I’m going to take Don at his word.
As for the NEC being free (the physical book) or at a highly reduced cost, that isn’t something I can support. As far as I know it’s still free to view online?
There was a comment about a lot of it being common sense, but sense isn’t that common.
The NEC has value for me, and I imagine it costs a lot of money to put it together. While the majority of my work is repetitive, I’m always doing some oddball job I’m not familiar with the requirements on. Especially hazardous locations. And even in the work I do repeatedly there are things that i forget the exact wording on and refer back to the code. Sometimes I run across a situation in my every day type work that I’m uncertain on and I’ll lookup the requirements. For me, I strive for a 100% code compliant installation. I don’t talk about this here much, but we’ve been involved in several lawsuits and insurance investigations, and these people will look for anything out of compliance to pin on you. It’s just statistics that the number of projects im involved with that I’m more likely to have this happen. I’ve seen forensic engineers disassemble my work and cart it off to a laboratory. That’s not the time to start questioning if you did it right. Anyway, I’m wandering off subject I think but the point is that the code is there for your protection as well.
Now as for the expanded AFCI requirements we’ve discussed, I’m fully in agreement that if the evidence doesn’t support it, we shouldn’t be on board with it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk