The Electrical Contractor Network

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

Books, Tools and Test Equipment for Electrical and Construction Trades

Register Now!

Register Now!

We want your input!

Featured:
   

2017 NEC and Related
2017 NEC
Now Available!

   
Recent Posts
Live Chat Feature
by Admin
Yesterday at 09:52 PM
Safety at heights?
by gfretwell
Yesterday at 07:16 PM
failed home inspection.
by gfretwell
Yesterday at 07:03 PM
Webmaster > Admin
by Admin
Yesterday at 05:49 PM
Old Bath Fan
by gfretwell
Yesterday at 01:38 AM
New in the Gallery:
Desk-mounted "power-board"
Top Posters (30 Days)
Admin 33
HotLine1 21
Ruben Rocha 16
gfretwell 15
Trumpy 13
Who's Online
0 registered (), 0 Guests and 201 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Topic Options
Rate This Topic
#95082 - 08/26/05 07:56 PM Old issue re-visited
George Little Offline
Member

Registered: 01/18/04
Posts: 1492
Loc: Michigan USA
Here's a picture of the violation I noted some time ago and I have been assured that the manufacturer will be making a change. Need "in-use cover" if installed in wet location. http://homepage.mac.com/georgelittle/generator_recptacle.jpg
_________________________
George Little

Top
2017 / 2014 NEC & Related Books and Study Guides
#95083 - 08/26/05 07:58 PM Re: Old issue re-visited
sierra electrician Offline
Member

Registered: 02/12/05
Posts: 220
Loc: North Fork, CA USA
But, the receptacle is not in use. Why change it?

Rob

Top
#95084 - 08/26/05 08:52 PM Re: Old issue re-visited
gfretwell Offline


Member

Registered: 07/20/04
Posts: 9065
Loc: Estero,Fl,usa
I agree with Sierra. The in use cover makes perfect sense when a receptacle is in use but the regular snap cover does a lot better job of keeping the water out when it isn't. Didn't we just have a long conversation about a tiny leak around an EMT fitting? Why force the installer to use a leaky cover on a seldom used receptacle. That is a GFI "nuisance trip" waiting to happen.
_________________________
Greg Fretwell

Top
#95085 - 08/27/05 04:40 AM Re: Old issue re-visited
Tiger Offline
Member

Registered: 05/04/05
Posts: 714
Loc: Crystal Lake, IL USA
I've never considered an in use cover to be leaky.

Dave

Top
#95086 - 08/27/05 04:52 AM Re: Old issue re-visited
iwire Offline
Moderator

Registered: 01/05/03
Posts: 4343
Loc: North Attleboro, MA USA
I have never believed the NEC should be used as a manufacturing standard.

Here if that unit was listed by an NTL the inspector must accept it as is.

Where I live 90.4 has been amended, in part it says

Quote:
shall accept listed and labeled equipment or materials where used or installed in accordance with instructions included with the listing or labeling.




Bob
_________________________
Bob Badger
Construction & Maintenance Electrician
Massachusetts

Top
#95087 - 08/27/05 07:38 AM Re: Old issue re-visited
PCBelarge Offline
Member

Registered: 06/08/03
Posts: 657
Loc: Dobbs Ferry, NY, USA
Bob
I agree it is much easier for an inspector to "APPROVE" listed equipment, but sometimes the listed equipment may have a defect or may have slipped an item in after some UL inspections. What I do is refer the photo like we see here to UL and have them reevaluate the situation. If they say okay, than that is good for me.

NYS requires "inuse covers" for all residential outdoor receptacles that are exposed to the weather (not protected by awnings, etc...).
_________________________
Pierre Belarge

Top
#95088 - 08/27/05 09:01 AM Re: Old issue re-visited
gfretwell Offline


Member

Registered: 07/20/04
Posts: 9065
Loc: Estero,Fl,usa
Tiger, the snap cover is gasketed, I have never seen an in use cover that was. Most end up being a pretty loose fit that is terrible if the user isn't very careful to lock it down.
Maybe if you live in a place where the rain always falls in a gentle straight down way that isn't a problem but it rains sideways here as often as not.
Even your garden variety summer shower will be accompanied by 30-40 mph gusts.
_________________________
Greg Fretwell

Top
#95089 - 08/27/05 10:15 AM Re: Old issue re-visited
iwire Offline
Moderator

Registered: 01/05/03
Posts: 4343
Loc: North Attleboro, MA USA
Pierre

Quote:
What I do is refer the photo like we see here to UL and have them reevaluate the situation. If they say okay, than that is good for me.


That is not an option for inspectors here, listed = approved.

The problem I have is this.

We can look at the inside of almost any listed equipment and find NEC violations, that outlet may well be wired with 14 AWG and have a 20 amp OCP.

NEC violation yes, but fine if part of listed equipment.

If inspectors start second guessing listings where would they stop?

As you can tell I think our amendment is a good one.

It also takes responsibility or concern away from the inspector for listed equipment.

Lets face it a home generator is a dangerous piece of equipment, fingers can get into moving parts, you can be burnt, the exhaust can kill and of course the electricity can hurt you.

At some point Americans have to be responsible for there own actions.

That cover clearly states.

"Approved for wet locations only when closed"

JMHO, Bob
_________________________
Bob Badger
Construction & Maintenance Electrician
Massachusetts

Top
#95090 - 08/27/05 10:42 AM Re: Old issue re-visited
Tiger Offline
Member

Registered: 05/04/05
Posts: 714
Loc: Crystal Lake, IL USA
I opened a P&S legrand while-in use cover and while not gasketed there is a tongue-in-groove configuration that looks pretty good to me. I could install it and stuff it with some tissue paper to give it a hose test, but the UL listing is good enough for me.

Dave

Top


ECN Electrical Forums - sponsored by Electrical Contractor Network - Electrical and Code Related Discussion for Electrical Contractors, Electricians, Inspectors, Instructors, Engineers and other related Professionals