• Welcome to The Building Code Forum

    Your premier resource for building code knowledge.

    This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.

    Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.

    Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.

island outlet

Just some background for you. Originally the propsal was 2-120 during the 1990 ROP stage which called for more receptacle outlets serving the kitchen counter area. During the 1990 ROC stage it was expanded to add the terms island and Peninsular to the mix and where that language actually began. The justification in proposal 2-120 was used to expand receptacle coverage. I have posted them both for you below but you can find them in the 1989 ROC and ROP stages.

Here is the ROC that started adding the terms Island and Peninsular and expended on the accepted proposal 2-120.

2- 679 - (210-52(b)): Accept

SUBMITTER: Robert H. Kels, First State Inspection

Agency, Inc.

O~_QH_MEN_ff!__Q_N PR~_POS~L_NO. : 2-120

RECOMMENDATION: This proposal should be accepted with

editorial changes. Revise the Section to read,

"In kitchens and dining areas of dwelling units a

receptacle outlet shall be installed at each counter

space wider than 12 inches. "Receptacles shall be

installed that no point along the wall line is more

than 24 inches, measured horizontally from a receptacle

oultet in that space. Island and peninsular counter

tops 12 inches or wider shall have at least one

receptacle for each four feet of counter top."

New text in quotation.

SUBSTANTIATION: The substantiation for the proposal

makes a lot of sense, as do Mr. Cunningham's comments.

Perhaps the suggested changes would be satisfactory.

Island and peninsular counter tops create problems of

their own when it comes to receptacles. Appliances are

not generally left connected at these areas anyway. A

lot of islands are built with cabinet doors and drawers

on all sides, and some are angled so that it is almost

impossible to locate receptacles in them. Mr.

Vaughan~s comments are very confusing to me. First he

tells us how many outlets he puts in, then tells us

that he has been called back to install more, but s t i l l

votes against proposal. Cost should have nothing to do

with safety, and appliance cords are getting shorter.

p__~NEL ACTION: Accept.

PANEL STATEMENT: Accept, and editorially add "so"

after "be installed".

VOTE ON PANEL ACTION; Unanimously Affirmative.

And here is the original proposal 2-120 for everyones enjoyment.

SUBMITTER: Frank K. Kitzantides~ National Electrical

Manufacturers Assn.

RECOMMENDATION: Revise the f i r s t sentence by adding

"and located so that no point along the counter space

is more than 24 inches (609 mm), measured horizontally

from a receptacle outlet."

SUBSTANTIATION: An ever increasing number of

electrical appliances are requiring dedicated outlet

receptacles for full time power. Programmable coffee

makers, radios and microwave ovens require power full

time in order to operate a clock circuit and a memory

circuit for programs. This means that so~e outlets are

no longer available for the temporary use of portable

mixers, can openers, electric knives, blenders,

toasters, waffle irons, fry pans, etc. The requirement

for more dedicated outlets promotes the use of cube

taps and other multiple outlet adaptors. Since more

counter top outlets are now required, the N.E.C. must

keep pace with new technology. Many portable

appliances are now supplied with 18" cords which would

also make this change desirable.

PANEL ACTION: Accept.

VOTE ON PANEL ACTION:

AFFIRMATIVE: 8

NEGATIVE: Cunningham, Rao, Vaughan.

EXPLANATION OF VOTE:

CUNNINGHAM: The Code Panel Accepted this proposal

with the understanding that this would result in a

maximum distance between counter top receptacle outlets

of 48 inches. However, a close examination of the

wording could lead to an interpretation that the 24

inches could be a radius from the receptacle outlets.

This would make it impossible for space on a counter

deeper than 24 inches to comply unless surface mounted

receptacles were installed.

I am voting against the Panel action because the

wording could be interpreted to require more

receptacles than the panel, and perhaps the proposer

i n i t i a l l y intended.

RAO: Tile proposed wording is not clear.

VAUGHAN: As a volumne electrical contractor, having

installed 4 or more duplex receptacles, constituting 8

or more receptacles, on 2 or more 20 ampere circuits in

over 60,000 residential dwelling units during the past

33 years, we have received many requests from many of

the home buyers for the need for additional receptacle

outlets in kitchens. Electrical requirements should

most certainly be based on overhwhelming substanciated

requirements, not on an unlikely rare requirement.

Furthermore, with the mixture usage of a very few short

cords with the longer cords, the present 8 or more

receptacles would be more than adequate to cover the

home owners requirements Thisproposed additional

requirement would needlessly increase the receptacles,

in some instances, over 25% in kitchens, resulting in

the primary financial benefit going to the

manufacturers, with no additional safety, and the

additional unnecessary costs being imposed upon the

home owner.
 
Back
Top