GFCI located within 25' of AC?

[sparkslord]

I have thought, for the last few years, that a gfci protected receptacle must be located within 25' of an ac or heat pump, on a single-family dwelling. I cannot find this in the 2005 NEC. Is this a requirement? If so what is the code reference?

 

[infinity]

210.63

 

[peter d]

I think it's 210.63

 

[induster]

I found a nice 30 amp disconnect that has a gfi outlet built into it. nifty!

 

[infinity]

Something like this:

 

[Brian D]

Whats the cost on somthing like that?

 

[triphase]

I have used those before but I was not the one who puchased.....While We are on 210.63 exception........Evaporative cooler. Is that a "Swamp cooler"..?

 

[George Stolz]

It sure is.

 

[jwelectric]

While we are talking about the receptacle required by 210.63 for servicing of heating, air-conditioning, and refrigeration equipment, would one of the receptacles required by 210.52(E) sacrifice for this required receptacle?

 

[steve66]

While we are talking about the receptacle required by 210.63 for servicing of heating, air-conditioning, and refrigeration equipment, would one of the receptacles required by 210.52(E) sacrifice for this required receptacle?

Absoultely, if it's on the same level.

Can someone tell me who makes the disconnects with the receptacle? Is the receptacle still hot when the disconnect is opened?

Steve

 

[peter d]

DO NOT buy the Cutler Hammer version of that AC disconnect. It is a PIA to install, particularly when you wire the GFCI.

 

[jwelectric]

While we are talking about the receptacle required by 210.63 for servicing of heating, air-conditioning, and refrigeration equipment, would one of the receptacles required by 210.52(E) sacrifice for this required receptacle?

Absoultely, if it's on the same level.

Can someone tell me who makes the disconnects with the receptacle? Is the receptacle still hot when the disconnect is opened?

Steve

I disagree with this way of thinking.

210.52(E) requires receptacles to be installed front and back and 210.63 is a different requirement and there is no exception allowing another section to fulfill its requirement.

The requirement found in 210.63 for the servicing of heating, air-conditioning, and refrigeration equipment is for all installations not just residential.

Yes I am saying that any dwelling unit will require at least three receptacles to be installed on the outside. No I am not saying that it is enforced, I am just saying that it is required.

The combination disconnect and receptacle enclosures that I have used require two circuits, one for the disconnect and one for the receptacle/

 

[haskindm]

Mike,
The code requires that a receptacle be installed "on the front and rear of a single family dwelling". If one of these required receptacles is 25 feet or less from the A/C equipment it may also serve as the receptacle required for that equipment, just as a "general use" receptacle in a basement may serve as the required receptacle for equipment installed in a basement. I see nothing in the requirement that requires an additional receptacle be installed that is dedicated to servicing the heating or A/C equipment. If there is a receptacle located within the required distance from the equipment it is sufficient. If this was not the case the code would have to say that receptacles installed to meet the requirements of 210.52(E) could not be used to meet 210.63. It does not say that.

 

[jwelectric]

Mike,
The code requires that a receptacle be installed "on the front and rear of a single family dwelling". If one of these required receptacles is 25 feet or less from the A/C equipment it may also serve as the receptacle required for that equipment, just as a "general use" receptacle in a basement may serve as the required receptacle for equipment installed in a basement. I see nothing in the requirement that requires an additional receptacle be installed that is dedicated to servicing the heating or A/C equipment. If there is a receptacle located within the required distance from the equipment it is sufficient. If this was not the case the code would have to say that receptacles installed to meet the requirements of 210.52(E) could not be used to meet 210.63. It does not say that.

Again I disagree. You are adding words to the two sections in question that are not there.

I am not saying that all three receptacles can not be on the same circuit.
The two receptacles, one on the front and the other on the back of the dwelling are required by 210.52(E). The one for the outside unit is required by 210.63. This is two separate sections of the code and two separate requirements.
Neither 210.52(E) nor 210.63 has an exception giving relief one from the other.

It is a common practice to allow one of the receptacles required by 210.52(E) that is with-in 25 feet of the unit count as the one required by 210.63 or the other way around but this is not what the code states.

Here are the two sections as they are worded.

210.52(E) Outdoor Outlets. For a one-family dwelling and each unit of a two-family dwelling that is at grade level, at least one receptacle outlet accessible at grade level and not more than 2.0 m (6? ft) above grade shall be installed at the front and back of the dwelling.

210.63 Heating, Air-Conditioning, and Refrigeration Equipment Outlet.
A 125-volt, single-phase, 15- or 20-ampere-rated receptacle outlet shall be installed at an accessible location for the servicing of heating, air-conditioning, and refrigeration equipment. The receptacle shall be located on the same level and within 7.5 m (25 ft) of the heating, air-conditioning, and refrigeration equipment. The receptacle outlet shall not be connected to the load side of the equipment disconnecting means.

As stated in 52(E) there is a requirement (shall be installed) for one receptacle to be installed at the front and back of the dwelling unit.

Again in 63 the requirement (shall be installed) is repeated for the outside unit.

I can not find relief in either one of these to allow one to be replaced by the other. Yes if I were a code enforcement official and doing the electrical inspection and the outside unit was sitting with-in 5 feet of a receptacle mandated in 210.52 I would require one more receptacle to be installed for the outside unit.

 

[buck33k]

Quote from handbook: The requirements in 210.52(E) for outdoor dwelling unit recepticles located within 25' of this equiptment will meet the requirements of 210.63.

 

[peter d]

Mike,

While I (somewhat) agree with your take on the literal wording of the code, do you really see a safety issue if the 210.52(E) receptacle is located within 25 feet of the HVAC equipment? What good does having another outlet near the equipment do?

This is a non-issue.

 

[jwelectric]

Hey listen you all I didn?t write this book I only read it.

This started out as a very easy answer with out a large debate, all that is required is the reading of the sections posted.

210.52(E) requires A receptacle front and back
210.63 requires A receptacle for the outside unit.

Answer to the problem is to install two receptacles at either front or back that would be with-in 25 foot of the outside unit.

This can be accomplished with a DUPLEX receptacle. Everyone calm down now. This was a small exercise on the play of words and the difference between receptacle and receptacle(S)
:lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[haskindm]

Mike,
Look at 210.8(A)(2) which requires GFCI protection for garage receptacles. It says that "Receptacles installed under the exceptions to 210.8(A)(2) shall not be considered as meeting the requirements of 210.52(G).
This illustrates that if the code panel does not want receptacles installed to satisfy one requirement to also satisfy another requirement, they are perfectly capable of saying so. On the contrary, I believe they allow the 25 foot distance from the equipment just so that the required front or rear receptacle could also satisfy this requirement. Otherwise they would have required the receptacle to be no more thn 6 feet from the equipment. What additional safety are you providing by requiring a third receptacle? What danger is being introduced by using the receptacle that is already required to be present? If the panel did not want the existing required receptacle to fulfill this requirement, they should have and would have said so. Those words are not there and no amount of reading between the lines can place them there.

 

[jwelectric]

Mike,
Look at 210.8(A)(2) which requires GFCI protection for garage receptacles. It says that "Receptacles installed under the exceptions to 210.8(A)(2) shall not be considered as meeting the requirements of 210.52(G).
This illustrates that if the code panel does not want receptacles installed to satisfy one requirement to also satisfy another requirement, they are perfectly capable of saying so. On the contrary, I believe they allow the 25 foot distance from the equipment just so that the required front or rear receptacle could also satisfy this requirement. Otherwise they would have required the receptacle to be no more thn 6 feet from the equipment. What additional safety are you providing by requiring a third receptacle? What danger is being introduced by using the receptacle that is already required to be present? If the panel did not want the existing required receptacle to fulfill this requirement, they should have and would have said so. Those words are not there and no amount of reading between the lines can place them there.

Did you read my post above?

 

[infinity]

Mike I disagree with your logic. A third receptacle will serve no real purpose. But even if someone did agree with you, your insistence on a third receptacle being required would be incorrect since a duplex receptacle within 25' of the AC unit is two receptacles. One would satisfy 210.52(E) the other will satify 210.63.