GFCI with no grounding conductor

[LarryFine]

... I punched in a GFCI upstream and marked all receptacles with "no equipment ground".

That's not even required for existing installations that were compliant when new.

... the home inspector is still going to say the receptacles need to be grounded.

He can say it, but it's still not required. It's only a recommendation.

 

[iwire]

And he may be correct depending on what the non-grounded GFCI receptacles will be used for. See 250.114.

I would love to agree with you about 250.114 but in the latest ROP the CMP makes clear that we can plug those items listed in 250.114 to non-EGC protected circuit if the circuits have GFCI protection.

 

[iwire]

The main thing a HI has to do is be able a support their opinions.

And there lies the problem in most cases, the HI cannot support their opinions.

No, they do not have to support their opinions, they can say the house is an ugly color and the landscaping is sub par, they can say that the kitchen counter outlets should have GFCI protection.

It is not a code compliance inspection they are hired for their opinion of the condition of the property.

 

[ozark01]

No, they do not have to support their opinions, they can say the house is an ugly color and the landscaping is sub par, they can say that the kitchen counter outlets should have GFCI protection.

It is not a code compliance inspection they are hired for their opinion of the condition of the property.

I should have clarified my "support their opinions" comment. HI do not report on cosmetic items like paint or landscaping. In NC there is a list of items that have to be inspected during an inspection.

Your example "they can say that the kitchen counter outlets should have GFCI protection" can be in the body of the report as an improvement but to be in the summary as a repair item the HI has to have some proof that it is required and not just a good idea. This proof would be that GFCI receptacles in the kitchen were required when the house was built.

In reality a HI can not voice an opinion on the condition of the property and whether it should be purchased or not. That is the duty of a real estate agent.

 

[LarryFine]

. . . they can say the house is an ugly color and the landscaping is sub par, . . .

HI do not report on cosmetic items like paint or landscaping.

I believe Bob's comment was a stab at sarcasm.

 

[iwire]

I should have clarified my "support their opinions" comment. HI do not report on cosmetic items like paint or landscaping.

I think you will find that changes from area to area.

In NC there is a list of items that have to be inspected during an
inspection.

That would not apply outside NC would it?

Your example "they can say that the kitchen counter outlets should have GFCI protection" can be in the body of the report as an improvement but to be in the summary as a repair item the HI has to have some proof that it is required and not just a good idea.

I disagree that they have to prove it is or was required, perhaps where you live that is true but it is not universal.

In reality a HI can not voice an opinion on the condition of the property and whether it should be purchased or not. That is the duty of a real estate agent.

They can certainly provide an opinion about the condition of the property, I do agree that they are not supposed to recommend buying or not buying the property.

 

[dana1028]

I would love to agree with you about 250.114 but in the latest ROP the CMP makes clear that we can plug those items listed in 250.114 to non-EGC protected circuit if the circuits have GFCI protection.

Bob - would you be kind enough to reference the ROP comment so I can look it up.

It seems bizarre they would say items mandated to be grounded in 250.114 do not need to be grounded; frequently the items listed in 250.114 are also required to be grounded per the mfr's. instructions....but the CMP is saying not so?

 

[ozark01]

All of my comments referenced NC rules only because I have no idea what is required in other states. It it helpful to be licensed in several trades when doing HI. The only time I have to defer to another trade is with structural problems. Those I have to suggest that items like cracks in foundations be checked by a licensed structural engineer.

I also do repairs for some Realtors who are working for the seller and it is amazing what some HI's write up as a repair item. I fully understand why some trades do not much care for HI's.

 

[iwire]

Bob - would you be kind enough to reference the ROP comment so I can look it up.

It seems bizarre they would say items mandated to be grounded in 250.114 do not need to be grounded; frequently the items listed in 250.114 are also required to be grounded per the mfr's. instructions....but the CMP is saying not so?

The CMP is saying 'not so' but it is the CMP for Article 406, is that the same group that writes 250?

Panel Statement: The current code indeed anticipates supplying cord and
plug-connected equipment (with a grounding plug cap) from a GFCI receptacle
that is not connected to earth ground as allowed by the present text. A GFCI
receptacle without a connection to earth ground is a safer alternative than a
grounding receptacle without connection to earth ground when used as a
replacement for a two-wire receptacle. CMP-18 notes that when a GFCI is
installed as permitted by this section, a special label is required noting that
there is no connection to earth ground.
This change would require the installer and AHJ to determine intent. This is
impossible and impractical. See 3.2.1 of the NEC Style Manual.
The proposal does not comply with 4.3.3(d) of the NFPA Regulations
Governing Committee Projects because the substantiation does not contain a
statement of the problem.
Number Eligible to Vote: 11
Ballot Results: Affirmative: 11

18-21 Log #2384 NEC-P18 Final Action: Reject
(406.3(D)(3))

 

[dana1028]

Thanx Bob.

 

[dana1028]

The CMP is saying 'not so' but it is the CMP for Article 406, is that the same group that writes 250?



18-21 Log #2384 NEC-P18 Final Action: Reject
(406.3(D)(3))

Actually, as written I agree with the panel. I don't believe they are saying it is OK to use a GFCI when a ground is required; they are just disagreeing with the submitted change. The submitter requires you [enforcement] to know what the 'intended' use of the outlet will be in the future.

 

[benaround]

That is the first time I've heard the CMP call the EGC an 'earth ground', where did that

come from ?

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Bob,
A statement from panel 18 about a rule that is in panel 5's jurisdiction has no real standing. If panel 18 wants to make their opinion a fact they would have to submit a proposal to panel 5 and have it accepted.

 

[iwire]

Bob,
A statement from panel 18 about a rule that is in panel 5's jurisdiction has no real standing. If panel 18 wants to make their opinion a fact they would have to submit a proposal to panel 5 and have it accepted.

Don, since you pointed out 250.114 to me (years ago now) I have seen it as you do. And I also wondered how one CMP could comment on another section of code ............... but they did.:roll:

 

[iwire]

Actually, as written I agree with the panel. I don't believe they are saying it is OK to use a GFCI when a ground is required; they are just disagreeing with the submitted change. The submitter requires you [enforcement] to know what the 'intended' use of the outlet will be in the future.

You and I must be reading different statements

The current code indeed anticipates supplying cord and
plug-connected equipment (with a grounding plug cap) from a GFCI receptacle
that is not connected to earth ground as allowed by the present text.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Don, since you pointed out 250.114 to me (years ago now) I have seen it as you do. And I also wondered how one CMP could comment on another section of code ............... but they did.:roll:

Bob,

In my opinion panel statements from the panel that has jurisdiction over the code section in question are almost as good as a FI, but a panel statement from a panel on a rule that is under the jurisdiction of another panel has no more standing than any post on this forum.

 

[iwire]

Bob,

In my opinion panel statements from the panel that has jurisdiction over the code section in question are almost as good as a FI, but a panel statement from a panel on a rule that is under the jurisdiction of another panel has no more standing than any post on this forum.

Don, I don't disagree with you, what your saying makes perfect sense and IMO they should not even be allowed to comment on another panels requirements ........... but yet they did.:roll:

 

[madpenguin]

Thanks all for the comments. Just emailed my invoice out for it.

This was all new romex BTW.... Was a typical situation of the homeowner adding receptacles and lights here and there but really didn't know what he was doing. Wound up correcting 3 open ground's, a reverse polarity, punched in a GFCI receptacle at the end of a run where the ground was dead and punched in 2 GFCI's on the kitchen circuits.

Also found #14 on a 20A circuit so had to derate the breaker. Who ever said HI's create LOTS of work for electricians.... Yes! They do! :grin: I have no problem with them. Even if their recommendations border on the moronic side at times.... More money in my pocket.

Thanks again for the Art #'s...