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?
