Shouldn't all outdoor lighting circuits be GFCI protected?

[Jon456]

I'm troubleshooting some problems in old wiring (about 10 years old) at an estate. There are a number of outdoor lighting circuits. Some of the switches are in open air and these are behind wet location switch plate covers. Some of the switches are in semi-enclosed areas (like a porch or covered walkway) with standard indoor "decor" switches. But NONE of the circuits are GFCI protected, at least not from the source.

One interesting circuit goes from the circuit breaker to the pool area where there are some 3-way switches, one set by each entry to the pool deck. These are behind wet-location switch plates, but no GFCI between the breaker panel and the switches. These switches provide power to low-voltage transformers for pool deck and landscape lighting, and there are GFCI receptacles placed in the circuit just before the low-voltage transformers. So the GFCIs will protect against a fault in the transformers only; not anything upstream (like at the switches). I don't think this is correct. I don't think the indoor switches belong in the semi-enclosed locations either, as it wouldn't take much wind for them to get doused in a a rain storm.

 

[iwire]

Sounds NEC compliant as far as the GFCIs go.

Can't say about the decora switches without seeing it.

 

[chris kennedy]

Yet there is no NEC violation with the installation you describe. Ever get shocked from a wet switch?

 

[Jon456]

Yet there is no NEC violation with the installation you describe. Ever get shocked from a wet switch?

No, but then I've never been shocked by a wet recepticle either. But that doesn't mean it can't happen. I think a wet switch could be dangerous also as the water could provide a path for the current to bypass the insulation of the switch body.

By the way, all of the open air switches (that were behind the wet location switch plates) were horribly corroded, some to the point of mechanical as well as electrical failure.

 

[charlie b]

Ever get shocked from a wet switch?

I have (well, sort of)! It was a couple months after I bought my house, and a couple weeks after an electrician added GFCI protection to my kitchen counter receptacles (along with a host of other tasks I had him do). I had a light plugged into one of the receptacles, and I touched it with wet hands. OK, so that's not quite exactly the same as being shocked by a wet switch. I even posted a question on this forum about whether the GFCI was doing its job. I was advised that the shock was of such a short duration that the GFCI did not have time to react.

That said, the NEC GFCI protection is generally limited to receptacle outlets, not lighting outlets.

 

[Jon456]

Sounds NEC compliant as far as the GFCIs go.

So basically, no GFCIs are needed? Note that while some of the circuits have GFCIs before the low-voltage transformers, not all of the circuits have GFCIs before the low-voltage transformers. And there have been some transformers in locations where they are mounted very close to the ground with poor local landscape drainage. It's obvious from the amount of rust and water damage that some have been at least partially submerged in the past.

Can't say about the decora switches without seeing it.

I'll take some photos this afternoon and post them tonight.

 

[chris kennedy]

So basically, no GFCIs are needed?

210.8 Ground-Fault Circuit-Interrupter Protection for Personnel.

(A) Dwelling Units. All 125-volt, single-phase, 15- and 20-ampere receptacles installed in the locations specified in (1) through (8) shall have ground-fault circuit-interrupter protection for personnel.

(B) Other Than Dwelling Units. All 125-volt, single-phase, 15- and 20-ampere receptacles installed in the locations specified in (1) through (5) shall have ground-fault circuit-interrupter protection for personnel:

I would doubt that CMP 2 would consider a proposal for change unless the was a history of documented accidents involving wet switches.

 

[iwire]

No, but then I've never been shocked by a wet recepticle either.

Jon, in my opinion the intent of the GFCI rules are to protect people from things beyond the receptacles not the to protect people from the receptacle itself.

If the devices are properly grounded it should be close to imposable to get a shock.

 

[cowboyjwc]

I hate when others do this, because it wasn't the question, but Article 680 does make mention of GFCI protected lights around a pool.

Other than that, I agree that it's not required.