ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals
ECN Shout Chat
Top Posters(30 Days)
Potseal 11
Recent Posts
201 volt equipment?
by bigpapa. 04/29/17 12:15 AM
Schneider LC1D09
by jraef. 04/28/17 11:05 PM
Permit Snafus...AHJs and Contractors Jump in
by sparky. 04/28/17 08:11 PM
Electrode boilers question
by annemarie1. 04/27/17 01:40 PM
Why cables look like they do
by LongRunner. 04/26/17 09:36 AM
New in the Gallery:
SE cable question
Popular Topics(Views)
234,929 Are you busy
169,757 Re: Forum
162,965 Need opinion
Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 56 guests, and 11 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
#205933 - 04/28/12 10:06 PM Interpreting 406.xx, two questions.  
CowboyJoe  Offline
New Member
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 4
Phoenix, AZ
So I started going back through some of the basics this week and its good because I'm noticing some stuff I've probably skimmed over before.

My first question is regarding 406.11 "Tamper-Resistant Receptacles in Dwelling Units In all areas specified in 210.52, all 125-volt, 15- and 20-ampere receptacles shall be listed tamper-resistant receptacles."

So, I believe in TR receps, but I admit I don't use them all the time, simply because they're annoying as hell if you're the end user. But is this really saying what I think it is? Are all receps in "every kitchen, family room, dining room, living room, parlor, library, den, sunroom, bedroom, recreation room, or similar room or area of dwelling units" (from 210.52(A)General Provisions) supposed to be TR? Am I dumb or is this saying that? Do you guys always install TR's? I'm pretty sure it's not the norm here. I know if I just go to the supply house and purchase a 20A recep it is not normally TR. Any other info I'm missing here or is this exactly what I read it to be?

Ok, my second question I might know the answer to, but I'll ask anyway and see if I'm thinking right. It comes from the exception found in "406.8(B)(1) 15- and 20- Ampere Receptacles in a Wet Location. 15- and 20-ampere, 125- and 250-volt receptacles installed in a wet location shall have an enclosure that is weatherproof whether or not the attachment plug cap is insterted." OK, so that one is pretty common knowledge, but I've never heard of the exception and not sure I fully understand the logic behind it. Exception reads; "15- and 20-ampere, 125- through 250-volt receptacles installed in a wet location and subject to routine high-pressure spray washing shall be permitted to have an enclosure that is weatherproof when the attachment plug is removed." Maybe I'm reading this wrong, but is this saying that you can put NON in-use covers in areas where there is routine high-pressure spray? I would think it would be the opposite, wherever there is high-pressure spray there should be in-use "bubble covers" installed. The only thing I can think of is that maybe it's because the bubble covers are not set up to keep out water from below? Is that correct? Maybe coupled with the assumption that routine high-pressure spray probably means an environment more likely to have "qualified personnel" running any equipment? Any of that correct?

I appreciate any input. I've never been one to be ok following the rules just because they're rules. I want to understand why as well, so hopefully you guys can shed some more light on all this for me. Thanks,


Sinusoidal Tendencies!

2017 / 2014 NEC & Related Books and Study Guides

#205934 - 04/29/12 02:16 AM Re: Interpreting 406.xx, two questions. [Re: CowboyJoe]  
gfretwell  Offline


Member
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,069
Estero,Fl,usa
On the first one, Yes you need T/R in all of those locations and as soon as your AHJ acknowledges that code, I bet you are doing it. wink

On the second one they realize bubble covers are really only designed for rain, not a directional spray like you get from pressure washing.
I still like the snap cover if this is a receptacle (at my house) that is not being used all the time. (Come and get me copper!)
I do understand the in use cover is code tho.
As a defense, we pressure clean the screen cage several times a year. That's my story and I am sticking to it.


Greg Fretwell

#205938 - 04/29/12 01:54 PM Re: Interpreting 406.xx, two questions. [Re: CowboyJoe]  
CowboyJoe  Offline
New Member
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 4
Phoenix, AZ
True, I guess we just haven't adopted that here yet. I've passed plenty of inspections w/out that ever coming up. Looks like I might as well be ahead of the curve and start slowly stocking up on them though.

As far as the snap covers, they do hold up WAY better than the bubble covers, cant say I blame you for putting them at your own place. (Your secrets safe with me, I wont tell the authorities).

Thanks for the clarification. smile


Sinusoidal Tendencies!


Member Spotlight
Lostazhell
Lostazhell
Bakersfield, CA (Originally Orange Co.)
Posts: 1,429
Joined: February 2004
Show All Member Profiles 
Featured:

2017 NEC and Related
2017 NEC
Now Available!

Shout Box
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0
Page Time: 0.014s Queries: 15 (0.003s) Memory: 0.7550 MB (Peak: 0.8805 MB) Zlib enabled. Server Time: 2017-04-29 13:30:26 UTC