Would a 240 volt, 50 amp receptacle require GFCI protection according to NEC Article 525. I'm aware all 15 and 20 amp, 125 volt receptacles do. I'm having difficulty understanding 525.23(C).

Frank

Frank:
I just read 525.23 (c) and it refers to 525.18 (A) or (B). Well, I can't find 525.18 (A) (B) in my 2002 NEC...
If the 50 amp is for a appliance see 525.23 (B). DEpending on the conditions, and the possible risks involved I probably would install a GFI device for "peace of mind".
Remember, the Code is "minimum requirements", no one can fail for exceeding the Code requirements.

John (HotLine1)

Hotline,
I have a feeling that the reference of 525.18(A) or (B), should be 525.23(A) or (B). I would guess that the intent is to refer back to "itself", and then (C) covers any receptacle not covered by (A) and (B).
Frank,
It says that outlets..."shall be permitted...". So, the code allows us to put in a GFI if we are so inclined.
I would also consider the type of equipment. Notice (B) speaks specifically about cooking and refrigeration which doesn't lend itself to GFI.

G Feel I terrific,
Doc

Watt Doctor-

The "shall be permitted" kind of threw me off. Does that mean it is a requirement or simply permitted if you so desire???

Frank

Mr. Cinker,

You hit the nail on the head. Go to Article 90.5(B)Permissive Rules. It will tell you that they are "....allowed but not required....options or alternative methods...."
Notice 220.17 Appliance Load-Dwelling Unit(s) "It shall be permissible to apply a demand factor of 75%....."

Notice 220.18 Electric Clothes Dryers-Dwelling Unit(s) ".....demand factors in Table 220.18 shall be permitted."

The code is saying, "Hey, you don't have to apply these demand factors, but you are allowed to if 'you so desire'."

There are other places in the code that use the permissible rule. So keep your eye out for it. That one rule can change your entire outlook on the code. It gives us freedom within the rules.

For the application that you are involved in, I would consider 525.23(C). What are the conditions surrounding this equipment? Can it be guarded? Can a "written procedure be continually enforced....to ensure safety..."? If the equipment trips out on GFI, will it endanger persons?

Frank, how about some tickets to the carnival? There's nothing like trying to make a rubber frog "jump" on a lilly pad, or throwing a 3" ring onto a 2 7/8" Coke bottle, or paying $5 for a 2 oz Coke.

I can feel my wallet getting lighter, and I'm not even there,
Doc

Watt Doctor-

To be more specific we must provide two 240 volt, 50 amp "pigtails" for sound system Technicians to plug their equipment in. One will be placed at each end of a very large State Park. We simply connect the 50 amp cable to the 50 breaker in the panelboard. We leave approx. 10 feet of cable coiled up with a female cord end on it for the sound Technicians to plug into the day of the event. We have been doing this for years without GFCI protection.
Frank

Frank,
I believe that your installation is an Article 520 application, and not 525. Look at the scope of 520 and the defintiton of "preformance area" in the 2002 code. As I recall, the scope of Article 520 was changed and the defintion added to make it clear that "road shows" are coverd by 520 and not 525.
Don

If you go to the IAEI.org site they have the errata for the 2002 code. Under art. 525.23(C) the code referance should read 525.23(A) or (B).

This may have something to do with the 50A GFCI use. When GFCIs were first called for on jobsites, 50-amp, 125/250V-fed "spider boxes" came with a single 5mA-trip protecting assorted 15-, 20- and 30-amp, 120- and 240-volt receptacles on the box.

It was a madhouse because any leaky 115- or 230-volt tool could dump the entire box; usually with a couple of strings of temporary lights included. There had to have been some bloody fistfights directed at those stupid electricians.


 

[This message has been edited by Bjarney (edited 06-27-2002).]

Capt19,
I'm going to have to disagree with you on this one.
According to the 2002 NEC Handbook, notice the following:
"Article 525 addresses the installation of portable wiring an equipment for temporary attractions, such as carnivales, circuses, and fairs. Article 525 is intended to apply to all wiring in or on portable structures, whereas Articles 518 and 520 apply to permanent structures.....Article 527 applies more to construction sites...."

Frank,
Is this installation going to be for the 4th of July? Sounds like a big holiday event.
The more I look at this installation, the more I feel that you don't need GFI protection. 525.23(A) is intended for 15 & 20 amp General Use Receptacles rated at 125 volts. 525.23(B) says you don't have to put it on cooking, etc. equipment. Last but not least, 23(C) says, "You can if you want to, or....ensure the safety of the equipment grounging conductors for all cord sets and receptacles, as described in 527.6(B)(2)." My next question would be, does your company have a "written assured equipment grounding conductor program"? Then the next question would be, will someone from your company be on "standby" for the duration of the event? So that they can be the "designated person to ensure that receptacles, etc.....are maintained in accordance with the applicable requirements of 250.114, 250.138, 406.3(C), and 527.4(D)."
Frank,
You have some room to work within this article. Heck, you might be able to go to the customer, and get an "extra" because you need a man on standby for the duration of the event. Ching! Ching! See, I'm making money for you right now, and I'm not even on the payroll.

Trying to get on Frank's payroll,
Doc

P.S.
Capt, I submit this, not at your expence, but to our expance, of knowledge, that is. Respectfully...........Doc

Call 110.3(A)(8) and be done with it! In the interest of safety!

[This message has been edited by Joe Tedesco (edited 06-27-2002).]

Doc
Look at the substantiation for proposal 15-20 in the 2001 ROP. This proposal added the words "performance area" to the title of 520.
The substantiation for this change was, "Article 525 has been missapplied by AHJs to touring concerts and theater productions in outside performance areas". The panel comments supported this in the ROC. I'm not sure of Frank's exact application, but if it is for a band or similar type of performance, the installation is to be made per 520 and not 525.
Don

After reading the discussion and referring to my code book, I would say that Art. 525 applies and that GFCI protection is not required.

I'm still intrested to see which way this goes though.

Don-

For my particular job Article 525 applies. I looked in my 2002 McGraw-Hill's NEC Handbook on page 1169 and read: "(C) all other receptacles, of any voltage or current rating, must be protected by a GFCI. This of course is in reference to NEC 525.23(C). This leads me to believe my 240V, 50A. receptacles must be GFCI protected.

Frank

90.6 Formal Interpretations.

To promote uniformity of interpretation and application of the provisions of this Code, formal interpretation procedures have been established and are found in the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee Projects.

The procedures for implementing Formal Interpretations of the provisions of the NEC are outlined in “NFPA Regulations Governing Committee Projects.” These regulations are included in the NFPA Directory, which is published annually and can be obtained from the Secretary of the NFPA Standards Council. The Formal Interpretations procedure can be found in Section 6 of the Regulations.

The National Electrical Code Committee cannot be responsible for subsequent actions of authorities enforcing the NEC that accept or reject its findings. The authority having jurisdiction is responsible for interpreting Code rules and should attempt to resolve all disagreements at the local level.

Two general forms of Formal Interpretations are recognized: (1) those that are interpretations of the literal text and (2) those that are interpretations of the intent of the Committee at the time the particular text was issued.

Interpretations of the NEC not subject to processing are those that involve (a) a determination of compliance of a design, installation, product, or equivalency of protection; (b) a review of plans or specifications or judgment or knowledge that can be acquired only as a result of on-site inspection; (c) text that clearly and decisively provides the requested information; or (d) subjects not previously considered by the Technical Committee or not addressed in the document.

Formal Interpretations of Code rules are published in the NFPA Electrical Section News Bulletin, “Current Flashes,” and in the National Fire Codes subscription service and are sent to interested trade publications.
Most interpretations of the NEC are rendered as the personal opinions of NFPA Electrical Engineering staff or of an involved member of the National Electrical Code Committee because the request for interpretation does not qualify for processing as a Formal Interpretation in accordance with “NFPA Regulations Governing Committee Projects.”

Such opinions are rendered in writing only in response to written requests. The correspondence contains a disclaimer indicating that it is not a Formal Interpretation issued pursuant to NFPA Regulations and that any opinion expressed is the personal opinion of the author and does not necessarily represent the official position of NFPA or the National Electrical Code Committee.

Thank you Joe.

Frank,
It looks to me like you are setting up a performace area for a band.
Don


[This message has been edited by resqcapt19 (edited 06-28-2002).]

Joe T.,
I understand the reason for the "90.6" post. If it were me, I would call the AHJ first, and see what they have to say about it. Then, if the AHJ gave me an interpretation that I didn't agree with, I would go through the procedures for "formal interpretation".

Don,
I read the ROP, and I see your point. The point that I was trying to make is that a comment is made on page 767 of the Handbook that pertains to 518 & 520 and how those two articles apply to permanent structures. Even 525.3(B) states:
So, I hope you can see why I made the statement I did. Let me continue by saying that I agree with you that Frank's application sounds like a "set up" for a band, or a "D.J.". I think that the purpose for ROP 15-20 is directed at That "wording" sounds to me like large shows that travel all over America (the professionals, if you will).
Mr. Vannice, who made the propsal, admits that 520 is He goes on to say that I have a feeling that in the past these large "shows" would come to a city, and the AHJ's would tell them that the equipment had to be GFI protected which caused problems with their equipment. These applications could, I would venture to say, be 100's or maybe 1000's of amps with large dimming systems and lighting controls. I think Mr. Vannice is saying, "Hey, we will install our equipment under more "restrictive" rules. Just don't make us submit to the GFI rule because our equipment won't work properly if GFI protected."
IMHO this is a far cry from the "50 amp pigtail" that was posed in the original post, and it would not be "inappropriate" to make the installation under 525. I think that you will agree that there is a lot of difference between "Joe Fish and the Boneheads" (a weekend local band), and Eric Clapton, Ozzy Osbourne, George Strait (for you C&W fans), or Snoop Doggy Dog (for all you rappers out there). I should mention J-Lo as well because the last time I checked her b00ty could be classified as a Performance Area (man that girl has a "backyard" on her). Don, I just "dug my heels in" on this one. Are you going to cut my feet off at the ankles?

Respectfully Submitted,
Doc

PS
I've enjoyed this thread so far. It's made me get in my code book, and that's a good thing.

Frank is the AHJ here and he has the duty of enforcing the NEC per 90.4.

If nothing else, Article 527 may be another way to address the need for the protection.

PS: A defective electrical instrument could carry current, and could be the cause of an electrical accident, trust me!

Also, some of the members here send me an email message and most of the time I include my reply here so all can see where I am coming from.

Gentleman-

I'm sorry if I caused a little confusion by not being more specific. The two 240 volt, 50 amp. receptacles are going to used for large public address systems in the State Park for a July 4th celebration. General announcements will be made along with a simulcast of a local radio station. No stage performances etc. That is the only need for 240 volt, 50 amp receptacles.
As I mentioned previously, the remainder of the power needs will be served with 125 volt, 20 amp. receptacles, primarily for food vendors. They will be all GFCI protected.
Many of events like this will take place across our Country this year. I hope nobody is getting bored with this thread because I do think it is applicable and the questions are sensible.

Frank

If this is a 525 or 527 application, GFCI or an assured equipment grounding program is required. An assured equipment grounding program would be almost impossible to implement for the application, that only leaves GFCI protection.
The code could use some clarification in this type of installation. Doc has correctly made the point that the change in 520 was indented to apply to large traveling shows, but that is not what the words in the definition of "performance area" say. You can make a case to apply 520, 525 or 527 to the application. Two of these would require GFCI protection.
Don

Don-

I agree. After reading my Mcgraw-Hill's NEC Handbook it seemed quite apparent that GFCI protection was required on the 240V, 50A receptacle. My NFPA NEC Handbook didn't touch on it with any commentary. 525.23(C)

Frank

Heck Frank,
You don't have anything to be sorry for. If you would have been more specific, we wouldn't have had anything to talk about. I love this forum because we come from all over the country, and even the world, and we can help each other solve problems.

An example of something that I learned from this thread is reading the ROP's, and ROC's. I've never really paid attention to them, but Don mentioned them in one of his posts, and I can tell you that Ol' Doc will be reading them in the future.

Thanks to all. Frank, I think you have made your decision to go with GFI protection (you can't go wrong by using GFI's), and I would "chalk" this up as another successful thread.

Regards,
Doc

Doc,
The ROPs and ROCs are great tools for trying to understand what the words really mean. I have copies back to the '84 code cycle and often look at them to answer some of the questions on the forums. Anyone who makes a proposal will automatically get a copy of the ROP and those making comments will get a copy of the ROC. They are also available to anyone on request (either paper or CD) as well as being on line. Remember that all proposals for the 2005 code must be received by the NFPA prior to 5PM, November 1, 2002.
Don

This 2005 NEC Proposal form can be found in the back of the 2002 NEC, or you can print it out here.

http://www.nfpa.org/PDF/NEC2005ProposalForm.pdf?src=necdigest

This has been an interesting and well-supported :-} exchange to follow. [Darn Crazy Internet Fad…]

Devil's advocate for a moment—What kind of hazards could be created with this PA-system outage? Would its loss generate a potential hazard/panic situation or otherwise become a critical issue?

There are PA-type systems used for facility-wide verbal emergency-egress instructions, but they are supervised [characteristics of the electrical circuits to various peripheral devices are continuously monitored for readiness and centrally alarmed.]

So it is unlikely that with dissimilarly conceived and engineered portable systems—primarily intended for entertainment applications—havw no intent of contingency operation. Although this may someday be the case, {and even routine or mandatory} the portable would not seem to qualify as, or serve a parallel function to that of a fixed system installed for the purpose.