# AFCI rule in 2008 NEC, 210.12(B)



## Joe Tedesco (Mar 25, 2007)

*210.12(B)Dwelling Units.* 

All 120-volt, single-phase, 15- and 20-ampere branch circuits supplying outlets installed in dwelling unit family rooms, dining rooms, living rooms, parlors, libraries, dens, bedrooms, sun rooms, recreation rooms, closets, hallways , or similar rooms or areas shall be protected by a listed arc-fault circuit interrupter, combination-type installed to provide protection of the branch circuit. :thumbup:


----------



## JohnJ0906 (Jan 22, 2007)

Unless the manufacturers have insured that the nusance trip problems are solved, I am against expanding this requirement.
Or, of course, they can pay for our time for the numerous service calls.


----------



## Joe Tedesco (Mar 25, 2007)

*Look at the video here:*

Look at the video here:

http://www.firemarshals.org/mission/residential/ignition_sources/electrical.asp

I am sure it will make you think about the issues associated with the subject of AFCI's


----------



## JohnJ0906 (Jan 22, 2007)

Are we being provided with a decent product? Are we being pushed into using product that don't have the bugs worked out? Who's footing the bill for the call-backs? 

I feel very comfortable INSISTING that these concerns be addressed by both UL and the various manufacturers before this is forced into law.

If AFCIs work as adverised, they are an absolute BOON to safety-on this I do not disagree-I have just had too many call backs on properly installed AFCIs on properly wired cicuits.


----------



## itsunclebill (Jan 16, 2007)

I suspect that when contractors reach the frustration saturation point and start returning ALL the AFCIs from panels, that is, 30 or 40 at a time, and do it on a VERY regular basis that the rule, or product, will change.

I personally intend to be responsible for starting this trend at several distributors. Large shipments of "problem" AFCIs back to the manufacturer that require extensive testing to weed out the bad from the good will definitely get attention. What's more, they can't prove the unit WASN'T causing a problem. I plan to build in pricing for this contingency should the requirement happen.

Now, I certainly wouldn't suggest anybody else do this:whistling2:

Guess maybe I ought to add that my attitude would be different if I was convinced that the AFCI isn't a solution looking for a problem, and that the first 2 or 3 minutes I spent with a GFCI convinced me they were a good idea and I used them lots of places before code required it. Of course I never returned over 30% of the GFCIs I installed, either............


----------



## oldnslow (Apr 14, 2007)

The same thing occured when GFCI's were introduced, many return trips to replace defective devices. 
If we were able to charge our warranty labor back to the manufacurers they would probably wait a code cycle and improve their products before code changes.


----------



## JohnJ0906 (Jan 22, 2007)

I think what we all want it to provide SAFE electrical power for our customers. For us to do that, we need decent products to install.

Also, some consumer education is warranted. Requiring a new product, with possible unseen problems, needs to be put before the general public. I just feel that the manufacturers, UL, NFPA, etc., just drop this into our laps with no consideration for the time and cost. How about selling AFCIs for NO profit? If they are so wonderful, then the PR would be worth it to them.


----------



## JohnJ0906 (Jan 22, 2007)

Joe Tedesco said:


> Look at the video here:
> 
> http://www.firemarshals.org/mission/residential/ignition_sources/electrical.asp
> 
> I am sure it will make you think about the issues associated with the subject of AFCI's


Propaganda. Pure and simple.


----------



## Speedy Petey (Jan 10, 2007)

There is not much I can add to the replies given here. 

How many code cycles did it take to mandate GFCIs in all the areas required today?

And now we have a proposed almost across the board AFCI requirement after only four code cycles? 
This REEKS of corruption and lobbying as much as anything else.


----------



## JohnJ0906 (Jan 22, 2007)

By the time I entered the trade (1990) GFCIs were fairly well established. The kinks were worked out before my time. My question is, was there this much controversy when they were introduced, and was there as much nusance tripping?


----------



## wireman3736 (Mar 3, 2007)

I here about all these call backs but I believe there has only been one time I was called back, a variable speed vacuum cleaner would cause the af to trip if it was started an any speed but high. after it started on high it would run on any speed. any product will have trial and error, you can't test for every situation in a fixed room environment. 95% of my af breakers are square D, I don't know if this makes a difference.


----------



## JohnJ0906 (Jan 22, 2007)

Doesn't Vermont already require AFCI protection most everywhere in a dwelling?


----------



## wireman3736 (Mar 3, 2007)

JohnJ0906 said:


> Doesn't Vermont already require AFCI protection most everywhere in a dwelling?


Yes all livable rooms.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

That product still does not deliver what the makers of it say it does, that is the truth. But I would be happy to take away any of those houses you fella's are going to pass up on because the rules have changed. I'll put em in, charge plenty for them of course, make profit, go sailing, while the rest of the complainers fight each other over non dwelling jobs since they got so mad about putting in all those ark fault breakers. :laughing:


----------



## JohnJ0906 (Jan 22, 2007)

wireman3736 said:


> Yes all livable rooms.


Judgeing by your previous comment, you're not seeing many problems, then?


----------



## Mountain Electrician (Jan 22, 2007)

macmikeman said:


> I'll put em in, charge plenty for them of course, make profit, go sailing, while the rest of the complainers fight each other over non dwelling jobs since they got so mad about putting in all those ark fault breakers. :laughing:


Amen. I agree this reeks of lobbying, etc., but so what? It is what it is, and no amount of complaining will change that. May as well just go with the flow, make sure you add enough money for the odd call back, and go on. I expect there will be a period of adjustment and some frustration making the HO understand why it costs more to wire his house, but at the end of the day if it saves one life IMO its worth it. Plus, the more mark up the merrier!


----------



## Speedy Petey (Jan 10, 2007)

First off I am not a real "Go with the flow" kind of guy. I do NOT do real well with being "lobbied" or having things forced upon me.
I am also quite stubborn and do just sit back and roll over when (IMO) unjustifiable requests are made/demanded.

It is also real easy to say "Just charge for 'em and allow for call backs". I think this is an unrealistic statement in many parts of the country. 
How many of us would lose jobs over the several hundred dollar, possibly $1k plus, difference created by installing AFCIs everywhere? 

I WILL NOT install these things until I am forced to by law.
http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/unjustifiable


----------



## JohnJ0906 (Jan 22, 2007)

What concerns me is the lack of consumer education. When legitimate, licenced electrical contractors raise prices for something not understood by the public, there will be more people using "trunk slammers". This results in LESS safety, not more.


----------



## Mountain Electrician (Jan 22, 2007)

Speedy Petey said:


> I WILL NOT install these things until I am forced to by law.


Do you think they don't work? If they prevent one house fire, isn't it worth it? As long as you get paid to install them, so what? It's natural to not want to do something you don't agree with, but we are foced to every day, (sales tax, stupid traffic laws, etc.) and at least this has the possibility of actually saving lives. For myself, I haven't had many trouble calls for AFCI's , so I don't have a real negative attitude towards them. Someone else's experience may be different, but as long as they *may* save lives, why not use them? If they will soon be law, why not offer the customer the choice to have them put in before that? IMO, the biggest thing that seperates electricians from the other trades is the fact that we are directly responsible for peoples safety and lives. If the plumber screws up, its a nasty mess and very unpleasent indeed. If we screw up, someone can die. If there is a product that helps protect peoples lives, I want to use it!


----------



## Speedy Petey (Jan 10, 2007)

Even the experts and lobbyists have not provided any real proof. All we get from them is that they "can" save lives. And this is coming from the folks trying to sell them to us. 
A new house is the last place that needs AFCIs. They were originally intended to protect appliance cords and extension cords. A new home has so many receptacles that x-cords are almost extinct. Also, wired properly a new home will NOT have any "arc faults" in the building wiring.

90% of the fires you hear about there is an automatic _"We believe the fire was electrical in nature"_. Of course it was. And typically it starts from an old overloaded extension cord. Or a space heater that tipped over and didn't stop running. 
So now the lobby groups have more than enough scare tactic ammunition (with little to no _proof_) to say "WE NEED these things!" ("And we can sell them to you!")



How many things can we do to "save lives"? Use 10 amp breakers on every branch circuit? Use GFIs everywhere in the house?
How about outlawing sharp corners? No more concrete floors in case we slip and fall? 

We are OVER lawing ourselves in this country! I think we all need to wear slippers and live in padded rooms.


----------



## wireman3736 (Mar 3, 2007)

JohnJ0906 said:


> Judgeing by your previous comment, you're not seeing many problems, then?


 
Now I think about it I had two call backs, one being the vacuum cleaner that I mentioned above, the other was a house that was tripping an AF about 6 months after the the house was built. I found that one of the contractors had put a finish nail through the wire when putting down the baseboard and had shorted the gnd and neutral together, this never would have been found if not for the AF breaker. so I don't feel either of these were an AF problem, it was just doing it's job. Other then these two instances I don't remember an instance when it was a problem with the breaker.


----------



## wireman3736 (Mar 3, 2007)

Speedy Petey said:


> Even the experts and lobbyists have not provided any real proof. All we get from them is that they "can" save lives. And this is coming from the folks trying to sell them to us.
> A new house is the last place that needs AFCIs. They were originally intended to protect appliance cords and extension cords. A new home has so many receptacles that x-cords are almost extinct. Also, wired properly a new home will NOT have any "arc faults" in the building wiring.
> 
> 90% of the fires you hear about there is an automatic _"We believe the fire was electrical in nature"_. Of course it was. And typically it starts from an old overloaded extension cord. Or a space heater that tipped over and didn't stop running.
> ...


Why have any laws? That way anybody can do it and that would be a real benefit to the trade.:jester:


----------



## Speedy Petey (Jan 10, 2007)

wireman3736 said:


> Why have any laws? That way anybody can do it and that would be a real benefit to the trade.:jester:


Which is an even dumber statement that my padded room comment.:jester:


----------



## Mountain Electrician (Jan 22, 2007)

Speedy Petey said:


> We are OVER lawing ourselves in this country! I think we all need to wear slippers and live in padded rooms.


LOL..Well said, maybe you're right. I would like to see some statistical data to support either the pro or the con on this issue, but regardless after the next code cycle it looks like we'll all be putting 'em in!


----------



## mdfriday (May 14, 2007)

Mountain Electrician said:


> Amen. I agree this reeks of lobbying, etc., but so what? It is what it is, and no amount of complaining will change that. May as well just go with the flow, make sure you add enough money for the odd call back, and go on. I expect there will be a period of adjustment and some frustration making the HO understand why it costs more to wire his house, but at the end of the day if it saves one life IMO its worth it. Plus, the more mark up the merrier!


 
So what? This is still a business. Business is competitive. Complaining will not change it, but returning 100s of defiective breakers a year will certainly send a message! (Amen to the person who first brought that idea up!)

It certainly is worth it if it saves lives. But will it. What is the point of a ARC fault breaker on a lighting circuit. Or a built-in appliance circuit. I can understand receptacle circuits, if the end user is willing to pay for the extra safety. Bedrooms should be as safe as we can make them.


----------



## Mountain Electrician (Jan 22, 2007)

mdfriday said:


> It certainly is worth it if it saves lives. But will it. What is the point of a ARC fault breaker on a lighting circuit. Or a built-in appliance circuit. I can understand receptacle circuits, if the end user is willing to pay for the extra safety. Bedrooms should be as safe as we can make them.


"But will it" Thats the million dollar (or more) question. Untill thats answered, isn't our job to err on the side of caution?

"If the end user is willing to pay for the extra safety" They won't have a choice. When the new code is adopted, they will have to pay for the extra safety.

Sending back breakers that are defective is just common sense. If I have a defefctive product, of course I'll send it back, who wouldn't? I'm not sure how that sends any other message except please send me a new breaker.


----------



## mcsparky (May 14, 2007)

Looking at the video it seems that the homes were older and that probably the wiring needed to be updated. Unfortunetly AFCI requirments for new homes is not going to keep those older overtaxed wiring systems from burning.All this will do is increase the cost of new home construction.(This is already to be added on to the sky high copper prices and other building material prices). With that being done HO and GC will be looking for ways around hiring REAL electricians and opt for the hack market. We will sooner or later NEC article our selves out of price range. I thought the NEC was supposed to be our bare minimum saftey anyway.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

The auto industry cried loud about seat belts until the money started rolling in. They did the same over air bags at first. Now they try to sell me side air bags as an upgrade feature. Ark fault breakers that are currently sold rely on the gfi portion of the breaker to provide the protection that they are touting. That is the simple truth. They have ark fault sensing circuits built in, but had to set the lower limits to above 75 amps to prevent trip whenever any typical household motor is plugged into a receptacle outlet. In my humble opinion, ark fault (gfi) protection for branch circuits wired with non metallic cable is a good idea. First reason is it is making electricians out of us. Most of us are now more careful to make sure our bare ground wires do not touch the neutral contact points on devices, but tell the truth, haven't you found that false trips you had are almost always because you had a sloppy connection between neutral and equipment ground and you had to seek it out and correct it? Second reason is , try taking your ***** sometime and snip a live 15 amp afci protected non mettalic cable.(nah, don't really, just take my word for it) Notice the kaboom turned into a pop now. And notice your ***** are still usable. Way I see it is that we will now have a better "nail guard" plate covering all our romex after the 2008 code takes effect. If it was up to me, houses wired with mc cable or emt should be exempt, but as far as romex goes, well, this is a boon financially and makes the house safer no doubt about it.


----------



## mcsparky (May 14, 2007)

Well I am sorry but I have to disagree with you. 1st the point that a nail being driven into a nm cable would have to have af protection is not totally right. I have been on service calls that siding had been put on a home and a nail driven through it. the normal 20 breaker tripped because it detected a short. What could a af do differently at that point? 2nd the car industry was fighting 0 protection for its passengers, we already have oc/short circuit protection for our circuits.The circuits are properly sized according to nec and protected by listed rated breakers.


----------



## wireman3736 (Mar 3, 2007)

mcsparky said
Well I am sorry but I have to disagree with you. 1st the point that a nail being driven into a nm cable would have to have af protection is not totally right. I have been on service calls that siding had been put on a home and a nail driven through it. the normal 20 breaker tripped because it detected a short. What could a af do differently,

Heres my two cent opinion, I got called back to a house I did because the af was tripping, after a couple of trips I found that a nail from the baseboard was driven into the wire causing the neutral and ground to short, a std breaker would not have picked that up, thats what an af breaker can do different, 
If the nail had shorted the hot to the gnd or neu then a std breaker would have tripped but not to gnd. or neu., I have installed hundreds and have had a total of 3 problems including the above, the other two were caused by vacuum cleaners on start up but other then that I don't see a big problem. Like macmikeman said maybe it will make electricians out of us. :laughing:


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

mcsparky said:


> Well I am sorry but I have to disagree with you. 1st the point that a nail being driven into a nm cable would have to have af protection is not totally right. I have been on service calls that siding had been put on a home and a nail driven through it. the normal 20 breaker tripped because it detected a short. What could a af do differently at that point? 2nd the car industry was fighting 0 protection for its passengers, we already have oc/short circuit protection for our circuits.The circuits are properly sized according to nec and protected by listed rated breakers.


Oh, I think you need to try my hot cable ***** test. Try it on both types of circuits. Afci and non afci. Report back after the bright lites clear out of your eyes. Like I said, it could have just as well been a requirement to have gfi protection on all branch circuits and the outcome would be the same. Some more fires in dwellings will be prevented than without the new afci requirement. How many? No one knows yet. Will they prevent series "hot point" wiring faults and associated fire? No. Would it be better all around to require sprinkler systems on all new dwelling construction? Yes. 
Cause then I will open up a second business installing sprinkler systems:thumbup: Nah, really the NFPA is pushing ark faults, because they know something must be done, but sprinklers will really boost the cost of a house. They would never get that one thru. So we put band aids on instead.


----------



## Mountain Electrician (Jan 22, 2007)

mcsparky said:


> Well I am sorry but I have to disagree with you. 1st the point that a nail being driven into a nm cable would have to have af protection is not totally right. I have been on service calls that siding had been put on a home and a nail driven through it. the normal 20 breaker tripped because it detected a short. What could a af do differently at that point? 2nd the car industry was fighting 0 protection for its passengers, we already have oc/short circuit protection for our circuits.The circuits are properly sized according to nec and protected by listed rated breakers.


One thing the AFCI will do is trip much, much faster than a standard OCPD. Thats why macmikeman's dikes aren't ruined. The AFCI opens the circuit before the arc has the time to really wreak some havoc. Three to eight half cycles clearing times (.5 sec) vs. hundreds for standard breakers, I think. An arc is many times hotter than the surface of the sun, so the quicker you open the circuit, the better off you are.


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

I was involved with residential wiring when GFCI's were brought into the NEC, I remember no issues or call backs...And we did one large project that was all Zinsco (not know as the standard for quality).

Take a look at the code panels and see who sits on them. The manufacture reps are mostly full time NEC, IEEE and other various standards employees. Their job is getting codes and standards written around their product and if possible stopping other products.

Lobbying is a big part of business today in Washington DC, in the state houses, and on code and standard panels.

If safety is the goal I am all for it, if selling a product and safety is presented but not really warranted or proven to sell a product then I feel it is a shame. But if both items can be satisfied safety and added sales, THEN GO FOR IT.

In my house all lighting and convenience outlets are on GFCI CB's and I plan on switching the bedroom panel to AFCI's, If I do not have problems then I'll change the other panels. 

After all it is only my family


----------



## mdfriday (May 14, 2007)

macmikeman said:


> Cause then I will open up a second business installing sprinkler systems:thumbup: Nah, really the NFPA is pushing ark faults, because they know something must be done, but sprinklers will really boost the cost of a house. They would never get that one thru. So we put band aids on instead.


 
Some places require sprinklers in homes now. It is becoming more and more popular. I think electricians need to raise prices big-time. We are way to cheep compared to other trades. Think about it. A sprinkler system will cost about 20 K+/-. Most of them will never get used.


----------



## JohnJ0906 (Jan 22, 2007)

Sprinkler systems in 1 and 2 family dwellings have a good track record. According to NFPA 101 (Life Safety Code) Handbook, Scottsdale, AZ has required this since 1986. NO fire fatalities in sprinklered houses. Less water damage. Less fire damage.

Prince Georges county, MD has required them since 1992


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

[quoteif the end user is willing to pay for the extra safety. Bedrooms should be as safe as we can make them.







 [/quote]


Why is a bedroom any different than a living room, if a fire starts in the living room from an electrical arc, that smoke is going to kill you as quick as the smoke from the bedroom. (leaving smoke detectors out of the equation).

These devices are either needed throughout or not need at all...IMO


----------



## mcsparky (May 14, 2007)

This is all well and good, however how is this going to stop the fires in these older overloaded wiring systems in these older homes? I think we are looking at to different times here. Around these parts when I pick up the paper and read of homes burning it is not newer homes that are burning. It all sounds good,but again I think we are passing more restrictive laws in the name of the children and safety. People will find others to do this work w/o afci installed. However with this code being passed I will install it accordingly. Thats my job ( even if I think its bunk)


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

Truth be told, a lot of older house electrical fires are caused by the tenants living there, the way they are careless about running cords and so forth. Newer homes tend to have yuppies that are concerned for the investment, and have more outlets to plug stuff into. I have been into way too many old homes to miss that fact. Lots of them have stacks and stacks of flamable items all over the place, various extension cords strewn about, and no way you can get to the receptacle outlets for any inspection or repair work.


----------



## JohnJ0906 (Jan 22, 2007)

IMHO, I think that the general public could really use some education about the hazards of electricity. Then they would realize why a professional, properly trained electrician should be used for electrical work, and not some handyman or cousin Earl, or whomever. Some of the attitudes I run into are just mind-boggling. 

Also why its a bad idea to overload receptacles, run extension cords everywhere, etc.


----------



## K&R (Jan 22, 2007)

The top inspector for Tennessee came into our local power company and shaved some copper off onto a piece of plywood. He then took the leads from an arc fault breaker he had hooked up as a display and hit the pile of shaved copper. It got the plywood smoking really good almost to the point of fire. He then shut the breaker off. After his little test he proceeded to say this is why Tennessee will not be going to the 2008 electrical code until the problem with arc fault is fixed. As of right now a lot of inspectors in the area will not enforce the arc faults being used in bedrooms.


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

K&R said:


> The top inspector for Tennessee came into our local power company and shaved some copper off onto a piece of plywood. He then took the leads from an arc fault breaker he had hooked up as a display and hit the pile of shaved copper. It got the plywood smoking really good almost to the point of fire.


The UL test on AFCI's isn't done that way. They literally chop through a cord with a paper-cutter type device, that also contains a wad of cotton. If the AFCI shuts off the circuit without setting the cotton on fire, the test is considered successful. Try it... a GFCI breaker will acheive the same result.


----------



## mcsparky (May 14, 2007)

Then why havn't we went to gfci protection through out the house instead of afci? Gfci has been around much longer and I am sure that it would have saved many lives in other areas of the home. They have been improved on for years.


----------



## JohnJ0906 (Jan 22, 2007)

I don't think a GFCI would do anything for a line - to - line or a line - to - neutral arc. AFCI breakers also have GFCI protection built in, 30 mA I think. At least that is my understanding.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

mcsparky said:


> Then why havn't we went to gfci protection through out the house instead of afci? Gfci has been around much longer and I am sure that it would have saved many lives in other areas of the home. They have been improved on for years.


John is spot on it. Standard gfi breakers are set to trip at a ground fault in excess of 5 millamps. Afci breakers have ground fault protection set at 30 millamps or higher in some brands. And an afci breaker does have the ark fault circuit protection in addition to the ground fault circuit protection. It is just a question of whether or not the ark fault part actually does anything in the real world or not.


----------



## sparky247 (May 26, 2007)

wireman3736 said:


> only been one time I was called back, a variable speed vacuum cleaner would cause the af to trip if it was started an any speed but high.


I have found the same problem with Vacuums


----------



## shazam (Apr 16, 2007)

I currently have a few hundred dollars worth of AFCI breakers sitting in my shop because they are a nusiance.

I LIKE the idea of keeping folks from burning their homes down.

But the average consumer doesn't want to reset the AFCI every day.
My experience is, after we are gone the homeowner hangs a ceiling fan and the motor trips the AFCI.

Another thing is.....you can explain away at the benefits of adding extra protection to a home......some people just don't get it.

"Getting the kids to the soccer game on time", is the only thing Mom is thinking about when you are trying to explain the benefits of AFCI.

So, in order to protect them from themselves, we as PROFESSIONALS will have to do our best and keep in mind the user end of our product so that the call backs are minimized.

The one "call back" I don't want to get is that the house burnt down.
BTW I voted "NO". They need drastic improveent first. Even local AHJ agrees with this one.


----------



## Joe Tedesco (Mar 25, 2007)

New Web Site here from NEMA:

http://www.afcisafety.org/


----------



## JohnJ0906 (Jan 22, 2007)

Thank you Joe.

What I didn't see is testing of various products, such as vacuums, while on AFCI protection. Are appliance manufacturers doing this?

I recently had a problem with a "nuisance trip", HO had 3 vacuums (all same brand, 2 same model) that she swore all would trip the AFCI. I could only make one actually do it. Ended up checking every outlet and switch, and replacing all the AFCI breakers. I contacted SquareD, and they did admit that some vacuums would cause tripping. 

Kind of difficult to explain to a person who just bought a $million + house that the vacuum cleaners that "worked just fine in the last house" are going to occasionally trip the circuit.

I know this is pretty much a done deal for 2008 NEC. So be it. It's the Code, and I will comply. I'm sure that, yes, this will save lives. But WHERE is the testing to find problem products, that don't work well on AFCI protection? WHERE is the consumer education that will be open to the fact this product DOES have a down side? Or is this just going to fall on the poor grunt in the field, with the manufacterers just ignoreing the issue, or keeping quiet?

Let's see the sites that don't just extoll the virtues, but also openly explain the down side.


----------



## Joe Tedesco (Mar 25, 2007)

I am sure they will welcome our feedback:

http://www.afcisafety.org/feedback.html


----------



## JohnJ0906 (Jan 22, 2007)

Thank you again Joe. I just sent them a message.


----------



## Joe Tedesco (Mar 25, 2007)

http://www.necplus.org/default.aspx

Chapter 2 Wiring and Protection :: ARTICLE 210 Branch Circuits :: I. General Provisions


70-2008:210.12(210.1-210.18)702008210.12 Arc-Fault Circuit-Interrupter Protection. 


*(A)* *Definition: Arc-Fault Circuit Interrupter (AFCI).* 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 Units.* All 120-volt, single phase, 15- and 20-ampere branch circuits supplying outlets installed in dwelling unit family rooms, dining rooms, living rooms, parlors, libraries, dens, bedrooms, sunrooms, recreation rooms, closets, hallways, or similar rooms or areas shall be protected by a listed arc-fault circuit interrupter, combination-type, installed to provide protection of the branch circuit. 


*Changed From 2005*
•







210.12(B): Expanded AFCI protection requirements to include all outlets supplied by 15- and 20-ampere, 120-volt branch circuits installed in family rooms, dining rooms, living rooms, parlors, libraries, dens, bedrooms, sunrooms, recreation rooms, closets, hallways, or similar rooms or areas, and deleted effective date on use of branch/feeder AFCIs. 


FPN No. 1: For information on types of arc-fault circuit interrupters, see UL 1699-1999, _Standard for Arc-Fault Circuit Interrupters_. 


FPN No. 2: See 11.6.3(5) of _NFPA 72_®-2007, _National Fire Alarm Code_®, for information related to secondary power supply requirements for smoke alarms installed in dwelling units. 


FPN No. 3: See 760.41(B) and 760.121(B) for power-supply requirements for fire alarm systems. 


Exception No. 1: Where RMC, IMC, EMT or steel armored cable, Type AC, meeting the requirements of 250.118 using metal outlet and junction boxes is installed for the portion of the branch circuit between the branch-circuit overcurrent device and the first outlet, it shall be permitted to install a combination AFCI at the first outlet to provide protection for the remaining portion of the branch circuit. 


*Changed From 2005*
•







210.12(B) Exception No. 1: Revised exception to permit branch-circuit conductors without AFCI protection from the panelboard to the first outlet if conductors are installed in rigid RMC, IMC, EMT, or steel AC cable for that portion of the circuit and the remaining portion is protected by a combination AFCI. 


Exception No. 2: Where a branch circuit to a fire alarm system installed in accordance with 760.41(B) and 760.121(B) is installed in RMC, IMC, EMT, or steel armored cable, Type AC, meeting the requirements of 250.118, with metal outlet and junction boxes, AFCI protection shall be permitted to be omitted. 


*Changed From 2005*
•







210.12(B) Exception No. 2: Added exception to permit omission of AFCI protection for conductors of an individual branch circuit supplying a fire alarm system that are installed in RMC, IMC, EMT, or steel AC cable.


----------



## TOOL_5150 (Aug 27, 2007)

<RANT>
So, AFCI breakers are avalible for 120v 15 and 20A circuits... Are they saying a 30A circuit cant start a fire? what about a 50A 240V circuit that runs all the way across a house to power the range? Please do not get me wrong, I am all for safety, But where to we stop before it gets rediculous? In my area they are installing AFCI's on any circuit that goes to a bedroom. Whats to say a circuit in the kitchen supplies a coffee pot that starts a fire, everyone in the house is sleeping. What if their smokes are not in working order? What if they do not even have smokes? I have been to many houses that do not have ANY smokes in their house. There are just too many 'what ifs' that have to do with electricity. GFCI protection in the proper areas and safe wiring practices is what it comes down to, because it comes down to the fact that even if the electrical syatem is installed in a neat and safe manner - anything can happen. In conclusion, I feel that AFCI breakers needing to be installed on just about any 15 or 20A circuit is over the top. It comes down to the fact that if you are not trained to be an electrician, you should not do electrical work and you should have smoke detectors installed in all the bedrooms and in the hall of your house and keep them maintained, and IMO, you will be as safe as one can be. </RANT>

~Matt


----------



## TheElectricalGuru (Jan 16, 2007)

*(B)* *Dwelling Units.* All 120-volt, single phase, 15- and 20-ampere branch circuits supplying outlets installed in dwelling unit family rooms, dining rooms, living rooms, parlors, libraries, dens, bedrooms, sunrooms, recreation rooms, closets, hallways, or *similar rooms or areas shall be protected* by a listed arc-fault circuit interrupter, combination-type, installed to provide protection of the branch circuit. 

Basically......would have been easier to just say ALL rooms and list the excluded locations....since now the arguement will be is a Kitchen considered a similar room...lol..does having cooking equipment within the room remove it from being similar. Guess is does now that we have a proper definition of a Kitchen...


----------

