Non-EGC'd 5-R is a fire hazard ??

[peter d]

More gibberish nonsense.

 

[iwire]

install a new Leviton 223-W, or if on old brown paneling, the 223 item.

Either of those receptacles would cause an NEC violation.

Do you have a solution that would actually pass inspection?

 

[FionaZuppa]

Either of those receptacles would cause an NEC violation.

Do you have a solution that would actually pass inspection?

your 1-R is busted
210-7(d)(3)

oh, i see, "new" got you hung up. i mean "new" as in buy a new one, replace the old.

did i miss your Q ?

 

[iwire]

your 1-R is busted
210-7(d)(3)

oh, i see, "new" got you hung up. i mean "new" as in buy a new one, replace the old.

did i miss your Q ?

Can you try posting in complete thoughts?

210-7(d)(3)? What year is this?


The replacement receptacles you suggested would create an NEC violation.

 

[peter d]

Can't you just say "ungrounded" instead of this 1-R, 5-P stuff? :roll::roll:

 

[FionaZuppa]

Can you try posting in complete thoughts?

210-7(d)(3)? What year is this?


The replacement receptacles you suggested would create an NEC violation.

maybe i just missed what your Q was

ok, 406.4(D)(2).

here, let Mr MH tell you if you are unsure. pay close attention at 32-38 seconds, replay if you need to.

 

[al hildenbrand]

let Mr MH tell you if you are unsure. pay close attention at 32-38 seconds, replay if you need to.

The 2011 NEC? Really?

Most of the country is under the 2014 NEC making that basic concept, of a one-for-one replacement, non-compliant for lack of AFCI in most residential settings where one will still find two wire nongrounding type receptacles still in service.

 

[iwire]

here, let Mr MH tell you if you are unsure. pay close attention at 32-38 seconds, replay if you need to.

Again I ask.

What year is this?

It seems you want to discuss changes you feel necessary to the NEC but you have not had your eyes on a recent code book.

Seems a bit odd.

 

[FionaZuppa]

The 2011 NEC? Really?

Most of the country is under the 2014 NEC making that basic concept, of a one-for-one replacement, non-compliant for lack of AFCI in most residential settings where one will still find two wire nongrounding type receptacles still in service.

my AHJ uses NEC 2011 w/ AHJ amendments. your point is what exactly ??

 

[user 100]

my AHJ uses NEC 2011 w/ AHJ amendments. your point is what exactly ??

That your solution is against the rules under the 2014 b/c of 406.4(D)(4).

 

[iwire]

my AHJ uses NEC 2011 w/ AHJ amendments. your point is what exactly ??

I will not speak for Al but for myself it becomes hard to take your criticisms of the NEC too seriously when you continue to use outdated references, code sections and are not aware of current code requirements.



(Hint, 2011 406.(D)(5) and as Al mentioned (4) )

 

[FionaZuppa]

That your solution is against the rules under the 2014 b/c of 406.4(D)(4).

ok, nobody asked for specific NEC versions, all that was blanket said was, "its NEC violation", and the answer to that is "no its not".

 

[user 100]

ok, nobody asked for specific NEC versions, all that was blanket said was, "its NEC violation", and the answer to that is "no its not".

Another hit against the idea would come in the few areas that still use the 2008 b/c of the tp rules.
(2011 and later gave an exception for the tamper proof requirement when replacing 2w receptacles)

 

[al hildenbrand]

install a new Leviton 223-W, or if on old brown paneling, the 223 item.

Either of those receptacles would cause an NEC violation.

Do you have a solution that would actually pass inspection?

my AHJ uses NEC 2011 w/ AHJ amendments. your point is what exactly ??

The 2011 NEC? Really?

Most of the country is under the 2014 NEC making that basic concept, of a one-for-one replacement, non-compliant for lack of AFCI in most residential settings where one will still find two wire nongrounding type receptacles still in service.

Slow down and read it again if you don't understand.

 

[iwire]

(2011 and later gave an exception for the tamper proof requirement when replacing 2w receptacles)

I am not seeing an exception to 406.4(D)(5).

Where should I be looking? :huh:

 

[user 100]

I am not seeing an exception to 406.4(D)(5).

Where should I be looking? :huh:

406.12

Exception #4:

"Nongrounding receptacles used for replacements as permitted in 406.4(D)(2)(a)- 2014

I believe the same is in the 2011

The exception was not in the 2008 iirc

 

[FionaZuppa]

2014 NEC
406.4

(2)Non–Grounding-Type Receptacles.
Where attachment to an equipment grounding conductor does not exist in the receptacle enclosure, the installation shall comply with (D)(2)(a), (D)(2)(b), or (D)(2)(c).
A non–grounding-type receptacle(s) shall be permitted to be replaced with another non–grounding-type receptacle(s).

 

[al hildenbrand]

I am not seeing an exception to 406.4(D)(5).

Where should I be looking? :huh:

What User100 says. And, FYI, in the 2017, the allowance for non-TR two wire nongrounding receptacles to be used for replacement has been added to 406.4(D)(5)

 

[FionaZuppa]

al hildenbrand[/B]] The 2011 NEC? Really?

Most of the country is under the 2014 NEC making that basic concept, of a one-for-one replacement, non-compliant for lack of AFCI in most residential settings where one will still find two wire nongrounding type receptacles still in service.

what do you mean re-read it? non-compliant for lack of afci? what? doesnt code say you need to have afci/gfci/tamper proof only if the location of the replacement requires such?
afci is not a requirement, its the exception that must be met.
so now we have basic concepts for the whole US based on NEC 2014, ah, right, got it hmy:

 

[al hildenbrand]

2014 NEC
406.4
(2)Non–Grounding-Type Receptacles.
Where attachment to an equipment grounding conductor does not exist in the receptacle enclosure, the installation shall comply with (D)(2)(a), (D)(2)(b), or (D)(2)(c).
A non–grounding-type receptacle(s) shall be permitted to be replaced with another non–grounding-type receptacle(s).

This quote of 406.4(D)(2)(a) does not exempt one from 406.12.