Hi,

I am replacing my medicine cabinet in my bathroom. The old medicine
cabinet had the bathroom lights built-in to it at the top. My new
medicine cabinet has no lights so I need to install some lighting above
it.

My question - the wiring for the light needs to be extended by a foot
or so. It is too short to reach where the new lighting will be
installed. I have never done electrical work -- is it as easy as just
buying a small piece of wire -- hooking up the black, white and copper
wire ends of each wire?

Please any help is appreciated. You can assume that I know nothing
about wiring - I will not be offended by very obvious things being
explained.

Thanks,
Joe

In article .com, "Joe" wrote:
Hi,

I am replacing my medicine cabinet in my bathroom. The old medicine
cabinet had the bathroom lights built-in to it at the top. My new
medicine cabinet has no lights so I need to install some lighting above
it.

My question - the wiring for the light needs to be extended by a foot
or so. It is too short to reach where the new lighting will be
installed. I have never done electrical work -- is it as easy as just
buying a small piece of wire -- hooking up the black, white and copper
wire ends of each wire?

No. It is an electrical code requirement that *all* junctions be made inside
junction boxes approved for that purpose, *and* that the junctions be
accessible. Simply extending the cable as you describe will not meet code.

Please any help is appreciated. You can assume that I know nothing
about wiring - I will not be offended by very obvious things being
explained.

Since you've never done this before, for your own safety and that of others,
PLEASE get someone who understands wiring to help you or show you how, or at
least get a book from the library. Electricity is dangerous if mishandled.
Mistakes can kill.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

Yes, however you have to make splices in splice boxes, which have to be
accessible. In your case you'd need to find a location where the cable will
reach to, where you can install such a box, or if that won't work, you have
to run a new cable from the switch to the new location



"Joe" wrote in message
oups.com...
Hi,

I am replacing my medicine cabinet in my bathroom. The old medicine
cabinet had the bathroom lights built-in to it at the top. My new
medicine cabinet has no lights so I need to install some lighting above
it.

My question - the wiring for the light needs to be extended by a foot
or so. It is too short to reach where the new lighting will be
installed. I have never done electrical work -- is it as easy as just
buying a small piece of wire -- hooking up the black, white and copper
wire ends of each wire?

Please any help is appreciated. You can assume that I know nothing
about wiring - I will not be offended by very obvious things being
explained.

Thanks,
Joe

Thanks - this was the type of info I was looking for. I have no
business trying to do this myself and will hire a professional.
Thanks,
Joe

RBM (remove this) wrote:
Yes, however you have to make splices in splice boxes, which have to be
accessible. In your case you'd need to find a location where the cable will
reach to, where you can install such a box, or if that won't work, you have
to run a new cable from the switch to the new location



"Joe" wrote in message
oups.com...
Hi,

I am replacing my medicine cabinet in my bathroom. The old medicine
cabinet had the bathroom lights built-in to it at the top. My new
medicine cabinet has no lights so I need to install some lighting above
it.

My question - the wiring for the light needs to be extended by a foot
or so. It is too short to reach where the new lighting will be
installed. I have never done electrical work -- is it as easy as just
buying a small piece of wire -- hooking up the black, white and copper
wire ends of each wire?

Please any help is appreciated. You can assume that I know nothing
about wiring - I will not be offended by very obvious things being
explained.

Thanks,
Joe

RBM (remove this) wrote:
Yes, however you have to make splices in splice boxes, which have to be
accessible. In your case you'd need to find a location where the cable will
reach to, where you can install such a box, or if that won't work, you have
to run a new cable from the switch to the new location




Has anyone ever wondered about the reasons for the boxes required to be
accessible? I certainly agree that it is highly desirable and should
always be done where practical. For example, it makes later trouble
shooting easier.

However, in a case like this, what exactly is the big deal if the box
that contains the splice were not accessible? For example, it doesn;t
suddenly become a fire or safety hazhard, does it? It would seem to me
if you were allowed to use a metal box and cover (to prevent driving a
nail into it) it would still be fine, even if not accessible. And it
would make some jobs a hell of a lot easier.

In article .com, wrote:

Has anyone ever wondered about the reasons for the boxes required to be
accessible? I certainly agree that it is highly desirable and should
always be done where practical. For example, it makes later trouble
shooting easier.

However, in a case like this, what exactly is the big deal if the box
that contains the splice were not accessible? For example, it doesn;t
suddenly become a fire or safety hazhard, does it? It would seem to me
if you were allowed to use a metal box and cover (to prevent driving a
nail into it) it would still be fine, even if not accessible. And it
would make some jobs a hell of a lot easier.

The "big deal" is that, barring some sort of mechanical damage, faults almost
occur in the wiring between boxes. Problems develop at junctions. That's why
junctions need to be accessible.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

Doug Miller wrote:
In article .com, wrote:

Has anyone ever wondered about the reasons for the boxes required to be
accessible? I certainly agree that it is highly desirable and should
always be done where practical. For example, it makes later trouble
shooting easier.

However, in a case like this, what exactly is the big deal if the box
that contains the splice were not accessible? For example, it doesn;t
suddenly become a fire or safety hazhard, does it? It would seem to me
if you were allowed to use a metal box and cover (to prevent driving a
nail into it) it would still be fine, even if not accessible. And it
would make some jobs a hell of a lot easier.

The "big deal" is that, barring some sort of mechanical damage, faults almost
occur in the wiring between boxes. Problems develop at junctions. That's why
junctions need to be accessible.

--


And so what? It's very unlikely that any given box that has just a
simple splice will ever develop a problem. And if it does, so what?
Why can't you just deal with it then? In many cases, you can't just
put an accessible box in because of the location. So, instead, you
wind up rerouting the wiring, all the way back to the accessible end
points, which can be a real headache. Now, I'd rather do that later,
replacing the wire IF the inaccessible junction box did develop a
problem, rather than always ahead of time, on the theory that someday
in MIGHT require access.





Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

The problem is that if it were "legal", it would be done all over as a lazy
man's solution. I agree that a properly made splice isn't likely to cause a
problem, and burying one in the wall is certainly not a fire hazard or every
recessed light fixture would be a fire hazard as well. The real problem as I
see it, is if the splice does go bad, you'd have no way to even guess at
where the buried box is located



wrote in message
ups.com...

Doug Miller wrote:
In article .com,
wrote:

Has anyone ever wondered about the reasons for the boxes required to be
accessible? I certainly agree that it is highly desirable and should
always be done where practical. For example, it makes later trouble
shooting easier.

However, in a case like this, what exactly is the big deal if the box
that contains the splice were not accessible? For example, it doesn;t
suddenly become a fire or safety hazhard, does it? It would seem to me
if you were allowed to use a metal box and cover (to prevent driving a
nail into it) it would still be fine, even if not accessible. And it
would make some jobs a hell of a lot easier.

The "big deal" is that, barring some sort of mechanical damage, faults
almost
occur in the wiring between boxes. Problems develop at junctions. That's
why
junctions need to be accessible.

--


And so what? It's very unlikely that any given box that has just a
simple splice will ever develop a problem. And if it does, so what?
Why can't you just deal with it then? In many cases, you can't just
put an accessible box in because of the location. So, instead, you
wind up rerouting the wiring, all the way back to the accessible end
points, which can be a real headache. Now, I'd rather do that later,
replacing the wire IF the inaccessible junction box did develop a
problem, rather than always ahead of time, on the theory that someday
in MIGHT require access.





Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

In article . com, wrote:

And so what? It's very unlikely that any given box that has just a
simple splice will ever develop a problem. And if it does, so what?
Why can't you just deal with it then?

You can't "just deal with it then" because if the junction box is concealed,
you don't even know where it is.

In many cases, you can't just
put an accessible box in because of the location. So, instead, you
wind up rerouting the wiring, all the way back to the accessible end
points, which can be a real headache. Now, I'd rather do that later,
replacing the wire IF the inaccessible junction box did develop a
problem, rather than always ahead of time, on the theory that someday
in MIGHT require access.

Hey, don't argue with me about it -- argue with the NFPA. They're the ones who
wrote the National Electrical Code, not me. I'm guessing they have a little
better handle on electrical safety than either you or I do.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

wrote:

However, in a case like this, what exactly is the big deal if the box
that contains the splice were not accessible

Andy writes:
Because it needs to be available for inspection by the electrical
inspector.....

Otherwise, any jackleg electrician wannabee would just twist a
couple
wires together and maybe put some electrical tape on it, and make a
fire hazard...

The splice must be made in accordance with the electrical code, and
, since an inspector isn't usually present when these things are done,
it must be made available for inspection when he comes to sign off
on the electrical work...

A LOT of rules are done like that...... Anything that is easy to
take
short cuts on instead of following safe practices has to be made
available for inspection.... and that means it is accessible so the
dude can look at it...

Andy in Eureka, Texas

In article .com, wrote:

Doug Miller wrote:
In article . com,
wrote:

And so what? It's very unlikely that any given box that has just a
simple splice will ever develop a problem. And if it does, so what?
Why can't you just deal with it then?

You can't "just deal with it then" because if the junction box is concealed,
you don't even know where it is.

You don't have to know where it is to deal with it. For example, in
the extremely unlikely event that a light stops working on a line that
happens to have a concealed junction box, and it's verified that there
is no continuity between the switch and the light, then you just run a
new wire. That's what you would do in any case, if you couldn;t see or
trace the wire and had a problem.

"Just run a new wire". Often easier said than done, particularly in older
homes -- and obviously much more difficult than repairing a failed splice.

The only difference is, if the concealed box were allowed, you could
do the wire run someday, IF, the simple splice in the concealed box
failed. The way it is now, you have to do it upfront, to meet code.

And this makes life easier exactly how -- ?

Like I said, argue with the NFPA. They're the ones who wrote the NEC, and I
suspect they have a little better handle on electrical safety than either you
or I.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

Doug Miller wrote:
In article .com, wrote:

Doug Miller wrote:
In article . com,
wrote:

And so what? It's very unlikely that any given box that has just a
simple splice will ever develop a problem. And if it does, so what?
Why can't you just deal with it then?

You can't "just deal with it then" because if the junction box is concealed,
you don't even know where it is.

You don't have to know where it is to deal with it. For example, in
the extremely unlikely event that a light stops working on a line that
happens to have a concealed junction box, and it's verified that there
is no continuity between the switch and the light, then you just run a
new wire. That's what you would do in any case, if you couldn;t see or
trace the wire and had a problem.

"Just run a new wire". Often easier said than done, particularly in older
homes -- and obviously much more difficult than repairing a failed splice.

You obviously don't get it, because the difficulty of running a new
wire is exactly the problem that allowing an inaccessible box would
avoid. The point is since you are not allowed to have an inaccessible
box, in many cases you are forced to do run a new wire right away. IF
you were allowed to do a box, then hide it, there are many cases where
you would have a simple solution, instead of being forced to run a
wire.

Take the case of a wall that is going to be be covered with tile, but
has an outlet that is no longer needed. If you could remove the
outlet, splice, cover and hide, you would have an easy solution. Not
having that option is what forces you to either put an ugly cover plate
in the middle of the wall or run a new wire, regardless of how
difficult that might be. And you have to run it today, not someday
30 years from now, IF the hidden splice were to come undone, which is a
remote possibility.

Or even the case of the OP. He likely doesn't want a box with cover
plate staring him in the face next to his new medicine cabinet. So,
what's he gonna do? He will wind up having to run a new wire.






The only difference is, if the concealed box were allowed, you could
do the wire run someday, IF, the simple splice in the concealed box
failed. The way it is now, you have to do it upfront, to meet code.

And this makes life easier exactly how -- ?

Like I said, argue with the NFPA. They're the ones who wrote the NEC, and I
suspect they have a little better handle on electrical safety than either you
or I.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

In article .com, wrote:

Doug Miller wrote:
In article .com,
wrote:

Doug Miller wrote:
In article . com,
wrote:

And so what? It's very unlikely that any given box that has just a
simple splice will ever develop a problem. And if it does, so what?
Why can't you just deal with it then?

You can't "just deal with it then" because if the junction box is
concealed,
you don't even know where it is.

You don't have to know where it is to deal with it. For example, in
the extremely unlikely event that a light stops working on a line that
happens to have a concealed junction box, and it's verified that there
is no continuity between the switch and the light, then you just run a
new wire. That's what you would do in any case, if you couldn;t see or
trace the wire and had a problem.

"Just run a new wire". Often easier said than done, particularly in older
homes -- and obviously much more difficult than repairing a failed splice.

You obviously don't get it, because the difficulty of running a new
wire is exactly the problem that allowing an inaccessible box would
avoid.

No, I "get it" just fine. You're the one who is missing something: that if the
boxes are accessible, there's no need to run new cables.

Look -- argue the point with the NFPA. They're the ones who made the rules,
not me, and I'm sure they know a lot more about electrical safety than you do.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

wrote in message
oups.com...

Doug Miller wrote:
In article .com,
wrote:

Doug Miller wrote:
(snip)
Or even the case of the OP. He likely doesn't want a box with cover
plate staring him in the face next to his new medicine cabinet. So,
what's he gonna do? He will wind up having to run a new wire.




Or just go with small side sconces instead of a top light, or put another
convenience outlet there. Great place to put one of those flat panel night
lights, so you don't have to wake all the way up when you need to take a
leak in the middle of the night. Women really like a dedicated hair dryer
outlet with a hook right beside it. Another thought, if the wire comes up
from below, is to put the junction box and the blank cover plate below the
counter in the vanity. Yes, it is a PITA, but it shouldn't be that big a
deal to come up with a workaround.

aem sends...

In article , "ameijers" wrote:

wrote in message
roups.com...

Doug Miller wrote:
In article .com,
wrote:

Doug Miller wrote:
(snip)
Or even the case of the OP. He likely doesn't want a box with cover
plate staring him in the face next to his new medicine cabinet. So,
what's he gonna do? He will wind up having to run a new wire.

Careful with the attributions, please... I didn't write that.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

Or even the case of the OP. He likely doesn't want a box with cover
plate staring him in the face next to his new medicine cabinet. So,
what's he gonna do? He will wind up having to run a new wire.


What *I* would do is cut a hole in the back of the medicine cabinet,
and stick a cover-plate over that. Or hang the cabinet on brackets.





The only difference is, if the concealed box were allowed, you could
do the wire run someday, IF, the simple splice in the concealed box
failed. The way it is now, you have to do it upfront, to meet code.

And this makes life easier exactly how -- ?

Like I said, argue with the NFPA. They're the ones who wrote the NEC, and I
suspect they have a little better handle on electrical safety than either you
or I.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

"Doug Miller" wrote in message
.com...
In article ,
"ameijers" wrote:

wrote in message
roups.com...

Doug Miller wrote:
In article .com,
wrote:

Doug Miller wrote:
(snip)
Or even the case of the OP. He likely doesn't want a box with cover
plate staring him in the face next to his new medicine cabinet. So,
what's he gonna do? He will wind up having to run a new wire.

Careful with the attributions, please... I didn't write that.

Ooops, sorry about that- unintentional, I assure you. Those darn s all run
together with my blurry eyes. Didn't mean to single out a particular poster
in any case, just had some further thougts on the whole thread.

aem sends...