Thread: Outlets under kitchen sink

Gentlemen:
Doing an inspection recently I came across two electrical outlets located under the kitchen sink behind the drain lines and slightly down the back wall. The outlets are within 12" of a plumbing waste line and one is even closer to the supply lines. I called this out as being unacceptable and when pointed out to the customer, they laughed and thought that was the dumbest location for an electrical outlet. Problem is I cannot find a code that says it is not allowed. The plumbing on this house had issues of its own, but if someone can set me straight from an electrical standpoint I would appreciate it.

Similar Threads:

• Kitchen vent
• Testing GFCI Outlets
• return over range in kitchen
• Kitchen area GFCI
• CPSC Recall: Floor Electrical Outlets

Originally Posted by Charles Wilson

Problem is I cannot find a code that says it is not allowed. The plumbing on this house had issues of its own, but if someone can set me straight from an electrical standpoint I would appreciate it.

You couldn't find anything because there is nothing to find.

That is where the garbage disposer and dishwasher receptacles are frequently located. There is nothing wrong with having those receptacles down there.

Thanks for your quick and accurate response Jerry. I was thinking they were just to close. Must have been all the homeowner special plumbing in the home that clouded my judgement. Well at least that's my story and I am going to stick with it. Again, thanks.

Originally Posted by Charles Wilson

Thanks for your quick and accurate response Jerry. I was thinking they were just to close. Must have been all the homeowner special plumbing in the home that clouded my judgement. Well at least that's my story and I am going to stick with it. Again, thanks.

If you do not have a copy of Code Check Complete you need to order a copy tomorrow! Keep it with you and use it as a tool just like you use your flashlight.

The outlets are fine, but you should note any cords from the dishwasher that penetrate the side of the cabinet walls through holes drilled by installer.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

You couldn't find anything because there is nothing to find.

That is where the garbage disposer and dishwasher receptacles are frequently located. There is nothing wrong with having those receptacles down there.

Jerry,

Would you recommend they be GF protected?

Originally Posted by Ken Amelin

The outlets are fine, but you should note any cords from the dishwasher that penetrate the side of the cabinet walls through holes drilled by installer.

Could you expand on this? Cords through a cabinet side like for a DW are allowed by the NEC.

Originally Posted by Scott Patterson

If you do not have a copy of Code Check Complete you need to order a copy tomorrow! Keep it with you and use it as a tool just like you use your flashlight.

I was unfamiliar with this book and just ordered a copy. Thanks.

Bob W, GFI protection is not required by the NEC. It could be installed if desired.

Originally Posted by Bob Wisnewski

Jerry,

Would you recommend they be GF protected?

Per the NEC, 2008 Version as currently enforced by NYS, receptacles serving a dishwasher or disposal, mounted under the sink, are NOT required to be GFCI protected. (Per the NEC handbook explanation.)

Only those receptacles "serving the countertop" are required to be GFCI protected in a residential (one or two family) home.

That code rule applies to refrigerator and stove/range receptacles as well.

Some electricians choose to GFCI protect such receptacles, however; as I understand it, the 2011 NEC (considerably past the proposed adoption date in NYS) will mandate that such GFCI protected receptacles be "accessible" to facilitate the monthly testing required.

Of course, if protected by a GFCI circuit breaker in the service panel, the accessibility of the receptacle is no longer an issue.

If, however; such an installation was in "other than a dwelling unit" such as in an employee breakroom, it would require GFCI protection per 210.8(B)(5).

Seems illogical to me and is often a topic of disagreement among inspectors and electricians alike.

I'm sure you'll see that evidenced in this forum.

What about 210.8(A)(7)?

The NEC Handbook contains an illustration that seems to contradict the above.

It states: "Laundry, utility and wet bar sinks - where the receptacles are installed within 1.8m (6 ft.) of the outside edge of the sink.

There IS no definition of a "wet bar sink" but the explanation that follows states: "....This change to the 2005 Code brought GFCI protection to all areas in a dwelling unit in which a sink is installed. The text of this requirement does not limit the GFCI requirement to receptacles serving the countertop surfaces, rather it covers all 125 volt, 15 and 20-ampere receptacles that are within 6 ft of any point along the outside edge of the sink."

Confusing?

Yeah....it is to me too.

Problem is that the NEC Handbook explanations are technically not enforceable to the best of my knowledge.

So....to put this to a conclusion, I would strongly encourage electrical contractors to consider installing GFCI protection to those receptacles, however; as an inspector, I cannot compel one to do so.

It would be nice if the authors of the NEC could clarify specifically what is desired.

Originally Posted by Jim Port

Could you expand on this? Cords through a cabinet side like for a DW are allowed by the NEC.

I am looking at NEC 400.8 "uses not permitted" (2) "Where run through holes in walls, ........., etc.) and (7) "Where subject to physical damage".

Do you have any information that says it is OK?

After seeing the other homeowner unhandy work on other plumbing fixtures in the house, when I saw these outlets so close to the plumbing, I acknowledge I had a brain cramp and lost my objectivity on that issue. When I did not see anything in my Code Check Complete which I keep in my clipboard with me at all times, I was thinking I just developed blurred vision on the subject. So when I got back and pulled out my 2012 copy of the IRC and did not see anything, I had to ask. I thank everyone for setting me straight and getting me back on task. I did contact my client and advised him of my incorrect evaluation and have since amended my report

As a follow up question, does anyone think outlets like these, where they are in such close proximity to plumbing lines should have waterproof covers on them, or am I just being overly sensitive to electrical issues?

Originally Posted by Charles Wilson

As a follow up question, does anyone think outlets like these, where they are in such close proximity to plumbing lines should have waterproof covers on them, or am I just being overly sensitive to electrical issues?

If anyone were to get shocked they would think it should have been done. But it is not required.

Originally Posted by Ken Amelin

I am looking at NEC 400.8 "uses not permitted" (2) "Where run through holes in walls, ........., etc.) and (7) "Where subject to physical damage".

Do you have any information that says it is OK?

You have the correct Article 400.8.

Here is a quote from (2):

(2) Where run through holes in walls, structural ceilings,
suspended ceilings, dropped ceilings, or floors

A cabinet is not mentioned in the list. By extension the receptacle for the DW should be accessible which would mean it would need to be installed in the adjacent cabinet and the cord would need to penetrate the cabinet side.

Originally Posted by Jim Port

You have the correct Article 400.8.

Here is a quote from (2):

(2) Where run through holes in walls, structural ceilings,
suspended ceilings, dropped ceilings, or floors

A cabinet is not mentioned in the list. By extension the receptacle for the DW should be accessible which would mean it would need to be installed in the adjacent cabinet and the cord would need to penetrate the cabinet side.

Jim,

This sounds like an interpretation difference.
I view the cabinet wall as a "wall". you view it as a "side".

I also view a hole drilled in the cabinet wall and the cord passing through the unprotected opening in the wall an issue of - "where subject to physical damage" per 400.8 (7) - What is your view on that?

I don't consider the under sink area to be subject to damage. I have never had an inspector question this either.

To me a wall is a framed construction like a stud wall with a finish material like drywall or a CMU structure.

This is from Article 422, and is a better fit to the discussion at hand.

(2) Built-in Dishwashers and Trash Compactors. Built-in
dishwashers and trash compactors shall be permitted to be
cord-and-plug-connected with a flexible cord identified as
suitable for the purpose in the installation instructions of
the appliance manufacturer where all of the following conditions
are met:
(1) The flexible cord shall be terminated with a groundingtype
attachment plug.
Exception: A listed dishwasher or trash compactor distinctly
marked to identify it as protected by a system of double insulation,
or its equivalent, shall not be required to be terminated
with a grounding-type attachment plug.
(2) The length of the cord shall be 0.9 m to 1.2 m (3 ft to
4 ft) measured from the face of the attachment plug to
the plane of the rear of the appliance.
(3) Receptacles shall be located to avoid physical damage
to the flexible cord.
(4) The receptacle shall be located in the space occupied
by the appliance or adjacent thereto.
(5) The receptacle shall be accessible.

Originally Posted by Jim Port

I don't consider the under sink area to be subject to damage. I have never had an inspector question this either.

Jim,

It's interesting how we perceive things differently.

I believe that the cord extending throught the hole in the cabinet wall under the sink is "without doubt" subject to physical damage. Just think about exposure from pulling the trash bin or dish pan and strainer out on a daily basis. Certainly that cord rubbing on an unprotected hole would be subject to damage.

Originally Posted by Jim Port

This is from Article 422, and is a better fit to the discussion at hand.
..... (4) The receptacle shall be located in the space occupied
by the appliance or adjacent thereto.

I don't view something that is run through a hole in the cabinet wall as " in the space occupied by the appliance or adjacent thereto." And I don't think anyone else would either.

Jerry P. - any comments?

Ken, how would a receptacle in the cabinet not be adjacent to the DW? The cord length would not allow another cabinet between the DW and the sink base.

As far as damage I would expect the cord to be in the back lower corner of the cabinet and would be shielded by the drain lines.

I don't like it either, but ...The cord set going thru the hole in the cabinet wall is shown in the manufacturer's installation manual, and that makes it OK, unless a local authority objects to it.

I will point out that the cord should not be hanging out where it can get snagged by the umpteen cleaning utensils, recyclables and trash cans we see under the sinks. I sometimes calls for a clamp or strap to hold the cord out of the way, which will also help to prevent wear and tear.

For the garbage disposer I will call out electrical cable hanging out without protection, flexible conduit, and without staples or clamps. If it is a flexible cord and plug set, it just needs to be tucked away in the back, maybe held back with a strap.

Under the sink is not a wet location, or at least, it shouldn't be.

Originally Posted by Jim Port

This is from Article 422, and is a better fit to the discussion at hand.

Specifically from 422.16 Flexible Cords.

Originally Posted by Jim Port

(2) Built-in Dishwashers and Trash Compactors. Built-in
dishwashers and trash compactors shall be permitted to be
cord-and-plug-connected with a flexible cord identified as
suitable for the purpose in the installation instructions of
the appliance manufacturer where all of the following conditions
are met:
(1) The flexible cord shall be terminated with a groundingtype
attachment plug.
Exception: A listed dishwasher or trash compactor distinctly
marked to identify it as protected by a system of double insulation,
or its equivalent, shall not be required to be terminated
with a grounding-type attachment plug.
(2) The length of the cord shall be 0.9 m to 1.2 m (3 ft to
4 ft) measured from the face of the attachment plug to
the plane of the rear of the appliance.
(3) Receptacles shall be located to avoid physical damage
to the flexible cord.
(4) The receptacle shall be located in the space occupied
by the appliance or adjacent thereto.
(5) The receptacle shall be accessible.

Originally Posted by Ken Amelin

I believe that the cord extending throught the hole in the cabinet wall under the sink is "without doubt" subject to physical damage. Just think about exposure from pulling the trash bin or dish pan and strainer out on a daily basis. Certainly that cord rubbing on an unprotected hole would be subject to damage.

I don't view something that is run through a hole in the cabinet wall as " in the space occupied by the appliance or adjacent thereto." And I don't think anyone else would either.

Jerry P. - any comments?

The different AHJ which I have worked in read this "(4) The receptacle shall be located in the space occupied by the appliance or adjacent thereto." as:
a) The receptacle needs to be in the same cabinet space as the appliance.
b) The receptacle may be one cabinet space over, i.e., in the cabinet under the sink which is next to the dishwasher and the cord may go through the side of the cabinet between the dishwasher and the sink.

So, which is correct?

First start here: (I've changed the highlighting for a different emphasis)
- (2) Built-in Dishwashers and Trash Compactors. Built-in dishwashers and trash compactors shall be permitted to be cord-and-plug-connected with a flexible cord identified as suitable for the purpose in the installation instructions of the appliance manufacturer where all of the following conditions are met:
- - (1) The flexible cord shall be terminated with a grounding-type attachment plug.
- - - Exception: A listed dishwasher or trash compactor distinctly marked to identify it as protected by a system of double insulation, or its equivalent, shall not be required to be terminated with a grounding-type attachment plug.
- - (2) The length of the cord shall be 0.9 m to 1.2 m (3 ft to 4 ft) measured from the face of the attachment plug to the plane of the rear of the appliance.
- - (3) Receptacles shall be located to avoid physical damage to the flexible cord.
- - (4) The receptacle shall be located in the space occupied by the appliance or adjacent thereto.
- - (5) The receptacle shall be accessible.

Is this "(2) Built-in Dishwashers and Trash Compactors. Built-in dishwashers and trash compactors shall be permitted to be cord-and-plug-connected with a flexible cord identified as suitable for the purpose in the installation instructions of the appliance manufacturer where all of the following conditions are met:" actually met?

If not, no cord and plug. End of story. Does someone have a sample installation instruction they would like to provide.

If the installation instructions does specify that it is allowed to be cord and plug connected (most do), do the installation instructions specify a what the cord and plug is to be identified as suitable for, such as for a "Built-in dishwasher"?

If not, is a cord and plug allowed by the above language?

Getting technical, yes, but sometimes that is the way to address these things first.

Personally, I would rather have the receptacle under the sink than have to pull the appliance out to get to the cord and plug.

Originally Posted by Richard D. Fornataro

Per the NEC, 2008 Version as currently enforced by NYS, receptacles serving a dishwasher or disposal, mounted under the sink, are NOT required to be GFCI protected. (Per the NEC handbook explanation.)

Some electricians choose to GFCI protect such receptacles, however; as I understand it, the 2011 NEC (considerably past the proposed adoption date in NYS) will mandate that such GFCI protected receptacles be "accessible" to facilitate the monthly testing required.

Yup. Here's the wording:

"210.8 Ground-Fault Circuit-Interrupter Protection for Personnel. Ground-fault circuit-interrupter protection for personnel shall be provided as required in 210.8 (A) through(C). The ground-fault circuit-interrupter shall be installed in a readily accessible location."

Although this is not related (and I could be opening a can of ..) the 2014 NEC will require all kitchen recepts to be on AFCI.

(A) Dwelling Units. All 120-volt, single phase, 15- and 20- ampere branch circuits supplying outlets or devices installed in dwelling unit kitchens, family rooms, dining rooms, living rooms, parlors, libraries, dens, bedrooms, sunrooms, recreation rooms, closets, hallways, laundry areas, or similar rooms or are as shall be protected as described by (1), (2), (3), or (4).

Originally Posted by Dennis Webber

Yup. Here's the wording:

"
Although this is not related (and I could be opening a can of ..) the 2014 NEC will require all kitchen recepts to be on AFCI.

(A) Dwelling Units. All 120-volt, single phase, 15- and 20- ampere branch circuits supplying outlets or devices installed in dwelling unit kitchens, family rooms, dining rooms, living rooms, parlors, libraries, dens, bedrooms, sunrooms, recreation rooms, closets, hallways, laundry areas, or similar rooms or are as shall be protected as described by (1), (2), (3), or (4).

What is the proposal number for that change? I looked through my Report on Proposals for the 2014 and did not see that one. I did see the one that is adding laundry areas to the list of required places AFCI protection will be required.

They also pull a cord through the bottom of the cabinet when they mount the microwave above the range. As far as the dishwasher goes the cord set for the disposal is more vulnerable then the cord tucked in the back for dishwasher.

Originally Posted by ken horak

What is the proposal number for that change? I looked through my Report on Proposals for the 2014 and did not see that one. I did see the one that is adding laundry areas to the list of required places AFCI protection will be required.

ROP 2-80, ROP 2-82A, ROP 2-85.

Originally Posted by Dennis Webber

ROP 2-80, ROP 2-82A, ROP 2-85.

Thanks Dennis-
I overlooked 2-82A as it was marked as "accepted in Principle" The original wording of that proposal was different than what the committee did with it.