It took grassroots efforts by NSCA advocates plus the Connected Technology Industry Consortium to ensure that CSI MasterFormat Division 27 isn’t compromised.
In May 2025, limited-energy integrators came dangerously close to being redefined in a way that would’ve negatively impacted their ability to bid and win business. We want you to know what happened: It’s a lesson in why grassroots advocacy is so important in our industry.
Before we get into the story, however, let’s talk background information.
How NSCA Advocates Drove the Evolution of MasterFormat
First, it’s necessary to understand that 2004 was a watershed year for the integration industry. That’s when the Construction Specifications Institute (CSI) expanded MasterFormat categories to include Division 27. CSI MasterFormat is widely used in North America as a standardized system for organizing construction documents and project specifications related to building design and construction. It’s a critical component of project bidding, especially for limited-energy integrators.
Before that, there were 16 divisions, and electrical was the 16th. Communication and audio were lumped into that division—until 2004. The addition of Division 27 established a dedicated category for communication systems, which were previously grouped under broader divisions like electrical. (Consider that almost all solutions on display at InfoComm likely fall under Division 27.) In total, the 2004 revision resulted in 50 divisions, reflecting the increasing complexity of the construction industry.
NSCA—Chuck Wilson, in particular—played a big role in carving out Division 27. During the revision cycle leading into 2004, he spent a lot of time shuttling between his home in Cedar Rapids, IA, and Washington, DC.
“We worked closely with CSI,” he says. “When we recreated the MasterFormat, we created it very differently than it was before. When a spec was written prior to this, all it said was, ‘These are the products we want you to use, and they will be installed in a neat and workmanlike manner.’ The perception was different for everyone, but that’s all we had at the time.”
After the revision, Chuck adds that “the spec writer had to give the intent or general idea of what they wanted.” Then, they identified products and execution, describing what they wanted integrators to do, in accordance with manufacturer best practices, training certifications, and credentials.
This was groundbreaking for the industry because it built a level of professionalism while helping create an identity that had been lacking.
What Happened in 2025, and How It Was Resolved
In May 2025, this industry progress was jeopardized.
NSCA is a founding member of the Connected Technology Industry Consortium, an integration advocacy group supporting bipartisan legislation that benefits the industry and scours, recognizes, and advocates against legislation that would negatively impact it.
The Consortium includes other organizations like CEDIA, BICSI, the Communications Cable & Connectivity Association (CCCA), and the Electronic Security Association (ESA), as well as like-minded manufacturers.
Individual members of the Consortium scour legislative news for bills, codes, regulations, and anything else that could impact the limited-energy integration industry. The group meets consistently to discuss what they’ve found, whether to take action, and—if so—how to create a grassroots plan to make our collective voice heard.
Related: NSCA Code & Compliance FAQ
During a recent Consortium meeting, representatives from BICSI shared information about potential changes involved with the upcoming revision to CSI MasterFormat. These changes would threaten the structure and independence of Division 27. In essence, the proposed changes would move core components of information and communication technologies industry into Division 26 (electrical), reverting back to the confusion of pre-2004, when limited-energy industry was lumped in with electrical.
Time was of the essence because CSI was scheduled to discuss the proposed changes the week after we heard about them.
Acting quickly, members of the Consortium—particularly BICSI, NSCA, and CEDIA—collaborated on an outreach campaign. NSCA sent an email to members with a templated letter they could use to reach out to CSI and voice their opposition.
Within 24 hours, BICSI members learned that our efforts worked. CSI welcomed the input from associations that support the limited-energy integration industry. It also reached a consensus to delay the proposal and reintroduce it in the next MasterFormat cycle, during which they will welcome Consortium members to participate in the process.
The Many Lessons to be Learned
It’s vital that NSCA members pay attention to government affairs. With help from your trade association, you can be ready to communicate loudly when needed. NSCA and the Consortium will always do what we can on behalf of the industry, but legislators and policymakers place special value on hearing from companies like yours.
Another lesson: The Connected Technology Industry Consortium worked. It identified a risk and responded quickly. NSCA board members have long recognized the significant time and effort NSCA staff dedicate to legislative research and advocacy. While the board views this work as a major benefit of NSCA membership, they also acknowledge that members are often unaware of these efforts—or how often industry regulations that could negatively impact business are successfully blocked.
NSCA board members want members to be aware of these risks—and of NSCA’s efforts to support the industry through advocacy. This recent situation provides a snapshot of the relentless risks—and equally relentless efforts—of NSCA, NSCA members, and the Connected Technology Industry Consortium.
