Receptacles In Drawers.

Status
Not open for further replies.

iwire

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Massachusetts
Well it can't fly as far as the required bathroom sink receptacle.

I see no code violation as far as an optional receptacle assuming it is GFCI protected.
 

Dennis Alwon

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Chapel Hill, NC
Occupation
Retired Electrical Contractor
iwire said:
Well it can't fly as far as the required bathroom sink receptacle.

I see no code violation as far as an optional receptacle assuming it is GFCI protected.

What kind of cable or cord would you use to make this code compliant.
 

M. D.

Senior Member
I guess so, the question I have is, what is feeding it or may be that drawer is fixed in the open posistion:grin: I'm happy to see that it ain't the curling iron that is plugged in ,..much harder to burn the place down with a hair dryer :smile:
 

M. D.

Senior Member
All that "hair product" would make for quite a pyrotechnic display. Those cans probably say "store away from heat sources".:grin: Looks the the makings of a crude bomb to me :smile:
 

iwire

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Massachusetts
M. D. said:
All that "hair product" would make for quite a pyrotechnic display.

:grin:

I never said it was a good idea. :grin:

How about I add a high limit switch in the drawer to shut it down if it gets hot in the drawer?

Or a switch that energizes the receptacle only when the drawer is open?

;)
 

iwire

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Massachusetts
Receptacles In Drawers.

MD posted this picture over at Kitchen Island ......Here we go again.

2yl0207.jpg


I think it deserves it's own thread so we don't get to far OT in the Island thread.
 

M. D.

Senior Member
I too think it can be acomplished and be code compliant.
I would be somewhat surprised if this installation were to be so.

We agree then , that this type of installation would be of no use to address the concern stated in the original post, as Pierre has pointed out ?
 

iwire

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Massachusetts
M. D. said:
We agree then , that this type of installation would be of no use to address the concern stated in the original post, as Pierre has pointed out ?

Yes I agree Pierre is correct.
 

iwire

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Massachusetts
I imagine the cord is run out the back of the box.

That said it must be a small cord in order to come in the back of a handy box and still fit an outlet.
 

George Stolz

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Windsor, CO NEC: 2017
Occupation
Service Manager
I've done this before and I'd do it again.

If the handy box pictured is not directly wired into the premises wiring system - if it is cord-and-plug connected into a GFCI protected receptacle, then what we are seeing is arguably not covered by the NEC. :)
 

iwire

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Massachusetts
georgestolz said:
I've done this before and I'd do it again.

If the handy box pictured is not directly wired into the premises wiring system - if it is cord-and-plug connected into a GFCI protected receptacle, then what we are seeing is arguably not covered by the NEC. :)

Hmmm.

So the NEC does not require Window shakers to have certain protections built in to the cord?

The NEC is not requiring vending machines to incorporate GFCIs in cords?

The NEC is not requiring factory installed disconnects in lighting fixtures?

I know what your saying George and I want to agree but it is not black and white to me. :)

That aside, lets say it was hard wired.....IMO still no violation.
 

donselectric

Senior Member
Location
nh
cords cant be used for perm wiring and cant pass through a drilled hole in
wood. thats my story and i'm stickin to it...
it would'nt fly around here..:wink:
 
For cords, 400.8(1) & (7), yes I would say without being able to see the length of cord it could be subject to physical damage. Remember the premise that cords are supposed to be visible their entire length, hence 400.8.

Also, hard wiring for this would not be permitted. What type of Chapter 3 wiring method would one use for the constant opening and closing of the draw?

George
If you are installing this, it would be a violation on your part, as it is field wiring...you are not installing a manufactured device. If a manufacturer designs and sells a listed product for this application, I would accept it.
 

LawnGuyLandSparky

Senior Member
Many of these newer vanities are backless. What about installing a receptacle in the wall directly behind the drawer? To me it's no different than installing a receptacle under a kitchen sink for a disposal or a dishwasher.
 

iwire

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Massachusetts
Pierre C Belarge said:
For cords, 400.8(1) & (7), yes I would say without being able to see the length of cord it could be subject to physical damage.

First off 400.8(1) and (7) are irrelevant as this installation is specifically permitted by 400.7(A)(9).

Next I find it interesting you can tell from this picture that the cord is subject to damage.

Lets say I have a commercial electric overhead door.

Lets say it has a reversing safety edge on the bottom of it.

What wiring method may I use to connect the door that may move 8' 10' 12' up and down to the stationary motor operator?

Of course flexible cord.

Is the cord in the drawer more subject to damage then the rubber cord hanging beside a overhead door?

Remember the premise that cords are supposed to be visible their entire length, hence 400.8.

Again not relevant.

The NEC does not require a cord to be visible their entire length.

Also, hard wiring for this would not be permitted. What type of Chapter 3 wiring method would one use for the constant opening and closing of the draw?

Your right no method in Chapter 3 is suitable for this use.

Some of the flexible cords in Article 400 are suitable for this use.

It's not about how we feel about it, it is about what the code does or does not require.
 

George Stolz

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Windsor, CO NEC: 2017
Occupation
Service Manager
Pierre C Belarge said:
If a manufacturer designs and sells a listed product for this application, I would accept it.
Where in the NEC is it required that we use listed appliances? :)

Is it not the AHJ's responsibility to approve/disapprove of equipment?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top