Thread: GFI Wiring Question

Now to address Marks point. I've drawn gfci A showing a set of contacts between line and load terminals. I believe Marks point is that these contacts are not rated for 20 amps feed thru and technically the screw terminals on the load side of the gfci are therefore not rated to continue to the next device at 20 amp rating.

Now assuming that is true IMO you would still be fine as long as the next connected device (receptacle)is also a 15 amp configuration on the face. So Nicks gfcis would be fine on a 20 amp branch circuit. Now again IMO .. if Mark is correct.. then a 20 amp device (receptacle or gfci with 5-20r configuration) could not be wired off the load terminals of gfci A in my drawing.

That's how I am understanding Mark to be describing the issue at hand. I don't agree with it as the NEC makes no exception to those regards. But maybe that is what Mark is saying that the NEC is wrong. Having sat on the cmp for this section of the NEC would provide him with the respect he deserves right or wrong. So would be nice if Mark returned to continue his point.[/quote]

Thanks that was my point, perhaps had you been on the code panel it would not be allowed today but the manufacturers have a lot of pull with their free drink rooms etc.

Holy crap these threads get complicated. I'm surprised we haven't gotten into electrical theory and quantum physics yet.
The reality is...some bonehead heard that all "wet area outlets" should be GFCI's. Off to Home Cheapo he went and bought the contractors pack and proceeded to change all the outlets. Sure it's safe now. I see this all the time. I call it double stacking. You only need one GFCI per circuit...period, that's how it's intended to be and that's how it's done normally. The way some of you are talking, we'd have two garbage disposal switches on each side of the kitchen sink, one for lefty's and one for righty's....all for convenience of course.
I see this "double stacked " problem so often that I have a standard script for it in my report. I see this invarably on flipped homes and harry homeowner the lectrician wannasaveabuck. It's basic home wiring but my feeling is if the person doing this kind of stuff is too stupid to read the instructions then they should not be messing with electricity in the first place. Stick with duct taping the drain pipes before you hurt someone.

Originally Posted by Daniel Rogers

Holy crap these threads get complicated. I'm surprised we haven't gotten into electrical theory and quantum physics yet.

Well, we have experts in every field here. First, we have Watson who has a compelling need to complicate EVERY single thread he responds to with crap totally unrelated and insinuations he has insights and access to info the rest of us just don't have or are too stupid to read and understand, or that it somehow matters. I think delusions of godhood appear here as well because there tends to be feeling expressed that because Watson says something that that's the way it is and no amount of information presented to the contrary will change his mind. Every forum seems to have one of these and if my PMs are any indication - well, never mind.

Then we have folks with insights on things that are totally off base - like not bothering to read the available specifications on something before swearing up and down they KNOW how it's designed.

Then we have those who know what the rules and regulations are and blatantly choose to ignore them when commenting on whether something is "to code" or not, or that it just doesn't matter 'cause, well, just because.

There is, unfortunately, bad and incorrect information presented here also and much as I'd like to leave some folks on permanent "ignore" I have a hard time letting the bad stuff stand as the last word. We're fortunate we have a moderator who understands and allows the discussions to hash things out.

Once you weed out this stuff there are some very informative discussions and a wealth of information here and the "complicated" threads magically unwind themselves into good basic information.

I will say this. I appreciate the scraps of truth, so keep them coming.
In my mind, it's like a garbage dump in India. You have to dig thru the pile.

I am sorry! Is this a conversation about GFCIs? I was wondering if someone could tell me the best way to wire them. I am not quite clear on this subject matter

I also appreciate all the input above on the subject matter.I want to hear all points of view and belief of facts and contraries to the matter. It is a whole lot better than the opinion of one or 2 folks. If that were the case it would be like watching one news channel and only getting a certain side of the story and then just believing everything you were told.

After all, the thinking end of things IS what this job is all about. The ongoing questions in our minds with everything we are looking at. I happen to love it and want more of it and, oh yeah, more work as well.

The absolute craziest week I ever had last week. I started with three inspection and then calls for a few more. I could have had 6 but by the time the second inspection came due ... bad financing. The third, put off until next Saturday. The 4rth, the Realtor actually talked them in letting the bank hire and pay for an inspection. The 5th and sixth, maybe sometime this week. That's right. From 6 to 1. A wonderful week.

Sorry about the side track.

Now ....... How about those GFCIs?

Originally Posted by Daniel Rogers

You only need one GFCI per circuit...period, ...

No, that is all you need to meet MINIMUM code, and the code does not care if 'the circuit' is protected, the code only specifies that the 'receptacle outlets' be protected, and in some cases the code adds 'lighting outlets'. I'm not saying there there is not some sections which want 'the circuit' protected, but the code is, for the vast majority of GFCI requirements, concerned with 'the outlets', not 'the circuits'.

Keep in mind that the code is only the minimum standard, the crappiest one is legally allowed to build/wire it.

The itself even tells you that it is not necessarily efficient, convenient, or adequate for good service.

Mannnnn this is too much talk about a simple situation,this is not unsafe installation,let the customer know what is going on,only recommend then to look for an electrician to fix it and that is all.We don't have to cause the imprecion that we are the best in the word having solution to every situation "LET THE TRADE DO THEIR TRADE"

Originally Posted by Alexei Chaviano

Mannnnn this is too much talk about a simple situation,this is not unsafe installation,let the customer know what is going on,only recommend then to look for an electrician to fix it and that is all.We don't have to cause the imprecion that we are the best in the word having solution to every situation "LET THE TRADE DO THEIR TRADE"

I don't think that is what this site is all about! Most of the people on here seem to genuinely care about what they write in their reports. They want to know how and why things meet code or don't and the best way to correct a problem when it's found. Inevitably your clients are going to ask you how and why and if all you have for an answer to that is "call an electrician" or "call a plumber" etc, they will certainly feel disappointed in your knowledge and your service!

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

the code does not care if 'the circuit' is protected, the code only specifies that the 'receptacle outlets' be protected,

Keep in mind that the code is only the minimum standard, the crappiest one is legally allowed to build/wire it.

Jerry, first let me thank you for paying tribute to my signature!

2nd: The fact that it is the receptacles that must be protected and not the circuit has always bothered me. Example: GFCI receptacle under spa tub, pipe bursts under tub, GFCI trips but box gets flooded and since the circuit is not GFCI protected everything is now possibly energized. Whats wrong with this picture?

It is standard practice and code compliant to install a GFCI receptacle under the spa tub and plug the pump motor into it. Likewise for a spa heater. I have my employees install GFCI breakers in the panel for these types of installations and quote the jobs that way but that is not the norm and it has never made sense to me. Do you find a problem with my logic on this?

Originally Posted by Nick Ostrowski

I've run into this problem a few times in the past and saw it again yesterday. Two GFI outlets in the kitchen, each with the test and rest buttons. The outlet to the right of the kitchen sink trips when tested but will not reset unless the outlet on left-hand side of sink is reset first.

What wiring configuration would cause this and does it need to be corrected?

A) A MWBC and older (standard version) GFCI combimation devices combined with a newer GFCI device

B) A Newer GFCI device to the right of the kitchen sink wired in series-parallel (load side) of the protected device on the left side of the kitchen sink, i.e. right combination GFCI/receptacle is "downstream" of the left side combination GFCI/receptacle and has some version of the latest two revisions of the standard features, or a smart-lock version self-test pre-Standard mandate.

C) Other possibilities depending on the vintage of the original installation and any modifications which may have taken place.

During my absence quite a few unprofessional assaults taken place. Obviously by those unfamailiar with flat work in the 80s on older installations, and the multitude of changes in both the standards for receptacles and those of GFCI devices over the years.

The OP asked what wiring condicitions might cause such, I addressed three such.

Who introduced the possiblity of a former split receptacle Multi-outlet MWBC in a kitchen of an unknown vintage? ME.

Who introduced the possiblity of combination devices of differing vintages and standard revsions relative to date of manufacture? ME.

The Standard(s) have NOT read the same over the years, neither has the testing parameters. Relying on 2011 language or 2002 language for an installation and equipment of same of UNKNOWN manufacture or vintage of installation is imprudant.

Contributions on a U.S.-based question (philly area PA) vs. Canada regarding historical electrical code requrements and equipment Standards requirements is beyond the scope of the OP but idiotic. Quoting out-of-context suposed UL correspondance is beyond incredulous.

Originally Posted by Roger Frazee

HG

Very informative post as was Kens. You are absolutely correct dates are very important. the email I posted was Dec. 2005.

The question was about 15 amp 5-15 non gfci receptacles being daisy chained using all four screws of the receptacle in a 'feed thru' manner. The installation was red tagged and a requirement to pigtail was the correction by the inspector. The correction was later overturned by the ahj in charge as the receptacles have 20 amp feed thru.

This of course is not what we are directly talking about in this thread, However I could not find documentation that said gfci's were any different.

And of course I realize that I could have to eat crow .... but I still do not see where I cannot continue a 20 amp branch circuit via the load terminals of a 15 amp gfci. I understand what Ken has posted but I do not clearly see what Mark is debating.

Never mind, since you've claimed, after much ad-hominim, that you won't bother to read a response; except to say you obviously missed the majority of the discussion points, and that a standard duplex (two) receptacle device is parallel in its configuration upon the unaltered yoke, Daisy-chaining sugestes simplified series-wiring.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

No, that is all you need to meet MINIMUM code, and the code does not care if 'the circuit' is protected, the code only specifies that the 'receptacle outlets' be protected, and in some cases the code adds 'lighting outlets'. I'm not saying there there is not some sections which want 'the circuit' protected, but the code is, for the vast majority of GFCI requirements, concerned with 'the outlets', not 'the circuits'.

Keep in mind that the code is only the minimum standard, the crappiest one is legally allowed to build/wire it.

The itself even tells you that it is not necessarily efficient, convenient, or adequate for good service.

Look Mr.Peck.
I can to apologize for my conduct on another thread..
Knee-jerk reaction to a member at my association.
Excuse my behavior. It was childish and should and will never be used that way again.
Have a great day.

Originally Posted by Nick Ostrowski

I've run into this problem a few times in the past and saw it again yesterday. Two GFI outlets in the kitchen, each with the test and rest buttons. The outlet to the right of the kitchen sink trips when tested but will not reset unless the outlet on left-hand side of sink is reset first.

What wiring configuration would cause this and does it need to be corrected?

Having 2 gfi's on same circuit can cause havic to the owner, the best thing to do would have the GFI that is down stream replaced with a duplex receptacle and tagged GFI protected. The whole purpose of having a load side on a GFI receptacle, this is what you get with do it yourself and handyman people trying to do electrical work, they have a concept to what needs to be done, but can not get it done right.

That's one way to correct the issue but it is not necessarily the correct or only way. The configuration as Nick explained it shows the downstream gfci is load connected to the upstream gfci. Point is that power to the 2nd gfci is controlled by the upstream gfci. It would be just as correct to move the load connection of the downstream gfci to the line side of the upstream gfci protecting it. Power would then be continuous to both gfci receptacles.

It is pointless to protect a gfci with another gfci or problems like being discussed will persist.

As for vintages and type of configuration this does not really mean much of anything as the solution remains the same regardless. Simply call for it to be corrected. Done deal.

Originally Posted by Lou Romano

Jerry, first let me thank you for paying tribute to my signature!

Lou,

I was not paying tribute to your signature line, although I agree with it (mostly) and have been telling people (pretty much) the same thing for years.

This is what I have been telling everyone for years, and you will see the difference and why the difference: The code is the minimum standard, it is the crappiest one is legally allowed to do the work.

The difference between that and what you say in minor, but critical:
You - you were allowed to get away with!
Me - is legally allowed to do the work.

People get away with doing much less, and home inspectors only find some of it (some of it will only be found during remodeling after the fire ).

Originally Posted by Roger Frazee

That's one way to correct the issue but it is not necessarily the correct or only way. The configuration as Nick explained it shows the downstream gfci is load connected to the upstream gfci. Point is that power to the 2nd gfci is controlled by the upstream gfci. It would be just as correct to move the load connection of the downstream gfci to the line side of the upstream gfci protecting it. Power would then be continuous to both gfci receptacles.

It is pointless to protect a gfci with another gfci or problems like being discussed will persist.

As for vintages and type of configuration this does not really mean much of anything as the solution remains the same regardless. Simply call for it to be corrected. Done deal.

I agree...see post #2...almost a month ago!

I like both versions! But I say "you" because "I" don't want to be mistaken for the "one" doing the crappy work!

Enjoy your vacation?

Hi Jerry,

I am going to have to conditionally disagree with you. In many cases, the code is the standard and there are cases when "exceeding" code can be detrimental and/or can adversely affect other parts of a system or component. Granted, there are different and incorrect opinions of "exceed".

For instance, over-tightening a terminal screw could result in a stripped screw and inadequate connection. Certainly, something was exceeded, maybe not code.

I have seen shear-wall panels that were nailed 2" O.C. instead of 4" O.C. Over-nailing can result in split wood and reduced strength. Would this be exceed or excessive?

I think I would rather have a house that was built "to code" consistently than a house that "exceeded code" in a haphazard manner.

Of course, I am not trying to pick a fight. Just offer a different point of view.

Hope you are having a wonderful summer in Florida. It's 76 right now in sunny Santa Rosa!

Originally Posted by Gunnar Alquist

Hi Jerry,

I am going to have to conditionally disagree with you. In many cases, the code is the standard and there are cases when "exceeding" code can be detrimental and/or can adversely affect other parts of a system or component. Granted, there are different and incorrect opinions of "exceed".

Gunnar,

Keep in mind that there is more than one way to "exceed" the code.

If the code specifies a "minimum" then more is exceeding the code, and if the code specifies a "maximum" then less is exceeding the code are you are, in either case, exceeding what is required.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

If the code specifies a "minimum" then more is exceeding the code, and if the code specifies a "maximum" then less is exceeding the code are you are, in either case, exceeding what is required.

Wow! This thread has gone absolutely berserk!

Jerry, this statement
"if the code specifies a "maximum" then less is exceeding the code are you are, in either case, exceeding what is required.

Makes no sense at all. Sometimes I think you rattle just to here yourself.

Okay... here comes a 300 word document explaining why this statement makes all the sense in the world! And this thread will last another six months or so after everybody dissects the quote about "are you are"

Take the stinking extra GFCI out and throw it away! Install a standard receptacal!

Oh Lord... now we'll have a debate about "What is a standard receptacal!

How do we know the GFCI is stinking? If it is stinking how should it be discarded? Are there EPA standards for throwing out a stinking GFCI? Are there UL regulations for the safe operation of a stinking GFCI? Is there a minimum or maximum amount of stink allowed? Are we exceeding the stink meter limitations or are we just having excessive stinking that needs to be included in the report?

Oh... yes sometimes I rattle just to here myself too! Sometimes I even amuse myself!

Install a standard receptacal!

Oh Lord... now we'll have a debate about "What is a standard receptacal!

I have no idea what a "receptacal" is but I do know what a receptacle is ....

Originally Posted by Roger Frazee

I have no idea what a "receptacal" is but I do know what a receptacle is ....

Ohhh crap!!! Ooops!

I didn't think it looked right...it was one of those....dang it!!!

Originally Posted by Wayne Carlisle

Jerry, this statement
"if the code specifies a "maximum" then less is exceeding the code are you are, in either case, exceeding what is required.

Makes no sense at all. Sometimes I think you rattle just to here yourself.

Okay... here comes a 300 word document explaining why this statement makes all the sense in the world! And this thread will last another six months or so after everybody dissects the quote about "are you are"

Wayne,

I've been waiting for someone to question that , here is the explanation:

Example: The NEC allows for a 12 AWG circuit to be protected by 20 amp circuit (given no derating applies nor any other factors apply).
- IF you install a 10 AWG circuit and protect it with that 20 amp breaker, you have "exceeded" the NEC requirements for minimum circuit conductor rating by installing higher rated circuit conductors for the given overcurrent protection allowed for that circuit (referring to the original 20 circuit). Got it?
- IF you install a 15 amp breaker on that 12 AWG circuit, you have "exceeded" the NEC requirements for protection by installing lower rated protection on that circuit (referring to the original 12 AWG circuit), thereby limiting the maximum current on the circuit to 15 amps. Got it?

Clear now?

Jerry you forgot to add use duplex receptacles rated for 20 amp circuits . or to verify circuit capacity count to 80% per General branch circuit by counting each duplex receptacle at 180 VA and fixtures at 90VA, pig tail receptacle junctions so they are not reuired to carry current up or down stream of the circuit, use single receptacle for dedicated circuits so it can't be shared, never install a 240V four wire receptacle on a panel with no mechanical ground to the nuetral bar. test all breakers for resistance to verify ability to trip under load. never use metal plate covers on plastic receptacle boxes (plastic receptacle boxes can not be grounded) make sure a proper drip loop is used at all service drops (drip loops don't only prevent water from running into the weather head, they prevent corrosion of the service conductor), and most importent of all never use un insulated tools when opening live electrical equipment.

GFCI receptacles are designed with a line/load ability, placing a GFI receptacle down stream of a GFI is not a code violation, but when you compare the cost of a gfi receptacle to a 20 amp rated duplex receptacle it is a costly and ineficient installation.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Wayne,

I've been waiting for someone to question that , here is the explanation:

Example: The NEC allows for a 12 AWG circuit to be protected by 20 amp circuit (given no derating applies nor any other factors apply).
- IF you install a 10 AWG circuit and protect it with that 20 amp breaker, you have "exceeded" the NEC requirements for minimum circuit conductor rating by installing higher rated circuit conductors for the given overcurrent protection allowed for that circuit (referring to the original 20 circuit). Got it?
- IF you install a 15 amp breaker on that 12 AWG circuit, you have "exceeded" the NEC requirements for protection by installing lower rated protection on that circuit (referring to the original 12 AWG circuit), thereby limiting the maximum current on the circuit to 15 amps. Got it?

Clear now?

Originally Posted by Norman Ellis

Jerry you forgot to add use duplex receptacles rated for 20 amp circuits . or to verify circuit capacity count to 80% per General branch circuit by counting each duplex receptacle at 180 VA and fixtures at 90VA, pig tail receptacle junctions so they are not reuired to carry current up or down stream of the circuit, use single receptacle for dedicated circuits so it can't be shared, never install a 240V four wire receptacle on a panel with no mechanical ground to the nuetral bar. test all breakers for resistance to verify ability to trip under load. never use metal plate covers on plastic receptacle boxes (plastic receptacle boxes can not be grounded) make sure a proper drip loop is used at all service drops (drip loops don't only prevent water from running into the weather head, they prevent corrosion of the service conductor), and most importent of all never use un insulated tools when opening live electrical equipment.

GFCI receptacles are designed with a line/load ability, placing a GFI receptacle down stream of a GFI is not a code violation, but when you compare the cost of a gfi receptacle to a 20 amp rated duplex receptacle it is a costly and ineficient installation.

How is any of this wiring "above" code? You are aware that 15 and 20 AMP receptacles are rated exactly the same except for the "face", and that most homes don't have and never will see a 20 AMP cord cap.

every above code installation mentioned are steps to a better and safer power source, and most 20 amp rated receptacles are for electrical units with over 15 amp power rating, such as window mount ac units (that are not required to be inspected by a home inspector so the power source is never verified to be on a dedicated circuit or if it is plugged into a general circuit). some medical equipment (that is basicly picked up or dropped off to the medical supply client, never having its power source checked or verified for ability to supply power safely), portable heating units ( that cause over 40% of winter electrical fires and main reason bedrooms are the highest rated location for cause to an electrical fire along with electiric blankets, a/c units waterbed heating pads, faulty power strips, cord end caps, debrie around receptacles and so on), commercial rated home entertainment equipment and so on. and yes they are needed, but not properly used or installed by the home owner because most don't care or understand.

And that is why we see 38 electrical fires an hour in the residential region, over 5000 people killed/injured and almost 500,000 home damaged or lost by electrical fires by Known or unknown point of origin from electricity in the home every year. and that is why it is important to know more about electrical theory and installation than what is just REQUIRED by NEC code from the time of installation.

Originally Posted by Bill Kriegh

How is any of this wiring "above" code? You are aware that 15 and 20 AMP receptacles are rated exactly the same except for the "face", and that most homes don't have and never will see a 20 AMP cord cap.

If 20 AMP loads on 15 AMP circuits are starting fires then we have an issue with 15 AMP breakers. Same is true if a "large" load on a 20 AMP multi-receptacle circuit starts a fire.

I've seen more electrical fires started by DIY wiring and defective items plugged in than I've ever seen by minimum code compliant wiring.

There's also a "stupid" factor. Improper placement of a portable electric heater can start a fire. The fire has nothing to do with the wiring involved but it often gets blamed

Now, if you want to complain about 50 year old code compliant over current protection not doing it's job anymore that's another matter, but the failure isn't from minimum code compliance.

If you want to complain about screws on receptacles and switches not being tightened within the torque limits, or loose wire nuts or other connectors, jump in. However, this ISN"T code compliant wiring.

Finally, who's crystal ball are you using to figure out which window will get the future A/C unit. Are you suggesting every window needs to be equipped with a dedicated circuit?

Originally Posted by Norman Ellis

placing a GFI receptacle down stream of a GFI is not a code violation, but when you compare the cost of a gfi receptacle to a 20 amp rated duplex receptacle it is a costly and ineficient installation.

Norman,

That's not what is being discussed here - there are already two GFCI receptacles installed, so the consideration is re-wiring one (cost is quite little here) or removing and replacing an existing GFCI receptacle with a non-GFCI receptacle, and this would cost more.

Then there is the convenience factor cost which one should factor in when installing a non-GFCI receptacle outlet versus a GFCI receptacle outlet in the first place - $$$$ is not the only consideration. As such, EVERY receptacle in my house which is required to have GFCI protection is a GFCI protected receptacle outlet, the convenience cost factor far out-weighed the $$$ cost factor ... even in our master bath when the receptacle outlets are 6 feet apart at the lavatories - both are GFCI receptacles outlets, as are each receptacle which serves the countertop ... all are GFCI receptacle outlets.

Many people, including many people on this thread, give no consideration to the value of convenience.

Believe it or not, there are also people on this forum who give no consideration to the value of common sense.

Darrel Hood
DILIGENT PROPERTY SERVICES

Originally Posted by James Duffin

I'm wondering if you consider this a repair item? I forget to put in my previous post that I do put it down as needing repair for the reason you just stated....it's confusing.

I don't consider that a defect but more of an inconvenience. The repair is pretty easy though, as others have noted.

The newest combination GFCI receptacles have self-diagnosing features and end-of-life (ability to provide GFCI protection) features. Some Mfg's have designed (last two revisions of the standard(s)) their devices to lock-out or to NOT reset, even if the DOWNSTREAM (load side) are in question.Vintage of the device(s) are important. Granted "old style" would indicate the Right side as Nick described would be wired off the Load Side protection of the Left side of the sink's "outlet", however, it could be the reverse, Depending on the vintage of the units (ex. the Left side is older (pre 03) mfg and the Right side is newer or rewest standard, also depending on the Manufacturer - some offered/offer different design solutions).The self-diagnosing/self-test - end-of-life features the standard now requires, are accomplished differently by different manufacturers.2-wire configurations w/o ground being tested with a "tester" can also produce interesting results, as can testing with non-polarized devices plugged in elsewhere upon the circuit (esp. if there is an issue with same).Lots of assuming going on with this thread - and those assumptions not being stated by those making them. Older residences with multitudes of revisions, changes, repairs, exchanges, replacements can have a multitude of variables. Varying "generations" of devices and especially of differing manufacturers, can have a multitude of distinctively different "behaviors" when combined properly, or improperly, upon wiring of questionable integrity or design.The NEC is not a design manual.

ok! In order for a GFCI receptacle to work properly it must sence a difference in current between the source(hot side) and the neutral (return/grounded conductor / circuit closing side) to trip out the receptacle. so whether you have one or ten gfi's on a circuit is not the point. GFI receptacle cost $17-$20 dollars, a quality duplex receptacle cost $2-$2.50. line and load on a GFCI is to protect the circuit down stream the same as at the point of the GFCI receptacle. the type of installation we are talking about; is it to code, proper, exceeding code, and so on. My point is three people are electrocuted every week in their home and alot of them are from miss wired not improper installation, faulty electrical devices, and unsafe acts while working on some/with electrical device. 2 GFI's installed next to each other is a sign of a person with lack of electrical knowledge doing electrical work. I would report it as a safety issue, because if the load side gfi trips the client could think the power is off and be exposed to electricity. and needs to be properly re wired or replaced to a proper installation with a duplex receptacle down stream from the load side of the GFI.

With your electrical safety in mind
Norman W. Ellis /Founder
Safe Home Energy LLC. Inspections, Consulting & Service

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Norman,

That's not what is being discussed here - there are already two GFCI receptacles installed, so the consideration is re-wiring one (cost is quite little here) or removing and replacing an existing GFCI receptacle with a non-GFCI receptacle, and this would cost more.

Then there is the convenience factor cost which one should factor in when installing a non-GFCI receptacle outlet versus a GFCI receptacle outlet in the first place - $$$$ is not the only consideration. As such, EVERY receptacle in my house which is required to have GFCI protection is a GFCI protected receptacle outlet, the convenience cost factor far out-weighed the $$$ cost factor ... even in our master bath when the receptacle outlets are 6 feet apart at the lavatories - both are GFCI receptacles outlets, as are each receptacle which serves the countertop ... all are GFCI receptacle outlets.

Many people, including many people on this thread, give no consideration to the value of convenience.

Originally Posted by Norman Ellis

2 GFI's installed next to each other is a sign of a person with lack of electrical knowledge doing electrical work. I would report it as a safety issue,

That statement in and of itself would indicate a lack of electrical experience ... except that I know from your posts that is not the case.

Two GFCI receptacles next to each other is indicative of an electrical contractor or builder who cares about the wants, needs, and conveniences of their client.

Now, what I think you meant to say was two GFCI receptacles outlets, with one wire feed-through from the previous GFCI receptacle outlet, that is an indication of inexperience in electrical work - and that MAY be correct, or it MAY NOT be correct as it may have been an experience electrician who was distracted by someone when they were installing the GFCI - maybe even their client for whom they were installing the GFCIs.

So of the assumptions jumped to by persons in this thread are absurd in that no consideration is given (no consideration SEEMS to be given) to anything other than what THEY THEMSELVES would do, and that is a sign of inexperience in and of itself as experience leads one to have a more open mind, one which is open to the ideas of others.

"...experience leads one to have a more open mind, one which is open to the ideas of others."

Jerry
Maybe you should make that your signature line

Originally Posted by Matthew Steger

I don't consider that a defect but more of an inconvenience. The repair is pretty easy though, as others have noted.

If a homeowner has to "know and remember" that for GFCI "A" to be reset... GFCI "B" has to be reset first ....it is a problem that needs to be repaired. Resetting a GFCI receptacle should be a no-brainier.

That I agree with, however, when "repairing" you cannot feed through the combination device - you must pigtail A and the continuation of the unprotected circuit. You are allowed to have additional outlets on the load side of A as well.That, of course, was the point, as such devices are not tested for feed-through except at the last outlet.Ken got it, way back; as Mark chimed in. Bill got tangled up regards someone's mis-citation as to paragraph numbering in the White Book.Best leave DESIGNED solutions to those qualified to do so. The NEC is NOT a design guide. HIs do not or rather should not prescribe designed changes to an electrical system, or a circuit path; neither do they trouble-shoot electrical problems.Observe, report, and refer/defer to a qualified licensed electrical contractor.

Originally Posted by H.G. Watson, Sr.

Best leave DESIGNED solutions to those qualified to do so.

Funny YOU would be the one to say that. You can't even keep straight what you say in the same thread, let alone from one thread to the next.

Originally Posted by Bill Kriegh

OK Watson. Have it your way. Your post I commented on and asked about doesn't say anything about multi-outlet circuits and concerns multi-wire circuits. Your post does not describe prohibited wiring methods. All of this is somehow related to feed through/pass through ratings on a GFCI receptacle installed on a multi-outlet circuit. Pigtailing is required on multi outlet circuits because a GFCI receptacle interrupts the neutral and that's not OK. You didn't drag in info in multiple posts to comment on a question I had about YOUR inclusion of a paragraph on a miswired device. You assume that the OP has a multi-wire circuit with no evidence for same.

Is THAT what you said?

Sorry for the confusion.

I think the major malfunction we have here is the total lack of a "WATSON to the REST OF THE WORLD, AFTER THE FACT" translation guide.

Ah YEAH it did, that is EXACTLY what the topic was (multi-outlet branch circuits, with a combination GFCI/receptacle device line side of last outlet)it said - you even quoted it, with the phrase "multi-outlet" underlined and bolded! By the way, you quoted my post you commented on in post #52 in this discussion. You seem to get yourself lost in any long discussion!

I honestly believe you don't know what a multi-outlet branch circuit is, or the difference between a multi-wire branch circuit which may or may not be a multi-outlet branch circuit as well. A circuit with more than one outlet (place where electricity can be worked, not just a convenience receptacle) is a multi-outlet circuit!

As far as your attempts at re-writing what I did or did not say, they demonstrate your inability to understand. I quoted the White Book, and the UL Category Code(s) and refered you to the LISTING STANDARDS. Try reading them, or get someone to read them to you, or explain them to you. THEY HAVE INFACT CHANGED OVER THE YEARS.

Neutral continuity throughout circuits and requirements have changed in the 2011. You are for example now required to run one to switch outlets as well. You are now required to maintain ready access to all self-test and resets GFCI, AFCI, devices as well. No more hiding a combination device or dead-front behind furniture, case goods, or installed-in-place appliances, or up at ceilings of garages for that garage door opener, etc.

Originally Posted by H.G. Watson, Sr.

Ah YEAH it did, that is EXACTLY what the topic was (multi-outlet branch circuits, with a combination GFCI/receptacle device line side of last outlet)it said - you even quoted it, with the phrase "multi-outlet" underlined and bolded! By the way, you quoted my post you commented on in post #52 in this discussion. You seem to get yourself lost in any long discussion!

I honestly believe you don't know what a multi-outlet branch circuit is, or the difference between a multi-wire branch circuit which may or may not be a multi-outlet branch circuit as well. A circuit with more than one outlet (place where electricity can be worked, not just a convenience receptacle) is a multi-outlet circuit!

As far as your attempts at re-writing what I did or did not say, they demonstrate your inability to understand. I quoted the White Book, and the UL Category Code(s) and refered you to the LISTING STANDARDS. Try reading them, or get someone to read them to you, or explain them to you. THEY HAVE INFACT CHANGED OVER THE YEARS.

Neutral continuity throughout circuits and requirements have changed in the 2011. You are for example now required to run one to switch outlets as well. You are now required to maintain ready access to all self-test and resets GFCI, AFCI, devices as well. No more hiding a combination device or dead-front behind furniture, case goods, or installed-in-place appliances, or up at ceilings of garages for that garage door opener, etc.

And now you are assuming you think you know which of many instances of your inconsistencies I was referring to. I must say, where there is an opportunity to insert your foot in your mouth and chew you don't often miss it.

This is to all reading this thread!
I have thirty years in the electrical trade working in several states and will be the first to say I don't know everything about it (I'm a Certified I.B.E.W. inside wireman, I cover all aspects of the electrical trade; Heavy industrial, Marine industrial, light industrail, commercial, residential). I have yet walked onto a job without learning something about new equipment coming on the market, states adopting parts of NEC code or taking upgrade classes. as most of my International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (I.B.E.W.) or Electricians of Associated contracting builders (ABC).

But what I do have THAT MOST DO NOT is three years of research and history from Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), United States Fire Administration (USFA) National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Electrical Safety Foundation International (ESFI) and other independent researchers of residential electrical fires and accidents. And I have traced causes to these cases recorded and established them to what type of circuit installation, what area of circuit, materials/equipment used, most common usage by the home/property owner and how they come to be electrical issues or safety concerns/hazards.

I can not tell you how many times I have received a service call by homeowners less than 3 years into their new/used home finding electrical issues missed by home inspections, This is why I became a home inspector. to help provide information from an experienced electrician with vast knowledge in electrical theory, code requirements and research knowledge to causes of electrical issues in the residential region.

Not trying to bloody noses or challange anyone, just trying to help those that want to help their clients purchase a safe electrical environment while they occupy their home.

A GFI receptacle being fed down stream from a GFI load side can cause a safety issue and should be corrected with a PROPER installation or repair on that circuit.

I'll say it again over 5,000 people are directly effected by electricity in the home every year by loss of life/injury, 455,000 homes are damaged or loss from fires caused by electricity from known or unknown point of ignition. This equals 38 electrical fires an hour in the residential region, 53% are caused by the home owner, 47% by faulty installation/remodel/repair by handyman, self do'rs or untrained electricians. 40% are in homes 30 years or older, 20%
by remodel/handyman repairs, 15% by defective equipment, 30% by deterioration of the electrical service and so on.

Alot of these fires or accidents can be prevented if people would just understand you are dealing with an energysource that works on a potential theory that can and will travel outside its designated path, and not just something that is there to be used till something goes wrong.

With your electrical safety in mind
Norman W. Ellis
Founder
Safe Home Energy LLC. Inspections, Consulting & Service
www.safehomeenrgy.com

Originally Posted by Norman Ellis

ok! In order for a GFCI receptacle to work properly it must sence a difference in current between the source(hot side) and the neutral (return/grounded conductor / circuit closing side) to trip out the receptacle. so whether you have one or ten gfi's on a circuit is not the point. GFI receptacle cost $17-$20 dollars, a quality duplex receptacle cost $2-$2.50. line and load on a GFCI is to protect the circuit down stream the same as at the point of the GFCI receptacle. the type of installation we are talking about; is it to code, proper, exceeding code, and so on. My point is three people are electrocuted every week in their home and alot of them are from miss wired not improper installation, faulty electrical devices, and unsafe acts while working on some/with electrical device. 2 GFI's installed next to each other is a sign of a person with lack of electrical knowledge doing electrical work. I would report it as a safety issue, because if the load side gfi trips the client could think the power is off and be exposed to electricity. and needs to be properly re wired or replaced to a proper installation with a duplex receptacle down stream from the load side of the GFI.

With your electrical safety in mind
Norman W. Ellis /Founder
Safe Home Energy LLC. Inspections, Consulting & Service

Wait, Wait, Wait. Let me go ask the little old lady down the street, what her oppinion is, she might know! L.O.L. Just Kidding.

George! would you get me a pie from her, I like home made pie!

Originally Posted by George Hallaron

Wait, Wait, Wait. Let me go ask the little old lady down the street, what her oppinion is, she might know! L.O.L. Just Kidding.

Originally Posted by Norman Ellis

George! would you get me a pie from her, I like home made pie!

Norman, apple or cherry?

A wise Master Electrician once told me years ago and I quote; "KEEP IT SIMPLE STUPID"!

Just food for thaught.

Neutral continuity throughout circuits and requirements have changed in the 2011. You are for example now required to run one to switch outlets as well.

Neutral continuity, without a device as the splice point, has not changed. It is still only required on multiwire branch circuits.

As far as the neutral at the switch HG is only partially correct. The neutral is only required if both sides of the wall are enclosed and a cable is used. A neutral is not required to be run in a conduit system that has room for the additional conductor or if access is available to run another cable at a later date.

I like apple pie. The term (K.I.S.S.) keep it simple stupid is a working phrase, but simple to some could mean some pretty ugly work.

Originally Posted by George Hallaron

Norman, apple or cherry?

A wise Master Electrician once told me years ago and I quote; "KEEP IT SIMPLE STUPID"!

Just food for thaught.