electrical safety in dwellings: summary of the results of the 2002 … · tables 1 and 2 in the...

1

Electrical Safety in Dwellings: summary of the results of the 2002 consultation

Contents

Proposals for new safety requirements for electrical installation work in dwellings2

Summary of responses and actions taken by BRAC...................................................4

The proposed limits on application of the requirement..............................................4

Proposed approach.........................................................................................................5

Application to extension of existing electrical installations........................................8

Proposed performance requirement.............................................................................8

Work that need not be notified .....................................................................................9

Minor work ...................................................................................................................11

Certification of minor work ........................................................................................11

List of minor work........................................................................................................12

Design, installation, inspecting and testing ................................................................14

Accessibility...................................................................................................................15

Material alterations......................................................................................................16

Appendix A: diagrams and notes................................................................................17

Appendix C: guidance on older installations.............................................................17

Draft regulatory impact assessment ...........................................................................17

Other comments ...........................................................................................................19


2

Proposals for new safety requirements for electrical installation work in dwellings

A summary of the results of the 2002 consultation

The Building Act 1984

The Building Regulations 2000

Part P & Approved Document P

Summary

1. This report gives summaries of the responses to the 23 questions posed in Part 4 of the consultation document published on 21 May 2002 and the other issues that consultees raised. Interleaved with these are summaries of the actions taken by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) working in conjunction with the Building Regulations Advisory Committee (BRAC) to take the comments and suggestions into account in the texts of the legal requirement, the Approved Document and the Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA) which have now been submitted for Ministers' approval.

2. The consultation document on the proposals to introduce into the Building Regulations requirements for the safety of electrical installations in dwellings can be viewed on this website under Building Regulations and Consultation papers. The list of questions posed in the consultation document is attached at Annex A.

3. The consultation closed on 13 September 2002 and 490 responses were received from bodies and individuals of which:

88 were full responses to the 23 questions in Part 4 of the consultation package,

259 were received by post and e-mail, mainly from electrical contractors (206)

143 were forwarded to the Minister by MPs acting on behalf of their constituents, including many that were from electrical contractors (142).

4. Although the document did not ask respondents to indicate overall support, of those which did, 63% of the detailed responses were supportive of the proposals and another 7% were neutral. 95% of all the responses in which an overall opinion was expressed, and 81% of all responses, indicated support for the introduction of electrical installations into the Building Regulations.

5. The proposed approach in the consultation document to indirectly address safety through reference to BS7671 was generally supported. As a means of controlling compliance with the Regulations, there was support to make electrical installations in dwellings a controlled service which would require notification to BCBs. However, many consultees were concerned at the increased workload on BCBs and recognised that self-certification by competent persons would assist in alleviating this. They also supported the approach to waiving the need to notify minor work.

Analysis of responses and actions taken

6. The ODPM received 490 responses to the consultation that took place between 21 May and 13 September 2003 on the introduction of safety requirements for electrical Installations in dwellings. However not all respondents answered all questions. Where percentages are quoted, the value is therefore based on the number of answers by respondents to that question.

7. The following definitions of groups of respondents are used in this analysis:


3

Main players: includes the Joint BSI / IEE National Committee JPEL/64 responsible for BS7671, the Health and Safety Executive (both Policy and Legislation) (HSE), the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI), Institution of Electrical Engineers (IEE), the Electrical Contractors Association (ECA), the National Inspection Council for Electrical Installation Contractors (NICEIC).

Government : includes the ODPM, the Department for Trade and Industry (DTI) and the Health and Safety Executive (HSE).

Industry: includes the Institution of Electrical Engineers (IEE), the Electrical Contractors Association (ECA), the National Inspection Council for Electrical Installation Contractors (NICEIC) and the Electrical Installation Equipment Manufacturers Association (EIEMA).

Users : includes the industry group outlined above plus other users of BS7671 such as designers, architects, the Institution of Incorporated Engineers (IIE), the Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers (CIBSE), the Association of Consulting Engineers (ACE), the National Association of Professional Inspector and Testers (NAPIT), Trading Standards departments, the District Surveyors Association (DSA), University Engineers, the Federation of Small Businesses (FSB) and the Construction Industry Council (CIC).

Public: includes respondents who have identified themselves as members of the public, many also indicate they are either electricians or DIY enthusiasts.

8. To assist readers, the questions contained in the consultation are repeated in this summary, together with the opinions expressed and how they have been taken into account. Matters raised by respondents that are unrelated to the specific questions have been included with the responses to question 12.


4

Summary of responses and actions taken by BRAC

The proposed Requirement

Is the proposed Requirement sufficiently clear on the hazards to be addressed and the means by which the risk of exposure to them can be controlled?

9. There was support (90%) that the proposed requirement was clear. Four issues were raised by a significant number of respondents:-

electrical installations in dwellings may also supply electricity to other parts of the property outside the dwelling, such as garages, outbuildings and gardens. The phrase "In dwellings" restricts the scope of the requirement and should be extended to include these outside areas.

BS7671 defines its scope as also protecting livestock; consideration should be given to include animals and/or livestock.

The nature of the danger is stated as fire, but shock is an equal danger and should be included.

The Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA) indicates that portable electrical equipment is a significant source of electrical accidents. As protective devices in modern fixed installations improve the protection of portable electrical equipment, their leads and the people using them, it may therefore be appropriate to reflect this in the Limits of Application.

Action Taken

10. The draft Approved Document P has been amended to include those parts of electrical installations that are outside dwellings but fed from the same supply.

11. Animals are not covered by the Building Regulations. It is now made clear that only those aspects of BS 7671 applying to the safety of people are relevant when seeking to comply with the proposed legal requirement.

12. The RIA takes account of some of the accidents each year that are caused by the use or abuse of portable electrical equipment. This is because residual current devices in fixed electrical installations also give protection to portable appliances, their leads and people using them.

The proposed limits on application of the requirement

The aim is to limit application to fixed electrical installations in dwellings. Are these proposed Limits on Application of the Requirement satisfactory?

13. The majority of respondents (63%) believe the `Limits on Application' were satisfactory. However the industry was divided over the mention of the Electricity at Work and Electricity Supply Regulations (now the Electricity Safety, Quality and Continuity Regulations 2002) as this seems to limit scope to too great a degree.

14. Other comments received included:

The definition of a dwelling was raised by several organisations, in particular the exclusion of outbuildings and the doubt over which Regulations would cover common areas in dwellings (such as stairs and landings in blocks of flats).

The distinction between small businesses and small commercial properties is not clear, particularly where a shop or office may be integral with a dwelling. These responders consider that a definition in the Regulations would assist.


5

The inclusion of portable equipment in the RIA caused many comments which suggest that there should be a reference to portable and non-portable equipment in these Regulations, perhaps a reference to guidance already supported by HSE would be helpful.

Comments from organisations representing small businesses suggested that the introduction of Part P would be a cost to their members.

Action Taken

15. The Requirement and Limits of Application have been amended and references to other legislation have been moved to a new section in the Approved Document as useful information.

16. The notes to the Requirement define that all circuits fed by the consumer unit in a dwelling are within the scope of Part P, and that the requirement applies to installations in gardens, shops which share an installation with a dwelling and to the common parts of blocks of flats.

Proposed approach Making electrical installations a controlled service would mean that all prospective electrical installations work would need to be notified to building control bodies unless it is carried out by prescribed persons or it comprises certain types of minor work (see paragraph 6 below).

Do you consider that approach is likely to prove effective?

17. 61% of all respondents, and all industry respondents, supported the proposed approach. Some members of the public did not support the requirement that DIY work on small additions and alterations required certification by a competent person.

18. Further observations included:

DIY and ad hoc work may not be reported and hence the present standard of existing installations, especially alterations and additions, will not be improved.

An additional cost of reporting and certification may discourage additions and alterations being reported to Building Control Officers.

Alterations may be designed in such a way as to avoid the need to report the work; this was of considerable concern over replacements, alterations and additions to kitchens and bathrooms (on safety grounds).

Many respondents expressed a concern at the increased workload for Building Control Officers to effectively police these Regulations (see Section 12.2).

Action Taken

19. The approach to make electrical installation work in dwellings a controlled service has been retained.

20. To reduce the work load on BCBs, work undertaken by persons who have been assessed as competent through a scheme recognised by the Secretary of State, or minor work specified in Tables 1 and 2 in the Approved Document need not be notified.

21. Work in kitchens and the special installations and locations given in Table 2 must be carried out by a competent person or notified to BCBs before work commences.

22. DIY work on electrical installations will be a controlled service and those undertaking the work, even minor work, are reminded in the Approved Document that their work must comply with BS7671, including inspection testing and certification by a competent person.


6

It is proposed in Approved Document P that the certificates taken from Appendix 6 of BS7671 and already required for electrical installation work will be a means of demonstrating compliance with Part P to Building Control (subject to further discussion under the Competent Persons Initiative).

The Department together with BRAC did consider another option which would reduce the administration burden by limiting application of the Requirement to electrical installations work in connection with building work as currently defined by the Regulations. This option was set aside because it was felt that it would miss a large proportion of the types of electrical installation work in dwellings.

Do you consider that this or another approach would be more effective than the one in 3.1?

23. There was support (94%) for the proposed approach. To reduce the immediate workload on BCBs, it was suggested that the requirements should be introduced to apply to new building work first and that those for alterations and additions be brought into force later.

Action Taken

24. With the support from the public consultation, the proposals in the draft Approved Document P have been recommended to Ministers as suitable for introduction into the Regulations.

The Department considered with HSE and DTI the possibility of defining the prescribed persons mentioned in question 1 by new legislation along the lines of the Gas Safety (Installation and Use) Regulations. These regulations control who may undertake gas installation work by identifying Approved Classes of Persons (the CORGI scheme is the only approved class of gas installation work at present). However after comparing the gas and electrical hazards and the risks of exposure, and taking account of the view that a less rigorous approach of allowing approved competent person to self-certify compliance with the Building Regulations is more appropriate for electrical installation work in dwellings. The hazards and risks are covered in the Regulatory Impact Assessment. What are your views on this matter?

25. Respondents who are associated with the industry or who have working knowledge of the CORGI scheme supported the draft proposals outlined in the consultation document (75% of those who gave an opinion).

26. There were many comments on this question, they included:

A personal certification scheme (similar to CORGI) will be more bureaucratic and ineffective than a company-based scheme but a scheme for individuals rather than firms will be substantially more expensive and may not be justified by the number of accidents.

There was support from users for a single recognisable identity for a competency scheme (or body promoting the scheme) although there may be several routes to demonstrate competency. It was further suggested that the scheme operators be defined in the Regulations.

It is likely that schemes will not improve the standard of either DIY work or work in connection with kitchens or central heating undertaken by specialists. Small-scale operators may be driven into the grey/black economy.

What is the role of the Certificate (electrical installation or minor works - see pages 49 et seq in the consultation document)? Should it be used to demonstrate to BCBs that the electrical installation is compliant with Part P?

Should electrical installation designers, consultants and architects be included in the legislation as the Electrical Installation Certificate in BS 7671 requires a signature for the design to be compliant?

What responsibility will designers, consultants and architects have in the Part P Requirements?


7

Action Taken

27. Since the publication of the draft proposals for Part P in May 2002, the ODPM have gained considerable experience with Competent Persons schemes in other areas of building control through the amendment SI 2002:0440 that introduced the FENSA, CORGI, OFTEC, HETAS and IoP schemes. It has therefore recommended that there should be further discussions with bodies who wish to be approved by the Secretary of State as scheme operators for Part P. These discussions under the Competent Persons Initiative will include further examination of the reporting process to BCBs to be consistent with the reporting requirements of The Building Regulations 2000 and electrical installation industry practice.


8

Application to extension of existing electrical installations The proposals include changes to Regulation 4 which mean that, for electrical installation work, existing installations must be altered to the extent necessary to supply extensions safely. Are these new provisions sufficiently clear?

28. The views of the electrical installation industry and Government bodies suggest that the requirement for "supply and earthing" be deleted and the words from BS7671 used for `alterations and additions' (see BS7671 Regulation 130-07-01). Members of the public and users suggest that the text is clear (71% of respondents). There was concern over the interpretation of Regulation 4 when applied to heritage buildings.

Action Taken

29. The requirements for supply, earthing and bonding have been clarified.

30. The requirements for "alterations and additions" are being examined by Government lawyers and may be changed better to align with BS7671, consistent with the powers provided in the Building Act 1984.

Proposed performance requirement This indicates that the legal requirement would be met by compliance with the fundamental principles given in CENELEC Harmonisation Document HD 384.1, as promulgated in the UK by Chapter 13 of BS7671: 2001. Is the paragraph a sufficiently clear distillation of the safety requirements and the fundamental principles in Chapter 13?

31. 61% of respondents supported the view that Chapter 13 of BS7671 summarises the safety requirement satisfactorily. However the organisations representing the industry believe that the whole of BS7671 should be referenced in paragraph 1 of Section 0. To be consistent with the industry view to reference the whole of BS7671, the CENELEC HD 384 series of standards should be referenced for EEA equivalence.

32. It was suggested that the hazards in paragraph 1.1 be spelt out to include `electric shock, fire and burns'.

33. The industry responses (30%) note that functionality in clause 1.3 is not a requirement of BS7671 certification and sub-paragraph 1.3 of Section 0 should be deleted as it has no bearing on safety.

Action Taken

34. The paragraph conveying the Secretary of State's view has been changed to focus on the fundamental principles in Chapter 13 of BS7671:2001. The reference to HS384.1 has been removed as the fundamental principles section in the HD does not address alterations and additions.

35. Equivalence of electrical installation standards of other EEA states is retained.

36. The reference to functionality has been dropped as it is not a safety issue.

The approach in BS 7671 is not to address safety directly but to ensure that installations are built in accordance with technical equipment, installation standards, and methods of inspection and testing that, as a whole, are considered by experts to achieve a satisfactory degree of safety. Would you prefer the performance requirements to be identified more specifically and / or could they be identified more effectively in another way?


9

37. There was substantial support (95%) for the reference to comply with the whole of BS7671 as suggested in para 5above.

Action Taken

38. The standard Building Regulations approach has been retained. This is:-

to determine the legal requirement in functional terms,

to go one step further into detail by providing the Secretary of State's view that compliance will be achieved by following the fundamental requirements in BS 7671 Chapter 13, and

to confine references to detailed technical ways of compliance to the approved guidance

Work that need not be notified Work self-certified by competent persons. The proposals allow that approved competent persons could self-certify compliance of their electrical installation work with the Building Regulations. Would it be sensible to allow non-approved persons to proceed with electrical installation work without giving prior notice if it is to be certified at completion by someone who is approved?

39. It should be noted that the printed consultation document uses the words "approved competent persons" and the web site question 6 states a "competent person". Both have been taken to mean the same for this analysis.

40. Two key issues were identified in the responses:

Is self-certification by competent persons the principal route to demonstrate an electrical installation is compliant with Part P?

Can electrical installations be inspected and tested to enable an Electrical Installation Certificate to be issued at the completion of the work without inspection(s) of the electrical installation during the build process?

41. The industry comments were generally in favour of the principal of self-certification, however the public suggested that certification is not necessary. There were a significant number of responses which suggested that a definition of "competent or approved person" and "competency" should be included in the Regulations. Guidance on the status of the designer, consultant and architect in the definition was requested.

42. Where the installer is not to be an approved competent person, clarification of the status and responsibilities of a third party inspector was requested and, in particular, the liabilities incurred when signing a certificate.

Inspection on completion

43. The responses from the industry and users, including the building industry, expressed concern over a single inspection on completion of the electrical installation work. It was noted that BS7671 requires inspection of electrical installation works during construction as the electrical installation may not be accessible when covered up during the further building and finishing processes.

44. Builders identified the three stages of an electrical installation as each requiring inspection.

45. The NICEIC suggest that a Periodic Inspection Report (not included in the consultation document but available on the IEE web site at www.iee.org.uk/technical ) is the only certificate that can be issued if there is no inspection other than at completion.

http://www.iee.org.uk/technical


10

46. The public respondents rejected the need for independent inspectors and expressed concerns that the added costs of an independent inspector on one or more occasions would deter the DIY worker and those working in the grey/black economy from notifying work at any time. This would defeat one objective of Part P of improving the standard of additions and alterations undertaken by people or firms that are not approved competent persons.

47. Some respondents indicated that Inspection(s) during the build process might not be justified dependent on the nature of the work.

48. Overall, there was support (65%) for electrical installation work to be covered by Part P to be notified to Building Control before the work commences unless the installation and the inspection and testing is undertaken by a competent person.

Action Taken

49. No decision has been reached on this matter. It has been left for resolution as part of the further work on developing the competent persons scheme system. Ministers issued a Parliamentary Written Statement on 15 July. This is available at www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm200203/cmhansard/cm030715/wmstext/30715m04.htm#30715m04.html_sbhd3

http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm200203/cmhansard/cm030715/wmstext/30715m04.htm



11

Minor work Minor Work. The proposal to exclude minor work from the requirement to notify stems from considerations of enforceability, and the improvements in safety that could be achieved compared with the administrative effort needed. Are you content in principle that minor work need not be notified? Are you also content that the definition of minor work is sufficiently explicit?

50. There was substantial support (76%) for minor work not to be notified. However there was some confusion between the title `Minor Work' and the `Minor Works Certificate' in BS7671. It was suggested that `Electrical Work exempt from Notification' be used for work which need not be notified to Building Control.

51. There was also consensus that the draft limit of electrical work exempt from notification is too extensive. There is a support in the industry that the limit above which notification is required should be a single or double socket outlet on one circuit. Concern was expressed by several respondents that the design of the installation might be such as to circumvent the requirement to notify.

Action Taken

52. The title "minor work" in the Approved Document has been changed to "work which need not be notified". Work identified in Table 1 in the draft Approved Document which need not be notified to BCBs has been clarified and further notes added.

53. Work in kitchens and special installations and locations defined in a new Table 2 in the Approved Document is now considered to attach such additional risks as to warrant requiring notification.

Certification of minor work Certification of minor work. Paragraph 5.2 in the draft AD defines minor work for the purposes of the Building Regulations and gives guidance on the use of the Minor Electrical Installation Works Certificate system. How might the testing and certification requirements for minor work be improved?

54. There was support (81%) for all new, additions and alterations to electrical installations (notified and non-notified) to be inspected and tested. It was suggested that paragraph 5.2.2 in the draft Approved Document should be more positive than "where prudence and these ...". Part 7 of BS7671 requires all installations to be inspected and tested, this should be reflected in paragraph 5.2.2.

55. Other issues raised included:

If only competent persons are intended to sign certificates (pages 49 et seq in the AD), then paragraph 5.2 should state this clearly.

It was recognised that DIY and work not undertaken by a competent person may be of a poorer standard and should therefore be included in the inspection, testing and certification process.

A frequency for periodic inspection (as competent in IEE Guidance Note 3) should be included in the Approved Document (normally every 10 years or change of ownership for a dwelling).

A special exemption for electrical work associated with boiler installation was requested.

It was noted that the European word used for this work in paragraph 5 is now conformity and not certification.


12

Action Taken

56. The requirement to inspect and test new and altered electrical installations in accordance with BS7671, Part 7 is outlined in clauses 10.1 and 10.2. In particular, all work undertaken by people or firms that are not members of an approved competent persons scheme must have an appropriate certificate issued by a suitably qualified person.

57. The requirements for inspection and testing are further outlined in paragraphs 17 to 22 of the Approved Document.

58. In accordance with item 2 of Table 1, it is not necessary to notify the provision of a simple connection to an existing ring main or radial circuit, including the provision of a further socket outlet or fused spur for a supply for a boiler not be notified. The additional wiring does however require inspection, testing and certification by a member of an approved competent person scheme or, where the people or firms are not members of such a scheme, by a suitably qualified person. .

List of minor work Table 1 is intended to be an exhaustive list of the types of minor work that need not be notified. Are you content with this approach and are there other types of work that you would wish to see listed?

59. There was support for a list of work not requiring notification, however most respondents (73%) suggested that the list should be more restricted than the draft list included in the consultation document.

60. The areas singled out for specific comment were:

As currently listed, new or replacement electrical work in kitchens, bathrooms and bedrooms could be installed as work not requiring notification to a Building Control.

There was concern that an unrestricted number of socket outlets could be installed on an existing circuit, in particular in a kitchen.

To comply with the Amendment Number 1 to Regulation 433-02-04 of BS7671:2001 (which requires an assessment of the current in any part of the ring), it is suggested that minor work be limited to the addition of ONE single or ONE double socket outlet to a circuit for item 2 in table 1. For consistency, a single fused spur should be added to the list in item 2 of table 1, work which need not be notified.

Also as drafted, a replacement 10.5 kW electric shower could be replaced by a person or firm that is not an approved competent person without any testing. Some respondents considered that this would be dangerous.

Main and supplementary bonding are safety requirements which should only be worked on and tested by a competent person with appropriate test equipment. Items 4 and 5 in table 1, page 38 of the consultation document on bonding should be deleted from the list of work which is exempt from notifying.

There was a suggestion that fitting of a residual current device (rcd) be exempt from the need to notify as an encouragement for these accessories to be fitted.

The replacement of a cable in item 6 and note 2 to table 1 as a like-for-like item may be difficult in the future with the change in all cable specifications to take account of the change in cable core colours in fixed installations (this also applies to replacing imperial standard cables).


13

Action Taken

61. Table 1 and its associated notes have been amended to take account of comments.

62. All electrical installation work in kitchens must be notified.

63. An additional Table has been added to the Approved Document which lists special installations and locations which require electrical installation work to be notified to BCBs.

64. Changes in the Table 1 have been made to improve enforceability.


14

Design, installation, inspecting and testing

Technical guidance.

Technical guidance. Section 1 of the draft Approved Document gives the technical goals established in BS 7671 and makes reference to other publications that give detailed technical guidance on ways in which the goals can be achieved. The diagrams in Appendix A are intended only to indicate the sorts of electrical services encountered in dwellings, some of the ways they can be connected, and the complexity of the wiring and protection systems necessary to supply them. Are you content that this approach, rather than detailed technical solutions, is satisfactory?

65. There was agreement (94%) that the approach using the goals of BS7671 is correct. Those organisations representing the industry and many other organisations and individuals suggest that the diagrams in Appendix A should be deleted with the comment that they "may give DIY workers or inexperienced persons confidence to use them as wiring diagrams". There is inadequate data in Appendix A for this purpose.

Action Taken

66. The approach to using BS7671 has been retained.

67. A statement in the text and a watermark on the background of each diagram in the Approved Document states that the diagrams are only illustrative and must not be used as installation diagrams.

Should we make electrical installations in dwellings more resilient against flooding, in what circumstances and how best might this be done (see Section 1 paragraph 8)?

68. There was no general consensus to make a requirement to provide protection against flooding in an electrical installation and the industry suggests that no special provision should be made in Part P. Where a risk of flooding is identified for a dwelling, chapters 32 and 52 of BS7671 give appropriate measures for the electrical installation and guidance from the electricity provider should be sought for the supply arrangements.

69. Several respondents suggested that a general comment (not a requirement) could be included for dwellings which were identified at risk from flooding that cabling should be installed from first floor level and none should be installed on or below the ground floor surface.

Action Taken

70. It is considered necessary to mention flooding as one of the important consequences of climate change. However para 13 now states that "the electricity distributor and installer may be required to take into account the risk of flooding" and a cross-reference to general guidance on flooding is given.

71. IEE have agreed to give guidance on flooding in the IEE On Site Guide and IEE Guidance Notes.

Will the forthcoming Electricity Safety, Quality and Continuity Regulations 2002 have a bearing on the proposed limits on application in this consultation (see Section 1 paragraph 9)?

72. DTI comment that Section 1, paragraph 9 of the ESQCR02 gives the supply authority the power NOT to connect an installation if it is NOT safe. Compliance with BS7671 can be demonstrated through an Electrical Installation Certificate.

73. A reference in Part P to the ESQCR02 may encourage discussions between rural and heritage sites on earthing with their electricity provider.


15

Action Taken

74. Paragraphs 30 to 38 in a new Section 3, Other Legislation, outlines the requirements of the ESQCR02 in respect of dwellings.

Technical references.

Technical references. The references in the draft Approved Document comprise BS 7671: 2001, the IEE On Site Guide and a set of IEE Guidance Notes. Bearing in mind that much electrical work is carried out in DIY projects (see the Regulatory Impact Assessment), it has been considered prudent to include DIY manuals in the references. Appendix B contains blank copies of the BS 7671 and IEE certificates that builders and householders might otherwise find difficult to get. Are you content that the references given, the acceptance of DIY manuals, and the inclusion of blank forms is satisfactory?

75. There was overwhelming support for the primary reference to be BS7671.

76. The industry supported the referencing of the IEE On Site Guide and IEE Guidance Notes as these are maintained compliant with BS7671. These texts are supported by the industry through the IEE consultation process which agrees the guidance and keeps the publications in line with the latest edition of BS7671.

77. There was no consensus to include references to DIY manuals. The contracting industry recommend that there should be no reference to texts other than the IEE texts, whilst independent respondents suggest that any guidance is good and may give information which may improve the quality of DIY and other electrical installations. It was noted by several respondents that most DIY manuals do not give guidance on inspection and testing or test instruments and their use. It was also noted that it is unlikely that DIY enthusiasts will have access to appropriate instruments.

78. There was support for the use of the model forms specified in Appendix 6 of BS7671. These forms are widely reproduced in IEE and other documents and freely available in two computer formats on the IEE web site (www.iee.org.uk/technical ). It should be made clear that test schedules should accompany all Electrical Installation Certificates, Minor Works Certificates and Periodic Inspection Reports when they are handed to the `person ordering the work'.

Action Taken

79. The references in Approved Document P for further information and guidance are now reduced to the IEE On Site Guide and IEE Guidance Notes 1 to 7.

80. The forms required in the Approved Documents are available in BS7671, IEE On Site Guide, IEE Guidance Note 3 and in pdf and WORD formats on the IEE web site (access is free to these pages).

Accessibility The draft Approved Document contains guidance on the accessibility of socket-outlets and protection devices (fuses, circuit breakers and residual current devices). Is this guidance satisfactory?

81. Many respondents noted that guidance on the positioning of socket outlets and switches for new dwellings is given in Part M of the Building Regulations. There was a consensus (79%) that there should be a reference to Part M, but it is not necessary to reproduce the text of Part M in Part P. Several bodies suggested that guidance should extend to include easy access to consumer units in dwellings.

Action Taken

82. Approved Document M is referenced to provide guidance on the positioning of socket outlets and switches.

http://www.iee.org.uk/technical


16

83. Approved Document P requires the consumer unit to be positioned for easy access.

Material alterations

Technical goals.

Technical goals. Paragraph 19 in the draft Approved Document gives guidance on how to comply with the proposed new version of Regulation 4 (see box 4 above). Are you content that the guidance is sufficient?

84. There was support (95%) for the guidance given in paragraph 19 of the draft Approved Document. To be consistent with earlier comments, there should be a reference to BS7671 and the addition of a clause to ensure that the material alterations require inspection and testing for compliance, together with any other circuits which may have been affected, as specified in BS7671.

Action Taken

85. The definition of `Material Alteration' is the subject of legal interpretation and drafting.


17

Appendix A: diagrams and notes The purpose of these is to give readers who are not qualified in electrical engineering information about the scale and complexity of the electrical installations commonly to be found in dwellings, whether newly built or upgraded to modern standards. They are not intended as substitutes for the detailed technical guidance given in the references listed in paragraph 10 of the Approved Document. Are the diagrams and notes clear and comprehensive enough, and how might they be improved?

86. Overall about 66% of respondents supported the inclusion of Appendix A in the style shown in the draft Approved Document, often commenting that further information may assist in making an installation by non-competent persons safer. Several commented that further information should be included to assist the DIY worker such as cable rating tables and guidance on earthing.

87. However the industry is opposed to the inclusion of Appendix A as they believe that the information in the diagrams is compressed and not adequate if used as the only source of information for a wiring project.

Action Taken

88. Appendix A has been retained and improved as an indication to builders and others that are unfamiliar with the scope of wiring systems in dwellings of what may be expected. However warnings are given in the paragraph in Section 0 that introduces them, and alongside the diagrams themselves, that the diagrams are NOT wiring diagrams.

Appendix C: guidance on older installations Appendix C offers guidance on the types of older installations that might be encountered in alterations work and what improvements may be needed. Is there any information that you believe should be included in Appendix C?

89. There was less support from respondents for the inclusion of Appendix C (40%) than there was for Appendix A. Several comments suggested that further information on fuses and miniature circuit breakers would be helpful. Others suggested that, in conjunction with Appendix A, it would give residents a false sense of danger because of age and also a false sense of confidence to undertake the work themselves. Interpretation of wiring rules at heritage sites and rural dwellings would be particularly prone to the judgement that old-age equals unsafe installation.

Action Taken

90. Appendix C has been retained as helpful advice to those who are not experienced electricians, recognising the extent of work that is carried out by DIY workers.

Draft regulatory impact assessment Do you have any comments on the benefits and costs identified in the RIA?

91. The RIA was criticised by 89% of those who gave an opinion on the document. The primary concern was the inclusion of accident figures from portable and non-portable appliances when Approved Document P is only applicable to fixed electrical installations. Table 1a in the RIA shows that 76% of fatal accidents and 74% of non-fatal accidents will not be directly affected by the introduction of the Part P proposals as they are not part of the fixed installation and hence outside the scope.


18

92. The public respondents focussed on the cost of the small number of accidents attributable to fixed installations (approximately 24% of fatalities and 26% of non-fatal accidents) and suggested that the savings in Table 2 in the RIA should exclude portable and non-portable appliances, making a saving of only £38m rather than £104m for an average of 2.6 deaths and 447 accidents per year. Whilst commenting on savings, some respondents queried the source of the 20% saving in accidents quoted in paragraph 33 of the RIA.

93. There was also a suggestion that the costs of compliance with Part P were optimistic, as only the direct costs of certification have been included and not the preparation cost for certification visits and the time costs for the visit. Estimates for the total costs to achieve certification can be much higher, depending on the size of the company being certified.

94. If BCBs are also involved in the certification process for non-competent persons, there may be a further cost that is not included in the RIA. For the DIY worker and non-competent persons, there could be an additional cost of inspection and certification by a competent person. There were several comments which suggest that the inspection and testing will not be done and that some of this work will be carried out in the grey/black economy.

95. It is noted that portable and non-portable appliances which are plugged into fixed installations now obtain some protection from modern protective devices, in particular residual current devices (rcd) in the fixed installation. The requirement in BS7671 is that any socket outlet which may provide power for equipment (fixed, portable or non-portable) outside the dwelling must now be protected by an rcd.

Action Taken

96. The RIA has been revised to take account of respondents' comments and later information.

The Department will be carrying out a survey of the impacts these proposals would have on small businesses during the consultation period, as indicated in paragraph 49 of the draft RIA. If your company would be willing to participate in this survey please let Andrew Brown know within the first two weeks of the consultation period. His contact details are in the letter at the front of the consultation document. The aim is to select about five firms for survey, so there can be no guarantee that expressions of interest will be taken up.

Action Taken

97. The results of the small business litmus test will be included as Appendix A to the Final Regulatory Impact Assessment when it is published, signed by Ministers, alongside the draft Statutory Instrument to bring the new requirements into force.


19

Other comments Do you have any other comments?

98. There were four issues which received a substantial number of comments:

12.1 - Comment and support for the Electrotechnical Assessment Scheme.

12.2 - Building Control.

12.3 - Portable and non-portable equipment.

12.4 - D I Y.

99. Other relevant single comment issues are included at the end of this section.

The Electrotechnical Assessment Scheme (EAS)

100. Some responders suggested that any proposals for a certification scheme should comprise a single scheme with a single logo if the public is not to be confused. One respondent suggested that the certification scheme should be named in legislation. Others thought that there should be one set of scheme criteria but that it should be open for any group to apply for approval to run a separate scheme.

101. The consensus was that it should be possible for competent persons schemes to be operated by more than one organisation.

102. The EAS is based on EN 45011. Other organisations in the consultation suggested that there should be flexibility in the certification procedures and different forms of certification to, perhaps, EN 45004, EN 45013 or EN 45020.

103. The RIA suggests that only 13,000 of 61,000 electrical installation contracting companies in the UK are in either the ECA or the NICEIC schemes. There is concern over the timescale and resources required to inspect and certify 48,000 contracting enterprises which are not at present certified and wish to become competent persons. This problem will be applicable to any scheme, so a reasonable lead-time will be required for implementation of any scheme.

104. There was a small lobby of inspectors and testers who suggested that electrical installation inspections should only be carried out by separately registered inspectors.

105. A problem was identified by several organisations of certifying new contractors once a scheme is running. A Certification Body will require evidence of competent work. Current schemes require a contractor to be in business for one year. If legislation requires competent persons to inspect installations, then there will be additional inspection costs for new contractors until they have been in business for a year. Should there be any transitional arrangements? Several responses suggested that any registration scheme for electrical installation contractors could lead to a shortage of competent electricians.

106. One respondent suggested a class of membership for DIY enthusiasts to promote their involvement and assist the signing off of the work through better guidance on inspection and testing.

107. There were 206 letters to the ODPM supporting Part P, mostly electrical contractors and 142 letters to Members of Parliament, again from electrical contractors, requesting their support for Part P in Parliament.


20

Action taken

108. Ministers have made an announcement on the way forward for self-certification of electrical work. This is available at www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm200203/cmhansard/cm030715/wmstext/30715m04.htm#30715m04.html_sbhd3

Building Control

109. The Requirement P of the Building Regulations states that electrical installations in dwellings will become a "controlled service". Although no question referred to BCBs, 45 organisations made comment on the additional work that would be required.

110. More than half identified the additional workload that these Regulations will impose as a result of the need to inspect of work undertaken by people or firms that are not approved competent persons. The draft RIA makes no comment on the extent of the additional work that BCBs would have to undertake or their powers of approval or rejection of work undertaken by non-competent persons.

111. There are two possible options for approving work by non-competent persons, inspection by a competent person or direct inspection by a BCB. It is unclear where responsibility and future liability will be for the safe functioning of the electrical installation by either approval mechanism.

112. Some respondents queried how a competent person would notify the BCB that installation works had satisfied the requirements of Part P. It was suggested that the Electrical Installation Certificate or the Minor Works Form (specified in Appendix 6 of BS7671) could be used to indicate compliance. Alternatively, a system similar to the Scottish system of statutory forms (although not statutory) may be all that is necessary. It is estimated that about 3 million electrical certificates are issued each year for all types of electrical installation work, the majority for domestic work.

Action Taken

113. Several Competent Persons Schemes have been introduced in the building industry since Approved Document P went out to public comment in May 2002. The role of BCBs in these provisions is in course of being reviewed. The provisions applicable to the certification the compliance of electrical work with the Building Regulations (as opposed to certification in compliance with BS7671) are being further developed.

Portable and non-portable appliances.

114. The main issue identified in the consultation on portable and non-portable appliances involves the inclusion of their accident statistics in the RIA (see section 11.1 above). The number of deaths and injuries from appliances is more significant than those from fixed installations. AMDEA suggest that appliances have never been safer. However, there are many more appliances in use in the normal dwelling. The ring circuit was designed in the late 1940s to supply power to space heat using electric bar heaters. The number of socket outlets and equipment plugged into them has increased about 12 times in 50 years, yet the total number of accidents has decreased.

115. It may be prudent to include appliances within the scope of the requirement for protection against shock in the dwelling, not just accidents caused by the fixed installation. An earlier comment outlined under question 11.1 suggests that the rcd in the fixed installation protects the user from shocks from defective appliances. The growth in mains powered garden equipment has contributed significantly to electrical accidents attributed to the dwelling. However, an rcd at the origin of the dwelling fixed installation significantly increases protection from a fatal shock from the appliance and the flex from the socket outlet to the appliance.




21

Action Taken

116. It is acknowledged that protective devices in the fixed installation also protect portable electrical equipment plugged into socket outlets. The RIA takes note of this benefit.

Do-it-yourself

117. Views expressed on DIY work on quality and safety issues are (numerically) divided in the consultation. Those respondents who support DIY suggest that more information should be given at DIY outlets and cheaper instruments made available to improve quality and compliance of the DIY installation with good practice. The industry and safety regulators believe that the most dangerous installations are those undertaken by DIY workers and un-qualified practitioners. It is further suggested that these are the installations which would not be inspected and tested by qualified persons unless the owner asked for the inspection and tests.

118. The proposals on how to deal with DIY installations which are more than minor work are not clear in Part P. A policy is required to determine if DIY work which is within scope of the Requirements of Part P are to be inspected, by either competent persons or a BCB. In these instances, does the responsibility for the installation pass from the DIY worker or non-competent person to the inspector?

Action Taken

119. Work carried out by DIY workers will be treated as work undertaken by persons not covered by a Competent Persons scheme. DIY installations are covered by BS7671 which requires the installation to be inspected and tested by a competent person in accordance with Part 7 of BS7671. Work other than that listed in Table 1 in the Approved Document must be notified to Building Control or undertaken by a member of an approved competent person scheme.

Other relevant single comment issues

120. The insurance industry may assist with the implementation of Periodic Inspections at the IEE Guidance Note 3 recommended frequency of every ten years by giving discounts to house owners for their accident insurance cover.

121. The inclusion of the Periodic Inspection Report in the purposes of the Home Information Pack should be promoted for use in the sale and transfer of dwellings.

122. An Electrical Installation Certificate should be provided for every new house.

123. The EU Construction Products Directive is not generally applicable to the proposals for Part P (except for cables).

Action Taken

Views on the desirability of including Electrical Installation Certificates, Minor Works Certificates and Periodic Inspection Reports in Home Condition Reports have been passed on to the Division in ODPM responsible for this initiative.