Microwave oven circuits in remodeled kitchens

[ramsy]

That's why I analyze the situation and violate the code if need be. I use common sense, not man-made rules.

If fire-code violations can be found, those rules allow property insurance to settle for next to nothing, deny claims, and keep years of property-insurance premiums --without having to pay a dime in claims--.

If your new plug replacement(s) missed A/GFCI or TR protection, and either 1) some toddler sticks a knife in the slot, or 2) another idiot's flying splice ignites the building, any surviving relative or owner of damaged property can point out your outlet device, and show its manufacture date was after their State adopted the "Replacement code" NEC 406.4(D).

Any Insurance inspector / forensics, or State Fire Marshals that discover fire-code violations will be forced to deny claims. Further, since the hack responsible for the flying splice is not found anywhere, the legal doctrine of Joint-and-Several Liability makes your "1% Responsibility" for fire-code issues on the property "100% Liable" for damages.

Your the last man standing, which just happened to be found in the public domain --bragging about violating the fire code--. You worked on the property, and are easily proven negligent.

Any GL policy you had bails out for willful negligence, as you are easily found responsible for everything any other idiot may have done, especially without an invoice showing your work was nowhere near the attic, or a list of material charges showing A/GFCI & TR-protected devices were installed.

 

[mbrooke]

It costs less to run a new circuit before the remodel is all finished!!!

Depending on the level of remodel and the home itself. If the home has no basement or crawl space, finished attic and the panel is all the way on the other side of the home in an attached garage it becomes more difficult.

That's why I analyze the situation and violate the code if need be. I use common sense, not man-made rules.

Here I feel we can agree to the fullest extent.

 

[mbrooke]

If fire-code violations can be found, those rules allow property insurance to settle for next to nothing, deny claims, and keep years of property-insurance premiums --without having to pay a dime in claims--.

If your new plug replacement(s) missed A/GFCI or TR protection, and either 1) some toddler sticks a knife in the slot, or 2) another idiot's flying splice ignites the building, any surviving relative or owner of damaged property can point out your outlet device, and show its manufacture date was after their State adopted the "Replacement code" NEC 406.4(D).

Any Insurance inspector / forensics, or State Fire Marshals that discover fire-code violations will be forced to deny claims. Further, since the hack responsible for the flying splice is not found anywhere, the legal doctrine of Joint-and-Several Liability makes your "1% Responsibility" for fire-code issues on the property "100% Liable" for damages.

Your the last man standing, which just happened to be found in the public domain --bragging about violating the fire code--. You worked on the property, and are easily proven negligent.

Any GL policy you had bails out for willful negligence, as you are easily found responsible for everything any other idiot may have done, especially without an invoice showing your work was nowhere near the attic, or a list of material charges showing A/GFCI & TR-protected devices were installed.

Yes in a worse case (very low probability) liability sense- but not one of those actually present a fire hazard.

A flying splice isn't anymore susceptible to burning down a home- any failing splice is capable of reaching temperatures that will ignite and burn through anything like a box. Even a metal box can transfer enough heat to ignite framing members. Absolutely nothing in the NEC other then workmanship addresses bad splices.

In terms of the microwave, yes there is a greater probability of over loading the circuit, but that is why circuit breakers exist. CMP members in ROPs have openly admitted this when presented with code proposals such as why can a single 20amp circuit feed unlimited bathroom receptacles- answer was that the breaker protected the circuit from overloading.

 

[Adamjamma]

In terms of the microwave, yes there is a greater probability of over loading the circuit, but that is why circuit breakers exist. CMP members in ROPs have openly admitted this when presented with code proposals such as why can a single 20amp circuit feed unlimited bathroom receptacles- answer was that the breaker protected the circuit from overloading.

It is funny... I mean, UK is not worried about it, but Jamaica requires separate circuit for each of the big appliances... freezer, fridge, microwave, dishwasher, washing machine... and the USA has a no problem on some of those being on sabc... but suggests different circuit, just don't put it on an RCD outlet over a counter to protect the hidden while in place outlet...

Then we have the bathroom circuit: if you feed the light it cannot feed more than one bathroom but if it does not feed the lights you can feed twenty bathrooms...

No wonder we have trouble figuring out the codes!

 

[mbrooke]

It is funny... I mean, UK is not worried about it, but Jamaica requires separate circuit for each of the big appliances... freezer, fridge, microwave, dishwasher, washing machine... and the USA has a no problem on some of those being on sabc... but suggests different circuit, just don't put it on an RCD outlet over a counter to protect the hidden while in place outlet...

Then we have the bathroom circuit: if you feed the light it cannot feed more than one bathroom but if it does not feed the lights you can feed twenty bathrooms...

No wonder we have trouble figuring out the codes!

I think codes should let electricians decide how to wire. Cookie cutter approaches never work well.

 

[growler]

I think codes should let electricians decide how to wire. Cookie cutter approaches never work well.

The cookie cutter approach works out pretty darn well for new construction. Wire the first house right and wire all the rest just like it.

 

[growler]

Just wondering how many of these types of calls you all get. I get these quite frequently, with the latest being today. I see this scenario far too often: Someone has their kitchen remodeled, which originally had a range hood over the stove. The customer wants a built-in microwave oven installed in its place. So the remodelers, who have no business doing electrical work, take the 14-2 cable from the range hood and use it to power an outlet in the cabinet for a microwave. The customer uses the microwave while other loads on the circuit are being used, and the breaker trips every time. So they call me to figure out what's going on. I determine that to be the cause, then end up running a new 20A circuit from that outlet to the breaker panel -- what should have been done during the renovation in the first place. When are people going to understand that you CANNOT run a microwave oven off a 15A lighting circuit without popping a breaker??

When the customer is willing to pay for it I like doing jobs like this. If everything was done right I would have to find something else to do for a living.

You can make more money repairing other people's mistakes at service call rates than doing remodeling a bid prices.

 

[Adamjamma]

I think codes should let electricians decide how to wire. Cookie cutter approaches never work well.

Actually, it is the war we seem to have over anything that is suggested but others don’t do... such as in a kitchen, proposing that a breaker to gfci to switch to disposal is a sabc... and then that the disposal is not allowed on it... when the two required sabc circuits are there already... it is not what other regularly do and so it must be wrong... though in effect it may give better safety and convenience to the customer, though it is obviously more expensive than simply running breaker to switch to disposal...

loads of arguments sometimes over specific points when even the code the code says it is not a design manual but. Aguideline of best practices..lol.

 

[peter d]

If fire-code violations can be found, those rules allow property insurance to settle for next to nothing, deny claims, and keep years of property-insurance premiums --without having to pay a dime in claims--.

If your new plug replacement(s) missed A/GFCI or TR protection, and either 1) some toddler sticks a knife in the slot, or 2) another idiot's flying splice ignites the building, any surviving relative or owner of damaged property can point out your outlet device, and show its manufacture date was after their State adopted the "Replacement code" NEC 406.4(D).

Any Insurance inspector / forensics, or State Fire Marshals that discover fire-code violations will be forced to deny claims. Further, since the hack responsible for the flying splice is not found anywhere, the legal doctrine of Joint-and-Several Liability makes your "1% Responsibility" for fire-code issues on the property "100% Liable" for damages.

Your the last man standing, which just happened to be found in the public domain --bragging about violating the fire code--. You worked on the property, and are easily proven negligent.

Any GL policy you had bails out for willful negligence, as you are easily found responsible for everything any other idiot may have done, especially without an invoice showing your work was nowhere near the attic, or a list of material charges showing A/GFCI & TR-protected devices were installed.

Cool story bro. Nobody said anything about TR outlets or flying splices. What are you smoking?

 

[peter d]

I think codes should let electricians decide how to wire. Cookie cutter approaches never work well.

I agree. :thumbsup:

 

[mbrooke]

The cookie cutter approach works out pretty darn well for new construction. Wire the first house right and wire all the rest just like it.

After the contractor has determined what is optimal for the common dominator.

Actually, it is the war we seem to have over anything that is suggested but others don’t do... such as in a kitchen, proposing that a breaker to gfci to switch to disposal is a sabc... and then that the disposal is not allowed on it... when the two required sabc circuits are there already... it is not what other regularly do and so it must be wrong... though in effect it may give better safety and convenience to the customer, though it is obviously more expensive than simply running breaker to switch to disposal...

loads of arguments sometimes over specific points when even the code the code says it is not a design manual but. Aguideline of best practices..lol.

I agree. But when you do look at it, it is design in now in many regards. For example, if the range hood is cord and plug connected, it must be on a separate circuit.

 

[Adamjamma]

In a way, I think they should drop the part about the plug and just make it a separate circuit anyway, due to the large number of people who like to put in microwave hoods. Because if the circuit is put in when building the home then you dont have the problems fixing it later.
Beside, when building a big expensive house, how much extra is it at that point to run the extra wire and breaker and outlet, in a USA home? In a Jamaican home you have the bigger conduit to run the extra circuit through, but most USA homes are stick frame construction so much easier to run extra circuits in.

 

[mbrooke]

In a way, I think they should drop the part about the plug and just make it a separate circuit anyway, due to the large number of people who like to put in microwave hoods. Because if the circuit is put in when building the home then you dont have the problems fixing it later.
Beside, when building a big expensive house, how much extra is it at that point to run the extra wire and breaker and outlet, in a USA home? In a Jamaican home you have the bigger conduit to run the extra circuit through, but most USA homes are stick frame construction so much easier to run extra circuits in.

I'll agree with this. If you make it so for a plug, just make it so far all setups. Again code leaves one scratching their head at the logic.

 

[jmellc]

When we remodeled the kitchen in our last home, we picked the spot where the microwave would live (counter-top model) and I had the electricians run a dedicated 20 amp circuit to that location. This was in addition to the required SABC's.

I like the way you think. Any time I know a MW is going to a specific location, I put a dedicated ckt for it. If unknown, I try to visualize the finished kitchen and do my best guess to spread the 2 SABC's around evenly. Then someone comes along and puts a toaster oven next to a MW and plugs them in together.

Years back, the range hood was standard in any kitchen and not a really heavy load in most average hoods. Made perfect sense then to put them on with lights, as MW hoods didn't exist until fairly recent years. No one thought about it becoming an issue.

 

[romex jockey]

Perhaps the most prevelant concern for an EC is liability

Especially if you're a 'little guy' ,and know how deeper pocket litigation really works.

And so many of us rely on the letter of the code, rely on our AHJ's, fire marshals, contractors insurance clauses, and/or whatever bureaucratic oversight approves our installs.

Rightly so, given so many incendiary events end up on our trades shoulders ,be them of electrical orgin or not.

Yet this is where so many of us could venture forth into the physics of electricity, forensics of fire, and marketable widgets approved for mitigation of electrical incendairy events

Much of it may be 'engineer level' ,often needing to be parsed out for an average spark like myself, but definitely worth one's time and effort to do so

~RJ~

 

[jmellc]

Perhaps the most prevelant concern for an EC is liability

Especially if you're a 'little guy' ,and know how deeper pocket litigation really works.

And so many of us rely on the letter of the code, rely on our AHJ's, fire marshals, contractors insurance clauses, and/or whatever bureaucratic oversight approves our installs.

Rightly so, given so many incendiary events end up on our trades shoulders ,be them of electrical orgin or not.

Yet this is where so many of us could venture forth into the physics of electricity, forensics of fire, and marketable widgets approved for mitigation of electrical incendairy events

Much of it may be 'engineer level' ,often needing to be parsed out for an average spark like myself, but definitely worth one's time and effort to do so

~RJ~

I try not to even think about this or I would never sleep. I know a lot gets blamed on wiring, sometimes as a default with no evidence. I have worked so many places full of slop that the owner would not pay to fix. I can easily foresee a fire happening and the last permit holder getting hung with it. I recall doing a job at a hotel. As I was cleaning up, a tech from their maintenance team came over to install something. After he left, I followed his route. He had tapped into one of our boxes under a platform floor. Added an MC cable for his item. Didn't use an MC connector. He clearly could see the right way to do it and purposely slopped it up. I fixed it, being wary of what may come up. We could have easily been nailed for any problem, since the ckt he tapped was on our prints for the permit. We couldn't have proved someone else did it.

 

[peter d]

Perhaps the most prevelant concern for an EC is liability

Especially if you're a 'little guy' ,and know how deeper pocket litigation really works.

And so many of us rely on the letter of the code, rely on our AHJ's, fire marshals, contractors insurance clauses, and/or whatever bureaucratic oversight approves our installs.

Not me, I don't even get permits most of the time. :thumbsup:

 

[peter d]

I try not to even think about this or I would never sleep. I know a lot gets blamed on wiring, sometimes as a default with no evidence. I have worked so many places full of slop that the owner would not pay to fix. I can easily foresee a fire happening and the last permit holder getting hung with it. I recall doing a job at a hotel. As I was cleaning up, a tech from their maintenance team came over to install something. After he left, I followed his route. He had tapped into one of our boxes under a platform floor. Added an MC cable for his item. Didn't use an MC connector. He clearly could see the right way to do it and purposely slopped it up. I fixed it, being wary of what may come up. We could have easily been nailed for any problem, since the ckt he tapped was on our prints for the permit. We couldn't have proved someone else did it.

That's just it. You can do a perfectly code compliant job and some hack comes along and adds to it. Bottom line - I'm not responsible for anything once I'm out the door. I have no control over who comes in after me.

 

[BobBrian]

I've had a GE Spacemaker over my range for 10 years and it works fine.