The receptacle isn’t allowed to be within the tub enclosure. I don’t like that one bit, but the fact that the side of that vanity is not tiled and not deteriorated with age leads me to believe that it’s no within the tub enclosure. I’d put that feeling aside and say it is within the enclosure anyhow, and cry foul on that one.
Good post as always Marc,…I think I would simply write in the report to remove the receptacle before someone gets killed, simple as that…I could really care less about codes, except the common sense ones…
Here’s more than you probably needed to know, but I highlighted a few things in red that might clear this up a tiny bit. These are some recent code change proposals that didn’t pass muster.
[size=]
[/size]
I guess you’d have to ask yourself if that receptacle is within the footprint of the tub or shower? I think the footprint of the tub ends where that tile starts next the vanity, but I still don’t like this install.
Lucky for you guys that you can use your gut and don’t have to worry so much about the exact words in any particular code. Anyone’s gut should twinge a bit seeing that receptacle there, even if it probably is code-legal.
Yes. But I’m not relying on a $12 GFCI fixture to protect me from a live 120v outlet within 12" of the tub deck and faucet fixtures. Can you imagine a couple of toddlers playing in that tub?:shock:
For Canucks reading the thread, our national electrical code (NEC) states in 26-710 (g):
Receptacles installed in bathrooms shall, where practicable, be located at least 1 meter (3.28’) but in no case less than 500mm (20") from the bathtub or shower stall, this distance being measured horizontally between the receptacle and the bathtub and shower stall, without piercing a wall, partition or similar obstacle.
Strictly as a H.I. I guess I would have a little different perspective. Rather than even worrying about which specific code paragraph may or may not apply, I would feel morally obligated to point out the obvious hazards of having a receptacle (even though GFI) in such a location.
If the outlet were about 8" higher, above the countertop, the hazard would be similar (picture a hairdryer on the counter with a cord dangling over the side). How would you address that issue?
Is the shock safety hazard the same standing on a dry floor with a counter outlet vs. being submerged in a tub with that outlet installation as noted in my original post? I just assumed if a child were in that tub and stuck a finger in that outlet they might not survive. Is that inaccurate?
It’s a hazard, Will. Call it as you see it. Technically correct does not reduce the shock hazard (agreed, Marc?). That’s why the Canadian code calls for a 1 meter distance from the outer surface of the tub for light switches. They don’t just make this stuff up to be difficult. Up here, we commonly see light switches outside the bathroom door for code clearance reasons.:mrgreen:
