Installation of a shower circuit

[vibrobullit407]

Our company has just undergone an NICEIC inspection and was just wondering what peoples thoughts are with what was pointed out to me.

The inspector was shown a shower circuit installation on a split load board (1 RCD), with the shower on the RCD side. The bathroom lighting however was not on the RCD side and was protected via a MCB. The lighting was an existing installation and has not been touched. I was then advised that since a new circuit i.e the shower circuit, has been introduced into the bathroom then the MCB for the lights should have been upgraded to an RCBO. I was under the impression that the responsibility was for the shower circuit to be installed up to the 17th edition and that the lighting circuit was not really our responsibility as it was existing.

My thinking is that what would happen if I had to change the MCB to a RCBO and found a fault, i.e a borrowed neutral. Surely I could not turn round to the customer and demand that I put that right as well! Or should I have tested all the circuits in the bathroom before hand and charged for this as well? I'm still under the impression that since the only circuit that was installed is the shower circuit and is installed up to 17th edition then that is where my obligations end!

Any comments?

 

[PrenticeBoyofDerry]

Inspector is is talking biliorks!
Why would you have to alter circuit you have not worked on?

 

[vibrobullit407]

Inspector is is talking biliorks!
Why would you have to alter circuit you have not worked on?

That's also my understanding. Just don't know what he is getting at! Seems a bit OTT to me.

 

[Click4]

could it have anything to do with the fact that bathrooms and kitchens under part p are considered special areas?

so the inspector is considering that if anything is done in a bathroom or kitchen because they are special areas they should be brought up to standard for safety reasons?

 

[PrenticeBoyofDerry]

No inspector talking biliorks!
So if you say installed a hob extractor in the kitchen, by installing a new circuit. Cables buried in wall less than 50mm, so 30mA RCBO is fitted.
You then need to upgrade all socket outlets, lighting circuit, oven, hob, all appliance circuit etc.... Me not think so!

 

[JohnW2]

...so the inspector is considering that if anything is done in a bathroom or kitchen because they are special areas they should be brought up to standard for safety reasons?

That is very probably what he was thinking - but he is wrong in terms of what is required by regulations.

Kind Regards, John

 

[Spark123]

Did you install supplementary bonding?

 

[EFLImpudence]

Inspector is is talking biliorks!
Why would you have to alter circuit you have not worked on?

I agree, according to the regulations.

However, the assessor may be 'correct' because NICEIC make up their own rules, don't they?


The shower will require supplementary bonding to the other parts (if the other parts require it) in the bathroom even though it is protected by an RCD.

 

[securespark]

I'm with my numerical colleague -

Did you install supplementary bonding?

 

[RMS]

Well clearly the kitchen is not a special location from the prospective of BS7671.

I'm thinking on the same lines as Spark123. Unless you installed supplementary equipotential bonding where required. (Including the new shower circuit). You would need to provide RCD protection to the lighting circuit or the part of the circuit that is present in the bathroom.

 

[JohnW2]

I'm thinking on the same lines as Spark123. Unless you installed supplementary equipotential bonding where required. (Including the new shower circuit). You would need to provide RCD protection to the lighting circuit or the part of the circuit that is present in the bathroom.

Indeed - but I would have said that, if supplementary bonding were required (i.e. there was something to bond) and was not present, then the inspector should have commented on that, rather than suggesting that the lighting circuit be upgraded to RCD protection. If you think about it, the default position of BS7671 is that supplemenatry bonding is required in bathrooms. If certain conditions (one of which is RCD protection) are satisfied, then that requirement is waived, but there is no compulsion to upgrade the lighting circuit so as to remove the need for supplementary bonding (rather than installing the bonding).

Kind Regards, John

 

[RMS]

Completely agree John.

Clearly supplementary bonding could have been installed where necessary and RCD protection for the light would not have been required.

Vibro, did the inspector suggest this as an option?

 

[vibrobullit407]

I now see where my mistake was!

Answer to the questions above; I did not install supplementary bonding to the shower circuit. I did not realise that I had to since the circuit I was installing was RCD protected. This is a misunderstanding on my part and I hold my hands up! I have arranged to go back to install an rcbo to the lighting circuit to rectify my mistake!

 

[RMS]

Are you a registered Qualifying Supervisor for your company?

 

[vibrobullit407]

Are you a registered Qualifying Supervisor for your company?

No, I had a discussion with my QS and he did not know that what I had done was a breach either. He suggested that we go back to fit the rcbo as per the NIC and I arranged it with the customer. i.e appointment date and informed them that it was at no charge!