Within BS7671 the regulation states that all installations "certified" after 27th September 2022 must comply with BS7671 AMD 2.

Where does it say that exactly? So far I've only spotted the introduction to AMD 2 that says  'may be implemented immediately' and that the previous edition 'will be withdrawn on 27th September 2022'.  Previous editions put a time limit on the design (e.g. the 2018 edition said "Installations designed after 31st December 2018 are to comply with BS 7671:2018") (with the rare exception on AMD 1 which based it on erection, but those changes were limited to EVSE installations).

The design limit was always argued over - as designs for very large projects can easily span two (or more) editions of BS 7671 - so I thought the intention these days was leave it down to a matter of contract - the customer can have the latest bells and whistles if they want, but it'll need paying for.

    - Andy.

It is quite common for long term building programmes to straddle changes in the regs. the classic is probably Heathrow terminal 5, which was designed and built to a set of rules that had changed at least  twice by it was all finished.

What happens  to accommodate this depends on contractual detail, rather than anything the set by IET.

To clarify, if the contract was specific, 'installation to BS7671 : 2018' or whatever,  it is a lot clearer that 'to the latest version' which results in a perambulatory (moving goal posts) requirement that can never be confidently quoted for, or ' to BS7671' without clarification of a date. The usual interpretation is that what will be delivered will meet the requirements as they stood at the time it was agreed but there is room for argument it could be when the job started, especially if no design work was actually done for a long time after contract award.

In any case, the final certification is then the previous version, and this is recorded in the notes - designed and tested to (earlier version) as set by contract dated xyz.. or design agreed date nnn.

Any new contracts, changes etc  of course are to the current as that is the only one that can sensibly be quoted for.

However, unless the installation is quite unusual there will not be that many differences, and if need be they can be singled out.

Mike..

mapj1 said:

It is quite common for long term building programmes to straddle changes in the regs. the classic is probably Heathrow terminal 5, which was designed and built to a set of rules that had changed at least  twice by it was all finished.

Precisely, and Terminal 5 is a great example, but I've worked on a number of large projects where they span a number of Amendments and sometimes versions of the standard.

mapj1 said:

The usual interpretation is that what will be delivered will meet the requirements as they stood at the time it was agreed but there is room for argument it could be when the job started, especially if no design work was actually done for a long time after contract award.

Yes, usually standards and legislation are taken to be those in force on an agreed date.

Changes to standards and legislation are subject to the Contract Variations procedures, and these procedures are accounted for in the standard forms of contract often used in large construction programmes.

As AJJewsbury  points out, the wording in the introduction about implementation of BS 7671:2018+A2:2022 and the withdrawal of BS 7671:2018+A1:2020 has changed - you never know, it might be because of the above and uncertainties that might otherwise arise with the former wording.

Martin Desbrulais said:

We are currently completing design from Stage 4 to 5. The project has been on going since 2020 with a completion date of September 2024. There was a design Freeze in April 2022 which was signed off by fire engineer and building control.

I would recommend you have a look at the Contract, and General and Particular Specifications, to determine the versions of standards to use, and also the procedure for Variations. It's worth checking whether anything in BS 7671:2018+A2:2022 has any changes that might change risk assessments (CDM or otherwise) for the project.

Would BS7671 be relevant to such a commercial project ? 

Jaymack said:

Would BS7671 be relevant to such a commercial project ? 

Absolutely, in no small way. LV and ELV installations not just within the buildings, but also outdoors, and non-machinery control and monitoring applications too. Even extends to LV distribution to FEGP (fixed electrical ground power used to power aircraft when on stand), which is supplied at 942 V AC and just within the scope of LV.

In my opinion the answer is simple.  Yes it needs to comply to BS7671 AMD 2 if completion date of September 2024 is met.

Why would you want the the install to meet the old regulations?  Future EICR would give a C3 code and recommend improvemnts to meet the current standard.  The point of BS7671 is the minimum standard, you can always go above and beyond the intent of BS7671

However the question ramains, who will pay for it?  The customer/The installer/The Designer?

Why would you want the the install to meet the old regulations? 

Because otherwise a large long running job will never finish, as you will be going back to those parts of the site that were 'finished' some years before the regs changed and are now out of date to update them. 

Now the only person who has any money that is their own is the customer, so they will pay, even if via the installers and designers, and the customer will want to pay for whatever they agreed to. Usually an installation to the regs as they stood they day the contract was signed but maybe not.

The saving grace  is that although the regs change, it is incremental ,  and there is rarely some major upheaval so a great many installations to last seasons rules meet current requirements as well.

(We are not going to suddenly adopt American wiring codes for example. Well I hope not... )

Mike.

I understand the logic.  At some point they must draw a line and say

Designed to 18th editon AM1 and installed 18th editon AM1 and tested to 18th editon AM1

They should also do a project and design review at the end and say the what regs and rules have changed since the initial design.

As an example AFDD in BS7671 18th in 2018 were a recommendation

then

BS 7671:2018+A2:2022 Regulation 421.1.7 now requires arc fault detection devices (AFDDs) conforming to BS EN 62606 to be provided for single-phase AC circuits supplying socket-outlets with a rating not exceeding 32 A in the following installations:

There are also other cases.  People did not understand the rules about SPD, a year later it was made clear that you must now fit an SPD in a CU/DB unless a risk assement has been carried out.

I do however see several flaws to this

Brand new install is out of date on day of hand over

in project summation you will need to recommend to the customer the following upgrades

Sergio Fernandez said:

In my opinion the answer is simple.  Yes it needs to comply to BS7671 AMD 2 if completion date of September 2024 is met.

In many cases, only a court or arbitration could decide that, if disputed between a client and contractor. This is supported by the main standard forms of construction contracts. I believe  there are legal precedents.

With respect to products, this is a little more tricky because other legislation may apply - so, for example, the UK government maintains a list of Designated Standards (in the same manner as applicable Harmonized Standards are published in the Official Journal of the EU), which (if the relevant ones to a product are used) are presumed to demonstrate conformity to the relevant legislation.

Sergio Fernandez said:

Brand new install is out of date on day of hand over

in project summation you will need to recommend to the customer the following upgrades

This is what variation clauses are about in standard forms of construction contract. However, the client needs to agree those variations. Sometimes, they may not ...

What's important, is that BS 7671 does contain a statement that says installations to earlier versions of the standard may not comply with the latest version, but that doesn't mean they are unsafe for continued use.

It's important that initial verification is carried out to the same version of the standard that the design and erection was performed to.

My experience includes working on very long contracts, where not only standards, but legislation, whole technology approaches, change over the lifetime of the contract ... it's a very difficult area and needs to be dealt with sensibly. There can certainly not be a "defining rule" such as "standards on date of handover" because you don't have a crystal ball when you start the job 10 or 15 years earlier !