Rules and Guidelines
Want to participate in the discussions? Please read our Community Rules and Guidelines. Need some help? Visit Support and Answers.

  • State Not Answered
  • Replies 20 replies
  • Subscribers 42 subscribers
  • Views 407 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
You may also be interested in

Coding and regs in force at time of installation

Newfutile

While we code to the current regulations we seem to make allowances usually a C3 for earlier installations.

for example Arc Fault Detection Device in a high risk residential building, if the building is 20 years old this makes sense, otherwise we would have to upgrade many properties.

how should we code if the building was wired recently when Arc Fault Detection Device is required .

Arc Fault Detection Devices were just picked as an example but could apply to any changed requirements where the installer has not met the regs at the time.

Parents
  • 0
    Newfutile said:
    If the inspector considers that an item, although not warranting code C1 or C2, requires improvement, it should be given code C3 on the EICR.

    I have dismissed the wording in GN3 as a mistake. 

    The above from Best Practice Guide 4 Version 7.2. Note the wording difference in a previous version below. Omit "significant" and a C3 can apply to any pittance of an enhancement, perhaps designed to accommodate those pushing AFDDs!! (Sorry for the cynical remark, the City and Guilds debacle has angered me and coloured my view on any guidance that can be tainted by a commercial connection). 

  • 0 in reply to lyledunn

    Lex de minimis non curat.

  • 0 in reply to lyledunn

    I don't see any mistake there.  If something does not cause any immediate or potential danger, how does fixing it produce a significant enhancement of the safety of the installation?

Reply Children
  • 0 in reply to Simon Barker

    At the risk of second guessing,  

    I think Lyle's concern is that the upper of those two quotes leaves open the door to a "make-work" approach to very marginal improvements, and someone may quote to go round oversleeving red cable with brown or something, that is equally neither cost effective nor desirable and brings the business into disrepute as rip-off merchants.

    M

  • 0 in reply to Simon Barker

    I am inclined to agree with Simon. The word, "significant" is otiose because you would not code a non-compliance which is trivial - e.g. red and black conductors instead of brown and blue.

Community Rules & Guidelines