The UL submitted an emergency request for code update:
http://www.nfpa.org/Assets/files/AboutTheCodes/70/ProposedTIA%201168_NFPA%2070.pdf
seeking to clarify 625.44 around the "fastening" requirement, classifying EVSE into "portable" vs. "stationary" vs. "fixed" and dropping the fastening requirement for portable EVSE. Comment period closed in February, and the balloting took place:
TIA1168 said:
According to 5.6(a) in the NFPA Regs, the final results show this TIA HAS NOT achieved the ¾ majority
vote needed on both Question 1 (Technical Merit) and Question 2 (Emergency Nature).
11 Eligible to Vote
2 Not Returned (F. Belio, K. Cunningham)
Technical Merit:
0 Abstentions
4 Agree (1 w/ comment: S. Cline)
5 Disagree (T. Brown, P. Clark, J. Holmes, T. Lottmann, D. Schamel)
Emergency Nature:
0 Abstentions
5 Agree (1 w/ comment: S. Cline)
4 Disagree (T. Brown, P. Clark, T. Lottmann, D. Schamel)
Some details about the votes:
- Thomas Brown (Intertek) voted "disagree": "Technical merits do not address usage by other than qualified persons in both potentially damp and wet locations."
- Philip Clark (City of Detroit, rep. Int'l Assoc. of Electrical Inspectors) voted "disagree": "Current code language provides adequate opportunity for portable equipment."
- Jeffrey Holmes (IBEW) voted "disagree": "The constant plugging and unplugging of 3 phase equipment will only decrease consumer safety. This type of equipment should only be permanently wired and fastened in place."
- Todd Lottman (Cooper-Bussman, rep. National Electrical Manufacturers' Association) voted disagree with a few paragraphs. It boils down to three points: 250V outlets aren't required to be protected by GFCI, it overstresses high-amperage receptacle contacts by repeatedly plugging/unplugging, and it encourages extension cord use.
- Duke Schamel (Electrical Service Solutions, Inc., rep. Independent Electrical Contractors, Inc.) voted disagree: "The current code language allows for fewer situations that the consumer could be exposed to an electrical supply that is not ground fault protected for personnel."
- Scott Cline-Chairman (McMurtrey Electric, Inc., rep. National Electrical Contractors Assoc.) voted agree: "People will do this, legal or not...let's make it as safe as possible as soon as possible."
(To Jeffrey Holmes' comment, I'll add my interpretation of the intention of his self-interested comments representing the union: "...by a union electrical worker." And NEMA wants to force more higher-margin gear, so they're holding out for forcing consumers to purchase $100 50-amp GFCI breakers before allowing portable 50A EVSE.)
The specific "agree" votes of individual members without comment are not listed on the balloting. They would be Jeff Menig of GM, representing the SAE hybrid committee; James Brown of DTE Electric, representing Electric Light & Power Group/EEI; and John Kovacik of UL, LLC.
Not voting were Karl Cunningham (Alcoa, Inc., rep. The Aluminum Association, Inc.) and Frank Belio (International Union of Elevator Constructors).
- - - Updated - - -
So essentially no EVs will be able to carry mobile chargers with them? That'd be a huge hit. I don't know that there's any general way to fasten it to the ground, and there certainly isn't a standard way to mount it to the wall near general plugs. You mention hooks, and while that might be feasible in your garage, most plugs are not going to have EVSE hooks.
It might end charging at campgrounds and such as well, given the wording. Seems like a bummer.
I have a feeling the manufacturers are going to contend it's not infrastructure gear and part of the appliance and is therefore outside of the NEC jurisdiction. The NFPA can't sue manufacturers over the NEC, so it won't be handled centrally; rather, a municipality, county, or state government would have to cite someone, then it could be challenged, and the precedent would only be valid locally. I just don't see that happening. I see the NFPA being forced in the 2017 or 2020 NEC cycle to capitulate and write some realistic rules. Inspectors who handle new branch circuits for EV charging will inspect up to the receptacle and sign off before anything is ever plugged in. Only the power-tripping inspectors will ask whether an EVSE will be used there, and whether it'll be fastened in place - usually because the receptacles are installed before the car is delivered.
However, the bottom line here is that if you're in an area governed by the 2014 NEC, technically you're supposed to have the UMC portion "fastened in place". From a legal and technical standpoint, you're not supposed to violate that. There may be insurance and liability implications.