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), 534 guests, and 35 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 2 of 3 1 2 3
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 681
P
Member
If you have an Analysis Book, it has a photo of an installation - with the receptacle installed above the unit, like a cabinet installed microwave.

Pierre


Pierre Belarge
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
 

Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,507
G
Member
"This statement and code change says something to me that makes me very uneasy. Why is the NEC making code changes based on Homeowners performing installations. ELECTRICIANS should be installing electrical work and using the NEC as well as their learned skills from the field"

You guys aren't seeing this as a plus- You are getting paid to install the circuit when you wire the home. Now let the home owner worry about the physical part of venting and mounting the Microwave. [Linked Image]

[This message has been edited by George Little (edited 10-24-2004).]


George Little
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 494
M
Member
Hi,
I appreciate you bringing this up...

I think making assumptions about what may or may not happen in the future is not a very sound practice. If they are going to do this who decides what articles should be considered for future updates or modifications?

You do not build a house to withstand a hurricane or tornado...it is too expensive.

I have installed a lot fo the new cord and plug connected Microwave/Vent hood combos...you do not need an extra circuit for a vent-a-hood...you need an extra circuit for the microwave..

Sure you can get paid for a separate circuit to a required outlet but that is after YOU have to answer for WHY and then listen to the HO say...OH I WILL NEVER DO THAT, I DONT NEED IT...

I know of several cities that require an existing house that gets a service upgrade to have the whole house brought up to todays code requiremnts...GFI indoor and out..separate laundry circuit etc..

while this all sounds great..the electrician is the one who has to break the news to the homeowner...it makes us sound like we are drumming up work..i always told them to thank the city and to call them if they had any complaints...most did not but a few got hot under the collar..

anyway..i beleive in making plans for future expansion, but not to go around trying to forsee the future..how many bedrooms do you know of that are now a HOME OFFICE with a single outlet that has surge protectors daisy chained around from the tv to the printer to the computer etc?

how many garages are now bedrooms?

how many garages are now workshops?

see what I am saying?

why dont they just require an extra circuit for small appliances in the kitchen? instead of two make it three or four..who knows what the kitchens of tomorrow will look like!

-regards

mustang

[This message has been edited by mustangelectric (edited 10-25-2004).]

Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 830
S
Member
Joe, I haven't reviewed this part of the code changes. Is this mandantory on all hood fans or just cord and plug? Is this in affect in the 2005 Code? Thanks. Steve

Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 2,749
Member
This comes from the NEC draft and appears to be the same as in the 2005 NEC. This is not a mandatory "shall" rule rule, it is a "shall be permitted rule", see 90.5.

Quote
422.16 Flexible Cords.

(A) General. Flexible cord shall be permitted (1) for the connection of appliances to facilitate their frequent interchange or to prevent the transmission of noise or vibration or (2) to facilitate the removal or disconnection of appliances
that are fastened in place, where the fastening means and mechanical connections are specifically designed to permit ready removal for maintenance or repair and the
appliance is intended or identified for flexible cord connection.

(B) Specific Appliances.

(5) Range Hoods. Range hoods shall be permitted to be cord-and-plug connected with a flexible cord identified as suitable for the use on range hoods in the installation instructions of the appliance manufacturer, where [b]all of the
following conditions are met.

(1) The flexible cord shall be terminated with a grounding type attachment plug.

Exception: A listed range hood distinctly marked to identify it as protected by a system of double insulation, or its
equivalent, shall not be required to be terminated with a grounding-type attachment plug.

(2) The length of the cord shall not be less than 450 mm (18 in.) and not over 900 mm (36 in.).

(3) Receptacles shall be located to avoid physical damage to the flexible cord.

(4) The receptacle shall be accessible.

(5) The receptacle shall be supplied by an individual branch circuit. [ROP 17–21]


Joe Tedesco, NEC Consultant
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,457
E
Member
I installed a range hood that came with a factory cord. Big unit. Can't remember the manufacturer but I do beleive they required a seperate circuit.

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 518
J
Member
It would seem to me that any hood that has a cord & plug would be likely one with a charcoal screen, intended to operate without an outside vent, and added later. If that's the case, this code provision seems to be futile.

I think that many on the code panels have confused "wise" with "bare minimum" requirements.

Funny thing is, I know folks who've been members of the NFPA for years, belong to the "electrical section," and have never had an opportunity to take part in the process, vote on the code, etc.
Without accountability at the grass root level, it's no surprise that the code seems to be drifting away from reality.

Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 394
B
Member
I'm guessing the panel concluded that the upgrade does happen and it happens frequently enough to represent a significant hazard. Let's face it, if there is a plug in the cabinet, no one is going to call an electrician to hook up their over-range microwave and that kind of change is a natural for the DIYer

Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 201
Member
It sounds to me like a good idea. The EC gets paid for the circuit and the homeowner has a receptacle that he can use to put whatever he wants above the stove. This is sort of like plugging in a coffee maker so the homeowner can do it correctly. Nothing changes if it is hardwired like most range hoods. [Linked Image]

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Charlie Eldridge, Indianapolis, Utility Power Guy


Charlie Eldridge, Indianapolis Utility Power Guy
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 345
T
Member
Charlie
I'm not trying to be quarrelsome when I say that you can take this look ahead stuff too far. I have had inspectors red tag a twelve slot panel that was used as service equipment because some one might install tandem breakers in it in the future. I've had home inspectors criticize multiwire branch circuits as a danger to do it yourself homeowners. The implications are ominous. If the entire electrical system has to be built so as to protect unqualified persons from their own stupidity we are heading down a dangerous road. It is a legal axiom that "no one can be required to imperil them self to rescue another from their own folly. That axiom is known as the doctrine of rescue. If the trend suggested by this change continues you should be able to sue uninvolved bystanders for not pulling you out of your burning car after you crash while driving drunk. I do realize that I'm offering an extreme example but that really is were this nanny state regulation is heading.
--
Tom H


Tom Horne

"This alternating current stuff is just a fad. It is much too dangerous for general use" Thomas Alva Edison
Page 2 of 3 1 2 3

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