AFCI Coverage

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

MVanB

Member
Location
SF Bay Area
Section 210.12 (B) states: All 120 volt, single phase, 15 and 20 ampere branch circuits supplying outlets installed in dwelling unit bedrooms shall be protected by a listed arc-fault circuit interrupter, combination type installed to provide protection of the branch circuit.

Looking for clarification (interpretation) of the above reference.
Does a 'dwelling unit bedroom' as stated above include the closet space off the bedroom?
 
In my opinion the closet is not part of the bedroom. However that opinion is not shared by others, and it would not really make any difference in the project cost to tie the circuits that serve the closet outlet(s) to the AFCI protected bedroom circuit.
Note that the expansion of the AFCI rule for the 2008 code specifically includes closets.
(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.
Click to expand...
 
Pretty much every room in the house with the exception of the kitchen, bathrooms, and garage are now covered in 2008. Depending on where you live. Might as well throw the closet in there too.
 
look at it this way, if a bed and be moved in and used in a room, arc fault it.
Also it doesn't just have to be an outlet circuit. Any circuit that enters a room ie. lts, outlets, smoke detectors (at least in VT) except like above post about bathrooms and kitchens and I think thats coming soon
 
RJohnsonMasterElectrician said:
look at it this way, if a bed and be moved in and used in a room, arc fault it.
Also it doesn't just have to be an outlet circuit. Any circuit that enters a room ie. lts, outlets, smoke detectors (at least in VT) except like above post about bathrooms and kitchens and I think thats coming soon
Click to expand...
I don't agree that any circuit that enters the room requires AFCI protection. The AFCI protection is only required for circuits that supply outlets in the room.
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
I don't agree that any circuit that enters the room requires AFCI protection. The AFCI protection is only required for circuits that supply outlets in the room.
Click to expand...

I remember that was a common myth-conception when AFCIs first hit the market. I recall being told if a circuit went through or passed by a bedroom, it had to be AFCI'd, even if it didn't supply anything in that room.

Some inspectors had that in their heads, and we spent mookoo bucks loading panels up with AFCIs back in those days.
 
I am of the persuasion that the closet space, whether immediately off the Bedroom or separated by a Bathroom (such as with a Master suite) would be representative of the rule dwelling unit bedroom.
It seems to me the intent, which I understand is based on studies showing that a higher percentage of house fires pointed toward issues related to bedroom branch circuits, is to reduce the # of electrical related house fires where the occupant spends the most amount of time.
That being said, an electrical contractor associate I know of insists on placing outlets w/o AFCI circuit protection in the bedroom closet spaces. None of the AHJ's in his area have required him to tie those outlets with the protected bedroom outlets. I am left scratching my head because we know how an occupant can load up a closet outlet just as much as those in the physical bedroom space, even more so! I mean, c'mon if it is req'd in the bedroom why would one look the other way and purposely install unprotected outlets in the bedroom closets, unless it is a dedicted purpose outlet for an alarm system, etc.:confused:
I suppose it's a matter of one's approach to the letter of the rule rather than the spirit of the rule and the having to continue to spell things out, such as with the 2008 code change.
 
MVanB said:
.....It seems to me the intent, which I understand is based on studies showing that a higher percentage of house fires pointed toward issues related to bedroom branch circuits, is to reduce the # of electrical related house fires where the occupant spends the most amount of time. .........
Click to expand...

When AFCIs first came out, I wondered why the bedrooms were targeted, and someone told my exactly what you stated here.

Only problem is, the reason most people spend the most time in the bedrooms of their homes is because they are asleep. How does sleeping cause more electrical fires?
 
This issue was just brought up about a GFCI in a toilet only room. It seems to me that a closet that is accessed only via the BR is part of the BRand a Toilet enclosed in a private "stall" room is still part of the bathroom.

A closet that is a walk-in with 2 points of entry I would consider a seperate room unless the other room dead ends into another single entry BR or a Bathroom.

I guess what I am trying to get at is if the area in question is dependent upon the room in which it resides for access, then it is part of that room.

A Master Bath attached to a BR would not be included into this reasoning due to the fact that Bathrooms are defined and detailed elsewhere in the code.

I may be wrong, but this is how I see it.
 
When Washington State adopted the 2008 NEC, it threw out the 2008 AFCI rule, limiting AFCI's to bedrooms only. But then it defined "bedroom" in such a way as to explicitly include the bedroom closet. The phrase is something like, "areas that are ancillary to the bedroom's function or that can be reached only through the bedroom."
 
charlie b said:
When Washington State adopted the 2008 NEC, it threw out the 2008 AFCI rule, limiting AFCI's to bedrooms only. But then it defined "bedroom" in such a way as to explicitly include the bedroom closet. The phrase is something like, "areas that are ancillary to the bedroom's function or that can be reached only through the bedroom."
Click to expand...

That basically will force the inclusing of many a master bath.
 
MVanB said:
...It seems to me the intent, which I understand is based on studies showing that a higher percentage of house fires pointed toward issues related to bedroom branch circuits, is to reduce the # of electrical related house fires where the occupant spends the most amount of time.
Click to expand...
That is not correct. The only thing that really dove picking the bedrooms as the first place to require AFCI protection was the fact that they needed a place to start and bedrooms don't have a lot of loads that may cause issues with the AFCIs. It was really a large beta field test for devices. As far as a higher percentage of electrical fires being traced to the bedroom circuits, that is not correct. More fire deaths do occur in the bedroom, but the majority of fires do not have the point of origin in the bedroom.
The 8% of home structure fires originating in the bedroom caused 24% of the civilian deaths and 21% of the civilian injuries.​
Click to expand...
The above is from this document.
 
charlie b said:
When Washington State adopted the 2008 NEC, it threw out the 2008 AFCI rule, limiting AFCI's to bedrooms only. But then it defined "bedroom" in such a way as to explicitly include the bedroom closet. The phrase is something like, "areas that are ancillary to the bedroom's function or that can be reached only through the bedroom."
Click to expand...

480sparky said:
That basically will force the inclusing of many a master bath.
Click to expand...

cycotcskir said:
Wouldn't it seem that since bathrooms are included elsewhere in the NEC, they would still follow those requirements.
Click to expand...

480sparky said:
Bathroom are not listed in 210.12.
Click to expand...


I have bolded my statement above.

CharlieB said "...ancillary rooms", you included master baths. My comment says that because Bathrooms are a location handled elsewhere, that they would fall under the rules that are specific to that classification of a location.

I am confused at how it matters that there is no mention of Baths in 210.12

If a bath happens to be ancillary to a BR, then one could think that it should be included (based on CharlieB's first post), but since baths are handled specifically elsewhere (210.8, 210.11, etc) they shouldn't.

General rules apply, but something specific overrules it
 
cycotcskir said:
I am confused at how it matters that there is no mention of Baths in 210.12
Click to expand...
It matters because the topic of discussion is AFCI, and AFCI is addressed only in 210.12. Bathrooms may be addressed elsewhere, but those other article(s) would not have anything to do with AFCI protection.
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
That is not correct. The only thing that really dove picking the bedrooms as the first place to require AFCI protection was the fact that they needed a place to start and bedrooms don't have a lot of loads that may cause issues with the AFCIs. It was really a large beta field test for devices. As far as a higher percentage of electrical fires being traced to the bedroom circuits, that is not correct. More fire deaths do occur in the bedroom, but the majority of fires do not have the point of origin in the bedroom.
Click to expand...

Without any conversation or research, I figured that they probably started in the BR because people that are asleep may be less likely to notice a burning receptacle. In other rooms where people tend to be awake, they are more likely to hear arcing or smell burning.

This was my guess.

Are you stating this from firsthand knowledge or documentation? If so, I will store the info in my brain in the FACT section rather than where the info I stated above was, in the WHO KNOWS...MAYBE section.
 
charlie b said:

It matters because the topic of discussion is AFCI, and AFCI is addressed only in 210.12. Bathrooms may be addressed elsewhere, but those other article(s) would not have anything to do with AFCI protection.
Click to expand...

Your WA code says ancillary rooms, but then you said that it specifically excludes Bathrooms. I presume the reason is because someone may attempt to claim a bathroom as part of a BR if it is ancillary.

My claim was that that isn't needed because ancillary or not, a bathroom is specifically defined elsewhere. It is just a redundancy, to me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top