# Receptacles and Tubs



## jar546 (Dec 5, 2009)

Pass or Fail?


----------



## Uncle Bob (Dec 5, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs

Jar,

I hate this one.  However, using the following; were I the Building Official; I would require it to be  moved!

Based on 2006 IRC;

R104.1  "Interprtations shall be in conformance with the intent and purpose of this code."

R101.3  "The purpse of this code is to provide minimum requirements to safeguard the public safety ---- through ---- safety to life from ---- and other hazards (electric shock) attributed to the built environment."

E3902.11 / 2005 NEC, 406.8©  "A receptacle shall not be installed within or directly over a bathtub ---- stall."

*Intent of the code*

E3903.10 / 2005 NEC, 410.8 (A), (B), ©, and (D)  Bathtub and shower areas. (To prevent danger of possible electrical contact) "shall not have any parts located within a zone measured 3 feet horizontally and 8 feet vertically from the top of a bathtub rim" "The zone is all encompassing"

In accordance with Section R112; you have the right to a hearing by the Board of Appeals.

(Provide request form; or instructions for appeals procedure)

Have a good day,

Uncle Bob


----------



## raider1 (Dec 7, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs

Pass,

The receptacle is not directly over the bathtub.

Chris


----------



## globe trekker (Dec 7, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs

Chris,

See Uncle Bob's psoting of the "encompassing area"  ( To prevent danger of possible electrical contact) "shall not have any parts

located within a zone measured 3 feet horizontally and 8 feet vertically from the top of a bathtub rim" "The zone is all

encompassing".

Also, is this particular receptacle GFCI rated?

.


----------



## JBI (Dec 7, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs

Agree with 'fail'.      See U Bs post.

raider - Unless that's one BIG duplex outlet, it looks to be in the 'zone' - less than 3' horizontally or 8' vertically.

 :?:


----------



## Mule (Dec 7, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs

Tub stall in my opinion.

Fail the installation.


----------



## Pcinspector1 (Dec 7, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs

"I like to eat pop tarts when in the tub, good place to set my toaster" but Uncle Bobs got it covered, if you can reach the outlet while in the tub, not allowed! Switches not allowed either in this area. See: IRC E3901.7 & E3902.11.


----------



## jim baird (Dec 7, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs

Fail.

Inside tub enclosure.


----------



## raider1 (Dec 7, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs



> E3903.10 / 2005 NEC, 410.8 (A), (B), ©, and (D) Bathtub and shower areas. (To prevent danger of possible electrical contact) "shall not have any parts located within a zone measured 3 feet horizontally and 8 feet vertically from the top of a bathtub rim" "The zone is all encompassing"


That section deals with luminares not receptacles.

406.8© does not deal with an "All encompassing zone".

Here is what 406.8© says:



> 406.8 Receptacles in Damp or Wet Locations.© Bathtub and Shower Space. Receptacles shall not be installed within or directly over a bathtub or shower stall.


I do not see the receptacle in the picture being installed directly over the bathtub.

Chris


----------



## raider1 (Dec 7, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs



			
				globe trekker said:
			
		

> Chris,See Uncle Bob's psoting of the "encompassing area"  ( To prevent danger of possible electrical contact) "shall not have any parts
> 
> located within a zone measured 3 feet horizontally and 8 feet vertically from the top of a bathtub rim" "The zone is all
> 
> ...


Again the section you posted does not apply to receptacles only to luminaires.

Chris


----------



## globe trekker (Dec 7, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs

Chris,

Good catch!  D`OH !!  

However,  I would still fail the install because of the intent of the code to safeguard the

users of the tub [ when full of water ].

Since I would consider this a "Damp location",  and if the typical wiring methods were

used [ using NM cable ],  Table 3702.4 and Note D do not allow NM to be used in

damp locations.    Hopefully, the inspector caught the errant wiring install at the

Rough Electrical inspection.

.


----------



## Uncle Bob (Dec 7, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs

Raider,

I understand what you are saying; and agree with the technical reading of the codes.  My consern is that the code has never really addressed the dangers of electrical outlets in the area of bathtubs.

I am not addressing this subject as an electrical inspector; but as a Building Official; who has  different responsibilities.

I don't believe this section has been specific enough;

"406.8 Receptacles in Damp or Wet Locations.

© Bathtub and Shower Space. Receptacles shall not be installed within or directly over a bathtub or shower stall."

"Receptacles shall not be installed within or directly over a bathtub" This statement would give the impression that it is perfectly safe to install electrical outlets within the tub "enclosure" all around the tub; as long as you don't install it "in the tub"?

As I stated at first;  *"I hate this one."*; because if you read it literally; you can put a receptacle anywhere you want around a bathtub; as long as it not over or *"in"* the bathtub with you.

That is why I stated that; "If I were the Building Official"; I would use my interpretive resposibilities to prevent some nut case from installing half a dozen receptacles above the back rim of the tub, on the back wall; or anywhere else in the enclosure.

That is also why I included;

"In accordance with Section R112; you have the right to a hearing by the Board of Appeals.

(Provide request form; or instructions for appeals procedure)"

If the Appeals Board wishes to allow such installation; then, I would place a copy of my "interpretation of the codes", and the written decision of the Board of Appeals; in each inspections file where electric receptacles were installed in bathtub enclosure area.

Let's see; I want one for my hair dryer, one for my boombox, one for my electric razor, one for my electric hibatchi, one for my 12" TV; and don't forget to put a hook above the tub and install a receptacle for my favorite swag lamp (since it is not a "permenant fixture", it's legal, right?)

When their kid's crap hits the shower curtain; I don't want them asking me why.

Uncle Bob


----------



## raider1 (Dec 7, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs



			
				globe trekker said:
			
		

> Chris,Good catch!  D`OH !!
> 
> However,  I would still fail the install because of the intent of the code to safeguard the
> 
> ...


You would consider the inside of the stud cavity next to a bathtub a damp location? :?:

Chris


----------



## raider1 (Dec 7, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs



> I understand what you are saying; and agree with the technical reading of the codes. My consern is that the code has never really addressed the dangers of electrical outlets in the area of bathtubs.


I always try to enforce the code as written.

I agree this is a tough call but will still say that the installation in the picture is code compliant. The receptacle is NOT within or directly over the bathtub.



> "Receptacles shall not be installed within or directly over a bathtub" This statement would give the impression that it is perfectly safe to install electrical outlets within the tub "enclosure" all around the tub; as long as you don't install it "in the tub"?As I stated at first; "I hate this one."; because if you read it literally; you can put a receptacle anywhere you want around a bathtub; as long as it not over or "in" the bathtub with you.


So how far away from the tub does a receptacle need to be kept so that it is "safe"?

What if the receptacle in the picture was located just above the edge of the vanity top? Would that be a violation?

Again my opionion is that the code says what it says and that is how I am going to apply it.

Chris


----------



## globe trekker (Dec 7, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs

O.K.,  ...so I'm reaching / looking for an exception.   Ya busted me!   :cry:

Let's try E3902.8 - Damp Locations.   If the subject receptacle is not being

used, then a weatherproof cover should be installed, ...to be compliant.

_" ..or in other damp locations"_

Can't you just envision a weatherproof cover being "required according to

code"!   :lol:

.


----------



## globe trekker (Dec 7, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs

Was this particular code section changed in the `09   or  `12 codes to include some

realistic restrictive dimensions,  or would the AHJ need to amend this to their own

interpretation?    

.


----------



## Mule (Dec 7, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs

SECTION E3902 RECEPTACLES

E3902.11 *Bathtub and shower space*.

A receptacle shall not be installed within or directly over a bathtub or shower stall.

Even though the code states: A receptacle shall not be installed within or directly over a bathtub or shower stall. The title of the section is Bathtub and Shower Space. In my opinion the area around the tub is the "space" for the tub.

Not to code.


----------



## raider1 (Dec 7, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs



			
				Mule said:
			
		

> SECTION E3902 RECEPTACLESE3902.11 *Bathtub and shower space*.
> 
> A receptacle shall not be installed within or directly over a bathtub or shower stall.
> 
> ...


So in you opinion how big is this "space"?

Chris


----------



## raider1 (Dec 7, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs



			
				globe trekker said:
			
		

> Was this particular code section changed in the `09   or  `12 codes to include somerealistic restrictive dimensions,  or would the AHJ need to amend this to their own
> 
> interpretation?
> 
> .


Here was an interesting proposal submitted for the 2011 NEC code cycle. This proposal would have required receptacles to be located at least 3' from the edge of the tub or shower. The proposal was rejected by the code making panel.

Here is the ROP;



> _______________________________________________________________18-57 Log #2254 NEC-P18 Final Action: Reject
> 
> (406.8©)
> 
> ...


Chris


----------



## Mule (Dec 7, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs



			
				raider1 said:
			
		

> Mule said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So in you opinion how big is this "space"?

Chris

This space is defined by the area of the tub enclosure. In this case, as far as the original picture posted, the space is defined with the marble surrounding the tub. Others may determine that the space for the tub or shower is different than I have determined, however this is the way I see it.


----------



## raider1 (Dec 7, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs



			
				Mule said:
			
		

> raider1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


This space is defined by the area of the tub enclosure. In this case, as far as the original picture posted, the space is defined with the marble surrounding the tub. Others may determine that the space for the tub or shower is different than I have determined, however this is the way I see it.

Again the language of section 406.8© does not use the term "space" or "enclosure" it states that a receptacle can't be installed within or directly above a bathtub. IMHO the receptacle in the picture at the beginning of this thread is NOT within the bathtub nor is it directly above the bathtub. It may not be the best of locations, but would meet the requirements of the code.

Chris


----------



## Mule (Dec 7, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs



			
				raider1 said:
			
		

> Again the language of section 406.8© does not use the term "space" or "enclosure" it states that a receptacle can't be installed within or directly above a bathtub. IMHO the receptacle in the picture at the beginning of this thread is NOT within the bathtub nor is it directly above the bathtub. It may not be the best of locations, but would meet the requirements of the code.Chris


No, but it is in the title of the section. The title of the section indicates what the section is in reference too. And in this case the code is referencing bathtub and shower spaces by title.


----------



## globe trekker (Dec 7, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs

Chris ( and others ),

Would Section E3908.2 apply?   Just put a weatherproof cover on there

and their compliant.    Not safe mind you, but code compliant!    

.


----------



## raider1 (Dec 7, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs



			
				Mule said:
			
		

> raider1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> > Again the language of section 406.8© does not use the term "space" or "enclosure" it states that a receptacle can't be installed within or directly above a bathtub. IMHO the receptacle in the picture at the beginning of this thread is NOT within the bathtub nor is it directly above the bathtub. It may not be the best of locations, but would meet the requirements of the code.Chris


No, but it is in the title of the section. The title of the section indicates what the section is in reference too. And in this case the code is referencing bathtub and shower spaces by title.

Correct, but the specific requirement is to not located receptacles within or directly over the bathtub.

Again just because it says "space" in the title of that section does not change the specific requirement located within the text of the section.

Chris


----------



## raider1 (Dec 7, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs



			
				globe trekker said:
			
		

> Chris ( and others ),Would Section E3908.2 apply?   Just put a weatherproof cover on there
> 
> and their compliant.    Not safe mind you, but code compliant!
> 
> .


Did you mean E3902.8?

If so, that section is for receptacles installed in a damp location and would not supersede E3902.11 which is specific for bathtub and shower space.

Chris


----------



## JBI (Dec 8, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs

"A receptacle shall not be installed within or directly over a bathtub or shower stall."

I think there are two ways to break this sentence down...

I believe in raiders' mind it is 'bathtub'.... or... 'shower stall', limiting application to either the tub itself or a shower and its' stall.

I believe in Mules' mind (and I tend to agree with him) it is 'bathtub stall' ... or... 'shower stall'. Broadening the application, but still reasonable. It IS about safety after all.

Grammatically, I believe either interpretation is valid. As a practical matter, I believe it is also the intent of the section to not allow the situation shown in the OPs picture.

Back in the day of free standing cast iron tubs there was usually open space between the wall and the tub, less opportunity for a small appliance to fall into the (full) tub. Very few tub rims are right up against a wall these days. In raiders' interpretation almost any tub could have outlets above them as long as the actual rim of the tub is 1" away from the wall. Most 'tub only' units I am seeing are jacuzzi tubs that have 3"-6" minimum ledge around them and are enclosed on two to three sides with walls. With the more current designs that open space has been replaced by a 'shelf' that the unaware consumer sees as a great place to put the radio/mini TV/i-pod/whatever. JMHO


----------



## pwood (Dec 8, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs

Chris

Correct, but the specific requirement is to not located receptacles within or directly over the bathtub.

fail! who would put a receptacle in a bathtub or directly above the bathtub on the ceiling? semantics? space is the key word here.


----------



## raider1 (Dec 8, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs



			
				pwood said:
			
		

> fail! who would put a receptacle in a bathtub or directly above the bathtub on the ceiling? semantics? space is the key word here.


Yes, semantics.

So, please define "space" for me so I know how far away from the edge of a tub I may place a receptacle so it is not in "space".

Chris


----------



## Mule (Dec 8, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs

Ask the building official in whatever jurisdiction you are working in. In our jurisdiction, the receptacle in the picture is within the space of the bathtub.

SECTION R104

DUTIES AND POWERS OF THE

BUILDING OFFICIAL

R104.1 General. The building official is hereby authorized

and directed to enforce the provisions of this code. *The building*

*official shall have the authority to render interpretations of*

*this code *and to adopt policies and procedures in order to clarify

the application of its provisions. Such interpretations, policies

and procedures shall be in conformance with the intent and

purpose of this code. Such policies and procedures shall not

have the effect of waiving requirements specifically provided

for in this code.


----------



## JBI (Dec 8, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs

Space, the final frontier. These are the voyages of the Starship Enterprise... OOOOOPS! Wrong channel!

Read my last post raider1...

Edit: Got to keep your names straight. Min&Max is commenting on another thread... DOH!


----------



## raider1 (Dec 8, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs



			
				John Drobysh said:
			
		

> Space, the final frontier. These are the voyages of the Starship Enterprise... OOOOOPS! Wrong channel!Read my last post Min&Max...


Thats one of my favorite shows.  

Chris


----------



## Pcinspector1 (Dec 8, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs

Raider1,

See that blue tape on the wall, that's an arrow pointing towards the red line. The outlet needs to be beyond the red line. Can we dare say mirror cut or is that the contractors call?


----------



## raider1 (Dec 8, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs



			
				Pcinspector1 said:
			
		

> Raider1,See that blue tape on the wall, that's an arrow pointing towards the red line. The outlet needs to be beyond the red line. Can we dare say mirror cut or is that the contractors call?


Yes I do see the red line.

Please show me a definitive code section that requires the receptacle to be beyond that line.

As I have said before the way I read 406.8© is that the receptacle can't be installed within or directly over the bathtub.

I don't particularly like the location of the receptacle in the picture, but IMHO it is code compliant.

Chris


----------



## raider1 (Dec 8, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs

I think that I might just submit a code proposal for the 2014 NEC to clarify whether or not "stall" applys to bathtub.

This has been a very interesting thread.

Chris


----------



## georgia plans exam (Dec 8, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs

Ok. I have stayed away from this one because I really don't like the location of the receptacle either. However, IMHO there is no such thing as a bathtub stall.

E3903.10 is very specific as to the zone measurements regarding luminaires, if it was the code writers intent to keep the receptacles out of that zone, it should have been written to that effect.

Under current code language, I would have to pass the installation. I don't see a receptacle within or directly over a bathtub.

GPE


----------



## Mule (Dec 8, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs

GPE,

E3902.11 Bathtub and shower space.

Could you see it as a bathtub space?


----------



## georgia plans exam (Dec 8, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs

Mule,

Good question. I guess a bathtub space would be measured vertically from the inside of the tub rim. A shower space would be measured at the enclosing walls.

GPE


----------



## globe trekker (Dec 8, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs

gpe,

Why only "measured vertically from the inside of the tub rim "?    Won't the water [ or damp substance ]

potentially go outside the vertically measured dimensions of the tub rim only?    Ever see kids playing in

a tub even half full of water.    The water goes everywhere!    

Realistically,  vertical and horizontal dimensions need to be addressed, ...or as ' Mule ' has stated, the

BO could make that interpretation.

However, for discussion purposes, and clarity, I agree that some sort of dimensions should be placed

on the Section E3902.11.


----------



## globe trekker (Dec 8, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs

John,

What pharmaceuticals are you using...          The "Starship Enterprise... "   That's funny!  :lol:

.


----------



## raider1 (Dec 8, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs



> However, for discussion purposes, and clarity, I agree that some sort of dimensions should be placedon the Section E3902.11.


The code making panel seems to disagree with you, as evidenced by the rejection of the proposal that I quoted.



> Ever see kids playing ina tub even half full of water. The water goes everywhere!


Same could be said for the bathroom sink  

Chris


----------



## Pcinspector1 (Dec 8, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs

What else could you plug into the tub outlet? Why stop with just one outlet use a quadeplex outlet and put a big screen TV above the tub and set the DVD on the vanity. "Scotty I need more power, eye, eye captin".


----------



## globe trekker (Dec 8, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs

Chris stated:



> Same could be said for the bathroom sink


True enough, but not a lot of people bathe in the sink, for the most part.

So, ...in the future how are we going to remove that darned receptacle and to be able to reference code language to support us?

.


----------



## raider1 (Dec 8, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs



			
				globe trekker said:
			
		

> So, ...in the future how are we going to remove that darned receptacle and to be able to reference code language to support us?.


Make a code change proposal.

I really think I will make a proposal to clarify whether or not the term "stall" applies to the bathtub.

Chris


----------



## paul hardy (Dec 8, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs

As inspectors we are inspecting for saftey issues looking at the receptacle as shown how much safer is it moved six  inches to the left outside of the space suggested in my opinion no safer. Looking from a saftey point I see no reason to require the receptacle to be moved and splitting hairs over the wording of the code as saftey is the main reason for inspections.


----------



## Oldman (Dec 9, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs



			
				georgia plans exam said:
			
		

> Ok. I have stayed away from this one because I really don't like the location of the receptacle either. However, IMHO there is no such thing as a bathtub stall.E3903.10 is very specific as to the zone measurements regarding luminaires, if it was the code writers intent to keep the receptacles out of that zone, it should have been written to that effect.
> 
> Under current code language, I would have to pass the installation. I don't see a receptacle within or directly over a bathtub.
> 
> GPE


I would agree. It is my understanding that the receptacles are required to be GFI protected and GFI are suppose to trip when expose to a ground fault such as the radio falling into the tub. The luminaires are not required to be GFI protected, which is the reason for the zone measurements.

Oldman


----------



## Pcinspector1 (Dec 9, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs

Adding a wrinkle or two to this thread, (a little bathtub humor).     What if this outlet was on the house plans that you do a review on. Would you pass it?

How may outlets would you allow and where could they be placed?


----------



## georgia plans exam (Dec 9, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs

1.  I would pass it. Plan review uses the same code books as field inspection.

2. They could install as many receptacles as the wanted as long as they were not in prohibited locations.

GPE


----------



## Mule (Dec 9, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs

So I believe this is one of those agree to disagree things???? In my opinion, and some others, this type of installations isn't allowed, and others say it's okay!

All in the interpretation of the individual.


----------



## JBI (Dec 9, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs

Mule - Yes. Lacking better or more specific language, this is an 'agree to disagree' and 'local interpretation' issue.

Too many of them for my liking.   

What good is a universal code if it cannot be enforced universally?


----------



## Pcinspector1 (Dec 9, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs

I think the op should get a prize! what u think!


----------



## fatboy (Dec 9, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs

Awesome thread. My initial reaction was what we enforce locally, this would not be compliant.

We look at the tub space the same as shower space. After reading all the posts, I see that technically the code does not support that, although on page three I think John brings a good point to the table, the sentence structure can lead you either way.

I think it's a poor design, and that yes, it would be compliant if it were 6 inches away, but is that any more safe? Not really.

I would still reject it, let the BOA make a ruling on it.

Somebody going to submit a code change proposal to make this more clear?


----------



## raider1 (Dec 9, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs

I will make a code proposal for the 2014 code cycle to try to clarify this code section.

Chris


----------



## peach (Dec 13, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs

darn handy if I want to dry my hair before I get out of the tub.

I'll call it tub stall and fail it.


----------



## globe trekker (Dec 14, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs

Chris,

2014 seems like a very long time to wait on this one.   Can something like an ' errata ' proposal be submitted?   :?:

.


----------



## raider1 (Dec 14, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs



			
				globe trekker said:
			
		

> Chris,2014 seems like a very long time to wait on this one.   Can something like an ' errata ' proposal be submitted?   :?:
> 
> .


Nope, errata is just for printing errors and errors in text. An actual code change must be submitted to NFPA through the process.

The 2011 NEC code cycle is almost finished and no new proposals will be accepted.

Unfortunately the 2014 NEC is the earliest a new proposal could be accepted into the code.

Chris


----------



## vegas paul (Dec 14, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs

Propose it for the 2012 IRC.


----------



## raider1 (Dec 14, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs



			
				vegas paul said:
			
		

> Propose it for the 2012 IRC.


The electrical portion of the IRC is written by NFPA and based on the most current edition of the NEC.

I'm not sure that you could propose a change specific to just the IRC electrical section.

Chris


----------



## EPrice (Dec 14, 2009)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs



			
				raider1 said:
			
		

> globe trekker said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Nope, errata is just for printing errors and errors in text. An actual code change must be submitted to NFPA through the process.

The 2011 NEC code cycle is almost finished and no new proposals will be accepted.

Unfortunately the 2014 NEC is the earliest a new proposal could be accepted into the code.

Chris

Well, on the bright side, the purpose of the code proposal is to get clarification on what the code, as currently written, intends.  Committee action for the 2014 NEC should be completed by some time in 2012 or early 2013, no?  At that time we'll know what the committee view on the current language is, and we'll have a clearer view of what the intent is.


----------



## Mule (Jan 29, 2010)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs

Just do an ammendment to your code when you adopt it!

Can you guys tell I've been gone for a while and I am just now getting around to reading all of my old posts???  :roll:


----------



## FredK (Jan 29, 2010)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs

Saw this and while I was wandering in ICC land with no where to go had the same thing come up.  Like many of you first response was get it out of there and when actually reading the code it could be there.  So it's there.

One of the many items that really should be changed IMHO.


----------



## GHRoberts (Jan 30, 2010)

Re: Receptacles and Tubs



			
				Mule said:
			
		

> SECTION E3902 RECEPTACLESE3902.11 *Bathtub and shower space*.
> 
> A receptacle shall not be installed within or directly over a bathtub or shower stall.
> 
> ...


I would suggest that the difference is because the entire section covers the entire space while the receptacle section covers only a part of that space. Not an uncommon use of titles and sections.

To Code. But importantly there is enough difference of opinion between professionals that the section should be rewritten.


----------

