ECN Forum Forums Code Related Discussion NEC & other Code issues 2011: Tamper Resistant Receptacles

Reviewing the "Report on Proposals," the committee has accepted a number of proposals that expand their required use to any commercial / institutional area used by children.

For the most part, these proposals seem to copy already existing requirements (in other codes) that schools, day care centers, etc., have the receptacles.

The committee seems to still consider it perfectly reasonable to require the receptacle on the ceiling of the garage, for the door opener, to be tamper resistant.

I don't understand the resistance to TR receptacles. They are simple mechanical devices that prevent inadvertent insertion of a single object (wire, screwdriver blade, whatever) into a hot slot. Mass produced, they cost very little, hardly more to be of consequence. True, they are not 'needed' in the strictest sense, but in the broader, statistical sense they certainly will help to reduce shock hazards. What's the big deal anyway?

Bigplanz,


If you have children, I can really see having tamper proof receptacles. I had 2 children and every one of my receptacles had childproof caps in them while the kids were growing up. If you are just 2 adults living in a house, why would you need TR receptacles? How much more do they cost than regular receptacles? It this time of recession, the HO is fighting for every dollar they have. They don't want to spend an extra $5 on anything. The new 2008 NEC now requires TR receptacles everywhere that 210.52 states. Does that mean garage door receptacles need TR receptacles? Don't get me wrong, I am all about safety. It is just getting out of hand. I believe that manufactures are taking over the code making boards of the NEC. Isn't this a conflict of interest? They changed the bonding grid around the pool (AGAIN) in this code. So what did the 3' grid around the pool prove. It made the manufacture of that copper 1' X 1' grid a lot of money. I will get off my soap box now. ( Sorry)

I'd like to observe that, prior to the NEC gettint involved in this matter, 'tamper resistant' trceptacles were addressed by other codes, other agencies, typically requiring them in day care centers and such.

Even then, the rules typically specified a distance (within reach of the little ones), restricted the requirement to areas used by the children, and perhaps removed the requirement if the circuit was FCI protected.

Most of the proposals submitted to the NEC panel restate these requirement, extending the NEC requirement into commercial locations.

The 2008 requirement was resisted primarily, I believe, because it took everyone by surprise. We can add to that a general cynicism (if it can break, it will), and concerns about servicing receptacles.

After all, just how do you test a receptacle. Now the things are specifically designed to keep your meter probes and ticker out!

There was also the broad scope of the 2008 requirement. No matter how inaccessible, or out of reach of children, the code requires the receptacles to be tamper resistant.

I started these threads - and there will be more - to encourage discussion and comment upon these, and other, proposals to the NEC. If you don't like a proposal, now is the time to speak up.

I wonder if a ticker can read current with the little screen in the way? Good point though. Hadn't thought of that one. My receptacle tester (plug in type) will work, but probably not the ticker.

I think a meter probe could work if you stuck both probes into the slots simultaneously.

With some fussing about,you just might be able to get your probes into both slots at once.

Yet, I'm at a loss to see how I can check for reverse polarity, or a bad ground, witout having but one probe in a 'slot,' while the other is in the ground prong opening.

The truth finally comes out, this is a plot by Ideal to sell SureTests

I'll bet the ticker will read through the shutters in the TR receptacles. They read through a heavy duty cord cap and they are much more insulated then those little shutters in the receptacle.

I just checked the Lowes web site, and a 10 pack of TR receptacles goes for $12. To me the 'it costs more issue' is a non-starter. The cost difference between TR and non-TR receptacles is negligible in regard to new construction or renovation. In regard to children v. non-children in the house, the concern is that houses change hands. What can be a 'child free house' can quickly become a 'full of children house' when property changes ownership/tenancy. I think TR receptacles should be required for all receptacles, the same as three-prong, grounded receptacles are required. I am sure the cost issue/government meddling issue came up when the three prong, grounded receptacles were required too.

TR receptacles are going to be problem for some adults but probably very few. I am concerned that kids smart enough to use 2 metal objects to find out where the electricity is will result in the fatalities we so far have not seen. apparently i never learned about not sticking thins into receptacles as I am told I used a tweezer the first time and a butter knife the second time and scissors the third time. I never touched the stove top as I knew what hot is. Some mom is going to believe their kid can't get hurt because they have TR receptacles installed and not watch for the kid that tries a tweezer with 2 prongs or two screw drivers or 2 paper clips, etc.
I can't recall if there were any fatalities listed as justification for the rule change but the injury severity will rise of kids start probing with 2 tools instead of just 1.