Hi guys,
Just wondering if anyone can help on a matter. I recently posted on here regarding non presence of existing supplementary bonding in a bathroom when working on an exisitng upstairs lighting circuit with no rcd, for example adding an extra light on the landing, and not touching the bathroom
I asked was it necessary to provide supplementary bonding even though I had not worked in the bathroom, as I was told by a work mate that as I worked on the circuit, I take responsibility for the whole circuit, the general opinion was no, as was mine but I have read in the regs (BYB) regarding
additions and alterations 132.16: no additions and alterations, temp or perm, shall be made to an existing install, unless it has been ascertained that the rating and condition or existing equipment, including that of the distributor, will be adequate for the altered circumstances. Furthermore, earthing and bonding arrangements, if necessary for the protective measure applied for the safety of the addition or alteration, shall be adequate.
Now as far as I am concerned you are only responsible for your own work, so lets say an extra light was added from an existing landing light, not needing an rcd as wiring was surface in the loft, and main bonding was adequate and present, your work would rely on the main earthing conductor, the main bonds and the cpc in the circuit you are adding from, you would inspect and test the addition and note on the cert no presence of supplementary bonding in bathroom and hand over certificate, as at the end it stated earthing and bonding to be adequate for the addition or alteration, and as I see it the extra light would not rely on the supplementary bonding, as that is concerned with the bathroom, that has not been touched.
But, I have read in the OSG Page 84 7.8 the same statement, but it says at the end:
where the addition or alteration is to an existing circuit, so far as reasonably practical, the installer/ designer takes responsibility for the circuit, not just the small addition/ alteration they are undertaking.
My question is from reading that in the OSG if that is the case would you need to install supplementary bonding in the bathroom to the circuit in question, if not on rcd and you was only adding a light in the landing, as it seems it is implying you do infact take responsibility for the whole circuit, (which is what I think my work mate was getting at). Which seems weird as when testing you state the addition/ alteration and test to that point that you have added.
Just wondering if anyone can clear this as I think I may have mis read/ misunderstood the regulation and obviously want to be carrying out additions and alterations in the correct way,as most of my work is new, and looking at carrying out a few additions and alterations in the future and want it to be right, and was always told you test and are responsible for what you do so now starting to doubt myself, and looking for others opinion.
Thanks for any help and sorry for the long post.
Regards
and happy new year to you all.
Just wondering if anyone can help on a matter. I recently posted on here regarding non presence of existing supplementary bonding in a bathroom when working on an exisitng upstairs lighting circuit with no rcd, for example adding an extra light on the landing, and not touching the bathroom
I asked was it necessary to provide supplementary bonding even though I had not worked in the bathroom, as I was told by a work mate that as I worked on the circuit, I take responsibility for the whole circuit, the general opinion was no, as was mine but I have read in the regs (BYB) regarding
additions and alterations 132.16: no additions and alterations, temp or perm, shall be made to an existing install, unless it has been ascertained that the rating and condition or existing equipment, including that of the distributor, will be adequate for the altered circumstances. Furthermore, earthing and bonding arrangements, if necessary for the protective measure applied for the safety of the addition or alteration, shall be adequate.
Now as far as I am concerned you are only responsible for your own work, so lets say an extra light was added from an existing landing light, not needing an rcd as wiring was surface in the loft, and main bonding was adequate and present, your work would rely on the main earthing conductor, the main bonds and the cpc in the circuit you are adding from, you would inspect and test the addition and note on the cert no presence of supplementary bonding in bathroom and hand over certificate, as at the end it stated earthing and bonding to be adequate for the addition or alteration, and as I see it the extra light would not rely on the supplementary bonding, as that is concerned with the bathroom, that has not been touched.
But, I have read in the OSG Page 84 7.8 the same statement, but it says at the end:
where the addition or alteration is to an existing circuit, so far as reasonably practical, the installer/ designer takes responsibility for the circuit, not just the small addition/ alteration they are undertaking.
My question is from reading that in the OSG if that is the case would you need to install supplementary bonding in the bathroom to the circuit in question, if not on rcd and you was only adding a light in the landing, as it seems it is implying you do infact take responsibility for the whole circuit, (which is what I think my work mate was getting at). Which seems weird as when testing you state the addition/ alteration and test to that point that you have added.
Just wondering if anyone can clear this as I think I may have mis read/ misunderstood the regulation and obviously want to be carrying out additions and alterations in the correct way,as most of my work is new, and looking at carrying out a few additions and alterations in the future and want it to be right, and was always told you test and are responsible for what you do so now starting to doubt myself, and looking for others opinion.
Thanks for any help and sorry for the long post.
Regards
and happy new year to you all.
