Panel change/AHJ wants AFCI/GFCI breakers on all single pole circuits....

Status
Not open for further replies.
D

D Electric

Member
Location
IL
Occupation
Residential electrician
Getting ready to do a panel change for a customer. We usually do AFCI breakers on all single pole circuits, but AHJ is telling me we now need to use combo AFCI/GFCI breakers on all single pole circuits due to recent amendments to code. I know the 2020 NEC requires dual protection for kitchens, bedrooms, hallways, laundry areas, finished basements and dishwashers, but does it make sense to have them for ALL single pole circuits?
 
Start with 210.12. As far as the NEC is concerned there are a few SP circuits that do not require AF protection and 210.12(D) spells out when such protection is needed when circuits are extended such as some panel change outs.
There is no NEC requiremetns that would necessitate AF on ALL SP circuits in a normal residential situations but LOCAL codes may have such requirements.
 
ptonsparky said:
No, it doesn’t make sense for ALL, but it is heading that way. MWBC will be a problem.

Ask nicely for a code reference.
Click to expand...
I will do that, but I am also going to bid the job accordingly. Went over the existing panel, and didn't see any MWBC's, so I think I'm good there. They don't require us to rectify existing wiring for the AFCI breakers unless it's listed as part of the job scope. I just hope the customer doesn't get sticker shock....😁....they specifically asked for Square D QO.
 
D Electric said:
I will do that, but I am also going to bid the job accordingly. Went over the existing panel, and didn't see any MWBC's, so I think I'm good there. They don't require us to rectify existing wiring for the AFCI breakers unless it's listed as part of the job scope. I just hope the customer doesn't get sticker shock....😁....they specifically asked for Square D QO.
Click to expand...
You don't even have to use AFCI breakers on a panel change unless you extend the circuits more than 6' or local amendments require it.
 
It sounds to me like the OP is saying they're already accustomed to putting arc fault breakers on all the single poles, but now the inspector is adding the requirement for ground fault protection also.

Asking about a price difference between arc fault breakers vs dual-function breakers? I think it's negligible.

If you are already doing afci, why not go dual-function?
 
All the locations you noted for 2020 do not require dual function protection? Would the interior branch circuits be without an EGC?
 
D Electric said:
Local amendment to NEC. Job went well, but we had to use a standard breaker for the furnace. They had an older unit that doesn't play well with the AFCI.
Click to expand...
And as NEC is written furnace typically would not require AFCI or GFCI. AFCI would be required if installed in any the rooms mentioned in 210.12, but building codes usually won't allow that for a gas fired central furnace, unit heaters are a different story.

GFCI would normally only come into play if it happened to be supplied by cord and plug, which would normally be pretty rare to even be allowed.
 
D Electric said:
Local amendment to NEC. Job went well, but we had to use a standard breaker for the furnace. They had an older unit that doesn't play well with the AFCI.
Click to expand...
Illinois historically made building safety codes after village idiots burned things down.

IIRC amendments prohibiting locking employees in buildings, and prohibiting Romex in dwellings, also originated in Illinois.

EMT in dwellings answered chicago's epidemic of ignoramus wiring hazards, which the rest of US still suffer at nausia.
 
ramsy said:
Illinois historically made building safety codes after village idiots burned things down.

IIRC amendments prohibiting locking employees in buildings, and prohibiting Romex in dwellings, also originated in Illinois.

EMT in dwellings answered chicago's epidemic of ignoramus wiring hazards, which the rest of US still suffer at nausia.
Click to expand...
Seem to recall reading that labor unions had strong impact on the EMT in dwellings thing. Yes the less fires was the agenda pushed, but also somewhat hidden agenda was that it would mean more specialized knowledge would generally be needed to do successful installs - a benefit to union members and more of a discouragement to non professionals doing the installs.
 
If I were president, unemployment rates could aproach Zero after NM Cable was banned, retroactively. JW's would have job security for the rest of their natural lives, running pipe remodels & renovations.

However, if Romex industry contributions were critical to the success of my election, any campaign promise that harms them would have to be delayed until the next election. Or relegated to replacement code NFPA-70 406.4(D), which is rarely read or enforced.

Human nature predominates brotherhoods and constitutions. Those who are lucky enough to escape with their lives will write the history books.
 
ramsy said:
If I were president, unemployment rates could aproach Zero after NM Cable was banned, retroactively. JW's would have job security for the rest of their natural lives, running pipe remodels & renovations.

However, if Romex industry contributions were critical to the success of my election, any campaign promise that harms them would have to be delayed until the next election. Or relegated to replacement code NFPA-70 406.4(D), which is rarely read or enforced.

Human nature predominates brotherhoods and constitutions. Those who are lucky enough to escape with their lives will write the history books.
Click to expand...
You think addressing these electrical installation issues is what would win a presidential election?

Or that there would be many willing to take those jobs, they may have to get their hands dirty and maybe even sweat a little.
 
ramsy said:
I believe mandating pipe-wiring methods, which remove AFCI requirements, would win me lots of votes on this forum.
Click to expand...

First, they could remove AFCI requirements right now and have zero effect on everything except the manufacturer's profits.

I would be for eliminating NM. I don't see a reason to go as far as pipe, but certainly MC along with steel boxes would be the way to go.

-Hal
 
hbiss said:
I would be for eliminating NM. I don't see a reason to go as far as pipe, but certainly MC along with steel boxes would be the way to go.
Click to expand...
We have lots of existing apartments built with Flex, originally exempt from adopted => 2011 406.4(D)(4) replacement code requiring AFCI's.

Unfortunately, during turnover renovation, unqualified persons ad 14-2 for remodel lighting & plugs, energize grounding for 3-ways, then force un-listed & over-fused breakers onto spray painted bus stabs.

The more hazards found, the more convincing that electrical supplies should be a controlled substance, similar to HVAC & Fire suppression equipment.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top