BS 7671 Section 717 - Mobile or Transportable Units. Applicable to refrigeration trailers?

Does a refrigeration trailer that is utilised to transport food goods between the clients depots and is then connected into the sites electrical supply through a trailer hook up connection unit to facilitate running of the refrigeration equipment classified as "Mobile or Transportable Unit" and therefore warrant the requirements of BS 7671 Section 717?  

The trailer will maintain the connection to the sites power supply for a few hours to facilitate loading/unloading. 

The regulations now adds further detail for PME installations, where it can only be permitted if one of the below applies: 

  

Would part (ii) be a satisfactory measure in the above scenario for a PME supply? 

  • The DTI Guidance on the ESQCR

    So guidance suggesting special consideration, rather than legislative prohibition?

    Containers and other mobile/transportable units are effectively treated as "caravans"

    Other than 717 does permit PME to be used in some circumstances - one of which is having a suitable human on site who presumably is able to recognise a broken PEN situation and do something sensible about it  (presumably not plugging the units in or pulling the plug on any units on site if it happens after the units are installed). It could be argued that an open-PEN device simply automates that process (possibly with better reliability).

      - Andy.

  • So guidance suggesting special consideration, rather than legislative prohibition

    Only for things that are not "caravan" or "boat".

    Other than 717 does permit PME to be used in some circumstances - one of which is having a suitable human on site who presumably is able to recognise a broken PEN situation and do something sensible about it  (presumably not plugging the units in or pulling the plug on any units on site if it happens after the units are installed).

    Agreed ... but that does not apply to 722.

    The issue being how that particular exception is worded.

    It could be argued that an open-PEN device simply automates that process (possibly with better reliability).

    Not if auto-reset is included.

    If the OPDD operates more frequently than real open-PEN events, that would be problematic (in fact, it already is, without considering the use of the installation supplied by it).

    When the installation supplied is a refrigerated unit, or some medical applications, like the local MRI etc units in frequent use, this is a huge issue.

    I guess, though that some of the points made assume that these issues have not already been considered ? Just because a standard is economic in its requirements, does not mean there has been an absence of robust discussion.