Rank: Forum user 
|
Hello All,
I'm seeking some advice reference PAT. All of the information I can find refers to someone 'suitably qualified' and all providers, obviously tell us that we need their services. I have completed a 5 year electrical engineering apprenticeship have decades of aircraft electrical engineering experience and a Licentiateship from City & Guilds in Electrical Engineering and finally, my favourite, an A level in common sense.
As the Health and Safety person for the office area of the company I work for I would be more than happy to get us to purchase a tester and carry out the checks my self rather than incur the extra training expense or the expense of employing an external provider. Would I meet the criteria to be a 'suitably qualified person'?
Regards
Barry
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
This doesn't answer your question, sorry, but what types of equipment are you wanting to PAT?
You mention the working environment as an office, maybe 1 solution is to risk assess the equipment and not do PAT if this is not required..
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Laptops and printers are the only portable appliances. When I joined everything was new and I argued that PAT testing wasn't required having risk assessed it myself, I am just pre-empting the fact that as the equipment ages and people transport their laptops (and leads) to and fro that a more thorough test may be asked for/required. I do like to advocate a sensible approach where possible and try to avoid overkill!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
I'd personally press for acceptance of your assessment: low risk office environment, no need for PAT at all?
There are better things to be spending money on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I'd opt for getting the current code of practice for PAT. Get someone trained to C7G 2377.
Risk assess it all and away you go.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Personally I would go with the risk assessment as someone has already stated. With regards to competence to PAT test I find the whole PAT testing courses ridiculous for a fully qualified electrician. I sat on one of these courses and knew more abou the theory side than the trainer. The course mainly focuses on the use of the equipment and in reality, as soon as you leave the course you go off and acquire different kit anyway, which is different to the kit you trained on. The courses are OK for someone new on the industry but I do not see why it is an additional requisite for an electrician to obtain.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
From what I've seen of more than a few HNC/HND electrical people they tend to think that they are above it all. Happy days.
Perhaps I've been unlucky inasmuch that they knew next to nothing about testing/PAT/17th etc and a few other things to boot. They could talk a good job too ;-)
Anyway, what is a fully qualified electrician these days?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
barry forrester wrote:Hello All,
I'm seeking some advice reference PAT. All of the information I can find refers to someone 'suitably qualified' and all providers, obviously tell us that we need their services. I have completed a 5 year electrical engineering apprenticeship have decades of aircraft electrical engineering experience and a Licentiateship from City & Guilds in Electrical Engineering and finally, my favourite, an A level in common sense.
As the Health and Safety person for the office area of the company I work for I would be more than happy to get us to purchase a tester and carry out the checks my self rather than incur the extra training expense or the expense of employing an external provider. Would I meet the criteria to be a 'suitably qualified person'?
Regards
Barry
Barry with your experience, prior training and qualifications I like to see someone argue you are not competent to carry out PAT testing on this type of equipment, however the office equipment you speak of most likely doesn't require a PAT, carry out visual inspections of the equipment, the cables and the internal wiring of the plug ect record these inspections and you'll be okay. If you have a kitchen with a kettle, toaster ect these will require PAT every 1- years.
My advice would be to stick with the risk assessment and visual inspections, however if pushed to formal PAT testing then I would have no problem in nominating you as a competent person to carry out this task.
Google INDG236 rev2 for more information on what is the requirements.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Aside from all of the various discussions over whether to test or not, there used to be an HSE document, and I am not sure which one, which dealt with the issues surrounding who could PAT with what sort of tester. This document essentially dealt with 2 types of tester
1. A tester which needed some interpretation of the results and which required a higher level of competency than;
2. A tester that needed little or no interpretation of the results i.e. pass or fail, which required a lower level of competency than the tester above
I am not sure what the document was or if it still exists, but if you can find it this may be helpful in answering your question
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Barry, the HSE provide excellent guidance on this matter, Link: http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg236.pdf
Also I would agree, if your have sufficient equipment etc to warrant the out lay cost for training (C&G) and test equipment then this would be the way to go.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.