Bathroom exhaust fan

[mjf]

Was installing a bath ex fan yesterday and noticed that the label said something along the lines of.... acceptable for use in shower if on a GFCI protected BRANCH CIRCUIT.

Of course, the fact that it would need to be GFCI protected is no surprise, but, I must admit, it got me to thinking as to whether or not I can legally have it powered by the load side of a GFCI receptacle. Maybe I'm wrong but I thought a branch circuit originates at OCP, not at a receptacle, which would technically mean that I need to put it on a GFCI breaker.

Thoughts on this?

 

[infinity]

As you've stated, it sounds like the manufacturer wants it on a circuit that's GFCI protected but IMO that makes no sense.

 

[480sparky]

You're over-thinking it.

If you put it on the load side of a GFCI receptacle, it is on a GFCI-protected branch circuit. It's merely on the part of the branch circuit that just happens to be GFCI-protected.

 

[mjf]

As you've stated, it sounds like the manufacturer wants it on a circuit that's GFCI protected but IMO that makes no sense.

Agreed, would make sense if it just said GFCI protected.

 

[kwired]

Was installing a bath ex fan yesterday and noticed that the label said something along the lines of.... acceptable for use in shower if on a GFCI protected BRANCH CIRCUIT.

Of course, the fact that it would need to be GFCI protected is no surprise, but, I must admit, it got me to thinking as to whether or not I can legally have it powered by the load side of a GFCI receptacle. Maybe I'm wrong but I thought a branch circuit originates at OCP, not at a receptacle, which would technically mean that I need to put it on a GFCI breaker.

Thoughts on this?

Although likely not the intent you are correct with your interpretation IMO.

We talk a lot about following manufacturers instructions to comply with product listings, but as time goes by I am finding more products with poorly written instructions or even fairly obvious errors in those instructions.

At least the NEC has had a lot of careful thought put into all of it. There are still occasions where the intent is not clear but not like some other reading out there. A lot of it doesn't even have any effective proofreading for simple misspellings. If I would have wrote some of those papers for English class in high school they would have been handed back to me with a request to correct all those mistakes.

 

[mjf]

You're over-thinking it.

If you put it on the load side of a GFCI receptacle, it is on a GFCI-protected branch circuit. It's merely on the part of the branch circuit that just happens to be GFCI-protected.

No disrespect, but I think you're under-thinking it. As you well know, the electrical industy is pretty much governed by specific technicallities. If it says GFCI branch circuit, it means GFCI branch circuit, not partially GFCI protected branch circuit.

Doesn't make sense to me either, but thats what it calls for.

BTW, you really surprised me with your answer...I read alot more than I post and you are generally "letter of the law" in your posts.

 

[stevenje]

No disrespect, but I think you're under-thinking it. As you well know, the electrical industy is pretty much governed by specific technicallities. If it says GFCI branch circuit, it means GFCI branch circuit, not partially GFCI protected branch circuit.

Doesn't make sense to me either, but thats what it calls for.

So if you follow the specs "to the letter" you would be required to install a GFCI breaker as apposed to a GFCI device. Do you agree?

 

[infinity]

So if you follow the specs "to the letter" you would be required to install a GFCI breaker as apposed to a GFCI device. Do you agree?

As ridiculous as it sounds I would agree.

 

[480sparky]

My vote is GFCI breaker or receptacle.... either one. Protection is protection. You're on a branch circuit that's protected by a GFCI. It's not relevant whether the protection comes from a breaker or a receptacle.

Would a GFCI receptacle right next to the panel be a violation just because there's 12" of circuit not protected?

I think the whole issue is making a mountain out of a molehill.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

Manufacturers have people writing their info without the editting it needs. But lets face it even the NEC can be interpreted many ways for many articles. The intent is to protect the equipment in the shower not the entire circuit as that would have no meaning. Now why can a shower light be in there without GFCI protection but a fan must have it. My guess is that the fan will eventual rust and have problems with conductivity and grounding issues so a gfci gives it a bit more protection.

 

[K8MHZ]

Manufacturers have people writing their info without the editting it needs. But lets face it even the NEC can be interpreted many ways for many articles. The intent is to protect the equipment in the shower not the entire circuit as that would have no meaning. Now why can a shower light be in there without GFCI protection but a fan must have it. My guess is that the fan will eventual rust and have problems with conductivity and grounding issues so a gfci gives it a bit more protection.

I thought it was the other way around, that a fan would be more likely to require a GFCI if it has a light, since a person would have to be standing in the tub or shower to change the bulb. That's what our local inspector told me, anyway.

 

[infinity]

It seems silly but by the definition of a branch circuit in Article 100 the instructions require a GFCI CB.

Branch Circuit. The circuit conductors between the final overcurrent device protecting the circuit and the outlet(s)

 

[al hildenbrand]

Was installing a bath ex fan yesterday and noticed that the label said something along the lines of.... acceptable for use in shower if on a GFCI protected BRANCH CIRCUIT.

Of course, the fact that it would need to be GFCI protected is no surprise, but, I must admit, it got me to thinking as to whether or not I can legally have it powered by the load side of a GFCI receptacle. Maybe I'm wrong but I thought a branch circuit originates at OCP, not at a receptacle, which would technically mean that I need to put it on a GFCI breaker.

Thoughts on this?

The UL White Book gives the exact language that the manufacturer must use in the "Product Marking". Take a look:

GUIDE INFORMATION FOR ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT ? THE WHITE BOOK

FANS, ELECTRIC (GPWV)​

PRODUCT MARKINGS​

Ceiling-insert fans, wall-insert fans, and ceiling-insert fan/light combinations intended to be mounted over bathtubs, showers, or within the zone above the bathtub and shower area as defined by Article 410 of the NEC, are marked ??Acceptable for use over a bathtub or shower when installed in a GFCI protected branch circuit.?? These products are investigated to determine the effects of moisture (dampness or wetting), such as shower spray.

Also, in order to line up the ducks in a row, the 2011 NEC Article 100 Definition of Branch Circuit is:

Branch Circuit. The circuit conductors between the final overcurrent device protecting the circuit and the outlet(s).

As I read the definition of Branch Circuit I pay attention to the fact that "conductors" is plural, and nothing limits the "hot" or "neutral" or "ECG" to each being a singular conductor. In fact, I read read the definition word "conductors" to include the segments of conductor that usually make up a branch circuit.

That is, each "hot" is made up of segments of conductor, along with the "neutral" and "ECG", and all those segments, some hot, some neutral, some ECG, are parts of the Branch Circuit.

Each segment of circuit conductor is one of the Branch Circuit circuit conductors.

A GFCI device, either a receptacle or a dead front, inserted at some point between the Overcurrent Protective Device (OCPD)and the Outlet (at the bath exhaust fan), has Branch Circuit circuit conductors on both the Line and Load sides of the device.

The exhaust fan is connected to the segment of Branch Circuit circuit conductors that are GFCI protected. That is, the exhaust fan is installed in a GFCI protected branch circuit.

In another thread, concerning GFCI receptacles connected to a MultiWire Branch Circuit (MWBC), a similar point was raised that the MWBC wasn't an MWBC unless all the conductors of the MWBC went from the OCPD to the farthest Outlet. I think the Bath Fan on a GFCI is a similar conflation.

 

[al hildenbrand]

To turn the thought back to the OP, if the GFCI device load side conductors leading to the Bath Exhaust Fan aren't IN the Branch Circuit, where are they, what are they?

 

[mjf]

To turn the thought back to the OP, if the GFCI device load side conductors leading to the Bath Exhaust Fan aren't IN the Branch Circuit, where are they, what are they?

No arguement from me on that point. Don't get me wrong. The AHJ has never had a problem with load side GFCI rect/deadfront and when he inspects this bath and trips the GFCI rect and the fan goes off he won't think twice about it.

I understand the intent...safety. I was questioning the specifics of the wording on the fan label....."GFCI protected branch circuit" as opposed to "GFCI protected". I never noticed this before. We are required to follow the manufacturers installation instructions. Is it a case of splitting hairs?? Is it a case of mistaken wording on the part of the manufacturer?? I don't know.

Ha ha ha...the thought just occurred to me that depending on location of a GFCI rect/deadfront, one could theoretically reset it while still in the shower, so, maybe the wording is properly thought out, correctly labeled, and the intent is for it to be installed on a GFCI breaker in a load center outside of a bathroom!!

 

[al hildenbrand]

. . . maybe the wording is properly thought out, correctly labeled, and the intent is for it to be installed on a GFCI breaker in a load center outside of a bathroom!!

I'm not quibbling with the wording, or the mystical "intent" that is extremely hard to document, rather, the common understanding of the language used.

I agree with Ken, (480 Sparky). Breaker or device, it doesn't matter. Let me try this slightly differently.

Take the UL required Product Marking language (my quote of it above is an unaltered direct cut and paste from the White Book), and, where the Article 100 Definitions term "branch circuit" is used, substitute the words of the definition.

So:

??Acceptable for use over a bathtub or shower when installed in a GFCI protected branch circuit.??

Becomes:

??Acceptable for use over a bathtub or shower when installed in The GFCI protected circuit conductors between the final overcurrent device protecting the circuit and the outlet(s).??

This sentence simply can't be used to exclude a segment of the branch circuit that is downstream (on the load side) of a GFCI device. The GFCI protection, by the language used, can be in either the OCPD or a device somewhere along the conductors of the branch circuit.

 

[al hildenbrand]

‘‘Acceptable for use over a bathtub or shower when installed in The GFCI protected circuit conductors between the final overcurrent device protecting the circuit and the outlet(s).’’

So, again I ask, if the load side conductors attached to the terminals of a "feed thru" GFCI receptacle or GFCI dead front and powering the bath fan AREN'T GFCI protected circuit conductors between the final overcurrent device protecting the circuit and the outlet(s) , where are they, what are they?