AFCI INQUIRY AND REPORT August 1, 2002

Consumer Product Safety Task Force National Association of State Fire Marshals

October 1, 2002 The National Association of State Fire Marshals represents the most senior fire safety officials of each of the 50 states and District of Columbia. Our mission is to protect life, property and the environment from fire. Over the past year, we have heard concerns raised about the price, availability and effectiveness of a relatively new technology known as Arc Fault Circuit Interrupters (AFCIs), which are designed to prevent fires originating in electrical wiring. These concerns caused us to reconsider our endorsement of AFCIs. The attached report provides details of our inquiry and the resulting recommendations to our membership. Having conducted this inquiry, we are persuaded that the criticisms being stated are without merit and that AFCIs should be added to the electrical and fire safety requirements in all jurisdictions. The most recent editions of the National Electrical Code require AFCIs for residential bedrooms of new homes. If there is one valid criticism of AFCIs, it is that they are not required more broadly. This is a criticism we can and will address in the immediate future. We hope this report is helpful to you as you strive to protect the people of your state. Sincerely,

Donald P. Bliss President Attachment

Executive Summary
The purpose of this inquiry and report is to reconsider National Association of State Fire Marshals support of the technology known as Arc Fault Circuit Interrupters (AFCIs), which are designed to prevent fires originating in electrical wiring due to unwanted arcing. Our inquiry was prompted by concerns raised about AFCIs with electrical and building code authorities considering adoption of National Electrical Code requirements for AFCIs. To approach this matter in a fair and objective fashion, we contacted the three organizations on record against AFCIs: the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) and two consultancies, Bernard Schwartz (who represents a group called the National Multi Housing Council) and Mike Holt, of Mike Holt Enterprises, Inc. The responses from NAHB and Messrs Schwartz and Holt are shown in Appendix B. Their concerns may be summarized as follows: AFCIs are unneeded, cost too much, are not yet available and do not work. In addition to seeking elaboration from NAHB, Schwartz and Holt, the Consumer Product Fire Safety Task Force conducted four separate inquiries, all of which are described in greater detail over the following pages. The first inquiry was a review of fire incident data pertaining to fires caused by arc faults, to determine need. The second inquiry was a survey of retail stores selling AFCIs, to determine the current retail price of these devices. The third inquiry was made of all four AFCI manufacturers to secure their assessment of supply. The fourth inquiry was made of technical experts familiar with the causes of electrical fires, and the various technologies available to address those hazards. This report is divided into several sections. Section 1 contains the assignment made by NASFM President George A. Miller that initiated this inquiry and report. It begins on page 3. Section 2 provides a brief history of the AFCI technology and the adoption of Section 210-12 of the 2002 National Electrical Code. It begins on page 5. Section 3 contains the conclusions of our various inquiries, beginning on page 7. Section 4 begins on page 12 and lists the recommendations of the Task Force based on the conclusions. Supporting appendices for all sections begin with Tab A and are referenced throughout the report.

The overall conclusion we draw from this work is that AFCIs are the most promising fire protection technology since the advent of the smoke detector. The criticisms that have been raised are unsupported by the facts, and appear to be little more than yet another campaign to place the economics of housing above the safety of American families. Respectfully submitted,

Donald P. Bliss, Chair Consumer Product Fire Safety Task Force

MEMORANDUM ________________________________________________________________________ Date: May 30, 2002 TO: FROM: Donald P. Bliss, Dr. Margaret Simonson George A. Miller

RE: Fact Findings: Arc Fault Circuit Interrupters ________________________________________________________________________ NASFM has received numerous reports from its members, the US Consumer Product Safety Commission technical staff and others regarding claims being made about the effectiveness of arc fault circuit interrupters (AFCIs). Last year, your respective two committees the Science Advisory Committee and Consumer Product Fire Safety Task Force advised NASFM that AFCIs are an important new fire safety technology that should be required in as many structures as possible. Since then, we have heard three broad criticisms of AFCIs. We should be in contact with those individuals who are making these statements. You will receive my file on this in the next few days. I would like to ask the Consumer Product Fire Safety Task Force to seek information and assess the first two: 1. That AFCI producers cannot meet the demand that will be created by changes to the National Electrical Code. 2. That AFCIs add too much to the cost of a home. I also would ask that the Science Advisory Committee (SAC) concern itself with claims that arc fault circuit interrupters do not work. Given the sophistication of electrical code officials, one criticism of AFCIs surprises me. Reportedly, code officials are being told that AFCIs do not address all types of arcing. One would hope not a standard electrical switch is a series arc and poses no harm.

I am sure that no one knowledgeable in electrical engineering would make this claim. It is my understanding that AFCIs are designed to detect only the harmful types of arcs that could lead to a fire. Please give this matter your immediate attention. I would like a report by June 10. My fear is that code officials are being misled at a time when adoption of the code is in full swing in several states. If either of you sense that inaccurate information is being intentionally distributed to interfere with public safety, I would like to know immediately so that we might notify the Attorneys General in states so affected.

cc

NASFM Membership

History of AFCIs and Their Inclusion in the National Electrical Code

Proposal to mandate low-instantaneous trip circuit breakers for dwelling units made by Electronics Industry Association in 1993 for the 1996 Code. The objective was to enhance fire safety. The proposal was rejected based on considerations such as nuisance tripping, and the Panel Statement included recommendations for further analysis including electronic sensing. In 1994, Underwriters Laboratories (UL) began working with all interested parties involving AFCIs to develop the requirements for an AFCI safety standard. Research sponsored by the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) in 1995 studied ways to reduce home wiring fire risk with new technology. Arc-Fault Circuit-Interrupter (AFCI) technology identified by CPSC as a promising new technology. In March 1996, UL issued a Report of Research on Arc-Fault Detection Circuit Breakers. First production AFCI devices appeared in 1997. CPSC electrical engineers tested the new AFCIs on the market and found these products to be effective. The results of many years of research, development and technical meetings at UL were used as the basis for development of UL 1699, Standard for ArcFault Circuit Interrupters, published in February 1999. The commercially available AFCIs were listed as Branch/Feeder AFCIs based on requirements in the standard. The National Electrical Code (NEC) requirement for AFCIs was supported by CPSC staff and adopted in the 1999 edition (210-12), with a 2002 effective date. Branch/Feeder AFCIs became readily available in stores in 1999. NEC 2002 edition (210-12b): AFCIs required for branch circuits providing power to outlets in dwelling unit bedrooms (new construction). NEC 2005 edition: Deadline for proposals is Nov 1, 2002. CPSC staff submitting AFCI proposal for existing homes that undergo electrical service replacement.

NOTE: The NEC is a model code for electrical wiring. It is up to individual states and other Authorities Having Jurisdiction (AHJs) to adopt the code according to their own initiative and schedules. Therefore, different states and AHJs may have different editions of the NEC in force at a given time, some have a different electrical code in place, and some do not have an electrical code at all.

Conclusions
In an effort to prevent or reverse adoption of Section 210.12 of the 2002 National Electrical Code in states and localities, certain individuals and organizations are raising concerns with state and local electrical safety and building code authorities regarding the cost, availability and effectiveness of arc fault circuit interrupters (AFCIs). Opponents of AFCIs have stated for the record, before electrical safety authorities and in response to NASFMs inquiries, that: AFCIs are not needed based on current fire losses.

Finding: The data in support of AFCIs are compelling. While conventional circuit breakers are designed to detect overloads and short circuits, AFCIs are designed to protect against fire by continuously monitoring the electrical current in a circuit and shutting off the circuit when many unintended arcing conditions occur. According to the National Fire Protection Association and National Fire Incident Reporting System data, during the five-year period from 1994-1998, there were an average of 73,500 total electrical fires annually, which were responsible for 591 deaths, 2,247 injuries, and property damage totaling $1,047,900,000.1 The electrical problems that lead to these fires went undetected by conventional circuit breakers. Of these 73,500 electrical fires, 60,900 or 82% were caused by arcing and not by overloads or short circuits. Additionally, the US Consumer Product Safety Commission technical staff, after conducting a great deal of independent research on AFCIs, estimates that 5075% of residential electrical fires can be prevented by employing AFCI technology. 2That means that of the 73,500 electrical fires annually, AFCIs could potentially prevent 55,125 fires and save more than 440 lives, 1,685 injuries, and $785,925,000 in property damage, when AFCIs work their way into electrical codes for installation throughout the house. (See Appendix C.) AFCIs cost in excess of $125 per unit. Finding: NASFMs survey of the two largest hardware retailers, Home Depot and Lowes, in nine US cities was completed on June 14, 2002, and reveals retail prices that range from $34.97 to $39.97 for both 20- and 15-amp units
1

Custom tables on structure fires involving electrical arcing or improper operating electrical equipment in one-two family dwellings prepared by Marty Ahrens, NFPA, Quincy, MA, March 2001 and custom tables on structure fires involving electrical arcing in one-two family dwellings, prepared by Marty Ahrens, NFPA, Quincy, MA, May 2002. 2 King, William H., Jr., Chief Engineer for Electrical and Fire Safety, Division of Electrical Engineering, US Consumer Product Safety Commission, in discussion with the NASFM Science Advisory Committee, July 14, 2002.

with contractors prices at typically discounted levels. (See Appendix D.) To meet the current NEC code, the CPSC estimates that two (2) AFCIs are needed per household. While the per-unit cost of an AFCI is greater than the $5 cost of a standard circuit breaker, cost-benefit analyses must also include an estimate of lives saved due to the technology and take into account the fact that, once AFCIs are installed, the benefits are cumulative for the life of the structure. The CPSC is finalizing a cost-benefit analysis of AFCIs that should be ready by Fall of 2002. AFCIs are not yet available in enough configurations and in enough markets to allow for compliance with the NEC. Finding: This statement may have been true at one time, but NASFMs survey of three AFCI manufacturers indicates sufficient manufacturing capacity to satisfy the AFCI demand created by the NEC. Of the major electrical equipment manufacturers, all four manufacture AFCIs in every configuration required to meet the code. At least one manufacturer has developed and soon will market an AFCI that can be used in any of the three most common circuit box/breaker boards or panels. (See Appendix E.) Since 2001, Vermont has required AFCIs for all living spaces in homes, and State Fire Marshal Robert M. Howe reports that supply has not been a problem. AFCIs are not reliable or effective. Finding: A CPSC fact sheet on AFCIs states, Several years ago, a CPSC study identified arc fault detection as a promising new technology. Since then, CPSC electrical engineers have tested the new AFCIs on the market and found these products to be effective. No device will ever prevent all of the fires it is intended to address. Consultations with the NASFM Science Advisory Committee, US Consumer Product Safety Commission, Underwriters Laboratories and SP Swedish National Testing and Research Institute all resulted in positive assessments of AFCI technology.3 AFCIs have undergone rigorous testing and have been

The following experts reviewed and commented on the documents shown in Appendix B: For NASFM: SP Swedish National Testing and Research Institutes Margaret Simonson, PhD, Chair, Science Advisory Committee; Donald P. Bliss, State Fire Marshal and Director of Fire Safety and Emergency Management, New Hampshire; Walter Smittle III, retired West Virginia State Fire Marshal. For the US Consumer Product Safety Commission: William H. King, Jr., Chief Engineer for Electrical and Fire Safety, Division of Electrical Engineering; Douglas Lee, Engineer, Division of Electrical Engineering; Andrew Trottar, Engineer, Division of Electrical Engineering. For UL: Howard Hopper, Manager, Corporate Regulatory Services; David Dini, Senior Research Engineer; Arthur Mastromarino, Senior Associate Manager for the Industrial Control Power Distribution Division; Paul Notarian - Senior Staff Engineer, Industrial Control Power Distribution

in use for several years. An AFCI installed at the circuit breaker level, which is known as a branch/feeder AFCI, protects against downstream and extension cord problems right to the point of the appliance. According to an article by UL Senior Research Engineer David Dini entitled "Arc-Fault Circuit Interrupters," [The AFCI] functions by recognizing characteristics unique to arcing and de-energizing the circuit when an arc-fault is detected. By doing so, this device will safeguard persons and property by mitigating the unwanted effects of arcing, which can result in a fire." (See Appendix F.) The following directly addresses some of the misstatements in the materials provided to us by the opponents of AFCIs. Claim: AFCIs do not pass all of the tests required by UL. Fact: The basic standard used to evaluate arc-fault protection devices is UL 1699, Arc Fault Circuit Interrupters. The UL 1699 Standard addresses several types of AFCIs, each intended for different applications and/or protection of the branch circuit and extension wiring. The performance requirements for these devices include the arc-fault detection tests as described in Section 56 of that standard. All manufacturers AFCI breaker devices pass all of the tests required for branch/feeder AFCIs. Some critics refer to a UL study for the CPSC, which involved research on five different technologies designed to detect and monitor conditions that could lead to residential electrical wiring fires. One of those technologies was AFCIs. However, not all of the 14 experimental tests described in the CPSCs report were intended for AFCI technology.4 Claim: Arc faults will not ignite structural wooden members of a home [thus, it is implied, there is no need to protect against arc faults]. Fact: To list the parts of a structure that arc faults do not ignite misses the point. Arc faults can easily ignite insulation and other polymeric materials commonly found within the walls of home. Those materials, in turn, can ignite the wooden structural members. Claim: AFCIs do not protect against ground faults, high-resistance contacts and glowing contacts. Fact: The AFCIs currently on the market (circuit breaker branch/feeder types) do protect against ground faults. While these AFCIs may not directly detect some electrical arcing and glowing that can occur at high-resistance contacts and other connection points, the devices respond to the secondary arcing and
Division. In addition, Dr. Joseph Engel, engineer for Eaton/Cutler-Hammer, was consulted to provide further technical clarifications. 4 Dini, David, Arc Fault Circuit Interrupters, IAEI News, September/October 2001.

leakage currents to the ground that result from degraded insulation between conductors in proximity to the incipient fault condition. (The Task Force wishes to note that the ground fault protection afforded by a branch/feeder AFCI does not qualify as a ground fault circuit interrupter or GFCI, which is a device designed to protect against electrocution, unless the device is marked to indicate that it is both an AFCI and a GFCI. Such a combination AFCI/GFCI device is available from one manufacturer at this time.) (See Appendix G) Claim: AFCIs have a history of nuisance tripping. Fact: UL1699, Standard for Safety for Arc Fault Circuit Interrupters, addresses nuisance tripping and is far in excess of practical requirements. An AFCI manufacturer told us that an electrician participating in beta testing of an AFCI device complained about nuisance tripping, only to learn that the problem actually was a severe arcing condition involving a garage door opener. In this situation, the AFCI did what it was designed to do and prevented a fire. In a similar incident, an electrician complained about nuisance tripping although inspection revealed that he had incorrectly installed radon fans, and the tripping of the AFCI had served to prevent major fires in several new homes. The UL 1699 Standard currently addresses 15 different unwanted tripping tests. Claim: AFCIs currently on the market (circuit breaker branch/feeder types) fail to protect against all arcing faults. Fact: AFCIs currently on the market protect against all unwanted arcs to ground at any point in the circuit, and unwanted arcing in parallel with the load throughout the circuit including the branch circuit extension wiring. These branch/feeder AFCIs are tested to decrease the risk of fire from various types of arcing in accordance with the UL 1699 Safety Standard. These tests include unwanted arcing in series with the electrical load in typical nonmetallic sheathed cable (NM-B plus ground) installed wiring. In practice, this is accomplished by the detection of leakage prior to cable combustion. The tests also include the detection and interruption of the high-energy parallel arcs that are most likely to create a fire hazard. The parallel tests are performed for both NM-B and two-conductor SPT cords. Branch/feeder AFCIs do not detect series arcs in two-conductor extension wiring. These arcs are less hazardous than parallel arcs since they are typically low current and short duration. The subsequent energy content is low. These arcs are essentially indistinguishable from switching-arcs. Other types of electrical arcing (for example, arcs that ignite flammable gasses or vapors) are beyond the capabilities of an AFCI. The currently available branch/feeder AFCIs are expected to eliminate the risk of fire associated with a significant percentage of unwanted arcing conditions. (See Appendices H and I)

10

In view of the Task Forces findings, the prevalence of conflicting claims or misinformation about AFCIs does a disservice to the future safety of American families. Consequently, the Task Force reiterates its support of AFCI technologies and implementation throughout both old and new homes.

11

Recommendations
The Task Force recommends: 1. The prompt distribution of this report and its appendices, with permission to cite this report as needed, to the following: All federal, state and local regulatory and procurement agencies with authority to adopt or otherwise utilize the National Electrical Code, or with an interest in electrical and fire safety. Special attention should be given to those jurisdictions that have chosen to exclude Section 210-12 from the 2002 National Electrical Code in the most recent cycles. The Governors of the States and the Mayors of the largest 100 cities. Appropriate Committees of the US Senate and House of Representatives. State and local Attorneys General in jurisdictions that utilize the NEC. UL, NFPA, IEC and other standards organizations. The major fire service organizations. National Electrical Manufacturers Association, International Association of Electrical Inspectors, National Electrical Manufacturers Association, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Communications Workers of America, AFL-CIO Office of Worker Safety. The producers of AFCIs. The organization and individuals on record against AFCIs.

2. A formal, written request that the opponents of AFCIs retract past misstatements and ensure that all future statements are in keeping with the facts. 3. A meeting of the respective officers of NASFM and the National Association of Home Builders. 4. Consideration of this matter in light of 101 Wn. App. 845, MENEELY v. S.R. SMITH, INC. (See Appendix I). We reserve the right to make further recommendations to NASFM in the event that these misrepresentations and misstatements of fact continue, or additional information comes to light.

12

The National Association of State Fire Marshals

The National Association of State Fire Marshals (NASFM) represents the most senior fire official of each of the 50 United States and District of Columbia. State Fire Marshals' responsibilities vary from state to state, but Marshals tend to be responsible for fire safety code adoption and enforcement, fire and arson investigation, fire incident data reporting and analysis, public education and advising Governors and State Legislatures on fire protection. Some State Fire Marshals are responsible for fire fighter training, hazardous materials incident responses, wildland fires and the regulation of natural gas and other pipelines. Most NASFM members are appointed by Governors or other high-ranking state officials. Some are state police officers. Many are former fire fighters. Some are fire protection engineers, while others are former state legislators, insurance experts and labor union officials. NASFMs mission is two-fold:

To protect human life, property and the environment from fire. To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of State Fire Marshals' operations.

NASFM is a 501(c)6 not-for-profit corporation. NASFM's membership meets annually, elects a Board of Directors and Officers and is consulted whenever possible on crucial matters. The members are the ultimate authority in the organization.

NASFM's Consumer Product Fire Safety Task Force

Most fire deaths and injuries occur in the home. Consumer carelessness is a significant factor. Consumer safety education is critical but imprecise and unreliable. Therefore, consumer products for use in the home must be made as safe as possible and anticipate the probability of human error. In pursuit of fire safety, products should not harm people in other ways. NASFM's Consumer Product Fire Safety Task Force addresses all ignition sources and fuels commonly found in the home. The Task Force focuses on priorities defined by fire incident data and on emerging trends in product design and manufacturing. The Task Force may recommend new methods and standards, as well as legislative, regulatory or market-oriented incentives to encourage safer products.

Structure Fires in One- and Two-Family Dwellings in which the Form of Heat of Ignition was the Heat from Electrical Equipment Arcing or Overloaded or Improperly Operating Electrical Equipment, by Area of Origin 1994-1998 Annual Averages Direct Property Damage (in Millions) $144.2 $198.6 $59.3 $133.0 $82.5 $55.7 $24.0 $80.0 $37.1 $24.2 $17.0 $27.9 $17.2 $14.6 $9.1 $13.4 $16.1 $12.1 $10.2 $8.5 $3.1 (13.8%) (18.9%) (5.7%) (12.7%) (7.9%) (5.3%) (2.3%) (7.6%) (3.5%) (2.3%) (1.6%) (2.7%) (1.6%) (1.4%) (0.9%) (1.3%) (1.5%) (1.2%) (1.0%) (0.8%) (0.3%)

Area of Origin

Fires

Civilian Deaths (16.0%) (22.1%) (4.0%) (23.9%) (3.0%) (4.0%) (1.1%) (2.0%) (2.2%) (2.6%) (0.6%) (3.1%) (0.4%) (0.3%) (1.3%) (3.0%) (1.9%) (1.2%) (0.6%) (0.7%) (0.0%)

Civilian Injuries 479 597 130 351 60 88 63 75 47 40 21 22 25 16 18 31 25 23 19 13 3

Kitchen 15,900 Bedroom 11,200 Laundry room or area 6,600 Living room, family room 6,200 or den Attic or ceiling/roof 4,600 assembly or concealed space Crawl space or 4,000 substructure space Heating equipment room 3,200 Garage* 2,900 Wall assembly or 2,400 concealed space Lavatory 2,200 Exterior wall surface 2,100 Ceiling/floor assembly or 1,200 concealed space Closet 1,200 Supply storage room or 1,000 area Hallway, corridor or mall 900 Dining room 900 Unclassified structural 900 area Unclassified area of 700 origin Unclassified storage area 600 Exterior balcony or open 500 porch Exterior roof surface 400

(21.7%) 95 (15.2%) 131 (9.0%) 24 (8.5%) 141 (6.3%) (5.5%) (4.3%) (4.0%) (3.2%) (3.1%) (2.8%) (1.7%) (1.6%) (1.3%) (1.2%) (1.2%) (1.2%) (1.0%) (0.8%) (0.7%) (0.5%) 18 24 7 12 13 15 3 18 3 2 8 18 11 7 3 4 0

(21.3%) (26.6%) (5.8%) (15.6%) (2.7%) (3.9%) (2.8%) (3.4%) (2.1%) (1.8%) (0.9%) (1.0%) (1.1%) (0.7%) (0.8%) (1.4%) (1.1%) (1.0%) (0.8%) (0.6%) (0.1%)

* This does not include dwelling garages coded as a specific fixed property use.

Source: Custom tables on structure fires involving electrical arcing or improper operating electrical equipment in one- and two-family dwellings, prepared by Marty Ahrens, NFPA, Quincy, MA, March 2001.

Structure Fires in One- and Two-Family Dwellings in which the Form of Heat of Ignition was the Heat from Electrical Equipment Arcing or Overloaded or Improperly Operating Electrical Equipment, by Area of Origin 1998-1998 Annual Averages (Continued) Civilian Deaths (1.6%) (1.1%) (0.7%) (1.8%) 1 9 16 9 (0.1%) (1.5%) (2.7%) (1.5%) Civilian Injuries 17 29 13 42 Direct Property Damage (in Millions) $10.5 $14.3 $10.6 $24.7 (1.0%) (1.4%) (1.0%) (2.4%)

Area of Origin Other service or equipment area Other function room or area Other means of egress Other known area of origin

Fires 1,100 800 500 1,300

(0.7%) (1.3%) (0.6%) (1.9%)

Total

73,500 (100.0%) 591 (100.0%) 2,247 (100.0%) $1,047.9 (100.0%)

This table shows structure fires (incident type 11) in one- and two-family dwellings (fixed property use 410-419) in which the form of heat of ignition was one of the following: 21-Water caused short circuit arc; 22-Short circuit arc from mechanical damage; 23-Short circuit arc from defective or worn insulation; 24-Unspecified short circuit arc; 25-Arc from faulty contact, loose connection or broken conductor; 26-Arc or spark form operating equipment or switch; 27-Heat from overloaded equipment, including wiring and motors; 28-Fluorescent light ballast; 29-Unclassified electrical equipment arcing or overloaded; 20-Unknown-type electrical equipment arcing or overloaded; or 57-Heat from improperly operating electrical equipment. These are fires reported to U.S. municipal fire departments and so exclude fires reported only to Federal or state agencies or industrial fire brigades. Fires are rounded to the nearest hundred, civilian deaths and civilian injuries are expressed to the nearest one and property damage is rounded to the nearest hundred thousand dollars. Sums may not equal totals due to rounding errors. Property damage figures have not been adjusted for inflation. A proportional share of fires in which the form of heat of ignition was unknown has been included in this table. Fires in which the area of origin was unknown were allocated proportionally among fires with known area of origin. Source: National estimates based on NFIRS and NFPA survey.

Source: Custom tables on structure fires involving electrical arcing or improper operating electrical equipment in one- and two-family dwellings, prepared by Marty Ahrens, NFPA, Quincy, MA, March 2001.

Table 1. Structure Fires in One - and Two-Family Dwellings in which the Form of Heat of Ignition was the Heat from Electrical Equipment Arcing Including Unclassified or Unknown-Type Arcing or Overload, by Area of Origin 1994-1998 Annual Averages Direct Civilian Property Damage Injuries (in Millions) 364 (20.0%) $118.1 (13.1%) 499 (27.4%) $170.9 (18.9%) 286 (15.7%) $116.3 (12.9%) 90 50 (5.0%) (2.7%) $45.2 $73.9 (5.0%) (8.2%)

Area of Origin Kitchen Bedroom Living room, family room or den Laundry room or area Attic or ceiling/roof assembly or concealed space Crawl space or substructure space Garage or vehicle storage area* Heating equipment room Wall assembly or concealed space Exterior wall surface Lavatory Ceiling/floor assembly or concealed space Closet Supply storage room or area Unclassified structural area Dining room Hallway, corridor or mall Unclassified area of origin Other service or equipment area Other structural area

Civilian Fires Deaths 12,800 (21.1%) 82 (16.7%) 9,500 (15.7%) 112 (22.8%) 5,400 (8.8%) 121 (24.6%) 4,500 4,100 (7.4%) (6.7%) 23 12 (4.7%) (2.4%)

3,400 2,500 2,500 2,200 1,900 1,900 1,100 1,000 800 800 800 800 600 900 800

(5.5%) (4.1%) (4.0%) (3.6%) (3.2%) (3.1%) (1.8%) (1.7%) (1.3%) (1.3%) (1.3%) (1.3%) (1.0%) (1.5%) (1.3%)

15 11 5 10 3 7 16 3 2 4 16 8 6 0 4

(3.1%) (2.2%) (1.1%) (2.0%) (0.5%) (1.4%) (3.2%) (0.5%) (0.3%) (0.9%) (3.3%) (1.6%) (1.2%) (0.0%) (0.9%)

74 65 47 41 21 32 20 25 13 22 28 14 16 13 14

(4.1%) (3.6%) (2.6%) (2.2%) (1.1%) (1.8%) (1.1%) (1.4%) (0.7%) (1.2%) (1.5%) (0.8%) (0.9%) (0.7%) (0.8%)

$50.4 $70.3 $19.6 $32.8 $16.0 $20.9 $25.1 $16.0 $12.6 $14.1 $11.6 $8.1 $11.0 $9.2 $10.2

(5.6%) (7.8%) (2.2%) (3.6%) (1.8%) (2.3%) (2.8%) (1.8%) (1.4%) (1.6%) (1.3%) (0.9%) (1.2%) (1.0%) (1.1%)

* This does not include dwelling garages coded as a specific fixed property use.

Table 1. Structure Fires in One - and Two-Family Dwellings in which the Form of Heat of Ignition was the Heat from Electrical Equipment Arcing Including Unclassified or Unknown-Type Arcing or Overload, by Area of Origin 1994-1998 Annual Averages (Continued)

Area of Origin Other storage area Other function room or area Other known area Total

Fires 700 (1.2%) 700 (1.1%) 1,300 (2.2%)

Civilian Deaths 4 (0.8%) 7 (1.4%) 22 (4.5%)

Direct Civilian Property Damage Injuries (in Millions) 25 (1.4%) $13.2 (1.5%) 26 (1.4%) $12.3 (1.4%) 39 (2.1%) $26.7 (3.0%) $904.6 (100.0%)

60,900 (100.0%) 490 (100.0%) 1,822 (100.0%)

This table shows structure fires (incident type 11) in one- and two-fa mily dwellings and manufactured housing (fixed property use 410-419) in which the form of heat of ignition was one of the following: 21-Water caused short circuit arc; 22-Short circuit arc from mechanical damage; 23-Short circuit arc from defective or worn insulation; 24-Unspecified short circuit arc; 25-Arc from faulty contact, loose connection or broken conductor; 26-Arc or spark form operating equipment or switch; 29-Unclassified electrical equipment arcing or overloaded; 20-Unknown-type electrical equipment arcing or overloaded; or These are fires reported to U.S. municipal fire departments and so exclude fires reported only to Federal or state agencies or industrial fire brigades. Fires are rounded to the nearest hundred, civilian deaths and civilian injuries are expressed to the nearest one and property damage is rounded to the nearest hundred thousand dollars. Sums may not equal totals due to rounding errors. Property damage figures have not been adjusted for inflation. A proportional share of fires in which the form of heat of ignition was unknown has been included in this table. Electrical equipment arcing fires in which the area of origin was unknown were allocated proportionally among fires with known area of origin. Source: National estimates based on NFIRS and NFPA survey.

Table 2. Structure Fires in One - and Two-Family Dwellings in which the Form of Heat of Ignition was the Heat from Electrical Equipment Arcing Excluding Unclassified or Unknown-Type Arcing or Overload, by Area of Origin 1994-1998 Annual Averages Direct Property Damage (in Millions)
$88.0 (12.3%) $135.4 (19.0%) $94.4 (13.2%) $61.1 $35.6 $42.2 $54.8 $15.5 $26.8 $13.1 $16.3 $20.4 $12.3 $10.0 $9.8 $6.8 $9.6 $7.5 $8.3 $10.7 $8.6 $26.6 (8.6%) (5.0%) (5.9%) (7.7%) (2.2%) (3.8%) (1.8%) (2.3%) (2.9%) (1.7%) (1.4%) (1.4%) (1.0%) (1.3%) (0.0%) (1.2%) (0.0%) (0.0%) (3.7%)

Area of Origin
Kitchen Bedroom Living room, family room or den Attic or ceiling/roof assembly or concealed space Laundry room or area Crawl space or substructure space* Garage or vehicle storage area Heating equipment room Wall assembly or concealed space Exterior wall surface Lavatory Ceiling/floor assembly or concealed space Closet Supply storage room or area Dining room Hallway, corridor or mall Unclassified structural area Other service or equipment area Other structural area Other storage area Other function area Other known area Total

Fires
9,000 8,000 4,600 3,500 3,400 2,900 2,000 1,900 1,900 1,700 1,600 900 800 700 600 600 600 700 700 600 500 1,500 (18.4%) (16.4%) (9.4%) (7.2%) (7.0%) (5.9%) (4.2%) (4.0%) (3.9%) (3.4%) (3.2%) (1.9%) (1.7%) (1.3%) (1.3%) (1.3%) (1.2%) (1.5%) (1.3%) (1.2%) (1.0%) (3.1%)

Civilian Deaths
52 70 97 9 19 10 6 5 4 2 5 15 2 0 13 3 1 0 3 4 2 24 (15.1%) (20.2%) (28.0%) (2.5%) (5.4%) (2.8%) (1.6%) (1.4%) (1.3%) (0.5%) (1.5%) (4.4%) (0.5%) (0.0%) (3.9%) (1.0%) (0.4%) (0.0%) (1.0%) (1.2%) (0.5%) (6.9%)

Civilian Injuries
193 415 232 44 65 60 49 39 28 18 26 16 20 10 23 13 16 12 13 22 16 40 (14.1%) (30.3%) (16.9%) (3.2%) (4.7%) (4.4%) (3.6%) (2.8%) (2.0%) (1.3%) (1.9%) (1.2%) (1.5%) (0.7%) (1.7%) (0.9%) (1.2%) (0.8%) (0.9%) (1.6%) (1.2%) (2.9%)

48,800 (100.0%) 345 (100.0%) 1,371 (100.0%)

$713.8 (100.0%)

* This does not include dwelling garages coded as a specific fixed property use.

Table 2. Structure Fires in One - and Two-Family Dwellings in which the Form of Heat of Ignition was the Heat from Electrical Equipment Arcing Excluding Unclassified or Unknown-Type Arcing or Overload, by Area of Origin 1994-1998 Annual Averages (Continued)

This table shows structure fires (incident type 11) in one- and two-family dwellings, including manufactured housing (fixed property use 410-419) in which the form of heat of ignition was one of the following: 21-Water caused short circuit arc; 22-Short circuit arc from mechanical damage; 23-Short circuit arc from defective or worn insulation; 24-Unspecified short circuit arc; 25-Arc from faulty contact, loose connection or broken conductor; 26-Arc or spark form operating equipment or switch; These are fires reported to U.S. municipal fire departments and so exclude fires reported only to Federal or state agencies or industrial fire brigades. Fires are rounded to the nearest hundred, civilian deaths and civilian injuries are expressed to the nearest one and property damage is rounded to the nearest hundred thousand dollars. Sums may not equal totals due to rounding errors. Property damage figures have not been adjusted for inflation. A proportional share of fires in which the form of heat of ignition was unknown has been included in this table. Electrical equipment fires in which the area of origin was unknown were allocated proportionally among fires with known area of origin. Source: National estimates based on NFIRS and NFPA survey.

Table 3. Structure Fires in One - and Two-Family Dwellings by Form of Heat of Ignition 1994-1998 Annual Averages Direct Property Damage (in Millions)
$14.1 $65.0 (0.4%) (1.9%)

Code
10 11

Form of Heat

Fires
1,300 5,600 (0.4%) (1.8%)

Civilian Deaths
8 53 (0.3%) (1.9%)

Civilian Injuries
47 271 (0.4%) (2.2%)

12 13

14 15

16 17

18

19

20

21 22 23

24

Heat from unknowntype fuel-fired object Spark, ember or flame escaping from gasfueled equipment Heat from gas-fueled equipment Spark, ember or flame escaping from liquidfueled equipment Heat from liquid-fueled equipment Spark, ember of flame escaping from solidfueled equipment Heat from solid-fueled equipment Spark, ember or flame escaping from equipment with unknown-type fuel Heat from equipment with unknown-type fuel Heat from unclassified fuel-fired or fuelpowered object Unknown-type electrical equipment arc or overload Water-caused short circuit arc Short circuit arc from mechanical damage Short circuit arc from defective or worn insulation Unspecified short circuit arc

28,600 1,500

(9.3%) (0.5%)

249 20

(8.9%) (0.7%)

1,283 78

(10.4%) (0.6%)

$210.5 $22.7

(6.0%) (0.7%)

4,900 8,900

(1.6%) (2.9%)

75 38

(2.7%) (1.4%)

225 81

(1.8%) (0.7%)

$46.1 $64.6

(1.3%) (1.9%)

19,600 600

(6.4%) (0.2%)

68 6

(2.4%) (0.2%)

186 10

(1.5%) (0.1%)

$136.6 $12.1

(3.9%) (0.3%)

1,400

(0.5%)

(0.2%)

40

(0.3%)

$14.5

(0.4%)

1,100

(0.4%)

10

(0.3%)

37

(0.3%)

$18.7

(0.5%)

8,000

(2.6%)

100

(3.6%)

290

(2.4%)

$132.6

(3.8%)

1,300 4,200 10,700

(0.4%) (1.4%) (3.5%)

3 18 77

(0.1%) (0.6%) (2.7%)

19 99 263

(0.2%) (0.8%) (2.1%)

$8.3 $50.0 $132.1

(0.2%) (1.4%) (3.8%)

27,600

(9.0%)

217

(7.7%)

801

(6.5%)

$458.3 (13.2%)

Structure Fires in One - and Two-Family Dwellings by Form of Heat of Ignition 1994-1998 Annual Averages Direct Property Damage (in Millions)
$39.4 $25.7 (1.1%) (0.7%)

Code
25 26

Form of Heat

Fires
3,200 1,800 (1.0%) (0.6%)

Civilian Deaths
14 16 (0.5%) (0.6%)

Civilian Injuries
91 97 (0.7%) (0.8%)

27 28 29

30

31 32 33 39 40

41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51

Arc from faulty contact Arc or spark from operating equipment or switch Heat from overloaded equipment Fluorescent light ballast Unclassified electrical equipment arc or overload Heat from unknowntype smoking material Cigarette Cigar Pipe Heat from unclassified smoking material Heat from unknowntype open flame or spark Cutting torch Welding torch Torch, not cutting or welding Candle Match Lighter Open fire Backfire from internal combustion engine Heat from unclassified open flame or spark Heat from unknowntype hot object Heat or spark from friction

7,000 400 4,000

(2.3%) (0.1%) (1.3%)

68 2 45

(2.4%) (0.1%) (1.6%)

249 5 162

(2.0%) (0.0%) (1.3%)

$90.5 $4.7 $58.2

(2.6%) (0.1%) (1.7%)

1,100

(0.4%)

58

(2.1%)

66

(0.5%)

$18.5

(0.5%)

13,900 200 100 700 6,100

(4.5%) (0.0%) (0.0%) (0.2%) (2.0%)

565 7 15 11 85

(20.1%) (0.3%) (0.5%) (0.4%) (3.0%)

1,128 11 5 32 257

(9.2%) (0.1%) (0.0%) (0.3%) (2.1%)

$177.0 $2.5 $1.4 $9.9 $97.2

(5.1%) (0.1%) (0.0%) (0.3%) (2.8%)

600 700 2,100 7,500 14,700 8,600 5,900 200 4,100 3,600 900

(0.2%) (0.2%) (0.7%) (2.5%) (4.8%) (2.8%) (1.9%) (0.1%) (1.3%) (1.2%) (0.3%)

1 2 8 92 145 172 32 0 41 39 1

(0.0%) (0.1%) (0.3%) (3.3%) (5.2%) (6.1%) (1.1%) (0.0%) (1.5%) (1.4%) (0.0%)

16 26 67 756 778 1,031 143 13 166 123 14

(0.1%) (0.2%) (0.5%) (6.1%) (6.3%) (8.4%) (1.2%) (0.1%) (1.3%) (1.0%) (0.1%)

$7.6 $9.8 $28.1 $111.7 $163.9 $118.0 $45.2 $4.5 $46.9 $41.6 $5.1

(0.2%) (0.3%) (0.8%) (3.2%) (4.7%) (3.4%) (1.3%) (0.1%) (1.3%) (1.2%) (0.1%)

Table 3. Structure Fires in One- and Two-Family Dwellings by Form of Heat of Ignition 1994-1998 Annual Averages Direct Property Damage (in Millions)
$5.3 $76.9 $56.2 $26.9 $234.9 (0.2%) (2.2%) (1.6%) (0.8%) (6.7%)

Code
52 53 54 55 56

Form of Heat

Fires
600 6,800 4,000 3,900 38,500 (0.2%) (2.2%) (1.3%) (1.3%) (12.6%)

Civilian Deaths
3 27 23 1 189 (0.1%) (1.0%) (0.8%) (0.0%) (6.7%)

Civilian Injuries
27 123 133 4 2,148 (0.2%) (1.0%) (1.1%) (0.0%) (17.5%)

57

59 60

61 62 63 64 65 66 69

70 71 72 73 74 79 80

Molten or hot material Hot ember or ash Electric lamp Rekindle or reignition Heat from properly operating electrical equipment Heat from improperly operating electrical equipment Heat from unclassified hot object Heat from unknowntype explosive or fireworks Explosive Blasting agent Fireworks Party cap, party popper Model rocket, not amateur rocketry Incendiary device Heat from unclassified explosive or fireworks Heat from unknowntype natural source Sun's heat Spontaneous ignition or chemical reaction Lightning Static discharge Heat from unclassified natural source Unknown-type heat spreading from another hostile fire

5,200

(1.7%)

31

(1.1%)

171

(1.4%)

$48.1

(1.4%)

3,300 100

(1.1%) (0.0%)

26 0

(0.9%) (0.0%)

123 3

(1.0%) (0.0%)

$37.0 $1.0

(1.1%) (0.0%)

100 0 800 0 0 1,900 100

(0.0%) (0.0%) (0.3%) (0.0%) (0.0%) (0.6%) (0.0%)

0 0 2 0 1 12 1

(0.0%) (0.0%) (0.1%) (0.0%) (0.0%) (0.4%) (0.0%)

8 0 25 0 2 62 1

(0.1%) (0.0%) (0.2%) (0.0%) (0.0%) (0.5%) (0.0%)

$1.3 $0.2 $8.7 $2.2 $0.9 $27.7 $2.2

(0.0%) (0.0%) (0.2%) (0.1%) (0.0%) (0.8%) (0.1%)

100 200 2,100 5,700 100 100 700

(0.0%) (0.1%) (0.7%) (1.9%) (0.0%) (0.0%) (0.2%)

0 0 3 12 0 0 1

(0.0%) (0.0%) (0.1%) (0.4%) (0.0%) (0.0%) (0.0%)

1 1 51 52 3 0 10

(0.0%) (0.0%) (0.4%) (0.4%) (0.0%) (0.0%) (0.1%)

$1.0 $1.5 $35.9 $122.9 $0.6 $0.7 $15.5

(0.0%) (0.0%) (1.0%) (3.5%) (0.0%) (0.0%) (0.4%)

Structure Fires in One - and Two-Family Dwellings by Form of Heat of Ignition 1994-1998 Annual Averages Direct Property Damage (in Millions)
$81.9 $53.2 $13.0 $8.7 $8.1 (2.4%) (1.5%) (0.4%) (0.3%) (0.2%)

Code
81 82 83 84 89

Form of Heat

Fires
5,900 6,400 700 900 600 (1.9%) (2.1%) (0.2%) (0.3%) (0.2%)

Civilian Deaths
24 17 2 2 3 (0.8%) (0.6%) (0.1%) (0.1%) (0.1%)

Civilian Injuries
88 71 4 28 7 (0.7%) (0.6%) (0.0%) (0.2%) (0.1%)

97 99

Heat from direct flame or convection current Radiated heat Heat from flying brand, ember or spark Conducted heat Unclassified heat spreading from another hostile fire Multiple forms of heat Unclassified form of heat Total

1,100 4,600

(0.3%) (1.5%)

9 55

(0.3%) (1.9%)

32 144

(0.3%) (1.2%)

$34.9 $80.1

(1.0%) (2.3%)

306,800 (100.0%) 2,810 (100.0%) 12,288 (100.0%) $3,481.2 (100.0%)

This table shows the form of heat of ignition in structure fires (incident type 11) in one- and two-family dwellings, including manufactured housing (fixed property use 410-419) These are fires reported to U.S. municipal fire departments and so exclude fires reported only to Federal or state agencies or industrial fire brigades. Fires are rounded to the nearest hundred, civilian deaths and civilian injuries are expressed to the nearest one and property damage is rounded to the nearest hundred thousand dollars. Sums may not equal totals due to rounding errors. Property damage figures have not been adjusted for inflation. A proportional share of fires in which the form of heat of ignition was unknown has been included in this table. Source: National estimates based on NFIRS and NFPA survey.

Appendix: How National Estimates Statistics Are Calculated Estimates are made using the National Fire Incident Reporting System (NFIRS) of the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA's) United States Fire Administration (USFA), supplemented by the annual stratified random-sample survey of fire experience conducted by the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), which is used for calibration. Databases Used NFIRS provides annual computerized databases of fire incidents, with data classified according to a standard format based on the NFPA 901 Standard. Roughly three-fourths of all states have NFIRS coordinators, who receive fire incident data from participating fire departments and combine the data into a state database. These data are then transmitted to FEMA/USFA. Participation by the states, and by local fire departments within participating states, is voluntary. NFIRS captures roughly one-third to one- half of all U.S. fires each year. More than one-third of all U.S. fire departments are listed as participants in NFIRS, although not all of these departments provide data every year. The strength of NFIRS is that it provides the most detailed incident information of any national database not limited to large fires. NFIRS is the only database capable of addressing national patterns for fires of all sizes by specific property use and specific fire cause. (The NFPA survey separates fewer than 20 of the hundreds of property use categories defined by NFPA 901 and solicits no cause-related information except for incendiary and suspicious fires.) NFIRS also captures information on the avenues and extent of flame spread and smoke spread and on the performance of detectors and sprinklers. The NFPA survey is based on a stratified random sample of roughly 3,000 U.S. fire departments (or just over one of every ten fire departments in the country). The survey includes the following information: (1) the total number of fire incidents, civilian deaths, and civilian injuries, and the total estimated property damage (in dollars), for each of the major property use classes defined by the NFPA 901 Standard; (2) the number of on-duty firefighter injuries, by type of duty and nature of illness; and (3) information on the type of community protected (e.g., county versus township versus city) and the size of the population protected, which is used in the statistical formula for projecting national totals from sample results. The NFPA survey begins with the NFPA Fire Service Inventory, a computerized file of about 30,000 U.S. fire departments, which is the most complete and thoroughly validated such listing in existence. The survey is stratified by size of population protected to reduce the uncertainty of the final estimate. Small rural communities protect fewer people per department and are less likely to respond to the survey, so a large number must be surveyed to obtain an adequate sample of those departments. (NFPA also makes follow-up calls to a sample of the smaller fire departments that do not respond, to confirm that those that did respond are truly representative of fire departments their size.) On the other hand, large city departments are so few in number and protect such a large proportion of the total U.S. population that it makes sense to survey all of them. Most respond, resulting in excellent precision for their part of the final estimate.

Projecting NFIRS to National Estimates To project NFIRS results to national estimates, one needs at least an estimate of the NFIRS fires as a fraction of the total so that the fraction can be inverted and used as a multiplier or scaling ratio to generate national estimates from NFIRS data. But NFIRS is a sample from a universe whose size cannot be inferred from NFIRS alone. Also, participation rates in NFIRS are not necessarily uniform across regions and sizes of community, both of which are factors correlated with frequency and severity of fires. This means NFIRS may be susceptible to systematic biases. No one at present can quantify the size of these deviations from the ideal, representative sample, so no one can say with confidence that they are or are not serious problems. But there is enough reason for concern so that a second database - the NFPA survey - is needed to project NFIRS to national estimates and to project different parts of NFIRS separately. This multiple calibration approach makes use of the annual NFPA survey where its statistical design advantages are strongest. There are separate projection formulas for four major property classes (residential structures, non-residential structures, vehicles, and other) and for each measure of fire severity (fire incidents, civilian deaths, and civilian injuries, and direct property damage). For example, the scaling ratio for 1998 civilian deaths in residential structures is equal to the total number of 1998 civilian deaths in residential structure fires reported to fire departments, according to the NFPA survey (3,250), divided by the total number of 1998 civilian deaths in residential structure fires reported to NFIRS (1,224). Therefore, the scaling ratio is 3,250/1,224 = 2.66. The scaling ratios for civilian deaths and injuries and direct property damage are often significantly different from those for fire incidents. Except for fire service injuries, average severity per fire is generally higher for NFIRS than for the NFPA survey. Use of different scaling ratios for each measure of severity is equivalent to assuming that these differences are due either to NFIRS under-reporting of small fires, resulting in a higher-than-actual loss-perfire ratio, or possible biases in the NFIRS sample representation by region or size of community, resulting in severity-per- fire ratios characteristic only of the oversampled regions or community sizes. Note that this approach also means that the NFPA survey results for detailed property-use classes (e.g., fires in storage structures) may not match the national estimates of the same value. Calculating National Estimates of Particular Types of Fires Most analyses of interest involve the calculation of the estimated number of fires not only within a particular occupancy but also of a particular type. The types that are mostly frequently of interest are those defined by some ignition-cause characteristic. The six causerelated characteristics most commonly used to describe fires are: form of the heat that caused the ignition, equipment involved in ignition, form or type of material first ignited, the ignition factor that brought heat source and ignited material together, and area of origin. Other characteristics of interest are victim characteristics, such as ages of persons killed or injured in fire. For any characteristic of interest in NFIRS, some reported fires have that characteristic unknown or not reported. If the unknowns are not taken into account, then the propensity to

report or not report a characteristic may influence the results far more than the actual patterns on that characteristic. For example, suppose the number of fires remained the same for several consecutive years, but the percentage of fires with cause unreported steadily declined over those years. If the unknown-cause fires were ignored, it would appear as if fires due to every specific cause increased over time while total fires remained unchanged. This, of course, does not make sense. Consequently, most national estimates analyses allocate unknowns. This is done by using scaling ratios defined by NFPA survey estimates of totals divided by only those NFIRS fires for which the dimension in question was known and reported. This approach is equivalent to assuming that the fires with unreported characteristics, if known, would show the same proportions as the fires with known characteristics. For example, it assumes that the fires with unknown ignition factor contain the same relative shares of child-playing fires, incendiary-cause fires, short circuit fires, and so forth, as are found in the fires where ignition factor was reported. Rounding Errors The possibility of rounding errors exists in all our calculations. One of the notes on each table indicates the extent of rounding for that table, e.g., deaths rounded to the nearest one, fires rounded to the nearest hundred, property damage rounded to the nearest hundred thousand dollars. In rounding to the nearest one, functional values of 0.5 or more are rounded up and functional values less than 0.5 are rounded down. For example, 2.5 would round to 3, and 3.4 would round to 3. In rounding to the nearest one, a stated estimate of 1 could be any number from 0.5 to 1.49, a roughly threefold range. The impact of rounding is greatest when the stated number is small relative to the degree of rounding. As noted, rounding to the nearest one means that stated values of 1 may vary by a factor of three. Similarly, the cumulative impact of rounding error - the potential gap between the estimated total and the sum of the estimated values as rounded - is greatest when there are a large number of values and the total is small relative to the extent of rounding. Suppose a table presented 5-year averages of estimated deaths by item first ignited, all rounded to the nearest one. Suppose there were a total of 30 deaths in the 5 years, so the total average would be 30/5 = 6. In case 1, suppose 10 of the possible items first ignited each accounted for 3 deaths in 5 years. Then there would be 10 entries of 3/5 = 0.6, rounded to 1, and the sum would be 10, compared to the true total of 6. In case 2, suppose 15 of the possible items first ignited each accounted for 2 deaths in 5 years. Then there would be 15 entries of 215 = 0.4, rounded to 0, and the sum would be 0, compared to the true total of 6. Here is another example: Suppose there were an estimate of 7 deaths total in 1992 through 1996. The 5-year average would be 1.4, which would round to 1, the number we would show as the total. Each death would represent a 5-year average of 0.2. If those 7 deaths split as 4 deaths in one category (e.g., smoking) and 3 deaths in a second category (e.g., heating), then we would show 4 x 0.2 = 0.8 deaths per year for smoking and 3

x 0.2 = 0.6 deaths per year for heating. Both would round to 1, there would be two entries of 1, and the sum would be 2, higher than the actual rounded total. If those 7 deaths split as 1 death in each of 7 categories (quite possible since there are 12 major cause categories), then we would show 0.2 in each category, always rounding to 0, and the sum would be 0, lower than the actual rounded total. The more categories there are, the farther apart the sum and total can -- and often do -- get. Note that percentages are calculated from unrounded values, and so it is quite possible to have a percentage entry of up to 100%, even if the rounded number entry is zero.

ARC FAULT CIRCUIT INTERRUPTER (AFCI) price list BRAND/TYPE PRICE 20 amp Boston QO Home Depot online $39.97 Homeline Home Depot online $34.97 Murray Home Depot online $34.97 Cutler-Hammer Home Depot online N/A GE Lowes online $34.56 15 amp QO Home Depot online Homeline Home Depot online Murray Home Depot online

Seattle $39.97 $28.00 N/A $29.97 $34.56

NY, Phila, Chi, Mia, Atl, LA, Vegas $39.97 $34.97 N/A N/A $34.56

$39.97 $34.97 $34.97

$39.97 $34.97 N/A

$39.97 $34.97 N/A

by David Dini

The results of ULs research were used as a basis for the development of the Standard for Arc-Fault Circuit Interrupters, UL 1699.

t is not often that a new safety device is introduced to protect individuals from the dangers that may be present in residential occupancies. Smoke alarms, carbon monoxide detectors, and ground-fault circuit interrupters are recognized as essential life saving devices. In 2002, the National Electrical Code (NEC) will require a new electrical safety device, the arc-fault circuit interrupter (AFCI), for added protection in certain dwelling unit branch circuits. Currently being incorporated into both residential circuit breakers and outlet receptacles, AFCIs incorporate very sophisticated electronics to recognize characteristics unique to arcing, and function to de-energize the circuit when a potentially damaging arc fault is detected. When devices intended to provide for safety are first introduced, it is not unusual to find that there are differing viewpoints as to the added benefits these safety devices may or may not provide. These differences in viewpoints often carry over into the development of proposals for revision of codes and standards. Proposals to adopt required use of the new AFCIs have raised such differences in viewpoints. Various concerns have been expressed which if left unanswered, could give a false impression about the ability of AFCIs to properly perform their intended function and provide the added safety benefit for which they were designed. The following are responses to specific concerns to help clarify the record. Concern NEC CMP-2 accepted adoption of this new requirement based on inaccurate and misleading documentation submitted by the manufacturers of these devices. Several documents were submitted to CMP-2 in substantiating the various proposals for the NEC Section 210-12 requirement for arc-fault protection. Included was a March 15, 1996, UL Report of Research on Arc-Fault Detection Circuit Breakers. This extensive work included development of arc-current versus time characteristics for ignition of materials by arcing faults, unwanted operation and operation inhibition considerations, and effects of building wire impedance. The results of ULs research

84

IAEI NEWS

ARC-FAULT CIRCUIT INTERRUPTERS

were used as a basis for the development of the Standard for Arc-Fault Circuit Interrupters, UL 1699. Proponents provided residential fire data provided by a major home insurance company that showed evidence of electrical arcing being common with many residential electrical fires. Concern At a recent meeting of NEC CMP-2, UL made a presentation that demonstrated that the AFCI devices would not detect all arcing faults. The UL representative described the basic technical problems with the device. It will not be able to detect all arcs that may produce a fire. Asked if the device will detect all arcs between the breaker and the first outlet, the answer was no. The answer was the same for detecting arcs in an outlet, in the cord from the outlet to the appliance, and the appliance itself. Asked what the percentage of arcs may be detected, the answer was they do not know. The UL 1699 Standard describes several different types of AFCIs for different applications and areas of protection. For example, a branch/feeder type AFCI is

intended to be installed at the origin of the branch circuit to protect the branch circuit wiring against the unwanted effects of arcing faults. There are also outlet branchcircuit AFCIs of the receptacle type that have been tested to protect the branch circuit wiring. AFCIs are tested to mitigate the effects of various types of arcing, including both contact and non-contact arcing, and series and parallel arcing. Surgical cotton is used as the fire indicator in many of the tests. Some electrical arcing, such as that which might ignite flammable gases or vapors, is beyond the capabilities of an AFCI. Concern The UL Standard used to manufacture and test this product has only been in existence a short time. It was rushed through development only to satisfy the needs of the manufacturers as it related to their specific product. UL has been working with all interested parties involving AFCIs since 1994 to develop the requirements for UL 1699. The results of thousands of hours of research, development, and technical meetings

To dweling unit bedrooms

Typical dweling unit bedroom

Circuit run to AFCI device

Dwelling unit panelboard

All branch circuits that supply 125-volt, 15-and 20-ampere Outlets installed in dwelling unit bedrooms shall be protected by an Arc-Fault Circuit Interrupter(s).

Figure 1. 210.12 Arc-Fault Circuit Interrupter Protection

SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2001

85

ARC-FAULT CIRCUIT INTERRUPTERS

culminated in the publishing of the UL 1699 Standard for AFCIs in February of 1999. Prior to publishing UL 1699, UL classified several AFCIs involved in beta site testing.

210-12 would only apply to new construction where branch-circuit wiring with an equipment ground would be required. The tests in UL 1699 that use SPT flexible cord are conducted on cords without ground. Additional requirements are being proposed for According to the 1998 Residential UL 1699 for some types of AFCIs to be tested with NM cable without ground, as may be found Fire Loss Estimates published by the in older homes.

Concern The claims that annual property losses are more than $1.5 billion are unsub(www.cpsc.gov), total residential stantiated. According to the 1998 Residential Fire Loss electrical equipment resulted in Estimates published by the CPSC and available on their web site (www.cpsc.gov), total $1.68 billion in fire losses in 1998, residential electrical equipment resulted in $1.68 billion in fire losses in 1998, the latest the latest year available. year available. From this, electrical distribution equipment resulted in $680 million in Concern Unfortunately, the devices can pass only losses. AFCIs are most effective in preventing fires four of the tests, not the full 14 tests needed for this within the electrical distribution system. This CPSC product to protect residential occupancies as outlined data came from the U.S. Fire Administrations (USFA) in a UL study for the U.S. Consumer Product Safety National Fire Incident Reporting System (NFIRS) and Commission (CPSC). the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA). The CPSC study referenced, Technology for Detecting and Monitoring Conditions that Could Cause Electrical Concern AFCIs are an unreliable product that Wiring System Fires, involved an in-depth study of five should not be counted upon for public safety. The different technologies to detect and monitor precur- current requirements for smoke alarms are much sory conditions that could lead to fires in residential more reliable and cost-effective in protecting occupants electrical wiring systems. Arc-fault detection technology from residential fires. was only one of the five technologies being studied. To compare AFCIs to smoke alarms would not be Not all of the 14 experimental tests described in that correct. A smoke alarm is a signaling device intended report were intended for arc-fault technology. For to warn people of a fire hazard that has already develexample, electrical ignition most frequently occurs oped. A smoke alarm is intended to protect people, as the result of Joule heating or electrical arcing. It and not necessarily property. An AFCI is not a signaling should not be expected that those ignition scenarios device; however, it is a safety protective device. It funcrepresenting Joule (I2R) heating would necessarily be tions by recognizing characteristics unique to arcing prevented by an AFCI. The UL 1699 Standard currently and de-energizing the circuit when an arc-fault is detected. addresses four different types of arcing tests with dif- By doing so, this device will safeguard persons and ferent types of wires and insulation cuts, 15 different property by mitigating the unwanted effects of arcing, unwanted tripping tests, 9 different operation inhibi- which can result in a fire. tion tests, and 14 additional tests representing environmental conditioning, overloads, short circuits, and Photographs and drawings provided courtesy of the IAEI educamechanical testing, among others. tion department. Concern The tests from the UL Standard only use NM cable with a grounding conductor, not the common single conductor concealed wiring method (knob and tube) installed in older dwellings. Most of the wiring fires included in the fire studies used by the proponents to support the requirement for AFCIs have occurred in older dwellings. The tests in UL 1699 for use with NM cable require NM cable with ground, as the NEC requirement in Section
86
IAEI NEWS

CPSC and available on their web site

David Dini is a senior research engineer at Underwriters Laboratories Inc.s (UL) Northbrook, Ill., office. As an electrical engineer with more than 25 years of experience in product safety testing, Dini is extensively involved in new technology research. Dini is a registered professional engineer (PE) in the state of Illinois; a member of the National Electrical Code (NEC) making panels 1 and 5; a senior member of IEEE; and an International Association of Electrical Inspectors associate member.

AFCI Types and Product Categories

The table below contains the current UL AFCI Product Categories as well as a similar product referred to as a leakage-current detection and interruption (LCDI) device. These product categories are tabulated by CCN (Category Control Number), product category name and AFCI or LCDI Type definition.

Home AFCI Categories Web Links

UL.com - Regulators AFCIs - Categories

By clicking on the CCN you will be linked to the UL Online Certifications Directory database which will provide you with the UL Guide Information for the category and all current Listings under that Product Category. AVYI is the main category that all AFCI sub-categories fall under. It contains the general information pertinent to all AFCI categories and sub-categories. CCN AVYI (Main Guide) Product Category and Type Definition Arc Fault Circuit Interrupters (AFCI) - A device intended to mitigate the effects of arcing faults by functioning to de-energize the circuit when an arc-fault is detected.

These following types of AFCIs are intended for permanent installation in a branch circuit (or feeder where noted). CCN AVZQ Product Category and Type Definition Arc Fault Circuit Interrupters, Branch/Feeder Type - A device intended to be installed at the origin of a branch circuit or feeder, such as at a panelboard. It is intended to provide protection of the branch circuit wiring, feeder wiring, or both, against unwanted effects of arcing. This device also provides limited protection to branch circuit extension wiring. It may be a circuit-breaker type device or a device in its own enclosure mounted at or near a panelboard. Arc Fault Circuit Interrupters, Combination Type - An

AWAH

AFCI which complies with the requirements for both branch/feeder and outlet circuit AFCIs. It is intended to protect downstream branch circuit wiring and cord sets and power-supply cords. AWBZ Arc Fault Circuit Interrupters, Outlet Branch Circuit Type - A device intended to be installed as the first outlet in a branch circuit. It is intended to provide protection to downstream branch circuit wiring, cord sets, and powersupply cords against the unwanted effects of arcing. This device also provides protection to upstream branch circuit wiring. It is intended to be provided with or without receptacle outlets. Arc Fault Circuit Interrupters, Outlet Circuit Type - A device intended to be installed at a branch circuit outlet, such as at an outlet box. It is intended to provide protection of cord sets and power-supply cords connected to it (when provided with receptacle outlets) against the unwanted effects of arcing. This device may provide feed-through protection of the cord sets and power-supply cords connected to downstream receptacles.

AWCG

The following types of AFCIs are portable devices and may be incorporated into appliances or utilization equipment. CCN AWAY Product Category and Type Definition Arc Fault Circuit Interrupters, Cord Type - A plug-in device intended to be connected to a receptacle outlet. It is intended to provide protection to the power-supply cord connected to it against the unwanted effects of arcing. The cord may be integral to the device. The device has no additional outlets. Arc Fault Circuit Interrupters, Portable Type - A plug-in device intended to be connected to a receptacle outlet and provided with one or more outlets. It is intended to provide protection to connected cord sets and powersupply cords against the unwanted effects of arcing.

AWDO

The following device is similar to AFCIs, they are referred to as leakage-current detection and interruption (LCDI) devices. CCN ELGN Product Category and Type Definition Leakage-Current Detection And Interruption (LCDI) This is a device provided in a power supply cord or cord set that senses leakage current flowing between or from the integral cord conductors and interrupts the circuit at a predetermined level of leakage current.

Arc-Fault Circuit Interrupters (AFCIs) Type and Performance Considerations

In February of 1999, UL published the First Edition of the Standard for Arc-Fault Circuit-Interrupters (AFCIs), UL1699. According to the National Electrical Code (NEC), an AFCI is defined as 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. The 2002 NEC will require all branch circuits that supply 125-volt, single-phase, 15- and 20-ampere outlets installed in dwelling unit bedrooms to be protected by an AFCI listed to provide protection to the entire branch circuit. Branch Circuits A branch circuit is defined in Article 100 of the NEC as the circuit conductors between the final overcurrent device protecting the circuit and the outlet(s). The length of a branch circuit can vary from several feet to several hundred feet, and include from one to several outlets. Figure 1 shows a pictorial representation of a typical branch circuit that could be associated with a dwelling unit bedroom.

Figure 1 Pictorial Representation of a Typical Branch Circuit (Not to Scale)

Copyright 2001 Underwriters Laboratories Inc.

The branch circuit overcurrent protection is provided by a fuse or circuit breaker usually located in a centralized panelboard that is served with power by the local utility. As the name implies, overcurrent protection protects the branch circuit against any currents that are in excess of the rated current or ampacity of the branch circuit conductors. Overcurrents can be the result of overloads, short circuits, or ground faults. Overcurrent protection is provided to open the circuit if the current reaches a value that will cause an excessive or dangerous temperature in the branch circuit conductors or conductor insulation. The branch circuit conductors are normally contained within a non-metallic cable (NM-B), armored cable (AC), or a metal or non-metallic raceway such as conduit or tubing. Non-metallic cables and raceway systems contain a separate conductor for equipment grounding purposes. Metal armor cables and raceways may contain an equipment grounding conductor, but in most cases the metal itself is permitted to serve as the equipment grounding path. The branch circuit conductors extend throughout the building to outlets, which may be a receptacle outlet for connecting to cord- and plug-connected appliances, or to fixed equipment, such as a lighting outlet for a wall or ceiling mounted lighting fixture (luminaire). Receptacle outlets in the branch circuit provide for the connection of cordconnected appliances, which in a bedroom may include appliances such as portable lamps, clock-radios, and portable air heaters. The cords attached to these appliances are generally referred to as power supply cords, as they supply the power from the branch circuit to the cord-connected appliance. In some cases, a power supply cord is not long enough to reach from the intended location of the appliance to the nearest receptacle outlet. In these situations, a cord set, often referred to as an extension cord, is used to extend the length of the appliance power supply cord to the electrical outlet. Cord sets and power supply cords are made from flexible cords that have designations such as SPT-2 which is often used on portable lamps and light duty extension cords. Although flexible cords are not a substitute for fixed branch circuit wiring, they are tested for mechanical impact and flexural strength properties that are suitable for their intended application. Flexible cords may or may not be provided with an equipment grounding conductor depending on the application or appliance involved. Cord sets and power supply cords are not part of the branch circuit wiring, but since they extend power beyond the branch circuit, they can be subjected to the same overloads, short circuits, and ground faults as would the branch circuit wiring. Branch Circuit Protection The branch circuit overcurrent protective device (OCPD), (i.e. a fuse or circuit breaker), is specifically designed to protect electrical circuits, including the

Copyright 2001 Underwriters Laboratories Inc.

branch circuit conductors and flexible cords, against the unwanted effects of overcurrents. For example, when too many products are plugged into the same electrical outlet, and the total load current exceeds the rating of the branch circuit (i.e. 15 or 20 amps), the OCPD will open the circuit before damage to equipment or a fire occurs. However, an OCPD is not designed to protect the circuit against arcing faults. Because of the time-current characteristics of the OCPD necessary to provide effective protection against overcurrents, some arcing faults, including damaging arcing faults, may have time and/or current characteristics below the threshold levels necessary to open the OCPD. Arcing Faults Arcing is defined as a luminous discharge of electricity across an insulating medium. The electrical discharge of an arc can involve temperatures on the order of several thousand degrees Celsius. In general, arcing can be divided into two categories: (1) non-contact arcing and (2) contact arcing. Non-contact arcing is arcing that does not require direct physical contact between the conductors where the arcing is taking place. With arcing between conductors separated by insulation, the mechanism of initiating an arc between stationary conductors separated by insulation will depend on the type and geometry of the conductors and insulation between them. Contact arcing is arcing that involves direct or indirect physical contact between the conductors or "electrodes" where the arcing is taking place, such as arcing between closing or parting conductors making or breaking a circuit. Arcing faults can occur in one of two ways, series arcing faults or parallel arcing faults. A series arcing fault can occur when one of the current-carrying paths (e.g. a single wire) in series with the load is unintentionally broken. For example, extreme flexing in an appliance power supply cord can cause one of the conductors to open and arc when flexed. Series arcing faults are limited in current to the load current of the connected appliance or appliances in that circuit. Parallel arcing faults occur when there is an unintentional conducting path between two conductors of opposite polarity, such as between a black and white conductor, or between a line conductor and ground. Parallel arcing faults generally involve high currents, as they are limited only by the available fault current of the circuit. AFCI Types The UL1699 Standard addresses several types of AFCIs. Each type of AFCI is intended for different applications and/or protection of different aspects of the branch circuit and extension wiring. Three types of AFCIs for permanent connection to the branch circuit are identified in UL1699 as follows:

Copyright 2001 Underwriters Laboratories Inc.

Branch/Feeder AFCI This device is installed at the origin of a branch circuit or feeder, such as at a panelboard, to provide protection of the branch circuit wiring, feeder wiring, or both, against unwanted effects of arcing. This device also provides limited protection to branch circuit extension wiring (e.g. cord sets and power supply cords). These may be a circuit-breaker type devices or a device in its own enclosure mounted at or near a panelboard. Outlet Circuit AFCI This device is installed at a branch circuit outlet, such as at an outlet box, to provide protection of cord sets and power-supply cords connected to it (when provided with receptacle outlets) against the unwanted effects of arcing. This device may provide feed-through protection of the cord sets and power-supply cords connected to downstream receptacles. Combination AFCI This is an AFCI which complies with the requirements for both branch/feeder and outlet circuit AFCIs. It is intended to protect downstream branch circuit wiring, cord sets and power-supply cords.

The NEC and AFCIs During the revision process for the 2002 NEC there were several proposals to revise Sec. 210-12 to require both a branch/feeder and outlet circuit AFCIs in branch circuits required to be protected (bedrooms). This would provide protection to both the branch circuit wiring, as well as cord sets and power supply cords that extend beyond the branch circuit. The Code Panel did not accept these proposals. There was also a proposal for the 2002 NEC to permit either a branch/feeder AFCI located at the origin of the branch circuit, or a new type of AFCI designated an outlet branch circuit type located at the first outlet receptacle. A proposed revision to UL1699 would include this new type of AFCI defined as follows: Outlet Branch Circuit AFCI A device intended to be installed as the first outlet in a branch circuit. It is intended to provide protection to downstream branch circuit wiring, cord sets and power-supply cords against the unwanted effects of arcing. These devices also provide protection to upstream branch circuit wiring.

The final language agreed upon by the Code Panel for the 2002 NEC for Sec. 210.12 will indicate the following: All branch circuits that supply 125-volt, singlephase, 15- and 20-ampere outlets installed in dwelling unit bedrooms shall be protected by an arc-fault circuit interrupter listed to provide protection to the entire branch circuit.

Copyright 2001 Underwriters Laboratories Inc.

AFCI Tests As the UL1699 Standard continues to develop and address different product types and technology enhancements, it is important to understand how each type of AFCI is suitable for protecting various regions of the entire circuit against arc faults, and the extent and conditions under which this protection will be provided. Four different arc-fault tests are identified in UL1699 as shown in Figure 2.
Tests Branch/ feeder AFCI <series> X X X(+) X(+) Combination AFCI Outlet branch circuit AFCI

Carbonized path arc ignition test

NM-B insulation cut <new> NM-B w/o gnd insulation cut Carbonized path arc interruption test <parallel>

SPT-2 insulation cut NM-B insulation cut Carbonized path arc clearing time test <series> SPT-2 insulation cut <new> NM-B insulation cut Point contact arc test <parallel> SPT-2 insulation cut NM-B insulation cut (+) also includes an upstream insulation cut

X X

X X

X X

X X(+)

X X

X X

X X

Figure 2 AFCI Arc-Fault Tests

The Carbonized Path Arc Ignition Test is a non-contact arcing test conducted with NM-B cable with a series insulation cut. Tests are conducted with arcing currents of 5 A, 10 A, rated current, and 150% rated current. The Branch/Feeder, Combination, and Outlet Branch Circuit AFCIs are subjected to the Carbonized Path Arc Ignition Test. The Outlet Branch Circuit AFCI is subjected to the Carbonized Path Arc Ignition Test with the arcing occurring upstream, to represent series arcing in the branch circuit wiring between the origin of the branch circuit and the first outlet receptacle. The Outlet Branch Circuit AFCI is also subjected to the Carbonized Path Arc Ignition Test using NMB cable without a grounding conductor, as may be found in some older homes built over 40 years ago. The Carbonized Path Arc Interruption Test is a non-contact arcing test conducted with NM-B cable and SPT-2 flexible cord with a parallel insulation cut. Tests are conducted with arcing currents of 75 A and 100 A. The Branch/Feeder, Combination, and Outlet Branch Circuit AFCIs are subjected to the Carbonized

Copyright 2001 Underwriters Laboratories Inc.

Path Arc Interruption Test, however, the Outlet Branch Circuit AFCI is not tested with this parallel arcing occurring upstream from the device. The Carbonized Path Arc Clearing Time Test is a non-contact arcing test conducted with SPT-2 flexible cord with a series insulation cut. Tests are conducted with arcing currents of 5 A, 10 A, rated current, and 150% rated current. The Outlet Branch Circuit and Combination AFCIs are subjected to the Carbonized Path Arc Clearing Time Test. The Branch/Feeder AFCI is not subjected to this series arcing test with flexible cord as found in many cord sets and power supply cords. The Outlet Branch Circuit AFCI is subjected to the Carbonized Path Arc Clearing Time Test with NM-B cable and the arcing occurring upstream, to represent series arcing in the branch circuit wiring between the origin of the branch circuit and the first outlet receptacle. The Point Contact Arcing Test is a contact arcing test conducted with NM-B cable and SPT-2 flexible cord with a parallel insulation cut. Tests are conducted with arcing currents of 75 A through 500 A. The Branch/Feeder, Combination, and Outlet Branch Circuit AFCIs are subjected to the Point Contact Arcing Test, however, the Outlet Branch Circuit AFCI is not tested with this parallel arcing occurring upstream from the device. Further Information For more information on AFCIs, see the Regulators Page on the UL Web site at: http://www.ul.com/regulators/afci/index.html

Copyright 2001 Underwriters Laboratories Inc.

Arc Fault Circuit Interrupter (AFCI) FACT SHEET

THE AFCI The AFCI is an arc fault circuit interrupter. AFCIs are newly-developed electrical devices designed to protect against fires caused by arcing faults in the home electrical wiring. THE FIRE PROBLEM Annually, over 40,000 fires are attributed to home electrical wiring. These fires result in over 350 deaths and over 1,400 injuries each year1 . Arcing faults are one of the major causes of these fires. When unwanted arcing occurs, it generates high temperatures that can ignite nearby combustibles such as wood, paper, and carpets. Arcing faults often occur in damaged or deteriorated wires and cords. Some causes of damaged and deteriorated wiring include puncturing of wire insulation from picture hanging or cable staples, poorly installed outlets or switches, cords caught in doors or under furniture, furniture pushed against plugs in an outlet, natural aging, and cord exposure to heat vents and sunlight. HOW THE AFCI WORKS Conventional circuit breakers only respond to overloads and short circuits; so they do not protect against arcing conditions that produce erratic current flow. An AFCI is selective so that normal arcs do not cause it to trip. The AFCI circuitry continuously monitors current flow through the AFCI. AFCIs use unique current sensing circuitry to discriminate between normal and unwanted arcing conditions. Once an unwanted arcing condition is detected, the control circuitry in the
1

Ault, Singh, and Smith, 1996 Residential Fire Loss Estimates, October 1998, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, Directorate for Epidemiology and Health Sciences.

AFCI trips the internal contacts, thus de-energizing the circuit and reducing the potential for a fire to occur. An AFCI should not trip during normal arcing conditions, which can occur when a switch is opened or a plug is pulled from a receptacle. Presently, AFCIs are designed into conventional circuit breakers combining traditional overload and short-circuit protection with arc fault protection. AFCI circuit breakers (AFCIs) have a test button and look similar to ground fault circuit interrupter (GFCI) circuit breakers. Some designs combine GFCI and AFCI protection. Additional AFCI design configurations are anticipated in the near future. It is important to note that AFCIs are designed to mitigate the effects of arcing faults but cannot eliminate them completely. In some cases, the initial arc may cause ignition prior to detection and circuit interruption by the AFCI. The AFCI circuit breaker serves a dual purpose not only will it shut off electricity in the event of an arcing fault, but it will also trip when a short circuit or an overload occurs. The AFCI circuit breaker provides protection for the branch circuit wiring and limited protection for power cords and extension cords. Single-pole, 15- and 20- ampere AFCI circuit breakers are presently available. WHERE AFCIs SHOULD BE USED The 1999 edition of the National Electrical Code, the model code for electrical wiring adopted by many local jurisdictions, requires AFCIs for receptacle outlets in bedrooms, effective January 1, 2002. Although the requirement is limited to only certain circuits in new residential construction, AFCIs should be considered for added protection in other circuits and for existing homes as well. Older homes with aging and deteriorating wiring systems can especially benefit from the added protection of AFCIs. AFCIs should also be considered whenever adding or upgrading a panel box while using existing branch circuit conductors. INSTALLING AFCIs AFCI circuit breakers should be installed by a qualified electrician. The installer should follow the instructions accompanying the device and the panel box. In homes equipped with conventional circuit breakers rather than fuses, an AFCI circuit breaker may be installed in the panel box in place of the conventional circuit breaker to add arc protection to a branch circuit. Homes with fuses are limited to receptacle or portable-type AFCIs, which are expected to be available in the near future, or AFCI circuit breakers can be added in separate panel boxes next to the fuse panel box. TESTING AN AFCI AFCIs should be tested after installation to make sure they are working properly and protecting the circuit. Subsequently, AFCIs should be tested once a month to make sure they are working properly and providing protection from fires initiated by arcing faults.

A test button is located on the front of the device. The user should follow the instructions accompanying the device. If the device does not trip when tested, the AFCI is defective and should be replaced. AFCIs vs. GFCIs The AFCI should not be confused with the GFCI or ground fault circuit interrupter. The GFCI is designed to protect people from severe or fatal electric shocks while the AFCI protects against fires caused by arcing faults. The GFCI also can protect against some electrical fires by detecting arcing and other faults to ground but cannot detect hazardous across-the-line arcing faults that can cause fires. A ground fault is an unintentional electric path diverting current to ground. Ground faults occur when current leaks from a circuit. How the current leaks is very important. If a persons body provides a path to ground for this leakage, the person could be injured, burned, severely shocked, or electrocuted. The National Electrical Code requires GFCI protection for receptacles located outdoors; in bathrooms, garages, kitchens, crawl spaces and unfinished basements; and at certain locations such as near swimming pools. A combination AFCI and GFCI can be used to satisfy the NEC requirement for GFCI protection only if specifically marked as a combination device.

Consumer Product Safety Commission

Preventing Home Fires: Arc Fault Circuit Interrupters (AFCIs)
Problems in home wiring, like arcing and sparking, are associated with more than 40,000 home fires each year. These fires claim over 350 lives and injure 1,400 victims annually. A new electrical safety device for homes, called an arc fault circuit interrupter or AFCI, is expected to provide enhanced protection from fires resulting from these unsafe home wiring conditions. Typical household fuses and circuit breakers do not respond to early arcing and sparking conditions in home wiring. By the time a fuse or circuit breaker opens a circuit to defuse these conditions, a fire may already have begun. Several years ago, a CPSC study identified arc fault detection as a promising new technology. Since then, CPSC electrical engineers have tested the new AFCIs on the market and found these products to be effective. Requiring AFCIs AFCIs are already recognized for their effectiveness in preventing fires. The most recent edition of the National Electrical Code, the widely-adopted model code for electrical wiring, will require AFCIs for bedroom circuits in new residential construction, effective January 2002. Future editions of the code, which is updated every three years, could expand coverage. AFCIs vs. GFCIs AFCIs should not be confused with ground fault circuit interrupters or GFCIs. The popular GFCI devices are designed to provide protection from the serious consequences of electric shock. While both AFCIs and GFCIs are important safety devices, they have different functions. AFCIs are intended to address fire hazards; GFCIs address shock hazards. Combination devices that include both AFCI and GFCI protection in one unit will become available soon. AFCIs can be installed in any 15 or 20-ampere branch circuit in homes today and are currently available as circuit breakers with built-in AFCI features. In the near future, other types of devices with AFCI protection will be available. Should You Install AFCIs? You may want to consider adding AFCI protection for both new and existing homes. Older homes with ordinary circuit breakers especially may benefit from the added protection against the arcing faults that can occur in aging wiring systems. For more information about AFCIs, contact an electrical supply store, an electrician, or the manufacturer of the circuit breakers already installed in your home. Sometimes these components can be replaced with AFCIs in the existing electrical panel box. Be sure to have a qualified electrician install AFCIs; do not attempt this work yourself. The installation involves working within electrical panel boxes that are usually electrically live, even with the main circuit breakers turned off.
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission protects the public from the unreasonable risk of injury or death from 15,000 types of consumer products under the agency's jurisdiction. To report a dangerous product or a product-related injury, you can go to CPSC's forms page and use the first on-line form on that page. Or, you can call CPSC's hotline at (800) 638-2772 or CPSC's teletypewriter at (800) 6388270, or send the information to info@cpsc.gov. Consumers can obtain this publication and additional publication information from the Publications section of CPSC's web site or by sending your publication request to publications@cpsc.gov. If you would like to receive CPSC's recall notices, subscribing to the email list will send all press releases to you the day they are issued. This document is in the public domain. It may be reproduced without change in part or whole by an individual or organization without permission. If it is reproduced, however, the Commission would appreciate knowing how it is used. Write the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, Office of Information and Public Affairs, Washington, D.C. 20207 or send an e-mail to info@cpsc.gov.