date:20160726

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

2016-07-26 Thread Mike Sherman ----- Original Message -----

Pete -- 

Thanks for the suggestion. I looked on the NFPA.org website at the NFPA 70 
draft dated 4-8-2016 and there is a new section 422.6: 
"422.6 Listing Required 
All appliances operating at 50 volts or more shall be listed." 

The definition for "Listed" in article 100 of NFPA 70 is complicated (too much 
to re-type here) but: 1) sounds like an NRTL; 2) does not specifically use the 
term NRTL. 

The definition for "Appliance" in article 100 of NFPA 100 starts off: 
"Utilization equipment, generally other than industrial..." and gives a few 
examples that could be either household or commercial (e.g., washing machine, 
air conditioning units, food mixers, deep fryers). Hard to tell the intent of 
the changes here. 

I'm guessing from the format that both "Listed" and "Appliance" definitions are 
being tweaked this time around, but have not checked this against the 2014 
version. 

Mike Sherman 
Graco Inc. 

- Original Message -

From: "Pete Perkins" <0061f3f32d0c-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org> 
To: "EMC-PSTC"  
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 11:35:43 AM 
Subject: Re: [PSES] NEC 2017 



Doug, et al, 



If you were really interested you would be involved in the committee that 
revises the NEC every 3 years and have already read the pertinent changes in 
which you are interested. 



All of these changes are done in an open forum and the documents seem 
available; I don’t follow them, however. 



:>) br, Pete 



Peter E Perkins, PE 

Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs Consultant 

PO Box 23427 

Tigard, ORe 97281-3427 



503/452-1201 



p.perk...@ieee.org 



From: Doug Powell [mailto:doug...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, July 22, 2016 3:13 PM 
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 
Subject: Re: [PSES] NEC 2017 




Have we established that the 2017 edition actually has NRTL vs Listed? 





I would like to hear some clause references since it is nearly 600 pages. 





Thanks, Doug 








Douglas E Powell 


Colorado USA 


doug...@gmail.com 


http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 





On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 3:20 PM, Richard Nute < ri...@ieee.org > wrote: 








The NEC is a model standard and intended to be adopted by local and state AHJs. 
In doing so, the AHJs often take exception to some requirements, and add some 
requirements. In adopting the NEC, the AHJs must specify what “listing” means – 
what third-party certifiers are acceptable to the local or state AHJ. The NEC 
has not mentioned or specified by name a third-party certifier. 



AHJs accept third-party certifications according to their local or state rules. 
A specific NRTL certification may or may not be currently acceptable. 



Now that the 2017 NEC specifies NRTL, it will be interesting to see how the 
local and state AHJs accept specific NRTLs, or NRTLs by standards (as does 
OSHA), or blanket all NRTLs. Note that AHJs have different objectives than 
OSHA, who runs the NRTL program. 





Rich 






- 
 

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to < 
emc-p...@ieee.org > 

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html 

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc. 

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ 
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) 
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 

For help, send mail to the list administrators: 
Scott Douglas < sdoug...@ieee.org > 
Mike Cantwell < mcantw...@ieee.org > 

For policy questions, send mail to: 
Jim Bacher < j.bac...@ieee.org > 
David Heald < dhe...@gmail.com > 












-- 





Douglas E Powell 

doug...@gmail.com 
http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 




- 
 

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to < 
emc-p...@ieee.org > 

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html 

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc. 

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ 
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) 
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 

For help, send mail to the list administrators: 
Scott Douglas < sdoug...@ieee.org > 
Mike Cantwell < mcantw...@ieee.org > 

For policy questions, send mail to: 
Jim Bacher < j.bac...@ieee.org > 
David Heald < dhe...@gmail.com > 
- 
 


This message is from the IEEE

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

2016-07-26 Thread Pete Perkins

Thanx to Joe and all for the comments, 

 

   With Joe’s explanation I now know 2 people who follow the NEC 
changes regularly; it doesn’t seem to be too common in this circle.  But my 
earlier point remains, it is possible to keep up with these changes by being 
part of the process.  

 

   I agree with the ongoing comments showing that each of the more 
than 10k Jurisdictions adopt the NEC on their own conditions.  The City of LA 
has always had a long list of delta’s with the code; perhaps that was their way 
of pushing for changes that they thought needed.   Within each Jurisdiction 
each AHJ inspector has their own short list of hot button issues to contend 
with.  I have smoothed over installation safety conflicts by arranging a 
meeting with the AHJ inspector, preferably at the equipment/jobsite to get 
agreement on what has to be done then working with the equipment supplier to 
get the work in place and properly identified as being adequate and walking the 
inspector thru the completed work to get agreement.  

 

   From a foreign outsiders point of view this is all confusing.  
Any company getting involved in selling electrical products in the US must come 
up to speed as quickly as possible in order to avoid getting stopped selling or 
installing their equipment here.  

 

   Harmonization of technical requirement over the last 30+ years 
has been helpful for the classes of equipment that have participated; the 
understanding of the specific country requirements and certification procedures 
has gotten more complicated.  This has been a recurring IEEE ISPCE conference 
theme.  

 

:>) br,  Pete

 

Peter E Perkins, PE

Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs Consultant

PO Box 23427

Tigard, ORe  97281-3427

 

503/452-1201

 

  p.perk...@ieee.org

 

From: Nyffenegger, Dave [mailto:dave.nyffeneg...@bhemail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 1:20 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

 

As far as I know in North Carolina the NEC is adopted by version so the 2017 
version will not apply until specifically adopted.  NC usually waits a few 
years after the initial release for things to shake out before adopting the 
latest.  And I believe the local inspector in NC has authority to accept or 
require what he wants regardless of the NEC.

 

-Dave

 

From: Scott Douglas [mailto:sdouglas...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 3:44 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG  
Subject: Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

 

Not only do states adopt specific versions, they often adopt just parts of 
specific versions. And unless they put specific language in the adoption law to 
allow newer or older sections, they are usually bound by what exactly was 
adopted.

 

On Jul 26, 2016 12:28 PM, "Joe Randolph" mailto:j...@randolph-telecom.com> > wrote:

Hi Pete:

 

Here’s my experience with keeping track of upcoming changes in NFPA 70.

 

For the last two years I have been following the development of the 2017 
edition of NFPA 70 because of some changes that it makes to Article 840, 
“Premises Powered Broadband Equipment.”  In order to see the current draft of 
the 2017 edition and the committee comments, I had to join the NFPA for $175, 
but it was worth it to me because the changes in Article 840 directly affected 
a project I was working on.  

 

While joining the NFPA allowed me to view the current draft on my computer 
screen, there was no way to download the document or even copy anything more 
than what is on the screen.

 

In summary, it *is* possible to see the draft version as it develops, but it 
requires some effort.  This may have changed recently because I believe the 
final draft has been officially voted on and adopted.

 

On a related note, I have found that when each state or jurisdiction adopts 
NPFA 70 into their local laws, the legislation often specifies a specific 
edition of NFPA 70.  For example, as of last year when I was looking at this, 
the state of Connecticut’s law still called out the 2005 edition of NFPA 70.   
This seems problematic for dealing with changes in the NEC over time.

 

I’m not sure what happens when a revised requirement appears in an edition of 
NFPA 70 that is newer than the edition called out by the laws of the local 
jurisdiction.  Two types of situation can occur:

 

1)  The new requirement is MORE restrictive than the version in the edition 
called out in the legislation

2)  The new requirement is LESS restrictive than the version in the edition 
called out in the legislation

 

Does anyone in this group know how that works?  My impression that the specific 
individual doing the inspection (the AHJ) has wide latitude to pick and choose 
from both editions, but this may be a mistaken impression.  It certainly would 
create a lot of uncertainly for a company that is trying to deploy a single 
product throug

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

2016-07-26 Thread Nyffenegger, Dave

As far as I know in North Carolina the NEC is adopted by version so the 2017 
version will not apply until specifically adopted.  NC usually waits a few 
years after the initial release for things to shake out before adopting the 
latest.  And I believe the local inspector in NC has authority to accept or 
require what he wants regardless of the NEC.

-Dave

From: Scott Douglas [mailto:sdouglas...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 3:44 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] NEC 2017


Not only do states adopt specific versions, they often adopt just parts of 
specific versions. And unless they put specific language in the adoption law to 
allow newer or older sections, they are usually bound by what exactly was 
adopted.

On Jul 26, 2016 12:28 PM, "Joe Randolph" 
mailto:j...@randolph-telecom.com>> wrote:
Hi Pete:

Here’s my experience with keeping track of upcoming changes in NFPA 70.

For the last two years I have been following the development of the 2017 
edition of NFPA 70 because of some changes that it makes to Article 840, 
“Premises Powered Broadband Equipment.”  In order to see the current draft of 
the 2017 edition and the committee comments, I had to join the NFPA for $175, 
but it was worth it to me because the changes in Article 840 directly affected 
a project I was working on.

While joining the NFPA allowed me to view the current draft on my computer 
screen, there was no way to download the document or even copy anything more 
than what is on the screen.

In summary, it *is* possible to see the draft version as it develops, but it 
requires some effort.  This may have changed recently because I believe the 
final draft has been officially voted on and adopted.

On a related note, I have found that when each state or jurisdiction adopts 
NPFA 70 into their local laws, the legislation often specifies a specific 
edition of NFPA 70.  For example, as of last year when I was looking at this, 
the state of Connecticut’s law still called out the 2005 edition of NFPA 70.   
This seems problematic for dealing with changes in the NEC over time.

I’m not sure what happens when a revised requirement appears in an edition of 
NFPA 70 that is newer than the edition called out by the laws of the local 
jurisdiction.  Two types of situation can occur:


1)  The new requirement is MORE restrictive than the version in the edition 
called out in the legislation

2)  The new requirement is LESS restrictive than the version in the edition 
called out in the legislation

Does anyone in this group know how that works?  My impression that the specific 
individual doing the inspection (the AHJ) has wide latitude to pick and choose 
from both editions, but this may be a mistaken impression.  It certainly would 
create a lot of uncertainly for a company that is trying to deploy a single 
product throughout the USA.


Joe Randolph
Telecom Design Consultant
Randolph Telecom, Inc.
781-721-2848 (USA)
j...@randolph-telecom.com
http://www.randolph-telecom.com

From: Pete Perkins 
[mailto:0061f3f32d0c-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org]
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 12:36 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

Doug, et al,

   If you were really interested you would be involved in the 
committee that revises the NEC every 3 years and have already read the 
pertinent changes in which you are interested.

   All of these changes are done in an open forum and the documents 
seem available; I don’t follow them, however.

:>) br,  Pete

Peter E Perkins, PE
Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs Consultant
PO Box 23427
Tigard, ORe  97281-3427

503/452-1201

p.perk...@ieee.org

From: Doug Powell [mailto:doug...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, July 22, 2016 3:13 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

Have we established that the 2017 edition actually has NRTL vs Listed?

I would like to hear some clause references since it is nearly 600 pages.

Thanks,  Doug


Douglas E Powell
Colorado USA
doug...@gmail.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01

On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 3:20 PM, Richard Nute 
mailto:ri...@ieee.org>> wrote:


The NEC is a model standard and intended to be adopted by local and state AHJs. 
 In doing so, the AHJs often take exception to some requirements, and add some 
requirements.  In adopting the NEC, the AHJs must specify what “listing” means 
– what third-party certifiers are acceptable to the local or state AHJ.  The 
NEC has not mentioned or specified by name a third-party certifier.

AHJs accept third-party certifications according to their local or state rules. 
 A specific NRTL certification may or may not be currently acceptable.

Now that the 2017 NEC specifies NRTL, it will be interesting to see how the 
lo

Re: [PSES] Safety requirements in US

2016-07-26 Thread Scott Douglas

And, by the way, don't forget the Department of Energy regulates External
Power Supplies. The whole Level VI thing.

On Jul 26, 2016 10:38 AM, "Ted Eckert" <
07cf6ebeab9d-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org> wrote:

> Hello Scott,
>
>
>
> The CPSC list you provided a link to covers mandatory national
> requirements for products covered by the CPSC. The key words are “national”
> and “mandatory”. There is no mandatory national safety requirement for
> televisions, refrigerators or many other consumer electrical products. OSHA
> has requirements for products used in the workplace, but OSHA has no
> authority over non-work use of these products.
>
>
>
> As numerous other people have noted, local electrical inspectors may have
> requirements for what is used in the home, but that depends on what code
> has been adopted locally. NFPA 70, the National Electrical Code, is fairly
> commonly adopted, but it is not a national law. It may be adopted by a
> state, county or city and they may adopt it with their own modifications.
> Even then, the local inspectors aren’t going to go to stores to check
> approvals on plug-connected products. They typically only do inspections on
> new construction and remodeling where a building permit is required.
>
>
>
> Ted Eckert
>
> Microsoft Corporation
>
>
>
> The opinions expressed are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of
> my employer.
>
>
>
> *From:* Scott Xe [mailto:scott...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 26, 2016 10:09 AM
> *To:* Ted Eckert ; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> *Subject:* Re: [PSES] Safety requirements in US
>
>
>
> Hi Ted,
>
>
>
> Appreciate your detailed explanation that is very useful for me!  OSHA
> requirements are primarily on the use of equipment at work.
>
>
>
> For consumer or household products, they are governed by CPSC.  I visited
> CPSC website and tried to find the same thing there.  I found the mandatory
> requirements, ie. Consumer product safety act under below link
>
>
>
>
> http://www.cpsc.gov/en/Regulations-Laws--Standards/Regulations-Mandatory-Standards-Bans/
>
>
>
> I only found very few products related to above category such as Hair
> Dryers.  No TVs, audios, MWOs, refrigerators, PCs, etc. in the list.  I
> hard to believe they are not regulated.  Did I locate incorrect place or
> the regulation system is different?
>
>
>
> Tks,
>
>
>
> Scott
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *Ted Eckert <07cf6ebeab9d-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org>
> *Reply-To: *Ted Eckert 
> *Date: *Tuesday, 26 July 2016 at 1:55 AM
> *To: *
> *Subject: *Re: [PSES] Safety requirements in US
>
>
>
> Hello Scott,
>
>
>
> OSHA runs the NRTL program . It
> includes a list of Nationally Recognized Test Laboratories
> . Click on any one of
> the labs and it will show the testing standards that lab is recognized for.
>
>
>
> A product is NRTL Listed if it has been approved by an NRTL under one of
> their OSHA approved standards and has been included in that lab’s list of
> approved products.
>
>
>
> A2LA laboratories have demonstrated that they follow specific procedures
> for repeatability and proper testing of products with a fairly broad scope
> of what they can do. NRTL only covers safety standards for a few
> laboratories and is much narrower in scope than A2LA.
>
>
>
> Ted Eckert
>
> Microsoft Corporation
>
>
>
> The opinions expressed are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of
> my employer, OSHA or A2LA. Your mileage may vary.
>
>
>
> *From:* Scott Xe [mailto:scott...@gmail.com ]
> *Sent:* Monday, July 25, 2016 9:42 AM
> *To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> *Subject:* Re: [PSES] Safety requirements in US
>
>
>
> Hi John,
>
>
>
> What is exact meaning of NRTL approved?  Is it a sample for type
> examination against applicable safety standard without production audits?
>
>
>
> What are the differences between A2LA and NRTL?
>
>
>
> *From: *"Tyra, John" 
> *Reply-To: *"Tyra, John" 
> *Date: *Monday, 25 July 2016 at 10:14 PM
> *To: *
> *Subject: *Re: [PSES] Safety requirements in US
>
>
>
> Some states have legal requirements for electrical products to be NRTL
> approved
>
>
>
> *From:* Richard Nute [mailto:ri...@ieee.org ]
> *Sent:* Sunday, July 24, 2016 8:26 PM
> *To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> *Subject:* Re: [PSES] Safety requirements in US
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi Scott:
>
>
>
> For consumer and household products, compliance with CPSC requirements is
> required.
>
>
>
> No.  Only products considered “substantial product hazards” such as hair
> dryers need comply with CPSC requirements.  However, any consumer product
> that injures someone is subject to CPSC recall order.
>
>
>
> What about OSHA?
>
>
>
> Electrical products that are used by employees are required to be NRTL
> certified.
>
>
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Rich
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -
> 
>
> This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc
> discussion list.

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

2016-07-26 Thread Scott Aldous

...and there are jurisdictions on a level smaller than state that can adopt
a version as well, such as counties and even cities.

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 12:43 PM, Scott Douglas 
wrote:

> Not only do states adopt specific versions, they often adopt just parts of
> specific versions. And unless they put specific language in the adoption
> law to allow newer or older sections, they are usually bound by what
> exactly was adopted.
>
> On Jul 26, 2016 12:28 PM, "Joe Randolph"  wrote:
>
>> Hi Pete:
>>
>>
>>
>> Here’s my experience with keeping track of upcoming changes in NFPA 70.
>>
>>
>>
>> For the last two years I have been following the development of the 2017
>> edition of NFPA 70 because of some changes that it makes to Article 840,
>> “Premises Powered Broadband Equipment.”  In order to see the current draft
>> of the 2017 edition and the committee comments, I had to join the NFPA for
>> $175, but it was worth it to me because the changes in Article 840 directly
>> affected a project I was working on.
>>
>>
>>
>> While joining the NFPA allowed me to view the current draft on my
>> computer screen, there was no way to download the document or even copy
>> anything more than what is on the screen.
>>
>>
>>
>> In summary, it **is** possible to see the draft version as it develops,
>> but it requires some effort.  This may have changed recently because I
>> believe the final draft has been officially voted on and adopted.
>>
>>
>>
>> On a related note, I have found that when each state or jurisdiction
>> adopts NPFA 70 into their local laws, the legislation often specifies a
>> specific edition of NFPA 70.  For example, as of last year when I was
>> looking at this, the state of Connecticut’s law still called out the 2005
>> edition of NFPA 70.   This seems problematic for dealing with changes in
>> the NEC over time.
>>
>>
>>
>> I’m not sure what happens when a revised requirement appears in an
>> edition of NFPA 70 that is newer than the edition called out by the laws of
>> the local jurisdiction.  Two types of situation can occur:
>>
>>
>>
>> 1)  The new requirement is MORE restrictive than the version in the
>> edition called out in the legislation
>>
>> 2)  The new requirement is LESS restrictive than the version in the
>> edition called out in the legislation
>>
>>
>>
>> Does anyone in this group know how that works?  My impression that the
>> specific individual doing the inspection (the AHJ) has wide latitude to
>> pick and choose from both editions, but this may be a mistaken impression.
>> It certainly would create a lot of uncertainly for a company that is trying
>> to deploy a single product throughout the USA.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Joe Randolph
>>
>> Telecom Design Consultant
>>
>> Randolph Telecom, Inc.
>>
>> 781-721-2848 (USA)
>>
>> j...@randolph-telecom.com
>>
>> http://www.randolph-telecom.com
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Pete Perkins [mailto:0061f3f32d0c-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org]
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 26, 2016 12:36 PM
>> *To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
>> *Subject:* Re: [PSES] NEC 2017
>>
>>
>>
>> Doug, et al,
>>
>>
>>
>>If you were really interested you would be involved in the
>> committee that revises the NEC every 3 years and have already read the
>> pertinent changes in which you are interested.
>>
>>
>>
>>All of these changes are done in an open forum and the
>> documents seem available; I don’t follow them, however.
>>
>>
>>
>> :>) br,  Pete
>>
>>
>>
>> Peter E Perkins, PE
>>
>> Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs Consultant
>>
>> PO Box 23427
>>
>> Tigard, ORe  97281-3427
>>
>>
>>
>> 503/452-1201
>>
>>
>>
>> p.perk...@ieee.org
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Doug Powell [mailto:doug...@gmail.com ]
>> *Sent:* Friday, July 22, 2016 3:13 PM
>> *To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
>> *Subject:* Re: [PSES] NEC 2017
>>
>>
>>
>> Have we established that the 2017 edition actually has NRTL vs Listed?
>>
>>
>>
>> I would like to hear some clause references since it is nearly 600 pages.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks,  Doug
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Douglas E Powell
>>
>> Colorado USA
>>
>> doug...@gmail.com
>>
>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 3:20 PM, Richard Nute  wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> The NEC is a model standard and intended to be adopted by local and state
>> AHJs.  In doing so, the AHJs often take exception to some requirements, and
>> add some requirements.  In adopting the NEC, the AHJs must specify what
>> “listing” means – what third-party certifiers are acceptable to the local
>> or state AHJ.  The NEC has not mentioned or specified by name a third-party
>> certifier.
>>
>>
>>
>> AHJs accept third-party certifications according to their local or state
>> rules.  A specific NRTL certification may or may not be currently
>> acceptable.
>>
>>
>>
>> Now that the 2017 NEC specifies NRTL, it will be interesting to see how
>> the local and state AHJs accept specific NRTLs, or NRTLs by standards (as
>> does OSHA), or blanket all NR

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

2016-07-26 Thread Scott Douglas

Not only do states adopt specific versions, they often adopt just parts of
specific versions. And unless they put specific language in the adoption
law to allow newer or older sections, they are usually bound by what
exactly was adopted.

On Jul 26, 2016 12:28 PM, "Joe Randolph"  wrote:

> Hi Pete:
>
>
>
> Here’s my experience with keeping track of upcoming changes in NFPA 70.
>
>
>
> For the last two years I have been following the development of the 2017
> edition of NFPA 70 because of some changes that it makes to Article 840,
> “Premises Powered Broadband Equipment.”  In order to see the current draft
> of the 2017 edition and the committee comments, I had to join the NFPA for
> $175, but it was worth it to me because the changes in Article 840 directly
> affected a project I was working on.
>
>
>
> While joining the NFPA allowed me to view the current draft on my computer
> screen, there was no way to download the document or even copy anything
> more than what is on the screen.
>
>
>
> In summary, it **is** possible to see the draft version as it develops,
> but it requires some effort.  This may have changed recently because I
> believe the final draft has been officially voted on and adopted.
>
>
>
> On a related note, I have found that when each state or jurisdiction
> adopts NPFA 70 into their local laws, the legislation often specifies a
> specific edition of NFPA 70.  For example, as of last year when I was
> looking at this, the state of Connecticut’s law still called out the 2005
> edition of NFPA 70.   This seems problematic for dealing with changes in
> the NEC over time.
>
>
>
> I’m not sure what happens when a revised requirement appears in an edition
> of NFPA 70 that is newer than the edition called out by the laws of the
> local jurisdiction.  Two types of situation can occur:
>
>
>
> 1)  The new requirement is MORE restrictive than the version in the
> edition called out in the legislation
>
> 2)  The new requirement is LESS restrictive than the version in the
> edition called out in the legislation
>
>
>
> Does anyone in this group know how that works?  My impression that the
> specific individual doing the inspection (the AHJ) has wide latitude to
> pick and choose from both editions, but this may be a mistaken impression.
> It certainly would create a lot of uncertainly for a company that is trying
> to deploy a single product throughout the USA.
>
>
>
>
>
> Joe Randolph
>
> Telecom Design Consultant
>
> Randolph Telecom, Inc.
>
> 781-721-2848 (USA)
>
> j...@randolph-telecom.com
>
> http://www.randolph-telecom.com
>
>
>
> *From:* Pete Perkins [mailto:0061f3f32d0c-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 26, 2016 12:36 PM
> *To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> *Subject:* Re: [PSES] NEC 2017
>
>
>
> Doug, et al,
>
>
>
>If you were really interested you would be involved in the
> committee that revises the NEC every 3 years and have already read the
> pertinent changes in which you are interested.
>
>
>
>All of these changes are done in an open forum and the
> documents seem available; I don’t follow them, however.
>
>
>
> :>) br,  Pete
>
>
>
> Peter E Perkins, PE
>
> Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs Consultant
>
> PO Box 23427
>
> Tigard, ORe  97281-3427
>
>
>
> 503/452-1201
>
>
>
> p.perk...@ieee.org
>
>
>
> *From:* Doug Powell [mailto:doug...@gmail.com ]
> *Sent:* Friday, July 22, 2016 3:13 PM
> *To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> *Subject:* Re: [PSES] NEC 2017
>
>
>
> Have we established that the 2017 edition actually has NRTL vs Listed?
>
>
>
> I would like to hear some clause references since it is nearly 600 pages.
>
>
>
> Thanks,  Doug
>
>
>
>
>
> Douglas E Powell
>
> Colorado USA
>
> doug...@gmail.com
>
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 3:20 PM, Richard Nute  wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> The NEC is a model standard and intended to be adopted by local and state
> AHJs.  In doing so, the AHJs often take exception to some requirements, and
> add some requirements.  In adopting the NEC, the AHJs must specify what
> “listing” means – what third-party certifiers are acceptable to the local
> or state AHJ.  The NEC has not mentioned or specified by name a third-party
> certifier.
>
>
>
> AHJs accept third-party certifications according to their local or state
> rules.  A specific NRTL certification may or may not be currently
> acceptable.
>
>
>
> Now that the 2017 NEC specifies NRTL, it will be interesting to see how
> the local and state AHJs accept specific NRTLs, or NRTLs by standards (as
> does OSHA), or blanket all NRTLs.  Note that AHJs have different objectives
> than OSHA, who runs the NRTL program.
>
>
>
>
>
> Rich
>
>
>
>
>
> -
> 
>
> This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc
> discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <
> emc-p...@ieee.org>
>
> All emc-pstc p

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

2016-07-26 Thread Joe Randolph

Hi Pete:

 

Here’s my experience with keeping track of upcoming changes in NFPA 70.

 

For the last two years I have been following the development of the 2017 
edition of NFPA 70 because of some changes that it makes to Article 840, 
“Premises Powered Broadband Equipment.”  In order to see the current draft of 
the 2017 edition and the committee comments, I had to join the NFPA for $175, 
but it was worth it to me because the changes in Article 840 directly affected 
a project I was working on.  

 

While joining the NFPA allowed me to view the current draft on my computer 
screen, there was no way to download the document or even copy anything more 
than what is on the screen.

 

In summary, it *is* possible to see the draft version as it develops, but it 
requires some effort.  This may have changed recently because I believe the 
final draft has been officially voted on and adopted.

 

On a related note, I have found that when each state or jurisdiction adopts 
NPFA 70 into their local laws, the legislation often specifies a specific 
edition of NFPA 70.  For example, as of last year when I was looking at this, 
the state of Connecticut’s law still called out the 2005 edition of NFPA 70.   
This seems problematic for dealing with changes in the NEC over time.

 

I’m not sure what happens when a revised requirement appears in an edition of 
NFPA 70 that is newer than the edition called out by the laws of the local 
jurisdiction.  Two types of situation can occur:

 

1)  The new requirement is MORE restrictive than the version in the edition 
called out in the legislation

2)  The new requirement is LESS restrictive than the version in the edition 
called out in the legislation

 

Does anyone in this group know how that works?  My impression that the specific 
individual doing the inspection (the AHJ) has wide latitude to pick and choose 
from both editions, but this may be a mistaken impression.  It certainly would 
create a lot of uncertainly for a company that is trying to deploy a single 
product throughout the USA.

 

 

Joe Randolph

Telecom Design Consultant

Randolph Telecom, Inc.

781-721-2848 (USA)

  j...@randolph-telecom.com

  http://www.randolph-telecom.com

 

From: Pete Perkins [mailto:0061f3f32d0c-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 12:36 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

 

Doug, et al,

 

   If you were really interested you would be involved in the 
committee that revises the NEC every 3 years and have already read the 
pertinent changes in which you are interested.  

 

   All of these changes are done in an open forum and the documents 
seem available; I don’t follow them, however.  

 

:>) br,  Pete

 

Peter E Perkins, PE

Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs Consultant

PO Box 23427

Tigard, ORe  97281-3427

 

503/452-1201

 

  p.perk...@ieee.org

 

From: Doug Powell [mailto:doug...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, July 22, 2016 3:13 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG  
Subject: Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

 

Have we established that the 2017 edition actually has NRTL vs Listed?

 

I would like to hear some clause references since it is nearly 600 pages.

 

Thanks,  Doug

 

 

Douglas E Powell

Colorado USA

  doug...@gmail.com

  http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01

 

On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 3:20 PM, Richard Nute mailto:ri...@ieee.org> > wrote:

 

 

The NEC is a model standard and intended to be adopted by local and state AHJs. 
 In doing so, the AHJs often take exception to some requirements, and add some 
requirements.  In adopting the NEC, the AHJs must specify what “listing” means 
– what third-party certifiers are acceptable to the local or state AHJ.  The 
NEC has not mentioned or specified by name a third-party certifier.  

 

AHJs accept third-party certifications according to their local or state rules. 
 A specific NRTL certification may or may not be currently acceptable.  

 

Now that the 2017 NEC specifies NRTL, it will be interesting to see how the 
local and state AHJs accept specific NRTLs, or NRTLs by standards (as does 
OSHA), or blanket all NRTLs.  Note that AHJs have different objectives than 
OSHA, who runs the NRTL program.

 

 

Rich

 

 

-


This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
 >

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats),

Re: [PSES] Safety requirements in US

2016-07-26 Thread Ted Eckert

Hello Scott,

The CPSC list you provided a link to covers mandatory national requirements for 
products covered by the CPSC. The key words are “national” and “mandatory”. 
There is no mandatory national safety requirement for televisions, 
refrigerators or many other consumer electrical products. OSHA has requirements 
for products used in the workplace, but OSHA has no authority over non-work use 
of these products.

As numerous other people have noted, local electrical inspectors may have 
requirements for what is used in the home, but that depends on what code has 
been adopted locally. NFPA 70, the National Electrical Code, is fairly commonly 
adopted, but it is not a national law. It may be adopted by a state, county or 
city and they may adopt it with their own modifications. Even then, the local 
inspectors aren’t going to go to stores to check approvals on plug-connected 
products. They typically only do inspections on new construction and remodeling 
where a building permit is required.

Ted Eckert
Microsoft Corporation

The opinions expressed are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of my 
employer.

From: Scott Xe [mailto:scott...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 10:09 AM
To: Ted Eckert ; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Safety requirements in US

Hi Ted,

Appreciate your detailed explanation that is very useful for me!  OSHA 
requirements are primarily on the use of equipment at work.


For consumer or household products, they are governed by CPSC.  I visited CPSC 
website and tried to find the same thing there.  I found the mandatory 
requirements, ie. Consumer product safety act under below link

http://www.cpsc.gov/en/Regulations-Laws--Standards/Regulations-Mandatory-Standards-Bans/

I only found very few products related to above category such as Hair Dryers.  
No TVs, audios, MWOs, refrigerators, PCs, etc. in the list.  I hard to believe 
they are not regulated.  Did I locate incorrect place or the regulation system 
is different?

Tks,

Scott


From: Ted Eckert 
<07cf6ebeab9d-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org>
Reply-To: Ted Eckert mailto:ted.eck...@microsoft.com>>
Date: Tuesday, 26 July 2016 at 1:55 AM
To: mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>>
Subject: Re: [PSES] Safety requirements in US

Hello Scott,

OSHA runs the NRTL program. It includes a 
list of Nationally Recognized Test 
Laboratories. Click on any 
one of the labs and it will show the testing standards that lab is recognized 
for.

A product is NRTL Listed if it has been approved by an NRTL under one of their 
OSHA approved standards and has been included in that lab’s list of approved 
products.

A2LA laboratories have demonstrated that they follow specific procedures for 
repeatability and proper testing of products with a fairly broad scope of what 
they can do. NRTL only covers safety standards for a few laboratories and is 
much narrower in scope than A2LA.

Ted Eckert
Microsoft Corporation

The opinions expressed are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of my 
employer, OSHA or A2LA. Your mileage may vary.

From: Scott Xe [mailto:scott...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2016 9:42 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Safety requirements in US

Hi John,

What is exact meaning of NRTL approved?  Is it a sample for type examination 
against applicable safety standard without production audits?

What are the differences between A2LA and NRTL?

From: "Tyra, John" mailto:john_t...@bose.com>>
Reply-To: "Tyra, John" mailto:john_t...@bose.com>>
Date: Monday, 25 July 2016 at 10:14 PM
To: mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>>
Subject: Re: [PSES] Safety requirements in US

Some states have legal requirements for electrical products to be NRTL approved

From: Richard Nute [mailto:ri...@ieee.org]
Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2016 8:26 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Safety requirements in US


Hi Scott:

For consumer and household products, compliance with CPSC requirements is 
required.

No.  Only products considered “substantial product hazards” such as hair dryers 
need comply with CPSC requirements.  However, any consumer product that injures 
someone is subject to CPSC recall order.

What about OSHA?

Electrical products that are used by employees are required to be NRTL 
certified.


Best regards,
Rich



-


This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org>>

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used f

Re: [PSES] Safety requirements in US

2016-07-26 Thread Scott Xe

Hi Ted,

 

Appreciate your detailed explanation that is very useful for me!  OSHA 
requirements are primarily on the use of equipment at work.

 

For consumer or household products, they are governed by CPSC.  I visited CPSC 
website and tried to find the same thing there.  I found the mandatory 
requirements, ie. Consumer product safety act under below link

 

http://www.cpsc.gov/en/Regulations-Laws--Standards/Regulations-Mandatory-Standards-Bans/

 

I only found very few products related to above category such as Hair Dryers.  
No TVs, audios, MWOs, refrigerators, PCs, etc. in the list.  I hard to believe 
they are not regulated.  Did I locate incorrect place or the regulation system 
is different?

 

Tks,

 

Scott

 

 

From: Ted Eckert <07cf6ebeab9d-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org>
Reply-To: Ted Eckert 
Date: Tuesday, 26 July 2016 at 1:55 AM
To: 
Subject: Re: [PSES] Safety requirements in US

 

Hello Scott,

 

OSHA runs the NRTL program. It includes a list of Nationally Recognized Test 
Laboratories. Click on any one of the labs and it will show the testing 
standards that lab is recognized for. 

 

A product is NRTL Listed if it has been approved by an NRTL under one of their 
OSHA approved standards and has been included in that lab’s list of approved 
products. 

 

A2LA laboratories have demonstrated that they follow specific procedures for 
repeatability and proper testing of products with a fairly broad scope of what 
they can do. NRTL only covers safety standards for a few laboratories and is 
much narrower in scope than A2LA. 

 

Ted Eckert

Microsoft Corporation

 

The opinions expressed are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of my 
employer, OSHA or A2LA. Your mileage may vary. 

 

From: Scott Xe [mailto:scott...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2016 9:42 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Safety requirements in US

 

Hi John,

 

What is exact meaning of NRTL approved?  Is it a sample for type examination 
against applicable safety standard without production audits?

 

What are the differences between A2LA and NRTL?

 

From: "Tyra, John" 
Reply-To: "Tyra, John" 
Date: Monday, 25 July 2016 at 10:14 PM
To: 
Subject: Re: [PSES] Safety requirements in US

 

Some states have legal requirements for electrical products to be NRTL approved

 

From: Richard Nute [mailto:ri...@ieee.org] 
Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2016 8:26 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Safety requirements in US

 

 

Hi Scott:

 

For consumer and household products, compliance with CPSC requirements is 
required.

 

No.  Only products considered “substantial product hazards” such as hair dryers 
need comply with CPSC requirements.  However, any consumer product that injures 
someone is subject to CPSC recall order.  

 

What about OSHA?

 

Electrical products that are used by employees are required to be NRTL 
certified.

 

 

Best regards,

Rich

 

 

 

-


This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell  

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher 
David Heald  

-


This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell  

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher 
David Heald  

-


This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compl

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

2016-07-26 Thread Pete Perkins

CR, etal,

Ok, so now you are mixing in additional regulatory requirements - FCC - 
on top of the safety requirements we have been discussing.  

So now, since they have been alerted HD will no longer sell items that 
do not meet the FCC emissions requirements - watch for the announcement.  

By the way, there are many other US regulatory requirements that are 
out there and they are not uniformly applied across the US.   Energy efficiency 
comes to mind; the state  of California is really on top of this one.  

:>) br,  Pete

Peter E Perkins, PE
Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs Consultant
PO Box 23427
Tigard, ORe  97281-3427

503/452-1201

p.perk...@ieee.org

-Original Message-
From: Cortland Richmond [mailto:k...@earthlink.net] 
Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2016 10:49 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

On 7/23/2016 10:07 AM, Brian Gregory wrote:
> Another is to research Home Depot's buyer's guide:  I believe they 
> somewhere say in writing that they'll not sell non-approved plug-in 
> appliances.

They do, however, readily sell DIY FCC-non-compliant lighting fixtures.

Cortland Richmond

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to 
unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald:

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

2016-07-26 Thread Pete Perkins

Doug, et al,

 

   If you were really interested you would be involved in the 
committee that revises the NEC every 3 years and have already read the 
pertinent changes in which you are interested.  

 

   All of these changes are done in an open forum and the documents 
seem available; I don’t follow them, however.  

 

:>) br,  Pete

 

Peter E Perkins, PE

Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs Consultant

PO Box 23427

Tigard, ORe  97281-3427

 

503/452-1201

 

  p.perk...@ieee.org

 

From: Doug Powell [mailto:doug...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, July 22, 2016 3:13 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

 

Have we established that the 2017 edition actually has NRTL vs Listed?

 

I would like to hear some clause references since it is nearly 600 pages.

 

Thanks,  Doug

 

 

Douglas E Powell

Colorado USA

  doug...@gmail.com

  http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01

 

On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 3:20 PM, Richard Nute mailto:ri...@ieee.org> > wrote:

 

 

The NEC is a model standard and intended to be adopted by local and state AHJs. 
 In doing so, the AHJs often take exception to some requirements, and add some 
requirements.  In adopting the NEC, the AHJs must specify what “listing” means 
– what third-party certifiers are acceptable to the local or state AHJ.  The 
NEC has not mentioned or specified by name a third-party certifier.  

 

AHJs accept third-party certifications according to their local or state rules. 
 A specific NRTL certification may or may not be currently acceptable.  

 

Now that the 2017 NEC specifies NRTL, it will be interesting to see how the 
local and state AHJs accept specific NRTLs, or NRTLs by standards (as does 
OSHA), or blanket all NRTLs.  Note that AHJs have different objectives than 
OSHA, who runs the NRTL program.

 

 

Rich

 

 

-


This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
 >

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) 
 
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas  >
Mike Cantwell  > 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher  >
David Heald  > 





 

-- 

 

Douglas E Powell

doug...@gmail.com  
http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01

-


This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org> >

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) 
 
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org> >
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org> > 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org> >
David Heald mailto:dhe...@gmail.com> > 


-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald:

Re: [PSES] Safety requirements in US

2016-07-26 Thread Brian Gregory

 NESC and NETA {2013} are both ANSI standards and are both pretty much aimed at 
the utility-distribution crowd:  aka, 4 kV and above.  Colorado Brian Gregory
720-450-4933

-- Original Message --
From: John Allen 
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Safety requirements in US
Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2016 11:23:00 +0100

What a web of “interconnecting” (and not!) US regulations, 
standards, codes and regulatory authorities!. But we still sometimes then get 
US-based questions on the “European Wiring Regs” or similar - seems 
like a case of “Physician, heal thyself” first. J
John E Allen
W.London, UK

From: Scott Douglas [mailto:sdouglas...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 26 July 2016 03:59
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Safety requirements in US

And not to confuse the issue even more, but then there is the N.E.S.C. - 
National Electrical Safety Code (or nowadays ANSI Standard C2) published by 
IEEE. Adopted in most states in some fashion, except for California which does 
its own thing. I think this one is primarily aimed at utilities though. Dates 
back to 1913.

On 7/25/2016 6:34 PM, Brian O'Connell wrote:
Correct, National Electric Code is pro forma NFPA70, or at least per 
administrative laws of each U.S. state. 

But the reader should understand that there are state and municipal regulations 
that also specifically and formally refer to NFPA79 and NFPA99 as national 
building codes.

And the NFPA itself refers to 99 as a national 'Code'. 

The scope of the thread was OSHA per the NEC and associated test standards, 
where my premise is that 'code' and standards evolve and are contrived via 
various circular references.

And Mr. Nute pointed to the problem of the various NEC versions enacted locally 
(most, but not all, have adopted 2014) vs the referenced product safety 
standard that would be used to verify compliance by the AHJ. And the OSHA 
cannot affect any force for an organizing change as their statue scopes only 
workplace safety.

Brian

From: msherma...@comcast.net 
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2016 6:02 PM
To: Brian O'Connell; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Safety requirements in US

NEC is specifically NFPA 70, otherwise known as the National Electrical Code. 

Sent from Xfinity Connect Mobile App

-- Original Message --

From: Brian O'Connell
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Sent: July 25, 2016 at 7:26 PM
Subject: Re: [PSES] Safety requirements in US
By 'NEC", will assume that the reference is something like NFPA70 or 79. There 
are, as we all know, many other elements of NFPA construction requirements . 
NFPAs can reference ANSI, IEC, NEMA, ASME, IEEE, and other standards; and many 
ANSI, NEMA, and IEEE standards reference one or more NFPA elements in the scope 
statements. So the references are intended to be circular. 

Brian
From: Richard Nute 
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2016 2:15:11 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Safety requirements in US

“Each NRTL has a scope of test standards that they are recognized 
for…”
https://www.osha.gov/dts/otpca/nrtl/
Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratories (NRTLs)
www.osha.gov
OSHA's Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory (NRTL) Program. Recognizes 
private sector organizations to perform certification for certain products to 
ensure that ...

NRTL certification for OSHA purposes is limited to its scope of test standards. 
 Check out your favorite NRTL for its OSHA test standards.

We don’t yet know whether the NEC is limited to the OSHA NRTL scope test 
standards or is open to all test standards the NRTL certifies products to.  
(Awful English, but understandable.)

And, we don’t yet know whether the locally-adopted NEC will be the OSHA 
NRTL scope test standards or will be open to all test standards the NRTL 
certifies products to.   

Rich

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.
Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 
For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher 
David Heald 

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
Attachments a

Re: [PSES] Safety requirements in US

2016-07-26 Thread John Allen

What a web of "interconnecting" (and not!) US regulations, standards, codes
and regulatory authorities!. But we still sometimes then get US-based
questions on the "European Wiring Regs" or similar - seems like a case of
"Physician, heal thyself" first. J

John E Allen

W.London, UK

 

From: Scott Douglas [mailto:sdouglas...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 26 July 2016 03:59
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Safety requirements in US

 

And not to confuse the issue even more, but then there is the N.E.S.C. -
National Electrical Safety Code (or nowadays ANSI Standard C2) published by
IEEE. Adopted in most states in some fashion, except for California which
does its own thing. I think this one is primarily aimed at utilities though.
Dates back to 1913.

 

On 7/25/2016 6:34 PM, Brian O'Connell wrote:

Correct, National Electric Code is pro forma NFPA70, or at least per
administrative laws of each U.S. state. 

 

But the reader should understand that there are state and municipal
regulations that also specifically and formally refer to NFPA79 and NFPA99
as national building codes.

 

And the NFPA itself refers to 99 as a national 'Code'. 

 

The scope of the thread was OSHA per the NEC and associated test standards,
where my premise is that 'code' and standards evolve and are contrived via
various circular references.

 

And Mr. Nute pointed to the problem of the various NEC versions enacted
locally (most, but not all, have adopted 2014) vs the referenced product
safety standard that would be used to verify compliance by the AHJ. And the
OSHA cannot affect any force for an organizing change as their statue scopes
only workplace safety.

 

Brian

 


  _  


From: msherma...@comcast.net  

Sent: Monday, July 25, 2016 6:02 PM
To: Brian O'Connell; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Safety requirements in US 

 

NEC is specifically NFPA 70, otherwise known as the National Electrical
Code. 

Sent from Xfinity Connect Mobile App 


-- Original Message --

From: Brian O'Connell
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Sent: July 25, 2016 at 7:26 PM
Subject: Re: [PSES] Safety requirements in US

By 'NEC", will assume that the reference is something like NFPA70 or 79.
There are, as we all know, many other elements of NFPA construction
requirements . NFPAs can reference ANSI, IEC, NEMA, ASME, IEEE, and other
standards; and many ANSI, NEMA, and IEEE standards reference one or more
NFPA elements in the scope statements. So the references are intended to be
circular. 

 

Brian


  _  


From: Richard Nute   
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2016 2:15:11 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Safety requirements in US 

 

 

"Each NRTL has a scope of test standards that they are recognized for."

https://www.osha.gov/dts/otpca/nrtl/


  Nationally Recognized Testing
Laboratories (NRTLs)

www.osha.gov

OSHA's Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory (NRTL) Program. Recognizes
private sector organizations to perform certification for certain products
to ensure that ...

 

 

NRTL certification for OSHA purposes is limited to its scope of test
standards.  Check out your favorite NRTL for its OSHA test standards.

 

We don't yet know whether the NEC is limited to the OSHA NRTL scope test
standards or is open to all test standards the NRTL certifies products to.
(Awful English, but understandable.)

 

And, we don't yet know whether the locally-adopted NEC will be the OSHA NRTL
scope test standards or will be open to all test standards the NRTL
certifies products to.   

 

 

Rich

 

 

-


This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in
well-used formats), large files, etc.

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to
unsubscribe)  
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell  

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher 
David Heald  

 

-


This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in
well-used formats), large

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

Re: [PSES] Safety requirements in US

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

Re: [PSES] Safety requirements in US

Re: [PSES] Safety requirements in US

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

Re: [PSES] NEC 2017

Re: [PSES] Safety requirements in US

Re: [PSES] Safety requirements in US

13 matches

Site Navigation

Mail list logo

Footer information