Hi All,
I am wondering if you are installing arc fault breakers when upgrading and/or replacing residential services? Are AHJ looking for them? How are you handling the cost?


Ob(Phil)

I'd also like to know this for when I move and have about four new circuits run for the upstairs of our new house. (2 on an AFCI I think, 1 for an A/C, 1 for the bathroom.)

Ian A.

Seems to me that if you are upgrading the service you would have to follow the guidelines of 210.12 (B). As far as the cost for the afci's...I adjust my billing accordingly for them.

Luke

We install AFCIs in each service upgrade that we do, and we charge for them. I don't believe that the AHJ is insisting on them. The only time that we don't is if the bedrooms are wired in a multiwire circuit.

I don't think that we should even give the H/O a choice about the matter. It's required by current code on new residences, and if its not done with the service change, when else will the H/O ever willingly pay for this safety device? Probably never. Let them know it is for their family's safety and include the cost in your price.

AFCI's are currently required in bedrooms in my area, but read this thread to find out more about impending code changes...
https://www.electrical-contractor.net/ubb/Forum19/HTML/000096.html

REW,
How do you charge for them on a 60A to 100A upgrade that is 100yrs old and has 30a fuses with multiple wire under the terminal and not 1 marking. Estimate how? It would be easier if all were required to be Arc Faults. My biggest bone right now is some are requiring and some aren't(AHJ). This last inspector didn't even know you couldn't install an arc fault on a 3 wire circuit
(Ob)Phil

Thanks Zapped,
I used some these same comments with the inspector. He was not aware of the costs involved. Sqd D Hom Arc faults are about $40. Ea my cost so retail is about $50.adding $100.to $400 to the costs. I have never had one trip for any good reason (fortuanatlly) but alot of false tripps. mostly from Vacuums and power tools.

Ob(Phil)

what do you mean you cant install an arc fault breaker on a mutli wire circuit? I have done it numerous times. CH make a 2 pole independent trip arc fault breaker specifically designed for 3 wire homeruns. I think that you should reconsider who you are buying your panels from untill they become more knowledgeable about what is available out there. There is a substantial cost savings with the price of copper nowadays to use these 2 pole arc faults. Of course if you are using GE panels they arent available. I used to use GE Panels for everything untill i started have 4 out of every 10 arc fault breakers being defective. Since i have switched to CH i have installed roughly 65 Arc faults and only had one bad one. I will never switch back to GE.

Scott

We discussed this at some length at our local IAEI meeting. As a esult, locally, we are not expected to install AFCI breakers on service upgrades.

One reason was that earlier wiring practices did not segregate bedroom circuits from others; each bedroom wall very well might be fed from a different circuit.

The real kicker was that remodels are often done on homes with obsolete equipment. When the older equipment has no ability to accept an arc fault breaker, the only option would be a complete service change ... which is quite an additional expense, when all the customer wants is another receptacle!

I've been putting AFCIs in all circuits (lights, receptacles and fire alarms) that end in bedrooms or go under the bedroom floor- basically, anything that doesn't have 1/2" of gypsum between it and a bedroom. I install only GFCI-protected breakers, too, except for dedicated receptacles.

They may be more expensive, but not THAT much more expensive in the whole scheme of things.

I'll wait till I am required or they start making AFCIs that actually do the job they say they will.

Up to this point I have still not even touched an AFCI breaker.

Not required in commercial work.

That could be an almost impossible task to do some service changes. 4hrs service change... 16 hours trouble shooting and fixing. ooh that would be crappy.

I havent had to do arc faults on any service change..

I have had to do, arc faults and connected smoke detectors through-out for additions.

I changed my service (100A zinsco to 100A QO) and I only did AFCI for bedrooms and the living room. I'm not really worried about romex as I am a table lamp, which the cord might get caught under a chair leg or something. I do have 3 knob and tube light circuits, but generally there's less chance of an arc because the wires are almost stud length apart (except at the terminations because of degraded insulation.)

My AHJ is pretty good on the AFCI. For example, it is city code that for any abandoned (as in taxes not paid) building, in order to be resold, must have all new wiring, gas, and plumbing. They MUST have AFCI in the bedroom, and the city was offering a tax break on up to 2 additional OPTIONAL AFCI's. Our inspector is pretty uptight, but with good reason, especially since the houses are so close together. (I'm not 100% sure if it city code not to granfather, or if it per contract, but the city treats it just the same)

The currently available AFCIs will not protect the lamp cord.

Yes that is what they where supposed to do....but they don't.

If you are doing service upgrades and you are putting in ark faults and making money at that then I like it. You should be making money, and I like ark fault breakers. That said, the code does not require ark faults on service changes, the 2005 code requires ark fault protection for the branch circuit when installing 120 volt 15 and 20 amp outlets in bedrooms of dwellings. When you are doing a service upgrade and you are not installing 15 and 20 amp 120 volt outlets in bedrooms of dwellings, than the ark fault requirement should not be applied to you, unless your area has an ammendment to the code that requires ark fault breakers on service changouts. If your local electrical inspector requires it, you should ask him for a code reference, unless you like installing and upselling the customer as the original poster does. Again, I myself like that style, but I personally stop short of trying to sell the value of ark fault breakers to customers because of the potential of liability of a series ark not interrupted and an ensuing fire is the result.

I've said it before in another forum and I'll post it here for the masses:

"Arc-fault breakers are the airbags of the electrical industry."

[rant on]

Another useless piece of junk which has the (high) potential to either malfunction or worse, provide a false sense of security.

I have yet to see any organization or the NFPA for that matter prove statistically that arc faults are suddenly extremely important to protect the public.

Maybe I need to think up some useless piece of garbage that will allegedly make the world's electrical systems safer and buy my way into making it a Code requirement.

[rant off]

I would not say that, no matter what info you look at airbags have saved many more lives than they have taken.

Approx 260 deaths have been attributed directly to airbags.

Most estimates of the lives saved are between 10 and 20 thousand. Even if you reduce those figures by 50% assuming they are 'hype' air bags still come out ahead.

In other words air bags routinely do what they are intended to.

I have not seen a single bit of evidence that an AFCI has saved anyone.

I have seen fairly convincing arguments that say by the time you need an AFCI it will be malfunctioning. (Assuming it worked as intended in the first place)

Renosteinke said
Now wouldn't that be a deal killer...

Customer: I need an outlet added in my spare room, right on the opposite side of the wall from the one in this bedroom....

EC: Sure, I can cut that in for you easy.. Oh by the way, I'll have to change that old fuse panel out to the tune of a couple grand in order to do this....

Customer: WHAAA???

So just adding an extension to an existing bedroom circuit is going to require me to AFCI it??? Makes me kinda glad I'm in the oilfields now

As far as when I was doing service work, the requirements by local AHJ's to use AFCI breakers on a service change was kind of a mixed bag... Some required it, some didn't. Even then, they wouldn't require it on multiwire circuits (Siemens didn't have 2P AFCI's then... I'm not sure if they do now even.)

You can always put in a sub panel with your arc faults in it even from an old fuse panel.

Just to be clear, I personally have never advocated requiring AFCI's for re-models.

Yet, I have encountered those who would. Some take the position that "anything, even if it saves but one life, is worthwhile" ... and have never heard ot the Constitution's prohibition of 'ex poste facto' laws.

These nomrods WOULD require a single new receptacle to be AFCI protected. And, since other nimrods, again in the name of greater safety, have effectively banned any AFCI devices, this means a breaker. So, we're back to a new sub-panel, with a homerun, at the least, for adding a single receptacle.

Or, as is the case here, the AHJ can decide that this is hogwash ... and not accept the code as written.

To return to the original question: Here I have not heard of even a service change requiring AFCI's. Only in new construction; and even there the inspection seems limited to bedroom receptacle circuits. SMoke alarms are generally not on AFCI circuits, and the lights are often "overlooked."

[This message has been edited by renosteinke (edited 12-06-2006).]

"Not that expensive..."

The next code cycle is looking to require all 120 circuits to be AFCI protected.

"Normal" breakers cost less than $5 each.

"AFCI" breakers cost about $35 each.

Now, it's not unusual for a house to have 30 breakers. That $900 in additional costs- for the breakers alone!

The few new homes I've seen have been largely filled with "skinnies," or breakers that let you place two circuits in one 'full size' breaker space. These panels are already full. So, the AFCI requirement will easily double the number of panels in a house.

Since panel feeders are often (locally) required to be in pipe, etc., you can count on the AFCI requirement to add several thousand to the cost of wiring a new house. For those who consider that 'small change,' well, I do not. I cannot recall any single code change before, whose effect on the price of a house could be counted in percentage points!

[This message has been edited by renosteinke (edited 11-27-2006).]

I gotta say Reno, you certainly have an eloquent way of putting things! Never quite thought of it that way. Sadly, I think the trend of expensive code changes will continue.

Joe

And these expensive manufacturer driven requirements will result in much less respect for the NEC.
Don

Bob, I meant my remark more in the context of airbags (and arc faults) being forced down the public's throat and also giving a false sense of security.


I totally agree that airbags have saved far more lives than they've taken. But I look at airbags as a band-aid to make up for the fact that modern vehicles are lightweight recycled beer can shells, not like the days of old with good solid frames and steel bodies. Despite that, they do indeed work well ...now. The early ones were quite dangerous IIRC , even if they worked "properly."


Exactly! Show me the proof that they have saved someone's life or property..that they will last for years without attention in a crowded panel, then as you pointed out, actually work when needed. (Not likely.)


Bingo!!


Something the CMP's better get a grip on soon or we may well see a spike in electrical-related fires and deaths due to boneheaded rules driving the DIY's to do a lot more to avoid the "Expensive EC who swears that I must have those $35 breakers when the $5 one from the Box store works just as good!"

This whole thing makes me want to hurl.....




[This message has been edited by mxslick (edited 11-28-2006).]

I agree mx' and a good question would be how or what solutions could be made to prevent a long term disaster to maintain the NEC's respect.

Maybe that could be a good topic for further discussion?

Luke




[This message has been edited by Luketrician (edited 11-28-2006).]

Deleted post

[This message has been edited by Ann Brush (edited 11-28-2006).]

My proposal to severely roll-back AFCI requirements was rejected specifically because the committee was "not aware of any documented nusiance tripping of an AFCI with a listed appliance."

The comments I have heard made by a manufacture's regional rep as to which appliances will cause nuisance trips are not quite "documentation."

With the period for comments to the report on proposals now closed, we are not in any position to provide the committee with any evidence .. for now.

I sincerely hope that committe members read this thread.

More important, I hope that they, the AFCI manufacturers, and the NFPA take the time to read the US Supreme Court case "ASME vs. Hydrolevel." That's 435 US 556 (1982) for the lawyers out there.
The very basis for that case is that a manufacturer used his membership on code committees to obtain a ruling that put an upstart competitor out of business. The ASME tried to argue that they were not liable. They lost - big time!

IF such documentation exists, then the manufacturers of AFCI's are opening themselves up to major damage awards ... even a violation of the RICO act could be alleged. And, as Ken Leigh recently prooved, even the most successful executives, with the best connections, can be sentenced to prison.

Now, the idea that any 'confidentiality' agreement would require anyone to be a party to such a fraud raises some serious ethical issues.
However, I was also taught that science is based upon controlled experiments, with repeatable results. What happens in one lab ought to happen in another. If another lab just happened to duplicate the research, and come up with similar results, those results would be suitable for presentation to the code committee.


[This message has been edited by renosteinke (edited 11-29-2006).]

One thing I find preplexing is inconsistent AFCI tripping, at least in my own home with GE AFCI's.

For example, I was using an electric sander you could see acrcing away from halfway across the house, and no trip. That same sander, when plugged into another circuit, would immediately trip. My miter saw, where I don't see any arcing, will instantly trip any AFCI in the panel. I hate having to run extension cords all over the house to reach a GFCI circuit, or even more rare "standard" breaker circuit.

By the same token, I don't buy the argument that nuisance tripping will cause homeowners to start opening up panels, exposing them to danger. (As has been said here, let Darwinism straighten things out.) That same argument can be made about GFCI breakers too. I can't tell you how many times I wanted to pull the GFCI out when my holiday lights wouldn't come on in the rain. Funny how for years I never got shocked by holiday lighting with plain old circuit breakers... a little tingle now and then when wet, but nothing to worry about.

Joe

Joe,
The currently available AFCIs should not be tripping under the conditions that you have described as they don't even look at the arc until the current exceeds 75 amps.
Don

I can say the information was not generated in the US or by a US company. That's all I will say.

Hi Ann Bush,
As an inspector/contractor is a copy of your data sheet available to the public?

Ken

After some reflection on what I said on the thread and some of the questions that followed I have learned that the decision to write what I did was a bit rash. In any controlled experiment there are numerous factors that need to be adequately communicated in order to interpret the data properly. In this instance I have commented on the results but cannot provide any of the conditions that generated them, as such none here are able to draw their own conclusions and I have done you all a disservice. I have deleted my original posting. Please accept my humble apologies and understand that I cannot comment further. This was not well thought out on my part.

I have some ideas, but since reno was nice enough to start a new thread here
I will make my comments there.

Ann, I completely understand, and regret it if anyone (including myself) 'pushed' a bit hard. One must listen to the BOSS sometimes ... and there are often details that can get in the way of a clean report.

This may have been covered in one of the other posts but lots of guys seem to jumping on the arc fault wagon whether required by code or not. My question would be 'isnt the effectiveness of the arc fault or gfci breaker compromised when they are not tested regularly?' So how many homeowners do a monthly trip test on them, even after you have carefully gone over the procedure? So you can say they can save lives, but if you want to start throwing them in everywhere, is there any data on age of breaker/effectiveness of protection and if they were regularly tested? Code is code, and we are required to follow it, but if fault protection is only ensured with regular testing, maybe some new rules or new product needs to be considered.

Jay,
Yes, because these devices are not fail safe. You can lose the arc fault part of the breaker and there is no indication and the breaker continues to supply the circuit with power. At this point the breaker becomes a standard thermal magnetic breaker.
Don

What would the inrush current be on a 15amp miter saw? My guess is probably more than 75 amps. I know that with the one that I have, (a large DeWalt unit) the inrush current is pretty strong.

They also look at the shape and frequency of the spikes. I doubt one big startup spike would do it. Maybe if your switch was bad and it saw LR current a few times real fast it might trip. One of my neighbors (Harvey Johnson) worked on the early development of AFCIs for Cuttler Hammer. I know they spent a lot of time looking at the difference between an arc fault and other large current transitions.

Had my first experience with an ark fault problem that was not a simple ground touching neutral or mixed up neutrals, the other day. Traced the problem to a loose compact fl lamp in a recess can. The screw in type lamp that looks like a twisted ice cream cone. Once I tightned up the lamp the problem went away and the circuit breaker was able to hold the entire load of the circuit ok. This was no ground fault situation, but rather an ark of sorts. I say of sorts, since the ballast for that lamp is in the base. Must have looked like an ark to the breaker.

That's exactly how I go about doing electrical work. Making people feel safe, IMO, is a part of our job. But since ARC-FAULT circuit breakers are NOT REQUIRED in the state of New Jersey, I've yet to install one. But I do have a bunch of them on the truck from a modular home job that where we never used them, nor were we required to use them.

Shockme, I appreciate your desire to do as good of a job as you can.

The statement "Anything, even if..." I criticise as it is, at best, sloppy logic. When that particular approach is used, often only one element is looked at, and not things in context. Often, it is also mere supposition, and there is no data to support it.

Our recent history is full of actual examples of such good intentions gone astray.

Just as an example - and I do not want to get into the entire 'gun control' debate, but just want to ilustrate the point - one often hears the 'just one life' argument used in support of additional gun laws. Yet, this argument completely ignores:
- Lives saved by firearms;
- Changes in criminal behaviour to target unarmed victims; and,
- The failure of experience to validate earlier measures of a similar type.

With AFCI's, I'm afraid that we're making many of the same errors.
The lack of AFCI devices precludes their use to protect parts of circuits, or existing circuits. This is ironic, as it would seem that older wiring would be more in need of this protection than new wiring.
The continued failure of AFCI makers to deliver as promised undermines their credibility.
The '96 code panel mandating a change in th '99 code undermined the claims the NFPA makes as to 'open' or 'transparent' code development. That today's vote can be binding on tomorrows' vote violates the very purpose of voting.
The lack of any acceptable 'tester' makes you wonder if that test button actually does anything.

Most important, the "but one life" argument ignores the unintended consequences of attempts to circumvent the code. How many AFCI's will remain installed a year after final inspection is one issue. You can be sure that there will be casualties as the untrained try to 'fix' things.
The substantial added expense will also serve to steer folks away from responsible electricians.

So, the jury will be out for some time. Unfortunately, it is far easier to pass a rule, than to repeal it.

I understand your point about the business end and the cost of using ARC FAULT CB's, however, didn't they (tradespeople) say the same exact thing about using GFCI's when they first came on the scene?

I haven't read everything on this thread, but it is interesting to know that there isn't even an ARC FAULT tester on the scene yet they are required by the NEC. That does not make sense.

Your point about using them on old-wiring compared to using them on new wiring is also a good one.