ECN Electrical Forum
Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals

Code States as Follows. 250.146(A).
This provision Shall not apply to Cover-Mounted recepacles UNLESS the BOX & COVER (Combination) are LISTED as providing satisfactory ground continuity between the box and the Receptacle.
Just produce a LISTED box & Cover (Combination) to meet that requirement & subject well be closed!
Otherwise Gotta put Pigtail as I see it.
Yoopersup

Kjay, all that's safe to say about the listing details is "I don't know." That's why I'd love to have UL weigh in on this. I am not familiar with the specific testing protocols, but those folks are no fools, and it's very possible that their suitability for grounding has always been a part of the standard evaluation.

UL white book or there number is 1-800-595-9844 .

Very nice .... how about posting your citation here for all to see?

Asking to see the listing is the same thing you would do with any piece of equipment that is required to be listed.
I really do expect that as soon as this question gets asked enough times one of the manufacturers will stamp "suitable for grounding" on their cover/receptacle assembly and charge a buck extra for it.

Sorry, Greg ... in this discussion I cannot accept someone implying that "UL says" and leaving us with their phone number.

If it's in the white book, for Pete's sake either quote from it, or copy and paste it.

If someone at UL said so, I want that correspondence also posted - and the name of the person.

The other alternative to to shut down the forum, as it's obviously not a way to learn anything.

I never said "call U/L". It is reasonable to ask for some kind of listing tho, when the NEC specifically says



It is up to the installer to demonstrate that, particularly when we are just talking about 8" of wire and a screw.

Gentlemen & Ladies (if it applies) Since I was the one who started this war, I guess I should make a comment from time to time so you know I'm monitoring. I just looked at the 2008 Analysis of Changes published jointly by IAEI and NFPA and maybe we can get a uniformed understanding after reading what it says on p. 132. For those of you who don't have a copy, I think they realized that there is this problem and they are trying to fix it by adding a new last sentence to 250.146(A). They are saying that if the receptacle is riveted or installed with some sort of thread locking or screw locking method it does not need a jumper installed between the green screw on the receptacle and the metal box. Nothing about the cover and receptacle being a Listed combination.

Works for me.

Theres Two parts to 250.146A
One is :This provision Shall not apply to Cover-Mounted Receptacles UNLESS the Box & Cover combination are Listed as providing Satisfactory Ground continuity between the Box & Receptacles.THE 2008 Analysis book doesn't deal with this as its not a change.
Part two is:A LISTED exposed work cover shall be permitted to be the grounding & bonding means when attached per # 1 & 2 as stated.
I'm saying either way a LISTED cover is required or a Pigtail is then required.
I never said UL says I just gave the number & White book as a reference which all of you should have to reference answers you"ve been giving.
Yoopersup

For me anyway, the "thread locking or screw locking means" mentioned in 250.146[A] is where the question arises.
Some form of written confirmation from the manufacture that the device fastening hardware included with the raised covers is satisfactory for the purpose would probably clear things up.
Seems like it should be okay since the covers themselves are UL listed.