New 2008 NEC Code today, anyone?

[wbalsam1]

This was probably the preferred map that representatives from NFPA used when making presentations to states considering amending codes in an effort to influence a skip past the '05. The built-in incentive is in the orange area from January to about mid-year.

 

[ptonsparky]

Not for Nebraska yet. Home builders association raised to much stink about AFCIs. Rumor has it the SED will try again the session which will put it sometime in Sept 09 unless it gets tagged for faster enforcement.

 

[mistermudd]

Nice map. I can confirm that WA State is now, as of this morning, officially under the 2008, subject to our own state ammendments. One such ammendment is that the AFCI rule applies only to bedrooms, and that a "bedroom" includes certain connecting rooms (accessible only via the bedroom, has a function that is ancillary to the bedroom).

One thing I would like to add. Permits purchased before 12/31 are still inspected under the 2005 code.

 

[Karl H]

California has better things to do than adopt new codes.
Last year we banned the use of cell phones while driving.
This year we banned Texting while driving.
Next year California will ban laughter while driving.

We are still under 2005 NEC BTW. I'm still having trouble
trying to get inspectors to read the change in 250.64(C).
I really love that change in that section.

 

[wbalsam1]

California has better things to do than adopt new codes.
Last year we banned the use of cell phones while driving.
This year we banned Texting while driving.
Next year California will ban laughter while driving.

Can you still read the NEC while driving?

We are still under 2005 NEC BTW. I'm still having trouble trying to get inspectors to read the change in 250.64(C).
I really love that change in that section.

What's up with that change, anyway? Seems like it was too handy, huh? The option of that "bar" was used a lot around here. I haven't heard anyone really complaining though. They must be finding other accomodations.

 

[C3PO]

That is something I often wondered. I was told by a fellow electrician that if the crawl space was 2' or less in height that we were not required to bore hols for wire. I have always bored holes or found a rat rail to make use of.

The new (TN) ammendment to 334.15(C) will only require bored holes if you have more than 4' 6" of clearance.

 

[peter d]

California has better things to do than adopt new codes.

I find it funny that a "progressive" state like California is a full code cycle behind their other sister progressive state Massachusetts.

 

[dreamsville]

Michigan typically lags adopting the latest code by (3) years, or one complete code cycle. Not sure why this is? We're working off of the 2005.

 

[charlie]

I find it funny that a "progressive" state like California is a full code cycle behind . . .

Indiana, until this cycle, has always adopted the NEC in the year of the code (the 2005, in 2005, etc). However, in presenting the Indiana amendments to the State Building Commission, there must also be an impact statement with every change. It is my belief that the financial burden versus the loss of property is too great for the AFCI issue.

Consider the smoke detectors that are required with new construction will protect against loss of life. The AFCI devices may protect against the loss of the home. The question, if there are X number of fires in Indiana and you safe $X by using AFCI devices, does the cost of the AFCI devices in every new home reduce the number of fires enough to make for the practical safeguarding of property in 90.1?

 

[sparkchaser1961]

NY uses the 2002 for SFD's and the 2005 for the rest. Stupid and confusing.

 

[Karl H]

Indiana, until this cycle, has always adopted the NEC in the year of the code (the 2005, in 2005, etc). However, in presenting the Indiana amendments to the State Building Commission, there must also be an impact statement with every change. It is my belief that the financial burden versus the loss of property is too great for the AFCI issue.

Consider the smoke detectors that are required with new construction will protect against loss of life. The AFCI devices may protect against the loss of the home. The question, if there are X number of fires in Indiana and you safe $X by using AFCI devices, does the cost of the AFCI devices in every new home reduce the number of fires enough to make for the practical safeguarding of property in 90.1?

I don't understand this logic.

 

[iwire]

I don't understand this logic.

Almost all code requirements should be made on a cost vs benefit analysis.

 

[chris kennedy]

Almost all code requirements should be made on a cost vs benefit analysis.

Care to list a couple that you feel don't meet this criteria?

 

[wbalsam1]

Almost all code requirements should be made on a cost vs benefit analysis.

I agree and to a large part that's the way it's done. :smile:

 

[stickboy1375]

Is anyone switching to the 2008 NEC today in their state, city, town, etc.? If so, where abouts? :-?:smile:

Connecticut is skipping it completely.

 

[peter d]

Connecticut is skipping it completely.

I'm sad.

 

[stickboy1375]

I'm sad.

Me too, glad I didnt buy a new paperweight though.

 

[peter d]

Me too, glad I didnt buy a new paperweight though.

I bought it just so I can make sure I quote the right codes here.

 

[Karl H]

Almost all code requirements should be made on a cost vs benefit analysis.

No I really don't undertstand. The cost of installing AFCI's in homes remodel
or new construction.The cost of the devices do'nt pay off if you only
have so many fires a year?So why do we have Tamper proof recepts?

 

[charlie]

No, I really don't understand. The cost of installing AFCIs in homes remodel or new construction. The cost of the devices don't pay off if you only have so many fires a year? So why do we have Tamper proof recepts?

We are looking at all the fires in the state. If an individual is having a home built and wants the new AFCIs, he may have them installed.

If the expenditure is $1000k total and the total amount saved is $500k and you were virtually assured that there would not be a loss of life, why wouldn't you choose the $500k? What we are talking about is choice not safety. I don't have the real totals and am just throwing out numbers but that is the situation.

The TR receptacles are a different situation. I have no kids at home and do not want TR receptacles. Why should I buy something I don't need if I don't want the? :smile: