April 2nd.
2008 minutes
|
MEMBERS
PRESENT: |
|
Russell
Brickell, Tim Kaufman, and Daniel Beebe |
|
MEMBERS
ABSENT: |
|
Larry
Frost, BJ LaBounty (Board
currently has two vacancies) |
|
|
|
|
|
STAFF
PRESENT: |
|
Phil Burke
|
|
PUBLIC
PRESENT: |
|
None
present |
|
|
|
|
Co-chairman
Brickell called the meeting to order at 6:05 pm.
Minutes
The
minutes of the March 5th, 2008 meeting had been emailed to all members. Kaufman made a motion to accept the minutes Beebe seconded the motion, the
motion passed unanimously.
Correspondence
Staff
provided a copy of the letter appointing BJ LaBounty to another term on the
Board. The two vacancies are still open at this time. Staff also provided a
copy of a cost comparison document created by the Ohio Chapter of the IAEI
outlining some costs associated with the implementation of the 2008 NEC
requirements.
Unfinished Business
Staff
provided a copy of a Kansas House bill outlining some changes in what tests
would have to be accepted by the City of Lawrence. The future statute includes ICC, and IAPMO as
well as the Prometric Company currently being accepted in the City of
Lawrence.
Beebe
asked if these new tests were all third party administered.
Staff
responded that they were, but sponsorship is not required to test under
ICC.
Beebe
questioned how that would work with the City.
Staff responded
that if they passed any of tests the City would have to issue them the
appropriate license. The City had
previously not accepted these tests for licensure.
Beebe
mentioned one of his co-workers had been licensed in another state and was
unable to license here in Lawrence since the test he passed was not one
recognized by the State of Kansas.
Beebe
asked to be emailed a copy of the house bill.
Brickell
provided a copy of a report of residential house fires and the impact AFCI
protection is providing to reduce the number of fatalities. He said the report concluded that arc-fault
protection is an excellent device to help reduce the number of residential
fatality fires. A copy had been sent
electronically to all members as well.
Brickell
added that he had discussed the report and arc-faults in general with the Fire
Marshal and they would be in favor of adding some limitation to the number or
outlets that could be placed on circuits.
Beebe
echoed that this may be the direction that is necessary to keep the playing
field even and make sure everyone is putting in the required number of circuits
for good performance. The Code has addressed
additional circuits over the years such as the bathroom basin receptacle
circuit to curtail problems with overloading in that area. At one time it was common for one GFCI to
protect a circuit and run it to all the places where gfci protection was required,
bathroom, basement, garage, and even the exterior of the house. The time may be right for the Board to place
some limitations on these circuits to get ahead of problems that might occur if
no limitation is placed.
Brickell
stated that they will use every outlet they are given and the report outlines
these problems especially in bedrooms.
Beebe
commented it is all done in an effort for cost cutting, while saving money is
important the system still needs to be functioning properly under normal everyday
loads.
Staff
added the increased number of areas requiring AFCI protection will likely cause
some people to stretch the limits of the circuits’ capacity. Staff currently sees a various number of AFCI
breakers in the panels he inspects, it just depends on the company.
New Business
Brickell
guided the membership towards the comparison document provided by staff and
asked in anyone had found issues with it that they wished to discuss.
Beebe
stated he had not found any issues within the document.
Staff
didn’t think there was anything too unusual other than one of our amendments
was encompassed by the new Code.
Brickell
asked if the members wanted to deal with the amendments or move into the text
of the new Code.
Kaufman made a motion to accept the
comparison document and adopt our current amendments as they would be reflected
in the 2008 NEC. Beebe seconded the
motion, motion passed unanimously.
Brickell
added the document would provide a guideline to format the changes necessary to
place the amendments into the 2008 NEC text.
Staff
stated that the one amendment could go away and we can still keep the AFCI’s
open for discussion.
Brickell
asked if anyone had any feelings on the request from Westar.
Staff had
been contacted by Chad Luce and asked if his attendance was necessary at this
meeting. Staff advised him that until
the Board had a draft in place his time might be wasted.
The
membership turned to their analysis books to discuss various topics that they
thought might be of concern.
Beebe
would like to spend some further time on the AFCI requirements and read some of
the literature provided by Brickell.
Beebe had highlighted the intersystem bonding termination required by
the 2008 NEC as a spot for some review.
Staff had
also written a comment about that particular area. Staff thought we may want some requirement to
what would be accepted or all sorts of configurations would be used. Staff thought the insertion of the term
“listed” in that article may provide the relief necessary. Staff had read some comments by other
jurisdictions that had adopted the 2008 without change to this area and they
are having to pass judgment on many items showing up on jobs to meet this
requirement.
Beebe
commented that we are likely to see everything possible stuck out of the siding
of homes to meet this requirement. Beebe further stated with the amount of
weathering this product would be exposed to whose responsibility is it when the
time comes to make sure it still is workable, cable, phone, satellite
installer, or the property owner. When it doesn’t work anymore what will be
used then? The utility may have some
concerns with what may be clamped to their meter enclosure, in the past they
haven’t allowed anything attached to the meter base. Beebe thought having the other members here
would also be advisable.
Beebe
cited the ambient temperature correction for conduits on roofs doesn’t indicate
anything about the length of the conduit run.
In many applications the length of conduit may be very short and the
temperature factor may not have an impact.
Beebe thought for long runs it would make sense.
Kaufman
questioned where most installations would fall into on this table.
Beebe
thought most runs would be elevated about three to three and a half
inches. It is common for installations
to be placed on top of treated 4 x 4’s laid flat. Beebe thought an exception in regards to the
length or possibly a conduit that remains vertical would be advisable. Beebe added a note regarding gas station
canopy lights wired with PVC conduit. He
has seen so many of these deteriorate with their exposure to sunlight.
Brickell
gave the members present the suggestion to go through these and also look for
other items in the change book they wish to discuss. At our next meeting we could go through all
these and make a list of possible areas we would like to see amended.
Beebe
asked what members we were looking to replace.
Staff
responded the two new members would need to be either a licensed journeyman or
electrical contractor. Staff said the
ordinance doesn’t require them to be citizens of Lawrence, but the preference
would most likely be given to those that do.
Brickell
asked if any other business needed to be dealt with at this meeting. Brickell received no new business so he
called for a motion to adjourn.
Adjournment
Beebe made a motion to adjourn,
seconded by Kaufman; motion passed unanimously and the meeting was adjourned at
6:45 pm.
Respectfully
submitted,
Phil Burke
Secretary