Outcome of the Changes from the Code Advisory Committee
The 2005 Code Advisory Committee has met on June 21, and July 14, 2005 at the Okemos office of the Bureau of Construction Codes.
Committee members include: Robert Fishel, Lee Hannahs, Lawrence Hidalgo, Tim Korcel, Tom Kriegish, Tom Sanford, Lee Schwartz, Phil Smith, Truman Surbrook, Virgil Monroe and David Williams.
We were informed that the State of Michigan and NFPA are very close to an agreement for publishing a 2005 Michigan Electrical Code. This will include the National Electrical Code and the Michigan Part 8 Rules include in the regular text. This is similar to what they have been doing with the Building, Mechanical and Plumbing Codes.
The following are the changes from the first two meetings through Article 422:
Section 90.1 was approved to place back into the code.
Section 90.3 was tabled.
Section 90.4 was accepted as written in the existing Part 8 Rules.
Section 90.5 was approved to place back into the code.
Section 90.6 was accepted as written in the existing Part 8 Rules.
The definitions in the existing Part 8 Rules were approved with the exception of “Dwelling Unit” which the NEC definition was approved.
The balance of the definitions in Article 100 were approved.
Section 110.2 accepted as written in the existing Part 8 Rules.
The balance of Article 110 was approved as written.
Section 230.40 was amended by removing Exception 3.
This exception was first added to the 1999 NEC and there was strong opposition from various groups mainly from the utility companies. Michigan removed this in the 1999 Part 8 Rules. The concern was that the utility would only mark for miss dig the lateral to the house and not the service conductors to another building. If someone went to dig this area up that accidents would happen. In the 2002 Part 8 it was removed since at that time the committee was told that if it applied to 1-2 family dwellings that the Residential code would take care of it. We now know that the residential code doesn’t address this issue and since it doesn’t then you fall back to the MEC. There is still a concern about someone digging this up without being marked.
Section 230.71(A) was amended by removing the reference to 230.40 Exception 3.
Article 250 was approved with the deletion of 250.118 (5) and (6).
Rule 835 (R 408.30835) in the 2002 Part 8 was voted to be rescinded.
This rule was from 300.(B)(5) in 2002. It was felt that the code covered this issue already.
There was a request to have a memo explaining any changes in the Part 8 Code Rules. There was also a request to place the electrical sections of the MRC into the MEC.
A Fine Print Note was added to 300.4(A)(1) to read “Distances greater than 32mm (1 ¼ inches) may be required by other codes, standards, or manufacture’s specifications.”
A motion was made to remove the reference to types Type, IV, and V construction in Section 334.10 (2), (3), and (4). This section and the balance of Article 334 was tabled.
Section 348.60 to read:
"An equipment grounding conductor or equipment bonding conductor shall be installed. Equipment grounding conductors shall be installed in accordance with 250.134(B). Equipment bonding jumpers shall be installed in accordance with 250-102."
Article 350 was approved with a same change made in 348.60 and the fine print note was deleted.
