NEC Article 625: Electrical Code Requirements for EV Charging

The National Electrical Code, or NEC, is the standard rulebook that licensed electricians follow when wiring buildings in the United States. It is published by the National Fire Protection Association as NFPA 70, and almost every city and state adopts a version of it as enforceable law. Article 625 is the section devoted entirely to electric vehicle power transfer systems — in plain terms, EV chargers and the wiring that feeds them.

You do not need to read Article 625 yourself. Your electrical contractor and the local building inspector will. But you do need to know it exists, because every cost estimate, permit drawing, and inspection sign-off in your project ties back to it. When an installer tells you a panel needs to be upsized, or that a charger has to sit a certain distance from a parking stall, or that a particular load management device is required, the answer to 'why' almost always lives in Article 625.

Article 625 has been updated in every recent NEC cycle — 2017, 2020, 2023, and 2026 — to keep pace with how fast EV charging is changing. The version your jurisdiction enforces depends on which edition your state or city has adopted. California, for example, generally moves to a new NEC cycle quickly, while some states lag by one or two cycles. Ask your installer which edition applies to your project.

The first rule in Article 625 that drives cost on a multifamily project is the requirement that each EV charging circuit be sized as a continuous load. The NEC defines a continuous load as one expected to run for three hours or more, and Level 2 EV charging easily qualifies. Continuous loads must be served by a circuit rated for at least 125 percent of the charger's draw.

In practical terms, this means a 40-amp Level 2 charger needs a 50-amp circuit and conductors sized accordingly. A 48-amp charger needs a 60-amp circuit. This 125 percent margin is why a 'simple' charger install often turns out to need a larger breaker, thicker wire, and sometimes a panel upgrade. It is not your contractor padding the bid — it is code.

Article 625 also requires each charger to be on its own dedicated branch circuit unless a listed energy management system is in place. That single requirement is why naive installations get expensive fast: ten chargers can mean ten new circuits, ten new breakers, and a panel large enough to host them all.

Section 625.42 is the part of Article 625 that has changed multifamily charging the most. It allows the use of an energy management system, sometimes called automatic load management or ALM, to share electrical capacity among multiple chargers. Instead of sizing the service for the worst case of every charger running at full power, the system throttles individual chargers so the total never exceeds the available capacity.

For a 50-unit condo with limited panel space, this can be the difference between an affordable project and an impossible one. A building with 200 amps of spare capacity might only support four full-power Level 2 chargers without load management — but could support twenty or more chargers with it, because they rarely all draw maximum power at the same time.

Code-compliant load management requires a listed product, not a custom workaround. Ask any vendor for the UL listing of their load management hardware and the specific NEC section their solution complies with. If they cannot answer, that is a red flag. The inspector will ask the same question.

Article 625 requires that EV charging equipment over 60 amps, or operating at more than 150 volts to ground, have a readily accessible disconnecting means. For most Level 2 installations at 240 volts and 40 to 48 amps, the breaker in the panel can serve as the disconnect, but the panel must be readily accessible — not buried behind a locked storage cage or stored equipment.

Ground fault circuit interrupter protection is built into modern listed EVSE equipment, so a separate GFCI breaker is generally not required for Level 2 chargers that meet UL 2231 or UL 2594 standards. Your installer should confirm the equipment is listed for the application.

Physical placement rules matter too. Article 625 sets minimum clearances around chargers and limits where cords can drape across walkways. Chargers in parking garages must be installed so vehicles cannot strike them — typically with bollards or wheel stops. Outdoor chargers must be rated for wet locations, with proper NEMA enclosures.

When boards see installation quotes that range from 2,500 to 8,000 dollars per port, Article 625 is doing most of that work. The wider the gap between a building's existing electrical capacity and the load required by the chargers, the more expensive compliance gets. A building with a recently upgraded service and free panel space might pay the low end. A 1970s condo with a full panel and a 400 amp service will pay the high end, sometimes with a five-figure utility upgrade on top.

The two most powerful levers you have to lower compliance costs are load management and phasing. Load management reduces how much new electrical capacity you have to install at all. Phasing — adding chargers in groups of four or eight over several years — lets you spread panel and service upgrades over multiple budget cycles instead of taking the full hit in year one.

Ask every bidder to identify, in writing, exactly which Article 625 provisions are driving their cost line items. Reputable installers can do this in plain English. If a quote does not break out load calculations, circuit sizing, and any required service upgrade as separate items, push back before signing.

You will never need to interpret Article 625 yourself, but a short list of questions can tell you very quickly whether your installer takes it seriously. Bring these to every vendor walkthrough and compare answers side by side. A confident installer will welcome the conversation. A vague one is telling you something important.

Document the answers in writing in your project file. If a permit issue arises later, or if a future board questions a decision, having the code reasoning on the record protects everyone involved — the board, the management company, and the residents who rely on the chargers.