The Electrical Contractor Network

ECN Electrical Forum
Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals

Books, Tools and Test Equipment for Electrical and Construction Trades

Register Now!

Register Now!

We want your input!

Featured:
   

2017 NEC and Related
2017 NEC
Now Available!

   
Recent Posts
Industrail Control Panel bonding per 409.108
by HotLine1
Today at 01:42 PM
Calling all Non-US members!! (Non-US only)
by aussie240
12/07/16 02:39 AM
Photo Upload Tutorial
by DanK
12/06/16 11:35 PM
Sprinklered equipment 26-008
by bigpapa
12/02/16 04:24 PM
On Delay Relay with Auto Reset
by Potseal
12/01/16 09:59 AM
New in the Gallery:
12.5A through 0.75mm▓ flex (just out of curiosity)
Shout Box

Top Posters (30 Days)
gfretwell 13
HotLine1 10
Texas_Ranger 8
sparkyinak 8
Potseal 6
Who's Online
2 registered (Webmaster, LongRunner), 227 Guests and 5 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 >
Topic Options
Rate This Topic
#100512 - 11/28/06 02:47 PM Has the NEC lost focus?
renosteinke Offline
Cat Servant
Member

Registered: 01/22/05
Posts: 5305
Loc: Blue Collar Country
Another discussion - about AFCI's - raised the assertion that the NEC will lose respect as it becomes just another marketing tool for manufacturers.

Other comments suggested that the code writing proces has become corrupt, with manufacturers twisting the code for their own ends.

We've certainly seen the NEC drift into design areas of late.

Is the day near when the NEC is considered but another worthless 'infomercial?' Does it try to be too many things to too many folks? Do we really need to update it every three years?

Have we reached the point where we can hear mary Jane Amp cry out "let them run romex!" ?

Top
2014 / 2011 NEC & Related Books and Study Guides
#100513 - 11/28/06 02:58 PM Re: Has the NEC lost focus?
HotLine1 Offline

Member

Registered: 04/03/02
Posts: 6805
Loc: Brick, NJ USA
Reno:
I heard a few comments from area EC's and some AHJ's at meetings related to the "Bubble Cover" mfg's possibly influencing that requirement.

As to the AFCI's, New Jersey did not adopt the AFCI requirements up to and including 2005 NEC, which was effective as of 11/01/06.

The only place I have seen AFCI CB's is in the big box store, and installed by one homeowner on his whirlpool tub.

I keep telling the homeowners that apply for permits to DIY, that the NEC is NOT a design tool, but that may change.

Good thread!

John
_________________________
John

Top
#100514 - 11/28/06 05:45 PM Re: Has the NEC lost focus?
ITO Offline
Member

Registered: 11/26/06
Posts: 341
Loc: Texas
The book reads like it was written by lawyers.

[This message has been edited by ITO (edited 11-30-2006).]
_________________________
101┬░ Rx = + /_\

Top
#100515 - 11/28/06 06:21 PM Re: Has the NEC lost focus?
mister h Offline
Member

Registered: 05/26/06
Posts: 20
Loc: erie, pa. usa
Good comment,


Ken
_________________________
ken

Top
#100516 - 11/28/06 09:49 PM Re: Has the NEC lost focus?
mxslick Offline
Member

Registered: 10/24/04
Posts: 785
Loc: Atomic City, ID USA
Reno, thank you for bringing this to life here.

In the arc fault thread It was asked what could be done about this kind of issue.

I feel that to totally exclude manufacturers from the Code Making Panels (CMP)'s, would be a mistake. They can provide valuable input as to what is available or possible in terms of equipment, materials and upcoming technology.

However, the conditions of thier participation MUST be changed so that they can only act in an advisory capacity, with absolutely NO VOTING POWER AT ALL!!!

This should be the first major change.

Secondly, it seems that, by following the threads on proposed rules and submissions by EC's and others in the commentary stages, that the CMPs, like most government-type bodies, tend to ignore the input of the folks in the real world who have to install/repair/design and inspect electrical systems. thus making such installs, etc. far more expensive with no tangible increase in safety.

Like I said in the arc fault thread, the current trend will cause more people to ignore the draconian Code and attempt thier own fixes, with predictable results.

And I agree with reno that the drift to areas clearly regarded as design issues, in direct violation of art. 90.1c which specifically points out that "This Code is not intended as a design specification nor an instruction manual for untrained persons."
(Bold emphasis mine.)

 Quote:
Does it try to be too many things to too many folks? Do we really need to update it every three years?


Yes and absolutely not.
_________________________
Stupid should be painful.

Top
#100517 - 11/29/06 04:07 AM Re: Has the NEC lost focus?
SteveFehr Offline
Member

Registered: 03/19/05
Posts: 1192
Loc: Chesapeake, VA
 Quote:
And I agree with reno that the drift to areas clearly regarded as design issues, in direct violation of art. 90.1c which specifically points out that "This Code is not intended as a design specification nor an instruction manual for untrained persons."
(Bold emphasis mine.)
It may not be intended as such, but this is exactly what it is. Many installations require no design at all outside of compliance with NEC- if that doesn't should "design guide!" I don't know what does. If you look at any document that does purport to being design specs (MIL-HDBKs and the like), you'll find they're remarkably similar.

Top
#100518 - 11/29/06 04:16 AM Re: Has the NEC lost focus?
resqcapt19 Offline
Member

Registered: 11/10/00
Posts: 2209
Loc: IL
The issue of getting people on the code panels that do not represent big organizations is the cost. All of the expenses and lost work time has to be covered by the panel member. If you are representing a big organization or company, those parties cover the costs. In many cases the organization that covers the costs gives you "directed votes" on some issues.
Don
_________________________
Don(resqcapt19)

Top
#100519 - 11/29/06 05:11 AM Re: Has the NEC lost focus?
George Little Offline
Member

Registered: 01/18/04
Posts: 1492
Loc: Michigan USA
I agree with Don on financial backing for code panel members. I do think that the makeup of the code panels seems fair and not loaded with manufacturers reps. Steve is correct in that the code book is not a design manual for "untrained persons" but I do believe it is a book of rules for design professionals (excluding interior decorators)and for the most part their projects use the code book as their guide. As for updating every 3 years - I support that 100%. We have to remember that the code book is a reactive document and when the insurance companies and manufacturers see a problem they address it with new products and rules. GFCI's, thermo protection in recessed lights, bubble covers (yes bubble covers) GFPE, PPE and AFCI's are examples of this type of reaction. Technology moves so fast we do need to review the code every 3 years for sure. So this is the other side of the issue for this thread. Go ahead hollar at me in uppercase.

Edit for typos

[This message has been edited by George Little (edited 11-29-2006).]
_________________________
George Little

Top
#100520 - 11/29/06 07:49 PM Re: Has the NEC lost focus?
NORCAL Offline
Member

Registered: 09/25/02
Posts: 807
Were the AFCIs and bubble covers added to requirements just to drum up more biz to their respective manufacturers?

Top
#100521 - 11/29/06 08:09 PM Re: Has the NEC lost focus?
George Little Offline
Member

Registered: 01/18/04
Posts: 1492
Loc: Michigan USA
I hope the statistics will show that AFCI's reduce losses due to fires. I'm not sold on the bubble cover unless it prevents nuisance tripping. Only time will tell I guess.
_________________________
George Little

Top
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 >



ECN Electrical Forums - sponsored by Electrical Contractor Network - Electrical and Code Related Discussion for Electrical Contractors, Electricians, Inspectors, Instructors, Engineers and other related Professionals