Originally Posted By: jtedesco This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Greg Fretwell wrote:
If those apartments were built under current code they WOULD require GFCIs on the balcony. I bet some in your picture don't even have GFCI in the kitchen or bath.
I know for a fact that Lee Co Fla will require a GFCI on any outside 120v 15/20a receptacle in a condo.
As an HI you really have to understand there is no obligation to bring existing homes up to current code but it is still valid to point out a possible danger. A am not sure what vehicle that is.
Please explain "outdoors" and tell me where I can call or go in the USA to be sure that this is the way it is interpreted. Same rule is found in the 99 Code 
Originally Posted By: gbeaumont This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Hi to all,
Joe, forgive me if I'm wrong and I know this is not about interprating any given code, but does it not make sense for any exterior outlet to be GFCI protected.
My thinking is that even a 15th storey balcony gets wet and anyone on it using an electrical outlet runs a certain risk, should "outside" realy mean any outlet outside of the heated envelope of the home regardless of its height above grade ??
Originally Posted By: gbeaumont This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
that GFCI’s are put in any exterior locations, period.
They are a sensible upgrade and save lives in potential shock enviroments. whether they are code requirement about 6.5 feet is for our purposes entirely irrelavent, I think this is the classic “code” debate gone astray.
I know Joe T well enough to know that he would not be saying outside of a code discussion that they should not be used above "n" height.
Originally Posted By: jtedesco This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
gbeaumont wrote:
Hi to all,
I think we are losing site of the real issue here, especially from a home inspectors perspective, I think from our perspective we should be recommending that GFCI's are put in any exterior locations, period.
They are a sensible upgrade and save lives in potential shock environments. whether they are code requirement about 6.5 feet is for our purposes entirely irrelevant, I think this is the classic "code" debate gone astray.
I know Joe T well enough to know that he would not be saying outside of a code discussion that they should not be used above "n" height.
Regards
Gerry
Gerry:
I agree! I will recommend that NACHI take a stand to support your comments and suggest or recommend that protection be provided for any receptacle installed outdoors, whether on a deck, or otherwise.
This business about trying to prove Code Superiority and dates of this and that are admirable, and scholarships should be given to anyone who can withstand the continued and sometimes long winded references to how it should or is required to be per the NEC.
I sincerely believe that we should all use common sense when it comes to lives by recommending AFCI, and GFCI, protection, etc., and so on.
This should be put to a vote, and we should take a stand and begin to express our real concerns for safety.
Originally Posted By: rrushing This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
From Jerry’s spreadsheet:
"WE RECOMMEND INSTALLING GFCI PROTECTION TO MEET, AT A MINIMUM, THE LATEST AND MOST CURRENT CODE, AND, ADDITIONALLY, AT ALL WET AREAS OR AREAS WITCH COULD POTENTIALLY BECOME WET AREAS".
Pretty much sums it up...
"I will have my crew go back to these buildings and add the GFCI protection for all receptacles if this is true. "
---Dang, Joe... that's alotta GFCI's to recommend your crew go back and install.
Originally Posted By: gbeaumont This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Hi to all,
OK Joe & Jerry, seeing as you both agree that taking "code" issues aside that GFCI's are best used in all exterior locations, can some explain to me why the NEC does not see this as a requirement.
IMHO, this is a complete "NO BRAINER" is this an oversight on NEC's part or is there something that I'm just not getting here, I have been running all these exterior outlet senarios through my mind this evening, and still cannot find a logical reason for this not to be a requirement.
Gentlemen, in home inspector speak  what am I missing ??
Originally Posted By: jpeck This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
$$$ and justification backup data.
You would think that backup data, at this point in time, would be a no brainer and not needed. But it is.
You don't go changing the code 'just because it is a good idea'. You must have backup data to support the reason why. But the NEC is getting there, it is a "living document" which is under constant review and change.
But the main reason they have not done it is that they just don't listen to Joe and me. 
Originally Posted By: Greg Fretwell This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
jtedesco wrote:
Greg Fretwell wrote:
If those apartments were built under current code they WOULD require GFCIs on the balcony. I bet some in your picture don't even have GFCI in the kitchen or bath.
I know for a fact that Lee Co Fla will require a GFCI on any outside 120v 15/20a receptacle in a condo.
As an HI you really have to understand there is no obligation to bring existing homes up to current code but it is still valid to point out a possible danger. A am not sure what vehicle that is.
Please explain "outdoors" and tell me where I can call or go in the USA to be sure that this is the way it is interpreted. Same rule is found in the 99 Code 
