Electrician Talk banner

New "Regulation"?

2222 Views 29 Replies 15 Participants Last post by  Meadow
As far as these mandatory tamper resistant receptacles...
I say the NFPA should supply us with a document, in contract form, that we can supply to the customer stating that it is their choice to have TRR's installed, or not, and the cost difference which would be the contractors discretion.
Then they can sign it, and that's that.
Should be the same for seat belt and helmet laws for insurance companies,
which is what the NFPA is anyway.
1 - 20 of 30 Posts
Where you been Caustic one? we;ve had the trucks stocked with TP's & WP's for 3 years now :whistling2:~CS~
As far as these mandatory tamper resistant receptacles...
I say the NFPA should supply us with a document, in contract form, that we can supply to the customer stating that it is their choice to have TRR's installed, or not, and the cost difference which would be the contractors discretion.
Then they can sign it, and that's that.
Should be the same for seat belt and helmet laws for insurance companies,
which is what the NFPA is anyway.
I don't think that the client will be interested,,these receptacles have been in the code since 2005 and they're not going away.

As for the cost,,,Raise your prices and you'll be fine.
  • Like
Reactions: 3
Tamper resistant receptacles make sense, what seems stupid to me is the " weather-resistant type" that is required to be installed in a "weatherproof" enclosure".

Makes as much sense as "Raceways on exteriors of buildings or other structures shall be arranged to drain and shall be raintight in wet locations." If we want these raceways to drain why do we care if they are "raintight"? :blink:
The difference in cost is peanuts. If your margins are that tight you're doing it wrong.
  • Like
Reactions: 1
As far as these mandatory tamper resistant receptacles...
I say the NFPA should supply us with a document, in contract form, that we can supply to the customer stating that it is their choice to have TRR's installed, or not, and the cost difference which would be the contractors discretion.
Then they can sign it, and that's that.
Should be the same for seat belt and helmet laws for insurance companies,
which is what the NFPA is anyway.
:laughing:
Tamper resistant receptacles make sense, what seems stupid to me is the " weather-resistant type" that is required to be installed in a "weatherproof" enclosure".

Makes as much sense as "Raceways on exteriors of buildings or other structures shall be arranged to drain and shall be raintight in wet locations." If we want these raceways to drain why do we care if they are "raintight"? :blink:
Condensation....
  • Like
Reactions: 2
Condensation....
That doesn't answer the question. If we know there will be moisture in the raceway why do we care if it's "raintight"? The conductors will be of a type listed for "Wet Locations" anyways.

Until the 2008 we could use FMC in wet locations as long as "W" type conductors were used. This made sense
As far as these mandatory tamper resistant receptacles...
I say the NFPA should supply us with a document, in contract form, that we can supply to the customer stating that it is their choice to have TRR's installed, or not, and the cost difference which would be the contractors discretion.
Then they can sign it, and that's that.
Should be the same for seat belt and helmet laws for insurance companies,
which is what the NFPA is anyway.
Since they have been required the price is no different than what the old ones used to cost and if they are more it's not enough to notice. We buy them in bulk and I don't think they are more than .75 each. On a service call we charge $5 per switch and receptacle changed out.
That doesn't answer the question. If we know there will be moisture in the raceway why do we care if it's "raintight"? The conductors will be of a type listed for "Wet Locations" anyways.

Until the 2008 we could use FMC in wet locations as long as "W" type conductors were used. This made sense
Same reason why when we install outdoor light fixtures and receptacles if we seal it up we only seal it up on the top and sides in case water gets in there it can go somewhere instead of being sealed in. If you were to seal all the way around and it fails at the top the water has nowhere to go but inside. Unless you are pressurizing that rain tight conduit moisture will get in there and needs a place to go instead of building up inside the lowest point of the run.
  • Like
Reactions: 1
Where you been Caustic one? we;ve had the trucks stocked with TP's & WP's for 3 years now :whistling2:~CS~
Well, I became a Project Manager for 10 years and went back in the field not too long ago.
The whole TR and AFCI thing is something I needed to update myself on.

We all grew up with normal outlets all around us. Any of you die back then?
I think it should be a choice, like seat belts and helmets.
Wake up America!
(Hehe)
Well, I became a Project Manager for 10 years and went back in the field not too long ago.
The whole TR and AFCI thing is something I needed to update myself on.

We all grew up with normal outlets all around us. Any of you die back then?
I think it should be a choice, like seat belts and helmets.
Wake up America!
(Hehe)
Choice is yours here in NY fines for no seatbelt is a decent fine 150 or more usually. It's your liability insurance the choice to use them is yours I guess. I wouldn't want to get caught in a lawsuit if some kid got hurt and I did not use them.
Unless you are pressurizing that rain tight conduit moisture will get in there and needs a place to go instead of building up inside the lowest point of the run.
You guys are missing the point I'm making.
We all know that water / moisture is going to get in outside installtions, which is the reason for arrainging these installations to "drain" and using Wet Location Conductors. With that being the case, why do we care if rainwater gets in a raceway that already has water in it?

Do you need a Hot Water Heater if you have a Water Heater?
We all grew up with normal outlets all around us. Any of you die back then?
I think it should be a choice, like seat belts and helmets.
Wake up America!
(Hehe)
The reason for the TRs is something like 7000 trips to ERs each year due to sticking things in the outlets.

It is a good rule and easy to comply with
You guys are missing the point I'm making.
We all know that water / moisture is going to get in outside installtions, which is the reason for arrainging these installations to "drain" and using Wet Location Conductors. With that being the case, why do we care if rainwater gets in a raceway that already has water in it?

You said it yourself, we already have to use type W wire in these outdoor locations, you seem to understand that so why not a type W device?

Are you saying you never find rotted out devices in outdoor locations?
Are you saying you never find rotted out devices in outdoor locations?
Not when they have ben arrainged to drain. ;)
Not when they have ben arrainged to drain. ;)
Well I find them arraigned to drain or not.
  • Like
Reactions: 1
Since they have been required the price is no different than what the old ones used to cost and if they are more it's not enough to notice. We buy them in bulk and I don't think they are more than .75 each. On a service call we charge $5 per switch and receptacle changed out.
hope 5 bucks is not for material and labor charge.
5 per receptacle and switch 25 per GFCI. That is on top of our service call rate.
5 per receptacle and switch 25 per GFCI. That is on top of our service call rate.
you're worth more than that bro. talk to Harry and look into the flat rate system he uses so you can make some good money. just my 2 cents
1 - 20 of 30 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top