I have a customer who has a house built in the 70's that has a 20 GFI breaker that feeds a lot of stuff from the house then a lot of lights down at the lake he lives next to
(Jecuzzi, path lights, boat house lights etc.). He's wanting me to add an outlet down near the lake and installing a GFI in it also. Any problems adding it on the same circuit as the breaker?? I think I've run into this before and had no problems, but can't remember. Thanks Steve..

It's a PIA to troubleshoot but its not a code issue. I'd recommend to the the customer go with the breaker. Less neuscience tripping and it would save hime a few dollars

If there is already a GFCI breaker, you don't need another GFCI on that circuit.
I do have a few that are stacked like that but it is a cord mounted GFCI in an appliance plugged into a GFCI circuit.

One PITA of a string of GFI devices (on load side) is hunting down the one that tripped.

Putting a regular WR duplex down by the lake, could be a life safety issue, being the OP said lights, path lights are on that circuit.

Personally, I would have the lights on a circuit, the jacuzzi on a circuit, and a circuit down by the lake. GFI protection as required.

BTW, the multiple GFI devices on the same circuit is one of the 'homeowner' specials up here

I am not sure why troubleshooting stacked GFCIs is harder. It should be easier. You have a better idea of which segment of wire is good or bad.

Its all down to trip times and device sensitivity. In a fault condition its a race between the devices and you can't predict which will go first. Hence the fault area is clear if only the one nearest the load trips, but a trip up the line and it's anyone's guess. In my opinion only time delayed units should be upstream of any others.

It is still safe to assume the fault is past the last one that trips tho.

It's harder to trouble shoot per say because is is no the first thing that comes to your mind. I had once a GFCI breaker, GFCI recept and a second GFCI recept on the load side on the first recept. All is needed is one GFCI device and I place it in the most convient location in the circuit. If more then one is needed for conscience, no need to put one on the load side of another. If the customer don't know where they are all at then its gets time consuming meaning a big repair bill needlessly. Not good for a reputation.

True, tripping a GFI from the line side is fairly hard, except for transients (e.g. lightning).

As an inspector, it is a royal pain 'hunting' for a tripped GFI downstream of the one I was testing.

that's another problem locating a tripped device that usually gets blocked by shelves and furniture

I prefer having GFI receptacles because if you trip the GFI it is easier to reset right there. You don't have to go all the way back to the first GFI device.

OTOH if someone gets thrifty and the GFI receptacle is behind the fridge or in the garage a breaker would be a lot easier to find.

They tried to address some of this by requiring the GFCI be readily accessible in the 2011 cycle but once the user moves in, anything goes.

I believe you're only allowed 3 to 4 receptacles downstream from the GFI's, Load Side .. in california anyway .. the breaker is the best way to cover the whole branch circuit .. just make sure the circuit to protect isnt a multiwire ..
ex: 14/3 .. 12/3

Mark:
To the best of my knowledge, there is no restriction on the quantity of downstream devices.

There may be local requirements.

Hmm. maybe the code has changed recently, it use to be up to 4, but maybe that was just california .. I'll have to check the code for the heck of it ..

just looked it up online, dang it ranges from 2 to 5 to 8 to as many as ya want, to resistive factoring .. crazy

I suppose I should finally invest into a new code book .. I'm behind about 12 years .. granted I seem to keep passing inspection.

I know ... get with the program

You can go back to 110.3 (b) (mfg instructions). We had a thread on this subject back somewhere.

As you said, it could be a local requirement.

If you follow careful wiring practices you can have a butt load of stuff behind a GFCI.
My whole pool deck is on one (14 lamp holders of lighting and a couple receptacles) along with several motion lights.

I don't know how much wire in pipe I have but it is a bunch.

It never occurred to me it was a bad thing until someone told me.
I keep thinking I will split it up but I am leaving it until I have a problem.

Personally from a safety point of view I don't see a problem with putting 1 upstream from 9 or so .. they usually have a 280 Watt rule per receptacle as far as a multiple, but that's just a generic wattage calc..

It is 180va per.

It should be noted the 180va is a commercial requirement, not residential.
In residential, receptacles are placed per 210.52 and you use 220.12 to compute the load based on square footage with those receptacles and 210.11(B) says you distribute them evenly across the required number of circuits.

Isn't 180 VA 1.5 Amps .. ? I' may be a little rusty on my calcs. I usually ever use the first 1/4 of the 4 calc groups

Yes, 180Va is 1.5 amps at 120 volts.

thats what I thought john.

divided by 2400w (20A.) = 13 receptacles ...

that's pushing it .. for a lighting circuit.

I think the 280w rule was a school spec. at the time

At best it is just an arbitrary number. They have no way of knowing whether you are going to plug in a 10 watt modem or a 1200w Laser printer.
We used to run into this exact problem in server rooms with a big modem or data switch rack. Occasionally we would have a fire inspector who would say flatly "no outlet strips" but if you had the electrician put in receptacles, you needed a half dozen or more 20a circuits to get enough receptacles for a few hundred watts of load.
Finally they came up with a U/L listed modem rack with a bunch of receptacles in it. That usually made everyone happy.