Sparks Electrical News June 2015

sparks

ELECTRICAL NEWS

june 2015

contractors’ corner

25 Years of Quality Products. 25 Years of Satis ed Customers.

CMY

Mark Palmer, Western Cape Electrical Inspection Authority (WCAEIA)

THIS month I’d like to tackle an area of

certification that seems to be misunderstood

by the electrical industry as a whole – that of

electrical equipment being ‘properly used’.

This already confusing scenario is aggravat-

ed when Registered Persons cover up non-

compliant installation work by deliberately

using other interpretations on the standards

that are, in fact, just watered down advice

from sources that may not fully comprehend

or understand the legal requirements.

The term 'properly used' is raised in An-

nexure 1 of the Certificate of Compliance

document. Now, in my opinion, because

the words 'properly used' form part of a

statement and are not an actual statement,

these words are frequently not read in

the context in which they must be legally

applied.

I would like, therefore, to look at the legal

implications of this in more detail:

“I (Registered Person name) (ID Number), a

Registered Person, declare that I have person-

ally carried out the inspection and testing of

the electrical installation described in the test

report as per the requirements of (nature of

electrical installation), and deem the electri-

cal installation to be reasonable safe when

properly used.”

To fully comprehend the meaning of

'properly used', one has to consult the

Occupational Health and Safety Act 85

of 1993 where the definition of 'properly

used' is contained.

'Properly used' means

used with reason-

able care, and with due regard to any infor-

mation, instruction or advice supplied by the

designer, manufacturer, importer, seller or

supplier

In comprehending the intention of the

legislator here, it has to be understood

that there is, in fact, a

dual

responsibility

created. Firstly, the

user

of an electrical

installation

(as more specifically detailed in

the Electrical Installation Regulations 2009)

has to use something with ‘reasonable

care’. This responsibility is coupled with the

responsibility of the

provider

of the article

or substance who has to provide informa-

tion and instructions in order to enable the

user thereof to use it properly.

In all instances it must be clearly under-

stood that any component used within

a low voltage electrical installation must

comply with a standard, which is referred

to in the incorporated standard

SANS 10142-1:

EIR 5(2) –

“No personmay use components

within an electrical installation unless those

components comply with the standards

referred to in the relevant incorporated

standard…”

Furthermore, in terms of these standards

to which components must comply, the

manufacturer of the component is legally

obligated to ensure that instructions are

available concerning the safe installation

and use of the component. Many of these

instructions are, in fact, incorporated in

the standard to which the component

complies.

Again, I must highlight the requirements

of the Act;

Section 10 – General duties of manu-

facturers and others regarding arti-

cles and substances for use at work

Sub section 1

“Any person who designs, manufactures,

imports, sells or supplies any article for use

at work shall ensure, as far as is reasonably

practicable, that the article is safe and with-

out risks to health when properly used and

that it complies with all prescribed require-

ments

.”

Here it is important to note that this

section of the Act goes even further and

extends this responsibility not only to the

manufacturer but also to 'others'.

These 'others' to which the Act refers

(and certainly in the scope of low voltage

electrical installations) include Registered

Persons and electrical contractors.

Sub section 2

“Any person who

erects or installs any article for

use at work on or in any premises shall ensure,

as far as is reasonably practicable, that noth-

ing about themanner in which it is erected or

installedmakes it unsafe or creates a risk to

health when properly used”.

And this is where my dilemma lies.

Where components are not correctly installed

(including distribution boards, cables, enclosures,

disconnectors, etc.) there is a clear contravention

of safety legislation. Many of the cases of non-

compliance, which I deal with on a daily basis,

include these contraventions and when they

are exposed, affected registered persons tend

to look for justification for the non-compliant

electrical work.

This ‘justification’is an attempt to disregard

the entire scope of the intention of legislation

by only looking at the two words contained in

the very same declaration I started with, which

are 'reasonably safe'.

These two words in the context of which non-

compliance is justified, do not however appear

in the definitions contained either in the Act or

in the Regulations.

The Act, however, only deals with two aspects

in this context: 'reasonably practicable' and 'safe'.

Next month, I intend to clarify these two aspects

in line with the 'properly used' issue discussed in

this column with specific reference to the issuing

of valid Certificates of Compliance.

To conclude, I’d like to leave Registered Persons

with a thought on which to ponder: 'Is reasonably

safe the same as being reasonable dead?'

The legal requirements of ‘properly used’ in CoCs (Part 1)