Romex From Wall to Garbage Disposal

[A/A Fuel GTX]

Putting in a receptacle under the sink and having the plumber supply the pigtailed disposer

Must be nice, the plumbers I work with never supply the pigtail just like the HVAC guys never supply the whip to the condensor unit.

 

[M. D.]

I use this box ,.. crank it out about an 1.5" works great

 

[walkerj]

Never thought of split-wiring one duplex?

I've never been a fan of a two-pole or handle tied breaker for this scenario.

So, I usually splurge for the extra outlet and box.

A whopping $12.67 installed and completely idiot proof

 

[gndrod]

xtra

xtra

Must be nice, the plumbers I work with never supply the pigtail just like the HVAC guys never supply the whip to the condensor unit.

It's part of the extras covered in the contract for garage door opener, range, dryer, and all other appliances delivered without connected pigtails. A/C's and Heatpumps, well pumps....are flex connected with disconnects as part of the contract. The GC or owner gets the idea. rbj

 

[wawireguy]

I got the fix for this one... Just don't do it! Put a receptacle in the wall and use a cord to connect your disposal.

 

[iaov]

A cord is much more tolerant to repeated bending at the connector then solid NM, at least IMO.

I think in reality also.

 

[LarryFine]

A whopping $12.67 installed and completely idiot proof

Let us not forget the labor to pull and terminate two cables (6 cond's vs 4 at both ends) as well as assemble and install the two boxes.

 

[partimer31]

Romex from wall garage disposal

Romex from wall garage disposal

I check with Carlon, and correct if I am wrong, but if a "PIG" garbage disposal
is considered a Motor connector then E.N.T. should not be used.

 

[riggenbw]

Okay, here's the deal. There's a discussion going on at another forum. It's a home inspectors forum and I am trying to figure out if my interpretation is wrong or right. I sure hope I don't have to suck up and admit I'm wrong but I've been wrong before!!

You've got your standard residential wiring, romex coming out of a drilled hole at the back of a cabinet. The romex runs over and is connected to the garbage disposal. The electrician slid a piece of ENT over the romex, no j-boxes or connectors on either end.

I am considering the ENT a sleeve and is there for the protection of the romex. I have read on this site where some feel that exposed romex is okay in this type of installation and others on here feel like it needs protection...about 50/50. Some of the others over at the HI site are saying that this is a raceway and needs a j-box and proper connectors and supported as required by the NEC.

Am I way out in left field on this one? Please let me know if I am making a mistake by allowing the electrician to use ENT in this type of installation without boxes, connectors and securing as stated in the NEC for raceways/ENT.

Here is a link to the discussion.
http://www.inspectionnews.net/home_inspection/electrical-systems-home-inspection-commercial-inspection/13399-romex-through-sheetrock.html#post84516

Sounds like the installation violates Art 422.31 (requiring disconnecting means of permanently connected appliances). The operating switch for the disposal is not "within sight" of the disposal, and therefore does not qualify as a disonnecting means. Since the early 80's we have installed a receptacle in the wall behind the sink base cabinet. When actually connecting the disposal, we install a short cord and cap to connect it to the power source. This does qualify as a disconnecting means. This also precludes NC cable, whether sleeved or not, from qualifying as a legal installation.

 

[realolman]

I think that's a pretty darn literal... too literal.. interpretation of "in sight"

My goodness the switch is right on top the countertop, the only way in or out is through the cabinet door....

you'd have a bit of difficulty positioning yourself at the g disp. without seeing the switch... or IMO the intent... someone turning on the switch without seeing you.

not suggesting those caliber doofuses aren't out there, though

 

[vinster888]

I think that's a pretty darn literal... too literal.. interpretation of "in sight"

My goodness the switch is right on top the countertop, the only way in or out is through the cabinet door....

you'd have a bit of difficulty positioning yourself at the g disp. without seeing the switch... or IMO the intent... someone turning on the switch without seeing you.

not suggesting those caliber doofuses aren't out there, though

sad thing for us is there is more of them out there than you think.

 

[iwire]

There is no NEC requiment that you must be able to see the switch while looking in the wiring compartment of the motor.

 

[realolman]

Art 100: In sight from ..... One equipment is visible and not more than 50 ft. from the other.

 

[mxslick]

Art 100: In sight from ..... One equipment is visible and not more than 50 ft. from the other.

Nice try..but you could have the breaker situated so that when working on the equipment the breaker is behind you and it would still be a fully compliant installation.

 

[realolman]

I agree the breaker could be behind you. Nice try at what?

An earlier post stated

The operating switch for the disposal is not "within sight" of the disposal, and therefore does not qualify as a disonnecting means.

I think it should qualify, although taken absolutely literally, I suppose it would not.

Iwire posted:

There is no NEC requiment that you must be able to see the switch while looking in the wiring compartment of the motor.

In my post I paraphrased the exact definition in Art. 100
Here's the exact definition:

In Sight From (Within Sight From, Within Sight) Where this Code specifies that one equipment shall be "in sight from, " within sight from," or "within sight", and so forth, of another equipment, the specified equipment is to be visible and not more than 15 m (50 ft) distant from the other.

I think the idea is that a reasonably cognizant person would not turn it on while you work on it. So I think the garbage disposal switch on the "other side" of the counter, while you are unlikely to be "in" the cabinet, and are only a couple feet from the switch, and would practically have to be stepped on in a residential setting to operate the switch, should qualify....

...but hey, if you wanna get real technical, you can't see one from the other.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

I have had homeowners turn switches on lights while I was working on them. It can happen but I rarely install a switch under the sink. I did, however, get turned down for installing a disco for a hot tub that could not be seen when you worked on the tub motor. The tub itself was in the way and the disco was on a way adjacent to the tub about 10 feet from the tub.

Ahj can rule that anyway they want to.

 

[alex_713]

I put in cord/recept. It's usually a better idea to use stranded wire connecting motors anyway.