It seems that changing the Code to sell products is the coming thing. (New) "406.11 Tamper resistant Receptacles in Dwelling Units. In all areas specified in 210.52, all 15- and 20- ampere receptacles shall be listed tamper resistant receptacles." Add that to the expansion of 210.12 and you can have receptacles that are AFCI protected plus GFI protected and just to make it totally idiot proof the receptacle is tamper proof. This may save energy since older people will never be able to make the system work. Alan--
At a certain point the general population needs to understand where this BS is coming from and demand that their states stop accepting this stuff. I always ask how much of this do you think survives the first year of installation? When you make something so inconvenient people can't stand it they rip it out, then you have nothing. The nanny state is out of control.
Re: New 406.11#154572 08/02/0612:13 AM08/02/0612:13 AM
I imagine they'll become a tad easier to find if NEC 2008 requires them!
This seems no different than any other new code- NFPA identifies a safety risk that can/does cause death or injury, and mandates a technological fix, even if it create a nuisance. Yeah, it will cost a boatload more than the 50-cent contractor specials we're used to, but so does GFCI and AFCI protection. I'd argue that if it saves even one life in the next two decades, it's worth all the cost and effort.
Re: New 406.11#154575 08/04/0612:48 PM08/04/0612:48 PM
I don't buy the "If it saves one life it was all worth it" argument. Especially coming from a government that still subsidizes tobacco. Mandating tamper-proof receptacles in all installations is ridiculous. AFCIs are great in theory but are far from proven as far as I can tell. Most of this kind of stuff is not so much safety driven as it is profit driven. Why don't we require seatbelts/airbags on school busses? Because it's not cost-effective to the manufacturers with the most lobby money. If receptacle were really a wide-spread safety concern the consumer market would be demanding an improvement, not the manufacturers. I wish I could invent a widget and then create legislation to require everyone to purchase it.
Re: New 406.11#154576 08/04/0603:07 PM08/04/0603:07 PM
Maybe we are going at this the wrong way. We should be going after the polititians who adopt these stupid codes. If NFPA started seeing large numbers of AHJs who rejected the new codes they would change or die. I think NFPA et al is a huge boondoggle in the first place. They started as a safety organization. Now they just seem to be selling books, CDs and classes.
Re: New 406.11#154577 08/04/0609:08 PM08/04/0609:08 PM