2029 Public Inputs

don_resqcapt19

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Illinois
Occupation
retired electrician
The submission of Public Inputs to make changes in the 2029 code will close at 5pm, Eastern time on April 9, 2026.

The closing date is typically in September, but it is much earlier this cycle to give NFPA staff more time for the complete re-organization of the NEC...pretty much nothing will be in the same location as it is now. You can check Informative Annex L in the 2026 code for the proposed chapter and section layout. While there may be some minor changes from Annex L, the general idea is set in stone and will not be changed.
 
The submission of Public Inputs to make changes in the 2029 code will close at 5pm, Eastern time on April 9, 2026.

The closing date is typically in September, but it is much earlier this cycle to give NFPA staff more time for the complete re-organization of the NEC...pretty much nothing will be in the same location as it is now. You can check Informative Annex L in the 2026 code for the proposed chapter and section layout. While there may be some minor changes from Annex L, the general idea is set in stone and will not be changed.

I appreciate your updates on these topics. I don't have a 2026 codebook yet, but what are they changing for layout? Never mind, just looked at the free access 26 from NFPA so I could check out the annex. That is absolutely insane to completely reorganize the book. Anyone who works with the code (i.e. the customer) knows where to find stuff now. This wonderful idea is from NFPA and not from the CMPs right? Its going to cost millions of dollars for every manual, publication, text book, etc to get updated with new code references. Absolute lunacy.

ETA: Apparently since I don't use an email service like outlook, I can't email them from the link on the feedback page as the mailto link doesn't work. Does anyone have the email address?
 
@don_resqcapt19
Where are "meta" comments on the process to be sent in the process?

---------------------
My concern is that like Football Jersey numbers, there will be overlap over time.
Take a controversial section like 210.8(F) -- what if the new code book places some other topic at number 210.8?
Consider the conversation confusion that will result in forms and at field check.

Could we at least get a promise to retire all the current 2026 section numbers, and start fresh at 1000 ?
Or maybe negative section numbers :) ?
 
so submit it!
Please forgive me I am new to this but it seems your on one of these code input committees, don't take this the wrong way but do they really take a proposal from your average electrician does that ever get thru?
Even if a working electrician with a family spends unpaid hours to research and draft a decent proposal, to yeah say bring some stuff back to the 05' code,
I imagine this stuff being sorted out long in advance over email with inspector associations, union bosses, UL, corporate lobbyists or industry reps as they are called then the votes are sealed over 18 holes drinks and dinner at some exclusive golf club the day before the voting.
 
Its going to cost millions of dollars for every manual, publication, text book, etc to get updated with new code references.
Actually it will generate millions of dollars for every manual, publication, text book, etc to get updated.
Then all the test prep, code classes JW's, inspectors need to pay to take to learn the layout, Its a windfall for the CEU industry they will be rolling in the dough.
 
Please forgive me I am new to this but it seems your on one of these code input committees, don't take this the wrong way but do they really take a proposal from your average electrician does that ever get thru?
Even if a working electrician with a family spends unpaid hours to research and draft a decent proposal, to yeah say bring some stuff back to the 05' code,
I imagine this stuff being sorted out long in advance over email with inspector associations, union bosses, UL, corporate lobbyists or industry reps as they are called then the votes are sealed over 18 holes drinks and dinner at some exclusive golf club the day before the voting.
I am not on any Code Making Panel and never have been. I am a retired electrician. I have been submitting changes since the 1984 cycle and have had 30-40 of my changes become part of the code. Every Public Input that is submitted is reviewed and acted on and every action requires a panel statement that tells you why the panel took the action that they did.

There is no advance work...the Code Making Panels do not even see the Public Inputs until after the closing date.

Some people and groups do work together to submit Public Inputs.

The first part of the process is that the Public Inputs are reviewed by a task group of CMP members. That task group works up a recommendation for the Public Input...Typically "resolve" (reject), "accept" (where the Public Input is accepted word for word) or "reject but see" where the PI is accepted but not exactly as worded. The task groups are Zoom or Teams meetings and not in person. Once or twice a week over a number of weeks, and typically one to two hours. You can sit in on these meeting with a request to NFPA, but you can only watch and listen. In some cases with the permission of the task group chair you would be permitted to speak.

At the actual Code Make Panel Meeting, the task group chairs present their recommendations and the complete panel discusses and votes on the PI. These meetings are in person and are open to the public, but they are not online. They are much more formal and public participation in the actual panel meeting is very limited.
The first draft panel meetings are Sept 22, through Oct 3, 2027. Each of the 18 panels is assigned a number of days to process their public inputs based on how many inputs need to be processed .The result of that vote becomes what you will see in the First Draft Report that will be published June 10th of 2027. The First Draft Report will be open for public comment until July 29, 2027. The Second Draft Report will be published March 17, 2028.

There are some panel members who represent organizations such as NEMA and other that have directed votes..that is the organization they represent specifies how they will vote.

Sure there are discussions between the panel members at dinner and in the bars after their panel session has closed, pretty much like any other business meeting.
 
Last edited:
Actually it will generate millions of dollars for every manual, publication, text book, etc to get updated.
Then all the test prep, code classes JW's, inspectors need to pay to take to learn the layout, Its a windfall for the CEU industry they will be rolling in the dough.
I think millions is off by a couple of powers of 10
 
Where are "meta" comments on the process to be sent in the process?
no idea what that means.
Could we at least get a promise to retire all the current 2026 section numbers, and start fresh at 1000 ?
That would make the process even more difficult to understand for the code user. In most cases even with the rules in a new chapter and article, the section numbers will remain as found in the 2026 code.
 
I agree with Don others on here whom are just regular electricians, educators, inspectors and engineers have had PI's go thru, I have had a few over the last decade mostly minor stuff. @wwhitney and a few other forum members have also had a few.
I also encourage all of you to take the time and make a PI. @wwhitney showed me even making a PI and a getting rejection can also be informative.
 
even making a PI and a getting rejection can also be informative.
The panel statement from one of my resolved (rejected) 2023 PIs was used at an IAEI section meeting because the panel statement clarified the rule.
In my opinion, when it comes to code language interpretation, the only thing that trumps a panel statement is a Formal Interpretation.
 
no idea what that means.
"meta" as in "metadata" or data about data.
A meta comment is not about a specific section, but about the process itself.

That would make the process even more difficult to understand for the code user. In most cases even with the rules in a new chapter and article, the section numbers will remain as found in the 2026 code.
Ah, then the code will no longer be numerically sequential.
That's an interesting tradeoff.

I will comment that old section numbers could be formally "retired" so new code can't end up with an old number.
That's easier if the sections no longer have to be in a particular order.
 
Actually it will generate millions of dollars for every manual, publication, text book, etc to get updated.
Then all the test prep, code classes JW's, inspectors need to pay to take to learn the layout, Its a windfall for the CEU industry they will be rolling in the dough.
I'm glad I resigned from my apprenticeship teaching this year.
 
Top