Small Appliance Circuit Exceptions

Status
Not open for further replies.
Refrigerator and Exhaust Fan on one circuit

Refrigerator and Exhaust Fan on one circuit

I don't have my code book with me right now. I know that you can run a circuit for the refrigerator that is not considered to be a small appliance circuit. Where in the code does it say that if I do this then I can't tie the exhaust fan in with it? It may state that it has to be a dedicated branch circuit for the refrigerator. The other option is to come off of a lighting circuit for the kitchen/dining room and catch it. How many people run a dedicated circuit?
 
Dennis Alwon said:
Pedro look at 210.52 (B). The refrigerator is considered part of the sabc
Click to expand...
Even if it is a dedicated [or individual] circuit, it is still an SABC (if the receptacle is in any SABC-required area).

210.52 said:
(B) Small Appliances.

(1) Receptacle Outlets Served. In the kitchen, pantry,
breakfast room, dining room, or similar area of a dwelling
unit, the two or more 20-ampere small-appliance branch
circuits required by 210.11(C)(1) shall serve all wall and
floor receptacle outlets covered by 210.52(A), all countertop
outlets covered by 210.52(C), and receptacle outlets for
refrigeration equipment.
...
Exception No. 2: The receptacle outlet for refrigeration
equipment shall be permitted to be supplied from an individual
branch circuit rated 15 amperes or greater.
Click to expand...
 
George Stolz said:
An exception overrides the rule. The fridge on a 15A individual branch circuit is not on a SABC.
Click to expand...
Where does the Code say this or any individual branch circuit cannot be an SABC?...or vice versa?

Doesn't this fridge receptacle outlet still fall under the title of 210.52(B), "Small Appliances"?

Isn't this fridge receptacle outlet specified by 210.52(B)?

210.11 said:
(C) Dwelling Units.

(1) Small-Appliance Branch Circuits. In addition to the
number of branch circuits required by other parts of this
section, two or more 20-ampere small-appliance branch circuits
shall be provided for all receptacle outlets specified by
210.52(B).
Click to expand...

What about the receptacle outlet in 210.52(B) Exception No. 1? I say no... but can you tell me why without referring to 210.70(A)(1)?
 
I agree with George. If you don't use the exception, the individual refrigerator circuit is on one of the SABCs, if you use the exception, it is not.
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
I agree with George. If you don't use the exception, the individual refrigerator circuit is on one of the SABCs, if you use the exception, it is not.
Click to expand...
So you are saying a household refrigerator is a small appliance when on an SABC, and not a small appliance when the same refrigerator is on an individual branch circuit under the exception...???

What if the refrigerator is on an 20A individual branch circuit? Is it on an SABC, not an SABC under the exception, or an SABC meeting both general and exception requirements?
 
George, I think there might be something to considering the hood as 'suplimental' to the range. Rick might be on track here.

First off, 'supplemental' seems to suggest 'in addition to,' rather than 'part of.' Second, the hood is even more clearly associated with the range when it's one of those 'downdraft' types, mounted in the counter.

Where the hood is mounted to the counter, I'd be amazed if it was not plugged into the same receptacle as the igniter.

You did have a good catch, as Individual = dedicated. Perhaps the NEC ought to use the term 'dedicated.'

It's a good point of definition, regarding the refrigerator on it's own circuit. A 15-amp circuit would not be an SABC, but a 20-amp circuit would meet the definition.

Note that code does not define 'small appliance.' Nor are we to infer any limitations on what we may plug into a 'small appliance' circuit. We can plug lights in - note I said "plug" - refrigerators, dishwashers, washing machines, whatever, and not have a code issue. The appliance need not even be on the counter; it appears that EVERY kitchen receptacle, with the exception of the ones actually within cabinets, has to be on an SABC. The only limitation is that the appliance can't draw more than 20 amps.

What about those receptacles inside cabinets, appliance garages, and the like? Well, it appears that they do not meet the definition of "SABC" even if they are 20-amp circuits, since they are not in an area required to be served by an SABC. Unless, of course, the cabinet contains a fridge. (Think: SubZero).

I've said it before, but it bears repeating: IMO, the NEC is not a design manual, and the SABC concept crosses the line into design. In the end, bad code leads to bad design - and undermines respect for the code.
 
renosteinke said:
...

It's a good point of definition, regarding the refrigerator on it's own circuit. A 15-amp circuit would not be an SABC, but a 20-amp circuit would meet the definition.

...
Click to expand...
I'll agree a refrigerator receptacle circuit per 210.52(B) Exception No. 2 is not an SABC if it is then not considered a general-use receptacle per 220.14(J)(1), and instead calculated as a specific appliance load under 220.14(A).
 
renosteinke said:
George, I think there might be something to considering the hood as 'suplimental' to the range. Rick might be on track here.
Click to expand...

Not within the context of a conventional range with a conventional hood mounted above it.

Exception No. 2: Receptacles installed to provide power for supplemental equipment and lighting on gas-fired ranges, ovens, or counter-mounted cooking units.
Click to expand...

The word "on" is key; the supplemental equipment is integral to the cooking unit.

renosteinke said:
First off, 'supplemental' seems to suggest 'in addition to,' rather than 'part of.' Second, the hood is even more clearly associated with the range when it's one of those 'downdraft' types, mounted in the counter.
Click to expand...

If the appliance has integral equipment, then that is a horse of a different color.

renosteinke said:
Where the hood is mounted to the counter, I'd be amazed if it was not plugged into the same receptacle as the igniter.
Click to expand...

I would go a step further and express amazement if they didn't share a cord - they are the same appliance.
 
George Stolz said:
The word "on" is key; the supplemental equipment is integral to the cooking unit.
Click to expand...
Think about it. You want to ignore the word "supplemental", but want to focus on the word "on". In reality, the word "supplemental" contradicts the word "on". "On" implies integral, and something that is integral cannot be supplemental.
 
George Stolz said:
I have thought about it more than I care to. :D

On a gas range, the gas burner is primary; the light to see if the cake is done is supplemental.
Click to expand...
Can you remove the light fixture from the appliance without tools? No. It is intergral. Its function may be supplemental, but it is not supplemental equipment. The words in the exception specifically call out "supplemental equipment". The light might be a supplemental function, but it is integral equipment.

The range hood is specifically supplemental equipment to the range. You don't find it mounted over the refrigerator or some other appliance, right? It is supplemental to the range. Its purpose exists solely to serve the supplemiental needs of the range.
 
You could sell ice to an Eskimo, Rick. Unfortunately, I've been working in below freezing temps and am not an Eskimo, so I'm not buying it. :D

If your interpretation were correct, then why would it matter whether the range were electric or gas?
 
George Stolz said:
You could sell ice to an Eskimo, Rick. Unfortunately, I've been working in below freezing temps and am not an Eskimo, so I'm not buying it. :D

If your interpretation were correct, then why would it matter whether the range were electric or gas?
Click to expand...
Because if it were an electric range, the circuit ampacity would be too high to install a range hood on it.

eskimo-pie.jpg

:lol::lol::lol:
 
I agree that 210.52(B)(1) spells out that the outlet serving refrigeration equipment is to be part of the SABC with the exception releasing this requirement when this outlet is placed upon an individual branch circuit rated 15 amperes or greater, meaning it still cannot serve any other outlets or loads as per the NEC definition in article 100 for "Branch circuit individual" so no it can't serve the range hood.

But in contrast the range outlet serving a gas range is not required to be part of an SBAC, but is permitted to be as per the exception so as such is allowed to have the range hood connected to it if it is not supplied by a SBAC and the hood is hard wired. (210.52(B)(2)

Only if the hood is cord and plug connected then it can no longer be supplied by the range circuit as again 422.16(B)(4) requires it to be supplied by a individual branch circuit as one of the conditions. again see definition in 100

For years we would feed a 20 amp circuit to pick up the range and fridge and hit the hood, never had a problem, but when the requirement was added to 422 to require the hood to be fed with an individual branch circuit when using a cord and plug method of connection which we always used we just started running a individual branch circuit to it, and the fridge leaving the range on the SBAC

Truthfully I think this requirement has no bases to be enforced as it really serves no safety purpose as the NEC is supposed to be written for, I think the idea of putting the hood on its own circuit for the future installation of a micro-mate is a good idea but we can't demand "what if's" as it has no place in law, putting the fridge on with a range is also not a safety problem and never will be, I see more of a problem with putting it on with counter receptacles that can be loaded as a more of a problem but we are allowed to do that so go figure:(
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top