light over tub

[george t. everett]

Just got red tagged today for installing an open bulb recess over a tub(no shower). I asked for code reference, he cited 410.4A. I said it is not a wet area & the fixture was listed for damp location. Comments appreciated.

 

[mikeames]

Re: light over tub

How high above the tub is it??? If its below 8ft then you need a shower or tub recess trim.

 

[paul]

Re: light over tub

I'm not sure exactly what you have, but 410.4(D) allows a damp location fixture if there is no shower spray present.

 

[websparky]

Re: light over tub

Hi George,
As long as he thinks it is a wet or damp location...

"(A) Luminaires (fixtures) installed in wet or damp locations shall be installed so that water cannot enter or accumulate in wiring compartments, lampholders, or other electrical parts."

(D) would not apply.

 

[mpd]

Re: light over tub

there are some open bulb recess lights that are listed for your application if you use a par lamp, check the listing on the recess trim.

 

[infinity]

Re: light over tub

This shouldn't be a problem if the ceiling isn't subject to shower spray. A damp location fixture should be all that you need. There is no requirement for a wet location fixture within 8' of the tub if the area isn't considered a wet location. IMO the ceiling of a shower is not a wet location by the definition in Article 100.

 

[allenwayne]

Re: light over tub

Progress lighting makes a shower trim when used with a ruberized halogen bulb can be in a 7 ft high shower.As long as it is Ul listed for the application then all is good

 

[charlie tuna]

Re: light over tub

george,
i think he meant 410.4(D) where you have an open socket within 8 feet of the top rim of the tub??

 

[haskindm]

Re: light over tub

Remember that all equipment must be approved. The only person that can approve equipment is the authority having jurisdiction (AHJ). Usually the AHJ will base his approval on the listing an labelling of a product, but he does not have to. In this case, it looks like he has not approved this fixture. That is his job. You can fight if you want, everybody has a boss that you can appeal to, but it looks like it is within his authority to not approve this particular fixture in this particular location.

 

[rasmithircgov.com]

Re: light over tub

Looking under the Definition of:
Location, Dry. A location not normally subject to dampness or wetness. A location classified as dry may be temporarily subject to dampness or wetness, as in the case of a building under construction.
Isnt the tub area subjct to dampness?

[ August 02, 2005, 03:09 PM: Message edited by: rasmithircgov.com ]

 

[electricmanscott]

Re: light over tub

Did he actually read 404.4A? At worst this is maybe a damp location though I would not even go that far. There is no reason to not allow this.

 

[infinity]

Re: light over tub

george,
i think he meant 410.4(D) where you have an open socket within 8 feet of the top rim of the tub??

There is no 8' restriction on a recessed fixture over a shower, open lamped or not. The only thing that would apply is whether or not the location were wet, damp or neither. Once that is determined than the recessed fixture would have to be of that type. There are a list of fixtures in 410.4(D) that are not permitted in the tub zone. A recessed fixture is not one of them.

[ August 02, 2005, 08:16 PM: Message edited by: infinity ]

 

[george t. everett]

Re: light over tub

The fixture I used was a lightolier 1004 can & a 1005 trim with a 75 watt par lamp. All are listed for damp location. I would not think this is a wet location (no shower).

 

[infinity]

Re: light over tub

I would agree with you even if there were a shower. Given the fact that there isn't a shower this IMO wouldn't even be a damp location. The inspector is wrong. He needs to cite a specific violation. If it 410.4(D) he's missed the boat.

 

[haskindm]

Re: light over tub

I am afraid you are all missing the point; arguing over whether the area over a tub is a damp, dry, or wet location. 110.2 says that equipment (including fixtures) are only acceptable if APPROVED. 90.4 says that the AHJ has the responsibility of APPROVING this equipment. In this case it appears that the AHJ has decided not to approve this particular fixture for this particular location. You can appeal that decision and we can argue whether or not the decision is proper, but the fact remains that the AHJ has the power and responsibility to make that decision. He does NOT have to approve something just because it is UL listed and labeled as suitable for a certain condition. The AHJ has tremendous latitude in these decisions.

 

[iwire]

Re: light over tub

Originally posted by haskindm:
I am afraid you are all missing the point; arguing over whether the area over a tub is a damp, dry, or wet location. 110.2 says that equipment (including fixtures) are only acceptable if APPROVED. 90.4 says that the AHJ has the responsibility of APPROVING this equipment.

 

[haskindm]

Re: light over tub

Let me make it clear that I am NOT an inspector.
The NEC is designed to give the AHJ (usually the inspector) a great deal of power and latitude. One of the responsibilities of the AHJ is approving equipment. They will usually base the approval of equipment on the UL Listing, if there is one. Equipment may be approved that isn't UL Listed and sometimes UL equipment is NOT approved. A dialogue can be held to get the AHJ's reasoning for not approving the equipment. To take this authority away from the AHJ is circumventing the intent of the NEC. It is almost like telling the inspector that he MUST accept anything that is installed by a Master Electrician. Can some AHJ's abuse their authority? Certainly. But does that mean that we take all of the authority away from them? Everyone has a boss and must answer to someone.

 

[infinity]

Re: light over tub

Haskindm,

I think that we need to step back for a second and remember that the original post was about a recessed light over a tub. Just because an inspector may have a right to approve or disapprove a fixture does not give the right to misapply the code that he is supposed to enforce.

He cited 410.4(A). Since the fixture was listed for damp locations than his interpretation had to be based on his feeling that this was a wet location . By definition in Article 100 this isn't a wet location so the installation does not violate the very code section that he sited.

[ August 03, 2005, 09:13 PM: Message edited by: infinity ]

 

[iwire]

Re: light over tub

Originally posted by haskindm:
Let me make it clear that I am NOT an inspector.

I know, there is an inspector referenced in the OP.

Originally posted by haskindm:
The NEC is designed to give the AHJ (usually the inspector) a great deal of power and latitude.

Is that the case?

Is the local inspector actually the AHJ?

In the New England States I work in the inspector is not the AHJ, a State agency is the AHJ.

Originally posted by haskindm:
Can some AHJ's abuse their authority? Certainly. But does that mean that we take all of the authority away from them?

We sure look at this differently.

IMO you think of the AHJ/Inspector as a judge who makes rulings and I think of AHJ/Inspectors as enforcement officers.

 

[haskindm]

Re: light over tub

It is not what I think, it is the authority that is specifically given to the AHJ by the NEC. 90.4 is pretty clear. The only person that may approve a piece of equipment is the AHJ. That is why it is important that we never refer to equipment as "UL Approved". Testing agencies do not approve anything, they list it so that the AHJ (whoever that is) may approve it based on their testing. If the inspector is the AHJ he has the authority and the responsibility to approve or NOT APPROVE a piece of equipment for ANY reason regardless of the listing and labeling. He may also approve equipment that is not listed. To avoid problems with inspectors making arbitrary decisions, the county in which I work has made the Electrical Board the AHJ. For 99% of the time this has no effect on the work done in the county, but when the electrician and the inspector disagree they can bring the dispute to the electrical board for arbitration. This has been in effect for about 6 years and seems to be working fairly well. If you do not trust the inspectors in your area you will need to work with the legislators to have someone else appointed as the AHJ. There are several areas in the code that give the AHJ a great deal of authority, that is why it is crucial that these people be extremely well qualified. Unfortunately in many jurisdictions the AHJ is whoever is available on that day. Sometimes that may be the plumbing inspector who is filling in for the electrical inspector who is on vacation.
In this case, if the inspector is NOT the AHJ, he has over-stepped his authority. If he IS the AHJ, he is doing his job. You may disagree with his decision; but he has the power, the authority, and the responsibility to make that decision.