Article 210.19(A)(3) Exception 1

[Dennis Alwon]

Had a discussion about this last night at our meeting and I would like some help with clarification. The image below should explain it all. Basically using 210.19(A)(3_ except.1 what are the tap conductors? Are they only the wires from the leads of the appliances or does it include the section with the "?" which are field run wires. In other words can I run 10/3 nm from the first jb to the jb's for the appliances or does it need to be 6/3nm

 

[augie47]

I think the key is in the last sentence "The taps shall not be longer than necessary for servicing the appliance".
That may still be a judgement call, but it certainly would give some limit.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

I think the key is in the last sentence "The taps shall not be longer than necessary for servicing the appliance".
That may still be a judgement call, but it certainly would give some limit.

But that does not answer my question. Are the whips the tap conductors or could it be the 10/3 nm I run to the whips. Let's say the run of 10/3 is only 5' on each one.

 

[augie47]

The exception also states the taps "include any leads supplied with the appliance". I read that to mean you could include the 5' of 10/3 if that was needed to service the appliance.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

The exception also states the taps "include any leads supplied with the appliance". I read that to mean you could include the 5' of 10/3 if that was needed to service the appliance.

That is the part that is giving me a problem. I read it as "The tap conductors are the leads from the appliance". The include means nothing without more info and why would the leads be mentioned if no distance is given anyway.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

This is what I found in the handbook but it is not enough

 

[fmtjfw]

240.2 Definitions.
Tap Conductors. As used in this article, a tap conductor is
defined as a conductor, other than a service conductor, that
has overcurrent protection ahead of its point of supply that
exceeds the value permitted for similar conductors that are
protected as described elsewhere in 240.4.

So if the OCPD is larger than that required for the conductor, it is a tap.

Note this definition is in 240 and may not apply to other articles?

 

[PetrosA]

My reading of it agrees with augie47's - no longer than needed to service the equipment. If the factory whip allows you to remove the wall oven when attached to a JB (not all of them do...), then up to that JB would have to be wiring rated for the full 50A. Same with the cooktop. A spliced in piece between a j-box in the basement or crawlspace, or even from behind the oven to the cooktop would not be part of the wiring needed to remove the appliance and would also have to be rated for the full 50A. Maybe silly, but that's how it reads to me. Now, if you were to put in a 4 space panel and run two smaller fused lines to the appliances I wouldn't see a problem with that from a safety perspective I'm not sure that it's compliant though. Would that panel be treated like any other sub-panel and be required to have a neutral and a ground separate even though you don't need them? I've seen 240V only panels at HVAC units, but they kind of looked like someone put them in later.

 

[texie]

But that does not answer my question. Are the whips the tap conductors or could it be the 10/3 nm I run to the whips. Let's say the run of 10/3 is only 5' on each one.

Interesting question. I was always of the opinion that the tap was a whip just long enough to service the appliance.

Since you ask the question, this makes me wonder if anyone still uses this exception. I have not seen it done in many years. I think this dates back to earlier days of electric kitchens. Is it just me, or is that a reality?

 

[PetrosA]

Interesting question. I was always of the opinion that the tap was a whip just long enough to service the appliance.

Since you ask the question, this makes me wonder if anyone still uses this exception. I have not seen it done in many years. I think this dates back to earlier days of electric kitchens. Is it just me, or is that a reality?

I would say the manufacturers are the ones using the exception. They're the ones installing the whips.

 

[curt swartz]

I have not put much thought into this but I'm inclined to say the the appliance whips are the taps. If you were to run #10's from the 50 amp circuit J-box to the oven box then the oven shows up with #12 leads you now have created a tap of a tap.

 

[augie47]

Dennis, What was the outcome of your discussion at the meeting ?

 

[Dennis Alwon]

Dennis, What was the outcome of your discussion at the meeting ?

Well I believe I was the only one who thought that the whip was the only tap allowed. It just doesn't make sense that a run of 10/3 could be run like that and not terminate in an overcurrent protective device as a feeder would be. This being a branch circuit of course, doesn't need to follow article 240. The last sentence states the taps must be no longer than necessary for servicing the equipment--- the 10/3 is not there to service the equipment , I believe, because it is the whip that would be used for the servicing. That's my take but I was the lone wolf.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

My reading of it agrees with augie47's - no longer than needed to service the equipment. If the factory whip allows you to remove the wall oven when attached to a JB (not all of them do...), then up to that JB would have to be wiring rated for the full 50A. Same with the cooktop. A spliced in piece between a j-box in the basement or crawlspace, or even from behind the oven to the cooktop would not be part of the wiring needed to remove the appliance and would also have to be rated for the full 50A. Maybe silly, but that's how it reads to me. Now, if you were to put in a 4 space panel and run two smaller fused lines to the appliances I wouldn't see a problem with that from a safety perspective I'm not sure that it's compliant though. Would that panel be treated like any other sub-panel and be required to have a neutral and a ground separate even though you don't need them? I've seen 240V only panels at HVAC units, but they kind of looked like someone put them in later.

I don't think that Augie (GUS) was saying that. It sounds like you agree with me-- the whip is the only part that are tap conductors... that's my take

 

[mwm1752]

Had a discussion about this last night at our meeting and I would like some help with clarification. The image below should explain it all. Basically using 210.19(A)(3_ except.1 what are the tap conductors? Are they only the wires from the leads of the appliances or does it include the section with the "?" which are field run wires. In other words can I run 10/3 nm from the first jb to the jb's for the appliances or does it need to be 6/3nm

210.19(A)(3) is specific to the cooking appliances I would say no to the 10-3 being part of the branch circuit -- 210.19(4) is the only way to reduce conductor size for the branch circuit as drawn IMO

 

[Dennis Alwon]

The exception also states the taps "include any leads supplied with the appliance". I read that to mean you could include the 5' of 10/3 if that was needed to service the appliance.

I am not sure how the 10/3 would be needed to service the appliance. Sorry I missed the "IF" before

 

[GoldDigger]

If you look at the illustration from the handbook, it leaves out part of what is under discussion. The J-box is accessible while both the oven and the range are in place and so they appear not to be long enough to allow the appliances to be removed without detaching them.
They are just long enough to supply power to ("service" ?) the equipment.
With regard to petrosa's comment, possibly the exception came into being when existing single unit stove/cooktop combinations were being replaced with more stylish separate units.
The rule allowed the original single circuit to supply both without having to replace the factory whips with larger conductors.
If that rationale is correct, then the rule would not have to be used to cover new extensions of the circuit from the original J-box to one at the new location, but it could be used anyway to save money on conductors or save copper "for the war".

Tapatalk!

 

[Dennis Alwon]

I have not put much thought into this but I'm inclined to say the the appliance whips are the taps. If you were to run #10's from the 50 amp circuit J-box to the oven box then the oven shows up with #12 leads you now have created a tap of a tap.

Well suppose #12 was enough for the install. Then you have a splice of tap- would that change anything?

 

[PetrosA]

I don't know if this makes any difference to the argument, but I've noticed that generally, the wires in the whips are one size smaller than what we would have to run per NEC and the insulation is rated at either 130C or 150C. Does that possibly make the whip part of the appliance, and not a tap?

 

[GoldDigger]

I don't know if this makes any difference to the argument, but I've noticed that generally, the wires in the whips are one size smaller than what we would have to run per NEC and the insulation is rated at either 130C or 150C. Does that possibly make the whip part of the appliance, and not a tap?

I would say that it potentially does both, actually. Thank you for pointing that out.
But even if it is not really undersized for the load current, it could still be a tap off the original circuit wiring protected at a higher ampacity.