Island Outlet Outage - AFCI next?

I saw it under the furniture listing, but also under this one:

So, the listing to UL-498 is just a general listing for receptacles, and does not include countertop receptacles? Are these listed to be installed in the floor or maybe a windowsill instead of a countertop?

Obviously I have not paid for the standard, but I thought the countertop requirements came from a section of UL-498.

Pop-Up Receptacle, Model Nos. PUR or UCPDR followed by 15 or 20, followed by four to twelve characters
A representative sample of the listed devices have been tested, investigated and found to comply with the requirements of the Standard(s) for Electrical Attachment Plugs and Receptacles (UL-498) and are identified with the ETL Listed Mark.
And that is the issue...without specifying exactly what sections of the standard a product is listed to, you have no idea of what application it has been listed for. In the original post, the ad said it complied with section 147 of UL 498 which is the mechanical endurance. It said nothing about compliance with 146 or 149 for the spill testing, even though the text of the ad does mention the 64 ounce spill test. Maybe that is a new product for them and it does comply, but without something telling me what sections or UL 498 that it complies with, I really don't know
 
According to the listing information at ETL that product is listed as a "furniture power distribution unit" and is not suitable for installation in countertops.
According to the product info provided by Hubbell in their "specifications" (which I assume are real info and not just marketing hype) this is UL 498 Section146 "Spillproof" and UL listed E2186. Also Canadian listing.
 
According to the product info provided by Hubbell in their "specifications" (which I assume are real info and not just marketing hype) this is UL 498 Section146 "Spillproof" and UL listed E2186. Also Canadian listing.
My comment that you quoted was aimed at the Lew product. As far as I know Hubbell is still the only manufacturer that has a listed countertop pop up receptacle assembly.
 
Like other post in the past these cmp guys need to find a new Job. These changes are just dump and not a safety issue.
You can’t fix stupid!
My kid pulled a cord and yanked crap on him, beside his second degree burns he would get an ass slapping.

I touched a front of a stove when I was a kid you know what I never did again.
Same with paper clip in socket .

Everyone just wants masked kids in bubbles. Hell live life you only got one. Only reason we as a society are we’re we are is from people expermiting- good and bad outcomes, you learn from them.

Should ban receptacles since people put in space heater let’s just hard wire everything or even safer just no electricity for anyone
 
Like other post in the past these cmp guys need to find a new Job. These changes are just dump and not a safety issue.
You can’t fix stupid!
There is even some question as to the accuracy of the statistics provided in the PI for this code change. Something like 9700 injuries over a period of 30 years.
 
I get some rules need tweaking but in 10 years once some company lines the pockets of these cmp or there bosses we will see a rule change back.
It’s just like politics and lobbyists lol no difference

I will no longer comment since I can cause fights just wanted to state my opinion

We should but differences aside and all team up to ban Home inspectors
 
There is even some question as to the accuracy of the statistics provided in the PI for this code change. Something like 9700 injuries over a period of 30 years.
My dad use to own a large civil engineering business in Portland Oregon.
There was a wicked curve in are area that when trees were harvested. You would fall 100 feet no gaurd railes. One day liked down saw a huge buss down the hill. Asked him why state won’t put up gaurd railes.
He told me they have to have so xxx number of deaths per year to address it. Number of deaths reset each year. I forgot what number but it was double digits.

So car crash deaths on road are less stringent then, Receptacle placement lol seems funny to think about that comparison in my mind.
 
My dad use to own a large civil engineering business in Portland Oregon.
There was a wicked curve in are area that when trees were harvested. You would fall 100 feet no gaurd railes. One day liked down saw a huge buss down the hill. Asked him why state won’t put up gaurd railes.
He told me they have to have so xxx number of deaths per year to address it. Number of deaths reset each year. I forgot what number but it was double digits.

So car crash deaths on road are less stringent then, Receptacle placement lol seems funny to think about that comparison in my mind.

Rocky point road up near Skyline?
 
If you have a back wall then you probably don't have an island?

Peninsula would have a back wall to the adjoining counter, but that is not part of the peninsula even though there is only an imaginary line separating the two in most cases.
Maybe an island with two counter heights? I've installed horizontal receptacles in the six inch space in islands where there is both a counter height and a bar height section.
 
I recently found out that per the 2023 NEC, islands no longer require to have outlets. Blew my mind, I found out by accident due to a youtube video. I thought it was a click bait title.

After years of increasing the requirements for outlets at island, poof, gone.

I had never seen such an about face and got me wondering - could the great invasion of AFCI breakers be next?
2023 NEC TX
Yeah, you, we, collectively speaking us electricians, will now assume the responsibility if you install a receptacle(s) for an island peninsular etc., see section 210.52(C)(1)(2)(3).

We are required as per 210.52(C)(2)..........to provide for future addition of a receptacle outlet......

OK, So you rough in for future receptacle (s) and you install them as you would normally would do, perhaps at the home owners request or someone else, remember, you are liable should any thing that may happen should there be an accidental spillage on to someone and cause acute harm.

I'm not a legal expert by any means, but I can't tell you what to do.

I know what I'd do, have the owner sign a legal document relieving me of any harm should there be an accidental spillage or harm to some one.

Because the Code only requires to provide for future addition.

Read all of 210.52(C)(1)(2)(3)_(1) (2)(3) for future options.

TX+MASTER#4544
 
OK, So you rough in for future receptacle (s) and you install them as you would normally would do, perhaps at the home owners request or someone else, remember, you are liable should any thing that may happen should there be an accidental spillage on to someone and cause acute harm.
I'm curious as to why someone would "install them as you would normally would do," when they're no longer permitted in the side of the island? Isn't that just asking for trouble?
 
The manufacturers don't make any real money from island receptacles, so it doesn't matter to them if they are eliminated. But AFCIs are here to stay and will only be expanded. Some engineer at Eaton is probably designing AFCIs for automotive use right now.
 
2023 NEC TX
Yeah, you, we, collectively speaking us electricians, will now assume the responsibility if you install a receptacle(s) for an island peninsular etc., see section 210.52(C)(1)(2)(3).

We are required as per 210.52(C)(2)..........to provide for future addition of a receptacle outlet......

OK, So you rough in for future receptacle (s) and you install them as you would normally would do, perhaps at the home owners request or someone else, remember, you are liable should any thing that may happen should there be an accidental spillage on to someone and cause acute harm.

I'm not a legal expert by any means, but I can't tell you what to do.

I know what I'd do, have the owner sign a legal document relieving me of any harm should there be an accidental spillage or harm to some one.

Because the Code only requires to provide for future addition.

Read all of 210.52(C)(1)(2)(3)_(1) (2)(3) for future options.

TX+MASTER#4544
There is no way that such a document would relieve you from liability. You are knowing installing something in violation of the rules found in the legally adopted electrical code, and no document will change that. In fact having such a document actually increases your liability because it shows that you knowingly violated the adopted code. The plantiff's attorney would tear you apart on the stand. It is also likely that your insurace company would not back you up as you have a document that shows you knew the installation was a violation of the code and a safety hazard.
 
As far as I know Hubbell is still the only manufacturer that has a listed countertop pop up receptacle assembly.
Can NEC have a rule to use a product only made by one manufacturer? I thought this was a reason in the past for delayed enforcement dates being part of code language?
 
Maybe an island with two counter heights? I've installed horizontal receptacles in the six inch space in islands where there is both a counter height and a bar height section.
I have done many islands where there is a verticle back splash running along the length on one side . This 2026 thing sounds like it will not allow for outlets in that splash as well?
I have such counter design in my own kitchen and do have receptacles in that six inch space. If NEC wants to specifically include or exclude that then they need to word it more clearly. That said I think is good idea to put them there, if anything they don't count as serving the countertop in 2023 NEC and are totally optional. Prohibiting them like may be the case in 2026 is just plain stupid. I'm fine with them being optional I'm fine with receptacle on the side of the cabined being optional, even if it isn't counted as serving the countertop.
 
Can NEC have a rule to use a product only made by one manufacturer? I thought this was a reason in the past for delayed enforcement dates being part of code language?
Yes. They cannot specify a product by brand name. They could also not specify a product where a patent prevented other manufacturers from making a similar product. That is not the case here...there are many ways the requirement of the product standard could be met. The Hubbell patent does not prevent other manufactures from designing a product and having it listed to the product standard.
 
I have such counter design in my own kitchen and do have receptacles in that six inch space. If NEC wants to specifically include or exclude that then they need to word it more clearly. That said I think is good idea to put them there, if anything they don't count as serving the countertop in 2023 NEC and are totally optional. Prohibiting them like may be the case in 2026 is just plain stupid. I'm fine with them being optional I'm fine with receptacle on the side of the cabined being optional, even if it isn't counted as serving the countertop.

IMHO this is another example of an installation that solves the problem of cords being yanked from the side of islands, and thus should not be prohibited even if the receptacles in the 6" space did serve the countertop.

I can think of any number of trim details or island layout that would protect cords from receptacles on the side of islands serving the countertop.
 
My comment that you quoted was aimed at the Lew product. As far as I know Hubbell is still the only manufacturer that has a listed countertop pop up receptacle assembly.
sorry I missed that. Good clarifiation. thanks. I am quoting on a kitchen and general remodeling renovation project and it includes a long penninsula. Customer has specifically asked for pop-up outlets. This brought me here.
 
Top