Hi Andy

My intention there was for Final circuits rather than distribution circuits but I do see your point about unneeded/unwanted disconnections.  I do wonder how this will change when schools start to have EVSE and Solar PV fitted?

I do wonder how this will change when schools start to have EVSE and Solar PV fitted?

It's already happening - the primary school near me had most of its south facing roofs covered in panels over last summer, and I doubt it was the first. What difference would it make though? - as they won't be downstream of other final circuits.

  - Andy.

The only reason that I can see for treating schools as a special location would be if either the risk of shock were increased, or the consequences of a risk materializing were graver; or a combination of the two.

I see no reason for more frequent inspection, but the interval is determined by the last inspector based upon the state of the installation, so there is no hard and fast rule.

P.S. I did all sorts of potentially dangerous things at school and if they had existed, RCBOs would have prevented none of them.

mapj1 said:

There may be parts of a School that have extra risks - cookery classes, various science labs, perhaps the gym, come to mind, but these I think are already handled by the relevant parts of the regs and the fact there is a more general H and S regime, as Graham points out.

I think to an extent many of these are covered in other codes of practice, such as BS 4163

Sergio has presented a perfectly reasonable case for additional control measures in a situation where he clearly perceives a heightened risk. So why not recommend 30mA RCD protection across the board.
After all, he can take a lead from BS7671 itself. Without any detailed evidence, risk or cost benefit analysis, the doyens mandated the use of AFDDs in certain situations and even had the temerity to “recommend” the things in all other installations! 

Why 30mA - that value was decided based mostly on the physiology of 95% of adults - wouldn't say 10mA be more sensible precaution for a user population that dominated by children, if you really think there's additional unmitigated risk there and weren't bothered about the cost?

As for the BS 7671 example, what's that old phrase of two wrongs not making a right?

   - Andy.

lyledunn said:

So why not recommend 30mA RCD protection across the board.

I can see that ... in one way ... but in the reality of a school setting,  if a 30 mA RCD operates within the electrical installation (e.g. distribution board or consumer unit), who will reset it, or more to the point, investigate for a potential fault, and reset it?

And for distribution circuits or circuits supplied from industrial distribution boards, not all the devices are intended for operation by 'ordinary persons'.

Come on Lyle! You can’t expect people to know that your tongue is in your cheek when you reply to posts! Get a grip and use one of those emoji thingies! 

lyledunn said:

You can’t expect people to know that your tongue is in your cheek when you reply to posts!

Many a true word is spoken in jest.

There is guidance such as this, but remember many schools are not under the control of the Local Authorities.

www.lbhf.gov.uk/.../school_electrical_safety.pdf