Report of the Committee on Robert A.
Koehler, Wausau HPR Engr, TX [I]
Handling and Conveying of Dusts, Vapors, and Gases
Murray A. Cappers, Jr., Chair
Marsh USA, Inc., NJ [I]
Joe R. Barton, Fountaintown, IN [U]
Kris Chatrathi, Fike Corp., MO [M]
John M. Cholin, J. M. Cholin Consultants Inc., NJ [SE]
David G. Clark, E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., DE [U]
C. James Dahn, Safety Consulting Engr., Inc., IL [SE]
Vahid Ebadat, Chilworth Technology Inc., NJ [SE]
Walter L. Frank, EQE Int’l, Inc., DE [U]
Henry W. Garzia, Fenwal Safety Systems/Williams Holdings, MA [M]
Ray E. George, The Chemithon Corp., WA [M]
Joseph P. Gillis, Westboro, MA [SE]
Ray Hunter, Ray Hunter & Assoc. Inc., AL [M]
Rep. American Air Filter
Jerry J. Jennett, Georgia Gulf Sulfur Corp., GA [M]
David C. Kirby, Union Carbide Corp., WV [M]
James E. Maness, Bunge Corp., MO [U]
Rep. Grain Elevator & Processing Society,
Guillermo A. Navas, Sheet Metal & Air Conditioning Contractors’
Nat’l Assn., VA [M]
Robert W. Nelson, Industrial Risk Insurers, MA [I]
Heron Peterkin, FM Global, MA [I]
James L. Roberts, Fluor Daniel, Inc., SC [SE]
Richard F. Schwab, Honeywell, NJ [U]
William J. Stevenson, Cv Technology, Inc., FL [M]
Lynn K. Underwood, Wausau HPR Engr, WI [I]
John Valiulis, FM Global, MA [I]
Harold H. Weber, Jr., The Sulphur Inst., DC [U]
(Vote Ltd to NFPA 655)
W. H. White, White Consulting Services, OH [SE]
Rep. TC on Finishing Processes
Alternates
Ted Brown, Int’l Sulphur, Inc., TX [M]
(Alt to J. J. Jennett)
Henry L. Febo, Jr., FM Global, MA [I]
(Alt. to H. Peterkin)
Paul F. Hart, Industrial Risk Insurers, IL [I]
(Alt. to R. W. Nelson)
Gregory I. Hurst, Nat’l Starch & Chemical Co., IN [U]
(Alt. to J. R. Barton)
5
(Alt. to L. K. Underwood)
Bernadette N. Reyes, Safety Consulting Engr, Inc., IL [SE]
(Alt. to C. J. Dahn)
John H. Stratton, Sheet Metal & Air Con Contr Nat’l Assn., VA [M]
(Alt. to G. A. Navas)
Nonvoting
Harry Verakis, U.S. Dept. of Labor, WV
Staff Liaison: Guy R. Colonna
Committee Scope: This Committee shall have primary
responsibility for documents on the prevention, control, and
extinguishment of fires and explosions in the design, construction,
installation, operation and maintenance of facilities and systems
processing or conveying flammable or combustible dusts, gases,
vapors and mists.
This list represents the membership at the time the Committee was
balloted on the text of this edition. Since that time, changes in the
membership may have occurred. A key to classifications is found at the
front of this book.
The Report of the Technical Committee on Handling and
Conveying of Dusts, Vapors, and Gases is presented for adoption.
This Report was prepared by the Technical Committee on
Handling and Conveying of Dusts, Vapors, and Gases , and
proposes for adoption, amendments to NFPA 655, Standard for
Prevention of Sulfur Fires and Explosions
, 1993 edition. NFPA 655-
1993 is published in Volume 7 of the 2000 National Fire Codes and
in separate pamphlet form.
This Report has been submitted to letter ballot of the Technical
Committee on Handling and Conveying of Dusts, Vapors, and
Gases , which consists of 25 voting members. The results of the
balloting, after circulation of any negative votes, can be found in
the report.
 NFPA 655 — May 2001 ROP — Copyright 2000, NFPA
(Log #CP4)
655- 1 - (Entire Document): Accept
SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Handling and Conveying
of Dusts, Vapors, and Gases
RECOMMENDATION : Restructure entire document to comply
with the NFPA Manual of Style as follows:
1. Chapter 1 to contain administrative text only.
2. Chapter 2 to contain only referenced publications cited in the
mandatory portions of the document.
3. Chapter 3 to contain only definitions.
4. All units of measure in document are converted to SI units
with inch/pound units in parentheses.
5. Appendices restructured and renamed as “Annexes.”
SUBSTANTIATION: Editorial restructuring, to conform with the
2000 edition of the NFPA Manual of Style.
COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.
NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 25
VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:
AFFIRMATIVE: 21
ABSTENTION: 1
NOT RETURNED: 3 Hunter, Schwab, Underwood
EXPLANATION OF ABSTENTION:
WEBER, JR: When I withdrew from discussions and left the
telephone conference call meeting on Wednesday, March 21, 2000,
I stated that as The Sulphur Institute’s (TSI) representative on the
committee, it was not appropriate for me to participate in the
development and addition of specifications that were proposed for
inclusion in the Annex to NFPA 655. Further, and in accordance
with TSI’s meeting guidelines, it is not appropriate for me to
participate in activities to establish any standards, whether
ostensibly for safety or other reasons, that could be construed to
have the purpose of eliminating a competitor or a competitor’s
product or reducing competition in the industry.
___________________
(Log #4)
655- 2 - (1-2.2): Accept
SUBMITTER: Ray E. George, Chemithon Corp.
RECOMMENDATION : Revise text as follows:
1-2.2 This standard shall not be intended to prevent the use of
systems, methods, or devices that provide equivalent protection
from fire and explosion, providing that suitable data are is
available to demonstrate equivalency.
SUBSTANTIATION: The word data is the plural of the word
datum. Plural nouns should be matched with plural verbs; i.e.
"are" rather than "is."
COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.
NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 25
VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:
AFFIRMATIVE: 21
ABSTENTION: 1
NOT RETURNED: 3 Hunter, Schwab, Underwood
EXPLANATION OF ABSTENTION:
WEBER, JR: See my Explanation of Abstention on Proposal 655-1
(Log #CP4).
___________________
(Log #2)
655- 3 - (1-4 Course Sizes of Sulfur, Finely Divided Sulfur (New)):
Accept in Principle
SUBMITTER: Ray E. George, Chemithon Corp.
RECOMMENDATION : Add text as follows:
Include definitions for "Coarse Sizes of Sulfur" and "Finely
Divided Sulfur".
SUBSTANTIATION: The transition between "Finely Divided
Sulfur" and "Coarse Sizes of Sulfur" can be inferred from "A-1-4 to
occur at a mean particle size distribution of about 150 um.
However, it is unclear if this is the intent of the standard.
COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle.
Revise the following definitions:
Chapter 3 Definitions
Sulfur Dust (finely divided sulfur). See Combustible Dust.
Retain the existing Annex material related to Sulfur Dust.
Add the following definition:
Combustible Dust. Any finely divided solid materials 420
microns or smaller in diameter (material passing a U.S. No. 40
Standard Sieve) that presents a fire or deflagration hazard.
COMMITTEE STATEMENT: This accomplishes the intent of the
submitter and utilizes a standard term already defined in the
6
Glossary of Terms and already used in the Committee's other
documents.
NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 25
VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:
AFFIRMATIVE: 21
ABSTENTION: 1
NOT RETURNED: 3 Hunter, Schwab, Underwood
EXPLANATION OF ABSTENTION:
WEBER, JR: Although I abstain on all items on this ballot, I
provide the following comments for the Committee’s
consideration on Proposal 655-3 (Log #2).
In 1992, the committee reviewed technical reports of testing
conducted by the U.S. Bureau of Mines (USBM) on sulfur dust.
The first was a letter report dated November 4, 1966, submitted to
the NFPA by Mr. John Nagy, Project Coordinator, Dust and
Ventilation. The second was USBM Report of Investigations 7132
entitled, “Dust Explosibility of Chemicals, Drugs, Dyes, and
Pesticides,” published in 1968. These reports provide test
information and data for sulfur samples.
The U.S. Bureau of Mines conducted explosion testing on sulfur
dust in 1964 that shows the influence of sulfur density on
explosivity. Samples with 99+ percent sulfur had to have more than
95 percent of the particles passing a U.S. No. 325 Standard Sieve to
obtain data on explosivity. When 94 percent sulfur with 6 percent
Fuller’s Earth was used, one hundred percent of the particles had
to pass a U.S. No. 400 Standard Sieve to obtain data on explosivity.
This study clearly shows that changing to a U.S. No. 40 Standard
Sieve (420 microns) is not technically substantiated.
Also, see my Explanation of Abstention on Proposal 655-1 (Log
#CP4).
___________________
(Log #3)
655- 4 - (1-4 Sulfur Dust): Accept in Principle
SUBMITTER: Ray E. George, Chemithon Corp.
RECOMMENDATION : Revise text as follows:
Dust or Sulfur Dust.* Any finely divided solid sulfur that presents
a fire or explosion hazard.
SUBSTANTIATION: In general, the word "dust" is used in the
text of this standard to mean "sulfur dust."
COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle.
COMMITTEE STATEMENT: See Committee Action and
Statement on Proposal 655-3 (Log #2).
NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 25
VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:
AFFIRMATIVE: 20
NEGATIVE: 1
ABSTENTION: 1
NOT RETURNED: 3 Hunter, Schwab, Underwood
EXPLANATION OF NEGATIVE:
VALIULIS: I do not agree that finely divided sulfur will prevent a
fire or explosion hazard.
EXPLANATION OF ABSTENTION:
WEBER, JR: See my Explanation of Abstention on Proposal 655-1
(Log #CP4).
___________________
(Log #1)
655- 5 - (4-3.5): Accept
SUBMITTER: Ray E. George, Chemithon Corp.
RECOMMENDATION : Revise text as follows:
4-3.5* In pits, or sections of tanks, used for melting sulfur, and in
liquid storage tanks which are regularly emptied, cooled and
exposed to air (moisture), the liquid level shall not be permitted
to expose the heating coils. The liquid shall always cover the
heating coils in pits used for melting sulfur.
SUBSTANTIATION: As stated, the usable tank volume can be
reduced to less than 70 percent for horizontal cylindrical storage
tanks, after providing sufficient heating surface by means of
internal steam coils. Molten storage tanks used for continuous
service do not have the potential that exists in temporary storage
containers for the formation of iron sulfide compounds.
Additionally, requiring heating coils to remain below the liquid
level is somewhat at odds with requirements for heated vents and
fill lines.
Iron sulfide formation occurs on steel components only when
sulfur solidifies in the presence of moisture at the surface. Sulfur
solidification does not occur on the heating surfaces of tanks
which are not regularly emptied, cooled, and exposed to air
(moisture). The second sentence in 4-3.5 is redundant.
COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.
 NFPA 655 — May 2001 ROP — Copyright 2000, NFPA
NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 25 (Log #CP3)
VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION: 655- 8 - (A-4-1 and Appendix B): Accept
AFFIRMATIVE: 21 SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Handling and Conveying
ABSTENTION: 1 of Dusts, Vapors, and Gases
NOT RETURNED: 3 Hunter, Schwab, Underwood RECOMMENDATION : Revise NFPA 655, Appendix A-4-1 as
COMMENT ON AFFIRMATIVE: follows:
VALIULIS: The substantiation provides good information A-4-1 The normal handling temperature of liquid sulfur is 250°F
regarding the hazard. Consideration should be given to including to 309°F (121°C to 154°C) which is slightly above the melting point
that text as appendix material. of 246°F (119°C). At the melting point sulfur is a transparent,
EXPLANATION OF ABSTENTION: mobile liquid. As the temperature of the liquid is raised it
WEBER, JR: See my Explanation of Abstention on Proposal 655-1 darkens, becoming deep orange in hue. Up to about 320°F
(Log #CP4). (160°C) the viscosity drops with rising temperature. Above this
point the viscosity increases with rising temperature. At 370°F
___________________ (188°C) the viscosity reaches a tremendously high maximum which
practically prevents it from flowing and the liquid is so intensely
(Log #CP1) colored as to be nearly opaque. Above 370°F (188°C) it again acts
655- 6 - (4-4.1): Accept in a more normal fashion with its viscosity falling somewhat as the
SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Handling and Conveying temperature continues to rise.
of Dusts, Vapors, and Gases At the normal handling temperature of liquid sulfur (250°F to
RECOMMENDATION : Revise 4-4.1 as follows: 309°F (121°C to 154°C)) the vapor concentration above the pure
4-4.1 Protection for covered liquid sulfur storage tanks, pits and sulfur, free of hydrocarbons or hydrogen sulfide, is too low to
trenches shall be by one of the following means: form a flammable mixture in air. While the flash point of liquid
(a) Inert gas system in accordance with NFPA 69, Standard for sulfur varies with purity, it is always higher than the normal
Explosion Prevention Systems. handling temperature. For pure sulfur, the flash point may be as
(b)* Steam extinguishing system capable of delivering 8 lbs/min low as 370°F (188°C) and for relatively impure crude sulfur, the
of steam per 100 cu ft of volume. flash point may be as low as 334°F (168°C).
(c) Rapidly seal the enclosure to exclude air. The relative low ignition temperature of sulfur and the possible
A-4-4.1(b) The steam should preferably be introduced near the presence of hydrogen sulfide are the primary fire and explosion
surface of the molten sulfur. See NFPA 86, Standard for Ovens hazards of liquid sulfur. Impure sulfur (sometimes referred to as
and Furnaces, Appendix E-3. “dark sulfur” contains hydrocarbons, which react slowly with the
SUBSTANTIATION: This recommendation brings the steam liquid sulfur to form hydrogen sulfide. Recovered sulfur, such as
flooding requirement in line with NFPA 86. The recommendation those produced from petroleum gas streams containing the
is based on 1934 FMRC fire test of a gasoline fire where the steam hydrogen sulfide using the Claus Process, often contain dissolved
was applied above the gasoline fire and combustion air was hydrogen sulfide which will be liberated slowly from a quiescent
introduced below the steam injection point. It in essence requires body of liquid sulfur. Agitation of such liquid sulfur will cause
supplying 200 cu ft/min steam for every 100 cu ft of enclosure rapid evolution of hydrogen sulfide, which may create a flammable
volume. For hot enclosures (above 220°F) where the steam is atmosphere within the storage tank. In the temperature range at
injected at the surface of the liquid sulfur, a supply capable of 4 cu which the liquid sulfur is normally handled the lower flammable
ft/min per 100 cu ft of enclosure volume would be satisfactory. limit for hydrogen sulfide is at about 3.4% compared to 4.3% at
This requirement ensures that the available steam supply is room temperature.
adequate to furnish enough steam at a rate sufficient to extinguish Pure sulfur will not generate a flammable atmosphere in the
the fire. normal temperature range of the liquid. Transfer of liquid sulfur
COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. using air pressure should be avoided. If air pressure is applied to
NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 25 the vapor space of an enclosure containing molten sulfur with high
VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION: concentrations of hydrogen sulfide there is a danger that the
AFFIRMATIVE: 21 hydrogen sulfide/air mixture will become flammable. Transfer by
ABSTENTION: 1 pressure should be restricted to using an insert gas. Use of pumps
NOT RETURNED: 3 Hunter, Schwab, Underwood would be the preferred transfer method.
EXPLANATION OF ABSTENTION: Add the following publications to the references in Appendix B.
WEBER, JR: See my Explanation of Abstention on Proposal 655-1 Schicho, C. M., Watson, W. A., Clem, K.R., and Hartley, D.: “A
(Log #CP4). New Safer Method of Sulfur Degassing”, Chemical Engineering
Progress, October 1985, pages 42-44.
___________________ Furno, Aldo L., Martindill, G. H., and Zabetakis, M. G.: “Gas
Explosion Hazards Associated with the Bulk Storage of Molten
(Log #CP2) Sulfur”, U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Mines RI 6185
655- 7 - (A-4-1): Accept (1963)
SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Handling and Conveying Wiewiorwski, T. K. and Touro, F. J.: “The Sulfur-Hydrogen
of Dusts, Vapors, and Gases Sulfide System”, Journal of Physical Chemistry, Vol. 70, pp. 234-239
RECOMMENDATION : Add the following to existing A-4-1: (Jan. No. 1) (1966).
A general specification for molten sulfur is as follows: Lagas, Jan A., et. al., “Understanding the Formation of and
Sulfur Purity, % 99.5% Min Handling of H 2S and SO 2 Emissions from Liquid Sulphur During
Carbon Content, % 0.01% Max Storage and Transportation.”
Ash, % 0.01% Max Handling and Storage of Solid Sulfur. National Safety Council,
Heat loss, volatiles, % 0.01% Max Data Sheet I-612, Rev. 91.
Acidity as H 2SO 4 0.05% Max Handling Liquid Sulfur. National Safety Council, Data Sheet 592,
Fluoride, Selenium, Rev. 93.
Tellurium, Arsenic < 1 ppm each SUBSTANTIATION: The existing material was edited and
Dissolved H 2S and H 2Sx 50 ppm Max rearranged for clarification purposes and some additional
SUBSTANTIATION: This is added to provide general information has been provided.
information on the composition of molten sulfur. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.
COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 25
NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 25 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:
VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION: AFFIRMATIVE: 21
AFFIRMATIVE: 21 ABSTENTION: 1
ABSTENTION: 1 NOT RETURNED: 3 Hunter, Schwab, Underwood
NOT RETURNED: 3 Hunter, Schwab, Underwood EXPLANATION OF ABSTENTION:
EXPLANATION OF ABSTENTION: WEBER, JR: Although I abstain on all items on this ballot, I
WEBER, JR: See my Explanation of Abstention on Proposal 655-1 also provide the following comments for the Committee’s
(Log #CP4). consideration on Proposal 655-8 (A-4-1 and Appendix B), Log
#CP3:
___________________

7
 NFPA 655 — May 2001 ROP — Copyright 2000, NFPA
The first sentence of the first paragraph should be reworded to The first sentence of the second paragraph should read:
read: “At In the normal handling temperature range of liquid sulfur,
“The normal handling temperature of liquid sulfur is 250°F and 250°F and 309°F (121°C to 154°C) the vapor concentration...”.
309°F (121°C to 154°C) 270-290°F (132-143°C) , which is slightly The last sentence of the fourth paragraph should be removed.
above the melting point of about 246°F (119°C).” Also, see my Explanation of Abstention on Proposal 655-1 (Log
This change is consistent with information from Data Sheet 592, #CP4).
Rev. 93, “Handling Liquid Sulfur,” published by the National Safety
Council. ___________________