| IAEI Michigan Chapter |
| Public Hearing 1-17-07 |
Public Hearing for the Plumbing, Mechanical, and Electrical Codes.
January 17, 2007
The Public Hearing for the Plumbing, Mechanical, and Electrical Code Rules took place on January 17th, 2007. The Plumbing and Mechanical rules only took a total of a half an hour and the Electrical Rules took about an hour an a half. The hearing was well attended, all the tables were full, chairs were massed along three of the four walls and some people had to stand out in the hallway. IAEI was well represented, IBEW, NECA, JATC’s, and contractors all supported the inspection and permitting of telecommunication wiring. Verizon, Moss, and a number of other communication companies (from Grand Rapids) were crying hardship, consumer price increase etc. To my knowledge, not one communication contractor supported the rules. A number of people declined public comment while some just supported what others had already said. It is too bad that so many that supported the rules chose not to speak.
Michigan Chapter Board members in attendance were, Dennis Cassady, Frank Donovan, Phil Clark, Paul Knapp, Darrick Whitaker, Jim Chase, George Little, John Hartigan, Brian Kiley, Gary Hellmer, Bob Hoekwater, Don LaBrenz, John Stoudt, Brian Carter and a few others. There were also other Chapter members in attendance as well. Mike Forister, from Wyoming, representing NEMA was also in attendance.
(1) The ONLY significant point of discussion on the proposed Code is the section on telecommunications issue. Other things were brought up (available fault current calculations, non-metallic sheathed cable) but almost everyone there was on one side or the other of the telecommunications issue.
(2) The opposition to the proposed rules was generally the same as the
Public Forum in June:
(a) There's no real safety issue due to the voltage.
(b) Electrical inspectors are not qualified to examine this type of work.
(c) Existing industry standards are more appropriate than the NEC as a measure of a "good" job.
(d) Severe economic problems will be caused by this new requirement.
(3) The Comments in favor of the proposed rules also similar as before:
(a) The Code is a consensus document developed by a wide spectrum of the industry, including the telecommunications industry.
(b) Electrical inspectors are NOT involved in judging quality of installations only safety of those installations.
(c) The Code raises many questions of safety beyond the simple act of installing a cable: penetrations of rated walls, ceiling support, fire load, lighting protection, etc.
(d) Inspectors are trained to deal with the Code as a whole...telecommunications installers are not.
A number of individuals from the telecommunications industry spoke out against the permits and fees but enough individuals from the industry spoke about the problems the state has faced without inspecting the telecommunications work. All in all it was favorable.
Some believe it was more in favor of adoption of the rules then against. Unfortunately a lot of people said “no comment” that I believe were for the adoption.
I want to thank everyone that provided me information about the hearings. I was unable to attend due the passing of my Mother.
Dave Williams,
Website Chairman
2005 Michigan Code Advisory Committee
The State of Michigan Code Advisory Committee is in the process of putting together of proposed rules for the 2005 Michigan Electrical Code. View the outcome of the meetings of the Code Advisory Committee Meeting. View Committee Action
