Will non-tamperproof recepts. disappear?

[Detective]

I don't have my 2008 Code yet to see how 406.11 reads, but what is your take on whether replacing an old receptacle means putting in a tamperproof? If the 2008 gets adopted everywhere, there shouldn't be old-fashioned receptacles sold anymore, except for non-residential purposes.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

There are a lot of products that are on the market that can't be used per the code rules. I don't see the standard receptacles going away. An example of this is the non-listed liquidtight flexible metal conduit. The code requires the use of a listed product but the non-listed product is very common. I discussed this with a manufacturer's rep at a trade show and his comment was; "it is not a violation to sell it, only a violation to install it and as long as there is a demand for the product we will continue to sell it".

 

[electricmanscott]

I don't have my 2008 Code yet to see how 406.11 reads, but what is your take on whether replacing an old receptacle means putting in a tamperproof? If the 2008 gets adopted everywhere, there shouldn't be old-fashioned receptacles sold anymore, except for non-residential purposes.

First off they are not tamper "proof" they are tamper "resistant".
Second 406.3 D 1-3 Spells out the requirements for replacement receptacles, non of which mention TR type.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

I don't have my 2008 Code yet to see how 406.11 reads, but what is your take on whether replacing an old receptacle means putting in a tamperproof? If the 2008 gets adopted everywhere, there shouldn't be old-fashioned receptacles sold anymore, except for non-residential purposes.

Many areas of the country are still on the 2002 and 2005 code while other may amend the TR receptacles. NC is one that has adopted the 2008 with some amendments. The TR are code now but the powers that be are meeting before Jan. 1, 2009 to decide whether or not TR recep. will be amended also.

Regular recep. will be here for some time.

 

[bphgravity]

If the legitimate manufacturers stop producing them (or any other product), and a demand still exists, this will lead to more conterfeit / non-listed products. (Not that this isn't occuring anyway)

 

[dbuckley]

As TR becomes the norm then non-TR will become more expensive than TR, so you'll put in TR whether required by code or not.

When buyers decide they are not willing to pay the premium for non-TR then manufacture will cease.

 

[iwire]

First off they are not tamper "proof" they are tamper "resistant".
Second 406.3 D 1-3 Spells out the requirements for replacement receptacles, non of which mention TR type.

IMO nothing in 406.3 has anything to do with needing a TR or not.

 

[peter d]

No. .......

 

[peter d]

IMO nothing in 406.3 has anything to do with needing a TR or not.

That's funny...I sat through a code seminar with some certain instructors you might be familiar with () and they said the very same think Scott said...

So now I'm :-?

I guess the logic is that eventually all receptacles will eventually need to be replaced, so when they do, they need to be TR. I wish the code was more specific about this.

 

[electricmanscott]

That's funny...I sat through a code seminar with some certain instructors you might be familiar with () and they said the very same think Scott said...

.

Probably where I heard it

 

[Detective]

Continuing my concern about TR receptacles, 2008 406.11 calls for these "in all areas specified in 210.52." Why didn't they just say all receptacles on dwelling premises? What isn't included in 210.52? Maybe outdoor receptacles that are not the ones required by 210.52 to be mounted on the house?

 

[alfiesauce]

Does 406.3's replacement situation really supercede 406.11 need for TR Recepts?
If you are "bringing a house up to code" for a flipper you can use 406.3 rather than turning to 406.11?

And so you have it-
406.11 reads-
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.

 

[George Stolz]

Continuing my concern about TR receptacles, 2008 406.11 calls for these "in all areas specified in 210.52." Why didn't they just say all receptacles on dwelling premises? What isn't included in 210.52? Maybe outdoor receptacles that are not the ones required by 210.52 to be mounted on the house?

That is exactly why all the cross-referencing in the NEC gets my goat. It sends us into the old "if I install a non-required receptacle in between two required receptacles, what codes govern it?" question, which has never been fully resolved, IMO.