MC Cable and Arc Faults

[jap]

Just had a fellow Electrician tell me that he wired a house all in MC Cable and Metal Boxes and the Inspector Exempt him from having to install any Arc Fault Devices.
He indicated it was in the code book.
I disagreed without even looking in the code book.

I seldom do residential wiring.

Am I missing something?

JAP.

 

[qcroanoke]

Just had a fellow Electrician tell me that he wired a house all in MC Cable and Metal Boxes and the Inspector Exempt him from having to install any Arc Fault Devices.
He indicated it was in the code book.
I disagreed without even looking in the code book.

I seldom do residential wiring.

Am I missing something?

JAP.

He can do it in rigid pipe and weatherproof boxes if he wants. He still has to use Arc fault breakers.
Unless the code year he is under does not require it.
It may be a local amendment but I would be surprised.

 

[GoldDigger]

There are some provisions related to protection of a circuit by an AFCI receptacle with feed through rather than a AFCI breaker that have as a condition the type of wiring used between the panel and the device. But none that eliminate the AFCI completely.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

 

[jap]

There are some provisions related to protection of a circuit by an AFCI receptacle with feed through rather than a AFCI breaker that have as a condition the type of wiring used between the panel and the device. But none that eliminate the AFCI completely.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

This same inspector failed another project siting that "All 15 or 20 Amp 125 Volt receptacles falling in the GFI areas must be GFI Receptacles" and is not allowing him to use the Feed thru function of the GFI. The Contractor installed 4 outlets on 1 circuit and was intending on putting a GFI Receptacle in the first outlet to feed the other 3 down line.
The Inspector made him install 4 GFI Receptacles.

Sounds like we got a runaway on our hands.

 

[ron]

Just had a fellow Electrician tell me that he wired a house all in MC Cable and Metal Boxes and the Inspector Exempt him from having to install any Arc Fault Devices.

I thought you were going to say he didn't require anti-short bushings for MC, which is correct, only AC cable. MC cable has noting to do with arc fault devices that I know of.

 

[jap]

I thought you were going to say he didn't require anti-short bushings for MC, which is correct, only AC cable. MC cable has noting to do with arc fault devices that I know of.

It does if you intend to install the Arc Fault Protection at the 1st outlet past the Overcurrent device in the Panel , which you can do, if the conductors are installed in Rigid, Imc, Emt or Mc Cable or buried in concrete or something , but it doesnt exempt you from having to install the Arc Fault Protection all together.
I think the Inspector quit reading the Exception before he read it all the way to the end.

 

[GoldDigger]

The Contractor installed 4 outlets on 1 circuit and was intending on putting a GFI Receptacle in the first outlet to feed the other 3 down line.
The Inspector made him install 4 GFI Receptacles.

Sounds like we got a runaway on our hands.

And why did the inspector think that the box for the GFCI included so many "GFCI protected" labels?
Agreed, the guy is a train wreck. Does he have a supervisor or is the the entire AHJ?

 

[don_resqcapt19]

And why did the inspector think that the box for the GFCI included so many "GFCI protected" labels?
...

The NEC does not require the use of the "GFCI protected" labels except when you are replacing receptacles on a circuit that does not have an EGC per the rules in 406.(D)(2)(c).

 

[GoldDigger]

The NEC does not require the use of the "GFCI protected" labels except when you are replacing receptacles on a circuit that does not have an EGC per the rules in 406.(D)(2)(c).

And that inspector would require that they all be replaced with GFCI receptacles at the same time.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

And that inspector would require that they all be replaced with GFCI receptacles at the same time.

Maybe so, but it is not a requirement of the NEC. Enforcement of rules that have not been adopted can be an issue for the AHJ.

 

[grizwald]

I'll catch some flak for this but, a lot of the inspectors out there are over whelmed with the constant change of the NEC. I'm referring to inspectors who are responsible for multiple trades, not just electrical. I've encountered a few that couldn't understand the Title 24 requirements in California...he simply said his way was how it is :happysad: He was right...he had the final say; even though he was wrong. Oh well:roll:

 

[jxofaltrds]

I'll catch some flak for this but, a lot of the inspectors out there are over whelmed with the constant change of the NEC. I'm referring to inspectors who are responsible for multiple trades, not just electrical. I've encountered a few that couldn't understand the Title 24 requirements in California...he simply said his way was how it is :happysad: He was right...he had the final say; even though he was wrong. Oh well:roll:

Were you able to explain it to him? If so I believe that the (any) inspector needs to back down.

 

[dereckbc]

I would thiink a local code amendment. Working a remodel in my home and the local has amended AFCI to bedrooms and smokes only.