We have recently taken ownership of a brand-new building, largeish in size and next door to a huge building. We have had a Fire risk assessment done and it makes note of needing to comply with a British Standard with respect to lightning protection, with an inspection every 11 months. This has never been noted by the various risk assessors for our other sites.

It is quoting in order to comply with Article 17 Maintenance of the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order2005, we would need to comply with the requirements of BS EN 62305, and carry out the inspection every 11 months.

The actual Legislation is quite vague on exactly what this actually covers, however from the Government document “The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 - Guidance Note No. 1: Enforcement”

Article 17

“the maintenance of any equipment and devices provided in accordance with the risk assessment to protect all relevant persons in and around the premises from the dangers of fire, eg fire extinguishers, fire suppression systems, alarm systems and emergency lighting.”

Article 50 ( from the guidance -  the legislation is not quite the same)

“the Secretary of State may adopt guidance written by others; so, for example, British Standards may be cited as the appropriate guidance, as may a sector specific guide produced by a third party”

This has brought up a number of questions

1. Have British standards now become legal requirements for everything or only just fire related? (note that in the extract for guidance on article 50 it uses the words “May adopt” & “May be cited” So how do we know which ones are adopted /Cited? (other than a Fire risk assessor has told us- who I believe sort of, but want to understand)
2. Why 11 months? internet suggests it is so it cycles through every season over time, OK but so would 13 months ( then 11 years later you discover you have a problem in March!). I ask this in relation that all our fixed electrical inspections are every 5 years. This seems a bit odd to me and if I didn’t know and had to guess, I would have put those time scales the other way around (doing the fixed more frequently and the Lightning protection less often). Interestingly an internet search quotes 12 months, but 11 to allow for the different seasons. What does the standard actually say.

We still have 8 months before we need the first inspection, so I have some time to get my head around it all. It just seems a little gold plated at first glance, so eager to follow the paper trail. I have other questions, but l will go with this one first.

What are people’s thoughts on the above, or links to other guidance on the subject, or where the guidance is actually cited. It it actually reasonable and do people have theirs inspected every 11 months

Chris

Does your building have a lightning conductor installed?

If so you need to start with the RA that deemed such provision was required to be fitted in the first place.

Otherwise I would speculate a template report - delete the unecessary unless the inspector forgets.

Surely this is down to the risk assessment. Lightning is not the hazard which the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order is designed to regulate. It is not surprisingly  fire and lighting can of coureswe,act as  an ignition source. So if you have a building on top of a hill full of flammable liquid ,the risk of a lightning strike causing a fire is high so fitting a decent system of lightning protection is probably a must. For most commercial properties the driver to fit  lightning protection is the insurance policy not legal requirements. Right now there seems to be a lot of confusion as to when legal requirements begin and  guidance ends. I am trying to imagine someone being prosecuted  for not fitting adequate lightning protection and I can’t see it.

Standards  tend to be about  how do something not what to do.   

Originally Posted by: Brian Hagyard

As an inspector I have used British Standareds as to evidance of what best practice should have been in complying with a legal requirement and the "accused" could not show a better option, so we won the case. 

So that seems to say yes we have to do what it says, as doing the inspection in 11 months is obviously better than doing it sometime greater than 11 months.

Edited by user 08 March 2022 16:27:49(UTC)  | Reason: removal of negative

20 pages on the search word lightning

11 months for something external exposed to the elements versus every five years for something protected inside seems quite reasonable.

Originally Posted by: Roundtuit

20 pages on the search word lightning

11 months for something external exposed to the elements versus every five years for something protected inside seems quite reasonable.

But its not outside in the elements it runs down inside, then inside a wall then underground into a chamber which is surrounded by concrete with a cover on top. 

Hi Chris,

I have checked.

I am guessing the 11 months is to ensure that it never has an inspection period greater than a year, as suggested by Peter.

The timetable for inspections is in BS EN (IEC modified) 62305-3 Annex E which is informative, clause E7.1 table E2.

Obviously, I can't share the standard for copyright reasons, the table recommends annual inspections on the critical situations such as where the building has lots of people within, high-value equipment or material, or is perhaps of national interest or business-critical.

It then splits into protection levels I & II, whereby it recommends annual visual inspections and bi-annual complete inspections.

Levels III & IV are biannual visual inspections and complete inspections every 4 years.

The note to the table states that it should be used where there is no statute licencing requirement.

The document then goes on to recommend that you discuss the scenario with your business insurer to ascertain their risk tolerance requirements.

Another factor mentioned is inclement and adverse weather, in standards, I believe the UK is considered quite a hostile weather environment due to the seasonal changes, and the proximity to the sea for most of the country when you look on a global scale.  So solar gain, freezing causing thermal expansion and contraction, the system could easily see possible changes in temperature on the external parts of nigh on 100 Celsius when you consider solar gain and wind chill across a year.

Then the clause containing E2 goes on to discuss various checks and considerations which you would input into your decision on the period between inspections.

I hope this helps, please message me if you want to discuss anything in detail.

I probably should go on the course, but I don't know if I would money out of the knowledge gained, so it's a big gamble!

Originally Posted by: Brian Hagyard

Originally Posted by: chris42

Originally Posted by: Brian Hagyard

As an inspector I have used British Standareds as to evidance of what best practice should have been in complying with a legal requirement and the "accused" could not show a better option, so we won the case. 

So that seems to say yes we have to do what it says, as doing the inspection in 11 months is obviously better than doing it sometime greater than 11 months.

Sorry i was obviously not clear. Following a BS, an ACOP or even guidance is one way of showing you have done what is reasonably practicable to comply with a law or regulation.. Remember what it says in an HSE guidance document,

This guidance is issued by the Health and Safety Executive. Following the guidance is not compulsory, unless specifically stated, and you are free to take other action. But if you do follow the guidance you will normally be doing enough to comply with the law. Health and safety inspectors seek to secure compliance with the law and may refer to this guidance.   

It is my understanding that BS are the same - so feel free to do something different but be prepared to justify your system. As i said with the prosecutions where i used them the diffendent could not offer a better system. Think about the requirements of keping Portable electrical appliances safe. The IEEE regs 18th addition - or more accuratly 7671 suggests PA testing (or it did been a while since i read them in detail) . The HSE is prepared to accept user checks in many situations. I think what i am trying to say (possibly vert badly) is that you dont have to blindly follow a BS. You will never be prsecuted for not applying a BS - but if its the best way of complying with a regulation an inspector may quote it.

BS 7671 was jointly published by the BSI and the IEE.  The IEEE is an American organisation that has nothing to do with UK standards apart from it's influence at IEC level, which then utimately filters down for example to BS 7671 via IEC then CENELEC via HD (IEC) 60364.

BS 7671 is controled by the joint BSI/IET commiteee designated JPEL/64.

Also, BS 7671 does not concern itself with appliances of any sort.  Its remit stops at the socket outlet (point of connection of the equipment), so similarly it does not apply to lamps (bulbs) or such things as generators or machinery.

The IEE is now the IET and BS 7671 is now branded as the IET Wiring Regulations. Amendment 2 to BS 7671 will be pubished on the 28th of March 2022.

The IET do recommend "PAT", though it is now termed, more descriptively, but not easier to say as "In Service Inspection and Testing of Electrical Equipment" ISITEE.

Why or how am I so sure of this, I know, whilst not a member of JPEL/64, I work with BS 7671 daily, and I don't mean in the way of putting sockets on the wall and running wires.  I work closely with JPEL/64 and the IET in. a volunteer role, and assist them in various ways.

I personally know a large percentage of the members of JPEL/64, and the employees at the IET who are involved with the creation of BS 7671.

Edited by user 09 March 2022 08:29:59(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

Thanks Paul

your right the old memory is going - if i send you my bosses email can you tell them its time they retired me off please? 

I freely admit electricity is not one of my strengths - and as always your post is well refranced and informative. Clearly i picked a bad BS to try and explain my point. Is it Friday yet?

The Electricity at Work Regulations do have remarkably little content.  They are entirely useless as a reference for electrical safety.

So i am now aware of 1 regulation that that makes BS a legal requirement!

Originally Posted by: Brian Hagyard

So i am now aware of 1 regulation that that makes BS a legal requirement!

Brian,

You could consider that the Supply of Machinery Safety Regulations (SMSR/CE marking to the Machinery Directive MD) legitimised British Standards as the means of compliance, even though it falls short of specifying them as compulsory.

It states (my words) that if you follow the harmonised/designated standards, you will meet the legislation's essential health and safety requirements.

Also suggested therein and in supporting EU guidance to the MD, identical to the SMSR (except now the UKCA bit, the EHSR's and such requirements are still identical), is that if you don't follow the BS/ENs, then you need to justify why you don't and prove that your solution is safer in your technical file.

Thanks Paul

It has the same table you refer to in your post. The plot thickens, I can’t find a risk assessment in the H&S file but did find a commissioning report that states it is a level 4 installation (so from the table visual inspection in 2 years and Complete inspection every 4 years, as per Pauls post as well), however at the bottom of the commissioning report it recommends annual inspection (they would wouldn’t they).

The fun thing is this BS (I do mean British Standard when I use that abbreviation), is under review according to BSI, so get ready to spend another £361.

Interestingly that document linked suggests it would be an acceptable to the yearly test would be to test on a 14 to 15 month cycle so testing can be done at different times of the year. Where UK testing companies decided to go the other way.

I think I’m being pushed into it being done every 11/12 months as it is on the commissioning report and our Fire RA, despite it being level 4. With the BS setting the requirement, you could be judged against in court for compliance to appropriate actions.

Out of the office tomorrow, so hopefully a fresh mind on Friday

Chris

Originally Posted by: Hunt42950

Have had a quick read through replies. Have a look at this company https://omegaredgroup.com/ and if you would like a contact to speak to who will I’m sure be able to help you, please drop me a message.

This could be viewed as an opportunity to drop in an advertisement given the acknowledgement of PM

Brian, it wasn't me (Kate) that wrote that, it was Paul Skyrme.  I have nothing like such a command of machinery standards!

To start not sure what made me think my brain would be in a better position come Friday as per my previous post.

Reread everyone’s comments and we have British Standards being used as evidence of Best Practice. Is best practice another way of saying “Gold plated”? Are we / Should we always be looking for “Best Practice” or “Acceptable practice”.  In H&S we have ALARP, which pushes you towards Best Practice or even Gold Plating as people try and be on the safe side of that requirement.

So not a legal requirement but just you try and not work to it, with your only option is to equal or better its requirements. So, if you have best practice / Gold plated in the BS, even if you did find an equal alternative you are still at gold plated levels.

You will potentially have the HSE, Fire brigade and insurance companies and Inspection companies in the mix and none of them are going to say its ok to ignore the BS.

I don’t normally click on links from non-site regulars, and it could be an advert. However, I did and within the web site text, as an example of all the various sites I have visited that offer this service it states: “Omega recommends that inspections are conducted every 11 months, to take account of seasonal variations” So that would be inspection every 11 months regardless of the level of installation, then!

The easiest thing for me to do as the H&S bod is to just let it go and tell the MD we have to do this every 11 months as per commissioning report / Fire risk assessment. However, I consider it is also part of my job not to waste money, when it is not needed, but make sure it is spent when it is. Not sure I’m always successful with this but like you all, I try. When I noted this 11-month requirement I was having difficulty justifying to myself, never lone to someone else. Now I know about the inspection frequency recommendation against installation level, I’m having even more issues regarding always 11 months.

Paul thanks for the offer for a contact at Dehn, but I’m not sure there is anywhere for me to go with this. What is it, fight the fights you can do something about and not waste time on fighting those you can’t? I can’t help thinking H&S is on a bit of a slippery slope here, with companies not only being judged against the law but British Standards or even industry bodies own guidance. Who are all free to write what they want (with perhaps some bias) and with no Government oversight.

It has been quite a few years since I did my formal training, and it makes me wonder exactly what those going through level 6 type of whatever flavour training, is currently being told regarding compliance, to non-legal guidance /standards.

Thanks to all for their helpful input and having the discussion. Now to go and check our other sites and see if they have lightning conductors ( not mentioned in any of our previous Fire RA’s but worth checking). Not sure if it possible to tell the install level from just looking at them. Possibly worth firing off an email to our Fire RA and pointing out the install level and asking if this makes a difference to the 11 months in his assessment.

Originally Posted by: peter gotch

Not sure your MD will thank you for just putting out the begging bowl if you think that somebody is overegging the pudding.

MD has lots of priorities to spend resources on - one of those is H&S. They are much more likely to be willing to spend more on H&S if you can show that this is money well spent.

Hi Peter - Yes that is why I wrote “The easiest thing for me to do as the H&S bod is to just let it go and tell the MD we have to do this every 11 months as per commissioning report / Fire risk assessment. However, I consider it is also part of my job not to waste money, when it is not needed, but make sure it is spent when it is.”

I said it was the easiest, but as above I have never taken the easy route, and don’t want money spent unnecessarily.

Originally Posted by: peter gotch

"ALARP" is NOT gold plating but rather deciding what is proportionate. Doing stuff that goes BEYOND what is "ALARP" is gold plating aka "blue tape".

Yes as I noted “as people try and be on the safe side of that requirement.” Ie go a bit further than necessary.

I thought the response from our fire Risk Assessor regarding my challenge to what was written in the assessment, may be of interest as I note this thread has had a good number of views.

He contacted a number of companies who carry out this work who all recommended 11 months and no mention of LPS level ( he commented “and haven’t differentiated across the four levels of lightning protection systems - then again, if it were your line of work and income, I don’t suppose you would!” They all apparently quoted The Electricity at Work Regulations.

I checked this again as well and the HSE guidance document does list the BS in “further reading” but that was part 1 which is all about installation (I think). So, guidance referring to more guidance.

He then went on to say that the BS is not statute. If I was to deviate from the standard (which is your right) I may not be covered by your insurance company should a defect occur that would have been picked up on more frequent inspection. You can therefore choose to do a visual in year 2 and full in year 4. He then suggests checking with the insurer.

Thing is if you ask them, they will say annual (or monthly etc as they are risk adverse), despite the BS allowing longer. I think if something did happen it would be hard to tell when the issue occurred. I don’t see how if we comply with the BS for the level of installation we have, it can be seen to be wrong.

Chris

So, we end up begging the Insurance company to allow us to use the British Standard. Sort of quite funny really when you consider the opening premise of this thread “is the BS a legal standard” and must we work to it.

Shouldn’t it be in whatever rules they have given us when they insured us, if there was any requirement greater than that legally required or in national guidance?

I did come across a HSE review on how H&S is getting pushed along by insurance companies and others, down the Blue tape route. It was quite long and didn’t have time to fully read, but did seem interesting. I suspect we all know this though without a formal review telling us. Can’t find the link but if someone is interested, I will have another go at finding it.

Chris