Receptacle vertical distance for spas

[Mr. Inspector]

I'm reading this right? Section E4203.1.1. E4203.1.2 and E4203.1.5 does not say horizonal or vertical or over the spa for a receptacle, so I guess it doesn't matter what direction the receptacle is from the inside wall of a spa as long as it's GFI protected. I had a couple of spas lately with receptacle 5' and 6' over a spa indoors and outdoors.

Just seems odd because IRC has restrictions for heights of lighting outlets but not receptacles. For outdoor spas the IRC does not allow a lighting outlet less than 12' above the water and within 5' horizonal of a spa (does not say inside wall of spa here so it means outside wall of spa). For lighting outlets above indoor spa water the same rule, but if GFI protected just 7'-6" and even closer to the water if in a unmetallic trim and globe with no horizonal requirement at all.

2018 IRCE4203.1.1 Location. Receptacles that provide power for
water-pump motors or other loads directly related to the
circulation and sanitation system shall be of the grounding
type, located not less than 6 feet (1829 mm) from the
inside walls of pools and outdoor spas and hot tubs, and
ground-fault circuit-interrupter protected.
E4203.1.2 Other receptacles. Other receptacles on the
property shall be located not less than 6 feet (1829 mm)
from the inside walls of pools and outdoor spas and hot
tubs. [680.22 (A)(3)
E4203.1.5 Indoor locations. Receptacles shall be located
not less than 6 feet (1829 mm) from the inside walls of
indoor spas and hot tubs. A minimum of one 125-volt
receptacle shall be located between 6 feet (1829 mm) and
10 feet (3048 mm) from the inside walls of indoor spas or
hot tubs. [680.43(A) and 680.43(A)(1)]

 

[ICE]

Using your logic, if the spa was 12’ in diameter there could be a receptacle in the center…in the spa.

 

[Mr. Inspector]

Using your logic, if the spa was 12’ in diameter there could be a receptacle in the center…in the spa.

I just want to know what the code means. The code didn't have any trouble using more details and the words over and horizonal for lighting outlets and luminaires, so they must have not used these words for receptacles for a reason. Maybe the code is more concerned with broken glass from a light bulb then a shock and that is why it's written this way or lighting outlets and luminaires are more dangerous than a receptacle over a spa for other reasons. I am hoping someone would know what the commentary says.

 

[ICE]

The IRC with all of the MEP included is akin to the old days where you could purchase a combination printer-scanner-fax machine. Space saving for sure but none of the operations were really great, performance wise.

NEC:
680.43(A) Receptacles.
At least one 125-volt, 15 or 20-ampere receptacle on a general-purpose branch circuit shall be located not less than 6 ft from, and not exceeding 10 ft from, the inside wall of the spa or hot tub.

(1) Location. Receptacles shall be located at least 6 ft measured horizontally from the inside walls of the spa or hot tub.

I realize that for some people that choose to over/under think things, even the NEC could be misused in as much as horizontal is available in 360°.

 

[ICE]

I'm reading this right? Section E4203.1.1. E4203.1.2 and E4203.1.5 does not say horizonal or vertical or over the spa for a receptacle, so I guess it doesn't matter what direction the receptacle is from the inside wall of a spa as long as it's GFI protected. I had a couple of spas lately with receptacle 5' and 6' over a spa indoors and outdoors.

I see that you got the idea that it was okay. So what did you do about that?

 

[Beniah Naylor]

The IRC with all of the MEP included is akin to the old days where you could purchase a combination printer-scanner-fax machine. Space saving for sure but none of the operations were really great, performance wise.

CHAPTER 34 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS​

This Electrical Part (Chapters 34 through 43) is produced and copyrighted by the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) and is based on the 2020 National Electrical Code® (NEC®) (NFPA 70®-2020), copyright 2019, National Fire Protection Association, all rights reserved. Use of the Electrical Part is pursuant to license with the NFPA.

ICC user note:
About this chapter: Chapter 34 contains broadly applicable requirements including provisions for the protection of the structural elements of a building, inspection of work, general installation and conductor identification. This chapter requires that all electrical system components be listed and labeled by an approved agency. The electrical provisions of this code are identical to the intent of the NEC provisions except that this code requires all electrical system components be listed and labeled. The code does not contain unique electrical requirements. A dwelling built to the code will have electrical systems identical to those required by the respective edition of the NEC. This code addresses only those electrical systems that are common to dwelling construction, and the NEC is referenced for any subject not addressed in the code.

 

[ICE]

CHAPTER 34 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS​

This Electrical Part (Chapters 34 through 43) is produced and copyrighted by the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) and is based on the 2020 National Electrical Code® (NEC®) (NFPA 70®-2020), copyright 2019, National Fire Protection Association, all rights reserved. Use of the Electrical Part is pursuant to license with the NFPA.

ICC user note:
About this chapter: Chapter 34 contains broadly applicable requirements including provisions for the protection of the structural elements of a building, inspection of work, general installation and conductor identification. This chapter requires that all electrical system components be listed and labeled by an approved agency. The electrical provisions of this code are identical to the intent of the NEC provisions except that this code requires all electrical system components be listed and labeled. The code does not contain unique electrical requirements. A dwelling built to the code will have electrical systems identical to those required by the respective edition of the NEC. This code addresses only those electrical systems that are common to dwelling construction, and the NEC is referenced for any subject not addressed in the code.

It's the Hewlett-Packard of codes.

 

[Mr. Inspector]

I passed both the indoor and outdoor spas going by what the IRC said.

The same part in the NEC requires an emergency switch while the IRC does not.
(1) Location. Receptacles shall be located at least 6 ft measured horizontally from the inside walls of the spa or hot tub. So I guess that these receptacles cannot be at higher or lower vertically than the sides of the spa. This makes some sense.

But he NEC still does not say what the vertical distance needs to be for outside spas.
2017 NEC 680.22(A)(3) other receptacles for outdoor spas does not say to measure horizontally 6' from the inside wall of a spa, 680.22(A)(5) says to measure by the shortest path the supply cord of an appliance would follow. This would mean a commercial outside spa could have a receptacle 6' exactly above the inside walls of the spa and even lower towards the center of the spa.

 

[ICE]

I passed both the indoor and outdoor spas going by what the IRC said.

The same part in the NEC requires an emergency switch while the IRC does not.
(1) Location. Receptacles shall be located at least 6 ft measured horizontally from the inside walls of the spa or hot tub. So I guess that these receptacles cannot be at higher or lower vertically than the sides of the spa. This makes some sense.

But he NEC still does not say what the vertical distance needs to be for outside spas.
2017 NEC 680.22(A)(3) other receptacles for outdoor spas does not say to measure horizontally 6' from the inside wall of a spa, 680.22(A)(5) says to measure by the shortest path the supply cord of an appliance would follow. This would mean a commercial outside spa could have a receptacle 6' exactly above the inside walls of the spa and even lower towards the center of the spa.

This is so completely wrong that I am debating whether to delete the thread.

For anyone that stumbles on this thread, be aware that there shall not be a receptacle outlet located above a spa at any height nor within 6 ft horizontally from the inside wall of the spa at any height. How this person got it so wrong dumbfounds me.

 

[wwhitney]

This is so completely wrong that I am debating whether to delete the thread.

Certainly this thread should not be deleted.

The OP is pointing out an oversight in the NEC language in 2023 NEC 680.22(A). That section seems to assume that of course there will be no receptacles within the horizontal footprint of the pool. Therefore 680.22(A)(3), for example, simply states that "Other receptacles shall be not less than 1.83 m (6 ft) from the inside walls of a pool." This in contrast to 680.22(B) on luminaires and lighting outlets, which clearly contemplates that you might want a luminaire or lighting outlet above the pool, and is written accordingly.

The result is that if you had, say, an indoor pool that was 13' in diameter, and for some reason you wanted to install a receptacle on a post from the ceiling at an elevation 1' above the water, nothing in the explicit language of 680.22(A) prohibits it. Yet I'm pretty sure the writers of 680.22(A) never intended to allow that.

680.22(A)(3) should likely be rewritten to say "other receptacles shall be not less than 1.83 m (6 ft) from the water surface and inside walls of a pool." Unfortunately this PI will need to wait for the 2029 NEC.

Cheers, Wayne

 

[ICE]

Certainly this thread should not be deleted.

The OP is pointing out an oversight in the NEC language in 2023 NEC 680.22(A). That section seems to assume that of course there will be no receptacles within the horizontal footprint of the pool. Therefore 680.22(A)(3), for example, simply states that "Other receptacles shall be not less than 1.83 m (6 ft) from the inside walls of a pool." This in contrast to 680.22(B) on luminaires and lighting outlets, which clearly contemplates that you might want a luminaire or lighting outlet above the pool, and is written accordingly.

The result is that if you had, say, an indoor pool that was 13' in diameter, and for some reason you wanted to install a receptacle on a post from the ceiling at an elevation 1' above the water, nothing in the explicit language of 680.22(A) prohibits it. Yet I'm pretty sure the writers of 680.22(A) never intended to allow that.

680.22(A)(3) should likely be rewritten to say "other receptacles shall be not less than 1.83 m (6 ft) from the water surface and inside walls of a pool." Unfortunately this PI will need to wait for the 2029 NEC.

Cheers, Wayne

You are being too kind. Twisted logic resulted in the OP allowing a receptacle above two spas at 5' and 6' from the water. It is one thing to point out a flaw in the code. It is quite another to employ said flaw. Taken a step further. I am convinced that the OP thinks that rather than an oversight, the code expressly allows what he has approved. Were it otherwise, he would not have walked away from a clearly dangerous condition.

 

[wwhitney]

I'm reading this right? Section E4203.1.1. E4203.1.2 and E4203.1.5 does not say horizonal or vertical or over the spa for a receptacle, so I guess it doesn't matter what direction the receptacle is from the inside wall of a spa as long as it's GFI protected. I had a couple of spas lately with receptacle 5' and 6' over a spa indoors and outdoors.

If the vertical separation was only 5', what was the horizontal separation? It would have to be over sqrt(6^2-5^2) = sqrt(11) = 3' 4" in order to comply with the 6' total distance required.

You are being too kind. Twisted logic resulted in the OP allowing a receptacle above two spas at 5' and 6' from the water.

If the total distance is over 6' as required by 680.22(A)(3), what's the problem? 680.22(A)(5) is very clear about how to measure the distance, we are to use the distance through 3-space and not just look at the horizontal projection (distance in plan).

Cheers, Wayne

 

[ICE]

If the vertical separation was only 5', what was the horizontal separation? It would have to be over sqrt(6^2-5^2) = sqrt(11) = 3' 4" in order to comply with the 6' total distance required.


If the total distance is over 6' as required by 680.22(A)(3), what's the problem? 680.22(A)(5) is very clear about how to measure the distance, we are to use the distance through 3-space and not just look at the horizontal projection (distance in plan).

Cheers, Wayne

Well then Wayne, what with you being one of the more intelligent people that I have encountered... I will concede the argument...sincerely apologize and be on my way.

 

[wwhitney]

I'm reading this right? Section E4203.1.1. E4203.1.2 and E4203.1.5 does not say horizonal or vertical or over the spa for a receptacle, so I guess it doesn't matter what direction the receptacle is from the inside wall of a spa as long as it's GFI protected. I had a couple of spas lately with receptacle 5' and 6' over a spa indoors and outdoors.

For the spa indoors, at least for the NEC (didn't check if the IRC has faithfully reproduced this), 680.43(A)(1) does specify that the 6' distance has to be maintained horizontally:

2017 NEC 680.43(A)(1): "Location. Receptacles shall be located at least 1.83 m (6 ft) measured horizontally from the inside walls of the spa or hot tub."

Not sure why there is a disparity between the 680.22(A) rules for pools and outdoor spas and hot tubs and the 680.43(A) rules for indoor spas and hot tubs. A brief check shows the same disparity in both the 2008 NEC and the 2023 NEC.

Cheers, Wayne

 

[wwhitney]

Well then Wayne, what with you being one of the more intelligent people that I have encountered... I will concede the argument...sincerely apologize and be on my way.

I think you left off the </s> notation to indicate sarcasm.

Anyway, see the previous post, it is unclear to me if the lack of "measured horizontally" in 680.22(A) is intentional or an oversight. If it is intentional, then clearly we are to measure the distance differently for 680.22(A) vs 680.43(A).

Cheers, Wayne

 

[ICE]

I think you left off the </s> notation to indicate sarcasm.

Anyway, see the previous post, it is unclear to me if the lack of "measured horizontally" in 680.22(A) is intentional or an oversight. If it is intentional, then clearly we are to measure the distance differently for 680.22(A) vs 680.43(A).

Cheers, Wayne

Intentional or not, the end result shall not be a receptacle outlet located above a spa at any height nor within 6 ft horizontally from the inside wall of the spa at any height.

You can do wizard math and compare this section with that section as long as you reach the right conclusion... so far I haven't seen that.

 

[wwhitney]

Intentional or not, the end result shall not be a receptacle outlet located above a spa at any height nor within 6 ft horizontally from the inside wall of the spa at any height.

But that is a presumption that you are bringing to the conversation, it may not match what the written code actually says.

Cheers, Wayne

 

[ICE]

But that is a presumption that you are bringing to the conversation, it may not match what the written code actually says.

Cheers, Wayne

I'm just simple enough that if there were no code at all, I would go with my presumption. I try to not let the code get so confused that I'm running in circles. If there is a legitimate conundrum built into the code it behooves us to reach a safe conclusion and let the heavy thinking folks figure it out. Your explanation might have merit and even so, it falls on deaf ears. Like I said, or maybe I didn't say, you can get me wound up in a ball of code with one premise after another... but come Hell or high water, I won't agree.

I suggest that you take this up with the NFPA. I'm pretty sure it would have never occurred to them either.

 

[Mr. Inspector]

I need to tell them the section number when I fail an inspection and the IRC did not say what direction to measure.

I called the ICC and they said the intent is to measure away from the spa, but not vertically. Well too late now on the spas I already passed the final.

 

[wwhitney]

I called the ICC and they said the intent is to measure away from the spa, but not vertically.

That may be the case, but based on the sections you've quoted, there is no language in E4203 to support the idea of measuring horizontally. E4203.1 clearly tells you to measure through 3-space. So ICC's "intention" did not translate into adopted enforceable language.

Cheers, Wayne

 

[ICE]

Well too late now on the spas I already passed the final.

It's never too late. Give me their phone numbers and I'll handle it for you.

 

[ICE]

I need to tell them the section number when I fail an inspection and the IRC did not say what direction to measure.

That's a lame excuse. You could use any random numbers for a code section and they wouldn't have a clue. Or you could use the section that gave you a brain freeze. But to throw up your hands and pass it shows a serious lack of sound judgement.