ECN Forum Forums General Topics of the Trade General Discussion Area Is "Overwiring" a Code Mandate?

Sorry for the delay ... I'm a bit 'internet access impaired' these days.

I don't want to get too far off on tangents, but ...

This site, and Holt's, have had extensive debates over whether a range igniter is allowed to be on an SABC, or tied into the micro / hood circuit. The volume of posts alone makes the case for there being 'plenty of room for debate.'

The hood / micro circuit requirement has plenty of qualifications to it; for this thread, it's enough to note that the result is often another circuit.

I've posted pics here of a kitchen with 14-ft. of counter and only one required receptacle. The trick was to have the upper cabinets come all the way down to the counter top, have built-in appliance garages, etc. The end result was only a small area next to the sink where there was ANY "wall space." The same kitchen also had an island you could land a helicopter on - with code (again) requiring but one receptacle. I often wonder if the entire kitchen design industry is deliberately trying to confound the code.

Adding receptacles to lighting circuits becomes a problem with the 'energy' codes.

Now, I have the opinion that we save the "law" for absolute necessities, and not for when something is "not a bad thing." The latter is, IMO, an abuse of authority.

Reno:

OK, I got it now. I have not come across a kitchen with a setup like you describe.

Reno: Please elaborate on this subject.

Plan review can include calculations of the lighting load - including assumptions for any receptacles on the lighting circuits. Too many loads, and you don't get your gold star.

OK, sure, you can wrangle with the city over this, but that can be tough when you're bound to the DOE program. Net effect: lighting is segregated.

Another complication creeps in when the lighting circuit has some manner of automatic control. Interrupt the power to the range igniter for even a moment, and the homeowner is likely to have to crawl behind the range and reset the gas valve.

Murphy's law- or paving the road to Hell with good intentions.

Austria and Germany seem to have the most limited code coverage in this regard - dedicated circuit for every known load exceeding 1500 W (e.g. small under-sink water heaters, built-in microwaves,...), 30 mA ground fault protection and fuse/breaker not exceeding 16 A for any circuits serving general-purpose receptacles (although it's really not recommended to skip on the GFP) and that's about it. If the EC does a really thorough load calculation, each receptacle counts as an assumed 200 W load, which limits a 16 A circuit to 18. On the other hand, if there are many receptacles in a small space, e.g. to serve computer or TV equipment, this does not necessarily make sense.

Other European countries are considerably more restrictive, such as Belgium, where the number of receptacles per circuit is limited to 6.

I have seen those kitchens where the uppers actually sit on the lower cabinets. Then there is no wall space and there is no "practical counter space." So therefore no place to install a receptacle.

What if the counter is 22" or so, plenty to use but still no wall space.

tombstone?

BigB, the question is not whether it is possible to place a receptacle - the point is that such design elements remove the requirement for receptacles .... or prohibit you from 'counting' the receptacles you do instal.

For example, an 'appliance garage' might very well have a receptacle in it. You are not,however, allowed to consider it as one of the 'counter' receptacles. Yet, the positioning of the garage might very well eliminate wall space - removing the requirement for there to be any receptacle.

Greg has a point about wall spacing. My previous home had a kitchen 'counter' area that was broken up into numerous sections that were too small for the receptacle requirement to kick in. Imagine - eight feet of 'counter,' and no receptacles required. Now THERE would be a real challenge to provide the two required SABC's, without exceeding 'minimum' code.

This is the kind of thing that should be caught in plan review. I might joke a bit about how they have found a loophole where they don't need any counter receptacles per 210.52(C)(1) <somewhere> but I want to be there when you explain that to the customer. We would come to an accommodation of some sort that would at least meet the spirit of 210.52. Maybe receptacles in fillers between the face frames or something. That is what kitchen designers are for.