SUPPLEMENT FEATURE TEST & MEASUREMENT
PUTTING SAFETY TO THE TEST T
Jim Wallace, associate director, products and technology, at the Seaward Group, looks at the electrical safety regulations that provided the stimulus for portable appliance testing 25 years ago
he Electricity At Work Regulations 1989 (EAWR 1989) set out to raise
the standards of electrical safety within industry and commerce. In doing so they largely provided the starting point for what is now known as portable appliance testing (PAT). The onus is on the dutyholder to ensure that equipment in the workplace is maintained due to the fact that nowhere in the regulations is there a specific requirement for the testing of portable appliances. It is this obligation that introduces the
implied requirement to perform periodic inspection and testing. Without such actions the inference is that the dutyholder will be unable to establish the potential dangers exposed by faulty or unsafe equipment. In the event of electrical accidents, property damage or personal injury occurring, portable appliance testing can demonstrate a responsible and diligent approach towards safety that may subsequently be required by the HSE, employers, insurance companies and other interested parties.
CONSEQUENCES Evidence suggests that faulty electrical appliances pose a real threat to people and property, and as such, the HSE states that ‘electricity can kill or severely injure people and cause damage to property. Every year many accidents at work involving electric shock or burns are reported to the Health and Safety Executive.’ The HSE is unable to provide detailed data on electricity related fatalities, accidents and injuries going back 25 years. However, it seems clear that since the introduction of the EAWR 1989, workplace accidents linked to electricity have shown a gradual decline. Figures extracted from RIDDOR from
2001/2002 to 2012/13, show that the total number of fatalities, major injuries and over three day injuries has fallen from 549 incidents to less than 300. However, potential electrocution and
electric shock represents only part of the problem associated with faulty electrical items. Proper consideration also needs to be made of the contributory role of faulty electrical appliances in commercial and industrial
S6 OCTOBER 2014 | TEST & MEASUREMENT
COMMON SENSE There is indisputable evidence that the periodic inspection and testing of portable electrical equipment saves lives and prevents fires that may otherwise have caused injuries, loss of life and serious damages to business and work premises. In the vast number of cases the cost of
taking a reasonable approach to inspection and testing can be considerably lower than that associated with other forms of assessing and preventing any health and safety risks - and certainly lower than the resultant financial cost of any personal injury or fire damage to premises resulting from faulty appliances remaining undetected. More recently, the new emphasis on a
property fires which are also a major cause of deaths, injuries and considerable costs to businesses. In particular, successive annual fire
statistics show that faulty appliances and leads continue to pose the single most common problem as the main cause of accidental fires in ‘other dwellings’ - i.e. non-residential properties. Over the 25 year period of the EAWR
1989 the following overall comparison can be made - in the 1989 UK Fire Statistics, among 45,600 fires in ‘other occupied buildings’ (non-domestic), 32,400 (71%) were regarded as accidental with the main causes being faulty appliances and leads with 6,800 incidents (21%) and misuse of equipment or appliances with 6,400 fires (20%). In the 2011/12 Fire Statistics Great Britain report, there were 24,100 fires in ‘other buildings’ of which 16,800 (70%) were regarded as accidental. The main cause of accidental fires in other buildings was faulty appliances and leads (24%). Over this period these figures would appear to show that the incidence of accidental fires caused by electrical appliance faults in commercial and industrial buildings has reduced significantly. In addition to these established dangers associated with faulty electrical items, portable appliance inspection and testing is also becoming one of the main ways of identifying potentially dangerous counterfeit electrical equipment or faulty appliances that have been the subject of a product recall.
Above: since the introduction of the EAWR 1989, workplace accidents linked to electricity have shown a gradual decline
Below: there is indisputable evidence that periodic inspection and testing of portable electrical equipment saves lives and prevents fires
common sense approach to testing has also been useful in helping to generate a better understanding of portable appliance testing. As a result, whilst risk assessment remains fundamental to this new approach, the clarification of the responsibilities of dutyholders and contractors will further strengthen relationships between the two and help to introduce higher levels of professionalism in the industry. Against the backdrop of 25 years of the
Electricity At Work Regulations 1989, few could dispute that the process of electrical inspection and testing has made an important contribution to improving and maintaining safety in the workplace.
Seaward Group
www.seaward.co.uk T: 0191 586 3511
Enter 235
/ ELECTRICALENGINEERING
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64