Light duty ovens without a hood

[Sifu]

I have a electric double oven (light duty appliance) installed without a hood in a commercial kitchen. A type II hood can be installed over a light duty appliance that does not produce grease or smoke per 2009 IMC 507.2.2. Otherwise, if it produces grease or smoke then it would need a type I per 507.2.1. So in this case, if you assume the oven does not produce grease or smoke then it would need a type II hood, and if you assume the oven does produce grease or smoke then it would need a type I. I read this as either way a hood must be installed. So how do you decide whether an oven will produce grease or smoke? Apparently someone has at this place, namely the architect and plan reviewer, and why no hood at all? Obviously when at the 11th hour mister inspector shows up and asks these questions his popularity suffers so any guidance is appreciated.

 

[JBI]

It's not the inspector's fault that everyone, including the plan reviewer, missed it. Guidance? Obtain compliance. Code enforcement is not a popularity contest. If it were we'd all be pretty, and you've seen some of our pictures...

 

[cda]

Read the menu

Coookies , cake type II

Fresh meat chicken beef type I

 

[mtlogcabin]

Is it gas?

Type II hoods shall be installed above all appliances that produce products of combustion and do not produce grease or smoke as a result of the cooking process. Spaces containing cooking appliances that do not require Type II hoods shall be provided with exhaust at a rate of 0.70 cfm per square foot (0.00033 m3/s). For the purpose of determining the floor area required to be exhausted, each individual appliance that is not required to be installed under a Type II hood shall be considered as occupying not less than 100 square feet (9.3 m2). Such additional square footage shall be provided with exhaust at a rate of 0.70 cfm per square foot [.00356 m3/(s · m2].

 

[cda]

I have a electric double oven

 

[Sifu]

Not looking for guidance on whether or not to enforce the code, rather which hood if either should be installed. The ovens are electric ( there are two units on opposite sides of the kitchen). Meat would definitely be on the menu. Maybe the type of establish will help. It is an A2, where groups of people will come in and assist with the cooking of there own meals, then eat eat and drink. It is not a typical restaurant where the public will come in and eat meals prepared by someone else. Apparently the health department claims no jurisdiction over the cooking area as it is deemed to be an area where people cook there own food, they do inspect the separate food prep area. I have never encountered this type of establishment. I think a hood should be over the ovens but they are claiming not since they are electric. 507.2.1 states that a type I hood shall be installed where the appliance produces grease or smoke. Is that the difference? Does that imply that an electric element does not produce grease or smoke by itself and therefore no hood requirement? Not sure that makes sense since a gas range by itself doesn't produce grease. I guess I am hung up on what a product of combustion is and whether the food produces them versus the appliance, if that matters.

 

[ICE]

It is an A2, where groups of people will come in and assist with the cooking of there own meals, then eat eat and drink. It is not a typical restaurant where the public will come in and eat meals prepared by someone else.

There is a distinct possibility that there will be smoke and grease. You can say that it is more likely than not.

 

[cda]

I vote type II

It is a totally enclosed oven? Correct?

 

[north star]

& : & : &

" Meat would definitely be on the menu. "

Since meat will be on the menu, ...IMO, a Type Iwould be required.............There are some types of

meat [ i.e. - venison ] that have a a very low amount

of fat in them, but they DO still have fat.

In would be good to hear from some of the insurance

people, on this Forum, on this topic , ...to get a sense

of what some of the restaurant insurers think \

require.

Let's see, ...patrons coming in to get good & liquored

up, and then throw their rack of brontosaurus on

the barbie...........Hmmmmmmm !............Does that sound

like a grease fire waiting to happen or what ?



& : & : &

 

[Sifu]

It is totally enclosed oven.

From the 2009 ICC publication "Commercial kitchen hood application guide"

-any activity that produces grease-laden vapors or smoke in a commercial cooking operation must be located beneath a type I hood.

(Note the work "activity")

-domestic cooking appliances are often used for commercial purposes in that they are used to generate revenue

(Seems to define "commercial cooking")

-table3-2: light duty cooking appliances requiring a type II hood--electric or gas ovens first on the list

(No difference in the type of oven)

-light duty cooking appliances can generally be served by a type II hood, but there are instances where a type I hood would still be required, such as where the light duty appliance generates smoke or grease due to the nature of the cooking process

( note "cooking process)

To me a hood is a no brainer, The type is a little cloudier. Type II for sure, I will look at the menu more closely and if raw meats are included it will help the position for a type I hood.

 

[cda]

I still vote for type II

What is a type I going to get you over type II???

Think about cooking a whole chicken in your home oven,,

Do you see smoke do you see grease

 

[Sifu]

I am not sure a type I is the answer either, but if not in this case, when. So playing the "devil's advocate", under what circumstances would a type I be required over a light duty oven? Remember, you may cook a whole chicken in your home a few times a year and under different circumstances than a commercial enterprise that may cook a couple hundred, and in this case by groups of people learning to cook it and many other things.....and there are two bars to get them in the mood.

 

[cda]

L

I am not sure a type I is the answer either, but if not in this case, when. So playing the "devil's advocate", under what circumstances would a type I be required over a light duty oven? Remember, you may cook a whole chicken in your home a few times a year and under different circumstances than a commercial enterprise that may cook a couple hundred, and in this case by groups of people learning to cook it and many other things.....and there are two bars to get them in the mood.

In my mind,,,

When not enclosed

Like a chain broiler

If you have seen enough restaurants with enclosed ovens, you do not see a problem

 

[cda]

The 2015 legal language

507.2.1 Type I hoods.

Type I hoods shall be installed where cooking appliances produce grease or smoke as a result of the cooking process. Type I hoods shall be installed over medium-duty, heavy-duty and extra-heavy-duty cooking appliances. Type I hoods shall be installed over light-duty cooking appliances that produce grease or smoke.

Exception: A Type I hood shall not be required for an electric cooking appliance where an approved testing agency provides documentation that the appliance effluent contains 5 mg/m3 or less of grease when tested at an exhaust flow rate of 500 cfm (0.236 m3/s) in accordance with Section 17 of UL 710B

 

[north star]

% ~ % ~ %

This sure doesn't sound like something that a Bldg. Inspector

should be performing a due diligence on [ IMO ].

Maybe we now know why the [ required ] hood was not

attentioned in the plan review process........Obtaining that

"approved testing agency" documentation on the electric

cooking appliance could take a while and be an extra cost

to someone.



% ~ % ~ %

 

[cda]

Over thinking this

Ovens gas or electric have been under type II hoods forever and including new installation today

 

[rgrace]

When I think about this logically, the purpose of a Type I hood is to capture and contain grease laden vapors that are produced during the cooking process. This is supported by 2012 IMC 507.2.1.1 (2015 507.1.1)which requires the exhaust fan associated with the hood be interconnected with the cooking appliance so that the hood operates during cooking operations. Generally speaking, during the cooking process, cooktops, griddles, open burner ranges, and the like will all continuously produce grease or smoke within a kitchen that will need to be captured and exhausted, or the entire space would quickly fill with grease and smoke. An enclosed, electric oven will not produce the same results. The cooking process is contained within the enclosed compartment of the oven, thus containing all grease and smoke within the oven. For most practical purposes, the only time that the oven door need be opened is when the cooking process is complete. At this point (during the cooking process), the oven is producing (radiating) heat into the kitchen. This would require a Type II hood per IMC 507.2.2 (2015, 507.3), unless the heat load from the oven can be incorporated into the HVAC system design, thus needing no hood system at all, only general exhaust at a rate of 0.70 cfm per square foot. This only applies to this electric oven, as gas oven will produce products of combustion and will require a Type II hood. It sounds to me like the architect and plan reviewer, per the original statement at the start of this string, were thinking along these lines, and the responsibility of the inspector will be to verify that the field installation matched the approved design and plans.

 

[rgrace]

The 2015 legal language 507.2.1 Type I hoods.

Type I hoods shall be installed where cooking appliances produce grease or smoke as a result of the cooking process. Type I hoods shall be installed over medium-duty, heavy-duty and extra-heavy-duty cooking appliances. Type I hoods shall be installed over light-duty cooking appliances that produce grease or smoke.

Exception: A Type I hood shall not be required for an electric cooking appliance where an approved testing agency provides documentation that the appliance effluent contains 5 mg/m3 or less of grease when tested at an exhaust flow rate of 500 cfm (0.236 m3/s) in accordance with Section 17 of UL 710B

I have seen this exception utilized, through the code modification process since we have not adopted the 2015 codes yet. The appliance should be listed under the UL Category KNLZ, at least the one I investigated was.

 

[cda]

When I think about this logically, the purpose of a Type I hood is to capture and contain grease laden vapors that are produced during the cooking process. This is supported by 2012 IMC 507.2.1.1 (2015 507.1.1)which requires the exhaust fan associated with the hood be interconnected with the cooking appliance so that the hood operates during cooking operations. Generally speaking, during the cooking process, cooktops, griddles, open burner ranges, and the like will all continuously produce grease or smoke within a kitchen that will need to be captured and exhausted, or the entire space would quickly fill with grease and smoke. An enclosed, electric oven will not produce the same results. The cooking process is contained within the enclosed compartment of the oven, thus containing all grease and smoke within the oven. For most practical purposes, the only time that the oven door need be opened is when the cooking process is complete. At this point (during the cooking process), the oven is producing (radiating) heat into the kitchen. This would require a Type II hood per IMC 507.2.2 (2015, 507.3), unless the heat load from the oven can be incorporated into the HVAC system design, thus needing no hood system at all, only general exhaust at a rate of 0.70 cfm per square foot. This only applies to this electric oven, as gas oven will produce products of combustion and will require a Type II hood. It sounds to me like the architect and plan reviewer, per the original statement at the start of this string, were thinking along these lines, and the responsibility of the inspector will be to verify that the field installation matched the approved design and plans.

Yea

That's what I meant

 

[Sifu]

This morning I requested the specifications on the hood with the caution that in all likelihood we would want a type II hood over them so we'll see what happens.

 

[Sifu]

I don't think any consideration was given to these particular appliances. The plans generically indicated an oven, to be supplied by owner. No specs were submitted on them and nobody knew what they were until I showed up. And while I pay great respect and deference to both the plan reviewer and architect I believe I have a responsibility to question if I observe something that I don't believe was given the attention it deserves with respect to the code. In this case the original plan reviewer is gone (and he was very good, that is why I struggled with this issue instead of just making the call) and the new plan reviewer agrees on the hood issue. I don't know what the architects position is since he presented no information from the outset. It is not my intention to second guess either one of them, only to try and ensure compliance with the code.

 

[cda]

I don't think any consideration was given to these particular appliances. The plans generically indicated an oven, to be supplied by owner. No specs were submitted on them and nobody knew what they were until I showed up. And while I pay great respect and deference to both the plan reviewer and architect I believe I have a responsibility to question if I observe something that I don't believe was given the attention it deserves with respect to the code. In this case the original plan reviewer is gone (and he was very good, that is why I struggled with this issue instead of just making the call) and the new plan reviewer agrees on the hood issue. I don't know what the architects position is since he presented no information from the outset. It is not my intention to second guess either one of them, only to try and ensure compliance with the code.

"""I have a electric double oven (light duty appliance) installed without a hood in a commercial kitchen"""

Was the a kitchen equipment sheet as part of the plans? And if so does it show the oven and in the place you found it??

 

[rgrace]

I don't think any consideration was given to these particular appliances. The plans generically indicated an oven, to be supplied by owner. No specs were submitted on them and nobody knew what they were until I showed up. And while I pay great respect and deference to both the plan reviewer and architect I believe I have a responsibility to question if I observe something that I don't believe was given the attention it deserves with respect to the code. In this case the original plan reviewer is gone (and he was very good, that is why I struggled with this issue instead of just making the call) and the new plan reviewer agrees on the hood issue. I don't know what the architects position is since he presented no information from the outset. It is not my intention to second guess either one of them, only to try and ensure compliance with the code.

Sifu, I completely agree with you when you say that you have the responsibility to question field installations. I rely heavily on the field inspectors in my jurisdiction to do just that, and they are very good at what they do. On the plan review side, I personally could not approve a plan unless the specific cooking appliances were identified, make and model. Without knowing this, I could not determine if a hood was required or what Type of hood would be required. I wouldn't be able to conduct a gas review if the appliances were gas fired. There are a number of things that I could not verify if I didn't know exactly what the cooking appliances were. As cda eluded to, most times the cooking appliances are located on the kitchen designer's plans and not on the mechanical sheets.

 

[Sifu]

The only reference I have found is to the oven with a schedule of appliances which indicates an owner supplied oven. I have no idea whether or not the original plan reviewer saw it or allowed it. I think it should have been called out, at least questioned but it apparently wasn't. I didn't want to make the assumption that it must have been seen and permitted therefore I should leave it alone. Based on what I have found I see no reason it should not have a hood over it. I made the call and I am sure if the architect can come up with a valid reason he will let me know and I can add that to my knowledge.