Bulletin

Date: To: From: Subject: July 18, 2011 All Kidde Fire Systems Engineered Systems Distributors Luc Merredew, Marketing Manager - Suppression Systems

#11-35K

NFPA 2001 Standard on Clean Agent Fire Extinguishing Systems

Code Update: NFPA 2001 Standard on Clean Agent Fire Extinguishing Systems As you may already be aware, extinguishing concentrations were the subject on several proposals made during the 2010 Fall Revision Cycle for the NFPA 2001 Standard. While the revision process is not complete this bulletin is intended to provide an update on some of the more important aspects of the topics under review. Since this is a complex subject matter we have provided a significant amount of detail in this document, for an overview of the impact of these changes please see the final section entitled Summary. Class A concentration In the 2008 edition of the standard, the class A Minimum Design Concentration (MDC) is defined as 1.2 x the Minimum Extinguishing Concentration (MEC). The Technical Committee report to the Standard Council included a change to this requirement, namely that the MDC would equal 1.2 x the MEC (Class A) or the standard Class B MEC, whichever was higher. The result of this was to increase the Class A MDC by approximately 7-8% for halocarbon agents (FM-200, Novec 1230 etc.) with no change to inert gas agent concentrations. A NITMAM (Notice of Intent to Make a Motion) was filed that if successful would have returned the standard to the original language; however it failed on the floor. The new version of the standard will therefore require halocarbon agents protecting Class A hazards to utilize higher concentrations: FM-200 at 6.7% and Novec 1230 at 4.5%. See table 1. HFC-227ea
Class A/C (2008 edition) Class A (2011 edition)*

FK-5-1-12 4.2

HFC-125 8

IG-55 37.9

IG-541 34.2

IG-100 36

6.25

6.7 4.5 8.7 7% 7% 9% 7 4.7 9 Class C (2011 edition)* 12% 12% 13% increase Table 1: Minimum Design Concentration for Clean Agents per edition and [*] preliminary 2011 edition where noted).
increase

37.9 34.2 36 42.7 38.5 40.5 13% 13% 13% NFPA Standard 2001 (2008

Kidde Fire Systems is a registered trademark of Kidde-Fenwal, Inc. FM-200 is a registered trademark of DuPont Novec is a trademark of 3M

2011 Kidde-Fenwal, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Class C concentration NFPA 2001 defines a Class C Fire as a fire that involves energized electrical equipment. One could assert on the basis of this limited definition that any electrical circuit that remains energized during the discharge would qualify for this fire class. However in practice Class C is applied to hazards where the equipment or process being protected involves energized electrical hardware such as that found in data rooms, server rooms and telecommunications facilities. The materials present in these areas are Class A ordinary combustibles but due to the continued potential availability of electrical energy during the discharge, a fire can be augmented requiring a higher concentration to maintain an equivalent safety factor. In the (current) 2008 edition of the standard, the Class C Minimum Design Concentration (MDC) is defined as a minimum of the Class A concentration, i.e. 1.2 x the Minimum Extinguishing Concentration (MEC). The Technical Committee report to the Standard Council included a significant change to this requirement. First, the new language required that the MDC be selected from a table whose values equated to a safety factor of 1.35. Second, a number of application conditions were to be incorporated that would have required that individual equipment power consumption, cable bundle diameter, cable tray spacing and cable tray fill all be managed within the protected space. Finally a voltage level of over 480V was defined as a further limit of systems thus designed. The result of this was to increase the Class C MDC by approximately 12% for halocarbon and inert gas agents. However, since Kidde already specify 7% for FM-200 systems protecting Class C energized electrical hazards there would effectively be no change for these systems. A NITMAM (Notice of Intent to Make a Motion) was filed to reject this new language. The NITMAM passed by the narrowest of margins in part due to a declaration that an Amending Motion would follow the floor vote. The Amending Motion was presented and passed on the floor. The Amending Motion proposed that the Class C language as defined in the original Report on Comments (ROC) be restored; that is that Class C concentration be equal to class A MEC x 1.35 but with only voltage levels of over 480V to be the limiting application condition. Amending Motions are returned to the specific standard Technical Committee (TC). The TC needs to agree with the Association by a 2/3 majority to make this results stick. If a suitable majority is not achieved the text will return to the last point of consensus between the TC and the Association, which is the previous edition text. It is fairly likely that the TC will support the Amending Motion. Preliminary results from the TC indicate strong support for the amending motion. The new version of the standard, assuming that TC action is as described, will therefore require all clean agents protecting Class C hazards to utilize higher concentrations except FM-200 (due to our specific design approach). For example Novec 1230 will require 4.7% v/v and Argonite will require 42.7% v/v. See table above. Summary The action on Class A has resulted in an increase in concentration for halocarbon agents relative to inert gas agents. This is not based on a technical basis but rather is a function of the linkage to Class B values for Class A fires. Future committee action will likely seek to address this unbalanced approach. The effective safety factor for Class A [halocarbon agents] will be ~1.27 to 1.29 (up from 1.2). Note that the provision for a safety factor of 1.3 for manual only systems has been removed. For Class C energized electrical hazards the increases affect all but FM-200. Some manufacturers may have supported the use of FM-200 or HFC-227ea at 6.25% for Class C hazards in which case they will see a commensurate increase. Significant further committee action on this subject is not

expected but cannot be ruled out. Class C concentrations for non-HFC-227ea systems will increase based on an increased safety factor of 1.3 (up from 1.2). These changes will not be retroactive. Properly designed systems using NFPA 2001: 2008 edition concentrations and installed per the relevant design, installation, operation and maintenance manual will not require an upgrade. It is important to note that not a single system failure has been presented as evidence of the need to increase concentration; furthermore the Fire Suppression Systems Association (FSSA) completed a survey of its membership and received feedback on almost two-hundred successful extinguishments involving clean agent systems. NFPA 2001: 2011 edition is scheduled for release in August. The adoption of the standard in the jurisdictions in which you operate will of course vary widely; we recommend you contact your AHJ to determine their specific requirements. As always, our default recommendation will be to comply with the requirements of the most current released version of the 2001 standard. If you have any questions relating to this subject please contact technical support or product management.