1 members (ale348),
302
guests, and
14
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,392
Member
|
imho, there are many whom simply never heard the term 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it' involved
the majority of what is addressed seems clerical, definitional, or that which still remains terminology challenged
or that which futher exasperates exceptions to exceptions...
to insinuate that much is done via 11th hour turnabout basically trashes any methodical order, and reeks of the 'squeeky wheel' scenario
Q~ do manufactures reps hold filibusters??
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 197
Member
|
The ' consensus ' method of the NFPA for the NEC is IMHO is the best method for updating the NEC. It does have it's faults, but anyone who takes the time to make proposals will have that proposal considered by the Code Making Panel (CMP) during the proposal stage [ Report On Proposal (ROP)] portion. Then during the comment stage [ Report On Comment (ROC)] anyone who takes the time can support the proposal, disagree with the proposal, suggest re-wording of the proposal and the CMP will address those comments. I really do not know what happens during the May meeting ( NFPA World Fire Safety Congress and Exposition ) stage. It seems then, many of the actions of the ROP and ROC are reversed.
I still believe the NFPA method for CODE actions is much better than having a 'handful' people decide what 'their' CODE will be.
IMHO, the manufactures, utilities and a few others do have a lot of proposals for the NEC, but there is the CMP to watch over the procedure.
On the other hand, what if one of the 'handful' people on the other CODES planning has a HUGE interest in a particular method, etc., there is not a CMP to keep an 'eye' on the proceedings.
Support the NEC !
Gwz
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,148
Member
|
Bill, The example that I am most familiar with is the rule that says you can't use a single screw to support a receptacle. I made the original proposal (18-51 for the '90 code) on that subject and it was accepted by all of the panel members in the ROP(TCR), (comments 18-26 through 18-31) but rejected by all in the ROC(TCD). There have been many others over the years. Just look at any of the code changes books that are published early. These early publications are written based on the ROP and there are always things that change in the ROC and even at the May meeting. I'm hoping that the ROC will accept my proposed change on the term equipment grounding conductor. CMP 5 accepted my proposal, but was one vote short of the required 2/3s majority. Comments on this proposal may result in a change. We all have a voice in the code writting process and if you don't like what you see in the ROP, you should submitt a comment. Don
Don(resqcapt19)
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,391
Moderator
|
Don, I would be happy to support your proposal.
I have always figured the CMP would think I was not qualified to comment on code proposals and any comments I would send would land in the round file, (trash barrel)
How do I properly make comment on your proposal and where do I send it?
Bob Badger Construction & Maintenance Electrician Massachusetts
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 681
Member
|
There are a lot of CMP members who would welcome comments from the people in the field, they are not looking for rocket scientists, and they know that many in the field are very savy. Go to www.NFPA.org to find out how to make a comment. The last date of accepted comments is October 31st. Piere
Pierre Belarge
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,391
Moderator
|
Well I went NFPA.org and found it to be not user friendly, what a surprise. Could you be little more specific, there is so much information that for me to poke around pdf files different pages etc. with a dial up connection I could be looking for a long time. Oh and I am not sure how to take the "Rocket Scientist" remark. LOL Bob
Bob Badger Construction & Maintenance Electrician Massachusetts
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 4,116 Likes: 4
OP
Member
|
Bob, You'll find the ROPs on the following page as well as a comment form that you can print out to send in. http://www.nfpa.org/nec/2005_NECR/2005ROP/2005rop.asp You may also be able to submit a comment online; http://forums.nfpa.org:8081/pcsubmit/pctop.html Bill
Bill
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,391
Moderator
|
Thank you Bill and Joe, I have saved the pdf file and printed a form out.
I may have more questions about filling it out.
It looks like the form is to make a new proposal, how do I make it clear that I want to support someone else's proposal.
Looking at the list Joe put up it seems Don's proposal is known as 5-1.
Bob Badger Construction & Maintenance Electrician Massachusetts
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 2,749
Member
|
Please Download the NFPA 2005 NEC® Report on Proposals (ROP), Report on Comments (ROC), and the draft of the 2005 National Electrical Code Download the "NFPA FORM FOR COMMENTS ON 2005 NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE® REPORT ON PROPOSALS" INSTRUCTIONS — PLEASE READ CAREFULLY Type or print legibly in black ink. Use a separate copy for each comment. Limit each comment to a SINGLE section. All comments must be received by NFPA by 5 p.m., EDST, Friday, October 31, 2003, to be considered for the 2005 National Electrical Code. Comments received after 5:00 p.m., EDST, Friday, October 31, 2003, will be returned to the submitter. If supplementary material (photographs, diagrams, reports, etc.) is included, you may be required to submit sufficient copies for all members and alternates of the technical committee. Draft: http://www.nfpa.org/nec/2005_NECR/2005_necr.asp Download Comment Form: http://joetedesco.com/nec/NEC05Comment.pdf
Joe Tedesco, NEC Consultant
|
|
|
Posts: 28
Joined: February 2011
|
|
|
|