GFI outlet allowed in crawl space?

[Little Bill]

I disagree.
The opening paragraph of 110.26 clearly states "...working space shall be provided and maintained about ALL electrical equipment..."

Are you arguing that a GFCI receptacle is not "electrical equipment?"

I'm sorry that the code doesn't say what you want it to say. A GFCI is not a piece of equipment. By your logic many receptacles switches, GFCI receptacles would be in violation due to space.

 

[Rock86]

Don't GFCIs still need to be periodically tested? I know that few people actually do it, but if looking at the letter of the law (Article 110 requiring following manufacturers' instructions), having to access a crawl space once per month to test your GFCI seems like a major PITA...

Self-testing GFCI... boom.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

I'm sorry that the code doesn't say what you want it to say. A GFCI is not a piece of equipment. By your logic many receptacles switches, GFCI receptacles would be in violation due to space.

I agree with Bill. A gfci is a device not a piece of equipment and doesn't need to meet 110.26.

 

[retirede]

From a practical standpoint, if the receptacle is for utility use in the crawl space, it makes sense to put it there.

It doesn’t make sense to protect non-crawlspace circuits by a GFCI receptacle installed in a crawlspace.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

From a practical standpoint, if the receptacle is for utility use in the crawl space, it makes sense to put it there.

It doesn’t make sense to protect non-crawlspace circuits by a GFCI receptacle installed in a crawlspace.

This is why I like the nc interpretation. Basically it is not an amendment per se, but it is how the state looks at this situation. Here is their statement

Question: Does section 210.8 of the electrical code prohibit a 125-volt, single phase, 15- or 20-ampere GFIC receptacle from being installed in a crawl space because the receptacle is not “readily accessible” from the normal occupied areas of the dwelling?

Answer: A GFCI receptacle located in a crawl space is not typically readily accessible from the normal occupied areas of the dwelling. Outlets located in normal occupied areas of the dwelling that possess GFCI protection located within the crawl space creates a hindrance to the occupants when such GCFI protection must be reset from within the crawl space. However, a GFCI receptacle is typically readily accessible from within the crawl space where such receptacle is being utilized for servicing HVAC or plumbing equipment. Therefore, a GFCI receptacle is allowed in the crawl space if the GFCI only protects the outlet(s) within the crawl space. Nothing in this document is meant to suggest that the branch circuit supplying the GFCI protected receptacle(s) within the crawl space is prohibited from also supplying outlets in the normally occupied areas of the dwelling. Additionally, nothing in this document is meant to suggest that the GFCI protection for the receptacle(s) in the crawl space must be located within the crawl space.

 

[Jerramundi]

I'm sorry that the code doesn't say what you want it to say. A GFCI is not a piece of equipment. By your logic many receptacles switches, GFCI receptacles would be in violation due to space.

The Article 100 definition of "Equipment" EXPLICITLY says "devices." I don't think I'm the one imposing my subjective view on the code...

Equipment - A general term, including fittings, devices, appliances, luminaires, apparatus, machinery, and the like used as a part of, or in connection with an electrical installation.

There should be ZERO debate that a GFCI receptacle qualifies as "Equipment," IMO.

 

[Jerramundi]

I'm sorry that the code doesn't say what you want it to say. A GFCI is not a piece of equipment. By your logic many receptacles switches, GFCI receptacles would be in violation due to space.

Now, I will acknowledge that I initially misinterpreted your argument as being about whether or not a GFCI receptacle qualifies as "electrical equipment."

It's clear to me now that you were arguing the condition of it being serviced per 110.26(A), which is somewhat open to interpretation.
In that case, I would still argue and agree with the handbook notes that simply testing for voltage = examination.

110.26(A) Working Space - Working for equipment operating at 600V, nominal, or less to ground and likely to require examination, adjustment, servicing, or maintenance while energized shall comply with...

There's zero debate that a GFCI receptacle qualifies as equipment.

You could argue the remaining (2) two conditions: (1) likelihood to be serviced... (2) serviced while energized... but those are both a stretch, IMO.

 

[Jerramundi]

I'm sorry that the code doesn't say what you want it to say. A GFCI is not a piece of equipment. By your logic many receptacles switches, GFCI receptacles would be in violation due to space.

One could easily argue that a GFCI receptacle is "...likely to require examination, adjustment, or maintenance." Personally, I think it's obvious that it will at some point require and meet those conditions.

The condition of being serviced while energized is a little bit trickier. But, if we go by the logic that it will be de-energized while being serviced, we could simply pull the meter and negate working space requirements for panelboards... which are widely accepted to require working space requirements despite the ability to be de-energized.

 

[Jerramundi]

I'm sorry that the code doesn't say what you want it to say. A GFCI is not a piece of equipment. By your logic many receptacles switches, GFCI receptacles would be in violation due to space.

The fact that many existing installations would be in violation is NOT a valid argument.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

According to the handbook, "examination" could be something as simple as testing for voltage, in which case 110.26(A) would kick in.

I agree that is what the code language says, but that is not what they really mean. When you apply the rule in 110.26(A) as actually written, the receptacles required by 210.52(C) are not permitted by 110.26(A).
110.26(A) needs fixing, but the CMP has not accepted any of the reasonable proposals to make the need changes.

 

[infinity]

I disagree.
The opening paragraph of 110.26 clearly states "...working space shall be provided and maintained about ALL electrical equipment..."

Are you arguing that a GFCI receptacle is not "electrical equipment?"

Then the same would apply to a counter top receptacle or a receptacle above a bathroom vanity.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

I'm sorry that the code doesn't say what you want it to say. A GFCI is not a piece of equipment. By your logic many receptacles switches, GFCI receptacles would be in violation due to space.

How is a receptacle not equipment? Receptacles and switches are devices.

Equipment.
A general term, including fittings, devices, appliances, luminaires, apparatus, machinery, and the like used as a part of, or in connection with, an electrical installation. (CMP-1)

 

[Jerramundi]

When you apply the rule in 110.26(A) as actually written, the receptacles required by 210.52(C) are not permitted by 110.26(A).

Well I'm glad that SOMEONE agrees that is what the code says, lol.
I'm honestly not trying to put my own spin on it. I'm trying to read it as objectively as is humanly possible.

Just out of curiosity, how does 110.26(A) negate 210.52(C)? Just curious what your argument is.
Is it about 110.26(A)(3) Height? Because you may have a point there and that's an oversight that should probably be addressed.

 

[Jerramundi]

One could also argue the end sentence of 110.26(A) leaves room for things like 210.52(C)

110.26(A) Working Space - ...shall comply with the dimensions of 11026(A)(1), (A)(2), and (A)(3) OR as required or permitted elsewhere in this code.

The only but here... is that this is talking explicitly about working space. So 210.52(C) would have to say something explicitly allowing/permitting a difference in "working space" requirements.

 

[Jerramundi]

Aren't most crawl spaces required to be at least 3 ft anyway for other safety reasons?

 

[Dennis Alwon]

Aren't most crawl spaces required to be at least 3 ft anyway for other safety reasons?

Not sure what code is now but I can tell you there are many that are 2' or less. If there is no equipment under the house then I believe you can be lower. I don't know what those numbers happen to be.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Well I'm glad that SOMEONE agrees that is what the code says, lol.
I'm honestly not trying to put my own spin on it. I'm trying to read it as objectively as is humanly possible.

Just out of curiosity, how does 110.26(A) negate 210.52(C)? Just curious what your argument is.
Is it about 110.26(A)(3) Height? Because you may have a point there and that's an oversight that should probably be addressed.

Yes, the work space has to be clear to the floor. The only oversight is that the application of 110.26(A) is not limited to specific equipment as is 110.26(E).