History of the National Electrical Code
- Thread starter joe tedesco
- Start date
- Status
charlie
Senior Member
- Location
- Indianapolis
Re: History of the National Electrical Code
I happen to agree with Don's proposal to change the term grounding conductor to bonding conductor. If enough comments are made to accept the change, it may well happen. In the long run, the Code will make more sense to the users. Grounding is one of the subjects that is the most difficult for the new person to grasp. I think it would be great if we all had Bennie's understanding of the theory and Ed's ability to teach the subject.
Ed, you have every right to jump into any conversation. Your Code may be different but the electrons run around the same way. Of course, when we differ on what the Code means, we gotta go with the NEC. Besides, we really need your wonderful drawings.
Roger, Ron, Russell, and Bob, I hope you never quit questioning the Code or any other document, regulation, law, treatise, doctrine, ordinance, or anything else that governs our lives and the way we do things. Get involved, propose changes, work to make thing happen that will make all of our lives better.
I know Leo Martin; I was on CMP 10 with him when I first started. I don't think he is the Bad A - - that he is made out to be. Joe is correct about me being ready to pounce on the proposals; it is called being prepared. All of the panel members get the package of proposals before the meeting. I go through the proposals and decide how I am going to address every one of them and write a panel statement for each rejection. If that is being ready to pounce, I am guilty.
Bennie, with encouragement from people who are respected, like you, many others will march to their own drums.
I happen to agree with Don's proposal to change the term grounding conductor to bonding conductor. If enough comments are made to accept the change, it may well happen. In the long run, the Code will make more sense to the users. Grounding is one of the subjects that is the most difficult for the new person to grasp. I think it would be great if we all had Bennie's understanding of the theory and Ed's ability to teach the subject.
Ed, you have every right to jump into any conversation. Your Code may be different but the electrons run around the same way. Of course, when we differ on what the Code means, we gotta go with the NEC. Besides, we really need your wonderful drawings.
Roger, Ron, Russell, and Bob, I hope you never quit questioning the Code or any other document, regulation, law, treatise, doctrine, ordinance, or anything else that governs our lives and the way we do things. Get involved, propose changes, work to make thing happen that will make all of our lives better.
I know Leo Martin; I was on CMP 10 with him when I first started. I don't think he is the Bad A - - that he is made out to be. Joe is correct about me being ready to pounce on the proposals; it is called being prepared. All of the panel members get the package of proposals before the meeting. I go through the proposals and decide how I am going to address every one of them and write a panel statement for each rejection. If that is being ready to pounce, I am guilty.
Bennie, with encouragement from people who are respected, like you, many others will march to their own drums.
cselectric
Senior Member
- Location
- Wisconsin
Re: History of the National Electrical Code
Joe,
As one of the lurkers here I wonder why I am being called out. Sure, I read a damn lot more than I wirte. That's true in general and not just on this thread. I've spent plenty of time in this trade, and invested a great deal in training and education to advance myself. For all it's worth, I fancy myself to be pretty damn good at my trade. But, I come here to learn, more so than anything. In my opinion, the best this trade has to offer are present and accounted for on this board. This is quite a brainpool to be swimming in. I feel no compelling need to jump headlong into a topic such as this without first thinking long and hard about my position and how I should state it. I am also not inclined to object to the disparity of views I see here. As the old saying goes "if everyone is thinkig alike, then nobody is thinking." I believe that is what many of us "lurkers" are doing here, thinking. Learning, digesting new and different viewpoints. Hopefully formulating questions that can be answered by the members here, thus expanding our knowledge.
Joe,
As one of the lurkers here I wonder why I am being called out. Sure, I read a damn lot more than I wirte. That's true in general and not just on this thread. I've spent plenty of time in this trade, and invested a great deal in training and education to advance myself. For all it's worth, I fancy myself to be pretty damn good at my trade. But, I come here to learn, more so than anything. In my opinion, the best this trade has to offer are present and accounted for on this board. This is quite a brainpool to be swimming in. I feel no compelling need to jump headlong into a topic such as this without first thinking long and hard about my position and how I should state it. I am also not inclined to object to the disparity of views I see here. As the old saying goes "if everyone is thinkig alike, then nobody is thinking." I believe that is what many of us "lurkers" are doing here, thinking. Learning, digesting new and different viewpoints. Hopefully formulating questions that can be answered by the members here, thus expanding our knowledge.
frenchelectrican
Senior Member
- Location
- Nord'est Wisconsin et Paris France
Re: History of the National Electrical Code
Joe ; i will like to say a quick word here and i will like to say merci beaucoupe [ thank you very much ] for a link for nec code history wise. and explain the facts here . yes i know i have few challange myself. no matter where we are from. it can be next door or next country but we are working hard to use the nec very wise way.
to bob , don , charlie and of course grand wizard of nec joe .. i really do enjoying to learn something new with you guys and i am glad to be here ( a quick fact here i did learn the NEC codes before i move to usa ) and from time to time i will come up with something i will ask you guys ..
thanks again
merci, marc
Joe ; i will like to say a quick word here and i will like to say merci beaucoupe [ thank you very much ] for a link for nec code history wise. and explain the facts here . yes i know i have few challange myself. no matter where we are from. it can be next door or next country but we are working hard to use the nec very wise way.
to bob , don , charlie and of course grand wizard of nec joe .. i really do enjoying to learn something new with you guys and i am glad to be here ( a quick fact here i did learn the NEC codes before i move to usa ) and from time to time i will come up with something i will ask you guys ..
thanks again
merci, marc
pierre
Senior Member
- Location
- Westchester County, New York
Re: History of the National Electrical Code
Joe
It sounds as if maybe you are having a bad day. After meeting you I think you are sometimes too fast to the trigger, but in all have very good intentions.
As far as Leo is concerned his bark is bigger than his bite, and he wants what we all want, an easier code to read and understand.
I spoke with Paul Dobrowsky of CMP 5 and he stated that the EBJ issue is not dead and they are looking for input at the comment stage.
I have said this before, and will again. When writing on this forum, none of us are expert writers and trying to get our point across sometimes offends others when offense was not intended.
Sure there are times when we all get crazy and say 'negative' things about the code, but most here are all pro NEC, the NEC is what gives all of us a common thread, no pun intended.
I will also say this. At Orlando many of the CMP members stated that they want to hear from the people in this industry, that they need our help, and they are only human and work very hard. Remember there are many interest groups (manufacturers for one) that are on the CMPs.
You have till October to respond, and you can do so on your computer, without leaving the comfort of your home/work or wherever space.
Pierre
Joe
It sounds as if maybe you are having a bad day. After meeting you I think you are sometimes too fast to the trigger, but in all have very good intentions.
As far as Leo is concerned his bark is bigger than his bite, and he wants what we all want, an easier code to read and understand.
I spoke with Paul Dobrowsky of CMP 5 and he stated that the EBJ issue is not dead and they are looking for input at the comment stage.
I have said this before, and will again. When writing on this forum, none of us are expert writers and trying to get our point across sometimes offends others when offense was not intended.
Sure there are times when we all get crazy and say 'negative' things about the code, but most here are all pro NEC, the NEC is what gives all of us a common thread, no pun intended.
I will also say this. At Orlando many of the CMP members stated that they want to hear from the people in this industry, that they need our help, and they are only human and work very hard. Remember there are many interest groups (manufacturers for one) that are on the CMPs.
You have till October to respond, and you can do so on your computer, without leaving the comfort of your home/work or wherever space.
Pierre
charlie
Senior Member
- Location
- Indianapolis
Re: History of the National Electrical Code
Cselectric, Marc, and Pierre:
Wow, good responses. I met Pierre in Orlando and I will be disappointed if he does not get involved in the Code making process sometime in the future.
Thanks gentlemen,
Charlie
Cselectric, Marc, and Pierre:
Wow, good responses. I met Pierre in Orlando and I will be disappointed if he does not get involved in the Code making process sometime in the future.
Thanks gentlemen,
Charlie
joe tedesco
Senior Member
- Location
- Boston, Massachusetts
Re: History of the National Electrical Code
Don; Roger, Bob, Charlie; and Bennie
Forgive me! It won't haqppen again!
Don; Roger, Bob, Charlie; and Bennie
Forgive me! It won't haqppen again!
Re: History of the National Electrical Code
Joe: Your reverence and dedication to the NEC is commendable.
My reverence and dedication has been to the accurate compliance with electrical technology. The code is supposed to reflect this compliance procedure, not dictate a "loose cannon" procedure of it's own.
My critical attitude is well founded, based on the many requests for clarification, of the various and numerous code sections.
The next few years will bring new concepts of installation procedures. The NEC will be challenged for credibility and value for the purpose of enforcement. Competitive code authoring will appear on the market, due to the implication of anti-trust violations by the NEC.
I would like to see the NEC survive, but it is up the NEC officials to make it possible.
I often request a clarification of various code articles, the response is usually "the text of the article speaks for itself". Really helpful, This is the reason of my question.
A user friendly, detailed code book, will be the demand by the next generation.
Joe: Your reverence and dedication to the NEC is commendable.
My reverence and dedication has been to the accurate compliance with electrical technology. The code is supposed to reflect this compliance procedure, not dictate a "loose cannon" procedure of it's own.
My critical attitude is well founded, based on the many requests for clarification, of the various and numerous code sections.
The next few years will bring new concepts of installation procedures. The NEC will be challenged for credibility and value for the purpose of enforcement. Competitive code authoring will appear on the market, due to the implication of anti-trust violations by the NEC.
I would like to see the NEC survive, but it is up the NEC officials to make it possible.
I often request a clarification of various code articles, the response is usually "the text of the article speaks for itself". Really helpful, This is the reason of my question.
A user friendly, detailed code book, will be the demand by the next generation.
joe tedesco
Senior Member
- Location
- Boston, Massachusetts
Re: History of the National Electrical Code
Thank you Bennie for your kind words.
It's time we join forces to see if there is a way to suggest the future of the Code.
I can tell you this right now, it is not going to be easy because of the political influences that are present on the committees.
Why I will bet that there are over 1/3 or more of the committee who are manufacturers, and they are concerned about their products.
Also, I have submitted various code changes in the past that were rejected, and then appear magically in a newer report by some new kid! For example, I suggested that Article 80 become an Annex, and now it was proposed to become Annex G, I proposed some changes for the use of renewal link type fuses, similar to the Edison base restrictions about 3 cycles ago, and now it appears as an accept.
Everyone has an agenda for sure, including guys like me who make their living teaching and writing about the NEC.
If I had my way I would adopt various rules from the Canadian Electrical Code, seems like the rules were written by electricians and people with real world experiences.
I will have more to say later!
Thank you Bennie for your kind words.
It's time we join forces to see if there is a way to suggest the future of the Code.
I can tell you this right now, it is not going to be easy because of the political influences that are present on the committees.
Why I will bet that there are over 1/3 or more of the committee who are manufacturers, and they are concerned about their products.
Also, I have submitted various code changes in the past that were rejected, and then appear magically in a newer report by some new kid! For example, I suggested that Article 80 become an Annex, and now it was proposed to become Annex G, I proposed some changes for the use of renewal link type fuses, similar to the Edison base restrictions about 3 cycles ago, and now it appears as an accept.
Everyone has an agenda for sure, including guys like me who make their living teaching and writing about the NEC.
If I had my way I would adopt various rules from the Canadian Electrical Code, seems like the rules were written by electricians and people with real world experiences.
I will have more to say later!
charlie
Senior Member
- Location
- Indianapolis
Re: History of the National Electrical Code
Joe, I have been working for several cycles to get some things through and because of the political influences, they have not made it yet. Don't give up, keep plugging away. If it is a good idea, it will finally make it through the process as membership changes on the panels. I grant you that manufacturers make up a portion of the panels, so what? You still have all the other factions who are looking after their own turf. I do know that the number one priority on every panel member's mind is safety. We all put that first and our own interests second. Sure, the manufacturers are concerned about their product, which is where their paycheck comes from.
When Article 80 was put into the Code, the intent was to have it prominent and in the front. It was originally intended to be moved after being in the front for a while. A lot of places do not adopt the Code and don't even have laws to adopt it, which is why they wanted it up front to start with.
As far as the renewable link fuses, I don't remember your proposal to drop them. I would be interested in the year and the proposal number. I think I would remember that proposal.
Yes, everyone has an agenda. My agenda is to protect the electric utility's interests and to keep everything as inexpensive as possible for our customers without sacrificing safety in the process. I have yet to find anything on CMP 10 that would be damaging to the electric utilities. That leaves me to keep everything as inexpensive as possible for our customers without sacrificing safety in the process.
On our panel, we have active electrical inspectors, electricians, teachers, etc. In fact, I used to hold a master electrician's license and have had some real world experiences. We are a very diverse group, is that so awful?
Joe, I have been working for several cycles to get some things through and because of the political influences, they have not made it yet. Don't give up, keep plugging away. If it is a good idea, it will finally make it through the process as membership changes on the panels. I grant you that manufacturers make up a portion of the panels, so what? You still have all the other factions who are looking after their own turf. I do know that the number one priority on every panel member's mind is safety. We all put that first and our own interests second. Sure, the manufacturers are concerned about their product, which is where their paycheck comes from.
When Article 80 was put into the Code, the intent was to have it prominent and in the front. It was originally intended to be moved after being in the front for a while. A lot of places do not adopt the Code and don't even have laws to adopt it, which is why they wanted it up front to start with.
As far as the renewable link fuses, I don't remember your proposal to drop them. I would be interested in the year and the proposal number. I think I would remember that proposal.
Yes, everyone has an agenda. My agenda is to protect the electric utility's interests and to keep everything as inexpensive as possible for our customers without sacrificing safety in the process. I have yet to find anything on CMP 10 that would be damaging to the electric utilities. That leaves me to keep everything as inexpensive as possible for our customers without sacrificing safety in the process.
On our panel, we have active electrical inspectors, electricians, teachers, etc. In fact, I used to hold a master electrician's license and have had some real world experiences. We are a very diverse group, is that so awful?
pierre
Senior Member
- Location
- Westchester County, New York
Re: History of the National Electrical Code
It is nice to see that this thread has turned from what could have been ugly to guys trying to work with each other. It is not a perfect world, but if the ones who want a 'perfect' world were to give up, it would have no chance. I do believe that if people like Joe and Bennie could communicate with each other, eventually some type of compromise could probably be reached and things would improve.
I have stated this before, but I believe it is important enough to state again.
The CMP members do look to the people in the field for help. Just because the CMP does not accept your proposal does not mean it is not what they are looking for, sometimes technicalities are stopping the change or timing is not right.
Keep plugging away!!
As an example, Ed Mclaren from canada has said that changing EGC to EBC has made it easier for people in the industry to comprehend grounding more.
There is a proposal for this in the 2005 NEC. I believe if more support was shown for this in the comment stage, that it could possibly happen in this code cycle. Send in your comments.
Pierre
It is nice to see that this thread has turned from what could have been ugly to guys trying to work with each other. It is not a perfect world, but if the ones who want a 'perfect' world were to give up, it would have no chance. I do believe that if people like Joe and Bennie could communicate with each other, eventually some type of compromise could probably be reached and things would improve.
I have stated this before, but I believe it is important enough to state again.
The CMP members do look to the people in the field for help. Just because the CMP does not accept your proposal does not mean it is not what they are looking for, sometimes technicalities are stopping the change or timing is not right.
Keep plugging away!!
As an example, Ed Mclaren from canada has said that changing EGC to EBC has made it easier for people in the industry to comprehend grounding more.
There is a proposal for this in the 2005 NEC. I believe if more support was shown for this in the comment stage, that it could possibly happen in this code cycle. Send in your comments.
Pierre
joe tedesco
Senior Member
- Location
- Boston, Massachusetts
Re: History of the National Electrical Code
Thanks Charlie and Pierre:
I apologized, because I was wrong! Now can you Guys please edit the stuff from your posts that were directed toward me? Please?
I really would like to continue with the History of the NEC because I have many pages and many bits of information I want to share with everyone here.
Thanks Charlie and Pierre:
I apologized, because I was wrong! Now can you Guys please edit the stuff from your posts that were directed toward me? Please?
I really would like to continue with the History of the NEC because I have many pages and many bits of information I want to share with everyone here.
charlie
Senior Member
- Location
- Indianapolis
Re: History of the National Electrical Code
Sorry Joe, if you want to thread removed, we can do that. However, unless I make a blatant error, I never go back and edit posts. If I post it, it stays and I take the heat for erroneous statements (sometimes, eating crow is a speciality of mine but I have never developed a taste for it).
Sorry Joe, if you want to thread removed, we can do that. However, unless I make a blatant error, I never go back and edit posts. If I post it, it stays and I take the heat for erroneous statements (sometimes, eating crow is a speciality of mine but I have never developed a taste for it).
Re: History of the National Electrical Code
The reason I like this forum is that no one person dominates the board. I have the largest number of posts, but that is due to the fact I have the time. It is for sure I don't dominate anything. I am often wrong and quickly find out.
I don't compete intellectually with anyone, there are too many bright people on the media.
Joe, you are correct, I am too critical. My action is an expression of fraustration over topics that can be made simple, without a lot of meaningless words.
I don't criticize the NEC for a negative purpose, I want it to become the document it claims to be, and for the reasons stated in the first pages.
The reason I like this forum is that no one person dominates the board. I have the largest number of posts, but that is due to the fact I have the time. It is for sure I don't dominate anything. I am often wrong and quickly find out.
I don't compete intellectually with anyone, there are too many bright people on the media.
Joe, you are correct, I am too critical. My action is an expression of fraustration over topics that can be made simple, without a lot of meaningless words.
I don't criticize the NEC for a negative purpose, I want it to become the document it claims to be, and for the reasons stated in the first pages.
G
Guest
Guest
Re: History of the National Electrical Code
In my opinion the NEC is a needed document.
It is bloated.
It is confusing.
It appears to be contradictory.
It takes a lot of cross-referencing to get the right answer.
It can take an insiders magic decoder ring to understand the true meaning of certain lingo.
Without knowing the lingo it is impossible to comply with the intent of the section.
Worse yet lack of section understanding results in unnecessary over compliance. Chasing windmills.
It is a moving target. By the time something is assimilated it's been revised.
The public comment for 2005 is near closing.
The wheels are already in motion for 2008.
How is a regular guy/gal supposed to keep up with this?
KISS!
I worry about fire.
I worry about safety.
Keep It Simple Stupid (KISS) so I can easily do it safely.
Right now I'm too stupid to fully assimilate the code. Bring it down to my level.
THANKS!
In my opinion the NEC is a needed document.
It is bloated.
It is confusing.
It appears to be contradictory.
It takes a lot of cross-referencing to get the right answer.
It can take an insiders magic decoder ring to understand the true meaning of certain lingo.
Without knowing the lingo it is impossible to comply with the intent of the section.
Worse yet lack of section understanding results in unnecessary over compliance. Chasing windmills.
It is a moving target. By the time something is assimilated it's been revised.
The public comment for 2005 is near closing.
The wheels are already in motion for 2008.
How is a regular guy/gal supposed to keep up with this?
KISS!
I worry about fire.
I worry about safety.
Keep It Simple Stupid (KISS) so I can easily do it safely.
Right now I'm too stupid to fully assimilate the code. Bring it down to my level.
THANKS!
big john
Senior Member
- Location
- Portland, ME
Re: History of the National Electrical Code
I think the main problem most folks have with code is that it isn't designed as a manual, but as a book of enforacable laws. I don't know for sure, but I'd be willing to bet there are a good number of lawyers involved in each version of the code. Read any legal statute and it reads like the NEC.
Me, I don't have a problem with it. There are definitely times when you have to read an article two or three or even four times to make sure you understand it, but I guess I like the challenge.
Now, if I was one of the poor suckers who had to check and assemble a big honkin' thing of electrical prints for a commercial or industrial job, then maybe I'd get a lot more frustrated at how obscure the code can be... I don't know how anyone manages to coordinate all the information in those things.
-John
I think the main problem most folks have with code is that it isn't designed as a manual, but as a book of enforacable laws. I don't know for sure, but I'd be willing to bet there are a good number of lawyers involved in each version of the code. Read any legal statute and it reads like the NEC.
Me, I don't have a problem with it. There are definitely times when you have to read an article two or three or even four times to make sure you understand it, but I guess I like the challenge.
Now, if I was one of the poor suckers who had to check and assemble a big honkin' thing of electrical prints for a commercial or industrial job, then maybe I'd get a lot more frustrated at how obscure the code can be... I don't know how anyone manages to coordinate all the information in those things.
-John
pierre
Senior Member
- Location
- Westchester County, New York
Re: History of the National Electrical Code
If I were to paint a picture, just about everyone would see what I see. When I use words to describe that same picture, than based on ones personal experience they may not see what I am writing. GET IT
That is how most any written word is, including the NEC and this or any forum.
The more time that you spend with a person, the easier it is to understand what he/she may be trying to say. The NEC is the same. The person who uses the code sparingly will not be able to understand the 'language' as easily as one who spends more time with it. Simple in theory, very hard with time issues.
Pierre
If I were to paint a picture, just about everyone would see what I see. When I use words to describe that same picture, than based on ones personal experience they may not see what I am writing. GET IT
That is how most any written word is, including the NEC and this or any forum.
The more time that you spend with a person, the easier it is to understand what he/she may be trying to say. The NEC is the same. The person who uses the code sparingly will not be able to understand the 'language' as easily as one who spends more time with it. Simple in theory, very hard with time issues.
Pierre
Re: History of the National Electrical Code
Wayne: Don't underestimate yourself. You are expressing the same feelings as the majority of the people in the trade.
There are other code authors preparing papers for legal adoption, at this time. The court decision to void the copyright protection of the NEC when it is adopted as law, has an impact on how the codes will be treated in the future.
There is also anti-trust questions when a single entity is unopposed in the industry. This becomes more of a problem when there is a financial impact on the consumer, because of mandatory code requirements. AFCIs are a good example.
Any official, of the government, who makes a decision that produces a profit for any special interest group, is guilty of conflict of interest. This is an ethics violation in law.
A government official is held legally responsible for the effects of legislation they approve.
Wayne: Don't underestimate yourself. You are expressing the same feelings as the majority of the people in the trade.
There are other code authors preparing papers for legal adoption, at this time. The court decision to void the copyright protection of the NEC when it is adopted as law, has an impact on how the codes will be treated in the future.
There is also anti-trust questions when a single entity is unopposed in the industry. This becomes more of a problem when there is a financial impact on the consumer, because of mandatory code requirements. AFCIs are a good example.
Any official, of the government, who makes a decision that produces a profit for any special interest group, is guilty of conflict of interest. This is an ethics violation in law.
A government official is held legally responsible for the effects of legislation they approve.
G
Guest
Guest
Re: History of the National Electrical Code
Only in a round table like this can the true meaning of a citation be fleshed out-- and maybe not. There are over 150 posts on one thread about grounding-- and the final answer is still not in. Mike Holt published a newsletter about grounding. All the best NEC minds on this forum replied to the question-- and in the end Mike Holt said, "you are all wrong. Here is the right answer: Yada, yada, yada". There are long threads about how many NM's can go in one drilled hole. There are long threads about how many NM's can go in one NM connector. Long threads about re-identifying a white non-grounded conductor. Green wire nuts. The list goes on. There is little agreement about here how to interpret the citations. When we get lucky this round table agrees and we move on. Even if we figure out the right interpretation many at the table remain befuddled or choose to stay misinformed.
I am far from an idiot, but the NEC is over our heads in too many ways. Thanks to this forum many of the citations I studied the hardest, and the ones I believed in the most, were found to be interpreted wrong by me & those who advised me. This round table fleshed out a better interpretation. There was a very small round table at my disposal in 1994.
It takes too much time to know the NEC, and it's easy to miss the point no matter how much you read it or many times you implement it. This forum has documented and proved this point. Misinterpretation of the intent of a citation leads to fire, electrocution, and wasted resources. Extensive study of the NEC should not be mandatory. It should be more of a no-brainer. Enough said for now.
../Wayne C.
[ September 23, 2003, 02:37 PM: Message edited by: awwt ]
That would be fine and good if it were a stationary target. The NEC is a moving target. In 1994 I spent over one year studying the 1993 code. I knew it inside and out front to back. By the time 1993 was adopted by all signatory jurisdictions the 1996 had come out. In 1994 many jurisdictions were still on the 1990 so I had to know that too. Not all code citations are a step forward-- meaning the 1993 is not entirely backward compatible to the 1990. You can do something by the 1993 that is NOT permitted by the 1990. If the jurisdiction has not adopted the 1993 you can't use the new citation-- even if it's more correct. The code cycle adoption is too long.
Only in a round table like this can the true meaning of a citation be fleshed out-- and maybe not. There are over 150 posts on one thread about grounding-- and the final answer is still not in. Mike Holt published a newsletter about grounding. All the best NEC minds on this forum replied to the question-- and in the end Mike Holt said, "you are all wrong. Here is the right answer: Yada, yada, yada". There are long threads about how many NM's can go in one drilled hole. There are long threads about how many NM's can go in one NM connector. Long threads about re-identifying a white non-grounded conductor. Green wire nuts. The list goes on. There is little agreement about here how to interpret the citations. When we get lucky this round table agrees and we move on. Even if we figure out the right interpretation many at the table remain befuddled or choose to stay misinformed.
I am far from an idiot, but the NEC is over our heads in too many ways. Thanks to this forum many of the citations I studied the hardest, and the ones I believed in the most, were found to be interpreted wrong by me & those who advised me. This round table fleshed out a better interpretation. There was a very small round table at my disposal in 1994.
It takes too much time to know the NEC, and it's easy to miss the point no matter how much you read it or many times you implement it. This forum has documented and proved this point. Misinterpretation of the intent of a citation leads to fire, electrocution, and wasted resources. Extensive study of the NEC should not be mandatory. It should be more of a no-brainer. Enough said for now.
../Wayne C.
[ September 23, 2003, 02:37 PM: Message edited by: awwt ]
lady sparks lover
Senior Member
Re: History of the National Electrical Code
You said it in a nutshell....the code is all of those things. I constantly find things that I should have done in my design, and things I have yet to hear of, then they change the code, and I have to learn it all over again.
- Status