AFCI enforcement in Michigan

[K8MHZ]

A discussion an another thread prompted some research on my part. A telephone call to our Bureau of Construction Codes revealed the following:

On Feb 8th, 2016, arc-fault circuit interruption devices will NOT be required on ANY circuit in 1- and 2-family dwellings and townhouses not more than 3 stories above grade plane in heightwith a separate means of egress and their accessory structures. per the Michigan Residential Code, Chapter 8.

http://www.michigan.gov/documents/lara/lara_bcc_2015_residential_code_502813_7.pdf

Arc-fault protection will be required as per the NEC's specs on other structures as covered by the Michigan Electrical Code.

But, hold on to your hat, the relief for 1 & 2 family dwellings, etc., is now under fire with HB 5123.

HOUSE BILL No. 5123

December 8, 2015, Introduced by Reps. Geiss, Goike, Cochran, Yanez, Hovey-Wright, Howrylak and Price and referred to the Committee on Regulatory Reform.

A bill to amend 1972 PA 230, entitled

"Stille-DeRossett-Hale single state construction code act,"

(MCL 125.1501 to 125.1531) by adding section 4a.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN ENACT:

SEC. 4A. (1) ALL BRANCH CIRCUITS THAT SUPPLY 120-VOLT, SINGLE-

PHASE, 15- AND 20-AMPERE OUTLETS SHALL BE PROTECTED BY A

COMBINATION TYPE OR BRANCH/FEEDER TYPE ARC-FAULT CIRCUIT

INTERRUPTER INSTALLED TO PROVIDE PROTECTION OF THE ENTIRE BRANCH

CIRCUIT. HOWEVER, THE LOCATION OF THE ARC-FAULT CIRCUIT INTERRUPTER

SHALL BE PERMITTED TO BE AT OTHER THAN THE ORIGINATION OF THE

BRANCH CIRCUIT IF BOTH OF THE FOLLOWING APPLY:

(A) THE ARC-FAULT CIRCUIT INTERRUPTER IS INSTALLED WITHIN 6



FEET (1.8 M) OF THE BRANCH CIRCUIT OVERCURRENT DEVICE AS MEASURED

ALONG THE BRANCH CIRCUIT CONDUCTORS.

(B) THE CIRCUIT CONDUCTORS BETWEEN THE BRANCH CIRCUIT

OVERCURRENT DEVICE AND THE ARC-FAULT CIRCUIT INTERRUPTER ARE

INSTALLED IN A METAL RACEWAY OR A CABLE WITH A METALLIC SHEATH.

(2) SUBSECTION (1) IS ADOPTED AS MODIFICATION OF THE RELEVANT

PROVISIONS OF THE INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE.

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(l4...ge=getobject&objectname=2015-HB-5123&query=on

So far, all that has happened was that the bill was read and has now been referred to the Committee on Regulatory Reform.

However, even AFTER Feb 8th, if HB 5123 makes it into law, it will trump the MRC exemption.

This will be interesting to follow, as I would hazard that none of the politicians voting know anything at all about AFCIs or anything electrical for that matter.

The proposed bill states that ALL BRANCH CIRCUITS will require AFCI's, no exceptions.

This will be interesting to watch.

 

[al hildenbrand]

The proposed bill states that ALL BRANCH CIRCUITS will require AFCI's, no exceptions.

This will be interesting to watch.

My my! They are proposing moving to the 2017 210.12 ahead of the rest of the country.

 

[K8MHZ]

My my! They are proposing moving to the 2017 210.12 ahead of the rest of the country.

How much do you want to bet the author of the bill has no idea what the 2017 NEC even is. My guess it was written up to include all outlets to make it simpler and sound better and more safer.

 

[al hildenbrand]

How much do you want to bet the author of the bill has no idea what the 2017 NEC even is.

You're probably right.

What intrigues me is that they don't care if the AFCI is Combination or Branch-Feeder. :jawdrop: :slaphead:

 

[K8MHZ]

You're probably right.

What intrigues me is that they don't care if the AFCI is Combination or Branch-Feeder. :jawdrop: :slaphead:

Probably because they don't know the difference.

 

[mbrooke]

How much do you want to bet the author of the bill has no idea what the 2017 NEC even is. My guess it was written up to include all outlets to make it simpler and sound better and more safer.

Well there is a plus. Its says outlets, so anything like lighting and hard wired equipment could be exempt. However the guys who are proposing this seem to have no idea what they are actually trying to put into law.

 

[al hildenbrand]

Its says outlets, so anything like lighting and hard wired equipment could be exempt.

Respectfully, maybe the drink is a little strong? "Outlet" is the all encompassing term from Article 100 Definitions.

 

[peter d]

I hope this reversal of the AFCI rules remains in place in Michigan.

 

[al hildenbrand]

Its says outlets, so anything like lighting and hard wired equipment could be exempt.

More to the point, they are trying to say, "All 120-volt, single phase, 15- and 20-ampere branch circuits supplying outlets" as stated in 210.12.

The proposed Michigan statute language is severely fractured in that attempt, saying, " ALL BRANCH CIRCUITS THAT SUPPLY 120-VOLT, SINGLE-PHASE, 15- AND 20-AMPERE OUTLETS" whatever that means.

 

[iwire]

Well there is a plus. Its says outlets, so anything like lighting and hard wired equipment could be exempt.

You need to take a look at what an outlet is in article 100.

 

[mbrooke]

Respectfully, maybe the drink is a little strong? "Outlet" is the all encompassing term from Article 100 Definitions.

Indeed it is. Rather worse then I thought.

 

[al hildenbrand]

Indeed it is.

......................

 

[mbrooke]

......................

What would that point be though for a desiccated home run?

 

[al hildenbrand]

What would that point be though for a desiccated home run?

:blink: Ahh. . . see Post # 9?

 

[mbrooke]

:blink: Ahh. . . see Post # 9?

But outlet refers to "a point", Id think that would be like a Jbox or receptacle. A dedicated circuit panel to appliance has no jbox other then what might be included within the appliance for hard wiring.

 

[al hildenbrand]

But outlet refers to "a point", Id think that would be like a Jbox or receptacle. A dedicated circuit panel to appliance has no jbox other then what might be included within the appliance for hard wiring.

"A point" is better read as "a point on the wiring system". See also Lighting Outlet and Receptacle Outlet and you see that they are both "outlet"s.

Outlet is worded to include Knob & Tube Lighting Outlets that traditionally had no box at all. It is a very old definition.

 

[peter d]

Can we focus on the AFCI issue rather than the definition of an outlet?

 

[al hildenbrand]

Can we focus on the AFCI issue rather than the definition of an outlet?

Given that the proposed statute language is only for 15 A and 20 A outlets, definition is prime. What about an outlet at the smoke detector, a detector that is only .01 A?

 

[GoldDigger]

Given that the proposed statute language is only for 15 A and 20 A outlets, definition is prime. What about an outlet at the smoke detector, a detector that is only .01 A?

No outlet too small?
I think that the original NEC wording contained the 15 and 20 amp figures in order to exempt larger circuits, not to ignore smaller ones.
You can get fuses smaller than 15A, but not AFCI or GFCI breakers, so even your smoke will be at a minimum of 15A outlet.

 

[mbrooke]

"A point" is better read as "a point on the wiring system". See also Lighting Outlet and Receptacle Outlet and you see that they are both "outlet"s.

Outlet is worded to include Knob & Tube Lighting Outlets that traditionally had no box at all. It is a very old definition.

Guess there is no way out.

Can we focus on the AFCI issue rather than the definition of an outlet?

I just hope those in Michigan dont have to.