NFPA 2001, Standard on Clean Agent Fire Extinguishing Systems now require an egress time study to show that the design limits exposure to halocarbon agents is no longer than 5 minutes, like FK-5-1-12 (NOVEC 1230), HFC-227ea (FM 200).

This comes from 2018 Edition Section 1.5.14, 2020 Edition Section 4.3.4, and 2022 Edition Section 4.3.4.

Exposure time for inert gas agents will depend on the oxygen levels within the space or room. Concentration below 43 percent shall be permitted where exposure is no longer than 5 minutes. Concentration between 43 and 52 percent shall be permitted where exposure is no longer than 3 minutes.

The annex of NFPA 2001 tells us to review the NFPA Handbook and the SFPE Handbook for more information.

Is anyone doing these calculations, and if so, what exit flow, movement speed, and reaction time would you consider appropriate for spaces using these systems?

​Thanks in advance.

Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

Where are we with the newest clean agents?

I'm running into an interesting scenario where the discussion of the phasing out by 3M of the NOVEC 1230 agent is coming up. I mentioned the competitors to NOVEC 1230 that we're aware of - FK-5-1-12 but they are interested in the next-gen stuff because they don't want to have to redo anything in the near future.

Does anyone have any experience with the Fluoro-K or any other newer, lesser used in the past but now have to look into agents?

I'm aware of Victaulic's Vortex and CO₂ options, but I'm asking about chemical agents. I look forward to hearing your thoughts and experience.

Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

Our facility is exploring constructing two large (7,200 ft²) facilities for media blasting and coating large steel structures.

The facilities have a ceiling height of approximately 40' and are enclosed via a large roll-up door on one end. The coating systems are categorized as flammable liquids.

There has been some internal debate on how to categorize these per the IFC - as "spray rooms," which would require fire suppression, or "spraying spaces," which the IFC does not have a prescriptive requirement for fire suppression.

The commentary in the IFC notes that spraying spaces are typically "unenclosed", leading us to lean towards considering these spray rooms, even though they make up the entirety of the building versus a portion of it.

We've reached out to some of the local AHJs, who all seem to agree with the spray room determination. However, the builder of the structures has indicated that most of their installations have not required suppression, even when reviewed by the local AHJ.

​Is categorizing these structures as "spray rooms" the wrong application of the term?

Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

What NFPA Standard(s) apply for two diesel generator tanks?

Two diesel generators (not emergency or standby), outside (but have enclosures) with each diesel tank stored underneath, the tank is rectangular in shape and has ~5,000 gallons of diesel fuel.

Looking at the following code path; IMC Chapter 13 for fuel oil piping and storage and IFC Chapter 6--> 605.4 Fuel Oil Storage Systems --> storage above ground in quantities exceeding 660 gallons --> NFPA 31; OR IMC Chapter 9 engine and gas turbine-powered equipment and appliances.

Is this approach correct?

In reviewing both NFPA 37 and NFPA 31, both seem to be applicable; however, when it comes to "outside aboveground tanks" of this capacity, they both reference NFPA 30 (Section 6.3.3 for NFPA 37 and 7.9.3 for NFPA 31).

So here's the main question - is NFPA 30 applicable here?

I base this on a few things:

1. NFPA 30 Scope section 1.1.2 item 9 - it says it is NOT applicable to "liquids in fuel tanks of... stationary engines" ; and
2. All the boundary and tank to tank separation requirements throughout chapter 22 are based on the diameter of the tank.

This leads me to believe this standard was not written for the type of tanks I have, but instead typical giant circular storage tanks.?

Any insight is greatly appreciated.

Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

I don’t often dabble in NFPA 30, so I have some specific questions regarding the protection of flammable and combustible liquids that I am having issues finding straight answers to.

I have a sprinklered general-purpose warehouse that stores flammable liquids in container sizes less than or equal to those indicated in NFPA 30 (2021) Table 12.8.1. The total quantities (MAQs) of these containers are also less than those shown in Table 9.6.1.

NFPA 30 (2021) Section 12.8.1 indicates that “The liquid-container combinations listed in Table 12.8.1 shall be permitted to be stored in a general-purpose warehouse without quantity limits if protected in accordance with Chapter 16."

An older version of NFPA 30 (2015) Section 12.8.1(1) indicates that if “the applicable provisions of NFPA 13 for 20ft high storage of Class IV commodities based on the storage configuration of the liquids” is used for protecting these containers, no additional protection criteria is required barring the storage arrangements are in line with the rest of the Section 12.8.

My questions are as follows (per NFPA 13 -2021):

1. If combustible liquids are stored in amounts under the MAQs stated in Section 9.6.1 (and IFC) are the additional requirements of Section 16 (NFPA 30) required, no matter what?

2. If combustible liquids are stored in container sizes less than or equal to those set forth in Table 12.8.1 (NFPA 30), are the requirements of Section 16 still required?

3. Will the storage of these commodities within liquid storage cabinets negate the requirements set forth by Section 16?

The bones of the matter is that I am having a hard time finding a section directly indicating that the requirements of Section 16 are not required. Most if not all sections I can find only indicate that Section 16 is to be used when something is stated.

​Thank you all ahead of time. As always this forum has always been a wealth of information.

Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

How would you classify metallic spray cans containing aerosol Category 3, where 20.1% of the contents by mass are flammable (specifically, propane-2-ol, isopropyl alcohol, or isopropanol). The product Flash point exceeds 61 (23 – 60) °C (estimated value).

How should I define and handle this product under NFPA 30B?

Is it defined as Aerosol Level 3?

Thank you!

Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

I have never quite understood the difference between the maximum floor area per unit of A and the maximum floor area per extinguisher in NFPA 10 Table 6.2.1.1.

If you are only permitted 6,000 sqft for a 2A (3,000 x 2) how does the 11,250 sqft limitation come into play?

Regardless, with a 75-ft travel distance maximum, you rarely get anywhere near these limits, but I wonder if anyone knows more. Thanks in advance!

Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

I had a client ask about Oxygen-Reduced Systems (ORS), aka Hypoxic air technology (displacing ambient oxygen in an enclosed environment such as in warehouses). I did a quick read with what's available on Wiki, FM and NFPA. But even my go-to suppression people have hardly encountered these. Testing has been very specific.

Just to increase my knowledge, does anyone here have an practical experience in these?

Are these systems really being installed?

Thanks in advance.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

Are foam system test headers allowed to flow outside and discharge the foam to the ground/storm water?

I see more and more places are banning AFFF from storm water.

What about flowing AR-SFFF to storm?

Any recommendations for capture if its not allowed to be send down the storm drain?

Thanks in advance.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

Is there a room volume cut off that you use for clean agent space to make sure that your system will pass the room integrity fan test?

As an extreme example, a 50,000 sf space would probably be better for something like a double interlock preaction system since it would be difficult to make sure that the space is of tight enough construction to hold the clean agent (there will inherently be some leaks in construction despite doing all the recommended practices of gasketing, door threshold blocking, etc).

Thanks in advance!

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

What is the correct procedure for determining the quantity of the reserve amount of foam, such as FP 3%, for a plant?

I've looked specifically through NFPA 11 and NFPA 16, and can't determine it.

Thanks in advance.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

We have a customer who is building a storage building that includes flammable liquids.

The liquids are Class I-B flammable (as classified under NFPA 30).

I understand that there are limits for the quantity that is allowed within one control area. The Maximum Allowable Quantity (MAQ) is 120 gallons, from NFPA 30 tables. The reading can be increased 100% when a sprinkler system is used. 

So the limit increases to 240 gallons with sprinkler protection.

The number can increase even more when stored in approved liquid storage cabinets or safety cans, which I assume the customer would prefer.

So the final MAQ becomes 240 gallons x 2 = 480 gallons.

The biggest storage room is 2,000 square feet and the customer wants to exceed the MAQ to be above 480 gallons in that storage room.

I have understood that exceeding the MAQ is permitted if the building is classified as an H-3 Occupancy (High Hazard). This occupancy applies more restrictive requirements. 

Is there any numerical value for a new MAQ limit in that case?

My current path is as follows:
Class I-B liquid storage in Storage occupancy > maximum MAQ exceeded > building re-classified as H-3 Occupancy > but where is the new MAQ?

Thanks in advance for your input. I usually design under SFS and CEA standards, and they don't have the same MAQ concept within those standards.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

I am overseeing an NFPA 101, Chapter 43 reconstruction project in an existing storage occupancy that is changing to an industrial/high hazard occupancy.

I am trying to coordinate the means of egress during construction.

Other parts of the building are currently occupied and the new area is less than 50% of the building.

Section 43.7.2.3 requires that the area comply with the applicable new construction chapters of the occupancy. The hazard category per table 43.7.3 leads me to believe this would be a hazard category 1.

The question is: when is the construction area considered to be high hazard?

The contents of the hazardous occupancy will not be present through the entirety of the construction and will only be put in place after the space is ready to be occupied and compliant with all means of egress requirements. During construction, the "high hazard contents room" is just a small room with nothing located inside.

Even with no high hazard contents present until the space is ready to be occupied, does it need to meet the egress requirements of new industrial/high hazard or can it meet the egress requirements of existing for storage?

Thanks.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

We have a project where we're adding a sound (anechoic) chamber and and protecting it with clean agent.

A question came up as to whether or not dampers are required for the HVAC system that provide supply and return air to the pre-manufactured chamber.

Is an anechoic chamber required to have dampers for limiting the migration of the clean agent?

My thinking is that the clean agent will be activated by an air sampling system, so there should be no meaningful amount of smoke in the chamber.

That said, do the dampers have to be listed for fire/smoke? 

Any help with getting specifics from code or a clearer understanding is always appreciated from the community so thanks in advance.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

3M recently announced they will no longer manufacture NOVEC 1230 by end of 2025 due to the presence of PFAS (https://news.3m.com/2022-12-20-3M-to-Exit-PFAS-Manufacturing-by-the-End-of-2025).

Other similar agents, such as FM-200, have similar environmental concerns due to having HCFCs.

Does anyone know a chemical fire suppression agent that doesn't have CFC or PFAS issues?

I know there is a new NFPA standard (770) on hybrid systems and that the Victualic Vortex is one such system, but not sure what other alternatives are out on the market. Thanks in advance.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

We have a situation where we'll have a piece of equipment in one control area that has a closed-use pipe arrangement with oxidizing gases that goes through different control areas. I've gotten conflicting feedback on this.

How do you figure the amount of "in-use" for each control area? 

Here's a sketch of the concept:

The equipment that is using the oxygen is on the fourth floor Control Area 2. The tanks that feed it are (2) 200 CF oxygen tanks that are in the second floor Control Area 1.

Which of the following two scenarios is the proper way to tally up the "in-use" quantity for the fourth floor Control Area 2 when comparing against the Maximum Allowable Quantities (MAQs)?

• Concept #1: The "in-use" amount is only the gas within the equipment itself, and only the gas within the piping to the extent of the control area wall.
• Concept #2: The "in-use" amount is all of the gas within the equipment itself, and all of the gas within all of the piping, and all of the gas within the (2) oxygen tanks which are actively hooked up to it.

 
My initial gut reaction was that the second option is correct, but now I’m not sure. My reasoning being that if there is an event in 4th floor control area 2 that causes a leak or something like that, it’s not going to just leak out what is physically within the control area… it’s going to leak out everything in all of the piping, all of the equipment, and all of the hooked up tanks. This is all presuming there are no safety devices to stop this from happening.

Assuming my initial gut reaction was correct, is there a way to limit the amount so that it stops at the control area wall?

As in: is there a safety device such as an automatic shutoff valve we can put at the wall such that in the event of a leak or other event, the automatic valve will shut off and then we only have to count the amount of gas between the equipment and the shutoff valve?

I’ve looked in the IBC and its commentary for more info, but couldn’t find anything helpful. I’ve also reached out to a number of different people and there seems to be a variety of different opinions on it.

Thanks in advance.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

I am a fire sprinkler fitter a military installation. Have a question regarding low expansion foam systems with the use of Viking Grate nozzles.

Of course with the concerns of AFFF, there are many issues and decisions flying around about the existing systems we have out here in our aircraft hangars.

Is it acceptable to use the Viking grate nozzles without the low expansion foam?

How does this provide any fire protection?

Obviously, this is not how the system was designed, in my opinion.

Please help me understand how this can be acceptable. I appreciate any and all input. 

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

What are some popular solutions for elimination of wet-pipe sprinkler systems in data centers that have installed wet-pipe, VESDA and clean agent systems?

A client wants me to find a solution that will be acceptable to the local Authority Having Jurisdiction to eliminate the wet-pipe sprinkler system in the data center portion of the facility.

We already have the VESDA and clean agent. Are there other recommendations/insight here that might be helpful?

Thanks in advance.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

We have a stand alone open-air pool pavilion with no attached building.

There is a gas grill under the roof with a very elaborate hood/exhaust/Ansul system. There is no fire alarm system in this pool pavilion.

The Fire Inspector wants the Ansul system monitored by the clubhouse fire alarm system that is 100-ft away.

Is he correct by code?

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

[Moderator's note: since the first lithium battery question a few weeks ago, we've been flooded with more questions on the topic. We'll do our best to not overburden everyone here but still keep with the topics people are asking. As always, we're thankful for you all!]

Could anybody point out some publications that deal specifically with the ventilation of lithium-ion batteries during off-gassing and how the ventilation should be controlled?

I am familiar with FM Global Loss Prevention Datasheet, and NFPA 855, and I went through some publications such as FIA, however from those I only get that there should be sufficient ventilation.

I am more interested in the off-gas detection part of the design.

The ventilation should be turned on and ESS turned off at the first sign of explosive gasses, but what gasses should those be?

H2, CO, C2H4, CH4, or all mentioned in a combination?

Not sure how to proceed in this.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe