technical committee on explosion protection … · alternate: thomas c. scherpa u 10/10/1997...
TRANSCRIPT
TECHNICAL COMMITTEE ON EXPLOSION PROTECTION SYSTEMS NFPA 67 (F2015)
Second Draft Meeting Agenda March 31, 2015 9:00 AM - 1:00 PM EST
Web/Teleconference Meeting
1. Welcome. Larry Floyd, Chair
2. Introductions and Update of Committee Roster. (attached)
3. Approval of First Draft Meeting Minutes of April 17 and May 19, 2014. (attached)
4. Staff updates. Laura Montville, NFPA Staff
a) Committee membership update.
b) Fall 2015 revision cycle schedule. (attached)
c) New Process Presentation.
5. Task Group Reports
Usage of Su to represent both Burning Velocity and Fundamental Burning Velocity throughout the document
o J. Senecal, A. Ibarreta, T. Heidermann
Revise new section 9.1.3 on deflagration arresters
o T. Heidermann, S. Rodgers, M. Davies
Section on vacuum regenerated carbon adsorption units to be placed in new section 10.4.2
o M. Davies, R. Zalosh
6. Comments from First Draft Ballot
7. TIA Discussion
Review of Procedures. Laura Montville
NFPA 68 TIA 1 – 3 addresses chapter 8 vent sizing flow issues, submitted by S. Rodgers. See
5/13/14 memo from L. Floyd to Sam Rodgers, “NFPA 68 (2013), Tentative Interim Amendments
(TIA).”
NFPA 68 TIA 4, Fireball Equation, submitted by Brice Chastain and Bill Stevenson. See attached
notes from the 7/31/14 CMD-HAP A2016 meeting in Atlanta.
NFPA 68 TIA 5, Paragraph 8.5.5. Submitted by S. Rodgers. See attached 8/21/14 e-mail.
NFPA 68 TIA 6, vent ducts for metal dusts, Submitted by Scott Davis and S. Rodgers, See 2/19/15
memo S. Rodgers to L. Floyd “Proposal for NFPA 68 and 69 TIAs on Metal Dusts”.
o Presentation from Scott Davis, Gexcon
NFPA 69, submitted by L. Britton, See 10/31/13 memo from L. Floyd to L. Britton, “Tentative
Interim Amendment (TIA)”
NFPA 69, submitted by S. Rodgers, See 2/19/15 memo S. Rodgers to L. Floyd “Proposal for NFPA
68 and 69 TIAs on Metal Dusts”
8. New Business.
9. Next Meeting.
10. Adjourn.
Committee Roster
Address List No PhoneExplosion Protection Systems EXL-AAA
Laura E. Montville03/18/2015
EXL-AAA
Larry D. Floyd
ChairBASF1379 Ciba RoadMcIntosh, AL 36553
U 7/29/2005EXL-AAA
Luke S. Morrison
SecretaryProfessional Loss Control Inc.PO Box 162Fredericton, NB E3B 4Y9 Canada
SE 1/1/1987
EXL-AAA
Venkateswara Sarma Bhamidipati
PrincipalPowder Process Solutions1620 Lake Drive WestChanhassen, MN 55317
IM 03/07/2013EXL-AAA
Martin P. Clouthier
PrincipalClouthier Risk Engineering6178 Cedar StreetHalifax, NS B3H 2J7 Canada
SE 10/27/2005
EXL-AAA
Michael Davies
PrincipalPROTEGOIndustriestrasse llBraunschweig, D-38110 GermanyAlternate: Thomas Heidermann
M 1/14/2005EXL-AAA
Alexi I. Dimopoulos
PrincipalExxonMobil CorporationEMRE, Safety, Risk and Fire Protection3225 Gallows Road, Room 3A0233Fairfax, VA 22037-0001American Petroleum Institute
U 4/15/2004
EXL-AAA
Henry L. Febo, Jr.
PrincipalFM GlobalEngineering Standards1151 Boston-Providence TurnpikePO Box 9102Norwood, MA 02062-9102Alternate: John A. LeBlanc
I 8/5/2009EXL-AAA
Robert J. Feldkamp
PrincipalNordson Corporation300 Nordson DriveAmherst, OH 44001Alternate: Edward L. Jones
M 7/29/2005
EXL-AAA
Joseph P. Gillis
Principal29 Hyder StreetWestboro, MA 01581
SE 10/1/1980EXL-AAA
Dan A. Guaricci
PrincipalATEX Explosion Protection, L.P.2629 Waverly Barn Road, Suite 121Davenport, FL 33897
M 7/1/1991
EXL-AAA
Michael D. Hard
PrincipalHard Fire Suppression Systems, Inc.4645 Westerville Road, Suite AColumbus, OH 43231-6050Fire Suppression Systems AssociationAlternate: Kirk W. Humbrecht
IM 10/1/1994EXL-AAA
David D. Herrmann
PrincipalE. I. DuPont de Nemours & Company1007 Market Street, (D12016)Wilmington, DE 19898Alternate: Thomas C. Scherpa
U 10/10/1997
EXL-AAA
Alfonso F. Ibarreta
PrincipalExponent, Inc.9 Strathmore RoadNatick, MA 01760-2418Alternate: Timothy J. Myers
SE 3/4/2009EXL-AAA
Eric R. Johnson
PrincipalSavannah River Nuclear Solutions, LLCSavannah River SiteBldg. 235-11H, Room 10Aiken, SC 29808Alternate: William B. Till, Jr.
U 10/18/2011
1
Address List No PhoneExplosion Protection Systems EXL-AAA
Laura E. Montville03/18/2015
EXL-AAA
David C. Kirby
PrincipalBaker Engineering & Risk Consultants, Inc.1560 Clearview HeightsCharleston, WV 25312Alternate: James Kelly Thomas
SE 1/1/1983EXL-AAA
Steven A. McCoy
PrincipalIngredionPO Box 1084Indianapolis, IN 46206NFPA Industrial Fire Protection Section
U 10/10/1997
EXL-AAA
James O. Paavola
PrincipalDTE Electric Company2000 Second Ave., Room 421 GODetroit, MI 48226
U 1/10/2002EXL-AAA
Stefan Penno
PrincipalRembe GmbH Safety & ControlGallbergweg 21Brilon NRW, D-59929 GermanyAlternate: Gerd Ph. Mayer
M 11/2/2006
EXL-AAA
Samuel A. Rodgers
PrincipalHoneywell, Inc.15801 Woods Edge RoadColonial Heights, VA 23834-6059
U 4/1/1996EXL-AAA
Mitchel L. Rooker
PrincipalBS&B Safety Systems, LLCPO Box 470590Tulsa, OK 74147-0590Alternate: Geof Brazier
M 10/10/1997
EXL-AAA
Cleveland B. Skinker
PrincipalBechtel Power Corporation5275 Westview DriveFrederick, MD 21703-8306
SE 3/4/2009EXL-AAA
Bill Stevenson
PrincipalCV Technology, Inc.15852 Mercantile CourtJupiter, FL 33478Alternate: Jason Krbec
M 7/22/1999
EXL-AAA
David R. Stottmann
PrincipalST StoragePO Box 996Parsons, KS 67357Alternate: Keith McGuire
M 11/2/2006EXL-AAA
Stephen M. Stuart
PrincipalHylant Group2401 West Big Beaver Road, Suite 400Troy, MI 48084
I 7/24/1998
EXL-AAA
Jérôme R. Taveau
PrincipalFike Corporation704 SW 10th StreetBlue Springs, MO 64015-4263Alternate: Jef Snoeys
M 03/07/2013EXL-AAA
David E. Trull
PrincipalXL Global Asset Protection Services17804 NE 100th CourtRedmond, WA 98052Alternate: Todd A. Dillon
I 03/03/2014
EXL-AAA
Erdem A. Ural
PrincipalLoss Prevention Science & Technologies, Inc.2 Canton Street, Suite A2Stoughton, MA 02072
SE 1/16/1998EXL-AAA
Robert G. Zalosh
PrincipalFirexplo20 Rockland StreetWellesley, MA 02481
SE 1/1/1991
2
Address List No PhoneExplosion Protection Systems EXL-AAA
Laura E. Montville03/18/2015
EXL-AAA
Randal R. Davis
Voting AlternateIEP Technologies417-1 South StreetMarlborough, MA 01752-3149Voting Alt. for IEP Technologies
M 7/14/2004EXL-AAA
Geof Brazier
AlternateBS&B Safety Systems, LLC7455 East 46th StreetTulsa, OK 74145Principal: Mitchel L. Rooker
M 3/21/2006
EXL-AAA
Todd A. Dillon
AlternateXL Global Asset Protection Services1620 Winton AvenueLakewood, OH 44107Principal: David E. Trull
I 7/16/2003EXL-AAA
Thomas Heidermann
AlternateBraunschweiger Flammenfilter GIndustriestrasse 11Braunschweig, 38110 GermanyPrincipal: Michael Davies
M 10/23/2013
EXL-AAA
Kirk W. Humbrecht
AlternatePhoenix Fire Systems, Inc.744 West Nebraska StreetFrankfort, IL 60423-1701Fire Suppression Systems AssociationPrincipal: Michael D. Hard
IM 7/19/2002EXL-AAA
Edward L. Jones
AlternateNordson Corporation300 Nordson Drive, M/S 42Amherst, OH 44001Principal: Robert J. Feldkamp
M 7/29/2005
EXL-AAA
Jason Krbec
AlternateCV Technology, Inc.15852 Mercantile CourtJupiter, FL 33478Principal: Bill Stevenson
M 10/18/2011EXL-AAA
John A. LeBlanc
AlternateFM Global1151 Boston-Providence TurnpikePO Box 9102Norwood, MA 02062-9102Principal: Henry L. Febo, Jr.
I 8/5/2009
EXL-AAA
Gerd Ph. Mayer
AlternateRembe, Inc.3809 Beam Road, Suite KCharlotte, NC 28217Principal: Stefan Penno
M 03/05/2012EXL-AAA
Keith McGuire
AlternateCST StoragePO Box 996Parsons, KS 67357Principal: David R. Stottmann
M 11/2/2006
EXL-AAA
Timothy J. Myers
AlternateExponent, Inc.9 Strathmore RoadNatick, MA 01760-2418Principal: Alfonso F. Ibarreta
SE 10/20/2010EXL-AAA
Thomas C. Scherpa
AlternateThe DuPont Company, Inc.71 Valley RoadSullivan, NH 03445Principal: David D. Herrmann
U 8/9/2011
EXL-AAA
Jef Snoeys
AlternateFike CorporationToekomstlaan 52Herentals, B-2200 BelgiumPrincipal: Jérôme R. Taveau
M 3/21/2006EXL-AAA
James Kelly Thomas
AlternateBaker Engineering & Risk Consultants, Inc.3330 Oakwell Court, Suite 100San Antonio, TX 78218Principal: David C. Kirby
SE 8/9/2011
3
Address List No PhoneExplosion Protection Systems EXL-AAA
Laura E. Montville03/18/2015
EXL-AAA
William B. Till, Jr.
AlternateSavannah River Nuclear Solutions, LLC197 Till Hill RoadOrangeburg, SC 29115Principal: Eric R. Johnson
U 10/29/2012EXL-AAA
Franz Alfert
Nonvoting MemberInburex ConsultingAugust-Thyssen-Str.1Hamm, D-59067 Germany
SE 7/29/2005
EXL-AAA
Laurence G. Britton
Nonvoting MemberProcess Safety Consultant848 Sherwood RoadCharleston, WV 25314
SE 1/1/1983EXL-AAA
Vladimir Molkov
Nonvoting MemberUniversity of UlsterFireSERT Institute(Block 27)Newtonwnabbey, BT37 0QB Northern Ireland, UK
SE 10/6/2000
EXL-AAA
Laura E. Montville
Staff LiaisonNational Fire Protection Association1 Batterymarch ParkQuincy, MA 02169-7471
01/06/2015
4
First Draft Meeting Minutes
Page 1 of 3
NFPA Technical Committee on Explosion Protection Systems
MEETING MINUTES
Fall 2015 Revision Cycle First Draft Meeting for the 2016 Edition of
NFPA 67 Guide on Explosion Protection for Gaseous Mixtures in Pipe Systems
DAY 1 - April 17, 2014 (Web / Teleconference)
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 9:00am. ATTENDANCE:
Chairman: Larry Floyd BASF, AL U
Staff Liaison: Barry Chase National Fire Protection Association, MA -
Principals: Venkateswara Bhamidipati Powder Process Solutions, MN IM
Martin Clouthier Clouthier Risk Engineering, NS, Canada SE
Alexi Dimopoulos ExxonMobil Corp., VA Rep. American Petroleum Institute
U
Henry Febo FM Global, MA I
Robert Feldkamp Nordson Corp., OH M
Michael Hard Hard Fire Suppression Systems Inc., OH Rep. Fire Suppression Systems Association
IM
David Herrmann E. I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., DE U
Todd Iaeger Reading Dept. of Fire & Rescue Services, PA E
Alfonso Ibarreta Exponent Inc., MA SE
Eric Johnson Savannah River Nuclear Solutions LLC, SC U
David Kirby Baker Engineering & Risk Consultants Inc., WV SE
Samuel Rodgers Honeywell Inc., VA U
Joseph Senecal UTC/Kidde-Fenwal, MA M
Cleveland Skinker Bechtel Power Corp., MD SE
Bill Stevenson CV Technology Inc., FL M
David Trull XL Global Asset Protection Services, WA I
Robert Zalosh Firexplo, MA SE
Alternates: (* voting)
*Thomas Heidermann (Alt. to M. Davies)
Braunschweiger Flammenfilter G, Germany M
William B. Till, Jr. (Alt. to E. Johnson)
Savannah River Nuclear Solutions Inc., SC U
James Kelly Thomas (Alt. to D. Kirby)
Baker Engineering and Risk Consultants Inc., TX SE
*Gerd Ph. Mayer (Alt. to S. Penno)
Rembe Inc., NC M
*Geof Brazier (Alt. to M. Rooker)
BS&B Safety Systems LLC, OK M
The agenda was reviewed and additional topics of discussion were added, as addressed in the minutes below.
TIA Attachments
NFPA Technical Committee on Explosion Protection Fall 2015 (2016 Edition) First Draft Meeting, Web / Teleconference April 17, 2014 & May 19, 2014
MEETING MINUTES Page 2 of 3
The committee was informed of the passing of two members: Richard F. Schwab (NJ) and Stanley S. Grossel (Process
Safety & Design Consultant, NJ).
CHAIR’S COMMENTS
The chair introduced himself to the committee and welcomed new members.
NFPA STAFF PRESENTATION
NFPA staff reviewed the meeting rules, the new standards development process, key dates in the revision schedule, and
available resources.
APPROVAL OF PREVIOUS MEETING MINUTES
The minutes from the NFPA 69 Second Draft Meeting (March 6-7, 2013, Ft. Lauderdale, FL) were approved.
NFPA 67 FIRST DRAFT
The committee reviewed the public input and developed the first draft.
A task group was formed to review the usage of SU to represent both Burning Velocity and Fundamental Burning Velocity
throughout the document. The following members volunteered: J. Senecal (chair), A. Ibarreta, T. Heidermann.
ADJOURN
After resolving 5 public input submittals and creating 7 revisions, the meeting was interrupted by a failure of the
teleconference connection. When the connection was restored, many members had not returned, and it was clear that
there would not be enough time to complete the committee’s work by the published ending time. The committee voted
to adjourn and to resume business on either May 19 or May 27, depending on the committee’s availability to be
determined by online poll. The meeting adjourned at 12:00pm.
*****
DAY 2 – May 19, 2014 (Web / Teleconference)
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 9:00am. ATTENDANCE:
Chairman: Larry Floyd BASF, AL U
Staff Liaison: Barry Chase National Fire Protection Association, MA -
Principals: Venkateswara Bhamidipati Powder Process Solutions, MN IM
Martin Clouthier Clouthier Risk Engineering, NS, Canada SE
Michael Davies PROTEGO, Braunschweig, Germany M
Henry Febo FM Global, MA I
Robert Feldkamp Nordson Corp., OH M
Dan Guaricci ATEX Explosion Protection L.P., FL M
NFPA Technical Committee on Explosion Protection Fall 2015 (2016 Edition) First Draft Meeting, Web / Teleconference April 17, 2014 & May 19, 2014
MEETING MINUTES Page 3 of 3
Michael Hard Hard Fire Suppression Systems Inc., OH Rep. Fire Suppression Systems Association
IM
David Herrmann E. I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., DE U
Alfonso Ibarreta Exponent Inc., MA SE
Eric Johnson Savannah River Nuclear Solutions LLC, SC U
Steven McCoy Ingredion, IN Rep. NFPA Industrial Fire Protection Section
U
Samuel Rodgers Honeywell Inc., VA U
Mitchel Rooker BS&B Safety Systems LLC, OK M
Joseph Senecal UTC/Kidde-Fenwal, MA M
Cleveland Skinker Bechtel Power Corp., MD SE
Bill Stevenson CV Technology Inc., FL M
Stephen Stuart Hylant Group, MI I
Jerome Taveau Fike Corp., KS M
David Trull XL Global Asset Protection Services, WA I
Robert Zalosh Firexplo, MA SE
Alternates: (* voting)
Thomas Heidermann (Alt. to M. Davies)
Braunschweiger Flammenfilter G, Germany M
*Gerd Ph. Mayer (Alt. to S. Penno)
Rembe Inc., NC M
The agenda was reviewed and an additional item was added, as addressed in these minutes.
NFPA 67 FIRST DRAFT
The committee reviewed the public input and developed the first draft.
A task group was formed to revise the new section 9.1.3 on deflagration arresters. The following members volunteered:
T. Heidermann (chair), S. Rodgers, M. Davies.
A task group was formed to draft a new section on vacuum regenerated carbon adsorption units to be placed in new
section 10.4.2, which was inserted by First Revision #16. The following members volunteered: M. Davies (chair), R.
Zalosh.
OTHER BUSINESS
The committee discussed a possible TIA on NFPA 68 to correct some lingering issues. The committee agreed that this
should be discussed in a separate teleconference to be scheduled at a later date.
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 3:00pm.
Respectfully Submitted,
Barry Chase
NFPA Staff
Fall 2015 Revision Cycle
2015 FALL REVISION CYCLE *Public Input Dates may vary according to standards and schedules for Revision Cycles may change. Please check the NFPA Website for the most up‐to‐date information on Public Input Closing Dates and schedules at
www.nfpa.org/document# (i.e. www.nfpa.org/101) and click on the Next Edition tab.
Process Stage
Process Step
Dates for
TC
Dates forTC with CC
Public Input Closing Date for Paper Submittal* 11/29/2013 11/29/2013
Public Input Closing Date for Online Submittal (e‐PI)* 1/3/2014 1/3/2014
Final Date for TC First Draft Meeting 6/13/2014 3/14/2014
Public Input Posting of First Draft and TC Ballot 8/1/2014 4/25/2014
Stage Final date for Receipt of TC First Draft ballot 8/22/2014 5/16/2014
(First Draft) Final date for Receipt of TC First Draft ballot ‐ recirc 8/29/2014 5/23/2014
Posting of First Draft for CC Meeting 5/30/2014
Final date for CC First Draft Meeting 7/11/2014
Posting of First Draft and CC Ballot 8/1/2014
Final date for Receipt of CC First Draft ballot 8/22/2014
Final date for Receipt of CC First Draft ballot ‐ recirc 8/29/2014
Post First Draft Report for Public Comment 9/5/2014 9/5/2014
Public Comment Closing Date for Paper Submittal* 10/10/2014 10/10/2014
Public Comment Closing Date for Online Submittal (e‐PC)* 11/14/2014 11/14/2014
Final Date to Publish Notice of Consent Standards (Standards that received no Comments)
11/28/2014 11/28/2014
Appeal Closing Date for Consent Standards (Standards that received no Comments)
12/12/2014 12/12/2014
Final date for TC Second Draft Meeting 5/1/2015 1/23/2015
Comment Posting of Second Draft and TC Ballot 6/12/2015 3/6/2015
Stage Final date for Receipt of TC Second Draft ballot 7/3/2015 3/27/2015
(Second Final date for receipt of TC Second Draft ballot ‐ recirc 7/10/2015 4/3/2015
Draft) Posting of Second Draft for CC Meeting 4/10/2015
Final date for CC Second Draft Meeting 5/22/2015
Posting of Second Draft for CC Ballot 6/12/2015
Final date for Receipt of CC Second Draft ballot 7/3/2015
Final date for Receipt of CC Second Draft ballot ‐ recirc 7/10/2015
Post Second Draft Report for NITMAM Review 7/17/2015 7/17/2015
Tech Session Notice of Intent to Make a Motion (NITMAM) Closing Date 8/21/2015 8/21/2015
Preparation Posting of Certified Amending Motions (CAMs) and Consent Standards
10/16/2015 10/16/2015
(& Issuance) Appeal Closing Date for Consent Standards (15 days) 10/31/2015 10/31/2015
SC Issuance Date for Consent Standards (10 days) 11/10/2015 11/10/2015
Tech Session Association Meeting for Standards with CAMs 6/13‐16/2016 6/13‐16/2016
Appeals and Appeal Closing Date for Standards with CAMs 6/29/2016 6/29/2016
Issuance SC Issuance Date for Standards with CAMs 8/4/2016 8/4/2016
Approved___ October 30, 2012 Revised____December 4, 2013____________
letter_britton_103113lf.docx Helping Make Products Better ®
Larry Floyd BASF Corporation 1379 Ciba Road McIntosh, Alabama 36553 Telephone (251)436-2747 Fax (251)436-5044 Cell (251)591-2068 [email protected] www.basf.com/usa
October 31, 2013
RE: NFPA 69 2014, Tentative Interim Amendment (TIA)
Laurence G. Britton Process Safety Consultant 848 Sherwood Road Charleston, WV25314 USA Phone: 304-768-8244 [email protected]
Dear Larry,
You recently sent a number of e-mails to Sam Rodgers, Joe Senecal, and Bob Zalosh, members of the Explosion Protection Systems Committee (EXL-AAA).
First, I apologize for the delayed response. My day job prevented a more timely response.
Hopefully, I am correctly summarizing the concerns expressed in your e-mails:
Inerting safety factors for systems not continuously monitored with interlocks are too conservative. Modifications to the figure in A.7.7.2.7 are recommended (Ref. section 7.7.2.7 in the 2014 edition). [1]
Adjusted LOC values in NFPA 69 2008 version table Table C.1(a) that reflect a 2% absolute adjustment from "classical" LOC values are too conservative. You cite work by Zlochower, Green. [2]
The two requirements above will negatively impact existing processing.
NFPA 69 should incorporate an LOC mixture rule based on Le Chatelier’s formula. You again cite Zlochower, Green. [2]
Regarding impact on existing processes please note the 2014 edition requirements are not retroactive unless specifically noted. With respect to comments on LEL and LOC, I believe your comments have merit.
I spoke this afternoon to Barry Chase, our NFPA staff liaison, who confirmed that the closing date for a Notice of Intent to Make a Motion (NITMAM) was August 23, 2013. Therefore, any revisions will be to the 2014 version, which is to be published within a few weeks.
At this time the vehicle for revising the standard will be through the Tentative Interim Amendment (TIA) process. Section 5.1 from NFPA regulations document that describes the procedure is attached. The TIA submission is to include:
(a) The proposed text and/or modification or deletion of existing text.
(b) The technical justification
(c) Justification of the emergency nature of the TIA. What constitutes an emergency is defined in NFPA regulations document [3].
(d) The written agreement of two members of the EXL-AAA committee agreeing with the TIA submission.
Letter_Britton_103113lf.docx Page 2 of 3
NFPA 69 2014, Tentative Interim Amendment (TIA)
The TIA is submitted to the Standards Secretary to be approved for processing. If approved, then the TIA will be balloted by the EXL-AAA committee for 1) technical merit, and 2) emergency nature.
Depending on the extent of your proposals, and judging from the content of your recent e-mails, I anticipate calling a meeting of the committee to discuss your recommendations prior to balloting. Given the subject matter of your concerns, multiple TIA may well facilitate the discussion and balloting process.
With respect to timing the TIA submission(s), please note that the next standards committee meeting is March 2014.
I am copying Sam, Joe and Bob with the intent of furthering technical discussions and identifying the two committee members who will support the TIA.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Best regards,
Larry D. Floyd BASF Member Process Safety CoE EXL-AAA Committee Chair
Cc: B. Chase, S. Rodgers, J. Senecal, R. Zalosh
attachments
Letter_Britton_103113lf.docx Page 3 of 3
NFPA 69 2014, Tentative Interim Amendment (TIA)
“5.1 Content of a Proposed Tentative Interim Amendment. Each Tentative Interim Amendment (TIA) shall be submitted to the Standards Council Secretary and shall include the following:
a) Identification of the submitter and his or her affiliation (i.e., Technical Committee, organization, company), where appropriate
b) Identification of the NFPA Standard, edition of the NFPA Standard, and paragraph of the NFPA Standard to which the TIA is directed
c) Proposed text of the TIA, including the wording to be added, revised (and how revised), or deleted
d) Statement of the problem and substantiation for the TIA
e) The signature of the submitter or other means of authentication approved by the Standards Council Secretary
f) Statement of the basis of conclusion that the TIA is of an emergency nature requiring prompt action g) The written agreement of at least two members of the involved Technical Committee or Correlating
Committee to the processing of the TIA. The agreement to the processing of the TIA is for the sole purpose to allow the TIA to be processed and does not necessarily imply agreement with the merits or emergency nature of the TIA.”[3]
References
1. NFPA 69 2nd Draft 2014 Working Draft of Committee Meeting Output, Technical Committee on Explosion Protection Systems, Editor. 2008, National Fire Protection Association: Quincy, Massachusetts. p. 70.
2. Isaac A. Zlochower and Gregory M. Green, The limiting oxygen concentration and flammability limits of gases and gas mixtures. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2009. 22(4): p. 499-505.
3. NFPA Policy, Regulations Governing the Development of NFPA Standards, in Regulations and Procedures. 2013, National Fire Protection Association: Quincy, Massachusetts. p. 25.
tia_rodgers_050914lf.docx Helping Make Products Better ®
Larry Floyd BASF Corporation 1379 Ciba Road McIntosh, Alabama 36553 Telephone (251)436-2747 Fax (251)436-5044 Cell (251)591-2068 [email protected] www.basf.com/usa
May 13, 2014
RE: NFPA 68 (2013), Tentative Interim Amendments (TIA)
Barry D. Chase NFPA Staff Liaison 1 Batterymarch Park Quincy, MA 02169‐7471 Office: (617) 984‐7259 [email protected]
Dear Barry,
Sam Rodgers is recommending an edit and three TIAs:
Edits
1. Place §8.4 “Effects of Initially Elevated or Subatmospheric Pressure” before §8.2.5.
2. Label §8.2.5 “Effects of Turbulence”.
TIA 1: Eliminate §8.2.2.1 criteria
§8.2.2.1 “Equation 8.2.2 shall apply to initial pressures before ignition of 1 bar-abs ± 0.2 bar.”
Problem: In all pressure cases the initial vent area, Av0, must be calculated using equation 8.2.2:
Av0 is subsequently used in equation 8.4.1 in §8.4.1 to determine the vent area for pressures outside of the 1 bar-abs ± 0.2 bar:
Substantiation: The initial pressure limits imposed by §8.2.2.1 are no longer needed as adjustment for a pressure outside of the limits is now addressed in §8.4. §8.2.2.1 is a source of confusion and should be deleted.
TIA_Rodgers_050914lf.docx Page 2 of 3
NFPA 68 (2013), Tentative Interim Amendments (TIA)
TIA 2 and 3: §7.2.1 and §7.2.6
1. Remove the default values for u, Gu, and b under 7.2.1, leaving the definitions of the terms. 2. Remove the definition for u under 7.2.6.1 because it is used already in 7.2.1 3. Remove the default values for u, and au under 7.2.6.1, leaving the definitions of the terms.
Add new paragraphs
1. 7.2.1.1* It shall be permitted to assume u = 1.2 for flammable gases with stoichiometric concentrations less than 5 vol% and an initial temperature of 20oC
2. A7.2.1.1 Parameters for gases and gas mixtures at various initial pressures and temperatures can be estimated using thermodynamic tools such as GASEQ and CHETAH.
3. 7.2.1.2 It shall be permitted to assume Gu = 230.1 kg/m2‐s for an enclosure initial temperature of
20oC
4. 7.2.1.3 It shall be permitted to assume b = 1.25 [this value is not as conservative as the original 1.1 – 1.2 range and should be discussed]
5. 7.2.6.1.2 It shall be permitted to assume u = 1.8E‐05 kg/m‐s for gas concentrations less than 5 vol% at ambient concentrations. (See also A7.2.1.1)
6. 7.6.1.2.3 It shall be permitted to assume au = 343 m/s for gas concentrations less than 5 vol% at ambient conditions (See also A7.2.1.1)
Best Regards,
Larry D. Floyd BASF Process Safety CoE NFPA EXL-AAA Committee Chair Cc: EXL-AAA Committee
TIA_Rodgers_050914lf.docx Page 3 of 3
NFPA 68 (2013), Tentative Interim Amendments (TIA)
Subject Fw: NFPA 68 Chapter 8 Vent Sizing Flow Issues
From Larry Floyd
Sent Friday, April 18, 2014 9:31 AM
TIA_Rodgers_051314lf
Larry,Yes – I recommend this for a TIA due to the potential to prevent someone properly applying the vent equations. Av0 must always be calculated to always have an Av1, otherwise the chain falls apart. I also just noticed that there is a typo in paragraph 8.4.1 ‐‐‐ it should say Avep/Av1 to match the equation, not Avep/Av0.
Sam
From: "Rodgers, Sam (Process Safety)" <[email protected]>To: Larry Floyd <[email protected]>Date: 04/17/2014 09:23 AMSubject: FW: NFPA 68 Chapter 8 Vent Sizing Flow Issues
Possible TIA #1 to NFPA 68
From: Rodgers, Sam (Process Safety) Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2013 10:18 AMTo: 'Jason Krbec'Cc: Bill Stevenson; 'Larry Floyd'; [email protected]: RE: NFPA 68 Chapter 8 Vent Sizing Flow Issues
Jason,I agree with you. We need Av0 in all cases. 8.2.2.1 should be eliminated now that we apply section 8.4 all the time. Paragraph 8.4.5 takes us back to Avep=Av1 if we are in the +0.2 bar initial pressure range.
Larry,The removal of 8.2.2.1 is a potential TIA due to confusion in applications. If you are keeping track of such things, maybe we could have a meeting to discuss errors noted and then consider which ones need a TIA developed. There are some questions about 67 and well as 69 that we could discuss.
We did not feel we had the time to re‐order the chapter at the last meeting, but section 8.4 should be placed before 8.2.5 and I would recommend we label section 8.2.5 to indicate it is “Effects of Turbulence”.
Regards,Sam
From: Jason Krbec [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2013 8:48 AMTo: Rodgers, Sam (Process Safety)Cc: Bill StevensonSubject: NFPA 68 Chapter 8 Vent Sizing Flow Issues
Sam,
One of our engineers came to me with an issue regarding the flow and limitations in Chapter 8 of NFPA 68. The issue centers around the requirement in 8.2.2.1 that limits the applicability of equation 8.2.2.
I attached some notes from my engineer. I spoke with him and was able to explain the process that should be followed. However, after reviewing the document I am in agreement that either 8.2.2.1 should be eliminated or reworded otherwise you cannot apply 8.2.2 which prevents you from developing an Av1 which is required to calculate 8.4.1 for initially elevated or subatmospheric pressures.
When you get a chance please look at this and let us know your thoughts.
Best Regards,
Jason KrbecEngineering Manager
NFPA 68 TIA 1 (S. Rodgers)Friday, April 18, 201412:45 PM
NFPA 68 Page 1
North America
CV Technology, Inc.15852 Mercantile CourtJupiter, Florida 33478Direct: 561‐318‐4051Main: 561‐694‐9588Mobile: 727‐460‐5519Fax: 561‐694‐9585E‐mail: [email protected]: www.cvtechnology.com
Come visit CV Technology, Inc. at the PTXi show in Houston!!!
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e‐mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e‐mail if you have received this e‐mail by mistake and delete this e‐mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.
NFPA 68 Page 2
Subject Fw: NFPA 68 2013 Spreadsheet Update
From Larry Floyd
Sent Friday, April 18, 2014 10:42 AM
Possible TIA #2 and #3 to NFPA 68
From: Rodgers, Sam (Process Safety) Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2014 9:18 AMTo: Larry Floyd ([email protected])Cc: 'Bill Stevenson'; Tom Scherpa; 'Walter Frank'; Zalosh, Bob ([email protected]); Erdem A. Ural; Bitter, Robert-1Subject: NFPA 68 2013 Spreadsheet Update
Larry,I am sharing my spreadsheet solving the 2013 equations as well as a couple concerns with the current gas equation system. My first concern is that we have a cut‐off for vent release velocity based on a ratio of Pred to Pa. The formula for the velocity is not the issue, rather that the cut‐off based on the Pred/Pa ratio can result in a velocity exceeding the speed of sound. We should have a TIA to correct the formula.
Recommend changing to
Subject RE: NFPA 68 TIA 2, 3: 2013 Spreadsheet Update, Section 7.2.6
From Rodgers, Sam (Process Safety)
To Larry Floyd
Sent Friday, April 25, 2014 5:05 PM
My actual proposal for the ability to adjust gas values is:
Remove the default values for u, Gu, and b under 7.2.1, leaving the definitions of the terms.
Remove the definition for u under 7.2.6.1 because it is used already in 7.2.1Remove the default values for u, and au under 7.2.6.1, leaving the definitions of the terms.
Add new paragraphs
7.2.1.1* It shall be permitted to assume u = 1.2 for flammable gases with stoichiometric concentrations less than 5 vol% and an initial temperature of 20 CA7.2.1.1 Parameters for gases and gas mixtures at various initial pressures and temperatures can be estimated using thermodynamic tools such as GASEQ and CHETAH.7.2.1.2 It shall be permitted to assume Gu = 230.1 kg/m2‐s for an enclosure initial temperature of 20 C.
7.2.1.3 It shall be permitted to assume b = 1.25 [this value is not as conservative as the original 1.1‐1.2 range and should be discussed]
7.2.6.1.2 It shall be permitted to assume u = 1.8E‐05 kg/m‐s for gass concentrations less than 5 vol% at ambient concentrations. (See also A7.2.1.1)7.6.1.2.3 It shall be permitted to assume au = 343 m/s for gas concentrations less than 5 vol% at ambient conditions (See also A7.2.1.1)
From: Larry Floyd [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, April 25, 2014 5:32 PMTo: Rodgers, Sam (Process Safety)Subject: NFPA 68 TIA 2, 3: 2013 Spreadsheet Update, Section 7.2.6
Sam,TIA’s 2 and 3.Larry
TIA_Rodgers_051314lf
NFPA 68 TIA 2, 3: 2013 Spreadsheet Update, Section 7.2.1, 7.2.6 (Sam Rodgers)Friday, April 18, 20142:16 PM
NFPA 68 Page 3
My second concern is that the heat capacity ratio for burnt gas is indicated as 1.1‐1.2. GASEQ shows that adiabatic combustion at constant P or V yields a value of closer to 1.25. This yields smaller vent areas and could be a better choice for a permitted value.
Lastly there have been multiple questions about adjusting the permitted values for the gas parameters with increased initial temperature or pressure. I added a tab to provide a method for this adjustment, but the standard does not give any guidance for adjustment. It would be helpful to formally permit adjustment of the parameters for the gas mixture (burned/unburnt).
Feel free to share with the entire Explosion Protection committee, if desired.
Sam[attachment "oledata.mso" deleted by Larry Floyd/NA/BASF] [attachment "image004.wmz" deleted by Larry Floyd/NA/BASF] [attachment "image007.wmz" deleted by Larry Floyd/NA/BASF] [attachment "NFPA 68 2013 Revised 20140112.xlsx" deleted by Larry Floyd/NA/BASF]
NFPA 68 Page 4
Subject Fw: NFPA 68 (2013), Tentative Interim Amendments (TIA)
From Larry Floyd
Sent Friday, May 16, 2014 1:59 PM
Attachments
From: "Rodgers, Sam (Process Safety)" <[email protected]> Date: 05/16/2014 01:49 PM Subject: RE: NFPA 68 (2013), Tentative Interim Amendments (TIA)
All,If time permits, I would also like to recommend a TIA to change equation 7.2.6.1e to be more appropriate. The current equation for vent velocity can result in velocity exceeding the speed of sound because of the approximate cut‐off based on Pred vs 0.9 bar‐g. As vent velocity goes up so does vent Reynolds number and flame enhancement, thus this leads to larger vent area than necessary.
Sam
Current Equation
Proposed Equation
The above equation has Pa in bar‐g, so it is normally ~0.
OR (assumes ambient at vent is always 0 bar‐g)
From: Larry Floyd [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2014 4:57 PMTo: Chase, BarryCc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Rodgers, Sam (Process Safety); [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; john.leblanc%[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]: NFPA 68 (2013), Tentative Interim Amendments (TIA)
Hello Barry,
See attached for recommended TIA to be discussed on 5/19.
Larry
Larry FloydSenior Process Safety SpecialistPhone: (251)436-2747, Mobile: (251)591-2068, E-Mail: [email protected] Address: 1379 Ciba Road, McIntosh, AL 36553BASF, The Chemical CompanyIf you think safety is expensive, try an accident. T. Kletz
NFPA 68 TIA 3 (4), change equation 7.2.6.1eFriday, May 16, 20143:09 PM
NFPA 68 Page 5
7/31/2014 2:13 PM During CMD‐HAP A2016 meeting Brice Chastain reported on an incident at Georgia Pacific that resulted in two fatalities and multiple injuries resulting from a dust collector venting during a fire event. The personnel fatally injured were emergency responders. He believes that the fireball equations in NFPA 68 may not be sufficiently conservative. That is, the radiant heat flux extended past the radius determined by the NFPA 68 fireball equation that is based on research done by Holbrow, "1. Paul Holbrow, Stuart J. Hawksworth, and Alan Tyldesley, Thermal radiation from vented dust explosions. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2000. 13(6): p. 467‐476."
Bill Stevenson's advice is to keep people 90ft away from the axial vented area.
From NFPA 68, 7.7 is for vapors, gases and mists,
NFPA 8.9.2 gives fireball dimensions for a dust deflagration
NFPA 68 TIA 4, Fireball EquationThursday, July 31, 20142:12 PM
NFPA 68 Page 6
Subject Fw: Paragraph 8.5.5
From Larry Floyd
Sent Thursday, August 21, 2014 1:43 PM
Luke,We were initially correct that this paragraph should not prohibit use of the vent duct correction for sub‐atmospheric pressures. The ROC record discusses the addition of sub‐atmospheric pressure and the real concern. Henry Febo object to the sub‐atmospheric correction in the voting saying that this technology was not demonstrated and that venting could actually occur at ambient conditions. His comment reminded me that the real issue for sub‐atmospheric venting is that there is a peak around ‐0.4 bar where the vent area requirement is higher than at atmospheric. Since we know the limits of the sub‐atmospheric correction, at least theoretically, we felt comfortable adding a maximum 10% vent area as a result. We do not have data to substantiate using the vent duct correction along with elevated pressure.
8.4.2 accounted for the peak by saying that for sub‐atmospheric always use the largest factor over the pressure range from operating to ambient, thus including the peak. 8.4.3 also permits just using a 1.1 factor for sub‐atmospheric venting as this is the maximum value. And 8.4.4 says for greater than 0.2 bar there are extra restrictions, specifically vent duct L/D < 1.
All of these are in agreement with Table 8.5.10. Thus Paragraph 8.5.5 is inconsistent and incorrect. It should be:
8.5.5 Equation 8.5.1a shall not be used if the initial pressure exceeds +0.2 barg. [It should NOT be + 0.2 barg]
We forgot to update this paragraph when we added sub‐atmospheric pressure.
Larry – This should be another item for our TIA, because it incorrectly prevents use of the vent duct equations for sub‐atmospheric conditions.
Barry – Luke has somehow gotten removed from the committee list in all three of our documents. Hopefully you can correct this computer glitch.
Best Regards,Sam
08/21/14 TIA, NFPA 68 Paragraph 8.5.5Friday, August 22, 20148:20 AM
NFPA 68 Page 7
Interoffice Correspondence Colonial Heights, VA
Date: February 19, 2015 From: Samuel Rodgers
Organization: SM Process Safety Engineering
Subject: Proposal for NFPA 68 and 69 TIAson Metal Dusts Location: Technical Center
Mail Stop: 15801 Woods Edge Road To: Larry Floyd Telephone: (804) 520-3706
Fax: (804) 520-
A presentation by Scott Davis of Gexcon illustrated failure of deflagration venting of metal dusts sized on the basis of NFPA-68. The failure was particularly worse for metals with higher burning temperatures and generally adequate for lower burning temperature metal dusts. Additionally it was noted that vent duct predictions were similarly inadequate for hotter burning metal dusts.
Bob Zalosh previously presented information to the committee on the higher KSt exhibited by hotter burning metal dusts in the 1 m3 sphere vs the 20 L sphere, this being the reverse of the trend for organic dusts. Evidence has also been presented to the committee that certain metal dusts present challenges to isolation and suppression systems beyond the common effects of KSt and Pmax.
Given the growing body of work showing incomplete accounting for the effects of metal dust deflagrations, it is recommended that TIA be processed for NFPA 68 to warn of this dangerous situation and provide guidance on testing metal dusts and using the sizing equations until more information is available.
The recommended change to NFPA 68, 8.5.5 is for consistency with the permission of vent ducts for initially sub-atmospheric conditions in Table 8.5.10. It is recommended because the prohibition of vent ducts for initially sub-atmospheric conditions results in an unnecessary business burden and was not intended by the committee.
NFPA 68 TIA Proposal
6.1.2* For dusts, KSt and Pmax shall be determined in approximately spherical calibrated test vessels of at least 20 L capacity per ASTM E 1226, Standard Test Method for Explosibility of Dust Clouds. 6.1.2.1* It shall be permitted to determine KSt and Pmax per ISO 6184/1, Explosion Protection Systems — Part 1: Determination of Explosion Indices of Combustible Dusts in Air. 6.1.2.2 The owner/user shall be permitted to test the dust with moisture content and particle size that deviates from the recommended conditions established by the method described in 6.1.2 or 6.1.2.1, provided a documented assessment acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction has been performed prior to using these KSt and Pmax values to determine vent sizing.
6.1.2.3* For metal dusts KSt and Pmax shall be determined in both nominal 20 L and 1 m3 calibrated test vessels. A6.1.2.3 Recent testing has shown that certain metal dusts exhibit KSt and Pmax values that are significantly larger in 1 m3 tests than in 20 L tests, the difference increasing with adiabatic flame temperature. Until more information is available, testing in both standard test vessels is intended to provide additional confidence in application of the design methods. 6.1.2.3.1 Testing shall be in accordance with the same test method in both cases, either ASTM E 1226, Standard Test Method for Explosibility of Dust Clouds, or ISO 6184/1, Explosion Protection Systems – Part 1: Determination of Explosion Indices of Combustible Dusts in Air. 6.1.2.3.2* KSt and Pmax values for metal dusts used in this standard shall be the larger of the individual values determined in the two different sized vessels. A6.1.2.3.2 Where both the KSt and Pmax values are higher in the larger 1 m3 calibrated test vessel and the enclosure to be protected is larger than 1 m3, the owner/user should consider vent sizing based on full-scale testing.
8.5.4 Equation 8.5.1a shall not be used if the vent cover is not located at the entrance of the duct. 8.5.5 Equation 8.5.1a shall not be used if the initial pressure exceeds ±0.2 bar-g +0.2 bar-g. 8.5.6 Equation 8.5.1a shall not be used if the vent duct crosssectional area varies by more than 10 percent anywhere along the length. 8.5.7* Equation 8.5.1a shall not be used for metal dusts with adiabatic flame temperature exceeding 2500 K. A.8.5.7 Equation 8.5.1a can be applied for metal dusts with flame temperatures equivalent to iron or lower. This does not mean that vent ducts cannot be used with metal dusts (see 8.5.9). 8.5.7 8.5.8 It shall be permitted to use Equation 8.5.1a for vent ducts equipped with elbows, bird screens, and rain covers as long as the obstructions are properly accounted for through the duct resistance coefficient K. 8.5.8 8.5.9 It shall be permitted to use vent ducts outside the limitations of Equation 8.5.1(a) if designed in accordance with full-scale test data. Renumber subsequent.
NFPA 69 TIA Proposal
Add ASTM E 1226 and ISO 6184/1 to section 2.3.3 and 2.3.4 references, respectively.
6.2 Limitations. The limitations specific to each method shall be considered and are specified in the corresponding chapter for each method. 6.2.1* When using the techniques of Chapters 10, 11, 12 or 13 or of NFPA 68, Standard on Explosion Protection by Deflagration Venting, for metal dusts, KSt and Pmax shall be determined in both nominal 20 L and 1 m3 calibrated test vessels. A6.2.1 Recent testing has shown that certain metal dusts exhibit KSt and Pmax values that are significantly larger in 1 m3 tests than in 20 L tests, the difference increasing with adiabatic flame temperature. Until more information is available, testing in both standard test vessels is intended to provide additional confidence in application of the design methods.
6.2.1.1 Testing shall be in accordance with the same test method in both cases, either ASTM E 1226, Standard Test Method for Explosibility of Dust Clouds, or ISO 6184/1, Explosion Protection Systems – Part 1: Determination of Explosion Indices of Combustible Dusts in Air. 6.2.1.2* KSt and Pmax values for metal dusts used in this standard shall be the larger of the individual values determined in the two different sized vessels. A6.2.1.2 Where both the KSt and Pmax values are higher in the larger 1 m3 calibrated test vessel and the enclosure to be protected is larger than 1 m3, the owner/user should consider protection based on full-scale testing. 6.2.2 When using the techniques of Chapters 10, 11 or 12 where metal dusts are involved, the system design methodology shall include testing using a metal dust having an adiabatic flame temperature the same or higher than the relevant dust.
Samuel A. Rodgers Process Safety Ldr PMT cc: