Receptacles for RV's

[jap]

Are campers and rv's with 30 and 50 amp cords on them governed by the NEC?


Jap>

 

[ptonsparky]

Article 551

 

[Adamjamma]

Ok... so it is a branch so that technically I could roll up, and instead of hooking an rv to it, hook up my shop equipment or cookstove..lol... no problem.. will call it such from now on.

 

[jap]

Ok... so it is a branch so that technically I could roll up, and instead of hooking an rv to it, hook up my shop equipment or cookstove..lol... no problem.. will call it such from now on.

Probably not without modifying your cord ends somewhat.

JAP>

 

[jap]

For the 30 amper that is.


JAP>

 

[Craigv]

Idaho is on 2017 statewide. This question apparently came up and was addressed.


https://dbs.idaho.gov/programs/electrical/publications/Electrical_Newsletter_7-2017.pdf

They agree with my opinion that if the intent was to require GFCI
on 30 and 50 amp receptacles, 551.71(F) would have included this. The paragraph modifies 210.8(B) in their opinion.

I'd be interested to find any other state opinions for or against.

 

[jap]

Idaho is on 2017 statewide. This question apparently came up and was addressed.


https://dbs.idaho.gov/programs/electrical/publications/Electrical_Newsletter_7-2017.pdf

They agree with my opinion that if the intent was to require GFCI
on 30 and 50 amp receptacles, 551.71(F) would have included this. The paragraph modifies 210.8(B) in their opinion.

I'd be interested to find any other state opinions for or against.

If it makes you feel better, I bet we wouldn't have held it against you if you found someone that didn't agree with your opinion.

JAP>

 

[Craigv]

North Dakota:

https://www.ndseb.com/image/cache/Newsletter_255_-_Oct_2017_2.pdf

Also uses 551.71 as the determining article for receptacles at RV sites.

 

[Craigv]

Not a state or local opinion, but rather cites the opinion of the CMP involved:

http://masterthenec.boards.net/thread/36/551-71-210-8-2017

 

[jap]

Most of these articles mention "RV Park" Receptacles.

To me, the language still needs to be improved.

Not all RV receptacle outlets are installed in "RV Parks".

It would be best to refer to the RV Outlet itself, not a particular geographical area such as an "RV Park" if the rule doesn't apply to 30 and 50 amp outlets for RV's.

JMHO.

Jap>

 

[jap]

If I install a 30 or 50 amp RV outlet somewhere other than an "RV Park", do I still have to GFI Protect it?

JAP>

 

[Craigv]

Most of these articles mention "RV Park" Receptacles.

To me, the language still needs to be improved.

Not all RV receptacle outlets are installed in "RV Parks".

It would be best to refer to the RV Outlet itself, not a particular geographical area such as an "RV Park" if the rule doesn't apply to 30 and 50 amp outlets for RV's.

JMHO.

Jap>

Article 551 applies to Recreational Vehicles and Recreational Vehicle Parks. Their definitions and the definition of a "recreational vehicle site" are in that article.

I've been pretty consistently stating the opinion that the language and definitions in the Code are often vague, or simply missing. There is substantial room for improvement. We have members here consistently of the opinion that lower articles are only modified by higher numbered articles if the higher numbered article specifically states an override or conflicting rule. Yet we apparently have states and in the case of my last link, a CMP member stating otherwise.

It shouldn't be this difficult or unclear.

If I install a 30 or 50 amp RV outlet somewhere other than an "RV Park", do I still have to GFI Protect it?

JAP>

Depends where somewhere is...

- If a residence (dwelling unit), then 210.8(A) applies. So no GFCI protection on 30 and 50.

- If an "other than dwelling unit" occupancy, such as a commercial garage, then 210.8(B) applies (with exceptions) and GFCI protection is required unless the exceptions apply.

 

[jap]

It shouldn't be this difficult or unclear.

Hey,,,,, High 5 Craigv,,,,, I feel exactly the same way. :thumbsup:


JAP>

 

[kwired]

Idaho is on 2017 statewide. This question apparently came up and was addressed.


https://dbs.idaho.gov/programs/electrical/publications/Electrical_Newsletter_7-2017.pdf

They agree with my opinion that if the intent was to require GFCI
on 30 and 50 amp receptacles, 551.71(F) would have included this. The paragraph modifies 210.8(B) in their opinion.

I'd be interested to find any other state opinions for or against.

AHJ is certainly allowed to set their preference on something like this that isn't all that clear in the NEC. But IMO 551 does not mention anything except the 20 amp receptacles when it comes to GFCI protection, how does having "nothing" in 551 modify something from chapters 1-4?

If I install a 30 or 50 amp RV outlet somewhere other than an "RV Park", do I still have to GFI Protect it?

JAP>

Per wording in 2017 - at a dwelling no, anyplace else and assuming outdoors, yes.

Plug your 50 amp RV in at home and you won't experience shock hazards. Plug it in anywhere else and apparently you are subject to shock hazards

 

[jap]

AHJ is certainly allowed to set their preference on something like this that isn't all that clear in the NEC. But IMO 551 does not mention anything except the 20 amp receptacles when it comes to GFCI protection, how does having "nothing" in 551 modify something from chapters 1-4?

Per wording in 2017 - at a dwelling no, anyplace else and assuming outdoors, yes.

Plug your 50 amp RV in at home and you won't experience shock hazards. Plug it in anywhere else and apparently you are subject to shock hazards

I'm more likely to get electrocuted at home than I am at the camp site.
That's where I wash my fifth wheel and do all the other maintenance on it.

I would think the biggest shock hazard at the site would be when you go to unplug it from the pedestal.

One tends to palm the male cap and your fingers wrap around and come close to the stabs as your working it out.
.

The newer rv male caps have a handles molded onto the back that you grab onto making this much less of an issue.

Jap>

 

[Craigv]

AHJ is certainly allowed to set their preference on something like this that isn't all that clear in the NEC. But IMO 551 does not mention anything except the 20 amp receptacles when it comes to GFCI protection, how does having "nothing" in 551 modify something from chapters 1-4?

That's a question for those AHJ's. If interested you could contact them and pose your position.

It should be interesting to see whether 2020 closes the loopholes. GFCI protection on RV receptacles is a rather odd requirement. They *are* functionally feeders, just with plugs.

 

[Craigv]

I'm more likely to get electrocuted at home than I am at the camp site.
That's where I wash my fifth wheel and do all the other maintenance on it.

I would think the biggest shock hazard at the site would be when you go to unplug it from the pedestal.

One tends to palm the male cap and your fingers wrap around and come close to the stabs as your working it out.
.

The newer rv male caps have a handles molded onto the back that you grab onto making this much less of an issue.

Jap>

Just shut off the receptacle.

 

[jap]

Just shut off the receptacle.

Not all Power outlets have the breaker in the outlet itself.


JAP>

 

[jap]

GFCI protection on RV receptacles is a rather odd requirement. They *are* functionally feeders, just with plugs.

Could you not say that about anything that plugs into an outlet that has additional overcurrent protection inside of it as I mentioned before ?

JAP>

 

[Craigv]

Not all Power outlets have the breaker in the outlet itself.


JAP>

551.77(B) Disconnecting Means. A disconnecting switch or circuit breaker shall be provided in the site supply equipment for disconnecting the power supply to the recreational vehicle.