Afternoon All,

Agree with what lyledunn says and also Graham, I have come across countless properties, industrial, commercial where 99.9% of electricians and electrical contractors will only carry out an EIC or EICR from the distribution boards to the final accessory or isolator. Doing "PAT" testing as we all know doesnt and didnt help as many including Duty Holders felt that only applied to things with a plug top on. The In Service C.O.P certainly in my mind clears that up. So from the isolator to a control panel, the internal wiring and everything from that panel needs inspected and tested by someone at a regular interval. Obviously manufacturers guidance takes preference,  but also is that HVAC or MCC classed under the machinery directive or A.N.Other standard in some ways doesnt matter, its electrical with conductors and electrical parts.

My understanding and reading of Reg 4(2) of the EAWR 1989 indicates that " As may be necessary to prevent danger, all systems shall be maintained so as to prevent, so far as is reasonably practicable, such danger". Of course the word "Maintenance" in a legal context means a regular period of test and inspection.

The "Duty Holder" as such if a person receives an electrical shock or there is a accident, fire etc from the MCC, HVAC ,Refridgeration panel or parts therein or supplied from those enclosures, then the question posed to the "Duty Holder" will be to prove that things had been maintained in a satisfactory condition.

I guess from a legal perspective you cant have something that falls into "No Mans (Or any other gender!) land".

So Duty Holder and/or their appointed agent needs to make sure everything is covered, so could be an electrical contractor does indeed cover from the utility meter to all D/B's and final circuit wiring, accessories and isolators. But the fire alarm company does the internal wiring/parts of the fire alarm panel and all connected circuits and accessories. The HVAC and Refridgeration company does everything from the point of connection (Outgoing Isolator cable) and everything within their panel and all wiring from that and items of equipment/control/measure connected to that wiring. DATA or IT company does the power racks and comms cabinets etc. I appreacaite manufacturer of certain enclosures and panels may be the manufacturer and/or their appointed agent does certain panels and MCC's. A lift company I would hope does all the lift wiring and control panels etc 

The paperwork issue should clearly demonstrate who the entity was that issued the paperwork, the name/s of the inspector/tester, their quals/competency and what it is that that inspection/test report actually covers and any items of deficciency and time to next inspection.

Personally Majority of Duty Holders dont understand their responsbilities and thing the electrical contractor/electrician covers everything, we know they dont.

I walk round a premises point out everything "Electrical" to the Duty Holder and would expect to be given an inspection report for it. If they cant, to me there is a weakness, it just cant fall between a crack in the floorboards somebody needs to regularly inspect it.

Based on probability what is more likley to cause an electrical shock, fire or incident an electrical installation and/or piece of equipment that is regularly "Maintained" and one that isnt??

Another anology is we all "Maintain" our cars according to manufacturers guideleines, so what car is more likley to have bald tyre, worn breaks, lights not working or even the engine seizing? the car that has been maintained or the car that is simply driven every day?

Projects are handed over and CDM says that details must be provided to the Duty Holder to explain how they look after and maintian what they have just purchased, reality is nobody really does things the way regs, C.O.Ps and guidance have been written.

GTB  

Afternoon All,

Agree with what lyledunn says and also Graham, I have come across countless properties, industrial, commercial where 99.9% of electricians and electrical contractors will only carry out an EIC or EICR from the distribution boards to the final accessory or isolator. Doing "PAT" testing as we all know doesnt and didnt help as many including Duty Holders felt that only applied to things with a plug top on. The In Service C.O.P certainly in my mind clears that up. So from the isolator to a control panel, the internal wiring and everything from that panel needs inspected and tested by someone at a regular interval. Obviously manufacturers guidance takes preference,  but also is that HVAC or MCC classed under the machinery directive or A.N.Other standard in some ways doesnt matter, its electrical with conductors and electrical parts.

My understanding and reading of Reg 4(2) of the EAWR 1989 indicates that " As may be necessary to prevent danger, all systems shall be maintained so as to prevent, so far as is reasonably practicable, such danger". Of course the word "Maintenance" in a legal context means a regular period of test and inspection.

The "Duty Holder" as such if a person receives an electrical shock or there is a accident, fire etc from the MCC, HVAC ,Refridgeration panel or parts therein or supplied from those enclosures, then the question posed to the "Duty Holder" will be to prove that things had been maintained in a satisfactory condition.

I guess from a legal perspective you cant have something that falls into "No Mans (Or any other gender!) land".

So Duty Holder and/or their appointed agent needs to make sure everything is covered, so could be an electrical contractor does indeed cover from the utility meter to all D/B's and final circuit wiring, accessories and isolators. But the fire alarm company does the internal wiring/parts of the fire alarm panel and all connected circuits and accessories. The HVAC and Refridgeration company does everything from the point of connection (Outgoing Isolator cable) and everything within their panel and all wiring from that and items of equipment/control/measure connected to that wiring. DATA or IT company does the power racks and comms cabinets etc. I appreacaite manufacturer of certain enclosures and panels may be the manufacturer and/or their appointed agent does certain panels and MCC's. A lift company I would hope does all the lift wiring and control panels etc 

The paperwork issue should clearly demonstrate who the entity was that issued the paperwork, the name/s of the inspector/tester, their quals/competency and what it is that that inspection/test report actually covers and any items of deficciency and time to next inspection.

Personally Majority of Duty Holders dont understand their responsbilities and thing the electrical contractor/electrician covers everything, we know they dont.

I walk round a premises point out everything "Electrical" to the Duty Holder and would expect to be given an inspection report for it. If they cant, to me there is a weakness, it just cant fall between a crack in the floorboards somebody needs to regularly inspect it.

Based on probability what is more likley to cause an electrical shock, fire or incident an electrical installation and/or piece of equipment that is regularly "Maintained" and one that isnt??

Another anology is we all "Maintain" our cars according to manufacturers guideleines, so what car is more likley to have bald tyre, worn breaks, lights not working or even the engine seizing? the car that has been maintained or the car that is simply driven every day?

Projects are handed over and CDM says that details must be provided to the Duty Holder to explain how they look after and maintian what they have just purchased, reality is nobody really does things the way regs, C.O.Ps and guidance have been written.

GTB