For anyone who’s interested the NFPA has published the 2014 ROP which will eventually become the next edition of the NEC. You can read through the code proposals and see the CMP’s comment(s) and whether or not they’ve been accepted or rejected. If there’s a specific section you’re interested in the search function is pretty good.
Hard to believe that some do not understand the word adequate and want to change the wording.
The thing that gets me is a proposal with merit can get rejected because it does not follow a style manual instead of being based on the merits of the concept.
You’re right. Sometimes the best ideas presented incorrectly get rejected. I’ve found that by reading the ones that have been accepted from prior code cycles and using them as a template increases your chances of having the Code Making Panel (CMP) look closely at your proposal. Also it helps if the change is really needed due to adequate substantiation.
One nice thing about the proposal process is that even if your proposal is rejected you may get commentary from the CMP that will either confirm or deny something that has up to that point been unclear.
I use and study the ROP and ROC as much as I do the NEC
One proposal I have used more than any other is the comments of the panel and 250.104(A).
I have this printed out and keep it in my code book for inspectors that want bonding to pipes that are not complete metal systems
Yes, although the document is long and tedious it can provide valuable insight into the minds of the CMP. I’ve done the same with an inspector who insisted on GFCI protection for an AC receptacle in an attic. Seems someone had a proposal for such a thing that was rejected by the CMP for lack of substantiation. Sometimes even the most diehard inspectors can’t argue with what written in black and white.
Understanding the historical progression from proposal to becoming part of the code can make it far more understandable.