I am writing in regards to the proposed Texas Real Estate Commission (TREC) Home
Inspectors Standards of Practice that is being considered for adoption. While the Inspector’s
Advisory Committee and the SOP Sub-committee have done an outstanding job addressing
many of the issues with the old SOP I am of the opinion that there are several discrepancies
and/or issues with the proposed SOP and I would like to bring just of them one to your attention
for consideration prior to the potential adoption of the SOP in June.
The Proposed SOP contains the following wording in the Electrical Section:
(b) Specific limitations for service entrance and panels. The inspector is not required
to:
(1) determine present or future sufficiency of service capacity amperage, voltage, or the
capacity of the electrical system;
(2) test arc-fault circuit interrupter devices when the property is occupied or damage to
personal property may result, in the inspector’s reasonable judgment;
(3) report the lack of arc-fault circuit interrupter protection when the circuits are in
conduit;
(4) conduct voltage drop calculations;
(5) determine the accuracy of overcurrent device labeling;
(6) remove covers where hazardous as judged by the inspector;
(7) verify the effectiveness of overcurrent devices; or
(8) operate overcurrent devices.
After having read (b)(3) and not being familiar with that exception I then asked one of the subcommittee members where it was stated in any formal context, i.e. a national code or the like.
He told me NEC 210.12 exceptions 1 & 2 provided for that. Further examination of that code
section led me to question the sub-committee’s interpretation of the rule & exceptions. Here is a
page from www.NECPlus.com that describes that NEC code in more detail (note: I have
paraphrased portions of that article for clarity and brevity):
210.12 Arc-Fault Circuit-Interrupter Protection.
(A) Definition: Arc-Fault Circuit Interrupter (AFCI). A device intended to provide protection
from the effects of arc faults by recognizing characteristics unique to arcing and by functioning
to de-energize the circuit when an arc fault is detected.
(B) Dwelling Units. All 120-volt, single phase, 15- and 20-ampere branch circuits supplying
outlets installed in dwelling unit family rooms, dining rooms, living rooms, parlors, libraries,
dens, bedrooms, sunrooms, recreation rooms, closets, hallways, or similar rooms or areas
shall be protected by a listed arc-fault circuit interrupter, combination-type, installed to provide
protection of the branch circuit.
Exception No. 1: Where RMC, IMC, EMT or steel armored cable, Type AC, meeting
the requirements of 250.118 using metal outlet and junction boxes is installed for
the portion of the branch circuit between the branch-circuit overcurrent device
and the first outlet, it shall be permitted to install a combination AFCI at the first
outlet to provide protection for the remaining portion of the branch circuit.
Exception No. 2: Where a branch circuit to a fire alarm system installed in
accordance with 760.41(B) and 760.121(B) is installed in RMC, IMC, EMT, or steel
armored cable, Type AC, meeting the requirements of 250.118, with metal outlet
and junction boxes, AFCI protection shall be permitted to be omitted.
Again, I do not see where there is a blanket statement that AFCI protection is not required for
branch circuits in conduit, except for fire alarm systems. Clearly, Exception 1 still requires AFCI
protection just not at the breaker box but rather at the first outlet. Unfortunately, at this point in
time that would be impossible since such an outlet mounted AFCI doesn’t yet exist.
I posed my AFCI/conduit question to several state & national Home Inspection industry
technical leaders. Here is what a few of them had to say:
I agree w/ Mike. This would not be the first nor will it be the last of incorrect code
opinions that spew forth from the IC members. This is frankly why they have no
business getting involved in code based inspections. – Texas based ICC certified
inspector
I view this with great apprehension, possibly because I remember what an absolute
mess Texas made of their GFCI testing requirements, where they insist inspectors use
something that isn't listed for what they must use it for, and where they must report as
defective things which are not defective anywhere that has blue sky... but I digress.
What do they mean by "when conduit is used?" Are they somehow under the impression
that the exception applies to any installation with "conduit." First off, that word isn't used
in the exceptions. Exception #1 talks about RMC, IMC, EMT, or steel-armored AC. The
latter two are not conduits; one is a tubing system and the other is a cable system. Next,
the exception only has to do with the LOCATION of the AFCI device, and is intended to
accommodate the yet-to-be-manufactured "outlet-type" AFCI. No such device exists.
There has never been an installation that utilizes exception #1. If they think they have
seen one, take them on a snipe hunt next.
This couldn't be more wrong. I can't wait to see how they define "missing AFCIs." If they
can mangle it as badly as their misinterpretation of these exceptions, it should be a real
howler. – Nationally known code book author
Mike…IMO you are correct – Prior Inspector Committee member
I have not found one TREC home inspector, code certified inspector nor any other person that
agrees with paragraph (b)(3), as written, therefore I would ask that the Advisory Committee
please reconsider that exception and delete it from the proposed SOP or, at a minimum, reword
it.
Regards,
Mike Boyett
TREC #7290