1. 2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18
Elliot Rappaport
Daleep Mohla
February 18, 2009
2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18

2. 2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18
Total Proposals
Number of Proposals
Number of Panel Proposals 18
TIA 01
Accept
Accept in Part 06
Accept in Pr in Part 04
Accept in Principle 69
Reject
Redirected to other panels 02
February 18, 2009
2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18

3. EEI Light and Power Task Force Proposals
16 proposals by EEI to redefine Service cable and Service Conductors to Service Entrance Cable and Service Entrance Conductors , definition of Ground Fault etc
February 18, 2009
2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18

4. 2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18
Definitions
Proposal Ground fault definition relocated to Article 100
Proposal 5-13
CMP 5 deleted the definition of Grounding conductor in place of correct term of Grounding Electrode Conductor.
Recommended formation of a TG of multiple panels to evaluate the impact of this change to other articles
February 18, 2009
2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18

5. 2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18
Color Coding of wires
200.6 (A) & (B)
Rejected Proposal 5-36 to change color coding from #6 AWG to # 10 AWG
February 18, 2009
2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18

6. 2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18
High Voltage
CMP 503 Proposal a
Changed “ high voltage” used in Article 250 to “Over 1 kV” to remove inconsistency with other articles where over 600 Volts is used as high voltage
February 18, 2009
2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18

7. Ground Detection Systems
Proposal 5-86
Panel rejected the proposal for equipment for annunciation of ground detector system at a readily accessible location
Negative vote : The proposal should have been accepted in principle to ensure that a ground alarm is conveyed to an attended location for detection and mitigation purposes
February 18, 2009
2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18

8. Ungrounded Systems Marking
CP 502 Proposal 5-86 a
Ungrounded systems to be marked at the source or at the first disconnecting means
February 18, 2009
2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18

9. 2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18
SSBJ
5-102
Introduces a new term Supply Side Bonding Jumper and acronym (SSBJ) in
This is called Equipment Bonding Jumper in 2008 NEC
February 18, 2009
2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18

10. Metal Underground water pipe
5- 146
250.52(A)(1).
Last paragraph ( 5 feet rule) and Industrial exception have been relocated to new (C) because it pertains to usage of electrode.
February 18, 2009
2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18

11. 2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18
Industrial Exception
5-148
(A)(1) Exception
Panel rejected the proposal to remove industrial exception
February 18, 2009
2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18

12. Concrete Encased Electrodes SCC 18:Do we need to comment?
Metal Frame of the Building or Structure. The metal frame of the building or structure that is connected to the earth by any of the following methods:
(At least one structural metal member that is in direct contact with the earth for 3.0m ( 10 ft) or more, with or without encasement
(2)          The hold- down bolts securing the structural member are connected to a concrete encased electrode that complies with (A)(3)…………..   
Other methods( using other electrodes, other approved methods have been deleted)
February 18, 2009
2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18

13. Ground Rod Size Vote negative?
(A)(5)(b)
Panel rejected the deletion of underlined text proposed by NEMA
Grounding electrodes of stainless steel and copper or zinc coated steel shall be at least mm ( in.) in diameter, unless listed and not less than mm (½ in.) in diameter.
Should NEC be establishing listing requirements?
February 18, 2009
2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18

14. Supplemental Electrode Required
5-169b (A)
A supplemental electrode is required where rod, pipe, or plate electrode is used
Exception: If a single rod, pipe , or plate electrode has a resistance of 25 ohms or less, the supplemental electrode shall not be required.
FYI : Proposal 5-176a deleted which had reverse requirement (second electrode is required if one is above 25 ohms)
February 18, 2009
2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18

15. Air Terminal changed to Strike Termination Device
5-169b (B); ;
Changed Air Terminal to Strike Termination Device to be consistent with NFPA 780
February 18, 2009
2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18

16. Bonding Jumpers Negative Vote or Affirmative comment?
5-240 was Accepted in Principle by the panel and title of (C) was changed to
“SSBJ on Supply Side of an Overcurrent Device”
See next slide for statement
February 18, 2009
2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18

17. Bonding Jumpers Negative Vote or Affirmative comment
Title reads “SSBJ on Supply Side of an Overcurrent Device”. If the acronym of SSBJ in (A)(2) is used, it will read “ Supply Side Bonding Jumper on the Supply side of Overcurrent Protection device. Can SSBJ term be used accurately if the bonding jumper is on the load side of the overcurrent protective device?
The title should read “Bonding Jumper on Supply side of Overcurrent device”
Section (C) uses the acronym “SSBJ” which is defined only once in (A)(2) (C) Use of the acronym will reduce usability until the acronym is in general use by the industry. This may take several Code cycles. Until then, the acronym as well as the full name should be used
February 18, 2009
2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18

18. 2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18
(B) 2008 NEC
B) Other Metal Piping. Where installed in or attached to a building or structure, a metal piping system(s), including gas piping, that is likely to become energized shall be bonded to the service equipment enclosure, the grounded conductor at the service, the grounding electrode conductor where of sufficient size, or the one or more grounding electrodes used. The bonding jumper(s) shall be sized in accordance with , using the rating of the circuit that is likely to energize the piping system(s). The equipment grounding conductor for the circuit that is likely to energize the piping shall be permitted to serve as the bonding means. The points of attachment of the bonding jumper(s) shall be accessible
February 18, 2009
2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18

19. 2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18
CSST
(B) TIA 941
Panel rejected the proposal to require a split (B) into two parts for metal piping other than CSST and CSST and require minimum # 6AWG Copper for bonding of Corrugated Stainless Steel Tubing (CSST) and follow table to prevent damage to CSST due to direct and indirect lightning strikes.
Proposal alos mentioned that this is required by all CSST manufacturers
February 18, 2009
2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18

20. 2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18
CSST
Panel statement mentioned that :
Not convinced that this will solve the problem as no test data or substantiation has been provide to support the claim.
Panel was made awate that at least one other manufacturer does not require larger than as required by current
This is a product safety issue.
Not currently prohibited by National Electrical Code
February 18, 2009
2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18

21. 2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18
CSST TIA 941
IEEE plans to vote negative on TIA 941 in support of the panel
February 18, 2009
2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18

22. Luminaire Grounding Discussion
(J) Rejected by the panel 12-4 Submitter require all luminaires be provided with an equipment grounding conductor even for GFCI protected replavement luminaires exempted at present under
Submitter’s concern that a ground fault will energize the frame of the luminaire supplied by GFCI without an EGC and ground path will be provided by the person touching it.
Should we trust GFCI without EGC?
February 18, 2009
2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18

23. EMT as an EGC? Negative vote by IEEE
(4)
Panel rejected the proposal to delete EMT as an equipment grounding conductor and require a separate EGC within EMT.
Concern is the ground path depends on connector ( not threaded) and couplings
IEEE plans to vote against the panel action with the statement on the next slide
February 18, 2009
2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18

24. EMT as an EGC? Negative vote by IEEE
It is regrettable that, after many years of proposals indicating that there is a real problem on roof tops, Code Panel 5 continues to use the same answer of “no technical substantiation”. There probably is none but there is evidence of real world issues of fittings coming apart and leaving equipment ungrounded. EMT can be installed easily without adequate tightening of fittings or fittings get loose . As a result, the raceway is adequate for installing conductors but inadequate as an equipment grounding conductor. This issue will not go away as evidenced by the proposal at every Code cycle.
February 18, 2009
2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18

25. 2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18
Table
5-281
Panel rejected proposal to replace table based on overcurrent devices with a new table based on ungrounded conductor sizes as certain sizes of cables were not included
Concern cited is inability to parallel muticonductor UL listed cables that has a fixed size EGC since EGC has to be based on OCPD because following each cable requires a EGC based on the table
February 18, 2009
2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18

26. EGC sizing in parallel cable possible negative vote? Panel vote 10-6
Panel rejected the proposal to add “including in parallel circuits” to (A) that does not require EGC to be larger than ungrounded conductor.
Concern cited by the submitter was a case where multiple 500 kcmil supplied by a 5000 A OCPD which requires 700 kcmil EGC ( larger than ungrounded conductors)
February 18, 2009
2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18

27. 2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18
Multigrounded system
Don Zipse proposals and on (A)(1) and C respectively were rejected by the panel.
Don proposed C be deleted. This allows systems to be multi grounded
Panel statement indicated no adequate substantiation has been provided to delete this “safe option”
IEEE plans to vote negative on 5-312
February 18, 2009
2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18

28. 5-313 250. 184 C Negative vote by IEEE
The Panel Statement is not correct. This proposal has been presented many times in the past for each Code cycle. Each time the Proposer presents additional substantiation of the hazards of the multigrounded system without repeating the previous substantiation. New Panel members are remiss if they do not seek out the previous substantiation which is pertinent to deciding how to address this issue. The Panel Statement is not correct in stating that the multigrounded neutral system is safe. This section was added in a previous Code cycle without substantiation except to state that it was permitted in the National Electric Safety Code used by the Utilities. Use by the Utilities is for the purpose of protecting the linemen and does not address the issue of ground currents that are hazardous to the public.
February 18, 2009
2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18

29. 2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18
Shielded Cable
Panel accepted in principle this proposal
Prohibits use of copper screen and ribbon shield to be used as EGC in solidly grounded systems.
Panel action has been sent to CMP 6 and 10 for comments
February 18, 2009
2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18

30. 2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18
Shielded Cable C (2)
Shielded Cables
If the cable assembly is suitably rated for the ground fault current and is of the concentric neutral type, the shield conductor shall be permitted as the equipment grounding conductor. For solidly grounded systems, the cable copper screen or ribbon shield or combination of both shall not be used as equipment grounding conductor.
February 18, 2009
2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18

31. 2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18
Surge Arresters
280.5
Proposals to
Listing requirement of Surge Arresters has been removed as no listed surge arresters are available
February 18, 2009
2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18

32. Surge Protection Devices (SPD)
5- 323
Panel rejected a proposal to require a status indication to indicate device is energized and some indication that it is no longer effective or usable.
Panel Statement : It is a product safety issue>
Is it or shall we require?
February 18, 2009
2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18

33. 2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18
SPD Type 3
Type 3 SPDs
Panel accepted ( 11-5) a proposal to add tagquirement for Type 3 SPD’s
Type 3 SPD connection shall be a minimum of 10 m (30 feet) of conductor distance from the service or separately derived system disconnect if the Type 3 SPD includes cautionary marking, tag, or instructions statement pertaining to 10 m( 30 ft) distance
February 18, 2009
2011 NEC ROP - CMP 5 Report to SCC 18