Grandfathering of 1970s kitchens and bathrooms without GFCIs

Status
Not open for further replies.

bradley

New member
As a manager of residential high-rise buildings in New York City (primarily of buildings constructed in the early 1970s) upon vacancy turnover of any of our units, we always change the electrical outlets in kitchens and bathrooms to GFCIs.

However, I am being pressured (maybe, in part, because of this voluntary upgrade) by some New York State housing officials (who oversee these buildings) to change ALL of our receptacles in kitchens and bathrooms (regardless of it's vacant or not).

I did review the NEC on line but was unable to find an citation regarding the 'grandfathering' of early 70s buildings that were built without GFCIs.

In all conversations with the electricians I know, they have unanimously agreed that we are not 'Required' to have these outlets changed, however, they cannot find that section of any relevant code that gives me this information. (It is quite difficult to 'prove a negative' in this instance).

Could someone direct me to either the place in the NFPA, NEC or the New York City Electric Code that will give me some ammunition to defend my option to avoid 'unilateral' upgrade of these outlets.
 

celtic

Senior Member
Location
NJ
I'm from NJ, so this may or may not even apply to NYC..but here goes...

A turnover in tenants may not trigger what's required from today's codes - although, I feel it is a good practice.
What would trigger enforcement of GFCI requirements would be turnover of the actual property from seller to buyer. In NJ - at least in my town - sale of real estate requires certain items to be "brought up to code" This is usually addressed in the phase of sale known as CCO (Continued Certificate of Occupancy). One of these things is GFCIs.


I would think you would need to find out what triggers a CCO - or similar for NYC - a turnover in tenants or a change in property owners. After that, you would need to find out what the CCO requirements are - if it even applies.



As a Landlord....I would change them all. It would give you an opportunity to "inspect" each unit for unauthorized animals, "extra" tenants in a unit, damages, etc.

But as both a LL and an EC, the cost for me to change the devices would be minimal..for you, well - good luck with that!
 

charlie b

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Lockport, IL
Occupation
Retired Electrical Engineer
406.3(D) is what tells you that if you replace a receptacle that other articles would require to be GFCI-protected, then the replacement must be a GFCI receptacle.

The "Grandfather Rule" has been moved to Annex G in the 2005 NEC. Being in the Annex means that it is not enforceable. But that is not important to you, as it doesn't say all that you might wish.

Look for article 80.9(B). It says that existing installations that do not comply with the current code are permitted to remain, unless the Authority Having Jurisdiction determines that failure to comply would present an imminent danger to the occupants. In other words, if your code officials want to push you to replace them all, they can do it, and you don't have an NEC requirement to use in your defense. All I can suggest is that you be nice to them, and promise to continue to do the replacements as the tenants move out.
 

al hildenbrand

Senior Member
Location
Minnesota
Occupation
Electrical Contractor, Electrical Consultant, Electrical Engineer
I work in a geographic area that has several local governments that have individual, and different, requirements for the electrical systems in existing occupancies. As a rule, single family stand alone dwellings that are owner occupied have the most "privacy". . .that is, the wiring system, as installed back when, receives the least pressure to improve.

Multi unit occupancies, that require renewable licensing to be able to rent out, receive more pressure to improve.

The pressure to improve is codefied in local ordinance. The language is generally spare and sometimes overly broad.

In my work, I have found that seeking out the complete language of the applicable ordinance has greatly aided my making informed dicisions.

Also, I have found that other bodies of regulation such as, but not limited to, federal, state or local rent funding program requirements, insurance underwriter's requirements, or mortgage holders, etc., will request specific improvements, and each will have varying degrees of sway, if not authority.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top