report of the committee on venting systems for cooking ......3.2 mm (1/8 in.) that has a flame...

Report of the Committee on

Venting Systems for Cooking Appliances

David P. Demers, ChairDemers Associates Incorporated, MA [SE]

R. T. Leicht, SecretaryState of Delaware, DE [E]

Rep. International Fire Marshals Association

Phil Ackland, Phillip Ackland Holdings Limited, Canada [SE]Bernard P. Besal, Besal Services, Incorporated, GA [IM] Rep. International Kitchen Exhaust Cleaning AssociationDavid R. Bouchard, Fire Consulting Associates Incorporated, RI [SE]Lawrence J. Capalbo, Flame Gard, Incorporated, CA [M]Laurence W. Caraway, Jr., Kitchen Klean Incorporated, NH [IM]Lee C. DeVito, FIREPRO Incorporated, MA [SE]David L. Foster, Insurance Services Office, Incorporated, NJ [I]Rod Getz, Getz Fire Equipment, IL [IM] Rep. National Association of Fire Equipment Distributors IncorporatedCharles H. Gibbons, Jr., Lampert-Lee & Associates, WI [SE]Ted W. Giles, Giles Enterprises, Incorporated, AL [M] Rep. Gas Appliance Manufacturers Association, IncorporatedDonald L. Griffes, NEVTEC, VT [M]Edward J. Hard, Koorsen Protection Services, OH [IM]Gary G. Hopson, Aon Risk Services, MI [I]William Klingenmaier, Tyco Suppression Systems, WI [M] Rep. Fire Equipment Manufacturers' AssociationSteven F. Levin, Royal & SunAlliance, IL [I] Rep. American Insurance Services GroupPhilip O. Morton, Gaylord Industries Incorporated, OR [M]Daniel P. Restelli, Underwriters Laboratories Incorporated, IL [RT]Roger Rotundo, City of Phoenix, AZ [E]Harry Schildkraut, Cini-Little International, Incorporated, IL [SE] Rep. Foodservice Consultants Society InternationalChristopher R. Schulz, Van-Packer Company, Incorporated, IL [M]Emmanuel A. Sopeju, Underwriters Laboratories of Canada, Canada [RT]Anthony J. Spata, McDonald's Corporation, IL [U]Laurie K. Szumla, Lane Fire & Safety, NY [IM]James F. Valentine, Jr., James F. Valentine, Jr., Incorporated, NJ [SE]Bruce A. Zimmerman, AVTEC Industries Incorporated, FL [M]

Alternates

Tammy Lynn Bitting, Van-Packer Company, IL [M] (Alt. to C. R. Schulz)George J. Campise, Jr., AVTEC Industries Incorporated, IL [M] (Alt. to B. A. Zimmerman)Leonard E. Griffes, NEVTEC Limited, VT [M] (Alt. to D. L. Griffes)Fred E. Kahn, Guardian Services, TX [IM] (Alt. to B. P. Besal)Richard Kukla, Robert Rippe & Associates, MN [SE] (Alt. to H. Schildkraut)Daryl Mirza, Ducts Unlimited, IL [SE] (Alt. to P. Ackland)John W. Rudd, Delaware State Fire Marshal Office, DE [E] (Alt. to R. T. Leicht)James Shea, Kidde-Fenwal, Incorporated, MA [M] (Alt. to W. Klingenmaier)

Staff Liaison: James D. Lake

Committee Scope: This Committee shall have primary responsibility for documents on fire safety in the design, installation, and use ofexhaust systems (including hoods, grease removal devices, exhaust ducts, dampers, air-moving devices; and auxiliary equipment) for the removalof products of combustion, heat, grease, and vapors from cooking equipment, including the application of associated fire extinguishing systems.

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

1

The Report of the Technical Committee on Venting Systems for Cooking Appliances is presented for adoption.

This Report was prepared by the Technical Committee on Venting Systems for Cooking Appliances, and proposes for adoption, amendmentsto NFPA 96, Standard for Ventilation Control and Fire Protection of Commerical Cooking Operations, 2001 edition. NFPA 96-2001 ispublished in Volume 5 of the 2002 National Fire Codes and in separate pamphlet form.

This Report has been submitted to letter ballot of the Technical Committee on Venting Systems for Cooking Appliances, which consists of27 voting members. The results of the balloting, after circulation of any negative votes, can be found in the report.

2

Report on Proposals – May 2004 NFPA 9696-1 Log #13 (Chapter 1)

Final Action: Accept in Principle

Submitter: Phil Ackland, Phillip Ackland Holdings Ltd.Recommendation: Add to Chapter 1: “The owner of the exhaust system is responsible for installation and modifications to the system.”

Substantiation:

It is the owner of the exhaust system who decides whether to spend the money to install or modify the exhaust system.Committee Meeting Action: Accept in Principle Add a new 4.1.5 and renumber the rest of the section accordingly. 4.1.5 The responsibility for inspection, maintenance and cleanliness of the ventilation control and fire protection of the commercialcooking operations shall be the ultimate responsibility of the owner of the system provided that this responsibility has not beentransferred in written form to a management company or other party.Committee Statement: The language addresses the submitters intent and places the requirement in Chapter 4 which is more appropriate for this requirement. Number Eligible to Vote: 27

Affirmative: 24Ballot Results:Ackland, Caraway, MortonBallot Not Returned: 3

96-2 Log #47 (2.1.2.2)

Final Action: Accept

Submitter: Bob Eugene, Underwriters Laboratories Inc.Recommendation: Revise text to read as follows: UL 1978, Standard for Safety for Grease Ducts, 1995 2002.

Substantiation:

Update to current standard edition and title.Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 27


96-3 Log #CP3 (2.1.2.2)


Submitter: Technical Committee on Venting Systems for Cooking AppliancesRecommendation: 2.1.2.2 UL Publications. Underwriters Laboratories Inc., 333 Pfingsten Road, Northbrook, IL 60062. UL 197, Standard for Commercial Electric Cooking Appliances, 1993. UL 300, Standard for Fire Testing of Fire Extinguishing Systems for Protection of Restaurant Cooking Areas, 1996. UL 710, Standard for Exhaust Hoods for Commercial Cooking Equipment. UL 723, Standard for Test For Surface Burning Characteristics of Building Materials, 1996, 2001. UL 1046, Standard for Grease Filters for Exhaust Ducts, 2000. UL 1978, Standard for Safety for Grease Ducts, 1995 2002. UL 2221, Standard for Tests of Fire Resistive Grease Duct Assemblies, 2001.

Substantiation:

Updated references.

Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 27


3

Report on Proposals – May 2004 NFPA 9696-4 Log #CP1 (Chapter 3 Definitions (GOT))


Submitter: Technical Committee on Venting Systems for Cooking AppliancesRecommendation: Adopt the preferred definitions from the NFPA Glossary of Terms for the following terms: Automatic (preferred) NFPA 101, 2000 ed. That which provides a function without the necessity of human intervention. Automatic (secondary) NFPA 96, Providing a function without the necessity of human intervention. Limited-Combustible Material (preferred) NFPA 5000, 2002 ed.Refers to a building construction material not complying with the definition of noncombustible material that, in the form in which it isused, has a potential heat value not exceeding 3500 Btu/lb (8141 kJ/kg), where tested in accordance with NFPA 259 and includes (1)materials having a structural base of noncombustible material, with a surfacing not exceeding a thickness of 1/8 in. (3.2 mm) that has aflame spread index not greater than 50; and (2) materials, in the form and thickness used, other than as described in (1), having neither aflame spread index greater than 25 nor evidence of continued progressive combustion, and of such composition that surfaces that wouldbe exposed by cutting through the material on any plane would have neither a flame spread index greater than 25 nor evidence ofcontinued progressive combustion. Limited-Combustible Material (secondary) NFPA 96, 2001 ed. As applied to a material of construction, any material that does not meet the definition of noncombustible, as stated elsewhere in thissection, and that, in the form in which it is used, has a potential heat value not exceeding 8141 kJ/kg (3,500 Btu/lb) when tested inaccordance with NFPA 259, Standard Test Method for Potential Heat of Building Materials, and also meets one of the followingsubparagraphs (a) or (b). (a) Materials having a structural base of noncombustible material, with a surfacing not exceeding a thickness of3.2 mm (1/8 in.) that has a flame spread rating not greater than 50, when tested in accordance with NFPA 255, Standard Method of Test ofSurface Burning Characteristics of Building Materials. (b) Materials, in the form and thickness used and not described by (a) above,having neither a flame spread rating greater than 25 nor evidence of continued progressive combustion and having such compositionthat surfaces that would be exposed by cutting through the material in any plane have neither a flame spread rating greater than 25 norevidence of continued progressive combustion, when tested in accordance with NFPA 255, Standard Method of Test of Surface BurningCharacteristics of Building Materials.

Substantiation:

Adoption of preferred definitions will assist the user by providing consistent meaning of defined terms throughout the National FireCodes.Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 27


96-5 Log #35 (4.1.5)


Submitter: R. T. Leicht, Delaware State Fire Marshal’s OfficeRecommendation: Revise paragraph to read as follows: “Maintenance and repairs shall be performed on all components at intervals necessary to maintain acceptable conditions.”

Substantiation:

Current wording refers to "these" conditions. It is unclear as to what conditions are being referred to.Committee Meeting Action: Accept in Principle Change current 4.1.5 to 4.1.3.1 “Maintenance and repairs shall be performed on all components at intervals necessary to maintain good working conditions.”Committee Statement: This requirement is more appropriately attached to the list in 4.1.3.Number Eligible to Vote: 27


4

Report on Proposals – May 2004 NFPA 9696-6 Log #34 (4.1.7)


Submitter: R. T. Leicht, Delaware State Fire Marshal’s OfficeRecommendation: Replace the words, "Multiple tenancy" with the words, "Multi-tenant".

Substantiation:

Current wording is not typical phrasing. Revised text is more in conformance with convention.Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 27


96-7 Log #7 (4.1.9)


Submitter: Robert Bourke, Northeastern Regional Fire Code Dev.Recommendation: Revise to read: 4.1.9* Cooking equipment used in fixed, mobile, or temporary concessions, such as trucks, buses, trailers, pavilions, tents, or any formof roofed enclosure, shall comply with this standard unless all or part of the installation is exempted by the authority havingjurisdiction.

Substantiation:

As currently worded the pressure to exempt requirements of this standard on installations is pushed on the inspectors. We agree thatthe standard should be applied to these installations without the deleted wording. The ahj has the authority to eliminate requirementswithout the additional wording.Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 27


96-8 Log #CP5 (4.3.1)


Submitter: Technical Committee on Venting Systems for Cooking AppliancesRecommendation: Revise 4.3.1 to read as follows: “Field-applied grease duct enclosures and factory-built grease duct enclosures shall be listed in accordance with UL 2221, Standard forTests of Fire Resistive Grease Duct Enclosure Assemblies, or equivalent standard and installed in accordance with the manufacturers'instructions and the listing requirements.”

Substantiation:

At the time of publication of the last edition of NFPA 96, UL had not yet completed the publication of the Standard for Testing ofGrease Duct Enclosures. Since this is now a published standard, this section should reference this standard.Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 27


96-9 Log #36 (6.2.2.4)


Submitter: R. T. Leicht, Delaware State Fire Marshal’s OfficeRecommendation: Rewrite as follows: “The baffle shall be located not less 152.4 mm (6 in.) from the grease removal devices.”

Substantiation:

Editorial; metric-primary.Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 27


5

Report on Proposals – May 2004 NFPA 9696-10 Log #37 (6.2.3.3)


Submitter: R. T. Leicht, Delaware State Fire Marshal’s OfficeRecommendation: Revise text to read as follows: “Grease filters shall be arranged so that all exhaust air passes through the grease filters.”

Substantiation:

Editorial; having the word "shall" twice in the same sentence is clumsy and may be confusing.Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 27


96-11 Log #6 (7.4.1)


Submitter: R. T. Leicht, Delaware State Fire Marshal’s OfficeRecommendation: 1. Insert new 7.4.1.1 with the following two sentences: 7.4.1.1 On horizontal ducts, at least one 508 mm by 508 mm (20 in. by 20 in.)opening shall be provided for personnel entry. Where an opening of this size is not possible, openings large enough to permit thorough cleaning shall be provided at 3.7 m (12 ft)intervals. 2. Renumber the paragraphs accordingly.

Substantiation:

Submitter's Reason: This matter is of an emergency nature in that the document contains an error in the form of an omission that wasoverlooked during the regular revision process (see 5-2 a of the Regulations Governing Committee Projects). Proposal 96-29 on page 168 of the ROP (Log #CP13) was to "reword 4-3.4.1."The proposal should have been to "reword the second sentence of 4-3.4.1."The only debate during ROP meeting was the second sentence of 4-3.4.1. No one picked up on that the other two sentences were beingdropped. As such, the proposal was accepted. The intent of the Committee was not to eliminate these two sentences. The Committee action should have been to ACCEPT INPRINCIPLE by keeping the two unaffected sentences and merely revising the second sentence of 4-3.4.1.

Committee Meeting Action: Accept in PrincipleCommittee Statement: See Committee Proposal 96-14 (Log #CP2).Number Eligible to Vote: 27


96-12 Log #32 (7.4.1)


Submitter: R. T. Leicht, Delaware State Fire Marshal’s OfficeRecommendation: Add a 7.4.1.3 to read as follows: “On horizontal ducts, at least one 508 mm by 508 mm (20 in. by 20 in) opening shall be provided for personnel entry. Where anopening of this size is not possible, openings large enough to permit thorough cleaning shall be provided at 3.7-m (12-ft) intervals.”

Substantiation:

When proposals and comments were received for the current edition of the Standard, a revision intended for a part of a paragraphresulted in replacing the entire paragraph with just the revision. This caused loss of these two sentences which were not intended to bedeleted.Committee Meeting Action: Accept in PrincipleCommittee Statement: See Committee Proposal 96-14 (Log #CP2).Number Eligible to Vote: 27


6



Submitter: R. T. Leicht, Delaware State Fire Marshal’s OfficeRecommendation: Replace existing text with the following: “Horizontal ducting support systems for nonlisted grease duct systems with any cross-sectional dimension of 609 mm (24 in.) andlarger shall be designed for the weight of the ductwork plus 363 kg (800 lbs) at any point in the duct systems.”

Substantiation:

Present text not written correctly. Typing error eliminated and metric-primary restored.Committee Meeting Action: Accept in PrincipleCommittee Statement: See Committee Proposal 96-14 (Log #CP2).Number Eligible to Vote: 27


96-14 Log #CP2 (7.4.1.1 and 7.4.1.2 (New) )


Submitter: Technical Committee on Venting Systems for Cooking AppliancesRecommendation: Add a new 7.4.1.1 On horizontal ducts, at least one 508 mm by 508 mm (20 in. by 20 in.) opening shall be provided for personnel entry. Add a new 7.4.1.2 Where an opening of this size is not possible, openings large enough to permit thorough cleaning shall be providedat 3.7 m (12 foot) intervals. Renumber current 7.4.1.1 as 7.4.1.3 and revise removing the term “nonlisted” and adding proper conversions. Renumber current 7.4.1.2 as 7.4.1.4.

Substantiation:

Incorporates the language of TIA Log 683. None of the current grease duct standards cover the capability of the grease duct supports to carry the load of the cleaning technician(s)and further editorially corrects existing language.Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 27


96-15 Log #14 (8.1.1 or 8.1.5)


Submitter: Phil Ackland, Phillip Ackland Holdings Ltd.Recommendation: Add to 8.1.1 or 8.1.5? “Up-blast fans shall be supplied with access opening on the curvature of the outer fan housing to allow for cleaning and inspection ofthe fan blades.”

Substantiation:

The general design of these fans hides the blades from view making it impossible to see the blades and fan wheel area. These areasaccumulate considerable amounts of grease and require cleaning with the rest of the system. These are presently inaccessible areas.Committee Meeting Action: Accept in Principle Change language to read as follows: “Up-blast fans shall be supplied with access opening a minimum of 76 mm by 127 mm (3 in. by 5 in.) on the curvature of the outer fanhousing to allow for cleaning and inspection of the fan blades”.Committee Statement: Add language as a new 8.1.5.3. The addition of opening size provides specific guidance for accessibility.Number Eligible to Vote: 27


7


Final Action: Reject

Submitter: Jon Nisja, Northcentral Regional Fire Code Development Committee/Southern FireRecommendation: Revise to read as follows: 8.2.1.1 The air velocity through any duct shall be not less than 152.4 m/min (500 ft/min) ???? m/min (1500 ft/min).

Substantiation:

Lowering the air flow requirements from 1500 to 1200 an now 500 ft/min creates situations where greater quantities of grease-ladenvapors can accumulate above the filters through condensation. The older requirement of 1500 ft/min did not create less hazardous ductsnor will the lower requirement permitting lesser flow rates. The issue with hazards in ductwork and exhaust removal of vapors is in the cleaning and maintenance. Permitting lower flow rates willcontribute to the creation of greater quantities of grease above the filtration devices and contribute to greater frequencies for cleaning.Technical data has not been available for review to substantiate the change from 1500 to 500 ft/min.

Committee Meeting Action: RejectCommittee Statement: This change was based ASHRAE Research see Committee Proposal 96-59 ( Log #CP13) for further explanation of the new velocity. Number Eligible to Vote: 27


96-17 Log #38 (8.2.3.2)


Submitter: R. T. Leicht, Delaware State Fire Marshal’s OfficeRecommendation: Change the word "restart" to "start”.

Substantiation:

In this context, "start" would be the proper word. Otherwise, it could be implied that the exhaust fan would have to start as long as ithadn't been previously shutdown. For instance, when the facility is closed for business, one still wouldn't want the fan to start if theextinguishing system activated.Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 27


96-18 Log #12 (9.3)


Submitter: Phil Ackland, Phillip Ackland Holdings Ltd.Recommendation: Add to Section 9.3 Other Equipment the wording from Section - 13.6 Use and Maintenance, 13.6.2, 13.6.3, 13.6.5, 13.6.6, and 13.6.7.

Substantiation:

These other sections relate to Use and Maintenance of secondary filtration and other air pollution devices. They need similarmaintenance as Recirculating Systems (Chapter 13.6).Committee Meeting Action: RejectCommittee Statement: The proposed addition would spread use and maintenance language out in numerous locations. Number Eligible to Vote: 27


8



Submitter: J. R. Nerat, Badger Fire ProtectionRecommendation: Revise text to read as follows: 10.2.2 A placard identifying the use of the extinguisher as a secondary backup means to the automatic fire-extinguishing system shallbe conspicuously placed near each class “K” rated portable fire extinguisher in the cooking area.

Substantiation:

Portable fire extinguishers provided within a kitchen for protection of class “A”, “B”, and “C” cooking occupancy hazards are first linefire defense devices and not associated with the activation of a cooking appliance fire suppression system addressing cooking mediafires. The added text clarifies the intended scope of the existing extinguisher placard requirements. Refer to the 2002 edition of NFPA 10, Paragraphs 1.4.3, 4.2.1.5, 4.3.2, 4.3.2.2, 5.1.1, 5.1.2, and 5.1.2.2.Committee Meeting Action: RejectCommittee Statement: The proposal does not recognize the presence of acceptable extinguishers other than Class K.Number Eligible to Vote: 27


96-20 Log #20 (10.2.3.1)


Submitter: Michael J. Laderoute, MJL Associates Inc. / Rep. Fire Equipment Manufacturer’s Association Inc.Recommendation: Add new text Section 10.2.3.1 and renumber remaining sections. 10.2.3.1 In existing systems, when changes in the cooking media, positioning, or replacement of cooking equipment occur, thefire-extinguishing system shall be made to comply with UL 300.

Substantiation:

New text is a partial extract from NFPA 1. This text provided guidance to users of the document as to when current systems must beupgraded to the latest requirements. There is no need to extract the exception from NFPA 1 as that text is already included in the NFPA96 document.Committee Meeting Action: Accept in Principle Delete UL300 and revise to read: “comply with 10.2.3.”Committee Statement: It is more appropriate to refer to previous paragraph than to refer to UL 300.

Number Eligible to Vote: 27Affirmative: 24Ballot Results:

Ackland, Caraway, MortonBallot Not Returned: 3

9



Submitter: Michael J. Laderoute, MJL Associates Inc. / Rep. Fire Equipment Manufacturer’s AssociationRecommendation: Delete text and renumber. 10.2.6 Automatic fire-extinguishing systems shall be installed in accordance with the terms of their listing, the manufacturer’sinstructions, and the following standards where applicable. (1) NFPA 12, Standard on Carbon Dioxide Extinguishing Systems (2) NFPA 13, Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler Systems (3) NFPA 17, Standard for Dry Chemical Extinguishing Systems (1) NFPA 17A, Standard for Wet Chemical Extinguishing Systems.

Substantiation:

It’s been 8 years since the requirement for systems protecting commercial cooking operations to meet the testing standard of UL 300.To date only wet chemical systems have been listed for such hazard. Any references to the other standards is not needed or appropriate.Referencing these other standards is confusing and implies other systems may be applicable.Committee Meeting Action: RejectCommittee Statement: Other automatic extinguishing systems are applicable to other types of process cooking operations that are outside the scope of UL300.Number Eligible to Vote: 27

Affirmative: 23 Negative: 1Ballot Results:Ackland, Caraway, MortonBallot Not Returned: 3

Explanation of Negative: KLINGENMAIER: To date, only wet chemical systems have been listed for cooking related hazards. The NFPA 96 committee hasnot been able to review any other test standards to show their equivalency to the rigors of UL 3000, nor has the committee beengiven evidence that there are nozzles or systems, other than wet chemical, that are listed by UL or any other equivalent testingagency.96-22 Log #22 (10.2.7)


Submitter: Michael J. Laderoute, MJL Associates Inc. / Rep. Fire Equipment Manufacturer’s AssociationRecommendation: Insert new 10.2.7 and renumber following sections. 10.2.7.1 Grease removal devices, hood exhaust plenums, and exhaust ducts requiring protection in accordance with 10.1.1 shall bepermitted to be protected by a listed fixed baffle hood containing a constant or fire-actuated water-wash system that is listed toextinguish a fire in the grease removal devices, hood exhaust plenums, and exhaust ducts and in compliance with UL 300, Standard forFire Testing of Fire Extinguishing Systems for Protection of Restaurant Cooking Areas, or other equivalent standards and shall beinstalled in accordance with the requirements of their listing.

Substantiation:

Currently, this type system is not tested to the same standard as other products listed for the same application. this requirement wouldplace all products under the same testing and listing requirements.Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 27


10



Submitter: Michael J. Laderoute, MJL Associates Inc. / Rep. Fire Equipment Manufacturer’s AssociationRecommendation: Add a new 10.2.7 and renumber the sections that follow: “Obstructions to extinguishing system discharge spray patterns such as baffle plates, shelves, pipe or conduit shall not be permitted.Any abandoned pipe or conduit from a previous installation shall be removed from within hood, plenum and exhaust duct.”

Substantiation:

Field conditions have revealed when updating or replacement of accessories within the exhaust hood take place such as lightingshelving or the fire system with new or upgraded materials, or when piping and conduit from the older installations have beenabandoned, these materials are being left in place. this can cause nozzle spray pattern obstructions of the extinguishing system,bacterial issues, decrease duct openings, reduce exhaust hood efficiencies, create hot spots in plenums, all which can increase the risk offire and life safety. The above text would clearly prevent these obstructions.Committee Meeting Action: Accept in Principle New 10.2.7 "Modifications to Existing Hood Systems" and renumber the sections that follow: 10.2.7.1 Any abandoned pipe or conduit from a previous installation shall be removed from within hood, plenum and exhaust duct. 10.2.7.2 Penetrations and holes resulting from the removal of conduit or piping shall be sealed with listed or equivalent liquid tightsealing devices. 10.2.7.3 The addition of obstructions to spray patterns from the cooking appliance nozzle(s) such as baffle plates, shelves or anymodification shall not be permitted. 10.2.7.4 Changes or modifications to the hazard, after installation of the fire extinguishing systems shall result in re-evaluation of thesystem design by a properly trained and qualified person(s) or company. Existing 10.2.7 will become 10.2.8.Committee Statement: Field conditions have revealed when updating or replacement of accessories within the exhaust hood take place such as lightingshelving or the fire system with new or upgraded materials, or when piping and conduit from the older installations have beenabandoned, these materials are being left in place. This can cause nozzle spray pattern obstructions of the extinguishing system,bacterial issues, decrease duct openings, reduce exhaust hood efficiencies, create hot spots in plenums, all which can increase the risk offire and life safety. The above text would clearly prevent these obstructions.Number Eligible to Vote: 27


96-24 Log #1 (10.4.4.1)


Note: This Proposal appears as Comment 96-30 (Log #CC5) which was held from the A2001 ROC on Propsoal 96-49.Submitter: Technical Committee on Venting Systems for Cooking AppliancesRecommendation: Add text to read as follows: 10.4.4.1 The reset mechanism for the shut off device shall be at a location in direct line of sight with the cooking equipment. ANNEX: The intent is so that the fuel shut off device cannot be manually reset from a remote location. Controls may need to be closed,pilot lights lit and thermostats turned down.

Substantiation:

None.Committee Meeting Action: RejectCommittee Statement: Due to the construction and design practices it would be impractical to coordinate locations of all fuel/energy resets to be in the line ofsight of the cooking equipment.Number Eligible to Vote: 27


11

Report on Proposals – May 2004 NFPA 9696-25 Log #8 (11.1 and 11.1.6)


Submitter: Peter Brock, District of KitimatRecommendation: Add text to read as follows: “Any post disaster building in which an emergency generator has been installed, the exhaust system must be connected to theemergency power supply and interconnects of all critical equipment provided such that, if any are interrupted, the cooking appliance(s)shall not be able to operate.”

Substantiation:

We have had a new hospital recently constructed in our community and during the final inspection on the exhaust system over thecooking surfaces all the required testing was done and the system was approved. After the final approval a change was made to the gas supply system by the installation of an uninterruptible power supply to the gasvalving system. This was done to assist the maintenance people as every time there was an interruption in the power supply to thebuilding the maintenance staff would have to relight all the pilot lights for the cooking appliances. It had been assumed that the exhaust system had been connected into the emergency generator of the hospital but just after the hospitalhad opened there was a power failure in town and the exhaust system shut down but the gas supply did not. As there were patients in thehospital the kitchen staff continued to cook meals even with the exhaust system not working. Therefore, I am proposing the change as noted to the requirements of the NFPA 96 standard.

Committee Meeting Action: RejectCommittee Statement: Building systems connected to emergency and standby power systems is outside the scope of NFPA 96. Number Eligible to Vote: 27


96-26 Log #CP6 (11.1.7 (New) )


Submitter: Technical Committee on Venting Systems for Cooking AppliancesRecommendation: Add new 11.1.7 as follows: “Secondary filtration and pollution control equipment shall be operated in accordance with the terms of their listing and themanufacturers recommendations.”

Substantiation:

Manufacturers published operating guidelines provided during commissioning of equipment offer guidance to reduce the hazardthrough proper operation and should be followed. High turnover rates of personnel in the food service sector mandates continuity in the safe practices of equipment operation.Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 27


96-27 Log #CP7 (11.1.8 (New) )


Submitter: Technical Committee on Venting Systems for Cooking AppliancesRecommendation: Add a new 11.1.8 to read as follows: “Inspection and maintenance of equipment allowed in 9.3.1 shall be conducted by properly trained and qualified persons at a frequencydetermined by the manufacturers instructions or equipment listing.”

Substantiation:

Current wording does not address requirements for servicing air pollution control and other equipment. Failure to address the servicerequirements of allowed other equipment may increase the hazard. Some of this equipment has frequent service intervals.Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 27


12



Note: This Proposal appears as Comment 96-36 (Log #CC9) which was held from the F2001 ROC on Propsoal 96-69.Submitter: Technical Committee on Venting Systems for Cooking AppliancesRecommendation: Revise 11.2.1 to read as follows: 11.2.1 An inspection and servicing of the fire extinguishing system and listed exhaust hoods containing a constant or fire activatedwater system shall be made at least every 6 months by properly trained, qualified and certified persons(s) or company.

Substantiation:

Certification is an important component of inspecting and servicing the fire extinguishing system.Committee Meeting Action: Accept in Principle Revise section to read: 11.2.1 Maintenance of the fire extinguishing systems and listed exhaust hoods containing a constant or fire activated water systemthat is listed to extinguish a fire in the grease removal devices, hood exhaust plenums, and exhaust ducts shall be made by properlytrained, qualified and certified persons(s) or company acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction at least every 6 months .Committee Statement: Further clarification of the requirement. Inspection is conducted by the owner and is not necessary in this requirement.Number Eligible to Vote: 27


96-29 Log #23 (11.2.4)


Submitter: Michael J. Laderoute, MJL Associates Inc. / Rep. Fire Equipment Manufacturer’s AssociationRecommendation: Add text to read as follows: 11.2.4* Fusible links (including fusible links on fire damper assemblies) and automatic sprinkler heads shall be replaced at leastsemiannually or more frequently if necessary where required by the manufacturer.

Substantiation:

Both the listing agency of the link and the manufacturer of the extinguishing system call out for link replacement semiannually. It’stime for the document to mandate link replacement semiannually as that is what the manufacturer requires.Committee Meeting Action: RejectCommittee Statement: Existing requirement is consistent with NFPA 17 and NFPA 17A and UL listings.Number Eligible to Vote: 27


Explanation of Negative: KLINGENMAIER: Hazard conditions, utilizing fusible links in cooking operations have been determined by the manufacturer of thelinks to be severe. The fuse link manufacturer indicates that to assure proper operation of the system, in these severeconditions/locations, they advise fusible link replacement every six months. All fire system manufacturers also require the samein their UL 300 listed installation and maintenance manuals. NFPA 96 should support this industry accepted practice andmanufacturer's listed requirement.96-30 Log #9 (11.3)


Submitter: Phil Ackland, Phillip Ackland Holdings Ltd.Recommendation: Change title of Section 11.3 to “Inspection for Cleanliness of Exhaust Systems” and change title of Table 11.3 to “Exhaust SystemCleanliness Inspection Schedule.”

Substantiation:

This wording better reflects the purpose of this section, which is to inspect for grease deposits (contamination) as stated in 11.4. An “Inspection” could also be considered to provide any number of things. Such as; inspecting for Code/Standard compliance,suitability for an Operating (occupancy) permit, or confirming that installation and construction requirements of the exhaust systemhave been met. I do not think it was the committee’s intent to empower exhaust cleaners in these manners.Committee Meeting Action: RejectCommittee Statement: It is the intent of the committee that this inspection may address more than just the cleanliness of the interior of the duct.Number Eligible to Vote: 27


13

Report on Proposals – May 2004 NFPA 9696-31 Log #3 (11.3 and 11-3.1)


Note: This Proposal appears as Comment 96-39 (Log # CC6) which was held from the F2001 ROC on Propsoal 96-69.Submitter: Technical Committee on Venting Systems for Cooking AppliancesRecommendation: Revise as follows: "11.3 Inspection of Exhaust Systems. 11.3.1 The entire exhaust system shall be inspected for contamination from grease-laden vapors by a properly...".

Substantiation:

This defines the parameters of inspection by certified people.Committee Meeting Action: RejectCommittee Statement: See Committee Statement on Proposal 96-30 (Log #9) for the scope of inspections.Number Eligible to Vote: 27


96-32 Log #39 (11.4.1)


Submitter: R. T. Leicht, Delaware State Fire Marshal’s OfficeRecommendation: Delete the words, "in accordance with Section 11.3".

Substantiation:

Section 11.3 provides no instructions on cleaning which is what 11.4 refers to. There is no text in 11.3 that isn't already in 11.4.1.Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 27


96-33 Log #CP9 (11.4.1)


Submitter: Technical Committee on Venting Systems for Cooking AppliancesRecommendation: Revise 11.4.1 by replace the word "entire" with "the contaminated portions of the".

Substantiation:

New text allows rotational cleaning of larger exhaust systems whereby "entire system" cleanings would not be cost effective for theconsumer. Larger kitchen exhaust systems of high-rise buildings may be so lengthy that cleaning the entire system each service would not bepractical.Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 27


96-34 Log #CP10 (11.4.2 and A.11.4.2)


Submitter: Technical Committee on Venting Systems for Cooking AppliancesRecommendation: Revise text to read as follows: 11.4.2 Hoods, grease removal devices, fans, ducts, and other appurtenances shall be cleaned to remove combustible contaminates priorto surfaces becoming heavily contaminated with grease or oily sludge. Delete A.11.4.2.

Substantiation:

· Existing wording (Bare metal) is restrictive and may not account for certain conditions, which exist such as coated surfaces, which aidin the release of grease during cleaning. · Bare metal can be discolored or stained which AHJ can interpret as not clean.Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 27


14



Submitter: R. T. Leicht, Delaware State Fire Marshal’s OfficeRecommendation: Delete the words, "in accordance with 11.3".

Substantiation:

Section 11.3 provides no instructions on cleaning which is what 11.4 refers to.Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 27


96-36 Log #11 (11.4.7.1)


Submitter: Phil Ackland, Phillip Ackland Holdings Ltd.Recommendation: Add text to read as follows: 11.4.7.1 (or in annex) Only properly trained fire suppression technicians (see 11.2.8) can perform cleaning or maintenance on the fixedpipe fire suppression system.

Substantiation:

Presently, it is the fire suppression manufacturer’s position that no one other than their technicians (trained to work on fire suppressionsystems) can touch these systems. Generally, exhaust cleaners are not qualified to touch these fire extinguishers.Committee Meeting Action: RejectCommittee Statement: Present text adequately addresses the committees intent on preserving the integrity of fusible links.Number Eligible to Vote: 27


96-37 Log #CP11 (11.4.8)


Submitter: Technical Committee on Venting Systems for Cooking AppliancesRecommendation: Revise 11.4.8 by deleting the words “to bare metal”.

Substantiation:

See Committee Proposal 96-34 (Log #CP10).Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 27


96-38 Log #41 (11.4.9)


Submitter: R. T. Leicht, Delaware State Fire Marshal’s OfficeRecommendation: Rewrite 11.4.9 as follows: “When cleaning procedures are completed, all access panels (doors) and cover plates shall be restored to their normal operationalcondition.”

Substantiation:

Current text suggests that access panels and cover plates are to be replaced every time cleaning takes place. Intention was to have themput back after the cleaning.Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 27


15

Report on Proposals – May 2004 NFPA 9696-39 Log #4 (11.5, 11-5.1, 11-5.2 and 11-5.3)

Final Action: Accept in Principle in Part

Note: This Proposal appears as Comment 96-43 (Log #CC1) which was held from the F2001 ROC on Propsoal 96-6.Submitter: Technical Committee on Venting Systems for Cooking AppliancesRecommendation: Add a new section to the end of the new Chapter 11 [(Comment 96-6 (Log #CP29) entitled “Procedures for the Use and Maintenance ofEquipment” to read as follows: 11.5 Cooking Equipment Maintenance 11.5.1 An inspection and servicing of the cooking equipment shall be made at least annually by properly trained and qualifiedpersons. 11.5.2 Cooking equipment shall have high limit devices inspected and if found defective be serviced or replaced in accordance withmanufacturer’s recommendations. 11.5.3 Cooking equipment that has a tendency to collect grease below the surface such as griddles or char boilers shall be inspectedand if found with grease accumulation cleaned by properly trained and certified person.

Substantiation:

There is a need to address the maintenance of the cooking equipment to prevent fires. The cooking equipment should be maintained inorder for the high temperature limit switch to work properly as well as other safety features. Note: Supporting material available for review upon request at NFPA headquarters.Committee Meeting Action: Accept in Principle in Part Delete 11.5.2. 11.5.3 Cooking equipment that collects grease below the surface, behind the equipment, or in cooking equipment flue gas exhaust,such as griddles or char broilers shall be inspected and if found with grease accumulation cleaned by properly trained, qualified andcertified person acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction.Committee Statement: It is not realistic to test high limit devices in the field. The changes to 11.5.3 were for consistency with other portions of the standard.Number Eligible to Vote: 27


96-40 Log #5 (12.1.2)


Note: This Proposal appears as Comment 96-45 (Log #CC3) which was held from the F2001 ROC on Propsoal 96-84.Submitter: Technical Committee on Venting Systems for Cooking AppliancesRecommendation: Add to 12-1.2 the following references: Kitchen Exhaust Cleaning & Certification Manual Inspection Manual for Commercial Kitchen Exhaust Systems

Substantiation:

The information in these manuals provide additional education regarding inspection and cleaning of kitchen exhaust systems.Committee Meeting Action: RejectCommittee Statement: This document cannot be referenced in this portion of the standard.Number Eligible to Vote: 27


16

Report on Proposals – May 2004 NFPA 9696-41 Log #17 (12.1.2.6 (New) )


Submitter: Jon Nisja, Northcentral Regional Fire Code Development Committee/Southern FireRecommendation: Add a new 12.1.2.6 to read as follows: “Portable gas fired cooking appliances that are supplied by a flexible gas line service shall be secured to prevent accidental damage ordisconnection of the gas line.”

Substantiation:

Often cooking equipment is moved from time to time for cleaning and maintenance. Over time this action can cause damage to theflexible gas line service, the resulting break can lead to life and property losses.Committee Meeting Action: RejectCommittee Statement: Outside the scope of the standard. This issue is addressed in NFPA 54.Number Eligible to Vote: 27


96-42 Log #31 (13.2.6)


Submitter: R. T. Leicht, Delaware State Fire Marshal’s OfficeRecommendation: Replace the words, "...that exceeds that system's labeled maximum limits..." with the words, "...that exceeds the recirculating system'slabeled maximum limits...".

Substantiation:

Clarity. This revision will eliminate the possible confusion as to what systems is to be referred to. The word "that" does not refer to thelast mentioned noun (cooking appliances); it refers to the recirculating system.Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 27


96-43 Log #46 (14.3.3.3)


Submitter: Alan Breitenfeldt, GreenbeckRecommendation: Revise text to read as follows: 14.3.3.3 All solid fuel cooking equipment served by hood and duct systems shall be separate from all other exhaust systems. The hoodscan be adjacent to each other with no space required between the hoods, but the hoods shall be separate and shall have separate ductsystems.

Substantiation:

This item has been a point of interpretation and confusion in the field by installers and authorities having jurisdiction. I have tried toclarify the interpretation I see most commonly. That is, there are two separate hoods but adjacent to each other with no physical distancebetween them. Then each hood is served by separate duct systems. The standard is very clear on a 3 ft space between fryers and surface flame, Section 14.9.4.5 and 12.1.2.5. But this section just said“separate” with no definite distance stated. So the authority having jurisdiction has commonly interpreted it to not require physicalseparation of the hoods. But this is not always the interpretation. It is common to have solid fuel cooking equipment in a cooking line up with other gas char broilers. The systems are installed with twoseparate hoods adjacent to each other and use separate duct systems.

Committee Meeting Action: RejectCommittee Statement: Improper language for the standard, the language is very difficult to enforce.

Number Eligible to Vote: 27Affirmative: 24Ballot Results:

Ackland, Caraway, MortonBallot Not Returned: 3

17



Submitter: Michael J. Laderoute, MJL Associates Inc. / Rep. Fire Equipment Manufacturer’s AssociationRecommendation: Revise text to read as follows: “All solid fuel appliances (whether or not under a hood) with fireboxes of 0.14 m3 (5 ft3) volume or less shall at least have a 2-A 9 liter(2.5 gal.) K rated water type or wet chemical fire extinguisher in accordance with NFPA 10, Standard for Portable Fire Extinguishers, inthe immediate vicinity of the appliance.”

Substantiation:

Since water type extinguishers discharge their agent through a straight stream nozzle, this could present a potential life safety hazardwithin the kitchen. changing the requirement to a K rated extinguisher solves this potential problem because of its nozzle design and issuitable for the hazard. The requirement for a 9 liter (2.5 gal.) is equal to the current requirement of a 2A rated water based extinguisher.since solid fuel fires are difficult to extinguish, sufficient size of the extinguisher is imperative. This is the reason for the 9 literrequirement.Committee Meeting Action: RejectCommittee Statement: Committee feels water type extinguishers are also appropriate for fire boxes and the language should not limit their use.Number Eligible to Vote: 27


Explanation of Negative: KLINGENMAIER: FEMA does not feel that water extinguishers are appropriate for the kitchen area, as the straight streamdischarge could create a dangerous safety issue if used on fuel-in-depth cooking appliances (i.e., fryers, tilt skillets, woks, oreven some range cooking operations). The NFPA 96 committee statement regarding the committee action taken, is notjustification for allowing water extinguishers for solid fuel cooking, in that a water extinguisher in the kitchen could be mistaken fora K Class extinguisher and used inappropriately on a fire other than a solid fuel cooking appliance.96-45 Log #43 (14.7.8)


Submitter: J. R. Nerat, Badger Fire ProtectionRecommendation: Revise text to read as follows: 14.7.8 All solid fuel appliances (whether or not under a hood) with fire boxes of 0.14 m3 (5 ft3) volume or less shall at least have a 2 Arated water type or require class “K” rated wet chemical fire extinguishers in accordance with NFPA-10, Standard for Portable FireExtinguishers in the immediate vicinity of the appliance. The total volume of wet chemical agent provided shall not be less than 11.4liters (3 gallons).

Substantiation:

The requirement for class “K” listed extinguishers containing a specified minimum quantity of wet chemical agent, more effectivelyaddresses the necessary cooling effects desired for proper protection of solid fuel cooking appliance hazards and accommodates variousother extinguisher compliance requirements. The proposed minimum wet chemical agent capacity specification of 11.4 L or (3 gal)maintains the minimum wet chemical agent capacity previously established by the NFPA 96 Committee in 14.7.9.Committee Meeting Action: RejectCommittee Statement: See the Committee Statement on Proposal 96-44 (Log #27).Number Eligible to Vote: 27


18



Submitter: Michael J. Laderoute, MJL Associates Inc. / Rep. Fire Equipment Manufacturer’s AssociationRecommendation: Revise text to read as follows: “Two listed portable K rated fire extinguishers of at least 5.7 L (1 1/2 gal.) each and containing potassium citrate, potassium acetate, orpotassium carbonate solutions shall be permitted to be used instead of the one 2-A- K rated 9 liter (2.5 gal.) portable fire extinguisher.”

Substantiation:

Since the requirement in 14.7.5 requires water-based agents, the above text stays within that requirement. Also revising the above textwill result in only K rated fire extinguishers being present within a commercial cooking kitchen.Committee Meeting Action: RejectCommittee Statement: See the Committee Statement on Proposal 96-44 (Log #27) and 96-45 (Log #43).Number Eligible to Vote: 27

Affirmative: 22 Negative: 1 Abstain: 1Ballot Results:Ackland, Caraway, MortonBallot Not Returned: 3

Explanation of Negative: KLINGENMAIER: 14.7.9, as well as 14.7.8 was all stated under one requirement in the 1998 edition of NFPA 96 (11-7.5). 14.7.9 isadditional information supporting 14.7.8. Consequently, this proposal should not have been rejected for the same reason as Log27. In addition to this, part of the changes to 14.7.9 were the elimination of the chemical compositions of current wet chemicalagents used with K Class extinguishers. The extinguishers need to be listed, but their agent's chemistry need not be limited to thecompositions currently identified in the requirement.Explanation of Abstention: SZUMLA: Submitter needs to provide additional information to the committee with regard to water based agents and why thenneed to be out of the kitchen and replaced with K class.96-47 Log #44 (14.7.9)


Submitter: J. R. Nerat, Badger Fire ProtectionRecommendation: Delete text as follows: 14.7.9 Two portable fire extinguishers of at least 5.7 L (1 1/2 gal) each and containing potassium citrate, potassium acetate, orpotassium carbonate solutions shall be permitted to be used instead of the one 2-A rated portable fire extinguisher.

Substantiation:

The previous proposals suggested text revision for Paragraph 14.7.8 eliminates the need for this paragraph. The requirement for a class“K” listed fire extinguisher containing a wet chemical agent in accordance with NFPA 10 addresses the desired cooling effects for solidfuel cooking appliance hazards and accommodates various other fire extinguisher compliance requirements. The proposed minimum wetchemical agent capacity specification of 11.4 L or (3 gal) in the newly proposed 14.7.8 maintains the minimum wet chemical agentcapacity previously established within this paragraph.Committee Meeting Action: RejectCommittee Statement: The committee feels that the option for the use of two extinguishers should be retained in the standard.Number Eligible to Vote: 27


19



Submitter: Michael J. Laderoute, MJL Associates Inc. / Rep. Fire Equipment Manufacturer’s AssociationRecommendation: Add text to read as follows: 14.7.10.1 Solid fuel appliances with fireboxes exceeding 0.14 m3 (5 ft3) shall be provided with a fixed water pipe system with a hose inthe kitchen capable of reaching the firebox. The hose shall be equipped with an adjustable nozzle capable of producing a fine to mediumspray or mist. The nozzle shall be of the type that cannot product a straight stream.

Substantiation:

The use of a hose within this environment could create a life safety situation should it be used improperly. Discharge of liquid througha nozzle that can only produce a fine to medium spray or mist is desirable. The above added text would eliminate the life safety issueand would also provide suitable fire protection for the hazard should it be needed.Committee Meeting Action: AcceptCommittee Statement: The new language will editorially be moved to subparagraphs of 14.7.10.1.Number Eligible to Vote: 27


96-49 Log #24 (14.9.3.7.4)


Submitter: Michael J. Laderoute, MJL Associates Inc. / Rep. Fire Equipment Manufacturer’s AssociationRecommendation: Add text to read as follows: 14.9.3.7.4 For either application, the nozzle shall be fitted with a manual shutoff device and shall be of the type to provide afine-to-medium spray of adequate length to reach all areas of the combustion and cooking chambers. Under no circumstances shall thisnozzle be the type that can product a straight stream.

Substantiation:

The use of a hose within this environment could create a life safety situation should it be used improperly. Discharge of liquid througha nozzle that can only product a fine to medium spray or mist is desirable. The above added text would eliminate the life safety issueand would also provide suitable fire protection for the hazard should it be needed.Committee Meeting Action: Accept in Principle Revise new sentence to read: 14.9.3.7.4.1 The nozzle shall be of the type that cannot produce a straight stream.

Committee Statement: Continuity with Proposal 96-48 (Log #25).Number Eligible to Vote: 27


20

Report on Proposals – May 2004 NFPA 9696-50 Log #CP15 (Chapter 15 (New))


Submitter: Technical Committee on Venting Systems for Cooking AppliancesRecommendation: Add a new Chapter 15 - Down Draft Appliance Ventilation Systems. Chapter 15 Down Draft Appliance Ventilation Systems 15.1* General Requirements. Down draft appliance ventilation systems containing or for use with appliances used in processesproducing smoke or grease-laden vapors shall be equipped with components complying with the following: (1) The clearance requirements of Section 4.2 (2) The hood portion shall comply with the requirements of Chapter 5 (3) Grease removal devices complying with Chapter 6 (4) Exhaust ducts complying with Chapter 7 (5) The air movement requirements of 8.2.1.2 and 8.2.2.3 (6) Auxiliary equipment (such as particulate and odor removal devices) complying with Chapter 9 (7) Fire extinguishing equipment complying with the requirements of Chapter 10 and as specified in 15.2 (8) The use and maintenance requirements of Chapter 11 (9) The minimum safety requirements of Chapter 11

See Figure A.15.1 Typical down draft system arrangement, shown on the following page.

15.2 Regarding fire extinguishing equipment on down draft appliance ventilation systems, the following will apply: (1) Cooking surface protection shall be provided, (2) At least one fusible link or heat detector shall be installed within each exhaust duct opening in accordance with the manufacturerslisting (3) A fusible link or heat detector shall be provided above each protected cooking appliance and in accordance with the extinguishingsystem manufacturer’s listing (4) A manual activation device shall be provided as part of each appliance at a height acceptable to the AHJ 15.2.1 A listed down draft appliance ventilation system employing an integral fire extinguishing system including detection systemsthat has been evaluated for grease and smoke capture, fire extinguishing and detection shall be considered as complying with 15.2. 15.2 The down draft hood system shall be provided with interlocks such that cooking fuel supply will not be activated unless theexhaust and supply air have been activated. 15.3 Airflow Switch or Transducer. 15.3.1 An airflow switch or transducer shall be provided after the last filter component to ensure that a minimum air-flow is maintained. 15.3.2 The airflow switch or transducer shall open the interlock circuit when the airflow falls 25 percent below the system’s normaloperating flow or 10 percent below its listed minimum rating, whichever is lower. 15.3.3 The airflow switch or transducer shall be a manual reset device or circuit, 15.4 Any surface located directly above the cooking surface shall be of non-combustible construction.

Substantiation:

These types of systems are being installed with increasing frequency and not currently addressed in the standard.Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 27


21

96-50 (Log #CP15) Recommendation

4 4

Nozzle 14 in. approx. abovesurface, perimeter located aimed towards center of griddle section. Maximum surface area of protection 42 in. × 30 in. per nozzle.

Nozzle 14 in. approx. abovesurface, perimeter located aimed towards center of griddle section. Maximum surface area of protection 42 in. × 30 in. per nozzle.

Cooking surface: 48 in. × 30 in.

One tank per table

8 in. dia. duct

5

44

One “K” fire extinguisher per set of two tables

Figure A.15.1 Typical Down Draft System Arrangement.

22

Report on Proposals – May 2004 NFPA 9696-51 Log #45 (A.5.5.4)


Submitter: Alan Breitenfeldt, GreenbeckRecommendation: Add new Figure A.5.3.4, K and L. Figure K is the back supply plenum and Figure L is the attached air curtain.

See the submitted artwork shown on the following page.

Substantiation:

The use of back supply plenum and attached air curtains are new and becoming more common in kitchens. They should be treated asceiling diffusers. Because they are manufactured of stainless steel, many authorities having jurisdiction consider them part of the hood.They are confused however if they should or should not require a supply air fire damper. When they look to NFPA 96 for clarificationthey can not find any information. These additional figures will provide them a clear direction. For the items listed in the figure, the requirement for dampers as the supply air ducts travel through fire rated walls or enclosures iscovered by building codes. The information provided in the figure provides additional information for hood assemblies. The twoadditional figures are becoming common hood assemblies and need to be addressed. I have drawn the back supply plenum without a fire-actuated damper. The inlet of the BSP is below the cooking equipment surface. Thedevice is outside the continuous liquid tight welded construction so a fire actuated damper should not be required. I have drawn the attached air curtain without a fire actuated damper. The register is above the lower outer most fully weld point of thehood. The register is positioned similar to the face supply plenum of item H in Figure A.5.3.4. The device is outside the continuousliquid tight welded construction so a fire actuated damper should not be required.

Committee Meeting Action: RejectCommittee Statement: At the time of the committee meeting the artwork was not present. The submitter is encouraged to submit a public comment with theartwork included.Number Eligible to Vote: 27

Affirmative: 23 Abstain: 1Ballot Results:Ackland, Caraway, MortonBallot Not Returned: 3

Explanation of Abstention: KLINGENMAIER: This addition to the Annex was rejected because the figures referred to, were not included. However, they areincluded in the ROP Ballot. FEMA does not have the technical expertise on ventilation design or engineering, to comment on thisproposal one way or the other. Consequently, FEMA abstains.96-52 Log #CP8 (A.8.2.1.1 (New) )


Submitter: Technical Committee on Venting Systems for Cooking AppliancesRecommendation: Add new annex material to read as follows: A.8.2.1.1 ASHRAE Research Project 1033-RP Final report titled "Effects of air velocity on grease deposition in exhaust ductwork"documented that grease deposition is reduced as air velocity is reduced, primarily due to less turbulence at the duct surface. Tests wereperformed at velocities of 500 fpm, 1000 fpm, 1500 fpm and 2000 fpm. The 500 fpm velocity maintains or improves the safety aspect ofminimizing grease build up, while allowing engineers more flexibility in both retrofit and new kitchen design including variable flowkitchen exhaust systems. According to the report, grease deposition, in un-insulated ducts, exposed to cold outdoor climates mayincrease with lower duct velocities, and insulation of R10 or greater was recommended.

Substantiation:

The reduction of minimum velocity is supported by research. This Annex note clarifies the technical support for the lowering ofminimum velocities.Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 27


23

96-51 (Log #45) Recommendation

Figure A.5.3.4

24

Report on Proposals – May 2004 NFPA 9696-53 Log #19 (A.10.5.4 (New) )


Submitter: Jon Nisja, Northcentral Regional Fire Code Development Committee/Southern FireRecommendation: Add a new Annex note to read as follows: A.10.5.4 Manual activation is not required for automatic sprinkler systems installed in accordance with NFPA 13.

Substantiation:

This section is confusing and has been misinterpreted by owners and contractors regarding the use of commercial hood suppressionsystems and the interpretation of sprinklers and system nozzles. It is not a recommended practice to use sprinkler systems to protectcommercial cooking operation appliances or cooking surface areas. The standard already requires extinguishing systems for theprotection of those appliances and operations consistent with the hazards that require manual means of activation. In the event asprinkler system were installed or maintained to protect an area or appliance, this system would be required to meet the requirements ofNFPA 13 and 25 which set the criterion for manual activation, operation and testing associated with foam-water, pre-action and delugeand fixed water spray systems.

Committee Meeting Action: RejectCommittee Statement: Language already exists in 10.5.4, it is not necessary to repeat this in the Annex.Number Eligible to Vote: 27


96-54 Log #10 (A.11.3 (New) )


Submitter: Phil Ackland, Phillip Ackland Holdings Ltd.Recommendation: Add Annex item to Section A.11.3*. A.11.3 The primary focus of an inspection for cleanliness is to establish whether the volume of grease build-up within the exhaustsystem warrants cleaning and to determine whether adequate access is available throughout the exhaust system to remove the greasebuild-up.

Substantiation:

To clarify inspection for “cleanliness”.Committee Meeting Action: Accept in Principle Add this language to new Annex language for A.11.4.2 from Proposal 96-56 (Log #CP12).Committee Statement: A.11.4.2 is more appropirate location for this paragraph.Number Eligible to Vote: 27


25

Report on Proposals – May 2004 NFPA 9696-55 Log #16 (A.11.4.1 (New) )


Submitter: Phil Ackland, Phillip Ackland Holdings Ltd.Recommendation: Add Annex item to Section 11.4.1*: A.11.4.1 The expression “properly trained, qualified and certified” is meant to establish the proficiency of the cleaning contractor whois on the job. The following qualifications define those proficiencies. The expression (properly trained, qualified and certified) applies to the Owner of the cleaning company or the Lead-Hand. A Lead-Hand(AKA, foreman, crew chief) is defined as the individual who is on the job site at the time of the cleaning, who is in charge of the cleaningcrew and responsible to report back to his employer (the cleaning company Owner). A Lead-Hand should have been working, on full time basis as a cleaner, for at least six month. A certified Owner and/or Lead-Hand should provide the AHJ with proof of knowledge in the following areas: Sections of NFPA 96 (or local Fire Codes) • General Requirements (Section 4.1) • Clearances (Section 4.2) A qualified exhaust cleaner should be able to recognize Type II construction in the ductwork. • Hood Construction (Section 5.1) • Grease Removal Devices in Hoods (Section 6.1) • Exhaust Duct Systems (Section 7.1 to 7.4.4.2) • Air Movement (Section 8.1) • Inspection (for Cleanliness) of Exhaust Systems (Section 11.3) • Cleaning (Section 11.4) • All associated Appendix items. Understand the various aspects of Safety related to this cleaning work. Understand the importance of Environmental and Wastewater Management. Demonstrate the ability to report deficiencies relating to the ability to clean or access any portion of the exhaust system. Owners and Lead-Hands are encouraged to maintain ongoing training through a recognized institution or trade association. Cleaners Certification Program For a vent cleaner to be considered Certified as a Kitchen Exhaust Cleaner they would have to comply with the following guidelines: • Maintains a General Liability Insurance policy that is of an acceptable level for the local AHJ • Has a business license for their home office location and operates in accordance with the requirements of the local, state/province andfederal by-laws • Has read and understands the contents of Phil Ackland’s Cleaning and Certification Manual • Has passed a test to confirm this knowledge • Has actively cleaned kitchen exhaust system for at least 6 months (see note 1) • Provide the AHJ with proof that they are using the forms required (see note 2) • Cleaning Proposal - Explaining that they have notified the customer of areas that they may not be able to clean (and why) • Job Performance Sheet - Committing them to the list of ethics found on the sheet • After Service Follow up Report - Informing the customer of reasonable understood deficiencies that the exhaust system may have • Note 1: there would be an Interim Certification of 6 months for companies just starting out • Note 2: Forms are free and downloadable at http://www.philackland.com/forms.htm Note: the above referenced are taken from the Kitchen Exhaust Cleaning Certification Manual (copyright 2003) and Inspection Manualfor Commercial Kitchen Exhaust Systems (copyright 2001).

Substantiation:

The qualifications will assist the AHJ with clarification on who should be considered “Trained, Qualified and Certified.”Committee Meeting Action: RejectCommittee Statement: The committee has established a Task Group to consider this issue and report back to the committee at the ROC stage.Number Eligible to Vote: 27


26

Report on Proposals – May 2004 NFPA 9696-56 Log #CP12 (A.11.4.2)


Submitter: Technical Committee on Venting Systems for Cooking AppliancesRecommendation: Replace A.11.4.2 with the following: A.11.4.2 Hoods, grease removal devices, fans, ducts, and other appurtenances should be cleaned to remove combustible contaminates tominimum of 50 microns (0.002").

See Figure A.11.4.2 Depth gage comb, shown on the following page.

When to clean: Establish a measurement system of deposition to trigger a need to clean in addition to a time reference based onequipment emissions. The method of measurement is a Depth Gage Comb shown in Figure A.11.4.2 that is scraped along the duct surface. Example- 2000microns (0.078") this depth determines the need to remove the deposition risk. The system would also include point measurement incritical areas. Example 3175 microns (0.125") in a fan housing requires clean.

Substantiation:

This provides further explanation and possible equipment to use to determine the need for cleaning the duct.Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 27


96-57 Log #15 (Annex B)


Submitter: Phil Ackland, Phillip Ackland Holdings Ltd.Recommendation: Add reference to Annex B Informational References: Kitchen Exhaust Cleaning and Certification Manual, NEED ISBN Phil Ackland, PO Box 856, Summerland, BC V0H 1Z0, 2003 Edition. Inspection Manual for Commercial Kitchen Exhaust Systems, ISBN 0-968160-4-6 Phil Ackland, PO Box 856, Summerland, BC, V0H1Z0, 2001 Edition.

Substantiation:

A number of the proposals relating to inspecting, as well as the certification of cleaners of kitchen exhaust systems are drawn from (andreferenced) in these manuals. The Kitchen Exhaust Cleaning and Certification Manual is the official training manual of both the Power Washers of North America(PWNA) and the International Kitchen Exhaust Cleaning Association (IKECA).Committee Meeting Action: RejectCommittee Statement: The committee did not have the opportunity to conduct a thorough review of this document prior to the meeting. Therefore theproposal is rejected for the time and the materials will be reviewed for possible action at the ROC stage.Number Eligible to Vote: 27


96-58 Log #CP14 (B.1)


Submitter: Technical Committee on Venting Systems for Cooking AppliancesRecommendation: Add reference to UL199E.

Substantiation:

Update informational references. This is an new standard. This proposal is a place holder for the addition of the standard which will bereviewed during the ROC stage.Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 27


27

Acceptablecleaned surface Depth gauge comb

Maximum duct deposition — Clean measurement

Location or point measurement:Maximum deposit — Cleaning required

[96-56 (Log #CP12) Recommendation]

Figure A.11.4.2 Depth Gage Comb.

28

Report on Proposals – May 2004 NFPA 9696-59 Log #CP13 (B.2)


Submitter: Technical Committee on Venting Systems for Cooking AppliancesRecommendation: Add the following references to Annex B.2 American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. 1999. "Chapter 30 Kitchen Exhaust." In Heating,Ventilating, and Air-Conditioning Applications. Atlanta: ASHRAE. Carson, Wayne G., PE and Klinker, Richard L., PE. 2000. Fire Protection Systems, Inspection, Test & Maintenance Manual, 3rd ed.Quincy, MA: NFPA. Fire Protection Handbook, 19th ed., chapter on kitchen fire protection and ventilation Kuehn, T. H., et al. 2001. "Effects of air velocity on grease deposition in exhaust ductwork." ASHRAE 1033-RP Final Report.Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Gerstler, William D., Ph. D. 2002. "New Rules for Kitchen Exhaust." ASHRAE Journal (November): 26-33. National Fire Protection Association Video. 2002. Using Extinguishers in Commercial Kitchens. VC72VH. Quincy, MA: NFPA. Fire and Life Safety Inspection Handbook, 8th edition, Chapter 55 - Protection of Commercial Cooking Equipment, NFPA, edited byRobert E. Solomon, PE.

Substantiation:

Updated and new information references providing further guidance on system maintenance and in support of the change in exhaustduct velocity.Committee Meeting Action: AcceptNumber Eligible to Vote: 27


29

report of the committee on venting systems for cooking ......3.2 mm (1/8 in.) that has a flame...

Documents