[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: NEON- Secondary Ground Fault Protection

Not being one who gets in the middle of controversy (hah) it seems 
that this whole deal with SGFP points out a major flaw with the 
process of improving and enacting code.  (Jeff, where are you these 
days?) 

Over the past 2 years I have slowly awakened to the NEC changes 
mostly from the alarm published over the apparently difficult 
modification and likely changes in installation methods.

I am not clear, for example, as to whether or not I will be able to 
install a reliable midpoint grounded circuit with SGFP.   Every time 
it cuts out because the range is just too tight - will I have to go 
to the site and reset it?  Obviously it will be impossible to perform 
the simplest arc to ground test to see if a coil is burned out.

Okay, so we'll adjust - but what will really happen is that in the 
real world, I can guarantee for at least the next few years while 
there are still non-complying ones that haven't yet sold, that 99% of the 
installations will not comply.  Those of us who might want to try to 
comply will be penalized by the extra cost and time.  Even just 
having to explain it to the client will add additional hassle.  

My complaint is that the process that enacted this provision clearly 
happened in a vacuum.  I imagine it has been documented, but I'm 
curious about who put it on the table and why, and how the discussion and 
feedback went.  You say that Allanson wasn't included in the panel 
discussions.  I hope at least one major manufacturer was.  Seems to 
me that all should have been.

Even Microsoft, Sun, Apple, and Netscape sit around a table (the WWW 
Consortium) to help figure out where they can cooperate so that the 
standards don't become an utter mess for everyone.

Does such a body exist for the transformer manufacturers?  Why not?

On another point, I  was contacted by UL just as the installation manual was 
finalized. I was hastily interviewed about solid state and SGFP and it 
wasn't as if I was really given specific questions to reply to - 
yet it wouldn't surprise me if my comments exist somewhere as a 
basis for something - where all I mostly did was listen and ask for 
more info.  I know UL and NEC are very different - but 
somehow I wonder if they don't suffer from the same problem that many 
large corporations have.   Namely, administrate from the top down 
rather than how it should be - from the ground up.

It would not surprise me in the least if there were not some 
knowledgeable and committed inspectors and ahj's  who were also 
omitted from the NEC process.  

I have no desire to get into the company vs company vs NEC vs UL 
situation at all - though it does sound wierd - and I hope y'all can 
straighten it out so that we can go on selling neon.  
I think there should be greater cooperation at making this 
issue accessible and workable for the end user.

Kenny


> Hello listers,
> 
> I am writing this posting regarding a very serious and important
> issue facing all of us:  the implementation of Secondary Ground
> Fault Protection into the 1996 National Electrical Code.  For
> virtually everyone working with neon, there will be some impact.  I
> hope that you will take the time to read it.  I will indulge your
> patience, it's a little long.
Kenny Greenberg --  Neon - Scenic and Environmental Art  
                    Internet Site Consultant and Author   
KRYPTON NEON 34-43 Vernon Blvd Long Island City, NY 11106
         Phone: 718-728-4450  Fax: 718-728-7206  
http://www.neonshop.com  -  The Internet's Neon Shop
http://www.licweb.com  - The Long Island City Web
Follow-Ups: