Refrigerators

[dema]

I am boggled and confused. It appears from reading 422.33, that a refrigerator outlet must be above the countertop to the side or otherwise accessible (and GFI if in a commercial facility's kitchen area or if at counter top height). I have not ever seen it done this way. And I have done plans as a sub for other engineers and have never been called on not doing it this way - nor has and inspector ever called me on it since I've been stamping drawings.

It seems black and white, clear as a bell that this should be done - but it defies my personal experience. When I asked another EE, he was totally skeptical that this is required.

Please, either confirm the requirement or explain the escape clause. Thanks.

 

[jimwalker]

Re: Refrigerators

What part dont you understand ? the outlet is behind the frig in a house so no gfci required.It is accessible by pulling the frig out.If it over the counter top it is a SA circuit

 

[gndrod]

Re: Refrigerators

Occasionally I see the home run to the first SA receptacle behind the refrigerator with the downstream hookup to the next counter receptacle being loaded with a GFCI that continues to any other counter receptacle of that BC. Fault current will trip the GFCI without interrupting the refrigerator operation. The second SA home run has it's GFCI installed in the first counter outlet that continues to downstream duplexes.

The accessibility nuisance occurs when the refrigerator outlet has the GFCI in that first outlet. Then the refrig has to be pulled out to reset the GFCI receptacle.

rbj, Seattle

 

[iwire]

Re: Refrigerators

Originally posted by jimwalker:
What part dont you understand ? the outlet is behind the frig in a house so no gfci required.It is accessible by pulling the frig out.If it over the counter top it is a SA circuit

Jim forget about the GFCI, the cord and plug on the refrigerator is the means of disconnect required by the NEC.

422.30 General.
A means shall be provided to disconnect each appliance from all ungrounded conductors in accordance with the following sections of Part III. If an appliance is supplied by more than one source, the disconnecting means shall be grouped and identified.

422.33 Disconnection of Cord-and-Plug-Connected Appliances.

(A) Separable Connector or an Attachment Plug and Receptacle. For cord-and-plug-connected appliances, an accessible separable connector or an accessible plug and receptacle shall be permitted to serve as the disconnecting means. Where the separable connector or plug and receptacle are not accessible, cord-and-plug-connected appliances shall be provided with disconnecting means in accordance with 422.31.

Accessible (as applied to equipment). Admitting close approach; not guarded by locked doors, elevation, or other effective means.

With the refrigerator in front of the outlet is it accessible?

Is the refrigerator other effective means of 'guarding' the outlet?

 

[electricmanscott]

Re: Refrigerators

Is the question can you put the receptacle behind the refrigerator?

 

[physis]

Re: Refrigerators

Bob, are you agreeing with my take on this in Sparty's Appliance Disconnect thread?

 

[iwire]

Re: Refrigerators

Originally posted by electricmanscott:
Is the question can you put the receptacle behind the refrigerator?

Yes Scott, I guess that is the question, and I think can pretty much guess what your response will be.
The "Sparty" Thread


Bob

[ November 24, 2004, 04:51 AM: Message edited by: iwire ]

 

[jimwalker]

Re: Refrigerators

My point was that if we do not want our frig on a gfci then we must not put that outlet in counter space.Also not the code said accessible not READILY ACCESSIBLE.So where is the violation if i put frig outlet behind frig ?

 

[physis]

Re: Refrigerators

It just gives me great pride that you might agree with me Bob.

But let me try to talk you out of this.

Why was there a need for 422.33(B)?

Because the outlet behind the range does not fit the definition of accessible as used in 422.33(A).

Let me play devil's advocate here.

You, well not you, someone else installs the fridge receptacle behind the fridge. The inspector shows up, and it's in San Francisco so he's really mean, and he yells a lot and fails the outlet siting 422.33(B).

Now the arguement isn't academic anymore. The person who installed the receptacle will have to move it or make his case.

If it were me I would say that 422.33(B) is clearly titled Connection at the Rear Base of a Range. And further it doesn't even say that unless this condition is met

if it is accessible from the front by removal of a drawer,shall be considered as meeting the intent of 422.33(A).

that it doesn't comply.

I could view the reason for 422.33(B) as being there because it's usally a lot harder to move a range than it is a refridgerator or a lamp. And it's sort of advice, like an fpn.

But either way speculation about the intent of 422.33(B) and the fact that it refers to 422.33(A) doesn't, in my mind, define 422.33(A). I would still go back to Article 100 and I think that defines it as accessible.

 

[websparky]

Re: Refrigerators

I also locate the outlets behind the refrigerators and will continue to do so until an inspector enforces the code as written.

Just because we have always done it that way does not mean it is code compliant.

As an inspector, I will continue to approve the installation until electricians learn to read the code as written.

Just because electricians have always misapplied this part of the code, doesn't mean it isn't code compliant.

Why was there a need for 422.33(B)?

Because electricians can't comprehend when something is accessable according to the way the code is written.

 

[macmikeman]

Re: Refrigerators

You guy's have way to much time on your hands.

 

[physis]

Re: Refrigerators

As an inspector, I will continue to approve the installation until electricians learn to read the code as written.

Well that's just it. How is it written?

Is there or do we need a formal interpretation?

Edit:

Because electricians can't comprehend when something is accessable according to the way the code is written.

?

[ November 24, 2004, 02:26 PM: Message edited by: physis ]

 

[physis]

Re: Refrigerators

Websparky, I'm not trying to be combative toward you but are you saying you're doing electricians a favor by allowing them to do what you beleive to be noncompliant work?

I'm really not wanting to argue with inspectors or instructors. I'd actually like to hear more input from them.

If this is almost always being done wrong I'm interested in how it's being taught and why it's being accepted.

 

[612278]

Re: Refrigerators

HI everyone-

I will also put them behind the fridge. But as far as puting the fridge on a SA circuit no way. Lets say the fride uses 7.2 amps (864 watts) and you have a 1100 watt micro (counter top) and a can opener etc. That 7.2 could kill.

 

[websparky]

Re: Refrigerators

physis,

No, just the opposite.

The receptacle behind the fridge IS accessable according to the way the code is written.

The code goes further to spell-out where to place the receptacle when it comes to a range.

When we bother to look at the manufacturer's installation instructions for a range, we find that the receptacle location is indicated on the drawing so that no one should be able to make a mistake!

 

[paul]

Re: Refrigerators

I have never installed a receptacle behind a fridge. There was never a fridge in place when the inspector passed any installations I have done that included refer recepts. I cannot help it if Joe-homeowner comes along, after my perfect work, and decided to block a code-legal receptacle with a fridge, thus creating what may seem like an infraction. If the inspector wants to come along afterwards and make the homeowner relocate said receptacle, then I suppose I will do so for a small fee.

However, seeing how fridges are installed on wheels these days and they are easily pulled out, I have yet to see where the receptacle does not fall under the definition of accessible any less than me placing a microwave, tv, stereo, or a coffee pot in front of a receptacle.

Sorry...I had to edit to correct my poor spelling of receptacle. It was driving me nuts.

[ November 24, 2004, 06:12 PM: Message edited by: paul ]

 

[iwire]

Re: Refrigerators

Originally posted by iwire:
Why was there a need for 422.33(B)?

Originally posted by websparky:
Because electricians can't comprehend when something is accessable according to the way the code is written.

What part do I not comprehend?

Dave I would have though you would want 110.26 working space at a means of disconnect.

 

[websparky]

Re: Refrigerators

However, seeing how fridges are unstalled on wheels these days and they are easily pulled out, I have yet to see where the receptical does not fall under the definition of accessible any less than me placing a microwave, tv, stereo, or a coffee pot in front of a recepticle.

Exactly!

Accessible (as applied to equipment). Admitting close approach; not guarded by locked doors, elevation, or other effective means.

How this is equated to apply to the fridge receptacle ?

[ November 24, 2004, 05:08 PM: Message edited by: websparky ]

 

[iwire]

Re: Refrigerators

At what point does an item become heavy enough to render a plug inaccessible?

A TV, microwave, TV, stereo, or a coffee pot in front of a receptacle.

All those items and even smaller refrigerators may be easily moved out of the way.

How about a large refrigerator like a Subzero is the receptacle behind that accessible?

I guess it comes done to a judgment call by the AHJ as to how big and item can be and not be in the way.

I have never installed a receptacle behind a fridge. There was never a fridge in place when the inspector passed any installations I have done that included refer recepts. I cannot help it if Joe-homeowner comes along, after my perfect work, and decided to block a code-legal receptacle with a fridge, thus creating what may seem like an infraction.

 

[jes25]

Re: Refrigerators

I Think anything including a recptacle behind a 36" or larger flat screen TV in not accsesible. It takes 3 man to move those things!!