18th Edition Amd3 DPC For Info

[mort2376]

IET and BSI urges electrical industry to have its say on IET Wiring
The Institution of Engineering and Technology (IET) and BSI are calling on the electrical industry to have its say on an amendment to BS 7671:2018+A2:2022, which will go to DPC (Draft for Public Consultation) on 8 May 2024.



The amendment follows a bulletin from BEAMA which aimed to clarify the differences between connections for unidirectional and bidirectional RCDs and circuit-breakers. The amendment is due to be published in summer 2024, where it will be free to view on both the IET’s and BSI’s websites. Comments on the DPC can be submitted through BSI’s Standards Development portal by 5 June 2024 at 5pm.



IET’s Mark Coles, Head of Technical Regulations, said: “When issues arise, it’s important that standards take on the necessary changes as quickly as possible. This fast-track route to amendment will allow designers and installers to quickly get the information out to their clients and promote safety in electrical installations.”



BSI’s Dan Palmer, Associate Director, Committees, said “We welcome public comments on BS 7671. Having your say can help shape the changes introduced in this new amendment and will help electrical professionals keep up to date with new and innovative technologies. We have been partnering with IET on the wiring regulations for more than 30 years, ensuring amendments are introduced to maintain the safety of electrical installations."



The IET and BSI jointly manage JPEL/64, the committee responsible for BS 7671.



More information can be found at theiet.org/updates

 

[mort2376]

Summer 2024 Amd 3
Summer 2025 19th ?????????

 

[Andy™]

so basically amd3 is a ****** correction

 

[mort2376]

Well they have to show that they are worth all the money we pay them

 

[Murdoch]

What a ******* mess.

JPEL/64 is a stitch up including OEMs with a vested interest to make changes for profits sake.

I’ve sent in comments in the past and as far as I can tell they are ignored.

All they need to do is send the draft to the Plain Speaking Society for comments - then act of their recommendations

 

[Fleeting]

Don't worry about it I don't.

 

[Murdoch]

Don't worry about it I don't.

I fear for the standards going forward as the unnecessary change on unnecessary changes make more people ignore the regs.................

 

[Andy™]

I fear for the standards going forward as the unnecessary change on unnecessary changes make more people ignore the regs.................

people writing the regs have the same issue as H&S people - they do a good job, things change for the best and everything goes better. now what do they do? they keep changing stuff to justify their existance (and get bribes from manufacturers to incluide a requirement for their products)

 

[UNG]

I always remember talking to a guy that sat on a few of the committees that produced the standards for the intruder alarm industry I suggested to to him that it was all about coffee and choccy biccy's and catching with some mates and that changes to the standards / regs were the justification for it and the high cost of the regs was what paid for it didn't really get and answer to that
The problem now as the regs morph is how do you get to having a compliant installation for longer than five minutes and there is the other side of it where with some installed equipment you may never be fully compliant. It is very easy for these committees to put it on paper but out in the real world from which they seem so divorced from it can be a nightmare meeting all the requirements

 

[Andy™]

The problem now as the regs morph is how do you get to having a compliant installation for longer than five minutes

looked at a job yesterday - EICR by another company has C2 for type AC RCBO's and require type A. installation is probably 4-5 year old

 

[Murdoch]

looked at a job yesterday - EICR by another company has C2 for type AC RCBO's and require type A. installation is probably 4-5 year old

and what is the customer going to do?

Thats a C3 in my book

 

[mort2376]

If the rcbos are tripping in time then it's a C3 only thing it can be.

 

[Murdoch]

It is very easy for these committees to put it on paper but out in the real world from which they seem so divorced from it can be a nightmare meeting all the requirements

And the more that they "improve" the more its ignored.

 

[Andy™]

and what is the customer going to do?

Thats a C3 in my book

told them that its a C3 at worst. they want a quote to change to type A though. its a school and they've now got a report saying its unsatisfactory. so they need to 'fix' it to get it compliant. and it being a school, certain other companies come in and think they can get away with trying to get as much extra out of it as possible. i did see the price they had quoted for the RCBO's and its a bit over 3x what i priced it at

 

[Murdoch]

told them that its a C3 at worst. they want a quote to change to type A though. its a school and they've now got a report saying its unsatisfactory. so they need to 'fix' it to get it compliant. and it being a school, certain other companies come in and think they can get away with trying to get as much extra out of it as possible. i did see the price they had quoted for the RCBO's and its a bit over 3x what i priced it at

If it was me reviewing this dodgy EICR I would recommend they challenge the report for over zealous coding

 

[Andy™]

i did suggest that and they may do so but that's not my decidion

 

[binky]

The problem now as the regs morph is how do you get to having a compliant installation for longer than five minutes

Older installations are not 'non compliant' except to undertrained sparkies, but it doesn't half cause arguments