ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals
ECN Shout Chat
Top Posters(30 Days)
sparky 5
Recent Posts
Dimmable LED 2x4 lay in fixtures
by ghost307. 12/15/17 08:13 AM
2017 NEC Changes
by ghost307. 12/15/17 08:09 AM
Casino Wiring methods
by HotLine1. 12/09/17 10:44 AM
Ground wire Size to water Line.
by HotLine1. 12/05/17 12:11 PM
Flexible conduit to an outside Spa
by gfretwell. 12/05/17 12:28 AM
New in the Gallery:
Gallery Test
Popular Topics(Views)
243,062 Are you busy
179,501 Re: Forum
170,422 Need opinion
Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 12 guests, and 9 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
#96900 - 01/05/06 06:30 PM AFCI's  
George Little  Offline
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,489
Michigan USA
No AFCI's for Indiana. they recently decided to remove that requirement from the electrical code after having it for 3 years. The action was approved based on the home builders bringing the substantiation of the recall by Square D breakers. DUH!

George Little

2017 / 2014 NEC & Related Books and Study Guides

#96901 - 01/05/06 08:28 PM Re: AFCI's  
HotLine1  Offline

Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,880
Brick, NJ USA
I don't know if you remember from another thread here, but good ol' New Jersey does not require AFCI protection & never has.

THe NEC is adopted with minimal deletions as the Electrical Sub-Code of the State Uniform Construction Code.



#96902 - 01/06/06 02:15 AM Re: AFCI's  
macmikeman  Offline
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 717
Honolulu, Hawaii
Oh man I wish I was a lawyer licenced to work in both of those states.

#96903 - 01/06/06 08:36 AM Re: AFCI's  
BKey  Offline
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 10
Kissimmee, Florida
Let's see, N.E.C. is the national minimums, so if they deleted the requirements for AFCI protection then they are in violation of National code. I do not think I would be happy about living in a state that fails to meet federal minimums.

So if I receive a shock from a circuit that is required by the NEC then I have the backing of the Government in any lawsuit I file, I feel a vacation to one of those states in the near future, be better than winning the lottery.

Bryan L. Key
Safety Inspector/Trainer
Terry's Electric Inc.
An Xcelecom Company
600 N. Thacker Ave., Suite A
Kissimmee, Florida 34741

#96904 - 01/06/06 09:06 AM Re: AFCI's  
Alan Nadon  Offline
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 399
Elkhart, IN. USA
The State of Indiana has the Indiana Electrical Code. It is adopted by law. it is the NEC as ammended.
Major amaendments of the 2005 NEC in Indiana are to delete 210.12 AFCI's.
To add to the end of 210.63 (HVAC recepticals) "located in attics and crawl spaces".
Delete 406.8(B)(1) (bubble covers) and renumber 406.8(B)(2)as (1)
My advice to contractors about AFCI's is that I cannot require them but, they are in the NEC and if something happens because they didn't install them then the lawyers and insurance guys will have something to do.
Note: the 2002 Indiana Code on AFCI's limited them to receptacle outlets only.
[We're still trying to figure out what time it is.]

[This message has been edited by Alan Nadon (edited 01-06-2006).]

If it was easy, anyone could do it.

#96905 - 01/06/06 12:14 PM Re: AFCI's  
macmikeman  Offline
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 717
Honolulu, Hawaii
A bit of a segway here but I saw a very interesting post on another forum today. The question was why are smoke detectors in a bedroom required to be on afci. We have seen tons of those questions before. What was unique about this one was the poster brought up the fact that in his smoke detector circuit none of the smoke detectors use the ground wire. And we know the ground wire is the real main component in the working of an afci breaker because it has a built in gfci. I guess the answer is because the branch circuit itself has the ground conductor and the branch circuit is therefore "protected" regardless of the device itself not being "protected" by the afci. Any thoughts?

#96906 - 01/06/06 02:32 PM Re: AFCI's  
gfretwell  Offline

Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,142
Let's see, N.E.C. is the national minimums, so if they deleted the requirements for AFCI protection then they are in violation of National code. I do not think I would be happy about living in a state that fails to meet federal minimums

The NEC is a document produced by NFPA and has absolutely ZERO connection with any government agency. It is adopted as law at the discretion of the local AHJ. If it is not adopted in whole or part it has the same force of law as the Boy Scout motto.

Greg Fretwell

#96907 - 01/06/06 08:16 PM Re: AFCI's  
ShockMe77  Offline
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 821
Rahway, New Jersey
The state of New Jersey also hasn't adopted the 2005 NEC yet either.

How could it be a federal violation if the state doesn't even recognize the 2005 NEC yet?

Does anyone else from NJ know when it will be adopted?

#96908 - 01/06/06 08:45 PM Re: AFCI's  
renosteinke  Offline
Cat Servant
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,316
Blue Collar Country
The NEC is only as "national" as we choose to make it, when we adopt it into our local regulations. Just because the publisher calls it "National" doesn't make it so!

The NEC has prooven itself so well over the years that is has become universally respected- if not always adopted verbatum. Of course, there have always been differing schools of thought, as well as regional differences.

Despite warm and suzy sentiments about the NEC being a "consensus" standard, the only parties with a real voice are those who are able to attend national conventions. Some cynics have claimed that this gives an advantage to manufacturers, and other large organisations, that have the time, personnel, and money to spend the thousands of dollars necessary to attend one of these conferences.

As the NEC has expanded over the years, more provisions are called into question. The entire AFCI debate has been the most passionate one. Many, in every aspect of the trade, have qualms about the way the code has addressed the issue, the way it has been put into practice, and the equipment required.

So I'm not surprised that there has been widespread disagreement over the AFCI part of the code. For tose who remember the introduction of the GFCI, it was not accepted- indeed faced fierce opposition- until there were literally decades of documented use. During these decades, there were many, many improvements made, to address flaws that were uncovered. Contrast this to the AFCI experience, which has seen the code repeatedly mandate the future use of things not yet manufactured- let alone prooven.

#96909 - 01/06/06 10:06 PM Re: AFCI's  
gfretwell  Offline

Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,142
Reno, I think the GFCI was a problem in search of a product.
Lots of people get shocked, deadly or not.
The AFCI was a product in search of a problem. The number of fires it might stop vs the cost is pretty lopsided.
I think someone here actually ran those numbers.
One of my long time neighbors was with Cuttler Hammer developing this thing and "arc signature was the stumbling block they never really got over. It only sees some of the arcs some of the time and may not really see the "problem" arc.
C/H was the main driving force in getting these into the NEC and I think it was rushed.
U/L ended up writing the standard based on the capability instead of starting with the standard as the design criteria.

Greg Fretwell

Page 1 of 2 1 2

Member Spotlight
Posts: 47
Joined: March 2008
Show All Member Profiles 

2017 Master Electrician Exam Preparation Combos
2017 NEC Electrician
Exam Prep Combos:
Master / Journeyman


Shout Box
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0
Page Time: 0.016s Queries: 15 (0.003s) Memory: 0.8212 MB (Peak: 0.9964 MB) Zlib enabled. Server Time: 2017-12-15 23:40:37 UTC