In regards to pedicure foot bath stations. We have a where we have twin socket outlets 800mm away from the foot bath itself. Now while the risk of splashes is minimal due to their positions at the back of the pedicure seat there is the likelihood of people plugging equipment in which could then be accidently dropped in the footbath itself. What are the regulations on this scenario as its very unclear?
Regards BS 7671, are these in the scope of Section 701 or Section 702? Probably not, in the same way that sinks aren't - doesn't fit the scope of either Section. The risks aren't the same as Section 701 (whole body wet, and potentially partly immersed)? I also thought about paddling pools and Section 702, but there is a statement 'Swimming pools within the scope of an equipment standard are outside the scope of these regulations.' and the general rules also state that assemblies containing electrical equipment are outside the scope of BS 7671 and should comply with appropriate standards, so I'd come down on the side of probably not 702 either.
So, we are looking at "general rules" regards splashing etc.
In terms of the risks associated with extension leads etc., those risks are present even with socket-outlets 2.5 m from the edge of Zone 1 in a Section 701 location, or if RCD protected in Zone 2 for Section 702 location, as you can always run a long extension lead. It seems to me that the risk assessment (and installation decisions) then need to me made in consultation with the organisation operating it, as required by CDM Regulations - the operational risk is that organisation's responsibility, and they need to be involved in the design risk assessment as well as the operational risk assessment.
Regards BS 7671, are these in the scope of Section 701 or Section 702? Probably not, in the same way that sinks aren't - doesn't fit the scope of either Section. The risks aren't the same as Section 701 (whole body wet, and potentially partly immersed)? I also thought about paddling pools and Section 702, but there is a statement 'Swimming pools within the scope of an equipment standard are outside the scope of these regulations.' and the general rules also state that assemblies containing electrical equipment are outside the scope of BS 7671 and should comply with appropriate standards, so I'd come down on the side of probably not 702 either.
So, we are looking at "general rules" regards splashing etc.
In terms of the risks associated with extension leads etc., those risks are present even with socket-outlets 2.5 m from the edge of Zone 1 in a Section 701 location, or if RCD protected in Zone 2 for Section 702 location, as you can always run a long extension lead. It seems to me that the risk assessment (and installation decisions) then need to me made in consultation with the organisation operating it, as required by CDM Regulations - the operational risk is that organisation's responsibility, and they need to be involved in the design risk assessment as well as the operational risk assessment.
Hi there,
In regards to potentially partly immersed, it’s likely that a customer’s feet will be immersed, it’s difficult to establish if it's 701 or 702.... grey area.
In regards to your comment about the risks being present at even 2.5m away I agree, but in this instance I think the risk is greater as the probability of an employee using this socket outlet for equipment that is then used on a client who has their feet fully immersed. It’s a difficult one as I don’t know the nature of the equipment they use (now or in the future) and although I would like to presume it is suitability designed for these applications I can’t make that assumption. The risk of electric shock is present as if the employee accidently drops the piece of equipment in the foot bath while a client has their feet fully immersed well….
Well just wondering if anyone else has had this predicament before and if so how they overcame it.
In regards to potentially partly immersed, it’s likely that a customer’s feet will be immersed, it’s difficult to establish if it's 701 or 702.... grey area.
In Section 701, the risk is that the whole body is usually wet, and there may be splashing water ... not the case here, only feet, or for the operative conducting any pedicure activities, their hands? So, perhaps like a sink?
Which leaves only 702, but it's not a fountain nor a swimming pool. It could be a paddling pool, but this type of product is not within scope for the reasons I described.
Hence, not really a grey area - it's "out of scope".
It’s a difficult one as I don’t know the nature of the equipment they use (now or in the future) and although I would like to presume it is suitability designed for these applications I can’t make that assumption.
But if you can't ascertain whether it meets a product standard, that has to be reported as a departure, or listed FI (depending on what you are doing)?
In any case, the risk assessment is, as I said, in the hands of the dutyholder. Surely this is covered adequately under EAWR and PUWER?
We're about to take you to the IET registration website. Don't worry though, you'll be sent straight back to the community after completing the registration.
Continue to the IET registration site
