Fixing the NEC

[Elect117]

I think that the metric first is the least of the problems with the entire process. I know Don is close follower and a proponent of how the NFPA works which somewhat surprises me. I've read many of his PI's going back to the days when they were called proposals. They're always well thought out and usually have a very legitimate substantiation. I'll go on record as saying his has some of the best proposals that have repeatedly been rejected. I wonder why he keeps going back for more rejection.

Because if nobody tried to address issues with the CMPs they would end up writing more nonsense. Even losing battles keeps the CMP on thier toes.

Gotta beware! Don and Wayne are lurking and ready to PI. lol

 

[infinity]

Because if nobody tried to address issues with the CMPs they would end up writing more nonsense. Even losing battles keeps the CMP on thier toes.

Gotta beware! Don and Wayne are lurking and ready to PI. lol

I'm glad that those guys do but it hasn't changed the way the system operates which is flawed. Anyone ever try to get on a CMP? There are many qualified individuals on this forum who would be excellent CMP members. There chances on getting on a CMP are between slim and none. From what's been reported even here on this forum it's who not what you know. Let's start with new CMP members every two code cycles.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

But he is working on things that are not made or designed here.

GM started switching to metric in the early 70s, and it was pretty much completed before 1990.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Well, maybe someone should submit a PI to change it. I

A PI cannot change it. This was done by the NFPA main office and nothing in a PI can change a decision by the main office.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

I wonder why he keeps going back for more rejection.

After three rejections on a proposal I give up

 

[hbiss]

GM started switching to metric in the early 70s, and it was pretty much completed before 1990.

Granted, I haven't worked on a GM product since before then, but are you saying that all GM products now use metric fasteners? If so, it was probably to make life easier because of all the foreign made parts they use.

-Hal

 

[EngineeredElectric]

16. Get rid of the torque rule. I don't know anyone that follows it.
17. Get rid of the available fault current labelling rule. Most don't follow that either.
18. Get rid of more labelling rules. The labels are getting ludicrous and everything is plastered in red stickers. It's stupid.

There are plenty more, but that's just off the top of my head. The code has been getting more and more stupid every cycle, and I'm sick of it. Start deleting stuff, and changing with the times instead of adding more and more garbage on top of garbage.

I'm hear-hear on 1-15.

16 I'm fine with. 90% of electrical failures I have repaired in the factories occurred at the lug, mostly mechanical. Torquing to spec may or may not have prevented some of those, but at least it's a start. I do sometimes look at the torque specs with some skepticism, but that's a different conversation.

17 In order to accurately calculate the available fault current the utility must tell you the AFC at the utiltiy transformer. I have spoken to 3 'engineers' at ComEd (Chicagoland) on 3 different occasions, each one did not what available fault current even is. The closest I ever got to an answer was a paper that with 3 different transformer configurations on it (They couldn't tell me which one was installed at the location in question) with a range of 10k-25k amps written next to each of them. I know a company that does nothing but facility arc flash studies for corporations who have nothing better to spend their money on and asked him how they get AFC from ComEd. He said they don't, ComEd doesn't know. His company just guesses. The arc flash values and one line diagrams he provides are educated guesses at best, totally made up sometimes. The entire thing is a giant circus put on for insurace companies.

When I need to find the AFC I just call a lineman and have him open the utility transformer for me so I can see the specifications, then I calcaulate it based on infinite AFC at the primary conductors. The difference between infinity and hundreds of amps at the primary side doesn't actually change the values downstream meaningfully.

18 Hard agree.

It may be easier to influence local/state electrical code alterations than the NEC itself. You may not be able to convice the NFPA to delete 210.12, but you might be able to convice your local government to do it.

 

[tortuga]

This one is interesting

10. Get rid of the stupid pop up island/peninsula receptacles.

Take it one step further since they deleted article 720 I have speculated that a PI to delete all of part III from Article of 210 might fly, but not with the effect you would like, as it would be covered in other codes like the residential code, kinda like rules on voltage drop is not in the NEC but appear in almost every states energy code.
I have herd a compelling argument that all of 210 part III required outlets is outside the scope of the NEC 90.2, the code is not a design manual and should not need to delve into details about where lights and receptacles go. Hazards from a cord hanging off a countertop are the same as if you had a rope there, its not a electrical hazard its a design issue. What's 720 got to do with it? Well 720 used to cover off grid dwelling units, like a cabin that runs off 12V that meets the NEC definition of dwelling used to have a 'out' from the required outlets as its not grid connected, I think there is no longer any 'out' for a off grid 'dwelling' AKA cabin but I may be wrong. Rather than delve into what kinds of dwellings need required outlets and lights and where just move all that to the building codes, as its not in the scope of 90.2.

 

[jim dungar]

the code is not a design manual

Read the entire sentence of 90.1 (2017). There is nothing that says the NEC cannot contain design elements at all.
The text says it is not a design specification or instruction manual for untrained individuals.