Thread: GFCI circuit question

Both bathrooms, upper and lower level, are on the same circuit.
I do not know if that circuit goes to other outlets and switches in the home other than the two bathrooms.

That being said.
1: Second floor bathroom. When the GFCI on the second floor upper bathroom is tripped it shuts off all power, including venting and lights, and disables/trips the GFCI in the lower bathroom.

a. The GFCI's are slaved.
b. The first floor bathroom circuit is upstream of the second floor bathroom circuit. I presume. I do not like being in a presumptive situation.

2: First floor bathroom/powderroom. When the first floor bathroom GFCI is tripped it does not affect the electrical circuit on the second floor bathroom.

3: To reset the Second floor bathroom GFCI and restore power to the circuit you must reset the GFCI in the bathroom on the first level.

This leaves several questions that can be hypothesized later but for now, are there any electrical infractions by setting up a circuit like this?

Thank you for your time.

Similar Threads:

• Testing GFCI when food freezer is connected to GFCI circuit
• GFCI protected circuit
• AFCI and GFCI downstream in same circuit??
• Refrigerator on GFCI circuit
• GFCI circuit servicing two or more rooms

Nothing done wrong, not really - was something done without using common sense? Yes,

Per your description, the circuit feeds the upstairs bathroom first (which is unusual and costs more if the panel is downstairs as it typically would be), then feeds the downstairs bathroom.

The simple solution, and it is simple, would be to re-wire the upstairs bathroom GFCI receptacle outlet from 'feed-through' to 'by-pass'. I.e., the upstairs bathroom GFCI has its 'Line' side connected to the circuit ('line') coming in, and this is correct, however, the circuit to the downstairs bathroom GFCI is connected to the 'Load' side of the upstairs bathroom GFCI ... if the circuit to the downstairs GFCI was re-wired from the upstairs bathroom GFCI 'Load' side to its 'Line' side, then that upstairs bathroom GFCI would not affect the downstairs bathroom circuit.

Each bathroom would have its own GFCI which could be reset in that bathroom - a common sense and convenient way to wire them. All code requires is that the receptacles be GFCI protected, and leaves it to the person doing the wiring as to how they do it.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Nothing done wrong, not really - was something done without using common sense? Yes,

Per your description, the circuit feeds the upstairs bathroom first (which is unusual and costs more if the panel is downstairs as it typically would be), then feeds the downstairs bathroom.

The simple solution, and it is simple, would be to re-wire the upstairs bathroom GFCI receptacle outlet from 'feed-through' to 'by-pass'. I.e., the upstairs bathroom GFCI has its 'Line' side connected to the circuit ('line') coming in, and this is correct, however, the circuit to the downstairs bathroom GFCI is connected to the 'Load' side of the upstairs bathroom GFCI ... if the circuit to the downstairs GFCI was re-wired from the upstairs bathroom GFCI 'Load' side to its 'Line' side, then that upstairs bathroom GFCI would not affect the downstairs bathroom circuit.

Each bathroom would have its own GFCI which could be reset in that bathroom - a common sense and convenient way to wire them. All code requires is that the receptacles be GFCI protected, and leaves it to the person doing the wiring as to how they do it.

As always, much thanks.

Originally Posted by ROBERT YOUNG

for now, are there any electrical infractions by setting up a circuit like this?

Thank you for your time.

Most likely, but not necessarily in what you've described.

If anything but the bathroom RECEPTACLES is on the circuit, it's a violation. Any kind of outlet other than in the bathrooms, any bathroom lighting outlets, fans, . . . . NEC Section 210.11(C)(3) (formerly part of 210.52, I believe), as its exception (which appeared in the 1999 Code) does not apply.

Originally Posted by david shapiro

Most likely, but not necessarily in what you've described.

If anything but the bathroom RECEPTACLES is on the circuit, it's a violation. Any kind of outlet other than in the bathrooms, any bathroom lighting outlets, fans, . . . . NEC Section 210.11(C)(3) (formerly part of 210.52, I believe), as its exception (which appeared in the 1999 Code) does not apply.

Hi, David!
I concur.
If I had time I would trace the circuit back to the panel breaker but there was much to inspect.

I recommended an electrician.
Bunched wiring and clearance could have been easily avoided.
The GEC ran for 40 feet and could have easily reduced to 10 feet along the floor joists to the main water pipe. A rear head scratched.
The way the bathroom GFCI's are slaved uses extra cable.

Here is an image of the GEC water pipe connection and bunched wires just before the service breaker panel.
GEC.JPGbunched wires.JPG

Originally Posted by ROBERT YOUNG

The GEC ran for 40 feet and could have easily reduced to 10 feet along the floor joists to the main water pipe. A rear head scratched.
.
Here is an image of the GEC water pipe connection and bunched wires just before the service breaker panel.

GEC or interior metal water piping bond?

Originally Posted by ROBERT YOUNG

Both bathrooms, upper and lower level, are on the same circuit.
I do not know if that circuit goes to other outlets and switches in the home other than the two bathrooms.

That being said.
1: Second floor bathroom. When the GFCI on the second floor upper bathroom is tripped it shuts off all power, including venting and lights, and disables/trips the GFCI in the lower bathroom.

a. The GFCI's are slaved.
b. The first floor bathroom circuit is upstream of the second floor bathroom circuit. I presume. I do not like being in a presumptive situation.

2: First floor bathroom/powderroom. When the first floor bathroom GFCI is tripped it does not affect the electrical circuit on the second floor bathroom.

3: To reset the Second floor bathroom GFCI and restore power to the circuit you must reset the GFCI in the bathroom on the first level.

This leaves several questions that can be hypothesized later but for now, are there any electrical infractions by setting up a circuit like this?

Thank you for your time.

If the local and CNC codes follow the NEC 210.11(C)(3), then this is a code infraction regardless of common sense or opinion. Reason, both GFCI receptacles are exceeding the BC 80% rating for cord and plug connected equipment NFIP requirement of 210.23(A)(1) and (A)(2)

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

GEC or interior metal water piping bond?

If I am not mistaken, but will refresh my memory, the equipment bonding conductor, usually also used as the equipment earthing conductor, is the main water service pipe.
The GEC connection must be within 5' feet from the point of entry, where the pipe goes into the earth/ground.
Metal water pipe used as grounding electrode.

A grounding electrode conductor (GEC), the grounding cable, connects one leg of an electrical system to one or more earth-electrodes. In this case it is the water pipe.

Originally Posted by ROBERT YOUNG

If I am not mistaken, but will refresh my memory, the equipment bonding conductor, usually also used as the equipment earthing conductor, is the main water service pipe.
The GEC connection must be within 5' feet from the point of entry, where the pipe goes into the earth/ground.
Metal water pipe used as grounding electrode.

A grounding electrode conductor (GEC), the grounding cable, connects one leg of an electrical system to one or more earth-electrodes. In this case it is the water pipe.

Please note that an equipment grounding conductor (EGC) is solely used for equipment ground bonding back to the main service disconnect grounding bus and is not to be connected to a water pipe as a GEC. See NEC Article 250 Part VI.

Originally Posted by Ben Jacks

Please note that an equipment grounding conductor (EGC) is solely used for equipment ground bonding back to the main service disconnect grounding bus and is not to be connected to a water pipe as a GEC. See NEC Article 250 Part VI.

An egc does not need to go back to the service disconnect.

- - - Updated - - -

Originally Posted by Ben Jacks

If the local and CNC codes follow the NEC 210.11(C)(3), then this is a code infraction regardless of common sense or opinion. Reason, both GFCI receptacles are exceeding the BC 80% rating for cord and plug connected equipment NFIP requirement of 210.23(A)(1) and (A)(2)

Could you please say this without all the acronyms? Can you please tell us how a receptacle adds a load to the circuit?

Originally Posted by Jim Port

An egc does not need to go back to the service disconnect.

I agree on commercial, but on NM BC's it is required.

Originally Posted by Jim Port

An egc does not need to go back to the service disconnect.

- - - Updated - - -



Could you please say this without all the acronyms? Can you please tell us how a receptacle adds a load to the circuit?

You think they are preparing an amendment to the alphabet to facilitate future acronyms?

The term egc did throw me off somewhat.
Time to get more informed.
Thanks, Jim.

Originally Posted by Ben Jacks

I agree on commercial, but on NM BC's it is required.

Why would the egc need to go to the service disconnect if the circuit does not originate there? Can you cite the code for this?

Originally Posted by Ben Jacks

If the local and CNC codes follow the NEC 210.11(C)(3), then this is a code infraction regardless of common sense or opinion. Reason, both GFCI receptacles are exceeding the BC 80% rating for cord and plug connected equipment NFIP requirement of 210.23(A)(1) and (A)(2)

Ben,

So if I plug my razor into into one bathroom receptacle outlet to charge it, and plug my Water-Pik into another receptacle outlet, that is somehow exceeding 80% of the branch circuit capacity and is a violation of 210.23.(A)(1)?

That would mean that the entire premise of 210.23 Permissible Loads, Multiple-Outlet Branch Circuits is ... well prohibited because multiple-outlets provides the possibility for more than one load and each load could exceed 80% of the branch circuit rating ... you are not making sense there as the premise of 210.23 is stated as being "Multiple-Outlet" branch circuits.

Combine that with 210.11(C)(3), which states "at least one" is required (meaning that there is nothing wrong with "more than one").

Seems that you have lost both Jim P. and myself with that post.

Originally Posted by Ben Jacks

Please note that an equipment grounding conductor (EGC) is solely used for equipment ground bonding back to the main service disconnect grounding bus and is not to be connected to a water pipe as a GEC. See NEC Article 250 Part VI.

Ben, you switched a presumption around from what was stated - and thus may not be applicable.

Originally Posted by Jim Port

An egc does not need to go back to the service disconnect.

Jim, don't all EGC eventually 'go back to the service equipment? Am I missing something there?

Everything is bonded to the EGC and, through all of its connections and interconnections, finds its way back to the service equipment where the grounded conductor is bonded to that ground connection.

Originally Posted by Jim Port

An egc does not need to go back to the service disconnect.

- - - Updated - - -
Did I forget to mention service disconnect "grounding bus"? Relative to the post, my replies are for a home inspection reference. The NM cable BC requires the EGC to route back to the main service disconnect grounding bus even if the routing is through a sub panel feeder unless this dwelling is conduited per Chicago AHJ specs.

Could you please say this without all the acronyms? Can you please tell us how a receptacle adds a load to the circuit?

EGC= Equipment Grounding Conductor, BC= Branch Circuit, NFIP= Not Fastened In Place
GEC= Grounding Electrode Conductor Pls let me know if there are any I might have missed?

Jim,
Please refer to the NEC Article/sections listed for explanations of AHJ adopted regulations. I can
give a layman's explanation of the code intent but there is a reason that is more accurate to follow Casey Stengal's old mantra, "it's in the book".

Sorry I forget that this is not an electrical code forum for giving reasons to read the NEC code terminology for better understanding rather than giving a context of interpretation. I write and publish electrical books from construction experience. Referencing a library of technical code and construction references is intensive. I want to help but find little time to do so. Forgive me for seeming so terse.

Ben

It sounded like Ben was saying the egc needed to originate at the service, not the panel where the circuit originates.

Any fault current would eventually find it's way back to the service and the neutral to ground bond at the service.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Ben,

So if I plug my razor into into one bathroom receptacle outlet to charge it, and plug my Water-Pik into another receptacle outlet, that is somehow exceeding 80% of the branch circuit capacity and is a violation of 210.23.(A)(1)?

That would mean that the entire premise of 210.23 Permissible Loads, Multiple-Outlet Branch Circuits is ... well prohibited because multiple-outlets provides the possibility for more than one load and each load could exceed 80% of the branch circuit rating ... you are not making sense there as the premise of 210.23 is stated as being "Multiple-Outlet" branch circuits.

Combine that with 210.11(C)(3), which states "at least one" is required (meaning that there is nothing wrong with "more than one").

Seems that you have lost both Jim P. and myself with that post.

Jerry,
The NEC code if adopted is the rule. Shoot the messenger and who will deliver the letter?

Ben, you make these assertions and then say you are too busy to back them up. Certainly doesn't help your case, nor does it add any chance to educate.

The NEC is not going g to have any local amendments from an AHJ .

Originally Posted by Ben Jacks

Jerry,
The NEC code if adopted is the rule. Shoot the messenger and who will deliver the letter?

Ben,

I am reading the code, and it does not state what the messenger stated it did.

Not shooting the messenger, just trying to make sure the messenger is reading out of the same code book as I am and not using a decoder ring I don't have.

- - - Updated - - -

Originally Posted by Ben Jacks

Jerry,
The NEC code if adopted is the rule. Shoot the messenger and who will deliver the letter?

Ben,

I am reading the code, and it does not state what the messenger stated it did.

Not shooting the messenger, just trying to make sure the messenger is reading out of the same code book as I am and not using a decoder ring I don't have.

Originally Posted by Jim Port

Ben, you make these assertions and then say you are too busy to back them up. Certainly doesn't help your case, nor does it add any chance to educate.

Please, read the book and I will answer pertinent questions to help understand why two different bathrooms can not be on the same BC if one of the bathrooms has utilization equipment wired into the same dedicated GFCI BC. Any code cycle back to 2002 will be the same for the related codes to 210.8 GFCI installations. Include the AFCI 210.12 for the latest 2017 dual function requirements and wonder why contractors have nuisance tripping of these protection devices and blame it on the manufacturers. I spend time consulting with project contractors explaining why their inspections get red tagged. Rationalization does not meet codes. I see this all the time.
Thanks for your help. Pick up the book.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Ben,

I am reading the code, and it does not state what the messenger stated it did.

Not shooting the messenger, just trying to make sure the messenger is reading out of the same code book as I am and not using a decoder ring I don't have.

- - - Updated - - -



Ben,

I am reading the code, and it does not state what the messenger stated it did.

Not shooting the messenger, just trying to make sure the messenger is reading out of the same code book as I am and not using a decoder ring I don't have.

Jerry,
Get serious. Read again 210.11(C)(3) and tell everyone on this forum what you interpret.

Originally Posted by Jim Port

Why would the egc need to go to the service disconnect if the circuit does not originate there? Can you cite the code for this?

A circuit originates at the power source as does the service point grounding impedance to all equipment bonding in the grounding system. 250.4(A)(3) Grounded systems

Originally Posted by ROBERT YOUNG

You think they are preparing an amendment to the alphabet to facilitate future acronyms?

The term egc did throw me off somewhat.
Time to get more informed.
Thanks, Jim.

Robert,
I hope you find a good source for electrical reference. The information that came from inputs to your post can be misleading or create liability if used for your concluding inspection reports. I would also highly recommend that any suggestions on how to fix the problems recommended here not be passed on to the client other than suggesting consulting a licensed electrical contractor.

God Bless,

Ben

Originally Posted by Ben Jacks

Robert,
I hope you find a good source for electrical reference. The information that came from inputs to your post can be misleading or create liability if used for your concluding inspection reports. I would also highly recommend that any suggestions on how to fix the problems recommended here not be passed on to the client other than suggesting consulting a licensed electrical contractor.

God Bless,

Ben

EGC= Equipment Grounding Conductor, BC= Branch Circuit, NFIP= Not Fastened In Place
GEC= Grounding Electrode Conductor Plus let me know if there are any I might have missed?

Ben, thank you. looks like you covered everything.
I was referring to the Equipment Grounding Conductor (EGC) and mistakenly wrote (GEC).

To answer your informational source question.: CEC, NEC, Mick Holt and yes the gang here.

Not to worry about reports. Sort condition narratives in my report: "When the GFCI on the second floor upper bathroom is tripped it shuts off all power, including venting and lights, and disables/trips the GFCI in the lower bathroom."
Recommend: Qualified electrician.

That being said. You read the post:-)

I was just covering 20 amp replicates and GFIC's amendments due to this post.

Ben, I am not afraid to answer and make mistakes along the way. All part of learning.
Bloody shame if you think only right answers count on MB,s.

You men have years/life-times in the this highly specialized trade under your belts. Always fun waiting for the first short circuit or breaker trip when posts develop beyond what was written.

Although I know a bit, I try to learn a bit more every day.

God bless.

Robert,

Since you are located in Quebec it leads me to ask why you are relying on NEC info rather than Canadian Electrical Code? I am sure there maybe similarities, but I trust you quote the Canadian equivalent and not the NEC code in your reports, if you do in fact sight code references?

Just saying.

Best,

Originally Posted by Ben Jacks

A circuit originates at the power source as does the service point grounding impedance to all equipment bonding in the grounding system. 250.4(A)(3) Grounded systems

So you think all circuits originate at the service instead of the actual panel they are fed from? That is a quite convoluted logic.

- - - Updated - - -

Originally Posted by Ben Jacks

A circuit originates at the power source as does the service point grounding impedance to all equipment bonding in the grounding system. 250.4(A)(3) Grounded systems

So you think all circuits originate at the service instead of the actual panel they are fed from? That is a quite convoluted logic.

Ben,

Where does a branch circuit originate? Let everyone on this forum know.

I know the answer, checking to see if you do.

Originally Posted by Raymond Wand

Robert,

Since you are located in Quebec it leads me to ask why you are relying on NEC info rather than Canadian Electrical Code? I am sure there maybe similarities, but I trust you quote the Canadian equivalent and not the NEC code in your reports, if you do in fact sight code references?

Just saying.

Best,

No, I am replying for information as a comparison for similarities.
Not much info for Canadian code on MB's.
Just say'en.

Quebec is amending a provincial code..
For the most part NBCC is utilized.
Completion date is April 2017.

I have the 2009 CEC for residential homes.I will post the comparison.

Originally Posted by Ben Jacks

If the local and CNC codes follow the NEC 210.11(C)(3), then this is a code infraction regardless of common sense or opinion. Reason, both GFCI receptacles are exceeding the BC 80% rating for cord and plug connected equipment NFIP requirement of 210.23(A)(1) and (A)(2)

You have still failed to provide a reason of how a receptacle could exceed the 80% rating. The receptacle only allows the connection of equipment. Could not the same condition happen on any branch circuit?

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Ben,

Where does a branch circuit originate? Let everyone on this forum know.

I know the answer, checking to see if you do.

Every one who read my post 23 already knows but to save time please note that a branch circuit can originate from the main service panelboard or a sub-panel. Also read my statement that "the circuit originates from the power source."
Jerry,
Would you also "again read 210.11(C)(3) and give interpretation to the forum" as I suggested? It could be possible that forum participants can help eliminate any confusion about what you stated in your post that describes a wiring fix "bypass" of the a GFCI receptacle on the common branch circuit. GFCI receptacle protection in the two bathrooms with utilization equipment on the same branch circuit might be a learning moment here. Is that a compliant method for implementing the NEC Article mentioned above?

Originally Posted by Jim Port

You have still failed to provide a reason of how a receptacle could exceed the 80% rating. The receptacle only allows the connection of equipment. Could not the same condition happen on any branch circuit?

Jim,
The question you ask about a receptacle also includes the complete Branch Circuit that contains the interconnected total 80% load limit as the code delegates and is supported by the 210.23(A) note Exception mentioning 210.11(C)(3) as "such circuits shall have no other outlets" as far as the two bathrooms GFCI protection receptacle outlets for the common BC in question.

Also note to that my post 23 reads "the circuit originates from the power source"...not BC source.

I hope this helps. Gotta get back to work. Ciao.

Originally Posted by Ben Jacks

Every one who read my post 22 already knows but to save time please note that a branch circuit can originate from the main service panelboard or a sub-panel. Also read my statement that "the circuit originates from the power source."

But in Post #23 you said,

A circuit originates at the power source as does the service point grounding impedance to all equipment bonding in the grounding system. 250.4(A)(3) Grounded systems

A non-service, AKA subpanel, is not the same as the service panel where the bonding takes place for the service point. Care to explain the flip flop?



210.11 states the bathroom circuit can only serve one bathroom if it supplies loads outside of receptacles. You are correct, but for the wrong reasons.

I am still waiting for you to explain why a non-metallic fed branch circuit needs to have the egc go all the way back to the service.

Remember this?

I agree on commercial, but on NM BC's it is required.

Originally Posted by Jim Port

But in Post #23 you said,



[/COLOR]A non-service, AKA subpanel, is not the same as the service panel where the bonding takes place for the service point. Care to explain the flip flop?



210.11 states the bathroom circuit can only serve one bathroom if it supplies loads outside of receptacles. You are correct, but for the wrong reasons.
Remember this? [/COLOR]

I am still waiting for you to explain why a non-metallic fed branch circuit needs to have the egc go all the way back to the service.

Jim,
As you and I know that a loose termination at the service point or anywhere in a conductor run will cause a malfunction in a panelboard or sub-panel whether the overall feeder contains an SE or NM cable types used in a series path. The system path back to the power source is being overlooked in your questions about system bonding ...."establishing an effective ground-fault current path."

I suspect the "wrong reasons" comment might stem from a few of my quotes being misread and you replied with misquotes. Maybe that could be comprehensively why you mention "flip flops" on subpanels that comprise a system bonding part of "establishing an effective ground-fault current path" back to the source. 250.4(A)(3) for grounded systems.
I hope that was the misunderstanding. Have a great day.

I see these circuits all the time. Townhomes with finished basements typically have baths on all floors slaved to one GFCI.

The only thing I ever call out is when the GFCI is actually in the basement or first floor bath. I simply point out that it is easier to reset if it is in the master bath and that could be easily accomplished.

Don't see GFCIs actually trip in use that often.

Originally Posted by Bob Kenney

I see these circuits all the time. Townhomes with finished basements typically have baths on all floors slaved to one GFCI.

The only thing I ever call out is when the GFCI is actually in the basement or first floor bath. I simply point out that it is easier to reset if it is in the master bath and that could be easily accomplished.

Don't see GFCIs actually trip in use that often.

Good observation Bob,
Another thought in considering high end construction amenities, one clever way to eliminate tripping out all three bathroom receptacles simultaneously is to parallel a GFCI in each bathroom off the dedicated branch circuit back to the AFCI breaker. (2014 NEC 210.12 protection requirement)

This is code compliant up to the point of the having a maximum 70 foot total conductor length requirement for the 20 amp circuit. (No FIP utilization equipment on circuit)

Originally Posted by Ben Jacks

Every one who read my post 23 already knows but to save time please note that a branch circuit can originate from the main service panelboard or a sub-panel. Also read my statement that "the circuit originates from the power source."
Jerry,
Would you also "again read 210.11(C)(3) and give interpretation to the forum" as I suggested? It could be possible that forum participants can help eliminate any confusion about what you stated in your post that describes a wiring fix "bypass" of the a GFCI receptacle on the common branch circuit. GFCI receptacle protection in the two bathrooms with utilization equipment on the same branch circuit might be a learning moment here. Is that a compliant method for implementing the NEC Article mentioned above?

Still using my phone (still no power) - Ben, a branch circuit originates at the last overcurrent device.

Originally Posted by Ben Jacks

This is code compliant up to the point of the having a maximum 70 foot total conductor length requirement for the 20 amp circuit. (No FIP utilization equipment on circuit)

Where do you get this requirement from? It is not in the NEC.

Some of these post are starting to sound like a former member.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Still using my phone (still no power) - Ben, a branch circuit originates at the last overcurrent device.

Jerry,
I think you are not grasping the context of the EGC discussion and not reading the related Articles and posts explanation of the original subject concerning erroneous GFCI statements you made to Robert's original post. Please understand the difference of using terminology when referring to branch circuits and when describing circuits concerning EGCs back to the power source when discussing SYSTEM CIRCUIT bonding that does not stop at a breaker. Neutral and EGCs do not go through a disconnect device. I believe Jim has asked relevant questions and he has gotten a substantial informative reason from the 250.4(A) reference I gave him.
The response you have just made is your wording in a different way but not exactly what I explained in my post that you are responding too.

Read the statement again as it relates to "the circuit originates from the power source" that can be to a main panelboard or via a feeder to a subpanel. The circuit neutral and EGC still goes to the power source. Take a look at the response I gave to Jim that also relates to NM bonding.
Glad that you have survived the hurricane.

Originally Posted by Jim Port

Where do you get this requirement from? It is not in the NEC.

Some of these post are starting to sound like a former member.

Jim,
You are going to owe me a beer on this answer. Read the paragraph above the reply segment for the AFCI 2014 code [210.12] protection and lengths for 14 and 12 awg conductors required. Hey, I am beginning to enjoy helping out. Were you caught up in the same hurricane Jerry was in?

Ps. Who is the former member?

Originally Posted by Ben Jacks

Good observation Bob,
Another thought in considering high end construction amenities, one clever way to eliminate tripping out all three bathroom receptacles simultaneously is to parallel a GFCI in each bathroom off the dedicated branch circuit back to the AFCI breaker. (2014 NEC 210.12 protection requirement)

This is code compliant up to the point of the having a maximum 70 foot total conductor length requirement for the 20 amp circuit. (No FIP utilization equipment on circuit)

I beleive that 210.12 (3) (b) NEC 2017, (can not lay hands on the 2014 NEC at the moment) says "The maximum length of the branch circuit wiring from the branch circuit overcurrent device to the first outlet shall not exceed 50 feet for 14AWG conductor or 70 feet for a 12 AWG conductor" when speaking of using a branch circuit receptacle type AFCI to acheive combination AFCI protection for the circuit.
(bold and underling for emphasis are by my hand and not present in NEC 2017).

Ben,

I am grasping the EGC discussion - YOU are apparently not grasping the limitation of the BRANCH CIRCUIT controlling aspect of the discussion about BRANCH CIRCUIT EGC ...

At least the is from your posts.

Again, I ask, where does a branch circuit originate? I know the answer ... do you?

Originally Posted by Alton Darty

I beleive that 210.12 (3) (b) NEC 2017, (can not lay hands on the 2014 NEC at the moment) says "The maximum length of the branch circuit wiring from the branch circuit overcurrent device to the first outlet shall not exceed 50 feet for 14AWG conductor or 70 feet for a 12 AWG conductor" when speaking of using a branch circuit receptacle type AFCI to acheive combination AFCI protection for the circuit.

Ben, if this is what you are trying to ssy, there are two issues ; 1, the 2017 NEC is not in force yet, 2,it says circuit length to the first device. You said total circuit length which is not what the code says.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Ben,

I am grasping the EGC discussion - YOU are apparently not grasping the limitation of the BRANCH CIRCUIT controlling aspect of the discussion about BRANCH CIRCUIT EGC ...

At least the is from your posts.

Again, I ask, where does a branch circuit originate? I know the answer ... do you?

Jerry,
I have already given you an answer. Using a cell phone in a storm to follow a forum dialog is very difficult. Wait until your home computer is back online and give the differences between EGC Bonding and "BRANCH CIRCUIT LIMITATION" that you have not defined.

A professional electrician is trained to practice EGC bonding for all circuits whether they are in 'branch or feeder' cable runs. Key-Article 250.4(A) System Grounding. Communication would improve by not repeating "I know the answer" assertions and not giving an answer.
(very rude IMO)

Originally Posted by Alton Darty

I beleive that 210.12 (3) (b) NEC 2017, (can not lay hands on the 2014 NEC at the moment) says "The maximum length of the branch circuit wiring from the branch circuit overcurrent device to the first outlet shall not exceed 50 feet for 14AWG conductor or 70 feet for a 12 AWG conductor" when speaking of using a branch circuit receptacle type AFCI to acheive combination AFCI protection for the circuit.
(bold and underling for emphasis are by my hand and not present in NEC 2017).

Alton,
Good catch. I cut the statement in a hurry. Sorry about that.
Thanks, Ben

Originally Posted by Jim Port

Ben, if this is what you are trying to ssy, there are two issues ; 1, the 2017 NEC is not in force yet, 2,it says circuit length to the first device. You said total circuit length which is not what the code says.

Jim,
I am glad you found the 210.12 section on AFCI parameters mentioned are in force as of the 2014 NEC code cycle. Sorry about the error.
Thanks, Ben

Ben, I think part of your issue is your terminology. You have said that the circuit and egc start at the power source. Surely you do not not mean the power generating station, but you keep insisting that the circuit starts ahead of the last overcurrent device which is not following the Article 100 definition.

Originally Posted by Ben Jacks

Jerry,
I have already given you an answer.
.
.
.
Communication would improve by not repeating "I know the answer" assertions and not giving an answer.
(very rude IMO)

As is insisting you are correct while giving "an answer" instead of "the answer".

"The answer" would clarify in your thinking what the discussion is about "branch circuit", not feeders, not service entrance conductors, not underground laterals/overhead drops.

When someone mentions branch circuit overcurrent device, do you go back to the service equipment disconnect and overcurrent protection? If not (and I presume you don't) then why do it now.

Working from my phone (still no power) is, as you said, not the best way to communicate ... which is one reason I am not very involved in this discussion.

Originally Posted by Jim Port

Ben, I think part of your issue is your terminology. You have said that the circuit and egc start at the power source. Surely you do not not mean the power generating station, but you keep insisting that the circuit starts ahead of the last overcurrent device which is not following the Article 100 definition.

Power source could also mean a stand alone solar photovoltaic system or generator that can be transfer switched at the utility service point outlets. The neutral and EGC terminate at the main service without any conductor interruption. The last overcurrent device will not function if the main bus NEUTRAL bonding and device EGC grounding is open-circuited. Pulling the meter will not disconnect the EGC connections to the power source.
Check out the informational Note under the Premises Wiring (System) definition.
Note: Given enough time, the utility transformer pole breaker will trip when a service breaker fault can cause an overload to the utility secondary power source.

Note: I follow the electrical industry the best I can with the construction trades slang, jargon, NFPA 70 electrical terminologies and NEC Article 100 Definitions.

Originally Posted by Ben Jacks

Wait until your home computer is back online and give the differences between EGC Bonding and "BRANCH CIRCUIT LIMITATION" that you have not defined.

Ben,

The "BRANCH CIRCUIT LIMITATION" which I did not define was because I PRESUMED that you would grasp that, when one talks about a "branch circuit", one is talking about the "bran circuit and its conductors": ungrounded conductor, grounded conductor, equipment grounding conductor.

Thus, when talking about a "branch circuit", one is not talking about the equipment grounding conductor which goes all the way back to the its source (be it a bonding screw in a panel or otherwise), or a grounded conductor going back to its source (be it a transformer, meter, or service equipment), an ungrounded conductor going back to its source (be it a transformer, meter, or service equipment).

I.e.., when talking about a "branch circuit" the conductors are "limited to those conductors" which are in the "branch circuit".

The equipment grounding conductor may go from the conductor in NM cable, to the metallic conduit enclosing the grounded and ungrounded conductors, to contact to and from a metallic enclosure with the enclosure becoming part of the equipment grounding conductors, so, in that sense, the equipment grounding conductor does go all the way back to the service equipment, however, the equipment grounding conductor in the "branch circuit" being discussed only goes back as far as the "branch circuit" goes, then that equipment grounding conductor may become an equipment grounding conductor for a feeder, which may then take it back to the next point.

You would not refer to the branch circuit grounded conductor as going all the way back to the power company generator, would you? No (hopefully "no") as the branch circuit grounded conductor only goes back to the end of the branch circuit, where that grounded conductor now likely becomes a feeder conductor, which likely goes back to the service equipment, where that conductor likely becomes a service entrance conductor.

It's all in the terminology used ... say or imply branch circuit and that is what the discussion includes.

A professional electrician is trained to practice EGC bonding for all circuits whether they are in 'branch or feeder' cable runs.

That shows you understand what I said above, except that you waited until then to clarify what you were meaning - would have been a lot simpler to have started off using the correct terminology at the beginning.

The branch circuit EGC does not go all the way back to the service equipment ... "the conductor" does, but the "branch circuit" conductors do not - there is a difference ... as you noted in the last part above.