Bathroom Branch Circuits

[CAA]

A house was wired in such a way that does not meet the letter of the code 210.11(C)(3) but does it meet the intent of the code? It's a 4 bedroom / 4 bath house. The contractor pulled four(4) 20 circuits (one to each bathroom) then connected each to their adjacent bedroom convenience receptacles. The circuits are AFCI/GFCI protected from the main service panel. What do you think?

 

[Buck Parrish]

It's not code compliant. Such circuits shall have no other outlets

 

[infinity]

Violation. Write it up.

 

[LarryFine]

You can supply either only bath receptacles, or only one entire bathroom.

In neither instance may you supply any outlets outside of the bathrooms.

 

[CAA]

What is the intent of the code? Is it to prevent nuisance tripping? If it is, don't you think the way this house is wired there would be far less of that?

 

[infinity]

What is the intent of the code? Is it to prevent nuisance tripping? If it is, don't you think the way this house is wired there would be far less of that?

IMO there is nothing unsafe about it.

 

[Chamuit]

What is the intent of the code? Is it to prevent nuisance tripping? If it is, don't you think the way this house is wired there would be far less of that?

The intent is to make sure the bathroom outlets are adequately supplied so that blow dryers, curling irons, and similar devices can be used without issue or nuisance tripping.

I don't think the wiring you mentioned meets the intent of the code. It would appear to me that the person doing the wiring didn't know the code, or, was trying to cut down on material cost by reducing the number of home runs and breakers used.

What I've seen:
Bathrooms used to be supplied off of regular branch circuits; sometimes not even have receptacles; used to be 15A circuits; and, even the circuit protected by the GFI used to supply outside receptacles.

 

[CAA]

IMO there is nothing unsafe about it.

That's what I was thinking too. I know it doesn't meet the letter of the code but as a code official, there are times when I look beyond the letter of the code as to what the intent of it was.

 

[hbiss]

You can supply either only bath receptacles, or only one entire bathroom.

I think it should be treated like a kitchen SABC. I can see other receptacles in other baths but I can't see a circuit supplying the lighting, fan and especially a heater in one bath. That heater with a hairdryer can easily max out a 20A circuit leaving somebody in the dark.

I put the receptacle(s) in a bath on a dedicated 20A all by themselves. The lighting and fan can share a circuit with other rooms. If a heater is involved, that may require another dedicated circuit. Depends.

-Hal

 

[Buck Parrish]

That's what I was thinking too. I know it doesn't meet the letter of the code but as a code official, there are times when I look beyond the letter of the code as to what the intent of it was.

How are you even considering this ? This is such an elementary mistake. If I was inspecting and saw this. That would be a red flag to look for other violations. Because usually if you see this you'll find other egregious violations.

 

[infinity]

That's what I was thinking too. I know it doesn't meet the letter of the code but as a code official, there are times when I look beyond the letter of the code as to what the intent of it was.

I see no reason to allow this even if it's not a hazard. It's a code violation and IMO the code should be enforced as written. As I said before it probably a better installation than what is allowed by the NEC. I have 4 bathrooms in my house with the receptacle in each one on the same 20 amp circuit. That's code complaint, ugly but it passes inspection.

 

[LarryFine]

I think it should be treated like a kitchen SABC. I can see other receptacles in other baths but I can't see a circuit supplying the lighting, fan and especially a heater in one bath. That heater with a hairdryer can easily max out a 20A circuit leaving somebody in the dark.

I don't disagree with you, but the NEC allows it, excluding a heater.

I put the receptacle(s) in a bath on a dedicated 20A all by themselves. The lighting and fan can share a circuit with other rooms. If a heater is involved, that may require another dedicated circuit. Depends.

I generally run separate lighting and receptacle circuits anyway.

 

[Buck Parrish]

I think it should be treated like a kitchen SABC. I can see other receptacles in other baths but I can't see a circuit supplying the lighting, fan and especially a heater in one bath. That heater with a hairdryer can easily max out a 20A circuit leaving somebody in the dark.

I put the receptacle(s) in a bath on a dedicated 20A all by themselves. The lighting and fan can share a circuit with other rooms. If a heater is involved, that may require another dedicated circuit. Depends.

-Hal

The heaters instructions generally call for a dedicated circuit. Unless maybe a heat lamp.

 

[ramsy]

That's what I was thinking too. I know it doesn't meet the letter of the code but as a code official, there are times when I look beyond the letter of the code as to what the intent of it was.

Alowing these kinds of construction defects may encourage more for the pushover Inspector to find next time, and even subject his department to liability.

To make the permit process positive, why not make the correction with a note saying "Almost there, a bit more work on these code sections and your golden"

 

[hbiss]

To make the permit process positive, why not make the correction with a note saying "Almost there, a bit more work on these code sections and your golden"

Sure. Everybody gets a trophy too.

-Hal

 

[ramsy]

Sure. Everybody gets a trophy too.

-Hal

I wouldn't mind a "golden contractor" certificate