<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://blog.nema.org/utility/FeedStylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>NEMA Currents  : Building Codes</title><link>http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/archive/tags/Building+Codes/default.aspx</link><description>Tags: Building Codes</description><dc:language>en</dc:language><generator>CommunityServer 2008.5 (Debug Build: 30929.2835)</generator><item><title>Investigators call Soldier’s electrocution “negligent homicide”</title><link>http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/archive/2009/01/26/investigators-call-soldier-s-electrocution-negligent-homicide.aspx</link><pubDate>Mon, 26 Jan 2009 13:33:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">1447dd18-a85e-48e6-bb73-6fd9ba4b7540:7006</guid><dc:creator>Winstanley, Gerard</dc:creator><slash:comments>2</slash:comments><wfw:commentRss xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/">http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/rsscomments.aspx?PostID=7006</wfw:commentRss><comments>http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/archive/2009/01/26/investigators-call-soldier-s-electrocution-negligent-homicide.aspx#comments</comments><description>&lt;span style="FONT-SIZE:11pt;LINE-HEIGHT:150%;FONT-FAMILY:Arial;"&gt;The &lt;a href="http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/01/22/soldier.electrocuted/index.html"&gt;death of a soldier&lt;/a&gt; electrocuted while showering at a military facility in Iraq a year ago may be changed from accidental death to negligent homicide.&lt;span style="mso-spacerun:yes;"&gt;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/span&gt;Army criminal investigators say that KBR, the largest US contractor in Iraq, may have failed to have qualified electricians and plumbers undertaking installation work at military camps.&lt;span style="mso-spacerun:yes;"&gt;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="mso-spacerun:yes;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;Up to 18 other deaths of military personnel and contracts have been blamed on faulty wiring or grounding.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="FONT-SIZE:11pt;LINE-HEIGHT:150%;FONT-FAMILY:Arial;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="FONT-SIZE:11pt;LINE-HEIGHT:150%;FONT-FAMILY:Arial;"&gt;The installation codes and inspection practices developed in this country over the last 100 years have brought us unparalleled electrical safety, but they require a strict adherence to the rules the industry has developed.&amp;nbsp; A process in which NEMA, and it&amp;#39;s members, have taken a leading role. Our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan spend their days in harms way, they should not have to face danger in their down time.&lt;span style="mso-spacerun:yes;"&gt;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/span&gt;They deserve the same levels of electrical safety that we enjoy at home.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="FONT-SIZE:11pt;LINE-HEIGHT:150%;FONT-FAMILY:Arial;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt; 
&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://blog.nema.org/aggbug.aspx?PostID=7006" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description><category domain="http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/archive/tags/Electrical+Safety/default.aspx">Electrical Safety</category><category domain="http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/archive/tags/Building+Codes/default.aspx">Building Codes</category><category domain="http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/archive/tags/Safety+and+Standardization/default.aspx">Safety and Standardization</category><category domain="http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/archive/tags/Standardization/default.aspx">Standardization</category></item><item><title>Electrical Safety – Ohio Back on Track.</title><link>http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/archive/2008/12/15/electrical-safety-ohio-back-on-track.aspx</link><pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2008 15:40:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">1447dd18-a85e-48e6-bb73-6fd9ba4b7540:5605</guid><dc:creator>Winstanley, Gerard</dc:creator><slash:comments>1</slash:comments><wfw:commentRss xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/">http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/rsscomments.aspx?PostID=5605</wfw:commentRss><comments>http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/archive/2008/12/15/electrical-safety-ohio-back-on-track.aspx#comments</comments><description>&lt;p&gt;Common sense won the day as the Ohio Board of Building Standards voted for a second time to adopt the &lt;i&gt;2008&lt;/i&gt; &lt;i&gt;National Electrical Code (NEC)&lt;/i&gt; on &lt;a href="http://www.newsnet5.com/video/18271738/index.html?taf=nn5"&gt;December 12&lt;sup&gt;th&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/a&gt; .&amp;nbsp; This cleared up a confused year in which Governor Stickland succumbed to pressure from the Home Builder&amp;#39;s Association of Ohio and signed an emergency order reversing the board&amp;#39;s earlier approval of the NEC 2008 and calling for public hearings. Fortunately those public hearings only strengthened the case for the Adoption of NEC 2008 with the additional safety&amp;nbsp;requirements&amp;nbsp;for Arc Fault Circuit Interrupters and tamper proof receptacles.&amp;nbsp; Congratulations to the officials of Ohio for resisting the political maneuverings and coming down on the side of electrical safety.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://blog.nema.org/aggbug.aspx?PostID=5605" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description><category domain="http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/archive/tags/Electrical+Safety/default.aspx">Electrical Safety</category><category domain="http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/archive/tags/AFCI/default.aspx">AFCI</category><category domain="http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/archive/tags/Building+Codes/default.aspx">Building Codes</category><category domain="http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/archive/tags/Fire+Safety/default.aspx">Fire Safety</category><category domain="http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/archive/tags/Tamper+Resistant+Receptacles/default.aspx">Tamper Resistant Receptacles</category></item><item><title>Kentucky Home Builders Kill Electrical Safety Bill Despite Overwhelming Public Support </title><link>http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/archive/2008/12/05/kentucky-home-builders-kill-electrical-safety-bill-despite-overwhelming-public-support.aspx</link><pubDate>Fri, 05 Dec 2008 14:14:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">1447dd18-a85e-48e6-bb73-6fd9ba4b7540:5203</guid><dc:creator>Winstanley, Gerard</dc:creator><slash:comments>4</slash:comments><wfw:commentRss xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/">http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/rsscomments.aspx?PostID=5203</wfw:commentRss><comments>http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/archive/2008/12/05/kentucky-home-builders-kill-electrical-safety-bill-despite-overwhelming-public-support.aspx#comments</comments><description>&lt;p&gt;Television viewers in Louisville overwhelmingly believe new homes built in Kentucky should require electrical safety features that help prevent fires and protect children from severe shock and burns, according to an online poll by &lt;a href="http://www.nema.org/"&gt;Louisville television station WHAS-11.&lt;/a&gt;The poll was conducted after the Home Builders Association of Kentucky (HBAK) managed to persuade the Kentucky Board of Housing, Buildings and Construction to reverse its earlier unanimous decision to adopt the 2008 National Electric Code.&amp;nbsp; HKAK objected to the requirements in the 2008 NEC, which expands the use of arc fault circuit interrupters (AFCIs), an electronic form of circuit breaker designed to detect and prevent home electrical fires, and requires the installation of tamper proof receptacles that prevent children from sticking items into the slots of electrical outlets.&amp;nbsp; Ninety percent of respondents responded &amp;quot;yes&amp;quot; to the question, &amp;quot;Do you think electrical safety features should be required for new homes?&amp;quot;&amp;nbsp; Some of the comments left by respondents include:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;&amp;quot;I feel that the department of building and housing is taking a MAJOR step backwards in fire safety and shock safety...saving a few dollars does not account for someone losing their life.&amp;quot;&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;&amp;quot;Some people, regardless of facts and statistics, continue to close their eyes and minds to these important fire and life safety features.&amp;quot;&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;&amp;quot;If it just saves one life, it&amp;#39;s worth it...It seems like everything is coming down to money, not safety.&amp;quot;&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;&amp;quot;It is amazing to what extent the Home Builders Association will go to fight Safety.&amp;quot;&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Kentucky fire chiefs, safety experts and the public all agree that the 2008 NEC would be a big step forward in electrical safety.&amp;nbsp; How could the Kentucky Board of Housing, Buildings and Construction ignore them?&amp;nbsp; Is saving a few dollars worth the inevitable loss of life?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://blog.nema.org/aggbug.aspx?PostID=5203" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description><category domain="http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/archive/tags/Electrical+Safety/default.aspx">Electrical Safety</category><category domain="http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/archive/tags/AFCI/default.aspx">AFCI</category><category domain="http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/archive/tags/Building+Codes/default.aspx">Building Codes</category><category domain="http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/archive/tags/Fire+Safety/default.aspx">Fire Safety</category><category domain="http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/archive/tags/Tamper+Resistant+Receptacles/default.aspx">Tamper Resistant Receptacles</category></item><item><title>NEMA and "Net Zero Energy" High Performance Green Buildings</title><link>http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/archive/2008/12/02/nema-and-net-zero-energy-high-performance-green-buildings.aspx</link><pubDate>Tue, 02 Dec 2008 18:01:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">1447dd18-a85e-48e6-bb73-6fd9ba4b7540:5109</guid><dc:creator>Moldoveanu, Andrei</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><wfw:commentRss xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/">http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/rsscomments.aspx?PostID=5109</wfw:commentRss><comments>http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/archive/2008/12/02/nema-and-net-zero-energy-high-performance-green-buildings.aspx#comments</comments><description>&lt;span style="FONT-SIZE:10pt;FONT-FAMILY:Arial;"&gt;In April 2008 the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) of the Executive Office of the President of the United States held a Workshop on &amp;quot;Net Zero Energy&amp;quot; High Performance Green Buildings. The scope was to define the R&amp;amp;D activities that could decrease use of natural resources and improve indoor environments while reducing greenhouse gas emissions and other harmful pollutants from the building sector. &lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="FONT-SIZE:10pt;FONT-FAMILY:Arial;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="FONT-SIZE:10pt;FONT-FAMILY:Arial;"&gt;NEMA participated in the workshop, and its&amp;nbsp;suggestions for areas that need to be researched and developed to achieve the net-zero energy building goal were&amp;nbsp;included in &lt;a class="" href="http://www.bfrl.nist.gov/buildingtechnology/documents/FederalRDAgendaforNetZeroEnergyHighPerformanceGreenBuildings.pdf"&gt;the final report&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="FONT-SIZE:10pt;FONT-FAMILY:Arial;"&gt;The specific items proposed were:&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="FONT-SIZE:10pt;"&gt;&lt;span style="mso-list:Ignore;"&gt;&lt;font face="Times New Roman"&gt;&lt;span style="FONT:7pt &amp;#39;Times New Roman&amp;#39;;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="FONT-SIZE:10pt;FONT-FAMILY:Arial;"&gt;(1) Integrate distributed generation and on-site renewable resources into the electrical power grid. (2) &lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="FONT-SIZE:10pt;FONT-FAMILY:Arial;"&gt;Develop energy storage technologies. &lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="FONT-SIZE:10pt;FONT-FAMILY:Arial;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="FONT-SIZE:10pt;FONT-FAMILY:Arial;"&gt;NEMA has established a Smart Grid Advisory Panel, a High Performance Buildings Council, and&amp;nbsp;an Energy Storage Council to support standardization work needed to implement the necessary infrastructure for this massive endeavor.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://blog.nema.org/aggbug.aspx?PostID=5109" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description><category domain="http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/archive/tags/Energy+Efficiency/default.aspx">Energy Efficiency</category><category domain="http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/archive/tags/Smart+Grid/default.aspx">Smart Grid</category><category domain="http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/archive/tags/Electrical+Grid/default.aspx">Electrical Grid</category><category domain="http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/archive/tags/Environment/default.aspx">Environment</category><category domain="http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/archive/tags/renewable+energy/default.aspx">renewable energy</category><category domain="http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/archive/tags/grid/default.aspx">grid</category><category domain="http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/archive/tags/Building+Codes/default.aspx">Building Codes</category></item><item><title>Georgia Officials Oppose Child Electric Safety Standards</title><link>http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/archive/2008/09/02/georgia-officials-oppose-child-electrical-safety-standard.aspx</link><pubDate>Tue, 02 Sep 2008 14:37:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">1447dd18-a85e-48e6-bb73-6fd9ba4b7540:2445</guid><dc:creator>Moldoveanu, Andrei</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><wfw:commentRss xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/">http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/rsscomments.aspx?PostID=2445</wfw:commentRss><comments>http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/archive/2008/09/02/georgia-officials-oppose-child-electrical-safety-standard.aspx#comments</comments><description>&lt;p&gt;After building and legislative officials in nearly 20 states have embraced the 2008 National Electrical Code® (NEC) and its tamper-resistant receptacle requirement, some Georgia officials are turning their backs on better child electrical safety. In a baffling move during a July 24 public hearing, the Georgia State Codes Advisory Committee (SCAC) recommended to exclude Article 406.11, which requires all 125-volt, 15- and 20-ampere electrical receptacles in residential construction to be tamper-resistant, from the state’s NEC adoption. The SCAC rejected this important safety measure in an 11 to 6 vote, citing issues of cost, product availability and usability by older individuals. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It baffles me to think that a technical advisory group like the SCAC made such claims despite multiple testimonials to disprove them at the meeting. This isn’t a cost issue, unless one considers an estimated increase of less than $70 in the cost of a new home’s electrical installation to be unreasonable. This isn’t an availability issue, since tamper-resistant devices have been around for decades and can be found in any hardware store or distributorship. This isn’t a usability issue, since the NFPA and NEMA have conducted thorough testing and research to ensure no major difference in the way tamper-resistant receptacles operate. The NFPA incorporates new requirements into the NEC after extensive research and testing indicate the need for the minimum safety standard to be enhanced. Therefore, any governing body that adopts the Code with amendments is disputing the need to recognize the minimum standard for its constituents. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Seeing the SCAC reject the Code after nearly 20 states have acknowledged its value and necessity shows a complete disregard for better electrical safety. Based on the comments presented at the public hearing and the overwhelming support for the tamper-resistant Code, it’s apparent that the SCAC put its self interests before the safety of Georgia citizens. Now we must do our part to convince the Department of Community Affairs Board of the advisory committee’s shortsightedness, and we won’t need to look far. The proof is right in the “peach state,” with reports of at least two counties (Brunswick and Glynn) pushing to overrule the SCAC recommendation and adopt the NEC with the tamper-resistant requirement by Sept. 1, 2008. I commend these officials for standing their ground and recognizing the importance of maintaining the same level of electrical safety standards that residents in other states will enjoy. Hopefully the DCA will take note of these Code supporters and follow their example. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Anyone concerned with the safety and security of Georgia residents should plan to attend the DCA review hearing, tentatively scheduled for September 24, and the DCA Board meeting scheduled for November 5 in Atlanta. And don’t forget to spread the word to other supporters! Andrei Moldoveanu, technical director, NEMA &lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://blog.nema.org/aggbug.aspx?PostID=2445" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description><category domain="http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/archive/tags/Electrical+Safety/default.aspx">Electrical Safety</category><category domain="http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/archive/tags/Building+Codes/default.aspx">Building Codes</category><category domain="http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/archive/tags/Tamper+Resistant+Receptacles/default.aspx">Tamper Resistant Receptacles</category></item><item><title>Even Congress Understands the Need for Building Code Enforcement</title><link>http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/archive/2008/07/10/even-congress-understands-the-need-for-building-code-enforcement.aspx</link><pubDate>Thu, 10 Jul 2008 14:06:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">1447dd18-a85e-48e6-bb73-6fd9ba4b7540:1725</guid><dc:creator>Owen, Sarah</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><wfw:commentRss xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/">http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/rsscomments.aspx?PostID=1725</wfw:commentRss><comments>http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/archive/2008/07/10/even-congress-understands-the-need-for-building-code-enforcement.aspx#comments</comments><description>&lt;p class="MsoNormal"&gt;Yesterday, the House of Representatives approved&amp;nbsp;H.R. 4461, the Community Building Code Administration Grant (CBCAG)&amp;nbsp;Act, by voice vote. This bill, and its Senate counterpart (S. 2458),&amp;nbsp;would offer local governments a dedicated source of federal funding ($20 million a year for five years) for programs to promote effective administration of building and fire codes. Federal CBCAG grants could be used by local entities to increase staffing, provide staff training, support individual certification or departmental accreditation, or to offset capital expenditures specifically dedicated to the local building code department. Under CBCAG, each year grant proposals would be evaluated competitively with all other applications for available funding, with individual grants of up to $1 million.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p class="MsoNormal"&gt;We all know that the enforcement of building and fire codes is vital to protecting the health and safety of Americans. The CBCAG Act shows that Congress is beginning to understand this, too. Please visit NEMA&amp;#39;s &lt;a class="" href="http://www.bipac.net/issue_alert.asp?g=nema&amp;amp;issue=CBCAG&amp;amp;parent=NEMA"&gt;&amp;quot;Take Action&amp;quot; page&lt;/a&gt; to urge your Senators to follow the House&amp;#39;s lead and pass the CBCAG Act.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://blog.nema.org/aggbug.aspx?PostID=1725" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description><category domain="http://blog.nema.org/blogs/currents/archive/tags/Building+Codes/default.aspx">Building Codes</category></item></channel></rss>