CMS Waiver for CMT piping

  • Monday, October 05, 2020 9:38 PM
    Quote
    Message # 9285923
    Dane Robertson

    As many of you know, CMS recently sent out a categorical waiver for CMT tubing (see attached). 


    Here is a summary:

    "The 2012 NFPA 99 does not include provisions for the use of CMT, which may be more efficient and economical to install. This may result in unreasonable hardship upon providers and suppliers. The 2018 NFPA 99 established requirements for the installation, inspection, testing, maintenance, performance, and safe practices for CMT that provide protection from related hazards."


    Recently, we had state officials asking about installing this product before this waiver was issued. They said they would not have accepted it without a waiver from CMS.


    My question is, why does this waiver need to be issued? If a more current code is being followed, I would think it is a nonissue unless an AHJ or State officially says otherwise? What guidance can we give CMS designees or State officials regarding similar situations in the future? As an example, does the new code requiring Vacuum filtration HEPA filters (5.1.3.7.4(3)) also need a waiver from CMS?


    Thanks all.


    1 file
  • Tuesday, October 06, 2020 10:01 AM
    Quote
    Reply # 9287012 on 9285923
    Rocky Plotts (Administrator)

    It's a clear path to states not on the 2018 code, such as KY where I am located. Although we did get authorized usage before the CMS document for CMT. If we would have had the CMS document, it would have saved us countless trips to the State Plumbing board. 


    I wouldn't see the vacuum filtration use as an issue for most states (stil on earlier codes) if they want to use it, it just isn't a requirement unless 2018 is enforced. It's not in the same category as the intro of CMT to the industry. The Fed is not requiring us to use CMT for example. 
  • Tuesday, October 06, 2020 3:53 PM
    Quote
    Reply # 9288007 on 9285923
    Jeffrey McBride

    I am on the NFPA 99 PIP technical committee, but I am not speaking for the NFPA. 


    NFPA 99 2018 edition section 5.1.12.3.1.1 "System inspections shall be performed prior to concealing piping distribution systems in walls, floors, ceilings, chases, trenches, underground, or otherwise hidden from view."


    This was in part put into the code to ensure that CMT installations were done correctly per manufacturer's directions by the installer.  If this "Categorical Waiver" is instituted then 5.1.12.3.1 should also be instituted to insure the components have been properly installed.


    Jeff McBride
  • Wednesday, October 07, 2020 12:32 AM
    Quote
    Reply # 9288708 on 9285923
    Dane Robertson

    Thank you for the responses.


    I still have concerns as to the path of least resistance for newer codes than what CMS recognizes. You can't say, this situation is fine but this situation  is not.


    How did this group manage the code differences from NFPA 99 1999 adoption to the adoption of 2012 edition? Did CMS issue waivers on issues like qualifications and axially swagged fittings?
  • Wednesday, October 07, 2020 2:30 PM
    Quote
    Reply # 9290098 on 9285923
    Don Holden

    I think there should be a provision for CMS to allow hospitals to adopt to the latest NFPA version.
  • Wednesday, October 07, 2020 5:02 PM
    Quote
    Reply # 9290417 on 9285923
    Al Moon (Administrator)

    SUBJECT: Categorical Waiver – Corrugated Medical Tubing / CMS


    First please let me say / This is my opinion only.


    If their was ever a topic that The Butterfly / Chaos Theory applies this is it.


    CMS ( the federal government / you know your tax dollars ) adopted the NFPA 99 the 2012 EDTION around July 01, 2016.

    I personally believe that adopting or approving a newer edition of any code every times a new edition is printed would add a great amount of confusion and pure pandemonium (i.e. The Butterfly / Chaos Theory )


    NFPA 99 the 2012 Edition, like all the other older editions of the 99. Has a provision for dealing with newer, effective, safer and better fire resistance items.

    Sorry, I m not going to cut & paste the section. Please look it up - its in.

    Chapter #1 Section #1.4 Equivalency

    NOTE:

    This still has to be documented and also shall be approved by the AHJ before installation and use. Again review and read the full section.


    Now the hard part, in regards to our topic.


    SUBJECT: Categorical Waiver – Corrugated Medical Tubing / CMS.


    As I understand it, CMS has approved the (CMT -Corrugated Medical Tubing) via The Categorical Waiver. Wow that's great news, this is a product that has value and efficacy for our industry.

    BUT the AHJ ( in this case the CMS local group ) still has to be notified and sign off on the product, process and material before the installation. The Equivalency Section in NFPA 99 the 2012 Edition still applies.


    So with the Categorical Waiver from CMS in print and presented to the local CMS group the  Equivalency Code Section should go smoother.

    ( sorry no short cuts in public safety )


    See & Review this again from / at Mr. Robertson first posting:


    The key reading is in the area listed ( Categorical Waiver Process )

    (i.e. its all about the documentation and conforming / yes their are tags & forms)




    Last modified: Wednesday, October 07, 2020 5:35 PM | Al Moon (Administrator)
  • Monday, October 12, 2020 3:36 PM
    Quote
    Reply # 9299554 on 9285923
    Dane Robertson

    Good answer Al. I'll concede to that.


    Just remember......


    Mr. Lawyer: Mr. Verifier, are you telling me that this death could have been prevented but because CMS didn't enforce the 2018 edition, you didn't take a corrective action?

    Mr. Verifier: Yes sir, that is correct.

    Judge: This court rules in favor of the plaintiff. Case dismissed.
  • Tuesday, October 13, 2020 1:15 PM
    Quote
    Reply # 9301396 on 9285923
    Don Holden

    Ha ha I like your answer Dane. Although I don’t think the verifier and the facility would think it was funny in the lawsuit.
  • Wednesday, October 14, 2020 2:11 PM
    Quote
    Reply # 9303917 on 9285923
    Al Moon (Administrator)


    In a study by the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics, only about 7 percent of medical malpractice cases end in a trial in which a jury determines the verdict. That means 93 percent of these types of claims are resolved before a trial. Aug 26, 2020


    In your example ( i would debate ) that after the the lawyer for the plaintiff made this type statement the lawyer for the defendant would cry out OBJECTION and the Judge would gavel down and say OBJECTION SUSTAINED !. 

16339 Kranker Drive, Stilwell, KS 66085

mgpho@me.com