ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals
ECN Shout Chat
ShoutChat
Recent Posts
Safety at heights?
by gfretwell - 04/23/24 03:03 PM
Old low volt E10 sockets - supplier or alternative
by gfretwell - 04/21/24 11:20 AM
Do we need grounding?
by gfretwell - 04/06/24 08:32 PM
UL 508A SPACING
by tortuga - 03/30/24 07:39 PM
Increasing demand factors in residential
by tortuga - 03/28/24 05:57 PM
New in the Gallery:
This is a new one
This is a new one
by timmp, September 24
Few pics I found
Few pics I found
by timmp, August 15
Who's Online Now
1 members (Scott35), 235 guests, and 27 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 2 of 2 1 2
#85476 07/08/03 12:30 PM
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 4,116
Likes: 4
Member
Don,

Thanks, I figured maybe I was missing something.

[Linked Image]
Bill


Bill
Stay up to Code with the Latest NEC:


>> 2023 NEC & Related Reference & Exam Prep
2023 NEC & Related Reference & Study Guides

Pass Your Exam the FIRST TIME with the Latest NEC & Exam Prep

>> 2020 NEC & Related Reference & Study Guides
 

#85477 07/22/03 12:17 AM
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 308
S
Member
I submitted a proposal for a wording change of 210.52(B)(1) which the committe accepted in principal and then the rewording they proposed in my opinion still has the same problem the original wording has.

My submittal is on page 297 at the top. I can understand not accepting my exact wording, but rewriting it with the same problem seems like they didn't get the concept of the problem to begin with even though they accepted my proposal in principal.

Let me know what you think--is my english or logic off base?

#85478 07/22/03 08:17 AM
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 681
P
Member
Hello Bill
sorry I am responding so late to you.
I read my post, must have been dilusional that day.

The different areas of a standard, although would seem to be related sometimes are not.
Point in hand, a dwelling unit kitchen and a commercial kitchen.
In a dwelling kitchen the cleaning methods are much different. The Health department does not inspect them, even though some should be.
In the commercial kitchens, the health department makes inspections for cleanliness. Because of this, the kitchens are mostly cleaned daily. Today these kitchens are being cleaned a lot of times with a 'washdown'. The reason for the 2002 code change in a kitchen is two fold.
1. The wash down creates a hazard for the cleaner.
2. The equipment in kitchens today are required to be on wheels for access to clean behind them. The people doing the cleaning are using the receptacles behind the equipment to plug in their cleaning equipment.

There have been reported injuries and death from shock, therefore the code change.
So the two different kitchens create different requirements.
Just a note. The GFCI protection for the fridges, can be a breaker. Most of the commercial equipment requires its own circuit anyway.
A friend of mine wired a huge commercial kitchen and was called in because the cleaning crew was experiencing shocks. I wired a commercial kitchen (stainless steel walls) next door to his job and because of his experience I used 'in use' covers and GFCI breakers. The cook was screaming at me because he said his food would go bad. Its 2 1/2 years later there has not been one problem. As a matter of fact I am getting married there Friday.

Pierre

[This message has been edited by PCBelarge (edited 07-22-2003).]


Pierre Belarge
Page 2 of 2 1 2

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5