This an outdoor location, right?
I have, because you have to have a way to ground a metal faceplate.
I don't see that many GFCIs that are not grounded since they would only be used as replacements. Not sure I would think of it on an inspection, but if I were on my toes, I would fail it under 406.5(B) (assuming it's metallic)
The next time I see such an install, I'll tell the electrician holding the red tag that he has you to thank
I'm not so sure I would fail it?
We could argue that the cover could be energized by the line side wiring but so could also the strap of the GFCI or even the ground terminal (that sticks out) which would also energize anything plugged into the GFCI through the ground terminal of the GFCI? the improper wiring that could cause the plate or strap of the GFCI to be energized to me is a "What If" if we are true professionals and take care in our wiring it shouldn't happen.
The bold is my concern and my argument. So you would be OK to install a metal cover plate on a 2 wire system?
I believe the code does cover a lot of "what ifs".
I don't think we can convince the AHJ that "our installation is top notch so I am OK with the metal cover plate on a 2 wire system"
You are assuming that the appliance has a three wire cord and that the ground of the receptacle is connected to the box?If either of the above was to happen, what ever appliance was plugged in would have a hot case, and since it is energized by the line side of the GFCI the GFCI would never trip.
I believe it would in the event of an actual ground fault. If the cause to the ground fault were human he or she might get a nasty bite.I agree but
What about if the line side hot energized the box on an ungrounded system?
or if a line side hot came onto contact with the ground screw tab or the GFCI yoke?
Both of the above would be just as dangerous as the metal cover plate and in some cases would be more likely to happen as they are much closer to the hot wire then the cover plate is.
If either of the above was to happen, what ever appliance was plugged in would have a hot case, and since it is energized by the line side of the GFCI the GFCI would never trip .
I agree but
What about if the line side hot energized the box on an ungrounded system?
or if a line side hot came onto contact with the ground screw tab or the GFCI yoke?
Both of the above would be just as dangerous as the metal cover plate and in some cases would be more likely to happen as they are much closer to the hot wire then the cover plate is.
If either of the above was to happen, what ever appliance was plugged in would have a hot case, and since it is energized by the line side of the GFCI the GFCI would never trip.
that the ground of the receptacle is connected to the box?
I believe it would in the event of an actual ground fault. If the cause to the ground fault were human he or she might get a nasty bite.
The metal box, the metal device yoke, the metal cover, anything connected to a cord via the equipment grounding pin are all bonded together. Energize any one of those items and you energize them all.
One thing that you do not want to do with the OP's install is use one of those plug in GFCI testers and hold on to the cover while pressing the test button. If you can't figure out why then maybe you should just try it:happyyes:
An equipment grounding conductor
shall not be connected from the ground-fault circuit interrupter-
type receptacle to any outlet supplied from the
ground-fault circuit-interrupter receptacle.
The funning thing I find is in 406.3(D)(3)(b) is this:
The funning thing I find is in 406.3(D)(3)(b) is this:
An equipment grounding conductor
shall not be connected from the ground-fault circuit interrupter-
type receptacle to any outlet supplied from the
ground-fault circuit-interrupter receptacle.
This tells me that they some what knew of this problem and by not allowing any EGC to be used after a GFCI on a ungrounded circuit tells me they some what tried to at least lower the risk of having the EGC energizeing all the ground pins on the receptacles down stream from the GFCI.
So why not require a GFCI that does not have the ground pin or allow a blank face GFCI to be used or a breaker only, at least this would not have the same problem? at least this would not energize any appliance case plugged into the GFCI, I think only allowing a breaker type GFCI would be the right way to go as even if the box was energized at least it would be on the load side of the GFCI not the line side.
I think that verbiage was added in either 2005 or 2008.
Actually it is in my 1999 but back then it was under 210-7(d) 3. c. before being moved to the present 406.3 in 2002 I also remember it being in my 1996 NEC also in 210.7 but it says the same thing it does in 406.3
You are assuming that the appliance has a three wire cord and that the ground of the receptacle is connected to the box?
As long as the appliance has a 2 wire cord, it will still be OK. Since the GFCI should be marked "No Ground Present" or equivalent, this seems to me to argue that one should not plug a three wire cord with ground into that receptacle in the first place. But that is probably asking too much from the homeowners.