Bath receptacle in bathtub space???
- Thread starter mistermudd
- Start date
- Status
sandsnow
Senior Member
- Location
- Southern California
dnem said:By saying "can't be directly over it" you mean can't be directly over the bathtub stall, then you're 100% right
David
That's what so great about the english language, people can read it differently so easily. Who's to say who's right unless you have a doctorate in English.
I see bathtub
or
I see shower stall
but
I do not see bathtub stall.
maybe bathtub stall is how it's supposed to be read. If so, then the recep. in the OP would be in violation.
It would be great if it said directly over the bathtub pedestal. Then all the tile projecting out from the rim of the tub would be covered no question.
- Location
- Chapel Hill, NC
- Occupation
- Retired Electrical Contractor
As far as I am concerned the receptacle is not over the tub unless it is in the ceiling. At what point would a receptacle over the edge of the tub be far enough away. If I had a 3' wide deck on one side, 8' , 10' -- get my point. This article definitely needs a rewrite in 2011. Any volunteers???
Well, I didn't expect things to be so chaotic in here.
First of all 680.70 - 680.71 does apply, read the definition of a hydromassage bathtub in 680.2 I am personally shocked anyone would doubt the application.
With regards to what is "over the tub" it is clear that the line formed by the inside of the tub is what you use... this is for virtually all water related electrical work. The plug in the picture is NOT over the water.
And just because 680.70 et al does apply, doesn't mean you thow out any previous bathroom code issues... this is supplimental to that.
One final note, is 680.70 was written solely to prevent you from having to bond every peice of metal in the bathroom that you could touch while in the water (see 680.62(B)(4)), instead it simply says items that are in contact with the water. I think this was an industry cop-out when the panel met, likely justified by saying it doesn't have it's own submerged heating element. But I am thinking some brands do have a heater now. Either way, if it is intended to be drained after each use it is a hydromassage bath.
Back to the original issue... if the plug is connected to the bathroom GFCI circuit it is fine!
First of all 680.70 - 680.71 does apply, read the definition of a hydromassage bathtub in 680.2 I am personally shocked anyone would doubt the application.
With regards to what is "over the tub" it is clear that the line formed by the inside of the tub is what you use... this is for virtually all water related electrical work. The plug in the picture is NOT over the water.
And just because 680.70 et al does apply, doesn't mean you thow out any previous bathroom code issues... this is supplimental to that.
One final note, is 680.70 was written solely to prevent you from having to bond every peice of metal in the bathroom that you could touch while in the water (see 680.62(B)(4)), instead it simply says items that are in contact with the water. I think this was an industry cop-out when the panel met, likely justified by saying it doesn't have it's own submerged heating element. But I am thinking some brands do have a heater now. Either way, if it is intended to be drained after each use it is a hydromassage bath.
Back to the original issue... if the plug is connected to the bathroom GFCI circuit it is fine!
- Location
- Chapel Hill, NC
- Occupation
- Retired Electrical Contractor
Mike03a3 said:
Ah but in the wall is not over the tub. We could get technical here. That is why I believe the article needs a rework.
- Location
- Chapel Hill, NC
- Occupation
- Retired Electrical Contractor
Kontrols said:
Where in that art. does it say you can't have a receptacle by the hydromassage. 680.72 says to comply with chapters 1-4. Bath recep. are GFCI protected so as you say --no issue.
sandsnow
Senior Member
- Location
- Southern California
M. D. said:
sandsnow
Senior Member
- Location
- Southern California
here's what the CMP meant, when they wrote that. And again the age old question, how come they just didn't write the code that way?? Footprint of the tub would have been great. Look at the tub before it is installed and see the footprint and stay out of there. The footprint would be the dimensions looking at the tub in plan view. No confusion about the inside walls or how big the pedestal or splash is.
18-41 Log #1514 NEC-P18
(406-8(C))
Final Action: Accept in Principle
Submitter: Harold F. Willman, City of Aurora
Recommendation:
Revise text to read as follows:
(C) Bathtub and Shower Space Area. A receptacle shall not be installed within a bathtub or shower space area.
FPN: See 410.4(D) for tub or shower area definition.
Substantiation:
Because all Code Panels intend exact wording, words with the same meaning are used to avoid the redundancy of a specific word. Space,
area and zone are examples of using words synonymously in Chapters 1 through 4. An example is NEC 110.26(F)(1) and 110.26(F)(2)
where all three words are used synonymously. By changing "space" to "area" and using the FPN to refer to the definition, it makes the
intent clear as to the space the receptacle is not to be installed. This will also void the argument that "area" and "space" are not the same
word and therefore do not mean the same thing. This wording and definition references clarifies the hazard of electric devices within a
wet space, area or zone.
Panel Meeting Action: Accept in Principle
Revise 406.8(C) to read:
(C) Bathtub and Shower Space. Receptacles shall not be installed within or directly over the bathtub or shower stall.
Panel Statement:
The panel does not agree that receptacles need to be installed 3 feet away from the outer edge of a tub or shower. In many instances,
especially in the smaller apartment sized bathrooms, it would be impossible to install a receptacle beyond 3 feet from the edge of the tub.
The panel does agree that receptacles shall not be installed within the footprint of a tub or shower. The panel action adequately conveys
the location restriction without the use of a fine print note. The panel does not concur with the submitter's statement regarding the use
of words with the same meaning to avoid redundancy.
Number Eligible to Vote: 10
Ballot Results: Affirmative: 10
18-41 Log #1514 NEC-P18
(406-8(C))
Final Action: Accept in Principle
Submitter: Harold F. Willman, City of Aurora
Recommendation:
Revise text to read as follows:
(C) Bathtub and Shower Space Area. A receptacle shall not be installed within a bathtub or shower space area.
FPN: See 410.4(D) for tub or shower area definition.
Substantiation:
Because all Code Panels intend exact wording, words with the same meaning are used to avoid the redundancy of a specific word. Space,
area and zone are examples of using words synonymously in Chapters 1 through 4. An example is NEC 110.26(F)(1) and 110.26(F)(2)
where all three words are used synonymously. By changing "space" to "area" and using the FPN to refer to the definition, it makes the
intent clear as to the space the receptacle is not to be installed. This will also void the argument that "area" and "space" are not the same
word and therefore do not mean the same thing. This wording and definition references clarifies the hazard of electric devices within a
wet space, area or zone.
Panel Meeting Action: Accept in Principle
Revise 406.8(C) to read:
(C) Bathtub and Shower Space. Receptacles shall not be installed within or directly over the bathtub or shower stall.
Panel Statement:
The panel does not agree that receptacles need to be installed 3 feet away from the outer edge of a tub or shower. In many instances,
especially in the smaller apartment sized bathrooms, it would be impossible to install a receptacle beyond 3 feet from the edge of the tub.
The panel does agree that receptacles shall not be installed within the footprint of a tub or shower. The panel action adequately conveys
the location restriction without the use of a fine print note. The panel does not concur with the submitter's statement regarding the use
of words with the same meaning to avoid redundancy.
Number Eligible to Vote: 10
Ballot Results: Affirmative: 10
Sorry if I confused anyone, the hydromassage tub art. does not require the outlet just if there is one... it must be GFCI and not over the water. Hence its location on the wall in proximity to the tub was fine. My thoughts where that everyone was thinking it was the wrong spot because of the tub.
Removing it completely would NOT be Ok because it is the bathroom basin outlet 210.52(D).
If the customer is the party that is unsatisfied and the opposite wall cannot accomodate the plug, consider putting it in the basin cabinet as noted in the exception to 210.52(D).
I think this horse is dead now...
Removing it completely would NOT be Ok because it is the bathroom basin outlet 210.52(D).
If the customer is the party that is unsatisfied and the opposite wall cannot accomodate the plug, consider putting it in the basin cabinet as noted in the exception to 210.52(D).
I think this horse is dead now...
View attachment 1215
OK , even I concede its time to quit beating a dead horse. If they don't get that the receptacle is legal , they aren't never going to get it .
OK , even I concede its time to quit beating a dead horse. If they don't get that the receptacle is legal , they aren't never going to get it .
M. D. said:
Next to the "twigs".
That one got me laughing !
And to answer,
above the half wall behind the "twigs" would not be in the tub stall, so NEC allows it.
Now look at the picture and can anybody state that a code allowing a plug over that half wall addresses safety ?
I really don't see this as a safety issue. . If I can put a plug next to the tub, then I haven't addressed safety, so the interpretation of 406.8(C) doesn't matter.
I can see that there's 2 sides to this debate and different ones supporting opposite opinions. . What I haven't seen yet is anyone discussion about how the word "stall" should be defined.
Keeping in mind that the original post showed:
the tub deck up against the sink cabinet
and
a couple of inches of deck meeting up against the wall while the porcelain itself doesn't touch the wall anywhere around the perimeter
It seems that it is being assumed that "stall" means "deck". . If that's true then one side is saying:
A] the plug next to the mirror [which places it over the deck] would need to be moved over into the mirror. . And if any plugs are located around the perimeter, they would need to be removed.
And the other side is saying:
B] the plug next to the mirror can stay put. . And if any plugs are located around the perimeter, they can also stay.
I would say that the "deck" is not the "stall" and the plug next to the mirror can stay put above the deck. . But if any plugs are located around the perimeter, they would need to be removed because they're in the bathtub stall. . The "stall" is defined by the wall more than it's defined by the deck.
But still I don't see this as a safety issue either way you look at it because ultimately there is no clearance measurement required between the tub water and any plug. . If you can have a plug next to, then you're not going to get anymore safety than that which is offered by the GFCI device function. . And hopefully the GFCI doesn't fail and remain energized.
David
lpelectric
Senior Member
Panel Statement:
The panel does not agree that receptacles need to be installed 3 feet away from the outer edge of a tub or shower. In many instances, especially in the smaller apartment sized bathrooms, it would be impossible to install a receptacle beyond 3 feet from the edge of the tub.
The panel does agree that receptacles shall not be installed within the footprint of a tub or shower. The panel action adequately conveys the location restriction without the use of a fine print note. The panel does not concur with the submitter's statement regarding the use of words with the same meaning to avoid redundancy.
Number Eligible to Vote: 10
Ballot Results: Affirmative: 10
The word "footprint" used in the CMP substantiation works for me. To me, this word is very descriptive. I just think of my own footprint when I walk. The area around my footstep is not included in my footstep. This means that the area around a tub is not included. It is only the tub itself.
No matter what I would like the code to say, it says what it says. :smile:
The panel does not agree that receptacles need to be installed 3 feet away from the outer edge of a tub or shower. In many instances, especially in the smaller apartment sized bathrooms, it would be impossible to install a receptacle beyond 3 feet from the edge of the tub.
The panel does agree that receptacles shall not be installed within the footprint of a tub or shower. The panel action adequately conveys the location restriction without the use of a fine print note. The panel does not concur with the submitter's statement regarding the use of words with the same meaning to avoid redundancy.
Number Eligible to Vote: 10
Ballot Results: Affirmative: 10
The word "footprint" used in the CMP substantiation works for me. To me, this word is very descriptive. I just think of my own footprint when I walk. The area around my footstep is not included in my footstep. This means that the area around a tub is not included. It is only the tub itself.
No matter what I would like the code to say, it says what it says. :smile:
lpelectric said:
"No matter what I would like the code to say, it says what it says."
And the wording of the code doesn't include the CMP statement so there's no reason to figure out what they meant by "footprint". . They chose not to put the word "footprint" in 406.8(C). . It says what it says and so an interpretation of "directly over a bathtub or shower stall" is required.
It's hard to get excited about a NEC wording dispute that has zero impact on safety.
Just put aside the dispute over the word "stall" for a moment.
Is there anybody here that thinks a plug located directly behind the tub is unsafe if the porcelain touches the wall directly under the plug but is safe if the porcelain doesn't touch the wall directly under the plug ?
How does 2 inches of deck make the plug any more or any less safe ?
David
- Status