NEC and State of the Art

[treymorgan]

As we know, the state of Florida is still using the 2008 NEC. As a professional engineer, I had specified that the installation shall meet NEC 2011. During a plan review, I was instructed to change that to NEC 2008.

My opinion is that the latest NEC is state of the art and is the proper reference, regardless of what edition has been accepted

For example, the 2014 NEC now requires two exits for electric rooms with an 800A service where is used to be required for 1200A services.

My opinion is that I would be negligent if I did not design to the state of art. What if someone got killed because they could not get out of the room and I knew better.

Another example is the expanded use of arc fault devices. If I knew the state of art, but chose not to use it, I could be held liable.

Of course, there would have to be an attorney who know the code.

 

[augie47]

Just an uniformed opinion, but I don't see where any liability could be in order as long as the adopted Code was used.
Keeping in mind that the Code is a minimum standard, designs often go above and beyond.
I see a pitfall in universally designing to a Code that has not been adopted as occasionally requirements are lessened and you would not want to put yourself in a position of specifying a requirement less than the adopted one.

 

[suemarkp]

There are also things you're allowed to do in the 2011 or 2014 that are not allowed in 2008. One example is NM cable in residential outbuildings. In 2008 and 2011, it must be behind a 15 minute rated fire barrier. In 2014, it can remain exposed.

So if you did this under the 2014 rules, the inspector may shoot you down because that isn't allowed.

What is your role - requirements, designer, reviewer, or implementer? I specify all kinds of things that are not code required because I think it is the better way to do it (keeping in mind cost too). To me, the code book you'll be making them adhere too would be for all requirements that are not specified. Example - you may specify a wire size larger than normal. If you don't specify, you'll probably get the code minimum wire size pulled.

You may also have difficulty in finding designers or implementers who are fully familiar with the 2011 or 2014 NEC if that version is not required yet in their area. Here in WA we skipped the 2011 (are on 2008 now and will jump to 2014 soon if not already). So I didn't pay much attention to what was in the 2011 book.

 

[charlie b]

My opinion is that the latest NEC is state of the art and is the proper reference, regardless of what edition has been accepted.

I do not share that opinion. Specifically, I would not call the latest NEC the "state of the art." Instead, I would call it the "present set of requirements as enacted into law." Those are the minimums that you and I must apply to our designs. We can do more if we wish, and if the owner is willing to pay the differences in cost, and if the local authorities have no objections. It appears that your local authorities objected to the blanket application of rules that had not been adopted. I agree with their stance. Since the code is not in force, they will not have been required to get training on the changes. It would be asking too much of them to force them to verify that your design meets the requirements of a document they have not yet read.

 

[charlie b]

Here in WA we skipped the 2011 (are on 2008 now and will jump to 2014 soon if not already).

I understand we get the 2014 this coming July.

So I didn't pay much attention to what was in the 2011 book.

I had to pay attention to 2011, since several of my clients were in locations that use that version. It is a bit confusing going back and forth through several editions, depending on which project I was dealing with.

 

[texie]

As we know, the state of Florida is still using the 2008 NEC. As a professional engineer, I had specified that the installation shall meet NEC 2011. During a plan review, I was instructed to change that to NEC 2008.

My opinion is that the latest NEC is state of the art and is the proper reference, regardless of what edition has been accepted

For example, the 2014 NEC now requires two exits for electric rooms with an 800A service where is used to be required for 1200A services.

My opinion is that I would be negligent if I did not design to the state of art. What if someone got killed because they could not get out of the room and I knew better.

Another example is the expanded use of arc fault devices. If I knew the state of art, but chose not to use it, I could be held liable.

Of course, there would have to be an attorney who know the code.

The AHJ adopts the version that they see fit and we have to adhere to that version. One issue that would be a problem with using a version newer than the adopted version are the cases when a given practice in the new version is less stringent than the adopted version. Then you would have a situation where the EC and/or designer would want to pick and choose between the versions that best suite them. It would be chaos.

On another note, take another look at the new requirements in 110.26(C). You can still have 1 door on 800 amp but it has to open out and have listed panic hardware. This has confused many.

 

[GoldDigger]

If you have specific concerns based on more restrictive changes to 2011 or 2014, you are free to write them into the contract specifications. Just do not expect the AHJ's inspector to enforce them.

Tapatalk!

 

[petersonra]

I think you should reference whatever code is currently in use in the jurisdiction where the equipment is going.

 

[fmtjfw]

I always used the newest

I always used the newest

When I worked as an electrician in schools my job description included "must follow the National Electric Code". I always worked against the newest code, not the adopted code for two reasons:

1) The newer codes often contained more requirements that appeared to enhance safety.

2) We were not inspected, so there was no problem concerning a confused inspector.

 

[dereckbc]

While I understand your passion, there is no negligence on your part or anyone else following the adopted code for the area being worked in. There are areas here in TX still following 2002 code which sparkies really like because they do not have to go to the expense of AFCI.

There is nothing wrong if you specify 2014 code but remember this. Your competition will likely beat you out of a bid using an older still compliant code. Each code cycle brings and adds on expense, and I bet your competition is fully aware of that and will use it against you. As others have pointed out 2014 is not the state of the art or better, it is just more expensive to implement.