ESQCR (The Electricity Safety, Quality and Continuity Regulations) and BS7671

If you were to do a cost/benefit analysis of the change in the legislation, would it say that it is worth it?

Suppose a building was designed to the 17th edition, but due to delays in building it's only now ready to connect to the public supply.  Is the electrical installation now so unsafe that it shouldn't be connected? How much would it cost to rip out (some of) the electrics and do it again?

Bear in mind that once something has been connected, it will only be disconnected if the DNO thinks it is so unsafe that it must be disconnected immediately.  There will still be houses out there wired to the 13th or 14th editions.

If you were to do a cost/benefit analysis of the change in the legislation, would it say that it is worth it?

Suppose a building was designed to the 17th edition, but due to delays in building it's only now ready to connect to the public supply.  Is the electrical installation now so unsafe that it shouldn't be connected? How much would it cost to rip out (some of) the electrics and do it again?

Bear in mind that once something has been connected, it will only be disconnected if the DNO thinks it is so unsafe that it must be disconnected immediately.  There will still be houses out there wired to the 13th or 14th editions.

Simon Barker said:

If you were to do a cost/benefit analysis of the change in the legislation, would it say that it is worth it?

Sometimes cost/benefit get put aside and legislation and regulations need to be updated.

Fault Detection Devices (AFDDs) were not mandatory in the 17th Edition of BS 7671

SPD type 2 were defined as devices suitable for installation

EVSE were in the 17th BUT significantly expanded upon in the 18th Edition

EICR (Electrical Installation Condition Report) became mandatory in England under the Electrical Safety Standards in the Private Rented Sector (England) Regulations 2020.
It was required for new tenancies from 1st July 2020 and for existing tenancies from 1st April 2021.

The legal definition of a Higher-Risk Building (HRB) in England was introduced through the
Building Safety Act 2022 (which received Royal Assent on 28 April 2022) and finalized through secondary legislation, specifically The Higher-Risk Buildings (Descriptions and Supplementary Provisions) Regulations 2023

Simon Barker said:

If you were to do a cost/benefit analysis of the change in the legislation, would it say that it is worth it?

Evidently, the Secretary of State thought so in 2009. Parliament agreed.

Sometimes cost/benefit get put aside and legislation and regulations need to be updated.

Agree, but only for example in a time of war or epidemic, should that due process be set aside. The alternative of a ruling elite making it up as they go along and the dispensing of arbitrary 'justice' is something that countries have had to fight to eradicate to ensure safe and fair government. (and not always succeeding at all points in history)

Normally govt. should not be acting against the national interest.  

For updates to things like the ESCQR it is hard to see why the proper channels should not be followed.- if anything a temporary suspension for certain types of natural disaster or civil defence situation feels  more likely to be needed.

Mike

Evidently, the Secretary of State thought so in 2009. Parliament agreed.

Indeed, but nothing much has been put in the parliamentary in-tray since. ;-) One assumes the extra danger levels of the regs as they stood in 2009 are not so great. I also suspect some pushing by interested parties to table something to keep electrical safety on the agenda as it was not long after the introduction of part P, and the stats were starting to come through to show it was not really working to reduce accidents as much as promised .

Mike.

mapj1 said:

For updates to things like the ESCQR it is hard to see why the proper channels should not be followed.

They were in 2006 and 2009. Impact statements are included in the explanatory memoranda: 2006 and 2009. The latter is much briefer than the former. It says:

7. Policy background

7.1 ... The amendment [of ESQCR 2002] will maintain consistency between the ESQCR and British Standards which will continue to aid any enforcement requirements. Should the ESQCR not be amended to reflect the latest British Standard there is a risk of inconsistency as stakeholders may work to differing standards.

8. Consultation outcome

8.1 With the agreement of the Better Regulation Executive these Regulations have not been subject to public consultation. This is because BS 7671 was revised by the British Standards Institute (BSI) and the Institution of Engineering & Technology (IET) on a fully consultative basis (the process for developing BSI standards involves consultation with relevant bodies so that consensus can be reached on what standards are appropriate).

So, there seems to be very little for the Government to do when a new edition of BS 7671 is published.