nfpa technical special and equipment · 2016. 4. 7. · technical committee on special operations ....

Omni San Diego Hotel San Diego, CA

December 10‐12, 2013

Agenda

1. Call to order 2. Introduction and attendance 3. Opening remarks by Interim Chair, Karen Lehtonen 4. Review and approval of minutes from previous meeting 5. NFPA Staff Liaison presentation, Chris Farrell 6. Reports 7. New business

A. 1952 a. Review public input b. Discuss committee input

B. 1953 a. Review public input b. Discuss committee input

8. Other items 9. Next meeting 10. Adjourn

NFPA TECHNICAL COMMITTEE FOR Special Operations Clothing and

Equipment

TECHNICAL COMMITTEE ON SPECIAL OPERATIONS

PROTECTIVE CLOTHING AND EQUIPMENT

JANUARY 15-17, 2013 ORLANDO, FL

MINUTES OF THE MEETING

The meeting was called to order by Chairman Dean Cox at 9:00 a.m. on Tuesday, January 15, 2013. The following members and guests were present:

MEMBERS IN ATTENDANCE: Dean Cox, Chairman Fairfax County (VA) Fire & Rescue Karen Lehtonen, Secretary Lion Dave Trebisacci, Staff Liaison NFPA Steve Corrado Underwriters Laboratories Paul Dacey WL Gore and Associates Charles Dunn TenCate/Southern Mills Jim Frank CMC Rescue Steve Geraghty FDNY Bill Haskell NIOSH Diane Hess PBI Performance Products Tricia Hock SEI Gavin Horn University of Illinois Fire Service Institute Steve Hudson Pigeon Mountain Industries George Krause Globe Manufacturing Jeremy Metz West Metro Fire Rescue James Murray FDNY Robert Nelson Chula Vista Fire Department H. Dean Paderick Special Rescue International Beverly Stutts Underwriters Laboratories GUESTS IN ATTENDANCE: Andrew Berndt Ansell Protective Solutions Randahl Dickson Orlando Fire Department Ben Favret Vestagen Pete Gannon Dive Rescue International Amanda Newsom Underwriters Laboratories Ulf Nystrom Ansell Protective Solutions Faith Ortins Diving Unlimited International Celia Powell US Army PM SCIE Blades Robinson Dive Rescue International

FAE-SCE Minutes 1/15-17/2013 Page 2 GUESTS IN ATTENDANCE (continued): Mark Saner Workrite Uniform Brian Shiels PBI Performance Products Jeff Stull International Personal Protection (by phone) Harry Winer HIP Consulting Patrick Woods FDNY

Members and guests introduced themselves. The Staff Liaison provided a Staff Liaison report which included a cycle update for the various documents covered by this Technical Committee. The Minutes of the last Committee meeting held in San Diego, CA on March 14-16, 2012 were reviewed. A motion to approve the Minutes was made and seconded. The motion passed. Chairman’s Remarks: A NITMAM on NFPA 1951 was withdrawn on the floor based on actions taken on similar NITMAM’s on NFPA 1971 that were not approved. However some additional issues have been identified with the 2013 Edition of NFPA 1951 that the TC needs to discuss. The proposal to incorporate the NFPA EMS Protective Clothing and Equipment committee into this technical committee is still being evaluated. More information will be provided when the details are available. A new technical committee is being formed within the NFPA Protective Clothing and Equipment project to address breathing apparatus for non-structural firefighting applications. At some time this may be a place for the SCUBA requirements that need to be addressed for contaminated dive. Chairman Cox informed the group about the upcoming FIERO symposium being held in Raleigh, NC from March 4-6, 2013. Correlating Committee Update: The Correlating Committee (CC) has appointed a task group to develop a process for introducing new test methods and performance requirements into the project standards. A procedure to follow will be developed for adding in new requirements, including evidence for need, test rationale, safety issues to be addressed and impact on current products. A meeting is also being planned to discuss the future of the protective clothing and equipment project which will include how SCAM documents will be addressed by the technical committees. Relevant to this TC, the NFPA 1858 on Rope and Harness SCAM will be addressed. FAE-SCE Minutes 1/15-17/2013

Two new projects have been approved; one for land mobile radios (FAE-ELS TC) and a new Technical Committee on SCBA for non-structural firefighting environments. NFPA 1975 Public Comments The technical committee reviewed and took action on the public comments received. The committee also generated committee comments/second revisions. NFPA 1952 Public Input The technical committee reviewed and took action on the public input received and generated additional committee input for the first revision. . NFPA 1953 Public Input The technical committee reviewed and took action on the public input received and generated additional committee input for the first revision.

Old Business: None New Business: Chairman Cox established a task group to review the First Drafts of NFPA 1952 and NFPA 1953 and submit public comments with proposed language in order to address unresolved issues (seals, gloves, booties, face openings) and editorial issues. A task group meeting will be held May 7-8 in the Northeast metro area and another meeting in the fall to finalize comments; the participation of the dive manufacturers and testing labs will be needed. Jim Murray (Task Group Chair) and Chairman Cox will organize the meeting. Notification of the task group meeting will be circulated to the technical committee and the resource group. The revision cycle for these documents – posting of first draft in early August (draft will be available to TC in April) – public comment closing date is November 15, 2013. NFPA 1951, 2013 Edition discussion. The certification organizations have identified some issues that were not addressed in the recent revision cycle which resulted in products not being able to be certified to the new edition of the standard. A list of these issues will be provided and reviewed by a task group to be chaired by Dean Cox and including Steve Corrado, Tricia Hock, Karen Lehtonen and George Krause. The task group will draft a TIA by May 1, 2013 to be submitted for the July meeting of the NFPA Standards Council. The first task group meeting will be held February 14, 2013 via teleconference. The next meeting will be held January 14-16, 2014. The location is TBD. This meeting will be to review the second draft (public comments) for NFPA 1952 and NFPA 1953. A motion was made and seconded to adjourn. The motion passed.

FAE-SCE Minutes 1/15-17/2013 Page 4 Chairman Cox adjourned the meeting at 12:00 on January 17, 2013. Respectfully submitted,

Karen Lehtonen Karen Lehtonen, Secretary TC on Special Operations Protective Clothing and Equipment

Public Comment No. 24-NFPA 1952-2013 [ Section No. 4.4.1

[Excluding any Sub-Sections] ]

All products that are labeled as being compliant with this standard shall undergo recertification on an annual basis. This recertification shall include the following:

(1) Inspection and evaluation to all design requirements as required by the standard on all manufacturer models and components

(2) Testing to all performance requirements as specified in Table 4.4.1 on all manufacturer models and components within the following protocol:

(a) Where a test method incorporates testing both before and after the laundering preconditioning specified in 8.1.3 and the test generatesquantitative results, recertification testing shall be limited to theconditioning that yielded the worst-case test result during the initialcertification for the model or component.

(b) Where a test method incorporates testing both before and after the laundering preconditioning specified in 8.1.3 and the test generates nonquantitative results, recertifications shall be limited to a single conditioning procedure in any given year. Subsequent annualrecertification shall cycle through the remaining conditioning procedure to ensure that all required conditionings are included over time.

(c) Where a test method requires the testing of three specimens, a minimum of one specimen shall be tested for annual certification.

(d) Where a test method requires the testing of five or more specimens, a minimum of two specimens shall be tested for annual certification.

Table 4.4.1 Recertification Schedule

Page 1 of 50National Fire Protection Association Report

11/18/2013http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentParams=%28Comme...

Product Test Time

Wet Suit 7.1.1 Overall Donning Efficiency Test Initial certification only

Wet Suit 7.1.2 Thermal Insulation Test Every yearWet Suit 7.1.3 Breaking Strength Test Every year

Wet Suit 7.1.4 Puncture Propagation Tear Resistance Test Every year

Wet Suit 7.1.5 Seam Breaking Strength Test Every yearWet Suit 7.1.6 Liquid Absorption Resistance Every year

Wet Suit 7.1.7 Retroreflectivity Test Initial certification only

Wet Suit 7.1.8 Zipper Strength Test Every yearWet Suit 7.1.9 Resistance to Twist Test Every year

Wet Suit 7.1.10 Opening & Closing of Zippers Test Every year

Wet Suit 7.1.11 Corrosion Resistance Test Every year

Wet Suit 7.1.12 Label Durability and Legibility Test Every year

Dry Suit 7.2.1 Air Retention Test Every year

Dry Suit 7.2.2 Overall Liquid Integrity Test One Every year

Dry Suit 7.2.3 Overall Donning Efficiency Test Initial certification only

Dry Suit 7.2.4 Water and Air Penetration Test Every yearDry Suit 7.2.6 Breaking Strength Test Every year

Dry Suit 7.2.7 Puncture Propagation Tear Resistance Test Every year

Dry Suit 7.2.8 Cleaning Shrinkage Resistance Test Every two years

Dry Suit 7.2.9 Seam Breaking Strength Test Every year

Dry Suit 7.2.10 Liquid Absorption Resistance Test Every year

Dry Suit 7.2.11 Liquid Penetration Resistance Test Every year

Dry Suit 7.2.12 Viral Penetration Resistance Test

Seams only - Every year

Dry Suit 7.2.13 Zipper Strength Test Every yearDry Suit 7.2.14 Resistance to Twist Test Every year

Dry Suit 7.2.15 Opening & Closing of Zippers Test Every year

Dry Suit 7.2.16 Zipper Point Breaking Strength Test Every year

Dry Suit 7.2.17 Zipper Leak Resistance Test Every year

Dry Suit 7.2.18 Zipper Opening & Closing Force Test Every year

Dry Suit 7.2.19 Retroreflectivity Test Initial certification only

Dry Suit 7.2.20 Corrosion Resistance Test Every year



Product Test Time

Dry Suit 7.2.21 Label Durability and Legibility Test Every year

Ice Suit 7.3.1 Overall Liquid Integrity Test One Every year

Ice Suit 7.3.2 Air Retention Test Every year

Ice Suit 7.3.3 Viral Penetration Resistance Test

Seams only - Every year

Ice Suit 7.3.4 Overall Donning Efficiency Test Initial certification only

Ice Suit 7.3.5 Thermal Insulation Test Every yearIce Suit 7.3.6 Breaking Strength Test Every year

Ice Suit 7.3.7 Puncture Propagation Tear Resistance Test Every year

Ice Suit 7.3.8 Seam Breaking Strength Test Every year

Ice Suit 7.3.9 Liquid Absorption Resistance Test Every year

Ice Suit 7.3.10 Liquid Penetration Resistance Test Every year

Ice Suit 7.3.11 Retroreflectivity Test Initial certification only

Ice Suit 7.3.12 Water and Air Penetration Test Every year

Ice Suit 7.3.13 Buoyancy Test Every yearIce Suit 7.3.14 Corrosion Resistance Test Every year

Ice Suit 7.3.15 Label Durability and Legibility Test Every year

Ice Suit 7.3.16 Zipper Point Breaking Strength Test Every year

Ice Suit 7.3.17 Zipper Leak Resistance Test Every year

Ice Suit 7.3.18 Opening & Closing of Zippers Test Every year

Ice Suit 7.3.19 Zipper Opening & Closing Force Test Every year

Surface Water Helmet 7.4.

1 Helmet Bucketing Test Initial certification only Surface Water Helmet 7.4.



2 Top Impact Resistance Test -Force

Every year

Surface Water Helmet

7.4.3 Physical Penetration Resistance Test Every year


7.4.4 Suspension System Retention Test Every year

Surface Water Helmet 7.4.5 Retention System Test Every year

Surface Water Helmet 7.4.6 Corrosion Resistance Test Every year

Surface Water Helmet 7.4.7 Retroreflectivity Test

Initialcertification only

Surface Water Helmet 7.4.8 Label Durability and Legibility Test Every year

Surface Water Helmet 7.4.9 Floatability Test



7.4.10 Impact Resistance Test -Acceleration Every year

Surface Water Helmet 7.4.11 Helmet Roll Off Test


Surface Water Helmet 7.4.12 Helmet Water Absorption Test


Wet Suit Glove 7.5.1 Cut Resistance Test Every yearWet Suit Glove 7.5.2 Puncture Resistance Test Every yearWet Suit Glove 7.5.3 Abrasion Resistance Test 2 Every yearWet Suit Glove 7.5.4 Glove Hand Function Test Every yearWet Suit Glove 7.5.5 Grip Test Every yearWet Suit Glove 7.5.6 Glove Donning Test Every yearWet Suit Glove 7.5.7 Corrosion Resistance Test Every yearWet Suit Glove 7.5.8 Label Durability and Legibility Test Every yearWet Suit Glove 7.5.9 Thermal Insulation Test Every year

Dry Suit Glove 7.6.1 Cut Resistance Test Every yearDry Suit Glove 7.6.2 Puncture Resistance Test Every yearDry Suit Glove 7.6.3 Abrasion Resistance Test 2 Every yearDry Suit Glove 7.6.4 Glove Hand Function Test Every yearDry Suit Glove 7.6.5 Grip Test Every yearDry Suit Glove 7.6.6 Glove Donning Test Every yearDry Suit Glove 7.6.7 Corrosion Resistance Test Every year

Dry Suit Glove 7.6.8 Liquid Penetration Resistance Test Every year

Dry Suit Glove 7.6.9 Viral Penetration Resistance Test Seams only -Every year

Dry Suit Glove 7.6.10 Overall Liquid Integrity Test 2 Every year



Dry Suit Glove 7.6.11 Label Durability and Legibility Test Every year

Dry Suit Glove 7.6.12 Thermal Insulation Test Every year

Ice Suit Glove 7.7.1 Cut Resistance Test Every yearIce Suit Glove 7.7.2 Puncture Resistance Test Every yearIce Suit Glove 7.7.3 Abrasion Resistance Test 2 Every yearIce Suit Glove 7.7.4 Glove Hand Function Test Every yearIce Suit Glove 7.7.5 Grip Test Every yearIce Suit Glove 7.7.6 Glove Donning Test Every yearIce Suit Glove 7.7.7 Corrosion Resistance Test Every year

Ice Suit Glove 7.7.8 Liquid Penetration Resistance Test Every year

Ice Suit Glove 7.7.9 Viral Penetration Resistance Test Seams only -Every year

Ice Suit Glove 7.7.10 Label Durability and Legibility Test Every year

Ice Suit Glove 7.7.11 Thermal Insulation Test Every year

Wet Suit Footwear 7.8.1 Footwear Drain Test Every year

Wet Suit Footwear 7.8.2 Abrasion Resistance Test 2 (Upper) Every year

Wet Suit Footwear 7.8.3 Cut Resistance Every yearWet Suit Footwear 7.8.4 Puncture Resistance Test (Upper) Every yearWet Suit Footwear 7.8.5 Abrasion Resistance Test 2 (Sole) Every yearWet Suit Footwear 7.8.6 Puncture Resistance Test (Sole) Every yearWet Suit Footwear 7.8.7 Slip Resistance Every yearWet Suit Footwear 7.8.8 Corrosion Resistance Every yearWet Suit Footwear 7.8.9 Label Durability and Legibility Test Every year

Dry Suit Footwear 7.8.1 Footwear Drain Test Every year

Dry Suit Footwear 7.8.2 Abrasion Resistance Test 2 (Upper) Every year

Dry Suit Footwear 7.8.3 Cut Resistance Every yearDry Suit Footwear 7.8.4 Puncture Resistance Test (Upper) Every yearDry Suit Footwear 7.8.5 Abrasion Resistance Test 2 (Sole) Every yearDry Suit Footwear 7.8.6 Puncture Resistance Test (Sole) Every yearDry Suit Footwear 7.8.7 Slip Resistance Test Every yearDry Suit Footwear 7.8.8 Corrosion Resistance Test Every yearDry Suit Footwear 7.8.9 Label Durability and Legibility Test Every year

Ice Suit Footwear 7.9.1 Abrasion Resistance Test 2 (Upper) Every year

Ice Suit Footwear 7.9.2 Cut Resistance Test Every yearIce Suit Footwear 7.9.3 Puncture Resistance Test (Upper) Every yearIce Suit Footwear 7.9.4 Abrasion Resistance Test 2 (Sole) Every yearIce Suit Footwear 7.9.5 Puncture Resistance Test (Sole) Every yearIce Suit Footwear 7.9.6 Slip Resistance Test Every year

Ice Suit Footwear 7.9.7 Liquid Penetration Resistance Test Every year



Ice Suit Footwear 7.9.8 Viral Penetration Resistance Test Seams only -Every year

Ice Suit Footwear 7.9.9 Corrosion Resistance Test Every year

Ice Suit Footwear 7.9.10 Label Durability and Legibility Test Every year

Ice Suit Footwear 7.9.11 Thermal Insulation Test Every year

Personal Flotation Device

7.10.1 Buoyancy Test — SG3 & 20 of UL 1123

Initialcertification

Personal Flotation Device 7.10.2 Label Durability and Legibility Initial

certificationPersonal Flotation Device 7.10.3 Corrosion Resistance Test Initial

certificationPersonal Flotation Device

6.11.1 Water Entry Test – SG3 & 16 of UL 1123



6.11.1 Flotation Stability Test – SG3 & 17 of UL 1123



6.11.1 Buoyancy Distribution Test – SG3 & 19 of UL 1123



6.11.1 Tensile Test – SG3 & 24 of UL 1123



6.11.1 730 Pound Shoulder Tensile Test – SG3, SG10, & 24 of UL 1123



6.11.1 55 Pound Release Test – SG7 of UL 1123



6.11.1 730 Pound Harness Strength Test (without accelerated weathering) –SG9 of UL 1123



6.11.1 Pamphlet Strength of Attachment Test – SG3 & 35 of UL 1123



6.11.1 Pull Toggle Security of Attachment Test – SG7A of UL 1123


Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment



I would like to request the technical committee to reconsider the helmet bucketing performance requirement. In water events such as personal watercraft, having a helmet that produces high bucketing forces can indeed be of concern. The dynamics of having a body decelerate at a very rapid rate can have negative ramifications on the neck region. This occurs when the body is moving in a forward trajectory at a much higher rate of speed than that of the water in which the body will impact (typically in a horizontal, feet first entry).Although not all water rescues will occur with adequate preparation, this standard intends to address trained individuals in the profession of surface water rescue. For bucketing to typically occur in water rescues, the rescuer would have to be in an orientation more suitable for maximum effect, such as having the head pointed down current while being pulled up current.

The test method defined in 8.18 will not adequately address the concern of bucketing. Based on the spherical form being used and the helmet being tested, and requiring the helmet or water move at a speed of 6.7 mph, there are variables that will be difficult , if not impossible to control as listed below:

1) Left to right movement of the head form and helmet2) Bobbing movement of the head form and helmet3) “Waggle” or rotational movement of the head form and helmet4) Noise from the possibility of wave feedback from the walls of the chamber being used.

Each of the above factors could possible skew the forces being recorded and not represent the bucketing characteristics of a helmet.

In summary, although bucketing characteristics are important in various applications, this proposal suggests that the Helmet Bucketing Test in Section 8.18 be deleted due to the intended application and users that are targeted by NFPA 1952, as well as the uncontrollable variables within the test method that would not produce representative or consistent results.

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Christopher JamesOrganization: UL LLCStreet Address:City: State: Zip:Submittal Date: Mon Nov 04 15:40:29 EST 2013

Copyright Assignment

I, Christopher James, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full rights in copyright in this Public Comment (including both the Proposed Change and the Statement of Problem and Substantiation). I understand and intend that I acquire no rights, including rights as a joint author, in any publication of the NFPA in which this Public Comment in this or another similar or derivative form is used. I hereby warrant that I am the author of this Public Comment and that I have full power and authority to enter into this copyright assignment.

By checking this box I affirm that I am Christopher James, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright Assignment and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by checking this box, I am creating an electronic signature that will, upon my submission of this form, have the same legal force and effect as a handwritten signature



Public Comment No. 26-NFPA 1952-2013 [ New Section after 4.6.12 ]

Text was deleted in the First Draft Report. See First Revision No. 5


CC NOTE: The following CC Note No. 3 appeared in the First Draft Report as First Revision No. 5.

Since the requirements of Chapter 4 of NFPA 1952 are also common to other documents in the Fire and Emergency Services Protective Clothing and Equipment project, the CC will be providing revised text for correlation purposes to be submitted via Public Comment to paragraph 4.6.13.

Related ItemFirst Revision No. 5-NFPA 1952-2013 [Section No. 4.6.13]


Submitter Full Name: CC on FAE-AAC

Organization: CC on Fire and Emergency Services Protective Clothing and Equipment

Street Address: City:State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Nov 15 12:10:01 EST 2013


I, CC on FAE-AAC, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full rights in copyright in this Public Comment (including both the Proposed Change and the Statement ofProblem and Substantiation). I understand and intend that I acquire no rights, including rights as a joint author, in any publication of the NFPA in which this Public Comment in this or another similar or derivative form is used. I hereby warrant that I am the author of this Public Comment and that I have full power and authority to enter into this copyright assignment.

By checking this box I affirm that I am CC on FAE-AAC, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright Assignment and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by checking this box, I am creating an electronic signature that will, upon my submission of this form, have the same legal force and effect as a handwritten signature



Public Comment No. 27-NFPA 1952-2013 [ Sections 6.2.11, 6.2.12 ]

Sections 6.2.11, 6.2.126.2.11*When the manufacturer designates a dry suit as “breathable,” the total heat loss shall be measured as specified in Section 8.41, Total Heal Loss Test, and the result shall be printed on the product label as required by 5.1.8(11).6.2.12Where a dry suit is intended to provide protection against chemical hazards, it shall have an environmental and pressure-proof closure by which the user is isolated from the surrounding contaminated environment with the exception of head andhands.


CC NOTE: The following CC Note No. 1 appeared in the First Draft Report as First Revision No. 2, and also related to Public Input No. 3.

The Correlating Committee requests that the Technical Committee on Special Operations Protective Clothing and Equipment clarify the requirement in paragraph 6.2.12 so that a certification organization can make a determination as to what constitutes an environmental and pressure-proof closure. The CC also recommends that performance criteria be provided instead of design criteria.

Related ItemFirst Revision No. 2-NFPA 1952-2013 [New Section after 6.2.11]Public Input No. 3-NFPA 1952-2013 [New Section after 6.2.11]









Public Comment No. 1-NFPA 1952-2013 [ Section No. 7.1.1 ]

7.1.1Protective wet suits shall be tested for donning efficiency as specified in Section 8.4, Overall Donning Efficiency Test, and shall be donned and doffed in 3 minutes or less.


To retain consistency within the test method for the donning evaluation of suits, clause 7.1.1 should be revised to remove the doffing requirements for wetsuits. Currently, Section 8.4, Overall Donning Efficiency Test doesn’t define a specific method for interpreting a doffing failure. In addition, given the intent and environment in which these protective suits are to be used, the need to evaluate the doffing characteristics is not necessary.


Submitter Full Name: Christopher JamesOrganization: UL LLCStreet Address: City:State: Zip: Submittal Date: Tue Sep 24 13:34:27 EDT 2013







7.1.2 *Protective wet suit materials shall be tested for thermal insulation and shall have a clo value of at least 1.


A thermal insulation value is irrelevant for wet suits since such suits are designed to allow water ingress and migration within the suit. Similar to the decision to remove a thermal insulation requirement for dry suits, the same consideration should be made for wet suits.









7.1.6Protective wet suit materials shall be tested for water absorption resistance as specified in Section 8.11 , Liquid Absorption Resistance Test, and shall nothave a water absorption greater than 10 percent.


A test to evaluate the resistance of liquid absorption is irrelevant for wet suits since such suits are designed to allow water ingress and migration within the suit.









7.2.4Protective dry suits shall be tested for the ability to evacuate air allow no more than 500 grams of water ingress, and shall allow for the evacuation of air from within the suit by means of the suit design and/or by the user, as specified in Section 8.33, Water and Air Penetration Test, and shall show no air or water entrapment .


The means for evaluating that no air is entrapped within a dry suit is not practical. There will always be entrapped air within a dry suit. The requirement should state that the suit should be designed to allow for any entrapped air to be removed either by the design of the suit or by the user. In addition, dry suits will typically allow small amounts of water ingress into the suit.









7.2.5Protective dry suit materials, dry suit bootie materials, and dry suit hood materials shall be tested for strength as specified in Section 8.6, Breaking Strength Test, and shall have a breaking strength of not less than 445 N (100 lbf).



The Correlating Committee requests that the Technical Committee on Special Operations Protective Clothing and Equipment provide additional information related to the justification for the removal of the performance requirement in paragraph 7.2.5.

Related ItemFirst Revision No. 8-NFPA 1952-2013 [Section No. 7.2.5]











7.2.19Dry suits that are intended to provide protection against chemical hazards shall have dry suit materials and seams, dry suit bootie material and seams, and dry suit zippers tested for permeation resistance after flexing and abrading as specified in Section 8.43 and shall not exhibit a breakthrough detection time of 1 hour or less for the following list of industrial chemicals:

(1) JP-8 (ASTM Oil #1)

(2) Sulfuric Acid (50%)

(3) Diesel/heating oil (ISO Liquid F)

(4) High Octane (ISO Liquid C)



The Correlating Committee requests that the Technical Committee on Special Operations Protective Clothing and Equipment to provide additional detail regarding the following issues in paragraph 7.2.19: 1. justification for the selection and concentrations for the chemicals to be evaluated 2. the ability to apply permeation testing to zipper samples 3. the ability to flex and abrade zipper and seam samples 4. the use of breakthrough detection time as a criterion; the CC recommends the use of cumulative permeation mass as an end point for permeation testing.

Related ItemFirst Revision No. 3-NFPA 1952-2013 [New Section after 7.2.19]Public Input No. 4-NFPA 1952-2013 [New Section after 7.2.19]









7.2.19Dry suits that are intended to provide protection against chemical hazards shall have dry suit materials and seams, dry suit bootie material and seams, and dry suit zippers tested for permeation resistance after flexing and abrading as specified in Section 8.43 and shall not exhibit a breakthroughdetection time of 1 hour or less for the average cumulative permeation mass in 1 hour shall not exceed 6.0 μg/cm 2 for the following list of industrialchemicals:






The currently specified test procedures do not account for the most recent changes that have been applied according to other NFPA standards. A cumulative permeation measurement provides a more consistent and standardized form of establishing permeation resistance for protective clothing materials..

Related ItemCorrelating Committee Note No. 2-NFPA 1952-2013 []


Submitter Full Name: Jeffrey StullOrganization: International Personnel Protection, Inc.Street Address: City: State:Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Nov 15 15:39:05 EST 2013


I, Jeffrey Stull, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full rights in copyright in this Public Comment (including both the Proposed Change and the Statement of Problem and Substantiation). I understand and intend that I acquire no rights, including rights as a joint author, in any publication of the NFPA in which this Public Comment in this or another similar or derivative form is used. I hereby warrant that I am the author of this Public Comment and that I have full power and authority to enter into this copyright assignment.

By checking this box I affirm that I am Jeffrey Stull, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright Assignment and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by checking this box, I am creating an electronic signature that will, upon my submission of this form, have the same legal force and effect as a handwritten signature



Correlating Committee Note No. 2-NFPA 1952-2013 [ ]


Submitter Full Name: Patrick FoleyOrganization: NFPAStreet Address: City:State: Zip: Submittal Date: Mon Jul 22 09:23:34 EDT 2013

Committee Statement and Meeting Notes

Committee Statement:

The Correlating Committee requests that the Technical Committee on SpecialOperations Protective Clothing and Equipment to provide additional detailregarding the following issues in paragraph 7.2.19: 1. justification for the selection and concentrations for the chemicals to be evaluated 2. the ability to apply permeation testing to zipper samples 3. the ability to flex and abrade zipper and seam samples 4. the use of breakthrough detection time as a criterion; the CC recommends the use of cumulative permeation mass as an end point for permeation testing

Ballot Results

This item has passed ballot

27 Eligible Voters7 Not Returned

20 Affirmative All0 Affirmative with Comments0 Negative with Comments 0 Abstention

Not ReturnedAllen, Jason L.Arrington, JosephBarker, Roger L.Beck, Eric J.Legendre, JeffNeilson, Gary L.Reall, Jack E.

Affirmative AllCorrado, Steven D.Duffy, Richard M.Fargo, Cristine Z.Freese, Robert A.Gulledge, Beverly F.


11/18/2013http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/FormLaunch?id=/TerraView/Content/1952-201...

Haskell, III, William E.Haston, David V.Hosea, Thomas M.Johnson, James S.Lehtonen, Karen E.Matthews, David G.McKenna, Michael F.Putorti, Jr., Anthony D.Sanders, Stephen R.Stull, Jeffrey O.Tomlinson, Tim W.Van Lent, William A.Varner, Bruce H.Winer, Harry P.Young, Richard H.




7.3.5 *Protective ice suit and protective ice suit hood materials shall be tested for thermal insulation as specified in Section 8.5, Thermal Insulation Test, and shall have a clo value of at least 2.


The proposed revision contains a requirement with no test method. The entire paragraph should be removed, or the thermal insulation test should be retained.









7.3.12Protective ice suits shall be tested for the ability to evacuate air allow no more than 500 grams of water ingress, and shall allow for the evacuation of air from within the suit by means of the suit design and/or by the user, as specified in Section 8.33, Water and Air Penetration Test, and shall show no air or water entrapment .


The means for evaluating that no air is entrapped within a ice suit is not practical. There will always be entrapped air within a ice suit. The requirement should state that the suit should be designed to allow for any entrapped air to be removed either by the design of the suit or by the user. In addition, ice suits will typically allow small amounts of water ingress into the suit.









7.4.1Protective helmets shall be tested for bucketing as specified in Section 8.17 , Helmet Bucketing Test, and shall not produce a force greater than 55 N (12.4lbf).













7.6.12 *Dry suit protective glove materials shall be tested for thermal insulation and shall have a clo value of at least 0.5.


The thermal insulation requirement was removed for protective dry suits, so to remain consistent, Clause 7.6.12 should also be deleted for dry suit gloves.









7.7.11 *Ice suit protective glove materials shall be tested for thermal insulation andas specified in Section 8.5, Thermal Insuation Test, and shall have a clo value of at least 2.











7.8.7Wet suit and dry suit protective footwear soles shall be tested for slip resistance as specified in Section 8.29, Slip Resistance Test, and shall have a static coefficient friction of 0.75 45 or greater under wet conditions.


There has been an ongoing need for a slip resistance method that incorporates the entire footwear assembly rather than just sections of the outsole. This proposal reflects the method that was developed by the ASTM F13 Pedestrian/Walkway Safety and Footwear Committee. The proposal resulted in the publication of a slip resistance method in ASTM F2913 which was published in 2011.









7.9.11 *Ice suit protective footwear materials shall be tested for thermal insulation and as specified in Section 8.5, Thermal Insulation Test, and shall have a clo value of at least 2.











7.10.1Protective personal flotation devices shall be tested for buoyancy as specified in Section 8.35, Buoyancy Test, and shall have a buoyancy of at least 9.9 kg 100 N (22 lb).


Buoyancy is measured in force, so the metric conversion is incorrect.








Public Comment No. 30-NFPA 1952-2013 [ Section No. 8.5 ]

8.5 Helmet Roll Off Thermal Insulation Test.8.5.1

Application.This test method shallbe applied to complete helmetsapply to protective wet suit materials and wet suit glovematerials; protective dry suit materials, dry suit hood materials, dry suit glovematerials, and dry suit bootie materials; and protective ice suit materials, ice suithood materials, ice suit glove materials, and ice suit footwear materials .

8.5.2

Samples.8.5.2.1

Samples shall be complete helmetsat least a 1 m (1 yd) square of each material .8.5.3 2.2

Samples shall be preconditioned as specified in 8.1.2 .8.5.3 Specimens.

8.5.3.1

A minimum of three specimens shall be tested.8.5.3.2

Specimens shall be conditioned as specified in 8.1.2 , and 8.1.6 prior to each test. 8.5.4 Procedure.consist of all layers used in the construction of the suit,

excluding any areas of reinforcement, arranged in the order andorientation as worn.8.5.4 Apparatus .

1

SpecimensThe test apparatus shall be



tested as specified in Section 12.7.2, Roll Off Test, ofASTM F 14461868 , Standard TestMethods

Method forEquipment and Procedures Used in Evaluating the Performance Characteristics of Protective HeadgearThermal and Evaporative Resistance of Clothing Materials Using a

Sweating Hot Plate .8.5.45 Procedure .2 A drop weight of 4 kg (8.8 lb), and a drop height of 0.6 m (24 in.) shall be used.

Testing shall be conducted in accordance with ASTM F 1868, Standard TestMethod for Thermal and Evaporative Resistance of Clothing Materials Using aSweating Hot Place , using Part D.

8.5.5 6 Report.

8.5.5.1The rotation of the helmet from the original position shall be measured, recorded, and reported for each helmet.

8.5.5.2Damage to the retention system resulting in the retention system not remaining intact shall be The average intrinsic thermal resistance ( R cf ) of the sample shall berecorded and reported.

8.5.6 7 Interpretation.

8.5.6.1Pass or fail performance determination shall be determined for each specimen.8.5.6.2

One or more helmet specimens failing this test shall constitute failing performancebased on the average reported intrinsicthermal resistance measurement of all specimens tested .





The Correlating Committee requests that the Technical Committee on Special Operations Protective Clothing and Equipment provide further justification for the removal the test method in 8.5 when it appears that it still applies to wet suits and ice suits.

Related ItemFirst Revision No. 10-NFPA 1952-2013 [Section No. 8.5]











8.5.1 Application.This test method shall apply to protective wet suit materials and wet suit glove materials; protective dry suit materials, dry suit hood materials, dry suit glove materials, and dry suit bootie materials; and protective ice suit materials, ice suit hood materials, ice suit glove materials, and ice suit footwear materials.


Retain Section 8.5 so that the thermal insulation can be measured for ice suits, ice suit hoods, ice suit gloves and ice suit footwear.









8.17 Helmet Bucketing Test.8.17.1 Application.

This test method shall apply to protective helmets.8.17.2 Samples.

Samples shall be conditioned as specified in 8.1.2 .8.17.3 Specimens.

A total of three different protective helmets shall be tested.8.17.4 Procedure.8.17.4.1

Specimens shall be fitted onto a neutral buoyant spherical form sized such that the helmet fits tightly in accordance with the manufacturer’s fittinginstructions.8.17.4.2

The spherical form shall have an attachment point directly opposite the crown of the helmet.8.17.4.3

A force gauge shall be attached to the attachment point and the helmet shall be pulled through the water at a constant speed of 3 m/sec (6.7 mph) for a distance of not less than 10 m (32 ft).8.17.4.4

The maximum force shall be measured.8.17.5 Report.8.17.5.1

The maximum force generated shall be recorded and reported.8.17.5.2

The average force shall be calculated, recorded, and reported.8.17.6 Interpretation.

The average force generated shall be used to determine pass or failperformance.




Public Comment No. 13-NFPA 1952-2013 [ Section No. 8.17.4.1 ]

8.17.4.1Specimens shall be fitted onto a neutral buoyant spherical form A neutrally buoyant, spherical form shall be used and shall be sized such that the helmet fits tightly in accordance with the manufacturer’s fitting instructions.


Due to the lack of specifics regarding the head form used to evaluate the bucketing properties of a helmet, the procedure should be revised to add a means to neglect the frictional force acting upon the head form being used. The procedure should be revised to require that a force shall be recorded with only the head form and then subtract the head form force from the force obtain with the helmet attached to the head form.









8.17.4.3A force gauge shall be attached to the attachment point and the helmet shall spherical form shall be pulled through the water at a constant speed of 3 m/sec (6.7 mph) for a distance of not less than 10 m (32 ft).










Public Comment No. 15-NFPA 1952-2013 [ New Section after

8.17.4.4 ]

TITLE OF NEW CONTENT8.17.4.5 The helmet shall then be fitted onto the spherical form and the methods in 8.17.4.3 and 8.17.4.4 shall be repeated.










Public Comment No. 16-NFPA 1952-2013 [ New Section after

8.17.4.4 ]

TITLE OF NEW CONTENT8.17.4.6 The force produced by the spherical form shall be subtracted from the force produced by the spherical form fitted with the helmet.











8.23.1.1This test method shall apply to protective dry suit materials and seams material , dry suit hood materials and seams, dry suit glove materials and seams, and dry suit bootie materials and seams; and protective ice suitmaterials and seams, ice suit hood materials and seams glove material, dry suit footwear material, ice suit material , ice suit glove materials material and seams, and ice suit footwear materials and seams material .


There are currently only cut resistance requirements for protect suit gloves and footwear. If the intent is to only evaluate the resistance of cutting for those pieces of apparel, then 8.23.1.1 should be revised to remove all other apparel.









8.24.4 Procedure.Specimens shall be tested in accordance with ASTM F 1342, Standard Test Method for Resistance of Protective Clothing Materials to Puncture, MethodA .


ASTM F 1342, Standard Test Method for Resistance of Protective Clothing Materials to Puncture, has 3 different methods (A, B or C). Clause 8.24.4 doesn’t define which method should be used. To maintain consistency with NFPA 1951, method A should be incorporated.









8.29 Slip Resistance Test.8.29.1 Application.

This test method shall apply to protective wet suit footwear soles , protective dry suit footwear soles , and protective ice suit footwear soles .8.29.2 Samples.8.29.2.1

Samples shall be at least three of each whole protective footwear.8.29.2.2

Samples shall be conditioned as specified in 8.1.2 . ASTM F2913, Standard Test Method for Measuring the Coefficient of Friction for Evaluation of Slip Performance of Footwear and Test Surfaces/Flooring Using a Whole Shoe Tester.8.29.3 Specimens.8.29.3.1

Specimens shall be at least three of each whole protective footwear.8.29.3.2

At least three specimens shall be tested.8.29.4 Procedure.

Slip resistance testing shall be performed in accordance with ASTM F 489F2913 , Standard Test Method for Static Measuring the Coefficient of Friction for Evaluation ofShoe Sole and Heel Materials as Measured by the James Machine, in a wet condition.Slip Performance of Footwear and Test Surfaces/Flooring Using a Whole Shoe Tester, in the following configurations. (1) Footwear shall be tested both in the forepart and heel positions.(2) Footwear shall be tested in the wet condition.(3) Footwear shall be tested on a quarry tile surface that meets thespecifications of ASTM F2913 and shall be calibrated in accordance withASTM F2913. The calibration frequency of 10 tests specified in ASTM F2913shall be equivalent to 50 test runs.8.29.5 Report.

The static coefficient of friction under a wet condition of each specimen and the average coefficient of friction of all specimens for each configuration shall be calculated, recorded, and reported.8.29.6 Interpretation.

One or more footwear specimens failing this test shall constitute failing The average coefficient of friction for each configuration shall be used to determine pass/fail performance.




There has been an ongoing need for a slip resistance method that incorporates the entire footwear assembly rather than just sections of the outsole. This proposal reflects the method that was developed by the ASTM F13 Pedestrian/Walkway Safety and Footwear Committee. The proposal resulted in the publication of a slip resistance method in ASTM F2913 which was published in 2011.









8.33.4 Procedure.Specimens shall be tested in accordance with Section 18, Water and Air Penetration Test, as specified in UL 1197, Standard of Safety for Immersion Suits, with the following modifications:

a) A PFD shall be worn with the protective suit if recommended by themanufacturer;

b) If a PFD is required, the weight of PFD shall not be included when the subject is being weighed;

c) If the suit doesn’t automatically expel any entrapped air, the suit shall allow the subject to expel

any entrapped air .


The Water and Air Penetration Test within UL1197 requires each subject to be weighed while wearing a prewetted suit. The subject is then to jump into the water from a height that results in the subject being completely immersed (typically 4.5 meters). After the water entry, the subject is to swim or tread water for 1 minute. At the end of the one minute period, the subject is to emerge from the water and be weighed in the wetted suit within 10 seconds. The procedure is then repeated with the subject entering the water head first. When air accumulates in the legs as the subject enters head first, it must be expelled automatically. The weight of the subject in the wetted suit following both immersions shall not exceed the weight of the subject in the dry suit by more than 500 grams (17.6 ounces). Each subject then is to re-enter the water without being completely immersed and is to float for a period of one hour. The weight of the subject in the suit at the end of the test shall not exceed the weight of the subject in the suit at the beginning of the period of flotation by more than 200 grams (7 ounces). This weight is to be determined within 10 seconds from emergence from the pool.

It is understood in UL1197 that most suits will allow some leakage during the 1 hour duration of floating. In addition, the subject will produce sweat. Understanding that it is impossible to differentiate between actual water ingress and sweat, the current requirements within UL1197 do allow for minimum water ingress.

Also, since most of the suits within UL1197 have internal buoyancy, a revision will also need to be made to allow for the use of a PFD when the device doesn’t have buoyancy.




Submitter Full Name: Christopher JamesOrganization: UL LLCStreet Address:City: State: Zip:Submittal Date: Tue Sep 24 15:20:32 EDT 2013







8.33.6 Interpretation.Air entrapment The amount of water inside the suit and the ability to expel air entrapped in the suit shall be used to determine pass or fail performance.


The Water and Air Penetration Test within UL1197 requires each subject to be weighed while wearing a prewetted suit. The subject is then to jump into the water from a height that results in the subject being completely immersed (typically 4.5 meters). After the water entry, the subject is to swim or tread water for 1 minute. At the end of the one minute period, the subject is to emerge from the water and be weighed in the wetted suit within 10 seconds. The procedure is then repeated with the subject entering the water head first. When air accumulates in the legs as the subject enters head first, it must be expelled automatically. The weight of the subject in the wetted suit following both immersions shall not exceed the weight of the subject in the dry suit by more than 500 grams (17.6 ounces). Each subject then is to re-enter the water without being completely immersed and is to float for a period of one hour. The weight of the subject in the suit at the end of the test shall not exceed the weight of the subject in the suit at the beginning of the period of flotation by more than 200 grams (7 ounces). This weight is to be determined within 10 seconds from emergence from the pool.

It is understood in UL1197 that most suits will allow some leakage during the 1 hour duration of floating. In addition, the subject will produce sweat. Understanding that it is impossible to differentiate between actual water ingress and sweat, the current requirements within UL1197 do allow for minimum water ingress.

Also, since most of the suits within UL1197 have internal buoyancy, a revision will also need to be made to allow for the use of a PFD when the device doesn’t have buoyancy.


Submitter Full Name: Christopher JamesOrganization: UL LLCStreet Address:City: State: Zip:Submittal Date: Tue Sep 24 15:22:13 EDT 2013






8.42 Chemical Permeation Resistance Test. (revise entire section by implementing Section 8.7 as provided in Section 8.7 of NFPA 1994-2012and adapting language to four chemicals specified in 8.42.4.2)8.42.1 Application.8.42.1.1This test method shall apply to dry suit materials, dry suit material seams, dry suit bootie materials, dry suit bootie material seams, and dry suit zippers.8.42.1.2Modifications to this test method for testing dry suit materials and dry suit bootie materials after flexing and abrading shall be as specified in 8.42.7.8.42.1.3Modifications to this test method for testing dry suit material and dry suit bootie seams shall be as specified in 8.42.8.8.42.2 Samples.8.42.2.1Samples for conditioning shall be as specified according to the specific requirements in 8.42.1.2 or 8.42.1.3.8.42.2.2Samples shall be conditioned as specified in 8.1.2 after the conditioning specified in the applicable modifications.8.42.3 Specimens.8.42.3.1Specimens shall be the size specified in ASTM F 739, Standard Test Method for Permeation of Liquids and Gases through Protective Clothing Materials under Conditions of Continuous Contact.8.42.3.2At least three specimens shall be tested per chemical challenge.8.42.4 Procedures.8.42.4.1Permeation resistance shall be measured in accordance with ASTM F 739, Standard Test Method for Permeation of Liquids and Gases through Protective Clothing Materials under Conditions of Continuous Contact at 27°C, ± 2°C (81°F, ± 3°F) for a test duration of at least 3 hours for the following chemicals:





8.42.4.2The minimum detectable permeation rate for the permeation test apparatus shall be measured for each chemical tested. The minimum detectable permeation rate shall be less than or equal to 0.10 μg/cm2/min for all permeation resistance tests.8.42.5 Report.8.42.5.1



The permeation normalized breakthrough detection time in minutes, calculated at a system detectable permeation rate of 0.10 μg/cm2/min for industrial chemicals, shall be recorded and reported.8.42.5.2The maximum permeation rate (μg/cm2/min) observed for industrial chemicals shall be recorded and reported.8.42.5.3The minimum detectable rate for the test apparatus (μg/cm2/min) for industrial chemicals shall be recorded and reported.8.42.6 Interpretation.8.42.6.1For industrial chemicals, the average normalized breakthrough detection time shall be used in determining compliance for the particular material/chemical combination.8.42.7 Specific Requirements for Testing Dry Suit Materials and Dry Suit Bootie Materials After Flexing and Abrading.8.42.7.1Samples for conditioning shall be 200 mm × 280 mm (8 in. × 11 in.) rectangles and shall consist of dry suit material or dry suit bootie material.8.42.7.2Two samples shall be subjected to flexural fatigue in accordance with ASTM F 392, Standard Test Method for Flex Durability of Flexible Barrier Materials. In lieu of Flexing Conditions A, B, C, D, or E, test specimens shall have a flex period of 100 cycles at 45 cycles per minute. A cycle shall be full flex and twisting action.8.42.7.3Following flexing, two samples for abrasion conditioning, each measuring 45 mm × 230 mm (1 3⁄4 in. × 9 in.), shall be cut from the center of the flexed samples.8.42.7.4The new samples shall be subjected to abrasion conditioning in accordance with ASTM D 4157, Standard Test Method for Abrasion Resistance of Textile Fabrics (Oscillatory Cylinder Method), under the following conditions:

(1) A 2.3 kg (5 lb) tension weight shall be used.

(2) A 1.6 kg (3 1⁄2 lb) head weight shall be used.

(3) An 80 grit abradant trimite D-weight open coat #1A4180, or equivalent, shall be used.

(4) The specimen shall be abraded for 25 continuous cycles.

8.42.7.5Following abrasion, one specimen for permeation resistance testing shall be taken from each sample subjected to abrasion.8.42.7.5.1The permeation test specimen shall be taken from the exact center of the abraded sample so that the center of the permeation test and the center of the abraded sample coincide.8.42.8 Specific Requirements for Testing Seams.8.42.8.1Samples for conditioning shall be 600 mm (2 ft) lengths of prepared seam or cut from the dry suit or dry suit booties.8.42.8.1.1Samples shall have a minimum of 150 mm (6 in.) of material on each side of the seam center.



8.42.8.2Permeation test specimens shall be cut such that the exact seam center divides the specimen in half.


The current permeation test procedures are not standardized for the use of cumulative permeation. The proposed procedures based on NFPA 1994 provide a standardized methodology for measuring permeation resistance as established in other standards.














The Correlating Committee requests that the Technical Committee on SpecialOperations Protective Clothing and Equipment consider the addition of thepermeation test procedures as in the 2012 edition of NFPA 1994 for themeasurement of cumulative permeation with adaptations for the specificchemicals to be evaluated.

Ballot Results




Not ReturnedAllen, Jason L.Arrington, JosephBarker, Roger L.Beck, Eric J.Legendre, JeffNeilson, Gary L.Reall, Jack E.

Affirmative AllCorrado, Steven D.Duffy, Richard M.Fargo, Cristine Z.Freese, Robert A.Gulledge, Beverly F.Haskell, III, William E.Haston, David V.



Hosea, Thomas M.Johnson, James S.Lehtonen, Karen E.Matthews, David G.McKenna, Michael F.Putorti, Jr., Anthony D.Sanders, Stephen R.Stull, Jeffrey O.Tomlinson, Tim W.Van Lent, William A.Varner, Bruce H.Winer, Harry P.Young, Richard H.




8.42.7 Specific Requirements for Testing Dry Suit Materials and Dry Suit Bootie Materials After Flexing and Abrading.8.42.7.1Samples for conditioning shall be 200 mm × 280 mm (8 in. × 11 in.) rectangles and shall consist of dry suit material or dry suit bootie material.8.42.7.2Two samples shall be subjected to flexural fatigue in accordance with ASTM F 392, Standard Test Method for Flex Durability of Flexible Barrier Materials. In lieu of Flexing Conditions A, B, C, D, or E, test specimens shall have a flex period of 100 cycles at 45 cycles per minute. A cycle shall be full flex and twisting action.8.42.7.3Following flexing, two samples for abrasion conditioning, each measuring 45 mm × 230 mm (13⁄4 in. × 9 in.), shall be cut from the center of the flexed samples.8.42.7.4The new samples shall be subjected to abrasion conditioning in accordance with ASTM D 4157, Standard Test Method for Abrasion Resistance of Textile Fabrics(Oscillatory Cylinder Method), under the following conditions:

(1) A 2.3 kg (5 lb) tension weight shall be used.

(2) A 1.6 kg (31⁄2 lb) head weight shall be used.(3) An 80 grit abradant trimite D-weight open coat #1A4180, or equivalent, shall

be used.

(4) The specimen shall be abraded for 25 continuous cycles.

8.42.7.5Following abrasion, one specimen for permeation resistance testing shall be taken from each sample subjected to abrasion.8.42.7.5.1The permeation test specimen shall be taken from the exact center of the abraded sample so that the center of the permeation test and the center of the abraded sample coincide.



The Correlating Committee requests that the Technical Committee on Special Operations Protective Clothing and Equipment consider the addition of the permeation test procedures as in the 2012 edition of NFPA 1994 for the measurement of cumulative permeation with adaptations for the specific chemicals to be evaluated.

Related ItemFirst Revision No. 15-NFPA 1952-2013 [New Section after 8.42.7]




Public Comment No. 42-NFPA 1953-2013 [ Global Input ]

The viral penetration criteria and test method established in NFPA 1952 should be applied to these products given the potential for encountering biological hazards.


Pathogenic bacteria and other microorganisms pose a serious threat to divers in contaminated water and should be included as a performance evaluation for these products.





I, Jeffrey Stull, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and fullrights in copyright in this Public Comment (including both the Proposed Change and the Statement of Problem and Substantiation). I understand and intend that I acquire no rights, including rights as a joint author, in any publication of the NFPA in which this Public Comment in this or another similar or derivative form is used. I hereby warrant that I am the author of this Public Comment and that I have full power and authority to enter into this copyright assignment.



11/18/2013http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/FormLaunch?id=/TerraView/Content/1953-pro...






The Correlating Committee notes that consideration should be given to theability of decontaminating ensemble elements for preventing first responder exposure to persistent chemical or biological contaminants.

Ballot Results




Not ReturnedArrington, JosephHaston, David V.Legendre, JeffNeilson, Gary L.Reall, Jack E.

Affirmative AllAllen, Jason L.Barker, Roger L.Beck, Eric J.Corrado, Steven D.Duffy, Richard M.Fargo, Cristine Z.Freese, Robert A.Gulledge, Beverly F.Haskell, III, William E.Hosea, Thomas M.Johnson, James S.



Lehtonen, Karen E.Matthews, David G.McKenna, Michael F.Putorti, Jr., Anthony D.Sanders, Stephen R.Stull, Jeffrey O.Tomlinson, Tim W.Van Lent, William A.Varner, Bruce H.Winer, Harry P.Young, Richard H.




Contaminated Water - A body of water that potentially contains a chemical or biological substance that poses a chronic or acute health risk to exposed personnel.


Additional information added to clarify document by Correlating Committee Task Group


Submitter Full Name: James MurrayOrganization: Fire Department City of New YoStreet Address: City: State:Zip: Submittal Date: Wed Nov 13 22:37:32 EST 2013


I, James Murray, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full rights in copyright in this Public Comment (including both the Proposed Change and the Statement of Problem and Substantiation). I understand and intend that I acquire no rights, including rights as a joint author, in any publication of the NFPA in which this Public Comment in this or another similar or derivative form is used. I hereby warrant that I am the author of this Public Comment and that I have full power and authority to enter into this copyright assignment.

By checking this box I affirm that I am James Murray, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright Assignment and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by checking this box, I am creating an electronic signature that will, upon my submission of this form, have the same legal force and effect as a handwritten signature




3.3.19 * Moderate Contamination. - Delete entire section on multiplelevelsWater that is contaminated but at a level not to exceed the following contaminant levels : 100% JP-8, 100% diesel fuel (Liquid F), and 100% high octane fuel (Liquid C) for an exposure of 5 minutes; and 10% sulfuric acid, 10% sodium hydroxide, 10% isopropanol, and 1.5% tributyltin for an exposure of 60 minutes.


The multiple levels do not make sense. Although surface hazmat allows for different levels of protection there is equipment available to determine eactly what chemicals they are dealing with and at what concentrations. In diving there is no equipment available to determine on scene what is in the water and at what concentration. To propose a dive that only lasts for 5 minutes is near impossible particulary where most of the time they are dealing in zero visability conditions. This dual levels with in one standard will only lead to confusion with the end users and the wrong equipment being used. I would suggest every public safety dive team has the chance to respond to a scene that would far go beyond the "Moderate Contamination" for more than 5 minutes. I do not understand the logic as to why one would want to dumb down the level of protection for the end user.


Submitter Full Name: John DrewniakOrganization: Aqua Lung AmericaStreet Address:City: State: Zip:Submittal Date: Sun Oct 13 08:48:59 EDT 2013


I, John Drewniak, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full rights in copyright in this Public Comment (including both the Proposed Change and the Statement ofProblem and Substantiation). I understand and intend that I acquire no rights, including rights as a joint author, in any publication of the NFPA in which this Public Comment in this or another similar or derivative form is used. I hereby warrant that I am the author of this Public Comment and that I have full power and authority to enter into this copyright assignment.

By checking this box I affirm that I am John Drewniak, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright Assignment and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by checking this box, I am creating an electronic signature that will, upon my submission of this form, have the same legal force and effect as a handwritten signature




3.3.19* Moderate Contamination.Water that is contaminated but at a level not to exceed the following contaminant levels : 100% JP-8, 100% diesel fuel (Liquid F), and 100% high octane fuel (Liquid C) for an exposure of 5 minutes; and 10% sulfuric acid, 10% sodium hydroxide, 10% isopropanol, and 1.5% tributyltin for an exposure of 60 minutes.



The Correlating Committee notes that the definitions for moderate and severe contamination do not appear to be risk-based and may not provide an adequate distinction for first responders to choose the appropriate level of performance.












3.3.19 * Moderate Contamination.Water that is contaminated but at a level not to exceed the following contaminant levels : 100% JP-8, 100% diesel fuel (Liquid F), and 100% high octane fuel (Liquid C) for an exposure of 5 minutes; and 10% sulfuric acid, 10% sodium hydroxide, 10% isopropanol, and 1.5% tributyltin for an exposure of 60 minutes.


End users do not have the ability to judge or measure their exposure circumstances. The current definition is not risk based and a single level of performance should be established.














The Correlating Committee notes that the definitions for moderate and severecontamination do not appear to be risk-based and may not provide anadequate distinction for first responders to choose the appropriate level of performance.

Ballot Results





Affirmative AllAllen, Jason L.Barker, Roger L.Beck, Eric J.Corrado, Steven D.Duffy, Richard M.Fargo, Cristine Z.Freese, Robert A.Gulledge, Beverly F.Haskell, III, William E.Hosea, Thomas M.



Johnson, James S.Lehtonen, Karen E.Matthews, David G.McKenna, Michael F.Putorti, Jr., Anthony D.Sanders, Stephen R.Stull, Jeffrey O.Tomlinson, Tim W.Van Lent, William A.Varner, Bruce H.Winer, Harry P.Young, Richard H.




3.3.30* Severe Contamination.Water that is contaminated but at a level not to exceed the following contaminant levels for an exposure of 60 minutes: 100% JP-8, 100% diesel fuel (Liquid F), 100% high octane fuel (Liquid C), 50% sulfuric acid, 50% sodium hydroxide, 100% isopropanol, and 15% tributyltin.



The Correlating Committee notes that the definitions for moderate and severe contamination do not appear to be risk-based and may not provide an adequate distinction for first responders to choose the appropriate level of performance.












3.3.30 * Severe Contamination. This should be the only level ofprotectionWater that is contaminated but at a level not to exceed the following contaminant levels for an exposure of 60 minutes: 100% JP-8, 100% diesel fuel (Liquid F), 100% high octane fuel (Liquid C), 50% sulfuric acid, 50% sodium hydroxide, 100% isopropanol, and 15% tributyltin.











3.3.30 * Severe Contamination.Water that is contaminated but at a level not to exceed the following contaminant levels for an exposure of 60 minutes: 100% JP-8, 100% diesel fuel (Liquid F), 100% high octane fuel (Liquid C), 50% sulfuric acid, 50% sodium hydroxide, 100% isopropanol, and 15% tributyltin.


End users have no real means for determining the level of contamination in advance. The definitions do not allow a risk assessment. A single level of performance should be specified.














The Correlating Committee notes that the definitions for moderate and severecontamination do not appear to be risk-based and may not provide anadequate distinction for first responders to choose the appropriate level of performance.

Ballot Results










All products that are labeled as being compliant with this standard shall undergo recertification on an annual basis. This recertification shall include the following:

(1) Inspection and evaluation to all design requirements as required by the standard on all manufacturer models and components

(2) Testing to all performance requirements as specified in Table 4.4.1 on all manufacturer models and components within the following protocol:

(a) Where a test method incorporates testing both before and after the laundering preconditioning specified in 8.1.3 and the test generatesquantitative results, recertification testing shall be limited to theconditioning that yielded the worst-case test result during the initialcertification for the model or component.

(b) Where a test method incorporates testing both before and after the laundering preconditioning specified in 8.1.3 and the test generates nonquantitative results, recertifications shall be limited to a single conditioning procedure in any given year. Subsequent annualrecertification shall cycle through the remaining conditioning procedure to ensure that all required conditionings are included over time.

(c) Where a test method requires the testing of three specimens, a minimum of one specimen shall be tested for annual certification.

(d) Where a test method requires the testing of five or more specimens, a minimum of two specimens shall be tested for annual certification.

Table 4.4.1 Recertification Schedule



Year

Product Test Frequency 1 2 3 4 5

Labels Label Durability and Legibility Test Initial certification only X

Hardware Corrosion Resistance Initial certification only XDry Suit Air Retention Test Every year X X X X X

Dry SuitExhaust Valve Chemical Permeation Resistance

TBD T B D

Dry Suit Inlet Valve Test TBD TBD T B DDry Suit Material Burst Strength Test Initial certification and

year 5 X X

Dry Suit Material

Puncture Propagation Tear Resistance Test Initial certification only X

Dry Suit Material

Chemical Permeation Resistance Test

Initial certification (all chemicals); every year (certain chemicals, 2 per year)

X X X X X

Dry Suit Material

Viral Penetration Resistance Test Initial certification only X

Dry Suit Material Cut Resistance Test Initial certification and

year 3 X X

Dry Suit Material

Abrasion Resistance Test

Initial certification and year 4 X X

Dry Suit Zipper Strength Test Initial certification only X

Dry Suit Resistance to Twist of Pull and Slider Test Initial certification only X

Dry Suit Opening and Closing of Zippers Test Initial certification only X

Dry Suit Zipper Point Breaking Strength Test Initial certification only X

Dry Suit Zipper



X X X X X

Dry Suit Retroreflectivity Test Initial certification only XDry Suit Seams

Seam Breaking Strength Test Every year X X X X X

Dry Suit Seams



X X X X X

Dry Suit Seams


Dry Suit Bootie Material

Burst Strength Test Initial certification and year 5 X X





YearProduct Test Frequency 1 2 3 4 5




X X X X X




Cut Resistance Test Initial certification and year 3 X X




Dry Suit Bootie Seams

Seam Breaking Strength Every year X X X X X




X X X X X



Attached Dry Suit Boot Materials

Burst Strength Test Initial certification and year 5 X X








Dry Suit Hood Material Burst Strength Test Initial certification and

year 5 X X

Dry Suit Hood Material





X X X X X



Dry Suit Hood Material Cut Resistance Test Initial certification and

year 3 X X




Dry Suit Hood Seams

Seam Breaking Strength Every year X X X X X




Dry Suit Hood Seams



X X X X X

Dry Suit Hood Seams


Dry Suit Glove Cut Resistance Test Initial certification and year 2 X X

Dry Suit Glove Puncture Resistance Test


Dry Suit Glove Abrasion Resistance Test Two


Dry Suit Glove Torque Test Initial certification only X

Dry Suit Glove Chemical Permeation Resistance Test


X X X X X

Dry Suit Glove Viral Penetration Resistance Initial certification only X

Dry Suit Footwear Uppers

Abrasion Resistance Test Two



Cut Resistance Initial certification and year 2 X X


Puncture Resistance Test


Dry Suit Footwear Soles







Slip Resistance Initial certification only X

Dry Suit Boot Materials



X X X X X

Dry Suit Boot Seams



X X X X X

Dry Suit Footwear Materials



X X X X X




Dry Suit Footwear Materials


Dry Suit Footwear Seams



X X X X X

Dry Suit Overboot

Footwear Drainage Test Initial certification only X

Dry Suit Overboot Uppers








Dry Suit Overboot Soles



Dry Suit Overboot Soles



Dry Suit OverbootSoles

Slip Resistance Initial certification only X

Add Hood to mask Seal Test to be tested for Initial certification and Year 4










6.1.5Hood for use with a full-face mask may be an integral part of the suit body or attached by a separate mechanical means. Where hoods are provided, the hood shall provide protection to at least the head and neck. The hood must provide a means for sealing the mask to the hood in the area of the divers head.

Add sentence- " It is highly recommended that a positive pressure full face mask, similar to an SCBA mask, is used in order to minimize the risk of exposure to vapor contamination on the water's surface.











6.1.6Diving helmet interface may be an integral part of the suit body or attached by a separate mechanical means.

In order to minimize the possibility of leakage between the breathing system and the hood, a mechanical connection between the hood and breathing system is required if the system is to be used in severe contamination.











The interface between the full face mask and drysuit hood will be tested for air retention and watertight integrity. Any moisture leakage will be considered a failure of the test.











When testing the drysuit ensemble for compatibility with the severe contamination level, the mechanical interface between the breathing system and drysuit hood will be tested for air retention and watertight integrity. Any moisture leakage will be considered a failure of the test.











7.1.7Protective dry suit materials and seams, dry suit bootie material and seams, exhaust valve diaphragm material, and dry suit hood materials and seams shall be tested for liquid permeation resistance after flexing and abrading as specified in Section8.8, and shall not exhibit a breakthrough detection time of 1 hour or less for the following list of industrial chemicals:

Severe Contamination Level

(1) JP-8 (ASTM Oil #1)........................................100%

(2) Sulfuric Acid.................................................50%

(3) Diesel/heating oil (ISO Liquid F)..................100%

(4) High- Octane Fuel (ISO Liquid C)...........................100%

(5) Tributyltin......................................15%

(6) Sodium Hydroxide......................50%

(7) Isopropanol.......................................................100%

7.1.7.1Protective dry suit materials and seams, dry suit bootie material and seams, exhaust valve diaphragm material, and dry suit hood materials and seams shall be tested for liquid permeation resistance after flexing and abrading as specified in Section 8.8 and shall be tested for a minimum of 1 hour to determine breakthough time as follows:

(1) Moderate Contamination Level Min. Time for Passing Std.

(2) JP-8 (ASTM Oil #1) 5 minutes

(3) Sulfuric Acid (10%) 60 minutes

(4) Diesel/heating oil (ISO Liquid F) 5 minutes (5) High-Octane Fuel (ISO Liquid C) 5 minutes

(6) Tributyltin (1.5%) 60 minutes

(7) Sodium Hydroxide (10%) 60 minutes

(8) Isopropanol (10%) 60 minutes



The Correlating Committee notes that the list of chemicals in paragraph 7.1.7 may not be sufficient to assess the performance of the ensemble against the range of hazards that could be encountered; some chemicals may not be testable at the concentrations indicated.

Related ItemFirst Revision No. 12-NFPA 1953-2013 [Section No. 7.1.7]Public Input No. 21-NFPA 1953-2012 [Section No. 7.1.7]





Protective dry suit materials and seams, dry suit bootie material and seams, exhaust valve diaphragm material, and dry suit hood materials and seams shall be tested for liquid permeation resistance after flexing and abrading as specified in Section8.8, and shall not exhibit a breakthrough detection time of 1 hour or less the average cumulative permeation in 1 hour shall not exceed 6.0 μg/cm 2 for the following list of industrial chemicals:


(1) JP-8 (ASTM Oil #1)........................................100%(2) Sulfuric Acid.................................................50% 20%



(5) Tributyltin......................................15%


(7) 2 0%

(8) Isopropanol.......................................................100% 20%


A cumulative permeation test approach should be used that is consistent with other standards in the project. One of the chemicals is relatively insoluble in water and should either be deleted or removed from the. Those chemicals that are water soluble or miscible in water should be tested at a lower concentration.











The Correlating Committee notes that the list of chemicals in paragraph 7.1.7may not be sufficient to assess the performance of the ensemble against the range of hazards that could be encountered; some chemicals may not betestable at the concentrations indicated.

Ballot Results










Protective dry suit materials and seams, dry suit bootie material and seams, exhaust valve diaphragm material, and dry suit hood materials and seams shall be tested for liquid permeation resistance after flexing and abrading as specified in Section8.8, and shall not exhibit a breakthrough detection time of 1 hour or less for the following list of industrial chemicals: THIS SHOULD BE THE ONLY LEVEL OF PROTECTION


(1) JP-8 (ASTM Oil #1)........................................100%

(2) Sulfuric Acid.................................................50%



(5) Tributyltin......................................15%


(7) Isopropanol.......................................................100%









7.1.7.1Protective dry suit materials and seams, dry suit bootie material and seams, exhaust valve diaphragm material, and dry suit hood materials and seams shall be tested for liquid permeation resistance after flexing and abrading as specified in Section 8.8 and shall be tested for a minimum of 1 hour to determine breakthough time as follows: Moderate Contamination Level Min. Time for Passing Std.



(3) Diesel/heating oil (ISO Liquid F) 5 minutes

(4) High-Octane Fuel (ISO Liquid C) 5 minutes

(5) Tributyltin (1.5%) 60 minutes(6) Sodium Hydroxide (10%) 60 minutes



As part of Correlating Committee Task Group, correcting typos








7.1.7.1Protective dry suit materials and seams, dry suit bootie material and seams, exhaust valve diaphragm material, and dry suit hood materials and seams shall be tested for liquid permeation resistance after flexing and abrading as specified in Section 8.8 and shall be tested for a minimum of 1 hour to determine breakthough time as follows:























Ballot Results









7.1.7.1Protective dry suit materials and seams, dry suit bootie material and seams, exhaust valve diaphragm material, and dry suit hood materials and seams shall be tested for liquid permeation resistance after flexing and abrading as specified in Section 8.8 and shall be tested for a minimum of 1 hour to determine breakthough time as follows: REMOVE THIS LOWER LEVEL OF PROTECTION

















7.1.15Zippers shall be tested for permeation resistance as specified in Section 8.8, and shall not exhibit a breakthrough detection time of 1 hour or less for the following list of industrial chemicals:

(1) JP-8 (ASTM Oil #1)...........................................100%

(2) Sulfuric Acid....................................................50%(3) Diesel/heating oil (ISO Liquid F).....................100%

(4) High- Octane Fuel (ISO Liquid C)..............................100%

(5) Tributyltin....................................................15%

(6) Sodium Hydroxide...................................50%

(7) Isopropanol........................................................100%

7.1.15.1Zippers shall be tested for liquid permeation resistance after flexing and abrading as specified in Section 8.8 and shall be tested for a minimum of 1 hour to determine breakthough time as follows:











The Correlating Committee notes that the list of chemicals in new section 7.1.5 may not be sufficient to assess the performance of the ensemble against the range of hazards that could be encountered; some chemicals may not be testable at the concentrations indicated. Also, the Correlating Committee requests the Technical Committee on Special Operations Protective Clothing and Equipment to provide evidence that zippers can be tested for permeation resistance.

Related ItemFirst Revision No. 13-NFPA 1953-2013 [Section No. 7.1.15]Public Input No. 22-NFPA 1953-2012 [Section No. 7.1.15]






Zippers The tape used in zippers shall be tested for permeation resistance as specified in Section 8.8, and shall not exhibit a breakthrough detection time of the average cumulative permeation shall not exceed 6.0 μg/cm 2 in 1 hour or less for the following list of industrial chemicals:

(1) JP-8 (ASTM Oil #1)...........................................100%

(2) Sulfuric Acid....................................................50% 20%

(3) Diesel/heating oil (ISO Liquid F).....................100%

(4) High- Octane Fuel (ISO Liquid C)..............................100%(5) Tributyltin....................................................15%

(6) Sodium Hydroxide...................................50%

(7) 20%

(8) Isopropanol........................................................100%















Ballot Results









7.1.15.1Zippers shall be tested for liquid permeation resistance after flexing and abrading as specified in Section 8.8 and shall be tested for a minimum of 1 hour to determine breakthough time as follows:Moderate Contamination Level Min. Time for Passing Std.

(1) JP-8 (ASTM Oil #1) 5 minutes(2) Sulfuric Acid (10%) 60 minutes
















7.1.15.1Zippers shall be tested for liquid permeation resistance after flexing and abrading as specified in Section 8.8 and shall be tested for a minimum of 1 hour to determine breakthough time as follows:





















Ballot Results









7.2.6Protective dry suit glove materials and seams shall be tested for permeation resistance after flexing and abrading as specified in Section8.8, and shall not exhibit a breakthrough detection time of 1 hour or less for the following list ofindustrial chemicals:

(1) JP-8 (ASTM Oil #1)....................................................100%(2) Sulfuric Acid..............................................................50%

(3) Diesel/heating oil (ISO Liquid F).................................100%

(4) High- Octane Fuel (ISO Liquid C).........................................100%

(5) Tributyltin.....................................................15%

(6) Sodium Hydroxide...............................................50%

(7) Isopropanol.....................................................................100%

7.2.6.1Protective dry suit glove material and seams shall be tested for permeation resistance after flexing and abrading as specified in Section 8.8 and shall be tested for a minimum of 1 hour to determine breakthrough time as follows:Moderate Contamination Level Min. Time for Passing Std.




(4) High-Octane Fuel (ISO Liquid C) 5 minutes(5) Tributyltin (1.5%) 60 minutes










7.2.6Protective dry suit glove materials and seams shall be tested for permeation resistance after flexing and abrading as specified in Section8.8, and shall not exhibit a breakthrough detection time of 1 hour or less for the average cumulative permeation in 1 hour shall not exceed 6.0 μg/cm 2 for the following list of industrial chemicals:

(1) JP-8 (ASTM Oil #1)....................................................100%

(2) Sulfuric Acid..............................................................50% 20%

(3) Diesel/heating oil (ISO Liquid F).................................100%

(4) High- Octane Fuel (ISO Liquid C).........................................100%

(5) Tributyltin.....................................................15%

(6) Sodium Hydroxide...............................................50%

(7) 20%

(8) Isopropanol.....................................................................100%







(7) Sodium Hydroxide (10%) 60 minutes (8) Isopropanol (10%) 60 minutes

(1) 20%













Ballot Results








Public Comment No. 37-NFPA 1953-2013 [ Section No. 7.3.1.7


Protective attached dry suit boot materials and seams shall be tested for permeation resistance after flexing and abrading as specified in Section8.8, and shall not exhibit a breakthrough detection time of the average cumulative shall not exceed 6.0 μg/cm 2 in 1 hour or less for the following list of industrial chemicals:

(1) JP-8 (ASTM Oil #1).......................................100%

(2) Sulfuric Acid.................................................50% 20%

(3) Diesel/heating oil (ISO Liquid F)...................100%(4) High- Octane Fuel (ISO Liquid C)............................100%

(5) Tributyltin................................................15%

(6) Sodium Hydroxide.................................50% 20%

(7) Isopropanol....................................................100% 20%





Submitter Full Name: Jeffrey StullOrganization: International Personnel Protection,Inc.Street Address:City: State: Zip:Submittal Date: Fri Nov 15 16:42:33 EST 2013


I, Jeffrey Stull, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full rights in copyright in this Public Comment (including both the Proposed Change and the Statement ofProblem and Substantiation). I understand and intend that I acquire no rights, including rights as a joint author, in any publication of the NFPA in which this Public Comment in this or another similar or derivative form is used. I hereby warrant that I am the author of this Public Comment and that I have full power and authority to enter into this copyright assignment.









Ballot Results








Public Comment No. 17-NFPA 1953-2013 [ Section No. 7.3.1.7.1 ]

7.3.1.7.1Dry suit boot materials and seams shall be tested for liquid permeation resistance after flexing and abrading as specified in Section 8.8 and shall be tested for a minimum of 1 hour to determine breakthough time as follows:Moderate Contamination Level Min. Time for Passing Std.

















7.3.1.7.1Dry suit boot materials and seams shall be tested for liquid permeation resistance after flexing and abrading as specified in Section 8.8 and shall be tested for a minimum of 1 hour to determine breakthough time as follows:












Submitter Full Name: Jeffrey StullOrganization: International Personnel Protection, inc.Street Address: City: State:Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Nov 15 16:40:54 EST 2013








The Correlating Committee notes that different permeation procedures are used for CBRN versus industrial chemicals. The same permeation proceduresshould be used for both types of challenges.

Ballot Results









7.3.1.9.1Footwear materials shall be tested for liquid permeation resistance after flexing and abrading as specified in Section 8.8 and shall be tested for a minimum of 1 hour to determine breakthough time as follows:Moderate Contamination Level Min. Time for Passing Std.

















7.3.2.9.1Bootie material shall be tested for liquid permeation resistance after flexing and abrading as specified in Section 8.8 and shall be tested for a minimum of 1 hour to determine breakthough time as follows:Moderate Contamination Level Min. Time for Passing Std.

















8.? Hood to Mask Seal Test.8.?.1 Application. This test method shall apply to seal between dry suit hood and mask.8.?.2 Samples.8.?.2.1 Samples shall be dry suit hood capable of being mounted on a head form in such a way of eliminating water intrusion from the neck area. A functioning full face mask will be supplied including all parts needed to provide air to the mask.8.?.2.2 Samples shall be conditioned as specified in 8.1.2.and 8.1.38.?.3 Specimens. A minimum of three hood specimens shall be tested with eachmanufacturer’s mask supplied for compliance8.?.4 Procedure. Hood to Mask Seal test shall be performed in accordance with the following procedure;

· Hood should be mounted on the head form in such a way to ensure water tight seal at neck. The mask should be filled with an absorptive material that will easily show wetness.· Mask shall be donned onto hooded head form with a minimum of 20mm overlap between hood and mask shirt and in accordance with manufacturer’s recommendations.· Air supply shall be turned on. At this time, the head harness should be adjusted to ensure it fits properly on the mask.· Entire form with donned mask shall be submerged in water in head down inverted position for 5 minutes.· Remove head form from water, towel dry exterior of hooded head form and mask and remove air supply.· Remove mask from head form and examine interior of mask and facial area of head form for moisture. Examine the absorptive material for any moisture as well.· This shall be performed on all three specimens.· This shall be repeated with the different mask manufacturers to ensure compliance with each. · It is permissible to use a dressed human for this test in lieu of the head form.

8.?.5 Report. Any moisture leakage for each specimen shall be recorded andreported.8.?.6 Interpretation. Pass or fail determination shall be based on evidence of moisture leakage.







8.? Hood to Breathing System Seal Test.8.?.1 Application. This test method shall apply to seal between dry suit hood and breathing system that is intended to be used in severe contamination and has a mechanical attachment.8.?.2 Samples.8.?.2.1 Samples shall be dry suit hood capable of being mounted on a head form in such a way of eliminating water intrusion from the neck area. A functioning breathing system will be supplied including all parts needed to provide air to the mask orhelmet.8.?.2.2 Samples shall be conditioned as specified in 8.1.2.and 8.1.38.?.3 Specimens. A minimum of three hood specimens shall be tested with each manufacturer’s mask supplied for compliance8.?.4 Procedure. Hood to Breathing System Seal test shall be performed in accordance with the following procedure;

· Hood should be mounted on the head form in such a way to ensure water tight seal at neck. The breathing system should be filled with an absorptive material that will easily show wetness.· Breathing System shall be donned onto hooded head form in accordance with manufacturer’s recommendations.· Air supply shall be turned on.· Entire form with donned mask shall be submerged in water in head down inverted position for 5 minutes.· Remove head form from water, towel dry exterior of hooded head form and breathing system and remove air supply.· Remove breathing system from head form and examine interior of mask and facial area of head form for moisture. Examine the absorptive material for any moisture as well.· This shall be performed on all three specimens.· This shall be repeated with the different mask manufacturers to ensure compliance with each. · It is permissible to use a dressed human for this test in lieu of the head form.

8.?.5 Report. Any moisture leakage for each specimen shall be recorded andreported.8.?.6 Interpretation. Pass or fail determination shall be based on evidence of moisture leakage.







8.8 Chemical Permeation Resistance Test. Test (Adapt and combine procedures with Section 8.9 for use of cumulative permeation for list ofchemicals)8.8.1 Application.8.8.1.1This test method shall apply to dry suit materials and seams, dry suit hood materials and seams, glove materials and seams, dry suit bootie materials and seams (if different from suit material and seams)or footwear materials and seams (if different from suit material and seams), exhaust valve and zippers.8.8.1.2Modifications to this test method for testing dry suit, hood , exhaust valve diaphragm material, and bootie materials shall be as specified in 8.8.7.8.8.1.3Modifications to this test method for testing dry suit, hood and bootie seams shall be as specified in 8.8.8.8.8.1.4Modifications to this test method for testing glove materials and seams shall be as specified in 8.8.9.8.8.1.5Modifications to this test method for testing footwear shall be as specified in 8.8.10.8.8.1.6Modifications to this test method for testing zippers shall be as specified in 8.8.11.8.8.2 Sample Preparation.8.8.2.1Samples shall be the chemical protection layer of the size specified in the modifications.8.8.2.2Samples shall be conditioned as specified in 8.1.2 after the conditioning specified in the modifications.8.8.3 Specimens.8.8.3.1Specimens shall be the size specified in ASTM F 739, Standard Test Method for Resistance of Protective Clothing Materials to Permeation by Liquids or Gases Under Conditions of Continuous Contact.8.8.3.2At least three specimens of each material shall be tested per chemical.8.8.4 Procedure.8.8.4.1Specimens shall be tested for permeation resistance for not less than 60 minutes against the chemicals specified in 8.8.4.2 in accordance with ASTM F 739, Standard Test Method for Resistance of Protective Clothing Materials to Permeation by Liquids or Gases Under Conditions of Continuous Contact.8.8.4.2The following liquid chemicals shall be tested:



(1) JP-8 (ASTM Oil #1)..............................100%

(2) Sulfuric Acid........................................50%

(3) Diesel/heating oil (ISO Liquid F)..........100%(4) High- Octane Fuel (ISO Liquid C)...................100%

(5) Tributyltin........................................15%

(6) Sodium Hydroxide..........................50%

(7) Isopropanol.............................................100%

(1) Moderate Contamination Level Min Time for Pass. Std.

(2) JP-8 (ASTM Oil #1, 100%).................................. 5 minutes(3) Sulfuric Acid (10%) ..............................................60 minutes

(4) Diesel/heating oil (ISO Liquid F, 100%) .............5 minutes

(5) High-Octane Fuel (ISO Liquid C, 100%) ......................5 minutes

(6) Tributyltin (1.5%) ..................................................60 minutes

(7) Sodium Hydroxide (10%) ......................................60 minutes

(8) Isopropanol (10%) .................................................60 minutes

8.8.4.3For permeation tests the concentration density shall be 100 g/m2, +1/-0 g/m2, and the cell shall be assembled in closed-top configuration.8.8.4.4*The test cell shall be assembled in the closed-top configuration with 0.3 lpm, ±0.03 lpm of filtered air with a relative humidity of 80 percent, ±5 percent flowing through the top of the cell. The test cell washer shall be allowed to be sealed by an impermeable nonreactive sealant.8.8.5 Report.The pass or fail results for each chemical tested and identification of location where breakthrough occurs, if discernible, shall be recorded and reported.8.8.6 Interpretation.Observed breakthrough at the end of the test for any specimen shallconstitute failure.8.8.7 Specific Requirements for Testing Dry Suit, Hood and FootwearMaterials.8.8.7.1Samples for conditioning shall be at least 380 mm (15 in.) square and shall consist of all layers as configured in the suit, hood, or bootie.8.8.7.2Composite samples prepared as described in 8.8.7.1 shall be tested after being subjected to the following conditioning:

(1) Specimens shall first be subjected to the procedure specified in 8.1.3.

(2) Specimens shall then be conditioned as specified in 8.1.2.

8.8.7.3The composite sample that was conditioned in 8.8.7.2 shall be trimmed to a sample size of 300 mm × 280 mm (12 in. × 11 in.). The trimmed composite samples shall be subject to flexing conditioning as specified in 8.1.4 with the 280 mm (11 in.) direction parallel with the compression action of the machine. The trimmed samples shall be mounted such that the outer layer is visible with all layers in their normal “as worn” orientation.8.8.7.4



Following flexing, samples of the barrier layer shall be removed from the flexed, trimmed composite sample, cut to the dimensions specified in 8.8.7.3with the long dimension of the sample parallel to the 280 mm (11 in.) dimension.8.8.7.5The layers in the flexed, trimmed composite sample adjacent to the barrier layer shall be retained for use as the abradants.8.8.7.6The barrier layer samples prepared as specified as 8.8.7.4 and the other samples retained as specified in 8.8.7.5 shall be subjected to abrasion asspecified 8.1.5.8.8.7.7Following abrading, the permeation test specimen shall be taken from the center of the abraded sample so that the center of the permeation test and the center of the abraded sample coincide.8.8.7.8The specimens shall be oriented in the permeation test cell with the exterior surfaces facing the challenge chemical.8.8.7.9Specimens shall be tested for permeation resistance as specified in 8.8.4.8.8.8 Specific Requirements for Testing Dry Suit, Hood, and FootwearSeams.8.8.8.1Samples for conditioning shall be at least 380 mm (15 in.) square and shall consist of all layers of the composite arranged in the order used in the construction of the suit, hood, or bootie. The multilayer composite shall be stitched around the entire periphery.8.8.8.2Composite samples prepared as described in 8.8.8.1 shall be tested after being twice subjected to the following conditioning.



8.8.8.3The composite sample that was conditioned in 8.8.8.2 shall be trimmed to a sample size of 300 mm × 280 mm (12 in. × 11 in.) with the seam parallel to the 300 mm (12 in.) direction. The trimmed composite samples shall be subject to flexing conditioning as specified in 8.1.4 with the 280 mm (11 in.) direction parallel with the compression action of the machine. The trimmedsamples shall be mounted such that outer layer is visible with all layers intheir normal “as worn” orientation.8.8.8.4Specimens for permeation testing shall be cut from the flexed, trimmed sample such that the seam bisects the specimen.8.8.8.5The specimens shall be oriented in the permeation test cell with the exterior surfaces facing the challenge chemical.8.8.8.6Specimens shall be tested for permeation resistance as specified in 8.8.4.8.8.9 Specific Requirements for Testing Glove Materials and Seams.8.8.9.1This test shall apply to all types of glove configurations.8.8.9.2Samples for conditioning shall be whole gloves.8.8.9.3



Glove samples shall be subjected to the following sequence a total of two times prior to permeation testing.



8.8.9.4Following the conditioning specified in 8.8.9.3, conditioned gloves shall be donned by a test subject and subjected to flexing by the test subject clenching his or her hands into a fist a total of 300 times over a period not greater than 6 minutes. Test subjects shall be selected so that their hand dimensions are as close as possible to the middle of the range for hand length and hand circumference as specified by the manufacturer.8.8.9.5Following the flexing in 8.8.9.4, specimens for permeation resistance testing shall be taken from the flexed glove. Where the outer layer includes seams, specimens shall include seams that bisect the specimens.8.8.10 Specific Requirements for Testing Footwear Materials.8.8.10.1This test shall not apply to footwear configurations that include booties that are subjected to the procedures in 8.8.7.8.8.10.2Samples for conditioning shall be whole footwear items.8.8.10.3Footwear samples shall be subjected to the following sequence a total of two times prior to permeation testing.

(1) Samples shall first be conditioned as specified in 8.1.2.

(2) Samples shall then be conditioned by flexing 1,000 cycles in accordance with Appendix B of FIA 1209, Whole Shoe Flex with the following modifications:

(a) Water shall not be used.

(b) The flex speed shall be 60 +/-2 cycles per minute.

(c) Alternative flexing equipment shall be permitted to be used.

(d) The flex equipment used shall meet the following criteria:

i. Capable of providing the angle of flex as described in FIA 1209.

ii. Capable of a flex speed of 60 +/-2 cycles per minute.

iii. Provide a means of securing the footwear during flexing.

8.8.10.4Following flexing, samples shall be taken in areas from the footwear upper at the footwear quarter and vamp areas, cut to the dimensions specified in 8.8.7.3 .8.8.10.5The cut samples shall then be conditioned by abrading as specified in 8.1.5using silicon carbide, ultrafine, 600 grit sandpaper as the abradant in lieu of other specified layers.8.8.10.6Following abrading, the permeation test specimen shall be taken from the center of the abraded sample so that the center of the permeation test and the center of the abraded sample coincide.8.8.11 Specific Requirements for Testing Zippers.



8.8.11.1 Application.This test method shall apply to zippers attached to the dry suit material.8.8.11.2 Samples.8.8.11.2.1Samples shall be permitted to be cut from dry suits or they shall be permitted to be panels of suit material containing the zipper attached in a way that is identical to the dry suit.8.8.11.2.2Samples shall be conditioned as specified in 8.1.3 followed by the conditioning specified in 8.1.2. Samples shall be permitted to be cut from a dry suit having undergone conditioning to 8.1.3 and then conditioned to 8.1.2.8.8.11.3 Specimens.8.8.11.3.1Three specimens shall be tested.8.8.11.3.2Specimens shall be cut from the sample having a width and length that exceeds the test cell diameter of ASTM F 739 Standard Test Method for Resistance of Protective Clothing Materials to Permeation by Liquids or Gases Under Conditions of Continuous Contact. The length of the specimen shall be enough to make sure the edges can be kept closed to avoid that the zipper opens during the test.8.8.11.4 Procedure.8.8.11.4.1Specimens shall be tested in accordance with ASTM F 739, Standard Test Method for Resistance of Protective Clothing Materials to Permeation by Liquids or Gases Under Conditions of Continuous Contact.8.8.11.5 Report.The test results shall be reported according to ASTM F 739Standard Test Method for Resistance of Protective Clothing Materials to Permeation byLiquids or Gases Under Conditions of Continuous Contact. Any modificationsto the test cell shall be made in order to accommodate the specimens.8.8.11.6 Interpretation.Observed permeation breakthrough within the stipulated time for anyspecimen shall constitute failure.













The Correlating Committee notes that different permeation procedures are used for CBRN versus industrial chemicals. The same permeation proceduresshould be used for both types of challenges.

Ballot Results









8.8.4.2The following liquid chemicals shall be tested:

(1) JP-8 (ASTM Oil #1)..............................100%

(2) Sulfuric Acid........................................50%

(3) Diesel/heating oil (ISO Liquid F)..........100%(4) High- Octane Fuel (ISO Liquid C)...................100%

(5) Tributyltin........................................15%

(6) Sodium Hydroxide..........................50%

(7) Isopropanol.............................................100%

Moderate Contamination Level Min Time for Pass. Std.

(1) JP-8 (ASTM Oil #1, 100%).................................. 5 minutes

(2) Sulfuric Acid (10%) ..............................................60 minutes

(3) Diesel/heating oil (ISO Liquid F, 100%) .............5 minutes

(4) High-Octane Fuel (ISO Liquid C, 100%) ......................5 minutes

(5) Tributyltin (1.5%) ..................................................60 minutes

(6) Sodium Hydroxide (10%) ......................................60 minutes

(7) Isopropanol (10%) .................................................60 minutes










8.8.4.3For permeation tests the concentration density shall be 100 g/m2, +1/-0 g/m2, and the cell shall be assembled in closed-top configuration.



The Correlating Committee notes that different permeation procedures are used for CBRN versus industrial chemicals. The same permeation procedures should be used for both types of challenges.

Related ItemFirst Revision No. 33-NFPA 1953-2013 [Section No. 8.8.4.3]











8.8.9 Specific Requirements for Testing Glove Materials and Seams.8.8.9.1This test shall apply to all types of glove configurations.8.8.9.2Samples for conditioning shall be whole gloves.8.8.9.3Glove samples shall be subjected to the following sequence a total of two times prior to permeation testing.

(1) Specimens shall first be subjected to the procedure specified in 8.1.3.(2) Specimens shall then be conditioned as specified in 8.1.2.

8.8.9.4Following the conditioning specified in 8.8.9.3, conditioned gloves shall be donned by a test subject and subjected to flexing by the test subject clenching his or her hands into a fist a total of 300 times over a period not greater than 6 minutes. Test subjects shall be selected so that their hand dimensions are as close as possible to the middle of the range for hand length and hand circumference as specified by themanufacturer.8.8.9.5Following the flexing in 8.8.9.4, specimens for permeation resistance testing shall be taken from the flexed glove. Where the outer layer includes seams, specimens shall include seams that bisect the specimens.


CC NOTE: The following CC Note No. 3 appeared in the First Draft Report as First Revision No. 21, and also related to Public Input No. 46, 45, 44, 43, and 42.

The Correlating Committee notes that different permeation procedures are used for CBRN versus industrial chemicals. The same permeation procedures should be used for both types of challenges.

Related ItemFirst Revision No. 21-NFPA 1953-2013 [New Section after 8.8.11.1]Public Input No. 46-NFPA 1953-2013 [New Section after 8.8.11.1]Public Input No. 45-NFPA 1953-2013 [New Section after 7.3.2.11]Public Input No. 44-NFPA 1953-2013 [New Section after 7.2.8]Public Input No. 43-NFPA 1953-2013 [New Section after 7.1.18]Public Input No. 42-NFPA 1953-2013 [New Section after 5.1.8]




Public Comment No. 27-NFPA 1953-2013 [ Section No. A.1.2.2 ]

A.1.2.2The testing requirements in Chapter 8 of this standard are not intended to establish the limitations of the working environment for contaminated water dive operations but are intended to establish material performance. Users should be advised that if unusual conditions prevail, or if there are signs of abuse or mutilation of the protective clothing and equipment or components thereof, or if modifications or replacements are made or accessories are added without authorization of the protective item manufacturer, the margin of protection could be reduced. Users should be advised that the protective properties in new contaminated water dive operations protective clothing and equipment, as required by this standard, can diminish as the product is worn and ages.



The Correlating Committee notes that consideration should be given to the ability of decontaminating ensemble elements for preventing first responder exposure to persistent chemical or biological contaminants.

Related ItemFirst Revision No. 52-NFPA 1953-2013 [Section No. A.1.2.2]Public Input No. 29-NFPA 1953-2012 [Section No. A.1.2.2]








A.3.3.19 Moderate Contamination.Moderate contamination is designed to be more representative of the typical contamination most dive teams will face. High concentrations of hydrocarbons are typically found on the surface thus exposure time is typically very short. However, other chemicals can be found dissolved throughout the water column. Therefore, the diver could be exposed to them for the entire dive operation, hence the longer exposure time. Dive teams are encouraged to develop baseline profiles of their operational areas in order to be able to determine the level of contamination present. For those environments in which information is not available, dive teams should err on the side of caution and use a dry suit ensemble appropriate for the most severe contamination level.



The Correlating Committee requests that the Technical Committee on Special Operations Protective Clothing and Equipment address respiratory protection as part of an integrated system of protection for the first responder.

Related ItemFirst Revision No. 49-NFPA 1953-2013 [New Section after A.3.2.4]











A.3.3.30 Severe Contamination.This level of contamination is intended for the highest levels of contamination to which a dive team could be exposed. Any contamination level above the moderate level of contamination will be considered severe contamination even if the level of contamination is far below the maximum severe contamination limits. In this case, wearing an ensemble approved for severe contamination will provide the user with an extra margin of protection. It is important to remember that the breathing system is not tested for this level of contamination and represents a potential weakness in the safety of the entire system.



The Correlating Committee requests that the Technical Committee on Special Operations Protective Clothing and Equipment address respiratory protection as part of an integrated system of protection for the first responder.











Public Comment No. 30-NFPA 1953-2013 [ Section No. A.8.8.4.4 ]

A.8.8.4.4The permeation test cell will need modification (e.g., notches might have to be made in its wall) to accommodate the zipper specimen. Special means could be required to assure the tightness of the test cell when testing zippers. Gaskets and/or sealants can be used provided they are nonreactive and compatible with the challenge liquid in this respect.



The Correlating Committee notes that the list of chemicals may not be sufficient to assess the performance of the ensemble against the range of hazards that could be encountered; some chemicals may not be testable at the concentrations indicated. Also, the Correlating Committee requests the Technical Committee on Special Operations Protective Clothing and Equipment to provide evidence that zippers can be tested for permeation resistance.











nfpa technical special and equipment · 2016. 4. 7. · technical committee on special operations ....

Documents