MINUTES: OCTOBER 12,2000, IAEI SUNCOAST DIVISION, FLORIDA CHAPTER
GENERAL MEETING: TECO WESTERN DIVISION


INSPECTOR MEMBERS 12 ASSOCIATE MEMBERS 6 GUEST 1


1. The Pledge to the Flag brought the Suncoast Division regularly scheduled meeting to order with President Doyle leading our group.

Mention was made to the USS Cole and its current condition.

Introductions commenced and at 1:38 pm, our meeting was underway.
A first time guest was recognized, Eric Boehcher, with U.L.

2.The minutes from the previous August 10th and September 14th meeting were reviewed. Scott Mroczkowski made a first motion for acceptance of the minutes as printed and a second was promptly voiced. All were in favor.

3.The Treasures report was deferred to later in the meeting.

4. Secretary Christlieb reviewed the Bylaws and informed the Division that the Bylaws are now posted at the website. Copies were made and on hand for the members present at this meeting. President Doyle reviewed one section of the By Laws that pertains to the financial Committee. All motions for expenditures will go to the Financial Committee first and the Financial Committee shall review the motion and present it back to the Membership.

On file with the Secretary are a copy of the Suncoast Division Bylaws and a copy of the model bylaws. Copy of the Executive Committee Meeting agenda and Florida Building Code

5.OLD BUSINESS: Bob Moore took to the floor to discuss surge arrestors. Bob made references to the U.L. white book for descriptions and use. He commented that the ANSI Standard and U.L. 1449 corroborate what the U.L. Book says. Essence, a suppressor should be protected and an arrestor does not have to be protected. Noted is to read your product literature. A question was fielded by Bob concerning the “Zap Cap”. Bob explained that this falls under C6211, as an arrestor. Comments of testing an arrestor and suppressor were made. Discussion on suppressors and arrestors with testing comparisons took place. Bob explained the use of the meter treater and possible scenarios of a lighting strike. Basically the arrestor is trying to shunt the current, while the suppressor is trying to keep the voltage level down.
Discussion of local ordinances and service requirements took place. Jim Pappas made inquiries into possible future requirements, with reference to the new Florida Building Code. A comment was answered that if you choose to put a suppressor on a service then an arrestor will be additionally required. Local ordinances were referenced.

There is no way to know what can happen when a service is hit directly by lighting. Bob pointed out that lighting does not necessarily have to hit a service directly for there to be damage.
Lighting can hit a hundred yards away from a utility line and induce 100,000 volts into the utility line. A customer will probably see that voltage.

Some concerns were expressed about the proper usage of arrestors and suppressors. Discussion on applications for commercial buildings and ups systems.


PAGE 2


6. Our Treasurer, Ruben Rocha, made his report with disbursements totaling $1,093.00, to the IEC, and $420.00 to the Chapter for CEU’s. The Division is solvent at this time. Nelson Montgomery made a motion for acceptance of the Treasures report and Bob Moore seconded the motion. All were in favor.

7.NEW BUSINESS: Discussion on service entrance cable and usage commenced. Rich Hittel presented a question concerning the temperature rating. The Division discussed that the rating depends upon the termination, and the insulation of the cable. Reference was made to Article 338-4 and Article 336. Discussion on the installation of Service Entrance cable must meet the requirements for Non-Metallic Sheathed cable when used for interior application.
President Doyle suggested that NFPA should be contacted for a formal interpretation.

Nelson Montgomery brought up some trivia and asked if anyone knew what “SEU” stands for. The answer is Service Entrance Un-armored. He then asked the Division what the “R” stands for. The answer is round.

8.Bob Moore informed the Body that Tampa Electric would be enforcing GFCI ‘s on construction poles starting November 1. On both the 110 and 220 volt circuits. If the GFCI’s are not present, the pole will not be connected to power. This brought up a lot of discussion.
Discussion about the Assured Grounding Program and OSHA. A comment by Ruben noted that according to OSHA, an approved person is the person who is responsible for taking corrective measures and should have the authority to do so on a job site. A designated person must continuously enforce safety.

9. Larry Diaz commented about a temporary pole panel that is currently available.

Discussion on Journeyman requirement took place. Local ordinances and state law were referenced. Reciprocity is available to those individuals that score a minimum of 75% on an exam. Some contractors expressed their concerns for the lack of available qualified help.
Larry Cox discussed the IEC apprenticeship program and the current college credit that will be available to apprentices that complete the program.

Larry Diaz commented about a recent mishap, expressing his concern that all installers should be careful when working around older meter banks and to wear eye protection. Comments about safety practices were made and many members voiced their concerns.


Discussion about the changes to the Florida Building Code took place Noted is Chapter 27, Electrical Systems, has no changes.


10.At 2:36pm a motion to adjourn was made by Jim Yost and Ruben Rocha promptly voiced a second.