ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals
ECN Shout Chat
Top Posters(30 Days)
Potseal 11
Recent Posts
600 KW 120/208 3 Phase Y protection
by Yooperup. 07/21/17 09:27 AM
1913 American Electrician's Handbook
by gfretwell. 07/20/17 01:08 PM
Green House wiring
by ghost307. 07/20/17 09:10 AM
Permit Snafus...AHJs and Contractors Jump in
by HotLine1. 07/18/17 08:06 PM
New in the Gallery:
SE cable question
Popular Topics(Views)
239,182 Are you busy
174,577 Re: Forum
167,015 Need opinion
Who's Online Now
1 registered members (gfretwell), 37 guests, and 11 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
#22858 - 03/05/03 10:19 PM Arbitrary Numbers from NFPA  
txsparky  Offline
Member
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 552
Magnolia,.Texas U.S.A.
Is anyone watching the NFPA getting grilled by 60 Minutes on why sprinklers arent required on a building occupancy of 299 but is required for an occupancy of 300.They(NFPA)don't have an answer or any data to support the 300 breaking point.

Kinda reminds you of the "42" circuit panel doesn't it?


Donnie

Work Gear for Electricians and the Trades

#22859 - 03/05/03 11:19 PM Re: Arbitrary Numbers from NFPA  
nesparky  Offline
Member
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 642
omaha,ne
The code commmittes made a choice when writing those code sections.
Sometime those choices look bad when later actions occur.
Balancing reasonable safety standards vs costs will always be a subject for discussion.
You can NOT legislate against a foolish action(s). Fools and those who do not think of consequences of thier actions will always cause injuries,death and damage- just give them time. [Linked Image]


ed

#22860 - 03/06/03 08:53 AM Re: Arbitrary Numbers from NFPA  
Electricmanscott  Offline
Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,457
Holden, MA USA
nesparky, the point is they could not say how they came up with the number 300. It seems like a number pulled out of the air. This seem to be the method of operation sometimes.


#22861 - 03/06/03 10:22 AM Re: Arbitrary Numbers from NFPA  
txsparky  Offline
Member
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 552
Magnolia,.Texas U.S.A.
nesparky,
I know that you can't legislate against foolish actions.I was trying to point out that some codes seem to have no rhyme or reason.Take for example 250.140 which allows type SE bare conductor to be used as a grounded conductor in existing range and dryer installations,but not a bare conductor in type NM. Hello,bare is bare,no matter what type of cable it is in! Where is the logic in it?
I feel that an organization that began in 1896 should base it's codes on past data and have something to back up their reasoning.Don't just tell me that thats the way it is and thats how it's going to be.Come on,they have had 106 yrs to come up with these codes and substantiate the reasoning behind them.
Having said that,I still feel the code works,just don't care for all of the grey areas.I don't want to hear someone say that we use that number because we always have.Tell me what the previous CMP that made the rule based it on.


Donnie

#22862 - 03/06/03 10:33 AM Re: Arbitrary Numbers from NFPA  
rowdyrudy  Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 169
Mascoutah, IL USA
txsparky: You are very correct regarding no ryme or reason items. Some excerpts from court decisions on the NFPA 70 are:
"....no factual data to support this contention."
"....no substantiation has been submitted."
"....no knowledge of fire loss data to support rule." This one was testimony by a NFPA committee member.
So, are some of the sections inserted in the code without anything in support? Yes!
Could we do without the NEC? NO!
Rowdy


#22863 - 03/06/03 10:39 AM Re: Arbitrary Numbers from NFPA  
jdevlin  Offline
Member
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 402
welland ontario canada
And if the number was 200 someone would ask what about 199.


#22864 - 03/06/03 11:20 AM Re: Arbitrary Numbers from NFPA  
txsparky  Offline
Member
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 552
Magnolia,.Texas U.S.A.
Quote
And if the number was 200 someone would ask what about 199.


So, why not just explain how you arrived at that number.If nothing else,admit that they picked it at random and that they will assess it further as data is compiled.

[This message has been edited by txsparky (edited 03-06-2003).]


Donnie

#22865 - 03/06/03 10:04 PM Re: Arbitrary Numbers from NFPA  
nesparky  Offline
Member
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 642
omaha,ne
All I am saying is that when this or any section of a code is written, a decision was made. That decision was what that section of code should read and how it was worded. Sometimes committees make decisions that make no sense later but seemed good at the time. There are many reasons this happens. If a commitee later cannot justify why a decision was reached, you can bet that not everyone was on the same page and there was some pressure to make a decision.
When something happens to make people ask questions, committees can look bad.
Still when used properly, it's still the best code making system we have. Far from perfect and can be worked on.


ed

#22866 - 03/07/03 01:01 AM Re: Arbitrary Numbers from NFPA  
George  Offline
Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 375
The NFPA does not make law. The body that adopted the code as law should have been asked to justify its decisions.

That includes the AHJ, the police, and the fire departments as they are the chief advisors of the adopting body.

The NFPA made the decision becasue it was a reasonably safe compromise.

Before the fire how many of you had lobbied for a lower number? (retorical)


#22867 - 03/07/03 04:02 PM Re: Arbitrary Numbers from NFPA  
Joe Tedesco  Offline
Member
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 2,749
Boston, Massachusetts USA


Joe Tedesco, NEC Consultant

Page 1 of 2 1 2

Member Spotlight
mxslick
mxslick
Atomic City, ID USA
Posts: 803
Joined: October 2004
Show All Member Profiles 
Featured:

2017 NEC and Related
2017 NEC
Now Available!

Shout Box
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0
Page Time: 0.021s Queries: 15 (0.004s) Memory: 0.8174 MB (Peak: 0.9928 MB) Zlib enabled. Server Time: 2017-07-21 18:44:42 UTC