Is there a code rule that prohibits "stacking" AFCI breakers on top of each other in a panel? Does the manufacturer recommend or require this?

Theres no problem with stacking ArcFaults. Why would you think there was one?

I received a copy of a home inspection report on a brand new house we just wired. I've never heard of it either. The report states:
"Arc fault breakers "stacked" in the panel - they should be separated by typical breakers"

Then again, another "problem" found was:
"Master bedroom outlets at bed location on arc faults"

The house is big money, a little south of 3 million, and I assume the report is being used as a negotiating tool.

There is heat concern with the heat distribution of the arc fault breakers in a panel. Another concern would be on the 2008 code change requiring arc fault in all living areas of a residential area.

I would say there is a concern with a home inspector who doesn't know what he is talking about.

The typical home report I see around here reports splices in the distribution panel. I have a friend that's a home inspector & he said they were taught about panel splices in class.

I quoted code to him & gave a rough calculation of how many wires and splices you could have in a panel. He said "You really like this stuff, don't you?"

I don't think they're taught NEC at all, I think they're taught what to look for, like a checklist. Sometimes they get confused.

Dave

I do wonder what happens when you get 15 or 20 AFCIs in a panel that is already living in a un-airconditioned garage that cruises in the 35c ambient range anyway. Breakers are usually rated at 40c (105f) or less.
I guess this will be like all the other rules they pass with unintended consequences.
It does sell books, classes and CDs. I think that is the main function of NFPA these days.

"Then again, another "problem" found was:
"Master bedroom outlets at bed location on arc faults""

... You could arc fault the whole house if you wanted...

You should print this page and send it to that guy.

It seems obvious to me that the heat situation pertaining to AFCI's is the reason Eaton submitted the proposal to end the 42 max OCPD's (which has been accepted in principal) in a panel, this will go along with their proposal for all circuits to be AFCI protected.

It will allow more spaces for selective positioning of the AFCI's

See proposals 9-117 and 2-111

I actually don't have a problem with allowing more OCPD's in a panel but, IMHO, Eatons reason for wanting it is way to predictable.

Roger

I like the code panel explination for the proposed AFCI in all living spaces:

"it appears that the intent of the AFCI in the NEC was to create a market for a product where the benifit of the device does not protect against all arcing problems".

More than 15 million AFCI installed to date.