1. ATTENTION returning members. If you are coming here from the old forum for the first time, you will need to reset you password. However, we had an email problem getting password reset links set out to a lot of the email addresses. That problem is temporarily rectified but IF you still have an issue, email me direct at info@thebuildingcodeforum.com and I will give you a temporary password.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by clicking here: Upgrades
    Dismiss Notice

Florida NEC 2014

Discussion in 'Code Development Discussion' started by jar546, Sep 8, 2018.

  1. jar546

    jar546 *****istrator

    Oct 16, 2009
    Likes Received:
    This is not news but I am getting to the point.

    States such as Florida have been dragging their heels and did not adopt the 2014 NEC until the last day of 2017. Not bad, only 1 cycle plus behind.

    Then there is Pennsylvania whos is still on a 10 year old code, the 2008 NEC with possible plans to go to the 2014 NEC sometime in the future.

    Why are some states so reluctant to go with the flow?
  2. north star

    north star Sawhorse

    Oct 19, 2009
    Likes Received:
    @ = @ = @


    IMO, it might be because to adopt newer editions would cost
    the RDP's money for them to purchase the Code; maybe
    even multiple copies [ i.e. - hardcopy & electronic ], ...get training
    and "up to speed" on all the changes, and to now say NEC
    2014 on all their plans, when in the past & currently, all they
    have to do is tell a junior office person to "cut & paste" everything
    from the 2008.......It [ might ] be one way of maximizing the
    organization' profits.

    And let's face it, ...every three years is too frequent !......Is four
    years too frequent, ...what about five, or six, or later ?
    The 3-Year cycles are fine for those entities developing, printing
    & selling their products to the masses, but from "the masses" side
    of the counter, there are very real limitations on resources [ i.e. -
    time & money ] to use on buying the updated editions, ...for there
    to be language specific to that jurisdiction included in the adoption
    process, ...for the Legal Beagles to vette the proposed language
    before adopting, ...[ hopefully ] to take the time to advertise to the
    public that updated Codes & Standards will be adopted & enforced
    beginning on " xxx " date, and as always, ...for there to be time
    for the Inspectors to actually read & understand the updated
    Codes & Standards that they are expected to enforce.

    The adoption process is a lengthy effort that should be scrutinized
    & vetted very carefully, so that the documents being adopted can be
    used for a lengthy amount of time, and not just by some administrative
    action by executive committee signatures.

    @ = @ = @
  3. TheCommish

    TheCommish Sawhorse

    Sep 27, 2011
    Likes Received:
    Developing code is a lot like sausage making, many things go into the process.

    Here in Massachusetts the move has been to adopt the virgin codes, however
    there are vested interests in keeping the status quo, sometime because we have
    done it that way, costs or perceived increased costs, the number of agencies
    that have a say in the adoption of code.

    In Mass., the electrical code is governed by the Fire Prevention Bureau, Plumbing
    by the Board Of Pluming Examiners, Building codes by the BBRS some of get
    to play.

    Many of the end users have know idea the code has changed over they years so
    to keep them happy, little change in some areas is the norm. Then again, my
    board, my code regardless of what the notion concensus is.

Share This Page