IET logo
 
IET
Decrease font size
Increase font size
Topic Title: Omission of rcds
Topic Summary: office lighting
Created On: 31 January 2013 08:50 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.
 31 January 2013 08:50 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



tillie

Posts: 795
Joined: 03 May 2006

Hi , with all the discussions regarding the omission of rcds I am starting to get a little worried.

I do a lot of office refurbs and because most if not all these offices have a main duty holder I have always assumed that they will be either skilled or instructed.

I always install the lighting circuits whether new or existing cabling without rcd protection.

Now I am seriously doubting if this is compliant.

Should I be getting written confirmation of them( duty holder) not to install rcds.

On my fist initial assessment last year I actually pointed out to my assessor the paragraph in the OSG relating to the omission of rcds and what was required.

He was unaware of this paragraph as well as the change in rules about labelling equipment up with 400v stickers between accessible parts on different phases.

I have just assumed that because it is an office then I can do away with the rcds.

I have a couple of nice little jobs ready for this years assessment but I am now worried that I omitted rcd protection for some lighting circuits be they new or extensions of the old wiring where the wiring is less than 50mm deep.

Should I be worried ?

Regards
 31 January 2013 08:54 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for slittle.
slittle

Posts: 3582
Joined: 22 November 2007

I wouldn't be installing RCD protection on office lighting in a building of normal construction.

Every place of work has a duty holder in my book


Stu
 31 January 2013 09:09 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



tillie

Posts: 795
Joined: 03 May 2006

Hi , Stu that has always been my way of thinking but after reading this weeks posts about omitting rcds then it seems essential that I get the duty holders written confirmation which I have not.

Regards
 31 January 2013 09:55 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



weirdbeard

Posts: 1612
Joined: 26 September 2011

Originally posted by: tillie

Hi , Stu that has always been my way of thinking but after reading this weeks posts about omitting rcds then it seems essential that I get the duty holders written confirmation which I have not.



Regards


Hi Tillie, I think that might be more appropriate where additional rcdprotection is concerned with socket outlets rather than the cables themselves as there may be less control over what gets plugged in. In an office environment its much less likely that there will be uncontrolled drilling and nailing to walls or similar, but more chance that someone may plug in something that may be faulty.
Statistics

See Also:



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