Kitchen/Bathroom GFCI accessibility requirements

curt swartz said:
For our residential projects we seldom use GFCI receptacles for interior areas.
Click to expand...
No doubt you would have OP's inspector lynched, since your projects are run by General Contractor laborers, who can't finish wire using different receptacles.
spencert said:
Sounds like I'm better off just bending to the request.
Click to expand...
IMHO that inspector offers you to return a bunch of unreliable junk.

You're better off with $20 point-of-use GFCI's, not designed to force people outside to restore power, or fail while energized.
 
Last edited:
When I install receptacle GFCI's, I like to use the audible alarm ones so it's apparent that one has tripped and easier to locate.
 
spencert said:
Just to close the loop on the breaker heights, I've attached a couple of photos. Both panels are 1 door and less than 40' from the kitchen. I guess the requirement to be "reached quickly" is being interpreted as same room. Sounds like I'm better off just bending to the request. Thanks for the feedback guys.
Click to expand...
spencert said:
The hang up seems to be the requirement that the reset be reached quickly and he claims that's at his discretion:
"Accessible, Readily (Readily Accessible). Capable of being reached quickly for operation,
Click to expand...
Ouch! That panel is outside! How readily accessible is it at night, during a storm, etc.? I have to side with the inspector after seeing that. IMO outside main panels should be prohibited. (See how long your GFI and AFCI breakers last with the moisture.)

-Hal
 
ramsy said:
Could breaker reset be too high to reach?
OP never said what height the box is?

That may be correct if switch is too high
Click to expand...
Will be a violation in regards to the overcurrent device whether it were standard breaker, GFCI breaker, AFCi breaker or a dual function breaker. They need to be readily accessible and do have maximum height rules that apply to them. So if this were the issue, then there should be more violations mentioned related to the panelboard as well and not just the location of the GFCI's for some kitchen or bathroom receptacles.
hbiss said:
Ouch! That panel is outside! How readily accessible is it at night, during a storm, etc.? I have to side with the inspector after seeing that. IMO outside main panels should be prohibited. (See how long your GFI and AFCI breakers last with the moisture.)

-Hal
Click to expand...
Though I kind of agree, outside panels tends to be the common thing in CA. I guess they never need to go out when it is below zero and walk through deep snow to reset a breaker though
 
kwired said:
Will be a violation in regards to the overcurrent device whether it were standard breaker, GFCI breaker, AFCi breaker or a dual function breaker. They need to be readily accessible and do have maximum height rules that apply to them. So if this were the issue, then there should be more violations mentioned related to the panelboard as well and not just the location of the GFCI's for some kitchen or bathroom receptacles.

Though I kind of agree, outside panels tends to be the common thing in CA. I guess they never need to go out when it is below zero and walk through deep snow to reset a breaker though
Click to expand...
Where would I put a panel at grain bins?
 
ramsy said:
No doubt you would have OP's inspector lynched, since your projects are run by General Contractor laborers, who can't finish wire using different receptacles.
Click to expand...
Really dude? Just because you only work on section 8 rental properties doesn't mean everyone else does. I don't let the GC's guys touch our work with the exception of cutting finish mill work/cabinets for devices/fixtures.

For over 40 years we have been wiring high end custom homes for founders/CEO's/executives of Silicon Valley tech companies. These projects are usually done T&M with no real budget because the team of Architects, interior designers and lighting designers are constantly making changes. No way to keep up with change orders.

There are a few reasons we don't use GFCI receptacles for most interior applications.
  1. Some clients don't like the look of GFCI receptacles.
  2. Most of our projects use Lutron devices. Lutron GFCI's are more expensive than a GFCI breaker with a standard receptacle.
  3. In areas that require AFCI and GFCI it is less expensive to use a DF breaker vs a AFCI breaker and GFCI receptacle.
  4. If I get a call from a client saying there is no power in part of the kitchen I can pull up the panel schedules for the job and tell them exactly what breaker to check. With separate devices it can be a game of them going back in fourth to get the correct device reset.
 
spencert said:
"Accessible, Readily (Readily Accessible). Capable of being reached quickly for operation, renewal, or inspections without requiring those to whom ready access is requisite to take actions such as to use tools (other than keys), to climb over or under, to remove obstacles, or to resort to portable ladders, and so forth."
Click to expand...

I was about to give my common "the inspector is a moron" response, but reviewing the definition, I think I have to agree with him, and instead place blame on the incompetent CMP's who can't come up with clear coherent non vague code articles and definitions.
 
curt swartz said:
Really dude? Just because you only work on section 8 rental properties doesn't mean everyone else does.
Click to expand...
It is true, Section-8 HUD, code enforcement, property Mgmt., and their maintenance staff can't tell a GFCI from an AFCI, much less when jammed with paint.
 
curt swartz said:
I don't let the GC's guys touch our work with the exception of cutting finish mill work/cabinets for devices/fixtures.
Click to expand...
Quite the contradiction to panel flippers who wont touch permits for the inside wiring.
curt swartz said:
For over 40 years we have been wiring high end custom homes for founders/CEO's/executives of Silicon Valley tech companies. These projects are usually done T&M with no real budget because the team of Architects, interior designers and lighting designers are constantly making changes. No way to keep up with change orders.
Click to expand...
How many liens over 40 years? Don't custom homes get tied up in divorce court, when the 2 kings can't live in the same castle?
 
Last edited:
electrofelon said:
I was about to give my common "the inspector is a moron" response, but reviewing the definition, I think I have to agree with him, and instead place blame on the incompetent CMP's who can't come up with clear coherent non vague code articles and definitions.
Click to expand...
I'll call the inspector a moron! Why stop at GFCI/AFCI? With this moron's logic, there should be branch circuit disconnect in every room. JMHO

Ron
 
curt swartz said:
There are a few reasons we don't use GFCI receptacles for most interior applications.
  1. Some clients don't like the look of GFCI receptacles.
  2. Most of our projects use Lutron devices. Lutron GFCI's are more expensive than a GFCI breaker with a standard receptacle.
  3. In areas that require AFCI and GFCI it is less expensive to use a DF breaker vs a AFCI breaker and GFCI receptacle.
  4. If I get a call from a client saying there is no power in part of the kitchen I can pull up the panel schedules for the job and tell them exactly what breaker to check. With separate devices it can be a game of them going back in fourth to get the correct device reset.
Click to expand...
It's true, Leviton is my goto device. Lutron is rarely found in my service market, except when unfortunate buyers need help with a custom home. These places are science projects with low voltage everywhere. More like getting lynched by cables, while tracing J-boxes in crawl spaces.
 
Thanks for the discussion and response guys! I've escalated to the building official and we'll see what happens. The inspector provided all of his responses via email with the building official on copy so I'm not sure if that's their official position or not but I find it hard to beleive that no one uses DF breakers in this city.

My argument is that the point of GFCI is PROTECTION for personnel:
"210.8 Ground-Fault Circuit-Interrupter Protection for Personnel. Ground-fault circuit-interrupter protection for personnel shall be provided as required in 210.8(A) through (F). The ground-fault circuit interrupter shall be installed in a readily accessible location."

The protection and locations protected are not in question. The method of providing that protection is a preference and not enforceable. Furthermore, GFCI protection is required for 125V through 250V receptacles, see 210.8(A). To my knowledge 250V receptacles with built in GFCI protection do not exist, requiring a GFCI breaker to meet the protection requirements. Throughout the 2022 CEC, there are references to 250V GFCI protection which can only be met via GFCI breakers further solidifying the use of GFCI breakers as an acceptable protection method. While there may be some ambiguity around the definition of "readily accessible", precedent is established by the acceptance of AFCI breakers which provide the required AFCI protection:
"210.12 Arc-Fault Circuit-Interrupter Protection. Arc-fault circuit-interrupter protection shall be provided as required in 210.12(A), (B), (C), and (D). The arc-fault circuit interrupter shall be installed in a readily accessible location."

As far as appliance protection, 2022 CEC 422.5(B)(1) explicitly allows the breaker to provide the required GFCI protection.

I'm pushing back on this for a number of reasons you guys have noted:
1. I don't like the look of receptacles.
2. The phantom power draw is greater.
3. More points of failure to troubleshoot. It's much more reliable to have all serviceable parts in a single location.
4. High(er) quality wiring devices can be used. All of my receptacles are spec grade Leviton TDR15s with pigtailed conductors and side wiring. Not that quality GFCI receptacles can't be had but I didn't install junk and I'm not excited about doing work for no reason.
5. It's just plain wrong. There is no SAFETY component to this argument. The protection is there, plain and simple, as verified with a listed test device. DF breakers are commonly used, listed and compliant. IF the breaker trips, I'm less concerned about if I can reset it in a matter of seconds vs finding the source of the arc or ground fault. It's actually EASIER to locate the reset if it's at the panel vs checking several outlets to find the one that tripped.

Thanks again for the discussion and let me know if there's anything I'm missing.
 
ptonsparky said:
Where would I put a panel at grain bins?
Click to expand...
IF there is no other alternative that's the only option. But in residential the architect or GC certainly has options but puts it outside either because it's always been done that way, or they are plain ignorant. To me, it's incomprehensible why you would put a barely weatherproof box full of breakers built with electronic circuitry in a wet environment at a location where you would have to exit the building if your hair dryer stopped working.

This is the definition of stupid.

-Hal
 
rc/retired said:
I'll call the inspector a moron! Why stop at GFCI/AFCI? With this moron's logic, there should be branch circuit disconnect in every room. JMHO

Ron
Click to expand...

The CMP's put "reached quickly" in the definition and did not define what quickly means, unfortunately that leaves it up to the inspector. Honestly I have to agree that down in the basement is not quickly. Not sure why they put quickly in the definition.
 
electrofelon said:
The CMP's put "reached quickly" in the definition and did not define what quickly means, unfortunately that leaves it up to the inspector. Honestly I have to agree that down in the basement is not quickly. Not sure why they put quickly in the definition.
Click to expand...
If the inspector interprets the definition to require GFCI's in the same room they should also be requiring AFCI's to be in the same room. Both are required to be readily accessible.
 
electrofelon said:
I was about to give my common "the inspector is a moron" response, but reviewing the definition, I think I have to agree with him, and instead place blame on the incompetent CMP's who can't come up with clear coherent non vague code articles and definitions.
Click to expand...
In general the CMP members do not write code. They act on the submitted public inputs and comments. Have submitted a public input to fix this so called issue?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top