Latest circuit requirements for kitchen appliances (island hood, fridge, etc)

Status
Not open for further replies.
P

pfus

Member
Location
Chicago NW burbs
Occupation
Elect. Engineer
What are the latest code requirements regarding circuits for kitchen appliances?
1.) Fridge: I believe it is required now to be on its on breaker?
2.) Dishwasher: own breaker
3.) Microwave own breaker
4.) how about island kitchen exhaust?

P.S. in Chicago conduit land
 
pfus said:
What are the latest code requirements regarding circuits for kitchen appliances?
1.) Fridge: I believe it is required now to be on its on breaker?
2.) Dishwasher: own breaker
3.) Microwave own breaker
4.) how about island kitchen exhaust?

P.S. in Chicago conduit land
Click to expand...
pfus,
When you have a second please update your profile to include your correct location and occupation. Thanks.
 
letgomywago said:
Chicago I think deleted afci requirements
Click to expand...
They are in the Chicago code, but they added exceptions which have the effect of deleting them. The Chicago code is based on the 2017 NEC, so the exceptions apply to the 210.12 language as found in the 2017 NEC.
Exception No. 1 to 210.12(A), (B), and (C): It shall be permitted to omit AFCI protection for that portion of the branch circuit enclosed in rigid metal conduit (RMC), intermediate metal conduit (IMC), electrical metal tubing (EMT), or Type MI cable sheath meeting the requirements of 250.118 along with metal outlet and junction boxes.
Exception No. 2 to 210.12(D): It shall be permitted to omit AFCI protection for that portion of the branch circuit installed in rigid metal conduit (RMC), intermediate metal conduit (IMC), electrical metal tubing (EMT), or steel sheathed cable, Type AC, Type MC, or Type MI cable sheath, meeting the requirements of 250.118, with metal outlet and junction boxes.
Click to expand...
That combined with the requirement to use EMT for dwelling units effectively eliminates the requirement for AFCIs in Chicago.

Note that some of the Chicagoland burbs, have the EMT requirement, but do not have the Chicago exceptions to 210.12.
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
They are in the Chicago code, but they added exceptions which have the effect of deleting them. The Chicago code is based on the 2017 NEC, so the exceptions apply to the 210.12 language as found in the 2017 NEC.

That combined with the requirement to use EMT for dwelling units effectively eliminates the requirement for AFCIs in Chicago.

Note that some of the Chicagoland burbs, have the EMT requirement, but do not have the Chicago exceptions to 210.12.
Click to expand...
Those odd ball areas in the outskirts make me wonder if they're aware afci is required if in those instances. Still emt offers device level afci protection which is easier to deal with especially when gfi is required so heavily you can use a dualfunction device
 
electrofelon said:
Although it's a good idea, #2 and #3 not required to be dedicated.
Click to expand...
disagree. Don't think 210 will allow these fastened-in-place appliances to be on just some general purpose circuit, like DW on with lights or SAPC. assumed Micro was OTR and not counter. You'll get the call if not dedicated circuit but I could be wrong.

I'd be careful of the circuit source for modern GAS ranges because many have 1200w heating element for convection feature and this might no longer be considered "supplemental"(210 exception) equipment.
 
farmantenna said:
disagree. Don't think 210 will allow these fastened-in-place appliances to be on just some general purpose circuit, like DW on with lights or SAPC. assumed Micro was OTR and not counter. You'll get the call if not dedicated circuit but I could be wrong.

I'd be careful of the circuit source for modern GAS ranges because many have 1200w heating element for convection feature and this might no longer be considered "supplemental"(210 exception) equipment.
Click to expand...
I'd be happy to look at a code section if you want to provide one supporting your position😉
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top