AFCI's Tripping -Solution? -No AFCI

[david]

It only mandates protection of the branch-circuit. Everything else is a by-product of that protection.

How can you lose? You used 90.4 to required the device.

The authority having jurisdiction for enforcement of the Code has the responsibility for making interpretations of the rules,

my understanding of the rule is that a GFCI breaker nor a GFCI receptacle at the temp service is not mandated by the rule . However GFCI protection in the General rule is mandated to protect the user of equipment at the site. I as an electrical inspector am not responsible for the protection being on site.

Case law has established professionals as ourselves have a higher threshold by knowledge of what the protection was designed to do,

You and I as professional understand that AFCI are designed to protect against series and parallel arcs. That protection if there will extend to a cord plugged in to the receptacle at the first outlet in your example had the protection been there. It is a technical argument to not require that protection. Even if you as an official state that the protection was not required at the first outlet.
If you find yourself before an arbitrator you will lose based on case law.

 

[david]

Keep in mind an exception is not designed to take away from the rule you could possibly win in arbitration if you could prove that the provided protection (AFCI) was not designed to protect equipment supplied from the single outlet.

 

[mwm1752]

Mike,

The 2011 ROC's pertaining to the use of AFCI receptacles is interesting. The arguements include the elimination of protection for the wiring from OC to first device. Alot of discussion about protection at the device was included. Statistics presented deemed the device be AFCI rated due to the amounts of protection needed due to faulty equipment & cords. The indication of using the AFCI recept was not the preferred method, but as an exception due to circumstances that would not allow breaker protection, then the device would start the protection for the branch circuit if extended and also serve as protection for faulty equipment served at the first device. You may have another take when you read the ROC's and there were many comments to scan. IMO first device under the exception is AFCI rated

 

[RichB]

Disagree. I see nothing that requires that receptacle to be AFCI protected. Now in most cases the receptacle is AFCI protected but I do not see were it is required.

(A) Dwelling Units. All 120-volt, single phase, 15- and
20-ampere branch circuits supplying outlets installed in
dwelling unit family rooms, dining rooms, living rooms,
parlors, libraries, dens, bedrooms, sunrooms, recreation
rooms, closets, hallways, or similar rooms or areas shall
be protected by a listed arc-fault circuit interrupter,
combination-type, installed to provide protection of the
branch circuit.

Exception No. 1: If RMC, IMC, EMT, Type MC, or steel
armored Type AC cables meeting the requirements of
250.118 and metal outlet and junction boxes are installed
for the portion of the branch circuit between the branch-circuit
overcurrent device and the first outlet,

No AFCI protection is required to this point.

it shall be permitted to install an outlet branch-circuit type AFCI at
the first outlet to provide protection for the remaining portion
of the branch circuit.

Now I only have to 'add' AFCI protection if I have a continuation of the branch circuit.

Branch Circuit. The circuit conductors between the final
overcurrent device protecting the circuit and the outlet(s).

Green highlight to me means that you must protect those areas with AFCI and the second highlight means that you will install and AFCI recep in the first outlet--that means that if there is only one outlet then it is the first one and the "remaining portion" all in one and therefore gets an AFCI--end of discussion--if you disagree here's my bosses phone # call him(her)

 

[jxofaltrds]

Green highlight to me means that you must protect those areas with AFCI and the second highlight means that you will install and AFCI recep in the first outlet--that means that if there is only one outlet then it is the first one and the "remaining portion" all in one and therefore gets an AFCI--end of discussion--if you disagree here's my bosses phone # call him(her)

Give me his # cause the Article starts with:

210.12 Arc-Fault Circuit-Interrupter Protection.
(A) Dwelling Units. All 120-volt, single phase, 15- and
20-ampere branch circuits supplying outlets installed in
dwelling unit family rooms, dining rooms, living rooms,
parlors, libraries, dens, bedrooms, sunrooms, recreation
rooms, closets, hallways, or similar rooms or areas shall
be protected by a listed arc-fault circuit interrupter,
combination-type, installed to provide protection of the
branch circuit.

Branch Circuit. The circuit conductors between the final
overcurrent device protecting the circuit and the outlet(s).

210 does not cover the installation of "outlets".

I. General Provisions
210.1 Scope. This article covers branch circuits except for
branch circuits that supply only motor loads, which are
covered in Article 430. Provisions of this article and Article
430 apply to branch circuits with combination loads.

 

[jap]

Give me his # cause the Article starts with:

210.12 Arc-Fault Circuit-Interrupter Protection.
(A) Dwelling Units. All 120-volt, single phase, 15- and
20-ampere branch circuits supplying outlets installed in
dwelling unit family rooms, dining rooms, living rooms,
parlors, libraries, dens, bedrooms, sunrooms, recreation
rooms, closets, hallways, or similar rooms or areas shall
be protected by a listed arc-fault circuit interrupter.

If you want to try to read something into the requirement there's no need to.
You can stop reading where I did above and it answers any question you might have about having to install arc fault protection.

JAP.

 

[jxofaltrds]

If you want to try to read something into the requirement there's no need to.
You can stop reading where I did above and it answers any question you might have about having to install arc fault protection.

JAP.

You should read further.

Exception No. 1: If RMC, IMC, EMT, Type MC, or steel
armored Type AC cables meeting the requirements of
250.118 and metal outlet and junction boxes are installed
for the portion of the branch circuit between the branch-circuit
overcurrent device and the first outlet, it shall be
permitted to install an outlet branch-circuit type AFCI at
the first outlet to provide protection for the remaining portion
of the branch circuit.

The AFCI is only required to protect the "remaining portion".

It is clear that the code believes the circuit protected to the first outlet in this exception.

If I supply no other outlets - no AFCI required.

 

[mwm1752]

Give me his # cause the Article starts with:

210.12 Arc-Fault Circuit-Interrupter Protection.
(A) Dwelling Units. All 120-volt, single phase, 15- and
20-ampere branch circuits supplying outlets installed in
dwelling unit family rooms, dining rooms, living rooms,
parlors, libraries, dens, bedrooms, sunrooms, recreation
rooms, closets, hallways, or similar rooms or areas shall
be protected by a listed arc-fault circuit interrupter,
combination-type, installed to provide protection of the
branch circuit.

Branch Circuit. The circuit conductors between the final
overcurrent device protecting the circuit and the outlet(s).

210 does not cover the installation of "outlets".

I. General Provisions
210.1 Scope. This article covers branch circuits except for
branch circuits that supply only motor loads, which are
covered in Article 430. Provisions of this article and Article
430 apply to branch circuits with combination loads.

So Mike with your logic then I would say the exception does not apply as you do not meet the charging statement of protecting Branch circuits. The exception is still designed to protect from faulty branch circuits and faulty plug in appliances/table lamps/electronic devices that can cause arcing & fires -- Did you have time to read any of the ROC's? It appears you are more involved with the wording of the code section rather than accept the intent. If so, get that code change in.

The recept is part of the branch circuit as the outlet provide energy to the appliance.

 

[jxofaltrds]

Jump over to post #55 here:

http://forums.mikeholt.com/showthread.php?t=159849&page=6&p=1550259#post1550259

 

[kwired]

I did not read every post, but I am in favor of metallic wiring methods, use of GFCI's, even at 30ma levels for some applications and forget that AFCI's ever existed

 

[acrwc10]

IMO, You are missing one major thing, the receptacle is still part of the branch circuit and still requires AFCI protection. So the circuit all the way to the box is in metal conduit (Great) and does not require AFCI protection, how is the receptacle not part of the branch circuit?

 

[mwm1752]

Read the post -- I would not consider the receptacle as utilization equipment --

Outlet. A point on the wiring system at which current is taken to supply utilization equipment.
Code Commentary;This term is frequently misused to refer to receptacles( this refers to the terminology only-- ie; where's an outlet I can plug my radio into dude). Although receptacle outlets are outlets(statement), not all outlets are receptacle outlets. Common examples of outlets include lighting outlets and smoke alarm outlets.
Utilization Equipment. Equipment that utilizes electric energy for electronic, electromechanical, chemical, heating, lighting, or similar purposes.

 

[jxofaltrds]

IMO, You are missing one major thing, the receptacle is still part of the branch circuit and still requires AFCI protection. So the circuit all the way to the box is in metal conduit (Great) and does not require AFCI protection, how is the receptacle not part of the branch circuit?

A receptacle is a device and is not part of the branch circuit.

Branch Circuit. The circuit conductors between the final
overcurrent device protecting the circuit and the outlet(s).

Branch Circuit, General-Purpose. A branch circuit that
supplies two or more receptacles or outlets for lighting and
appliances.

Layman's terms - the wires.

Read the post -- I would not consider the receptacle as utilization equipment --

Outlet. A point on the wiring system at which current is taken to supply utilization equipment.
Code Commentary;This term is frequently misused to refer to receptacles( this refers to the terminology only-- ie; where's an outlet I can plug my radio into dude). Although receptacle outlets are outlets(statement), not all outlets are receptacle outlets. Common examples of outlets include lighting outlets and smoke alarm outlets.
Utilization Equipment. Equipment that utilizes electric energy for electronic, electromechanical, chemical, heating, lighting, or similar purposes.

Yes!

 

[RichB]

in re post #25---I agree with mwm1752 as he states in response to post 25 that the recept in the outlet is still part of the branch circuit and as it is exposed on the face and NOT completely contained in a metallic raceway or box then it needs to be AFCI protected and the only way to do that is to put in an AFCI recept--or go back and put in a combination breaker.

222-AHJ-SAYS ext 210.12

 

[david]

When I was in the artillery I was in a unit the 2nd of the 1st we were in brutal competition with a unit the 1st of the 1st

Ok I said it was a technical argument. And I was going to stay uninvolved in the discussion.

we do not need to try and define the receptacle a part of the branch circuit.

Someone maybe Ryan Stated recently that a code section has a charging statement . You have a statement saying All 120-volt, single phase, 15- and 20-ampere branch circuits supplying outlets

A technical argument is being made that in using the exception that states that the AFCI (receptacle) is only mandated to provide protection of the "rest of the branch circuit".
And in this thread there is only one outlet the mandate for AFCI at this only outlet is defeated because of the wording.

However one could make just as strong of a technical argument The mandate for AFCI protection is not defeated in neither the General rule or the exception.
Do you really have clear language to use the exception when the exception is only applicable to multi-outlet branch circuits.
In fact the exception says

?and the first outlet?

you cant have a first outlet unless you have a second outlet (multi- outlet)

So once again this becomes a technical argument You say the exception defeats the mandate for AFCI protection for a circuit supplying a single outlet. I can make the technical argument it does not and in fact the exception is not applicable to a branch circuit supplying a single out let

 

[david]

If I pull away from the technical argument and look at the rule and take a more reasonable approach I would say that the rule is requiring AFCI protection for the branch circuit at the panel. And in lue of that you could chose to install ACFI protection with a receptacle if the conductors? meet the mechanical protection criteria called out in the exception up to the point ( 1st outlet) that AFCI protection is provided.

either way as I stated before Mike Has a point that there is a problem with the way that the exception is worded. If we are going to hold Mike to the definitions in other threads to show in he is wrong lets not stray far away from that same standard in this thread

 

[david]

Just got back from doing a service inspection at the university

Thought about this while driving,

Let us say a multi-outlet branch circuit has the mechanical protection of the branch circuit conductors in a way describe in the exception . The circuit consist of one receptacle outlet and one light outlet. The light fixture will be a keyed fixture (pull Chain) to illuminate the confusion the switch will cause.
1). Using the exception can I supply the light fixture first then continue to the receptacle outlet.
Or must I supply the receptacle outlet first pick up the AFCI protection then supply my light outlet.

2) eliminate the receptacle as part of the equation.

Using the exception can I supply the single outlet (light fixture).

I contend that the answer is ether yes you can or no because the exception does not address single outlet branch circuits.
Either way the conclusion should be the same for a single outlet for a receptacle or a single outlet for a light fixture

 

[mjf]

instead of debating here when we all know the intent is to provide AFCI protection, just submit something to the "code makers" asking the wording to be clarified. Stop the nonsense.

 

[david]

instead of debating here when we all know the intent is to provide AFCI protection, just submit something to the "code makers" asking the wording to be clarified. Stop the nonsense.

There may be some truth to that, If discussions here need to limit themselves to what the intent of the code is rather then the content as written. If the intent was to provide Ark fault protection then that was accomplished with the Ark fault breaker. The intent seems to be to bring receptacle into the mix similar to the way it was done with GFCI receptacle. It is a little bit awkward thou with the Ark Fault receptacle.

 

[kwired]

instead of debating here when we all know the intent is to provide AFCI protection, just submit something to the "code makers" asking the wording to be clarified. Stop the nonsense.

Like clarifying it by omitting any use of the word "AFCI"