IAEI
News>Issue Listing>July/August 2003 >Proposed Code Changes for the 2005 NEC
| Proposed Code Changes for the 2005 NEC |
This
part one of a two-part series provides a brief
summary of the proposed changes and includes the proposal
number, the section, and a short description of how each
of these
sections was reviewed as a result of panel
actions. |
|
It
is that time of the Code cycle again. Over 3,580
proposed changes were submitted to the National Fire
Protection Association (NFPA) to amend the 2002 National
Electrical Code (NEC). The 2005 NFPA-70
committees have been reduced from twenty code-making
panels (CMP) to nineteen as a result of shifts in
responsibilities in an effort to more evenly distribute
the workloads among the panels. Many of the code-making
panel responsibilities have not changed. A summary of
only those shifts in responsibility as a result of
reducing from twenty to nineteen panels can be found here
These nineteen code-making panels met in January 2003
and took action on proposed changes to articles of the Code falling within the scope of the respective panel’s
responsibility. This article provides a preview of the
significant proposed changes and is the first of a
two-part series to provide a brief summary of the
actions accepted by the panels.
The NEC is amended on a three-year cycle and
follows the ANSI- approved, NFPA open consensus process
of developing codes and standards. The process is an
opportunity for all to submit proposals and public
comments. Proposal and comment forms are readily
available for anyone who wishes to participate and
everyone is encouraged to do so. The Report on
Proposals (ROP) will be available for public review
in July 2003. Code-making panels are required to act on
proposals and comments submitted to them.
IAEI has assembled in this article a summary of some of
the more significant proposals accepted by the panels in
the first phase of the Code development process.
This summary is not an indication that the Code is going to be revised as provided in this article, just
that this is the initial action taken by the code-making
panels, in the proposal stage of the process. Public
comments and actions by the panels during the Report on
Comments (ROC) meeting in December can have an impact on
what has been accepted initially. Public comments to the
proposed changes are strongly encouraged and needed for
the best result. The IAEI is dedicated and committed to
the NEC development process as evidenced by the
participation in the panel hearings. IAEI seats a
principal and an alternate representative on each CMP to
represent the enforcement segment of the industry and
provide the perspective of the electrical inspector.
In recent code cycles, significant emphasis has been
placed on making the NEC a more user-friendly
document. Some of the recent revisions that addressed
the user-friendly issues include minimizing the use of
fine print notes (FPNs) or eliminating them where
possible, changing exceptions to positive text, and
reorganizing and renumbering to provide a parallel
numbering scheme between articles on the various wiring
methods. The 2002 NEC experienced a major
restructuring in Chapter 3 that incorporated many of the
above-mentioned revisions and also included the
relocation of articles covering equipment, such as
switches and switchboards and panelboards to Chapter 4
of the Code, which was appropriate as these
articles covered equipment rather than wiring methods or
materials. Many involved in the day-to-day use of the Code saw these revisions as significant; and in many cases
shocking, and they were resistant to these changes.
In the 2005 cycle a few more efforts were enacted that
are intended to address usability issues. Guidance to
the nineteen code-making panels was to address the term
"listed for the purpose" where it appears
throughout the Code. Basically, the panels have
been directed to address this term and clarify what is
actually required and, where possible, state what the
purpose is. Another area addressed in the 2005 cycle is
Article 220. The goal of the usability task group was to
restructure and bring clarity to the provisions of
Article 220, "Branch-Circuit, Feeder, and Service
Calculations." Two terms computed and calculated that were used in Code rules to mean essentially
the same thing have been changed to calculated throughout for consistency throughout the NEC as
well as to harmonize with the term calculated as
used in other NFPA standards.
The following provides a brief summary of the proposed
changes and includes the proposal number, the section,
and a short description of how each of these sections
was revised as a result of panel actions. This article
is part one of a two-part series. Part two will follow
in the September/October issue of the IAEI News
Article 90 Introduction
Proposal 1-25
New 90.2(B)(4) and (5) FPN
A new fine print note (FPN) has been added to this
section to provide additional clarification and
information as to what constitutes a "utility"
as the word is used in this section. The information in
the FPN explains in general terms that city, county,
state, and federal government bodies regulate the
installation, operation and maintenance of utilities.
Utilities may also be subject to requirements and
regulations by public service commissions or other
regulatory agencies having jurisdiction. The FPN also
indicates that utilities falling under such regulations
are subject to meeting applicable codes and standards
covering these installations or activities relevant to
their industry as adopted under governmental law or
regulation.
Proposal 1-45
Revision 90.9(C)(4)
The revision to this section clarifies when the soft
conversion shall be used in Code rules where a
negative impact on safety would result. The term
"hard conversion shall not be required" has
been revised from permissive language to the mandatory
language "soft conversion shall be used" as
incorporated in the revision. This should provide
additional clarity and eliminate confusion that may have
existed resulting from the current 2002 wording in the
section. The soft conversion is considered a direct
mathematical conversion and does not involve a change in
the actual dimension as compared to the hard conversion,
which is a change in dimension or properties of an item
that might or might not be interchangeable with the
original measurement.
Article 100 Definitions
Proposal 1-46
New Article 100 Definition of Abandoned Cable
This term was introduced into several articles in
the 2002 cycle and also was included in rules to these
various articles that require removal of abandoned
cables. To meet NEC Style Manual requirements,
the term has been defined in Article 100; and this
definition is consistent with the definitions of abandoned
cable in each individual article. The definition is
consistent with the use of the term in the NEC.
Proposal 1-63
New Article 100 Definition of Bonding Jumper, System
The new definition is intended to clarify and
differentiate between a main bonding jumper, which, by definition, is located at the service and a system
bonding jumper, which essentially functions the same
at separately derived systems. The current term used in
250.30(A)(1) is bonding jumper and will be
replaced with system bonding jumper, thus
requiring a definition for the new term. This change
also will coordinate with other proposed changes made to
existing grounding and bonding terminology used in
Article 250 and other areas of the NEC.
Proposal 1-98
Revision Article 100 Definition of Grounding
Electrode Conductor
The revision removes the term "from a common
service" and adds the words "supplied by
feeders or branch circuits" to the definition. The
proposed change is not intended to impact current
requirements of the definition, only to clarify that
separate buildings or structures are generally supplied
by feeder(s) or branch circuit(s) and are not
necessarily always supplied from a common service. The
changes proposed also promote consistency with the
requirements of Article 225 and proposed revisions to
Section 250.32 that remove the term "supplied from
a common service" from that section.
Proposal 1-130
Revision Article 100 Definition of Qualified Person. Add new FPN
A new FPN has been added to the definition of qualified
person to provide additional clarification and
examples of what types of skills, knowledge, and
training are necessary to meet the definition and true
meaning of qualified person as it is used in numerous
sections of the Code.
Article 110 Requirements for Electrical Installations
Proposal 1-172a
Revision 110.16 Flash Protection
This section was new for the 2002 NEC and has
been revised to become more restrictive for the 2005.
The revision will now require additional information
that includes the incident energy levels(s) in calories
per centimeter squared as well as the level of personal
protective equipment and/or clothing required. The
revision is safety driven and is intended to aid in
proper selection of protective clothing or equipment
where equipment must be worked on while energized. A new
FPN has also been added to this section which provides a
reference to IEEE Std. 1584-2002, IEEE Guide for
Performing Arc-Flash Hazard Calculations to assist
users of the Code on where to obtain necessary
information to ensure compliance with this section.
Proposal 1-157
New 110.20 Enclosure Types
A new section was added here that parallels the
provisions of 430.91, which includes enclosure
information and a new table that provides the permitted
uses for various types of electrical enclosures. The new
section adds the requirements in text and tabular form
just as is provided in Article 430. By inserting the
information into Article 110, the enclosure requirements
become a general requirement for electrical enclosures
as referred to throughout the NEC and not limited
to those covered by Article 430.
Article 200 Use and
Identification of Grounded Conductors
Proposal 5-20
Revision 200.6(D)
This change reorganizes the section into a list format
and clarifies the identification requirements for
grounded conductors where grounded conductors of
different systems are installed in the same enclosure or
raceway. The revision clearly indicates methods by which
these grounded conductors are permitted to be identified
so as to be distinguished more readily from one another.
The revision also incorporates the words "or
gray" within this section to provide consistency
with the color identification permitted by 200.6(A) and
200.6(B) and more directly correlates with those
sections. A new sentence was added to indicate that the
means of identification shall be permanently posted at
each branch-circuit panelboard.
Article 210 Branch Circuits
Proposal 2-5
Revision Articles 210 and 220 – Revise the term guest
room as used in these articles.
This revision resulted from a recommendation by the
Technical Correlating Committee to clarify what is
intended to be covered by the term guest room as
the term is used in Articles 210 and 220. The term has
been changed from guest room to guest rooms or
suites, which clarifies that the requirements apply
whether a single room is involved or a suite, which can
include multiple rooms or a suite. A proposal for new
definition of the term guest suite was accepted
by Panel 1 which will correlate with the changes in
terminology incorporated into Articles 210 and 220.
Proposal 2-70
Revision 210.8(B)(4)
This proposal was accepted in part to include additional
requirements for GFCI protection for 15- and 20-ampere
receptacles located outdoors and in public places in
other than dwelling units. The new requirement is not
intended to be applicable for those areas where the
public does not have access.
Proposal 2-134a
Revision 210.12(B) and add a new exception
This section has been revised to indicate that a listed
AFCI, combination-type device is required to be
installed for protection of the entire branch circuit. A
new exception has been added that will permit the
location of the AFCI device to be where the branch
circuit originates or, by exception, installed within
1.8 m (6 ft) of where the branch circuit originates. The
conductors installed between the branch-circuit
overcurrent device and the AFCI device for the length of
up to 1.8 m (6 ft) must be installed in a metal raceway
or cable with a metallic sheath to meet the provisions
of the exception.
Article 220 Branch-Circuit, Feeder, and Service
Calculations
Proposal 2-292
Revision Article 220 Branch-Circuits, Feeders, and
Service Calculations
Article 220 was restructured and arranged to provide a
more logical layout and address usability. The revisions
were the result of efforts of a usability task group
assigned by the Technical Correlating Committee.
Additional proposals to revise Article 200 were
appropriately incorporated into the acceptance of the
proposal by the task group to restructure the article.
Proposal 2-298
New 220.3 Application of Other Articles
This change inserts language to reference other articles
applying to calculations of loads in specific
applications. They are provided in Table 220.3 that are
in addition to, or modifications of, those requirements
contained in Article 220. The table now includes a cross
reference to the appropriate article and section to
enhance usability.
Article 225 Outside Branch Circuits and Feeders
Proposal 4-9a
Revision 225.16 and 225.17
These sections have been renumbered as 225.16(A) and (B)
and 225.17 was revised to add a reference to
"masts" as a means of support to clarify that
masts used as support means for overhead branch circuits
or feeders are required to meet the same requirements
presently found in 230.28 for service masts. The
revisions to these sections provided consistency and
uniformity between the support means and points of
attachment for overhead branch circuits or feeders.
Proposal 4-25
Revision 225.30(A)(4)
The term standby systems was replaced with the
term optional standby systems as directed by the
TCC and is consistent with the language presently used
in Article 702. Inserting the word "optional"
provides reasonable assurances that the appropriate
article will be applied based on the type of system
installed in these locations.
Proposal 4-26a
Revision – 225.32
The revision of this text combines Sections 225.31 and
225.32 for clarity and usability.
The requirements in former Section 225.32 were combined
and organized into Sections 225.31(A)(1) and (2)
covering inside and
outside disconnecting means locations respectively. This section was also revised to
add the wording "on or within sight from the
building or structure supplied" to this section.
Incorporating the term within sight from in this
section relative to the required disconnecting means for
separate buildings or structures provides reasonable
clarity as to the permitted location of the
disconnecting means where it might not be mounted
directly on the building or structure. The term within
sight from is defined in Article 100 as visible and
not more than 15 m (50 ft) in distance from the building
or structure (see figure
1).
Article 230 Services
Proposal 4-62
Revision 230.23(A) Change in terminology for consistency
This revision changes the word "computed" to
the word "calculated" in this section as a
result of the efforts of the NEC Usability Task
Group to standardize the language used throughout the NEC. Essentially the two words had the same meaning in the Code rules where they appeared so the same word should be
used for clarity. This revision in this section and the
rest of the NEC where these words are used
provides uniformity in the NEC and harmonizes
with the same terms used in other NFPA Standards.
Proposal 4-77
Revision 230.44 Cable Trays
This section was revised to clarify that cable tray used
to support "service-entrance conductors" is
not permitted to support conductors other than
service-entrance conductors. A new exception was added
to clarify that cable trays provided with suitable
barriers compatible with the tray are permitted to
separate the service-entrance conductors from the other
conductors supported by the same cable tray.
Proposal 4-84a
Revision 230.70
The revisions in 230.70(A) include renumbering the
section to separate the inside location requirements
from the outside location requirements. The words
"on or within sight from the building or structure
served" were added to new subdivision
230.70(A)(1)(a) which will permit the disconnect located
outside the building or structure to be installed on the
building or structure or located "within sight
from" which, by definition, allows the disconnect
to be remote but the building and service disconnect
must be visible from one another and at a distance not
to exceed 1.8 m (50 ft). This proposed change provides
needed clarification to this section and is consistent
with a similar proposed change to insert similar
requirements in Article 225, which addresses outside
feeder or branch-circuit disconnecting means locations
(see figure
2).
Proposal 4-90
Revision 230.71(A)
This revision will now allow an additional disconnection
means supplying a transient voltage surge suppressor (TVSS)
to be exempt from the "six disconnects"
requirement of 230.71(A) when the disconnect is
installed as a part of listed equipment. Previous
language did not recognize TVSS equipment as exempt from
meeting the "six disconnects" rule. The
requirement for the additional disconnecting means being
part of listed equipment assures that the TVSS will be
connected on the load side of the service disconnect as
required by product standards and 285.21(A)(1).
Proposal 4-106
Revision 230.82(2)
The revisions to this section add "meter socket
transfer switches" to the list of equipment
permitted to be installed ahead of the service
disconnecting means. The provision is applicable to
equipment rated not in excess of 600 volts. The term meter
disconnect switches was relocated to a new item (3)
and minimum short-circuit current rating requirements
for these types of meter socket disconnects was also
added.
Note: To be continued in the
September/October issue of IAEI News.
Michael J. Johnston is IAEI’s director of education
and an IAEI principal member on CMP-5. Johnston was
formerly employed as an electrical field inspections
supervisor for the city of Phoenix, Arizona. He is fully
certified in many areas. He is a member of the IBEW. He
achieved both journeyman E-2 and master electrician E-1
licenses in the state of Connecticut. Additionally, he
holds all IAEI certifications. He also holds ICBO
Electrical Inspections Certification. He is a member of
the UL Electrical Council.
|
