Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

First draft of the 2020 NEC has been posted and is open for comments

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    First draft of the 2020 NEC has been posted and is open for comments

    Open for public comment until August 30, 2018. Get your input in while you can.

    https://www.nfpa.org/codes-and-stand...ab=nextedition

    #2
    The Terraview interface for submitting a Public Comment on the First Draft appears to be the same as what one would use for submitting a public input. Is that really all there is? There's no way to submitting comments directly in response to the "Committee Statement"?

    cheers, Wayne

    Comment


      #3
      I have not submitted one yet this round but last time you submit a comment just like you did a PI but you have to link your comment to an existing PI or other input. So you can only comment on something that has PI or committee input. In the substantiation, you can refer to the PI if you want to argue a point.

      It's also strange in that you have to read the first draft report in one window and submit comments in another window where you have NFPA 70 open. It's a rocky interface.

      Comment


        #4
        There also does not appear to be an easy way to comment on a PI that was rejected and did not make it into the first draft report.
        Don, Illinois
        (All code citations are 2017 unless otherwise noted)

        Comment


          #5
          Not directly. What you have to do is mark up the same change as the rejected PI, reference that PI, and in the substantiation put in the reasons why the PI should have been accepted. Not the best way I agree, but it's what they gave us.

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by pv_n00b View Post
            Not directly. What you have to do is mark up the same change asCMO the rejected PI, reference that PI, and in the substantiation put in the reasons why the PI should have been accepted. Not the best way I agree, but it's what they gave us.
            Appears to be an intentional attempt to keep the public out of the process. The number of comments for the last cycle were about 50% of the average for the previous few code cycles.

            They are already skirting the ANSI consensus rules with the way they are processing the PIs...they split the CMP into task groups that decide on the panel action, and then the complete CMP just rubber stamps the task group action. This method takes the intended panel diversity out of the system.
            Don, Illinois
            (All code citations are 2017 unless otherwise noted)

            Comment


              #7
              Well, based on what I have heard casually from CMP members and what I see happening in the PI and PC process I don't think all PIs and PCs are reviewed on an even playing field. I think input that comes through one of the many code working groups and input where the author has an ally on the CMP get much better consideration. Most of the code changes as you have pointed out seem to come from these CMP task groups and not from the public. It's possible for someone not on the CMP to get involved in a task group but you have to know someone to get in.

              The switch to TerraView has made it much harder to submit PIs and PCs and probably has reduced public input overall. I should look at how the number of PIs has varied over the last 5 code cycles.

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by pv_n00b View Post
                Well, based on what I have heard casually from CMP members and what I see happening in the PI and PC process I don't think all PIs and PCs are reviewed on an even playing field. I think input that comes through one of the many code working groups and input where the author has an ally on the CMP get much better consideration. Most of the code changes as you have pointed out seem to come from these CMP task groups and not from the public. It's possible for someone not on the CMP to get involved in a task group but you have to know someone to get in.

                The switch to TerraView has made it much harder to submit PIs and PCs and probably has reduced public input overall. I should look at how the number of PIs has varied over the last 5 code cycles.
                I think that the use of "task groups" within the CMP voids or comes very close to voiding the ANSI certification for the NEC. It removes the panel diversity from the process. The small task groups review proposals and then bring them to the full CMP. I have talked to more than one CMP member who has told me that the full CMP just automatically accepts what the small task group has recommended.

                As far as terraview, I think, when it works correctly it has made the process of submitting PIs and comments on accepted PIs easier, but has made the process of submitting comments on rejected PIs much more difficult. Last cycle the comments were about half of what they had been for previous code cycles, and it is my opinion that most of that is because of the process required to find and comment on a rejected PI.

                As I have said before, it appears to me that the new process was intentionally designed to keep the public out of the process.
                Don, Illinois
                (All code citations are 2017 unless otherwise noted)

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by don_resqcapt19 View Post
                  I think that the use of "task groups" within the CMP voids or comes very close to voiding the ANSI certification for the NEC. It removes the panel diversity from the process. The small task groups review proposals and then bring them to the full CMP. I have talked to more than one CMP member who has told me that the full CMP just automatically accepts what the small task group has recommended.

                  As far as terraview, I think, when it works correctly it has made the process of submitting PIs and comments on accepted PIs easier, but has made the process of submitting comments on rejected PIs much more difficult. Last cycle the comments were about half of what they had been for previous code cycles, and it is my opinion that most of that is because of the process required to find and comment on a rejected PI.

                  As I have said before, it appears to me that the new process was intentionally designed to keep the public out of the process.

                  Appears? If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, swims like a duck...
                  Our comedian shamelessly joked about a blackout. Talk about dark humor.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Quack, Quack ...I have to agree. The comment process seems like a waste of time. Submitted public inputs only to have the CMP write there own version of what they think is best. It doesn't appear that the PUBLIC has much say in the process.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by shortcircuit2 View Post
                      Quack, Quack ...I have to agree. The comment process seems like a waste of time. Submitted public inputs only to have the CMP write there own version of what they think is best. It doesn't appear that the PUBLIC has much say in the process.
                      Even worse was that the review of the PIs was done by small task groups within the CMP that do not have the diversity of the full CMP. On most panels the other members just "rubber stamped" the work of task groups that they were not part of.
                      Don, Illinois
                      (All code citations are 2017 unless otherwise noted)

                      Comment


                        #12
                        While the process to submit comments on a failed PI is cumbersome, the process to submit a comment on an accepted change is fairly straight forward. The pubic comment perious ends at the end of the day on August 30th.
                        Don, Illinois
                        (All code citations are 2017 unless otherwise noted)

                        Comment


                          #13
                          So did the full AFCI expansion make it through? I read CMP-2's draft and saw it in there, but was wondering if it's going to be in the '20 code.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by peter d View Post
                            So did the full AFCI expansion make it through? I read CMP-2's draft and saw it in there, but was wondering if it's going to be in the '20 code.
                            The first revision report has no changes for dwelling unit AFCIs. There are major changes in the GFCI requirements. Go to nfpa.org/70, click on next edition and then on First Revision. You can see all of the changes in legislative format (strike through for deletions and underline for new). The one you see when you click on "submit a pubic comment", only has the new code with no indications as to what may have changed.

                            You have a bit over 24 hours to make a comment...comments close at midnight eastern on the 30th.
                            Don, Illinois
                            (All code citations are 2017 unless otherwise noted)

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Originally posted by don_resqcapt19 View Post
                              The first revision report has no changes for dwelling unit AFCIs. There are major changes in the GFCI requirements. Go to nfpa.org/70, click on next edition and then on First Revision. You can see all of the changes in legislative format (strike through for deletions and underline for new). The one you see when you click on "submit a pubic comment", only has the new code with no indications as to what may have changed.

                              You have a bit over 24 hours to make a comment...comments close at midnight eastern on the 30th.
                              Do you know what the changes are? At least the big ones?
                              Our comedian shamelessly joked about a blackout. Talk about dark humor.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X