ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals
ECN Shout Chat
ShoutChat
Recent Posts
Increasing demand factors in residential
by gfretwell - 03/28/24 12:43 AM
Portable generator question
by Steve Miller - 03/19/24 08:50 PM
Do we need grounding?
by NORCAL - 03/19/24 05:11 PM
240V only in a home and NEC?
by dsk - 03/19/24 06:33 AM
Cordless Tools: The Obvious Question
by renosteinke - 03/14/24 08:05 PM
New in the Gallery:
This is a new one
This is a new one
by timmp, September 24
Few pics I found
Few pics I found
by timmp, August 15
Who's Online Now
1 members (CoolWill), 250 guests, and 13 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
#85466 07/07/03 07:05 PM
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,148
R
Member
The 2005 ROP is available for download now. Get started on your comments!!
Don


Don(resqcapt19)
Stay up to Code with the Latest NEC:


>> 2023 NEC & Related Reference & Exam Prep
2023 NEC & Related Reference & Study Guides

Pass Your Exam the FIRST TIME with the Latest NEC & Exam Prep

>> 2020 NEC & Related Reference & Study Guides
 

#85467 07/07/03 08:46 PM
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 4,116
Likes: 4
Member
Don,

If a proposal was rejected because supporting evidence did not acompany it can it be provided now with comments? Or is it too late for that?

Bill

[This message has been edited by Bill Addiss (edited 07-07-2003).]


Bill
#85468 07/07/03 09:03 PM
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 163
D
Member
...just slightly off topic -

Don - I had heard NFPA was going to provide access to older ROPs/ROCs via the internet.

Is this true? If so, what kind of timetable before these are available?

#85469 07/07/03 09:23 PM
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,148
R
Member
Bill,
I'm not sure, but I think that you can submit supporting evidence in the comment stage. I know that you cannot submit new or substantially changed wording, but as long as it supports the original proposal, they should consider it.

Dana,
I haven't heard that the older ROPs and ROCs were going to be placed online. It would be a good idea.

Don


Don(resqcapt19)
#85470 07/07/03 11:11 PM
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 4,116
Likes: 4
Member
Don,

My reason for asking is that I had submitted a proposal for an Exception to 210.8(B)(3) that would allow a Receptacle behind an Appliance (ie: Refrigerator) in Commercial Kitchen to be non-GFCI protected.
It was rejected for lack of substantiation.

My "substantiation" was that GFCI protection is not required behind Refrigerators in Dwelling Units and it is already recognized in 525.23(B) that some cooking and refrigeration equipment is incompatible with GFCI protection and therefore not required by that section. I thought that an established code section would provide substantiation for a proposal that (I thought) just asks for some consistancy among sections.

What are your thoughts? Was my reasoning flawed?

Bill

[This message has been edited by Bill Addiss (edited 07-07-2003).]


Bill
#85471 07/08/03 06:04 AM
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 681
P
Member
Hello Bill

For other than an appliance, what would the need for a receptacle be? Such as behind a refridgerator, which is not really accessible anyway, is it?

Pierre


Pierre Belarge
#85472 07/08/03 10:20 AM
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,148
R
Member
Bill,
Sometimes the CMPs are real picky about what they will accept. The nondwelling unit kitchen GFCI requirement has generated a number of proposals. I don't think that this issue will be completely resolved this code cycle.
Don


Don(resqcapt19)
#85473 07/08/03 10:34 AM
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 4,116
Likes: 4
Member
Pierre,

I'm not sure what you mean.
I thought that pointing to something already established/conceded in another area of the same standard would be a good substantiation, and an opportunity to get rid of another inconsistancy.

Bill

[This message has been edited by Bill Addiss (edited 07-08-2003).]


Bill
#85474 07/08/03 11:18 AM
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 4,116
Likes: 4
Member
Don,

I thought it was a good argument just on the basis of existing code sections. What do you think?

Bill


Bill
#85475 07/08/03 12:11 PM
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,148
R
Member
Bill,
I think that should be good enough, but apparently the CMP doesn't.
Don


Don(resqcapt19)
Page 1 of 2 1 2

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5