2029 National Electrical Code Panel 12

  1. Home
    2. Page 2
Loading
loading...

2029 National Electrical Code Panel 12

July 21, 2026
mike@standardsmichigan.com
No Comments

Ahead of the September-October First Draft Meetings in Redondo Beach California, we sort through the proposals related to electric vehicle safety and sustainability.

Public Input Report (546 pages)

From our perspective the omissions are probably more interesting than the inclusions:

  • No discussion of maintenance bays servicing high-voltage traction batteries.
  • No discussion of vehicle-to-grid (V2G) installations on campuses; or off-campus housing with merchant utility services.
  • No discussion of shared charging yards used jointly by universities and municipal transit agencies.
  • No discussion of fleet maintenance worker clearances around energized traction systems.

We are spread pretty thin and Mike’s reassignment by IEEE to CMP-3 limits the time for getting topics like these discussed.



We shall see the results of the First Draft meetings. If Standards Michigan – or the IEEE Education & Healthcare Facilities Committee were looking ahead we might consider proposals addressing:

  • Electrical design guidance for large educational fleet charging depots. (An authoritative title pulling together concepts from other standards catalogs)
  • Coordination between Article 625 and school bus maintenance facilities.
  • Service disconnecting and emergency shutdown arrangements for campus charging yards.
  • Arc-flash and maintenance access requirements unique to fleet charging equipment.
  • Load-management systems serving university transportation departments.
  • Cross-references to NFPA 70B for maintenance of campus EV charging infrastructure.
  • Guidance for campuses that operate both transit buses and public charging facilities.

Even if it means submitting proposals to the ICC, ASHRAE, SAE or other standards development organizations.

Campus Micromobility

Electric Vehicle Charging

July 21, 2026
mike@standardsmichigan.com
No Comments

GROUP A MODEL BUILDING CODES: Comments on Committee Actions will be received until July 8th

International Building Code Chapter 4, Section 406.2.7

Edison electric vehicle | National Park Service, US Department of the Interior

 

Free public access to the 2021 edition of the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) is linked below:

2021 International Energy Conservation Code

 

Electric vehicle charging stations are addressed in the 2024 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) within two specific appendices:

Appendix RE: This appendix provides detailed requirements for electric vehicle charging infrastructure, focusing on both residential and commercial buildings. It includes definitions and infrastructure standards to ensure that new constructions are equipped to support electric vehicle charging​

Appendix CG: This appendix offers guidance on electric vehicle power transfer and charging infrastructure, emphasizing the integration of EV-ready requirements into building designs. It outlines the necessary provisions for installing and managing EV charging stations, ensuring compliance with energy conservation standards​

.These appendices are part of the broader efforts to incorporate EV infrastructure into building codes, promoting energy efficiency and supporting the transition to electric vehicles.

Recharging infrastructure at at Google’s Mountain View (California) campus | Pretty ugly, eh?

“Gas” 1940 Edward Hopper

This standard will be updated within a reconfigured code development cycle linked below:

2024/2025/2026 ICC CODE DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE

Keep in mind that many electric vehicle safety and sustainability concepts will track in other titles in the ICC catalog.   It is enlightening to see other energy related proposals tracking in the most recent Group A code revision cycle

The following proposals discussed during the Group A Hearings ended earlier this month are noteworthy:

IBC § 202 (NEW) | G66-21 |  Electrical mobility definitions

IBC § 1107.2, et al | E124-21 & E125-21 & E126-21 |  Electrical vehicle charging stations for R-2 occupancies.

From the Group B revision cycle — COMPLETE MONOGRAPH:

R309.6 Electric vehicle charging stations and systems. Where provided, electric vehicle charging systems shall be installed in accordance with NFPA 70. Electric vehicle charging system equipment shall be listed and labeled in accordance with UL 2202. Electric vehicle supply equipment shall be listed and labeled in accordance with UL 2594.

IBC 406.2.7 Electric vehicle charging stations and systems. Where provided, electric vehicle charging systems shall be installed in accordance with NFPA 70. Electric vehicle charging system equipment shall be listed and labeled in accordance with UL 2202. Electric vehicle supply equipment shall be listed and labeled in accordance with UL 2594. Accessibility to electric vehicle charging stations shall be provided in accordance with Section 1108.

TABLE R328.5 MAXIMUM AGGREGATE RATINGS OF ESS (Energy Storage Systems) – PDF Page 1476

Incumbents are socking in EV concepts all across the ICC catalog.  We refer them to experts in the Industrial Applications Society IEEE E&H Committee.

 

 

One of the more spirited debates in recent revision cycles is the following:

Who shall pay for electrical vehicle charging infrastructure?   

The underlying assumption is that the electrification of the global transportation grid has a net benefit.   We remain mute on that question; the question of net gain.

Of course, many proposals pointed the finger at the stakeholder with the deepest pockets.  Accordingly, new commercial building owners will be required to install charging stations for new buildings.   During 2018 and 2019 we tracked the action in the workspace below so that we could collaborate with the IEEE Education & Healthcare Facilities Committee:

2021 Electric Vehicle Infrastructure

Given that most higher education facilities are classified as commercial, the cost of charging stations will be conveyed into the new building construction budget unless the unit takes an exception.   Generally speaking, most colleges and universities like to display their electric vehicle credentials, even if the use of such charging stations remains sparse.

Cornell University

Issue: [11-40]

Category: Electrical, #SmartCampus

Colleagues: Mike Anthony, Jim Harvey

* The education industry has significant square footage this is classified as residential; particularly on the periphery of large research campuses.

LEARN MORE:

ICC 2021/2022 Code Development Cycle

The Top 5 Energy Efficiency Proposals for the 2021 IECC

Archive / IECC Electric Vehicle Charging

 

Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Study

July 21, 2026
mike@standardsmichigan.com
No Comments

Edison electric vehicle | National Park Service, US Department of the Interior

We present two research reports funded by the Michigan Office of Future Mobility & Electrification to establish the broad contours of a build out of charging infrastructure to support Michigan economic activity:

Part 1: August 2025.  The report is principally about public EV charging infrastructure for passenger vehicles—where chargers should be located, grid readiness, consumer adoption, and statewide deployment. It does not appear to devote significant discussion to electric school buses or K–12 transportation fleets.  The report repeatedly identifies the University of Michigan and Michigan State University as participants in Michigan’s EV ecosystem, charging research, workforce development, and mobility initiatives.

Part 2: February 2026  This phase of the project is principally an optimization study for upscaling EV penetration and asks the following questions:

  • Which charging stations should be built first?
  • Which can wait?
  • Where should public investment be concentrated?
  • How can stranded investment be avoided during early adoption?

Given that the technical specifics have stabilized over the past 5 t0 10 years, the Standards Michigan raison d’être  requires turning attention to state specific institutional ownership models.  Specifically:

  • university-owned and operated;
  • parking authority-owned;
  • electric utility-owned;
  • third-party concessionaire;
  • public-private partnership;
  • donor-funded demonstration projects;
  • research installations;
  • fleet-only facilities versus public access.

From the perspective of Standards Michigan, that is where the next frontier lies. The engineering standards are approaching maturity. The unresolved standards are becoming institutional standards—the policies, accounting practices, procurement models, utility tariffs, and governance frameworks that determine whether EV infrastructure remains a mission-supporting asset or becomes a long-term financial liability.  These questions will occupy university trustees and facilities executives for the next twenty-odd years.  Some of the back-and-forth on this aspect tracks in our coverage of the building codes:

Electric Vehicle Charging

 

 

2029 National Electrical Code Panel 3

July 21, 2026
mike@standardsmichigan.com
No Comments

Electrical Safety Catalog

2029 Revision Calendar

 

Articles covered by CMP-3:

Article 206
Non-Power-Limited Remote-Control and Signaling Circuits | Article 300
General Requirements for Wiring Methods and Materials | Article 335
Instrumentation Tray Cable — formerly Article 727 | Article 720
Limited-Energy System Installations | Article 721
Limited-Energy Power Sources | Article 722
Limited-Energy Cables |  Article 723
Raceways, Cable Routing Assemblies, and Cable Trays for Limited-Energy Systems | Article 724
Class 1 Power-Limited Remote-Control and Signaling Circuits | Article 725
Class 2 and Class 3 Power-Limited Circuits | Article 726
Class 4 Fault-Managed Power Systems | Article 728
Fire-Resistive Cable Systems | Article 760
Fire Alarm Systems | Article 772
Chapter 9 Tables

Top 10 Issues

Issue Summary
1. Consistency of Code Language Standardize terminology throughout the NEC by eliminating inconsistent wording, duplicate phrases, and varying expressions that describe the same technical concepts.
2. Compliance with the NEC Style Manual Many proposals seek removal of redundant requirements already addressed elsewhere in the Code, resulting in a cleaner, more concise document.
3. Restoring Lost Requirements Numerous submitters argue that important technical provisions disappeared during recent article reorganizations and should be restored.
4. Article Organization Improve article formatting, numbering, and overall structure to make the NEC easier to navigate and maintain.
5. Emerging Technologies Expand the Code to better accommodate fault-managed power, battery energy storage, portable power systems, EV-based power sources, hydrogen technologies, and new circuit classifications.
6. Installation Clarification Clarify requirements for raceways, wet locations, roof decks, cable trays, conductor spacing, barriers, and other installation practices.
7. Installer Safety & Reliability Enhance electrical safety through improved wiring practices, better physical protection, stronger cable support requirements, and fewer failure points.
8. Definition Ownership Assign definitions to the Code-Making Panels having primary technical expertise to improve long-term consistency and maintenance.
9. Coordination with Other Standards Improve harmonization between the NEC and companion standards such as UL, ANSI, NFPA 79, and hazardous-location requirements.
10. Reducing Complexity A recurring objective is to simplify the NEC by reducing duplication, improving readability, and making the Code easier for installers, inspectors, designers, trainers, and licensing authorities to use.

The Public Inputs demonstrate a broad desire to make the National Electrical Code more consistent, technically complete, better coordinated with related standards, and easier to understand without compromising electrical safety. Many proposals emphasize restoring requirements inadvertently lost during recent reorganizations while preparing the Code to accommodate rapidly emerging electrical technologies.

Mike recommends these issues as priority for the Joint IEEE IAS/PES committee
Atul Arunkumar Shenoy, P.E., SMIEEE is Mike Anthony’s Alternate on CMP-3
Susan Newman Scearce is the Chairperson for CMP-3
Ω

2029 Public Input Submittals CMP-3

N.B.  Public Input No. 2633-NFPA 70-2026 [ Global Input ]  PDF Page 6, regarding re-organization of the NEC into below 1000 V and above 1000 V.  

Noteworthy proposal concepts:

  1. Cable trays interfering with HVAC ductwork and fire sprinkler lines.  Parallel cable tray feasibility
  2. Difficulty accessing lighting fixtures and fire alarm components for maintenance.
  3. Potential violation of plenum clearance and airflow requirements.  Some cable trays in plenums reportedly contain non-plenum-rated cables, which is a fire code violation.
  4. Document flags this as a high-priority remediation item before any LED lighting retrofit proceeds.
  5. Existing security wiring (CCTV, access control, intrusion detection) is a mix of old analog coax and early Cat 5 cables.
  6. Many runs exceed recommended length for reliable video transmission.  Frequent signal degradation and reliability complaints.
  7. Security cables are sharing overcrowded cable trays with power-limited lighting control wires and fire alarm cabling.
  8. Risk of electromagnetic interference (EMI) noted due to proximity to higher-voltage lines.
  9. Plenum space constraints make it difficult to add new IP-based security cameras without major reorganization.
  10. Current security wiring cannot support newer high-resolution IP cameras or PoE+ powered devices.
  11. Several editorial proposals by Mike Holt. (He’s generally correct on clarity improvements that he needs for educational purposes)
Ω
For discussion next meeting, when we march through all proposals of interest to IEEE:
  • When electricians work in ceiling plenums above hallways while students pass below, several serious hazards emerge. Tools, screws, cable scraps, or ceiling tiles can fall, causing head injuries or slips. Disturbed dust, fiberglass, or potential asbestos particles may rain down, creating respiratory risks.
  • Live electrical work on lighting or cable trays raises shock/fire dangers if a fault occurs or debris shorts circuits. Open plenums can compromise fire-rated barriers, allowing smoke or flames to spread rapidly in an emergency.
  • Noise and visual distractions increase trip hazards for students. Without full barricades, lockout/tagout, and proper fall protection, these overhead activities expose young people to preventable injury. Scheduling work after hours or using full corridor closures is essential.
  • Power-limited (Class 2) cabling operates at low voltage (<60V DC) with current/power caps (~100VA), dramatically reducing shock and fire risks. Installation is simpler and cheaper—no conduit or heavy mechanical protection needed in many cases, allowing flexible routing. LEDs run cooler and more efficiently with remote drivers, improving lifespan and energy savings. Easier maintenance and safer for retrofits.
  • Severe distance and power limits due to voltage drop and 100W/5A caps require multiple drivers or shorter runs. Higher upfront costs for specialized power supplies. Potential reliability issues from more connection points. Less suitable for high-power or long-distance applications compared to line-voltage wiring.

Public Inputs Relevant to School and College Facilities

Campus Facility Relevant Issue Why It Matters
Student Health Centers, Medical Schools & Campus Hospitals Improved protection of underground feeders, raceways, and wiring methods, together with replacement of conductors damaged by water, fire, corrosion, or severe physical impact. Enhances electrical reliability for healthcare occupancies where continuous operation is essential.
Athletic Stadiums & Arenas Improved protection of underground services, direct-buried conductors, warning ribbons, and raceways. Supports reliable electrical service for stadium lighting, scoreboards, concessions, and outdoor utility infrastructure.
Temporary Athletic & Campus Events Recognition of modern portable power sources, including battery energy storage systems and portable fuel cells, in addition to traditional generators. Useful for commencement ceremonies, concerts, athletic tournaments, festivals, and temporary event power.
Research Laboratories Expanded wiring methods for hazardous (classified) locations, including ITC-HL cable installations. May affect university research laboratories, pilot plants, engineering facilities, and chemical research buildings.
Residence Halls & Classroom Buildings Improved protection against concealed wiring damage caused by nails, screws, and furring strips during construction and renovation. Helps reduce wiring damage during frequent campus remodeling and maintenance projects.
Campus Utility Infrastructure Clarifications involving direct boring, underground raceways, service feeders, and warning ribbon installation. Relevant to the large underground electrical distribution systems commonly found on university campuses.

Although these proposals would benefit campus infrastructure, the CMP-3 transcript contains very little discussion directed specifically at educational occupancies. Topics such as healthcare facilities (Article 517), stadium emergency systems, data centers, laboratories as occupancies, residence halls, libraries, and central utility plants largely fall within the jurisdiction of other NEC Code-Making Panels such as CMP-1 and CMP-15 where Mike has been a Principal or Alternate for IEEE.

April 29, 2026

 

At the request of IEEE Joint IAS/PES Standards Michigan, Mike Anthony moved to CMP-3 from CMP-15.

Articles Under CMP 3

  • Article 300 — General Requirements for Wiring Methods and Materials
  • Article 335 — Instrumentation Tray Cable (in some references for the 2029 cycle)
  • Article 590 — Temporary Installations (being relocated/renumbered in the 2026 cycle, e.g., potentially to Article 140 in Chapter 1, as temporary wiring is not treated as a special occupancy)
  • Article 720 — Limited-Energy System Installations (new/general article covering wiring methods for limited-energy systems)
  • Article 721 — Limited-Energy Power Sources
  • Article 722 — Limited-Energy Cable (covers cables for power-limited, fault-managed, etc.)
  • Article 723 — Raceways, Cable Routing Assemblies, and Cable Trays for Limited-Energy Systems (newly created in the 2026 cycle)
  • Article 725 — Class 2 and Class 3 Remote-Control, Signaling, and Power-Limited Circuits
  • Article 726 — Class 4 Fault-Managed Power Circuits and Equipment
  • Article 727 — Instrumentation Tray Cable
  • Article 728 — Fire-Resistive Cable Systems
  • Article 760 — Fire Alarm Systems (power-limited and non-power-limited portions)

CMP 3 also handles associated content in: Chapter 9 — Tables, including Tables 11(A) & (B) and Tables 12(A) & (B) (related to conductor properties and other supporting tables for the above topics).

  • Notes on Changes and Scope
    CMP 3 focuses on general wiring rules, cable types, raceways/trays for low-energy applications, and signaling/communications-related wiring (distinct from higher-power utilization equipment or special occupancies handled by other panels).
  • In the 2026 NEC cycle, there has been significant reorganization of Chapter 7 to consolidate limited-energy systems under articles like 720–726 (and related ones), moving away from older structures. This includes new articles for raceways/cable trays specific to limited-energy systems and adjustments to scopes for clarity.
  • Article 206 (Non-Power-Limited Remote-Control and Signaling Circuits) appears in some 2026-related references as newly designated or relocated material handled in this area.
    Temporary installations (Article 590) are transitioning out of “special” categories in restructuring efforts.

During today’s sessions of the IEEE E&H Committee and our own we will prepare draft proposals relevant to the safety and sustainability agenda of the USA education facility industry.  Use the login credentials at the upper right of our home page.

 

Brown University Electrical Design Criteria | Information Technology Resources Policy

Posted December 20, 2025

The University of Michigan has supported the voice of the United States education facility industry since 1993 — the second longest tenure of any voice in the United States.  That voice has survived several organizational changes but remains intact and will continue its Safer-Simpler-Lower Cost-Longer Lasting priorities on Code Panel 3 in the 2029 Edition.

Today, during our customary “Open Door” teleconference we will examine the technical concepts under the purview of Code Panel 3; among them:

Article 206 Signaling Circuits

Article 300 General Requirements for Wiring Methods and Materials

Article 335 Instrumentation Tray Cable

Article 590 Temporary Installations

Chapter 7 Large sections of limited energy cabling for signaling and information technology

Chapter 9 Conductor Properties Tables 11A & B, Tables 12A&B

Public Input on the 2029 Edition will be received until April 9, 2026.

Related:
  • Since the lifespan of educational buildings make the building core and shell susceptible to multiple changes not typically associated with commercial buildings, additional pathways should be placed in areas where the core and shell components of the facility are likely to re-main for extended periods of time
  • It is recommended that all areas of an educational building have wireless coverage unless prohibited

Easy Greek Salad

July 20, 2026
mike@standardsmichigan.com
, , ,
No Comments

West Virginia University Financial Statement 2024 | $1.234B

The Recipe

Standards West Virginia

Related:

Fruit Smoothie

 

Tokens

July 20, 2026
mike@standardsmichigan.com
No Comments

Standards Michigan: Language*

American English is effectively the de facto reference language for most modern LLM tokenization.   During today’s session we explore the at-present advantage Americans have in the development of artificial applications — whether it should always be that way or not.  Tokenization isn’t language-neutral — it’s heavily skewed toward English due to data realities. This is one of the core reasons why “English-first” prompting often works best in today’s LLMs.

We will use the document linked below to begin the exploration:

NIST AI Consortium

Use the login credentials at the upper right of our home page

The Quick Brown Fox – Tokenization Example

Original English Sentence:

The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog.

1. Tokenization

Tokens: ["The", " quick", " brown", " fox", " jumps", " over", " the", " lazy", " dog", "."]

2. Token IDs (Numbers fed to the AI model)

Token Token ID
The 464
quick 2068
brown 7583
fox 1776
jumps 18045
over 625
the 262
lazy 16925
dog 3290
. 13

Final Input to the AI Model:

[464, 2068, 7583, 1776, 18045, 625, 262, 16925, 3290, 13]

Background:

The model only sees this list of numbers. It has no direct understanding of English words anymore — it learned patterns from billions of examples during training using these number sequences.This numerical input then goes through embeddings (turning numbers into vectors), attention layers, etc., to generate a response.  Most widely used tokenizers (e.g., OpenAI’s tiktoken, Llama’s, etc.) are trained primarily on English-heavy datasets (often 60–90%+ English in pre-training corpora).

Outcome:

    • Better compression for English — Common English words and patterns become single tokens or short subwords.
    • Worse efficiency for other languages — Non-English text often gets fragmented into more tokens (sometimes 2–5× more for the same semantic content).

Impact:

    • Higher token counts = higher API costs and shorter effective context windows for non-English users.
    • Poorer downstream performance on non-English tasks.
    • English becomes the “cheapest” and often “best-performing” language for prompting and reasoning.

Studies consistently show this “tokenization tax” or “language premium”: English typically has the lowest token-per-character or token-per-meaning ratio in major models.

Bias:

    • Multilingual models still underperform on low-resource languages.
    • It reinforces English as the default language for AI development.
    • It affects fairness, accessibility, and global adoption.

Efforts to fix this include dedicated multilingual tokenizers, language-specific fine-tuning, and more balanced approaches. However, because English dominates training data and benchmarks, it remains the practical standard that everything else is measured against.

Tokenization isn’t language-neutral — it’s heavily skewed toward English due to data realities. This is one of the core reasons why “English-first” prompting often works best in today’s LLMs.

 

* StandardsMichigan.COM normally deals with Language issues every Monday at least once per month.

How Your LLM Costs 5X More If You Don’t Speak English

Same content, 65% more expensive in Chinese! Cross-model tokenization comparison: Claude users pay the highest ‘Chinese tax’

Language 600

July 20, 2026
mike@standardsmichigan.com
No Comments

Starting from the canonicals of any standard suitable for optimizing innovation (and incorporation by reference into public law) — Title, Scope, Purpose and Definitions — we will turn our attention to the Call for Public Comment by NIST which is open until July 28th.

Innovation and Competitiveness in Artificial Intelligence

Artificial intelligence is built upon language, but the meaning of “standard language” becomes complicated when machines learn from billions of human expressions. Unlike electrical, building or safety standards, language standards are rarely governed by a single authority. Dictionaries, style manuals, universities, publishers, governments and professional societies establish conventions, while ordinary speakers continuously modify them. AI systems operate in the middle of this tension between prescription and usage.

Training data. Large language models learn statistical patterns from books, websites, journalism, academic literature, software and other sources. The composition of that material influences what the model recognizes as normal, authoritative or acceptable language. Decisions about inclusion, exclusion and weighting can therefore function as de facto standards, even when no formal standards organization is involved.

 Grammar and intelligibility. AI can reinforce conventional spelling, syntax and technical terminology, making communication across institutions and borders easier. This is particularly valuable in engineering, medicine, law and education, where small differences in terminology can have substantial consequences. Yet excessive normalization may flatten dialect, regional vocabulary and inherited forms of expression.

Meaning. Words change over time and contested words often carry political, cultural or institutional assumptions. When an AI system chooses one definition over another, it may unintentionally appear to settle a dispute that society itself has not settled. Transparency about ambiguity is therefore an important characteristic of trustworthy AI.

Tchnical standardization. AI increasingly depends upon formal vocabularies, ontologies, metadata, machine-readable definitions and interoperability protocols. Standards organizations such as International Organization for Standardization, IEEE and National Institute of Standards and Technology have roles in developing frameworks through which AI systems can be evaluated and governed.

Above all we still face the question: Who gets to set the language standard? Should AI reflect contemporary majority usage, established literary traditions, professional terminology, institutional style or the language of particular communities? Probably some combination is unavoidable.

For Standards Michigan, the deeper question may be this: AI does not merely follow language standards; through widespread daily use, it may increasingly help create them. If millions of students, teachers, engineers and institutions rely upon AI to write and interpret language, the model’s linguistic choices can become conventions themselves. Understanding how those choices are made may therefore become as important as understanding the standards written by traditional standards-setting bodies.

 

print(“Python”)

July 20, 2026
mike@standardsmichigan.com
, , , ,
No Comments

Active Python Releases

 

“Python is the programming equivalent

of a Swiss Army Knife.”

— Some guy

 

The Python Standard Library

Open source standards development is characterized by very open exchange, collaborative participation, rapid prototyping, transparency and meritocracy.   The Python programming language is a high-level, interpreted language that is widely used for general-purpose programming. Python is known for its readability, simplicity, and ease of use, making it a popular choice for beginners and experienced developers alike.  Python has a large and active community of developers, which has led to the creation of a vast ecosystem of libraries, frameworks, and tools that can be used for a wide range of applications. These include web development, scientific computing, data analysis, machine learning, and more.

Another important aspect of Python is its versatility. It can be used on a wide range of platforms, including Windows, macOS, Linux, and even mobile devices. Python is also compatible with many other programming languages and can be integrated with other tools and technologies, making it a powerful tool for software development.  Overall, the simplicity, readability, versatility, and large community support of Python make it a valuable programming language to learn for anyone interested in software development including building automation.

As open source software, anyone may suggest an improvement to Python(3.X) starting at the link below:

Python Enhancement Program

Python Download for Windows

Python can be used to control building automation systems. Building automation systems are typically used to control various systems within a building, such as heating, ventilation, air conditioning, lighting, security, and more. Python can be used to control these systems by interacting with the control systems through the building’s network or other interfaces.

There are several Python libraries available that can be used for building automation, including PyVISA, which is used to communicate with instrumentation and control systems, and PyModbus, which is used to communicate with Modbus devices commonly used in building automation systems. Python can also be used to develop custom applications and scripts to automate building systems, such as scheduling temperature setpoints, turning on and off lights, and adjusting ventilation systems based on occupancy or other variables. Overall, Python’s flexibility and versatility make it well-suited for use in building automation systems.

Subversion®

Building Automation & Control Networks

Sport News

July 20, 2026
mike@standardsmichigan.com
No Comments

“Man’s life is brief, but through contests he touches the eternal.”

— Pindar, ‘Nemean Ode 6.23-24’

Michigan State University | Ingham County

Rocky Mountain Intercollegiate Skiing Association

College Bowl Games

Fernando Mendoza’s post game interview after winning the Big Ten
byu/justletmeregisteryou insports

 

 

 



Michigan Girl, Our Michigan Girl….

Sport Standards

 

 

Mixed Gender Sport by Design

Engineering in Sport



“Rowing is more poetry than sport.” — George Pocock (‘Boys in the Boat’ 2024), a British-born boat builder, rowing coach, and influential figure in American rowing, best known for his craftsmanship of racing shells and his philosophical approach to the sport.

Winter Sport

“There is no greater glory for a man than that which he wins with his own hands and feet.” (Homer, Iliad c. 8th Century BCE)

Graduation, Dating, Engagements, Weddings, Births & Obituaries

July 20, 2026
mike@standardsmichigan.com
No Comments


‘In the end, it is character that decides . things, not intellect alone.’ (C.P. Snow, ‘The Masters’, 1951)


Michigan State University

t5rtrtr

Weddings

 



Nine years later and first day as husband and wife they got to finally sneak a kiss in one of the first places they ever passed notes

Hun School Of Princeton

“…I have spread my dreams under your feet; Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.” –W.B. Yeats | ‘He Wishes for the Cloths of Heaven’

“Nature’s Masterpiece”

Several colleges and universities have “kissing benches” or similar traditions tied to romance on campus.

Michigan State University Beaumont Tower: Nick and Myra Kanillopoulos

Syracuse University. Kissing Bench: This bench on the Quad is steeped in tradition. Legend has it that if a couple kisses on the bench, they will eventually marry. Conversely, if a single person sits there alone, they risk staying single forever.

University of Idaho.  Hello Walk and Kissing Rock: While not a bench, this area on campus features a large rock where students have historically kissed. It’s a romantic tradition for couples at the university.

Florida State University Kissing Bench

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Clemson University Lover’s Lane

Illinois State University

University of Cambridge: St. John’s College Bridge of Sighs

University of Oxford: The Bridge of Sighs

University of Bath Somerset County: Sham Castle

Weddings

 

Welcome

Standards Michigan Group, LLC

2723 South State Street | Suite 150
Ann Arbor, MI 48104 USA

888-746-3670

DIRECTIONS

icon icon
icon icon
icon icon  
Layout mode
Predefined Skins
Custom Colors
Choose your skin color
Patterns Background
Images Background
Standards Michigan
error: Content is protected !!
Skip to content