625.43 - EVSE Emergency Disconnect - 2026 NEC Changes

[brycenesbitt]

I don't understand the link to that public comment. The language in the 2026 code does not require an emergency disconnect for one and two family dwellings. It appears that all the PC was asking was to eliminate the emergency disconnect for one and two family dwellings.

The language changed
The real issue I have with e-Stop is twofold: for multifamily garages which got forgotten,
and for public fast charging because of the manual reset requirement.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

The language changed
The real issue I have with e-Stop is twofold: for multifamily garages which got forgotten,
and for public fast charging because of the manual reset requirement.

All E-stop type systems need to have a manual reset for safety. I understand the issue with a malicious push of the emergency shut down button, and since this is really only for first responders, the button should be in a knoxbox type enclosure. However that would need the approval of the local AHJ or a code change.

As far as multifamily garages, I am not sure that EV charging should even be permitted in a multifamily garage where the garage is part of the residential building. There is a serious potential issue, and that is illustrated by one of the major insurers in the US taking action last year to remove all EV chargers from their parking garages and place them in open outside parking areas.

 

[ActionDave]

I am not sure that EV charging should even be permitted in a multifamily garage where the garage is part of the residential building. There is a serious potential issue, and that is illustrated by one of the major insurers in the US taking action last year to remove all EV chargers from their parking garages and place them in open outside parking areas.

Insurance companies will do anything and everything to avoid paying a claim. It doesn't matter how remote the possibility of an incident, only how definable it is. There may be a hundred other things that are harder to define or enforce and more likely to cause a fire that will never be moved outside.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Insurance companies will do anything and everything to avoid paying a claim. It doesn't matter how remote the possibility of an incident, only how definable it is. There may be a hundred other things that are harder to define or enforce and more likely to cause a fire that will never be moved outside.

This was at their own facilities, they have not extend that rule to their insured properties, as far as I know. I expect,based on claims, the insurance companies have better knowledge than any other organization on these types of issues.

 

[TwistLock]

“ The disconnecting means shall be lockable open… “. Isn’t the shunt only a means to trip breaker but breaker still can be switched back on. Are there shunt trips that won’t allow manual reset of breaker (?)

 

[don_resqcapt19]

“ The disconnecting means shall be lockable open… “. Isn’t the shunt only a means to trip breaker but breaker still can be switched back on. Are there shunt trips that won’t allow manual reset of breaker (?)

This thread is about the emergency shutoff in 625.43(D) and not the equipment disconnect in 625.43(C). The lockable open language is found in (C), but not in (D).

The rule for the emergency shutoff would permit a shunt trip, as turning the breaker back on after the shunt trip device has opened it, is a manual reset. All manual reset means is that some physical action must be taken to restore power. The act of turning the breaker back on is a physical action.

 

[TwistLock]

Ah, referenced the 2023 by mistake.