Does the NEC have a "Grandfather" clause?

[taylorp]

Ladies and or Gentlemen:

Does the NEC contain a "grandfather" clause? The reason I am asking this is because several of my Engineer friends keep insisting that the NEC "grandfathers" older installations.

I keep telling them I can't find a "grandfather" clause in the NEC. About as close as I can get is Article 90.4, but this has to do with the AHJ.

My engineer friends then ask me if my bedroom (built before 2005) has an AFCI per 2005? If not, then I'm "grand-fathered." I tell them it is none of their business what is in my bedroom.

Well, is there a "Grandfather" clause in the NEC, or is it left to the local/regional AJH?
Am I missing something?

 

[cselectric]

Re: Does the NEC have a "Grandfather" clause?

I believe the alleged grandfather clause is a product of logic and not an NEC article. Logically, we cannot expect a building to meet anything more than the code that was in effect when it was built.

Beyond that, there is nothing in NEC that grandfathers explicitly. In the event of a remodel, it is common to have to bring all or part of a buildings electrical system up to current code. How much so depends on local regulation ie: the AHJ. The rule around here tends to be "you touch it, you own it." Meaning anything that falls within the area of remodel, and any system I have to change or alter for the remodel, has to be brought up to current code.

 

[volt102]

Re: Does the NEC have a "Grandfather" clause?

No, but NFPA 1 does.
Jim

 

[jwelectric]

Re: Does the NEC have a "Grandfather" clause?

P.Taylor

Let?s take it easy on us grandfathers. I have been a grandfather for eighteen years and am a grandfather to five, four boys and then there is my favorite Granddaughter.

As far as you remark here:

My engineer friends then ask me if my bedroom (built before 2005) has an AFCI per 2005? If not, then I'm "grand-fathered." I tell them it is none of their business what is in my bedroom.

well in my bedroom there ain?t much arcing going on but there is with out a doubt a grandfather in there as well as a very beautiful Grandmother.

 

[macmikeman]

Re: Does the NEC have a "Grandfather" clause?

I know one place in the code where there ain't no grandfathring, or grandmothering for that matter. If you replace a receptacle outlet that was never gfi protected, but is in a location that requires one by current code then you must provide gfi protection on that receptacle outlet. I do not have my code book handy, and do not have the thing memorized, so I leave the actual reference to others .

 

[jimwalker]

Re: Does the NEC have a "Grandfather" clause?

Only code required of the house is the one that was inforced at the time of it being built.Repairs could be required to meet current code.After all before you can replace a receptacle you must remove it first.Now that its not there what your doing is installing a new one .Remodels must meet new code.Something to remember is if while doing repairs or remodels is it must have been to code at time built,so just because it is already there doesnt grandfather everything you see.

 

[LarryFine]

Re: Does the NEC have a "Grandfather" clause?

Originally posted by macmikeman:
If you replace a receptacle outlet that was never gfi protected, but is in a location that requires one by current code then you must provide gfi protection on that receptacle outlet.

Mike, I must disagree; otherwise, you wouldn't be allowed, for example, to replace a 2-prong receptacle with another 2-prong. Additions to existing circuits must be so protected, but not replacements.

 

[petersonra]

Re: Does the NEC have a "Grandfather" clause?

Originally posted by macmikeman:
I know one place in the code where there ain't no grandfathring, or grandmothering for that matter. If you replace a receptacle outlet that was never gfi protected, but is in a location that requires one by current code then you must provide gfi protection on that receptacle outlet. I do not have my code book handy, and do not have the thing memorized, so I leave the actual reference to others .

that has nothing to do with grandfathering. you are replacing it, and a repalcement needs to meet the current code.

 

[charlie b]

Re: Does the NEC have a "Grandfather" clause?

Let me say, as a first-time grandfather in the making, that the term "grandfather" should be left out of all discussions of code. It is not a code word. And the "rule" about "if you touch it, then bring it up to code" is not a matter of overruling any grandfather rule, nor is it explicitly included as a rule within the NEC itself.

I think the legal rule that comes into play here is the fourth amendment to the US Constitution:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

What I mean is that an Inspector cannot just walk up to your house, knock on your door, ask to see your bedroom, and write you up for not having AFCI protection. The thing that gives the Inspector the right to enter your house is the fact that you (or your EC) applied for an electrical permit, after which some work was done, and now an inspection is required.

Whatever is covered by the permit is within the scope of the inspection. That is the legal basis for the commonly used "rule of thumb" that, "if you touch it, then bring it up to code." You touched it because you had a permit to touch it. That permit requires you to follow the code, in whatever work is covered by the permit.

Whatever is not covered by the permit is not within the scope of the inspection. The line between the two might be hard to draw, and that is the reason for the "A-word" in "AHJ." Someone has to have the authority to draw that line.

 

[macmikeman]

Re: Does the NEC have a "Grandfather" clause?

original post by Larry Fine -
Mike, I must disagree; otherwise, you wouldn't be allowed, for example, to replace a 2-prong receptacle with another 2-prong. Additions to existing circuits must be so protected, but not replacements.

Good morning from Hawaii, My code reference is 406.3(2)"Ground fault circuit protected receptacles shall be providedwhere replacements are made at receptacle outlets that are required to be so protected elesewhere in this Code"

This is the only place in the code book outside of annex #80 that has this type of wording as far as I know. Larry if you replace a two prong receptacle outlet in a bathroom for instance, you must replace it with a gfi receptacle, or else the circuit must have gfi protection. You cannot put a two prong receptacle back in there just because no grounding means is present.

 

[cselectric]

Re: Does the NEC have a "Grandfather" clause?

Originally posted by macmikeman:
Larry if you replace a two prong receptacle outlet in a bathroom for instance, you must replace it with a gfi receptacle, or else the circuit must have gfi protection. You cannot put a two prong receptacle back in there just because no grounding means is present. [/QB]

If you look at 406.3(D)(3)(a)- (2005) you will find that you can replace an ungrounded recept. with same.

 

[benaround]

Re: Does the NEC have a "Grandfather" clause?

Not in the Bathroom!!

 

[LarryFine]

Re: Does the NEC have a "Grandfather" clause?

I will gladly concede that Mike is correct about the bath receptacle replacement.

 

[jwelectric]

Re: Does the NEC have a "Grandfather" clause?

Originally posted by cselectric:

Originally posted by macmikeman:
Larry if you replace a two prong receptacle outlet in a bathroom for instance, you must replace it with a gfi receptacle, or else the circuit must have gfi protection. You cannot put a two prong receptacle back in there just because no grounding means is present.

If you look at 406.3(D)(3)(a)- (2005) you will find that you can replace an ungrounded recept. with same. [/QB]

Free lessons in reading the code so pay close attention.

First when reading a section of the code such as 406.3 (D) it is very important to read each and every word that is written starting with the top going to the bottom.

406.3 (D) is broken into three parts with part three being broken into three parts itself.
When reading this section we must start with D and make sure it is fulfilled before moving to the next so lets take a close look at ?

406.3 (D) Replacements. Replacement of receptacles shall comply with 406.3(D)(1), (D)(2), and (D)(3) as applicable.

notice that we are told that the receptacles shall comply with 406.3(D)(1), (D)(2), and (D)(3) as applicable.
Well being that we are talking about two wire receptacles (D)(1) will not apply. Let?s move on to (D)(2).

406.3 (D) (2) Ground-Fault Circuit Interrupters. Ground-fault circuit-interrupter protected receptacles shall be provided where replacements are made at receptacle outlets that are required to be so protected elsewhere in this Code.

Here we are told that if making a replacement where a GFCI is now required a GFCI shall be provided.
If we elect to use a two wire receptacle for replacement as outlined in ?..

406.3 (D)(3) (a) A non?grounding-type receptacle(s) shall be permitted to be replaced with another non?grounding-type receptacle(s)

Then a GFCI breaker SHALL be installed to fulfill 406.3 (D) (2)

This concludes lesson one stay tuned for information about later lessons or contact you host for material.

 

[macmikeman]

Re: Does the NEC have a "Grandfather" clause?

This concludes lesson one stay tuned for information about later lessons or contact you host for material.

Nice job JW, but take note that I already said as much at the start.

 

[jwelectric]

Re: Does the NEC have a "Grandfather" clause?

Just trying to help you Boss.

Sitting around with nothing good on TV and thought I would mess around on the web a little. What time is that Bush race?

Getting a little hungry and I am thinking about starting a fire and skinning a cow and digging a few taters up.

Well instead of doing all that work on a Saturday guess the steak house will be having a little company early this afternoon.

 

[iwire]

Re: Does the NEC have a "Grandfather" clause?

Originally posted by charlie b:
I think the legal rule that comes into play here is the fourth amendment to the US Constitution:

Charlie I think that was part of an excellent post, I thank you for reminding us all of that.

What disturbs me is that the authors behind Article 80, now found in Annex G (and not part of the code) seemed to forget we have a Constitution.

Take a look at 80.13, here is just a sample;

80.13 Authority.
Where used in this article, the term authority having jurisdiction shall include the chief electrical inspector or other individuals designated by the governing body. This Code shall be administered and enforced by the authority having jurisdiction designated by the governing authority as follows.

(5)The authority having jurisdiction shall be authorized to inspect, at all reasonable times, any building or premises for dangerous or hazardous conditions or equipment as set forth in this Code. The authority having jurisdiction shall be permitted to order any person(s) to remove or remedy such dangerous or hazardous condition or equipment. Any person(s) failing to comply with such order shall be in violation of this Code.

Now I have to ask, did the authors of this actually think areas would adopt this section?

 

[macmikeman]

Re: Does the NEC have a "Grandfather" clause?

Now I have to ask, did the authors of this actually think areas would adopt this section?

Bob, maybe they were thinking Berkley, California?