# Junction Box behind Microwave?



## richp0 (Jun 24, 2011)

I'm remodeling my kitchen, and replacing/relocating some appliances. To do so, I need to extend an 8 ga circuit. Is it ok to put a junction box inside the cabinet, behind where the microwave will be installed? It's a standard countertop microwave, with a trim kit that will cover the entire enclosure. 

The other option would be in the attic directly above the same cabinet.

Is there a preferred approach?

Thanks


----------



## gregzoll (Dec 25, 2006)

Only if you can open the cabinet and see the junction box. Otherwise, it is illegal in the scope, due to you have to remove the microwave to get to the junction box. It would be the same as installing a cabinet, and not cutting an access hole where a junction box was placed on the wall. Think of it this way, if there is a problem, how is the next electrician or home owner going to know where to look.


----------



## richp0 (Jun 24, 2011)

gregzoll said:


> Only if you can open the cabinet and see the junction box. Otherwise, it is illegal in the scope, due to you have to remove the microwave to get to the junction box. It would be the same as installing a cabinet, and not cutting an access hole where a junction box was placed on the wall. Think of it this way, if there is a problem, how is the next electrician or home owner going to know where to look.


 
Thanks! I assume there's no issue putting junction box for 8 ga in the attic - correct? Any special considerations for that gauge?


----------



## vsheetz (Sep 28, 2008)

attic is fine as long as accessible.


----------



## gregzoll (Dec 25, 2006)

Make sure you use the proper connectors to secure the cable where it meets the other going to the new receptacle. BTW, is this Aluminum or Copper #8.


----------



## richp0 (Jun 24, 2011)

It's copper


----------



## jbfan (Jul 1, 2004)

Is this stove wiring?
Is it 4 conductor?
3 condutor wiring is prohibited from being extended.


----------



## electures (Dec 22, 2009)

richp0 said:


> I'm remodeling my kitchen, and replacing/relocating some appliances. To do so, I need to extend an 8 ga circuit. Is it ok to put a junction box inside the cabinet, behind where the microwave will be installed? It's a standard countertop microwave, with a trim kit that will cover the entire enclosure.
> 
> The other option would be in the attic directly above the same cabinet.
> 
> ...


The NEC states the following;


*314.29 Boxes, Conduit Bodies, and Handhole Enclosures to Be Accessible. *
​​Boxes, conduit bodies, and handhole enclosures shall be installed so that the wiring contained in them can be rendered accessible without removing any part of the building or, in underground circuits, without excavating sidewalks, paving, earth, or other substance that is to be used to establish the finished grade.​ 
A junction box behind the M/W is compliant is long as it is accessible when the M/W is removed. It is no different then the receptacle that the M/W plugs into, or a junction box for a wall mounted oven. The M/W is not part of the building or structure.​


----------



## gregzoll (Dec 25, 2006)

electures, if you have to remove screws to detach the microwave, it is considered a non-compliant use of the junction box. That is why when over the range microwaves are installed, their plugs are up in the cabinet, not directly behind it. If it was a counter-top, or slid into a microwave cabinet above the stove, then yes it is considered removable without having to detach it from the structure.


----------



## electures (Dec 22, 2009)

gregzoll said:


> electures, if you have to remove screws to detach the microwave, it is considered a non-compliant use of the junction box. That is why when over the range microwaves are installed, their plugs are up in the cabinet, not directly behind it. If it was a counter-top, or slid into a microwave cabinet above the stove, then yes it is considered removable without having to detach it from the structure.


Sorry, you are incorrect. The M/w is not part of the structure. It is an portable appliance.


----------



## richp0 (Jun 24, 2011)

It's a 3-conductor cable for a cooktop. 

As noted earlier, the microwave has a trim kit. The trim kit screws onto brackets, which fasten to the insides of the cabinet.


----------



## gregzoll (Dec 25, 2006)

electures said:


> Sorry, you are incorrect. The M/w is not part of the structure. It is an portable appliance.


Again, it is a part of the structure, when it is screwed into the securing rail to hold it over a range, or counter. The rules apply, because you have to remove it from the structure, in order to get behind it. That is why again, they place the outlet for them above in a cabinet, so it can be de-powered in case of incident that may warrant so.


----------



## gregzoll (Dec 25, 2006)

richp0 said:


> It's a 3-conductor cable for a cooktop.
> 
> As noted earlier, the microwave has a trim kit. The trim kit screws onto brackets, which fasten to the insides of the cabinet.


In that case, follow the directions to place the jb up in the attic, or in the cabinet if cut out is able to be made.


----------



## richp0 (Jun 24, 2011)

What about other comment from jbfan, that "3 condutor wiring is prohibited from being extended". Does that mean that I really need to run a new line from the service entrance?


----------



## G-Mo (Feb 16, 2009)

gregzoll said:


> Again, it is a part of the structure, when it is screwed into the securing rail to hold it over a range, or counter. The rules apply, because you have to remove it from the structure, in order to get behind it. That is why again, they place the outlet for them above in a cabinet, so it can be de-powered in case of incident that may warrant so.


According to the CEC/OESC and numerous ESA inspectors, this is correct.


----------



## rjniles (Feb 5, 2007)

richp0 said:


> What about other comment from jbfan, that "3 condutor wiring is prohibited from being extended". Does that mean that I really need to run a new line from the service entrance?


Is your cook top rated as 120/240 or 240 volts?

Is you 3 wire cable , 2 insulated conductors with bare ground or is it 3 insulated conductors?


If the cook top is rated 240 volts and your cable is 2 insulated conductors with a bare ground, you can install it and be code compliant.


----------



## richp0 (Jun 24, 2011)

Specifications just list 240V and 208V (I assume the latter is for other countries). All 3 wires are insulated. I take it this means I need to run a new line.


----------



## electures (Dec 22, 2009)

gregzoll said:


> Again, it is a part of the structure, when it is screwed into the securing rail to hold it over a range, or counter. The rules apply, because you have to* remove it from the structure*, in order to get behind it. That is why again, they place the outlet for them above in a cabinet, so it can be de-powered in case of incident that may warrant so.


Again I will reference the NEC. 

*314.29 Boxes, Conduit Bodies, and Handhole Enclosures to Be Accessible. *

Boxes, conduit bodies, and handhole enclosures shall be installed so that the wiring contained in them can be rendered accessible without removing any part of the building or, in underground circuits, without excavating sidewalks, paving, earth, or other substance that is to be used to establish the finished grade.​
Article 100 definitions states;

*Accessible (as applied to wiring methods).​*​​​​Capable of being removed or exposed without damaging the building structure or finish or not permanently closed in by the structure or finish of the building.

The JB behind the MW is accessible. The MW is not part of the structure. There is nothing wrong with putting the JB behind the MW.

If you disagree please provide a code reference.​


----------



## rjniles (Feb 5, 2007)

richp0 said:


> Specifications just list 240V and 208V (I assume the latter is for other countries). All 3 wires are insulated. I take it this means I need to run a new line.


I assume the 3 insulated wires are red, black, white. By code yes, you need a bare or green wire for the ground.

Code is a little strange in this area; if you were to run an 8-2 NM cable, the 2 hots would be black and white (re-marked black) and a bare ground. But you would not be allowed to re-mark one of your insulated conductors as a ground. What you have is 2 hots and a neutral.

Just so you understand, you do not need a neutral for your cook top. It is straight 240


----------



## gregzoll (Dec 25, 2006)

electures said:


> Again I will reference the NEC.
> 
> 314.29 Boxes, Conduit Bodies, and Handhole Enclosures to Be Accessible.
> 
> ...


And again, if I am looking for a problem in an electrical circuit, I am going for the obvious places that the JB is going to be. I am not even going to think the first place to lool is behind a microwave that has yo have screws removed, lifted out of place with possible help with another person. That is why it is a non compliant placement of the JB.


----------



## richp0 (Jun 24, 2011)

rjniles said:


> I assume the 3 insulated wires are red, black, white. By code yes, you need a bare or green wire for the ground.
> 
> Code is a little strange in this area; if you were to run an 8-2 NM cable, the 2 hots would be black and white (re-marked black) and a bare ground. But you would not be allowed to re-mark one of your insulated conductors as a ground. What you have is 2 hots and a neutral.
> 
> Just so you understand, you do not need a neutral for your cook top. It is straight 240


Yes, the wires are red, black, and white. Base on all the feedback, I'll plan to replace the current cable with a new one, from the service entrance to the cooktop. Thanks to all for your help!


----------



## mpoulton (Jul 23, 2009)

gregzoll said:


> And again, if I am looking for a problem in an electrical circuit, I am going for the obvious places that the JB is going to be. I am not even going to think the first place to lool is behind a microwave that has yo have screws removed, lifted out of place with possible help with another person. That is why it is a non compliant placement of the JB.


I really don't think I'd agree with that interpretation. Plenty of JB's are installed behind things that require a screwdriver to remove - including access panels! In my experience, any means of access that doesn't require DAMAGE to the structure has been considered compliant. That includes some pretty improbably difficult locations buried in the ceilings and mechanical rooms of high-rises - much more difficult than behind a microwave. The question isn't whether you would think to look for the JB there, or whether you need more than one person to help access it. The question is whether it CAN be accessed without damaging (and subsequently rebuilding) part of the building.

I would have said that the reason microwave receptacles are usually in the cabinet is because it's convenient and makes sense, not because it's required.


----------



## gregzoll (Dec 25, 2006)

mpoulton, when working in a office building or such, you will have blueprints or schematics telling you where to look for jb's, etc in most cases, unless something happened later on down the road, then yes you will be running through the run, but will be going by the blueprint or schematic to follow the run. In a home, a person does not expect to have to remove equipment such as microwaves, or pull dishwashers or other secured items to be able to access a JB. If I am looking for point A to point B on a wire run, if I can not find voltage. I am the type, that if I am doing what the OP is doing, I am going to place the JB up in the attic, or go through the trouble if I have time, to pull a whole new run if it does not involve a lot of work, especially in the case of a basement, where most times they are unfinished, and the cabling is going from the service panel to through the floor to the outlet.

OP, do yourself a favor, and the next person, and place it in the attic. When you install the new outlet, make sure to mark something to note that the jb is in attic, or place a note attached to a pouch on the service panel describing, so someone does not have to tear the kitchen apart if they ever have a problem with that connection.


----------



## rjniles (Feb 5, 2007)

richp0 said:


> Yes, the wires are red, black, and white. Base on all the feedback, I'll plan to replace the current cable with a new one, from the service entrance to the cooktop. Thanks to all for your help!


Having made my previous posts as to what the code requires, unless the existing cable is very short and easily replaced, this is what I would do:

Use the existing red and black as the hot (current carrying) conductors and paint the white conductor green at both ends and use as the ground. Install a JB and extend as required with 8-2 NM. Electrically there is absolutely no problem with what I suggest. But it is a code violation.


----------



## electures (Dec 22, 2009)

gregzoll said:


> And again, if I am looking for a problem in an electrical circuit, I am going for the obvious places that the JB is going to be. I am not even going to think the first place to lool is behind a microwave that has yo have screws removed, lifted out of place with possible help with another person. That is why it is a non compliant placement of the JB.


And you failed to provide any code reference. Do you even own a code book? Do you know how to use one?


----------



## electures (Dec 22, 2009)

@richp0. There is nothing wrong with putting the JB in the attic. And there is nothing illegal about putting the JB behind the MW. Future occupants will have no idea that there is a JB in the attic or behind the MW. If it is properly spliced there probabely will never be a reason to open it up again. If you think it is necessary, you can make a little map showing the locations of all your JB's, wether in the attic or behind the M/W. If you like working in the heat then the attic is the place for you. However, the kitchen is a lot cooler and cleaner. As a licensed New Jersey Electrical Inspector I would accept either way. As an electrical contractor I would install it behind the MW.


----------



## Saturday Cowboy (Nov 29, 2009)

a fastened inplace appliance is not considered to be portable. therefore it does not allow the exception to hiding things behind the appliance.


----------



## Saturday Cowboy (Nov 29, 2009)

electures said:


> And you failed to provide any code reference. Do you even own a code book? Do you know how to use one?


play nice!!


----------



## electures (Dec 22, 2009)

Saturday Cowboy said:


> a fastened inplace appliance is not considered to be portable. therefore it does not allow the exception to hiding things behind the appliance.


I'll agree about the fastened in place, but you aqre wrong about placing the JB behind the MW. What is your code reference?


----------



## electures (Dec 22, 2009)

Saturday Cowboy said:


> play nice!!


As a licensed inspector I have to provide code references for all violations. Everything I stated here has been backed up with code sections unlike other posters. I don't have the privilage to say something is a violation and not back it up with a code section. If I am wrong prove it!!


----------



## Saturday Cowboy (Nov 29, 2009)

electures said:


> As a licensed inspector I have to provide code references for all violations. Everything I stated here has been backed up with code sections unlike other posters. I don't have the privilage to say something is a violation and not back it up with a code section. If I am wrong prove it!!


 a personal slur about someones ability to read is uncalled for.


----------



## Saturday Cowboy (Nov 29, 2009)

electures said:


> Again I will reference the NEC.
> 
> *314.29 Boxes, Conduit Bodies, and Handhole Enclosures to Be Accessible. *
> 
> ...


we make the claim that a *fastened inplace appliance* is part of the building.

also susgest that you take such a theoretical and technical discussion to our sister site: http://www.electriciantalk.com/ you can report back here your findings. (as it tends to confuse the DIYers)


----------



## electures (Dec 22, 2009)

Saturday Cowboy said:


> we make the claim that a *fastened inplace appliance* is part of the building.
> 
> also susgest that you take such a theoretical and technical discussion to our sister site: http://www.electriciantalk.com/ you can report back here your findings. (as it tends to confuse the DIYers)


*314.29 Boxes, Conduit Bodies, and Handhole Enclosures to Be Accessible. *


Boxes, conduit bodies, and handhole enclosures shall be installed so that the wiring contained in them can be rendered accessible* without removing any part of the building *or, in underground circuits, without excavating sidewalks, paving, earth, or other substance that is to be used to establish the finished grade.​


Article 100 definitions states;


*Accessible (as applied to wiring methods). *​​Capable of being removed or exposed without damaging the building structure or finish or not permanently closed in by the structure or finish of the building.​ 
The MW is not part of the structure and removing it causes no damage. Itt is not part of the finjish and does not permanently close the structure in.​ 
SO if you continue this line of thinking then if a receptacle is installed under the dishwasher to plug into is that a violation? You would have to remove the cover to access it. Is the cover part of the structure also?​


----------



## electures (Dec 22, 2009)

Saturday Cowboy said:


> a personal slur about someones ability to read is uncalled for.


I only speak the truth. People come here to get accurate and correct information. That is all I am providing.


----------



## electures (Dec 22, 2009)

Saturday Cowboy said:


> we make the claim that a *fastened inplace appliance* is part of the building.
> 
> also susgest that you take such a theoretical and technical discussion to our sister site: http://www.electriciantalk.com/ you can report back here your findings. (as it tends to confuse the DIYers)


Been a long time member at ET. Here is the link to thread regarding this question.

http://www.electriciantalk.com/f5/compliant-25685/


----------



## Speedy Petey (Feb 1, 2004)

I have to say, I am with electures on this one. 

NO WAY would I be convinced that a counter top micro, installed in a dedicated space, is part of the structure just because it has a screw on trim kit around it. 

I think post #33 clearly defines this IMO.

How would you defend a box under or behind a dishwasher then???


----------



## NJMarine (Apr 13, 2011)

electures said:


> The NEC states the following;
> 
> 
> *314.29 Boxes, Conduit Bodies, and Handhole Enclosures to Be Accessible. *
> ...


This no different than a built in oven or double oven. The juction box ls located on top/behind the oven. The oven has to be moved out to get to it.
The junction box behind an applinace is legal, since only the applinace has to be moved and not any part of the building.


----------

