Bubble covers in old work

[mdshunk]

If I am called to replace an ordinary outdoor duplex receptacle that is broken, I'd obviously replace it with a GFCI. Question is, since I've replaced the device, am I now required to put on the bubble cover, even if the location never had one? Granted, changing from a regular duplex to a GFCI, I'd need to get a new cover anyhow, but should it be weatherproof (like the old one) or a bubble cover? I'm working in central PA, where there are no state or local codes or local inspectors to ask. Latest NEC is generally observed.

 

[bigjohn67]

Re: Bubble covers in old work

In our area. If you make a repair, you must do so to satisfy current code. Jan.1 we now use 2003 code. Therefore, If I make repairs to an outside receptical it must: 1. be gfi protected 2. have an approved "in-use" cover installed.
But again, this is in our area.

 

[jimwalker]

Re: Bubble covers in old work

In use cover is for anything that stays plugged in.The reason for it is that a WP cover in the open condition offers no protection.So if there is nothing staying in it i see nothing to make it mandatory

 

[hurk27]

Re: Bubble covers in old work

So Big John from your view it would then be requires to AFCI any bedroom circuit that you had to replaced a receptacle on? I don't think when we make normal repairs to existing system's that we should have to bring them up to todays codes. Or we could be having to update more than we should. Think of it this way would you want the EPA to require you to bring your older car up to todays emission standard's when the engine has to be replaced? I belive that normal repairs can be made to existing system's without having to up date them to new code's. Should a whole panel have to be replaced when we have a bad breaker?

Jim: So if there is nothing staying in it i see nothing to make it mandatory

It is in the NEC that outdoor receptacle's in wet location's shall be protected by a in-use cover. Look at 406.8 (B)(1)&(2)

 

[iwire]

Re: Bubble covers in old work

We all have different ways of looking at this.

Broken outdoor outlet I have to remove the cover and the outlet, now when I close it up GFCI and bubble cover get used.

Broken bedroom outlet would just get a new outlet.

Broken bedroom breaker in old panel, this would get an AFCI breaker and the old panel could stay.

Relocate an old non code compliant panel and it gets a new one.

I do not put things back in service that do not meet code once they have been removed.

Jim just how do you know if something is going to "stay plugged in" follow the code references given.

Someone is now making a flush type in use cover for new work only.
Bob

[ January 04, 2004, 07:43 AM: Message edited by: iwire ]

 

[pierre]

Re: Bubble covers in old work

406.8(B)(1) 15- and 20- Ampere Outdoor Receptacles.
15- and 20- ampere, 125- and 250- volt receptacles installed outdoors in a wet location shall have an enclosure that is weatherproof whether or not the attachment plug cap is inserted.

This wording has been changed from the '99 and is easier to follow.

Wayne
When installing new electrical to an existing system there is considerable leeway in the NEC, that is one of the reasons you will see Knob & Tube wiring method still in the NEC. One will be required to make a code compliant installation when replacing existing work.

Pierre

 

[mdshunk]

Re: Bubble covers in old work

Honestly, my knee jerk reaction would be to put on a bubble cover. As usual, some customers balk at the added expense and the aestetics of a bubble cover. This is why I decided to gather opinions as to it's requirement in old work. I am interested in the flush in use cover Bob wrote of for new work. Can someone post a link to a picture of this item?

 

[scott moran]

Re: Bubble covers in old work

iwire you stated

"Broken bedroom breaker in old panel, this would get an AFCI breaker and the old panel could stay."


I am from the Chicago area and here we us EMT to ruff homes. As a result a multi wire circuits are pulled to all areas of the home. In an older home that would mean that there would be 2 hots to one neutral. Just replaceing the breaker would now cause a trip due to the unbalanced load on the neutral being read by the breaker.

In a new home we pull a seperate neutral for each AFCI circuit to avoid this problem.

Following your logic how do we maintain the same compliance to the NEC??? Does that mean that to now replace an outlet in a bedroom we must repull the bedroom circuits and whatever else may be tied onto that circuit over the years???

 

[iwire]

Re: Bubble covers in old work

Maybe, for you EMT guys it would be a simple mater, imaging the difficulty here with the feed in 3 wire cable.

Nothing is absolute and we all must make decisions to fit the job.

So would you feel better if I said when it is convenient?

So if I could change it without ripping up the house I would, and think I should.

 

[jimwalker]

Re: Bubble covers in old work

So far i havn't been called on this bubble cover.Do agree that the wording would require it.The ones i have seen wont take that kind of use long before they break.Then we have something even worse with a broken cover.

 

[hurk27]

Re: Bubble covers in old work

The reasone I made my statement was not because I wouldn't install the GFCI or the in use cover. It was for the protection of grandfather laws that should be protected. we cant keep going around making requirements that place undue hardships on customers that might be on fixed income and can not afford much yes offer the code compliant way but it cant be a have to, if it met code at the time of the original installation. Let the customer decide what they can afford or the repair won't be fixed at all. We are allowed to make repairs with out having to bring the repair up to todays code if not then why doesn't the EPA try the same thing? Because they can't!

[ January 04, 2004, 05:54 PM: Message edited by: hurk27 ]

 

[iwire]

Re: Bubble covers in old work

Jim you are definitely correct there are some on the market that would barely last long enough for the inspector to see them, real junk.

You can get some nice metal ones from Red Dot, in this area even HD carries them, along with the junk ones.

 

[iwire]

Re: Bubble covers in old work

Wayne I think there is a large difference between adding an in use cover and ripping down the walls to replace K&T.

I agree with you I do not want inspectors forcing replacement of old work.

But for me if I take it out it won't go back. Just how I like to do my work.

 

[jimwalker]

Re: Bubble covers in old work

My thinking is this is a local AHJ issue to bring it to code.I see nothing in NEC that say we must bring old buildings to code just because an electrician touched the building.If that was required no one would call us, they would repair themself or call handyman.
They call us to replace a broken WP cover.This should be a 15 min .service call when we are in the area.Maybe charge them $50 (and i feel bad to charge that).Now i am forced to make it gfci protected and bubble cover.Whats the bill up to now ? Remove old duplex and find old steel small box!!!!! now what ?
We could end up easily with a $200 repair bill over a simple $2 cover that worked for 30 years

 

[hurk27]

Re: Bubble covers in old work

This is the way I was taught if we start (requireing) to much then the job starts getting done by the home owner not us and this could lead up to worse instalations than the existing if it was just replaced as it was. Or not done at all leaving a dangerous outdoor receptacle inplace. so I do offer and explain why the inuse cover and GFCI should be installed but I still try to allow the home owner (who is paying for it) to make the final decision.

 

[iwire]

Re: Bubble covers in old work

Jim did your area adopt article 80?

part of 80.9(C)

80.9(C) Additions, Alterations, or Repairs. Additions, alterations, or repairs to any building, structure, or premises shall conform to that required of a new building without requiring the existing building to comply with all the requirements of this Code.

In MA we do not use article 80 we have "rules"

MA rule 3

Additions or modifications to an existing installation shall be made in accordance with this Code without bringing the remaining part of the installation into compliance with the requirements of this Code. The installation shall not create a violation of this Code, nor shall it increase the magnitude of an existing violation.

Of course I do not know the rules you have in FL but it would not surprise me if you have something similar.

[ January 04, 2004, 06:16 PM: Message edited by: iwire ]

 

[electricmanscott]

Re: Bubble covers in old work

Jim if you replace the outside receptacle would you not install a gfci? I hope you would. Why then would you ignore the requirement for an in use cover. It is clearly required as is the gfci. Do you pick and choose which parts of the NEC you comply with?

 

[jimwalker]

Re: Bubble covers in old work

I dont believe they have.In my area we deal with 3 counties ,city of tampa,and a few other local cities.No way can anyone keep up to what they each want.In general i wire everything to city standards as they are the tougher standards.
In a case like small repairs unpermitted we would make our own call.
Do your T poles have bubbles ?

[ January 04, 2004, 06:29 PM: Message edited by: jimwalker ]

 

[jimwalker]

Re: Bubble covers in old work

Yes if i replace the receptacle it gets gfci.
If i see a maliboo light that will stay pluged in yes bubble
If its just a required and unused recepticle with just a broken cover ,i think thats pushing too far.
What will happen to that cover it is used every weekend to work on that crappy chevy?How many weeks before it snaps off.Lets see now i go back and replace for free.

 

[iwire]

Re: Bubble covers in old work

Originally posted by jimwalker:
Do your T poles have bubbles ?

Temp services, yes without question, major OHSA fines without.

And yes the cheap covers will break first day on a construction site.

edit I should say only the ones in wet locations as required, not every temp outlet we put in the building.

[ January 04, 2004, 06:48 PM: Message edited by: iwire ]