
IAEI
News>Issue Listing>July/August 2003 >The Truth About AFCIs, Part III
The Truth About AFCIs, Part III  |
Part III responds to comments and inquiries from readers of the earlier parts and interest in what is coming in the next National Electrical Code (NEC) cycle. |
|
| by George Gregory and Alan Manche |

Inquiries
from Parts I and II
Is it a requirement that AFCIs
be installed at the time of an electrical service change
or upgrade to an existing installation?
The enforcement of the AFCI requirements is a common
question that must be communicated by the authority
having jurisdiction. New dwelling construction or the
addition of a bedroom is being consistently enforced as
requiring AFCI protection of the branch circuit. The two
questions that arise are: 1) Is AFCI required for the
addition of an outlet in an existing bedroom? 2) Is the
AFCI protection required when a service change / upgrade
occurs and the protection of those branch circuits are
re-inspected?
Although enforcement may not be uniform on this topic
across the country, the most common interpretation is
that AFCI is not required for either a service change or
the addition of an outlet to an existing branch circuit.
The addition of an outlet to an existing branch circuit
does not require the contractor to do any further work
on the branch circuit protection so the interpretation
has been to not require an upgrade of the branch circuit
device in order to provide AFCI. One might draw a
parallel to adding a branch circuit to a home built in
the 1960s with a 60-ampere service; this service is not
required to be upgraded to 100 A in order to comply with
230.79. However, there may be local regulations that
require this upgrading.
How can an inspector verify that wiring to a bedroom is
connected to an AFCI at the time of a rough-in
inspection?
Several manufacturers of test devices have announced
availability of devices that will trip an AFCI if the
circuit is energized. We have no information on the
reliability or safety of such devices. If the circuit is
not energized, a continuity check of the wiring back to
the AFCI can be made.
Can multiple bedrooms be connected in the same AFCI
circuit?
The NEC does not establish restrictions on the number of
bedrooms served; however, 210.11(B) establishes
provisions that the load be evenly proportioned among
the branch circuits and the circuit must be capable of
serving the computed load.
Revisions
Proposed for NEC 2005
There were 60 proposals to revise 210.12 of the NEC. A
rough breakdown of the proposals included these points.
· 10 were to expand the requirement to cover additional
locations beyond dwelling unit bedrooms
· 10 were to delete the requirement in its entirety
· 15 were to exclude AFCI protection for alarm circuits
such as for smoke detectors
· 3 were to include more specific protection of
appliance and extension cords
· 3 were to require AFCIs for retrofit in existing
dwellings
· A variety of other items and suggestions for wording
changes were submitted
The breakdown is rough because some of them included
multiple proposals or variations of these points. Those
not included in this count had specific wording or other
detail that is beyond our intent to cover here.
Needless to say, code-making panel 2 (CMP-2) members had
to do some careful evaluation of these proposals and
establish the appropriate course to set for AFCI
requirements.
Code-Making Panel Action
CMP-2 deliberations yielded the following language for
public comment.
210.12 Arc-Fault Circuit-Interrupter Protection.
(A) Definition. An arc-fault circuit interrupter is a
device intended to provide protection from the effects
of arc faults by recognizing characteristics unique to
arcing and by functioning to de-energize the circuit
when an arc fault is detected.
(B) Dwelling Unit Bedrooms. All 120-volt, single-phase,
15- and 20-ampere branch circuits supplying outlets
installed in dwelling unit bedrooms shall be protected
by a listed arc-fault circuit interrupter, combination
type, installed to provide protection of the branch
circuit.
FPN: For information on types of arc-fault circuit
interrupters, see UL 1699 – Arc-Fault Circuit
Interrupters
Exception: The location of the arc-fault circuit
interrupter shall be permitted to be at other than the
origination of the branch circuit in compliance with (1)
and (2).
(1) The arc-fault circuit interrupter is installed
within 1.8 m (6 ft) of the branch circuit overcurrent
device as measured along the branch-circuit conductors.
(2) The circuit conductors between the branch circuit
overcurrent device and the arc-fault circuit interrupter
shall be installed in a metal raceway or a cable with a
metallic sheath.
The panel made two fundamental changes.
1. The revision requires the installation of the
combination AFCI. This is the AFCI that combines fixed
wire protection with extension and appliance cord
protection as described in Part I of this series of
articles.
2. The language will allow the combination device to be
installed at the panel or within 6 feet of the panel.
The portion of the branch-circuit conductors between the
panel and the AFCI device must be in metal conduit or a
metal-sheathed cable.
Let’s explore some of the discussion points arising
from the proposals.
Expansion of
AFCI
The proposals to expand coverage to locations beyond
dwelling unit bedrooms included a number of prospective
areas:
· All circuits in dwelling units
· All living areas in dwelling units
· Dormitories
· Assisted living units and nursing homes
· Day-care facilities
CMP-2 did not act to expand coverage beyond that of the
2002 NEC. As we have seen in previous parts of this
article, there are various types of AFCI with different
levels of protection to understand. There are also a
number of proposals to delete the requirement.
Deletion of the
requirement
The action of CMP-2 shows that the panel continues to
support AFCI protection. Among the items mentioned to
substantiate deletion of 210.12 were:
· AFCIs do not perform as desired
· The benefit is not clear for the cost
· Installations are safe without AFCIs
· Evidence of arcs as a cause of fire is not clear
Let’s look briefly at each of these.
AFCI performance
Those who have actually witnessed AFCI testing have
found that they perform to the intended requirements of
UL 1699, Standard for Arc-Fault Circuit Interrupters.
They operate properly with the arcing current levels
indicated in Part I of this series of articles. They
have also found that they detect real conditions that
occur in service. One prominent submitter of a proposal
to delete the requirement sent a letter to CMP-2 asking
them to withdraw his comment. He witnessed the effective
protection demonstrated by the AFCI on arcing conditions
and even on glowing connections that had progressed to
be a potential fire hazard.
Others have stated disappointment that the presently
available branch/feeder AFCI is not required to detect
arcing current below the 75-ampere level. This means
that they cannot detect lower level series arcs unless
they are line-to-ground (L-G) arcs. Lower level arc
detection enhances circuit protection. The authors point
out that the branch/feeder AFCI is providing a
significant degree of protection on the branch circuit
and cords that was not available before. As the
"combination" AFCI becomes available, it will
provide the lower level series detection desired for the
entire branch circuit including full protection of cords
connected at outlets.
Cost/benefit analysis
Analyses have been done, for example by the Consumer
Product Safety Commission (CPSC) in a memorandum dated
3/10/03, that generally show that the added cost of AFCI
protection is lower than the monetary cost of results of
fire it would offset. Although monetary values are
assigned to injury and death, the value of avoiding
these conditions cannot be expressed financially.
Protective devices such as the AFCI provide an element
of security along with the protective function. The AFCI
is a circuit protection device.
Installations safe without
AFCIs
Much has been done with construction requirements that
make new housing resistant to fire. The trend
illustrated in an annual report by the National Fire
Protection Association titled, "The U.S. Fire
Problem Overview Report" is a slow reduction of
numbers of fires annually. With these facts, the
question about whether AFCIs are needed is reasonable.
However, there are two key counterfacts that support
installation of AFCIs.
Even though the trend is toward fewer fires, the number
of fires remains significant. Adding protection such as
AFCIs is intended to drive the trend sharply lower.
Fire evidence illustrates that the materials that are
ignited are frequently organic electrical insulation
such as wire insulation and not building materials. The
ignition mechanism begins with a small leakage current
tracking over the surface of insulation in the form of
an arc. The extremely hot arc chars the insulation
causing carbon to form. The carbon is ignition fuel and
is also an electrical conductor instead of an insulator.
Insulation is excellent as an electrical and thermal
insulator until exposed to the extreme condition of an
arc. Then it becomes ignition fuel and sustains the
ignited fire until other materials are ignited.
Evidence that arcs cause fire
Fire investigators are split on views regarding whether
electrical causes of fire are legitimate, let alone
whether electrical arcs are a cause. The contention is
that inexperienced personnel at a fire scene who are
required to fill in a form that includes fire cause are
sometimes tempted to check "electrical" when
another cause is not obvious. As we ask deeper, we find
that all investigators recognize that electrical causes
exist and a number of them have provided evidence of
electrical causes. The question is really about the
percentage of fires that are electrical and the
possibility that some are arson fires reported as
electrical. However, reports from the National Fire
Incident Reporting System as compiled by NFPA and CPSC
are the best information available and show sufficient
consistency from year to year to be considered
applicable.
Square D Company has collected evidence from actual
fires in order to study the mechanism under which fires
start. These items confirm that electric arcs start
fires. Among the many items collected are:
· An overloaded extension cord that arced from
line-to-neutral when insulation melted, thereby directly
igniting flammable material in the area
· Incandescent lighting fixtures that had arc tracking
from line-to-ground igniting insulating material in the
base of the fixture
· Wiring devices that had arc tracking from
line-to-ground in a damp atmosphere
AFCIs in alarm
circuits
CMP-2 did not elect to exclude alarm circuits, including
those with smoke detectors, from the requirement in
210.12. However, a revision to NEC 760.41 was proposed
and accepted in the ROP stage by CMP-3 that requires
fire alarm circuits to not be supplied through AFCIs or
GFCIs.
Protection of
appliance and extension cords
This topic received considerable discussion by CMP-2
members. Protection of both fixed wiring and appliance
and extension cords had been desired from the start. The
response was that the AFCI device to be installed must
be the "combination" AFCI. The name
"combination" here means that it combines
protection of fixed wiring with protection of cords.
That means that it is required to detect arcs at levels
down to 5 amperes, including series arcs, parallel arcs
and L-G arcs.
There is likely to be discussion regarding availability
of these devices during the comment stage of the
revision cycle since only two manufacturers have
announced products that meet the requirements.
Retrofit in
existing dwellings
CMP-2 made no changes regarding replacement or retrofit
for AFCIs. See also our response to the first question
above under "Inquiries from Parts I and II."
George Gregory is manager of Industry
Standards, Schneider Electric/Square D Company, Cedar
Rapids, Iowa. He is a registered P. E. in Iowa,
Illinois, and Puerto Rico. He serves on NEC Panel 10
representing NEMA, and has been an associate member of
IAEI since 1972.
Alan Manche is a manager of Industry
Standards, Codes and Inspector Relations, Schneider
Electric/Square D Company, Lexington, KY. He is a
registered P.E. in Kentucky. He serves on a number of
NFPA Technical Committees including NEC Panel 8, NFPA
70B and NFPA 73. He is an active participant in NEMA,
UL, CSA, NFPA and IAEI.
|