Connection at the Rear Base of an Electric Range

Originally Posted By: jtedesco
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



Joe, was this the issue? The receptacle being on the floor?



NEC Rules that will allow the receptacle as shown can be found in:

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

(B) Connection at the Rear Base of a Range. For cord-and-plug-connected household electric ranges, an attachment plug and receptacle connection at the rear base of a range, if it is accessible from the front by removal of a drawer, shall be considered as meeting the intent of 422.33(A).

422.33(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.

422.31 Disconnection of Permanently Connected Appliances.

(A) Rated at Not Over 300 Volt-Amperes or Horsepower. For permanently connected appliances rated at not over 300 volt-amperes or hp, the branch-circuit overcurrent device shall be permitted to serve as the disconnecting means.

(B) Appliances Rated Over 300 Volt-Amperes or Horsepower. For permanently connected appliances rated over 300 volt-amperes or hp, the branch-circuit switch or circuit breaker shall be permitted to serve as the disconnecting means where the switch or circuit breaker is within sight from the appliance or is capable of being locked in the open position.

FPN: For appliances employing unit switches, see 422.34.



--
Joe Tedesco, NEC Consultant

www.nachi.org/tedescobook.htm

Originally Posted By: jmyers
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



Joe T,


This particular issue involved the romex running halfway around the kitchen (attached to the baseboard) to the receptacle behind the stove. There is also romex running up the cupboard to a receptacle mounted on the side (definite problem).

I did not find anything wrong with the stove receptacle being mounted horizontally, although in this particular installation I was not pleased that all this electrical stuff was mounted right along side of a sink. I did pick up on the fact that this cable was no longer connected to the panel. I therefore called it an abandoned cable (not tagged of course) and receptacle and suggested they be removed.

This house had just been reportedly rewired, now I just need to find out where! ![icon_biggrin.gif](upload://iKNGSw3qcRIEmXySa8gItY6Gczg.gif)

Joe Myers


Originally Posted By: jtedesco
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



Thanks for the review Joe.


Here's a link I just found showing the work done by a homeowner.

The wires were concealed behind the wall.

Look at the damage that was necessary, the heavy hand and a hammer, I can hear the electricin now: (*&^&^%$#@$#% ^%&$#%)


http://electrical-contractor.net/ubb/Forum5/HTML/000469.html


--
Joe Tedesco, NEC Consultant

www.nachi.org/tedescobook.htm

Originally Posted By: phughes
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



Shouldn’t the exposed romex been in conduit/raceway?


Originally Posted By: jmyers
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



Peter,


Yes, placing the wiring in conduit would have been acceptable. It would have also been acceptable to run this with MC or AC style cable which is also protected from physical damage. I see the latter quite a bit, while doing inspections, especially in the basement.

Joe Myers