Thread: Switches and Outlets on flat surfaces

The electrician from todays inspection preferred to install switches and receptacles on flat surfaces.

The dishwasher disconnect was on the floor of the adjoining cabinet. Of course this is the sink cabinet and every time they take the trashcan in or out they operate the switch.

Then in the cabinet under the gas cook top, he placed a receptacle in the bottom of the cabinet for the ventilation fan.

In the mud room, there is a recessed niche with an receptacle on the ledge. The other side of the wall is the tiled back splash over the cook top. So instead of putting the receptacle next to the niche, he put it in the niche.

Neither installation makes good user sense but it it against code to have switches and receptacles on flat surfaces?

Similar Threads:

• Outlets under soffits
• Exterior light fixtures and recept. outlets
• Testing GFCI Outlets
• Commercial: Stucco interface with flat work
• CPSC Recall: Floor Electrical Outlets

AFAIK if it's not a counter top, a "similar surface", or a floor (where a correct box/cover plate is required) it's allowed.

IMO the bottom of the niche is arguably a "similar surface", but the switch in the cabinet (which I agree is pretty bonkers) is not.

Originally Posted by A.D. Miller

That switch is not even required. They should just remove it.

That switch is labeled Dishwasher disconnect. If the DW is hardwired, a means to disconnect the power is required. It can be a permanently installed breaker lock on the panel or a local switch can act as the disconnect.

Nuisance operation does not negate the need for the disconnect. Perhaps you saw my post as stating the obvious, but I saw your statement as ignorance of a code requirement.

I know you don't do codes, but your statement that the switch was not required was not entirely correct. A means to disconnect the power while the unit is being serviced is required. I further explained that a breaker lock at the panel was also acceptable.

Originally Posted by Jim Port

That switch is labelled Dishwasher disconnect. If the DW is hardwired, a means to disconnect the power is required. It can be a permanently installed breaker lock on the panel or a local switch can act as the disconnect.

I see your point.
If the circuit is not dedicated solely to the DW, it needs a remote disconnect, is that correct?

Whether or not the installation in the first two photos are "allowed" is a bit irrelevant to me. Considering all the items (including a trash can) that can be stuffed in the cabinet under the sink, and, in my experience, these areas are often water stained from leaks, I think that the switch and receptacle are poorly located and that consideration should be given to relocating them.

2008 NEC saw changes to 404.4, requiring covers for surface mounted switches in not only wet but in damp locations.

Evidenced by delamination of the floor on the sink cabinet adjacent to the switch, and apparent swelling, as well as the presence of slip joint plumbing, dishwasher drain hose, etc. and a healthy dose of common sense regarding the spill/humidity/condensation conditions of the arguably wettest and possibly most corrosive of garbage production in the residence, and the storage of same at this location, and of an adjacent (venting through the door) automatic dishwasher; IMHO make it obvious that the location is at a minimum requiring damp location protections and wiring methods.

Equipment switch is subject to splashing, wetting; physical and environmental damage by its location, equipment protection or guard. Dedicated equipment space.

The switch cannot perform its required safety functions by virtue of its location and proximity to the working path of connections (not just electrical) to service the dishwasher, (i.e. routing path of the pictured drain hose) without a protective cover or guard (to assure the disconnect position while working/servicing). One would have to reach/lean/lay past it to perform disconnect/reconnect/inspection/repair. From the photo it is unclear if the discharge/drainage hose reaches a counter height air gap, discharges to a sink tail piece, or a disposal.

It is not unreasonable to expect at some point verifying or draining the hose may be necessary to service the dishwasher installation during its useful life or for a replacement. At the time the hose termination is being re-routed to provide for a complete drainage or verifying not clogged, the appliance would need to be maintained in an assured disconnect status.

Unknown if the switch meets requirements for appliance motor disconnect but I don't guess so (unknown distance to the left of the appliance itself and working space) because the drain hose location leads me to believe the appliance is just to the left of this sink cabinet, and the sink cabinet door opens out to the left, thus: One would (unless I'm wrong in my guess of distance, swing path of cabinet door) have to close the sink cabinet door to be working on the dishwasher (and unable to verify that the switch position hadn't been disturbed - lets say by something in the cabinet falling over and rolling over the switch, the drain hose flopping when being pulled back through the cabinet compartment housing the dishwasher, etc.) and the requirement for disconnect is that it be in sight (line of sight - not obstructed by a panel, door, etc.) while working OR that it be able to be locked out (assuring it remains in locked position). Purely from memory think thats around 430.102.

Since a hole/leak from the pump of a DW is a not uncommon occurance, neither would be a door leak front or dispenser leak (recent history involving thousands of recalls from many manufacturers) - I would also question the proximity for the switch box to the floor having a sufficient clearance to provide for a DRIP LOOP before its (wiring method) to the box. Being under the sink couldn't know if it was a false sink front with bottom platform adjacent to an end cap return panel to the dishwasher compartment/alcove or a TRUE cabinet (full side panel to kitchen subfloor), unknown wiring method for connection from switch box.

That's my no-caff 3x espresso cafe quick thought on the method, location, etc. of that dishwasher "disconnect".

2008 NEC saw changes to 404.4, requiring covers for surface mounted switches in not only wet but in damp locations.


Evidenced by delamination of the floor on the sink cabinet adjacent to the switch, and apparent swelling, as well as the presence of slip joint plumbing, dishwasher drain hose, etc. and a healthy dose of common sense regarding the spill/humidity/condensation conditions of the arguably wettest and possibly most corrosive of garbage production in the residence, and the storage of same at this location, and of an adjacent (venting through the door) automatic dishwasher; IMHO make it obvious that the location is at a minimum requiring damp location protections and wiring methods.

Please read the definition of Location, damp. The inside of this cabinet is not a damp location. If it is there are other issues which need to be addressed, like the plumbing leak. Would you also ban a switch from being in the same wall cavity in case the pipe broke? Maybe the slip joint plumbing should be outlawed if it leaks that much. I don't know how the physics of warm air are around your area, but in the areas I have seen the steam from the DW goes up, not into the adjacent cabinet.

Equipment switch is subject to splashing, wetting; physical and environmental damage by its location, equipment protection or guard. Dedicated equipment space.

Tell don't tell me that you believe the wetting and splashing is part of the normal operating environment.


Dedicated equipment space. I guess you have never tried to wire a garbage disposal.

Originally Posted by Jim Port

Tell don't tell me that you believe the wetting and splashing is part of the normal operating environment.

As is the topic of the discussion the under the sink on the floor of the sink cabinet switch as described and photographed? YEP. But that's not the definition of a damp location. And for a similar location in most kitchens, yeppers reasonable to expect and safeguard (excepting the small percentage occupied by the "Felix Unger"s amongst us).


I'm going to go non-technical and common sense here for a moment.

Read the definition of what constitutes a location, damp.

Cheap mdf based "foiled" cabinets. Ask someone who has had the misfortune to have them as base cabinets and sink fronts, with a DW next to the kitchen sink if this is a regularly exposed to excess humidity, condensation and occasional wetting.

Realizing that so many now use individually wrapped pellets or liquid automatic dishwashing detergent, take yourself back to the days when powdered free-flowing automatic dish washing detergent was the norm.Foil wrapped chipboard box with a metal spout. Stored in under-sink cabinet adjacent to automatic dishwasher. Freshly opened - free flowing. Close up spout, next use free-flowing. Bought a larger box - before you got to the 14-15th cycle, NOT SO FREE FLOWING.

Sprayer at the sink deck/faucet? water on your hand while you spray? get water on the deck where the nipple rest for the sprayer, or pull-out faucet/sprayer where do you think some of that water goes? It runs down the sprayer hose and usually drips off its lowest point (most of the time where the weight clamp on the hose is).

Is every kitchen sink the same? Of course not. Cheap SS builders models not very well insulated (condensation galore), enameled CI, composite sinks.Drain basket after a sink load of scalding dishwater let to drain? or a machine load of sanitizing rinse water drains from the dishwasher to the sink-tail or disposer? area cools, Radiant heat warms up the air space. Cools, humid air hits dew point, result? Condensation.

Metal supply plumbing? (Its not all plastic everywhere) Condensation.

Drains? chromed brass, plastic PVC, slip joints at the trap.

The humidity and condensation under a WELL USED kitchen sink EXPECTED. Drips off of wet hands going in and out under the sink at stored items, happens frequently in most residences. Humidity and condensation under a sink adjacent to an automatic dishwasher, THE NORM.

Splashes, drips (even off of wet hands accessing or placing something) during the "normal" use of the kitchen sink and storage under the sink in the front of the bottom base plane of the sink cabinet or sink front? NORMAL EXPECTED EVERY-DAY OCCURANCE.

Add to that increased activies - ins and outs to the sink cabinet/sink-front under sink storage to deposit kitchen GARBAGE, which is EXPECTED to be food scraps, packaging, wrapping of FOODS and LIQUIDS: Yes, splashes, drips of water, food, sauces, other liquids - juice, milk, etc. Especially in a large family with younger children. Perhaps not so likely in an empty nest, or single occupant. Is that all dry trash in the garbage can? Not likely. More likely wet damp garbage. Does everyone seal and remove every hour or so all the scraps and garbage from a residential kitchen? Nope. Do the kitchen sink cabinets seal completely? No, but they do sufficiently deter air exchange - and that damp garbage under the sink can sit in a virtual terarium.

The storage/utility shelf/bottom plane area of the kitchen sink cabinet or sink-front storage area under the sink is reasonbly expected to at minimum be a (as defined in the electrical code) a DAMP area. Esp. as photographed and described (and evidenced by the photo).

Just as it would be inappropriate to hard wire the disposer with NM-B, especially in this kitchen as B.R. has described the use.

I would yes, recommend relocating from the floor of the kitchen sink cabinet/sink-front and/or protected from damage and Yes the Code speaks to this condition for the reasons I outlined earlier.

Damp location, protection of equipment, subject to damage environmental in its present location (caustic and corrosive qualities of what is usually expected to be stored in this cabinet and could be spilled - who amongst us has never heard of a spray bottle, cleanser canister, etc. not being knocked over and leaking, even just once? (liquid dish detergents, powdered detergents, cleansers, oven cleaners, kitchen sanitizing formulas, etc.) and the switch is already being hit/operated as indicated whenever they access the garbage can), dedicated equipment space, etc. It is reasonable for practical safeguarding, and quite possible to do so.

I believe that the logical principle is that you collect data, then use the data to form an opinion. Instead, I see a few examples of doing the opposite: 'feeling' som,ething is wrong, then 'dredging' the code, twisting definitions, and making all manner of inferences to support the pre-formed opinion. That's not logic, that's superstition.

Among the concepts confused are 'required,' 'advised,' and 'minimum.' I would expect ordinary folks to be able to make those distinctions; this goes double for "professionals." Think of it this way: would you want yourself on your own jury?

I cannot, no mater how I stretch my imagination, imagine the typical sink cabinet a 'damp' location. Sure, anything 'might' happen, but that's not the issue. Evidence for the area being 'dry' can be found in the can of Comet that's usually down there; those things turn into a solid brick with the least amount of moisture. I've had more set up in the pantry than under the sink.

As for the disconnect, just because the breaker can serve as a disconnect does not mean you're not allowed to have another under the sink. I'd be thankful that someone went 'beyond' code to make things more convenient for the serviceman.

You're limited as to where the disconnect can be placed. One would naturally want it where it can be easily found and reached. Cabinet bottoms are usually much thicker than cabinet sides; I doubt that cabinet sides would have enough material for screws to hold.

Even a baby knows the difference between a 'bottom' and a 'floor.' When you tell one you plan to spank his bottom, it's not his feet that he grabs.

What exactly is the code reference that is being discussed? I see vastly different interpretations.

Originally Posted by Rich Goeken

What exactly is the code reference that is being discussed? I see vastly different interpretations.

I believe the issue some perceive is that the cabinet is a damp or wet location. I will post the Article 100 definition.

Location, Damp.

Locations protected from weather and
not subject to saturation with water or other liquids but
subject to moderate degrees of moisture. Examples of such
locations include partially protected locations under canopies,
marquees, roofed open porches, and like locations,
and interior locations subject to moderate degrees of moisture,
such as some basements, some barns, and some coldstorage
warehouses.

Location, Dry.

A location not normally subject to dampness
or wetness. A location classified as dry may be temporarily
subject to dampness or wetness, as in the case of a

building under construction.

Every single one of those positions of switches and outlets/receptacles I wright up every time I see them.

If an electrician and or home owner or handy man does not have a lick of common sense it is of no concern of mine. I could care less what it says in a code book or if a particular area in mentioned or not. It gets written up out of ignorance and certainly not my ignorance. Ever single one of those instances could have just as easily been different in locations and should have been. As Jim said the breaker lock out would have been acceptable for the dishwasher and the very stupid spot that someone stuck there out of complete ignorance of common sense could have been avoided and should have been at all cost. That is about the most ignorant thing I have seen in a long time. I bright could one possibly be to have put that switch in the floor of the cabinet under the kitchen sink. This should have no thought to it what so ever as far as a write up from any home inspector.

In the case of damp verses wet areas........... every person on the planet knows that under a kitchen sink liquids are spilled constantly and this is the most likely place in any cabinet in a home to have a leak as items are pulled out of there daily. Two sink drains, disposal connection, bottles of liquids, water lines to the dish washer and kitchen sink faucet. Did I say the most utilized under sink cabinet in the home etc etc etc etc This is not like a plug on the side wall or receptacle on the side wall under a sink.

How about the nitch where is is more likely to set a drink down, set a nice set of flowers on, taking up space on a small nitch shelf etc etc.

Sorry folks but this electrician (or who ever did the things in this home) had to be from California with a medical prescription for weed. Legal drugs are still drugs.

Originally Posted by Ted Menelly

In the case of damp verses wet areas........... every person on the planet knows that under a kitchen sink liquids are spilled constantly and this is the most likely place in any cabinet in a home to have a leak as items are pulled out of there daily. Two sink drains, disposal connection, bottles of liquids, water lines to the dish washer and kitchen sink faucet. Did I say the most utilized under sink cabinet in the home etc etc etc etc This is not like a plug on the side wall or receptacle on the side wall under a sink.

Ted, based on my personal experiences, both in my parents home and as a homeowner myself for over 20 years, I have had one leak under the sink. That was when I moved the DW out and the nut on the water supply line loosened enough to allow a small leak. I don't think I am just lucky or that much more careful than the rest of the general population.

Originally Posted by Jim Port

Ted, based on my personal experiences, both in my parents home and as a homeowner myself for over 20 years, I have had one leak under the sink. That was when I moved the DW out and the nut on the water supply line loosened enough to allow a small leak. I don't think I am just lucky or that much more careful than the rest of the general population.

Looking at it from the perspective of one that has been rehabbing and remodelling homes as well as inspecting homes all my life there is damage from water under far many more cabinets than there are without damage. You must admit.....forget about water. Is that not the dumbest idea anyone could have come up with for placement of that switch.

Pull the dishwasher out. Cut a hole in the back wall behind the dishwasher. Snake wires up to the back splash. Insert switch. Even a tile back splash would have been pretty simple. I would imagine everyone that does work on existing homes has a small router and can obtain a bit to rout thru the tile and drywall to add a switch. I was using a router (small hand held) decades ago to route tile and drywall. I would imagine they have been around for decades. anyone doing remodel work and even electricians and plumbers would be using them after all the decades they have been out. They are cheap and worth their wait in gold. Dremel or what ever.

If you don't have the toils, don't do the job But don't do it wrong and have that switch being hit constantly or spilled on or what ever.....simply just in the way of everything.

Originally Posted by Rich Goeken

What exactly is the code reference that is being discussed? I see vastly different interpretations.

Article 100-I, Definitions; 110.11, Deteriorating Agents; Table 110.20; 110.22, Identification of Disconnecting Means; 110.26, Working Space; 110.27(B), Prevent Physical Damage; 404.4 Damp or Wet Locations; 314.15;
404.14(A), Alternating-Current General-Use Snap Switch;
404.14 (B), Alternating-Current or Direct-Current General-Use Snap Switch; 312.2; 314.15; 314.27(C) and Exception, Floor Boxes; 314.28; 404.8(A), Switches Accessibility and Grouping, Location; 404.9, Provisions for General-Use Snap Switches; 422 Appliances; 422.31 Disconnection of Permanently Connected Appliances; presuming DW doesn't have Unit Switch complying with 422.34, Unit Switch(es) as Disconnecting Means, Part IX of Article 430;
433.32 and Exception, Disconnecting Means for Motor-Driven Appliance; 422.35;
For switches controlling motors, see 430.83, 430.109, Type; and 430.110(C), Combination Loads;
I cited 430.102 404.4 and 110 previously.

Receptacles, 210.52 (not in cabinet or cupboard - no door); 406.4(E), Receptacles in Countertops and Similar Work Surfaces in Dwelling Units;

Time pressed, that should do for start.

Falling liquids and light splashing, at a bare minimum!
See table referenced above 110.20

OBVIOUS under a kitchen sink in storage area. Add to this we have the area being used to seat the kitchen GARBAGE CAN.
OP has already indicated the switch is constantly being struck by said garbage can!

This is a floor surface type platform installation of box and device as disconnect. see 314.17(C) read all of it including exception for clarity.


Read the entirety (including FPNs) of Deteriorating Agents at 110.11; what can be EXPECTED to be stored here? Detergents, cleansers, oven cleaners, etc.

The location is NOT dry. The location is not wet, the location is damp, a floor platform surface of either false sink front or sink cabinet, there is no protection surface, guarding, from wet plumbing above - slip joints, sprayer hose nipple, etc. it is not protected from accidential operation OR DAMAGE by trash can use (as stated it - the switch- gets HIT all the time by the trash can) , or items stored, cannot be visualized while servicing dishwasher due to door swing and is not capable of being locked out, and is subject to spillage seepage from materials stored on the same planar surface (fallen over srayer bottle, dish soap bottle, etc.) which are ALSO DETERIORATING AGENTS to wiring, device, etc. LOOK AT THE PHOTO. Not only damage/missing laminate/foil/faux wood finish missing, but look up and to the right in the photo (background and to right of switch cover) note RAISED areas - the cancering blistering effects of MOISTURE and DETERIORATING AGENTS as well as DAMAGE to the foiled layer of the SINK BASE or SINK FRONT PLATFORM FLOOR.

The install of the unprotected switch and box pictured as dishwasher disconnect is a safety issue and should be corrected.

I find Mr. Port's arguments, justifications, etc. unsubstantiated and frankly misguided. Similarly to Mr. Steinike's, outdated and not consistant with changes/clarifications to the 2005 & 2008 NEC. Especially considering the existing evidence of damage to the sink cabinet FLOOR pictured. The presence of DETERIORATING AGENTS is pictured - note automatic dishwasher detergent PELLET in the left foreground of the cabinet (bag containing same in right background). Apparently also failed to read the information about the incidential and accidental HITTING of the switch itself with the garbage can. Any HI who inspects other than new or newly remodeled kitchens KNOWS what is OFTEN EVIDENCED under a Kitchen Sink behind the cabinet door(s).

Originally Posted by H.G. Watson, Sr.

;
404.4 Damp or Wet Locations;

Again this does not meet the defintion of a damp location regardless of your wishes. Re-read the definition of Location, Dry. That even allows for the occassional wetness.

314.15; 314.27(C) and Exception, Floor Boxes;

Not a floor box so this would not apply either. Show me how you would walk on the bottom of the cabinet. .

Receptacles, 210.52 (not in cabinet or cupboard - no door); 406.4(E), Receptacles in Countertops and Similar Work Surfaces in Dwelling Units;

This is a switch, not a receptacle. This would be like trying to apply that since there is no speed limit on the Autobahn, there is no speed limit on the Interstate freeway. Nice try

Mr. Port,

You are being silly: There were at least three face-up receptacle locations photographed. I quoted the question I was addressing with the citations regarding my comments to the topic thread. IIRC there were at least four photos to the Original Post.

As for the Sink Cabinet containing switch, it (the sink base cabinet and countertop is attached to the home, it is installed; it contains systems other than electrical in nature. There is no adequate separation between or protection of those systems and environment and those electrical and installed. The protection of equipment requires more than just the protection of the device. You should know better.

The floor or platform of same is self-evident. Read the citations.

The under the sink location is not dry. It is a storage location as well. It houses other non-electrical, non-dry components. The electrical system must be protected from deteriorating agents, environmental conditions, and damage.

This includes the box containing the device, wiring system components, etc.

It is obvious you will continue to dispute the obvious, Just as you continue to do so relative to other electrical topics, i.e. prohibition of use of NM-B in certain locations, or that underground raceways are wet locations, despite specific prohibitions and changes in language in NEC.

The location and environment of the switch is NOT a DRY ONE. It requires protection from damage, due to its installation location requires a lock or protective device since it cannot be visualized while servicing the DW due to cabinet door swing and proximity to the permanently installed appliance to which it is designed to serve as a disconnect (and labeled as same). The ENVIRONMENT of the electrical installation is NOT a dry one, it is installed on and below the floor platform of a location subject to splash, drips, and DETERIORATING AGENTS being stored there. Accidental spillage or seeping of same would result in exposure, infiltration of the switch device, the box containing same, the wiring within same, and pooling in the box. The switch itself is inadvertantly being operated during everyday use. The switch itself is being subjected to damage during everyday use as described by the original poster. The surface to which the switch and box are mounted is DETERIORATING DUE TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL EXPOSURE and DAMAGE. ENOUGH ALREADY!!!

It is pointless to discuss the matter further with you. I will simply agree to disagree with your assertions and justifications on this topic thread.

Have a nice day.

I agree with Eric here. Having had kids, all fully grown now, I can the see the possibility (probability) of spills. Just because it might be technically allowed doesn't make it good practice.

Originally Posted by Eric Barker

Whether or not the installation in the first two photos are "allowed" is a bit irrelevant to me. Considering all the items (including a trash can) that can be stuffed in the cabinet under the sink, and, in my experience, these areas are often water stained from leaks, I think that the switch and receptacle are poorly located and that consideration should be given to relocating them.

ARTICLE 90 Introduction
90.1 Purpose

(A) Practical Safeguarding. The purpose of this Code is the practical safeguarding of persons and property from hazards arising from the use of electricity.

(B) Adequacy. This Code contains provisions that are considered necessary for safety. Compliance therewith and proper maintenance results in an installation that is essentially free from hazard but not necessarily efficient, convenient, or adequate for good service or future expansion of electrical use.

I agree completely. M.G.

Given the capitalistic nature of companies I don't know why anyone hasn't made a cabinet with a shower stall liner or made of a composite material so it doesn't fall aart in the rain forest like environment that some here seem to think is so commonplace. Think about the advantage that you could market, a cabinet that never rots. Nevermind, no demand for this in a dry location. Show me the black mold that grows in damp locations.

How are all the harzardous chemicals safely shipped and stored? Shouldn't the packaging be able to contain the material safely? I have yet to see the spontaneous leaks that must happen under everyones sink but mine. Lucky me I guess. Where are the warning to wear a respirator around these chemicals?

If the plumbing is so prone to leakage where are the class action lawsuits against the manufacturers for producing such a faulty product? Why are these faulty pipes allowed to be concealed where mold can grow behind the surface? Why are they allowed to be installed in a ceiling where a leak could damage the living areas below? It seems some of you are envisioning "little people" taking showers under the leaks under the sinks.

Some one said something about equipment space. We have read here that not even a trash can can be kept below a panel. Clearly the problem with the issue of the switch is the improper location of the trash can. After all the switch was there first.

Again some have twisted their wishes into what they want to see in the code despite what is actually written. Your arguments don't hold water. Why don't the AHJs see it your way? Cleary NFPA would have taken corrective action if these issues were a dangerous as some here think they are.

I think there was something from Disney like "When you wish upon a star". Wish away, but don't hold your breathe. You haven't proved your point.

Originally Posted by H.G. Watson, Sr.

It is obvious you will continue to dispute the obvious, Just as you continue to do so relative to other electrical topics, i.e. prohibition of use of NM-B in certain locations, or that underground raceways are wet locations, despite specific prohibitions and changes in language in NEC.

I have never argued that NM-B is allowed in a conduit outdoors. I have said that not all crawlspaces are damp and that NM-B would be allowed there.

Originally Posted by H.G. Watson, Sr.

The location and environment of the switch is NOT a DRY ONE. It requires protection from damage, due to its installation location requires a lock or protective device since it cannot be visualized while servicing the DW due to cabinet door swing and proximity to the permanently installed appliance to which it is designed to serve as a disconnect (and labeled as same)

Well the location proposed above the backsplash could not be visualized either while working under the DW. It would be even more accessible if it were within reach of a pass-thru. Where do you suggest locating the switch in a code compliant manner? Couldn't we just ask the gremlins in the closed cabinet to please leave the switch off while the repairs are made?

This is a common sense issue, and as HG has listed, one does not have to look to hard to find the 'codes' concern regarding obscene installations such as this.
Reaffirming HG's posts: protecting from physical damage, deteriorating agents, practical safeguarding, and....how about suitable for the environment and likely to....are also expressed throughout the code.
Bob Smit, County EI

Originally Posted by bob smit

This is a common sense issue, and as HG has listed, one does not have to look to hard to find the 'codes' concern regarding obscene installations such as this.
Reaffirming HG's posts: protecting from physical damage, deteriorating agents, practical safeguarding, and....how about suitable for the environment and likely to....are also expressed throughout the code.
Bob Smit, County EI

Just a quick question. The dishwasher manufacturers usually require a dedicated circuit of a specific size in their installation/warranty information. As the circuit breaker is the disconnect device, why would you want a switch at the dishwasher? It's not like a AC unit that is outside the house.

As to the classification of the area, we're just going to have to agree to disagree.

I'm not sure which of the changes in 2005 or 2008 has made my position 'outdated.'

"Common sense" is most uncommon. The very existance of this thread suggests that the issue isn't as plain as some assert.

I'm not aware of any dishwashers that require a dedicated circuit, but that's not really the question here. Dedicated circuit or not, there is no way to stretch the code's permitting the use of a breaker as the disconnecting means as being any sort of prohibition of an additional disconnect. "Good design" would suggest an additional disconnect be placed where convenient to whomever might feel the need of one.

As for those who fear that putting a switch on the bottom of a cabinet will cause the sky to fall, well, everyone is entitled to have their own opinion.

As for considering the cabinet bottom like a 'floor,' keep in mind that there are several inches of space under that switch, and there is no seal between the box and the base. You'd have trouble filling that box with water if you used a hose.

Originally Posted by Rich Goeken

Just a quick question. The dishwasher manufacturers usually require a dedicated circuit of a specific size in their installation/warranty information. As the circuit breaker is the disconnect device, why would you want a switch at the dishwasher? It's not like a AC unit that is outside the house.

Fixed in place hard-wired combination load appliance (motor(s) and resistive heating element/s, etc.), require means to disconnect if the unit itself does not contain a qualifying and indicating means to disconnect in/on itself. Cord-and-plug where-in not accessible as per rules and specific exceptions similarly require disconnect that meets the rules for same.

If the circuit breaker is not equiped with a means to LOCK IT OUT, and is not/does not meet the requirement of "with in sight of" while servicing the appliance - then it requires a local disconnect that does. That local disconnect, if required, must also meet the requirement of remaining "within sight of" (as defined in article 100-I) as in under the control and view of the one servicing said appliance OR be able to be LOCKED OUT and the rules for a disconnect, previously referenced earlier in the string. The "within sight of" does not mean the location entrance of the disconnect as much as it is the OFF position of the disconnect ITSELF which must remain in sight during any/all operations involving the appliance or equipment.

Yes, as the combination load generally exceeds the 80 percent rule, and its motor rating plus resistive use the 50 percent rule, and as the appliance generally has at least one cycle scenario which exceeds 2-hours in total (including timer pre-set cycles) it is generally not disputed that the equipment is continuous duty. And yes, most such appliances include in their Listed Manufacturer instructions recommendations or outright requirements of the NEC, most do require a dedicated circuit, esp. if the circuit is 15 amps, and yes some require a dedicated 20 amp circuit.

As we have already established the equipment (switch) as pictured is subject to falling drips or splashes, etc. Table 110.20 already eliminates options even in the most minimally circumstances. As the box is mounted in the floor OR PLATFORM we are further limited. As the installation is concealed but not protected in COMBUSTIBLE material, we are further limited in our application, we also see the deterioration and damage to this surface due to environmental and in-use conditions. As pictured, it is unsafe and non-complaint. As described it is a defect and hazard and requires remediation. Practical Safeguarding has been ignored in the selection of equipment and installation in this instance.

Originally Posted by H.G. Watson, Sr.

Fixed in place hard-wired combination load appliance (motor(s) and resistive heating element/s, etc.), require means to disconnect if the unit itself does not contain a qualifying and indicating means to disconnect in/on itself. Cord-and-plug where-in not accessible as per rules and specific exceptions similarly require disconnect that meets the rules for same.

If the circuit breaker is not equipped with a means to LOCK IT OUT, and is not/does not meet the requirement of "with in sight of" while servicing the appliance - then it requires a local disconnect that does. That local disconnect, if required, must also meet the requirement of remaining "within sight of" (as defined in article 100-I) as in under the control and view of the one servicing said appliance OR be able to be LOCKED OUT and the rules for a disconnect, previously referenced earlier in the string. The "within sight of" does not mean the location entrance of the disconnect as much as it is the OFF position of the disconnect ITSELF which must remain in sight during any/all operations involving the appliance or equipment.

So, as I understand you, if the breaker specific to the dishwasher is equipped with the ability to be locked out----it does not need to comply with the "...within sight..." rule. Otherwise, a disconnect device local to the dishwasher shall be provided. My concern with the switch under the sink, in any variation, is that while servicing the machine it is probably pulled out on the floor, and the under-sink switch cabinet installation, due to the door not being open, is not "...within sight...".

Bruce,I got twenty years doing electrical installations and bolive me it is the first time I see this way of installing devices in undersink cabinet ,the code got some grey areas were people like to use the terminology of "code interpretation" hire is one of this cases but is not totally grey NEC 406.4(E) stand:receptacles shall not be installed in face-up position in countertops or similar work surfaces.Some one can say "this is not a work suface".Knowing all the stuf people put in this particular space for me it is.I did not find the same requirement for switches on NEC 404 but 120V is runing through the switch and it is dangerous too.The point of this requirements are becouse face -up device can acumulate more level of moisture then when is intalled in or on the wall.I agree with H.G about include the undersink cabinet in the definition of damp location becouse the level of moisture hire is real,how many time people find a "pool" in this particular space.that hapen to me in my home before!NEC 406.8(A)say more about receptacles in damp locations.
GOOD LUCK

Originally Posted by Rich Goeken

Just a quick question. The dishwasher manufacturers usually require a dedicated circuit of a specific size in their installation/warranty information. As the circuit breaker is the disconnect device, why would you want a switch at the dishwasher? It's not like a AC unit that is outside the house.

too avoid this with units that can start upon door closure
parental control device usually seen at back splash or sink cabinet wall, some are a flush mount pneumatic button built into the cabinet trim

Originally Posted by John Steinke

I'm not aware of any dishwashers that require a dedicated circuit, but that's not really the question here.

The wording in dishwasher instillation instructions is usually something like an "individual properly grounded branch circuit" (GE), or an "individual 120VAC 60Hz grounded electrical circuit" (Maytag), or similar.

I have always assumed that "individual" = "dedicated", and have never had an electrician question this interpretation.

But now that I think about it, AFAIK that's just my assumption.

Originally Posted by Michael Thomas

The wording in dishwasher instillation instructions is usually something like an "individual properly grounded branch circuit" (GE), or an "individual 120VAC 60Hz grounded electrical circuit" (Maytag), or similar.

I have always assumed that "individual" = "dedicated", and have never had an electrician question this interpretation.

But now that I think about it, AFAIK that's just my assumption.

No, I wouldn't call it an assumption, but it is a logical conclusion. An "individual branch circuit" is "dedicated" to a singular utilization equipment, and as long as you realize the reverse is not true (i.e. "dedicated" branch circuit is not equal to "individual branch circuit") you are correct in your reasoning.

The NEC defines an "individual branch circuit" {(Article 100) branch circuit, individual} as "a “branch circuit that supplies only one utilization equipment.” This does not restrict a MWBC from being an individual branch circuit supply. (for a well-thought discussion on this subject, see Electrical Contractor Magazine, March 2008, article by Mike Holt clickable link direct to article here: Electrical Contractor: A Serious Decision ).

"Dedicated" is not specifically "defined" universally in the NEC, IIRC. Dedicated as in a branch circuit pertains to a particular limitation as to type or area of utilization, to the restriction of other types or areas of utilization. i.e. a circuit "dedicated" to supply bathroom receptacles, OR all outlets (points of utilization) in ONE bathroom; a circuit dedicated to supplying solely small appliance receptacles (no lighting, fixed in place equipment, etc.); a circuit "dedicated" to snow melting equipment, etc.; versus a general use circuit, or one "dedicated" to soley suppling light fixtures (as was common in the past).

So, "dedicated" does not necessarily equate "individual" in terms of the branch circuit; however. an "individual branch circuit" is by necessity and definition thereby effectively "dedicated" to a singular utilization equipment.

HTH.

H.G.

P.S. I realize it can get a little dicey when reviewing the requirements and exceptions pertaining to outlets and receptacles, for example 2005 NEC, but when you review next, note the usual includes language for such receptacles being dedicated for a specific type of equipment(s) and identified. e.g. 2005 210.50(C)

Mike Thomas ... would you happen to have a link to, or be able to post a scan of, such an instruction?

If that's the case, I don't think I've ever seen a compliant installation. Why? Because a dishwasher doesn't draw very much current.

If you have a 'dedicated' circuit, then the overcurrent protection must be sized to the known load. I haven't seen too many panels with 5-A or even 10-A breakers in them. Of course, a fused disconnect at the appliance could be used to provide the correctly sized protection.

And to think we haven't even begun to explore the joys of a cord & plug for the DW ....

Originally Posted by John Steinke

Mike Thomas ... would you happen to have a link to, or be able to post a scan of, such an instruction?

If that's the case, I don't think I've ever seen a compliant installation. Why? Because a dishwasher doesn't draw very much current.

If you have a 'dedicated' circuit, then the overcurrent protection must be sized to the known load. I haven't seen too many panels with 5-A or even 10-A breakers in them. Of course, a fused disconnect at the appliance could be used to provide the correctly sized protection.

And to think we haven't even begun to explore the joys of a cord & plug for the DW ....

John, from a "typical" dishwasher installation manual, (GE, featured in this weeks HD flyer....):

"Electrical Requirements
• This appliance must be supplied with 120V, 60Hz., and
connected to an individual properly grounded branch circuit
protected by a 15- or 20-ampere circuit breaker or time-
delay fuse....." .

What is interesting, and not commented on yet, is the requirement (with this dishwasher and possible others) for a permanent ground. Their alternate installation with a plug ended cable in an adjacent cabinet (under sink preferred, rear wall 6" from base, or adjacent cabinet same height). (Oh Joy!!)

If in fact an undersink location was considered a damp location, The NEC article 406.8 would apply for receptacles and 404.4 would apply to switches.

These would apply to any device mounted in the undersink area whether mounted on the cabinet bottom or in the back or side.

Both an undersink area and a basement are a normally dry location. The fact a plumbing problem can temporarily change the situation doesn't change the designation. I've never seen an "in use" cover required under a sink (or in a basement) by any jurisdiction.

Maybe you need a checkbox on your inspection forms that qualifies something as "stupid and ought to be changed", but don't get going on trying to do your own definitions.

Thank you, Rich, for the reply.

As for the instructions ... every circuit coming from the panel is an 'individual branch circuit.' Now, were you to supply a 240 load by drawing from two separate (existing) 120 circuits, you would not be usinf an 'individual' circuit. In the case of a 120 load, I doubt anyone here has ever seen a single-pole load that was not an 'individual' circuit.

This is something quite different from requiring a dedicated circuit.

Remember, were a dedicated circuit required, the code would not allow you to use a 15 or 20 amp circuit (commonly called 'convenience' circuits). Instead, the code would require the breaker or fuse to be sized according to the nameplate. Since there's usually a heating element, this would not be a 'motor' circuit. Nor would the load be 'continuous.' You would be limited to the 'next standard breaker' after 125% of the nameplate FLA. In most instances, this would be a 10 amp breaker.

I'm not sure what you mean by a 'permanent' ground. The instructions do call for a 'proper' ground. In many cases, this can be provided by the jacket of the flex. If you're advocating the use of a separate green wire, well, that's another discussion.

Originally Posted by John Steinke

Thank you, Rich, for the reply.

As for the instructions ... every circuit coming from the panel is an 'individual branch circuit.' Now, were you to supply a 240 load by drawing from two separate (existing) 120 circuits, you would not be usinf an 'individual' circuit. In the case of a 120 load, I doubt anyone here has ever seen a single-pole load that was not an 'individual' circuit.

This is something quite different from requiring a dedicated circuit.

Remember, were a dedicated circuit required, the code would not allow you to use a 15 or 20 amp circuit (commonly called 'convenience' circuits). Instead, the code would require the breaker or fuse to be sized according to the nameplate. Since there's usually a heating element, this would not be a 'motor' circuit. Nor would the load be 'continuous.' You would be limited to the 'next standard breaker' after 125% of the nameplate FLA. In most instances, this would be a 10 amp breaker.

I'm not sure what you mean by a 'permanent' ground. The instructions do call for a 'proper' ground. In many cases, this can be provided by the jacket of the flex. If you're advocating the use of a separate green wire, well, that's another discussion.

Mr. Steinke,

It is obvious that you didn't bother reading my post (#32) above, NOR REVIEWED THE DEFINITION of what a "Branch Circuit, Individual" (or in the language of the Code when used "individual branch circuit") actually IS.

See: Article 100-I, branch circuit, individual. 2008 National Electrical Code (NFPA-70).

Your statements above are inopposite the Code. {IOW, bass-ackwards}.

I suggest you review the National Electrical Code 2008 edition before you spout off in direct conflict to it. There is much wrong and little if anything right in what you said in the quote above).

Originally Posted by John Steinke

This is something quite different from requiring a dedicated circuit.

To follow up on what H. G. said, the 2008 NEC RARELY uses "dedicated" with "circuit", the main use of "dedicated" is with "space" as in "dedicated space" - yes, there are some other limited "dedicated" uses, but not in conjunction with "circuit".

The two exceptions I found which do refer to "dedicated circuit" are for snow melting equipment and air conditioning and heating units on each elevator car.

As H. G. said, the 'individual branch circuit' is the term the code uses for the common meaning of 'dedicated branch circuit'. The 'individual branch circuit' supplies only one piece of utilization equipment - i.e., the circuit is 'dedicated' for that one use.

Originally Posted by DenBenson

I have such in my kitchen, the box is leakproof, so i don't bother about spills and so on.

Leak proof or leak resistant? If you've got such a thing on a flat surface it'd be a neat trick and I'd be interested in seeing a pic of it.

We're going to have to agree to disagree completely as to the meaning of 'individual branch circuit.'

As the NEC states in Article 90, it is not an instruction book, and you are expected to have a prior understanding of the craft.

As used in the NEC, and as I explained, 'individual branch circuit' means simply any circuit with its' own breaker. Were there to be 20 receptacles on the same breaker, that would be 20 receptacles on the same individual branch circuit.

The code panels are well aware of the term 'dedicated.' If they want something to be dedicated, they're perfectly capable of saying that. Or, as they do several times, they will limit the scope by adding some words to the effect of 'serving no other area.'

Originally Posted by John Steinke

We're going to have to agree to disagree completely as to the meaning of 'individual branch circuit.'

As the NEC states in Article 90, it is not an instruction book, and you are expected to have a prior understanding of the craft.

As used in the NEC, and as I explained, 'individual branch circuit' means simply any circuit with its' own breaker. Were there to be 20 receptacles on the same breaker, that would be 20 receptacles on the same individual branch circuit.

The code panels are well aware of the term 'dedicated.' If they want something to be dedicated, they're perfectly capable of saying that. Or, as they do several times, they will limit the scope by adding some words to the effect of 'serving no other area.'

NOPE, WE do not have to agree to disagree. YOU ARE FLAT OUT WRONG.

"branch circuit, individual" IS DEFINED IN THE NEC IN ARTICLE 100 Part I. ITS MEANING IS CLEAR AND IS APPLICABLE THROUGHT THE ENTIRETY OF THE NEC.

It reads:

Originally Posted by NFPA 70 the National Electrical Code

(Article 100)

branch circuit, individual. A branch circuit that supplies only one utilization equipment.

You are flat out wrong, and I will not agree to DISAGREE WITH YOU on the fact that the NEC DEFINES AND LIMITS JUST WHAT IT IS and that definition is far more specific than what you say it is. It is NOT as you say, "any circuit with its own breaker"

Thank you, HG, for the correction. I grovel accordingly ....

We're still back to the original claim: that dishwashers require their own dedicated circuit. I still say ';no.'

I can't speak for the sources others cited, but I have just lookd at the instructions for some Whirlpool dishwashers. In their instructions, they 'require' a 15 amp 'fused' supply, and 'recommend' a 'separate' circuit. The instructions also assume cord & plug connection, and illustrate a location under the sink.

While there are many things that are questionable in those instructions, I don't see where we have the basis to infer very much. After all, we have no assurance that any particular dishwasher will be used - and who knows what those instructions will say?

Just as important, the instructions cannot contradict the code, if for no other reason than the boilerplate statement that the instructions have about complying with codes, etc.

If you were to run a separate circuit, for the dishwasher alone, your primary requirement would be to follow the nameplate information. Unless that dishwasher just happens to have ONLY a 6FLA motor (no heater), the 15 amp fuse called for in the instructions is not appropriate under code rules.

For that matter, if it's a motor-only load, then the values of fuses will be different from the allowed breaker sizes. All of these numbers will change dramatically if the replacement dishwasher has a water heater in it.

Do those requirements infer 'fuse only, no breakers allowed?' I'd say "no," unless that proscription is also on the nameplate.

Can you, contrary to the instruction, share a 20 amp circuit? I'd allow it, on the principle that code allows 15 amp receptacles on 20 amp circuits.

Using a dedicated circuit, we're also back to where you end up needing a fused disconnect .... probably not what one usually thinks of whan they see a cord and plug on the appliance. Whether that fused disconnect would have to be installed according to workspace clearance rules is another issue

Recapping ... Whirlpool, at least, does not 'require' a separate circuit; they only 'reccomend' it. Thus, we cannot infer any code requirement that ALL dishwasherd be supplied by dedicated circuits.

Originally Posted by John Steinke

Thank you, HG, for the correction. I grovel accordingly ....

We're still back to the original claim: that dishwashers require their own dedicated circuit. I still say ';no.'

I can't speak for the sources others cited, but I have just lookd at the instructions for some Whirlpool dishwashers. In their instructions, they 'require' a 15 amp 'fused' supply, and 'recommend' a 'separate' circuit. The instructions also assume cord & plug connection, and illustrate a location under the sink.

While there are many things that are questionable in those instructions, I don't see where we have the basis to infer very much. After all, we have no assurance that any particular dishwasher will be used - and who knows what those instructions will say?

Just as important, the instructions cannot contradict the code, if for no other reason than the boilerplate statement that the instructions have about complying with codes, etc.

If you were to run a separate circuit, for the dishwasher alone, your primary requirement would be to follow the nameplate information. Unless that dishwasher just happens to have ONLY a 6FLA motor (no heater), the 15 amp fuse called for in the instructions is not appropriate under code rules.

For that matter, if it's a motor-only load, then the values of fuses will be different from the allowed breaker sizes. All of these numbers will change dramatically if the replacement dishwasher has a water heater in it.

Do those requirements infer 'fuse only, no breakers allowed?' I'd say "no," unless that proscription is also on the nameplate.

Can you, contrary to the instruction, share a 20 amp circuit? I'd allow it, on the principle that code allows 15 amp receptacles on 20 amp circuits.

Using a dedicated circuit, we're also back to where you end up needing a fused disconnect .... probably not what one usually thinks of whan they see a cord and plug on the appliance. Whether that fused disconnect would have to be installed according to workspace clearance rules is another issue

Recapping ... Whirlpool, at least, does not 'require' a separate circuit; they only 'reccomend' it. Thus, we cannot infer any code requirement that ALL dishwasherd be supplied by dedicated circuits.

John, think that you are creating a big smokescreen here. The manufacturer "recommends" a circuit with only the dishwasher on it----period, Call it what you want. They are staying out of the code issue, and extensive calculations such as you are using---by using "recommendation" and not "required". They put "recommendation" on all their products.

But as you like smoke, let's do a backward calculation. The manufacturer says 15 amps. The start-up load should be less than rated circuit---let's say the start-up load is maybe 12 amps, running load 4 amps. Now, explain to me why you want to put a device that has an estimated start-up of 12 amps on a shared circuit, on a protected circuit with a higher rating than the recommendation of the manufacturer of the product, prevent protection of the product due to a higher circuit rating, and suggest that this approach is applicable to all manufacturers of dishwashers? I think that would give them an out on the warranty--not installed as required in the installation instructions. Good smoke John.

As to the wiring, the few I looked at today said plug or hard wiring.

.

John Steinke,Your posts on this topic string are so peppered with incorrect information, misrepresentations of LISTED appliance STANDARD requirements, statements inopposite the NEC, misapplication of terminology, and "bass-ackward" basic electrical standards, and stale. It is obviously a waste of time to even remotely consider responding, and pointing out your latest flawed and erroneous statements, as it seems to take repeated blows with a virtual sledge hammer to get you to GRASP even the most obvious of your many most basic factual errors. It is unclear if your participation on these subjects is driven by suspect motivation, ignorance or some other factor; in either case it is neither accurate nor helpful.Since your participation on this topic thread has in the most part been relative to topic subject hijack, there is no point in engaging you further. The original topic and the subject hijacks have been correctly addressed by others.

Originally Posted by H.G. Watson, Sr.

It is obviously a waste of time to even remotely consider responding, and pointing out your latest flawed and erroneous statements....

And yet, you felt compelled to do it anyway.

Could someone please define "inopposite"? The closest I could find was this.

define:inapposite - Google Search

Originally Posted by Jim Port

Could someone please define "inopposite"?

in (space) opposite.

A space was missing. Several in fact (those following punctuation) as were all the originally inserted line (carriage returns, "enter key") returns.

Not the first time a script for the text editor failed to load/debug when someone replies to a thread on the forum.

opposite:
opposite - unlike, conflicting; completely different.
adverse, contradictory, inconsistent, in opposition.

pertains to that which is diametrically opposed to ..... (insert)


Get it? got it? good!

I have often had disagreements with folks, and I have always endeavored to maintain a professional demeanor. I expect the same treatment from other. Period.

As for making errors: show me someone who's perfect, and I'll show you his nail holes and the spear wound in his side - and I'll be doing it at the Mount of Olives

As for the 'backwards calculations:' That's what's meant when they speak of things like 'diversity' and 'load factors.' That's why the breakers in your panel add up to far more than the size of your service, the NEC has many sections that directly address various situations.

The simple version is: it is assumed that not everything will be pulling maximum load at the same instant.

I don't think this is the place to discuss the various calculations- if for no other reason than the fact that such calculations are beyond the scope of anf HI's license. If you want to visit an electrical forum, feel free to do so.

So ... what about multiple appliances on a 'convenience' or 'small appliance' circuit? What about their loads? Well, that's where the NEC takes a giant leap. With such circuits, basic rules are literally turned on their heads. Perhaps we need to look at the common, everyday household circuit as really being the biggest 'exception' in the code book.

I say this because every other circuit is assumed to be providing power to a specific load. The NEC adds to this reams of specifications as to how that known load will be treated. 1 load = 1 circuit; that's the starting point.

Would the NEC allow you to put a 30A clothes dryer, 30A water heater, and 30A air conditioner on the same 30A circuit? That might be a good discussion in itself ..... but doing so certainly isn't anticipated by code language.

(That might be a good HI topic, since such expedient 'improvements' are commonly found in old homes).

Only with the household 'convenience' circuits (I include the kitchen counter circuits for this discussion) do we NOT make any sort of load calculation. Indeed, the NEC specifically tells you that you need not make any such calculation. Absent a specific code provision relating to a specific receptacle, every receptacle in the house could be on the same breaker.

Place that same circuit in anything besides a residence, and the NEC gives us a load calculation to make. Use it for lighting -even in a house - and the code gives us a load calculation to make.

Plug several large appliances into a convenience circuit, and the NEC cares not how often the breaker trips. Hard-wire the tinyiest appliance, and the NEC wants there to be overcurrent protection to be sized according to the nameplate. Since very small fuses are included in the code as 'standard' sizes, we're looking at situations arising that are almost comical.

Another situation that can lead to interesting discussions is where the 'equipment' requiring a 'dedicated' circuit has several interrelated components, each with it's own plug. For example, a furnace might have an igniter, fan, air cleaner, and humidifier. Or, when the same circuit is used for both the furnace and the air conditioning. (I think a separate thread is warranted for those discussions as well).

John S. U'll get allot of information from H.G. W, almost always correct. But mutual respect? R U kidding? H.G. only knows how to argue and incite.
He does not know the meaning of (or how to) have dialog. IMO Bob Smit.

Originally Posted by bob smit

John S. U'll get allot of information from H.G. W, almost always correct. But mutual respect? R U kidding? H.G. only knows how to argue and incite.
He does not know the meaning of (or how to) have dialog. IMO Bob Smit.

Some nerve you have "bob smit"! Speaking as to what I know or don't know. Mischaracterizing the nature, content and direction of my posts and the dialogue on this thread, and somehow thinking throwing a "IMO" at the end somehow makes it okay to do so?

Mutual respect, that's rich!

Originally Posted by bob smit

John S. U'll get allot of information from H.G. W, almost always correct. But mutual respect? R U kidding? H.G. only knows how to argue and incite.
He does not know the meaning of (or how to) have dialog. IMO Bob Smit.

Originally Posted by H.G. Watson, Sr.

Some nerve you have "bob smit"! Speaking as to what I know or don't know. Mischaracterizing the nature, content and direction of my posts and the dialogue on this thread, and somehow thinking throwing a "IMO" at the end somehow makes it okay to do so?

Mutual respect, that's rich!

Bob,

H. G. showed us just what you were referring to.

H. G. and I used to butt heads a lot when he first came here, but he really has calmed down quite a bit and is actually contributing good information most of the time ... guess you did not see the debates when he first got here, his high horse was really high (so he thought at the time), but he is much better now, and his information is much more useful now.

I don't know if there is a code that definitively says that those switches and outlets are in the wrong place but they are not in a very safe place. Spills and leaks were mentioned. Things like vinegar or other liquids tend to get stored in kitchen cabinets. Without mentioning a code, I would recommend relocating for safety reasons.

H.G. W, & Jerry P,;
I personally dropped that E-bomb not as an intentional attack on Mr. W, (even tho I used him as the Guinea pig cause he's the worst offender, yes IMO),...but to bring up this issue.

If we can somehow leave out the personal attacks, rhetoric, and just plain nastiness, then those of us without much available time can get through these threads and absorb all the 'useful' information that is really abundant on this site.

BTW, U2 fellas (as well of some others) really get me thinking on some issues/perspectives that I would otherwise have just kept practicing 'as usual'. Thanks to all. Sincerely