October 5th, 2005 minutes
|
MEMBERS PRESENT: |
|
Russell Brickell, Dan Wilkus, Jeff Oliver, Moncef Hadiji and Jeff Hardie |
|
|
|
|
|
MEMBERS ABSENT: |
|
Larry Frost and Patrick Shepard |
|
|
|
|
|
STAFF PRESENT: |
|
Phil Burke |
|
PUBLIC PRESENT: |
|
|
Russell Brickell called the meeting to order at 6:03 pm.
Introductions
Dan Wilkus and Jeff Oliver introduced themselves to each other.
Minutes
The minutes of the September 7th, 2005 meeting were read. Brickell moved to accept the minutes as read. Hadiji seconded the motion which passed unanimously.
Unfinished business
Staff stated that no correspondence had been received since the last meeting.
New business
Russell Brickell gave an update on the Code Change Seminar. He had spoken with Tim Pinnick, NR Inspections Supervisor, earlier in the day and Mr. Pinnick had left a message with a possible presenter and was awaiting a return call.
Board began the review of the current amendments in comparison with the 2005 NEC. Board members were asked to review each amendment and comment on whether it should be considered for removal or change.
Jeff Oliver suggested that each amendment be viewed and discussed separately rather than as a group.
A consensus to retain the definitions of “story” and “basement” from whatever the current building code that is adopted at the time was reached.
An agreement was reached to retain the requirement that a separate GFCI device be located in each bathroom of a hotel or motel.
All members consented to retain the individual circuits for sump pumps.
All Members agreed to retain the requirement for a receptacle for garage door openers.
A decision to retain the requirement for show window receptacles and definition of such was reached by all Members.
A consensus to retain the requirement to exclude additional services for fire pumps and emergency systems was reached.
A consensus to retain the requirement for service masts when used as support was reached.
A consensus could not be reached in regards to 230.40 Exception 1, which had been deleted from the 2002 City of Lawrence Electrical Ordinance. This amendment will be tabled for further review.
A consensus was reached in regards to the current restrictions placed on ENT and Service-Entrance cables being used as service entrance wiring methods.
A consensus could not be reached in regards to changes to 230.70 that allowed particular lengths of service conductors to be installed within a structure. This amendment will be tabled for further review.
A consensus could not be reached about 230.72 with respect to marking of disconnects are meter enclosures and other associated issues. This amendment will be tabled for further review. Staff added that several issues regarding labeling are ahead in the 2005 as well as the previous issue of type panel schedules on commercial projects.
A consensus was reached regarding the listing of the location of the grounding electrode connection on the main service disconnects.
A consensus was reached in favor of retaining the current amendment to 334.12 that limits the use of non-metallic sheathed cable (romex) in other than R occupancies and in any dwelling exceeding three floors.
A consensus was reached to allow the deletion of two permitted uses in 362.10 in reference to electrical non-metallic tubing.
A consensus was reached to retain the amendments from 700.12(D) and 701.11(E)
coincide with previous amendments made in Article 230 regarding separate services for fire pumps and emergency power.
Brickell formed into a motion the results of the meeting to retain all afore mentioned amendments into the 2005 NEC with any resultant changes in form and format to be handled by staff. He also reiterated that 230.40 Exp. 1, 230.70, and 230.72 had been tabled for further review and research and that these actions were to be included into the motion.
Jeff Hardie moved that this motion be accepted and it was seconded by Jeff Oliver, motion passed.
A Code comparison document created by staff to outline the possible impact changes was distributed to all present. Staff stated it was created to provide some clarity to several items in the 2005 NEC that would most likely need to be addressed, but by no means is a complete comparison.
Vice-Chair Brickell suggested this document be used as homework for the Board and will be discussed at the next meeting.
A motion was made by Jeff Hardie to adjourn and seconded by Dan Wilkus, motion passed.
Meeting was adjourned at 7:35 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Phil Burke, Secretary