter effective date plus 12 months} 1 September 2005, and the certification organization shall verify this action is taken. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu Feb 20 08:21:41 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: The technical committee is providing adequate time for an orderly transition to the next edition. Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M.

319 Page 70 of 238 6/6/2014 Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is.

320 Page 71 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 24-NFPA [ Section No ] Global FR-90 Hide Deleted The certification organization shall be accredited for personal protective equipment in accordance with ISO , General requirements for bodies operating product certification systems Conformity assessment requirements for bodies certifying products, processes and services. The accreditation shall be issued by an accreditation body operating in accordance with ISO 17011, General requirements for accreditation bodies accrediting conformity assessment bodies. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 19 18:37:16 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: TC incorporated revised ISO standard. Response Message: Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M.

321 Page 72 of 238 6/6/2014 Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is.

322 Page 73 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 17-NFPA [ Section No [Excluding any Sub-Sections] ] The certification organization shall have or have access to laboratory facilities and equipment available for conducting proper tests to determine product compliance. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 19 16:37:25 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: As written, it can be interpreted that the certification organization must also have lab equipment on-site. This represents a change to the product certification, and refers to the Correlating Committee for future applicability to other project standards. Response Message: Public Input No. 10-NFPA [Section No [Excluding any Sub-Sections]] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M.

323 Page 74 of 238 6/6/2014 Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is.

324 Page 75 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 18-NFPA [ New Section after ] The certification organization shall ensure that the manufacturer tests each vaporprotective ensemble for gastight integrity as specified in ASTM F 1052, Standard Test Method for Pressure Testing of Vapor-Protective Ensembles. Each ensemble shall show an ending pressure of at least 797 Pa (3.2 in. water gauge) pressure. The date of the test shall be placed on the product label as specified in (5). The manufacturer shall provide the result with each ensemble. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 19 16:52:29 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: It is important for this information to be provided to the end user. Response Message: Public Input No. 162-NFPA [New Section after ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M.

325 Page 76 of 238 6/6/2014 Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is.

326 Page 77 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 20-NFPA [ Section No ] Global FR-90 Hide Deleted Global FR-90 Hide Deleted Each vapor-protective ensemble specimen shall be tested for overall performance as specified in Section 7.1 using the following sequence of tests: (1) The vapor-protective ensemble specimen shall be tested for gastight integrity in accordance with Section 8.2, Gastight Integrity Test. (2) The vapor-protective ensemble specimen shall then be tested for liquidtight integrity as specified in Section 8.3, Liquidtight Integrity Test. (3) The vapor-protective ensemble specimen shall then be tested for overall function and integrity as specified in Section 8.4, Overall Ensemble Function and Integrity Test. (4) The vapor-protective ensemble specimen shall then be tested for airflow capacity as specified in Section 8.5, Maximum Suit Ventilation Rate Test. (5) If certified for optional chemical flash fire protection, the a new vaporprotective ensemble specimen shall then be tested for overall ensemble flash protection as specified in Section 8.25, Overall Ensemble Flash Test. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 19 17:36:01 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: The technical committee is clarifying the annual certification requirements. Ballot Results This item has passed ballot

327 Page 78 of 238 6/6/ Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 19 Affirmative All 5 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Fithian, William A. As noted in FR-90, Section titles should not be deleted. Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is. Stull, Jeffrey O. A test by test review is needed to ascertain if the proposed testing reduction captures all essential requirements and is satisfactory to addressing continued certification of the product.

328 Page 79 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 19-NFPA [ Section No ] All suit material, visor, glove, footwear, optional chemical flash fire protection, and optional liquefied gas protection performance requirements shall be evaluated as specified in Chapter 5 7 with the following modifications: (1) Chemical Permeation permeation and chemical penetration resistance testing shall be limited to the testing specified in 7.2.1, 7.2.6, , 7.3.1, 7.3.6, 7.4.1, and and shall be performed against each of limited to the following chemicals: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) Carbon disulfide Dichloromethane Diethylamine Methanol Tetrahydrofuran (2) A total of two specimens shall be permitted for testing requirements. If the testing is specified for both directions of a material, a total of two specimens per material direction shall be permitted for testing requirements. Chemical permeation testing as specified in shall not be required. (3) Chemical permeation resistance testing specified in shall be limited to ammonia. (4) If the number of specimens is greater than two in the initial testing, a total of two specimens shall be permitted for annual testing requirements. If the testing is specified for both directions of a material, a total of two specimens per material direction shall be permitted for testing requirements. Supplemental Information File Name NFPA_1991_FR_19_Formatted_Text_edited.docx Description Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 19 17:08:14 EST 2014 Committee Statement

329 Page 80 of 238 6/6/2014 Committee Statement: Response Message: Clarifies annual recertification testing requirements.see attached Word document for formatting. Public Input No. 72-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 19 Affirmative All 4 Affirmative with Comments 1 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is

330 Page 81 of 238 6/6/2014 Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur - including Negative vote comment consideration. Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is. Stull, Jeffrey O. According to item (4) permeation tests would be conducted with two replicates. Given the reduction in the number of chemicals, three replicates of these tests be carried out. Negative with Comment Fithian, William A. The Section numbers are not correct and there are additional issues that require action by the committee. [Proposed language: Chemical permeation testing as specified in shall not be required.] The new Section defines optional Liquefied Gas Testing and needs to remain. The existing Section defines CBRN chemical performance requirements, which have been inadvertently removed from the proposed language in new edition. The committee needs to reevaluate this issue and fix the appropriate sections. [Proposed language: Chemical permeation resistance testing specified in shall be limited to ammonia.] This should reference Section in the new edition, unless the comments above change the new edition section numbers.

331 Page 82 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 21-NFPA [ Sections 4.5.2, ] The operation of the quality assurance program shall evaluate and test compliant product production against this standard to assure production remains in compliance * The manufacturer shall be registered to ISO 9001, Quality management systems requirements Registration to the requirements of ISO 9001, Quality management systems requirements, shall be conducted by a registrar that is accredited for personal protective equipment in accordance with ISO 17021, Conformity assessment Requirements for bodies providing audit and certification of management systems The scope of the ISO registration shall include at least the design and manufacturing systems management for the personal protective equipment being certified The registrar shall affix the accreditation mark on the ISO registration certificate. Supplemental Information File Name NFPA_1991_FR_21_Formatted_Text_edited.docx Description includes annex a Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 19 17:41:48 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: The proposed changes provide consistency with current project certification requirements. The TC also included other ISO quality management systems which incorporate and exceed ISO Response Message: Public Input No. 42-NFPA [Sections 4.5.2, 4.5.3]

332 Page 83 of 238 6/6/2014 Ballot Results

333 Page 84 of 238 6/6/2014 This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is.

334 Page 85 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 22-NFPA [ Section No ] * Where a change to an NFPA standard(s) is felt to be necessary, the certification organization shall also provide a copy of the report and corrective actions indicated to the NFPA, and shall also submit either a Public Proposal Input for a proposed change to the next revision of the applicable standard or a proposed Temporary Interim Amendment (TIA) to the current edition of the applicable standard. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 19 18:29:58 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: The technical committee made the change and will refer to Correlating Committee for further action and discussion. Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M.

335 Page 86 of 238 6/6/2014 Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is.

336 Page 87 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 23-NFPA [ Section No ] Manufacturers shall provide corrective action in accordance with ISO 9001, Quality management systems requirements, for or an equivalent ISO quality management system for investigating written complaints and returned products. (See also A ) Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 19 18:32:45 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: See FR 21. Response Message: Public Input No. 97-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William

337 Page 88 of 238 6/6/2014 Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is.

338 Page 89 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 70-NFPA [ Section No ] The manufacturer shall provide at least the following instructions and information with each vapor-protective ensemble and each element: (1) Pre-use information as follows: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) Safety considerations Limitations of use Marking recommendations and restrictions A statement that most performance properties of the vapor-protective ensemble or ensemble element cannot be tested by the user in the field Closure lubricants, if applicable Suit visor antifog agents or procedures Recommended undergarments Shelf life Storage life and storage conditions Warranty information (2) Preparation for use as follows: (a) (b) Sizing/adjustment Recommended storage practices (3) Inspection frequency and details (4) Don/doff information as follows: (a) (b) (c) Donning and doffing procedures Sizing and adjustment procedures Interface issues (5) Proper use consistent with NFPA 1500, Standard on Fire Department Occupational Safety and Health Program, and 29 CFR (6) Maintenance and cleaning information as follows: (a) (b) (c) (d) Cleaning instructions and precautions with a statement advising users not to use garments that are not thoroughly cleaned and dried Inspection details Maintenance criteria and methods of repair, where applicable Decontamination procedures for both chemical and biological contamination (7) Retirement and disposal criteria and consideration (8) Removal and reinsertion of hand from gloves (9) Removal and replacement of gloves and other user-replaceable components Submitter Information Verification

339 Page 90 of 238 6/6/2014 Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 21 10:19:13 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: The term "Shelf Life" is only mentioned once in the standard and Storage Life is a defined term. This cleans this up and requires the the manufacturer state the environmental conditions under which the shelf life can be achieved. The technical committee also is adding instructions for userreplaceable features and for glove hand insertion/removal. Response Message: Public Input No. 113-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 20 Affirmative All 4 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A.

340 Page 91 of 238 6/6/2014 Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur. Consider additional comment. Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is. Stull, Jeffrey O. New items (8) and (9) should be retititled "Procedures for". Item (8) should be moved under item (4), while item (9) belongs with item (6).

341 Page 92 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 71-NFPA [ New Section after ] 5.2.7* The manufacturer shall state the model of NFPA 1981 compliant, open-circuit SCBA worn during certification of the garment. Supplemental Information File Name NFPA_1991_FR_71_Annex_edited.docx Description Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 21 10:33:34 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: The technical committee believes that users should be aware of the model(s) of SCBA that was used for the certification of the ensemble. Response Message: Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 20 Affirmative All 4 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A.

342 Page 93 of 238 6/6/2014 Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur. Consider additional comments. Lovasic, Susan L. I do not believe adding this information to the technical data package is relevant or adds any value to the specifier or user of the suit. Stull, Jeffrey O. The word "worn" should be changed to "used".

343 Page 94 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 72-NFPA [ Section No ] * The technical data package shall contain all documentation required by this standard and the data values obtained from the initial certification showing compliance with the requirements of Chapter 7 in the current edition of this standard. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 21 10:42:43 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: Th proposed change provides consistency with the more recently updated NFPA 1992 and NFPA Public Input No. 43-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M.

344 Page 95 of 238 6/6/2014 Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is.

345 Page 96 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 39-NFPA [ New Section after 6.1 ] Respiratory equipment for hazardous materials emergencies and CBRN terrorism incidents is a critical part of overall protection and shall be specified and provided by the authority having jurisdiction. Only open-circuit SCBA that is certified to NFPA 1981 shall be specified to be worn with NFPA 1991 compliant ensembles * The interface of and integration of the selected respirator with the protective ensemble shall not invalidate the NIOSH certification of the respective respirator Where a nonencapsulating vapor-protective suit is used as part of the vaporprotective ensemble, the manufacturer shall specify the specific respiratory equipment to be worn for the vapor-protective ensemble to be certified All testing requiring the evaluation of complete vapor-protective ensembles that include nonencapsulating vapor-protective suits shall be performed with each type of respiratory equipment for which the manufacturer is certifying the vaporprotective ensemble. Supplemental Information File Name NFPA_1991_FR_39_Annex_Text_edited.docx Description Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu Feb 20 08:44:00 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Definitization was added for the selection of respiratory equipment for testing purposes and the inclusion of non-encapsulating suit variants in the standard. Response Message: Public Input No. 119-NFPA [New Section after 6.1] Ballot Results

346 Page 97 of 238 6/6/2014 This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 18 Affirmative All 2 Affirmative with Comments 3 Negative with Comments 1 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Mann, Philip C. The specific chemical barrier performance requirements to support use of respirator face pieces as primary chemical barrier need to be addressed in Chapter 7. Negative with Comment Beggs, Dale Gregory Per TI/Rob West: Concur with other Negative votes, dissenting comments & justifications. Do not support allowing non-encapsulating in Lovasic, Susan L.

347 Page 98 of 238 6/6/2014 (1) Respiratory protection is not "provided" by the authority having jurisdiction. That text needs to be removed. (2) I do not support allowing non-encapsulating suit designs to be permitted in NFPA See supporting rationale in file "Negative - non-encapsulating". Zeigler, James P. With nonencapsulating ensembles, there are no assurances and significant reason to be concerned that open-circuit, SCBA cannot provide chemical barrier comparable to the requirements that are otherwise mandated for the rest of the ensemble in NFPA Since its inception, NFPA 1991, Standard on Vapor-Protective Ensembles for Hazardous Materials Emergencies, has required that all ensemble components provide protection against a battery of chemicals. Originally, this battery consisted of 21 chemicals. This battery was selected for its wide range in chemical solubility and polymer diffusion characteristics, critical factors in the chemical permeation through protective materials. The chemicals were not chosen because their represent a specific threat, although the list includes some high volume, frequently encountered, toxic chemicals. The requirements that the ensembles protect against all of these chemicals provides a high probability that the NFPA 1991 compliant ensembles would protect against a high concentration of an unknown chemical, an unknown mixture mixture or a peculiar environmental condition. In contrast, military chemical protective equipment is tested against specific chemicals and specific concentrations, based on the assumption that both the identity and concentration of the chemical hazards can be determined beforehand. Along these lines, additional chemicals barrier requirements were added to NFPA 1991, first as options, and then mandated in the 2005 edition, in response the threat of chemical terrorism. These additional chemicals consisted of chemical warfare agents and industrial chemicals recognized as potential terrorism weapons. The latter are sometime described as dualuse chemical agents. These five additional chemicals are also utilized in NFPA 1994, Standard on Protective Ensembles for First Responders to CBRN Terrorism Incidents. When NFPA 1994 was being developed, the lack of chemical barrier testing of SCBA was recognized. NIOSH developed a set performance requirements for respirators to accompany that standard. The testing requirements in the NIOSH CBRN certification program only involve 2 chemicals sulfur mustard and sarin. The sarin challenge is only vapor and at a concentration about ½ that of saturated environment. There is no liquid challenge with sarin. Mustard barrier is determined against liquid and vapor challenges. The vapor challenge is about 1/3 saturated vapor concentration and the liquid challenge consists of ul droplets placed (total of 0.86 ml or 0.03 oz) around the facepiece and interfaces. There are no other chemicals used on the barrier testing of the respirator. By comparison, NFPA 1991 requires barrier testing of all ensemble components with exposure to 100% of the chemical (liquid or vapor) and complete coverage. Therefore, the testing requirements of the NIOSH CBRN certification are significantly lower than required for components of NFPA 1991 ensembles. Butyl rubber has become a common polymer for the construction of military facepieces. We do not have barrier data on the facepieces, but we do have generic data on butyl gloves. The data taken from the most recent edition of the Pocket Guide for Chemical Protective Clothing for the 26 chemicals in the proposed NFPA 1991 battery shows that butyl provides poor barrier (< 60 minutes) against 7 and marginal barrier (<4 hours) against 3 of 25 chemicals. There is no data on the 26th chemicals. This is far from the high level of chemical performance mandated in NFPA Therefore if the committee choses to permit non-encapsulating garment, it is endorsing the use of respirators with unknown, but likely poorer barrier performance than mandated for the remainder of the garment. Abstention Nystrom, Ulf Whereas there may be a point in making the standard less design restrictive I choose to abstain because I am not convinced that allowing non-encapsulating ensembles for the top level protection only means improvements for the users. There may be disadvantages for example concerning decontamination of the respiratory protective devices.

348 Page 99 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 81-NFPA [ Section No ] 6.1.1* Vapor-protective ensembles shall be designed and configured to protect the wearer's torso, head, arms, legs, hands, and feet, and shall completely enclose the wearer. Supplemental Information File Name NFPA_1991_FR_81_Annex_edited.docx Description Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 21 13:33:14 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: The technical committee intends to allow the certification of nonencapsulating suits. Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 19 Affirmative All 1 Affirmative with Comments 3 Negative with Comments 1 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A.

349 Page 100 of 238 6/6/2014 Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. While I do not feel that the evidence is available to allow for respiratory face pieces to be tested against the necessary chemical threat list, this wording is less design restrictive. Negative with Comment Beggs, Dale Gregory Per TI/Rob West: Concur with other Negative votes, dissenting comments & justifications. Do not support allowing non-encapsulating in Lovasic, Susan L. I do not support allowing non-encapsulating suit designs to be permitted in NFPA See supporting rationale in file "Negative - non-encapsulating". Zeigler, James P.

350 Page 101 of 238 6/6/2014 With nonencapsulating ensembles, there are no assurances and significant reason to be concerned that open-circuit, SCBA cannot provide chemical barrier comparable to the requirements that are otherwise mandated for the rest of the ensemble in NFPA Since its inception, NFPA 1991, Standard on Vapor-Protective Ensembles for Hazardous Materials Emergencies, has required that all ensemble components provide protection against a battery of chemicals. Originally, this battery consisted of 21 chemicals. This battery was selected for its wide range in chemical solubility and polymer diffusion characteristics, critical factors in the chemical permeation through protective materials. The chemicals were not chosen because their represent a specific threat, although the list includes some high volume, frequently encountered, toxic chemicals. The requirements that the ensembles protect against all of these chemicals provides a high probability that the NFPA 1991 compliant ensembles would protect against a high concentration of an unknown chemical, an unknown mixture mixture or a peculiar environmental condition. In contrast, military chemical protective equipment is tested against specific chemicals and specific concentrations, based on the assumption that both the identity and concentration of the chemical hazards can be determined beforehand. Along these lines, additional chemicals barrier requirements were added to NFPA 1991, first as options, and then mandated in the 2005 edition, in response the threat of chemical terrorism. These additional chemicals consisted of chemical warfare agents and industrial chemicals recognized as potential terrorism weapons. The latter are sometime described as dualuse chemical agents. These five additional chemicals are also utilized in NFPA 1994, Standard on Protective Ensembles for First Responders to CBRN Terrorism Incidents. When NFPA 1994 was being developed, the lack of chemical barrier testing of SCBA was recognized. NIOSH developed a set performance requirements for respirators to accompany that standard. The testing requirements in the NIOSH CBRN certification program only involve 2 chemicals sulfur mustard and sarin. The sarin challenge is only vapor and at a concentration about ½ that of saturated environment. There is no liquid challenge with sarin. Mustard barrier is determined against liquid and vapor challenges. The vapor challenge is about 1/3 saturated vapor concentration and the liquid challenge consists of ul droplets placed (total of 0.86 ml or 0.03 oz) around the facepiece and interfaces. There are no other chemicals used on the barrier testing of the respirator. By comparison, NFPA 1991 requires barrier testing of all ensemble components with exposure to 100% of the chemical (liquid or vapor) and complete coverage. Therefore, the testing requirements of the NIOSH CBRN certification are significantly lower than required for components of NFPA 1991 ensembles. Butyl rubber has become a common polymer for the construction of military facepieces. We do not have barrier data on the facepieces, but we do have generic data on butyl gloves. The data taken from the most recent edition of the Pocket Guide for Chemical Protective Clothing for the 26 chemicals in the proposed NFPA 1991 battery shows that butyl provides poor barrier (< 60 minutes) against 7 and marginal barrier (<4 hours) against 3 of 25 chemicals. There is no data on the 26th chemicals. This is far from the high level of chemical performance mandated in NFPA Therefore if the committee choses to permit non-encapsulating garment, it is endorsing the use of respirators with unknown, but likely poorer barrier performance than mandated for the remainder of the garment. Abstention Nystrom, Ulf Whereas there may be a point in making the standard less design restrictive I choose to abstain because I am not convinced that allowing non-encapsulating ensembles for the top level protection only means improvements for the users. There may be disadvantages for example concerning decontamination of the respiratory protective devices.

351 Page 102 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 82-NFPA [ Section No ] The suit hood shall be permitted to be provided with a visor that is designed to allow the wearer to see outside the vapor-protective ensemble. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 21 13:41:08 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Allows for flexibility for non-encapsulating variants. Response Message: Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 20 Affirmative All 1 Affirmative with Comments 3 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P.

352 Page 103 of 238 6/6/2014 Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Negative with Comment Beggs, Dale Gregory Per TI/Rob West: Concur with other Negative votes, dissenting comments & justifications. Do not support allowing non-encapsulating in Lovasic, Susan L. I do not support allowing non-encapsulating suit designs to be permitted in NFPA See supporting rationale in file "Negative - non-encapsulating". Zeigler, James P.

353 Page 104 of 238 6/6/2014 With nonencapsulating ensembles, there are no assurances and significant reason to be concerned that open-circuit, SCBA cannot provide chemical barrier comparable to the requirements that are otherwise mandated for the rest of the ensemble in NFPA Since its inception, NFPA 1991, Standard on Vapor-Protective Ensembles for Hazardous Materials Emergencies, has required that all ensemble components provide protection against a battery of chemicals. Originally, this battery consisted of 21 chemicals. This battery was selected for its wide range in chemical solubility and polymer diffusion characteristics, critical factors in the chemical permeation through protective materials. The chemicals were not chosen because their represent a specific threat, although the list includes some high volume, frequently encountered, toxic chemicals. The requirements that the ensembles protect against all of these chemicals provides a high probability that the NFPA 1991 compliant ensembles would protect against a high concentration of an unknown chemical, an unknown mixture mixture or a peculiar environmental condition. In contrast, military chemical protective equipment is tested against specific chemicals and specific concentrations, based on the assumption that both the identity and concentration of the chemical hazards can be determined beforehand. Along these lines, additional chemicals barrier requirements were added to NFPA 1991, first as options, and then mandated in the 2005 edition, in response the threat of chemical terrorism. These additional chemicals consisted of chemical warfare agents and industrial chemicals recognized as potential terrorism weapons. The latter are sometime described as dualuse chemical agents. These five additional chemicals are also utilized in NFPA 1994, Standard on Protective Ensembles for First Responders to CBRN Terrorism Incidents. When NFPA 1994 was being developed, the lack of chemical barrier testing of SCBA was recognized. NIOSH developed a set performance requirements for respirators to accompany that standard. The testing requirements in the NIOSH CBRN certification program only involve 2 chemicals sulfur mustard and sarin. The sarin challenge is only vapor and at a concentration about ½ that of saturated environment. There is no liquid challenge with sarin. Mustard barrier is determined against liquid and vapor challenges. The vapor challenge is about 1/3 saturated vapor concentration and the liquid challenge consists of ul droplets placed (total of 0.86 ml or 0.03 oz) around the facepiece and interfaces. There are no other chemicals used on the barrier testing of the respirator. By comparison, NFPA 1991 requires barrier testing of all ensemble components with exposure to 100% of the chemical (liquid or vapor) and complete coverage. Therefore, the testing requirements of the NIOSH CBRN certification are significantly lower than required for components of NFPA 1991 ensembles. Butyl rubber has become a common polymer for the construction of military facepieces. We do not have barrier data on the facepieces, but we do have generic data on butyl gloves. The data taken from the most recent edition of the Pocket Guide for Chemical Protective Clothing for the 26 chemicals in the proposed NFPA 1991 battery shows that butyl provides poor barrier (< 60 minutes) against 7 and marginal barrier (<4 hours) against 3 of 25 chemicals. There is no data on the 26th chemicals. This is far from the high level of chemical performance mandated in NFPA Therefore if the committee choses to permit non-encapsulating garment, it is endorsing the use of respirators with unknown, but likely poorer barrier performance than mandated for the remainder of the garment.

354 Page 105 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 83-NFPA [ Section No ] The visor shall be permitted to be constructed of a transparent material that qualifies as a chemical-protective layer. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 21 13:42:12 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Allows for non-encapsulating variants. Response Message: Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 19 Affirmative All 1 Affirmative with Comments 3 Negative with Comments 1 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P.

355 Page 106 of 238 6/6/2014 Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Negative with Comment Beggs, Dale Gregory Per TI/Rob West: Concur with other Negative votes, dissenting comments & justifications. Do not support allowing non-encapsulating in Lovasic, Susan L. Keep original text. I do not support allowing non-encapsulating suit designs to be permitted in NFPA See supporting rationale in file "Negative - non-encapsulating" suit must have integrated visor design. Zeigler, James P.

356 Page 107 of 238 6/6/2014 With nonencapsulating ensembles, there are no assurances and significant reason to be concerned that open-circuit, SCBA cannot provide chemical barrier comparable to the requirements that are otherwise mandated for the rest of the ensemble in NFPA Since its inception, NFPA 1991, Standard on Vapor-Protective Ensembles for Hazardous Materials Emergencies, has required that all ensemble components provide protection against a battery of chemicals. Originally, this battery consisted of 21 chemicals. This battery was selected for its wide range in chemical solubility and polymer diffusion characteristics, critical factors in the chemical permeation through protective materials. The chemicals were not chosen because their represent a specific threat, although the list includes some high volume, frequently encountered, toxic chemicals. The requirements that the ensembles protect against all of these chemicals provides a high probability that the NFPA 1991 compliant ensembles would protect against a high concentration of an unknown chemical, an unknown mixture mixture or a peculiar environmental condition. In contrast, military chemical protective equipment is tested against specific chemicals and specific concentrations, based on the assumption that both the identity and concentration of the chemical hazards can be determined beforehand. Along these lines, additional chemicals barrier requirements were added to NFPA 1991, first as options, and then mandated in the 2005 edition, in response the threat of chemical terrorism. These additional chemicals consisted of chemical warfare agents and industrial chemicals recognized as potential terrorism weapons. The latter are sometime described as dualuse chemical agents. These five additional chemicals are also utilized in NFPA 1994, Standard on Protective Ensembles for First Responders to CBRN Terrorism Incidents. When NFPA 1994 was being developed, the lack of chemical barrier testing of SCBA was recognized. NIOSH developed a set performance requirements for respirators to accompany that standard. The testing requirements in the NIOSH CBRN certification program only involve 2 chemicals sulfur mustard and sarin. The sarin challenge is only vapor and at a concentration about ½ that of saturated environment. There is no liquid challenge with sarin. Mustard barrier is determined against liquid and vapor challenges. The vapor challenge is about 1/3 saturated vapor concentration and the liquid challenge consists of ul droplets placed (total of 0.86 ml or 0.03 oz) around the facepiece and interfaces. There are no other chemicals used on the barrier testing of the respirator. By comparison, NFPA 1991 requires barrier testing of all ensemble components with exposure to 100% of the chemical (liquid or vapor) and complete coverage. Therefore, the testing requirements of the NIOSH CBRN certification are significantly lower than required for components of NFPA 1991 ensembles. Butyl rubber has become a common polymer for the construction of military facepieces. We do not have barrier data on the facepieces, but we do have generic data on butyl gloves. The data taken from the most recent edition of the Pocket Guide for Chemical Protective Clothing for the 26 chemicals in the proposed NFPA 1991 battery shows that butyl provides poor barrier (< 60 minutes) against 7 and marginal barrier (<4 hours) against 3 of 25 chemicals. There is no data on the 26th chemicals. This is far from the high level of chemical performance mandated in NFPA Therefore if the committee choses to permit non-encapsulating garment, it is endorsing the use of respirators with unknown, but likely poorer barrier performance than mandated for the remainder of the garment. Abstention Nystrom, Ulf Whereas there may be a point in making the standard less design restrictive I choose to abstain because I am not convinced that allowing non-encapsulating ensembles for the top level protection only means improvements for the users. There may be disadvantages for example concerning decontamination of the respiratory protective devices.

357 Page 108 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 40-NFPA [ Section No ] * Vapor-protective ensembles shall only be permitted to be constructed using an outer garment designed to be worn over the suit element where such additional garments are necessary to meet the suit ensemble element requirements of this standard optional liquefied gas protection performance requirements specified in Section 7.8, or the optional chemical flash fire protection performance requirements specified in Section 7.9. Supplemental Information File Name NFPA_1991_FR_40_Annex_edited.docx Description Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu Feb 20 09:42:42 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: The technical committee would like to provide unambiguous criteria that prevents the misinterpretation of garments that utilize overcovers for meeting the baseline requirements of this standard. Response Message: Public Input No. 93-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 20 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 1 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S.

358 Page 109 of 238 6/6/2014 Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur - consider additionl voters' comments. Corrado, Steven D. The associated Annex item contains a Performance Requirement and therefor should be in Ch. 7 as a mandatory item. Negative with Comment Lovasic, Susan L. Use of multiple layers should continue to be permitted. If there is concern about possible mis-use of these ensembles, that can be handled with additional instructions/wording in the TDP or labels inside the suit itself.

359 Page 110 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 84-NFPA [ Section No [Excluding any Sub-Sections] ] Vapor Where encapsulating, vapor -protective ensembles shall be equipped with an exhaust valve(s). Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 21 13:43:31 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Non-encapsulating suits would not require exhaust valves. Response Message: Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 19 Affirmative All 2 Affirmative with Comments 2 Negative with Comments 1 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P.

360 Page 111 of 238 6/6/2014 Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Fithian, William A. Current proposed language is awkward. Suggest changing to the following: For encapsulating designs, vapor-protective ensembles shall be equipped with an exhaust valve(s) Negative with Comment Beggs, Dale Gregory Per TI/Rob West: Concur with other Negative votes, dissenting comments & justifications. Do not support allowing non-encapsulating in Lovasic, Susan L. I do not support allowing non-encapsulating suit designs to be permitted in NFPA See supporting rationale in file "Negative - non-encapsulating". Abstention Nystrom, Ulf Whereas there may be a point in making the standard less design restrictive I choose to abstain because I am not convinced that allowing non-encapsulating ensembles for the top level protection only means improvements for the users. There may be disadvantages for example concerning decontamination of the respiratory protective devices.

361 Page 112 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 41-NFPA [ New Section after ] Where the glove consists of multiple layers to meet the glove element requirements, all layers shall extend to at least the interface connection. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu Feb 20 10:38:48 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: The new section adds clarity to the intent of allowing an outer glove to be worn in combination with the primary glove in order to meet the requirements for the glove element of the standard. Currently, it is unclear how this design requirement is presented and could enable an improper and unsafe design (such as leaving areas of the primary glove exposed, not being protected by the required outer glove). Response Message: Public Input No. 98-NFPA [New Section after 6.2.5] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M.

362 Page 113 of 238 6/6/2014 Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur - considering other Affirmative comment. Lovasic, Susan L. For clarity, should add the words "suit sleeve" to the sentence as noted below. "...extend to at least the suit sleeve interface connection."

363 Page 114 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 37-NFPA [ New Section after ] Heel breast shall not be less than 13 mm ( 1 2 in.) nor more than 25 mm (1 in.). Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu Feb 20 08:36:20 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: The technical committee is adding this paragraph to align with NFPA 1992 and NFPA Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D.

364 Page 115 of 238 6/6/2014 Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is.

365 Page 116 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 38-NFPA [ New Section after ] Toe impact resistant, compression-resistant, and sole puncture resistant components shall be integral and nonremovable parts of the footwear Footwear shall meet the performance requirements as specified in ASTM F 2413, Performance Requirements for Protective (Safety) Toe Cap Footwear, for impact -resistant, compression-resistant, and puncture-resistant footwear with the exception that flex resistance to cracking shall not be evaluated. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu Feb 20 08:38:23 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: The technical committee is adding these two new paragraphs to align the document with NFPA 1992 and NFPA Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E.

366 Page 117 of 238 6/6/2014 Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is.

367 Page 118 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 46-NFPA [ Chapter 7 ] Chapter 7 Performance Requirements 7.1 Vapor-Protective Ensemble Performance Requirements Global FR-90 Hide Deleted Vapor-protective ensembles shall be tested for overall function as specified in Section 8.3, Liquidtight Integrity Test, and ensembles shall allow no liquid penetration; where outer gloves are designed to be worn in conjunction with gloves attached to the ensemble, the outer gloves shall not collect liquid; and where outer boots are designed to be worn in conjunction with garment booties, the outer boots shall not collect liquid Global FR-90 Hide Deleted Ensembles shall be tested for overall function and integrity as specified in Section 8.4, Overall Ensemble Function and Integrity Test, and shall meet the following performance criteria: (1) Ensembles shall have an ending pressure of at least 80 mm ( in.) water gauge pressure upon completion of the functional test. (2) Ensembles shall allow the test subject to complete all tasks while wearing a head-protective device. (3) Ensembles shall permit the test subject to see through the combination of respiration and ensemble visor with a visual acuity of 20/35 or better. (4) Ensembles shall permit the test subject to remove and reinsert their hand into the glove system 5 times sequentially within a period of 2 minutes or less Global FR-90 Hide Deleted Ensembles shall be tested for airflow capacity as specified in Section 8.5, Maximum Suit Ventilation Rate Test, and shall exhibit no internal pressures greater than 100 mm 150 mm ( 4 in. 6 in. ) water gauge pressure, and shall show an ending pressure of at least 80 mm ( in.) water gauge pressure after subsequent testing for gastight integrity as specified in Section 8.2, Gastight Integrity Test Global FR-90 Hide Deleted Ensembles on which external fittings are installed that penetrate any primary materials shall be tested for gastight integrity as specified in Section 8.2, Gastight Integrity Test, and show an ending pressure of at least 80 mm ( in.) water gauge Global FR-90 Hide Deleted Exhaust valves installed in vapor-protective ensembles shall be tested for mounting strength as specified in Section 8.9, Exhaust Valve Mounting Strength Test, and shall have a failure force greater than 135 N (30 lbf) Global FR-90 Hide Deleted

368 Page 119 of 238 6/6/2014 External fittings installed in vapor-protective ensembles shall be tested for pull-out strength as specified in Section 8.13, Fitting Pull Out Strength Test, and shall have a failure force greater than 1000 N (225 lbf) Global FR-90 Hide Deleted Exhaust valves installed in vapor-protective ensembles shall be tested for inward leakage as specified in Section 8.24, Exhaust Valve Inward Leakage Test, and shall not exhibit a leakage rate exceeding 30 ml/min (1.83 in. 3 /min) Vapor-protective ensembles shall be tested for overall inward leakage as specified in Section 8.8, and shall have an average local physiological protective dosage factor (PPDF i ) value at each PAD location for the four ensembles tested of no less than and an average systemic physiological protective dosage factor (PPDF sys ) value for each of the four tested ensembles of no less than Vapor-Protective Suit Element Performance Requirements Global FR-90 Hide Deleted Suit materials and seams shall be tested for permeation resistance after flexing and abrading as specified in Section 8.6, Chemical Permeation Resistance Test, and shall not exhibit exceed a breakthrough detection time cumulative permeation of 1 hour or less 6.0 μg/cm 2 for the following list of industrial chemicals: each chemical tested Acetone Acetonitrile Anhydrous ammonia (gas) 1,3-Butadiene (gas) Carbon disulfide Chlorine (gas) Dichloromethane Diethyl amine Dimethyl formamide Ethyl acetate Ethylene oxide (gas) Hexane Hydrogen chloride (gas) Methanol Methyl chloride (gas) Nitrobenzene Sodium hydroxide Sulfuric acid Tetrachloroethylene Tetrahydrofuran Toluene

369 Page 120 of 238 6/6/2014 Suit materials shall be tested for permeation resistance after flexing and abrading as specified in Section 8.6, Chemical Permeation Resistance Test, and shall not exhibit a breakthrough detection time of 1 hour or less for each additional chemical or specific chemical mixture for which the manufacturer is certifying the ensemble. Suit materials and seams shall be tested for permeation resistance as specified in Section 8.6 and shall not exceed a cumulative permeation of 1.25 μg/cm 2 for the chemical warfare agent Soman (GD or O-Pinacolyl methylphosphonofluoridate) Suit materials and seams shall be tested for permeation resistance as specified in Section 8.6 and shall not exceed a cumulative permeation of 6.0 μg/cm 2 for each additional chemical or specific chemical mixture for which the manufacturer is certifying the ensemble Global FR-90 Hide Deleted Suit materials shall be tested for resistance to flame impingement as specified in Section 8.7, Flammability Resistance Test, and shall have not ignite during the initial 3-second exposure period, shall not burn a distance of greater than 100 mm (4 in.), shall not sustain burning for more than 10 seconds, and shall not melt as evidenced by flowing or dripping during the subsequent 12-second exposure period. an afterflame time of not greater than 2.0 seconds and shall not melt Global FR-90 Hide Deleted Suit material shall be tested for bursting strength as specified in Section 8.10, Burst Strength Test, and shall have a bursting strength greater than 200 N (45 lbf) Global FR-90 Hide Deleted Suit materials shall be tested for puncture propagation tear resistance as specified in Section 8.11, Puncture Propagation Tear Resistance Test, and shall have a puncture propagation tear resistance greater than 49 N (11 lbf) Global FR-90 Hide Deleted Suit materials shall be tested for cold weather performance as specified in Section 8.12, Cold Temperature Performance Test One, and shall not have a bending moment greater than of less than N m (0.5 in.-lbf) at an angular deflection of 60 degrees at - 25 C ( - 13 F) Suit seams shall be tested for permeation resistance as specified in Section 8.6, Chemical Permeation Resistance Test, and shall not exhibit a breakthrough detection time of 1 hour or less for the following list of industrial chemicals: Acetone Acetonitrile Anhydrous ammonia (gas) 1,3-Butadiene (gas) Carbon disulfide Chlorine (gas) Dichloromethane Diethyl amine Dimethyl formamide Ethyl acetate

370 Page 121 of 238 6/6/2014 Ethylene oxide (gas) Hexane Hydrogen chloride (gas) Methanol Methyl chloride (gas) Nitrobenzene Sodium hydroxide Sulfuric acid Tetrachloroethylene Tetrahydrofuran Toluene Suit seams shall be tested for permeation resistance as specified in Section 8.6, Chemical Permeation Resistance Test, and shall not exhibit a breakthrough detection time of 1 hour or less for each additional chemical or specific chemical mixture for which the manufacturer is certifying the ensemble Global FR-90 Hide Deleted Suit seams shall be tested for seam strength as specified in Section 8.22, Seam/Closure Breaking Strength Test, and shall have a breaking strength greater than 2.88 kn/m (30 lbf/2 in.). 67 N/25 mm (15 lbf/1 in.) Global FR-90 Hide Deleted Suit closure assemblies shall be tested for penetration resistance as specified in Section 8.23, Closure Penetration Resistance Test, and shall not exhibit a breakthrough detection time of 1 hour or less for the following industrial chemicals: show no penetration of the test liquids for at least 1 hour Acetone Acetonitrile Carbon disulfide Dichloromethane Diethyl amine Dimethyl formamide Ethyl acetate Hexane Methanol Nitrobenzene Sodium hydroxide Sulfuric acid Tetrachloroethylene Tetrahydrofuran Toluene

371 Page 122 of 238 6/6/2014 Global FR-90 Hide Deleted Suit closure assemblies shall be tested for chemical penetration resistance as specified in Section 8.23, Closure Penetration Resistance Test, and shall show no penetration of the test liquids for at least 1 hour and for any additional chemicals or specific chemical mixtures for which the manufacturer is certifying the suit Global FR-90 Hide Deleted Suit closure assemblies shall be tested for closure strength as specified in Section 8.22, Seam/Closure Breaking Strength Test, and shall have a breaking strength greater than 2.88 kn/m (30 lbf/2 in.). 67 N/25 mm (15 lbf/1 in.). 7.3 Vapor-Protective Suit Element Visor Performance Requirements Global FR-90 Hide Deleted Visor materials shall be tested for permeation resistance after flexing and abrading Visor materials and visor material seams shall be tested for permeation resistance as specified in Section 8.6, Chemical Permeation Resistance Test, and shall not exhibit a breakthrough detection time of 1 hour or less for the following list of industrial chemicals: exceed a cumulative permeation of 6.0 μg/cm 2 for each chemical tested. Acetone Acetonitrile Anhydrous ammonia (gas) 1,3-Butadiene (gas) Carbon disulfide Chlorine (gas) Dichloromethane Diethyl amine Dimethyl formamide Ethyl acetate Ethylene oxide (gas) Hexane Hydrogen chloride (gas) Methanol Methyl chloride (gas) Nitrobenzene Sodium hydroxide Sulfuric acid Tetrachloroethylene Tetrahydrofuran Toluene Global FR-90 Hide Deleted

372 Page 123 of 238 6/6/2014 Visor materials and visor material seams shall be tested for permeation resistance as specified in Section 8.6, Chemical Permeation Resistance Test, and shall not exhibit breakthrough detection time of 1 hour or less, and shall not exhibit a breakthrough detection time of 1 hour or less for each additional chemical or specific chemical mixture for which the manufacturer is certifying the ensemble. exceed a cumulative permeation of 1.25 μg/cm 2 for the chemical warfare agent Soman (GD or O-Pinacolyl methylphosphonofluoridate) Visor materials and visor material seams shall be tested for permeation resistance as specified in Section 8.6 and shall not exceed a cumulative permeation of 4 μg/cm 2 for the chemical warfare agent sulfur mustard, distilled [HD or bis (2- chloroethyl) sulfide] Visor materials and visor material seams shall be tested for permeation resistance as specified in Section 8.6, and shall not exhibit breakthrough detection time of 1 hour or less and shall not exceed a cumulative permeation of 6.0 μg/cm 2 for each additional chemical or specific chemical mixture for which the manufacturer is certifying the ensemble Global FR-90 Hide Deleted Visor materials shall be tested for resistance to flame impingement as specified in Section 8.7, Flammability Resistance Test, and shall not ignite during the initial 3 -second exposure period, shall not burn a distance of greater than 100 mm (4 in.), shall not sustain burning for more than 10 seconds, and shall not melt as evidenced by flowing or dripping during the subsequent 12-second exposure period. have an afterflame time of not greater than 2.0 seconds and shall not melt Global FR-90 Hide Deleted Visor materials shall be tested for bursting strength as specified in Section 8.10, Burst Strength Test, and shall have a bursting strength of not less than 200 N (45 lbf). not have a full-thickness puncture or crack Global FR-90 Hide Deleted Visor materials shall be tested for puncture propagation tear resistance as specified in Section 8.11, Puncture Propagation Tear Resistance Test, and shall have a puncture propagation tear resistance of not less than 49 N (11 lbf). not have a full-thickness puncture or crack Global FR-90 Hide Deleted Visor materials shall be tested for cold temperature bending puncture resistance as specified in Section 8.14, Cold Temperature Performance Test Two, and shall not crack or show evidence of visible damage. a visible hole extending through all layers Visor material seams shall be tested for permeation resistance as specified in Section 8.6, Chemical Permeation Resistance Test, and shall not exhibit a breakthrough detection time of 1 hour or less for the following list of industrial chemicals: Acetone Acetonitrile Anhydrous ammonia (gas) 1,3-Butadiene (gas)

373 Page 124 of 238 6/6/2014 Carbon disulfide Chlorine (gas) Dichloromethane Diethyl amine Dimethyl formamide Ethyl acetate Ethylene oxide (gas) Hexane Hydrogen chloride (gas) Methanol Methyl chloride (gas) Nitrobenzene Sodium hydroxide Sulfuric acid Tetrachloroethylene Tetrahydrofuran Toluene shall be tested for cold temperature bending as specified in Section 8.14 and shall not crack or show evidence of visible damage Visor material seams shall be tested for permeation resistance as specified in Section 8.6, Chemical Permeation Resistance Test, and shall not exhibit a normalized breakthrough detection time of 1 hour or less, and shall not exhibit a breakthrough detection time of 1 hour or less for each additional chemical or specific chemical mixture for which the manufacturer is certifying the ensemble Global FR-90 Hide Deleted Visor material seams shall be tested for seam strength as specified in Section 8.22, Seam/Closure Breaking Strength Test, and shall have a breaking strength of not less than 2.88 kn/m (30 lbf/2 in.). 67 N/25 mm (15 lbf/1 in.). 7.4 Vapor-Protective Glove Element Performance Requirements Global FR-90 Hide Deleted Glove materials shall be tested for permeation resistance after flexing and abrading as specified in Section 8.6, Chemical Permeation Resistance Test, and shall not exhibit a breakthrough detection time of 1 hour or less for the following list of industrial chemicals: exceed a cumulative permeation of 6.0 μg/cm 2 for each chemical tested. Acetone Acetonitrile Anhydrous ammonia (gas) 1,3-Butadiene (gas) Carbon disulfide Chlorine (gas)

374 Page 125 of 238 6/6/ Dichloromethane Diethyl amine Dimethyl formamide Ethyl acetate Ethylene oxide (gas) Hexane Hydrogen chloride (gas) Methanol Methyl chloride (gas) Nitrobenzene Sodium hydroxide Sulfuric acid Tetrachloroethylene Tetrahydrofuran Toluene Global FR-90 Hide Deleted Glove materials shall be tested for permeation resistance after flexing and abrading as specified in Section 8.6, Chemical Permeation Resistance Test, and shall not exhibit a breakthrough detection time of 1 hour or less, and shall not exhibit a breakthrough detection time of 1 hour or less for each additional chemical or specific chemical mixture for which the manufacturer is certifying the ensemble. and shall not exceed a cumulative permeation of 1.25 μg/cm 2 for the chemical warfare agent Soman (GD or O-Pinacolyl methylphosphonofluoridate) Glove materials shall be tested for permeation resistance as specified in Section 8.6 and shall not exceed a cumulative permeation of 4 μg/cm 2 for the chemical warfare agent sulfur mustard, distilled [HD or bis (2-chloroethyl) sulfide] Glove materials shall be tested for permeation resistance as specified in Section 8.6 and shall not exceed a cumulative permeation of 6.0 μg/cm 2 for each additional chemical or specific chemical mixture for which the manufacturer is certifying the ensemble Global FR-90 Hide Deleted Glove materials shall be tested for resistance to flame impingement as specified in Section 8.7, Flammability Resistance Test, and shall not ignite during the initial 3 -second exposure period, shall not burn a distance of greater than 100 mm (4 in.), shall not sustain burning for more than 10 seconds, and shall not melt as evidenced by flowing or dripping during the subsequent 12-second exposure period. have an afterflame time of not greater than 2.0 seconds and shall not melt Global FR-90 Hide Deleted Glove materials shall be tested for cut resistance as specified in Section 8.15, Cut Resistance Test, and shall have a blade travel distance of not less than 25 mm (1 in.) 20 mm (0.8 in.)

375 Page 126 of 238 6/6/2014 Global FR-90 Hide Deleted Glove materials shall be tested for puncture resistance as specified in Section 8.16, Puncture Resistance Test One, and shall have a puncture resistance of not less than 22 N (5 lbf) Global FR-90 Hide Deleted Glove materials shall be tested for cold weather performance as specified in Section 8.12, Cold Temperature Performance Test One, and shall have a bending moment of N m ( 1 2 in.-lbf) at an angular deflection of 60 degrees and -25 C (-13 F). bending moment of less than N - m ( 0.5 in.-lbf) at an angular deflection of 60 degrees and 25 C ( 13 F) * Global FR-90 Hide Deleted Gloves shall be tested for dexterity as specified in Section 8.17, Glove Hand Function Test, and shall have an average percent increase of bare - hand control of less than 600 percent. 7.5 Vapor-Protective Footwear Element Performance Requirements Global FR-90 Hide Deleted Footwear upper materials shall be tested for permeation resistance after flexing and abrading as specified in Section 8.6, Chemical Permeation Resistance Test, and shall not exhibit a breakthrough detection time of 1 hour or less for the following list of industrial chemicals: exceed a cumulative permeation of 6.0 μg/cm 2 for each chemical tested. Acetone Acetonitrile Anhydrous ammonia (gas) 1,3-Butadiene (gas) Carbon disulfide Chlorine (gas) Dichloromethane Diethyl amine Dimethyl formamide Ethyl acetate Ethylene oxide (gas) Hexane Hydrogen chloride (gas) Methanol Methyl chloride (gas) Nitrobenzene Sodium hydroxide Sulfuric acid Tetrachloroethylene Tetrahydrofuran Toluene

376 Page 127 of 238 6/6/ Global FR-90 Hide Deleted Footwear upper materials shall be tested for permeation resistance after flexing and abrading as specified in Section 8.6, Chemical Permeation Resistance Test, and shall not exhibit a breakthrough detection time of 1 hour or less, and shall not exhibit a breakthrough detection time of 1 hour or less for each additional chemical or specific chemical mixture for which the manufacturer is certifying the ensemble. exceed a cumulative permeation of 1.25 μg/cm 2 for the chemical warfare agent Soman (GD or O-Pinacolyl methylphosphonofluoridate) Footwear upper materials shall be tested for permeation resistance as specified in Section 8.6 and shall not exceed a cumulative permeation of 4 μg/cm 2 for the chemical warfare agent sulfur mustard, distilled [HD or bis (2-chloroethyl) sulfide] Footwear upper materials shall be tested for permeation resistance as specified in Section 8.6 and shall not exceed a cumulative permeation of 6.0 μg/cm 2 for each additional chemical or specific chemical mixture for which the manufacturer is certifying the ensemble Global FR-90 Hide Deleted Footwear upper materials shall be tested for resistance to flame impingement as specified in Section 8.7, Flammability Resistance Test, and shall not ignite during the initial 3-second exposure period, shall not burn a distance of greater than 100 mm (4 in.), shall not sustain burning for more than 10 seconds, and shall not melt as evidenced by flowing or dripping during the subsequent 12-second exposure period. have an afterflame time of not greater than 2.0 seconds and shall not melt Footwear upper materials shall be tested for cut resistance as specified in Section 8.15, Cut Resistance Test, and have a blade travel distance of not less than 25 mm (1 in.). 20 mm (0.8 in.) Global FR-90 Hide Deleted Footwear upper materials shall be tested for puncture resistance as specified in Section 8.16, Puncture Resistance Test One, and have a puncture resistance of not less than 36 N (8 lbf) Global FR-90 Hide Deleted Footwear toes heels shall be tested for impact and compression resistance as specified in Section 8.21, Impact and Compression Test, and shall have an impact resistance of not less than J (75 ft-lb), and shall have a compression resistance of not less than 11,121 N (2500 lbf). abrasion resistance as specified in Section 8.20 and the relative volume loss shall not be greater than 250 mm Footwear soles and heels or ladder shanks shall be tested for puncture bending resistance as specified in Section 8.16, Puncture Resistance Test Two, and shall have a puncture resistance of not less than 1210 N (272 lbf). not deflect more than 6 mm ( 1 4 in.) Global FR-90 Hide Deleted Footwear soles and heels shall be tested for abrasion resistance slip resistance as specified in Section 8.19, Abrasion Resistance Test, and have an abrasion resistance rating of not less than 65. shall have a coefficient of 0.40 or greater.

377 Page 128 of 238 6/6/ Footwear soles or ladder shanks shall be tested for bending resistance as specified in Section 8.22, Ladder Shank Bend Resistance Test, and shall not deflect more than 6 mm ( 1 4 in.) Footwear soles shall be tested for slip resistance as specified in Section 8.23, Slip Resistance Test, and shall have a static coefficient of 0.75 or greater. 7.6 Optional Liquefied Gas Protection Performance Requirements for Vapor- Protective Ensembles and Ensemble Elements Vapor-protective ensembles and ensemble elements that will be certified as compliant with the additional optional criteria for liquefied gas protection for escape only shall also meet all applicable requirements in Sections 7.1 through Primary suit, glove, and footwear element materials shall be tested for liquefied gas permeation resistance as specified in Section 8.6, and shall not show signs of damage and shall not exceed a cumulative permeation of 6.0 μg/cm 2 for the following list of gaseous industrial chemicals: (1) Ammonia (2) Chlorine (3) Ethylene oxide 7.7 Vapor-Protective Ensemble and Ensemble Element CBRN Protection Performance Requirements for Terrorism Incidents. Optional Chemical Flash Fire Protection Performance Requirements for Vapor-Protective Ensembles and Ensemble Elements Vapor-protective ensembles and ensemble elements that will be certified as compliant with the additional optional criteria for chemical flash fire protection for escape only shall also meet all applicable requirements in Sections 7.1 through Primary suit, glove, and footwear element materials and seams shall be tested for permeation resistance as specified in Section 8.6, Chemical Permeation Resistance Test, and shall not exhibit normalized breakthrough detection times of 60 minutes or less for the following list of industrial chemicals: Cyanogen chloride (CK; ) Carbonyl chloride (CG; ) Dimethyl sulfate (DMA, sulfuric acid dimethyl ester; ) Hydrogen cyanide (AC, HCN, CAS; ) Global FR-74 Hide Deleted

378 Page 129 of 238 6/6/2014 Primary suit, glove, and footwear materials and seams shall be tested for permeation resistance as specified in Section 8.6, Chemical Permeation Resistance Test, and shall not exceed a cumulative permeation of 1.25 μg/cm 2 for the chemical warfare agent sarin (GB, or isopropyl methyl phosphonofluoridate). Vapor-protective ensembles and elements shall be tested for overall ensemble flash protection as specified by Section 8.2.7, and shall not have any afterflame times longer than 2 seconds, shall show an ending pressure of at least 13 mm ( 1 2 in.) water gauge in the subsequent gastight integrity testing, and shall permit visual acuity through the visor of 20/100 or better Global FR-74 Hide Deleted Primary suit, glove, and footwear materials and seams shall be tested for permeation resistance as specified in Section 8.6, Chemical Permeation Resistance Test, and shall not exceed a cumulative permeation of 4 μg/cm 2 for the chemical warfare agent sulfur mustard, distilled [HD, or bis(2-chloroethyl) sulfide]. Suit materials, visor materials, glove materials, and footwear upper materials shall be tested for heat transfer performance (HTP) as specified in Section 8.18 and shall have an average HTP rating of not less than 12 cal/cm Primary suit, glove, and footwear element materials shall be tested for resistance to flame impingement as specified in Section 8.7 and shall have afterflame time not greater than 2.0 seconds during the initial 3-second exposure period, shall not burn a distance of greater than 100 mm (4 in.), shall not sustain burning for more than 2 seconds, and shall not melt during the subsequent 12-second exposure period Global FR-74 Hide Deleted Vapor-protective ensembles and elements shall be tested for overall heat transfer performance as specified in Section 8.18 and shall have an average predicted body burn rating of not more than Vapor-protective ensembles shall be tested for inward leakage as specified in Section 8.8, Overall Ensemble Inward Leakage Test, and shall have no inward leakage greater than 0.02 percent. 7.8 Optional Liquefied Gas Protection Performance Requirements for Vapor- Protective Ensembles and Ensemble Elements Vapor-protective ensembles and ensemble elements that will be certified as compliant with the additional optional criteria for liquefied gas protection for escape only shall also meet all applicable requirements in Sections 7.1 through Primary suit, glove, and footwear element materials shall be tested for liquefied gas permeation resistance as specified in Section, 8.6, Chemical Permeation Resistance Test, and shall not show signs of damage, and shall not exhibit a normalized breakthrough detection time of 15 minutes or less for the following list of gaseous industrial chemicals: (1) Ammonia (2) Chlorine (3) Ethylene oxide 7.9 Optional Chemical Flash Fire Protection Performance Requirements for Vapor-Protective Ensembles and Ensemble Elements.

379 Page 130 of 238 6/6/ Vapor-protective ensembles and ensemble elements that will be certified as compliant with the additional optional criteria for chemical flash fire protection for escape only shall also meet all applicable requirements in Sections 7.1 through Global FR-90 Hide Deleted Vapor-protective ensembles and elements shall be tested for overall ensemble flash protection as specified by Section 8.25, Overall Ensemble Flash Test, shall not have any afterflame times longer than 2 seconds, shall show an ending pressure of at least 13 mm ( 1 2 in.) water gauge in the subsequent gastight integrity testing, and shall permit visual acuity through the visor of 20/100 or better Global FR-74 Hide Deleted Primary suit, glove, and footwear element materials shall be tested for thermal protective heat transfer performance ( TPP HTP ) as specified in Section 8.18, Thermal Protective Performance Test, and shall have an average TPP HTP rating of not less than Global FR-90 Hide Deleted Primary suit, glove, and footwear element materials shall be tested for resistance to flame impingement as specified in Section 8.7, Flammability Resistance Test, and shall not ignite during the initial 3-second exposure period, shall not burn a distance of greater than 100 mm (4 in.), shall not sustain burning for more than 2 seconds, and shall not melt as evidenced by flowing or dripping during the subsequent 12-second exposure period. Supplemental Information File Name NFPA_1991_FR_46_Chapter_7_Performance_Requirements_edited.docx Description Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu Feb 20 18:14:48 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: The technical committee is deleting the current Chapter 7 and replacing it with the attached Word document. All Public Input and reorganization items are included in the rewrite. Ballot Results

380 Page 131 of 238 6/6/2014 This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 15 Affirmative All 2 Affirmative with Comments 7 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Wisner, Jr., John E. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Corrado, Steven D. Sections 7.7 and 7.9 are redundant to each other. References should be updated as follows: In paragraph 7.3.3; the 8.10 reference should be In paragraph 7.3.4; the 8.11 reference should be In paragraph 7.3.5; the 8.14 reference should be Stull, Jeffrey O. Specific criteria are needed to provide minimum field of vision requirements for ensemble in and added based on changes made in Section 8.4 and addressed in FR-51. Negative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. while I am in complete agreement with the concept of cumulative permeation versus breakthrough times, I feel that the user community has been provided with enough information to create mass confusion over the issues versus understanding. I feel that the cumulative permeation issues should be tabled until the next round of 1991 updates where detailed laboratory testing of materials can be provided to the users.

381 Page 132 of 238 6/6/2014 Beggs, Dale Gregory Per TI/Rob West: Concur with other Negative votes, dissenting comments & justifications. Needs additional re-working for greater / unanimous agreement potential. Fithian, William A. Section Titles need to be included as noted in FR-90 above. Liquefied Gas & Flash Fire sections - eliminate the term primary suit material and replace it with garment, visor, glove and footwear materials Lovasic, Susan L. Specific sections for which I am voting negative in this ballot item are: Time limit should be 5 minutes rather than 2 minutes proposed / Should stay with SF6 test. See file "Negative-Inward leakage-sf6 to MIST" / / / / / / / / / / Should stay with NBTT - see file "Negative - Cumulative Permeation" / / / Should stay with NBTT - see file "Negative - Cumulative Permeation". AND if non-encapsulating suit designs are permitted, then all "visor" requirements must be applied to all exposed components of the external SCBA system / / / / / / If non-encapsulating suit designs are permitted, then ALL "visor" requirements for flammability, burst strength, etc must be applied to all exposed components of the external SCBA system Soles of boots should also be tested (not just heels) The addition of the new requirement for ASTM F1930 testing is not additive to this standard. See FR52 comments due to limited space under this FR comments , and are redundant to 7.7.2, 7.7.3, and Mann, Philip C This section only addresses the afterflame time and not the char length as specified in A char length needs to be added. 7.7 and 7.9 are redundant the afterflame time should be zero, not 2.0 seconds references testing as specified in 8.18, this should be 8.26 Specific performance requirements for non-encapsulating ensembles that utilize respirator face pieces as the chemical barrier need to be included in Chapter 7. Nystrom, Ulf It has not been shown that replacing permeation breakthrough time with cumulative permeation means any advantages to the users in terms of a concept that is easier to understand or to apply e.g. in hazmat response. Further, the suggested use of cumulative data does not solve the potential problem of permeation spikes being missed. We are concerned the MIST test may not be the most appropriate method to evaluate level A suits and we are are concerned about the reduction of the protection factor requirement to Zeigler, James P. I have three major concerns regarding the proposed move to cumulative permeation: 1.) It significantly lowers the barrier performance requirement of NFPA 1991 ensemble materials. 2.) It is based solely on long-term systemic toxicity. The proposal ignores short term exposure to high concentration (ceiling limits) and the potential for skin irritation, dermatitis, sensitization and allergic skin reactions. 3.) It provides less information about the barrier performance of the material during the testing interval that the current method. Two additional documents Proposed Changes to NFPA 1991 Barrier Requirements and Cumulative Permeation Performance from Breakthrough Data have been provided to NFPA or inclusion with this ballot response.

382 Page 133 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 47-NFPA [ Section No ] Samples or specimens shall be conditioned at a temperature of 21 C, ±3 C ± 3 C (70 F, ±5 F ± 5 F ) and a relative humidity of 65 percent, ± 5 percent until equilibrium is reached as determined, as specified in ASTM D 1776, Standard Practice for Conditioning and Testing Textiles, or for at least 24 hours. whichever is shortest. Specimens shall be tested within 5 minutes after removal from conditioning. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu Feb 20 18:17:37 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: The technical committee is correlating the text with other documents in the project. Public Input No. 17-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 20 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 1 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M.

383 Page 134 of 238 6/6/2014 Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur - considering additional / other voter comments. Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is. Negative with Comment Corrado, Steven D. The minimum 24 hour option for conditioning should be maintained in order to correlate with the other documents is this project (as stated in the Committee Statement).

384 Page 135 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 48-NFPA [ Section No ] Abrasion Procedure for Suit Materials Samples shall be abraded in accordance with ASTM D 4157, Standard Test Method for Abrasion Resistance of Textile Fabrics (Oscillatory Cylinder Method), under the following conditions: (1) A 2.3 kg (5 lb) tension weight shall be used. (2) A 1.6 kg (3 1 2 lb) head weight shall be used. (3) An If the ensemble does not employ a separable inner and outer layer, the outer surface shall be abraded with an 80 grit abradant trimite D-weight open coat #1A4180, or equivalent, shall be used. (4) The specimen shall be abraded for 25 continuous cycles. If the ensemble employs a separable inner and outer layer, in which the inner layer is the chemical barrier layer, the following shall apply: (a) (b) The abradant of the outer surface of the inner suit shall be the inner surface of the outer layer. The abradant of the outer surface of the outer layer shall be 80 grit trimite D-weight open coat #1A4180, or equivalent. (5) The specimen shall be abraded for 25 continuous cycles for (3) and (4)(b), and 200 continuous cycles for (4)(a). Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu Feb 20 18:43:02 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: There are two wear surfaces moving independently of one another when an over garment is worn over the suit element resulting in an abrasive condition while the ensemble is in use. Therefore, testing abrasion resistance on the outer garment only is insufficient. Response Message: Public Input No. 164-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot

385 Page 136 of 238 6/6/ Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 20 Affirmative All 1 Affirmative with Comments 3 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Negative with Comment Beggs, Dale Gregory Per TI/Rob West: Concur with other Negative votes, dissenting comments & justifications. Needs additional re-working for greater / unanimous agreement potential, including standalone tests for each layer separately. Lovasic, Susan L. Under section (4), it is irrelevant whether the "inner layer is the chemical barrier layer" or not. If a two layer garment system is used in the 1991 ensemble then the abrasion tests should always abrade the outside of the inner suit with the inside of the outer suit.

386 Page 137 of 238 6/6/2014 Nystrom, Ulf There should not be any changes or added procedures for the suit material abrasion procedure. The reason is that the committee did agree that outer covers and similar may only be used to achieve compliance with the optional additional requirements for chemical flash-over and liquefied gas protection. Consequently the garment material of all ensembles submitted for testing shall be subjected to the same base requirement testing without any outer layers being involved in any way.

387 Page 138 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 49-NFPA [ Section No ] Flexural Fatigue Procedure for Footwear. Sample footwear shall be subjected to 100,000 flexes in accordance with Appendix B of FIA Standard 1209, Whole Shoe Flex., with the following modifications: (1) Water shall not be used. (2) The flex speed shall be 60 ± 2 cycles per minute. (3) Alternative flexing equipment shall be permitted to be used when the flexing equipment meets the following parameters: (a) (b) (c) The flexing equipment is capable of providing the angle of flex as described in FIA The flexing equipment is capable of a flex speed of 60 ± 2 cycles per minute. The flexing equipment provides a means of securing the footwear during flexing. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu Feb 20 18:47:50 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: The proposed changes provide procedures that are consistent with the similar changes made within the project for footwear flexing. Public Input No. 76-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention

388 Page 139 of 238 6/6/2014 Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approved as is.

389 Page 140 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 50-NFPA [ New Section after ] Elevated Temperature and Humidity Conditioning Procedure Samples or specimens shall be conditioned at a temperature of 32 C ± 2 C (90 F ± 4 F) and a relative humidity of 80 percent ± 5 percent until equilibrium is reached, as specified in ASTM D 1776, Standard Practice for Conditioning and Testing Textiles, or for at least 24 hours Specimens shall be tested within 5 minutes after removal from conditioning. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu Feb 20 18:52:18 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: Conditioning for permeation testing should reflect the conditions under which permeation testing is conducted. Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E.

390 Page 141 of 238 6/6/2014 Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approved as is.

391 Page 142 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 85-NFPA [ Section No. 8.4 ] 8.4 Overall Ensemble Function and Integrity Test Application. This test method shall apply to vapor-protective ensembles Sample Preparation Samples shall be complete vapor-protective ensembles Samples shall be conditioned as specified in Specimens Specimens shall be complete vapor-protective ensembles At least one three specimen specimens shall be tested using a different test subject for each specimen Where the vapor-protective ensemble consists of multiple separate layers, and outer layers are not considered gastight, then only the portion of the vaporprotective suit that is considered gastight shall be tested Apparatus. The equipment and supplies specified in ASTM F 1154, Standard Practices for Qualitatively Evaluating the Comfort, Fit, Function, and Integrity of Chemical Protective Suit Ensembles, shall be used along with the following additional items: (1) A Snellen eye chart for a 6 m (20 ft) distance (2) A stopwatch or other timing device (3) Multiple cards on white card stock with four random capital letters printed in 10 mm high block-style font (4) A protractor or other device to measure the angle of a word card relative to the test subject Procedure Suit overall function and integrity shall be measured in accordance with ASTM F 1154, Standard Practices for Qualitatively Evaluating the Comfort, Fit, Function, and Integrity of Chemical Protective Suit Ensembles, with the following parameters: (1) Both exercise Procedures procedures A and B shall be used. (2) Ensembles tested shall meet the sizing range of the test subject as determined in The suit shall be donned in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions. (3) Testing shall be conducted at 25 C, ± 7 C (77 F, ± 10 F) and relative humidity of 50 percent, ± 20 percent. (4) Test subjects shall wear head protection meeting the dimensional requirements of Type I, Class G helmets of ANSI Z89.1, Standard for Industrial Head Protection, while carrying out the exercise protocols.

392 Page 143 of 238 6/6/2014 (5) Test subjects shall wear underclothing in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations, or in lieu of a detailed recommendation, a full-body coverall. (6) Test subjects shall wear a self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) that is compliant with NFPA 1981, Standard on Open-Circuit Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus for Fire and Emergency Services Visual acuity testing shall be conducted using a standard 6.1 m (20 ft) the eye chart, with a normal lighting range of 100 through 150 ft candles at the chart and with the test subject positions at a distance of 6.1 m (20 ft) from the chart The test subject shall have a minimum visual acuity of 20/20 in each eye, uncorrected or corrected with contact lenses, as determined in a visual acuity test or doctor's examination The test subject shall read the standard eye chart through the lens of the SCBA facepiece and suit visor to determine the ensemble visor's impact on the test subject's visual acuity The field of vision for the test subject shall be assessed by determining the angular degree to the left and right where the test subject can read four random 10 mm high letters from a distance of 6 m (20 ft) that is 2 m (6 ft) off of the ground At the end of all testing, the test subject shall be instructed to remove his or her hands from each of the gloves while still wearing the suit, touch the bypass valve on the SCBA, and then reinsert his or her hands into the gloves. The test subject shall perform this action in accordance with the manufacturer s instructions. This action shall be sequentially repeated a total of five times. The time for completing this action shall be timed using a stopwatch or other suitable timing device Gastight integrity shall be measured as specified in Section 8.2 upon completion of the exercise protocols Report The end suit pressure shall be recorded and reported The ability of the test subject to satisfactorily complete all exercises while wearing head protection meeting the dimensional requirements of Type I, Class G helmets of ANSI Z89.1, Standard for Industrial Head Protection, shall be recorded and reported The visual acuity of the test subject when in and out of the suit shall be recorded and reported The angular degree for both the left and right defining the field of vision shall be measured and reported. The average angular degree for the left and right field of vision for all test subjects shall be calculated and reported The ability of the time for each test subject to repeatedly remove and reinsert his or her hands completely into the gloves 5 five times sequentially shall be recorded and reported. The average time for all test subjects shall be calculated and reported Interpretation

393 Page 144 of 238 6/6/2014 Following the test subject exercises, an ending suit pressure after inflation testing shall be used to determine pass or fail performance The ability of the test subject to satisfactorily complete all exercises while wearing head protection meeting the dimensional requirements of Type I, Class G helmets of ANSI Z89.1, Standard for Industrial Head Protection, shall be used to determine pass or fail performance The visual acuity of the test subject when inside the suit shall be used for determining pass or fail performance The average left and average right angular field of vision shall be used to determine pass or fail performance The inability of the test subject average time of all test subjects to repeatedly remove and reinsert his or her hands their completely into the gloves 5 five times sequentially shall determine pass or fail performance. Supplemental Information File Name NFPA_1991_FR_85_Formatted_Text_edited.docx Description Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Sat Mar 08 10:03:14 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: The Technical Committee is revising the Overall Ensemble Function and Integrity Test. Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 20 Affirmative All 2 Affirmative with Comments 2 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention

394 Page 145 of 238 6/6/2014 Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Stull, Jeffrey O. Additional work is needed to specify and validate the proposed test procedures for the measurement of ensemble field of vision. Further enhancement is needed for how ensemble glove dexterity and hand function is addressed in functional testing of the ensemble. Negative with Comment Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur with other voter commentary - Needs additional re-working for clarity & greater / unanimous agreement potential. Lovasic, Susan L.

395 Page 146 of 238 6/6/2014 Specific sections for which I am voting negative in this multi-part ballot item are: This references 20/20 vision correction with "contact lenses" only. Is it intended that the wearer's vision cannot be corrected to 20/20 with glasses? Not enough detail is provided to run this new test. How is "angular degree" determined? Are the large block letters placed 90 degrees from the center vision point to begin the test and then move slowly until they come into view to the wearer? Is the wearer permitted to turn their head to try to see the letters or is this measuring the wearer's peripheral vision? Seems to be a meaningful test to include, but as written it is not a proper test method Need to add specifics for what test is to be used (ASTM F1052?) I did not note any pass/fail limits for this new test added in Section 7.

396 Page 147 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 51-NFPA [ Section No. 8.6 ] 8.6 Chemical Permeation Resistance Test One Application This test method shall apply to suit, visor, glove, and footwear element materials, and shall apply to the selected elements' seams Modifications to this test method for testing suit materials after flexing and abrading shall be as specified in Modifications to this test method for testing glove materials after flexing and abrading shall be as specified in Modifications to this test method for testing footwear materials after flexing and abrading shall be as specified in Modifications to this test method for testing seams shall be as specified in Modifications to this test for testing primary materials against liquefied gases shall be as specified in Modifications to this test for testing suit, visor, glove, and footwear materials following cold temperature embrittlement exposure shall be as specified in Sample Preparation Samples shall be either vapor-protective ensembles or suit materials, visor materials, gloves, and footwear of the sizes specified in the modifications Samples shall be conditioned as specified in after the conditioning specified in the modifications Specimens Specimens shall be the size specified in ASTM F 739, Standard Test Method for Resistance of Protective Clothing Materials to Permeation by Liquids and Gases At least three specimens shall be tested per chemical challenge For composite materials, only the chemical protection layer shall be the sample for testing for chemical permeation resistance Procedures Permeation resistance shall be measured in accordance with ASTM F 739, Standard Test Method for Resistance of Protective Clothing Materials to Permeation by Liquids and Gases, at 27 C, ±2 C (81 F, ±3 F) for a test duration of at least 3 hours for the following chemicals: with the following modifications: (1) Cumulative permeation shall be measured for a period of 1 hour, +1 minute, - 0 minutes.

397 Page 148 of 238 6/6/2014 (2) Testing shall be performed at a temperature of 32 C, ± 2 C (90 F, ± 4 F). (3) The minimum detectable cumulative permeation mass shall be determined for each chemical tested and shall be at least 0.6 µg/cm 2 or lower Permeation resistance shall be measured for each of the following chemicals at its normal laboratory-grade concentration, with gases at a concentration of 99.0% or greater, except as indicated: (1) Acetone (2) Acetonitrile (3) Acrolein (4) Acrylonitrile (5) Anhydrous ammonia (gas) (6) 1,3-Butadiene (gas) (7) Carbon disulfide (8) Chlorine (gas) (9) Dichloromethane (10) Diethyl amine (11) Dimethyl formamide (12) Dimethyl sulfate (13) Ethyl acetate (14) Ethylene oxide (gas) (15) Hexane (16) Hydrogen chloride (gas) (17) Methanol (18) Methyl chloride (gas) (19) Nitrobenzene (20) Sodium hydroxide, 50% w/w (21) Sulfuric acid, 96.1% w/w (22) Tetrachloroethylene (23) Tetrahydrofuran (24) Toluene Industrial Chemicals Permeation resistance shall be measured in accordance with ASTM F 739, Standard Test Method for Resistance of Protective Clothing Materials to Permeation by Liquids and Gases, at 27 C, ±2 C (81 F, ±3 F) for a test duration of at least 3 hours for the following chemicals: Acetone Acetonitrile Anhydrous ammonia (gas) 1,3-Butadiene (gas) Carbon disulfide

398 Page 149 of 238 6/6/2014 Chlorine (gas) Dichloromethane Diethyl amine Dimethyl formamide Ethyl acetate Ethylene oxide (gas) Hexane Hydrogen chloride (gas) Methanol Methyl chloride (gas) Nitrobenzene Sodium hydroxide Sulfuric acid Tetrachloroethylene Tetrahydrofuran Toluene The minimum detectable permeation rate for the permeation test apparatus shall be measured for each chemical tested. The minimum detectable permeation rate shall be less than or equal to 0.10 μg/cm 2 /min for all permeation resistance tests. When using closed loop systems, the testing laboratory shall assume 1 hour accumulated permeation Chemical Warfare Agents Specimens shall be tested for permeation resistance for not less than 60 minutes in accordance with ASTM F 739, Standard Test Method for Resistance of Protective Clothing Materials to Permeation by Liquids or Gases Under Conditions of Continuous Contact, with the following modifications: The test cells shall be designed to accommodate the introduction of liquid chemicals in a safe manner. The liquid concentration density shall be 100 g/m 2, +10/-0 g/m 2, and the cell shall be assembled in closed-top configuration. The collection media shall be filtered air flowed through the bottom of the test cell at a rate of 1 L/min ±0.1 L/min. Analytical methods used shall be sensitive to concentrations of at least one order of magnitude lower than the required end points. Cumulative permeation shall be determined and reported. Testing shall be performed at a temperature of 32 C, ±1 C (90 F, ±2 F) The following chemicals shall be tested: Cyanogen chloride (CK; ) Carbonyl chloride (CG; ) Dimethyl sulfate (DMA, sulfuric acid dimethyl ester; ) Hydrogen cyanide (AC, HCN, CAS; )

399 Page 150 of 238 6/6/ The chemical warfare agent sarin (GB) shall be tested The minimum detectable cumulative permeation shall be determined for each chemical warfare agent tested Report The following information and results shall be recorded and reported: (1) Material type or name (2) Chemical or chemical mixture (volume composition of mixture) Permeation normalized breakthrough detection time in minutes calculated at a system detectable permeation rate of 0.10 μg/cm 2 /min for industrial chemicals Maximum permeation rate (μg/cm 2 Minimum detectable rate for test apparatus (μg/cm 2 chemicals /min) observed for industrial chemicals /min) for industrial (3) Cumulative permeation mass (μg/cm 2 ) for chemical warfare agents (4) Minimum detectable cumulative permeation mass (μg/cm 2 ) for chemical warfare agents (5) Detection method (6) Date of test (7) Testing laboratory The average cumulative permeation mass shall be determined for each chemical If no chemical is detected for any replicate permeation resistance test, then the cumulative permeation mass used for that replicate shall be the minimum detectable cumulative permeation mass for purposes of calculating the average cumulative permeation mass If no chemical is detected for all replicates in a specific chemical test, then the average cumulative permeation mass shall be reported as a value less than the minimum detectable cumulative permeation mass The manufacturer shall report all three measured normalized breakthrough detection times or the average cumulative permeation masses in the technical data package The manufacturer shall report all three observed permeation rates in the technical data package for industrial chemicals Interpretation. The average cumulative permeation mass shall be used in determining compliance for the particular material/chemical combination For chemical warfare agents, t he average cumulative permeation mass shall be used in determining compliance for the particular material/chemical combination Specific Requirements for Testing Suit Materials After Flexing and Abrading

400 Page 151 of 238 6/6/2014 Samples for conditioning shall be 200 mm 280 mm (8 in. 11 in.) rectangles and shall consist of all layers as configured in the suit Two samples shall first be conditioned by flexing as specified in One sample shall be flexed with the longitudinal axis parallel to the machine direction of the material, and the second sample shall be flexed with the longitudinal axis parallel to the cross-machine direction of the material Following flexing, two samples for abrasion conditioning, each measuring 45 mm 230 mm (1 3 4 in. 9 in.), shall be cut from the center of the flexed samples At least one specimen for abrasion conditioning shall be taken from a sample flexed in the machine direction, and at least one specimen for abrasion conditioning shall be taken from a sample flexed in the cross-machine direction for each chemical tested These new samples for abrasion conditioning shall then be conditioned by abrading as specified in Following abrasion, only one specimen for permeation resistance testing shall be taken from each sample subjected to abrasion The permeation test specimen shall be taken from the exact center of the abraded sample so that the center of the permeation test and the center of the abraded sample coincide Specific Requirements for Testing Glove Materials After Flexing and Abrading Samples for conditioning shall be whole glove components or whole glove individual elements Following flexing, t T hree samples for abrasion conditioning, each measuring 45 mm 230 mm (1 3 4 in. 9 in.), shall be cut from the center of the gauntlet portion of the flexed sample Samples shall first be conditioned by flexing as specified in Following flexing, three samples for abrasion conditioning, each measuring 45 mm 230 mm (1 3 4 in. 9 in.), shall be cut from the center of the gauntlet portion of the flexed sample At least one specimen for abrasion conditioning shall be taken from a sample flexed in the machine direction, and at least one specimen for abrasion conditioning shall be taken from a sample flexed in the cross-machine direction for each chemical tested These new samples for abrasion conditioning shall then be conditioned by abrading as specified in Following abrasion, only one specimen for permeation resistance testing shall be taken from each sample subjected to abrasion

401 Page 152 of 238 6/6/2014 The permeation test specimen shall be taken from the exact center of the abraded sample so that the center of the permeation test and the center of the abraded sample coincide Specific Requirements for Testing Footwear Materials After Flexing and Abrading This test shall apply to all types of footwear configurations. Where the footwear incorporates a bootie constructed of suit material, the suit material flex fatigue resistance test shall be permitted to be substituted for this test Samples for conditioning shall be whole footwear components or whole footwear individual elements Samples shall first be conditioned by flexing as specified in Following flexing, three samples for abrasion conditioning, each measuring 45 mm 230 mm (1 3 4 in. 9 in.), shall be cut from the center of the footwear upper. where the greatest flexing occurred, usually at the quarter or vamp of the flexed sample The se new samples for abrasion conditioning shall then be conditioned by abrading as specified in Following abrasion, only one specimen for permeation resistance testing shall be taken from each sample subjected to abrasion The permeation test specimen shall be taken from the exact center of the abraded sample so that the center of the permeation test and the center of the abraded sample coincide Specific Requirements for Testing Seams Seam specimens shall be prepared from seam samples that have a minimum of 150 mm (6 in.) of material on each side of the seam center Permeation test specimens shall be cut such that the exact seam center divides the specimen in half Seam specimens shall be prepared representing each different seam or shall be taken from each different type of seam found in the vapor-protective suit, including as a minimum the suit-to-suit material seams and the suit-to-visor material seams Samples for conditioning shall be 600 mm ( in.) lengths of prepared seam or cut from vapor-protective ensembles Specific Requirements for Testing Primary Materials Against Liquefied Gases Samples for conditioning shall be suit material, visor material, glove material from the glove gauntlet, and footwear material from the footwear upper Glove material specimens shall include all layers used in construction of the glove system Where the footwear consists of a bootie and outer boot, the footwear specimens shall include all layers in the footwear system Specimens shall be conditioned as specified in Specimens shall be exposed on their normal outside surface.

402 Page 153 of 238 6/6/ Visor materials that are rigid and cannot be bent in the test apparatus shall be excluded from this conditioning Only one specimen for permeation resistance testing shall be taken from each sample subjected to embrittlement conditioning. The permeation test specimen shall be taken from the exact center of the folded sample so that the center of the permeation test and the center of the folded sample coincide The test cell and test chemical shall be maintained at a temperature sufficient to keep the test chemical as a liquid at ambient pressure such that a 13 mm ( 1 2 in.) liquid layer is maintained at all times during the test Specific Requirements for Testing Suit, Visor, Glove, and Footwear Materials Following Cold Temperature Embrittlement Exposure Samples for conditioning shall be suit material, visor material, glove material from the glove gauntlet, and footwear material from the footwear upper Specimens shall be conditioned as specified in Only one specimen for permeation resistance testing shall be taken from each sample subjected to embrittlement conditioning The permeation test specimen shall be taken from the exact center of the folded sample so that the center of the permeation test and the center of the folded sample coincide. Supplemental Information File Name NFPA_1991_FR_51_Formatted_edited.docx Description Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu Feb 20 19:17:06 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: The proposed changes transition the permeation resistance test from the measurement of breakthrough time to cumulative permeation and further separate the chemical warfare agent testing to a separate method. Response Message: Public Input No. 171-NFPA [Section No. 8.6] Ballot Results

403 Page 154 of 238 6/6/2014 This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 17 Affirmative All 2 Affirmative with Comments 5 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Rogers, Paul G. Wisner, Jr., John E. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Ormond, R. Bryan Proposed changes are accepted under the assumption that all chemicals can be shown to have reliable and proven collection and analysis methods under the given testing parameters. For example, the issues that were raised with the reactivity of chlorine and acrolein that make the actual challenging of the material and collection of the permeant extremely difficult if even possible. Also, the preconditioning of materials prior to permeation testing in a high humidity environment is unnecessary due to the fact that the testing is not performed at high humidity. It adds an additional unnecessary burden to the testing laboratory. Stull, Jeffrey O. A detailed review is needed to ensure that the new procedures meet the intended objectives of the method change from a breakthrough-based testing approach to one that utilizes cumulative permeation.

404 Page 155 of 238 6/6/2014 Negative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. I do not think the user community is ready to transition to cummulative permeation at this point in time. Beggs, Dale Gregory Per TI/Rob West: Concur with other Negative votes, dissenting comments & justifications. Lovasic, Susan L. Specific sections for which I am voting negative in this multi-part ballot item are: If non-encapsulating suit designs are permitted, then ALL "visor" requirements for permeation must be applied to all components of the external SCBA system parts (1) and (2) / / / / / Retain text as written. Should stay with NBTT - see file "Negative - Cumulative Permeation" The section "chemicals at its normal laboratory-grade concentration" is not precise enough for the liquid chemicals. Suggest that text be changed to "chemicals with at least 95% concentration..." All "visors" must be assessed to the same set of standards. Exclusions for "rigid" visors just because they cannot be tested in a specific test apparatus is not acceptable. Some replacement test to assess the same performance property for rigid visors must be included. All "visors" should be held to a comparable performance standard. Nystrom, Ulf It has not been shown that replacing permeation breakthrough time with cumulative permeation means any advantages to the users in terms of a concept that is easier to understand or to apply e.g. in hazmat response. Further, the suggested use of cumulative data does not solve the potential problem of permeation spikes being missed. Some problems could perhaps be overcome by reporting both cumulative and breakthrough time and/or increasing sampling frequency but the current revision does not do this. Zeigler, James P. I have three major concerns regarding the proposed move to cumulative permeation: 1.) It significantly lowers the barrier performance requirement of NFPA 1991 ensemble materials. 2.) It is based solely on long-term systemic toxicity. The proposal ignores short term exposure to high concentration (ceiling limits) and the potential for skin irritation, dermatitis, sensitization and allergic skin reactions. 3.) It provides less information about the barrier performance of the material during the testing interval that the current method. Two additional documents Proposed Changes to NFPA 1991 Barrier Requirements and Cumulative Permeation Performance from Breakthrough Data have been provided to NFPA or inclusion with this ballot response.

405 Page 156 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 53-NFPA [ Section No. 8.7 ] 8.7 Flammability Resistance Test Application. This test method shall be applied to suit, visor, glove, and footwear element materials This test method shall be applied to suit, visor, glove, and footwear element materials Modifications to this test method for base ensemble performance shall be as specified in Modifications to this test method for optional chemical flash fire protection performance shall be as specified in Sample Preparation Samples for conditioning shall be at least 1 m (1 yd) squares of material Samples shall be conditioned as specified in Specimens Specimens shall be the size specified in ASTM F 1358, Standard Test Method for Resistance of Protective Clothing Materials to Flame Impingement Standard Test Method for Effects of Flame Impingement on Materials Used in Protective Clothing Not Designated Primarily for Flame Resistance Five specimens in each of the warp directions, machine or coarse, and the filling directions, cross-machine or wale, shall be tested Where the material is isotropic, 10 specimens shall be tested Procedure. Flame resistance testing shall be conducted in accordance with ASTM F 1358, Standard Test Method for Resistance of Protective Clothing Materials to Flame Impingement Standard Test Method for Effects of Flame Impingement on Materials Used in Protective Clothing Not Designated Primarily for Flame Resistance, with the following modifications:. (1) The test apparatus shall include the test cabinet and accessories, burner, and gas regulation system, as specified in Sections 6.1, 6.2, and 6.3 of ASTM D 6413, Standard Test Method for Flame Resistance of Textiles (Vertical Test). (2) A specimen shall have been considered to ignite during the 3-second exposure when the measured afterflame time exceeds 2.0 seconds Report Afterflame times shall be recorded and reported for each specimen and as the average for each material direction

406 Page 157 of 238 6/6/2014 Burn distances shall be recorded and reported for each specimen and as the average for each material direction Ignition during the initial 3-second exposure shall be recorded and reported for each specimen Evidence of dripping, melting, or flowing during the 12-second exposure period shall be recorded and reported for each specimen Interpretation Ignition of any individual specimen during the initial 3-second exposure shall be used to determine compliance with the ignition requirements The longest average afterflame time in any direction shall be used to determine compliance with the afterflame requirements The longest average burn distance in any direction shall be used to determine compliance with burn distance requirements Evidence of melting, dripping, or flowing of any specimen shall be used to determine compliance with melting requirements Specific Requirements for Testing Base Ensemble Materials Only the 3-second flame exposure shall be used Burn distances and afterflame times shall only be determined for the 3-second exposure Specific Requirements for Testing Optional Chemical Flash Fire Protection Ensemble Materials. The full procedures in ASTM F 1358, Standard Test Method for Effects of Flame Impingement on Materials Used in Protective Clothing Not Designated Primarily for Flame Resistance, shall be used including both the 3-second and 12-second exposures. Supplemental Information File Name NFPA_1991_FR_53_Formatted_Text_edited.docx Description Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu Feb 20 19:40:29 EST 2014 Committee Statement

407 Page 158 of 238 6/6/2014 Committee Statement: The proposed changes account for flame resistance performance consistent with field expectations for chemical protective clothing that may only incidentally contact flame or be exposed to high heat. Response Message: Public Input No. 180-NFPA [Section No. 8.7] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 20 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 1 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment

408 Page 159 of 238 6/6/2014 Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur with Negative vote commentary & should be incorporated into further TC re-work clarification discussions. Mann, Philip C (2) should be removed considering the specifications in and Negative with Comment Lovasic, Susan L. Specific sections for which I am voting negative in this multi-part ballot item are: If non-encapsulating suit designs are permitted, then ALL "visor" requirements for flammability must be applied to all components of the external SCBA system The average afterflame time should be used to determine "pass/fail" not the longest afterflame time recorded. My proposed data treatment is consistent with other flammability tests used in NFPA 1971, 1975, The average burn distance should be used to determine "pass/fail" not the longest burn distance recorded. My proposed data treatment is consistent with other flammability tests used in NFPA 1971, 1975, 2112.

409 Page 160 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 16-NFPA [ Section No. 8.8 ] 8.8 Overall Ensemble Inward Leakage Man-In-Simulant Test (MIST) Application. This test method shall apply to complete vapor-protective ensembles Sample Preparation. Samples Samples for conditioning shall be complete vapor-protective ensembles and shall include the respirator where the ensemble utilizes the respirator facepiece as the ensemble visor Samples shall be conditioned as specified in Specimen s S The s pecimens shall be complete vapor-protective ensembles. a complete ensemble with gloves and footwear and shall include the respirator where applicable At least one specimen shall be tested. Where the ensemble utilizes the respirator facepiece as the ensemble visor, the ensemble shall be tested with each type or model of the respirator specified by the manufacturer Where the respirator is completely encapsulated by the ensemble, the ensemble shall be tested with a respirator specified by the manufacturer A minimum of four specimens shall be tested. The specimens shall represent a minimum of two different ensemble sizes Where the ensemble has multiple types of external fittings, each type of external fitting shall be present on each specimen at the time of testing Specimens shall be provided to fit or be adjustable to fit the selected test subjects in accordance with the manufacturer s sizing provisions that are specific to each ensemble * None of the ensembles or components of the ensemble to be tested shall have been previously subjected to MIST testing unless it can be demonstrated that the ensemble or components are free of contamination Underclothing and socks shall be permitted to be reused, provided they have been laundered with a detergent that has been demonstrated not to cause interference with the analytical method Apparatus Test Facility. Sulfur hexafluoride, CAS No , with a minimum purity of 99.8 percent, shall be used as the test agent The test facility shall include areas for dressing, a first stage undressing area adjacent and accessible to the chamber, and a second stage undressing area adjacent and accessible to the first stage undressing area.

410 Page 161 of 238 6/6/ The test shall be conducted in a sealed test chamber with a minimum volume of sufficient dimensions to permit free movement of the test subject (s) when fully dressed in the vapor-protective ensemble and for the test subject(s) to carry out the physical exercise routine specified in The chamber shall have a circulation fan or other means to ensure uniform concentration of the test agent throughout the chamber during the test The exact dimensions of the chamber shall be measured and shall be used to calculate the total volume of the chamber in order to determine the amount of sulfur hexafluoride gas to be added to achieve the required concentration specified in More than one test subject shall be permitted in the chamber at the same time, provided that they can complete all tasks completely in the appropriate time period and that they have an unobstructed direct path to the wind stream The test chamber shall have a circulation fan or other means to ensure uniform concentration of the test agent throughout the chamber during the test. temperature of 25 C, ± 2 C, relative humidity of 55 percent, ± 10 percent, and a nominal wind speed of 0.9 to 2.2 m/sec (2 to 5 mph). The average wind speed shall be 1.6 m/sec, ± 0.2 m/sec (3.5 mph, ± 0.5 mph) The test shall be conducted in a sealed test chamber with minimum volume of sufficient dimensions to permit free movement of the test subject when fully dressed in the vapor-protective ensemble The chamber shall have a circulation fan or other means to ensure uniform concentration of the test agent throughout the chamber during the test The exact dimensions of the chamber shall be measured and shall be used to calculate the total volume of the chamber in order to determine the amount of sulfur hexafluoride gas to be added to achieve the required concentration specified in Test Chemical and Analytical Equipment. Two calibrated portable pumps that are capable of maintaining a flow rate of 0.4 L/min, ±0.005 L/min, shall be provided The test simulant shall be methyl salicylate (MeS; C 8 H 8 O 3 ) CAS # , more commonly known as oil of wintergreen. The MeS minimum purity shall be 95 percent. Vapor doses shall be measured using Passive Adsorbent Dosimeters (PADs). Both pumps shall be placed outside the test chamber * The standard concentration of MeS in the vapor chamber shall be 100 mg/m 3, ± 15 mg/m 3, as measured by a real-time infrared analysis of the chamber air or other validated real-time analytical technique. Pump A shall have a gas stream selection valve with a minimum of four isolated stream settings. A stream setting shall be provided for each ensemble interior sampling location Infrared readings shall be taken every 60 seconds to verify compliance with the concentration requirement, and an air sample shall be taken at least every 10 minutes for validation of infrared readings Every step shall be taken to avoid generation of liquid aerosol.

411 Page 162 of 238 6/6/ The sensitivity of the analytical technique used for the measurement of MeS in the PADs shall provide a detection limit of 30 ng MeS per PAD. The analytical technique shall have an upper limit of quantification of 31,500 ng * Passive Adsorbent Dosimeters (PADs). One or more suit wall connectors shall be installed in the ensemble in such a manner that the fixtures do not interfere with the movement of the test subject and that the installation does not adversely affect the integrity of the ensemble. The test shall be conducted using PADs that affix directly to the skin of test subjects and that have the following characteristics: (1) The PADs shall be a foil packet, which contains an adsorbent material covered by a high-density polyethylene film that acts as a pseudo-skin barrier. (2) The PADs shall have an uptake rate of 3.0 cm/min or greater The one or more suit wall connectors shall permit the establishment of five separate airlines to pass into the suit One airline shall be designated as an air sample return port Each remaining airline shall consist of a 10 mm ( 3 8 in.) nominal outer diameter flexible tubing attached to the interior of the respective suit wall connector in such a manner as to allow the other end of the tubing to be attached to the required sampling locations on the test subject's body. Pinning tubing to the test subject's body shall be permitted Test Subjects All test subjects shall have a medical doctor's certificate that substantiates they are All test subjects shall be medically and physically suitable to perform these tests without danger to themselves. The A medical certificate for each test subject shall have been issued within 12 months prior to testing Test subjects shall be familiar with the use of vapor chemica l-protective ensembles and with self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) the selected CBRN SCBA. The test subject shall select the appropriate size of the vaporprotective ensemble from available sizes using the manufacturer's sizing chart All test subjects shall have a medical doctor's certificate that substantiates they are medically and physically suitable to perform these tests without danger to themselves. The medical certificate shall have been issued within 12 months prior to the testing Test subjects shall be familiar with the use of vapor chemica -protective ensembles and with self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) the selected CBRN SCBA. The test subject shall select the appropriate size of the vaporprotective ensemble from available sizes using the manufacturer's sizing chart Equal lengths of 3 mm ( 1 8 in.) nominal outer diameter flexible tubing shall be used to transfer air samples from sampling ports to sample pumps and back to the return port from the exhaust port of sample pump A

412 Page 163 of 238 6/6/2014 One length of tubing shall be attached to the test chamber ceiling in such a manner that one end of the tubing hangs as close as possible to the center of the test chamber and the other end is attached to the intake port of sample pump B One length of tubing shall be attached to the respective suit wall connector exterior sampling port, with the other end attached to an inlet port on the gas stream selection valve on pump A One length of tubing shall be connected to the respective suit wall connector exterior and airline designated as the return port, with the other end of the tubing attached to the exhaust port of pump A Sample tubing shall be permitted to be joined together by means of hose clamps or taping in a manner that does not restrict airflow Sample tubing shall be permitted to be taped to the exterior of the ensemble to permit the reduction of hanging weight stress and strain on the suit wall connectors by the employment of one piece of duct tape no greater in length than 305 mm (12 in.). All tubing shall be taped together in no more than one location on the ensemble. The tape shall not cover any seams The total interior volume of each gas tubing sampling stream shall be determined for each sampling location At least 23 gastight sample bags shall be used to collect air samples. An adapter shall be used to connect the inlet valve of the sample bags to the exhaust ports of the pumps to facilitate changing of sample bags. The adapter shall not affect the integrity of the sampling system A thermometer sensor shall be placed in the test chamber in a manner allowing the test administrator to record the initial and final test chamber temperatures A syringe suitable for gas sampling and capable of delivering the required amount of sulfur hexafluoride into the chamber shall be placed in the test chamber with a sealed bag containing 10 percent v/v sulfur hexafluoride in nitrogen All test subjects shall have a medical doctor's certificate that substantiates they are All test subjects shall be medically and physically suitable to perform these tests without danger to themselves. The A medical certificate for each test subject shall have been issued within 12 months prior to the testing Test subjects shall be familiar with the use of vapor chemica -protective ensembles and with self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) the selected CBRN SCBA. The test subject shall select the appropriate size of the vaporprotective ensemble from available sizes using the manufacturer's sizing chart For consistency in testing, the SCBA used for all testing with the vapor-protective ensemble shall be certified as compliant with NFPA 1981, Standard on Open- Circuit Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus for Fire and Emergency Services, and shall be equipped with a fully charged 60-minute breathing air cylinder Procedure

413 Page 164 of 238 6/6/2014 Interior sampling tubes Test subjects shall be pinned to the test subject as follows shall have followed pretrial procedures that include proper hydration and avoiding personal hygiene products that could contain MS. : One tube attached to the middle of the subject's back directly under the shoulder One tube attached to the sternum One tube attached to an extremity location on the forearm or calf One tube attached to the crotch Additional sampling locations shall be permitted if the testing apparatus allows such sampling PADs shall be placed on test subjects at the body region locations shown in Figure Figure Locations of PADs on Test Subjects All PADs shall be applied in a clean dressing area by personnel who have followed pretrial procedures to minimize contamination. Test subjects shall also follow pretrial procedures to minimize contamination

414 Page 165 of 238 6/6/2014 Cheek PADs shall be located entirely within the respirator facepiece, and all other PADs shall be located entirely outside the seal of the respirator facepiece Three additional PADs shall be used to conduct background sampling and for quality control during the trial. These PADs shall be located in the dressing area, the stage 1 undress area, and the stage 2 undress area The test subject shall don the protective ensemble and respirator in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions in an area located away from the test chamber. Donning The test subject shall be accomplished without causing the restriction of flow through interior sampling tubes. Adjustment of tube pathways shall be permitted to connect the sample tubes to the interior sampling ports. wear clothing under the CBRN protective ensemble as specified by the manufacturer. If no undergarments are specified or required by the manufacturer as part of the certified ensemble, the test subject shall wear a short-sleeve cotton shirt and shorts or underwear Exterior sampling tubing and return tubing shall be attached to the exterior sampling ports and return port After sealing the ensemble, the test subject shall enter the test chamber, and the test chamber shall be sealed Sample pumps A and B shall be turned on and function at a flow rate of 0.4 L/min. Each pump shall be placed on hold while not actively performing purging or sampling At least one baseline sample set shall be taken prior to the addition of sulfur hexafluoride to the chamber A baseline sample shall consist of one test chamber air sample and one sample taken from each sampling location within the ensemble after sampling lines have been purged Sampling lines shall be purged for a duration of time that flushes the air volume completely out of the sampling lines twice. The gas sample return line to the ensemble shall be disconnected during this purge cycle. Ensemble air sampling shall be taken between purge cycles of each air sampling line. Purge cycles shall be employed for all inward leakage sampling Each air test sample shall be collected from the exhaust port of the sample pumps at a rate of 0.4 L/min, ±0.005 L/min for 1 minute, ±1 second Test chamber and ensemble baseline air samples shall be permitted to be taken simultaneously At the end of the baseline test chamber and ensemble air sampling periods, the sampling bags shall be removed from the pump, sealed, and stored. The gas sample return line shall be reconnected to the exhaust port of pump A. The removal of the gas sample return line from the exhaust port of pump A shall be permitted during sample acquisition

415 Page 166 of 238 6/6/2014 The test subject shall add sufficient sulfur hexafluoride to achieve a concentration of 1000 ppm,±100 ppm on a volume basis. The air inside the chamber shall be allowed to reach equilibrium for a period of 1 minute, ±1 second prior to performing inward leakage testing At least three full sets of air samples from each sampling location shall be taken, and at least three sets of two test chamber samples shall be taken for inward leakage detection testing At the conclusion of the challenge agent equilibrium period, the test subject shall perform one series of stationary exercises for each of the three air test sample sets. The stationary exercise shall be as specified in Procedure A of ASTM F 1154, Standard Practice for Qualitatively Evaluating the Comfort, Fit, Function, and Integrity of Chemical Protective Suit Ensembles, as modified by The stationary exercises specified in Procedure A of ASTM F 1154, Standard Practice for Qualitatively Evaluating the Comfort, Fit, Function, and Integrity of Chemical Protective Suit Ensembles, shall be performed with the following modifications: At the conclusion of the duck squat exercise specified in of ASTM F 1154, test subjects shall remain in a squatting position and exhaust as much of the internal volume of the suit as possible by placing their hands on top of their heads, tucking their arms in toward their bodies, and gathering as much of the excess ensemble material to the body as possible. The test subject shall then resume the exercise protocol as specified in Procedure A of ASTM F For each exercise protocol, at least two test chamber air samples shall be collected while the test subject is performing the exercise protocol At least one sample from each ensemble sampling location shall be taken after the completion of each exercise protocol. The test subject shall be allowed to rest while the ensemble samples are acquired At the conclusion of the three exercise series and collection of chamber and ensemble air samples, the test subject exits the chamber and doffs the vaporprotective ensemble in an area well away from the chamber All samples collected shall be analyzed using an appropriate analytical technique within 8 hours of collection. The sensitivity of the analytic technique chosen shall provide for a minimum detection limit of at least 0.2 ppm in order to determine compliance with Alternate plumbing of gastight sample tubing streams directly into analytical equipment shall be permitted if the device meets the criteria required in and each required measurement is able to be individually acquired The test duration will be 30 minutes in the chamber with a 5-minute decontamination period The start of the test, in which the test subject enters the MIST chamber, shall be initiated within 60 minutes after removal of the ensemble from the conditioning environment.

416 Page 167 of 238 6/6/ Physical Exercise Routine Once the chamber concentration has been established, the test subject(s) shall perform the following physical activity protocol and the chamber concentration shall remain within acceptable limits during the exercise protocol: (1) Drag 70 kg (154 lb) human dummy using both hands a distance of 10 m (33 ft) over a 15-second period. Stop and rest for 15 seconds. Repeat exercise twice. (2) Duck squat, pivot right, pivot left, stand. Rotate orientation 90 degrees to wind stream between each repetition. Repeat exercise twice in each orientation for a total of 1 minute. (3) Stand erect. With arms at sides, bend body to left and return, bend body forward and return, bend body to right and return. Rotate orientation 90 degrees to wind stream between each repetition. Repeat exercise twice in each orientation for a total of 1 minute. (4) Stand erect. Extend arms overhead in the lateral direction, then bend elbows. Extend arms overhead in the frontal direction, then bend elbows. Rotate orientation 90 degrees to wind stream between each repetition. Repeat exercise twice in each orientation for a total of 1 minute. (5) Stand erect. Extend arms perpendicular to the sides of torso. Twist torso left and return, twist torso right and return. Rotate orientation 90 degrees to wind stream between each repetition. Repeat exercise twice in each orientation for a total of 1 minute. (6) Stand erect. Reach arms across chest completely to opposite sides. Rotate orientation 90 degrees to wind stream between each repetition. Repeat exercise twice in each orientation for a total of 1 minute. (7) Climb two steps of the ladder and touch the ceiling with one hand (use alternate hands each time). Climb down, squat, and touch the floor with both hands. Repeat exercise three times within 1 minute. (8) Crawl in place for 1 minute. Rotate orientation 90 degrees to wind stream every 15 seconds. (9) Sit on stool (facing wind) for 1 minute. (10) Sit on stool (back to wind) for 1 minute Physical activities and rest periods shall be performed in a chamber location that provides an unobstructed exposure of the protective ensemble to the required wind stream Each physical activity and rest cycle shall be 10 minutes. The cycle of exercise and rest shall be completed a total of three times, for a total chamber exposure of 30 minutes. Each exercise cycle shall consist of eight 1-minute activities followed by a 2-minute rest (sitting) period The test subject shall begin the first repetition of each activity facing the wind stream and shall rotate 90 degrees between each repetition until the time period for that exercise has ended For activities (7) (walking in place) and (8) (crawling in place), the test subject shall rotate 90 degrees on 15-second intervals during the 1-minute period

417 Page 168 of 238 6/6/2014 All physical activities shall be a full range of motion and performed at a moderate speed Decontamination and Doffing After completion of the 30-minute MIST exposure, the test subjects shall move to a decontamination area, where they shall remain for at least 5 minutes. This area shall be well ventilated to assist in off-gassing of the outside of the ensemble In the decontamination area, all exposed ensemble surfaces, including such items as the respirator, boots, gloves, and helmets, shall be washed with a liquid soap solution If the garment is designed for wet decontamination, it shall be washed with the liquid soap solution as well Alternative decontamination methods, such as an air wash, shall be permitted if the selected decontamination method can be demonstrated to remove MeS to levels that do not result in contamination of the test subjects during the doffing of the protective ensemble The decontaminated test subject shall move to the first stage undressing room where all remaining items of clothing, except for underclothes, shall be doffed. The undress process shall not exceed 5 minutes As soon as the garment is unsealed and the PADs on the test subject s body are exposed to the ambient atmosphere in the first stage undressing room, three fresh PADs shall be placed near the test subject to detect background MeS concentrations As soon as all items of clothing, except the underwear, are removed, the decontaminated test subject shall proceed to the second stage undressing room and the background PADs shall be collected and handled as specified in The exposure time for the first stage undressing room background PADs shall be recorded When the test subject enters the second stage undressing room, three additional PADs shall be placed near the test subject and the exposure PADs shall be removed from the test subject s body. Both the second stage undressing room background PADs and the exposure PADs taken off the test subject s body shall be handled as specified in The exposure time for the second stage undressing room PADs shall be recorded Where an adhesive is used on the back of the PADs, each PAD shall be backed with aluminum foil, placed in individual sealed glass vials with a nonadsorbent lid liner, and shall remain at room temperature of 25 C, ±3 C (77 F, ± 5 F) for 30 min, ± 5 min, immediately after exposure PAD Qualification and Analysis The uptake rate for each lot of PADs shall be determined in accordance with using a minimum of seven PADs selected randomly from the lot * Measurement of PAD Uptake Rate

418 Page 169 of 238 6/6/2014 PAD uptake rate shall be measured by exposing PADs in a small-scale chamber under the following conditions: (1) The concentration of MeS shall be 1 mg/m 3, ± 0.5 mg/m 3. (2) The temperature shall be 35 C, ± 2 C (94 F ± 4 F). (3) The relative humidity shall be 55 percent, ± 20 percent. (4) The flow of MeS in the humidified air or nitrogen shall be at a rate of 1 cm/sec, ± 0.2 cm/sec over the PAD. (5) The exposure shall be conducted for a period of 30 minutes, +1/-0 minutes The PAD uptake rate shall be calculated in accordance with the procedures provided in The average of all PAD uptake rates shall be calculated and used in the calculation of MeS dosage on the test subject PADs After their initial 30 minutes at room temperature, the PADs shall be subjected to one of the following handling and analysis procedures: (1) The PADs shall be stored at a cold temperature sufficient to prevent the migration of MeS from the adhesive until extraction or analysis. (2) The PADS shall be extracted within 4 hours. (3) The adsorbent shall be removed and thermally desorbed within 4 hours The determination of a sufficiently low temperature that prevents migration of the MeS from the adhesive shall be made by exposing 12 pads simultaneously in the test chamber in a vertical position at a concentration of 100 mg/m 3 of MeS for 30 min, +5 min, -0 min. After this exposure, the PADs shall be covered in foil and each placed in a sealed container and stored at 25 C, ±3 C (77 F, ± 5 F) for 30 min, ± 5 min. Four of these PADs shall be packed in dry ice for 24 hours, four placed in the proposed cold storage temperature for 24 hours, and four extracted or analyzed within 4 hours. The average mass absorbed on the four PADs stored at the proposed storage temperature shall equal with 95% confidence the after four PADs stored for 24 hour in dry ice and four PADs analyzed immediately after exposure Where liquid extraction of the PADs samples is performed, the liquid extracts shall be stored at 0 C to 4 C (32 F to 39 F) for up to 14 days following their exposure before analysis where: u = the uptake rate in cm/min m = the total mass of MeS measured on the PAD in mg A = the average active area of the PAD in cm 2 Ct = the exposure vapor dosage in mg/min/cm 3 [ ]

419 Page 170 of 238 6/6/2014 The actual MeS vapor exposure concentration and the actual time of exposure shall be used to determine the uptake rate from the following equation: The range of the analytical technique shall be sufficient to measure the expected range of MeS dosage on the test subject PADs When liquid extraction is used as the analytical technique, the calibration curve used for determining the equipment response to MeS shall be established using at least 4 MeS concentration standards accounting for the proper density of the extraction solvent For the test results to be considered valid for a given ensemble, no more than one PAD from each of the body region locations tested (i.e., no more than one PAD out of the four replicates for any particular region) shall be permitted to be lost to analysis over the course of the four test subjects Calculations The dosage measured by each PAD (Ct inside,i ) shall be determined using the average uptake rate determined for the PAD lot used in the evaluation of a specific ensemble using the following equation: where: Ct inside.i = the MeS vapor dosage at the specific PAD in mg/min/cm 3 m i u avg = the total mass of MeS measured on the specific PAD in mg = the average uptake of the PAD lot in cm/min A = the average active area of the PA in cm The protection factor at each PAD location shall be calculated using the following equation: [ ] [ ] where the Ct outside shall be determined from the measured chamber vapor dosage of the individual trial over the entire exposure. The value for Ct outside shall be the average of the chamber MeS concentration readings taken during the course of the test subject exposure period Where the measured total mass of MeS for a given PAD falls below 30 ng, the value of 30 ng shall be used for that specific PAD All results for each PAD location shall be expressed in terms of the local physiological protective dosage factor (PPDF) value and shall be calculated according to the following equation: * The site-specific onset of symptoms exposure dosages OSED for each PAD shall be based on ECt 10 values for mustard blistering/ulceration according to Table Table Site-Specific OSED by PAD Location [ ]

420 Page 171 of 238 6/6/2014 Head/neck Body Region Torso/buttocks (excluding perineum) Arm/hand PAD Location 1, 1A, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 19, 19A , 12, 13, 13A, 14, 14A, , 8, 9, 10, 10A, 20, 20A 50 Leg/foot 17, 17A, 18, 18A, Perineum 16, 16A 25 OSED (mg min m- 3 ) The average local PPDF values at each PAD location for all specimens tested shall be calculated A systemic PPDF shall also be calculated from the PAD data. The systemic protection analysis shall use the systemic weighting body region hazard analysis values from the Defense Research Establishment Suffield Report and National Research Council Report to calculate the systemic physiological protective dosage factor for each ensemble test (PPDF sys ). The PPDF sys for each specimen is calculated as follows, where each of the terms is calculated using the information in Table

421 Page 172 of 238 6/6/2014 Table ED 50 i Values by PAD and Body Location Body Region i for BRHA Model PADs Mapped to This Region (Average Dosage from Each PAD, Then Calculate PF i ) Area of Body Region ( dz i, cm 2 ) Scalp 1,1A Ears 2, Face, cheeks, and neck 4,5,19,19A Chin and neck 4, Nape Abdomen 13A Back 11,12,14A Axillae Upper arm medial Upper arm lateral Elbow fold 8,9,10,10A Elbow 8,9,10,10A Forearm extensor 10,10A Forearm flexor 10,10A Hands dorsum 20,20A Hands palmar 20,20A Buttocks Groin 13, Scrotum 16,16A Thigh anterior 17,17A Thigh posterior 17,17A Knee 17,17A,18,18A Popliteal space (back of knees) 17,17A,18,18A Shins 18,18A Calves 18,18A Feet dorsum Feet plantar ED 50 i for Severe Effects (VX) for Body Region (mg/individual)

422 Page 173 of 238 6/6/ The average PPDF sys for all specimens tested shall be calculated Report The individual specimen and average local PPDF i values for each PAD location shall be recorded and reported The PPDFsys value for each specimen and the average PPDF sys value for the ensemble tes shall be recorded and reported A spreadsheet shall be prepared that shows all test measurements and calculations, includi least the following: (1) The MeS vapor exposure concentration for PAD lot qualification (2) The exposure time used for PAD lot qualification (3) The measured MeS mass on each PAD used for PAD lot qualification (4) Each individual and the average PAD uptake rate (5) The measured MeS mass on each PAD used in the dressing room, stage 1 undressing room, and stage 2 undressing room. (6) The measured MeS mass on each PAD placed on the test subject (7) The calculated vapor dosage for each PAD placed on the test subject Interpretation. The average local PPDF i values at each PAD location and the average PPDF sys value sha used to determine pass or fail performance Report. The percent inward leakage of sulfur hexafluoride into the ensemble shall be calculated, recorded, and reported based on the measured concentration inside the ensemble versus th average measured concentration in the test chamber for each sampling location using the following equation: Interpretation. Failure at any sampling location shall constitute failure of the test. Supplemental Information File Name MIST_Paper_NCSU.pdf 1994_12Tables.docx NFPA_1991_FR_16_Formatted_Text_edited.docx Description includes annex text Submitter Information Verification

423 Page 174 of 238 6/6/2014 Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Feb 19 16:05:17 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: The proposed change provides a change to an industry standardized method for measuring inward leakage of gases used in other standards within the project. See white paper provided by North Carolina State University (see attached document). The technical committee is proactively addressing the expected limited availability of SF6 for test implementation by replacing the inward leakage test with the MIST test. Response Message: Public Input No. 175-NFPA [Section No. 8.8] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 18 Affirmative All 2 Affirmative with Comments 4 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E.

424 Page 175 of 238 6/6/2014 Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Rogers, Paul G. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Ormond, R. Bryan Proposed changes are accepted, but any alterations to the current MIST method need to be reviewed and must be proven to be possible for the testing facilities to actually perform. Stull, Jeffrey O. Further review of this test method is needed to ensure that the specific conditions chosen will provide the expected levels of performance appropriate for vapor-protective ensembles. Negative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. Not enough data exists to show that MIST will be able to provide the data necessary at very low levels of breakthrough. Beggs, Dale Gregory Per TI/Rob West: Concur with other Negative votes, dissenting comments & justifications. Needs additional TC re-working discussions for greater / unanimous agreement potential. Lovasic, Susan L. Should stay with SF6 test. See file "Negative-Inward leakage-sf6 to MIST". Nystrom, Ulf We are concerned the MIST test may not be the most appropriate method to evaluate level A suits and we are are concerned about the reduction of the protection factor requirement to 1080.

425 Page 176 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 54-NFPA [ Section No ] This test shall apply to vapor-protective suit elements and visor materials. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu Feb 20 19:51:59 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: The test within the current nfpa edition does not properly evaluate visors for burst. Public Input No. 23-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 20 Affirmative All 4 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J.

426 Page 177 of 238 6/6/2014 Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur - considering other comments. Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is. Stull, Jeffrey O. A similar changes is needed to remove visor materials from puncture propagation tear resistance testing (paragraph ). The requirement for visor puncture propagation tear resistance has been proposed for deletion as part of FR-46.

427 Page 178 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 55-NFPA [ Section No ] Cut resistance testing shall be performed under a load of 200 g 150 g ( 7 oz 5.5 oz ). Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu Feb 20 19:52:57 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Correlating the cut resistance requirements in NFPA 1991 to all other standards in the project. In the last revision cycle of NFPA 1991, the ASTM F 1790 test method was updated to the 2005 edition, but at that time it was not realized that the method was changed in a manner to make it more severe. As a result, a TIA was submitted to reduce the weight used in the test for gloves. No other adjustment was made. Since that time, this same change was made in other standards within the project either through TIA s or during revision cycles. However, along with the weight reductions, the requirement was also reduces from 25 mm to 20 mm. NFPA 1991 is the only standard within the project where this change was not incorporated. Response Message: Public Input No. 66-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 20 Affirmative All 4 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W.

428 Page 179 of 238 6/6/2014 Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur - considering other comments. Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is. Stull, Jeffrey O. This specific change should be validated by the examination of available data at the new blade travel distance.

429 Page 180 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 56-NFPA [ Section No ] Cut resistance testing shall be performed under a load of 400 g 350 g ( 14 oz 12.5 oz ). Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu Feb 20 19:54:05 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Correlating the cut resistance requirements in NFPA 1991 to all other standards in the project. In the last revision cycle of NFPA 1991, the ASTM F 1790 test method was updated to the 2005 edition, but at that time it was not realized that the method was changed in a manner to make it more severe. As a result, a TIA was submitted to reduce the weight used in the test for gloves. No other adjustment was made. Since that time, this same change was made in other standards within the project either through TIA s or during revision cycles. However, along with the weight reductions, the requirement was also reduces from 25 mm to 20 mm. NFPA 1991 is the only standard within the project where this change was not incorporated. Response Message: Public Input No. 67-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 20 Affirmative All 4 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W.

430 Page 181 of 238 6/6/2014 Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is. Stull, Jeffrey O. This specific change should be validated by the examination of available data at the new blade travel distance.

431 Page 182 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 57-NFPA [ Section No ] Procedure. Specimens shall be tested in accordance with ASTM F 1342, Standard Test Method for Resistance of Protective Clothing Materials to Puncture. Test Method A, conducting three punctures per specimen with the modifications listed in through A mm (0.01 in.) thick, ultrahigh molecular weight, high-density polyethylene shall be used as a standard reference material Puncture probes shall be qualified first before use in testing by showing an average puncture resistance of 10.3 N (2.3 lbf) The compression load cell shall be capable of discerning 0.5 N (0.1 lbf) of force in the range suitable for the material being tested. The upper limit of the load cell shall not be more than 10 times the actual puncture resistance measured for the specimens. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu Feb 20 19:57:43 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: Adding a verification procedure and reference material to test method Public Input No. 68-NFPA [Section No ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 20 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 1 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention

432 Page 183 of 238 6/6/2014 Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur - considering Negative vote commentary. Stull, Jeffrey O. The source for the standard reference material should be provided or a more detailed specification provided. Data utilizing the standard reference material should be provided. Negative with Comment Lovasic, Susan L. While the concept of adding a reference standard for this test is good, there is not enough detail provided. The description of the reference standard in section is not adequate to ensure that test labs are using comparable materials for qualification of the test probes. More details on physical properties such as burst strength, breaking strength, stiffness, etc should be provided so that the appropriate reference materials can be obtained and used by the labs lists "10.3 N" as the required result for all probes (assuming using the reference standard - that should be added to the text also). There should be a +/- limit included with the 10.3 N target. Otherwise the probes would only pass by delivering that exact level of performance.

433 Page 184 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 58-NFPA [ Section No ] Application. This test method shall apply to suit materials, visor materials, glove materials, and footwear element upper materials. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 21 07:29:51 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 2 Affirmative with Comments 1 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention The technical committee wants to clarify which materials need to be tested. Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D.

434 Page 185 of 238 6/6/2014 Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur - considering Negative vote commentary. Negative with Comment Lovasic, Susan L. If non-encapsulating suit designs are permitted, then ALL "visor" requirements must be applied to all components of the external SCBA system. That text must be added to clarify what must be tested.

435 Page 186 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 59-NFPA [ Section No ] Apparatus. The test apparatus specified in ISO 17492, Clothing for protection against heat and flame Determination of heat transmission on exposure to both flame and radiant heat ASTM F 2700, Standard Test Method for Unsteady-State Heat Transfer Evaluation of Flame Resistant Materials for Clothing with Continuous Heating, shall be used. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 21 07:40:46 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: The technical committee is adding this reference for consistency with other documents in the project. Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M.

436 Page 187 of 238 6/6/2014 Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is.

437 Page 188 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 60-NFPA [ Section No ] Procedure. Global FR-74 Hide Deleted TPP H eat transfer performance testing shall be performed in accordance with ISO 17492, Clothing for protection against heat and flame Determination of heat transmission on exposure to both flame and radiant heat, shall be used ASTM F 2700, Standard for Test Method for Unsteady-State Heat Transfer Evaluation of Flame Resistant Materials for Clothing with Continous Heating, with the following modifications: (1) An exposure heat flux of 84 kw/m 2 (2.0 cal/cm 2 s) shall be used. The optional spacer shall not be used. (2) The contact configuration shall be used for testing of all material specimens. The heat transfer performance value shall be used with calculations made using the heat flux in calories per square centimeter per second and reported as the HTP rating. The thermal threshold index analysis method shall be used with calculations made using the heat flux in calories per square centimeter per second and reported as the TPP rating. T-150 quartz tubes shall be used. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 21 07:42:52 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: The technical committee is adding this reference for consistency with other documents in the PC&E project. Ballot Results This item has passed ballot

438 Page 189 of 238 6/6/ Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is.

439 Page 190 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 61-NFPA [ Section No ] If an individual result from any test set varies more than ±8 ± 10 percent from the average result, the results from the test set shall be discarded and another set of specimens shall be tested. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 21 07:50:14 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: The technical committee is making this change for consistency with other documents in the PC&E project. Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William

440 Page 191 of 238 6/6/2014 Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is.

441 Page 192 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 62-NFPA [ Section No ] 8.19 Puncture Resistance Test Two Application. This test method shall apply to vapor-protective footwear element soles Sample Preparation Samples shall be footwear sole sections Samples shall be conditioned as specified in Specimens Specimens shall be footwear sole sections At least three specimens shall be tested Procedure. Puncture resistance shall be performed in accordance with Section 5 of ANSI Z41, Standard for Personal Protection Protective Footwear Report. The force required to puncture the sole reinforcement device of each specimen shall be recorded and reported Interpretation. One or more footwear specimens failing this test shall constitute failing performance. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 21 07:53:00 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: The Technical Committee is deleting this test method because it is contained in ASTM F2413. Public Input No. 62-NFPA [Section No. 8.19] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot

442 Page 193 of 238 6/6/ Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is.

443 Page 194 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 63-NFPA [ Section No ] 8.19 Abrasion Resistance Test Application. This test method shall apply to vapor-protective footwear element soles with heels Sample s Preparation Samples for conditioning shall be uniform cylinders of footwear soles and heel material Samples shall be conditioned as specified in Specimens Specimens shall be footwear soles At least A minimum of three specimens of the footwear soles and heel material shall be tested Procedure. Abrasion resistance shall be performed in accordance with ASTM D 1630, Standard Test Method for Rubber Property Abrasion Resistance (NBS Abrader) ISO 4649, Rubber, vulcanized or thermoplastic Determination of abrasion resistance using a rotating cylindrical drum device, Method A, with a vertical force of over 10 N over an abrasion distance of 40 m Report. The abrasion resistance rating relative loss volume of each specimen shall be recorded and reported Interpretation. One or more footwear specimens failing this test shall constitute failing performance. Supplemental Information File Name NFPA_1991_FR_63_Formatted_Text_edited.docx Description Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 21 07:55:12 EST 2014 Committee Statement

444 Page 195 of 238 6/6/2014 Committee Statement: The proposed change in test method accounts for the changes to the project test methods for footwear abrasion resistance. This change was made partly to the unavailability of the abradant and standard rubber compound specified in ASTM D1630, which was formerly specified. Response Message: Public Input No. 81-NFPA [Section No. 8.20] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael

445 Page 196 of 238 6/6/2014 Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Currently reads "This test method shall apply to vapor-protective footwear element soles with heels." I believe it should read "This test method shall apply to vapor-protective footwear element soles and heels."

446 Page 197 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 64-NFPA [ Section No ] 8.21 Impact and Compression Test Application. This test method shall apply to the toe section of vapor-protective footwear elements Sample Preparation Samples shall be complete footwear toes Samples shall be conditioned as specified in Specimens Specimens shall be complete footwear toes At least three specimens shall be tested Procedure. Footwear specimens shall be tested in accordance with Section 1.4 of ANSI Z41, Standard for Personal Protection Protective Footwear Report. The impact and compression forces for each specimen shall be recorded and reported Interpretation. One or more footwear specimens failing this test shall constitute failing performance. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 21 07:56:46 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: The Technical Committee is deleting this section because the test method is contained in ASTM F2413 Public Input No. 63-NFPA [Section No. 8.21] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot

447 Page 198 of 238 6/6/ Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is.

448 Page 199 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 65-NFPA [ Section No ] 8.21 Slip Resistance Test Application. This test method shall apply to vapor-protective footwear element soles Sample Preparation. Samples Samples shall be complete footwear Samples shall be conditioned as specified in ISO 13287, Personal Protective Equipment Footwear Test Method for Slip Resistance Specimens Specimens shall be complete footwear heels and ball of soles elements in men s size 9D, medium width, or equivalent At least three specimens of footwear heels and at least three specimens of ball of soles shall be tested Procedure. Slip resistance testing shall be performed in accordance with ASTM F 489, Standard Test Method for Static Coefficient of Friction of Shoe Sole and Heel Materials as Measured by the James Machine, for a dry condition. ISO 13287, Personal Protective Equipment Footwear Test Method for Slip Resistance, in the following configurations and references to any other flooring and/or contaminate within ISO shall not apply: (1) Footwear shall be tested both in the forepart and heel positions. (2) Footwear shall be tested in the wet condition. The wet condition shall be achieved using distilled or de-ionized water. The water shall be applied to thoroughly wet the testing surface and make a pool at least as wide and as long as the test portion of the footwear in the area of initial contact. (3) Footwear shall be tested on a quarry tile surface that meets the following specifications: (a) (b) (c) (d) The surface is a flat, unglazed clay quarry tile that is wider than the test specimen and long enough to allow a sliding distance of at least 75 mm (3 in.) without crossing a joint. The surface is sufficiently flat to allow it to be secured on the mounting table such that no movement occurs between the tile and the mounting table during the test. The surface has a ribbed profile or directional marking on the underside to identify the direction in which the tile should be aligned (with the ribs parallel to the sliding direction). The surface conforms to the values specified in Table where calibrated by the Slider 96 method. (4) Calibration of the quarry tiles shall be checked after every 10 tests or prior to each day of testing, whichever is less frequent, to ensure that they are not being worn smooth or otherwise damaged. Table Calibration Values for Quarry Tiles

449 Page 200 of 238 6/6/2014 Dry CoF Minimum Maximus Wet CoF Report. The static coefficient of friction average of four readings obtained from each heel and each ball of sole shall be recorded and reported as the average of a total footwear sole The coefficient of friction of each specimen shall be recorded and reported The average coefficient of friction of all specimens for each configuration shall be calculated, recorded, and reported Interpretation. One or more footwear specimens failing this test shall constitute failing The average coefficient of friction for each configuration shall be used to determine pass/fail performance. Supplemental Information File Name NFPA_1991_FR_65_Formatted_Text_edited.docx Description Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 21 08:00:09 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Revised performance requirement to reflect new whole footwear slip testing. This will bring this requirement in line with other documents in the project. Response Message: Public Input No. 58-NFPA [Section No. 8.23] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot

450 Page 201 of 238 6/6/ Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approve as is.

451 Page 202 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 66-NFPA [ New Section after ] Closure samples shall be permitted to be individual samples cut to specimen width. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 21 08:02:19 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: The TC is adding this section to allow for tacking of the closure. Response Message: Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P.

452 Page 203 of 238 6/6/2014 Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. As written "Closure samples shall be permitted to be individual samples cut to specimen width", this does not achieve the intent of the change - "The TC is adding this section to allow for tacking of the closure." The text should be changed to "Closure samples shall be permitted to be individual samples cut to specimen width and can be secured (tacked) at the cut edges." FR-66 is redundant to FR-67.

453 Page 204 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 67-NFPA [ New Section after ] Closure specimens shall be permitted to be 25 mm ± 6 mm (1 in. ± 1 4 in.) larger than the required specimen size. The specimen edges of the closure shall be permitted to be secured. Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 21 08:05:18 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: The technical committee is providing this requirement to permit the tacking of the closure. Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 21 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William

454 Page 205 of 238 6/6/2014 Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Stull, Jeffrey O. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur Lovasic, Susan L. Approved as is. FR-66 is redundant to FR-67.

455 Page 206 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 52-NFPA [ New Section after 8.27 ] 8.26 Manikin Test Specimens Three specimens shall be tested Fabrics to be tested shall be used to construct the standard garment design specified in of ASTM F 1930, Test Method for Evaluation of Flame Resistant Clothing for Protection Against Flash Fire Simulations Using an Instrumented Manikin Procedure Specimens shall be tested in accordance with ASTM F 1930, Test Method for Evaluation of Flame Resistant Clothing for Protection Against Flash Fire Simulations Using an Instrumented Manikin, using an exposure heat flux of 84 kw/m 2 (2.02 cal/cm 2 -sec) with an exposure time of 6 seconds The manikin shall be dressed in 150 g/m 2 (4.5 oz/yd 2 ) (± 5 percent), jersey knit, 100 percent cotton underwear briefs and short-sleeved crew-neck T-shirts before the garment specimen is placed on the manikin. Supplemental Information File Name NFPA_1991FR_52_Text_edited.docx Description Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Thu Feb 20 19:27:18 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: This addition of the Manikin Test will provide for improved user protection by establishing minimum burn requirements during a full scale chemical flash scenario. Response Message: Public Input No. 173-NFPA [New Section after 8.27] Ballot Results

456 Page 207 of 238 6/6/2014 This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 19 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 2 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Nystrom, Ulf There is probably a need to look into reproducibility, repeatability and variability arising from a number of factors including garment sizes and fit. Also, the 6s exposure time requirement may need some substantiation and/or furthter looking into. Stull, Jeffrey O. No specific criteria have been provided to go along with the proposed test method. Negative with Comment

457 Page 208 of 238 6/6/2014 Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur with other & Negative vote commentary, dissenting comments & justifications. Needs additional TC re-working discussions. Lovasic, Susan L. The rationale for my negative vote is: (1) The existing propane flash test is adequate for the needs since it assesses the actual ensemble being certified. (2) The bulkiness of most suit fabrics are not conducive to being cut and sewn into the basic coverall pattern specified in ASTM F1930. (3) The proposed test will not assess what the NFPA 1991 ensemble's protection from potential burn injury will be since the pattern does not match the actual ensemble and there is no testing of the visor or glove materials. (4) The selection of 25% body burn as the limit is arbitrary. (5) The selection of 6 seconds flame exposure time is arbitrary. (7) This testing is not as relevant as the existing HTP test which is conducted on all components of the ensemble (suit fabric, visor material, glove materials) to determine the level of thermal insulation (burn injury potential) of these materials when exposure to heat and flame.

458 Page 209 of 238 6/6/ ] First Revision No. 68-NFPA [ Sections , , Apparatus A human-form mannequin manikin shall be used to support the protective suit during chemical flash fire testing. The mannequin manikin shall be coated with a suitable flame-retardant coating A one-piece flame-retardant coverall shall be placed over the mannequin manikin The protective ensemble to be tested shall be placed on the mannequin manikin, over the flame-resistant clothing, in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions A flash chamber shall be constructed as illustrated in Figure and shall include the following: (1) It shall have an internal width and depth of 2 m, ±100 mm (6 1 2 ft, ±4 in.) and a height of 2.5 m, ±200 mm (8 ft, ±8 in.). (2) It shall be constructed of 50 mm 100 mm (2 in. 4 in.) framing lumber or other suitable structural material. Fire wall Firewall, 20 mm ( 3 4 in.), or other suitable flame-resistant paneling, shall be used on the opposite two walls of the chamber walls. A piece of 13 mm ( 1 2 in.) heat-tempered safety glass of sufficient size shall be used on the remaining opposite chamber walls for multiple viewing points during testing. At least one of the glass walls shall be attached by a means that allows for easy removal of the mannequin. Both glass walls shall be configured to achieve gastight seals with the chamber. (3) All fire wall seams The chamber shall be taped and the interior walls of the chamber coated sealed with a suitable flame- retardant resistant material to provide a gastight seal when the door is closed.. (4) It shall have a port for filling the chamber with propane gas located as shown in Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure The port shall allow isolation of the propane source through a valve. The port shall be leakfree with respect to the outside environment. (5) It shall have two ports for electric ignitors located as in Figure Figure Figure Figure It shall have a minimum of two ports for electric igniters located on one wall of the chamber. The ports shall be positioned at heights on the chamber wall such that the propane will ignite immediately once triggered. The port shall be leakfree with respect to the outside environment. (6) It shall have a top that allows containment of propane gas within the chamber during filling and venting of flash pressure after ignition. (7) A suitable stand that allows the mannequin manikin to be positioned 305 mm, ± 25 mm (1 ft, ±1 in.) above the chamber floor shall be constructed. (8) The flash fire chamber shall be located so that testing is performed at a temperature of 24 C, ± 11 C (75 F, ± 20 F) and a relative humidity of 70 percent, ± 25 percent. Tests shall not be conducted outdoors during precipitation.

459 Page 210 of 238 6/6/2014 Figure Overall Ensemble Chemical Flash Chamber Verification of Flash Exposure Prior to testing each day, thermocouples shall be placed in the empty chamber so that temperature measurements are taken at the following heights from the floor: 30 cm (12 in.), 76 cm (30 in.), 122 cm (48 in.), 168 cm (66 in.), and 213 cm (84 in.). All heights are ± 2.5 cm (± 1 in.) A data acquisition system shall be used to collect the temperature readings during the burn exposure and shall be sufficient to provide at least 1 temperature reading per second for each thermocouple used Propane gas, at 99 percent purity or better, shall be metered into the chamber at a delivery pressure of kpa, ± 13.8 kpa (25 psi, ±2 psi) and rate of 0.16 m 3 /min, ± 0.01 m 3 /min (5 1 2 ft 3 /min, ± 1 2 ft 3 /min). The concentration of propane within the chamber shall be sufficient to produce a visible chemical flash fire lasting 7 seconds, ±1 second. The concentration of the propane shall be permitted to be checked by a combustible gas meter or similar detector. for 2 minutes ±1 minute to produce a visible chemical flash fire lasting 7 seconds, ± 1 second. The exact time that it takes to produce a visible chemical flash fire lasting 7 seconds, ± 1 shall be recorded. The concentration of the propane shall be permitted to be checked by a combustible gas meter or similar detector After determination of the adequate time to create a 7-second, ± 1 second flash fire exposure, the data collected from the thermocouples shall be evaluated to determine the maximum temperatures reached during the exposure at each height location. The maximum average temperature of all locations shall be within a temperature range of 650 C to 1150 C (1202 F to 2102 F) Procedure Each protective ensemble selected shall be tested for gastight integrity in accordance with ASTM F 1052, Standard Test Method for Pressure Testing of Vapor-Protective Ensembles The suited mannequin shall be placed on the stand in the center of the flash chamber in an upright stationary position

460 Page 211 of 238 6/6/2014 Propane gas, at 99 percent purity or better, shall be metered into the chamber at a delivery pressure of kpa, ±13.8 kpa (25 psi, ±2 psi) and rate of 0.16 m 3 /min, ±0.01 m 3 /min (5 1 2 ft 3 /min, ± 1 2 ft 3 /min). The concentration of propane within the chamber shall be sufficient to produce a visible chemical flash fire lasting 7 seconds, ±1 second. The concentration of the propane shall be permitted to be checked by a combustible gas meter or similar detector A gastight integrity test shall be performed on the ensemble in accordance with Section 8.2 prior to the chemical flash fire exposure The suited manikin shall be placed on the stand in the center of the flash chamber in an upright stationary position Propane gas, at 99 percent purity or better, shall be metered into the chamber at a delivery pressure of kpa, ± 13.8 kpa (25 psi, ± 2 psi) and rate of 0.16 m 3 /min, ± 0.01 m 3 /min (5 1 2 ft 3 /min, ± 1 2 ft 3 /min). The concentration of propane within the chamber shall be sufficient to produce a visible chemical flash fire lasting 7 seconds, ±1 second. The concentration of the propane shall be permitted to be checked by a combustible gas meter or similar detector The flash chamber shall be viewed at both vantage points, front and back, throughout the test. Video documentation shall also be conducted from the front vantage point The chamber atmosphere shall be remotely ignited at 30 seconds, ±5 seconds after the chamber has been filled with propane gas The suited mannequin manikin shall not be removed until all surfaces have cooled to ambient temperature The protective ensemble shall be removed from the mannequin manikin and examined visually for physical signs of damage from thermal exposure Global FR-90 Hide Deleted A gastight integrity test shall be performed on the ensemble in accordance with Section 8.2, Gastight Integrity Test, following the chemical flash fire exposure Following gastight integrity testing, the ensemble shall be donned by a test subject and evaluated for visual acuity The test subject shall have a minimum visual acuity of 20/20 in each eye, uncorrected or corrected with contact lenses, as determined in a visual acuity test or doctor's examination Visual acuity testing from within the ensemble shall be conducted using a standard 6.1 m (20 ft) eye chart with a normal lighting range of 100 to 150 ft - candles at the chart and with the test subject positioned at a distance of 6.1 m (20 ft) from the chart The test subject shall then read the standard eye chart through the lens of the SCBA facepiece and ensemble visor(s) to determine his or her visual acuity All testing shall be performed at a temperature of 24 C, ±11 C (75 F, ±20 F) and a relative humidity of 70 percent, ±25 percent. Tests shall not be conducted outdoors during precipitation.

461 Page 212 of 238 6/6/ Report The before and after gastight integrity test results, afterflame time, and visor clarity shall be recorded and reported for each test specimen An illustration of the protective ensemble, as shown in Figure , shall be prepared, and the location of any damage shall be recorded and reported. Damage shall include but not be limited to charring, blistering, evidence of material melting, delamination, or destruction of any ensemble components. Figure Suit Diagram (for noting damage locations) The verification burn visible chemical flash fire time shall be recorded and reported The verification burn maximum average temperature of all locations shall be recorded and reported Separate illustrations shall be prepared for over covers if tested with the protective ensemble. Supplemental Information File Name NFPA_1991_FR_68_Formatted_edited.docx Description Submitter Information Verification

462 Page 213 of 238 6/6/2014 Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Feb 21 08:15:02 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: The Task Group identified multiple concerns with current procedure and the variability in test results. Inconsistent procedures were noted in the conduct of the test due lack of testing apparatus specifications and no verification procedure. Chamber verification testing was performed at UL using thermocouples to measure temperatures at various heights in the center of the chamber (see attached data). This verification procedure has been included in the test method for recording and reporting procedures. Other items were introduced into the test method to reduce variability. Response Message: Public Input No. 101-NFPA [Sections , , ] Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 20 Affirmative All 4 Affirmative with Comments 0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R.

463 Page 214 of 238 6/6/2014 Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur - considering other comments. Lovasic, Susan L. There are several sections that required further revisions It should note that adjustment to the 2 +/- 1 min suggested propane fill time is permitted to achieve the 7 +/- 1 second visible flash fire time requirement the phrase "..the adequate time to create.." in the first sentence should be edited to be "..the propane fill time required to create" What if the fire time is 7 +/- 1 second, but the measured temperatures during the verification burn are not all within the C specified? What should be done to reconcile any differences? is redundant to In the report section ( ) will need to add a notation to record the ambient temperature and RH when the test burn was completed. Stull, Jeffrey O. This first revision is confusing because it should be part of FR-52 instead of its own first revision.

464 Page 215 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 86-NFPA [ New Section after ] 8.30 Visor Puncture Resistance Test Application This test shall apply to visor materials Where the visor is constructed of several layers, then all layers, assembled in the order in which they appear in the suit, shall be tested as a composite Sample Preparation Samples shall be at least 2 m 2 (2 yd 2 ) of material Samples shall be conditioned as specified in Specimens Specimens shall be 450 mm 305 mm A minimum of five specimens shall be tested Procedure. Specimens shall be tested in accordance with Section 9.13 of ANSI Z87.1, American National Standard for Occupational and Educational Personal Eye and Face Protective Devices, with the following modifications: (1) Visor material shall be securely mounted to the test fixture as shown in Figure (2) The sample number shall be indicated. (3) The impact location shall be in the center of the visor Report Visible penetration of the impactor shall be recorded and reported Interpretation Penetration on any single impact shall be used to determine compliance. Supplemental Information File Name NFPA_1991_FR_86_Text_edited.docx Description Submitter Information Verification

465 Page 216 of 238 6/6/2014 Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Sat Mar 08 15:49:48 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: The Technical Committee is adding a test for visor puncture resistance. Response Message: Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 20 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 1 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C.

466 Page 217 of 238 6/6/2014 Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur - considering Negative vote commentary. Stull, Jeffrey O. This test method is only a concept and should be validated. Negative with Comment Lovasic, Susan L. If non-encapsulating suit designs are permitted, then all suit "visor" requirements must be applied to the "visor/facepiece" of the externally worn SCBA system.

467 Page 218 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 87-NFPA [ New Section after ] 8.28 Visor Drop-Ball Impact Resistance Test Application This test shall apply to visor materials Where the visor is constructed of several layers, then all layers, assembled in the order in which they appear in the suit, shall be tested as a composite Sample Preparation Samples shall be at least 2 m 2 (2 yd 2 ) of material Samples shall be conditioned as specified in Specimens Specimens shall be 450 mm 305 mm A minimum of five specimens shall be tested Procedure. Specimens shall be tested in accordance with Section 9.6 of ANSI Z87.1, American National Standard for Occupational and Educational Personal Eye and Face Protective Devices, with the following modifications: (1) Visor material shall be securely mounted to the test fixture as shown in Figure (2) The sample number shall be indicated. (3) The impact location shall be in the center of the visor. Figure Test Fixture.

468 Page 219 of 238 6/6/ Report Visible penetration or full-thickness cracks shall be recorded and reported Interpretation Penetration or full-thickness cracking on any single impact shall be used to determine compliance. Supplemental Information File Name NFPA_1991_FR_87_Text_edited.docx Description Submitter Information Verification Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Sat Mar 08 15:54:05 EST 2014 Committee Statement

469 Page 220 of 238 6/6/2014 Committee Statement: Response Message: The Technical Committee is adding a new impact test for evaluating visor toughness. For visors this test is more appropriate than the Ball Burst test. Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 20 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 1 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C. Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M.

470 Page 221 of 238 6/6/2014 accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur - considering Negative vote commentary. Stull, Jeffrey O. This test method is only a concept and should be validated. Negative with Comment Lovasic, Susan L. If non-encapsulating suit designs are permitted, then all suit "visor" requirements must be applied to the "visor/facepiece" of the externally worn SCBA system.

471 Page 222 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 88-NFPA [ New Section after ] 8.29 Visor High-Mass Impact Resistance Test Application This test shall apply to visor materials Where the visor is constructed of several layers, then all layers, assembled in the order in which they appear in the suit, shall be tested as a composite Sample Preparation Samples shall be at least 2 m 2 (2 yd 2 ) of material Samples shall be conditioned as specified in Specimens Specimens shall be 450 mm 305 mm A minimum of five specimens shall be tested Procedure. Specimens shall be tested in accordance with Section 9.11 of ANSI Z87.1, American National Standard for Occupational and Educational Personal Eye and Face Protective Devices, with the following modifications: (1) Visor material shall be securely mounted to the test fixture as shown in Figure (2) The sample number shall be indicated. (3) The impact location shall be in the center of the visor Report Visible penetration or full-thickness cracks shall be recorded and reported Interpretation Penetration or full-thickness cracking on any single impact shall be used to determine compliance. Supplemental Information File Name NFPA_1991_FR_88_Text_edited.docx Description Submitter Information Verification

472 Page 223 of 238 6/6/2014 Submitter Full Name: [ Not Specified ] Organization: [ Not Specified ] Street Address: City: State: Zip: Submittal Date: Sat Mar 08 16:00:06 EST 2014 Committee Statement Committee Statement: Response Message: Ballot Results This item has passed ballot 31 Eligible Voters 7 Not Returned 20 Affirmative All 3 Affirmative with Comments 1 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention The Technical Committee is adding a test for visor high mass impact resistance. Not Returned Buck, Ted S. Kelly, Bruce S. North, John W. Ott, Louis V. Pever, Kenneth A. Shelton, Robert E. Starrett, William M. Affirmative All Alexander, William Clifford, Brian J. Corrado, Steven D. Daly, Jr., Richard P. Fithian, William A. Greene, Russell R. Haines, Todd W. Harkness, A. Ira Haskell, III, William E. Kavalesky, Pamela A. Kienzle, Michael P. Lancaster, Beth C. Lehtonen, Karen E. Mann, Philip C.

473 Page 224 of 238 6/6/2014 Nystrom, Ulf Ormond, R. Bryan Rogers, Paul G. Wisner, Jr., John E. Zeigler, James P. Ziskin, Michael Affirmative with Comment Baxter, Christina M. accept as is Beggs, Dale Gregory Concur - considering Negative vote commentary. Stull, Jeffrey O. This test method is only a concept and should be validated. Negative with Comment Lovasic, Susan L. If non-encapsulating suit designs are permitted, then all suit "visor" requirements must be applied to the "visor/facepiece" of the externally worn SCBA system.

474 Page 225 of 238 6/6/2014 First Revision No. 89-NFPA [ New Section after ] 8.27 Chemical Permeation Resistance Test Two Application This method shall apply to the suit, visor, glove, and footwear element materials, and to the selected elements seams Specific requirements for testing suit materials after flexing and abrading shall be as specified in Specific requirements for testing glove materials after abrading shall be as specified in Specific requirements for testing footwear materials after abrading shall be as specified in Specific requirements for testing seams shall be as specified in Samples. Samples shall be either vapor-protective ensembles or suit materials, visor materials, gloves, and footwear of the sizes specified in the modifications Specimens Specimens shall be of a size required to fit the permeation test cell A minimum of three specimens shall be tested against each challenge chemical For composite materials, only the chemical protection layer shall be the sample for testing for chemical permeation resistance Following any sample preparation, the specimens shall be conditioned as specified in Apparatus A controlled environmental chamber shall be used to maintain the test cell, air flow control system, and reagent chemicals within ± 2.0 C (± 4.0 F) of the test temperature and ± 5 percent of the test relative humidity. The controlled environment chamber shall be sized so that it can be used for conditioning test materials, to test cells when not in use, to challenge chemicals and other test apparatus prior to testing, as well as for holding the test cells horizontally during use while connected to the air delivery system manifold and to the effluent sampling mechanism * The test cell shall be a two-chambered cell for contacting the specimen with the challenge chemical on the specimen s normal outside surface and for flowing a collection medium on the specimen s normal inside surface, consisting of parts shown in Figure (a) and individual part detail shown in Figure (b) through Figure (f). Figure (a) Diffusion Test Cell Assembly. (Source: W. L. Gore & Associates, Inc.)

475 Page 226 of 238 6/6/2014 Figure (b) Sample Support Plate. (Source: W. L. Gore & Associates, Inc.) Figure (c) Compression Plate. (Source: W. L. Gore & Associates, Inc.) Figure (d) Lower Body (Collection Side). (Source: W. L. Gore & Associates, Inc.)

476 Page 227 of 238 6/6/2014 Figure (e) Upper Body (Challenge Side). (Source: W. L. Gore & Associates, Inc.) Figure (f) Top Cap. (Source: W. L. Gore & Associates, Inc.) * An air delivery system and manifold shall be used to provide oil-free, conditioned air to the test cell/fixtures at a rate of 2 standard liters per minute (SLPM) per test cell/fixture with a temperature precision of ± 0.2 C and a relative humidity precision of ± 5 percent An analytical system shall be used to evaluate the amount of challenge chemical in the effluent air streams from the collection side of the test cell and shall be selected to provide the ability to measure the challenge chemical at 0.1 µg/cm 2 over the test exposure period. The analytical system shall be permitted to include a bubbler tube, solid sorbent, or real-time chemical analyzer. Effluent sampling shall be permitted to be taken discretely or cumulatively; however, the selected analytical system shall be able to determine all of the challenge chemical permeating through the specimen in 60 minutes * A vacuum pump capable of creating vacuum of at least 5 in. water column shall be used for testing the integrity of the assembled test cell * A manometer or pressure gage capable of measuring pressures or vacuums to 10 in. water column, with an accuracy of 5 percent of scale, shall be used for testing the integrity of the assembled test cell.