2008 Nec 680.71

[pete m.]

Please read the substantiation provided for proposal #17-164 below. Unless I'm looking at it incorrectly it would seem that the submitter intends that the person using the tub be able to reset a tripped GFCI receptacle, protecting said tub motor, while still sitting in the actual tub? Am I looking at this wrong, or is that what was given as substantiation for the "readily accessible" requirement in the '08 code?

17-164 Log #2343 NEC-P17 Final Action: Accept in Principle
(680.71)
____________________________________________________________
Submitter: Andre R. Cartal, Princeton Borough Building Dept.
Recommendation: Add new text:
A GFCI receptacle shall not be located in the tub motor space or cavity.
Substantiation: The installation of a GFCI type receptacle in the tub motor
space is not apparent to the average homeowner as evidenced by the many
complaints received in our office. Even if the tub occupant is aware of the
location of the receptacle, it does not seem appropriate to expect a person to
exit the tub and remove the side of the tub or the access panel to reset the
receptacle.
Panel Meeting Action: Accept in Principle
Panel Statement: See panel action on Proposal 17-165.
Number Eligible to Vote: 11
Ballot Results: Affirmative: 11
____________________________________________________________
17-165 Log #2547 NEC-P17 Final Action: Accept in Principle
(680.71)
____________________________________________________________
Submitter: Robert P. McGann, City of Cambridge
Recommendation: Revise text to read as follows:
Hydromassage bathtubs and their associated electrical components must be
on dedicated circuit(s) and shall be (protected by a) ground-fault interrupter.
Substantiation: If it is not spelled out in the listing papers, contractors are
tapping in on hallway, living room and/or bedroom circuit without a violation.
Panel Meeting Action: Accept in Principle
Change 680.71 to read as follows:
Hydromassage bathtubs and their associated electrical components shall be
on a dedicated circuit and protected by a readily accessible ground-fault
circuit interrupter. All 125-volt, single-phase receptacles not exceeding 30
amperes and located within 1.5 m (5 ft) measured horizontally of the inside
walls of a hydromassage tub shall be protected by a ground-fault circuit
interrupter(s).
Panel Statement: The change meets the submitter?s intent.
Number Eligible to Vote: 11
Ballot Results: Affirmative: 11


Pete

 

[M. D.]

.... Even if the tub occupant is aware of the
location of the receptacle, it does not seem appropriate to expect a person to
exit the tub and remove the side of the tub or the access panel to reset the
receptacle.
Panel Meeting Action: Accept in Principle

This is a crack up,.... for the love of Pete ,..." not appropriate " to expect a person to get out of the tub???? To reset a GFCI?? a personal protection device ???? What if I choose to use a breaker type GFCI in the panel ?? This guy is a real piece of work ....believe me I can tell:wink:

 

[weressl]

This is a crack up,.... for the love of Pete ,..." not appropriate " to expect a person to get out of the tub???? To reset a GFCI?? a personal protection device ???? What if I choose to use a breaker type GFCI in the panel ?? This guy is a real piece of work ....believe me I can tell:wink:

The dude has a 5' long arm? Alien electrifiers !

 

[charlie b]

Unless I'm looking at it incorrectly it would seem that the submitter intends that the person using the tub be able to reset a tripped GFCI receptacle, protecting said tub motor, while still sitting in the actual tub?

You?re looking at it incorrectly. You missed part of the substantiation.

. . . it does not seem appropriate to expect a person to exit the tub and remove the side of the tub or the access panel to reset the receptacle.

The proposer didn?t want the GFCI device inside the cavity (i.e., the equipment space underneath the tub). It is OK to expect the user to exit the tub, but not OK to expect the user to get out a screwdriver to open a panel door. Seems reasonable to me.

 

[romeo]

2008 Nec 680.71

You?re looking at it incorrectly. You missed part of the substantiation.

The proposer didn?t want the GFCI device inside the cavity (i.e., the equipment space underneath the tub). It is OK to expect the user to exit the tub, but not OK to expect the user to get out a screwdriver to open a panel door. Seems reasonable to me.

I totally agree, The GFCI does not belong behind the access panel.The requirement to make the receptacle more accessible IMHO is also a good change.

 

[stickboy1375]

This has been a requirement since 2005 in Connecticut...



(Amd) 680.73 Accessibility. Hydromassage bathtub electrical equipment shall be accessible without damaging the building structure or building finish. Ground-fault circuit-interrupter devices shall be located in a readily accessible location for testing purposes. Ground-fault circuit-interrupter devices shall not be installed within the enclosure of the hydromassage tub.

 

[M. D.]

These folks can just lean over and fire her back up again ... nice.

Should they not have used " accessible " instead of " readily accessible" ?
I was taught that equipment behind a locked door meets the definition of readily accessible #14

 

[stickboy1375]

The problem I think is that the average homeowner does not test the GFCI device, so hiding it behind a panel does not help matters. This is Connecticuts view on it anyhow.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

The problem I think is that the average homeowner does not test the GFCI device, so hiding it behind a panel does not help matters. This is Connecticuts view on it anyhow.

Stickboy, the average ec will not test those GFCI's in their own house even if they are staring you in the face.

 

[stickboy1375]

Stickboy, the average ec will not test those GFCI's in their own house even if they are staring you in the face.

I agree, but like I said, hiding it behind a panel does not help either. IMO putting a GFCI behind a panel is just plain dumb anyhow.

 

[M. D.]

The problem I think is that the average homeowner does not test the GFCI device, so hiding it behind a panel does not help matters. This is Connecticuts view on it anyhow.

I understand the intent ,.. I'm not sure they used the proper term

 

[Dennis Alwon]

IMO putting a GFCI behind a panel is just plain dumb anyhow.

Agreed-- I always use the faceless gfci's near the tub.

 

[pete m.]

it does not seem appropriate to expect a person to
exit the tub and remove the side of the tub or the access panel to reset the
receptacle.

Since I read it incorrectly the first time would it be more appropriate to say that as long as the person does not have to exit the tub and remove a panel they should be able to reset the GFCI device while immersed in the tub water?

Why would we not want a person, at the least, to exit the tub to reset the tripped GFCI device? I would assume that the GFCI opened the circuit for a reason (4 to 6 mA of leakage current perhaps?).

I get the submitters "intent" but I found the way it was worded in the substantiation a bit humorous. :smile:

Pete

 

[Dennis Alwon]

Why would we not want a person, at the least, to exit the tub to reset the tripped GFCI device? I would assume that the GFCI opened the circuit for a reason (4 to 6 mA of leakage current perhaps?).
Pete

I believe that the resetting of the GFCI is as safe as flipping a light switch. I am not encouraging having the gfci that close but I don't really see it as an issue with hydomassage tubs. When we talk hot tubs that's another story-- different rules.

 

[M. D.]

I get the submitters "intent" but I found the way it was worded in the substantiation a bit humorous. :smile:

Pete

So did I,. find it humorous that is .. Not quite sure why he mentions having to exit the tub:-?

I like to use GFCI circuit breakers myself ,..though I have used a dead front or two.

 

[charlie b]

Why would we not want a person, at the least, to exit the tub to reset the tripped GFCI device?

Not quite sure why he mentions having to exit the tub

Again, not the point. The emphasis is on opening the cover, not on getting out of the tub. The proposer was saying, ?let?s make the guy get out of the tub, but let?s not make him open the cover.? At least, that is how I read the paragraph.

 

[M. D.]

Again, not the point. The emphasis is on opening the cover, not on getting out of the tub. The proposer was saying, ?let?s make the guy get out of the tub, but let?s not make him open the cover.? At least, that is how I read the paragraph.

Charlie,. I get it. exiting the tub is irrelavent to the intent of the submitter. He was just adding a bit of color.

In your opinion does the access panel render the receptacle not readily accessible

 

[charlie b]

In your opinion does the access panel render the receptacle not readily accessible

It does not, IMHO. Reading the definition of "readily accessible," I think an access panel in front of an item still qualifies. It is essentially the same as the panel door on a branch circuit panel. You just have to open the door.

 

[M. D.]

It does not, IMHO. Reading the definition of "readily accessible," I think an access panel in front of an item still qualifies. It is essentially the same as the panel door on a branch circuit panel. You just have to open the door.

I agree , ...so a fat lot of good agreeing in priciple was ,..IMO they did not adress his concern
Speaking of fat,....
"There's a fat man in the bath tub with the blues I heard him mo..ooan ,I heard him moan"
YouTube - Little Feat Fat Man In The Bathtub

It's FRIDAY ,...just having a little fun

 

[romeo]

2008 Nec 680.71

It does not, IMHO. Reading the definition of "readily accessible," I think an access panel in front of an item still qualifies. It is essentially the same as the panel door on a branch circuit panel. You just have to open the door.

I would agree,if all you had to do is open the door.I have inspected many hydro massage tubs, but never saw an access panel door that could be opened without having to use a tool to do so.

I have even seen some where a utility knife had to be used to remove grout form tile to access the opening. Needless to say it did not pass.

The truth is it is time that someone did something to correct this problem and I am glad they did. The next thing that needs to be done is make the pump motor more accessible.