June
3rd. 2009 minutes
|
MEMBERS
PRESENT: |
|
Mel
Lisher, Tom Cox, Daniel Beebe, Russell Brickell and Verlon Myers |
|
MEMBERS
ABSENT: |
|
BJ
LaBounty and Tim Kaufman |
|
|
|
|
|
STAFF
PRESENT: |
|
Phil
Burke |
|
PUBLIC
PRESENT: |
|
Bobbie
Flory and Lee Queen |
|
|
|
|
The meeting was called to order at 6:01 by Chairman Beebe.
Minutes
The
minutes of the May 6th, 2009 meeting had been provided to all members. Beebe
made a motion to accept the minutes, Myers seconded the motion; the motion
passed unanimously.
Correspondence
The
only letter was one submitted by Ms. Flory on behalf of the Lawrence Home
Builders Association. It outlined their
concerns on the AFCI issue as well as tamper resistant receptacles. All members present had a chance to read the
letter.
Unfinished Business
None
pending.
New Business
Beebe
asked who would like to begin the discussion about the public input received
from last month’s meeting.
Myers
began the discussion and stated he had contacted the Electrical Inspector for
the City of Wichita to ask his opinion on the arc-fault requirements in the
2008 NEC. Wichita has gone with the 2008
NEC, but had kept the 2005 NEC language in regards to AFCI protection. Myers had done some additional research
regarding these devices and all the things he found pointed to nuisance
tripping with the newer combination type AFCI’s.
Cox
relayed a story about a house they had wired in Junction City using the
combination AFCI’s and they had nuisance tripping. The breakers would trip repeatedly and then stop;
a service call had to be made since the house is under warranty.
Lisher
had brought various poke-in type connectors that are being distributed and used
in the field. He has heard some AFCI
manufacturers warn against the use of stab in or poke in type connections in
response to nuisance tripping claims. He
also thinks the manufacturers have made a rush to market with this new
technology before it was completely field tested.
Cox
said they have starting taping up terminals on receptacles to try and help the
nuisance tripping issues.
Beebe
stated that during his 10 year tenure as a service electrician he has seen many
problems with receptacles that have been connected using the stab in
connection. He gave an example by saying
if an entire bedroom receptacle circuit had been connected in this manner and
the last receptacle has a large load connected, a small arcing condition may be
occurring at each of the other receptacles where they are stabbed in. He doesn’t think the stab in type connection
provides a solid enough connection for the newer large amperage loads.
Lisher
said the ones that are inserted correctly are usually not a problem. He has
seen ones done improperly create issues especially those on outside walls where
movement might be present. He said they
didn’t have any trouble with the first type of AFCI’s.
Beebe
asked if Lisher had ever used a GFCI breaker as part of the testing
process. Beebe has researched the
different manufacturers and received input from several on how to properly
troubleshoot one of these AFCI circuits to help determine why it might be
tripping for no apparent reason. The
GFCI eliminates as to whether or not the breaker might be sensing an arc fault
or a ground fault.
Cox
said with local homes monitoring a breaker may be possible, but they have
expanded their territory due to work shortages.
He thinks an actual problem should be more consistent in tripping, not
this random type activity.
Myers
said accepting the 2008 NEC as written would be subjecting the new homeowner
with problems from the start. He is
concerned about nuisance tripping and someone taking out the AFCI’s and
installing another standard breaker in its place. He has seen in over 23 years in business
where manufacturers use the market place as a test lab for their new
products. He is all for safety, but it
may be too soon for this type of AFCI.
Beebe
responded that a lot of problems can be attributed to workmanship. The device should be providing protection and
not creating a nuisance. The situation
where homeowners start changing these breakers out because of this nuisance
could create many more issues than would be solved by the AFCI expansion.
Myers
added that anyone with an electrical license should do the right thing and
replace an AFCI with another AFCI and not counter what the code says. He still thinks the homeowner after repeated
problems will find someone to change out the breaker to some other type that
won’t trip repeatedly.
Beebe
presented the scenario that it could have been tripping due to an arc and it
was never found, and the breaker change could result in a fire.
Myers
asked how many of the newer homes built in the last 20 years have burned
because and an electrical arcing problem, or from an electrical problem.
Brickell
responded that the fire data is not tracked in a way to show how many were
caused by an electrical arc. He
commented that one of the more recent fires was of an electrical nature, but its
origin was in the service equipment.
Cox
added that someone can intentionally plug in a dangerous appliance and it
starts and fire and the records show that as an electrical fire.
Brickell
commented that this is one problem with how fires are tracked and why the specific
data to support the AFCI expansion isn’t available locally.
Beebe
asked if you had to be licensed to change out a device.
Staff
stated that to do electrical work a person must be licensed; some types of work
don’t require permits, like the task Beebe mentioned. Owner occupants are allowed to take out a
permit to do electrical work in their own home.
Some items considered as maintenance may be exempt from having licensed
persons perform the work.
Myers
mentioned the ads in the local paper where handymen advertise electrical work.
Cox
asked Myers what Wichita did about the tamper resistant receptacles.
Myers
said they had left the requirement for tamper resistant receptacles in the
code.
Myers made a motion
to stay with the requirement for AFCI’s that is currently in the 2005 NEC for
another three year cycle and see how it plays out. Lisher seconded the motion.
Cox
added that he would like to see the requirement for combination type AFCI’s
also be changed.
A
short discussion ensued regarding whether or not the original branch feeder
type AFCI’s will still be available.
Members stated that local supply houses will ask you which type you want
when AFCI’s are requested. Clarification had been sought on this issue but no
responses had been received by meeting time.
Beebe
commented that he talked to a number of people and asked them about AFCI’s and
most of them pointed to one manufacturer.
Many of those switched to another brand and they eliminated their
problems. He also questioned the big
three manufacturers of breakers and asked them for information. Two of the three responded fully, but the one
manufacturer that has had problems locally basically ignored the request.
Myers
related that during his training trips around Kansas for continuing education
he often hears complaints about AFCI’s and the nuisance problem.
Cox
is troubled by some breaker manufacturers suggesting the “face time” with the
electrical panel for homeowners. He said
the type of customer you want is the one when you return three years later and
they don’t know where the panel even is.
I don’t want to suggest to someone that just spent $350,000 on a house
that they need to come to the panel and I’ll show them how to reset these AFCI
breakers, because they are going to trip for no apparent reason.
Myers made a motion
to accept the wording in the 2005 NEC and have it include the branch-feeder or
series one type AFCI breaker.
A
second discussion ensued around the topic of whether or not the series one or
branch feeder as they are called will be available for very long. A provision in the 2005 NEC took effect on
January 1, 2008 to require the combination or series two to be installed. It is apparent more information on the intent
of the manufacturers will have to be looked into. A nationwide chart indicates
the majority of States are using the 2008 NEC, so the demand for older style
breakers should be limited at best.
Brickell
questioned with all these problems how did they get into the code in the first
place. His understanding is that the code panels are made up of a diversified
group of professionals and one would assume they would have known about these
issues. Brickell reiterated that this is the minimum standard they all could
agree on.
Cox
stated if Brickell had heard all the comments from the audience last week it
may have made an impression. The people
that expressed their concerns were those that deal with these issues in the
field every day.
Myers
commented that the code panels are subject to lobbying by many different
factions.
Beebe
questioned about the motion.
Staff
attempted to answer the proposed question; the first motion made by Myers and
seconded by Lisher was to amend the 2008 to reflect the requirements in the
2005 NEC in respect to AFCI’s. The second motion did not receive a second and
was technically out of order. The motion
with the second needs to be voted upon.
Myers
asked if he could amend his first motion.
Brickell
stated since it was his motion and not yet voted on he could amend it or
withdraw the motion.
Myers would like to
amend his first motion to include the series or branch feeder type breaker. The
amending was seconded by Cox; the motion passed three to two.
Staff
commented that it would depend on whether or not the older style will be
available. The 2008 NEC language is what
would be amended,
Queen
asked for a clarification on what this amendment would mean.
The
respondent stated the bedroom outlets would be required to be AFCI protected as
they currently are. The issue of the
availability of the older style AFCI breakers will have to be researched prior
to the final draft.
Cox
doesn’t think the tamper resistant receptacle is worth the problem since the
price currently is rather low. He
doesn’t exactly believe in the requirement, but doesn’t want to see it
implemented on just a couple rooms. He
would find that too difficult to keep track of where they go.
Beebe
didn’t like the blanket approach. He
thought those were the only two issues from the public input.
Adjournment
Cox made a motion to
adjourn, seconded by Beebe; motion passed unanimously and the meeting was
adjourned at 7:00 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Phil Burke, Secretary