2008 NEC Proposals and actions can be seen here

[Mike03a3]

Mike03a3
Try the garage GFCI for Skilsaws etc. that should still work. I agree about seeing safety as the prime goal but the cost is still another hit on the escalating cost of residential electrical systems. I have not seen a combination receptacle out in the field to date...Has anybody?

Unless I misread it, the 2008 code will require them in the garage as well.

 

[gndrod]

Mike,
That may be, like in other outlets other than the garage GFCI receptacle requirement that I do not think was pre-empted. Could be included in the combination receptacle scheduled for 2008 possibly. Power tools will trip at a lower threshold in the AFCI, whereas a GFCI will hold more reliably most of the time.

 

[k5brad]

How's the arc-fault for the whole house gonna turn out, where would I make toast? I dont know if I fully understand that change, other than it was a manufacturer of the arc-fault breakers idea. I have my flame suit on simply because I'm too lazy to fully research it right now.

 

[tom baker]

Too early to tell yet. We'll know when the comments come out. I feel its too big of a leap. We are still adding GFCI requirements for dwelling units, GFCI's were first required in the early 1970's, AFCIs only since 2002 NEC

 

[joe tedesco]

2008 ROC Actions, 110.16, 1-82 Rejection!

2008 ROC Actions, 110.16, 1-82 Rejection!

_____________________________________________________________​

1-54 Log #835 NEC-P0

Final Action: Accept​

(110.16)

​

​

_____________________________________________________________​

Submitter:​

Jim Pauley, Square D Company​

Comment on Proposal No:​

-82​

Recommendation:​

Reject this Proposal.​

Substantiation:​

Both the submitter’s language and that accepted by the panel​

is unnecessary. The current text of the NEC exempts the equipment in the
dwelling occupancy. Even in a multi-family installation, the panel that is within
the occupancy itself is not a significant arc flash concern. The current NEC
language would still apply the requirement to the service equipment (meter
center, switchboard, etc.) that supplies the dwelling unit panelboards.
Although many panelboards used even in dwelling units already have a
marking that warns against an arc flash hazard. Adding a specific requirement
to this section could encourage some AHJs to require a separate and distinct
label on the front of the enclosure. Given that these are often installed in the
living space, we are simply inviting the resident to paint over the label or
remove it because of the unpleasant aesthetics. The label adds no value in these
applications.​

Panel Meeting Action: Accept​

Panel Statement: ​

​

The panel does not necessarily agree with all of the​

submitters substantiation.

​

​

Number Eligible to Vote: 12​

Ballot Results: ​

​

Affirmative: Negative:​

Explanation of Negative:​

HICKMAN, P.: We are voting negative to the panel action to accept

Comment -54. Our explanation is as follows: The comment should have
been rejected. We support the panel action on Proposal -82 as written. The
submitter’s substantiation for Proposal -82 states: “Many dwellings have
services that are 400 amperes or more, and some services are located within
commercial occupancies where there are stores and dwelling units served
by the same electrical system.” We agree that the available fault currents in
multifamily dwellings could very well rival fault currents found in many
commercial and industrial applications. We feel that adding the 0. 6 marking
requirements would greatly enhance worker safety and awareness of potential
arc-flash hazards.
The substantiation provided in Comment -54 states: “many panelboards
used in dwelling units already have a marking that warns against an arc-flash
hazard.” We feel that marking the rest of the panelboards (other than the
“many” the submitter has identified as already being marked) makes sense.
Someone has already seen the need to do it. It makes sense to be consistent and
require that they all be marked, not just the ones that the comment submitter
recognizes as being done voluntarily.
The argument has been raised that adding an arc flash label on equipment
would diminish awareness because the labels would become commonplace
and, therefore, be ignored. I offer the analogy of a speed odometer in a vehicle.
While it could be argued that we should not bother to put speed odometers in
vehicles because they are ignored, it could also be argued that they are nice to
have when you need them.
Adding a label is inexpensive in both terms of cost of the label and
manpower to apply it. With such a huge upside for safety, there seems little
reason not to add this requirement.
___________________________________​

​

​

 

[joe tedesco]

How's the arc-fault for the whole house gonna turn out, where would I make toast? I dont know if I fully understand that change, other than it was a manufacturer of the arc-fault breakers idea. I have my flame suit on simply because I'm too lazy to fully research it right now.

:smile: HERE"S THE FINAL TEXT IN THE 2008 NEC:

Chapter 2 Wiring and Protection :: ARTICLE 210 Branch Circuits :: I. General Provisions

70-2008:210.12(210.1-210.18)702008210.12 Arc-Fault Circuit-Interrupter Protection.


(A) Definition: Arc-Fault Circuit Interrupter (AFCI). A device intended to provide protection from the effects of arc faults by recognizing characteristics unique to arcing and by functioning to de-energize the circuit when an arc fault is detected.


(B) 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.


Changed From 2005
?

210.12(B): Expanded AFCI protection requirements to include all outlets supplied by 15- and 20-ampere, 120-volt branch circuits installed in family rooms, dining rooms, living rooms, parlors, libraries, dens, bedrooms, sunrooms, recreation rooms, closets, hallways, or similar rooms or areas, and deleted effective date on use of branch/feeder AFCIs.


FPN No. 1: For information on types of arc-fault circuit interrupters, see UL 1699-1999, Standard for Arc-Fault Circuit Interrupters.


FPN No. 2: See 11.6.3(5) of NFPA 72?-2007, National Fire Alarm Code?, for information related to secondary power supply requirements for smoke alarms installed in dwelling units.


FPN No. 3: See 760.41(B) and 760.121(B) for power-supply requirements for fire alarm systems.


Exception No. 1: Where RMC, IMC, EMT or steel armored cable, Type AC, meeting the requirements of 250.118 using metal outlet and junction boxes is installed for the portion of the branch circuit between the branch-circuit overcurrent device and the first outlet, it shall be permitted to install a combination AFCI at the first outlet to provide protection for the remaining portion of the branch circuit.


Changed From 2005
?

210.12(B) Exception No. 1: Revised exception to permit branch-circuit conductors without AFCI protection from the panelboard to the first outlet if conductors are installed in rigid RMC, IMC, EMT, or steel AC cable for that portion of the circuit and the remaining portion is protected by a combination AFCI.


Exception No. 2: Where a branch circuit to a fire alarm system installed in accordance with 760.41(B) and 760.121(B) is installed in RMC, IMC, EMT, or steel armored cable, Type AC, meeting the requirements of 250.118, with metal outlet and junction boxes, AFCI protection shall be permitted to be omitted.


Changed From 2005
?

210.12(B) Exception No. 2: Added exception to permit omission of AFCI protection for conductors of an individual branch circuit supplying a fire alarm system that are installed in RMC, IMC, EMT, or steel AC cable.