You cannot arbitrarily set aside a specification from a consultant. If the internal wiring of the panel is not LS0H, then the panel can be legitimately rejected. 
The specification may be have been embedded in an over all, fire-engineered solution for the building.

lyledunn said:

You cannot arbitrarily set aside a specification from a consultant. If the internal wiring of the panel is not LS0H, then the panel can be legitimately rejected. 

Agreed.

JEH said:

the specs for the project calls for all internal cabling and wiring of the building to be LS0H. 

Did the project specifications go down to wiring within assemblies? Or assemblies specifically produced for the project (i.e. not commercial-off-the-shelf?

Perhaps worth a good look at the specifications again - possibly with a quantity surveyor or external consultant - to check?

There are total three separate headings/instances where specifications mention about LS0H cables:

1. Power Supply cables:

Power supply cables shall generally consist of copper conductor, XLPE insulation and LS0H extruded bedding and oversheath....

2. LS0H insulated with/without Sheath

General wiring cables for use in wiring systems and in conduit or trunking enclosures shall be in accordnace with BS6724 electrical cables.

3. Switch gear cables

Cables used for internal wiring of switch and control gear shall consist of a plain annealed copper conductor, LS0H insulatd in accordance with the requirements of BS 6231

Thank you, I guess i will sit down with the QS team on this to provide their input.

Thank you for the response and yes I totally agree with what you said. Trust me, the intention is not to set aside anything. Its just that specs are not written explicitly for this situation. At the end, if the consultants does agree with any of the counter logic, we will be replacing all the cabling.

3. Switch gear cables

Cables used for internal wiring of switch and control gear shall consist of a plain annealed copper conductor, LS0H insulatd in accordance with the requirements of BS 6231

That looks to cover this case to me - a box containing circuit breakers to feed sockets sounds like 'switchgear' to me.

   - Andy.

Hi Andy, 

I principally agree with you that it is definitely the closest one but to me switchgear is the equipment that controls or is used to switch the power supply. I would rather refer the case under discussion as a distribution panel and not a switch/control gear.

JEH said:

but to me switchgear is the equipment that controls or is used to switch the power supply

That may be the case, but a 'switchgear and controlgear assembly' is something else again.

So, if the specification just asks for LS0H in switchgear (in those words), then that's not the same as switchboards/distribution boards (the switchgear is what's inside the assembly) ... so yes, the QS ought to have a look at this and help work things out.

This is a case where standards for the products and assemblies may help to define what is what.

but to me switchgear is the equipment that controls or is used to switch the power supply.

To my mind "switchgear" would include distribution boards and the like - the BS 7671 definition includes "protection" as well as "switching" and its use in reg 421.1.201 "...  consumer units and similar switchgear assemblies.." would seem to align with that.

   - Andy.

I think you're missing the point here. It's the whole building that has to contain only LS0H cables within it. If you're choking to death on toxic fumes, it doesn't make any difference whether they came from distribution cables or control panel wiring.

regards, burn

Agree with that - the 'big picture' approach  is often lacking. Such silliness is  often seen in the form of LS0H wires/ cables, but inside a  PVC conduit or even PVC duct / dado rail.

The volume of the plastic in  the enclosure is many times that of the insulation on the wire and  just waiting there to emit more volume of choking fumes than the cable would ever have done.

Mike.