|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
#6360 - 06/11/09 11:06 PM
Re: Rule 9B – 3.047, GFCI Protection
[Re: Ruben Rocha]
|
Post-A-Holic Member
Registered: 11/08/01
Posts: 1295
Loc: West Palm Beach
|
Hey guys, the Florida Building Commission makes total sense on this issue, because everyone knows that the electrical for a commercial pool is far more dangerous than the electrical for a residence. WAY TO GO 'FELLAS!
They should keep screwing with the electrical code until there is an accident. Then after the accident, they can go retroactive and abolish the amendment, and adopt the NEC as written. Until then, the prority is to coddle the pool contractors. "Waaaaaaaaahhh. Waaaaaaaaaaahh. We don't wanna do it............."
I'm sure this is the result of some very smart "engineers" on the commission and not the electrical tac. The tac voted to adopt as written. This is probably the result of a civil engineer, or several, or a building official with no electrical experience, applying their superior intelect and knowledge. If an electrical engineer voted for this amendment then I will eat my pouch.
If the manufacturer's instructions require it and it's not there you can be sure I'm writing a RED TAG. If my building official says they don't need it then he can PUT IT IN WRITING. If I ever get the chance to act as an expert in a law suit where there was no GFCI protection, than rest assured I will make mincemeat out of that contractor (your liability insurance rates will triple) and the jurisdiction as well. I should be so lucky.
And no, it's not a call from the building official - to violate 110.3(b) on purpose because the commission is not smart enough to know the difference.
ns
Edited by Nick Sasso (06/11/09 11:11 PM)
_________________________
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
#6379 - 06/15/09 07:58 AM
Re: Rule 9B – 3.047, GFCI Protection
[Re: gfretwell]
|
Secretary
Registered: 10/05/04
Posts: 1352
Loc: City of North Port
|
Here is one commentary on the issue I was able to find online: FBC adopts 2008 NEC, exempting GFCI requirement on residential pools
FSPA President Alan Cooper, "This epitomizes what our government relations program is all about. Further, it is an excellent example of the importance of having a swimming pool contractor on the FBC."
On Tuesday the Florida Building Commission (FBC) held a final rule hearing on glitch rule 9B-3.047, which encompassed a number of proposed changes to the 2007 Florida Building Code (the code). Most important to the pool industry was the 2008 NEC discussion.
In April the FBC voted to adopt the 2008 NEC, but exempt the GFCI requirement on residential pools. However, the National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA) and others received word of this action and were in attendance on Tuesday. Testimony from a NEMA representative and an electrical contractor asked the FBC to reverse their original decision and adopt the 2008 NEC in total. Representatives from FSPA and other groups provided testimony to rebut the NEMA claims and encourage the FBC to stand by their original decision.
Larry Brown, FSPA Central Florida member and electrical contractor for Mid Florida Pools, did a superb job rebutting the NEMA testimony. In addition, comments were made to the FBC by UPSA members. To sum up the discussion, Commissioner Ken Gregory spoke to his fellow Commissioners asking them to vote down a motion to adopt the 2008 NEC in its entirety. The FBC agreed with him and the testimony the pool industry provided, ultimately voting down the motion 16-6. The original decision to adopt the 2008 NEC except for the GFCI requirement on residential pools withstood.
Also note that the FBC voted to incorporate into the glitch rule the 64E-9, F.A.C., public pool code revisions.
Read this story in its entirety in the July issue of Florida Pool Pro (sm).
_________________________
Bryan P. Holland, ICC Electrical Code Official
CBO, Plans Examiner, Inspector, Instructor
Secretary - IAEI Florida Gulf Coast Division
Secretary - BOAF Gulf Coast Chapter
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Registered: 05/17/08
Posts: 4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previous Topic
Index
