Such a view would, it seems to me, go against the '60% rule' rule regarding remodels. That is, the idea that the value of the remodel (or part thereof) has to be at least 60% the cost of a complete re-do for the new codes to apply.
I even think this rule is spelled out in the UBC.
Perhaps it's one of creation's never-ending battles, like the one of 'good vs. evil,' but I see a contstant attempt by various governmental minions to extend their reach - despite our having a starting point (the Constitution) that makes clear that government is to be quite limited in scope.
While it's bad enough when someone feels government no longer needs limitations when THEY'RE the ones in charge, what's truly horrifying are those who consider themselves on some holy mission.
If I haven't said this before, I'll say it now: "Model" codes have expanded way beyond the 'basic minimum required for safety,' and ought not be automatically adopted, in full, at the publishers' discretion.
Don't simply 'hop on the bandwagon.' NECA recently asserted that Ohio was the only state that had not adopted the NEC. This is not correct. Nevada has not, as a state, adopted ANY version of the NEC; such matters are determined locally. More to the point, NECA and the NFPA were most certainly NOT pointing out in early 2008 that 'no one had adopted it - and therefore you should avoid the 2008.'
Another argument is that 'we have to justify why we are not accepting the national industry-wide standard.' Balderdash! None of those national groups are the AHJ- you are! It is they who need to justify themselves to you - not the other way around.
Now, if someone can explain just how safety is advanced by requiring the ceiling-mounted receptacle for the garage door opener to be tamper resistant, I'm all ears.
