Coalition meeting: alternatives to GFCI expansion to hardwired EVSE

B

brycenesbitt

Senior Member
Location
United States
The coalition (or at least one of them) preparing NITMAM's on the GFCI expansion in the 2026 code are meeting Tuesday. Get in touch via PM you're interested, or interested in helping the group who are mostly outside the "code making cognoscenti" :).


The association of home appliance manufactures is working on separate actions. PM if interested in either.
 
Off and running. The coalition met today, and is very much working the issue. Different members, different sections, but all trying to expose the awkwardness of the 2026 draft on EV charging.
 
NoahsArc said:
Requiring GFI for hardwire would be the NEC declaring boldly that it no longer cares about actual safety and is just a vehicle for manufacturers to make more money.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure how anyone with eyes could not see it already. There are people who believe in the Gospel of the code no matter how ridiculous the requirement or obvious the manufacturer influence. It's clear the NEC is a tool to hock products.
 
I think the issue is existing inverse time breaker's rated 35-60A like a typical 50A EVSE may not pull enough fault current (150A) to trip at 3X its rating within less than 7 seconds before burning up or blowing out the ECG path in the equipment. And that 50A breaker will allow a ground fault of 50 Amps to flow indefinitely.
If you want to have a serious conversation about ground fault protection of personnel from faulty equipment of any type, ranges, refrigerators, EVSE's, HVAC, there are three possible arguments against the GFCI requirements in the NEC .


First the CMP or AHJ will have to identify a allowable trip time, the amount of time a person can be exposed to a full ground fault path no matter what the protection type.
To pick a number I'd use the maximum published UL spec for a GFCI (not performance of products)
check me on this but I think its around a 7 second trip time for a 5 mA ground fault, so up to 6.9999 seconds someone in the ground fault path in could be exposed to the full available fault current of the branch circuit per the spec.
Then you'd have to agree no fault between 5 and 30 ma would be possible to personnel since equipment is grounded in the US per NEC 250, to a TN-C-S system.
  1. The main one would be arguing inverse time breakers are effective, it would be neat to see a serious presentation of one, but I dont have anything in support of that.
  2. A type 2 RCD breaker is acceptable a RCD will trip at no greater than 30ma in 300 milliseconds, over 200x faster than a GFCI. However a RCD will allow a leakage of ~25ma indefinitely. It also is a product that is manufactured today and works over 120V to ground.
  3. A GFPE breaker is acceptable it has a 30ma trip setting and will trip in 2 seconds at 150% or 45ma. It will allow a leakage of 29ma indefinitely, It also is a product that is manufactured today and I have not seen one for over 120V to ground.
  4. Or you could have UL invent products and specs that have not been ever made for each type of appliance, one for EVSE another for HVAC cords and wait till 2039 when manufacturers make all this stuff for just the US market.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top