AFCI Protection Question

[Jerramundi]

Hey all, I have a question regarding AFCI protection requirements. I know how you all feel about AFCI, but just humor me.

210.12(A) states that "All... 15- and 20-ampere branch circuits SUPPLYING OUTLETS OR DEVICES installed in dwelling unit kitchens... shall be protected..."

I'm bringing a homerun to a kitchen counter top outlet. From there it will branch off in two directions: (1) To feed the remainder of the counter tops and (2) To feed the bathroom / first bathroom opening which is adjacent / on the same wall.

My concern is that I will be pulling the bathroom circuit through this first kitchen counter top opening. Does this violate the code above in that there is a non-AFCI protected circuit passing through an opening that is required to be AFCI protected?

I'm assuming NO because I'm interpreting the above code reference as meaning protection is only required for circuits that SUPPLY outlets or devices and this bathroom branch circuit is merely passing through this opening, not "supplying" the opening or any devices in it.

Thoughts?

 

[kwired]

I think you are fine with what you have.

You can't put bathroom loads on the kitchen counter outlets, but you could possibly put a switch on the kitchen side of the wall in a circuit supplying a bathroom load and if you did that would then kick in AFCI requirement for that circuit.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

You are in Chicago so I assume it is in conduit. If so then I don't see an issue with it passing thru the box on the counter.

 

[charlie b]

I am a bit confused.

I'm bringing a homerun to a kitchen counter top outlet. From there it will branch off in two directions: (1) To feed the remainder of the counter tops and (2) To feed the bathroom / first bathroom opening which is adjacent / on the same wall.

You mention "a homerun," but you don't give a number of conductors. Is this homerun fed from a single pole, 20 amp breakers, and are there just one each of black, white, and green wires in this homerun? If so, I would call this a violation, as the kitchen countertop receptacles are sharing a circuit with the bathroom receptacles.

Is this instead a multi-wire branch circuit, fed with a two-pole breaker, with one black wire feeding the kitchen outlets, with a different wire (red, perhaps?) feeding the bathroom outlets, and a shared neutral? If so, I would call that a violation as well. Kitchen countertop receptacles cannot share a circuit with other outlets.

Is this instead a homerun fed by two single pole breakers, separate hot conductors, and separate neutrals, and do they all pass through an outlet box in the kitchen before one set turns sideways towards the bathroom? I think this would be OK, although I would be concerned about the back of the box getting a bit crowded with wires.

 

[charlie b]

. . . but you could possibly put a switch on the kitchen side of the wall in a circuit supplying a bathroom load and if you did that would then kick in AFCI requirement for that circuit.

I must beg to disagree here. I submit that a switch being installed into an "outlet box" does not cause that box to become an "outlet." My reason is that current is not taken from the premises wiring system at the switch. Rather, current simply passes through the switch to (let us say) a receptacle further downstream, and it is at that receptacle that current is taken from the premises wiring system.

This point had been argued on this forum long ago, and at the time it was the single longest thread. So let's not go deeply into the topic again, or at least not in a thread that was started for a different purpose.

 

[hbiss]

Hasn't Chicago stricken, deleted and redacted any requirement for AFCIs because you are running everything in EMT?

-Hal

 

[retirede]

Remember, Illinois is on 2008 code. AFCIs for bedrooms only.

 

[synchro]

This is the applicable Chicago code:

 

[don_resqcapt19]

I must beg to disagree here. I submit that a switch being installed into an "outlet box" does not cause that box to become an "outlet." My reason is that current is not taken from the premises wiring system at the switch. Rather, current simply passes through the switch to (let us say) a receptacle further downstream, and it is at that receptacle that current is taken from the premises wiring system.

This point had been argued on this forum long ago, and at the time it was the single longest thread. So let's not go deeply into the topic again, or at least not in a thread that was started for a different purpose.

That is exactly why the current code says "supplying outlets or devices". The word "devices" was added in the 2004 code to make that issue go away. A switch is a device.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Remember, Illinois is on 2008 code. AFCIs for bedrooms only.

That applies only where the local county or city has not adopted a different code. Most, but not all areas, that have permits and inspections are on codes newer than 2008.

 

[retirede]

That applies only where the local county or city has not adopted a different code. Most, but not all areas, that have permits and inspections are on codes newer than 2008.

I knew the larger cities (Chicago area, Rockford, Springfield, Quad Cities area) did this, but I wasn’t aware it was that widespread. That’s what I get for living in the sticks!

 

[kwired]

I must beg to disagree here. I submit that a switch being installed into an "outlet box" does not cause that box to become an "outlet." My reason is that current is not taken from the premises wiring system at the switch. Rather, current simply passes through the switch to (let us say) a receptacle further downstream, and it is at that receptacle that current is taken from the premises wiring system.

This point had been argued on this forum long ago, and at the time it was the single longest thread. So let's not go deeply into the topic again, or at least not in a thread that was started for a different purpose.

This isn't about definition of an outlet, that discussion was a bigger factor before the AFCI requirements changed (2014 I believe) to state "outlets or devices" instead just "outlets". Before that change you could use non AFCI circuit to supply outside outlets, but after that change if there was an interior switch to an outside outlet and it was in any the rooms mentioned in 210.12 you had to protect that circuit as well.

I am presuming since the OP is in Chicago where metal raceway is a requirement as the general rules that his "home run" is a metal raceway and that he has different circuits pulled through it as the kitchen counter receptacle can not be on same circuit as any outlet in the bath. Nothing would prohibit a switch at that kitchen counter location to control an outlet in the bath (maybe not normal to see but certainly not a NEC violation) Said switch is a device and would require AFCI protection per wording of 210.12(A) since it is in a location mentioned in 210.12(A) even though the outlet it controls is otherwise not required to have AFCI protection.

 

[hbiss]

I am presuming since the OP is in Chicago where metal raceway is a requirement as the general rules that his "home run" is a metal raceway and that he has different circuits pulled through it as the kitchen counter receptacle can not be on same circuit as any outlet in the bath. Nothing would prohibit a switch at that kitchen counter location to control an outlet in the bath (maybe not normal to see but certainly not a NEC violation) Said switch is a device and would require AFCI protection per wording of 210.12(A) since it is in a location mentioned in 210.12(A) even though the outlet it controls is otherwise not required to have AFCI protection.

What about Exception #1 in the Chicago code????

-Hal

 

[Edval69]

Interesting. Correct me if I’m wrong on this. Article 210.11(c)(3) requires a dedicated branch circuit for bathroom. Is this counter where your j-box is part of the required 2 small appliance which are required to be dual function breakers?

 

[kwired]

What about Exception #1 in the Chicago code????

-Hal

I have no idea what Chicago differs on for AFCI requirements from NEC requirements, but I have a feeling there is differences.

 

[kwired]

Interesting. Correct me if I’m wrong on this. Article 210.11(c)(3) requires a dedicated branch circuit for bathroom. Is this counter where your j-box is part of the required 2 small appliance which are required to be dual function breakers?

Chicago requires metal raceway methods for most things. No the bath likely still can not be on with kitchen counter receptacles, but if run in raceway certainly can occupy same raceway on the way to the bath, I'm fairly certain that is what OP has and is questioning if there is any AFCI requirements since an outlet box in a kitchen contains those bath ciruit conductors.

 

[hbiss]

I have no idea what Chicago differs on for AFCI requirements from NEC requirements, but I have a feeling there is differences.

@synchro posted the full text of the Code section and amendment in post #8 so you can see for yourself. It looks to me like the OP is exempt from installing AFCIs so his question is moot. Unless of course he is not working in that jurisdiction.

So OP, what Code are you under?? Did you check your local Codes?

-Hal

 

[kwired]

@synchro posted the full text of the Code section and amendment in post #8 so you can see for yourself. It looks to me like the OP is exempt from installing AFCIs so his question is moot. Unless of course he is not working in that jurisdiction.

So OP, what Code are you under?? Did you check your local Codes?

-Hal

I see that now.

Kind of odd though because they tell us mostly what NEC tells us, but then put in exceptions that say you don't have to do it when using the most common wiring methods you are generally required to use.

 

[Jerramundi]

Chicago requires metal raceway methods for most things. No the bath likely still can not be on with kitchen counter receptacles, but if run in raceway certainly can occupy same raceway on the way to the bath, I'm fairly certain that is what OP has and is questioning if there is any AFCI requirements since an outlet box in a kitchen contains those bath ciruit conductors.

That's precisely what is being asked - does that SEPARATE bathroom 20a circuit passing through that first kitchen counter top opening (but not supplying anything) require AFCI protection since it is passing through an opening (i.e. the kitchen counter top opening) that does require AFCI protection.

It seems you and I are in agreement that because the bathroom circuit is NOT "SUPPLYING" the opening or any devices in it, that AFCI protection is NOT required for that particular circuit... but I just wanted to see what you all had to say about it.

I'm in Chicago, but this job is in a different municipality so no dice on the Chicago exceptions.