How to read all the PI's?

[tortuga]

Greetings group the deadline for 2026 is approaching.
Is there a way on nfpa.org to read all the PI's people have submitted so far?
Sorry if this a a dumb question.
I have an nfpa online account and clicked 'next edition' but dont see where to read the PI's?
Thanks!

 

[don_resqcapt19]

The PIs wont be available to read for some time after the submission deadline. The last few cycles they have published the "raw" PIs prior to the first draft reporting date. Once they publish the first draft, they are all available, but you have to take extra steps to see the "resolved" (rejected) PIs.
Raw = the PI by itself with no panel action.

 

[tortuga]

Wow interesting thanks.
Then in the case there is no way to tell if one is submitting a duplicate PI.
Unless they post their PI on here.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Wow interesting thanks.
Then in the case there is no way to tell if one is submitting a duplicate PI.
Unless they post their PI on here.

Correct. It is common to have multiple PIs for the same subject, often the results of discussion groups like this.

 

[AC\DC]

I assume if more people submit a PI about the same issue, it sway the members to actually look into the subject?

 

[don_resqcapt19]

I assume if more people submit a PI about the same issue, it sway the members to actually look into the subject?

All PIs are read, but I doubt that multiple PIs on the same issue would get any more attention than a single PI. If there are multiple on the same subject, they will be put in a group and there will be one panel response or action for the whole group.

 

[yesterlectric]

The PIs wont be available to read for some time after the submission deadline. The last few cycles they have published the "raw" PIs prior to the first draft reporting date. Once they publish the first draft, they are all available, but you have to take extra steps to see the "resolved" (rejected) PIs.
Raw = the PI by itself with no panel action.

What makes something be a "resolved" or rejected PI? I'm assuming that means it doesn't get considered at committee meetings or voted on.

 

[mtnelect]

What makes something be a "resolved" or rejected PI? I'm assuming that means it doesn't get considered at committee meetings or voted on.

There is no "Rejection" anymore, only "Resolved". It's a more "Woke" way to comfort rejection. Don't you feel better ?

 

[mtnelect]

We all must learn that some customary words or phrases are very harsh on some people's feelings ! Don't you care.

 

[AC\DC]

We all must learn that some customary words or phrases are very harsh on some people's feelings ! Don't you care.

That hurt my feelings

 

[Mr. Serious]

Someone told me that in California, teachers aren't allowed to use red pens to correct papers anymore, because it can be perceived as threatening. I don't know whether to believe that.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

What makes something be a "resolved" or rejected PI? I'm assuming that means it doesn't get considered at committee meetings or voted on.

All PIs are considered and have a voice vote at the first draft meeting. In most cases, there will be task group meetings, prior to the full committed meetings. Most of the discussion will actually take place in the task group meetings, than at the full committee meeting the task group reports will be reviewed and voted on. Some times what the task group members had decided on in their group meetings will be rejected by the full code making panel.

Those that get at least a 50% favorable vote at the full committee meeting will be formally balloted. Anything that does not get the 50% vote at the meeting will be reported as resolved.

When the formal ballots are counted, any code change requires at least a 2/3's majority vote.

 

[wwhitney]

Is there a way on nfpa.org to read all the PI's people have submitted so far?

They are available now at the expected location:

NFPA 70®: National Electrical Code®

<p>90.2(C) Installations Covered.<br /><br />This Code covers the installation and removal of electrical conductors, equipment, and raceways; signaling and communications conductors, equipment, and raceways; and optical fiber cables for the following:<br /><br /> (1) Public and private...

www.nfpa.org

Cheers, Wayne

 

[tortuga]

All PIs are considered and have a voice vote at the first draft meeting.

Now that the meeting happened how do we check on the PI's Wyane and other forum members submitted?

 

[tortuga]

Nevermind I see its in the meeting minutes for each CMP

 

[brycenesbitt]

Is it possible to read the submitted PI's for the prior edition?
How is that done in TerraView?

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Is it possible to read the submitted PI's for the prior edition?
How is that done in TerraView?

For the 2017 and 2020, it is is TerraView, you just go to nfpa.org/70, select the edition and then select view first draft report. Same for the second draft report to view the comments.
For the older ones you can go to the code edition, click on "archived revision information" and scroll a long way down to "Report on Proposals (ROP)" where you can view or download the ROP. Same for the Report on Comments (ROC). You can also find all of the ballot information there too.
In my opinion the old ROP/ROC process was much easier to use than TerraView and because you have to go out of the way to comment on a resolved PI, the number of comments has had a significant drop since the NFPA started using TerraView.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Nevermind I see its in the meeting minutes for each CMP

You can also see them in TerraView, but if the PI was resolved, you have to open the first draft report, and then click on the "PIs(x) at the top of the sections, where "x" equals the number of PIs for that section.

 

[mtnelect]

On this cycle of "Public Input" one committee mentioned that they were overwhelmed with "Anonymous" submittals, so next cycle they would not allow them.

 

[tortuga]

On this cycle of "Public Input" one committee mentioned that they were overwhelmed with "Anonymous" submittals, so next cycle they would not allow them.

I bet the was in relation to article 512, they seemed to get allot of wacky feedback on that one.