No lights on SABC rule

[Nutmegger]

Since the NEC is not a design guide, there must be a safety reason for the rule prohibiting lighting outlets on small appliance branch circuits.
What is that reason?

 

[growler]

Since the NEC is not a design guide, there must be a safety reason for the rule prohibiting lighting outlets on small appliance branch circuits.
What is that reason?

My dad used to say if you give them an inch they will take a mile.

If you want to have a minimum of 2 small appliance circuits you would have to have some sort of limit on what's allowed to be connected. If you wish to alllow some lighting then just how many would you allow?

I would think the code is written this way because it's they only way that it's clear enough to enforce it.

 

[mbrooke]

Consider what gets plugged into a SABC. Often multiple 900-1500 watt appliances. Typical busy morning breakfast often maxes out the circuit. Do you really want other loads? That and the fact if a SABC goes (I've done it) you loose the lights as well.

 

[kwired]

Since the NEC is not a design guide, there must be a safety reason for the rule prohibiting lighting outlets on small appliance branch circuits.
What is that reason?

All things considered, NEC overall principle of requiring the SABC's as they do is an example of NEC violating their own purpose in 90.1 and is to some extent design/guide instruction.

Safety? If you have 20 amp conductors and a 20 amp overcurrent device, the overcurrent device should trip before there is any safety issues. So what if it leaves you in a dark room, it certainly doesn't matter in most other rooms.

 

[mbrooke]

All things considered, NEC overall principle of requiring the SABC's as they do is an example of NEC violating their own purpose in 90.1 and is to some extent design/guide instruction.

Safety? If you have 20 amp conductors and a 20 amp overcurrent device, the overcurrent device should trip before there is any safety issues. So what if it leaves you in a dark room, it certainly doesn't matter in most other rooms.

Look at it like this: Code requiring X number of receptacles per X feet of wall space seems like design and in many ways it is. But homes with a limited number of receptacles also have increased use of extension cords which increase the likely hood of fire.

 

[kwired]

Look at it like this: Code requiring X number of receptacles per X feet of wall space seems like design and in many ways it is. But homes with a limited number of receptacles also have increased use of extension cords which increase the likely hood of fire.

I do have some understanding for that concept. Prohibiting lighting outlets on a SABC doesn't really fit into that logic all that well though.

Besides we now have AFCI's to protect us from extension cord issues, what was the excuse before we had them:blink:

 

[mbrooke]

I do have some understanding for that concept. Prohibiting lighting outlets on a SABC doesn't really fit into that logic all that well though.

It does if you are running all the high hats in a large kitchen.

Besides we now have AFCI's to protect us from extension cord issues, what was the excuse before we had them:blink:

If it frays, not if someone decides to use a space heater or a window AC.

 

[growler]

All things considered, NEC overall principle of requiring the SABC's as they do is an example of NEC violating their own purpose in 90.1 and is to some extent design/guide instruction.

Safety? If you have 20 amp conductors and a 20 amp overcurrent device, the overcurrent device should trip before there is any safety issues. So what if it leaves you in a dark room, it certainly doesn't matter in most other rooms.

I don't see it that way. The idea is to have a minimum of two 20 Amp small appliance circuits.
This is a requirement and not design advice.

I think this does make a kitchen safer because if you didn't have this requirement you could have the whole kitchen wired on one 15 amp circuit (seen it done). Some people would call an electrician to add circuits and others would drag out the extension cords to other areas of the house.

 

[mbrooke]

I don't see it that way. The idea is to have a minimum of two 20 Amp small appliance circuits.
This is a requirement and not design advice.

I think this does make a kitchen safer because if you didn't have this requirement you could have the whole kitchen wired on one 15 amp circuit (seen it done). Some people would call an electrician to add circuits and others would drag out the extension cords to other areas of the house.

Yup- or go to HD and pull their own circuit/up-size said breaker. Granted that could happen anywhere- but with ample capacity the probability and temptation goes down.

 

[growler]

Yup- or go to HD and pull their own circuit/up-size said breaker. Granted that could happen anywhere- but with ample capacity the probability and temptation goes down.

They only state that a house wired to code meets the minimum safety standards and not that it's perfect.

 

[mbrooke]

They only state that a house wired to code meets the minimum safety standards and not that it's perfect.

And I would argue 99% of the time two SABC with minimal other loads works without issue. More would be over-kill less would start to cause problems 1% of the time and up as you go down in available VA. I know at times it seems arbitrary, but the 3va per foot rule among others are chosen based on what will work most of the time as is proven every day.

 

[kwired]

I don't see it that way. The idea is to have a minimum of two 20 Amp small appliance circuits.
This is a requirement and not design advice.

I think this does make a kitchen safer because if you didn't have this requirement you could have the whole kitchen wired on one 15 amp circuit (seen it done). Some people would call an electrician to add circuits and others would drag out the extension cords to other areas of the house.

I don't have much problem with dedicating a couple 20 amp circuits to the kitchen. It is somewhat silly to prohibit lighting outlets to be on them, even if you limit lighting outlets to the same room. We can put all the kitchen receptacles along with all the receptacles in a dining room, breakfast room, pantry, etc on just those two circuits, but add just one undercabinet light to either of those circuits and you have compromised the safety of those living in that dwelling??

Still should be up to designer and not a code requirement IMO. I myself would likely keep lights off said circuits in most instances, but like I said, a situation of something already existing and you want to add one undercabinet light that uses maybe 10VA max, just don't seem logical to me to not put it one of those outlets if it is convenient.

 

[480sparky]

I don't have much problem with dedicating a couple 20 amp circuits to the kitchen. It is somewhat silly to prohibit lighting outlets to be on them, even if you limit lighting outlets to the same room. We can put all the kitchen receptacles along with all the receptacles in a dining room, breakfast room, pantry, etc on just those two circuits, but add just one undercabinet light to either of those circuits and you have compromised the safety of those living in that dwelling??

Still should be up to designer and not a code requirement IMO. I myself would likely keep lights off said circuits in most instances, but like I said, a situation of something already existing and you want to add one undercabinet light that uses maybe 10VA max, just don't seem logical to me to not put it one of those outlets if it is convenient.

Then make a proposal for the 2020.

 

[kwired]

Then make a proposal for the 2020.

If I wanted to get rid of any codes where NEC contradicts itself as not being a design manual, this one is not where I would start, but it still is pushing it some on being a design issue IMO.

As long as this has been a requirement I know better then to even try, as one would need some pretty outstanding reasoning to convince them to even think about making any change here.

 

[growler]

I don't have much problem with dedicating a couple 20 amp circuits to the kitchen. It is somewhat silly to prohibit lighting outlets to be on them, even if you limit lighting outlets to the same room. We can put all the kitchen receptacles along with all the receptacles in a dining room, breakfast room, pantry, etc on just those two circuits, but add just one undercabinet light to either of those circuits and you have compromised the safety of those living in that dwelling??

How do you intend to clarify the number of lights allowed on the small appliance circuit. Once you allow some then you have opened up a real can of worms. I have been in a couple of kitchens where they needed a dedicated circuit just for the lights.

You have to admit that many times even the electrician doesn't have much to say about the electrical design. The only way you can get GCs and designers to be reasonable is to point out the fact that everything they want to put on one circuit is against code.

I don't see any problem with leaving the code just the way it is with 2 required small appliance circuits. On new contruction it's not a problem and on remodels people often don't pay attention anyway.

 

[ActionDave]

How do you intend to clarify the number of lights allowed on the small appliance circuit. Once you allow some then you have opened up a real can of worms. I have been in a couple of kitchens where they needed a dedicated circuit just for the lights.

You have to admit that many times even the electrician doesn't have much to say about the electrical design. The only way you can get GCs and designers to be reasonable is to point out the fact that everything they want to put on one circuit is against code.

I don't see any problem with leaving the code just the way it is with 2 required small appliance circuits. On new contruction it's not a problem and on remodels people often don't pay attention anyway.

Everything you say here points up how this is a design issue and not a safety issue.

 

[480sparky]

If I wanted to get rid of any codes where NEC contradicts itself as not being a design manual, this one is not where I would start, but it still is pushing it some on being a design issue IMO.

As long as this has been a requirement I know better then to even try, as one would need some pretty outstanding reasoning to convince them to even think about making any change here.

Just remember............ there was a time it was permitted. So perhaps you should research why the exclusion was created in the first place.

 

[kwired]

Just remember............ there was a time it was permitted. So perhaps you should research why the exclusion was created in the first place.

There also was a time when there was no NEC, and a time when man hadn't discovered how to use electrical energy.

This rule AFAIK has been in place for quite a while before I ever started wiring. I don't know when it came into effect, but even here where codes were not enforced that much in dwellings until 1990's, you still find 1950 -1960's homes that seemed to sort of follow that rule to some extent (kitchen receptacles typically have no other loads connected to them), so it was either a rule then or people were just smart enough with design concerns to do it that way anyhow.

 

[mbrooke]

There also was a time when there was no NEC, and a time when man hadn't discovered how to use electrical energy.

This rule AFAIK has been in place for quite a while before I ever started wiring. I don't know when it came into effect, but even here where codes were not enforced that much in dwellings until 1990's, you still find 1950 -1960's homes that seemed to sort of follow that rule to some extent (kitchen receptacles typically have no other loads connected to them), so it was either a rule then or people were just smart enough with design concerns to do it that way anyhow.

Around here up until the 90s the code was loosely enforced. Electricians knew that and wired more for what worked for them and the area. Its very common to find dinning rooms wired in #14 and to have the range hood and under sink light wired off the SABC. DW and Disposer on the same #12. In so far there are zero problems with this.

I will agree with you that code is antiquated. Ie, it was not until recently they took the term rubber out of describing wire insulation.

My only hold back on allow lights on the SABC is that there must be a listed limit. One or two lights are ok, but if 1,200 watts of high hats gets put on the SABC it defeats the intention of the rule.

 

[ActionDave]

How do you get from here....

Around here up until the 90s the code was loosely enforced. Electricians knew that and wired more for what worked for them and the area. Its very common to find dinning rooms wired in #14 and to have the range hood and under sink light wired off the SABC. DW and Disposer on the same #12. In so far there are zero problems with this.

to here?

My only hold back on allow lights on the SABC is that there must be a listed limit. One or two lights are ok, but if 1,200 watts of high hats gets put on the SABC it defeats the intention of the rule.

Cognitive dissonance is the only answer.