The ICC Website is changing. As this transition is made, our new format can be found at www.pesicc.org/ICCWP. Please send any comments or questions to mvh@voncorp.com.
Subcommittee No. 8 meeting was held concurrently with Subcommittee No. 9 meeting chaired by Jim Pickering on April 8, 1998 with 12 members and guests present.
In Sub 8 Jim Pickering led a discussion on plenum cables (power-limited, signal, data and communications) and recent modifications UL has made to the E-84 Steiner tunnel which many subscribers feel have caused follow-up failures of commercial plenum cables. UL claims that their modifications only improve the acquisition of data and are not responsible for the failures. The failures have all been excessive smoke evolution and not flame spread.
The upshot of this situation has been to cause a switch back to fluropolymers for insulation instead of FR olefin insulation. Thus certain hybrid cables (mixtures of FEP and FR olefin insulation) have been stopped. Now there is another FEP shortage which aggravates the problem. Many of UL’s clients are upset over the loss of their plenum cable UL recognition and are working with UL and other labs who have E-84 Steiner tunnels to resolve the problem to provide more information on the impact of UL’s changes. UL has asked the NFPA to recognize their tunnel modifications in NFPA 262. A number of UL’s clients oppose changing NFPA 262 until more information is generated.
In addition to E-84 tunnel changes UL will change its follow-up program to include a range of different pair-count cables for testing and will institute a plenum cable compound recognition program which will require cable producers and compound manufacturers to submit their materials for analytical test identification. UL will use this ID system to eliminate possible material changes. The materials of construction will also be part of UL’s follow-up program. Any changes in materials of construction in the future will require new test qualification.
Frank LaGasse of Rome Cable reported that in July 1997, UL proposed changes to conductor sizes for some low voltage cables based on electrical resistance and many UL clients are concerned about the changes. Apparently UL received comments on the changes but is going ahead with the changes despite some questioning responses.
Return to the SC 9 Homepage
