Replacement Receptacles

[augie47]

Confused over the wording of 406.4(D)(4) and 210.12(D) exception.
If a receptacle in an an required to be AFCI is changed to a newer one, does the new receptacle need to be AFCI or AFCI protected ?

406.4(D) basic wording seems to indicate that but210.12(D) exception has the"additional outlet clause" but 404.(D)(4) exception says the 210 exception does not apply to replacements.

Huh ??

 

[charlie b]

I had to read the two articles several times, before I understood. Here is how I interpret things:

• Change the wiring, and the exception to 210.12(D) applies.
• Don't change the wiring, but simple replace the receptacle, and the exception to 210.12(D) does not apply.

Now, ask me whether I think this makes sense, and I will pass. :happysad:

 

[cowboyjwc]

I would say no, but it would need to be TR.

 

[david luchini]

If a receptacle in an an required to be AFCI is changed to a newer one, does the new receptacle need to be AFCI or AFCI protected ?

Yes, the replacement receptacle would need to be AFCI or AFCI protected.

 

[al hildenbrand]

Confused over the wording of 406.4(D)(4) and 210.12(D) exception.
If a receptacle in an an required to be AFCI is changed to a newer one, does the new receptacle need to be AFCI or AFCI protected ?

406.4(D) basic wording seems to indicate that but210.12(D) exception has the"additional outlet clause" but 404.(D)(4) exception says the 210 exception does not apply to replacements.

Huh ??

The 2014 NEC 406.4(D)(4) did not have the Exception. Only the 2014 NEC 210.12(B) Exception existed. Only the allowance for adding conductors up to six foot in length to be done to an existing Branch Circuit assembly without triggering AFCI protection being required was in the 2014 NEC.

To me, that meant I could add pigtailed conductors to the existing branch circuit conductors in a dwelling receptacle outlet, inside the outlet box, in the act of replacing the old receptacle device with a new receptacle device, and that addition of new conductor met the 2014 NEC 210.12(B) Exception that allowed then, the receptacle replacement to be done without requiring AFCI protection.

In 2017, the 2014 NEC 210.12(B) was relocated to 2017 NEC 210.12(D) along with its Exception. And, in 2017 the new Exception to 406.4(D)(4) was added to make it clear to guys like me that I couldn't us "adding pigtails while replacing a receptacle device" as a way to keep from having to add AFCI protection when replacing a device.

 

[augie47]

Yes, the replacement receptacle would need to be AFCI or AFCI protected.

FWIW, after I posted I managed to make contact with a friend that is on CMP 18 and he concurs Appreciate you !