Who are CMP’s on this forum?

Status
Not open for further replies.
mopowr steve

mopowr steve

Senior Member
Location
NW Ohio
Occupation
Electrical contractor
I was wondering if any of the forum members are NFPA CMP members?
Reason I’m asking is I’m wondering what some of the hub-bub is on the inside in regards to AFCI’s their expansion and the trouble they have caused many of us.
 
mopowr steve said:
I was wondering if any of the forum members are NFPA CMP members?
Reason I’m asking is I’m wondering what some of the hub-bub is on the inside in regards to AFCI’s their expansion and the trouble they have caused many of us.
Click to expand...
Yeah I am curious. Have any of the CMP members been vocal against them? What were the vote tallies for the various AFCI expansions?
 
electrofelon said:
Yeah I am curious. Have any of the CMP members been vocal against them? What were the vote tallies for the various AFCI expansions?
Click to expand...
There have been votes against and negative comments from panel members on various AFCI proposals over the years. You can look to the archived revision information to read those things. With the new system, used starting with the 2017 code cycle, it is not as easy to find that information for PIs that have been rejected, but it is there.
 
mopowr steve said:
I was wondering if any of the forum members are NFPA CMP members?
Reason I’m asking is I’m wondering what some of the hub-bub is on the inside in regards to AFCI’s their expansion and the trouble they have caused many of us.
Click to expand...
Guessing to even have much chance of an answer regarding AFCI's would have to be a member of whichever CMP covers that section of the code.
 
I guess I’m hoping that CMP’s are taking some que on what’s being said out here in the real world, such as what has been said on this forum time and time again. Do they even know this forum exists? Do they even care? Or are we in some kind of bubble here that NFPA doesn’t know we exist?
 
mopowr steve said:
I guess I’m hoping that CMP’s are taking some que on what’s being said out here in the real world, such as what has been said on this forum time and time again. Do they even know this forum exists? Do they even care? Or are we in some kind of bubble here that NFPA doesn’t know we exist?
Click to expand...
I doubt that many of them look to online forums for information about what they are doing. The best way to get their attention is a well written PI with solid technical substantiation, however, it is my opinion that the door is closed on this issue. I don't recall any PIs in the past couple of cycles to eliminate AFCIs. Without a PI to do that, there is no chance that they go away.
 
I've suggested in the past that alternatives to AFCIs be permitted.

I don't see convincing anyone that AFCI expansion was a mistake; the CMP has stated a position that AFCIs provide more benefit than they cost.

But I think one could substantiate that sprinklers provide better safety enhancement for the same money.

Anyone interested in working with me to write a PI saying that AFCIs are not required if sprinklers are installed?

Jon
 
winnie said:
I've suggested in the past that alternatives to AFCIs be permitted.

I don't see convincing anyone that AFCI expansion was a mistake; the CMP has stated a position that AFCIs provide more benefit than they cost.

But I think one could substantiate that sprinklers provide better safety enhancement for the same money.

Anyone interested in working with me to write a PI saying that AFCIs are not required if sprinklers are installed?

Jon
Click to expand...
The push back you will get is two fold...first sprinkler protection is outside the scope of the NEC, and second, sprinklers only control the fire after it has started, but AFCIs prevent the fire. You might also get a statement that says the model building codes already require sprinkler protection for dwelling units. While that is correct, many jurisdictions remove that requirement when they adopt the building codes. I believe that about 105 cities in Illinois currently require dwelling units to have a fire sprinkler system. Our city did not adopt that requirement.

We have an exception in our local code that says you are not required to install AFCIs if you install a sprinkler system, but no one has taken advantage of the exception.

Our thoughts were that in the overall fire safety of the home, sprinklers provide more safety than AFCIs, considering that lass than 15% of dwelling unit fires are of electrical origin. The second though was that the elimination of the cost of the AFCI breakers could fund 1/3 to 1/2 the cost of a sprinkler system.
 
I don't agree with omitting AFCI if a Sprinkler is installed for the reason Don gave, but I do feel the CMP needs more than just their opinion. Not sure how they say the AFCI provides more value than their cost. Says who? Cost does not have a linear impact on people. In a 5 million dollar house it does not matter. In a 150k dwelling it matters. Would they say the same about mandating MC or EMT in residential? The benefits outweigh the cost?
 
mikeames said:
I don't agree with omitting AFCI if a Sprinkler is installed for the reason Don gave, but I do feel the CMP needs more than just their opinion. Not sure how they say the AFCI provides more value than their cost. Says who? Cost does not have a linear impact on people. In a 5 million dollar house it does not matter. In a 150k dwelling it matters. Would they say the same about mandating MC or EMT in residential? The benefits outweigh the cost?
Click to expand...
My numbers show that over a 20 year period, based in one million new houses being built each year, that the cost per fire prevented would be about one million dollars and the total number of fires prevented would be about 11,500. That is based on the fire data that shows that 85% of the fires said to be of electrical origin occur in dwelling units over 20 years old. I assumed an additional cost of $600 per house for the AFCI installation and also assumed that the AFCIs would prevent 100% of the fires that are said to be of electrical origin, something even the manufacturer's do not claim. The average loss in a dwelling unit fire is less than $50,000.

This type cost benefit data has been presented to CMP-2 more than once, but they did not see that as a reason to delete the AFCI requirement.

For the record, I would support fire sprinklers over AFCIs because they provide protection for the 85% of the fires that are not of electrical origin. I would not have any issue with the tradeoff of having 15 percent more fires, while having protection for 100% of the fires. AsI said before we have an amendment to our electrical code that would permit that, and I was the author of that amendment.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top