2-76 Log #687 NEC-P02 Final Action: Reject
(210.12)
________________________________________________________________
Submitter: Robert Huddleston, Jr., RLH Engineering Consulting
Recommendation: Revise text to read as follows:
210.12(A): All 120-volt, single phase, 15- and 20-ampere branch circuits
supplying outlets…shall be protected by a listed arc-fault circuit interrupter,
combination-type, installed to provide parallel arc fault protection of the branch
circuit.
210.12(B): Branch Circuit Extensions or Modifications – Dwelling Units. (1)
A listed combination-type AFCI located at the origin of the branch circuit.
Substantiation: A CD shall be provided to each Code-panel Principal Voting
Member showing actual real-world testing of combination-type AFCIs. This
testing clearly demonstrates and proves that these devices do not trip when
sensing a real-world series arc-fault, as they are advertised. Regardless of the
type of series arc fault (loose connection, broken wire, damaged cord, junction
box splice failure), combination-type AFCI devices do not trip and provide
protection even though they claim to provide such. Please view the Powerpoint
presentation on the CD and click on the imbedded video for testing results. It is
completely inappropriate for the National Electrical Code to specify and
require equipment that does not work properly. It is sincerely hoped that the
Panel will correct this issue.
Note: Supporting material is available for review at NFPA Headquarters.
Panel Meeting Action: Reject
Panel Statement: Replication of the experiments shown in the video shows
that there is minimal actual arcing occurring. When arcing does occur, causing
the sparking seen in the video, its duration is very short and the energy is three
orders of magnitude below what is required to ignite the NM cable or
surrounding materials.
The waveform looks the same as when a wall switch is switched on and off.
If the AFCI responded to this waveform it would increase the incidence of
unwanted tripping while not contributing significantly to mitigating fire hazards.
Number Eligible to Vote: 11
Ballot Results: Affirmative: 10 Abstain: 1
Explanation of Abstention:
ORLOWSKI, S.: See my Explanation of Vote on Proposal 2-92.