TR gfci, WR Gfci

[brother]

IMSO this won't fly. 2008 says "In all areas specified in 210.52", not "all receptacles required by 210.52".
If an area is specified in 210.52, and I don't think it misses any areas of a residence, then receptacles in that area must comply.


Edit to add: Maybe attics would be okay.

I agree 100%!! the code says 'in all areas specified in 210.52. so if its in the area It has to be tamper resistant. The thing is i have yet to see both Tamper resistant and weather resistant GFCI receptacle. they have the 'tamper resistant GFCI , and they have the Weather resistant GFCI, but to comply with the code in a dwelling (outside) then it has to be Both Tamper resistant and weather reistant at the same time GFCI.

 

[electricmanscott]

The thing is i have yet to see both Tamper resistant and weather resistant GFCI receptacle. they have the 'tamper resistant GFCI , and they have the Weather resistant GFCI, but to comply with the code in a dwelling (outside) then it has to be Both Tamper resistant and weather reistant at the same time GFCI.

I have TRWR Gfcis.

 

[al hildenbrand]

IMSO this won't fly. 2008 says "In all areas specified in 210.52", not "all receptacles required by 210.52".
If an area is specified in 210.52, and I don't think it misses any areas of a residence, then receptacles in that area must comply.

This is interesting.

The term area is not defined directly in the NEC. For the definition we are directed to the dictionary.

I draw your attention to the List, (1) thru (4) in the second sentence of 210.52. I read this list as the specification of areas that are not to be specified in 210.52.

2008 NEC

210.52 Dwelling Unit Recptacle Outlets. This section provides requirements for 125-volt, 15- and 20-ampere recetacle outlets. The receptacles required by this section shall be in addition to any receptacle that is:

1. Part of a luminaire or appliance, or
2. Controlled by a wall switch in accordance with 210.70(A)(1), Exception No. 1, or
3. Located within cabinets or cupboards, or
4. Located more than 1.7 m (5 1/2 ft) above the floor.

Quite simply, if an area is listed as not to be counted for the requirements of 210.52, then it is not in the areas in 210.52.

 

[al hildenbrand]

Donut holes

Donut holes

210.52 second sentence (1) thru (4) might be thought of as donut holes, that is, holes in the larger areas specified in the text of 210.52.

 

[al hildenbrand]

* * Bump * *

 

[peter d]

Set. Spike.

 

[electricmanscott]

This might be one that could be argued for ever, like 15 amp counter receptacles after you have installed the code minimum.

It really doesn't matter to me if I can install non TR receptacles in certain areas. I won't be buying or stocking anything other than TR. It's just not that big of a deal money-wise and just another thing to keep track of.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

It would appear to me if they wanted all the receptacles in a dwelling to be TR then they would have said "all receptacles in a dwelling". The NEC did not so I would bet they deliberately did that. Why would you need TR behind a ref. etc. I agree if you are stocing recep. you may as well just do them all. When I install decora recep. in a house I don't install standard duplex receptacles behing the refrig.-- Iuse what I have-- decora.

 

[brother]

It would appear to me if they wanted all the receptacles in a dwelling to be TR then they would have said "all receptacles in a dwelling". The NEC did not so I would bet they deliberately did that. Why would you need TR behind a ref. etc.

then why do we need TR on counter tops? or the receptacle for the garage door opener that is about 8feet in the air on the ceiling?? Im just making the point of arguement from your 'logic' (Why would you need TR behind a ref). But yet TR is still required in those areas, not to mention what if you just wanted a receptacle up high on the wall for a clock in the living room? It still would need to be TR. I dont think that just because they did not say "all receptacles in a dwelling", doesnt mean they did not want it.

 

[wirebender]

This is interesting.

The term area is not defined directly in the NEC. For the definition we are directed to the dictionary.

I draw your attention to the List, (1) thru (4) in the second sentence of 210.52. I read this list as the specification of areas that are not to be specified in 210.52. Quite simply, if an area is listed as not to be counted for the requirements of 210.52, then it is not in the areas in 210.52.

So you think it will be okay to not use TR receptacles as long as they are controlled by a wall switch?

 

[al hildenbrand]

if you just wanted a receptacle up high on the wall for a clock in the living room? It still would need to be TR.

Let's say that clock receptacle is at 84" above the finished floor.

What's the code citation(s) that say it must be tamper-resistant?

 

[al hildenbrand]

So you think it will be okay to not use TR receptacles as long as they are controlled by a wall switch?

It seems to me that a wholly switched duplex receptacle or a switched single receptacle are Lighting Outlets covered by 210.70.

The Lighting Outlet is not included in the specified area in 210.52, as stated in 210.52(2).

 

[brother]

Let's say that clock receptacle is at 84" above the finished floor.

What's the code citation(s) that say it must be tamper-resistant?

Do I need to break it down??

406.11 Tamper-Resistant Receptacles in Dwelling Units. In all areas specified in 210.52, all 125-volt, 15 and 20-ampere receptacles shall be listed tamper resistant receptacles.

Ok now lets look at 210.52 AGAIN!! Remember there is NO (a) or 1 or 2, so this means that whole CHAPTER!! Lets see what AREAS are specified in that WHOLE CHAPTER! Im not going to type it all though

210.52 Dwelling Unit Receptacle Outlets. This section provides requirements for 125 volt, 15 and 20 ampere receptacle outlets.
(A) Genteral Provisions. In every kitchen, family room, dining room, living room parlor, library, den sunroom, bedroom, recreation room, or similar room or area of dwelling units receptacle outlets shall be installed in accordance with the general provisions specified in 210.52(A)(1) through (A)(3).
(C) Countertops.
(D)Bathrooms.
(E) Outdoor Outlets
(F) Laundry Areas
(G)Basement and Garages.
(H)Hallways.

In all those areas there is NO exception for height of the receptacles in living rooms or any other rooms for that matter. I hope this is enough 'code citation' for you.

 

[wirebender]

I agree. Attics is about the only area not covered, IMSO.

 

[brother]

It seems to me that a wholly switched duplex receptacle or a switched single receptacle are Lighting Outlets covered by 210.70.

The Lighting Outlet is not included in the specified area in 210.52, as stated in 210.52(2).

Even if you try to call a switched receptacle a lighting outlet, (which is a stretch IMHO) it is STILL a receptacle Because that is what is installed there at that so called 'lighting outlet' , a receptacle!! So that takes you back to 210.52, that deals with 'receptacles'!!

Not to mention that someone can plug something in there other than a light or lamp and have it switch.

 

[iwire]

I can not even believe this :roll:

 

[electricmanscott]

I can not even believe this :roll:

I can. :roll:

Come on Bob 20k posts and this surprises you?

 

[al hildenbrand]

I can not even believe this :roll:

I just completed a 16 hour continuing ed course on the 2008 NEC. The instructors are Minnesota State Electrical Inspectors.

The printed course material says this about 406.11:

Note! Now all receptacles required for a dwelling unit must be listed Tamper-resistant, except receptacles for specific equipment, such as; water softeners, sump pumps, and similar appliances. The laundry circuit is included in 210.52 and must use a Tamper-resistant receptacle. A US Consumer study found that 7 kids per day are injured by contact with receptacles.

In class, I took this to be a mistake. But greater minds than mine are reflected in the above statement, and I believe it to be representative of the AHJ for the largest amount of area I work in.

 

[al hildenbrand]

Remember there is NO (a) or 1 or 2, so this means that whole CHAPTER!! Lets see what AREAS are specified in that WHOLE CHAPTER!

210.52 is a section in Article 210. Artcle 210 is in Chapter 2. So, I believe you mean "that means the whole SECTION!!"

I agree with you that the whole section of 210.52 is invoked by 406.11.

In all those areas there is NO exception for height of the receptacles in living rooms or any other rooms for that matter. I hope this is enough 'code citation' for you.

Since we agree that we're looking at the whole section 210.52, then we have to include the second sentence at the very beginning, before (A). This second sentence text is global for the whole section 210.52.

2008 NEC

210.52 Dwelling Unit Recptacle Outlets. This section provides requirements for 125-volt, 15- and 20-ampere recetacle outlets. The receptacles required by this section shall be in addition to any receptacle that is:

1. Part of a luminaire or appliance, or
2. Controlled by a wall switch in accordance with 210.70(A)(1), Exception No. 1, or
3. Located within cabinets or cupboards, or
4. Located more than 1.7 m (5 1/2 ft) above the floor.

Brother,

If there truly is no height restriction, what prevents one from placing all the receptacles in the Living Room (to use your example) at more than 5? feet above the floor and claiming to have satisfied 210.52?

 

[brother]

210.52 is a section in Article 210. Artcle 210 is in Chapter 2. So, I believe you mean "that means the whole SECTION!!"

I agree with you that the whole section of 210.52 is invoked by 406.11.Since we agree that we're looking at the whole section 210.52, then we have to include the second sentence at the very beginning, before (A). This second sentence text is global for the whole section 210.52. Brother,

If there truly is no height restriction, what prevents one from placing all the receptacles in the Living Room (to use your example) at more than 5? feet above the floor and claiming to have satisfied 210.52?

Yes I meant 'SECTION'. However I think your example is taking this context. From where i sit, the part about 'in addition to' does not make an 'exception to'. In 210.52 does not negate the area of 210.52. This is how the code is MAKING sure that you have those 'other' receptacles required in this section. The key word here is 'area'. so those 'in addition to' receptacles does not get escape the TR requirement if they are in the 'area'.

And that class you went through, I think they are target in the way the language is interperted.