How well do you know the Code? Think you can spot violations the original installer either ignored or couldn’t identify? Here's your chance to moonlight as an electrical inspector and second-guess someone else's work from the safety of your living room or office. Can you identify the specific Code violation(s) in this photo? Note: Submitted comments must include specific references from the 2023 NEC.
Hint: Piggybacking prohibited!
Tell Them What They've Won…
Using the 2023 NEC, correctly identify the Code violation(s) in this month's photo — in 200 words or less — and you could win an Arlington Industries 18-in. Slider Bar and plastic box for mounting between studs with non-standard spacing. E-mail your response, including your name and mailing address, to [email protected], and Russ will select three winners (excluding manufacturers and prior winners) at random from the correct submissions. Note that submissions without an address will not be eligible to win.
April Winners
Our lone winner this month was James Hazelwood, a senior project engineer for 70e Advisors, LLC of Pensacola, Fla. He was able to correctly cite some of the Code violations in this installation.
Section 406.9(B)(1) requires 15A and 20A, 125V and 250V receptacles installed in wet locations to be installed in a weatherproof enclosure. The lack of a cable connector and the broken cover plate certainly do not provide a weatherproof enclosure for the duplex receptacle installed here. Section 406.9(B)(1) additionally requires weather-resistant (WR) type receptacles to be used in wet locations. Section 406.9(A) also requires weather-resistant type 125V and 250V nonlocking receptacles to be used in damp locations too. As best as I could determine, the cable used to provide power to this receptacle outlet is a 2-wire cable and does not contain an equipment grounding conductor. This is a violation of Sec. 406.4(B), which requires the equipment grounding contacts on the receptacle to be connected to an equipment grounding conductor. Since I was only a visitor to this location, I was unable to determine if GFCI protection was provided for this duplex receptacle as required by Sec. 210.8.
