225.31 Outside circuits

[celtic]

Why not,they require afci breakers and none that do whats required have been made yet

"They" do not live in NJ...we are ahead of the curve, the other 49 can be the "control" for the AFCI experiment...AFCI's are optional here

 

[DaveTap]

Either 2 pole or a 60 amp pull out.Why is a receptacle or switch ok as disconnect for garbage disposal but not here ?Its the same switch.

My guess is because the feeder disconnecting means is in a seperate (possibly inacessable) building... remember they are treating this as main service disconnect for the detached building.
What I'm curious about is why they allow a 15 amp for a single circuit but then jump to 30 amps for 2 circuits. (Is a multi-wire branch circuit counted as one or 2 circuits here?)
So if you have a detached garage and want to run a 15 amp lighting circuit and say a 20 amp for a GFCI you need a 30 amp disconnect? I'll stick to my standard installation of a 100amp MBR panel in the garage... then run outdoor lighting circuit on 15amp 3-way back to house. Its only a few bucks more anyway and the customer can plug in his welder and compressor no problem.

 

[Jim W in Tampa]

"They" do not live in NJ...we are ahead of the curve, the other 49 can be the "control" for the AFCI experiment...AFCI's are optional here

Isn't that sorta a time bomb ? If someone dies and its proven an afci would have saved them how will they defend this in court ? Its a willfull endangerment of the public.Why exactly did they remove them ?They work fine in the other 49.

 

[iwire]

Isn't that sorta a time bomb ? If someone dies and its proven an afci would have saved them how will they defend this in court ?

Jim any state with amendments changes the code.

We have about 70 amendments, some tighten and some loosen the rules.

 

[celtic]

These are all good and valid questions.
I'll try and address each one...

Isn't that sorta a time bomb ?

Quite possible, yes.

If someone dies and its proven an afci would have saved them how will they defend this in court ? Its a willfull endangerment of the public.

That's a good question...and people HAVE died in Flanders, NJ:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4088103852863064062&q=AFCI

I don't know the actual date of the video, seems to have been posted 8/10/2006.

When RE is transferred in NJ there is a CCO inspection. The top of the list (for us ECs) is usually GFIs in bath/kit/exterior and bubbles on ext. The state may have to re-evaluate the critera and include AFCI in the requirements...but that will happen only AFTER the state has accepted the requirements of 210.12...and will only effect homes that are going through a sale...Aunt Molly who has lived in her home for the past 76 years is on her own...as are the newly married Jack and Jill w/their newborn who bought their home prior to any changes in the CO/CCO requirements.

The question that needs to be answered is:
Why only in bedrooms, why not everywhere not in condradiction of 210.8?

Why exactly did they remove them ?

As I recall, there was recall of AFCIs... (http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml05/05035c.html)

If the ACFI is not functioning as it should, what's the point in even buying it?
In NJ's adaption of the '02, AFCI was completely deleted
For '05, it's "optional", which *should* put the onus on the HO - but as an EC we should perform our due diligence and at the very least offer these products to the end user in writing requiring their signature.
That's all well and good..BUT, in the case of a multi-unit, multi-story property w/o commitments from buyers (HO) who decides? The GC, architect, builder, etc?
It's a tough question.

They work fine in the other 49.

...but not always:
...recall of AFCIs... (http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml05/05035c.html)

*****
Don't get me wrong here people....I am in FAVOR of AFCI protection - protecting all circuits not mentioned in 210.8.

Watch the video .....
...maybe this tangent needs it's own thread?

 

[celtic]

As a footnote....you can check for recalls on a host of items here:
http://www.recalls.gov/search.html

 

[stickboy1375]

(Is a multi-wire branch circuit counted as one or 2 circuits here?)
So if you have a detached garage and want to run a 15 amp lighting circuit and say a 20 amp for a GFCI you need a 30 amp disconnect? I'll stick to my standard installation of a 100amp MBR panel in the garage... then run outdoor lighting circuit on 15amp 3-way back to house. Its only a few bucks more anyway and the customer can plug in his welder and compressor no problem.

Multi-wire branch circuit is counted as 1 circuit.

I think I will just start installing a 2 pole switch for my disconnect....

 

[George Stolz]

Originally Posted by allenwayne
George wouldn`t you need some type of handle tie to break both conductors on a MWBC if toggle switches are used ?

Yes, 225.33(B) requires that.

I'm feeling a little slow tonight.

225.33(B) Single-Pole Units. Two or three single-pole switches or breakers capable of individual operation shall be permitted on multiwire circuits, one pole for each ungrounded conductor, as one multipole disconnect, provided they are equipped with handle ties or a master handle to disconnect all ungrounded conductors with no more than six operations of the hand.

Wouldn't two single pole switches without handle ties disconnect all ungrounded conductors with less than six throws of the hand?

 

[allenwayne]

George I think the intent of that last article in your post is to ensure that the ungrounded conductors in a MWBC are opened together.To make sure that one isn`t left energized by mistake.Same as a handle tie is required on 1 pole cb`s in a MWBC.

 

[George Stolz]

A handle tie is required by 210.4 and 210.7 if two legs of a MWBC or two seperate circuits terminate on a single device.

A MWBC may supply seperate receptacles without handle ties.

I just woke up, so I'm still feeling slow.

 

[jwelectric]

I think I will just start installing a 2 pole switch for my disconnect....

I can?t find a section that will allow a multi pole switch for the disconnecting means.

225.36 Suitable for Service Equipment.
The disconnecting means specified in 225.31 shall be suitable for use as service equipment.
Exception: For garages and outbuildings on residential property, a snap switch or a set of 3-way or 4-way snap switches shall be permitted as the disconnecting means.

All I see in the exception is single pole, three way and four way switches. Everything else is required to be suitable as service equipment.

A handle tie is required by 210.4 and 210.7 if two legs of a MWBC or two seperate circuits terminate on a single device.

A MWBC may supply seperate receptacles without handle ties.

I just woke up, so I'm still feeling slow.

I think that this is about to change.

 

[iwire]

225.36 Suitable for Service Equipment.
The disconnecting means specified in 225.31 shall be suitable for use as service equipment.
Exception: For garages and outbuildings on residential property, a snap switch or a set of 3-way or 4-way snap switches shall be permitted as the disconnecting means.

All I see in the exception is single pole, three way and four way switches.

Did you leave something out?

I don't see single pole at all.

All I see is an exception that allows a snap switch or a set of three and four way switches.

A 'snap switch' could be two or three poles.