- Location
- New Jersey
- Occupation
- Journeyman Electrician
Inspectors conflicting
- Thread starter Fred B
- Start date
- Status
mwm1752
Senior Member
- Location
- Aspen, Colo
406.4(D)(4) give you direction and options to choose which AFCI protection method for replacement only - it states "receptacle outlet located in any areas specified in 210.12(A), (B), or (C)" does not say use the restrictions provided for those areas - IMO an AFCI receptacle is compliant in every replacement if chosen.
- Location
- Placerville, CA, USA
- Occupation
- Retired PV System Designer
Right. IMHO the method restrictions for the run from panel to first box, where the AFCI will be located, apply only to new circuits subject to AFCI requirements, not to device replacements or circuit extensions that trigger an AFCI requirement.
Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk
Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk
Last edited:
Fred B
Senior Member
- Location
- Upstate, NY
- Occupation
- Electrician
Would this section also apply to lighting additions if so how would you handle AFCI for that? Back to the panel or add an AFCI receptacle?
kwired
Electron manager
- Location
- NE Nebraska
I believe a new circuit
Yes it does and yes those are about your only choices unless they make a "blank face" AFCI that mounts in a device box like they do with GFCI's.
LarryFine
Master Electrician Electric Contractor Richmond VA
- Location
- Henrico County, VA
- Occupation
- Electrical Contractor
Or, mount one or several feed-through devices in boxes at the panel.
Fred B
Senior Member
- Location
- Upstate, NY
- Occupation
- Electrician
I was wondering about that, thought that might be an option just never tried to get that past. Would that also work for a mwbc past point of split in to 2 separate neutral?
LarryFine
Master Electrician Electric Contractor Richmond VA
- Location
- Henrico County, VA
- Occupation
- Electrical Contractor
Yes, but wouldn't qualify to protect the portion upstream of the split point.
Fred B
Senior Member
- Location
- Upstate, NY
- Occupation
- Electrician
This section of the codes still seems to be highly questioned or debated (even by inspectors). I heard that there was language added to the 2020 that was supposed to clear up some of the (mis)interpretations made by many of this section. Is that true? I don't have a 2020 to compare with, NYS just went 2017. Perhaps someone with access can share the wording from 2020 that supposedly makes it clearer. Or was that just a rumor?
Fred B
Senior Member
- Location
- Upstate, NY
- Occupation
- Electrician
Nobody on 2020? Or was there no changes?
The 2020 Code still gives you the 6 methods which you can protect a circuit, but like earlier additions, your best option is just to supply a new afci breaker.
Fred B
Senior Member
- Location
- Upstate, NY
- Occupation
- Electrician
I was curious as to what language had changed to clear some of the confusion about AFCI requirements, what I had heard was that the elements of the section was not changed but the language did to clarify the interpretation of the section of code. Or was I misinformed?
kwired
Electron manager
- Location
- NE Nebraska
One thing that did change relates to the 6 foot extension that doesn't require upgrading to AFCI - it says that six feet doesn't include conductors inside boxes or cabinets - or something to that effect. So when moving a panel you don't need to change to AFCI's if cable sheath added is no more than six feet.
Before it could be interpreted that if you had say 1.5 feet of free conductor in the old panel that you used as a splice box and had 2 feet of conductor in the new panel you could only relocate the new panel up to 2.5 feet away, now it is clear it can still be full six feet away even with additional conductor in the boxes/cabinets.
Does the 2020 NEC give a definition of modify? My NEC doesn't but, I don't have access to a 2020 codebook. I can see the wording being interpreted in multiple ways as well. They need to define "modify" in the NEC I think, for clarity.
If I were reading this, I would assume that as long as I didn't add or remove anything from the original circuits design and didn't extend its point of utilization by 6' or more, then I wouldn't need to bring an existing circuit up to current code.
Example: Existing circuit = 6 receps, 20 amp, #12 AWG and no EGC.
As long as all I did was change out the receptacle's or replaced wiring with newer wiring (12-2) and the replacement components had the same attributes as the original then, I wouldn't have extended or modified the circuit in anyway other than, added an equipment ground.
The circuit would still have all of the receps located in the same spots with, the same amount of receps, fused at the same current rating being conducted by a wire with the same ampere rating as before. All I would have done was change out old components with, new components and stuck with the original circuit by design.
The addition of the EGC would be the catch. As long as the NEC clearly defines "Modify" then it makes it pretty simple to me.
210.12(A) of (B), where branch-circuit wiring is modified, replaced, or extended, the branch circuit shall be protected by one of the following:
(1) A listed combination-type AFCI located at the origin of branch circuit......
I would say you modified the circuit by replacing the circuit wiring which is in the wording of the rule.
JAP>
- Status