2019 SENATE INDUSTRY, BUSINESS AND LABORCOMMITTEE SB … · Senator Kannianen: If you’re not grandfathered in and you don’t have any other technical or tradesman certification,

2019 SENATE INDUSTRY, BUSINESS AND LABOR COMMITTEE

SB 2359

2019 SENATE STANDING COMMITTEE MINUTES

Industry, Business and Labor Committee Roosevelt Park Room, State Capitol

SB 2359 2/5/2019

Job #32187

☐ Subcommittee

☐ Conference Committee

Committee Clerk: Amy Crane

Explanation or reason for introduction of bill/resolution:

Relating to the regulation of electricians and power limited technicians; and to provide a penalty.

Minutes: Att #1-12

Chairman Klein: Opened the hearing on SB 2359. A quorum was present. Senator Kannianen, District 4: See attachment #1 for testimony in support of the bill. (5:50)Chairman Klein: So we have no fence now? There’s no rule, those folks are out there working now under no rules? We’re gonna create a new class which we do not have. Senator Kannianen: There is certain work that is being done now that technically should be done by an electrician but is not at the current time. There’s some pushback there, this would alleviate that. Chairman Klein: So we’re trying to find a defining line because we’ve got folks crossing that line that the electrical board feels have been established but there’s electrical creep, perhaps. Senator Burckhard: Is safety still the main concern here? We’re not making it less safe by doing this are we? Senator Kannianen: No I think this will make it more safe, would allow more individuals that do this kind of work have the proper training and certifications.

Senator Piepkorn: Is there a shortage of PLTs now? Senator Kannianen: In different parts of the state you could argue there’s a shortage of electricians, so by allowing this license to be involved that would alleviate some of that pressure and job cost. Chairman Klein: How many hours do you need to be PLT versus apprentice electrician?

Senate Industry, Business and Labor Committee SB 2359 2/5/19 Page 2

Senator Kannianen: If you’re not grandfathered in and you don’t have any other technical or tradesman certification, then to obtain the level of a power limited technician, you would need 6,000 hours of work experience plus one year of educational experience. Chairman Klein: And to be an apprentice electrician is what? Senator Kannianen: For an apprentice to be able to qualify for a journeyman’s its 8,000 hours. Chairman Klein: So its 2,000 less? Senator Kannianen: Correct. (11:49)James Schmidt, Executive Director, North Dakota State Electrical Board: See attachment #2 for testimony in support of the bill. (22:06)Chairman Klein: How did we come up with 6,000 hours? James: I took what it took to be an electrician, I looked at other states, because we needed that for reciprocity, but we also added by amendment, that tradesman certification which if they come in and they have tradesman certifications for power limited, we would recognize that too. So by rule we would need to define that and we wanted it in law but I was scared of missing somebody. I think they have four different certifications. And I know there’s more out there, so I thought if I could identify those by rule, they could fill that gap. Right now when electrical engineers design projects for data or whatever, they’ll specify what companies they’ll hire to do that work, and I thought as far as a vetting process, maybe we need to tap those resources too to get everybody a fair chance. If they are qualified, we want to license them to do the work. Chairman Klein: In Fargo when they have the wrong wire hooked up, don’t you ever have electricians that are trained that do something wrong that you catch? Isn’t that why you send out inspections? James: Yes, we do inspections but right now these power limited people, we don’t even know where they are. Senator Burckhard: 6,000 hours is 3 years; does it take three years to become a power limited technician? Does that seem like a long time? James: The idea there was, visiting with contractors that do this kind of stuff. After the second year they’re getting a grip on it, but three years is reasonable. You’ve got to remember if they have that tradesman certification, if they’ve gone through some sort of fast course like a CTE is $600 and there’s continuing education, I don’t know why that wouldn’t qualify. But that’s something that the education committee could vet out. Senator Burckhard: Did you say the Telco’s were exempt from this legislation? Are they in favor of what you’re doing?


James: The rural utilities and that language is what defines them in the law. (28:00)Doug Grinde, Director of Inspections, North Dakota Electrical Board: see attachment #3 for testimony in support of the bill. (31:28)Chairman Klein: Are you called out there a lot? Somebody rats somebody out, or how do you get called out there? Are you finding a lot of connections that are loose? Are you giving a lot of warnings or citations? Doug: We do get calls on it. A lot of it is finding it, you get a wiring certificate from an electrician from the gas pump that Josh is gonna show you. You go out to look at it, and he’s flat out gonna tell the inspector, by the way I didn’t install this cable. I don’t want to be responsible for the way we installed it, we have to put it back on the owner. We already make them have the electrician to do it. That’s what stops us from finding a lot of them. Chairman Klein: So we don’t know how many houses or businesses have been burned down because of somebody installing something wrong? Doug: No I don’t have stats or anything. Chairman Klein: But generally, we do this because we’re concerned about public safety? Doug: Correct. (Personal anecdote relating to the question). Chairman Klein: So what you’re saying is if these guys had some training they would have put the right thing in but they didn’t and they were just following the boss who didn’t know what he was doing either? Senator Burckhard: So if you’re a small business who sells computers and you install security systems, are they going to have to have this program? They’re going to have to have an apprenticeship program? Doug: Defer to James on anything to do with licensing.

Chairman Klein: So Doug you’re making the point, the case for the other folks, their gonna say we’re following Minnesota, overburdening or over regulating and I think we understand the concerns.

Josh Wilson, District 1 State Electrical Inspector: see attachment #4 for testimony in support of the bill. (43:54)Senator Piepkorn: When this was done nobody had to inspect it? But if I was a homeowner I could do it myself, correct? Josh: Self-wiring is allowed, but they would have to contact us prior to the wiring on their own residential property where they own and occupy, it would be possible for the to self-wire that but at that point they would have to get inspector involved. This would not fall under our


jurisdiction right now. So a homeowner could probably do that himself without even calling us because it’s not required. Chairman Klein: So what you’re saying is every lawn sprinkler system that’s installed in the future, if we had the power limited technician, we’d have to hire an inspector to go out and inspect that? Because we need inspection then, if we’re covering the PLTs, we would require that every project they do, also has an inspection like we do with the electricians don’t we? Josh: I would agree with that yes, a lot of these inspections I can double up though. I’m already going there for the basement; I could do the lawn sprinkler at the same time. (50:08)Representative Ben Koppelman, District 16: see attachment #5 for testimony in opposition to the bill. (57:38)Senator Piepkorn: What leads you to believe that most of the low voltage contractors know the industry better than the electrical inspectors that would be inspecting them? Rep. Koppelman: I am a commercial general contractor myself, and I work with a lot of companies that do low voltage items and a lot of them specialize in their trade and an electrician that I work with that’s in the room today would tell me well Ben we don’t do that, we subcontract to a specialist in the low voltage trades and so if my electrician who is one of the most knowledgeable that I’ve ever met, differs to someone in the trades, that suggests that they know the trade better than the electrician. It’s mostly personal experience that I drive that claim from. (59:30)Cameron Fleck, New Vision Security, on behalf of Chris Heaton, Vice President of Advocacy & Public Affiars, Electronic Security Association: see attachment #6 for testimony in opposition to the bill. Chairman Klein: So you work with electricians, you still need electricians with you when you install? Cameron: 90% of the time, we work side by side with the electricians. As a matter of fact, they are leaning on us as we are trained and certified a little bit more in depth with those particular pieces of equipment. We work as a team. Chairman Klein: So you would ask them to pull a wire or something but ultimately, you are the one that has to hook the stuff up? Cameron: That’s correct. Senator Piepkorn: Just briefly describe your training or credentials, and what you need to do to get those? Cameron: As I said I do agree with training and other things out there, however, I do think it should be a little bit more on the low voltage end of things and not crossed so much with the high voltage. We do have the electronic security association where they have credits you can


take and classes. Also the fire alarm association, NICET, they just came out with a CCTV or camera course. Chairman Klein: You hire somebody; do they have a college background? Cameron: Well with our unemployment rate being below 3% it’s hard to find employees in general, but we do have internships set up with BSC, we do have some knowledge coming in. We do also train people from the ground up and get them into this industry so a lot of times you’ll see them move on to the electrician field and sometimes they say. Chairman Klein: So you pluck out of the college system? Cameron: Correct. Senator Kreun: How do you get engaged with the electricians on the large job, does the engineer or the architect require each company to come in and put the plans together or does the electrician or the architect lay it all out and then you bid with or separately from the electricians? Cameron: Depends the size of the contract, but majority of the time it is put together by electrical engineers and architects and you’ll have a prime bid and I guess the electrical contractors are usually bidding on those prime bids and we will come on as a sub-contractor of an electrician. Taking care of the security portion, camera portion. Senator Kreun: So you are working under the electrician in those instances? Cameron: At that time, yes. Currently, we have five projects where we are working under an electrician. Trent Slater, AVI Bismarck: testified in opposition to the bill. As proposed it would have put our North Dakota operation, out of business. James was very helpful in getting that first amendment that you see there, it will keep us in business. The two sides, gentleman spoke about grain bins and gas pumps, totally on board with that. This seems really wide ranging. All of the things he talked about are not anything our company does and I close 40 jobs a month. From a pragmatic standpoint, how are we going to inspect 40 jobs a month. That means I need one of James’s guys with one of my guys every single day of the month. From a logistical standpoint, you need to think about how many inspectors are you going to hire, how’s this all going to work. AVI is the only AV company in the nation certified to provide CTS training, which is certified technology specialist training, we do that in Minneapolis and we have our competitors and our customers and our own guys go through that. I’m kind of cool with this because we do it all anyway but I just wanted to bring up a few of the things that you probably want to consider as you’re thinking about this. I could be on board with this for the classified areas, nobody wants their gas pumps to blow up. I just think we need to look at the ramifications because this covers a huge gamut, from putting stuff in somebody’s lawn to right now, today, I’m closing out Border State Electric’s new headquarters in Fargo, I’ve got guys in there, we’re literally bringing rooms online hour by hour. So do I have an inspector with us as we’re finishing and the rooms get going? I’m finishing the installation at the city of Fargo, at their new city hall. Same situation, we’re literally working day and night cause the


first commission meeting is at 5 pm on Monday and not matter what it has to happen. The stuff that we deal in and the stuff they’re talking about; it just seems like it’s a huge gamut. Senator Piepkorn: Just describe the work you are doing, for example at Border State. Trent: So they have 30 rooms there, some that will hold 3 or 4 people and some that will hold 30-40 people. We’re putting in the speakers, video conferencing, the places to plug your computers into. We’re bring Skype for business into all of those. We’re putting up video walls. Brent Michelsen, City Wide Electric: testified in opposition to the bill. All of the testimony you’ve heard today is true. When we talk about the electrical industry it is a huge wide brush, and it is changing rapidly. And if we’re gonna go down the rabbit hole of safety, I would hate to see us have a 75% license and training for something that took me 10,000 hours to become a qualified contractor to do. And now we’re thinking we’re gonna grandfather some people in, and some people not, and then start a 6,000-hour apprenticeship versus an 8,000 apprenticeship. When you start to go down this road, they have all sorts of things, inductive heating, that they’ve talked about, induced voltage on the ceiling grid, and all of those are a part of our state’s requirements to become an electrician. Right now, our state’s standards are 8,000 hours and 576 hours of education. Trade school covers it so if they complete a two-year trade school they get quantified for the 576 hours, to be able to take your state test. That doesn’t mean you get a license, that means it gives you the opportunity to meet the minimum requirement to be a journeyman electrician. I would have you guys look at that. Talking to James earlier, I wish I was on this committee because I think we could’ve clarified and narrowed the scope to give you a better bill. When you talk about the young man with the security stuff, a lot of the engineering, or when you bid a project, its division 16 electrical, my division encompasses all of these guys that have spoken. I as the electrical prime, I absorb them, unless its carved out of my bid, in the bid instructions, I pay a permit fee on all of that. So I always believed that we were getting inspected this whole time. Having said that, I’ve always used qualified subs when necessary. (1:12:21)Chairman Klein: When you have all those different sub-contractors, and you have those permit fees or inspection fees, so every time you called for inspectors does that cost somebody money? Brent: My fees are based on my total cost of the job. So if I have a job that’s $277,000 which encompassed my subcontractors, that’s what I send the fees in on. Chairman Klein: My new thought was when I’m installing my underground sprinklers and now they’re covered by a new PLT technician, am I gonna have to pay a fee to get somebody out there to inspect it? Brent: Well anything less than $500 I believe is a self-certify. So if that guy didn’t charge you $500 there would be no permit on it, you would just be going off of his reputation as a qualified sprinkler guy to do it right for you. Chairman Klein: Well has anyone paid less than $500 for a sprinkler system? Brent: No, you’re probably looking at $3500-$4000 for a typical house in North Dakota.


Trinity Schaff, President/Owner, TrinSPIN Inc.: see attachment #7 for testimony in support of the bill. Chairman Klein: So shouldn’t we have some carve outs for these things that you just mentioned that seem odd that we would need to bring an electrician in for? Isn’t there a way around this without legislation? Isn’t that something they can do within their own rules? Trinity: I have reached out to different people in my district, Koppleman was one of them, no response back from him. I figured out the avenues I could go to get something changed so we could continue to do the work we were doing. The biggest feedback I get is we’re out there to take business away from electricians. That’s the last thing we’re trying to do, if anything the electricians are taking business from us. Electricians aren’t going to go up there and do sprinkler systems or access points and program wireless access points throughout the building. They’re not gonna go up there and get into the camera business or program and operate a phone system. That’s our stuff. Let us do it, and let us do it from start to finish. There’s no high voltage, and if there is, we are going to call in the high voltage certified people in to do that. That’s out of our scope, I agree with that. But anything around that 5-volt range should be our responsibility. I have reached out. James knows how much I’ve reach out. He got a butt chewing from me when I first got shut down because I could not understand why we were not allowed to put in a 12-volt cable. Even the electricians that we are working this were unaware of that. Many of them do not want to deal with the detailed work or under cabinet lighting or accent lighting. They want to get in and get out, they don’t want to spend six hours on their back trying to do under cabinet lighting. When I brought this law up to them they said what do you mean its 12 volts. These are master electricians telling me this, that they had no idea we couldn’t do this. Today is the first day I’ve heard we can’t even pull a PLE cord to a camera, the biggest portion of our business. You’re allowed to plug a cable in, why can’t I plug a cable in? I’m desperate right now, we estimated last year that we lost $100,000 in profit not being able to do low voltage work in the state of North Dakota. I’m a resident of North Dakota and I like to support the state that I’m in, but when I’m limited in what I can do, I’m forced to take my business to Minnesota. Chairman Klein: If we pass this, you would be grandfathered in, so you like the idea of passing something because if would get you moving in the right direction? Trinity: Yes. Senator Kreun: You’re in support? Trinity: I’m not saying there aren’t things I wouldn’t change, but again it’s the desperation that brings me here. Chairman Klein: Well it certainly seems it should be brought to someone’s attention, it’s just unfortunate that it has to be the legislature. See attachment #8-12 for additional testimony in support of the bill submitted to the committee.

2019 SENATE STANDING COMMITTEE MINUTES

Industry, Business and Labor Committee Roosevelt Park Room, State Capitol

SB 2359 2/11/2019

Job #32535

☐ Subcommittee


Committee Clerk: Amy Crane


Relating to the regulation of electricians and power limited technicians; and to provide a penalty. Minutes:

Chairman Klein: Opened the committee work session on SB 2359. All members were present. Chairman Klein: I will start the discussion. This is my opinion, sometime we have to look at this and we have to move something forward that relates to the power limited technicians. We have a day or so to figure this out, 6,000 hours seems inappropriate. I see that as a problem, I see we allow some people to be grandfathered and some others not. I see us pushing this thing back and forth and somebody is going to wind up on the wrong side. But I think its worthy of keeping it alive. Senator Roers: So after last week’s meeting I did contact the electrical inspector James Schmidt and I said to him, you have to try to split this job description into two pieces because it’s too wide of a range and he came up with an amendment that I think is somewhere in circulation that would clearly delineate what the electrical contractors would do and then everything that wasn’t delineated would be in the power limited technicians category and that was the licensing and all that was much more scaled down and much more manageable. Including the 6,000 hours would go down to 2,000 hours. So I thought they had a pretty good compromise coming forward and I didn’t think we could get it done as quickly as they did. They literally got it done overnight. But now I understand Senator Kreun has another approach to this. But I just wanted to say we’ve been making some headway on that but apparently Senator Kannianen wasn’t getting the same read. Senator Kreun: Senator Roers is correct, as Senator Kannianen sits right behind me and we had several conversations and in those conversations he literally had three amendments put together trying to work with his constituents and the individuals and anyone of them have a possibility of maybe but none are a sure thing. So in the conversation between us, his last recommendation was a study bill. I don’t know if we’d have to put any of these other amendments into the bill then would we?


Chairman Klein: It would be a hog house basically. Senator Kreun: And that was, he visited with Mr. Schmidt, a couple times he visited with his supports on the bill, and the individuals that were there gave him information that this would probably be as good a possibility as any to settling as a third party in between. And as its written, one of the things I asked him to do is, during the 19-20 interim the legislative management shall consider studying the regulation of scope and practice of electricians the study must include consideration of scope of practice and regulation as they relate to power limited systems and must include receipt of information from stakeholders including trade groups. The legislative management shall report its findings and recommendation necessary together with legislation necessary to implement the regulations. I think that’s important to have the trade groups at the table when they do that. And that may be a subcommittee or whatever it might be but from what I’m gathering is these groups are pretty far apart. They met they had a subcommittee and it kind of fell apart on a couple different parts and they haven’t been able to weave it back together. So possibly this is the best solution. Chairman Klein: Well and it keeps it alive. And we don’t know where the pushback is going to be as we get a message cause uh… Vice Chairman Vedaa: I wasn’t here for some of these, do I understand that the power limited technicians have never been regulated and now they want to be? Or they want them regulated? But why now? Chairman Klein: There is some concerns of what they can and can’t do. Some of the power limited technicians are getting ratted out by the electricians when they pull a wire that they weren’t supposed to. It seems odd that the electrical board wouldn’t want to work together, but the power limited technicians also want to be able to move forward so they know what they are and are not allowed to do. But the debate is do we want them to have to have 6,000 hours of training where now if you’re installing a camera system and it’s all pretty low voltage and most of these folks are interested in that last step where they program the stuff, and they don’t really care about pulling the wires but often times they’re not allowed to pull the wires so that’s where the conflict is. So some of the folks doing this limited stuff want some of this, the electricians didn’t seem to want any of it. All these inspectors telling us their going to start the lawn on fire if you put your sprinkler system in. I think Mr. Schmidt realized that maybe they overdid it a bit. Senator Roers: I would say that’s about 90% correct. The electricians want to manage anything that’s 110 or 220, and they don’t want to deal with anything that’s low voltage but sometimes these things interface with each other and that’s where they’re having a problem. Especially when it deals with class one like elevators or gas pumps, where sparks can be very detrimental. Electricians and electrical people want to be in charge of those. Right now whoever gets there first does it and the other person has to deal with it. But when it comes to putting the system in and programming it, and doing the final terminations of all the things you see in front of you. Electricians have no clue what’s going on and they’d like it out of their world, but they’re all thrown in one big basket right now. So either the electrical inspectors inspect it, or they don’t.


Senator Kreun: One addition, when we visited with the electricians, they kind of say that but if you look at what’s taking place. We’re talking low voltage, like 5,6,12 volts. Remember they showed they’re going to be a conductor a conduit when they shove all this low voltage through one. Well voltage isn’t the problem, it’s the amps that you push on. And the amps are what create heat in the pushing. At some point in time the heat builds up from these low voltage wires, so in these class one areas, that’s one of the things they’ll have determine, is what’s class one areas? So if you’re looking just right in the ceilings of some of these places that aren’t fire proof and you have easily up to 90 amps, that’s huge when you figure out a 30 amp is a big circuit in your house. You take the gas stations, schools, some of these places would have to be labeled under that, that’s where they have to have the discussion of where some of this takes place. And that was brought up in their discussion as well. That’s why it’s important to have all the people at the table when this is done. Everybody is right and everybody is wrong at this point. Senator Burckhard: There was some electricians that said we have to supervise underground sprinkler systems, and that seems a little ridiculous. And then you have that guy that says this is wasting my time that I have so supervise someone putting in a low voltage wire. And then the 6,000 hours is certainly a lot of training for that. And I happen to have a brother in law who is a state electrical inspector and he said that bill has got a lot of things that are wrong with it. Chairman Klein: Well we hope the study will hold in the house and maybe there are wise people over there that will figure it out before it comes back. And then at conference time, well maybe we won’t concur with what they decide. Senator Piepkorn: It seems like a subject for study like the gas flaring issue, a bigger issue more far reaching deal. We ought to be able to tell these two sides to go figure this out rather than making us figure it out for them. It’s a shame that our decision can’t be to tell them to sit down together and figure it out yourselves. Come back when you have it figured out. Chairman Klein: That’s what we’re hoping to do. However, we’re a little too far apart to come together. I think what we’ve done here is by providing this legislation has brought those folks, that Cameron Flack, until he saw this bill he didn’t know that there was going to be any regulation at all. So at least we’re putting people together in the same room. Senator Roers: I talked to Tom McDougal from High Point, and he said this is a huge can of worms and then if you read the letters from Delcom they said the same thing. I think this study is the right thing, I pushed the electrical inspector after the hearing to do a study. I said this is too complicated and he came back the next day and said oh its very simple we just change a few words and it’s all okay but apparently that didn’t get agreed upon. Chairman Klein: Yeah, let’s just grandfather these folks. Well you don’t know who you’re leaving out. Senator Kreun: I almost 100% agree with Senator Piepkorn, except I just think that they are so far apart that if we don’t create this we could leave our constituents at some point in time in a little bit of a safety concern so we have to force this into something.


Senator Kreun: Move a Do Pass on Amendment. Senator Roers: Seconded. Chairman Klein: Any discussion? Senator Piepkorn: I will vote against the amendment and prefer we vote on the bill at which time I would also encourage a no vote and then we just move on. And then if we want to do something in two years from now, we do it again. Chairman Klein: We’re being kind of to one of our senators. I think you’re correct that once it gets over there even the study is going to go away. We’re providing an opportunity, all those folks that had some input want to continue the input they can, but I think you’re probably right that we should just euthanize our faithful companion here right away but we’re dragging it out a bit. That’s why moving the study, we wimp out and change things into a study and is it the right thing to do? Some times? Sometimes not. but I think Senator Kreun and Senator Roers have been working on this and sees some of these things and encounters people that are hogtied a bit by the rules. Senator Roers: We absolutely do, when we do student housing complex but we do see this conflict arise a lot. I would love to see them resolve their turf issues because we heard about them here. This kind of takes us back 20 years ago the elevator. Well 30 years ago we used to have this problem between the telephone companies AT&T and the independent telephone companies when they used to come in and cut each other’s wires off. We resolved that. Then we had the problem with the elevator companies who gets jurisdiction inside the elevator and who doesn’t the communications people or not, the fire alarm people or not? so this is something we’ve been through many times before we need to get it resolved. So that we know where we’re at in the market place. I would encourage the study to go forward, there’s no assurance that this is even going to get approved by legislative counsel as a study so there will be another vetting process if it goes through. So I would like it go. Senator Kreun: We have to take a quick look then because its shall consider? Chairman Klein: Yes, shall consider that’s okay that means they shall consider it doesn’t mean shall study. Senator Piepkorn: So regardless of how I feel I wouldn’t raise holy hell. Senator Kreun: Well you’ve got fine points. Chairman Klein: Yep, and that’s what we do here. We all have an opinion. A Roll Call Vote Was Taken: 5 yeas, 1 nay, 0 absent. Motion carried. Senator Kreun: Do Pass as Amended.


Senator Roers Seconded. Chairman Klein: any discussion? Senator Piepkorn: And in light of our discussion just recently I would vote no just to see it die. Chairman Klein: And I don’t think anyone will battle anyone on the floor on this one. A Roll Call Vote Was Taken: 5 yeas, 1 nay, 0 absent. Motion carried. Senator Roers will carry the bill.

19.0442.02005 Title.03000

Prepared by the Legislative Council staff for Senator Kannianen

February 8, 2019

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO SENATE BILL NO. 2359

Page 1, line 1, after "A BILL" replace the remainder of the bill with "to provide for a legislative management study of the scope of practice and regulation of electricians.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF NORTH DAKOTA:

SECTION 1. LEGISLATIVE MANAGEMENT STUDY - REGULATION OF AND SCOPE OF PRACTICE OF ELECTRICIANS. During the 2019-20 interim, the legislative management shall consider studying the regulation of and scope of practice of electricians. The study must include consideration of scope of practice and regulation as they relate to power limited systems and must include receipt of information from stakeholders, including trade groups. The legislative management shall report its findings and recommendations, together with any legislation necessary to implement the recommendations, to the sixty-seventh legislative assembly."

Renumber accordingly

Page No. 1 19.0442.02005

Date: �\ \\ Roll Call Vote#: -�1-----

2019 SENATE STANDING COMMITTEE ROLL CALL VOTES

BILL/RESOLUTION NO. ';l )54 Senate Industry, Business and Labor

D Subcommittee

Committee

Amendment LC# or Description: _\;__9..;__. _C)_l{--=--4__._._.J.__· 6=--->-'.d"'-0-=--==CJ=S..___ ________ _

Recommendation: itl Adopt Amendment D Do Pass D Do Not Pass D Without Committee Recommendation D As Amended D Rerefer to Appropriations D Place on Consent Calendar

Other Actions: D Reconsider D

Motion Made By � \f.JJJ\v\ Seconded By ------"-'--------

Senators Yes No Senators Chairman Klein x.. Senator Piepkorn Vice Chairman Vedaa Senator Burckhard Senator Kreun Senator Roers ){

Yes No

Total

Absent

(Yes) 5 No ----��----- ---------------

(j

Floor Assignment

If the vote is on an amendment, briefly indicate intent:

Date: � / ll Roll C all Vote#: �;) ____ _

2019 SENATE STANDING COMMITTEE ROLL CALL VOTES

BILL/RESOLUTION NO. �35� Senate Industry, Business and Labor

D Subcommittee

Amendment LC# or Description:

Committee

----------------------

Recommendation: D Adopt Amendment t3 Do Pass D Do Not Pass rKl As Amended D Place on Consent Calendar

Other Actions: D Reconsider

D Without Committee Recommendation D Rerefer to Appropriations

D

Motion Made By ___ }....,(_W_AA�Vl�--- Seconded By

Senators Yes No Chairman Klein )(

Vice Chairman Vedaa X

Senator Burckhard )<

Senator Kreun )<

Senator Roers )(

No Total

Absent

(Yes) ------------G

Floor Assignment

If the vote is on an amendment, briefly indicate intent:

Senators Yes No Senator Piepkorn ,x;·

Com Standing Committee Report February 12, 2019 8:22AM

Module ID: s_stcomrep_27 _006 Carrier: J. Roers

Insert LC: 19.0442.02005 Title: 03000

REPORT OF STANDING COMMITTEE SB 2359: Industry, Business and Labor Committee (Sen. Klein, Chairman) recommends

AMENDMENTS AS FOLLOWS and when so amended, recommends DO PASS (5 YEAS, 1 NAYS, 0 ABSENT AND NOT VOTING). SB 2359 was placed on the Sixth order on the calendar.

Page 1, line 1, after "A BILL" replace the remainder of the bill with "to provide for a legislative management study of the scope of practice and regulation of electricians.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF NORTH DAKOTA:

SECTION 1. LEGISLATIVE MANAGEMENT STUDY - REGULATION OF AND SCOPE OF PRACTICE OF ELECTRICIANS. During the 2019-20 interim, the legislative management shall consider studying the regulation of and scope of practice of electricians. The study must include consideration of scope of practice and regulation as they relate to power limited systems and must include receipt of information from stakeholders, including trade groups. The legislative management shall report its findings and recommendations, together with any legislation necessary to implement the recommendations, to the sixty-seventh legislative assembly."


(1) DESK (3) COMMITTEE Page 1 s_stcomrep_27 _006

2019 HOUSE INDUSTRY, BUSINESS AND LABOR

SB 2359

2019 HOUSE STANDING COMMITTEE MINUTES

Industry, Business and Labor Committee Peace Garden Room, State Capitol

SB 2359 3/11/2019

33540

☐ Subcommittee


Committee Clerk: Ellen LeTang


Legislative management study of the scope of practice and regulation of electricians.

Minutes:

Chairman Keiser: Opens the hearing on SB 2359. Sen Kannianen~District 4: Introduces SB 2359. This bill turned into a shall study. Rep Laning: You are essentially proposing two different electrical licenses? One is control & the other one is high power or voltage. Sen Kannianen: Yes, the electrician can do everything & the high power would be restricted power limited, low voltage work. Rep Laning: The electronic type low voltage? Sen Kannianen: Not the electronic in terms of engineering but they can do installations. Rep Schauer: What do you want to accomplish with this study? Sen Kannianen: To address concerns & pass some solutions for the matter. James Schmidt~Electrical Board: We encompassed too much with some amendments & so the senate turned it into a study. There are some situations that need to be addressed out there. (Didn’t turn on microphone). Chairman Keiser: Anyone else here to testify on SB 2359 in support, opposition, neutral position? Closes the hearing. What are the wishes of the committee? Vice Chairman Lefor: Moves a Do Pass. Rep Laning: Second.

House Industry, Business and Labor Committee SB 2359 Mar 11, 2019 Page 2

Chairman Keiser: Further questions? Roll call was taken on SB 2359 for a Do Pass with 10 yes, 0 no, 4 absent & Rep M Nelson is the carrier.

Date: Har ll I �l4 Roll Call Vote #: _/ __ _

2019 HOUSE STANDING COMMITTEE ROLL CALL VOTES

House

Amendment LC# or Description:

Recommendation

BILL/RESOLUTION NO.

Industry, Business and Labor

D Subcommittee

D Adopt Amendment

Committee

� Do Pass D Do Not Pass D As Amended

D Without Committee Recommendation D Rerefer to Appropriations

D Place on Consent Calendar Other Actions D Reconsider

Motion Made by ::Bep �f-o f

Representatives

Chairman Keiser Vice Chairman Lefor Rep Bosch Rep C Johnson Rep Kasper Rep Laning Rep Louser

Total IO

Yes

X

l<

)<

)(

A.b

)C

�

D

Seconded By 'Pep l.o.,,n"1n3 No Representatives Yes

Rep O'Brien Ab Rep Richter .6N)

Rep D Ruby x... Rep Schauer X. Rep Adams X. Rep P Anderson ;,<.

Rep M Nelson :x

No 0

No

(Yes) ----------- ---------------

Absent

Floor Assignment

Com Standing Committee Report March 12, 2019 3:09PM

Module ID: h_stcomrep_ 43_011 Carrier: M. Nelson

REPORT OF STANDING COMMITTEE SB 2359, as engrossed: Industry, Business and Labor Committee (Rep. Keiser,

Chairman) recommends DO PASS (10 YEAS, 0 NAYS, 4 ABSENT AND NOT VOTING). Engrossed SB 2359 was placed on the Fourteenth order on the calendar.

(1) DESK (3) COMMITTEE Page 1 h_stcomrep_ 43_011

2019 TESTIMONY

SB 2359

Testimony for SB 2359

Senator Jordan Kannianen - District 4

Prepared for Senate IBL Committee - Chairman Klein and Vice-Chair Vedaa

Chairman Klein and committee, this bill proposes to create a power limited licensing structure.

In addition to the electrical licenses that the State Electrical Board administers, this bill would

create the licenses of Power Limited Technician Contractor, Power Limited Technician (PLT) and

Power Limited Technician Apprentice. I have an amendment to propose that I request be

adopted by the committee. It makes a few changes or additions to the bill.

There is a "grandfather clause" in Section 7 of the bill that allows licenses to be acquired

without examination for all those currently engaged in power limited systems work in the state.

The amended bill would state that those who have either a tradesman certification or have

completed a course of study as approved by the board and 6,000 hours of work experience

would qualify for a power limited technician's license. One year of experience as a power

limited technician would qualify an individual to apply for a power limited technician contractor

license.

The electrical and power limited/low voltage field has changed so rapidly over the past decade,

and the lines have been blurred between traditional electrical systems and work and low

voltage/power limited systems. This is one of the reasons for this proposal, and the definition

of power limited systems has been left undefined in this bill to allow the board to define it in

administrative rule. This allows for more flexibility in an ever-changing field.

This would allow individuals to perform power limited work on jobs that now require an

electrician to complete, effectively expanding the pool of companies/workers available to

complete that type of work.

With the changing field and blurred lines, this bill would mean the electrical board is inspecting

some power limited/low voltage work that they haven't previously inspected (with safety being

the intent) and licensing individuals that haven't previously been licensed by the board.

However, the creation of power limited licenses would allow more individuals into the field to

complete work currently only electricians can do, would grandfather in all companies and their

employees currently engaged in the trade in the state, and allows for other tradesman

certifications to qualify for a PLT license.

The amendment also clarifies that the following would be exempted from this licensing

requirement: maintenance personnel of a facility performing maintenance work on existing

systems, employees of telecommunications carriers, and those installing satellite systems.

Please move the amendment and give SB 2359 a Do Pass recommendation as amended.

•

•

•

si�:ss q J/s(t q Af t-1t:1 19.0442.02003 Title.

Prepared by the Legislative Council staff for Senator Kannianen

February 4, 2019

PRO POSED AMENDMENTS TO SENATE BILL NO. 2359

Page 5, line 16, after "have" insert "a board-recognized tradesman certification or must have the following experience and education"

Page 5, line 25, replace "this subsection" with "subdivision a"

Page 8, line 24, remove "public utility"

Page 8, line 24, overstrike "that operates or installs telephone and radio"

Page 8, line 25, overstrike "communication systems when"

Page 8, line 25, remove "while"

Page 8, line 25, overstrike "engaged in work pertaining directly to the"

Page 8, overstrike lines 26 and 27

Page 8, line 28, overstrike "signals" and insert immediately thereafter "telecommunications carrier, as defined under section 57-34-01, while acting in the scope of employment"

Page 9, line 1, after the second comma insert "satellite systems,"

Page 9, after line 6, insert: 11.Q,, Maintenance personnel regularly employed by the owner of an industrial

facility in the course of maintaining or making minor repairs to an existing electrical wiring device or appliance. This exemption does not include extending or changing the characteristics of an existing circuit or feeder or other electrical apparatus."


19.0442.02003

f J

• TESTIMONY SUPPORT of SB 2359 PL T Licensure

PRESENTED BY JAMES SCHMIDT

•

•

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NORTH DAKOTA STATE ELECTRICAL BOARD

Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee:

Senate Bill 2359 was introduced with the support of the North Dakota State Electrical Board. There have been discussions for the past several years whether there is a need for a power limited technician license in North Dakota.

To give you some background on how we ended up here today, in 1982, AT&T was deemed a monopoly and was required by the federal government to dissolve effective January 1, 1984. I have been a licensed electrician since 1979. I recall that prior to 1984 AT&T installed the telephone wiring on nearly all projects in North Dakota. After the AT&T breakup in 1984, telephone system installers emerged in the private sector and picked up where AT&T left off.

Every three years, the ND State Electrical Board adopts the National Electrical Code {NEC, NFPA Chapter 70} in its entirety. Included in the NEC are code articles that regulate power limited technician work. When AT&T was doing this work, because it was a utility, it was exempt from electrical licensing and inspections in North Dakota. In short, the problem started back in 1984, and in reality the State Electrical Board should have looked at doing something about inspections and licensure of this work back then.

Since 1984 breakup of AT&T, power limited technician {PLT} work has grown immensely with all the new systems that have been developed. In recent years new technologies in PLT systems

1 01-30-19

• such as security, nurse call, telephone, sensing, monitoring, and other various types of data related systems have been developed to control or monitor various systems in hospitals, nursing homes, schools, commercial buildings, crude oil handling facilities, factories, grain elevators, manufacturing plants and your homes.

•

•

One of the many concerns that have arisen is the individuals currently doing PLT work are not aware of classified areas and the code requirements of the National Electrical Code and the ND Wiring Standards. Hazardous locations fall under the classified areas category and includes flammable gas-air, vapor-air and dust-air mixtures. Also these individuals need to be aware of the proper sizing of raceways, cable tray, proper sizing of conductor/cable fill in a raceways, proper grounding methods for these raceways, using the correct wire insulation type in a plenum rated ceiling space, installing systems in a workmanship like manner, properly sealing fire/smoke building barriers and proper distance for PLT system conductors from line voltage conductors.

Some might interpret this bill is just another way for the board to impose more regulation, or to steer more work to electricians. This is incorrect. The board is trying to categorize and define this field of electrical work within the trade. This bill will allow more trained individuals {including those not licensed as electricians) to work on power limited systems. Currently some of the power limited installations may require an electrician to perform part of the PLT installation such as in the case of power over Ethernet circuits. Moving forward, a licensed PLT would be able to perform that work without using an electrician in most cases.

We have heard from telephone utilities concerned SB 2359 would affect their business operations. Currently utility

2 01-30-19

• companies are exempt from licensure and inspections for their systems and this would remain the case.

•

•

Passage of SB 2359 would allow the board to enter into PLT reciprocal licensure agreements with our member NERA (National Electrical Reciprocal Alliance) states as we do with electrician licensing.

The board would also require proper training for the individuals installing these systems in homes and public places to ensure they are qualified professionals and will install to the National Electrical Code and ND Wiring Standards.

Another concern we have heard about is: "the board has adopted the NEC in its entirety so enforce it." If this were the case the firms that are currently doing PLT work would need to have a Master electrician issuing wiring certificates and journeyman electricians performing the installations. This would not be practical for most firms, and the board does not believe this is good policy.

An oil company introduced a bill in the 2015 legislative session to exempt electrical work 24 volts and less from licensure or inspections. The purpose of that bill was to allow their technicians to perform this work without being licensed or inspected. The 2015 bill failed.

SB 2359 is in response to that 2015 bill and will allow trained oil company employees to have a PLT license and perform their work. During the 2015 legislative session, at the boards January 5, 2015, the board first discussed PLT licensure.

At the Board's May 20, 2015, meeting the board further discussed and authorized me to form a low/limited voltage license study committee. This consisted of a seven member advisory committee to study PLT work and whether changes to the law

3 01-30-19

• were necessary. This committee was made up of two electrical engineers, a contracting master electrician, a past college electrical instructor/present electrical trainer, an individual that holds a neighboring state PLT license, an individual that represents and install PLT systems, our director of inspections and myself. I have attached the notes from board meetings addressing PLT to my testimony.

•

•

As part of this process, the board conducted a survey of the respondents (engineers, electricians, power limited companies and the general public) a full 80% were in favor of some form of PLT licensure. Some companies currently doing PLT work would also like to see something put in place as they too are frustrated to see untrained individuals doing poor quality of work. I have attached those survey results to my testimony.

SB 2359 is the product of a nearly 4 year study by the PLT committee and the Board. We therefore urge a do pass vote on SB 2359.

We thank the Committee for hearing our comments and I would be happy to answer any questions the committee may have .

4 01-30-19

•

•

•

7/2/14

Power Limited Technician (PL T) Discussions from

Various State Electrical Board Meetings

Mr. Schmidt was contacted by Rocky Scheving of RD Sales concerning low voltage

licensing. No action was taken by the Board due to legislative procedure, as if it has

to do with electric light, heat or power and fire alarms, it requires a Master

electrician.

1/5/15

Mr. Schmidt, based on recent conversations, indicated that the Board may need to

consider low-voltage licensing, similar to Minnesota, in the near future. No action

was taken at this time.

4/2/15

Mr. Schmidt presented the Board with a recommendation to look at low-voltage

licensing, and whether a committee should be assigned to address this type of

licensing, if needed. History was presented on this topic, and if it should be

pursued. Mr. Schmidt suggested two engineers, two contracting Masters, one at

large from the electrical industry and any Board representatives to make up the committee. Mr. Schmidt will inquire of other states as to their low-voltage licensing

process. This matter will be tabled for further discussion at future meetings .

5/20/15

Low or limited voltage licensing was reviewed. Mr. Mayer inquired of the Board

meeting attendees of their opinion on low-voltage licensing. Cody Serr stated that

he has been in North Dakota for 14 years and does not believe there is a need for

this license although there have been some shoddy low-voltage practices. Mr.

Mayer indicated he wants to be proactive on this issue, so it was motioned by Kyle

Miller and seconded by Karen Karls to authorize James Schmidt to form a

low /limited voltage license study committee.

7/14/15

Low or limited voltage licensing was reviewed. Mr. Schmidt indicated that so far at

least two engineers have agreed to serve on a study committee, which will include

development of a program and a recommendation to the Board. This committee is

needed to determine if this type of licensing is warranted, and to determine the

regulations that may come with it. Mr. Scherer indicated that the Board needs to be

proactive for safety reasons.

3/29/17 Mr. Schmidt updated the Board on the Power Limited Advisory Committee which

has been put together and the committee's first meeting has been scheduled.

Further discussion was held on Power Limited licensing and Power-Over-Ethernet

situations. Curt Kasper inquired if there were any vacancies on this committee and

Mr. Schmidt indicated all positions have been filled.

•

•

•

5/24/17

Mr. Schmidt gave the Board an update on the PL T Advisory Committee. Feedback

was received and reviewed from committee members. Much discussion was had

regarding PL T. It was the Board's decision to continue the process of a PL T

registration and license.

9/21/17

Mr. Schmidt provided an update on the Power Limited Technician. It continues to

be a work in progress and he has asked inspectors and others to get input and

feedback from contractors.

11/15/17

Mr. Schmidt provided an update on the Power Limited Technician. A survey was

sent out in the last newsletter. Mr. Schmidt provided a handout of survey results for

the Board to review. Discussion was had on low voltage installations, permits, and

inspections. This topic will be placed on the January, 2018 agenda for further

review and discussion.

1/24/18

A Power Limited Technician license was discussed and President Mayer requested

that the committee meet at least one more time and possibly attend a future Board

meeting as well to keep the process moving forward .

3/21/18

Mr. Schmidt reviewed the article that could be placed in the next newsletter

allowing an open forum regarding PL T Licensing. The Board decided to place the

article in the next newsletter and have an open forum the day prior to the May

Board meeting.

5/22/18 - Special meeting for public input on PLT

The Board introduced themselves to those in attendance. President Mayer indicated

the purpose of the meeting is to get the public input and their thoughts on the

possibility of power limited licensing (PL T). The meeting is open to comments and

for testimony only. The Board is simply here to listen.

President Mayer turned the meeting over to James Schmidt, Executive Director.

Mr. Schmidt opened the meeting by reviewing the handout which included

comments received as a result of a survey that was previously sent out. The PLT

committee was formed about two (2) years ago. The PL T committee consists of two

engineers, a master electrician, a fire alarm installer and a MN PL T license holder

who is also BICSI certified. The committee met and reviewed code articles that

would be affected by PL T. The purpose of all of this is to see if the Board should

•

•

•

move forward with this or not. The majority of the survey results at this point show

80% or more in favor of moving forward.

5/23/18

The Board discussed the PL T open forum. Ben Koppelman reviewed the possibility

of making changes to define NDCC 43-09-16 versus creating an additional license.

An email from Tim Pull was also reviewed, along with a chart attached from the MN

Department of Labor & Industry's website for when a PL T license is required and

what is required to be inspected.

7/25/18

Mr. Schmidt updated the Board on PL T. The PL T committee met and reviewed the

Laws & Rules along with PL T requirements, exams, CEUs, ratios, etc. Motioned by

Tom Paulson and seconded by Mark Christopher to move forward with the PL T licensing. Motion carried.

9/12/18

Mr. Schmidt provided a review and update of the PLT licensing. Discussion followed with moving forward with PL T licensing.

11/7/18

Mr. Schmidt presented a power limited technician table and proposed law changes

to include power limited technician (PL T) licensing. Board would like to move

forward with having a senator present a legislative bill.

•

•

•MM:1-hi��id{f ,1�1!,�i: :U. 1929 N. WAS H I N GTO N ST. , SU ITE A-1

PO BOX 7335, B ISMARCK, ND 58507 701 -328-9522 I FAX: 701-328-9524

electr [email protected] / www.ndseb.com

James Schmidt Douglas Grinde Paula Glass EXECUTIVE D IRECTOR D IRECTOR OF I NSPECTIONS OFFICE MANAGER

At recent North Dakota State Electrical Board meetings, the board has discussed the following and would like your opinion on whether or not a power limited technician license is needed in North Dakota similar to other states. For the board to continue, they are asking for your input so please review this rough draft language below (will be revised as needed), complete the survey below and return it to the board office.

Rough Draft for Proposed Power Limited Requ irements for North Dakota : Power Limited Technician (PLT) Requirements: A statewide license is required for: Power Limited Technician (PLT} - an individual having the necessary qualifications, training, experience, and technical knowledge to install, alter, repair, plan, lay out, and supervise the installing, altering, and repairing of electrical wiring, apparatus, and equipment for technology circuits or systems, and who is licensed as a PLT by the NDSEB. "Technology circuits or systems" means systems covered by the National Electrical Code, articles 640, 720, 725, 727, 770, 800, 81 0, 820, 830, and 840. The planning, laying out, installing, altering, and repairing of technology circuits or systems must be performed in accordance with the applicable requirements of the National Electrical Code pursuant to section NDCC. "Technology System Contractor" means a licensed contractor whose responsible licensed individual is a licensed Power Limited Technician (PL T} .

Thank you for your input in advance.

(please print your name) (please print your occupation)

D Yes I would support some version of PLT licensure D No I would not support (Please mark an X for your choice on the line above)

Additional comments:

BOARD MEM BERS Rod Mayer Ben Koppelman Tom Pau lson Brad Syl l iaasen Mark Christopher PRES I DENT V ICE PRES IDENT SECRETARY TREASURER MEM BER

•

•

•

Power L im ited Techn ic ian (PL T) Survey Resul ts (Updated 01 /28/1 9)

Occupation: Electrical Engineer

Yes: 4 Comments:

• Power over internet & IOT , internet of things, will make communication wiring more common. I've seen too much poorly installed communication cabling. It would be a good thing to improve the quality of communication wiring to require licensing & inspection . Make equal rules for Minnesota & North Dakota would be a good thing.

• I believe there should be an addit ional requirement (hours of superv1s1on installing projects similar or years of experience) or licensure level to conduct LV wiring operations in hazardous and industrial application to ensure only knowledgeable and qualified personnel are conducting the installations and service work .

No: 3 Comments: None

Occupation: Various (Farmer, Project Manager, Supervisor/President , Automation Specialist , Building Engineer, Quotations Rep, Service Rep, Integrator, etc . )

Yes: 24 Comments:

• Will this apply to the phone and cable company technicians? If so how would i t be enforced? What about out of state (Verizon , Dish, Direct TV)?

• I visited with a current PL T licensed contractor and he is in favor of the license. hear some non-license are pulling control wire with their internet . This is high voltage not PL T work. I hear mount of cables are not correct .

• I think with the new technology out there if you have to use a code book for your job they should be required to have a license.

• Electricians have enough to do getting power installed .

• I used to work at a college in Minnesota and I thought the guys that had PL T license did a better job of pulling and strapping wire they pulled than they do in

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

North Dakota. Better workmanship. A little education doesn't hurt. It makes them more accountable for their work.

I have seen some real horrors on cable TV mainly due to ignorance of minimum safety codes. I believe anyone working with low voltage should have training and certification of safety codes.

Only if l icensed electricians are able to do this wiring without getting a separate PLT license.

Low voltage installers within an Industrial environment would benefit from this requirement with regards to basic electrical practices as well as setting and adhering to specified standards set forth by the NEC.

I would like to see article 409, 41 0. 500. 501 , 502 and 504 brought into this proposal . Low voltage is util ized in many situations for controls of larger equipment and in oil , gas and coal industries. They should have knowledge of classified areas. They should also have the abil ity and knowledge of how to install and maintain the equipment. I am referring to l&E techs.

• On behalf of G&R Controls, we would l ike to convey our support for some version of PL T l icensure. We are a temperature control contractor with locations in Fargo and Bismarck. As such, most of our work is with low voltage controls and wiring. Under current rules, we must employ Journeyman and Apprentice electricians to perform our work. It has been extremely difficult to staff our business for several reasons:

o Electricians seem to be in short supply , especially in the western part of the state, where there are no trade schools that offer Electrical Construction Programs.

o When we do find employees who are interested in becoming Apprentices and pursuing their Journeyman license, the work we have them doing does not support the th ings they need to learn to successfully pass the exam. They must spend time learning things that aren't particularly relevant to our business in order to become Journeyman.

o Building and process automation is a growing industry. More technicians will be needed to support the growing need.

In addition to implementing PL T l icenses, we would like to see the state support adding PL T curriculums to North Dakota trade schools. Thank you for the opportunity to provide input .

• I have a PL T license in the state of Minnesota, so I get the continuing education to maintain the l icense and understand the requirements of the NEC. I work for

•

•

•

•

•

an Independent Telephone Company on the eastern side of the state and see some of the work that is being done by communicat ion companies; it would fail inspect ion every t ime. If you ask a North Dakota electrical inspector about i t they will tell you it is not their job to inspect the communicat ions piece. We NEED PL T in the state of North Dakota!

As technology continues to evolve in the oil patch, so too are the skills required to work on low power electronics. Electricians will always play a huge role in the industry. l&E tech schools provide training in communicat ions, networking, programming and instrument troubleshoot ing. Grads will use the PL T path as a way to eventually obtain their journeyman electrician license. Giving these folks the opportunity to obtain a PL T l icense and eventually become an electric ian would be good for the industry as a whole .

To be successful in the Automat ion Industry it takes two types of professionals . The first is the Journeyman Electrician to get the power to where it needs to go. The second is a Technician, who understands communicat ion protocols, IP Networking and programming. This technician often is college educated and/or very experienced and intelligent . The PL T is a very necessary license with an ever growing demand for controls and technology .

• Today a Journeyman license is required to perform all work at all sites no matter the complexity or voltage of the work being performed. There is a reason to provide for a more limited license for those that would be performing work that involves only lower voltage or communicat ions work and does not involve either the complexity or risk that other work may require. We are supportive of some version of a PL T license from the state of North Dakota.

• There are multiple disciplines necessary in the complet ion of an oil & gas wellpad. Roustabouts, automat ion technicians, helpers, electricians, etc. Today, it is required for us to have an electrician on-site when even most electricians don't think they need to be. The PL T proposal is a good one. A similar requirement exists in WY for "low voltage technicians" which has been good for the oil & gas industry , allowing electricians to work on "real" electrical work.

No: 1

Comments: • A few thoughts:

1 . Is what being proposed going to benefit the residents of ND by protect ing them and their property from hazards caused by the use of electricity? Are people being injured or is property being damaged from power limited circuits? 2. Is the board prepared for the ramificat ions that will occur with licensing, inspections, cont inuing educat ion and enforcement of these rules?

•

•

•

3. As someone who has been an electrician, inspector, teacher, and now a specialist for an electrical distributor I know in my 24 years of trade experience that there is currently a sizeable amount of wiring installed by both professionals and non-licensed installers which is not being inspected or done legally . My only reason for pointing this out is that I suggest you do a better job with enforcing current rules before making new ones. 4. As a resident of MN and someone who witnessed what occurred when this took place there I have a couple of opinions/observations:

A . Spotty enforcement - many people who would be required to be licensed are not going to go through the process to run a thermostat cable and there is not much incentive for the inspector/DOLi to enforce the rules. Electrician on the job (will often cover for them) and say they ran it . B. The few ones that are following the rules are required to have 1 6 hours of continuing education every two years. I have never heard any good reason why this is required. Also it doesn't matter what continuing education they take. Many sit in a class for 1 6 hours which has nothing to do with the reason they are required to be licensed in the first place. Puts a bad "taste" in their mouth for DOLi and government in general. C . Confusion about what these installers are allowed to do. Be careful writing this if it goes forward .

Occupation: Inspector

Yes : 3 Com ments:

• As long as it is regulated, licensed and inspected. Because ND State Standards 24. 1 -02-01 -02. 1 purpose and scope in my opinion already covers the proposed PL T articles. As they all use and/or control power. Plus consider the PL T person has to know other areas of the NEC and State Standards. Just like our current contractors/electricians do now. Like hazardous locations, places of assembly, health care, places of assembly , etc .

• Too many violations land on the responsibility of licensed ND contractors. Little effort performed by "low voltage" contractors to abide by any standards. It will be a difficult task to accomplish but has to start somewhere.

• Under article 90. 1 of the NEC, the purpose of this code is the practical safeguarding of persons and property from hazards arising from the use of electricity . Also under Laws, Rules and Wiring Standards of ND section 43-09-09, an electrical license is required. These rules are very clear. We do not need unlicensed, uneducated, untrained and uninsured persons doing electrical work.

•

•

•

No: O Comments: None

Occupation: Electrician

Yes: 1 48 Comments:

• Long overdue - someone to monitor installation of low voltage wiring. Question - would past industry certifications qualify - BICSI.

• As a former inspector I would see violations on projects and the only fix was to address concerns with owners. Yes there should be accountability to the installer to meet minimum codes.

• Requiring a license would provide some assurance that the installers are aware of the installation requirements in the NEC.

• Garage door sensors and buttons suck .

• Explanations will need to be available for #1 - programmable logic controllers, some of these control 1 20 volt c ircuits. #2 - the power circuit to power limited circuits will need to be defined.

• I believe working on low voltage can be just as dangerous as high voltage. With all the new low voltage instrumentation not knowing what you are doing can put other people's lives at risk. Any extra training would help keep people safer in my opinion.

• My feeling that all cable infrastructure systems to support audio/video signed processing, low voltage, instrumentation, fiber optic, communication system, etc . . . should be installed by trained & licensed personnel and subject to inspection if needed. This would provide a degree of insurance that a quality installation is provided in a neat and workmanlike manner. This would help protect the owner's investment . Hazardous locations?

• As long as the work is performed under the license of a ND Master no matter what the voltage or usage.

• Must be only required for projects by amount of equipment so not required unnecessarily .

•

•

•

• Need to maintain CEU 's? Will the PL T license be needed if you have a Journeyman and/or Master license now?

• I support this as long as there are regulations in place that require license holders to adhere to similar standards in place for current electrical installations. Also, I would like to see these installations be required to be inspected by a state electrical inspector as well as required wiring certificates to be pulled for such installations.

• Important to ensure qualified installers. However, enforcement and licensing process leaves much work to implement . Will contractors be required to write certificates for such?

• They install and overfill raceways.

• I would support some version of PL T license. Would also like to see some form of continuing education for this license.

• You should be certified in whatever you do no matter what the voltage.

• Would be nice to make sure the minimal knowledge is acquired for some certification.

• I would gladly support this so long as it is covered under the Journeyman electrician license without needing extra certifications.

• If a person already has a state inside wireman's license I think it should be covered under that , however, if they do not I am all for having a special licensing requirement .

• Take out the word "pursuant" and use more common language to be sure your message and intents are clear.

• Good idea!

• I think any and all systems involving current and/or voltage needs to be regulated by some sort of license.

• Licensing is another step to ensure installations are performed in a safe and workmanlike fashion. Proper installations are a direct reflection of our professionalism and commitment to quality for and safety to the public .

•

•

•

• Please make a note that this applies to all installations including residential , commercial, and industrial .

• MN has and so do other states. When it's too busy for a Class A JW to mess with "little" wire when could use the additional help.

• I think that PL T licensing is necessary . I have seen far too many "low voltage" workers and contractors performing work on systems that are potentially more dangerous than traditional electrical systems (oil and gas production controls, communications and controls in schools and health care occupancies, fire alarm cabling in public occupancies, etc . ) but I believe it is more important that the new license receive proper support from the NOSES; wiring certificates, proper inspections, continuing education requirements, etc . will be necessary .

• One issue I see is controlling what the PL T is doing. I can see them doing more than allowed. Example; 1 1 Ov to control panel.

• I believe this would be a great idea due to future expansion of tech systems. The notorious reputation of data/low voltage installers have poor workmanship and lack of knowledge of the risks posing danger. I.E. , plenum/non-plenum areas, curly knots in Ethernet wire than adding a load such as P.O .E. Now days there are many contractors "out of their garage" installing security cameras, and may be novice. This will maintain installers/contractors to be informed of dangers, and abide by rules and regulations. It is time; we should have had this ten years ago.

• With all the new electronic devices coming out , yes they need to be licensed. They need to be tested to understand wiring requirements that meet code.

• Yes if doing low voltage/technology circuits you should be licensed. You should do so under a contracting Master license or if on your own just doing strictly low voltage technology circuits. They should have the training and follow all inspectors, bonding and insurance just like a contracting master. If you are under some sort of Master license, PL T not required.

• Would still like certain things that a Journeyman electrician can do like running conduit and anyone who would already have a Journeyman license would automatically qualify for a PL T license. A PL T apprentice license should also be included.

• Would be nice to hold everyone that pulls cable to the same standard .

• All contractors would have some form of licensing that would help keep wiring methods the same for all .

•

•

•

• Would save a lot of hassle with non-qualified companies doing jobs.

• If they followed local, state and national codes.

• I think this is a good idea to keep installers accountable and also recognized for the skills possessed. Local contractors know who does quality work and that isn't usually the problem its usually people from outside the area coming in and taking the "short cuts" getting the work done "good enough" and then they are gone. Someone else usually has to come behind to deal with the short comings! !

• First and foremost I want to state that I most definitely support the regulation of low voltage electrical work. I have been the license holder for Lucent Technologies from the time they split from AT&T until October 2000 and then was the license holder for Avaya Inc . until the end of 201 5 when I retired from there. I am currently the backup license holder for another company that doesn't do much low voltage but I still remain in touch with the person that replaced me at Avaya. During this time I have noticed that in a new large commercial building probably half of the wiring that is installed is some form of low voltage wiring. Both voice and data, and now some video is starting to show up. And you have a right to be concerned as a lot of the low voltage equipment is powered by POE (Power Over Ethernet) . Some of this can be as much as 56 volts and 60 watts. While this doesn't sound like much I've seen some data cables overheat to the point of nearly being on fire. Modern telephone wiring is the same type of installation as data and would have the same results in a failure. Too many times have one of our technicians gone into a job location and found over fusing on POE circuits, loose wires thrown across dropped ceilings, and a large gripe of mine has been the unbelievable number of fire rated walls and ceilings that were almost completely destroyed leaving no protection at all . I even found a couple of fire dampers that had 50 to 1 00 blue low voltage wires passing THROUGH the damper. While I was with Lucent it was common to install and maintain power supplies of 48 volts that would fill a small building and would be equipped with battery strings that would go for 50 to 1 00 feet. These power supplies would light a small city at 50 volts . If they would be worked on or installed by incompetent persons a failure would be catastrophic. With the advent of wind power and solar power some of the systems are very similar as are the failures. There most definitely is a need for regulation to be sure that the contractors and technicians have the appropriate know how, training and insurance that would afford the public and property owners some protection. I can't say that I feel that this licensing and regulation should apply to single family residential structures. There really isn't much low voltage wiring that is installed in that type of structure. But I do think in multi-family structures this should be considered. You mention that you haven't decided on the voltage break point yet . I have been licensed in about 40 states and the typical maximum in most areas that regulate low voltage

•

•

•

•

is 50 volts. California stands out as being 9 1 volts. But I would like to mention that a charging system for 48 volts does operate at about 54 volts and maybe a little more.

I do have a little background that might be useful to you: I have an Associate of Applied Science in Electronics Technology (NOT Electrical) from NDSCS from 1 988. I also have a Bachelor of Arts in Organizational Communication from Concordia College. I have taught electrical and PL T CEU classes in MN and ND. Specifically, I have taught PLT classes with technical information on HVAC, Sound systems, Garage Door Openers, etc . When the PL T requirement was being adopted in M N about a dozen years ago I personally called hundreds of Sprinkler, Garage Door companies, Satellite installers, HVAC companies and so on to "warn" them of the upcoming license requirements and the narrow window to jump on board before time documentation and major test requirements kicked in. I made arrangements with about 1 7 MN colleges to provide the t raining. I recruited some of the instructors and taught some classes myself. I was working for MNSCU then. I have been a MN State Electrical Inspector. I have been a licensed Electrical Contractor. (MN and ND) . I have been a low voltage contractor in Fargo. At the F-M Builders Exchange I would bid alarm, antenna, sound, etc . systems across MN and ND. Initially as an Electronics Technician at Fargo Schools I maintained their audio visual systems. I installed their first computer and TV wiring systems. Later, as an electrician at Fargo Schools I maintained all their low voltage systems (fire alarm, clock, intercom, sound, etc .) and electrical . As Master Electrician at Concordia I worked on electrical and Technology systems. Presently I'm volunteering at the Historic Holmes Theater in Detroit Lakes, MN where I am routing all control wiring for the theater sound, lighting, and video systems between Master Control and the Stage Equipment . I believe North Dakota should have a requirement similar to M N . As the lines of distinction between technology and electrical merge and integrate , it will be even more important . I notice the wording for the proposed ND license is the same as MN. Although it is tempting to get out the Thesaurus and change it up, it is probably smarter to keep it the same as your neighbor. The couple of wordy sentences MN uses is an attempt to t ry to cover all possibilities. I would prefer to not be so lengthy, specific , and redundant in the initial description but would use a more concise sentence and refer the reader to a more lengthy paragraph with detail. But , not reinventing the wheel is better so I would leave it alone. If MN received negative feedback or if they thought it needed clarification, they probably would have done it by now.

•

------

•

•

•

Just like some of the farm workers in our area are worried about being deported back to their countries, there might be low voltage installers worried about being deported to unemployment . This can be completely avoided by following the same philosophy as in MN: Allow those already (in the country to stay here) working in the world of low voltage technology to become easily licensed. Of course, some will be competent . Others will NOT be competent . But I see no recourse other than to let them all become licensed PL T's . The process of licensing will or should be pretty basic . I think I would concentrate on what they SHOULD know and not what they NEED to know. T he test might be one of those tests that everyone passes if they know their name and can pay the fee. I would recommend that anybody wanting a PL T license has until a specific date to take an 8 hour class and then write a test afterwards. If the person does extremely badly on the test, I would still pass them. My point is: 1. Require the license. 2. Require the 8 hour training. 3. Require the test. 4. Issue the license. After a certain point of course , anybody wanting to be a PL T would need to take a more extensive test to obtain the PL T license. I understand the MN PL T test is as difficult as the M N Master test . I really hope ND doesn' t make taking this future PL T test as difficult as the MN Master. I agree that to obtain a ND or MN Journeyman or Master license a person's time must be carefully documented to ensure proper training has been obtained. I believe MN requires careful documentation of hours for a PL T. I don't think that is necessary and the requirement is likely heavily influenced by the Twin Cities electrical unions. Once the initial batch of PL T 's have jumped through the hoop, a more comprehensive test should be completed for future PL T 's. I do think these PL T 's should have some field experience but it might be unreasonable to expect them to have years of field experience; working in an apprenticeship fashion is not often the culture of the low voltage world . Maybe the applicant either show extensive field experience through a method similar to electrical licensing OR they have "some" field experience and perform a demonstration of some sort. Here is an example of four open book exam questions in lieu of extensive field experience: "What method and what type of cable would you use to route and support Cat6E cable from a computer room to an office where dropped ceiling tiles are used and where there is no airflow in the ceiling"? "What would be different if the area above the ceiling is used as an air return?" "What NEC code article(s) apply?" "Describe the color code of both ends of a Cat6E cable terminated with RJ45 jacks in a crossover configuration" .

For Heating & AC contractors, it would be ok for them to wire their own equipment only . All low voltage lighting should be done by Electrical Contractors .

• I believe that if a person is to work any electrical system involving wires of any voltage should have a license. Fiber optics should be included since it is tied into

•

•

•

•

the same power limited systems. In your rough draft it should read; "JW license or PL T license. "

Some wording needs to be included to allow a Journeyman or Master electrician to also be considered to meet PL T requirements without additional testing or different continuing education .

• Good for everyone to make sure the job gets done safely and correctly.

• I received a PL T license in Minnesota several years ago. At first I thought it was stupid but after going through the training and education as an apprentice I realized that "knowing" the NEC made for better quality installation, not to mention legal. Too many low voltage installers don 't know any code rules.

• I am in support of this new requirement and hope it would include some rudimentary knowledge of the NEC. I have seen work done "not to code" by a technician to supply 1 20v power for the equipment they are installing.

• I think qualified and licensed technicians of every field can only help all trades become better and more efficient.

• Any system involving voltage and/or current should require some sort of licensed individual installing said system.

• The Master and Journeyman electrician license should be qualified to include Power Limited with an endorsement or continuing education processed on this area since there is danger or fire with this technology and coordination between trades is beneficial.

• I think this would be a good idea because of the amount of knowledge required and future requirements for the Technology being utilized in construction .

• My only question would be are current Master/Journeyman electricians going to need to test and get a PL T license or would we be covered (grandfathered in) with our current license?

• Technology is really changing - techs should be trained.

• I think it would be a good thing for the inspectors, communities and customers overall. It would give the state more awareness of who and where all doing this type of work is being done. This day and age there is becoming more and more of this type of work .

• It is very common to see 1 00's of feet of unsupported communications cable.

•

•

•

• Will this require certificates for the work completed? Has the minimum requirements for qualifications, training, etc . been developed yet? How do we take in this discipline of work of our industry without over-regulating the consumers, workers, and companies already installing these systems safely and professionally? Great approach to the solution. Keep up the good leadership of our electricians. Doug,

• I would like to support the NDSEB on the proposed Power Limited Technician License. I would also propose that along side it they mirror the inspection process we all observe. This will be an excellent revenue builder for NDSEB which I support 1 00% . I think the best thing we can do is put your inspectors eyes on some of the low voltage and instrument work that gets done out there.

If I could also offer another area, there are a lot of oilfield folks up here, programming, controls and instrumentation that design and build non code compliant systems. I think that area would allow for the Board to get eyes on some of those systems and designs, participate in that process and hold some accountability .

Unsure: 6 Comments:

• My position is these licenses should only be instituted if they are needed from a safety standpoint. If there is data to suggest that there are accidents happening that involve injuries or major loss of property and the data also suggests that implementing a license system would mitigate some of those accidents, the system should be implemented as soon as possible. However, if there is not enough data to support this I think the Board should refrain from implementation. Adding more license procedures will add more difficulty to getting work done. It will be harder for employers to find qualified people, the Board would probably have to add more personnel for licensing and inspection and more resources will have to be spent for training and licensing. All of these will end up costing consumers and owners more in the end. I understand there are many factors that go into a decision like this but I think safety should be the foremost factor for the Board to consider.

• I'm looking for some clarification prior to filling out the form and returning it . As I read it, the individual must have the "necessary qualifications, training, experience, and technical knowledge" in order to be eligible for the statewide license. My question would be what are the qualifications going to be and what type of training will be required in order to qualify for this license? I am sure experience hours will be done the same way as with the JW license through the

•

•

•

employer, but is there going to be classroom training required as well, like there is for the JW license? One of the biggest issues I see is the safety side of things, where someone holding this license is not qualified to identify high voltage or the dangers associated with it . Many times low voltage wiring is terminated in a cabinet that also contains higher voltages. Without any knowledge of training associated with this license I am a bit reluctant to allow someone with a PL T license to enter a cabinet that may contain other voltages. I would appreciate any insight on what the board has in mind, as I was unable to attend the previous meeting to hear the discussion.

• I worked in one of those other states. Did you think this through carefully? You need to supply more information. How will you address boiler systems? Thermostats for NC and furnace? TV? Telephone? Alarms? Will this be separate from Journeyman license? Will a low voltage tech need to employ a Journeyman to pull wire? Who pulls the permit? How much? Because other states do it doesn't make it a good idea. Will inspectors have the license so they can inspect? When a LV specialist is licensed where would the electrician come in? Why is he needed?

• This would be something to look at . However how much can we put on people. With this new regulation/license would that affect the people that already have licenses and would this be a separate license. Yes personnel that are providing a service should be qualified and be held to a quality installation for the NEC code sections listed above. To sum up this would be something to look into. Do not feel that there should be other license required if you are a qualified and licensed electrician already. With this you most likely are still not going to stop the do it yourself people though.

• I think a lot of thought needs to be put into this. As this develops I will form an opinion. Presently I lean more to no PL T license but get all involved educated on the type of work & inspections. Also would this PL T be working under a Master like a Journeyman?

• Does this include low voltage 1/E work for Industrial/Oilfield? Would a PL T be able to install low voltage cables, terminates ESD shutdowns (24vDC), PLC's, MOV's etc on an industrial/oilfield location where it wouldn't need to be a Journeyman electrician anymore? There needs to be more details on this type of license before any action is taken.

No: 33

Comments: • I once worked for a company and they wanted me to do fiber optic. They said it

in the NEC it the responsibility of an electrician to know and be able to perform such tasks. There is a code for every trade and electricians should not be

•

•

•

•

required to have 2 licenses to do their job . A separate license for work I have been doing for over 25 years and now require me to pay more. Also this would reflect and change which states will reciprocate with ND. Like when Washington State did the exact same thing. Many states, many oil producing states including Alaska no longer reciprocate with Washington State . It has come to haunt them now Washington State is begging for electricians that they can no longer get because they require so many different licenses for so many different electrical tasks. I gave up my Washington electrical license for that reason.

Who determines qualifications and enforcement? Is there continuing education? Will Journeyman be qualified automatically? It not will classes be required? Will Master be automatically qualified? Are there conditions for number of Apprentice working under Journeyman and/or Master?

• Seems to be too many issues to say yes. What about hazardous locations? Will this certification cover fire walls, etc? With all of the tech changes that are coming around might this be out of control at some point?

• Who is going to monitor this and at what expense?

• Don't see any reason to have it . Just adds more licensing to create more gray areas.

• I feel the need is already being covered and installed by qualified electrical Journeyman and contractors. No need to add additional license when it is already in place. I think it would add huge regulation issues as well . How would the state be able to monitor that the new PL T are not installing or helping with electrical side, I think it would add mass confusion for all parties involved.

• A lot of electrical equipment is becoming lower voltages. Example ; low voltage LED's - where would an electrical license now become not needed. It seems this is leading to a green light for underqualified individuals doing more electrical installations. Training requirements can be given to already licensed individuals to help solve this area.

• Come on we have so many rules and licenses and insurance costs already. Wow - I guess it's the idea of the state having more overall control and revenue though so I am sure this will pass instead of the book of enforcement . Pay that inspection fee ! !

• I do see where this could be a benefit. My concern is that once they receive a PL T license they will be given permission to "know no boundaries" . At present we do the installations and these trades do the terminations and verification.

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

With the intermingling of trades, who will be liable if there is an injury or structural damage.

I think they should be Journeyman. I have seen power limited work and they don't often follow our general guidelines and rules.

Not necessary. Low voltage not a hazard to persons or property. Additional license requirements only adds to the paperwork required by the state.

I think we have enough rules and regulations and don't need anymore. Some electricians I know aren't best at low voltage stuff. The guys in our area doing low voltage are pretty good at it and don't need more regulation on them too.

Minnesota has this but no inspection so it is just money for the state and some have quit rather than get license and education.

As long as there is not a life safety issue, which there would not be with Power Limited, the licensing should not really be needed.

• We have enough guys running around without licenses doing electrical work. believe if there was a PL T license they would not limit the work they do .

• Any/all wiring should be done by a licensed electrical contractor. If we start classifying this work as "Power Limited" it will not stop them from tying in/running 1 20 volt system power. Journeyman or above - let 's not add to the number of people already working in this state without a license !

• I feel strongly that an additional license classification for PL T would be costly and challenging to enforce at best and dangerous at worst . Electricians can specialize in any number of areas that are covered under the current license structure. It seems to me that offering a specialized license is akin to dumbing down a standardized test . I am proud to be a ND wireman, due in part to the level of education that we are required to have. Please do NOT reduce this requirement .

• Maybe leaning more toward not . Maybe if it is attached to the electrical license. Already have a lot of licenses to keep track of as far as expiration dates and continuing education classes and fees. Wouldn't it make more sense to have people that install and work on elevators to have a license which MN also has. PLC - is there a "safety" issue for the person installing system or personnel after installation if not installed properly. If no then why should a person need to be required to have a license? Code was developed for concern of people's safety not because of a person's livelihood.

•

•

•

• Does not go far enough. Need to include card access & security installat ions. These have voltages of up to 24 AC/DC and are currently not inspected. The main panels need to be either powered by cord transformers or live voltage wiring. Not inspected installat ions are somet imes shoddy to be polite. Firewall penetrat ions not maintained. I feel this should fall under the current electrical standards.

• The ability for a contractor to use this license as a cheaper electrician is too great . We do not have enough supervision to ensure that this would not happen.

• I do not support a PL T license. Some will st ill work on 1 20v and should be a Journeyman.

• As a Master I am already qualified to do this work. Enforce the codes we already have. No need for a watered down license to make it easier for unqualified people to do our work. If these HVAC or similar companies want to do that kind of work, they should hire a Master electrician or write the test themselves.

• We have Master, Class B, Journeymen and Apprent ices who are doing this work. Having a class (PL T) of lower qualificat ions will only reduce wages and work for the qualified electrician. We already have electrical companies that have a division for electrical and a division for low voltage. This allows lower skill level installers to perform the work. Inspect ion and enforcement of PL T companies would be hard and also may cause electrical companies to employ PL Ts so they can bid work on engineered jobs where specs call for PL T installers. To help keep electrical contractors in business, I would not support the proposal. The proposal would be great for the companies doing low voltage installat ion now and harmful to electrical contractors.

• We believe all work under NFPA and NEC should be done under a licensed North Dakota Journeyman/Master Electrician. The North Dakota Journeyman's license already covers your proposed language for Power Limited Technician Requirements. There is no reason to dilute the license or make a subclassificat ion. The State of North Dakota already has the authority to inspect this work under the current July 1 , 201 7 Laws, Rules & Wiring Standards of North Dakota.

• I don't support the draft as written but I do support having licensed people doing the work. There is no need for a separate classificat ion of license when Journeyman wireman are already trained and experienced to do the work, why complicate i t . The state just needs to require licensed Journeyman to do the work eliminat ing any confusion. A lot of t ime a higher voltage is present with the lower voltage, so keep it safe. Just look at the oil field and see the quality of unlicensed work.

•

•

•

Testimony Support ing SB 2359

Presented by Doug Grinde

Di rector of Inspections, North Dakota E lectrica l Board

M r. Cha i rma n and Members of the Comm ittee :

My name is Doug Grinde and I a m here to spea k to you i n SU PPORT of Senate B i l l 2359 .

The reason for th is b i l l is for the safegua rd ing of persons and bu i l d i ngs a nd bu i l d i ng contents from ALL e lectrica l hazards .

E lectric power is the rate at which e lectrica l energy is tra nsfe rred by an e lectric c i rcu it, a nd whether you a re dea l i ng with a 480 volts i ndustri a l i nsta l lat ion, or a POWER L IM ITED SYSTEM such as Power ove r Ethernet, Temperature control , Video and Audio Systems, Secu rity Systems, Home Automation, N u rse Ca l l Systems and even Data Cab le Networking, there is a potentia l threat fo r e lectrica l shock a nd/o r fi re if not insta l led properly and fo l lowing the Nat iona l E lectrica l Code (N EC), State a nd Loca l Codes and Manufacture rs recommendat ions . Loose connections, under sized conducto rs, non- l isted eq u ipment and improper insta l lat ions ca n a l l contribute to an e lectrica l shock or fi re rega rd less of the vo ltage . A 24 volt spark from a speaker wire or surve i l l a nce camera ca b le i n a gra i n e levator, gas stat ion pump, o r o i l we l l site cou ld be dead ly and cause extens ive property damage.

The Nationa l F i re Protection Associat ion updates the Nat iona l E lectric Code eve ry 3 yea rs to he lp l i censed insta l lers stay up to speed with new i nsta l l at ion and wir ing req u i rements, system component and wire l im itat ions and genera l codes and ru les that must be fo l lowed fo r system re l i ab i l ity a nd safety for persons and property from a l l e lectrica l hazards .

With a l l the cha nges and updates to the Nat iona l E lectric Code, there is a constant need fo r education and tra i n ing to provide a sk i l led l abor fo rce for the insta l l at ion of ALL E lectrica l Systems that a re covered in the N EC, i nc lud ing Power Lim ited Systems, a nd the passing of SB 2359 wi l l he lp ensure proper tra i n ing and education requ i rements a re met to he l p keep North Da kota safe, a nd up to date w ith a n eve r-cha nging E lectrica l I nd ustry .

M r. Cha i rman and members of the comm ittee, th is conc ludes my test imony SUPPORTI NG SB 2359 . If there a re any quest ions, I wi l l do my best to answer them for you at th is t ime .

Thank you .

m� D E PA R T M E N T O F • I I L A B O R A N D I N D U S T R Y

•

•

Genera l Summary of Technology Circu its and Systems (TCS)

Please refer to the detai led licensing and inspection chart for

Technology Circuits and System s

http://www.dli .mn.gov/sites/defau lt/files/pdf/LicAndl nspChart.pdf

Also refer to Minnesota Statutes 326B.31 to 326B.399 and Rules Chapters 3800 and 3801

Safety

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/326B

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/rules/3800/

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/rules/3801/

• TCS systems genera l ly p rod uce l im ited e l e ctr i ca l power ( i . e . l ower voltages a n d l im ited a mperes}

• TCS systems genera l ly a re safe from fi re i n it i a t ion a n d e l ectr ic shock ha za rds ( i . e . l im ited ene rgy)

• TCS systems i n c l ude, but a re not l im ited to, systems for a l a rm, s ign a l i ng, fi re a l a rm, computer d ata,

commun icat ions, a ud io s igna ls, video s ig n a l s, a ntennas and ce rta i n remote control a pp l icat ions

• Certa i n TCS systems a re subject to a dd it iona l safegua rds to ensure m it igat ion of haza rds re l ated to fire

i n it iat ion and e lectr ic shock

Licensing and Registration

• The i n sta l l a t ion of TCS systems is req u i red to be performed by l i censed Techno logy System Contractors

(TSC) (or l i censed E lectr ica l Contractors, who a re a uthor ized to i n sta l l a l l types of e lectr ica l work}

• TSC contractors emp loy l i censed powe r- l im ited techn ic ia ns ( P LT} a nd registe red ( u n l i censed }

techn ic i ans ( RT}

• Tech n ic i ans a re on ly req u i red to ho ld the P LT l i cense for a l im ited n umbe r of categor ies of TCS work

• A PLT l i cense i s requ i red for certa i n remote control c i rcu its and where techn ic i ans a re exposed to non

TCS c i rcu its i n enc losu res and ca b inets (e .g . h igher voltage c i rcu its i n motor control eq u i pment}

• A PLT l i cense i s a lso req u i red where TCS systems a re i n sta l l ed i n hazardous locat ions (e .g . spray

pa int i ng, fue l d ispens i ng, a i rcraft ha nge rs, refi ner ies, gra in p rocess ing and s im i l a r locat ions}

• The vast major ity of TCS systems are not req u i red to be i n sta l led by i nd iv id ua l s ho l d i ng the P LT l i cense

• Most common TCS systems a re typ ica l ly i n sta l led by registe red ( u n l i censed } techn ic i ans ( RT}

• Al l u n l icensed e l ectr ica l workers a re req u i re d to be registered with the depa rtment

Supervision

• For TCS systems that req u i re a PLT l i cense, RTs a re req u i red to be p rovided with d i rect superv is ion by a

PLT

• Di rect superv is ion mea ns the PLT is p hysica l ly p resent and supervis ing the RT the ent i re work ing day

443 Lafayette Road N . , St. P au l, M N 55 155 • (65 1 ) 284-5005 • www.d l i .mn .gov Summary_ T echnologyCircu itsAnd Systems.docx Checked 20190204

• The vast majority of TCS work does n ot req u i re a PLT l i cense, t hus no d i rect superv is ion of the RT i s

• req u i red (on ly genera l superv is ion i s req u i red, wh i ch does not req u i re on-the-job supervis ion )

•

•

Inspections

• I n spect ions a re req u i red for fire-a l a rm syste ms, remote contro l systems, where TCS systems com ing l e w i th non -TCS systems i n enc losures a n d ca b i nets, cr it ica l ca re a reas i n med ic a l fa c i l it ies, a nd secu rity system s in detent ion fa c i l it ies (most TCS systems a re not req u i red to be i n spected )

Inspection Fees

• The fee for TCS c i rcu its of less tha n SO-vo lts i s 75-cents for each system device or a ppa ratus

Occupancy Types

• Res i de nt ia l Dwe l l i ngs : Com mon TCS systems can be i n sta l led by a n RT a n d d o n ot req u i re a n i nspect i on • Othe r Tha n Dwe l l i ngs: Except for fi re a l a rm systems, common TCS systems ca n be i n sta l l ed by a n RT

a nd do not req u i re an inspect ion • Detent ion Fac i l it ies : Except for fi re a l a rm a nd secu rity systems, common TCS syste ms can be i n sta l l ed

by an RT a nd do not requ i re an inspect ion • Med ica l Cr it ica l Ca re Areas : Most TCS systems o n ly requ i re a n RT, h owever most systems a re requ i re d

t o b e i nspected • Haza rdous Locat ions : A l l TCS systems req u i re a PLT l i cense, a n RT with d i rect superv is ion by a P LT, a n d

i n spect ions ( l icens ing a nd i nspection req u i rements a re a c rit ica l pr ior ity i n haza rdous l ocat ions )

Additional Information

• The i n format ion i n th i s bu l let in is essent i a l ly eq ua l ly a pp l i c ab l e to both l i censed Techno logy System Contra ctors who perform techno logy work for c l i e nts a n d customers i n the ma rketp la ce, a nd emp l oyers who a re registe red with the depa rtment ( i . e . reg iste red emp loyers)

• Registered emp loyers a re compan ies who emp loy l i censed a nd registe red tec hn ic ia ns who perform techno l ogy work with i n the l im its of fa c i l i t ies that a re owned or leased by the registered emp loye r (e .g . h osp ita l s, co l leges, school d i str i cts, m a nufactu rers a nd other s im i l a r l a rge fa c i l it ies )

• Cont i nu i ng Educat io n : 16-hou rs for P LTs eve ry two yea rs, a nd on ly 2-hou rs for RTs every two yea rs

Disclaimer

• Th i s b u l let in i s on ly intended to prov ide a genera l ove rview of Techno logy C i rcu its and Systems • The i nformat ion conta ined i n th i s ge ne ra l s ummary is superseded by the app l i ca b l e M i n nesota Statutes

and Ad m i n istrat ive Ru les • P lease contact the M i nnesota Depa rtment of La bor & I n du stry fo r more i nformat ion • Ema i l : d l i .e lectri c ity@state .mn . u s

•

•

•

Test imony in s upport of Senate B i l l No . 2359

By Josh Wi l son , North Da kota State E lectr ica l Boa rd I nspector D istr ict 1

Cha i rma n, Membe rs of the Com m ittee :

I a m Josh Wi l son , D istr ict 1 State E lectr ica l I n spector . M y d istr ict covers Cass Cou nty othe r tha n the co rporate city l im its of Fa rgo . I have worked for the North Da kota State E lectr ica l Boa rd as an e lectr ica l i n spector fo r the l ast 13 yea rs . I t ha s come to my attent ion that Senate B i l l No . 2359 has been i ntroduced to cha nge some defi n it ions in ou r sta nda rds a nd add l icens ing a nd ed ucat ion for power l im ited techn ic ia ns a nd inspect ion of the i r work. I a m i n s uppo rt of th is b i l l a s it wou ld c l a rify d iffe rent scopes of work re l ated to the e l ectr ica l i ndustry a nd provide a certificat ion, i n spect ion , a nd educat ion a l p rocess that wou ld he l p to safegua rd peop le a nd property.

I n my exper ie nce most people be l i eve that e lectr ic ity (be low 24 vo lts to ground ) i s not d a ngerous . That is s imp ly not true .

I have attached seve ra l exa mp les of power l im ited c i rcu its with the code a rt ic les v io lated that we re i n sta l led by u n l icensed i nd ivid ua l s .

Example 1 : I h ave recently done an i n spect ion at a new gas stat ion i n the C ity of West Fa rgo . The e lectric ia ns a re req u i red to i nsta l l the i r wi re i n cond u it a nd provid e sea l offs (a sea l wh ich gets pou red with a com pound that p revents the tra nsfe r of gas fu mes th rough the cond u it i nto the bu i ld i ng ) . The e lectr ic i ans a l so prov ide the condu it a nd the sea l off fitt ing, go ing from the bu i l d i ng to the fue l d ispense r, for t h e power l im ited systems . The peop le i n sta l l i ng t h e i nte rcom system a nd some other power l im ited a pp l icat ions a ssociated with the fue l d i spensers d i d not pou r the sea l off a nd the i r w i res were j u st free a i red ( not i n sta l l ed i n a condu it) i ns ide the co l u m n . Some of these wi res were d roop ing down i nto the haza rdous locati on . Th i s cou l d have ser ious conseq uences .

Example 2 : I have done inspect ions on gra i n b i n s s ites a nd othe r fac i l it ies that have gra i n d u st p resent . G ra i n d u st i s ve ry f la m ma b le . Some of the sensor eq u i pment a nd othe r controls ru n off of power l im ited c i rcu its . M a ny of the wi res

• were not i ntr i ns ica l ly safe a nd the components we re not rated fo r c l ass 2 d iv i s ion 1 o r 2 locat ions . Th is a l so ca n have ser ious consequences if the gra i n d ust was to ign ite .

•

•

Example 3 : I rece ived a phone ca l l from a person who had a fi re sta rt i n the i r l awn th i s su m mer a nd i t was due to the power l im ited w i r i ng i n the i r u nde rgrou nd spri n k le r . S i nce then I have hea rd o f a nother i nsta nce where a ga rden hose sta rted on fi re from the spri n k l e r system a s we l l .

Example 4 : A very l a rge b u n d l e o f cat 5 commun ication ca b l i ng was l a id d i rect ly on the ce i l i ng gr id . The i nducta nce from a l l of th is ca b le ly ing d i rect ly on the meta l ce i l i ng gr id ca used 90 vo lts to be i nduced onto the ce i l i ng gr id .

Example 5 : Lack of wire nuts u sed for sp l i c ing power l im ited w i res a bove suspended ce i l i ngs .

Example 6 : Power l im ited ca b les a nd w i res not stra pped p rope r ly o r not s uppo rted at a l l .

Example 7 : No inspect ion process for n u rse ca l l c i rcu its i n hosp ita l s a nd c l i n ics .

Example 8 : No inspect ion process for power l im ited wi r i ng i n c l ass ified a reas .

Example 9 : The use of components that a re not l i sted by recogn ized test ing l a borator ies . (Such as U L, ETL, CSA, etc . )

Example 10: Unqua l ified i nd iv id u a l s a re not awa re they must read a nd fo l l ow the i nstruct ions fo r the i nsta l lat ion of e lectr ica l eq u i pment .

In s umma ry, I fee l there is a need for the creat ion of a Power l im ited tech n ic ia n l icense i n the state of North Da kota . Techno logy is cha ng ing at a ra p id pace a nd I be l i eve the North Da kota State E lectr ica l Boa rd shou l d be a b le to adju st to the cha ng ing needs of the e lectrica l i ndustry to prope r ly safegua rd peop le a nd property. I keep com ing back to "safegu a rd peop le a nd property" beca use that i s the ma i n pu rpose a nd the genera l statement of po l icy i n ou r Laws, Ru les a nd Wir ing Sta nda rds . I n my yea rs of i n spect ing, I have witnessed ma ny cha nges i n the e lectr ica l i ndustry. Cha nges a re happen i ng much fa ste r now tha n they eve r have

• before . Th is b i l l wou ld give the North Da kota State E lectr ica l Boa rd the a b i l ity to cha nge more effic ie ntly to ca u se less h a rd sh i p on the bus i nesses a nd worke rs i n t he e l ectrica l i n du stry. I t a l so gives t he cit izens o f No rth Da kota add it iona l p rotect ions from the use of power l im ited systems wh ich a re be ing used more a nd more .

•

•

I wou l d l i ke to tha n k the com m ittee for ta k ing the t ime to hea r my conce rns . I f a nyone has a ny q uest ions I wi l l do my best to a nswer them .

•

Example #1

Motor Fuel Dispensing

800.3(A) Hazardous (Classified) Locations. Com m u n icat ions c i rcu its a nd equ i pment i n sta l l ed i n a location t h a t is c l ass ified i n a ccorda nce with 500 .5 and 505 . 5 sha l l comp ly with t he a pp l i ca b l e req u i rements o f Cha pter 5 .

Table 514.3(8) (1) . The a rea up t o 18 i n ches above grade l eve l , extend i ng 20 feet in a l l d i rect ions from the d ispenser enc losu re sha l l be c l ass ified a C lass 1 Div is ion 2 locat ion .

501. 10(8)(1) Wir ing Methods. I n a C lass 1 Divi s ion 2 l ocat ion com m u n icat ions ca b les s ha l l be i n sta l l ed i n r ig id meta l condu it o r i ntermed iate meta l condu it .

514.9 Sea l i ng. A l isted sea l sha l l be i n sta l l ed in each condu it run enter ing or l eavi ng a d ispenser or a ny cavit ies or enc losu res in d i rect comm u n icat ion therewith . The sea l i ng fitt ing or l i sted exp los ion p roof red ucer at the sea l sha l l be

• the fi rst fitt i ng after the condu it emerges from the ea rth or concrete .

•

•

•

Example #2 Gra in Elevator Enclosure

800. 133 Insta l lation of Communications Wires, Cab les, and Equipment. Commun ications conductors sha l l not be p l aced i n a ny raceway, compa rtment, out let box, ju nction box, or s im i la r fitt ing with conductors of e lectr ic l ight, power, C lass 1, non-power l im ited fi re a l a rm, or med i umpower network-powered broad ba nd commun icat ions ci rcu its .

•

•

•

Example #3

Sprinkler I nsta l l at ion

110. 14{8) E lectrica l Connections. Conductors sha l l be sp l iced o r jo ined with sp l ic ing devices i dentified for the use. Wi re connectors o r sp l i c ing mea ns i nsta l l ed on conductors fo r d i rect bu ri a l s ha l l be l i sted fo r such use .

110. 11 Deteriorating Agents. U n less i dentified fo r use i n the operat ing envi ronment, no conductors or equ i pment sha l l be located i n d a m p or wet locations .

•

•

•

Example #4, 5, & 6 Cable tray

800 .110 Raceways and cab le routing assembl ies for communications wires and cables. Commun icat ions wires a nd ca b les sha l l be perm itted to be i n sta l led in a ny raceway i nc l uded in cha pte r 3 . The raceways sha l l be i n sta l led i n accordance with the req u i rements of cha pte r 3 .

392 .18 Cable tray insta l l ation. Ca b le trays sha l l b e i n sta l led as a comp lete system . F ie ld bends or mod ificat ions sha l l be so made that the e lectr ica l conti nu ity of the ca b le tray system and su pport fo r the ca b les is ma i nta ined .

•

•

•

Example #4, 5, & 6 Cable support

800.24 - Mechanical Execution of work. Ca b les i n sta l led on the su rface of ce i l i ngs a nd s idewa l ls sha l l be su pported by the bu i l d i ng structu re i n such a manne r that the ca b le wi l l not be da maged by norma l bu i l d i ng use . Such ca b les sha l l be secu red by ha rdwa re, i nc l ud i ng stra ps, sta p les, ca b le t ies, ha nge rs, or s im i l a r fitti ngs, des igned a nd i nsta l l ed so a s to not d a mage the ca b le .

300. 11 Securing and supporting. Wir ing with i n the cavity of a floor - ce i l i ng or roof - ce i l i ng assem bly sha l l not be secu red to, o r su pported by, the ce i l i ng assemb ly, i nc l ud i ng the ce i l i ng su pport wires . An i ndependent mea ns of secu re support sha l l be provided a nd sha l l be perm itted to be attached to the assemb ly .

•

•

•

Example 4, 5, & 6 Workmanship

725.24 Mechanica l Execution of Work. Class 1, Class 2, Class 3 circuits shall be installed

in a neat and workmanlike manner. Cables and conductors installed exposed on the

surface of ceilings and sidewalls shall be supported by the building structure in such a

manner that the cable will not be damaged by normal building use.

725.3(J ) Bushing. A bushing shall be installed where cables emerge from a raceway or

enclosure.

24. 1-06-03-14 Boxes and Fitt ings. Boxes or conduit bodies shall be installed at each

opening, splice, or connection, except as provided in Article 604, 2017 edition, National

Electrical Code.

300.4 Protection from Physical Damage. Where subject to physical damage,

conductors, raceways, and cables shall be protected against physical damage .

300.ll(D) Cables not used as means of support . Cable wiring methods shall not be used

as a means of support for other cables, raceways, or nonelectrical equipment.

•

•

•

Example 4, 5, & 6 Cable support

800.24 - Mechanical Execution of work. Ca b les i n sta l l ed on the s u rface of ce i l i ngs and s idewa l l s sha l l be su pported by the bu i l d i ng structu re i n such a ma nne r that the ca b le wi l l not be da maged by norma l bu i l d i ng use . Such ca b les sha l l be secu red by ha rdwa re, i nc l u d i ng stra ps, sta p les, ca b le t ies, ha nge rs, or s im i l a r fitti ngs, des igned a nd i nsta l led so a s to not da mage the ca b le .

300. 11 Securing and supporting. Wir ing with i n the cavity of a floor - ce i l i ng or roof - cei l i ng assemb ly sha l l not be secu red to, or su pported by, the ce i l i ng assemb ly, inc l ud i ng the ce i l i ng s upport wi res . An i ndependent mea ns of secu re support sha l l be provided a nd sha l l be perm itted to be attached to the assemb ly.

•

•

Example #7 Access and power

Article 800.21 - Access to elect rica l equipment behind panels designed to a l low access. Access to e lectr ica l eq u i pment sha l l not be den ied by a n accu mu lat ion of commun ications wi res a nd ca b les that prevents remova l of pa ne ls , i nc l ud i ng suspended ce i l i ng pa ne l s .

Artic le 800.24 - Mechanical Execution of work. Commun icat ions c i rcu its a nd eq u i pment sha l l be i nsta l led i n a neat a nd workman l i ke man ner . Ca b les i n sta l led on the su rface of ce i l i ngs a nd s idewa l l s sha l l be su pported by the bu i l d i ng structu re i n such a ma nne r that the ca b le wi l l not be da maged by norma l bu i l d i ng use .

Article 400. 12 - Uses not permitted . F lexi b le cords such as power su pp ly co rds sha l l not be used where concea led by wa l l s, floors, or ce i l i ngs or

• located a bove suspended or d ropped ce i l i ngs .

•

•

•

Example #8

Murphy Switch wir ing

800.24 Mechan ica l Execution of Work. Comm u n icat ions ca b les sha l l be i nsta l l ed in a neat and workma n l i ke manne r. Ca b les sha l l be secu red by h a rdwa re or s im i l a r fitt i ngs des igned and i n sta l l ed so as to not damage the ca b l e .

501 . 10 Wiring Methods. CL2P ca b le i s not perm itted for use in C lass 1 Div is ion 1 a nd 2 haza rdous l ocations .

392. l0(C) Hazardous (Classified) Locations. Ca b le t rays in haza rdous (C lassifi ed ) l ocat ions sha l l conta i n o n ly the cab le types and raceways perm itted by othe r a rt i c les in t h is code.

300.G(C) (l) Nonmeta l l ic Equ ipment exposed to sun l ight. Where exposed to s u n l ight, the mater i a l s sha l l be l i sted as s un l ight resista nt or sha l l be identified as s u n l ight resistant .

•

•

•

Example #8

Murphy Switch wi ring

800.24 Mechanical Execution of Work. Com mun icat ions ca b les sha l l be i n sta l l ed in a neat and workman l i ke man ner . Ca b les sha l l be secu red by h a rdwa re or s im i l a r fitt ings des igned a nd insta l l ed so as to not damage the cab le .

501 . 10 Wiring Methods. CL2 P ca b l e is not perm itted fo r use i n C lass 1 Divi s ion 1 and 2 ha za rdous locat ions .

392. l0(C) Hazardous (Classified) Locations. Ca b le trays i n hazardous (C lass ifi ed ) l ocat ions sha l l conta i n on ly the ca b l e types and raceways perm itted by other a rt ic les i n th i s code .

300.G(C)(l) Nonmeta l l ic Equipment exposed to sun l ight. Where exposed to s un l ight, the materi a l s sha l l be l isted as s un l ight res ista nt or s h a l l be ident ified as s un l ight res ista nt .

•

•

•

Example #8

Tray cable

336. 10 Uses Permitted. Type TC -ER ca b le sha l l be perm itted to be used between uti l ization eq u i pment a nd devices if the ca b le i s conti nuous ly su pported a nd protected aga i nst physica l d a mage us ing mechan ica l p rotect ion such as struts, a ng les o r cha nne l s .

352.30 Securing and Supporting. PVC cond u it sha l l be secu re ly fastened with i n three feet of each condu it te rm i nat ion a nd su pported a nd secu res to prevent movement accord i ng to Ta b le 352 . 30 .

•

• Example #8 Cable Tray F i l l

392.22(A) (l ) Number of conductors or cables. Where ca b le trays conta i n a m ixtu re of mu lt i-conductor power, l ight i ng, contro l , a nd s igna l ca b les with 4/0 a nd l a rge r conductors i n sta l l ed with ca b les sma l le r tha n 4/0, the max imum fi l l fo r the sma l l e r ca b les sha l l be ca lcu l ated accord i ng to Ta b le 392 . 22 (A) a nd the ca b les l a rge r tha n 4/0 sha l l be i n sta l l ed i n a s i ng le layer a nd no othe r ca b les sha l l be p l aced on them .

392.22(A)(2) Ladder cable trays conta in ing mu lti-conductor control and/or signa l cables on ly. Where a l adder ca b le tray hav ing a u sab le i ns ide depth of s ix i nches or less conta i ns m u lti-conductor contro l a nd/or s igna l ca b les on ly, the sum of the cross sect iona l a rea of the ca b les sha l l not exceed 50% of the cross sectiona l a rea of the ca b le tray.

725. 136(G) Separation of Conductors . Ca b le Trays conta i n i ng C lass 1, 2, or 3 c i rcu its sha l l be sepa rated from the conductors of e lectr ic power

• conductors by a so l i d fixed barr ier or d iv ider .

• Example #9 Control cabinet

•

•

725. 136 Separation from electric l ight, power, c lass 1, non-power l imited fi re a la rm ci rcuit conductors, and med ium power network powered broadband commun ications cables. The e lectr ic l ight, power, c lass 1, non-power l im ited fi re a l a rm c i rcu it conductors, a nd med ium power network powered broadband commun icat ions cab les must be i nsta l l ed to ma i nta i n a . 25 i n ch sepa rat ion from the conductors and ca b l es of c lass 2 and c l ass 3 c i rcu its .

725.24 Mechan ical execution of work. Class 1, c lass 2, and c lass 3 c i rcu its sha l l b e i n sta l l ed i n a neat a n d workman l i ke man ner .

504.30(A) Sepa ration of i ntrinsica l ly safe conductors. (D) With i n Enclosures. Conductors o f i ntrins ica l ly safe c i rcu its sha l l be secu red so that a ny conductor that m ight l oose from a term i n a l is u n l i ke ly to come i nto contact with a nothe r term i n a l . The conductors sha l l be sepa rated from the conductors of non- i ntr i ns ica l ly safe c i rcu its by sepa rat ion of at least two i nches or by the use of a grounded meta l pa rt it i on or a pproved i nsu l at ing pa rt it ion .

110.3(A) Examination, identification, i nsta l l at ion, use, and l i st ing (product certification) of equ ipment. (A) Exa m i nat io n . I n j udg ing eq u i pment, su itab i l ity or i n sta l l at ion and use i n conform ity wi th the p rovis ions of the code ca n be evidenced by l i st i ng and l abe l i ng.

24. 1-06-02-10 Requ i rements for e lectrica l insta l lat ions. Al l wi r ing materi a l s a nd eq u i pment sha l l be l isted by nat iona l ly recogn i zed test ing l a borator ies to safegua rd l ife and property.

•

•

•

Example #9

N ice control cabinet

Th is is a n exa mp le of a we l l done control ca b i net with ca b le ma nagement a n d d iv ide rs i n sta l l ed .

•

•

Example #10 E lectric Baseboa rd Heat

110 .3(8) I nsta l l ation and Use. L isted or La be led eq u ipment sha l l be i n sta l l ed and used in accorda nce with a ny i n st ruct ions i nc l uded in the l i st i ng or l a be l i ng .

I nfo rmat ion from Mar ley e lectr ic baseboa rd heater i n sta l l at ion i n st ruct ions . 5 . Do not i n sta l l heater be l ow an e lectr ica l conven ience receptac le (out let ) . 6 . CAUTION - Heater Operates a t H igh Tem peratu res. Keep E l ectr ica l Cords ( i nc l ud i ng te lephone a nd com puter ca b les ) , Drapes, a nd Other Fu rn i s h i ngs Away From Heater . Fo r effic ient and safe operat ion , we recom mend ma i nta i n i ng a m i n imum of 6 i nches ( 152 m m ) c lea ra n ce

• a bove a nd i n front of the heater at a l l t imes .

SB2359

Mr . Cha i rman a nd Members of the Com m ittee, my n ame is Rep. Ben Koppe lman ,

and I rep resent D istr ict 16 i n West Fa rgo. I am here i n oppos it ion to SB 2359 .

SB 2359 seeks to u njust ifia b ly grow govern ment by doub l i ng the s i ze, scope, a nd

reach of t he State E lectr ica l Boa rd by a l lowing it to ta ke control of a comp letely

sepa rate i nd ustry wh ich has operated i n a greatly p rofess i ona l m a n ne r for many

decades . L ike many i ndustr ies, some low voltage contractors ( kn own i n th is b i l l as

P LT contractors ) may be do ing low qua l ity work, but that can be sa id of some

bu i l d i ng contractors and e lectric i ans as we l l . S im p ly by h eav i ly regu lat ing an

i ndustry and creating a h igh ba rr ie r of entry l ike th is b i l l wou l d do i s not the

sol ut ion . It is a myth that there a re not sta nda rds i n the l ow voltage i n d ustry.

Prior to be ing e lected to the state leg is latu re, I was appo i nted to the State

E lectr ica l Boa rd , and I served u nt i l my second term ended l ast J u ly . I served as a

consu mer member of a rura l e lectr ica l cooperat ive . D u ri ng that 10 yea rs of

service I came to appreciate the boa rd a nd its fun ctions . However, every 3 yea rs

when it came t ime dec ide wethe r or not to expand regu l at ion by adopti ng the

updated nat iona l e l ectr ica l code ( N EC) , there was a lways great ph i l osoph i ca l

debate between myse lf and othe r boa rd members as t o the necess ity of adopt ing

such onerous new regu lat ions . I wou l d a lways ask for safety stat ist ics from N D

that demonstrated the need, and if it was worth the cost to the consu mers .

Never were ND statist ics provided to j ustify the new regu l at ions . Although I d id

win a few sma l l batt l es, I genera l ly lost based on the des i re to fo l low the n ew

code rega rd l ess the effects it had on consumers . Th is s ame debate eventua l ly

fou nd its way to the s u bject that i n it iated th is b i l l . The fact that the N EC has a

chapter a bout l ow voltage wir ing that cur rently is not unde r the j u r i sd ict ion of the

boa rd certa i n ly bothe rs some of the e lectrica l i nspectors .

If we use a s impl e n ecess ity test, it shows that th is b i l l is m isgu ided . 'Has there

been l a rge n u m bers of reported i nj u r ies or death caused by l ow voltage

contractors in recent yea rs ?' The answer is NO. 'Has there been a l a rge n umbers

of fi res or othe r property d amage caused by l ow voltage contractors i n recent

yea rs?' The answer is NO. What has h appened in recent yea rs i s cha nges i n

techno logy. These tech no logica l adva ncements a l low more power, l ighti ng, and

HVAC contro ls to be done with l ow voltage and even wi re l ess so l utions . 'Su re ly

th is m ust wa rrant th is b i l l to a l low the E lectrica l Boa rd to h ave j u r isd ict ion, right?'

The answer once aga in is NO. I n N DCC 43-09-09 it says :

A person, partnership, company, corporation, limited liability company, or

association that undertakes or offers to undertake with another to plan,

Jay out, supervise, install, make additions, make alterations, or make repairs

in the installation of wiring, apparatus, or equipment for electric light,

heat, or power shall apply to the board for a license.

Th is means that rega rd l ess whether the vo ltage used i n the wir ing of l ighti ng,

heat, or power is trad iti ona l voltage such as 120v and 240v or if it is low vo ltage

such as 12v a n d 24v, the board a l ready has j u risd iction without ta k ing over

anothe r i ndu stry. Th is a lso means that i f the wi r ing is for l ight, h eat, or power

that a n e l ectr i c ia n i s req u i red and that if the wir ing is not fo r l ight, h eat, or power

that a n e l ectr i c i a n i s not n eeded . Th is d ifferentiat ion has worked for many yea rs

and does not n eed to cha nge.

,

H B 2359 conta ins ba rr ie rs to entry, or "fence bu i l d ing", as we refe r to it i n the

legi s l atu re . On pg. 5 l i nes 16-25 it wou ld req u i re 3 to 4 yea rs of a pprenticesh i p to

even be ab l e to work unsu pervised . Then on pg. 5 l i n es 14-15 it req u i res a n

add it iona l yea r to b e a b l e to contract on you r own . That i s a 4 t o 5 yea r p rocess

to contra ct in the i nd ustry. These new req u i rements wou l d m a ke it eas ier to

become a C lass B e lectr ic ia n that to become a l ow voltage contractor, wh ich

seems odd given the potentia l of h a rm that e lectr ic ity poses ve rses th at of low

vo ltage d ata wiring. On pg. 6 l i n es 3-7 it p rovides a test ing wa iver if you a l ready

meet the 3-year req u i rement . So, I ca n see how some l ow voltage contractors

and even some e lectr ic i ans cou l d be attracted to th is as it l im its the i r competit ion

from new sta rt-up compan ies and nea rly e l im in ates the poss ib i l i ty of com petit ion

from out-of-state contractors. However, I don 't th i n k that is cons istent with ou r

North Dakota va l u es . We a re a r ight to work state tha t va l ues e ntrepreneu rsh ip

and va l ues one1s a b i l ity to be the i r own boss . I n add it ion to that, most of these

low voltage contractors know the i r i ndustry better than the e lectr ica l i nspectors

that wou l d be inspecti ng them.

On pg . 8 l i nes 24-28 the b i l l appears to remove a long time exem pt ion for

com pan ies that i nsta l l te lephone wir ing i n bu i l d i ngs a nd seems to l im it it to pu b l ic

ut i l it i es . Th is wi l l h ave a negative effect on i ndustry s i nce the w i res cu rrently used

for te l ephone wir ing a re a lso used for internet service .

In c los i ng, I be l ieve th at putt ing the E lectr ica l Boa rd i n cha rge of every sate l l ite or

cab le TV insta l l er, every phone or internet i n sta l l e r, every home theater or home

secu rity i n sta l l e r, or othe r low voltage contractor is a so l ut ion look ing for a

prob lem . I a sk th at you he l p keep North Dakota a low regu lat ion state a nd give

th is b i l l a Do-Not-Pass recommendation . Than k you for you r time .

•

•

•

ELECTRON IC SECUR ITY ASSOCIATION .

The Voice of the Electronic Security & Life Safety Industry

January 29, 2019 Senator Jerry Klein, Chairman Senator Shawn Vedaa, Vice Chairman Industry, Business and Labor Committee North Dakota Senate State Capitol 600 East Boulevard Bismarck, North Dakota 58505-0360

st :r�s� �/sl q fo\-\\\� f \ 6333 North State Highway 161

Su ite 350

Irving, TX 75038

P: 888.447.1689

ESAWEB.ORG

We write today to express concerns about several provisions in SB 2359 we feel must be considered as this bill is deliberated, and discuss its potential negative impact for small companies that provide invaluable electronic security and life safety services to citizens in this state. The Electronic Security Association is the largest trade association in the United States representing large and small businesses that professionally install, service and monitor electronic security and life safety systems for the public . ESA member companies represent more than 70 percent of the market for intrusion, fire alarm, access control and video surveillance systems. In 2018, ESA provided education and training to over 6, 300 professionals in the electronic security and life safety industry . ESA certifications and CEU courses are widely accepted by states across the country including, AL, AK, FL, LA, MS, MT, NC, NJ, TX, TN, WA With these facts, we wish to deliver the following points and concerns:

• ESA supports licensing and regulation that fits the skills for the service performed and employs the least restrictive regulatory framework needed to achieve the health, safety and welfare of consumers. One would not expect a physical therapist to go to medical school because physical therapy is related to medicine. Nor should low-voltage training and education emulate high voltage electrical training and experience simply because low-electric currents are involved.

• The electronic security industry is rapidly changing and evolving. Many new applications involve no interaction with exposed wiring of any sort. And most importantly, the electronic security industry has concerns and issues not addressed by this legislation, such as criminal background checks for technicians who install home security, video surveillance and access control systems. These same technicians possess personal privacy information that could undermine the safety and security of consumers, if not properly vetted.

• This legislation provides no representation for the low-voltage industries the state electrical board would now control .

• This legislation offers no "active supervision" required of an occupational board that resulted from the Supreme Court decision in 2015, NC Board of Dental Examiners v. FTC . It appears this legislation is in fact, attempting to expand licensing control for an occupational board without any legislative, executive or judicial oversight.

• This legislation creates an unnecessary barrier to entry in the labor market for small businesses that are already struggling across the country to find new employees. Adding onerous training and experience requirements before one can work independently in the electronic security industry as a qualified technician will further erode workforce development and exacerbate a looming and growing problem.

As mentioned, ESA is a very supportive of licensing and regulation for the electronic security and life safety industry. We believe North Dakota should provide regulatory guidance to lowvoltage industries that have an impact on the health, safety or welfare of consumers and we will be happy to work with you to achieve the best means to reach this laudable goal. We look forward to a continuing dialogue with you and other stakeholders on this important issue.

Respectfully Submitted,

Chris Heaton Vice President of Advocacy & Public Affairs Electronic Security Association 972.807.6815 chris . heaton@esaweb. org

•

•

•

•

•

•

Trin ity Schaff P res ident/Owner Tr inS P I N i n c . 3042 39th Street S FARGO N D 58 104 701 . 361 .0358 Tr i n ity@tr i n spi n . com

As owner of Tr inSP IN i n c, wh ich perfo rms low voltage contract work, I wan t i t to be known that I am i n fu l l s u ppo rt o f Senate B i l l No . 2359 .

I fee l i t w i l l ra ise the q ua l ity and saftey of low voltage workman s h i p i n both res ident i a l and commerc i a l p rojects a n d c lear ly defi ne t he l i n e of wha t se rvices techno logy contractors such a s myse lf a re lega l l y a l lowed to offe r and perform . I a l so fee l t h e fees a nd cont in u i ng educat ion cost a nd req u i rement s a re a l l w i th - i n rea son .

We have h ad 2 projects shu t down and h ave loss the ab i l ity t o s a l e a n d pe rfo rm l ow voltage l i gh t i ng a nd even t he a b i l ity t o cab l e ou r own contro l system s i n N D m uch o f what i s S -12vDC. I F ee l The cur rent word i ng i n sect ion 43-09-09 i s too b road . I t has left my bus i ness i n tu rmo i l of whe re the l i ne i s d rawn . Wha t a nd when is t h e i n spector go i n g t o l ook a t next tha t v io l a tes t h i s l aw . I n fra red l i gh t i ng of ou r c ame ra systems? PoE powered switches t ha t r u n 48v? Aud io system s tha t r u n on 70vo l t a m ps ? I f I have to remove these serv ices from our offer ings , or i f we had to h ighe r a l i cen sed e lectri c i a n j u st to pe rform these task you w i l l see compan ies such a s o u rs e lf e i ther fo ld o r go heav i ly a fte r the e lectr ica l m a rket to com pensate fo r the add it iona l cost compan ies a s myself wou l d fo l d . O ppos ite of "the we wa n t to do e lect r i ca l wo rk" , "o r we wan t to ta ke bu s i ness from the e lectr ica l contracto rs : " Th i s s hou ld not be t he ca se . I fe lt strongly that do i ng 12v l i ght i ng was we l l w i th- in a l lowab le work . O nce we were i n formed of t he a bove sect ion and s hu t down due to t h is word i ng, we were left w i th t he q uest ion of where t h e l i n e i s go i ng t o b e d rawn . I s tomorrow the d a y we ca n no longer i n sta l l i n fra red p rod ucts, i s t h a t now cons ide red l ight i ng? How a bout ou r Poe system s that prov ide LED l i ght i n g, a utomotive i nsta l l e rs a n d mecha n ics work on 1 2 v systems with no i ssues , b u t accord i ng t o t h i s sect i on we vio late t he l aw .

M i n ne sota offe rs the P LT l icen se wh ich I do ca r ry . Th i s I fee l has d rast ica l l y red uced t he f ly by n igh t i n sta l l e rs/bus i nesses, h a s made s u re we h ave qu a l if ied tech n ic ia ns i n the fie ld . , a nd t he g ray a reas to n ow be c lea red, it has a lso caused the q u a l ity of work to i nc rease . The o n ly t h i n g they don ' t do i s en fo rce i t e nough for t he ones who do fo l low the ru les .

With t h is l aw and i nspect ion system i n p l ace I fee l i t wi l l on ly imp rove the fi n a l p rod uct fo r o u r consu.me��,. g iv,�A>he!Jl t he'p iece o f m i nd i t wa s do ne r ight a n d he l p i n crease educat ion of o u r t rade .

... /· �·· 1/ . . I ,, .,. ' /.· / ....... ·· � <. ...... / , / Tr in ity Scha ff P res ide nt/ Owner Tr i nS P I N I nc .

•

•

•

G reg Mattson 9 1 5 so 48th st .

Grand Forks, North Dakota 2 1 8-79 1 -4734

Senator Jerry Klein Chairman In support of Senate bj// 2359

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee :

Thank you for taking the time to hear my opin ion on Senate Bi l l 2359 , regarding PLT

(Power Limited Techn ician ) licensure . My name is G reg Mattson and I have had co-ownership

in Century Electric Inc . i n Grand Forks, North Dakota s ince 1 989 . I graduated i n 1 979 from

NDSCS with a bachelor's degree in E lectrical Technology and later went on to obtain my

master's degree in the same field. I am here today as I am strongly i n favor of passing SB

2359 as it is currently written .

I am extremely thankfu l t o l ive i n a state that stands strong against over regu lation

while keeping its consumers best interest at heart i n every decision related to implementing

necessary regu lations . I have been very proud of our State Electrical Board and their

leadership in our i ndustry throughout my career.

When it comes to SB 2359, I feel that we have one of three choices, al l of which wil l

have a great impact on the electric industry :

1 . Listen to the compell ing evidence i n favor of SB 2359 and do nothing

2 . Over- regulate low voltage technicians, upsetti ng consumer balance and threatening

jobs and livel ihoods in our industry

3 . Adopt S B 2359 , the perfect m iddle ground the state of North Dakota needs to solve the

growing issue in this area of the industry whi le keeping costs low and safety of the consumer i n mind

Pushing this bi l l to the s ide would be a great inj ustice to our consumers and the

qual ity contractors and electricians that already complete high qual ity low voltage work in

the state . With the passing of this b i l l we wi l l close a vast gray area i n the industry which

now offers loopholes for unqualified i ndividuals to do work in our state, leaving the safety of our job sites and consumers i n possible danger.

SB 2359 came as a result of years of find ings by electrical i nspectors as they were

inspecti ng the work of licensed electrical contractors . While i nspecti ng their j ob sites they

were finding bui lding and NEC electrical code violations committed by Low Voltage installers.

Many times these installers were long gone leaving the mandatory repai rs i n the hands of the consumer. SB 2359 will be the start of major changes in quality as we move through this very

changing time .

With the above evidence and thoughts i n mind , why would anyone be opposed to

mandatory education and trai n ing for PLT licensure? What other industry has ever been

harmed by requiring their personnel to be registered , l icensed , insured and bonded and

•

•

•

overseen? These are all thi ngs to keep i n m ind as you consider what positive effects SB 2359 cou ld have on our great i ndustry in this great state .

I feel that my 40+ years of industry experience gives great qualification to the points

outlined above . I have great respect for the job that our state board does to regulate and

oversee our industry, cu rrent regu lations and futu re regu lations such as SB 2359 are what

keeps the i ndustry safe and cost effic ient .

I strongly urge you to pass SB 2359 i n its current state and continue the betterment of the electrical industry in the great state of North Dakota .

I thank the committee for hearing my comments and I would be happy to answer any questions you may have .

Respectful ly,

G reg Mattson

•

•

•

Testimony in Support of SB 2359

By Terry She l l nut

Dear Senator/Representative :

For qu ite some t ime now the N DSEB has been consider ing creat ing a new l icense for low voltage techn icians to accommodate the instrumentat ion and automation industry. As a l icensed jou rneyman e lectric ian here in North Dakota , I have been fo l lowing the progress of this proposal with g reat i nterest .

For the record , I fi rst started work ing as an electric ian i n North Dakota i n the Fa l l of 20 1 2 . That was when the Wyoming company I was work ing for took a job i n M inot to do the electrica l for the new Koh l 's department store . After that we d id the Walmart's in Mandan and Grand Forks . Although I knew I cou ld make a lot more money in the oi l patch I remained loya l to my emp loyer unt i l h is North Dakota work was fin ished , then I moved to Watford C ity i n the spring of 20 14 . S ince then , I 've been work ing mostly on compress ion stat ions and gas p lants . But last year, I took a job with an instrumentation and automation company.

S ince com ing to the Bakken , I 've made a lot more money and cou ld fi na l ly afford a fam i ly. I 'm married now with two kids and own a home i n Watford C ity .

I fi rst learned of the Power L im ited Techn ician p roposa l i n the quarterly newsletter from the NDSEB over a year ago. At that t ime the board asked for comment from us e lectric ians and I subm itted one. At the risk of be ing ostracized by my peers , I expressed my support for th is proposal because I had seen some "hacked" work where techn ic ians pu l led power from nearby h igh voltage c i rcu its (+60 vo lts) in an u nsafe manner. These insta l lat ions were in vio lation of the N EC and created potentia l ly hazardous situations .

I bel ieve by creating a low voltage techn ic ians l icense the automation industry wi l l b e better regu lated wh i le ab le to complete 95% of the i r work , a n d ca l l u s (the h igh voltage l icensed) to s imply br ing power to the i r sma l l transformers . Having been requ i red to watch over these techn ic ians for the last year I fee l confident that they can do this low voltage work safe ly. In fact , they have taught me a few th ings about safely insta l l i ng instruments and va lves .

The pu rposes of rules and regu lat ions i n i ndustry have a lways been about persona l and environmenta l safety. When new technology creates a new industria l envi ronment, the ru les get changed to accommodate prog ress , bu t safety shou ld a lways be the foremost consideration . I th ink it is very sad when the protect ion of personal ga in becomes an issue .

Wi l l the creation of a Power L im ited Techn ic ian License i n the state of North Dakota d im in ish my va lue as a l icensed journeyman? Yes , absolutely. Without a doubt . Just

•

•

•

as the va lue of o i l is dependent on supp ly and demand , so are my services . The demand for us wi l l be less , but the supp ly wi l l remain , reducing my va lue .

So why wou ld any l icensed jou rneyman advocate for such a change? Because it's the right th ing to do. I love my cou ntry and be l ieve that we are the most p roductive people on Earth . Government red tape should not h inder the productivity of the American workforce , provided the e l im ination of such red tape does not comprom ise safety.

The on ly question is where do we d raw the l i ne . I th i nk the new PL T's shou ld not be a l lowed to put tools or fingers in a box or apparatus that has h igh voltage (over 60 volts) , with one exception : where a s ing le c i rcu it p rovides power un i nterrupted to a device for the s ing le pu rpose of p rovid ing low voltage for instrumentat ion and automation . Perhaps there shou ld be a clause i n there requ i ri ng a d isconnecti ng means to safely mainta in th is equ ipment s im i lar to the code for motors .

Th is is j ust a sma l l deta i l that cou ld be decided by the N DSEB at a later t ime. For now, I encourage you to vote i n favor of SB 2359.

Thank you for you r consideration ,

Terry She l l nut 3 1 6 3rd St N E Watford City 701 -65 1 -9525

•

•

•

SB 2359

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Brad Sanford

70 1 -570-0492

-The North Dakota State Electric Board has put this bi l l forward . They understand that th is b i l l needs to pass .

-Senator Kann ianen introduced this b i l l , he is an Electr ic ian by trade. He understands the importance of this b i l l .

-The reason th is b i l l is so essential is because we have an industry that has evolved d ramatica l ly with today's technolog ical advances .

-The Journeyman Electrician is the most educated person on an electrica l job of 60 volts or h igher. With lower voltage work that isn 't necessari ly the case . The Journeyman is sti l l educated and va luable, but the Automation Techn ic ian is the subject matter expert on the Low Voltage Automation Equ ipment. Often t imes that Journeyman is learn ing from the Techn ician , yet accord ing to today's laws the Journeyman has to be onsite in order for the Techn ic ian to touch ANY wires .

-The Journeyman commands much h igher wages because they know they are rare and hard to fi nd , this drives costs for consumers , especia l ly oil compan ies, up sign ificantly. E lectrical and Automation is a huge cost when producers ca lculate their breakeven points . Low Voltage Techn ic ians wi l l cost less than electricians, effectively lowering the breakeven points that so many producers use to determine current and future product ion p lans . The Bakken competes with other o i l plays and when oil prices d rop we strugg le to compete with other plays l i ke the Permian and Eagle Ford due to our h igh labor cost. Anyth ing the State of ND can do to lower E&P costs keeps the dr i l l ing rigs dr i l l ing and the frac-er's frac- ing . When that activity stops, those ski l led workers head to the Permian and Eag le Ford and don't come back.

-Today the State Electrical Board req u i res a wiring certificate , or E-Cert , be pu l led for any work over $500 . When completed the work is inspected by the State E lectrical I nspectors . This is a good way to do it and it works very wel l . This b i l l sti l l req u i res th is process to take place, even on the Low Voltage equ ipment, so a l l insta l lations wi l l sti l l need to fol low Nationa l E lectric Codes and be inspected by the State Electrical I nspectors . That said , there wi l l no reduct ion i n Safety or State Revenue.

-Growth in evolving Low Voltage technolog ies wi l l on ly contin ue to stress the electric ian shortage. If someth ing isn 't done to add ress the shortage today, it wi l l serve to constrict g rowth i n the future . Power Limited Techn icians a l low us to be both safe and competitive . Th is wi l l foster g reater economic growth with in our state .

-We've experienced many electricians that "don't want to learn a new trade" and therefore the controls side of what we do is not wel l-su ited for them . Excel l ing i n contro ls is crit ica l for safety and environmenta l concerns (avoid ing spi l ls) .

- I n closing I would l i ke to say that th is b i l l is good for the electrica l industry . It is good for our youth who are looking to learn a ski l led trade. I t is good for the consumer. I t is good for o i l compan ies . Qu ite simply it is good for our state .

•

•

•

Testimony to Legis lat ive Assem b ly Sub-Comm ittee

SE NATE B I LL NO . 2359

M r. Cha i rma n, Mem bers o f t h e Com m ittee :

My name i s Timothy P u l l a nd with th i s l ette r I wou l d l i ke to recom mend passage of Senate B i l l NO . 2359 .

I am a Maste r e lectr ic ia n i n both North Da kota a nd M i n nesota . For 3 1 yea rs I was a n i n structo r i n the E lectrica l Depa rtment a t the North Da kota State Co l l ege of Science i n Wa hpeton, N D . Du ri ng my t ime at N DSCS I a l so d id a lot of i ndu stry tra i n i ng th rough the Outreach a nd Custom ized Tra i n i ng Depa rtment. The custom ized tra i n i ng I p resented to i ndu st ry i n c l uded many c la sses for Power Lim ited Tech n ic ia ns i n the state of M i n nesota . The refore, I a m ve ry fa m i l i a r with the l im itat ions a nd req u i rements fo r Power L im ited Techn icia ns .

For the fo l l owing reasons I be l i eve a req u i rement for l icens ing of persons i n sta l l i ng/ma i nta i n i ng Lim ited Ene rgy Systems i n North Da kota is a pos itive step i n assu r ing these systems a re safe ly i n sta l l ed a nd ma i nta i ned .

1 . The n umber of l im ited energy systems be ing i n sta l l ed conti nues to i ncrease . Fo r exam p le , the wi r i ng of Low-Vo ltage Suspended Ce i l i ng Power D istri but ion Systems was added to the 2014 Nationa l E lectrica l Code . Many d rop ce i l i ng gr ids i n sta l led i n the futu re wi l l have low vo ltage power i n them . Power over Ethe rnet systems a re becom i ng more a nd more common . For exa mp le, the ca b l i ng to many secu rity ca mera s i nc l udes both power a nd data . Wh i l e a "fu l l b lown" e lectric i an s l i cense may not be req u i red fo r systems l i ke these, there shou l d be a method i n p l ace to p rovide some overs ight to i n su re these systems a re i n sta l led safe ly .

2 . Cu rrent ly, a n i n sta l l e r of a C l a ss 2 remote contro l c i rcu it i s req u i red to have an e lectr ic ia n l i cense . Pe rsons i nvolved i n the HVAC i ndustry dea l w ith many C lass 2 contro l c i rcu its. The P LT l i cense wou ld a l low them to i n sta l l these low voltage systems lega l ly without gett ing a n e lectr ica l contracto r i nvolved .

•

•

•

3 . From a bus i ness po i nt of view, the PLT req u i rement wou ld create a more leve l p l ay ing fie l d for contra ctors . Even though a C l ass 2 contro l c i rcu it fo r a n AC system is req u i red to be wired by a l icensed e lectr ic ia n , ma ny HVAC contra cto rs have the i r u n l icensed emp loyees do the wir ing . S ince most HVAC contractors have no commun ication with the N DSEB i t is ve ry d ifficu lt to become awa re of these v io lat ions . With the P LT l i cense req u i rement a l l HVAC contractors w i l l need to have some com m u n icat ion with the N DSEB a nd wi l l therefo re "show up on the rad a r" . Th is wi l l e l im i nate the u nfa i r a dva ntage a contracto r may have had i n the past when that contracto r b id a job knowing that he was not go i ng to h i re a l icensed e lectr ica l contracto r to i nsta l l the C lass 2 Contro l c i rcu its wh i l e h i s competitor was add i ng the expense fo r the e lectr ica l contra ctor that he was l ega l ly req u i red to have .

4 . Tech no logy cha nges ve ry q u ick ly wh i l e the N EC i s u pdated eve ry th ree yea rs . Tech no logy i n the low voltage a rea cha nges espec ia l ly fa st. With the P LT req u i rements there wi l l be a mecha n ism i n p lace to add ress new low voltage techno logy a s i t shows u p i n the ma rketp lace .

Tha nk You for you r service to t he cit izens o f North Da kota .

S i ncere ly,

t imjohnpu l l@gma i l .com

701 371-3531

•

•

•

Febru a ry 5, 2019

Senator J erry K le in , Cha i rman

I n du st ry, Bus i ness & La bor Committee

IN SUPPORT OF ND SB 2359

POWER LI M ITED TECH N I CIAN ( P LT) L ICENS I NG

W. B r i a n Poykko, P . E .

3 7 12 Be l mont Road

G ra n d Forks, ND 58201

701 739-3 128

M r. Cha i rman and members of the com m ittee, my n ame i s W. Br ia n Poykko from G ra nd Forks . I

a m i n favo r of th i s b i l l .

I am p resent ly a n e lectr ica l eng ineer for Oberm i l l e r N e lson Eng ineer ing, a reg io n a l eng i neer ing

consu lt i ng fi rm . I h ave worked as an e lectr ica l eng ineer i ng des ign consu lta nt i n ND s i n ce 1982

and was fi rst registered as a p rofess iona l eng ineer in ND i n 1984. I am a lso registered in M N ,

SD, a n d MT.

I am a lso a membe r of the Power Lim ited Tech Adviso ry G roup to the N DSEB that fi rst met to

beg i n this d iscuss ion i n Feb ru a ry 2017 .

Most of my l ife's work exper ience has been i n the e lectr ica l des ign of commerc i a l , i n d ustri a l ,

educat i ona l , and mun ic ipa l constru ct ion p rojects. P rojects that I des ign i n c l ude power- l im ited

systems . I a l so have forens ic experi ence i n i nvestigat i ng fi res, i nj u r ies, and fa i l u res that may

have been ca used by e l ectr ic ity in some capac ity.

Wh i l e p roduc ing construct ion p l ans a nd spec ificat ions wh i ch is the major ity of my da i ly work, I

refe ren ce the Nat iona l E lectr ic Code ( N EC), wh i ch N D has adopted as the root sta nda rd for t he

pract ica l safeguard i ng o f persons and property from haza rds a r i s i ng from the use o f e lectr ic ity.

Throughout the Un ited States a nd a round the wor ld , the N EC sets t he fou nd at ion for e l ectr ica l

safety i n res ident ia l , commerc ia l , a nd i n d ustr i a l occupancies . Th is t rusted Cod e i n c l udes the

latest comprehensive regu lat ions for e l ectr i ca l wi r i ng, ove rcu rrent p rotect ion , grou nd i ng, a n d

i n sta l l at ion of equ i pment . The NEC cove rs A C a n d D C voltage systems a t a l l potent ia l s, low

voltage from O to 1000 volts and med i um-voltage a bove 1000 up to 72,500 volts .

The NEC, as a n adopted sta nda rd, add resses the m i n imum req u i rements that e lectr ica l

i n sta l l at ions must meet to ensure safety.

Page 1 of 5

•

•

•

Wh i l e the N D State E lectri c a l Boa rd a dopts the cu rrent ed it ion of the N EC on a th ree-yea r cyc l e, it does not enforce com p l i a n ce for a l l N EC p rovis ions .

There a re 8 "code" cha pte rs i n t he N EC . Th rough the cu rrent l i cens ing of e lectr ic i an s, No rt h Da kota e nforces p rovis ions i n Cha pte rs 1 t h rough 5 a n d some sect ions o f Chapters 6 a nd 7 i n c l u d i ng f ire a l a rm systems . No rth Da kota doesn't enforce a ny of the p rovis ions cove red i n Chapter 8 - Com m u n icat ions Systems .

What is m iss i ng i n No rth Da kota e nforcement and why d oes it matte r? The miss ing pa rts of Cha pter 6 and 7 and the m iss i ng Chapter 8 cove r power l i m ited e l ect rica l systems with cab l i ng requ i red for the i n sta l l at ion of a u d io systems, te l ephone systems, m eta l l i c data systems with copper o r fi ber opt ic cab l i ng, b roadband te l ev is ion a n d rad i o systems .

Each N EC a rt i c l e re l a t i ng to these systems add resses m ateri a l that is perm itted to be used, p rotect ion of materi a l , ground i ng, and i n sta l l at ion m ethods . Comp l i a n ce with the p rovis ions in the a rt i c les a re i ntended to resu lt i n a safe system .

P l ease let m e re iterate, t h e No rth Da kota adopted N EC i s t h e means t o b e used t o enforci ng ru les to en su re that a l l e l ectr ica l i n sta l l at ions a re safe i n No rth Da kota . Th i s inc l u des l i n evo ltage u n l i m ited power system s a nd power l im ited systems .

Some m ight t ry to a rgue that power l i m ited systems a re not i mportant fo r the safety of pe rsons o r t he safegua rd i ng of property. Obvious ly, the Nat iona l F i re P rotect ion Assoc iat ion ( N FPA) that is the sponsor of the N EC cons iders safe power l i m ited systems i m po rtant and has i n c l uded ru l es cove r ing such systems .

Be ing power l i m ited does not mean that you ca n not be a cc ident ly e lectrocuted . Be ing power l i m ited does not mean that it ca n n ot be the ca use of a fi re . Com p l i a n ce with the N EC chapte rs rega rd i ng power l i m ited p rovi s ions a re j u st a s im portant a s com p l i a n ce with the N EC cha pters rega rd i ng non-power l im ited p rovis ions .

As a fo rens i c e lect rica l eng ineer, I h ave from t ime to t ime been asked to investigate e lectr ica l system that may have been i nvolved i n persona l i nj u ries a n d/or p roperty damage . Based on these i nvest igat ions I h ave fi rst h and expe r ience i n see i ng t he im portance of the N EC, i n c l u d i ng where it cove rs, o r shou l d h ave covered, power l im ited c i rcu its .

Seve ra l of these cases i nvo lved low voltage or i nvolved basic grou nd i ng and bond i ng p ra ct ices fo r a l l type of power systems, a l l of wh ich a re cove red i n those fi n a l chapters of the N EC . Were these N EC prov is ions fo l l owed, I be l i eve the ensu i ng i nj u r ies a nd/or d amage wou l d have been avo ided or certa i n l y m it igated .

POYKKO Page 2 of 5

•

•

•

For exa mp le, I was reta ined by an attorney to investigate a n o i l r ig fi re . I n it i a l ly thought to be

ca used by an e l ectr ica l system on a po rtab l e l ight set, the scene was found to h ave seve ra l

potent ia l e lectr ica l safety issues . Beca use we l l d r i l l i n g s ites a re cons id e red construct ion sites,

the N EC has spec if ic p rovis ions for e lectr ica l safety for tempora ry i n sta l l a t ions that wou ld a pp ly

and where there a re no spec if ic provis ions the rema i n i ng p rovis ions a pp ly . Th is shou l d i n c l ude

power l im ited system c i rcu its, l i ke 12 VDC cha rg ing systems tha t p robab ly were i nvolved i n th i s

event .

Another exam p le is a case i n West Fa rgo where a nea rby l ightn ing str i ke i n d u ced a voltage

su rge that destroyed the ent i re video and sou nd system i n a sports ba r . L ightn i ng/su rge

p rotect ion on the roof mounted sate l l ite rece iver was i neffective because the i n sta l l e r dec ided

to bond the a ntennas p rotective term ina l to the nea rby enc losu re of a sma l l a i r cond it i on i ng

u n it . The anten na ca b le d i d not have any p rotect ion at the po int where it entered the bu i l d i ng,

wh i ch i n my op in ion enab led i nd uced voltage to be t ra nsferred to the e l ect ron i c equ i pment .

Had the system i n sta l l at ion compl ied with Chapter 8 of the N EC, the property d amage cou ld

have been greatly m it igated .

POYKKO Page 3 of 5

•

•

•

Anothe r exa m p le is a case at the Sta n ley Cou rthouse . The te l ephone serv ice outs i de p l a nt i nsta l l at ion cons isted overhead 25 pa i r ca b l e . Ca b les were a tta ched to a latt ice rad i o a nten n a tower on t h e roof of the th ree-story courthouse . T h e tower was u ngrou nded . Over t h e yea rs the Cou nty had exper ienced a h igh rate of te l ephone l i n e fa i l u res . After so m a ny pa i rs wou l d fa i l t h ey wou ld i n sta l l a nther m u lt i-pa i r ca b l e . When I wa s t he re t hey were on the i r t h i rd ca b l e . Even th rough there were ca b l e p a i r p rotectors at the dema rcat ion po i nt, the p rotectors were i neffective because of the poor grou nd i ng . Had the system comp l i ed with the grou nd i ng a nd bond i ng p rov is ions i n Cha pter 8 of the N EC, ca b l e p rotect ion wou l d have been great ly i mp roved .

It was a lso at the Stan ley Cou rthouse that I observed a she riff's rad i o a ntenna cab l e that extended from the roof, down the outs ide of the bu i l d i ng, a n d e nter ing t h rough a w indow s i l l a t the s heriff' s desk to a base stat ion rad io . The re were no p rotecto rs and no ground i ng on the coax ia l an tenna ca b le . Some of the staff ment ioned that t hey were so concerned a bout l ight n i ng stri k ing the bu i l d i ng that when a l ightn ing sto rm appea red em i nent they p referred to l eave the bu i l d i ng and seek the she lter of t he i r ca rs .

I h ave a l so invest igated s im i l a r roof equ i pment with ground i ng a n d bond i ng issues that h ave caused commun icat ions prob lems, i n c l ud ing Tre nton Schoo l a n d at the G ra n d Forks Po l i ce Depa rtment .

POYKKO Page 4 of 5

•

•

•

Anothe r case i nvolved a fa i l u re a few yea rs ago at the Ra l ph Enge l stad Arena i n G round Forks . An a m p l ifi e r output c i rcu it fa i l ed and sta rted one of the a rena 's spea ke rs on fire, wh i ch eventua l ly fe l l to the i ce . P resent ly i n N D, the h igh-power sound system i n R EA d i d not requ i re i n sta l l at ion by l i censed contractors. The i n sta l l at ion was not i n spected with reference to the N E C to ensu re safety. I n my op i n ion if th i s i n sta l l at ion had been i n com p l i a nce w i th Chapter 6, Art i c l e 640 of the N EC, th is fi re cou l d h ave been p revented .

These a re just a few examp l es to i l l u st rate that I hope i l l ust rate t he im portance of the N EC i n No rth Da kota fo r the p rotect ion of property a nd l ife .

I n c los i ng, I a m st rong ly i n favo r of SB 2359 to i nc l u d e P LT l i censu re i n Chapter 43-09 of the N DCC to p rotect t he peop le a nd property of North Da kota us i ng a l l of the too l s that h ave been deve l oped i n ou r i n d u stry . I be l i eve that hav ing i nspect ions of "power l im ited" systems is j u st a s important as i nspect ions of trad itio n a l non-power l i m ited systems .

I a sk that you pass SB 2359 as presented or as it may be a mended with PLT l i cens i ng i n p l ace . No rth Da kota needs to bu i l d on i t s p resent system and it needs to e nforce a l l p rov is ions of its adopted N at iona l E l ectr ic Code .

W. Bri a n Poykko, P . E .

POYKKO Page 5 of 5

Documents

2019 SENATE INDUSTRY, BUSINESS AND LABORCOMMITTEE SB … · Senator Kannianen: If you’re not grandfathered in and you don’t have any other technical or tradesman certification,