What's everyone's thoughts on proposed 625.4?

Willie Snyder

Co-Host High Voltage Live Podcast
Location
Denver, Co
Occupation
Electrical Foreman / Certified NICET II Fire alarm technician
So if the language passes for 625.4 it would read all permanently installed EVSE shall be installed by a qualified person. Did they make some classes that I'm not aware of? Does my Colorado JW license make me qualified? TIA
 
Yet another example of how the CMP's have way too much free time on their hands and we need a much longer code cycle.

Man these CMP people are gullible. I'm going to sell one the Brooklyn bridge, prolly make some quick easy cash.
Bro that is exactly it that is only 1 of the dumb poopie diaper dookie in this cycle too
 
I have passed on a few things I feel 'not qualified' to take the lead on.
Designing a new fire alarm system to NFPA 72 for a old 6 story office building comes to mind..
But installing a UL listed protective device for a flexible cord to charge a electric car seems silly to even give it a code article.
 
Washington considers an installer qualified if certified electrician and the install is in there scope of work. Same as other sections that mention qualified
 
Not new, "Qualified person" is in the code 138 times, and of course the definition. Why they feel they have to keep adding it is beyond me. Is there anything in the code that is relevant to an "un-qualified" person that they should concern themselves with?


1750161704990.png
 
The requirement (Qualified Person) adds muscle to enforcement against the prolific occurrences of "hacks" and HO doing installations that they have no business in doing. Codes enforcement as a result would have "just cause" to fail or otherwise require additional overview of installations by such persons. Adding such requirement to specific items acknowledges special conditions and training is required for such installation beyond basic wiring.
Currently most legitimate quality EV charging equipment mfg. have "certification" for installers of their equipment.
 
The requirement (Qualified Person) adds muscle to enforcement against the prolific occurrences of "hacks" and HO doing installations that they have no business in doing. Codes enforcement as a result would have "just cause" to fail or otherwise require additional overview of installations by such persons. Adding such requirement to specific items acknowledges special conditions and training is required for such installation beyond basic wiring.
Currently most legitimate quality EV charging equipment mfg. have "certification" for installers of their equipment.
Why would you need certification to install an EV charger? Isn't that what permits and inspections are for, to ensure that the installation is code compliant regardless of who installed it?
 
To Fred's point if a manufacturer wants to put restrictions who can install their products go right ahead but that doesn't need to be in the NEC.
 
IMHO... this passes the enforcement of the restrictions from the manufacturer to the state, since it's stated in the NEC.
If it were part of the listing instructions it would be enforced by the state with or without the wording proposed in 625.4 wouldn't it? That would make this new wording added to the NEC redundant and unnecessary.
 
Why would you need certification to install an EV charger? Isn't that what permits and inspections are for, to ensure that the installation is code compliant regardless of who installed it?
Most state building codes include by reference the NEC. Thus if it's not in there, the requirement doesn't exist. An inspection is no substitute for a qualified person installing.

How many here, even as an electrician, will have the HO or even GC misdirect or redirect or outright lie about work they attempted or to avoid having a non related (their opinion) bad installation done by themselves or other hack looked at and questioned. Or how many times have you heard "the lights come on so what's the problem" related to a non-compliant installation, Zip cord in the wall will make the lights work. How many even here will complain "what were they thinking" related to a job they went to, filled with non-compliant work, Seen many many such comments on this forum. How many time have we seen or had made to us "can't you just" comments that would make an installation non-compliant. Just throw a penny under the fuse the power will come back on.
Many levels to being qualified.

If I'm working on my own home I'm qualified.
Look at the definition of qualified person. Just because you own the home or business building, it DOES NOT make you qualified. I know how to strike an arc and weld my lawn mower deck but does that make me "qualified" to weld a stainless steel chemical storage tank that will be used in a high risk area that I may own and may impact others?
If it were part of the listing instructions it would be enforced by the state with or without the wording proposed in 625.4 wouldn't it? That would make this new wording added to the NEC redundant and unnecessary.
Even if it is in the manufacturers instructions the mere fact that a person take the company course doesn't make the person "qualified" under the code. How many times have ones here seen a plumber who took a Generac course try to do a generator installation and fail to install to NEC requirements. And then further think they can do "ANY" electrical work by virtue of the Generac course, I have many times.

If everyone (not pointing any fingers here) was doing safe, non risky, will not harm anyone, just by common sense and basic electrical theory compliant and safe, there would be no need for a "code" of code enforcement. But because these unsafe non-compliant installations ARE happening the "CODE" gets changed or added to to allow for more supervision and stricter control of such installation and to accommodate for changing conditions or equipment (no longer installing K&T as new installation, adding EGC for receptacle installation). At times requirements are added not for the person doing things correctly but for those who don't or can't because they don't know how to or has a "little knowledge". It wouldn't be a saying if it wasn't happening "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing". Also in part why this forum avoids advising non-electricians on how to for their lack of knowledge. Forum moderators have shut them down.
 
Most state building codes include by reference the NEC. Thus if it's not in there, the requirement doesn't exist. An inspection is no substitute for a qualified person installing.
Shouldn't all electrical work be installed by qualified persons so why single out just EV chargers? To many this is just more pointless language added to an already bloated electrical code.
 
Top