Does any one else think this SPD Regulation is a bit rushed in, for want of a better phrase ?
I've a few things that this subject has affected my already furrowed brow. I reckon insursance companies might start using (if not already) this sort of thing in there premium calculations at some point and yes, they are in use elsewhere on the planet and the intention is honourable etc...but..
On one matter (yes I know this is a bit simple and there are a raft of scenario question possible): assuming that there is no existing co-ordinated SPD setup on an installation and a job is to replace on of the sub-boards somewhere down the installation, can the job be certificated to 18th compliance without concern to a wholistic SPD co-ordinated system being in place e.g. at other boards and the origin ?
Is not fitting it in such circumstances (assume any risk calculation or other suggests one should be fitted), a non-compliance, or does changing the sub-board in such circumstances imply that consideration must be given to the whole installation ..even in this 'changing a sub-board' ficticious scenario !
Or is fitting one going to be better than nothing on such a sub-board and regardless of effectiveness of the SPD, therefore just get it in and all certified and be happy, or "I regret to inform you that your whole installation will need a co-ordinated SPD system fitting to allow the sub-board to be changed" :-)
Or perhaps I'm just not quite appreciative of it all just yet - most likely.
Regards
Habs
