You are on page 1of 14

NFPA

2001 Edition 2012 Review


August22,2011

Fire Suppression Systems Association 5024-R Campbell Boulevard Baltimore, Maryland 21236-5974

Phone: (410) 931-8100 Fax: (410) 931-8111 Copyright,2011,FireSuppressionsSystemsAssociation,Allrightsreserved.

NFPA 2001 Edition 2012 Review


I. II. III. Introduction..........................................................................................................................................3 SummaryofSelectChangesandAdditions..........................................................................................3 NFPA2001Chapter1Administration...............................................................................................5

Safety........................................................................................................................................................5 EnvironmentalImpact ..............................................................................................................................5 . IV. NFPA2001Chapter3Definitions.....................................................................................................8 FinalDesignConcentration(FDC).........................................................................................................8 AdjustedMinimumDesignConcentration(AMDC)..............................................................................8 V. NFPA2001Chapter4SystemComponents..........................................................................................8 HighPressureFK5112andHFC227ea..................................................................................................8 300barIG541............................................................................................................................................8 ManualControl.........................................................................................................................................9 SupervisionofElectricActuators..............................................................................................................9 DisconnectSwitch.....................................................................................................................................9 VI.NFPA2001Chapter5DesignConsiderations........................................................................................10 ProtectionofRoomshavingSubfloors...................................................................................................10 ExtentofProtection............................................................................................................................10 AgentsforProtectionunderSubfloorOnly........................................................................................11 MinimumDesignConcentrations...........................................................................................................12 ClassAfuels.........................................................................................................................................12 ClassCfuels.........................................................................................................................................12 DeepSeatedClassA............................................................................................................................13 DurationofProtection(HoldTime)........................................................................................................14 DischargeTime(InertAgents)................................................................................................................14 VI. AnnexCEnclosureIntegrityProcedure..........................................................................................14

August 22, 2011

Page 2

NFPA 2001 Edition 2012 Review

I.

Introduction

During their August 2011 meeting, the NFPA Standards Council released a revised edition of NFPA Standard 2001. The revision will be known as the 2012 edition of NFPA 2001 and has an effective date of August 31, 2011. In this FSSA document, select changes to NFPA 2001 are reviewed. The changes will be presented in the order they appear in the standard and not in any order of importance or impact. Please note that there are additional changes and corrections present in the NFPA 2001 Standard Edition 2012 which are not addressed in this document.

II.

Summary of Select Changes and Additions

Under Safety in Chapter 1, exposure to the discharge of clean agent during a local application discharge is discussed. The information on environmental impact of clean agents given in the 2008 edition is expanded upon in the 2012 edition. Definitions of Final Design Concentration (FDC) and Adjusted Minimum Design Concentration (AMDC) are given. FK5112 and HFC227ea high pressure systems up to 725 psi are included in the standard. IG541 stored at 300 bar is included in the standard. Supervision of the installation of electric actuating devices will become mandatory January 1, 2016. The mandatory disconnect switch (service disconnect switch) must be either located within a lockable cabinet or require a key to operate. It is reiterated that this must be a physical switch which opens the connection between the releasing control unit and the actuating device. When protecting a room which has a subfloor, clean agent systems which protect the space above the raised floor must simultaneously protect the space below the raised floor. The space under the raised floor must be equipped with detectors, pipe and nozzles. If a clean agent system is used to protect only the space below a raised floor, NFPA 2001 only permits the use of an inert gas clean agent system. Minimum design concentration for Class A fuels shall be the greater of the Class A minimum extinguishing concentration determined by the Class A approval test times a factor of 1.2 or the cup burner extinguishing concentration for normal heptane. Minimum design concentration for Class C fire hazards with electric power supplied at 480 volts or less shall be 1.35 times the minimum extinguishing concentration determined by the Class A approval test. The minimum design concentration for a smoldering combustion hazard (deep seated fire hazard) shall be determined by an application specific test.
August 22, 2011 Page 3

NFPA 2001 Edition 2012 Review

The hold time or duration of protection requirement is clarified to be 85% of the adjusted minimum design concentration (not the final design concentration) to be held at the highest level of combustibles for a minimum period of l0 minutes or for a time period to allow for response by trained personnel. For inert gas agent systems protecting Class A surface fire or Class C hazards, the discharge time required to achieve 95 percent of the minimum design concentration for flame extinguishment shall not exceed 120 seconds. Annex C Enclosure Integrity Procedure has been rewritten for clarity and a number of errors in the formula contained in the 2008 Edition of NFPA 2001 have been corrected. IMPORTANT NOTE In this FSSA document portions of the soon to be published NFPA 2001 Standard 2012 edition are quoted based on the published ROP and ROC documents. Neither these quotations nor this document should be relied upon for purposes of system specification, design, analysis, commissioning or approval. The official NFPA 2001 Standard published by the National Fire Protection Association must be obtained and consulted for all purposes, including system specification, design, analysis, commissioning or approval. The commentary on NFPA 2001 contained in this document is not to be considered an official interpretation of NFPA 2001. To obtain an official interpretation of a NFPA standard, consult the NFPA.

August 22, 2011

Page 4

NFPA 2001 Edition 2012 Review

III.
Safety

NFPA 2001 Chapter 1 Administration

Paragraph 1.5.1.1 has a clarification which notes SNAP evaluation of agents by the US EPA addresses total flooding agents. Also included is an Annex section discussing exposure to agent discharge from local application systems. The affected paragraphs are shown below. New text is italicized. 1.5.1.1* Any agent that is to be recognized by this standard or proposed for inclusion in this standard shall first be evaluated in a manner equivalent to the process used by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agencys (EPA) SNAP Program for total flooding agents. A.6.1.3 Local concentrations of agent in the vicinity of the discharge often will exceed the maximum permitted exposure limits described in Section 1.5. Consideration for exposure to agent discharge from local application systems vary greatly and may be more complicated than that for total flooding systems depending on: the amount of agent released, the time needed to extinguish a fire, the size of the room or enclosure in which a fire occurs, the size of the fire, the proximity of the person to the point of discharge of the agent, the rate at which fresh air infiltrates the space, and the air exchange rate near the fire.

Environmental Impact
Paragraph 1.6 was modified as follows: 1.6* Environmental Factors. When an agent is being selected to protect a hazard area, the effects of the agent on the environment shall be considered. Selection of the appropriate fire suppression agent shall include consideration of the following items: (1) Potential environmental effect of a fire in the protected area (2) Potential environmental impacts, including but not limited to Ozone Depletion Potential (ODP) and Global Warming Potential (GWP), of the clean agents that could be used. The Annex material for Paragraph 1.6 was greatly expanded to include a table of ODP and GWP values for the various clean agents as well as tables comparing the relative Global Warming impacts of various common types of gases which are emitted to the atmosphere. A discussion of these tables and the concept of Global Warming Potential is added to the Annex.
August 22, 2011 Page 5

NFPA 2001 Edition 2012 Review

Annex 1.6: Table A 1.6 Agent FIC13I1 FK5112 HCFC Blend A HFC Blend B HCFC124 HFC125 HFC227ea HFC23 HFC236fa IG01 IG100 IG541 IG55 GWP (IPCC 2007) 0.4 1 1550 1540 609 3500 3220 14800 9810 0 0 0 0 ODP 0* 0 0.048 0 0.022 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

* Agent may have a nonzero ODP if released at altitudes high above ground level Greenhousegas effect: The GWPs of the agents (as listed in Table A.1.6 (A)) provide a relative comparison of the direct greenhouse gas emissions of fire protection systems and do not take into account any effects from indirect emissions. For most applications, the indirect effects are negligible compared with the direct effects. By contrast with other sectors, the amount of energy required to operate fire protection systems is trivial and largely unaffected by the agent used. Global warming potential (GWP) is a measure of how much a given mass of greenhouse gas is estimated to contribute to global warming. It is a relative scale which compares the gas in question to that of the same mass of carbon dioxide (whose GWP is by convention equal to 1). A GWP is calculated over a specific time interval and the value of this must be stated whenever a GWP is quoted or else the value is meaningless. The substances subject to restrictions in the Kyoto protocol either are rapidly increasing their concentrations in Earth's atmosphere or have a large GWP. The GWP depends on the following factors: the absorption of infrared radiation by a given species the spectral location of its absorbing wavelengths the atmospheric lifetime of the species Thus, a high GWP correlates with a large infrared absorption and a long atmospheric lifetime. The dependence of GWP on the wavelength of absorption is more complicated. Even if a gas absorbs radiation efficiently at a certain wavelength,
August 22, 2011 Page 6

NFPA 2001 Edition 2012 Review

this may not affect its GWP much if the atmosphere already absorbs most radiation at that wavelength. A gas has the most effect if it absorbs in a "window" of wavelengths where the atmosphere is fairly transparent. Global Warming Potential (GWP) It is important to understand that the impact of a gas on climate change is a function of both the GWP of the gas and the amount of the gas emitted. For example, carbon dioxide (CO2) has one of the lowest GWP values of all GHGs (GWP=1), yet emissions of CO2 account for approximately 85% of the impact of all GHG emissions. The US EPA has employed its Vintaging Model [US EPA, Inventory of Greenhouse Gas Emissions: 19902007, US EPA 2009] to estimate the emissions of GHGs from various sources, and the most recent results are shown in Table A.1.6 (A) and Table A.1.6 (B), which indicate the relative impact of GHG emissions (Tg of CO2 equivalents) for the various GHGs (Table A.1.6 (A)) and for HFCs as a function of industry (Table A.1.6 (B)). Table A.1.6 (A): Relative Impact of GHG Emissions Emissions, Tg CO2 Equivalents 6103.4 585.3 311.9 125.5 7.5 16.5 7150.1 % of Total Impact 85.40% 8.20% 4.40% 1.70% 0.10% 0.20% 100%

GHG CO2 CH4 N2O HFCs PFCs SF6 Total

Source: EPA (4/15/2009) Table A.1.6 (B): Impact of HFC Emissions Emissions, % of Total Tg CO2 Equivalents Impact 0.3 0.20%

Source Semiconductor Industry HCFC22 production Refrigeration/AC Aerosol Foams Solvents Fire Protection Total

17 13.50% 97.5 77.70% 6.2 4.90% 2.6 2.10% 1.3 1.00% 0.7 0.60% 125.5 100%

Source: EPA (4/15/2009)


August 22, 2011 Page 7

NFPA 2001 Edition 2012 Review

As can be seen from Table A.1.6(A) and Table A.1.6(B), the impact (in Tg of CO2 equivalents) of HFC emissions from fire suppression applications represents 100 x (0.7/7150.1) = 0.0098% of the total impact of all GHGs, i.e the impact of HFC emissions from fire protection applications represents less than 0.01% of the impact of all GHG emissions. Recent results from the HEEP program, which estimates the emissions of HFCs from fire suppression, are in good agreement with the results of EPA's vintaging model results for the emission of HFCs from fire suppression applications. By these changes and additions, the Technical Committee hoped to clarify what was meant by the existing NFPA 2001 Edition 2008 1.6 Item 2 which directs that the environmental effect of the clean agent should be considered in addition to environmental effects of the fire in the process of agent selection.

IV.

NFPA 2001 Chapter 3 Definitions


Final Design Concentration (FDC). The actual concentration of agent discharged into

New definitions are included in the 2012 edition of NFPA 2001. the enclosure.

Related Annex Material: The FDC is equal to, or greater than, the Adjusted Minimum Design Concentration.
Adjusted Minimum Design Concentration (AMDC). The target minimum design

concentration after the Safety Factor and the Design Factors have been taken into account. Related Annex Material: This term is also referred to as simply Design Concentration throughout this document. In determining the Duration of Protection (5.6) it is 85 percent of the AMDC that must be held for the duration of the retention time. These definitions were added to address incorrect interpretations of NFPA 2001 Paragraph 5.6. Please see discussion of Duration of Protection (Hold time) on page 14.

V.

NFPA 2001 Chapter 4 System Components

High Pressure FK5112 and HFC227ea


Annex A.4.1.4.1 is expanded to include FK5112 stored at 600 psi at 70F as well as FK5 112 and HFC227ea stored at 725 psi at 70F

300 bar IG541


IG541 at a nominal storage pressure of 300 bar was added to Table 4.2.1.1.1(a) together with cylinder and pipe pressure requirements. This recognizes the trend in some locales to use higher storage pressures for inert gases.
August 22, 2011 Page 8

NFPA 2001 Edition 2012 Review

Table A4.2.3.1 (a) includes the following information on pipe and fittings for 300 bar IG 541: Agent: IG541 Pressure in Agent Container at 70F (21C) 4508 psig (31,050 kPa) Minimum Acceptable Fittings: Class 3,000 lb. thrd. forged steel Maximum Pipe Size: 1 in. Class 6,000 lb. thrd. /weld F.S. Maximum Pipe Size: All Class 2,500 flanged joint Maximum Pipe Size: All

Manual Control
Section 4.3.3.6.2 which refers to the operation of manual system controls was modified for sake of clarity as follows: 4.3.3.6.2 Operation of any manual control shall cause the complete system to operate as designed in its normal fashion.

Supervision of Electric Actuators


A new section requiring supervision of electric actuators has been added to the standard. This requirement will become effective January 1, 2016. Jim Kidd submitted the original proposal for this requirement which was accepted by the Technical Committee during ROP development. John Spalding, representing the FSSA, contributed some clarifying modifications as a comment to the ROP. The resulting new text is as follows: 4.3.4.1* Removal of an electric actuator from the agent storage container discharge valve which it controls shall result in an audible and visual indication of system impairment at the system releasing control panel. 4.3.4.1.1 Section 4.3.4.1 shall become effective January 1, 2016. 4.3.4.1.2 Section 4.3.4.1 shall not apply to systems covered under Chapter 8 of this standard with the exception of those systems included under 8.6. 4.3.4.2 Removal of an electric actuator from the selector valve which it controls shall result in an audible and visual indication of system impairment at the system releasing control panel. 4.3.4.2.1 Section 4.3.4.2 shall become effective January 1, 2016. 4.3.4.2.2 Section 4.3.4.2 shall not apply to systems covered under Chapter 8 of this standard with the exception of those systems included under 8.6. Annex material discussing this new requirement is included in the 2012 Standard.

Disconnect Switch
The requirement for a disconnect switch is not new. The technical committee, however, added the requirement that the switch must be located inside a lockable cabinet or require a key to operate it in order to secure the switch against unauthorized operation. It is
August 22, 2011 Page 9

NFPA 2001 Edition 2012 Review

clarified that a supervisory signal shall occur at the releasing control unit when the releasing circuit to the suppression circuit is disconnected from the control unit. 4.3.6.1 To avoid unwanted discharge of a clean agent system, a supervised disconnect switch shall be provided. The disconnect switch shall interrupt the releasing circuit to the suppression system and shall cause a supervisory signal at the releasing control unit. 4.3.6.2 The disconnect switch shall be located inside a lockable fire alarm control panel, inside a lockable enclosure, or require a key for activation of the switch. 4.3.6.3 When the disconnect switch requires a key for activation, the access key shall not be removable while disconnected so that the suppression system can be quickly returned to the operational condition in the event of a fire. 4.3.6.4 Suppression systems disconnect achieved via software programming shall not be acceptable for use in lieu of a physical disconnect switch. 4.3.6.5 The disconnect switch shall be listed.

VI. NFPA 2001 Chapter 5 Design Considerations


Protection of Rooms having Subfloors
Extent of Protection

Reports from the field indicated that clean agent system were being installed in rooms with raised floors and the space under the raised floor was not afforded simultaneous protection. Section 5.3.5 is added to the 2012 edition of the standard to make it clear that when the room above a raised floor is protected by total flooding with a clean agent, the space under the raised floor (within the subfloor) must be simultaneously protected by a clean agent system. 5.3.5 When a clean agent total flooding system is being provided for the protection of a room with a raised or sunken floor, the room and raised or sunken floor shall be simultaneously protected. Each volume, room and raised or sunken floor to be protected, shall be provided with detectors, piping network and nozzles. We paraphrase substantiation provided by the submitter of the original comment with which the technical committee agreed: Even if there is no air flow or cabling in the lower space, the agents will eventually leak to the low point and may prematurely cause the concentration in the room to decay. If there happens to be a fire below the raised floor, the concentration of agent leaking downward may not be enough to develop an extinguishing concentration, and therefore, could possibly produce great amounts of products of agent decomposition.

August 22, 2011

Page 10

NFPA 2001 Edition 2012 Review


Agents for Protection under Subfloor Only

Subsection 5.3.5.1 was added to make it clear that when a system is arranged to discharge only in the space under the raised floor, an inert gas must be used. NFPA 75 requires either automatic sprinkler protection or a gaseous extinguishing system to be installed under the raised floor of a data center. Gaseous systems protecting only the space below a raised floor are not uncommon. The newly stated requirement in NFPA 2001 is below and new Annex material explains the reason for the requirement. 5.3.5.1 If only the space under the raised floor is to be protected by a total flooding system, an inert gas shall be used to protect that space. Annex 5.3.5.1 NFPA 75 2009 edition 8.1.1.2 requires An automatic sprinkler system, a carbon dioxide extinguishing system, or an inert agent fire extinguishing system for the protection of the area below the raised floor in an information technology equipment room or information technology equipment area shall be provided. NFPA 75 2009 edition A.8.1.1.2 notes that Halocarbon agents should not be used to protect the space below a raised floor unless the space above the raised floor is likewise protected by the system and the system is designed to discharge simultaneously into both the space below the raised floor and the room above the raised floor. During and after a discharge some of the agent from the space under the raised floor will migrate into the room above the raised floor. If any fire exists in the equipment above the raised floor, the agent at a concentration below the extinguishing concentration may be exposed to the fire. If the agent were a halocarbon, considerable decomposition of the agent could occur. Note that NFPA 12A 2009 5.3.1.2 also prohibits the use of Halon 1301 for flooding the space under a raised floor if the room above the raised floor is not simultaneously protected by the Halon 1301 total flooding system. Note from the FSSA Technical Director: In a closely related action, NFPA 75 has proposed a clarification to its requirement for protection of space under raised floors in data centers. Currently NFPA 75 edition 2009 states: 8.1.1.2* An automatic sprinkler system, a carbon dioxide extinguishing system, or an inert agent fire extinguishing system for the protection of the area below the raised floor in an information technology equipment room or information technology equipment area shall be provided. This provision has been incorrectly interpreted by some to mean that even if the entire IT room or area and subfloor area are protected by a total flood clean agent system, the subfloor must be protected separately by an automatic sprinkler system, a carbon dioxide system, or an inert agent fire extinguishing system . . . The ROC for NFPA 75 edition 2012 was published on August 8, 2011. If adopted, the requirement for protection of the space under the raised floor will be clarified as follows: 8.1.1.3 Where a gaseous fire extinguishing system is provided only under a raised floor, the gaseous system shall be either carbon dioxide or an inert gas.

August 22, 2011

Page 11

NFPA 2001 Edition 2012 Review

8.1.1.4 Where a clean agent fire extinguishing systems is provided to protect the space above the raised floor, the space under the raised floor shall be simultaneously protected by the clean agent fire extinguishing system.
From the Report on Comments F2011 Copyright, NFPA

Unless Amending Motions are certified for this document, the changes set forth in the ROP and ROC for NFPA 75 edition 2012 will be incorporated in the standard and released this coming winter. The deadline for filing NITMAMs on NFPA 75 is October 21, 2011.

Minimum Design Concentrations


Class A fuels

The method for determining the minimum design concentration for extinguishing fire in Class A fuels has been modified as follows: 5.4.2.4* The minimum design concentration for a Class A surface fire hazard shall be determined by 5.4.2.4.1 or 5.4.2.4.2, whichever is greater. 5.4.2.4.1 The extinguishing concentration, as determined in 5.4.2.2, times a safety factor of 1.2 5.4.2.4.2 Equal to the minimum extinguishing concentration for heptane as determined from 5.4.2.1. The net effect of this change is the minimum design concentration for Class A fuels may not be less than the minimum extinguishing concentration for normal heptane determined from the cup burner test. The current Class A minimum design concentrations for inert gases will not change. The Class A MDC for most halocarbon agents will be increased to the MEC for heptane. Designers and installers should consult with the system manufacturer to obtain the correct MDC for hazards in which Class A fires are to be extinguished with total flood clean agent systems.
Class C fuels

In the 2008 edition of NFPA 2001, the minimum design concentration for a Class C hazard was at least that for Class A surface fire. The 2012 edition will mandate the following minimum design concentrations for Class C hazards: 5.4.2.5 The minimum design concentration for a Class C hazard shall be the extinguishing concentration, as determined by 5.4.2.2, times a safety factor of 1.35. 5.4.2.5.1 The minimum design concentration for spaces containing energized electrical hazards supplied at greater than 480 volts which remains powered during and after agent discharge, shall be determined by testing, as necessary, and a hazard analysis. The discussion of Class C minimum design concentrations has been ongoing for several revision cycles of NFPA 2001. The requirement which will be set forth in the 2012 edition is a result of this ongoing discussion as well as debate which took place at the NFPA technical report session this June in Boston. Designers and installers should consult the
August 22, 2011 Page 12

NFPA 2001 Edition 2012 Review

system manufacturer for the minimum design concentrations required to meet NFPA 2001 Edition 2012.
Deep Seated Class A

Section 5.4.2.6 and its related Annex will address deep seated Class A hazards as follows: 5.4.2.6 The minimum design concentration for a smoldering combustion hazard (deep seated fire hazard) shall be determined by an application specific test. A.5.4.2.6 Fires in Solid Materials. Two types of fires can occur in solid fuels: one in which volatile gases resulting from heating or decomposition of the fuel surface are the source of combustion; and another in which oxidation occurs at the surface of, or within, the mass of fuel. The former is commonly referred to as flaming combustion, while the latter is often called smoldering or glowing combustion. The two types of fires frequently occur concurrently, although one type of burning can precede the other. For example, a wood fire can start as flaming combustion and become smoldering as burning progresses. Conversely, spontaneous ignition in a pile of oily rags can begin as a smoldering fire and break into flames at some later point. Flaming combustion, because it occurs in the vapor phase, may be extinguished with relatively low levels of clean agents. In the absence of smoldering combustion, it will stay out. Smoldering combustion is not subject to immediate extinguishment as is flaming combustion. Characteristic of this type of combustion is the slow rate of heat losses from the reaction zone. Thus, the fuel remains hot enough to react with oxygen, even though the rate of reaction, which is controlled by diffusion processes, is extremely slow. Smoldering fires can continue to burn for many weeks, for example, in bales of cotton and jute and within heaps of sawdust. A smoldering fire ceases to burn only when either all of the available oxygen or fuel has been consumed or when the fuel surface is at too low a temperature to react. These fires are usually extinguished by reducing the fuel temperature, either directly by application of a heatabsorbing medium, such as water, or by blanketing with an inert gas. The inert gas slows the reaction rate to the point where heat generated by oxidation is less than heat losses to surroundings. This causes the temperature to fall below the level necessary for spontaneous ignition after removal of the inert atmosphere. For the purposes of this standard, smoldering fires are divided into two classes: (1) where the smoldering is not deep seated and (2) deepseated fires. Whether a fire will become deep seated depends, in part, on the length of time it has been burning before application of the extinguishing agent. This time is usually called the preburn time. Another important variable is the fuel configuration. While wood cribs and pallets are easily extinguished with Class A design concentrations, vertical wood panels closely spaced and parallel may require higher concentrations and long hold times for extinguishment. Fires in boxes of excelsior and in piles of shredded paper also may require higher concentrations and long hold times for extinguishment. In these situations, heat tends to be retained in the fuel
August 22, 2011 Page 13

NFPA 2001 Edition 2012 Review

array rather than being dissipated to the surroundings. Radiation is an important mechanism for heat removal from smoldering fires.

Duration of Protection (Hold Time)


This is a clarification of an existing requirement. 5.6* Duration of Protection. A minimum concentration of 85 percent of the Adjusted Minimum Design Concentration shall be held at the highest level of combustibles for a minimum period of l0 minutes or for a time period to allow for response by trained personnel. It is important that the agent Adjusted Minimum Design Concentration not only shall be achieved, but also shall be maintained for the specified period of time to allow effective emergency action by trained personnel. This is equally important in all classes of fires, since a persistent ignition source (e.g. an arc, heat source, oxyacetylene torch, or deepseated fire) can lead to resurgence of the initial event once the clean agent has dissipated. This change makes it clear that the intent of this requirement was and is to hold 85 percent of the adjusted minimum design concentration (AMDC). The adjusted minimum design concentration may differ from the final design concentration (FDC), that is, the agent concentration actually provided. For example, if the required design concentration (AMDC) is 42%, but a 50% concentration (FDC) is provided, then 85% of 42% shall be held at the highest level of combustibles for a minimum period of l0 minutes or for a time period to allow for response by trained personnel.

Discharge Time (Inert Agents)


When Class A surface fire or Class C fire hazards are protected by inert gas agents, the discharge time required to achieve 95 percent of the minimum design concentration may be extended to a maximum of 120 seconds. 5.7.1.2.2 For inert gas agents, the discharge time required to achieve 95 percent of the minimum design concentration for flame extinguishment shall not exceed 60 seconds for Class B fuel hazards, 120 seconds for Class A surface fire hazards or Class C hazards, or as otherwise required by the authority having jurisdiction. The approved limits for a given inert gas system must be followed. Designers and installers should seek and follow the guidance of the system manufacturer in applying the revised 5.7.1.2.2.

VI.

Annex C Enclosure Integrity Procedure

In the 2012 edition of NFPA 2001, Annex C has been rewritten for clarity and a number of errors in the formulas contained in the 2008 edition of NFPA 2001 have been corrected.

August 22, 2011

Page 14