Should the NEC start over from scratch?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Should the NEC start over from scratch?

The code will never be perfect. It's a place of constant evaluating and learning. A common place for all the idea's to come together and those who choose to get involved, can do so. Ya cant beat it!
 
Re: Should the NEC start over from scratch?

I would like to see the Code cycle increased to 4 or even 5 years from the present three. It seems we just get used to using one Code when the new edition comes out, and we have to learn much of it all over again.

Just look at the deadline for change submissions. The 2005 NEC is barely adopted and it's already too late to submit proposals to change the 2008 edition.

Another year or 2 could certainly allow for a bit more discussion and use of the present Code before churning out a new one? :confused:
 
Re: Should the NEC start over from scratch?

Actually i think it could use yearly updates.3 years along with the 3 year cut off then a year or 2 to get adopted leaves some safety issues taking far too long to be law.And to add to that we have some areas still on 99 think about that.Safety issues could take 10 years to reach us.
 
Re: Should the NEC start over from scratch?

Kbsparky, today more than ever the cycle should be three years, probably less in fact.

Technology is moving faster than we can keep up with on even a daily basis.

Whether we, or the NEC is wanting this to be the case, it is.

The reality is, it is not negotiable and to stay on top, the NEC may have to consider a shorter update period.

Roger
 
Re: Should the NEC start over from scratch?

I'm with kbsparky on one item. It stinks to notice potential proposals just after the deadline, which comes so quickly.

Sticking with the three year cycle and decreasing the time alloted for the proposal/comment process would be nice. It would probably be a large burden on the NFPA, but it would make it easier on the users (and would-be proposers). :)

A shorter code cycle would be counterproductive for the people in the field, I think. By the time we see the changes, it'd change again. :)
 
Re: Should the NEC start over from scratch?

I used to not like the code so much. Then I started coming here. Then I learned to shut up and listen and learn. Then I really started learning. Now I like the code book alot. Thanks everybody.
 
Re: Should the NEC start over from scratch?

For the past 6 months or so, I have been working in the maritime industry. One of our key regulatory documents relates to the "Safety of Life at Sea," or "SOLAS." It is revised every few years or so. But at each new cycle, the structure of the document (i.e., chapter, article, and paragraph numbering) is completely redone. If you knew a particular regulation by its previous article number, you would have to start from the Table of Contents to find it again in the next edition.

How important is it to you to be able to say "310.16," or "250.122," or "110.26," without worrying if the listener knows what you are talking about? Can you imagine what would happen if they published a new NEC with a completely new numbering scheme? I don't want to imagine! :eek: :eek:
 
Re: Should the NEC start over from scratch?

Thank you for each of your responses.

They are all appreciated.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top