IET logo
 
IET
Decrease font size
Increase font size
Topic Title: Absence of RCD in commercial premises
Topic Summary: Establishing skilled/instructed persons
Created On: 04 November 2010 11:57 PM
Status: Post and Reply
Linear : Threading : Single : Branch
Search Topic Search Topic
Topic Tools Topic Tools
View similar topics View similar topics
View topic in raw text format. Print this topic.
 04 November 2010 11:57 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



12216

Posts: 45
Joined: 22 August 2010

evening all
i have been asked to carry out a PIR in a small commercial premises where the socket outlets have no rcd protection,
who is responsable in establishing who is an instructed/skilled person. is it the tester or is it acceptable that if you are informed that there is a skilled person within the premises then there is no need to make any further enquiries.
I have read the defs in part 2 and also chapter 7 in I.T & C in the NIC publication but does not say who is responsable in establishing who the instructed skilled person.

My concern is when i advised that in my opinion the circuit should be RCD protected and explained the regs to them they promptly replied that they have a guy on site who is skilled person and therefore are exempt from the presence of RCD protection. if it turned out he was not skilled and there was an incident who to blame.

opinions please

many thanks

Martin
 05 November 2010 12:38 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for rocknroll.
rocknroll

Posts: 8887
Joined: 03 October 2005

Its not your concern who is a skilled and instructed person as all you have been required to do is a PIR on the installation not a PIR on the management structure, the company have to base their opinion on this premise that the complexity of the work activity shall be assessed before the activity starts so that the appropriate choice of skilled, instructed, or ordinary person is made for carrying ot the work activity, simple risk assessment.

You can mention that there is no RCD protection on your report but you cant start questioning the skills of their employees otherwise they might have doubts about you! The electrical installation and the safety is their responsibility and liability never transfers to a person inspecting, in the same token you must also observe the rules for safety.

regards

-------------------------
"Take nothing but a picture,
leave nothing but footprints!"
-------------------------
"Oh! The drama of it all."
-------------------------
"You can throw all the philosophy you like at the problem, but at the end of the day it's just basic electrical theory!"
-------------------------

Edited: 05 November 2010 at 12:51 AM by rocknroll
 05 November 2010 09:07 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for ebee.
ebee

Posts: 5780
Joined: 02 December 2004

Merthinks both a good question and a good answer.

The OP is obviously concerned and caring as to question the fact that a skilled or instructed person may indeed be present and therefore the regulation be satisfied and feels that a little checking is required rather than just taking someones word for it. This shows a proper sense of duty.

The answer of course means you can only do whats reasonable without going OTT.

Perhaps some mention somewhere of NO RCD and the Skilled/instructed requirement would satisy all, bit difficulkt with a simple 1 or 2 or 3 or 4 report though.

-------------------------
Regards,
Ebee (M I S P N)

Knotted cables cause Lumpy Lektrik
 05 November 2010 10:05 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for spinlondon.
spinlondon

Posts: 4517
Joined: 10 December 2004

The reason BS7671 allows an exception to the Regulation requiring amongst other's, of RCD protection for socket-outlets.
Is quite simply because of EAWR.
It is a statutory requirement that any employee be either skilled or instructed.
Here is the relevant Regulation:
"16. No person shall be engaged in any work activity where technical knowledge or experience is necessary to prevent danger or, where appropriate, injury, unless he possesses such knowledge or experience, or is under such degree of supervision as may be appropriate having regard to the nature of the work."
If it is part of an employee's duties to use a socket-outlet. then they must be either skilled or instructed.
Certain establishments, such as hotels or internet cafes, would require RCD protection on socket-outlets that could be used by guests and patrons.
The exception however does not apply to socket-outlets that are used for mobile equipement outdoors.
 05 November 2010 07:47 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



12216

Posts: 45
Joined: 22 August 2010

many thanks all for your replies.

regards
Martin
 05 November 2010 10:59 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



John Peckham

Posts: 7575
Joined: 23 April 2005

The answer to your question can be found here on the ESC web site

http://www.esc.org.uk/forum/forum_wn_thread.html

-------------------------
John Peckham

http://www.astutetechnicalservices.co.uk/
 06 November 2010 07:42 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for kj scott.
kj scott

Posts: 2144
Joined: 02 April 2006

Originally posted by: spinlondon

The reason BS7671 allows an exception to the Regulation requiring amongst other's, of RCD protection for socket-outlets.

Is quite simply because of EAWR.

It is a statutory requirement that any employee be either skilled or instructed.

Here is the relevant Regulation:

"16. No person shall be engaged in any work activity where technical knowledge or experience is necessary to prevent danger or, where appropriate, injury, unless he possesses such knowledge or experience, or is under such degree of supervision as may be appropriate having regard to the nature of the work."

If it is part of an employee's duties to use a socket-outlet. then they must be either skilled or instructed.

Certain establishments, such as hotels or internet cafes, would require RCD protection on socket-outlets that could be used by guests and patrons.

The exception however does not apply to socket-outlets that are used for mobile equipement outdoors.


ant; EAWR does not require a person to be skilled or instructed, you will note it also states under such degree of supervision.
If legislation required only skilled or instructed persons, eventually we would have to stop work all together.

-------------------------
http://www.niceic.biz
 07 November 2010 10:33 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for spinlondon.
spinlondon

Posts: 4517
Joined: 10 December 2004

A bit confused kj, is your post just gobbledygook?
You state that EAWR does not require a person to be skilled or instructed.
The definition of a skilled person in BS7671 is:
"A person with technical knowledge or sufficient experience to enable him/her to avoid dangers which electricity may create."
The definition of an instructed person, also in BS7671 is:
"A person adequately advised or supervised by skilled persons to enable him/her to avoid dangers which electricity may create."
To my mind the definitions of both skilled and instructed persons, fit quite nicely with the requirements of EAWR Regulation 16.
You then go on to mention that Regulation 16 also states under such degre of supervision. Is that as in instructed?
Your final statement, shows either complete ignorance, or total disregard for the obvious.
Is EAWR legislation?
Does EAWR require persons conducting work involving electricity to meet the definitions in BS7671 of skilled and instructed?
Have we all stopped work all together?
Statistics

See Also:



FuseTalk Standard Edition v3.2 - © 1999-2014 FuseTalk Inc. All rights reserved.