Go figure

So I guess were back to the origional question from Bryan:

I believe the intent of this change is to basically require AFCI protection on all 120v circuits that are not presently required to be GFCI protected.

Rob, the purpose and function of an afci is completely different than that of a gfci. I do not believe that has any consideration at all. Gfcis protect against electrocution, afci's protect against fires cause by arcing faults.

Based on the ROP and ROC panel statements, it again appears to simply be a compromise. One side wants everything, the other wants nothing, so they are meeting in the middle.

I suspect it has more to do with the places where wires will be in contact with combustible materials and pose a hazard if they ignite.
The GFCI does help tho. You have a greater than 50:50 chance the fault will be a fault to ground. I assume that is why AFCIs have GF protection too.

Bryan, GFCI is required in wet areas. My thinking is that in wet areas there will less chance of fires starting from arcing and igniting combustable materials.