Toxicity and Safety in Communications
Cable Products
www.wireville.com www.communicationplanning.com
frank@wireville.com fbisbee@fdn.com
August 22, 2003
Mr. Mike Holt
Mike Holt Enterprises Inc.
7310 West McNab Road, Suite 201
Tamarac, Fl 33321
Tel: (954) 720-1999
Fax: (954) 720-7944
RE: How do we get the NFPA/NEC to consider another
aspect of fire safety?
Dear Mike,
You are the guru on the NEC. How do we get the NFPA
to consider another aspect of fire safety in communications cable products? Toxicity?
Imagine a fire drill
(office building, hospital, or school) where everyone was required to wear a blindfold while exiting
the building. That seems sort of ridiculous, but that may replicate part of the scenario that may
occur if there is a real fire. Thick black smoke or colorless and odorless gas can have the same
effect on the individual.
Gas emissions, due
to the heat decomposition of some return-air plenum (CMP) communications cable materials, are
dangerous, because when they come in contact with water (even minute amounts), they immediately form
acid. The water source that the gases use to form these acids can be found almost anywhere-moisture
in the eyes, throat and lungs of individuals with whom it comes in contact. For example: due to
the heat decomposition, FEP (fluorinated ethylene propylene), may emit a colorless and odorless
hydrogen fluoride gas, which becomes hydrofluoric acid in the eyes, nose and throat of the individuals
exposed to the gas.
Virtually everything
that burns is toxic. Some materials are more toxic than others. During a fire, the occupants should
try to exit the structure immediately. However, they may be blinded and choking from either heavy
smoke or acids from invisible gases.
For many years we have
acknowledged the issues of reduced flame spread and low smoke generation. The cables that are located
in the plenum space (usually above the ceiling) are potential concealed highways for a fire to spread.
Reduced flame spread is part of the safety formula. The low smoke generation property of the cable
is designed to inhibit the obscuration factor associated with thick smoke. We need to see the exit
signs and the pathways to safety. Smoke also has a choking effect when inhaled. That is one more
reason to limit the smoke. Both flame spread and smoke are part of the testing criteria (UL910/NFPA
262 for CMP) for communications cables for use in return-air plenum space.
Safety is too important to ignore. As the public
and private sectors are besieged with higher insurance premiums and liability litigation about safety
issues, we asked the "BIG" question. Does the testing process for fire safety measure the
TOXICITY of the cables when overheated or burned? The answer is shockingly "NO".
Measuring toxicity output from cables used in building
air systems is NOT part of the testing criteria for communications cables. This important aspect
of safety is completely absent from the criteria of the current of the NEC 2002 (National Electric
Code) and the proposed criteria of the upcoming NEC 2005.
During the past several decades, we have seen the
effect of product “toxicity” on various industries and the victims. No one can ignore the echoing
repercussions from tobacco, asbestos, and lead. The finger pointing and lawsuits continue to be prominent
in the news. One common area of these products seems to be the failure to warn the buyers/users about
the dangers.
Currently in the cabling marketplace, limited combustible
cable is touted as the premier cable construction for fire safety. The fire testing (per NFPA 90A-National
Fire Protection Association) includes maximum potential heat value of 3500 btu/lb, and maximum smoke
developed index of 50 for the NFPA 255 surface burning characteristics test. The cable is UL (Underwriters
Laboratories) approved and marked CMP-Limited Combustible. The testing (NFPA 90A) for smoke generation
and flame spread is more stringent that the tests (UL910/NFPA 262) for CMP. At this time, FEP appears
to be the only material commercially available that will pass the limited combustible test. Certainly,
it would seem that more stringent fire testing is good.
In the last cycle of the National Electric Code
(NEC 2002) an important development for the cabling industry took place. The need to reduce the fuel
load in the return air plenums was identified and the code added a provision for the mandatory removal
of "abandoned" cable. This is a big step towards safety, but it does not address the toxicity
issue of the cables "in use".
Can cables emit toxic
gases when heated beyond their operating threshold? Yes! Toxicity can affect your ability to escape
the burning building.
In summary, what you
can't see can blind you. After years of research we have determined that there is no PERFECT cable.
The best solution seems to be a fully informed buyer/user. Perhaps, the NEC could be amended to include
Toxicity in the testing criteria for cables in the air systems.
Best regards,
Frank Bisbee
President
Further Info: Web Resources
* Combustion atmosphere toxicity of materials intended for internal cables - white paper by Borealis
http://www.borealisgroup.com/public/pdf/customer_centre/0202toxicity_FROCC.pdf
* Hydrofluoric Acid MSDS (Material Safety Data Sheet)
by DuPont
http://msds.dupont.com/msds/pdfs/EN/PEN_09004a2f801b4efc.pdf
* Toxics Use Reduction Initiative – www.turi.org.
*"Cabling: What You Don’t Know Can Kill You"
article by Stephen Saunders
http://www.wireville.com/news/Cabling%20Can%20Kill%20You.html
Copyright © 2002, 2003 Mike Holt Enterprises,Inc.
1-888-NEC-CODE (1-888-632-2633) | 
