Standards Council Meeting August 18th -- Appeal on GFCI reach

[brycenesbitt]

Motor Trend, where I get most of my breaking news on circuit protection just released:

https://www.motortrend.com/news/national-electric-code-revision-threatens-ev-charging

"Cross your fingers and say a little prayer for the industry cognoscenti to make a convincing case."

"That addition to the NEC didn’t last long. In August, the NFPA Standards Council made the rare decision to override the code-making panel based on an appeal that had support from Honda, GM, Ford, Rivian, ChargePoint, Emporia, and the auto-industry standards organization SAE International, among others.

The person who made that public comment later said on a podcast that he had made the proposal as a joke, and he ultimately submitted a second public comment asking the code-making panel to reverse its actions."

I'd say it lasted quite long, given the lack of substantiation.
It was a nail biter over here.

 

[WD40]

Side question what is a 'SPGFCI' ? I have seen that referenced a few times and ask at my supply house and they have never herd of such a breaker.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Side question what is a 'SPGFCI' ? I have seen that referenced a few times and ask at my supply house and they have never herd of such a breaker.

It is a Special Purpose Ground Fault Interrupter. However it is not a breaker. It is a large and costly stand alone device that provides protection at 20 mA and can be used on circuits where the voltage to ground exceeds 150 volts.

 

[ActionDave]

It is a Special Purpose Ground Fault Interrupter. However it is not a breaker. It is a large and costly stand alone device that provides protection at 20 mA and can be used on circuits where the voltage to ground exceeds 150 volts.

Why this exists is so annoying to me when we already have RCD in use all over the rest of the world. (insert heavy sigh and downward facing shaking head emoticon here)

 

[hbiss]

The GFCI requirement had been written into code based on a public comment that lacked the necessary technical justification for the change. The person who made that public comment later said on a podcast that he had made the proposal as a joke...

I rest my case. We have idiots writing code.

-Hal

 

[brycenesbitt]

Why this exists is so annoying to me when we already have RCD in use all over the rest of the world. (insert heavy sigh and downward facing shaking head emoticon here)

But the RCD MCB's are widely available, low cost, made by a bunch of vendors, easy to wire, flexible and have low stand by power consumption, and feature arc chutes to contain sparks even if they trip at full load. Why would we want that commie stuff in the USA ?

 

[don_resqcapt19]

But the RCD MCB's are widely available, low cost, made by a bunch of vendors, easy to wire, flexible and have low stand by power consumption, and feature arc chutes to contain sparks even if they trip at full load. Why would we want that commie stuff in the USA ?

They are made by the same vendors that make GFCIs, and are no easier to wire than a GFCI. All breakers have arc chutes to contain the sparks when they open under load.
It is these same vendors that are driving the push for GFCIs and SPGFCIs.

CORRECTION the breaker manufacturers do not manufacture SPGFCIs

 

[brycenesbitt]

There are a much larger number of UL 1077 MCB vendors compared to UL 489 breaker vendors. The MCB arc chute design is quite sophisticated.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

much larger number of UL 1077 MCB vendors

How many are actually owned by the major manufacturers? What is used for the actual overcurrent protection as UL 1077 is not branch circuit protection.

 

[brycenesbitt]

Update:

Whoa, you did it! Good job.

Update:
The August decision on William Snyder's Public Input for article GFCI mandates in article 625.54 specified that:

The record reflects technical disagreement that warrants further consideration. Therefore, the Council
directs NFPA staff to establish a balanced task group to review the technical issues raised in this appeal in
order to identify any safety concerns, identify any risk, and to determine whether a Tentative Interim
Amendment (TIA) may be appropriate.

The balanced task group has been formed, and meets December 3rd for the first time. I believe that the meeting is open to outside observers, at least someone I know got the Teams link from the NFPA on request.

Representatives were invited at least from:

Ford

Tesla

Siemens

IEBW

UL

SAE

Intertek

Eaton

EV Plugbox LLC

 

[brycenesbitt]

The first meeting of the 625.54 emergency amendment balanced task group was today.
Observers were indeed allowed, and even invited to an introductory statement.