Twayne wrote:
In ,
Doug Miller typed:
In article ,
"Twayne" wrote:
You are under a serious misconception. The NEC et al, is a
set of nationwide MINIMAL requirements
Wrong. The Code describes itself as "contain[ing]
provisions that are
considered necessary for electrical safety." Nowhere does
it describe itself
as a set of minimum standards. Further, the Code
specifically authorizes local
jurisdictions to waive provisions of the Code.

Of course not!, AFAIK, and it should not anyway since NEC is NOT the body
responsible for deciding what is a set of minimal requirements and what is
not.

The NEC is not a "body". The NFPA creates the NEC.

It is, however the MINIMAL requirements for the US fire and personal
safety protection requirements.

Cite. Feds? UN? T-party? The pope?

Hallucinations do not count.

It may specify say 8 conductors in a certain
box: no more than 8 in a box can be used and still pass the electrical
code. It is not possible for another body to step in and say BS, I'll allow
10, or 12, or 21!

The NEC explicitly gives the AHJ authority to modify NEC requirements in
particular cases.


What you are trying to say, and failing to do, and only bringing up
confusion for most who are not familiar wth these areas, is that the NEC
comes from a SMALL part of the NFPA - 70 I think? Not sure but if YOU don't
know, it wouldn't surprise me in the least.

The NEC is one of many standards that come from the NFPA. None of them
are applicable unless adopted in whole or part by an "authority". (ANSI
is not that authority.)

The NFPA "adopted" NEC and approved by ANSI. I almost defy you to cite
ANY local which has less stringent rules than the NEC unless the artcles
concern something that is Not Applicable to the region.

A number of jurisdictions had less stringent, or no, rules on AFCIs.

According to you that can't happen.

You will find that
even such a case, should it exist, is NOT the end of the line and WILL have
been approved, usually by ANSI. I don't mention the other 3 because I don't
want to do your homework for you.

Beyond stupid. Jurisdictions don't need ANSI permission to adopt what
they want (or nothing).


Oh, then how come the NEC calls FOR the NFPA in many sections if IT IS the
NFPA sourced it? It's not uncommon at all to see things like:
"
NEC REQUIREMENT
? Either of the following listing
requirements**
A. Underwriters Laboratories
B. FM Global

Does not exist in the NEC. Acceptance is by the AHJ.


* Refer to NFPA 220 for definition of non-combustible Type I and II building
construction.

Geez - I guess the NFPA could include all of its standards in one
document. That would be real useful.


MINIMUM is the operative word
there. Many zoning areas management choose to strengthen
some parts of it as they see fit for the demographics of
any geographical area they serve. They use the NEC as the
basiis for their requirements and adjust it as they
require for their own specifc needs. The NEC requirements
can only be strengthened, never loosened, by local
jurisdiction.
Wrong; as noted above, local jurisdictions are explicitly
permitted under the
Code to waive portions of it if they choose. Further, the
Code itself has no
legal force unless adopted as law by a particular
jurisdiction -- and nothing
at all prevents a jurisdiction from adopting only part of
the Code as law,
should they choose to do so.

The above is so far off base as to make me wonder whether you anything but a
passing familiarity with NEC, NFPA/NEC, ANSI, UL and the other associated
bodies.

You are apparently educated beyond your intelligence.

What ever happened to you promise to HeyBub: "next time I'll be a lot
more careful."

--
bud--