- Location
- Bremerton, Washington
406.4 (D)(4) requires a replacement receptacle to be AFCI where required else where in the NEC. We can replace a 2 wire recpt with GFCI, but what about a 2 wire with an AFCI? Do we need to run a EGC to the AFCI?
Replacing 2 wire receptacles with AFCIs
- Thread starter tom baker
- Start date
- Status
- Location
- Chapel Hill, NC
- Occupation
- Retired Electrical Contractor
The way I see it is you would have to have a gfci first then an afci receptacle and then no ECG is required
You can't fit both in a single gang box... when you are only replacing one receptacle. Even if it is a 2-gang (quad), which gets priority: the AFCI or the GFCI. Neither require an EGC to operate its protection feature.
It's a good question... which I don't believe there is any resolution in present Code.
- Location
- Placerville, CA, USA
- Occupation
- Retired PV System Designer
GFCI breaker, then just the AFCI in the single gang box.
And if the box is too shallow, extend it out of the wall using a Wiremold adapter ring/box.
And it would definitely be a greater undertaking if OCPD was old screw-in fuse type.
- Location
- Chapel Hill, NC
- Occupation
- Retired Electrical Contractor
Smart, no one said it would be easy but I answered based on what I know. IMO, if you install agfci breaker or receptacle ahead of the afci then you would be covered. Yes , a PITA but as I see it that is what needs to happen.
Agree.
al hildenbrand
Senior Member
- Location
- Minnesota
- Occupation
- Electrical Contractor, Electrical Consultant, Electrical Engineer
Since we are directed to "elsewhere in the NEC" I believe that includes the Exception to 2014 210.12(B). If the conductors are at all short (and in many cases in the older installs they are) the existing conductors invite the installation of pigtails. Adding conductor less that six foot in length invokes the exception to 210.12(B), and no AFCI protection is needed whether the old two wire nongrounding type receptacle is replaced with a GFCI receptacle, or a similar new nongrounding type receptacle.
jxofaltrds
Inspector Mike®
- Location
- Mike P. Columbus Ohio
- Occupation
- ESI, PI, RBO
Are they TR?
Two choices.
1 AFCI protect at the panel then GFCI first receptacle. AFCI breaker or AFCI blank face
2 GFCI protect at the panel then AFCI first receptacle. GFCI breaker or GFCI blank face.
PS At does not mean 'in' the panel.
The reason for the blank face is to keep it simple if "no other loads/receptacles can be on the circuit.
AFCIs per Leviton can be placed on a 2 wire system. Remember the no equipment ground stickers.
al hildenbrand
Senior Member
- Location
- Minnesota
- Occupation
- Electrical Contractor, Electrical Consultant, Electrical Engineer
Mike, that's a non-issue with new nongrounding type 15 and 20 A 125 V receptacles. The NEC says clearly they don't have to be Tamper-Resistant.
Read 406.12 Exception (4).
The simplest solution to this 2014 NEC 406.4(D)(4) conundrum is to pigtail the conductors between the branch circuit and the replacement device, IMHO, thereby invoking 2014 NEC 210.12(B) Exception.
jxofaltrds
Inspector Mike®
- Location
- Mike P. Columbus Ohio
- Occupation
- ESI, PI, RBO
We (Ohio) are using 2011 :
(5) Tamper-Resistant Receptacles. Listed tamper-resistant
receptacles shall be provided where replacements are made at
receptacle outlets that are required to be tamper-resistant elsewhere
in this Code.
Can you post the 2014 for me and others?
al hildenbrand
Senior Member
- Location
- Minnesota
- Occupation
- Electrical Contractor, Electrical Consultant, Electrical Engineer
Mike, again, go to 406.12 Exception (4). It is not new Code. The 2011 and the 2014 are unaltered on this point I am making.
al hildenbrand
Senior Member
- Location
- Minnesota
- Occupation
- Electrical Contractor, Electrical Consultant, Electrical Engineer
Last edited:
Sierrasparky
Senior Member
- Location
- USA
- Occupation
- Electrician ,contractor
al hildenbrand
Senior Member
- Location
- Minnesota
- Occupation
- Electrical Contractor, Electrical Consultant, Electrical Engineer
Your quoting 2011 NEC 406.4(D)(5) as THE requirement for nongrounding-type receptacles to be TR is how I finally figured out how to read the AFCI requirement that some attribute to 406.4(D)(4). Manufacturers of nongrounding-type receptacles have refused to give us tamper-resistant two wire receptacles, so the Code was written to allow non-tamper-resistant nongrounding-type receptacles. The way one got to the exception was by finding out what receptacle outlets were required to be TR elsewhere in the Code, other than 406.4(D)(5). You have to go to 406.12 to read the actual TR requirement. The actual TR requirement is NOT in 406.4(D)(5).
The AFCI requirement, similarly, is elsewhere in the Code other than 406.4(D)(4). One goes to 210.12. And, new in the 2014 NEC, the Exception to 210.12(B) tells us when AFCI is not required.
jxofaltrds
Inspector Mike®
- Location
- Mike P. Columbus Ohio
- Occupation
- ESI, PI, RBO
I was stuck in 406.4. TY
That said, it still requires AFCI protection.
If it was outside then you would need a TR WP GFCI.
al hildenbrand
Senior Member
- Location
- Minnesota
- Occupation
- Electrical Contractor, Electrical Consultant, Electrical Engineer
When you are limited to being under the 2011 NEC, yes, I agree. The 2014 NEC is different, with regards to the AFCI protection.
macmikeman
Senior Member
- Location
- Planet macmikeman
I wait to see how many decades will pass before I am able to find a TR WP ARC FAULT GFI device on the shelves at my Home Depot since they are still selling more non tr devices than tr ones and don't seem to be in any hurry to stop stocking those.
- Status