GFCI under sink

Jim …

Sorry I haven’t got back to you. I’m sure in your area somebody might recommend a GFCI under a sink at a disposal outlet. In MY area its not done. Could I make that recommendation … Yes. Would I? NO.

Why? Because I think its stupid #1 AND #2 its not required or done in MY area.

Just my own personal thoughts as a licensed builder; Code Inspector, National Home Inspection Trainer and 35 year Home Inspector.

Would most of us inspecting a 1950’s house recommend adding GFCI’s at wet areas if not present … Yes I think so (we do).

Would that include ALL kitchen outlets (like refrigerator, trash compactor, dishwasher OR gas range with 110v outlets). How about an outlet at the garage ceiling for the automatic garage door operator ???

The answer is a simple NO … In my area I’ve never met OR heard OR talked to any inspectors that do that.

Dan,

Even under the 2014 NEC some of that still would not need gfi protection. The receptacle for the go would. Perhaps your area is not enforcing the latest codes or the Hi’s are not aware of the changes?

We mostly use the 2002 NEC

I find that pretty amazing. :shock:


And there is the crux of the issue. You are now 12 years or 4 code cycles behind. You have missed the 05, 08, 11 and now the 14 editions. The codes have moved so far beyond what you are used to or aware of there is going to be discrepancies in the need for items. An example is that under the 02 only bedroom outlets need afci protection. The 14 now has most of the house needing afci protection.

During those code cycles how many times did garage GFCI requirements change, or should I say flip flop?

This all works great for me when I tell clients that “Inspections are not commodities. You aren’t buying a carton of eggs or a pack of No 2 pencils. There are vast differences between inspection companies, inspectors and the detail to which they inspect and report…”

You would find plenty of company. However, to do it properly, you have to throw out something vague like it’s “substandard” or “suspect”, then you get to use the Universal Liability Diversion Verbiage (ULDV)
by telling the client that they need to hire someone to actually come inspect the thing that they thought they had hired you to inspect.