|
|
|
1 members (Scott35),
449
guests, and
29
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 98 Likes: 1
Member
|
It's a Canadian thing and it's in the 2009 code as Appendix I, Rule 26-724(a). This seems to contradict the wording of the actual rule, but there it is, 'no' means 'yes'. Unless the actual CEC differs from the Ontario version, I don't see any contradictions. It states quite clearly that all outdoor receptacles have to be on a circuit (or circuits) dedicated for outdoor receptacles. Bruce
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 947
OP
Member
|
The clause we are referring to is: "outdoor receptacles readily accessible from ground level and installed in accordance with Rule 26-714(a) shall be supplied from at least one branch circuit dedicated for those outdoor receptacles."
The interpretation is that all additional receptacles are required to be on a dedicated circuit. The effect of that is that even if you have several outdoor receptacles on several dedicated circuits, you still can't take a general use receptacle in the garage and extend it to an outside receptacle.
Not long ago, a couple inspectors agreed that one circuit met code. So, there were at least three of us, and CSA agreed it was sufficiently unclear that they issued an interpretation.
Now that we have this interpretation, we have similar wording for other areas: "At least one branch circuit shall be provided solely for receptacles installed in the laundry room" and "at least one branch circuit shall be provided solely for receptacles in the utility room". Does the same standard apply?
The real reason that I dislike this interpretation is an actual situation. A farmer had a house with a two-car garage attached on the opposite end from the electrical panel. He ran an extension cord from inside the garage to outside the garage because he liked to sit on the sunny side of the garage and he had a bug zapper. He would pay for a gfi plug outside the garage, but didn't want a circuit run on the surface of his house back to the panel.
Given that he had a dedicated cct plug outside the house, a work shop a hundred yards away with a couple dedicated outdoor circuits, and a quonset with receptacles for trucks and tractors almost as close, what is the point of making him run an extension cord through the garage window?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 98 Likes: 1
Member
|
I'm not saying that I agree or disagree with the code on this issue. I'm just saying that there shouldn't be any ambiguity in it's interpretation.
You can see in this thread the differences in opinion on whether outside receptacles should be allowed to be branched off of indoor receptacles.
Personally I feel that as a professional electrician, it should be up to me to determine what the best solution should be for any customer in a given situation. If I assess the situation incorrectly, then the buck stops with me and it's my responsibility to rectify the situation.
However you can't legislate common sense and in this society it seems that nobody wants to take responsibility for their own actions, thus we have rules that are based on the assumption that we are all idiots.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 7,382 Likes: 7
Member
|
Gentlemen:
Please be aware of one important thing in this thread....
The OP is from Canada!
Some of the comments within are from guys that are 'stateside'.
Here in the US, there is no NEC requirement that the exterior receptacle be on a dedicated circuit, and/or not tapped from an interior circuit. We prohibit tapping it from the SA circuits in a kitchen, and bathroom.
I refer this as a design issue, and not a code issue.
And, I have to agree, even here in the US, common sense cannot be legislated.
John
|
|
|
|
Posts: 31
Joined: December 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
