Older house with no ground wire

[Robert Huffman]

I am new in the business and am curious how some of you write up the issue of an older house wired with no ground wire. I have heard stories from local realtors where the inspector talks about the dangers of the system and recommends rewiring the house is the only solution.

If some electrical upgrade has happened, are electricians required to install a 3 prong outlet even though there is no ground wire?

[Gunnar Alquist]

I am new in the business and am curious how some of you write up the issue of an older house wired with no ground wire. I have heard stories from local realtors where the inspector talks about the dangers of the system and recommends rewiring the house is the only solution. If some electrical upgrade has happened, are electricians required to install a 3 prong outlet even though there is no ground wire?

Oy Robert,

That is a huge question that could take hours to fully explain, partially because I am not entirely sure which "ground wire" you are referring to, and what level of knowledge you are starting with. My first recommendation is to search equipment grounding conductor (EGC) and grounding electrode conductor (GEC) on this site and invest some time reading. There is a lot of useful information that would be silly to repeat here.

Briefly, if you are asking about older NM without an EGC, then only two-slot receptacle outlets are allowed unless the three-slot are GFCI protected. If you are asking about GEC, then that has ( as far as I know) always been required and you might not be seeing it. But, equipment grounding, grounding electrode, and bonding requirements have changed over the years, so having some kind of knowledge about the changes is also helpful. Also, jurisdictions differ in what they require when upgrading older systems.

To help you further, I highly recommend that anyone who is inspecting homes pick up Douglas Hansen's book "Electrical Inspections of Existing Dwellings". Douglas does go into a bit too much detail in some areas, but his sections on grounding and bonding and multi-wire branch circuits are excellent.

Someone online here has posted documents on date requirements for GFCI and AFCI. That is helpful too. If someone has those or knows where they are, it would be great if you could post again or provide a link.

[Bill Kriegh]

A residence that was built with a two wire type electrical installation generally has more issues than lack of a ground wire. All the problems inherent with this old wiring and equipment need to be evaluated as part of a decision on what makes good sense to get a system that is safe.

Because of the nature of the old insulation and the way things were installed "back in the day", as well as what people may have done to the wiring, two otherwise identical houses next to each other may have totally different needs to wind up with a safe electrical system. The things that need to be addressed need more of a small book than a few paragraphs to describe.

Any modifications to an existing electrical residential installation need to be grounded (since 1962, depending on code enforced locally at the time) and will require grounding type receptacles, and depending on the time frame when done may also require Arc Fault Circuit Interrupter protection. Un-grounded extensions aren't permitted and the NEC details how the grounding must be handled.

Grounding type receptacles are prohibited on un-grounded circuits UNLESS they are protected by a Ground Fault Circuit Interrupter AND each receptacle (or it's cover) marked as having "No Equipment Ground."

Non-grounding type receptacles may be replaced with like type receptacles, and this type receptacle is exempted from needing to be the tamper resistant variety.

[ROBERT YOUNG]

Robert. Are you referring branch circuit grounding? Really old house. K&T.
Typically/usually Armor cable covered equipment grounding.
Old 2 conductor cables terminated in 2 slot outlets. No branch circuit ground.
Awaiting your reply.

[Frank Belluccia]

If some electrical upgrade has happened, are electricians required to install a 3 prong outlet even though there is no ground wire?

Without rewiring the house, there are three considerations:
No EGC - GFCI in the breaker, or GFCI outlet as the first outlet in a circuit.
Age - AFCI - Insulation degradation, with high current loads (heaters), makes arcing more likely.
Gauge - if the old wire is thinner 14AWG, amperage is an issue.

If you have all three, one solution could be 15A AFCI/GFCI combo breakers.
GFCI, somewhere upstream, is minimum to have 3-prong outlets.

1) GFCI breaker, 2) GFCI at first outlet, 3) AFCI/GFCI combo breaker, or 4) AFCI/GFCI combo at first outlet in each circuit. In all instances ALL 3-prong outlets outlets labeled as missing EGC.

N.b.: without an EGC, a plug-in GFCI tester will not work in any outlet.

[Lon Henderson]

Know what your local AHJ requires, because there is no nationwide standard applied the same way, every time, every where.

A common rule-of-thumb, is that you can replace like with like. An old two-prong outlet can be replaced with a new two-prong outlet. Ungrounded 3-prong outlets are not allowed and boot-leg grounds (jumper from grounding lug to the neutral on an outlet or switch) are not allowed.

Allowed improvements are typically, replace two-prong outlets with GFCI outlets. Because there is no grounding conductor in the circuit, to have total ground fault protection, each and every outlet has to be replaced with a GFCI outlet.

And of course, the best improvement is rewire the house to current code.

Service panels can also be replaced like for like. An old panel can be replaced with new non-AFCI and non-GFCI breakers, unless your AHJ wants it done differently.

[William Cline]

There is one other wiring method that doesn't seem to have been addressed here. Some house prior to the 70's were wired with metal outlet boxes connected by a common ground wire thru the framing. This wire was typically a #14, but have fun into some wired with#12. The wire was typically terminated inside the box and depended on the box to ground the outlet thru the device attachment screw and yoke. The common ground wire was typically terminated in the main or sub-panel. It was also easily broken by remodeling activities. An volt-ohm meter can be used to verify condition of this type of grounding.

[Bill Kriegh]

Robert. Are you referring branch circuit grounding? Really old house. K&T.
Typically/usually Armor cable covered equipment grounding.
Old 2 conductor cables terminated in 2 slot outlets. No branch circuit ground.
Awaiting your reply.

There are currently two types of cable used with a metallic armor, AC and MC. At one time something called BX was used. This stuff has a steel outer sheath and has neither an internal grounding conductor (type MC) or an internal bonding strip (type AC). The metal armor on BX is not recognized as a ground, and even on relatively short runs will not carry enough fault current to trip a breaker. It will, however, provide a nice heater, sometimes with a bright red glow, if it is attempting to carry fault current. I've opened up many an attic scuttle hole and seen a number of places that have a dull red glow with flammable insulation and various other things stored on top of the cables.

If BX was used to wire a residence it is possible, even likely, that testing a 3 prong receptacle used on on one of these systems will show a correctly grounded receptacle. One giveaway you have BX is rubber insulation with fabric covering, but BX was made into the plastic insulation era.

[david shapiro]

Know what your local AHJ requires, because there is no nationwide standard applied the same way, every time, every where.

A common rule-of-thumb, is that you can replace like with like. An old two-prong outlet can be replaced with a new two-prong outlet. Ungrounded 3-prong outlets are not allowed and boot-leg grounds (jumper from grounding lug to the neutral on an outlet or switch) are not allowed.

Service panels can also be replaced like for like. An old panel can be replaced with new non-AFCI and non-GFCI breakers, unless your AHJ wants it done differently.

Lon, lest you confuse Robert, we'd better note that where GFCI protection is now required in the jurisdiction, it is illegal to replace a 2-prong receptacle with its like without adding the GFCI protection, either there or upstream.

[david shapiro]

There are currently two types of cable used with a metallic armor, AC and MC. At one time something called BX was used. This stuff has a steel outer sheath and has neither an internal grounding conductor (type MC) or an internal bonding strip (type AC). The metal armor on BX is not recognized as a ground, and even on relatively short runs will not carry enough fault current to trip a breaker.
. . .
One giveaway you have BX is rubber insulation with fabric covering, but BX was made into the plastic insulation era.

Bill, to avoid confusing Robert, we should note that since the early 20th century, "BX" has been trade slang. In much of the country "BX" is used to refer to new Type AC and Type ACHH cables, as well as to older armored cable. The key difference IMO between modern and older armored cable, Robert, is the presence (in newer stuff) or absence (in the stuff Bill refers to) of an ~18AWG bonding strip, normally aluminum, inside the armor to short inductive impedance so as to expedite tripping the overcurrent device.

[Jerry Peck]

Lon, lest you confuse Robert, we'd better note that where GFCI protection is now required in the jurisdiction, it is illegal to replace a 2-prong receptacle with its like without adding the GFCI protection, either there or upstream.

"is now required" = 'has been required for many code cycles' that when a receptacle in an area which requires GFCI protection is replaced, the replacement receptacle is required to be GFCI protected, or have GFCI protection upstream.

[david shapiro]

"is now required" = 'has been required for many code cycles' that when a receptacle in an area which requires GFCI protection is replaced, the replacement receptacle is required to be GFCI protected, or have GFCI protection upstream.

Absolutely correct, Jerry. I was speaking as an electrician/TPI, which means that exactly where GFCI protection was or is legally required depends on which code edition/amendments have been locally adopted. For a HI, this is less an issue, IMO, because (a) without research you don't know what edition was in force when an existing nonconforming device was installed and (b) I hope you'd recommend GFCI protection of any replacement in keeping with the Second Draft of the 2020 NEC.

[Robert Huffman]

Should have specified. Referring to old 2 conductor cable with 2 slot outlets.





Robert. Are you referring branch circuit grounding? Really old house. K&T.
Typically/usually Armor cable covered equipment grounding.
Old 2 conductor cables terminated in 2 slot outlets. No branch circuit ground.
Awaiting your reply.

[Chris Roth]

I am new in the business and am curious how some of you write up the issue of an older house wired with no ground wire. I have heard stories from local realtors where the inspector talks about the dangers of the system and recommends rewiring the house is the only solution.

If some electrical upgrade has happened, are electricians required to install a 3 prong outlet even though there is no ground wire?


I write it up this way:

"There are original two-prong outlets throughout the house. Two-prong outlets are not grounded. Recommend having an electrical contractor provide grounded outlets throughout the house."

[Lon Henderson]

Lon, lest you confuse Robert, we'd better note that where GFCI protection is now required in the jurisdiction, it is illegal to replace a 2-prong receptacle with its like without adding the GFCI protection, either there or upstream.
It is not illegal to replace like with like and done all the time with fix-n-flips.

[Jerry Peck]

It is not illegal to replace like with like and done all the time with fix-n-flips.

I find it hard to believe that you just said that. :confused:

Is Colorado still on the 1984 NEC? (Just pulled on old edition year out of the air, even it may have the replacement section in it, I guess I will now have to check.)

The part I find it hard to believe is "and done all the time with fix-n-flips." as though that is evidence that something therefore must be in compliance with the codes.

I use that as basically meaning the opposite - if it is done in a fix-flip, it is likely done using 'whatever was in the truck' and 'permits? who needs permits?' along with 'code? never heard of it', and as final proof ... 'we ain't been caught yet'.

[Lon Henderson]

It is done all the time with permits. I find it hard to believe that you didn't know that. At my own fixer, the city inspector commented that I didn't have to replace the two prong outlets with GFCIs and was happy that I did.

[Jerry Peck]

It is done all the time with permits. I find it hard to believe that you didn't know that. At my own fixer, the city inspector commented that I didn't have to replace the two prong outlets with GFCIs and was happy that I did.

What NEC edition is applicable in your area?

[Lon Henderson]

What NEC edition is applicable in your area?
I don't know which edition the Englewood inspector was using, but there was a not so amusing moment where my electrician had the NEC open regarding size of the service mast. My electrician, pointing at the page, says, "See, I did it right." The inspector said, "Yes, you did, but we are going to do it my way." His way cost me extra.

The point of the story is that an AHJ is god on this. The code books are barely his/her bible, in that, they interpret, change, add to or subtract from code guidelines as they please. A suburb here was on the 2012 IRC until last year. The head of their compliance told me, "We like to use common sense when we apply the code." Another suburb has adopted EPA guidelines regarding the installation of radon mitigation systems as their city code and require a permit.

Because I'm in this biz, and care about what I do, I went way beyond what I had to do on my fixer-upper regarding not just the electrical but a number of other areas.

In my earlier comments, I stated that it is important to know what your AHJ requires. I talk to inspectors all over the country all the time, and the way AHJs interpret and ignore code is as varied as there are AHJs. One town can have a stickler for the code as their AHJ. and the next town uses "common sense."

And here is where different HIs see their role differently. I know from past exchanges that you are a fundamentalist regarding the code and you will argue with an AHJ that isn't. That's fine for HIs who like arguing with AHJs. I lean more to the side of avoiding beating my head against the wall and inspect based on what I know local AHJs allow. At the same time, over the years, I've convinced an AHJ here and there to modify their inspections to what code says.

[Jerry Peck]

And here is where different HIs see their role differently. I know from past exchanges that you are a fundamentalist regarding the code and you will argue with an AHJ that isn't. That's fine for HIs who like arguing with AHJs.

Lon,

Frequently, I AM the AHJ when I do inspections as I work part-time for an engineering firm I used to work for (before retirement from that work, and now after retirement from that work) doing AHJ inspections.

I really, really, really dislike AHJ inspectors who "make things up" as they wish.

One advantage of having all the licensing in Florida that we have (we just can't seem to be able to count ballots is all) is that, for AHJ inspectors and plans examiners, when something is written up as not being compliant with the code (which also includes the approved construction documents, i.e., plans) the inspector or plans examiner is required to provide THE SECTION OF THE CODE which is not in compliance.

If the inspector or plans examiner is not able to do that, then they are not allowed to fail it (and if they do fail it, the contractor needs to report that inspector or plans examiner to the building official, and if it is the building official, then the contractor needs to report that to the state - inspectors, plans examiners, and building official do get reprimanded here in Florida, and sometimes that reprimand is revoking their licenses - I have been to commission meetings where that has happened.


I lean more to the side of avoiding beating my head against the wall and inspect based on what I know local AHJs allow. At the same time, over the years, I've convinced an AHJ here and there to modify their inspections to what code says.

Which is what I've been telling HIs to do for over 30 years now - go meet with the inspector 'to educate yourselves on the way the AHJ does things', and that process usually results in AHJ recognizing that what they are 'teaching' the HI is not right, or is right, but not what the AHJ is actually doing ... I've only seen positive results come out of those meetings - including (usually) a higher level of respect that the AHJ gives those HIs as the AHJ knows the HIs care about what is being done.

One step at a time, even if it is 'two steps forward, one step back' that is still 'progress'.

[Jim Port]

I don't know which edition the Englewood inspector was using, but there was a not so amusing moment where my electrician had the NEC open regarding size of the service mast. My electrician, pointing at the page, says, "See, I did it right." The inspector said, "Yes, you did, but we are going to do it my way." His way cost me extra.

The point of the story is that an AHJ is god on this. The code books are barely his/her bible, in that, they interpret, change, add to or subtract from code guidelines as they please. A suburb here was on the 2012 IRC until last year. The head of their compliance told me, "We like to use common sense when we apply the code." Another suburb has adopted EPA guidelines regarding the installation of radon mitigation systems as their city code and require a permit.

Because I'm in this biz, and care about what I do, I went way beyond what I had to do on my fixer-upper regarding not just the electrical but a number of other areas.

In my earlier comments, I stated that it is important to know what your AHJ requires. I talk to inspectors all over the country all the time, and the way AHJs interpret and ignore code is as varied as there are AHJs. One town can have a stickler for the code as their AHJ. and the next town uses "common sense."

And here is where different HIs see their role differently. I know from past exchanges that you are a fundamentalist regarding the code and you will argue with an AHJ that isn't. That's fine for HIs who like arguing with AHJs. I lean more to the side of avoiding beating my head against the wall and inspect based on what I know local AHJs allow. At the same time, over the years, I've convinced an AHJ here and there to modify their inspections to what code says.

Hard to believe that a large metropolitan area like Denver can be so loosely regulated and that no one has challenged the BS of do it my way. If it is not in the book it is not enforceable, period.

[Lon Henderson]

Hard to believe that a large metropolitan area like Denver can be so loosely regulated and that no one has challenged the BS of do it my way. If it is not in the book it is not enforceable, period.

Hard to believe? Hell yeah, it's believable. And not just here.
Enforceable? The AHJ is god and enforcement is no problem.

If state legislatures or even municipalities made adoption of national codes the law, then it would be very different, but that is not commonly done. Standardization would make our jobs easier on one level, but would require us to be far more knowledgeable about all codes than the vast majority of us are. The average member of this forum is more knowledgeable than the average inspector in my experience, but even here, Jerry is unique in his vast knowledge of code across all areas.

[Lon Henderson]

This thread ventured off topic (imagine that) but as I have some time today to venture back toward the original topic, I want to address what the NEC says about replacing non-grounding type receptacles. I called Denver to see if there had been any changes with their policy.

Lon, lest you confuse Robert, we'd better note that where GFCI protection is now required in the jurisdiction, it is illegal to replace a 2-prong receptacle with its like without adding the GFCI protection, either there or upstream.
Your comment goes to my comment about knowing what your AHJ requires. However, as I read the NEC, if your AHJ requires replacement of old 2-prong receptacles to be replaced with GFCI protected receptacles, then that is beyond the NEC requirements even if a best practice. Which raises the question of, if doing less than national code requirements is making it up as you go, then, wouldn't doing more than code requirements also be making it up?


"is now required" = 'has been required for many code cycles' that when a receptacle in an area which requires GFCI protection is replaced, the replacement receptacle is required to be GFCI protected, or have GFCI protection upstream.


I find it hard to believe that you just said that. :confused:

Is Colorado still on the 1984 NEC? (Just pulled on old edition year out of the air, even it may have the replacement section in it, I guess I will now have to check.)
I confess that your comment made me look it up, in case I was having brain flatulence. Does not 2017 NEC 406.4(D)(2)(a) state "A non-grounding-type receptacle(s) shall be permitted to be replaced with another non-grounding-type receptacle(s)? I spoke with the head of Denver electrical compliance this morning and he interprets 406.4(D)(2)(a) as it is permitted to replace old 2-prong receptacles(outlets) with new 2-prong receptacles.

Since, some of you think the NEC is saying something different, please show me where I (and Denver) am wrong about 406.4(D)(2)(a).

[Jerry Peck]

Which raises the question of, if doing less than national code requirements is making it up as you go, then, wouldn't doing more than code requirements also be making it up?

No.

No, because the NEC is a minimum standard, the minimum code requirements, and the NEC itself says:
(bold and underlining are mine)
- 90.1(B) Adequacy. This Code contains provisions that are considered necessary for safety. Compliance therewith and proper maintenance result in an installation that is essentially free from hazard but not necessarily efficient, convenient, or adequate for good service or future expansion of electrical use.

And some people think that the NEC is so difficult to meet, and that meeting the NEC makes it "safe" and "good' - yet the NEC itself says that a compliant system will only be "essentially" free from hazard" ... "but not necessarily" ... "efficient, convenient, or adequate for good service" - shouldn't owners expect a code compliant electrical system to be more than "essentially free from hazard", and shouldn't they expect such a code compliant electrical system to be "adequate for good service"?

Not according to the NEC.


Since, some of you think the NEC is saying something different, please show me where I (and Denver) am wrong about 406.4(D)(2)(a).

You made a blanket statement, and I recall (I didn't scroll down to verify) that it was mentioned below that receptacles replaced in locations where GFCI protection is required by the current code require GFCI protection (GFCI type receptacles; GFCI protection back at the panel, which will be difficult with older panels which do not have GFCI breakers available); and what about receptacles for which the equipment/appliance being plugged in is required to be grounded (required by the manufacturer of the equipment or appliance, such as computers and many electronic appliances).

Neither/none of the above addresses acceptance of replacement two-prong receptacles.

Blanket questions leave many things open to be brought up, and many things were brought up.

[Gunnar Alquist]

Lon,

My view is:

To the best of my knowledge, existing two-slot receptacle outlets may be replaced with new two-slot receptacle outlets or with GFCI devices. Any receptacle outlets that do not have an equipment grounding conductor but are protected by a GFCI device should be labeled "GFCI Protected" and "No Equipment Ground".

As far as existing two-slot receptacle outlets. I let folks know that the wiring supplying the outlet does not have an equipment grounding conductor and, as long as the fixture/appliance that they are plugging-into the receptacle outlet does not have a grounding-type (three-pin) plug, that particular fixture/appliance will not use the equipment grounding circuit. For any appliance with grounding-type (three-pin) cords, either a GFCI device should be used or the circuits supplying those receptacle outlets should be rewired with new cable that contains an equipment grounding conductor.

Ideally, all homes would be constantly upgraded to meet the current code cycle, but the reality is that doesn't happen. As a result, our primary job is to inform our clients of what is going on and to make recommendations accordingly.

[D Morris]

A residence that was built with a two wire type electrical installation generally has more issues than lack of a ground wire. All the problems inherent with this old wiring and equipment need to be evaluated as part of a decision on what makes good sense to get a system that is safe.

Because of the nature of the old insulation and the way things were installed "back in the day", as well as what people may have done to the wiring, two otherwise identical houses next to each other may have totally different needs to wind up with a safe electrical system. The things that need to be addressed need more of a small book than a few paragraphs to describe.

Any modifications to an existing electrical residential installation need to be grounded (since 1962, depending on code enforced locally at the time) and will require grounding type receptacles, and depending on the time frame when done may also require Arc Fault Circuit Interrupter protection. Un-grounded extensions aren't permitted and the NEC details how the grounding must be handled.

Grounding type receptacles are prohibited on un-grounded circuits UNLESS they are protected by a Ground Fault Circuit Interrupter AND each receptacle (or it's cover) marked as having "No Equipment Ground."

Non-grounding type receptacles may be replaced with like type receptacles, and this type receptacle is exempted from needing to be the tamper resistant variety.

Agree, enough said.
Yes I'm new here occasionally a viewer and will rarely interject

[THOMAS HORNE]

There are currently two types of cable used with a metallic armor, AC and MC. At one time something called BX was used. This stuff has a steel outer sheath and has neither an internal grounding conductor (type MC) or an internal bonding strip (type AC). The metal armor on BX is not recognized as a ground, and even on relatively short runs will not carry enough fault current to trip a breaker. It will, however, provide a nice heater, sometimes with a bright red glow, if it is attempting to carry fault current. I've opened up many an attic scuttle hole and seen a number of places that have a dull red glow with flammable insulation and various other things stored on top of the cables.

If BX was used to wire a residence it is possible, even likely, that testing a 3 prong receptacle used on on one of these systems will show a correctly grounded receptacle. One giveaway you have BX is rubber insulation with fabric covering, but BX was made into the plastic insulation era.
When Armored Cable; Type AC; was first made the electricians then working in the craft began calling it BX because of the large card-stock tag which was wired to each roll and read BX. The GE Bronx plant was the first place that Armored Cable was made and GE held a patent on it's design and was the only source of that cable for many years. General Electric practice was to label every product they shipped with the designation they used to identify GE manufacturing locations. So in reality BX was made until General Electric closed their Bronx manufacturing plant. If that plant were still open then every type of cable that was made there would be BX. That GE Bronx facility origin flag never indicated a type of cable! Electricians still call Armored Cable "BX" to this day.

--
Tom Horne

[THOMAS HORNE]

A residence that was built with a two wire type electrical installation generally has more issues than lack of a ground wire. All the problems inherent with this old wiring and equipment need to be evaluated as part of a decision on what makes good sense to get a system that is safe.

Because of the nature of the old insulation and the way things were installed "back in the day", as well as what people may have done to the wiring, two otherwise identical houses next to each other may have totally different needs to wind up with a safe electrical system. The things that need to be addressed need more of a small book than a few paragraphs to describe.

Any modifications to an existing electrical residential installation need to be grounded (since 1962, depending on code enforced locally at the time) and will require grounding type receptacles, and depending on the time frame when done may also require Arc Fault Circuit Interrupter protection. Un-grounded extensions aren't permitted and the NEC details how the grounding must be handled. It is not clear to me what you are saying here so let me say that I'm writing in order to understand rather than to be quarrelsome. When you say that "Any modifications to an existing electrical residential installation need to be grounded (since 1962, depending on code enforced locally at the time) and will require grounding type receptacles,..." what do you mean? Many additions of the NEC well after 1962 permitted ungrounded circuit extensions. None of those additions require the retrofitting of Equipment Grounding Conductors. Even the 2014 Edition of the US NEC Permits retrofitting rather than requiring it.


Grounding type receptacles are prohibited on un-grounded circuits UNLESS they are protected by a Ground Fault Circuit Interrupter AND each receptacle (or it's cover) marked as having "No Equipment Ground."

Non-grounding type receptacles may be replaced with like type receptacles, and this type receptacle is exempted from needing to be the tamper resistant variety.

--
tom Horne

[THOMAS HORNE]

I don't know which edition the Englewood inspector was using, but there was a not so amusing moment where my electrician had the NEC open regarding size of the service mast. My electrician, pointing at the page, says, "See, I did it right." The inspector said, "Yes, you did, but we are going to do it my way." His way cost me extra.

The point of the story is that an AHJ is god on this. The code books are barely his/her bible, in that, they interpret, change, add to or subtract from code guidelines as they please. A suburb here was on the 2012 IRC until last year. The head of their compliance told me, "We like to use common sense when we apply the code." Another suburb has adopted EPA guidelines regarding the installation of radon mitigation systems as their city code and require a permit.

Because I'm in this biz, and care about what I do, I went way beyond what I had to do on my fixer-upper regarding not just the electrical but a number of other areas.

In my earlier comments, I stated that it is important to know what your AHJ requires. I talk to inspectors all over the country all the time, and the way AHJs interpret and ignore code is as varied as there are AHJs. One town can have a stickler for the code as their AHJ. and the next town uses "common sense."

And here is where different HIs see their role differently. I know from past exchanges that you are a fundamentalist regarding the code and you will argue with an AHJ that isn't. That's fine for HIs who like arguing with AHJs. I lean more to the side of avoiding beating my head against the wall and inspect based on what I know local AHJs allow. At the same time, over the years, I've convinced an AHJ here and there to modify their inspections to what code says.You had to go and push that BIG RED BUTTON. This is my Pet Peeve. I look forward to the day when the entire country is using a Minimum/Maximum Electric Code. That would absolutely forbid any local modifications to the State adopted electric code. I also want to see State licensure of Electrical Inspectors who are exercising enforcement authority over electrical work. And I want a State appeals process rather than or addition to any local appeals process. I want automatic suspension of an inspector's license if three appeals are decided against them and a requirement for remedial education prior to reinstatement. Last I want mandatory re-certification for any new adoption of an addition of the State adopted electrical code and continuing education on the outcome or appeals.

I have no intention of holding my breath while we wait though. Erroneous corrective orders cost the economy many thousands of dollars. I cannot stand the arrogance of inspectors who believe that their judgement is superior to the hundreds of persons who participated in the code writing process. Without some sort of Truly independent quality assurance system.

[/RANT]

--
Tom Horne

[THOMAS HORNE]

Hard to believe that a large metropolitan area like Denver can be so loosely regulated and that no one has challenged the BS of do it my way. If it is not in the book it is not enforceable, period.From your pen to the Force's consciousnes.

--
Tom Horne

[THOMAS HORNE]

Know what your local AHJ requires, because there is no nationwide standard applied the same way, every time, every where.

A common rule-of-thumb, is that you can replace like with like. An old two-prong outlet can be replaced with a new two-prong outlet. Ungrounded 3-prong outlets are not allowed and boot-leg grounds (jumper from grounding lug to the neutral on an outlet or switch) are not allowed.

Allowed improvements are typically, replace two-prong outlets with GFCI outlets. Because there is no grounding conductor in the circuit, to have total ground fault protection, each and every outlet has to be replaced with a GFCI outlet.

And of course, the best improvement is rewire the house to current code.

Service panels can also be replaced like for like. An old panel can be replaced with new non-AFCI and non-GFCI breakers, unless your AHJ wants it done differently.If you use one of the modern multi-function Circuit Testers that measure the impedance of the circuit then you cannot be fooled by a "bootleg ground" and it will still test GFCIs on a circuit which has no Equipment Grounding Conductor (EGC). Ideal Sure Test is one that I have used with good results. Amprobe's INSP-3 Wiring Inspector Circuit Tester does the same job with less effort. Both devices run just over $300 if you shop around carefully.

--
Tom Horne

[Jerry Peck]

If you use one of the modern multi-function Circuit Testers that measure the impedance of the circuit then you cannot be fooled by a "bootleg ground" and it will still test GFCIs on a circuit which has no Equipment Grounding Conductor (EGC).

Tom,

Is there some new circuitry in those testers which create a 4-6 ma fault to ground and can still test that when there is no ground available to fault to?

I haven't heard of that yet.

- - - Updated - - -


Electricians still call Armored Cable "BX" to this day.

In my experience, only a few do ... and very few call AC "BX".