Note 3 to 710.1 says that  Section 710 'can also be used also be used in veterinary clinics' ... although the values (of current, resistance etc.) are there to protect persons, so there's no guarantee of absolute direct transfer of requirements to all kinds of animals.

As with designating the location as Group 0, 1 or 2 in a hospital (which is done by relevant experts in consultation with clinicians) it would be recommended to discuss the particular requirements with the veterinary professionals responsible.

We have had a client that wished their veterinary practice to be designed as a medical location and to follow the HTMs.

Greetings, Graham. I value your input and expertise on this issue. I would like to hear yours and others opinions on this situation. A veterinary installation that was renovated in compliance with the chapters 11 to 61 of BS 7671, but without regard to the section 710 requirements for medical locations, has been functioning for five years without any problems. However, an EICR is required and exposes several non-conformities that do not satisfy the specific standards for group 1 or 2 locations of section 710. Would the installation be deemed unsatisfactory?

AMK said:

However, an EICR is required and exposes several non-conformities that do not satisfy the specific standards for group 1 or 2 locations of section 710. Would the installation be deemed unsatisfactory

That is a question for the veterinary professionals involved to determine whether the practice requires any equivalents to Group 0, 1 or 0 Medical Locations ... and if there are:

(a) Do they want you to consider it in the EICR; and

(b) Are there any requirements (depending on what animals are being treated, in what way) that need to be put in place over and above those in Section 710 of BS 7671 ?

This is not something that an electrician can, or should, be taking on themselves, because they do not have the veterinary medical expertise to make all the decisions, and know the issues.

If you are being asked for an opinion, without having the relevant expertise in other veterinary surgeries, you would have to decline the work.

710.1 says it all. "safety of patients and medical staff" - I personally would consider the safety of animals to be a lesser consideration than the safety of people, but the principles are the same. The cost-benefit equation is adjusted accordingly.

Both types of surgeon deal with broken skin (as well as delving around in various body cavities) and there are similar risks if life support equipment loses its supply.

Note 3, IMHO, makes Section 710 entirely optional in veterinary premises.

Just to add to the 'it depends' - some (rural) practices seem often specialise in "large" animals - in such cases some of the provisions of 705 might be more (or additionally) appropriate.

   - Andy.

AJJewsbury said:

705 might be more (or additionally) appropriate.

I would say, if anything "additionally" ... although in general the requirements of Section 710 would be more onerous and also have performance requirements for a bonding system that are directly related to touch-voltages in normal use.

Chris Pearson said:

and medical staff

That is an important consideration, but again the veterinary clinicians own the risk assessment on this ... they may, of course, need help from experts with appropriate electrical design and electrical safety expertise. Regulation 710.3 refers.

The problem is that things like safe shock current and duration are very Physiology dependent.

A vet specialising in primates or pigs may well read across what is needed from humans, but some one doing mostly cats or birds probably cannot. Disconnection times ought to scale with heartbeat period, so smaller animals like mice will go into fibrillation in a far shorter time than elephants or heavy horses. (I do not have a good reference for that.)

The choice has to be driven by the medical considerations  - BS7671 being written by electrical subject matter experts, therefore, quite correctly says nothing beyond "refer to the experts".

The whole zone groups and shock levels thing is really derived for humans on the operating table and assuming a  human heart and lungs, As soon as this assumption is invalid so is the rest.

By all means use the 710 material as a starting point but do not get hung up if it ends up being decided that something else, or even no special measures at all, makes more sense.

Mike.

mapj1 said:

so smaller animals like mice will go into fibrillation in a far shorter time than elephants or heavy horses

Strange thing is that fibrillation (of atrium or ventricle) can be fixed by a shock. Trust me, I have had it done!