Can not agree more: "Retard" means delay, hence ignition is delayed not stopped or eliminated. You may also like to note the reference from Treaties (https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/CN/2013/CN.934.2013-Eng.pdf) that "HBCD is listed for elimination, but with a specific exemption for expanded polystyrene (EPS) and extruded polystyrene (XPS) in buildings. Countries may choose to use this exemption for up to five years after the request for exemption is submitted. Japan was the first country to implement a ban on the import and production of HBCD effective in May 2014." So in a few years the building may need to remove this material. EPS-SE is still EPS hence need proper protection.
Cheers Jack C KILAVUZ -----Original Message----- From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, 3 February 2015 6:56 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: fire retardant treated plastic foam Fire retardant does not equal fire proof or non-combustible. For a lot of commodities such as this all it means is that the material burns when in direct contact with flame but will self-extinguish when a flame is removed. They will also meet the smoke/flame spread ratings to be called a fire retardant material. The designation for fire resistant EPS is EPS-SE, this stuff still degrades, melts, burns and gives off fumes but ignition requires a higher temperature and the material will self-extinguish when the ignition source is removed. It's interesting that they would go the route of using HBCD with the ongoing EPA investigations into health and environmental concerns related to the material. There was a draft report published by the EPA in 2013 looking at alternatives to the use of HBCD. If it was me, I would not downgrade any level of protection one bit. I'd treat it like EPS and move on since there is no documented testing that I could find stating a change in the design criteria was appropriate due to the fire resistance nature of the material. The only difference in the FR and non-FR materials was the ignition temperatures and shrinkage under a fire condition. Both ended up in liquid form, both emitted combustible and toxic fumes and smoke. Craig L. Prahl Fire Protection Group Lead CH2MHILL Lockwood Greene 1500 International Drive Spartanburg, SC 29303 Direct - 864.599.4102 Fax - 864.599.8439 CH2MHILL Extension 74102 [email protected] -----Original Message----- From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Matt Grise Sent: Monday, February 02, 2015 2:17 PM To: [email protected] Subject: fire retardant treated plastic foam I am looking at a warehouse storing expanded polystyrene building insulation. Normal plastic foam is a pretty clear cut group A plastic, however, this foam has a fire retardant treatment in it so that it can be used for construction. (the chemical used is HBCD) Anyone heard of any studies or info regarding how this should be protected? Still a group A expanded plastic, or does the FR incorporated into it reduce the commodity rating? Thanks! Matt Grisé PE*, LEED AP, NICET II Sales Engineer Alliance Fire Protection 130 w 9th Ave. North Kansas City, MO 64116 *Licensed in KS & MO 913.888.0647 ph 913.888.0618 f 913.927.0222 cell www. AFPsprink.com _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2015.0.5646 / Virus Database: 4273/9047 - Release Date: 02/02/15 _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
