As I am in the regulatory field (not electrical, but in ‘Codes and Regulations’) this is a subject that comes up frequently: how much is ‘too much’ regulation without creating undue expense and complexity with little, if any, improvement in safety? A cost benefit analysis is usually done when making this determination and each person has their own opinion of what ‘costs too much.” Consider the GFCI. It was unavailable in any form until the late 60’s and wasn’t adopted as a requirement until (I believe) the 1990’s. It has gradually been required for more and more applications, but is it worth it?
Even prior to the GFCI’s requirement, rates of electrocution deaths were quite low, given the population of persons potentially exposed to shock hazards in wet areas. Undoubtedly, GFCI’s have lowered the rate and total number of deaths, but that number was already very small to begin with. Why require them, then? If tens of millions of persons are exposed to a wet area shock hazard annually and 1000 die, and if GFCI use cuts the rate to 100, that is still a small improvement. Vanishingly small. Placing a burden on everyone to install these expensive devices for such a small improvement seems unnecessary, from that perspective.
But, of course, who wants a bathroom/outdoor outlet without GFCI protection? Not me. And not you either, I bet. It is a requirement because it works, it isn’t that expensive and because it does save lives: Lives of children, lives of persons who are exposed (through no fault of their own) to shoddy electrical installations and, yes, it protects those who are stupid or foolhardy.
Other devices, like tamper resistant receptacles seem to me to be no-brainers as a requirement. They are relatively cheap (particularly when mass produced) and they do work to prevent children from poking wires in outlets. Sure, why not? The technology is there, they aren’t that pricey, and they work.
AFCI’s, ironically, are probably least needed in the applications they are required for: new construction. Most arc fault fires I hear of are in old installations where the wiring is frayed or damaged. It is almost unheard of for a new house to have an arc fault fire (or so I have been told). If anything, they should be required for replacement of existing breakers in old systems.
In my jurisdiction, we still use the 2005 NEC and I doubt we’ll adopt the 2008 in its entirety. In terms of “freedom to choose” that is still the prerogative of the local jurisdiction, after all. They can, and do, cherry pick the code changes they wish to adopt for their jurisdiction.
