Report of the Committee on

Fire Department Rescue Tools

Daniel T. Smith, Chair Illinois Emergency Mgmt. Agency, IL [SE]

Rep. II4inois Fire Service Inst./University of IL

.William Gif t Swayne, Secretary. Holmatro, Inc., MD [M]

Michael J. Amoroso, Amoroso Engr Co. Inc., IL [M] Christopher H. Born, Kempsville Volunteer Fire Dept.& Rescue Squad, Inc., VA[E] Michael Brick, Phoenix Rescue Equipment, PA [M] Daniel F. Czarnecki, Village of Oak Lawn, IL [U] Mark P. Dempsey, Wheaton Volunteer Rescue Squad, MD [U] Dennis N. Gage, Insurance Services Office, Inc., 16-14, NY [I] Thomas W. Gaylord, Township of Morris Fire Dept., NJ [U] Dieter Hesse, LUKAS Hydraulik GmbH & Co. KG, Germany [M] ames A. Kaye, Hale Products Inc., PA[M]

hn D. MarstUler, Harrods Creek Fire Protection District, KY [U] obert L. McKee, Chicago Fire Dept., IL [U]

Richard Otte, Curtiss-Wright Flight Systems Inc., NJ [M] Alan J. Painter, Amkus Rescue Systems, IL [M] Karen E. Strumlock, Intertek Testing Services, NY [RT] Win Van Basten, Willow Grove, PA[SE]

Alternates

Marshall lssen, Underwriters Laboratories Inc., IL [RT] (Voting alto to UL Rep.)

Michael IL Maeomson, Jr., Hurst Emergency Products, NC [M] (Alt. to J. A. Kaye)

Eric D. Marquess, Holmatro, Inc., MD [M] (Alt. to W. G. Swayne)

John D. McCarthy, Curfiss-Wright Flight Systems, Inc., NJ [M] (AIt. to R. ORe)

Robert William O'Gorman, Intertek Testing Services NA Inc., NY [RT]

(Alt. to K. E. Strumlock) John L. Zilles, Amkus Rescue Systems, IL [M]

(Alt. to A.J. Painter)

Staff Liaison: Bruce W. Teele

Committee Scope: This Committee shall have primary responsibility for documents related to the design, inspection, testing, and use of rescue tools for file fire services.

This list represents the membership at the time the Committee was balloted on the text of this edition. Since that time, changes in the membership may have occurred. A key to classifications is found at the front of this book.

This portion of the Technical Committee Report of the Committee on Fire Department Rescue Tools is presented for adoption.

This Report on Comments was prepared by the Technical Committee on Fire Department Rescue Tools, and documents its action on file comments received on its Report on Proposals on NFPA 19S6, Standard on Hydraulic Powered Rescue Tools, as

ubli.shed in the Report on Proposals for the 1999 Spring (May) eeung.

This document when adopted will be retitled, Standard on Powered Rescue Tool Systems.

This Report on Comments has been submitted to letter ballot of the Technical Committee on Fire Department Rescue Tools which consists of 18 voting members; of whom 14 voted affirmatively, and 4 ballots were not returned (Messrs. Dempsey, Gage, Kaye, and Van Basten).

317

N F P A 1 9 3 6 m A 9 9 R O C

(Log #3) 1936- 1 - (Entire Document): Reject SUBMITTER: Ralph Craven, Rend, NV COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1936-54 RECOMMENDATION: Reject entire standard. SUBSTANTIATION: Standard is limiting. Only hydraulic tools are covered. Other tools do same job. Other standards are broken into chapters to cover different types of equipment that does same job. COMMITTEE ACTION: Reject. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: Standard will include electric powered tools. See actions taken on many comments that accomplishes the inclusion of electric powered tools.

(Log #14) 1936- 2 - (Entire Document): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: James B. Graham, Safety Equipment Co. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1936-54 RECOMMENDATION: NFPA 1936 should be modified from its current form to be more generic in nature, thus allowing testing and compliance of non-hydraulic rescue tools that perform similar operations and are used in the same applications. SUBSTANTIATION: Battery powered tools are available and should be allowed to be tested and compete. Failure to modify NFPA 1936 will result in unfair restriction of business for non- hydraulic tools that are on the market today. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: See action taken on Comments 1936-5 (Log #4), and 1936-7 (Log #20), and many other comments that accomplishes the inclusion of electric powered tools.

(Log #15) 1936- 3 - (Entire Document): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Lonnie Toby, Government Fire & Safety Int'l COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1936-54 RECOMMENDATION: NFPA 1936 should be modified from its current form to be more generic in nature, thus allowing testing and compliance of non-hydraulic rescue tools that perform similar operations and are used in the same applications. SUBSTANTIATION: Failure to do so will result in restriction of business for non-hydraulic tools that are currently on the market today. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: See action taken on Comments 1936-5 (Log #4), and 1936-7 (Log #20), and many other comments that accomplishes the inclusion of electric powered tools.

(Log #16) 1936- 4- (Tide): Accept SUBMrlTER: Daniel T. Smith, Thomasboro, IL COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1936-54 RECOMMENDATION: Revise text to read as follows:

Standard on H;.'drau!ic Powered Rescue Tool SUBSTANTIATION: This change is necessary to reflect the fact that there are other types of rescue tool systems besides hydraulic that the Standard should apply to. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

(Log #4) 1936- 5 - (Chapters 1 through 6): Accept SUBM1TTER: John D. McCarthy, Curtiss-Wright Flight Systems Inc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1936-54 RECOMNIENDATION: Section Proposed Change

Title Change to "NFPA 1936 Standard on Powered Rescue Tool Systems" (See Dan Smith Public Comment)

1-1.1 See Dan Smith Public Comment 1-1.2 Replace "hydraulic powered rescue tools" with "powered

rescue tool systems" 1-1.3 See Dan Smitll Public Comment 1-1.4 Replace "hydraulic powered rescue tools" with "powered

rescue tool systems" 1-1.5 Replace "hydraulic powered rescue tools" with powered

rescue tool systems"

1-2.1 See Dan Smith Public Comment 1-2.2 Replace "hydraulic powered rescue tools" with "powered

rescue tool systems" I-3 Definitions CHANGES TO EXISTING... Accessories - Replace "HRT" with "RTS" in 2 places Combination Tool - Remove "hydraulic" in 2 places Cutter - (See Dan Smith Public Comment definition.) Highest Pulling Force (HPF) - Remove "hydraulic" before rescue

tool. Replace "hydraulic pressure" with "input". Highest Spreading Force (HSF) - Remove "hydraulic" before

"rescue tool". Replace "hydraulic pressure" with "input". HRT - Change to "RT" - (See Dan Smith Public Comment

definition.) HRTS - Change to "RTS" - (See Dan Smith Public Comment

definition Hydraulic Rescue Tool (HRT)- Change to "Rescue Tool (RT)."

(See Dan Smith Public Comment # definition.) Hydraulic Rescue Tool System (HRTS) - Change to "Rescue

Tools System (RTS)." Identical HRT - Change to "Identical RT." (See Dan Smith

Pubfic Comment definition.) Lowest Pulling Force (LPF) - Remove "hydraulic' before rescue

tool. Replace "hydraulic pressure" with "input". Lowest Spreading Force (LSF) - Remove "hydraulic" before

"rescue tool". Replace "hydraulic pressure" with "input". Prime Mover - (See Dan Smith Public Comment definition.) Product Label - Replace "HRT" with "RT"

Pulling Force - Remove "hydraulic". Ram - (See Dan Smith Public Comment definition.) Rated System Hydraulic Pressure - Change to "Rated System

Pressure". Remove "hydraulic" before "rescue tool system". Rescue Tool - Delete to avoid duplication. Replaced by new

definition above which was "Hydraulic Rescue Tool". Spreader - (See Dan Smith Public Comment definition.) Spreading Force - Remove "hydraulic" System CompOnents - Remove "hydraulic". Replace "and the

hose assembly" with "hose assemblies, and cables". Add "switches," after "valves,".

System Pressure - Change to "System Input - the input pressure of electrical power that the tool is subjected to at any given moment."

Tool - Remove "Hydraulic" ADD DEFINITIONS... Cable Assembly - Cables that connect the RT to the power unit

and all permanently attached connectors. Power Unit - (See Dan Smith Public Comment definition.) Rated System Input - (See Dan Smith Public Comment

definition.) 2-1.1 Replace "HRT" with "RTS" 2-1.3 Replace "HRT" with "RTS" in 2 places 2-3.6 Replace "HRT" with "RTS" 3-1.1 Remove "hydraulic in 2 places 3-1.3 Change label statement to "...STANDARD ON POWERED

RESCUE TOOL SYSTEMS, 1999 EDITION" After "model name, number, or design" change information to: "Rated system ]pressure, where applicable" "Manufacturer s specified hydraulic fluid for power unit, where

applicable" "Fluid capacity of hydraulic reservoir of the power unit, where

applicable" "Operating voltage and current type, where applicable" "Operating amperage at no-load, where applicable" "Operating amperage at maximum load, where applicable" 3-1.7 Replace "HRT" with "RT" 3-2.1 Replace "HRT" with "RTS" in 2 places 3-2.2 Replace "HRT" with "RTS" in 2 places 3-2.3 Replace "HRT" with "RTS" 4-1.1.1, 4-1.2.1, 4-1.3.1, 4-1.4.1 (See Dan Smith Public Comment) 4-1.1.2, 4-1.2.2, 4-1.3.2, 4-1.4.2 (See Dan Smith Public Comment) 4-1.1.3, 4-1.2.3, 4-1.3.3, 4-1.4.3 (See Dan Smith Public Comment) 4-1.1.4, 4-1.2.4, 4-1.3.4, 4-1.4.4 (See Dan Smith Public Comment) 4-1.1.5, 4-1.2.5, 4-1.3.5, 4-1.4.5 (See Dan Smith Public Comment) 4-1.1.6, 4-1.2.6, 4-1.3.6, 4-1.4.6 (See Dan Smith Public Comment) 4-1.1.7, 4-1.2.7, 4-1.3.7, 4-1.4.7 (See Dan Smith ~ublic Comment) 4-1.1.8, 4-1.2.8, 4-1.3.8, 4-1.4.8 (See Dan Smith Public Comment) 4-1.1.9, 4-1.2.9, 4-1.3.9, 4-1.4.9 (See Dan Smith PuBlic Comment) 4-1.1.15, 4-1.2.12, 4-1.3.16, 4-1.4.13 (See Dan Smith Public

Comment) 4-1.1.17, 4-1.2.14, 4-1.3.18, 4-14.4.15 (See Dan Smith Public

Comment) 4-1.1.13 Replace "hydraulic pressure" with "input". Replace

"hydraulic power" with "rated system input".

318

N F P A 1 9 3 6 ~ A 9 9 R O C

4-1.2.10 Replace "hydraulic pressure" with "input". Replace "hydraulic power" with "rated system input".

4-1.3.11 Replace "hydraulic pressure" with "input". 4-1.3.14 Replace "hydraulic pressure" with "input". Replace

"hydraulic power" with "rated system input". 4-1.4.10 Replace "hydraulic pressure" with "input". 4-2.1 Replace "HRT" with "RTS" 4-3.1 (See Dan Smith Public Comment) 4-3.2 (See Dan Smith Public Comment) 4-3.14 Replace "HRT" with "RTS" 4-3.15 (See Dan Smith Public Comment) 4-3.16 (See Dan Smith Public Comment) 4-3.17 Add "hydraulic fluid" before "reservoir" 4-3.19 (See Dan Smith Public Comment) 4-3.20 (See Dan Smitt~ Public Comment) 4-3.22 Add "or automatic limiting" after "relief" 4-3.31 Replace "HRT" with "RTS" 4-4.4 (See Dan Smith Public Comment) 4-4.5 (See Dan Smith Public Comment) 5-1.1.2 Replace "Pressure" with "Power" (See Dan Smith Public

Comment) 5-1.1.3 Replace "Pressure" with "Power" 5-1.2.3 Replace "Pressure" with "Power 5-1.2.4 Replace "Pressure" with "Power 5-1.3.2 Replace "Pressure" with "Power (See Dan Smith Public

Comment) 5-1.3.3 Replace "Pressure" with "Power" 5-1.3.5 Replace "hydraulic cylinder" with "tool" 5-1.4.3 Remove "hydraulic" before cutter. Replace "hydraulic

cylinder" with "tool". 5-3.3 Replace "hydraufic pressure" with "input" 6-1.1 After "all hose" imert "and cables" 6-1.2 Replace "full operating pressure" with "rated system input" 6-1.3 After "power unit," change to "hose and cables shall be.." 6-1.4 After "hose" insert "and cables" 6-1.5 Replace "full operating pressure" with "rated system input" 6-1.6 After "power unit," change to "hose and cables shall be..." 6-1.7 After "hose" insert "and cables" 6-2.5 Replace "hydraulic pressure" with "input" 6-3.3 Replace "hydraulic pressure" with "input" 6-4.5 Replace "HRT" with "RT" 6-4.6 Replace "hydraulic pressure", with "input" 6-5.3 Replace "HRT" with "RT" 6-5.4 Replace "hydraulic pressure" with "input" 6-6 Replace "Pressure" with "Power" (See Dan Smith Public

Comment) 6-6.2 (See Dan Smith Public Comment) 6-7 (See Dan Smith Public Comment) 6-7.2 (See Dan Smith Public Comment) 6-8.4 (See Dan Smith Public Comment) 6-8.7 (See Dan Smith Public Comment) 6-10.5 (See Dan Smith Public Comment) 6-15.4 (See Dan Smidt Public Comment) 6-17.3 Replace "hydra~Jlic pressure" with "input" 6-17.4 Replace "hydraalic pressure" with "input" 6-17.6 Replace "hydraulic pressure" with "input" 6-17.7 Replace "hydra~Jlic pressure" with "input" A-2-1.4 2nd paragraph - Remove "hydraulic in 2 places 3rd paragraph - Remove "hydraulic in 2 places. Change Title to

"Standard on Powered Rescue Tool Systems" 4th paragraph - Remove "hydraulic" in 2 places 6th paragraph - Remo~e "hydraulic" in 2 places

SUBSTANTIATION: The existing standard does not allow for testing and compliance of (a) electro-mechanical rescue tools, (b) self-contained "closed-loop" hydraulic rescue tools, and (c) other non-hydraulic rescue tools that perform the same operations and are used in the same applications, some of which are on the market today. Release c..f NFPA 1936 in its current fashion will surely cause restriction of business for those similar application tools that cannot be tested, since many emergency services organizations will require NFPA compliant tools if a standard exists, regardless of the technology being used. This comment is one of nine submitted by Curtiss-Wright that makes the proposed standard generic to alloa testing and compliance of the above tools that have been excluded. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: During its July 15-17, 1998 meeting, the NFPA Standards Council voted not to approve a new document on electromechanical rescue tools stating, "as it appeared tile Committee [Fire Department Rescue Tools] could cover the subject within its proposed document, NFPA 1936...". The existing standard DOESNOT allow for testing and

compliance of (a) electro-mechanical rescue tools, (b) self- contained "closed-loop" hydraulic rescue tools, and (c) other non- hydraulic rescue tools that perform the same operations and are used in the same applications. Release of NFPA 1936 in its current fashion will surely cause restriction of business for those similar application tools that cannot be tested, since many emergency services organizations will require NFPA compliant tools if a standard exists, regardless of the technology being used.

The following are proposed changes in existing wording and minor additions in NFPA 1936 -A99 ROP that make the standard generic in nature for similar operation/application rescue tool systems, rather than exclusively for hydraulic rescue tool systems. These changes DO NOT alter the requirements of the standard but rather broaden it to allow testing and compliance of rescue tools that may not be hydraulicallypowered.

The submitter was present at the ROC meeting on 24-25 October and stated this comment was mostly a recap of "editorial" issues if file Techincal Committee agreed to add electromechanical tools. The Committee will make the necessary editorial changes.

(Log #1) 1936- 6 - (1-1.1): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Ralph Craven, Rend, NV COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1936-54 RECOMMENDATION: Revise text to read as follows:

tJ.,a . . . . ~:~ Powered rescue tools. A A ] . . . . . . .

SUBSTANTIATION: Standard is limiting. There are other rescue tools out there that need to be incorporated into standard. Electric tools are one example. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: See Committee Action taken on Comment 1936-7 (Log #20).

(Log #20) 1936- 7- (1-1.1): Accept SUBMITTER: Daniel T. Smith, Thomasboro, IL COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1936-54 RECOMMENDATION: Revise text to read as follows:

1-1.1 This standard shall specify the minimum requirements for the design, performance, testing, and certification of powered rescue tools sys¢~ms ~nd the individual comnonents of spreaders, rams. cutters, combination tools, power units, and power transmission cables, conduit or hose ~ a t arc . . . . A ,^

SUBSTANTIATION: The above change is necessary to make the Standard apply to all powered rescue tool systems. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

(Log #21) 1936- 8- (1-1.3): Accept SUBMITTER: Daniel T. Smith, Thomasboro, IL COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1936-54 RECOMMENDATION: Add new Section 1-1.3 to read as follows:

1-1.3 This standard shall not aoolv to manually Dowered tools and shall pot apply to small mnlti-Duroose tools includin~ but not limited to: saws. drills, chisel, t~rv bars. sharin~ systems, and similar tools. SUBSTANTIATION: The above change is necessary to make the Standard apply to all powered rescue tool systems. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

(Log #22) 1936- 9 - (1-1.3, 1-1.4, 1-1.5): Accept SUBMITTER: Daniel T. Smith, Thomasboro, IL COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1936-54

I RECOMMENDATION: Renumber Sections 1-1.3, 1-1.4, and 1-1.5. to 1-'1.4, 1-1.5 and 1-1.6 respectively. SUBSTANTIATION: The above change is necessary if the previous comment is accepted. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

319

NFPA 1 9 3 6 - - A 9 9 ROC

(Log #23) 1936- 10 - (1-2.1): Accept SUBMITTER: Daniel T. Smith, Thomasboro, IL COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1936-54 RECOMMENDATION: Revise text to read as follows:

1-2.1 The purpose of dais standard'shall be to p r - o , A d ~ the minimum performance requirements for hydraut~ powered rescue tools ~ that are utilized by emergency services personnel to facilitate the extrication of victims from entraoment. SUBSTANTIATION: The above change is necessary to make the Standard apply to all powered rescue tool systems. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

(Log #24) 1936- 11 - (1-3 Cutter, Identical RT, Prime Mover, Ram, Spreader, and Tool): Accept SUBMITTER: Daniel T. Smith, Thomasboro, IL COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1936-54 RECOMMENDATION: Change the following definitions to read as follows:

Cutter. A system component of a rescue tool system; a rescue tool with at least one movable blade that is used to cut/shear/sever material.

Identical RT. RT that are produced to the same engineering and manufacturing specifications.

Prime Mover. The energy source that drives the principal power output device of the power unit.

Ram. A system component of the rescue tool system; a rescue tool that has a piston or other type extender that generates extending forces or both extending and retracting forces.

Spreader. A system component of a rescue tool system; a rescue tool with at least one movable arm that opens to move material.

Tool. See the definition of Hydraulic Rescue Tool and Rescue Tool. SUBSTANTIATION: The above change is necessary to make dae Standard apply to all powered rescue tool systems. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

(Log #25) 1936- 12 - (1-3 Power Unit (New), Rated System Input (New), Rescue Tool (RT) (New), Rescue Tool System (RTS) (New), RT (New), and RTS (New)): Accept SUBMITI'ER: Daniel T. Smith, Thomasboro, IL COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1936-54 RECOMMENDATION: Add the following definitions to read as follows:

Power Unit. A component of a powered rescue tool system consisting of a prime mover and the principal power output device used to power rescue tools.

Rated System Input. The maximum pressure/electrical power at which the rescue tool system is designed to operate.

Rescue Tool (RT). A system component of a rescue tool system dlat is the tool used by file operator to perform one or more of file functions of spreading, lifting, holding, cruslfing, pulling or cutting. Herein identified as RT. (See also the definition of "Rescue Tool System")

Rescue Tool System (RTS). A system that uses power to generate the output forces or power of a rescue tool(s); the compatible combination of system components that consist of a rescue tool, power unit and hose and /o r cable assembly. Self-contained systems might exclude the hose and/or cable assembly. Herein identified as RTS. (See also the definition of "Rescue Tool")

RT. An abbreviation for Rescue Tool. (See also the definition of "Rescue Tool")

RTS. An abbreviation for Rescue Tool System. (See also the definition of "Rescue Tool System")

Delete HRT Delete HRTS Delete Hydraulic Rescue Tool Delete Hydraulic Rescue Tool System

S U B S T A N T I A T I O N : Tlle above change is necessary to make the Standard apply to all powered rescue tool systems. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

(Log #18) 1936- 13 - (2-1.1, 2-1.$, 2-3.6, 3-1.7, 3-2.1, 3-2.2, 3-2.3, 4-3.14, 4-3.30, 4-3.~1 ): Accept SUBMITTER: Daniel T. Smith, Thomasboro, IL COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1936-54

I RECOMMENDATION: Change HRT to RT. SUBSTANTIATION: The above change is necessary to make the Standard apply to all powered rescue tool systems. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

(Log #17) 1936- 14- (3-1.1): Accept SUBMITTER: Daniel T. Smidl, Thomasboro, IL COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1936-54

I RECOMMENDATION: Delete the word "hydraulic". SUBSTANTIATION: Needed to clearly reflect the intent of the standard. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

(Log #33) 1936- 15 - (3-2.4): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Karen E. Strumlock, Intertek Testing Services COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1956-54 RECOMMENDATION: Revise text to read as follows:

"...established in 4-1.1.13, 4-1.2.10, 4-1.3.11, ~ and 4-1.4.10... SUBSTANTIATION: Paragraph 4-1.$.15 does not address data on opening/closing travel distance or times. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle.

I Changes references to read: "...established in 4-1.2.4, 4-1.$.1, 4-1.1.4.2, and 4-1.5.1."

COMMITTEE STATEMENT: Section was reformated and numbers change by action taken on Comment 1956-16 (Log #27).

See Committee Action taken on Comment 1956-16 (Log #27).

(Log #27) 1936- 16 - (Chapter 4): Accept SUBMITTER: Daniel T. Smith, Thomasboro, IL COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1936-54 RECOMMENDATION: Reformat Chapter 4 as follows:

Add 4-1.1 to read: 4-1.1 "Requirements for all Rescue Tools." Change 4-1.1 to 4-1.4 to read: 4-1.2 Additional Requirements for Spreaders 4-1.$ Additional Requirements for Rams 4-1.4 Additional Requirements for Combination Tools 4-1.5 Additional Requirements for Cutters Combine 4-1.1.1, 4-1.2.1, 4-1.$.1, and 4-1.4.1 to read: 4-1.1.1 Where hydraulic fluid is used the manufacturer of seal,

valves, and fittings that will come into contact with hydraulic fluid in the rescue tool shall supply the RT manufacturer with written documentation that such seals, valves, and fittings are compatible with the specified hydraulic fluid for the rescue tool and that they will function properly at a maximum hydraulic fluid temperature of 71°C (160°F).

Combine 4-1.1.2, 4-1.2.2, 4-1.3.2 and 4-1.4.2 to read: 4-1.2.2 Handles and controls shall be located on the rescue tool

to allow the rescue tool to be safely carded and operated while wearing gloves that are certified as compliant with the glove requirements of NFPA 1971, Standard on Protective Ensemble for Structural Fire Fighting. All handles and controls shall be designed to prevent the user's hand(s) from being caught or crushed by the moving parts of the tool during the tool operation.

Combine 4-1.1.$, 4-1.2.$, 4-1.$.$ and 4-1.4.$ to read: 4-1.1.$ The rescue tools controls shall be designed to return to

the neutral position automatically in the event that the control is released. When the control is in the neutral position, the rescue tool shall not operate by itself. The operation of the control shall be clearly indicated on the tool.

Combine 4-1.1.4, 4-1.2.4, 4-1.3.4 and 4-1.4.4 to read: 4-1.1.4 where the rescue tool has an extension area of the

activating piston rod assembly that is greater than 1.5 times the retract area of the piston rod assembly, the rescue tool shall be equipped with a built-in automatic safety relief device to prevent overpressurization.

320

NFPA 1936 - - A 9 9 ROC

Combine 4-1.1.5, 4-1.2.5, 4-1.3.5 and 4-1.4.5 to read: 4-1.1.5 Where hydraulic fluid is used the hydraulic fluid specified

for use with the rescue tool shall not be classified as either a f lammable liquid or a combustible fluid unless classified as a Class IIIB combustible liquid in accordance with NFPA 30, Flammable and Combustible Liquids Code.

Combine 4-1.1.6, 4-1.2.6, 4-1.3.6 and 4-1.4.6 to read: 4-1.1.6 Where hydraulic fluid is used all rescue tool hydraulic

fittings and quick-connect couplers shall be rated for at least the rated system hydraulic pressure and shall have a safety factor of at least 2 to 1.

Combine 4-1.1.7, 4-1.2.7, 4-1.3.7 and 4-1.4.7 to read: 4-1.1.7" Rescue tools shall be equ ipped with quick-connect

couplers. Where hydraulic fluid is used each female and male quick-connect coupler shall have a check valve dlat can withstand the specified rated system hydraulic pressure when disconnected.

Combine 4-1.1.8, 4-1.2.8, 4-1.3.8 and 4-1.4.8 to read: 4-1.1.8 All rescue tool quick-connect couplers shall be equipped

with a locking feature to prevent accidental uncoupl ing during operation.

Combine 4-1.1.9, 4-1.2.9, 4-1.3.9, and 4-1.4.9 to read: 4-1.1.9 All controls th~.t are required for the safe operation of the

rescue tool shall be marked to indicate their function. Combine 4-1.1.15, 4-1.2.12, 4-1.3.16 and 4-1.4.13 to read: 4-1.1.10 the length, width, and height dimensions of the rescue

tool, stated in the commercially pr inted material as supplied by the tool manufacturer , shall be verified in order to establish min imum

s t o r a g e dimensions. Combine 4-1.1.16, 4-1.2.15, 4-1.3.17, and 4-1.4.14 to read: 4-1.1.11 All electric components shall be listed and labeled for

the in tended application. Where labeled and listed electric components are not available for a specific application, the electric components shall be suitable for the in tended application.

Combine 4-1.1.17, 4-1.2.14, 4-1.3.18, and 4-14.15 to read: 4-1.1.12 Where rescue tools are equipped with attachments, such

at tachments shall be secured against accidental release. Renumber: 4-1.1.10 to 4-1.2.1 4-1.1.11 to 4-1.2.2 4-1.1.12 to 4-1.2.3 4-1.1.13 to 4-1.2.4 4-1.1.14 to 4-1.2.5 4-1.2.10 to 4-1.3.1 4-1.2.11 to 4-1.3.2 4-1.2.13 to 4-1.3.3 4-1.3.10 to 4-1.4.2 4-1.3.11 to 4-1.4.2 4-1.3.12 to 4-1.4.3 4-1.3.13 to 4-1.4.4 4-1.3.13.1 to 4-1.4.4.1 4-1.3.13.2 to 4-1.4.4.2 4-1.3.14 to 4-1.4.5 4-1.3.15 to 4-1.4.6 4-1.4.10 to 4-1.5.1 4-1.4.11 to 4-1.5.2 4-1.4.12 to 4-1.5.3 4-1.4.12.1 to 4-1.5.3.1 4-1.4.12.2 to 4-1.5.3.2

SUBSTANTIATION: The proposeci reformatt ing would removed redundan t sections and make the Standard easier to read. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

(Log #5) 1936- 17 - (4-1, 7-1.3): Accept in Principle SUBM1TTER: John D. McGarthy, Curtiss-Wright Flight Systems Inc. COMMENT O N P R O P O S A L N O : 1936-54 RECOMMENDATION: The following are proposed addit ions to NFPA 1936 - A99 ROP that specify the electrical requirements for rescue tools.

,Section Proposed Chant~e The following design requirements for electric tools would be

under "Requirements for ,all Rescue Tools", a new section proposed by Dan Smith in his Public Comment .

4-1.1.1 RTS having an operating voltage greater than 30V shall comply with the applicable and appropriate electrical safety requirements of UL 45 - Standard for Safety for Portable Electric Tools.

4-1.1.2 All RT electrical connectors shall be rated to handle the electrical cur ren t realized when the system is operating at rated system input.

4-1.1.3 A switch or o ther control device shall be acceptable for file application, with voltage and amperage ratings no t less than the corresponding values of the load that it controls.

4-1.1.4 Electrical parts of RT shall be so located or enclosed that protect ion against unintent ional contact with non-insulated live parts will be provided.

4-1.1.5 Strain relief shall be provided to prevent a mechanical stress on a flexible cord from being transmitted to terminals, splicing, or internal wiring.

4-1.1.6 Wiring shall be protected f rom sharp edges, burrs, moving parts, and other agencies that might cause abrasion of the insulation of conductors.

4-1.1.7 The electric motor of the RT shall drive the maximum in tended load of the tool without introducing risk of fire, electric shock, or injury to persons.

4-1.1.8 An enclosure of a battery or battery cell shall be provided with ventilation openings so located as to permit the circulation of air for dispersion of gases that may be genera ted under abnormal battery or charging conditions.

4-1.1.9 An enclosure of a battery or battery cell shall be provided with heat transfer means, such as ventilation openings or heat sinks, so located as to prevent thermal runaway of the battery

I dur ing normal charging at the maximum allowable ambient I tempera ture as specified by the battery manufacturer. i 4-1.1.10 RTs that use self-contained batteries shall provide an indicator or other means to visually check the battery's state of charge (indicator).

4-1.1.11 All battery or battery pack exposed "live" terminals shall have protective covers to prevent accidental contact and arching when no t being used.

7-1.3 Add the following UL Standard.. .UL 45, Standard for Safety for Portable Electric Tools SUBSTANTIATION: During its July 15-17, 1998 meeting, the NFPA Standards Council voted no t to approve a new documen t on electromechanical rescue tools stating, "as it appeared tile Commit tee [Fire Depar tment Rescue Tools] could cover the subject within its p roposed document , NFPA 1936...". The existing s tandard DOES NOT allow for testing and compliance of (a) electro-mechanical rescue tools, (b) self-contained "closed- loop" hydraulic rescue tools, and (c) o ther non-hydraulic rescue tools that perform the same operations and are used in file same applications. Release of NFPA 1936 in its current fashion will surely cause restriction of business for those similar application tools that cannot be tested, since many emergency services or.gan, izations will require NFPA compliant tools if a s tandard exists, regardless of the technology being used.

The existing s tandard does no t allow for testing and compliance of (a) electro-mechanical rescue tools, (b) self-contained "closed- loop" hydraulic rescue tools, and (c) other non-hydraulic rescue tools that perform the same operations and are used in the same

ol~ications , some of which are on the market today. Release of A 1936 in its current fashion will surely cause restriction of

business for those similar application tools that cannot be tested, since many emergency ser~ces organizations will require NFPA compliant tools i f a s tandard exists, regardless of the technology being used. This commen t is one of n ine submit ted by Curtiss- Wright that makes the proposed standard generic to allow testing and compliance of the above tools that have been excluded. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle.

The Commit tee added number ing and revised 4-1.1.1 to read: 4-1.1 RTs that utilize electric power shall comply with the

applicable and appropriate electrical safety requirements COMMITTEE STATEMENT: The Committee feels the requi rement of UL 45 should apply to all electric power, not jus t voltage greater than 30V.

(Log #13) 1936- 18 - (4-1.1, 4-2.2, 5-2, 6-2.4, 6-3.2, 6-10.6, 6-12.1): Accept in Principle in Part SUBMITTER: John D. McCarthy, Curtiss-Wright Flight Systems Inc. COMMENT O N P R O P O S A L N O : 1936-54 RECOMMENDATION: The following are proposed corrections to NFPA 1936 - A99 ROP.

proposed Chan~e I 4-1.1.11 Replace "capable of" with "designed for"

321

N F P A 1936 m A 9 9 R O C

4-1.1.12 Delete. This is covered in Performance and Testing. Should not be in Design Requirements .

4-2.2 Change to original Repor t on Proposals words - "Hose for rescue tool systems shall be rated for use with hydraulic fluid that is nonf lammable of noncombust ib le unless classified as a Class IIIB combustible liquid in accordance with NFPA 30 - Flammable and Combustible Liquids Code."

5-2 Change Section title to "Hose Assemblies" 6-2.4 Delete Figure 6-2.4A. This is r edundan t and does not show

a clear pivot point. Re-label existing Figure 6-2.4B as Figure 6-2.4 with tide "Test fixture to de te rmine spreading and pulling forces spreaders and combinat ion tools". Change any reference to Figure within doc um e n t (i.e. 6-2.4, 6-4.4).

Add double-arrow to drawing to show the fixture must be able to apply external loads in both directions, as shown below:

(~ 0 0 0 00~I~

Able to apply external loads in both directions

Figure 6-2.4 Test fixture to determine spreading and pulling force spreaders and combination tools

6-3.2 Add double-arrow to drawing to show the fixture must be able to apply external loads in both directions, as shown above.

6-10.6.1 Delete. Tiffs is covered in 6-14 Cutter Integrity Test. 6-10.6.2 Delete. This is covered in 6-14 Cutter Integrity Test. 6-12.1 Replace "travel distance" with "extension". Travel does

not specify direction. Figure 6-12.1 change tide to "Fixture for Ram Bend Test" Change drawing to show offset f rom the edges of the gripping

surfaces rather than f rom center l ine of ram as follows:

(Log #35) 1956- 20 - (4-1.2.12): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Karen E. Strumlock, Intertek Testing Services COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1956-54 RECOMMENDATION: Revise text to read ~s follows:

"...in the commercially pr inted m a t t ~ ~ as supplied by flae tool manufacturer. . ." SUBSTANTIATION: Type, word should be material. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: See Committee Action taken on Comment 1936-16 (Log #27).

(Log #37) 1936- 21 - (4-1.3.13.1): Accept SUBMITTER: Karen E. Strumlock, lntertek Testing Services COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1936-54

I RECOMMENDATION: Revise text to read as follows: "...in the per formance requ i rement 5-1.3.4:

SUBSTANTIATION: The performance requ i rement referenced in this section is found in 5-1.3.4 no t 5-1.3. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: Note: 4-1.3.13.1 is now 4-1.4.4.1 by Commit tee Action taken on Comment 1936-16 (Log #27).

(Log #38) 1936- 22 - (4-1.3.18): Accept in Principle SUBMITI'ER: Karen E. Strumlock, Intertek Testing Services COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1936-54 RECOMMENDATION: Add new text to read as follows:

The length, width and he ieht dimensions of the combination tools, stated in the commercially or inted material as supplied by the too[ manufacturer, shall be verified in order to estab[ish the min imum storage dimensions.

il Ram

L3mm maximum ,V-L'-" , J I ,~---

13 mm maximu Load

Force measuring device (newtons)

Figure 6-12.1

SUBSTANTIATION: This commen t clarifies ,and makes corrections in 7 sections. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle in Part.

I (a) Reject 6-2.4. (b) 6-10.6.2 will be moved to become 6-14.4 (c) Accept all others.

COMMITTEE STATEMENT: (a) The Committee feels both figures add useful information.

(b) 6-10.6.2 text is a necessary part of the text in 6-14.

SUBSTANTIATION: All o ther tools have this requi rement to verify the overall dimensions of the tool, combinat ion tools should also have this requirement . COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: See Commit tee Action taken on Comment 1936-16 (Log #27).

Note: 4-1.3.18 is now numbered as 4-1.1.12 by Committee Action taken on Comment 1936-16 (Log #27)

(Log #34) 1936- 19 - (4-1.1.15): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Karen E. Strumlock, Intertek Testing Services COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO" 1936-54 RECOMMENDATION: Revise text to read as follows:

"...in the conunercially pr in ted mat-t~ material as supplied by the tool marmfacturer. . ." SUBSTANTIATION: Type, word should be material. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: See Committee Action taken on Comment 1936-16 (Log #27).

(Log #36) 1936- 23 - (4-1.4.13): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Karen E. Strumlock, Intertek Testing Services COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1936-54 RECOMMENDATION: Revise text to read as follows:

"...in the commercially pr inted m a t t ~ ~ as supplied by the tool manufacturer. . ." SUBSTANTIATION: Type, word should be material. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: See Committee Action taken on Comment 1936-16 (Log #27).

322

N F P A 1 9 3 6 ~ A 9 9 R O C

(Log #6) 1936- 24- (4-2): Accept SUBMITTEl~ John D McCarthy, Curtiss-Wright Flight Systems Inc. COMMENT O N PROPOSAL NO: 1936-54 RECOMMENDATION: The following are proposed changes and addit ions to NFPA 1936 - A99 ROP that specify the design requi rements for electrical cables.

Section Proposed Change 4-2 Change title to "l tose and Electrical Cables Add the following: 4-2.6 Electrical cables and wires shall be rated to handle the

electrical current realiTed when the system is operating at rated system input.

4-2.7 All quick-connect electrical cables shall be polarized. 4-2.8 All electrical cables ,and wires shall be properly insulated to

prevent short circuits. SUBSTANTIATION: During its July 15-17, 1998 meeting, the NFPA Standards Council voted not to approve a new documen t on electromechanlcal rescue tools stating, "as it appeared the Commit tee [Fire Depar tmen t Rescue Tools] could cover the subject within its proposed documerit , NFPA 1936...". The existing standard DOES NOT allow for testing and compliance of (a) electro-mechanical rescue tools, (b) self-contained "closed- loop" hydraulic rescue tools, ,and (c) other non-hydraulic rescue tools that per form the same operations and are used in the same applications. Release of NFPA 1936 in its current fashion will surely cause restriction of business for those similar application tools tl~at cannot be tested, since many emergency services organizations will require NFPA compliant tools if a s tandard exists, regardless of the technology being used.

The existing standard does no t allow for testing and compliance of (a) electro-mechanical rescue tools, (b) self-contained "closed- loop" hydraulic rescue tools, and (c) other non-hydraulic rescue tools that per form the same operations and are used in the same applications, some of which are on the market today. Release of NFPA 1936 in its current fashion will surely cause restriction of business for those similar application tools that cannot be tested, since many emergency services organizations will require NFPA compliant tools if a s tandard exists, regardless of the technology being used. This c ommen t is one of n ine submit ted by Curtiss- Wright that makes the proposed standard gener ic to allow testing and compliance of the above tools that have been excluded. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

(Log #2) 1936- 25- (4-2.3): Reject SUBMITTERz Ralph Craven, Rend, NV COMMENT O N PROPOSAL NO: 1936-26 RECOMMENDATION: Revise text to read as follows:

Safety factor against burst of 299 Fcrcc=t 400 percent. SUBSTANTIATION: Any hydraulic hose on devices of this type should have 4-1 safety factor. Hydraulic hoses on aerial devices have 4-1 burst safety factors. COMMITTEE ACTION: Reject. COMMITTEE.STATEMENT: The Commit tee will retain 200 percen t safety factor. The difference between operating pressure and min imum burst pressure is a function of predict ing the fatigue life of a hose assembly over time where fire majority of impulse cycles are a constant ampli tude pressure. The same design verification procedure may be used to assure adequate fatigue life for applications, such as portable rescue tools, having variable ampli tude pressure usage where the majority of the peaks are between 25 percen t a n d 5 0 percent of the minimum burst pressure.

(Log #7) 1936- 26 - (4-3): Accept in Part SUBMITTER: John D. McCarthy, Curtiss-Wright Flight Systems inc. COMMENT O N PROPOSAL NO: 1936-54 RECOMMENDATION: The following are proposed addit ions to NFPA 1936 - A99 ROP that, specify the electrical design requirements for Power Units.

Add the following: Section Pronosed C[aan~¢ 4-3.32 For self-containe(] RTs where a battery or o ther electrical

power source is contained in the tool itself, the self contained energy system shall be considered the power uni t for the tool.

4-3.33 All power uni t electrical connectors shall be rated to handle the electrical current realized when the system is operating at rated system input.

4-3.34 An enclosure of a battery or battery cell shall be provided with ventilation openings so located as to permi t the circulation of air for dispersion of gases that may be genera ted under abnormal battery or charging conditions.

4-3.35 An enclosure of a battery or battery cell shall be provided with heat transfer means, such as ventilation openings or heat sinks, so located as to prevent thermal runaway of the battery dur ing normal charging at the maximum allowable ambient temperature as specified by the battery manufacturer .

4-3.36 Power units that use batteries shall provide an indicator or other means to visually check the battery's state of charge.

4-3.37 All battery or battery pack exposed "llve" terminals shall have protective covers to prevent accidental contact and arching when not being used.

Renumber the remaining: Existing 4-3.24 thru 4-3.31.

SUBSTANTIATION: During its July 15-17, 1998 meeting, the NFPA Standards Council voted no t to approve a new document on electromechanlcal rescue tools stating, "as it appeared the Commit tee [Fire Depar tment Rescue Tools] could cover the subject within its p roposed document , NFPA 1936...". The existing s tandard DOES NOT allow for testing and compliance of (a) electro-mechanical rescue tools, (b) self-contained "closed- loop" hydraulic rescue tools, and (c) o ther non-hydraulic rescue tools that perform the same operations and are used in the same applications. Release of NFPA 1936 in its current fashion will surely cause restriction of business for those similar application tools that cannot be tested, since many emergency services organizations will require NFPA compliant tools if a s tandard exists, regardless of the technology being used.

The existing s tandard does no t allow for testing and compliance of (a) electro-mechanical rescue tools, (b) self-contained "closed- loop" hydraulic rescue tools, and (c) o ther non-hydraulic rescue tools that perform the same operations and are used in the same

icatious, some of which are on the market today. Release of 1936 in its current fashion will surely cause restriction of

business for those similar application tools that cannot be tested, since many emergency services organizations will require NFPA compliant tools i f a s tandard exists, regardless of the technology being used. This commen t is one of n ine submit ted by Curtiss- Wright that makes the proposed standard generic to allow testing and compliance of the above tools that have been excluded. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Part.

Reject Section 4-3.32. Accept Sections 4-3.33 thru 4-3.37.

COMMITTEE STATEMENT: See Commit tee Action taken on Comment 1936-12 (Log #25) that adopts new definit ion of term "power unit".

(Log #19) 1936- 27 - (4-3.1, 4-3.2, 4-3.15, 4-3.16, 4-3.19, 4-3.20, 4-4.4, 4-4.5): Accept SUBMITTEl~ Daniel T. Smith, Thomasboro, IL COMMENT O N PROPOSAL NO: 1936-54 RECOMMENDATION: Revise text to read as follows:

Change Section 4-3.1 to read as follows: 4-3.1 Where hydraulic fluid is used. the manufacturer of seals,

valves, and fittings that will come into contact with hydraulic fluid in the F~v.'~r u:=!t tool shall supply the HRT manufacturer with written documenta t ion that such seals, valves, and fittings are compatible with tire specified hydraulic fluid for the pewc: u.n:t tool and that they will funct ion properly at a maximum hydraulic fluid temperature of 71°C (160°F).

Change 4-3.2 to read as follows: 4-3.2 Where hydraulic fluid is used. the hydraulic fluid specified

for use with the p~;;'c: un ' t t oo l shall not be classified as either a f lammable liquid or a combustible fluid unless classified as a Class IIIB combustible liquid in accordance with NFPA 30, Flammable and 'Combus t ib le Liquids Code.

323

NFPA 1936 - - A 9 9 ROC

Change 4-3.15 to read as follows: 4-~.15 Where hydraulic fluid is used. a hydraulic reservoir shall

be provided and shall have an unobs t ruc ted port(s) for add ing hydraulic fluid to the reservoir or for dra in ing hydraulic fluid f rom the reservoir.

Change Section 4-3.16 to read as follows: 4-3.16 Where hydraulic fluid is used. a label shall be provided

near the hydraulic fluid fill por t tha t indicates the type fluid tha t is specified by the manu fac t u r e r for use with the system.

Change Section 4-3.19 to read as follows: 4-3.19 Where hydraulic fluid is used. the hydraulic fluid reservoir

shall be provided with a m e a n s to visually de te rmine the fluid level. Such means shall include, bu t n o t be l imited to, dip-stick type indicators, s ight gauges, or remote fluid level gauges.

Change Section 4-3.20 to read as follows: 4-3.20 Where hydraulic fluid is used. the power uni t hydraulic

i p u m p intake shall be provided with a filter screen. Change Section 4-4.4 to read as follows: 44 .4 Where hydraulic fluid is used. the manufac tu re r of seals,

valves, and fittings tha t will come into contact with hydraulic f luid in the ~ - e e s s o ~ tool shall supply the HRT manufac t u r e r with written d o c u m e n t a t i o n tha t such seals, valves, and fittings are compat ible with the specified hydraulic fluid for the ~ - e e s s o ~ t o o l ,and tha t they will func t ion properly at a m a x i m u m hydraulic fluid t empera tu re of 71°C (160°F).

Change Section 4-4.5 to read as follows: 44 .5 Where hvdranlic fluid is used ' the hydraul ic fluid specified

for use with the accessory shall no t be classified as e i ther a f l ammable licjuid or a combust ib le f luid unless classified as a Class IIIB combusub l e l iquid in accordance with NFPA 30, F lammable and Combust ib le Liquids Code. S U B S T A N T I A T I O N : T he above change is necessary to make the S tandard apply to all powered rescue tool systems. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

(Log #39) 1936- 28 - (5-1.2.4): Reject SUBMITTER: Karen E. Strumlock, Intertek Tes t ing Services C O M M E N T ON PROPOSAL NO: 1936-54 R E C O M M E N D A T I O N : Delete Section 5-1.2.4. S U B S T A N T I A T I O N : T he re is no test to suppor t this r equ i rement . COMMITTEE ACTION: Reject. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: T he reference to the test m e t h o d in Section 6-6 is the correct reference and test m e t h o d for this pe r fo rmance requ i rement .

(Log #40) 1936- 29 - (5-1.3.11): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Karen E. Strumlock, Inter tek Tes t ing Services C O M M E N T ON PROPOSAL NO: 1936-54

I R E C O M M E N D A T I O N : Revise text to read as follows: Where combina t ion tools are equ ipped with a built-in au tomat ic

safety relief device in accordance with ~ 4 - 1 . 3 . 4 . . . S U B S T A N T I A T I O N : Section 4-1.3.4 covers safety relief devices for combina t ion tools no t Section 4-1.2.4. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle.

Change reference f rom 4-1.34 to "4-1.1.4". COMMITTEE STATEMENT: T he Commi t tee Action taken on C o m m e n t 1936-16 (Log #27) changed the pa rag raph n u m b e r s and 4-1.3.4 is now 4-1.1.4.

(Log #41) 1936- 30 - (5-1.4.4): Accept in Principle SUBMITrER: Karen E. Strumlock, Intertek Tes t ing Services C O M M E N T ON PROPOSAL NO: 1936-54 R E C O M M E N D A T I O N : Revise text to read as follows:

T h e d e a d m a n control of cutters shall be tested for e n d u r a n c e as specified in Section 6-10, D e a d m a n Control Device Test, a n d tile d e a d m a n conucol shall automatical ly re turn to neutral . And- th~ cut tcr ~!~a!! dc;'c!c,~ ~ c m~-m..~n. Icr_~ ~ dctcrm'~ned in 5 !A.~. The cut ter shall also ner form ,as reouired in Section 5-1.4.3. S U B S T A N T I A T I O N - There is no m a x i m u m load de t e rmined in 5-1.4.3, the cut ter is pressurized to a specified load and t hen shou ld be requi red to cut as specified in the Cutter Test.

COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. I evise 5-1.4.4 to read:

".. .and the cut ter shall develop the rated system input ." COMMITTEE STATEMENT: T h e Commi t tee only in tends for the cut ter to develop the ra ted system input . T h e Commi t tee has rewritten the text to reflect a n d no t to also pe r fo rm cut t ing at this stage.

(Log #11 ) 1936- 31 - (5-3.5, 6-19): Accept S U B M I T r E R : J o h n D. McCarthy, Curtiss-Wright Flight Systems Inc. C O M M E N T ON PROPOSAL NO: 1936-54 R E C O M M E N D A T I O N : T h e following are p roposed changes a n d addi t ions to NFPA 1936 - A99 ROP that adds test ing of a power uni t ' s au tomat ic shut-off device.

Sect ion p roposed Change 5-3.5 T h e power un i t h) '~-au! 'c v . . . . . . . . . v ~ pressure relief or

~U~qmatic l imit ing device shall be tested for p rope r opera t ion as specified in Section 6-19, Power Uni t Pressure Relief an d Automat ic Shut-off Device Test, a n d shall p revent the p u m p f rom ~ . . . : l a : - - t . . . a . . . . 1 : . . . . . . . . . . Dower un i t ou tou t f rom achieving greater than 105 pe rcen t o f the rated system h T d ~ : ! ' c prczz~:rc

6-19 Change title to: Power Uni t Pressure Relief an d Automat ic Limit ing Device Test

Rewrite as follows: 6-19.1 The ~ safety pressure rel ief valve or au tomat ic

l imit ing device of the power un i t test spec imen shall be set at ~ t h e rated system ..jt-'"~--"l:.~ . . . . . . . . . . v, . . . . . i npu t ~ a t "z zafc for t.4c =)=tom.

6-19.2 Power un i t test spec imens shall be tested on a level surface, and the system pr-ess~n~ittp.~ shall be mon i to r ed by a gauge.

6-19.3 The system ~ h l R . O . ~ of the power un i t test spec imen shall be raised until the pressure relief or au tomat ic shut-offdevice operates. This test cycle shall be repea ted for a total of 10 cycles.

6-19.4 The ~ s v s t e m inpu t at which the pressure relief or au tomat ic shut-off device operates shall be recorded for each of the 10 test cycles.

6-19.5 The recorded pr-e~e,~s- system inputs at which the pressure relief or au tomat ic shut-off device operates shall be evaluated to de t e rmine pass/fail . SUBSTANTIATION: Dur ing its Ju ly 15-17, 1998 meet ing , the NFPA Standards Council voted no t to approve a new d o c u m e n t on e lec t romechanical rescue tools stating, "as it appea red the Commi t t ee [Fire D e p a r t m e n t Rescue Tools] could cover the subject within its p roposed d o c u m e n t , NFPA 1936... ' . The existing s tandard DOES N O T allow for tes t ing and compl iance of (a) e lec t ro-mechanical rescue tools, (b) self -contained "closed- loop" hydraulic rescue tools, a n d (c) o the r non-hydraul ic rescue tools tha t pe r fo rm the same opera t ions a n d are used in the same applications. Release of NFPA 1956 in its cu r ren t fash ion will surely cause restrict ion of business for those similar applicat ion tools tha t c anno t be tested, s ince m a n y emergency services organizat ions will r equ i re NFPA compl ian t tools if a s tandard exists, regardless of the t echno logy be ing used.

The existing s tandard does n o t allow for test ing and compliance of (a) e lec t ro-mechanical rescue tools, (b) self -contained "closed- loop" hydraulic rescue tools, and (c) o ther non-hydraul ic rescue tools tha t pe r fo rm the same opera t ions a n d are used in the same

nbPl~Aications, some of which are on the marke t today. Release of 1936 in its cu r ren t fashion will surely cause restriction of

business for those similar appl icat ion tools tha t canno t be tested, s ince many emergency services organizat ions will require NFPA compl ian t tools i f a s tandard exists, regardless o f the technology be ing used. This c o m m e n t is one of n ine submi t t ed by Curfiss- Wright tha t makes the p roposed s tandard gener ic to allow testing and compl iance of the above tools tha t have been excluded. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept .

3 2 4

NFPA 1936 - - A 9 9 R O C

(Log #42) 1936- $2- (6-1.4): Accept SUBMITFER: Karen E. Strumlock, intertek Testing Services COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1936-54

I RECOMMENDATION: Revise text to read as follows: ~After a 12 hour minimum dwell time. the same tool test

specimen..." SUBSTANTIATION: Without specifying a dwell time, the hot test can be started immediately following completion of the cold test. It was my understanding that we wanted to allow the tool to come back to room temperature before proceeding to the hot test. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

1936- 33 - (Figure 6-2(a) and Figure 6-2(b)): Reject (Log #28) SUBMITrF~R: Daniel T. Smith, Thomasboro, IL COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1936-54 RECOMMENDATION: Delete Figure 6-2.4A.

Renumber Figure 6-2.4B to Figure 6-2.4A. SUBSTANTIATION: The above Figure is unnecessary. COMM]TrEE ACTION: Reject. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: The Committee feels both figures add important information that should be helpful to the testing laboratories.

(Log #'29) 1936- M - (6-2.4): Reject SUBMITFER: Daniel T. Smith, Thomasboro, IL COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1936-54 RECOMMENDATION: Revise text to read as follow~

6-2.4 The general test setup shall be as shownin Figure 6-2.4.4. o¢ F'g-::: ~ 2.!B ~ =:p!'.=-~!:. Equiwalent test setups that ~se the same concept shall be permitted. SUBSTANTIATION: The above change is necessary if the

revions comment is accepted. OMMrrrEE ACTION: Reject.

COMMrrFEE STATEMENT: See Committee Action taken on Comment 1956-33 (Log #~28).

(Log #43) 1936- 35 - (6-2.9): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Karen E. Strumlock, Intertek Testing Services COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1936-54 RECOMMENDATION: Revise text to read as follows:

"...as required by ~ 4 - 3 - ~ 5 " SUBSTANTIATION: Section 3-2-5 "m actually the section that requires the reporting of the calculated spreading forces. COMMrrrEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: The text already specifies 3-2,5.

(Log #44) 1936- 36- (6-3.1 through 6-3.4): Accept SUBMrIWER: Karen E. Strumlock, Intertek Testing Services COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1956-54 RECOMMENDATION: Revise text to read as follow~

6-$.1 The soreadlng forces of tool test soeclmens shall be measured usln~ the dm normally sunnlieci to the ourchaser or user.

6-3.2 A test fixture shall be orovided. The test fixture shall be equipped With a force measuring device and shall allow the tool test snecimen to move throuLyh its full overational cycle.

6-3.$ The test fixture shall be eouinned with a dali-brated force measuring device, with a minimum accuracy of ~ . 5 nercent of the total scale reading, to record the forces developed. -

6-$,4 The general test set-un shall be as shown in Figure 6-3.4 as annlicahle. [¢xmivalent test set-uPs of the same concefit shall be oermitted. - 6-3.4.1 The test noints shall be the existing holes in the tool for

6-3,4,2 Where there are no hulling attachment holes on the tool. holes shall be made for the nuroose of conducting this test.

Current 6-3.3 to become 6--3.5 ~md so on.

SUBSTANTIATION: All other spreading and puffing tests are written as above. These changes would make the spreading and . pulling test methods for all tools identical. Section 6-3 does npt match the other spreading and pulling test sections when there is no reason to have an alternate method. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

(Log #30) 1936- 37- (Figure 6-3.2): Accept SUBM1TTER: Daniel T. Smith, Thomasboro, IL COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1936-54 RECOMMENDATION: Change Figure 6-3.2 by adding a double arrow to the fight side of the drawing. " SUBSTANTIATION: The above change is necessary to reflect the intent of the section. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

(Log #4S) 1956- 38 - (6-3.8): Accept in Principle SUBMFrTER: Karen E. Su'umlock, Intertek Testing Services COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1936-54 RECOMMENDATION: Revise text to read as follows:

"...required by $-~4- 3-2.5" SUBSTANTIATION: Section 3-2.5 is the section which requires the recorded pulling forces to be reported. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. COMMFrrEE STATEMENT: Text already specifies 3-2.5.

(Log #46) 1936- 39 - (6.5.1 and 6-5.2): Accept SUBMITrER: Karen E. Strumlock Intertek Testing Services COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 19~-54 RECOMMENDATION: Revise text to read as follows."

6-5.1 The hulling forces of tool test snecimens shall be measured using the tins norvaallv sunnlled to the-purchaser or user.

6-5".2 A test fixture shall-be nrovided. -The test fixture shall be eauinv.ed with a force measurin~ device and shall allow the tool test soeclmen to move through (ts full oneration~! cycle.

6-5.$ The test fixture shall be eouinned with acah~rated force measuring device, with a minimum ~c-curacv of ~0.5 nercent of the total scale reading to record the forces develooed.

6-5.4 The general test set-un shall be as sho~vn in Fitmres 6-$.4 as anDlicable. ~ulva lent test set-uos of the same conceot shall be nermitted. - Current 6-5.3 to become 6-5.2 and so on. SUBSTANTIATION: All other spreading and pulling tests are written as above. These changes would make the spreading and pulling test methods for all tools identical. Section 6-3 does not match the other spreading and pulling test sections when there is no reason to have an alternate method. COMMITIF~ ACTION: Accept.

(Log #32) 1936- 40 - (6-6, 6-6.2, 6-7, 6-7.2, 6-8.7, 6-10.5, and 6-15.4): Accept SUBMITTER: Daniel T. Smith, Thomasbor0, IL COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1936-54 RECOMMENDATION: Revise Chapter 6 to read as follows:

Change title of Section 6-6 to: 6-6 Spreading Force Sudden ~emur-e power Loss Test Change Section 6-6.2 to read: 6-6.2 T h e pressure supply bose fl.r..f~f,~iif~i~P~ supplying the

tool test specimen shall then be disconnected from the tool to simulate a sudden premer-el~.ly.~ loss and any creep of the tool -.. shall be measured.

Change the work lsr-emere to ~ in Sections 5-1.1.2 and 5-1.3.2. Change Section 6-7 to read: 6-7.2 The pressure supply hose or electric cable supplying the

tool test specimen shall then be disconnected from the tool to simulate a sudden im~mer~gg.~y.~ loss and any creep of the tool shall be measured.

325

N F P A 1 9 3 6 m A 9 9 R O C

Change Section 6-10.5 to read: 6-10.5 For spreaders, rams and combination tools, the tool test

specimen shall then be evaluated in accordance with Section 6-6, Spreatting Force Sudden ~ P o w e r Loss Test.

Change Section 6-15.4 to read: 6-15.4 The rated system h)?~-v.u!'c prezzure ~ of the tool that

is achieved while being powered by the power unit test specimen during each of the five cycles shall b~ recorded to determine pass/fall. SUBSTANTIATION: The above change is necessary to make the Standard apply to all powered rescue tool systems. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

(Log #47) 1936- 41 - (6-6.1): Accept SUBMITTER: Karen E. Strumlock, Intertek Testing Services COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1986-54 . RECOMMENDATION: Add text to read as follows:

"...measured in the respective spreading force test _+2 percent." SUBSTANTIATION: Need to add a tolerance, similar to other sections where generation of the greatest spreading force needs to be applied. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

(Log #48) 1936- 42 - (6-7.1): Accept SUBMITTER: Karen E. Strumlock, Intertek Testing Services COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1936-54 RECOMMENDATION: Add text to read as follows:

"...measured in the respective spreading force test +2 percent." SUBSTANTIATION: Need to add a tolerance, similar to other sections where generation of the greatest force needs to be

~ ' P S ~ E E ACTION: Accept.

(Log #26) 1936- 43- (6-8.4): Accept SUBMrI'rER: Daniel T. Smith, Thomasboro, IL COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1936-54

I RECOMMENDATION: Change 6-8.4 to read as follows: 6-8.4 Cooling of the hydraulic fluid, electric motor, and electric

shall be permitted during the test. SUBSTANTIATION: The above change is necessary to make the Standard apply to all powered rescue tool systems. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

(Log #8) 1936- 44- (6-9): Accept SUBMITTER: John D. McCarthy, Curtiss-Wright Flight Systems Inc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1986-54 RECOMMENDATION: Section Proposed Change

Rewrite as follows: 6-9.1. While the test specimen is still- in the fixture used for the

force test specified in Section 6-2 or 6-8, as applicable for the specific tool test specimen, a test pr-essu~ load equal to 150 percent of the ra=c~ =)'~zm !~)'~u!!c ~rczzure HSF and HPF. as applicable shall be applied ~ follows for 1 minute.

6-9.1.1 For RTs with t~ressure vessels having external nressure supply and return torts, the test load shall be achieved by applying 150 oercent of the rated system inout.

6-9.1.2 For non-oressure vessel RTs the test load shall be applied .exteroally.

6-9.1.3 RTs with oressure vessels havin~ self-contained internal pressure suoolv and return norts (closed-loot svstems), shall be oermitted to-be tested bv the nrocedures specified in either 6-14.2 or__fit-I 4.3.

6-9.2 For spreader tool or combination tool test specimens, the test ~ load shall be applied to the tool at the tip separation producing the HSF as determined in 5-1.1.4. Where the tool is also

rated for purling, the test t~tw, e~,r~ load shall be applied to the tool at the tip separation producing the HPF as determined in 5-1.1.5.

6-9.3 For ram tool test specimens, the test l~ - e~ r~ load shall be applied to the tool at the tip separation producing the HSF as determined in 5-1.2.5. Where the ram is also rated for pulling, the test 9r-essur~ load shall be applied to the tool at the tip separation producing the HPF as determined in 5-1.2.6.

6-9.4 The test results shall be evaluated and the tool test ecimen shall be examined and operated to determine pass/fail. e inability of a tool to produce the HSF of HPF, or both, as

applicable, shall constitute failure. The inability of a tool to be fully operational from fully open to fully closed to fully open shall constitute failure. SUBSTANTIATION: During its July 15-17, 1998 meeting, the NFPA Standards Council voted not to approve a new document on electromechanical rescue tools stating, "as it appeared the Committee [Fire Department Rescue Tools] could cover the subject within its proposed document, NFPA 1936...". The existing standard DOES NOT allow for testing and compliance of (a) electro-mechanical rescue tools, (b) self-contained "dosed- loop" hydraulic rescue tools, and (c) other non-hydraulic rescue tools that perform the same operations and are used in the same applications. Release of NFPA 1986 in its current fashion will surely cause restriction of business for those similar application tools that cannot he tested, since many emergency services organizations will require NFPA compliant tools if a standard exists, regardless of the technology being used.

These proposed changes and additions to NFPA 1936 - A99 ROP specify the Overload Test requirements. The existing test will not a/low testing and compliance of "closed-loop" self-contained electro-hydraulic tools such as the Lukas, Hurst and Junkers models and electro-mechanical tools such as the Curtiss-Wright model, which are all on the market today. Because these systems cannot feasible achieve the 150 percent overload condition via input from their power source, it is recommended that these types of tools be subjected to an external load of 150 percent of the HSF and /o r FIPF, as applicable. The applied external load will test the mechanical limits of the tools as well as hydrostatic (over- pressurization of the pressure vessel) for electro-hydraulic tools. It is recommended that the existing test remain for traditional hydraulic rescue tools due to their ability to intensify pressures if connected in series.

The existing standard does not allow for testing and compliance of (a) electro-mechanical rescue tools, (b) self-contained "dosed- loop" hydraulic rescue tools, and (c) other non-hydraulic rescue tools that perform the same operations and are used in the same applications, some of which are on the market today. Release of NFPA 1936 in its current fashion will surely cause restriction of business for those similar application tools that cannot be tested, since many emergency services organizations will require NFPA compliant tools if a standard exists, regardless of the technology being used. This comment is one of nine submitted by Curtiss- Wright that makes the proposed standard generic to allow testing and compliance of the above tools that have been excluded. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

(Log #49) 1986- 45- (6-9.2): Accept SUBMITTER: Karen E. Strumlock, Intertek Testing Services COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1936-54 RECOMMENDATION: Add text to read as follows:

"...producing the HSF as determined in 5-1.1.4 ~ Where the tool is rated for pulling, the test pressure shall be applied to the tool at the tip separation the HPF as determined in 5-1.1.5 or

SUBSTANTIATION: This section covers both spreaders and combination tools, Section 5-1.1.4 and 5-1.1.5 only cover HSF and HPF for spreader tools. Sections 5-1.3.6 and 5-1.3.7 cover the requirements for HSF and HPF for combinations tools. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

(Log #50) 1936- 46 - (6-10.6): Accept in Principle SUBMIT'fER: Karen E. Strumlock, Intertek Testing Services COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1936-54 RECOMMENDATION: Revise text to read as follows:

Cutter Integrity Test. ff-es~ SUBSTANTIATION: Typo, word test is repeated.

326

N F P A 1 9 3 6 ~ A 9 9 R O C

COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: Text is already corrected in the Report on Proposals.

(Log #51) 1936- 47- (6-11.4): Accept SUBMITTER: Karen E. Strumlock, Intertek Testing Services COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1936-54

I RECOMMENDATION: Revise text to read as follows: "...pass/fall shall be de te rmined as specified in 6 -6~ 5-1.1.2. 5-1.2.2.

and 5-1.3.2 resoectivelv." SUBSTANTIATION: Section 6-6.3.5 is a test method, cannot evaluate something for pass/fail to a test method. Need to change to evaluate pass/fail to a performance requirement . COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

(Log #9) 1936- 48 - (6-12): Accept SUBMITTER: J o h n D. McCarthy, Curtiss-Wrigbt Flight Systems Inc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1936-54 RECOMMENDATION: During its July 15-17, 1998 meeting, the NFPA Standards Council voted no t to approve a new documen t on electromechanical rescue tools stating, "as it appeared the Commit tee [Fire Depar iment Rescue Tools] could cover the subject within its proposed document , NFPA 1936...". The existing s tandard DOES NOT allow for testing and compliance of (a) electro-mechanical rescue tools, (b) self-contained "closed- loop" hydraulic rescue tools, and (c) other non-hydraulic rescue tools that per form the same operations and are used in the same applications. Release of NFPA 1936 in its current fashion will surely cause restriction of business for those similar application tools that cannot be tested, since many emergency services organizations will require NFPA compliant tools if a s tandard exists, regardless of the technology being used.

The following ,are proposed changes and addit ions to NFPA 1936 - A99 ROP that specify the Ram Bend Test requirements . The existing test will not allow testing and compliance of "closed-loop" serf-contained electro-hydranlic tools and electro-mechanical tools, because these systems cannot feasibly achieve the 125 percent overload condit ion via input from their power source. It is r e c o m m e n d e d that dais test be changed to an external load equal to 125 percent of the spreading force achieved at 95 percent fidl extension in Section 6-3. The applied external load will test the mechanical limits of the ram as well as over-pressurization of the pressnre vessel for h~,draulic tools. Applying an external load also tests the holding capability of the ram while the control is in the nentral position.

Section. proposed Chan g_¢. Rewrite the sections as follows: 6-12.1 The ram tool test specimen shall be tested at 95 percent of

the full ".ravc! ~ ' ~ r : c c ~ as shown in Figure 6.12.1. Add trrow to show external load.

6-12.3 The tool test specimen shall be examined for leakage to de te rmine pass/fall. Any leakage shall constitute failure.

6-12.4 The tool test specimen shall be operated to de termine pass/fall. The inability of the tool to produce the HSF or HPF, or both, as applicable, shall constitute failure. SUBSTANTIATION: The existing s tandard does no t allow for testing and compliance of (a) electro-mechanical rescue tools, (b) self-contained "closed-loop" hydraulic rescue tools, and (c) o ther non-hydraulic rescue tools that perform the same operations and are used in the same applications, some of which are on the market today. Release of NFPA 1936 in its current fashion will surely cause restriction of business for those similar application tools that cannot be tested, since many emergency services organizations will require NFPA compliant tools if a s tandard exists, regardless of the technology being used. This commen t is one of nine submitted by Curtiss-Wright that makes the proposed standard generic to allow testing and compliance of the above tools tha£ have been excluded. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

(Log #10) 1936- 49- (6-14): Accept SUBMITTER: J o h n D. McCarthy, Curtiss-Wright Flight Systems Inc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1936-54 RECOMMENDATION: During its July 15-17, 1998 meeting, the NFPA Standards Council voted not to approve a new documen t on electromechanical rescue tools stating, "as it appeared the Commit tee [Fire Depar tment Rescue Tools] could cover the subject within its proposed document , NFPA 1936...". The existing standard DOES NOT allow for testing and compliance of (a) electro-mechanical rescue tools, (b) self-contained "closed- • loop" hydraulic rescue tools, and (c) o ther non-hydraulic rescue tools that perform the same operations and are used in the same applications. Release of NFPA 1936 in its current fashion will surely cause restriction of business for those similar application tools that cannot be tested, since many emergency services organizations will require NFPA compliant tools if a s tandard exists, regardless of the technology being used.

The following are proposed changes and addit ions to NFPA 1936 - A99 ROP that specify the Cutter Integrity Test requirements. The existing test will no t allow testing and compliance of "closed-loop" self-contained electro-hydraulic tools such as the Lukas, Hurst and Junkers models and electro-mechanical tools such as the Curtiss- Wright model, which are all on the market today. Because these systems cannot feasibly achieve the 150 percen t overload condit ion via input f rom their power source, it is r e c o m m e n d e d that these types of tools be tested at the maximum system input possible without the use of a pressure relief or automatic shut-off device. It is r e commended that the existing test remain for traditional hydraulic rescue tools due to their ability to intensify pressures if connec ted in series.

• J ~ Ram

mLI maximum

i-}- J , , I - - - -

13 mm max imu Load

Force measur ing device (newtons)

Figure 6-12.1.

6-12.2 An external off-center load o f ~ 125 percent of the . . . . . . i . . . . . . . . s . . . . . . . . Fro~=:rc spreading force measured at 95 percent of its dill extension in 6-3.4 shall be applied to the ram while the ram is extended to 95 percent of its stroke. Tbe load shall be applied at a point not more than 13 mm (1/2 in.) from the f i ir thermost edge of r.he gripping surfaces of the feet and in ~ e same radial plane.

Section Pronosed Chan~e Rewrite as follows: 6-14.2 T!~c cuttcr~ of ~ c t~.o! tc~t ~Fcc'mc~ For RTs with

pressure vessels havilag external pressure supply and return norts. pressurized to 1.5 times the rated system h y ~

p r - e s s u r ~ and caused to cut into a steel rod that is beyond the cutter 's capacity for one minute.

327

NFPA 1936 - - A 9 9 ROC

6-4.3 For non-pressure vessel RTs the cutter shall be onera ted at ra.t.ed system innu t to cut into steel that is beyond the cutter 's cut t ing capacity and th~t~ is connec ted to a force measu r ing devi~¢, Tlle force achieved by the cutter shall be recorded. With the cutter blades still engaged into the steel, an oot)osing external eoual to 1.5 t imes the achieved force shall be aoolied for 1 minute .

6-14.4 RTs with oressure vessels havin~ self-contained internal pressure supply and re turn norts (closed-loop svstemsL shall be permi t ted to be tested by the p rocedures specified in ei ther 6-14.2 or 6-14.5.I.___.~.

6-14.5 Following the a t t empted cut overload ¢oodi t ion, the cutters shall be opera ted for a single cut of each material Category at the pe r fo rmance Level for which the cutter is rated. For each cut. the cutter shall comoletelv sever the material in a single con t i nuous mot ion . Cut t ing shall be permi t ted to be pe r fo rmed at any area of the blades.

6-14.6 The cut t ing process shall be evaluated to de t e rmine pass/fai l . S U B S T A N T I A T I O N : T h e existing s tandard does no t allow for test ing and compl iance of (a) e lectro-mechanical rescue tools, (b) serf-contained "closed-loop" hydraulic rescue tools, and (c) o the r non-hydraul ic rescue tools that per form the same opera t ions and are used in the same applications, some of which are on the market today. Release of NFPA 1936 in its cu r ren t fashion will surely cause res~ic t ion of business for those similar appl icat ion tools tha t canno t be tested, s ince many emergency services organizat ions will requi re NFPA compl ian t tools if a s t andard exists, regardless o f the t echnology be ing used. This c o m m e n t is one of n ine submi t ted by Curtiss-Wright tha t makes tile p roposed s tandard gener ic to allow test ing a n d compl iance of tile above tools tha t have been excluded. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

Section Prooosed Change 6-21.1 Power un i t test spec imens shall be tested on a level surface

and the system ~ i npu t shall be moni to red by gauge. 6-21.2 Tl~e power un i t test spec imen shall ~e prc~zurZ.zc~ ta

eneg~.q.~_~ the m~-c:imum vv . . . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . ~, v- ~ . ~ rated system input and shall be he ld at the mm".imum . . . . "~ . . . . . . . . . . . rated system v t " . . . . . . b t " . . . . . .

for 20 seconds. T h e pr-essuc-e power un i t shall t hen be l-¢ljeved of the rated system inou t for 20 seconds. The

dura t ion of the test shall comprise 100 20-second prcssur!zcd rated system inpu t "held"/ ' 20-second ~cnpressur !ze~ rated svstem inou t

cycles. 6-21.3 A pause slmll be permi t ted as requi red for refilling a fuel

tank or changinff renlaceable battery hacks. 6-21.4 Cool-inffof ~ e hydraulic fluid, electric motor , an d electric

s ~ t c h e s shall be permi t ted du r ing the test. 6-21.5 T h e power un i t test spec imen shall be observed dur ing

and immediate ly after comple t ion of the test for leaks or mal func t ion to de te rmine pass/fail . S U B S T A N T I A T I O N : The existing s tandard does not allow for test ing and compl iance of (a) e lectro-mechanical rescue tools, (b) self-contained "closed-loop" hydraul ic rescue tools, an d (c) o ther non-hydraul ic rescue tools tha t pe r fo rm the same operat ions and are used in file same applications, some of which are on the marke t today. Release of NFPA 1956 in its curreiat fashion will surely cause restr ict ion of business for those similar applicat ion tools tha t c anno t be tested, s ince m a n y emergency services organizat ions will require NFPA compl ian t tools if a s t andard exists, regardless of the technology being used. This c o m m e n t is one of n ine submi t t ed by Curtiss-Wright tha t makes the p roposed s tandard gener ic to allow test ing a n d compl iance of the above tools that have been excluded. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

(Log #12) 1936- 50 - (6-21): Accept SUBMITTER: J o h n D. McCarthy, Curtiss-Wright Flight Systems Inc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 1936-54 RECOMMENDATION: Dur ing its July 15-17, 1998 meet ing, the NFPA Standards Council voted no t to approve a new d o c u m e n t on e lec t romechanical rescue tools stating, "as it appea red the Commi t t ee [Fire D e p a r t m e n t Rescue Tools] could cover the subject widlin its p roposed d o c u m e n t , NFPA 1936...". The existing s tandard DOES N O T allow for test ing and compl iance of (a) e lec t ro-mechanical rescue tools, (b) se l f -contained "closed- loop" hydraulic rescue tools, and (c) o ther non-hydraul ic rescue tools tha t pe r fo rm the same opera t ions and are used in tile same applications. Release of NFPA 1936 in its cu r ren t fashion will surely cause restr ict ion of bus iness for those similar appl icat ion tools tha t canno t be tested, s ince m a n y emergency services organizat ions will require NFPA compl ian t tools if a s t andard exists, regardless of tile t echnology be ing used.

The following are p roposed changes and addi t ions to NFPA 1936 A99 ROP that specify the Power Uni t E ndu rance Tes t requ i rements .

Editorial Correction

T h e Technical Commi t t ee on Fire D e p a r t m e n t Rescue Tools proposes the following editorial change to NFPA 1936, Standard on Hydraulic Powered Rescue Tools:

1. Correct 4-3.2.5 to add the word "portable" as follows: 4-3.2.5 All ~ internal combus t ion pr ime movers tha t are

equ ipped with an electric starter shall also be equ ipped with a mechanica l s tarter as a backup.

3 2 8