Extending Cooker Feed - Notifiable?

[JohnW2]

Installing a CU in the garage may not be notifiable - depends how large the garage is, what it's made of, etc.

I'm a bit confused. As you recently pointed out, even for those outbuildings for which most parts of the Building Regs don't apply, Part P (and hence, presumably, the relevant parts of Schedule 4) do still apply. That being the case, what part of Schedule 4 could allow one to install a CU, anywhere, without notification?

In any event, as I've just written to scousepark, if one does install a garage CU, then one is likely to have discrimination problems unless one upgrades the cable all the way back to the CU to something larger than the present 4mm² (hence allowing a house MCB >32A) - which probably ought to be notifiable. I realise that some people would claim that the existing 4mm² cable was damaged, and therefore 'replace' it with, say, 10mm² (we;re usually agreed that 'replacement' doesn't necessarily have to be 'like-for-like'!), and then extend that 10mm² 'existing circuit', but that's stretching things a bit!

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

I'm a bit confused. As you recently pointed out, even for those outbuildings for which most parts of the Building Regs don't apply, Part P (and hence, presumably, the relevant parts of Schedule 4) do still apply.

No - there's no connection between Schedule 4 and Part P.

Schedule 4 relates to Regulation 12.

I'm a little surprised that, like so many others, you seem to be rather muddling up the concepts of compliance (with Part P of the Building Regs) and notification (under the Building Regs).

Indeed.

 

[JohnW2]

I'm a bit confused. As you recently pointed out, even for those outbuildings for which most parts of the Building Regs don't apply, Part P (and hence, presumably, the relevant parts of Schedule 4) do still apply.

No - there's no connection between Schedule 4 and Part P. Schedule 4 relates to Regulation 12.

Goodness, I didn't expect you to come back with that! As I implied, my assumption was that, given that Reg 9 imposes Part P in relation to buildings which are exempt from most of the Building Regs, the implication was that Reg 12 (requirement to notify, as modified by Schedule 4) would also apply to electrical work in such buildings - but I can understand you having interpreted it differently.

Are you therefore saying you believe that aboslutely any electrical work can be undertaken without notification in a building exempt from most Building Regs (but not Part P) under Reg 9 ? If so, do you share my view that this makes very little sense?

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

I can understand you having interpreted it differently.

Interpreted it differently?

There is nothing to "interpret".

Regulation 9 is perfectly clear and unambiguous.

The regulations, save for the exceptions listed, do not apply to certain classes of buildings. None of them, save the exceptions.

The exceptions include some of Reg 21, some of Part G and Part P, but not Part 12.

Are you therefore saying you believe that aboslutely any electrical work can be undertaken without notification in a building exempt from most Building Regs (but not Part P) under Reg 9 ?

That's what it says, unless you can find anything in Regulation 9 which retains Regulation 12.

If so, do you share my view that this makes very little sense?

Yes.

 

[JohnW2]

I can understand you having interpreted it differently.

Interpreted it differently? There is nothing to "interpret". Regulation 9 is perfectly clear and unambiguous. ...

Yes, the words of Reg 9 are pretty clear but, particularly in view of the fact that you go on to agree with me that it makes no sense, wonder if their intention was that by excepting Part P from the exemptions in Reg 9, they thought that they were also retaining the notification requirements which normally went with work under Part P (except where exempted by Schedule 4).

Are you therefore saying you believe that aboslutely any electrical work can be undertaken without notification in a building exempt from most Building Regs (but not Part P) under Reg 9 ?

That's what it says, unless you can find anything in Regulation 9 which retains Regulation 12.

As above, I agree that the words don't say that, but I do wonder about the intent ....

If so, do you share my view that this makes very little sense?

Yes.

That's the point. In fact, it does not merely 'make very little sense', but it sounds quite crazy to me! Hence my suspicions about 'intent'. However, I guess I have to agree that, with the law worded as it is, one could do absolutely anything electrical in one of these exempt buildings without the need to notify!

Kind Regards, John

 

[dhutch]

I have read the thread and it sort of meanders. The original question asked if an outside socket is notifiable. The next option discussed was to install circuits in the detached garage. The remainder of the thread seems aimed at getting away from notification.
An electrician will design a circuit based on the expected load. I am not
psychic, so I don't know what the OP is feeding.

Well yes i guess it does, I'm getting a feel of what my options are, what I can reasonably do without notification, to then be in a position to discus what I want in detail go about having it done.

In fact, he essentially has two spare ways
in the CU, since the cooker circuit we're talking about is 'spare'.

Ive got about five! Full 17th Ed Spec consumer unit, put in prior to
me buying the house, with only one ring main, two lighting circuits, the
cooker feed, and a radial to the conservatory.

Installing a CU in the garage may not be notifiable - depends how large the garage is, what it's made of, etc.

FWIW, its about 5m square, steel clad steel frame.

dhutch seems to have got bored with his pidldling littel garage and is now wiring up the lights in a boat shed. See post entitled Lighting a large fabrication shed.

As said in the other thread, im not wiring anything up, im discussing options, on behalf of myself an others, while at work.


It also appears when looking at it this evening the cooker feed is in fact not 4mm csa but looks instead to be more like 6mm, although still on a 32amp mcb.


Daniel

 

[JohnW2]

Installing a CU in the garage may not be notifiable - depends how large the garage is, what it's made of, etc.

FWIW, its about 5m square, steel clad steel frame.

It's sufficiently marginal that you neeed to me more precise than 'about 5m square'. The exemption to which BAS was referring to relates to a maximum of 30m². 5m square would be OK at 25m², but 5.5m square would be over the top, at 30.25m². If you are within the limit then, given that it's of non-combustible construction (and assuming it contains no sleeping accommodation!) then, crazy though it seems, there seems no escaping BAS's view that the 'word of the law' appears to say that you could do absolutely anything electrical (including installing a mini CU) within it without notification!

It also appears when looking at it this evening the cooker feed is in fact not 4mm csa but looks instead to be more like 6mm, although still on a 32amp mcb.

If that's true, and if you extended it with 6mm² SWA, you would probably be just about able to use a 45A MCB in the house, which would give you reasonable chance of discrimination from a 16A,or even 20A sockets circuit MCB in the garage - if you chose to go down the 'CU in garage' approach. However,as you will have seen from our earlier exchanges, and mine with scousespark, that is not necessarily the only option, even if it is the 'preferred' one.

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Yes, the words of Reg 9 are pretty clear but, particularly in view of the fact that you go on to agree with me that it makes no sense, wonder if their intention was that by excepting Part P from the exemptions in Reg 9, they thought that they were also retaining the notification requirements which normally went with work under Part P (except where exempted by Schedule 4).

I doubt that very much, because Regulation 9 pre-dates Part P and making electrical work a controlled service.

Regulation 9 already put certain classes of buildings outside the scope of the Building Regulations.

As they took the trouble to amend it to not exempt those classes from Part P then they would surely have also have amended it to not exempt them from notification too, had that been their intent.

As above, I agree that the words don't say that, but I do wonder about the intent ....

And they also amended Regulation 9 to not exempt those classes of buildings from Regulation 21, which not only gave them another opportunity to make electrical work notifiable, it shows that they understand full well the need, in some cases, to remove the exemption from numbered regulations as well as requirements in Schedule 1.

So no - whatever their reasons were I am in no doubt about their intentions.

 

[JohnW2]

So no - whatever their reasons were I am in no doubt about their intentions.

I can't really fault your logic, based on what's written in the SI, but it's such a bizarre thing to have been written that I can't help but feel that I ought to be able to (fault your logic)!

Kind Regards, John

 

[dhutch]

It's sufficiently marginal that you neeed to me more precise than 'about 5m square'. The exemption to which BAS was referring to relates to a maximum of 30m². 5m square would be OK at 25m², but 5.5m square would be over the top, at 30.25m². If you are within the limit then... ...it seems.. ...the 'word of the law' appears to say that you could do absolutely anything electrical (including installing a mini CU) within it without notification!

Presumably thats external (rather than internal) dims? I have measured more exactly in the past, but didnt realise it would be on the margin. What would happen if it was then extended after the installation was put in... the mind boggles!

If that's true, and if you extended it with 6mm² SWA, you would probably be just about able to use a 45A MCB in the house, which would give you reasonable chance of discrimination from a 16A,or even 20A sockets circuit MCB in the garage - if you chose to go down the 'CU in garage' approach. However,as you will have seen from our earlier exchanges, and mine with scousespark, that is not necessarily the only option, even if it is the 'preferred' one.

Sounds fair. Obviously before I start uprating the MCB I need to determin exactly what it is, currently ive just taken the coverplate off in the kitchen and visually inspected it to be considerably larger than 4mm, like 50% bigger, ish. But im hoping I can somewhere see enough of the outer sleave at some point to be able to see whats its marked as.


Daniel

 

[JohnW2]

Presumably thats external (rather than internal) dims? I have measured more exactly in the past, but didnt realise it would be on the margin.

I don't think so - the 30m² limit is for floor area - which I would have thought meant internal - so you may well be OK.

What would happen if it was then extended after the installation was put in... the mind boggles!

Electrics may then be the least of your worries, becasue the entire building might then loose its exemption from the Building Regs.

Sounds fair. Obviously before I start uprating the MCB I need to determin exactly what it is, currently ive just taken the coverplate off in the kitchen and visually inspected it to be considerably larger than 4mm, like 50% bigger, ish. But im hoping I can somewhere see enough of the outer sleave at some point to be able to see whats its marked as.

I obviously don't quite know what you mean by 50%-ish. Per the forum wiki, the approximate overall external dimensions are 11.9x6.25 mm for 4mm², 13.5x7mm for 6mm² and 17.1x10mm for 10mm².

Kind Regards, John

 

[dhutch]

Electrics may then be the least of your worries, becasue the entire building might then loose its exemption from the Building Regs.

But as said, if its fairly borderline, stick a 2m lean to on the back an your over! But point taken.

I obviously don't quite know what you mean by 50%-ish.

Just that there appears to be around 50% more csa than a peice of 'known 4mm^2' I was compairing it to.

Obviously it needs measuring and or reading off the size if they is enough exposed to confirm exactly what is it but it does appear to be 6mm^2.


Daniel

 

[JohnW2]

I obviously don't quite know what you mean by 50%-ish.

Just that there appears to be around 50% more csa than a peice of 'known 4mm^2' I was compairing it to. Obviously it needs measuring and or reading off the size if they is enough exposed to confirm exactly what is it but it does appear to be 6mm^2.

Fair enough. I wasn't sure whether you meant it looked about 50% bigger in terms of CSA or linear dimensions. Had you meant the latter, it could well have been 10mm². Just one warning. If your cooker cable is fairly old and your 'known 4mm²' fairly new, then (if you're anything like me!) you might possibly be visually overestimating the CSA of the cooker cable - modern 4mm² looks surprising small to me!

Kind Regards, John

 

[dhutch]

If your cooker cable is fairly old and your 'known 4mm²' fairly new, then (if you're anything like me!) you might possibly be visually overestimating the CSA of the cooker cable - modern 4mm² looks surprising small to me!

Ok, if it comes to it, I can run a digi vernier over the individual strands and do a sum on csa!

 

[JohnW2]

Ok, if it comes to it, I can run a digi vernier over the individual strands and do a sum on csa!

Indeed so. 4mm², 6mm² & 10mm² should all have 7-stranded L & N conductors. The diameter of individual strands should be 0.85mm, 1.04mm and 1.35mm respectively.

Kind Regards, John