Here's another take on this. Anyone can write an email on this, the more the better. Are there other lists people could forward to ?
Regarding: TIA Log #1874. Sent to: [email protected] 27th of January 2026 Dear NFPA Secretary; TIA 1874 presents a quandary. While the proposed changes are an improvement, the entire 625.43(D) is a hot mess that is not working well for field installers like our company. The very fact that 625.43(D) was revised so quickly and so substantially shows that it did not go through a good consensus process. We urge the NFPA to create a task group composed of the stakeholders including separately public fast charger, HOA and multifamily experts. The one-size liquid fuel approach of 625.43(D) does not recognize the diversity of charging sites, means and methods. As an EV specific electrical contracting firm, EVITP trained, we care about safety, maintainability, reliability and the overall ecosystem of charging. We faced similar regulations in a certain nearby jurisdiction, and quite frankly hated it so much we avoided projects in that jurisdiction. We’re sad to see that approach moved nationwide, and urge the NFPA to get the right people together to do better. A “balanced task group” was formed for GFCI issues, that model seems needed here. https://docinfofiles.nfpa.org/files/AboutTheCodes/70/NFPA_70_Proposed_TIA_1874.pdf _______________________________________________ Address messages to [email protected] No other addresses in TO and CC fields HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/
