Jim Wallace of Seaward looks at the emphasis on risk
assessment in the new IET Code of Practice for maintaining
the safety of electrical equipment in the workplace

The fourth edition of the IET Code of
Practice for In Service Inspection
and Testing of Electrical Equipment
provides a timely reminder to all those with
a responsibility for workplace safety under
the Electricity At Work Regulations 1989.

By providing comprehensive guidance on
periodic in-service inspection and testing of
electrical appliances, it is designed to ensure
that organisations, administrators and those
carrying out the testing fully understand the
requirements of the EAWR 1989 and can
demonstrate compliance with it.

There is considerable evidence that faulty
electrical appliances continue to pose a
serious threat to people and property
through accidents, injuries and fire hazards.

There is also indisputable evidence that the
periodic in-service testing of electrical
equipment prevents injuries, saves lives and
avoids workplace fires that would otherwise
be devastating for those involved.

This has not changed – but the clear
message from the IET is that electrical
equipment inspection and testing regimes
should be based on a more focused and
robust approach to assessing the safety risks
posed by appliances.

The fourth edition of the IET Code of
Practice therefore focuses on the importance
of taking a proportionate response to the
need to ensure that all workplace electrical
systems should be maintained to prevent
danger, so far as is reasonably practicable.

Alongside this renewed emphasis on risk
assessment, the new guidance also provides
further clarification on the responsibilities of
duty holders and the extent to which the
involvement of external contractors or
advisors might be used.

Risk based approach The clear implication of the new IET Code is
that only when the risk of using electrical
equipment has been assessed and
understood can it be managed through a
programme of inspection and testing.

In doing so, the latest document also
reiterates that risk based assessments are the
responsibility of the duty holder (which
might be the facilities manager, building
manager, landlord or other such responsible
person), but that a duty holder may enlist the
services of a competent person to assist in
this process.

Importantly, the new emphasis on risk
assessment of the Code of Practice also is
completely consistent with the existing legal
requirements of the Management of Health
and Safety at Work Regulations 1999.

Regulation 3 of the regulation requires all
employers and self employed persons to
assess the risks to workers and others who
may be affected by their undertaking.

In support of this, the Code states that
there are many different methods of risk
assessment and provided they are carried out
within their individual scope of use, any can
be used. It is also highlighted that risk
assessments should be reviewed regularly to
ensure that any control measures are
effective. If there are any significant changes,
the risk assessment should be updated to
reflect this.

Risk encompasses many factors that can
eventually influence a final decision and, for
example, should include a full consideration
of the environment in which the equipment
is being used, the level of user awareness, the
equipment construction and type, frequency
of use, previous records and type of
installation for fixed appliances.

All of the factors used in the risk
assessment should culminate in enabling an
informed decision to be made on the
frequency of any inspections and tests
required.

Importantly, in a significant change to
existing practices and as further emphasis of
the link between the duty holder, risk
assessment and inspection and testing
intervals, the new Code also recommends
that the date for re-testing should not be
marked on the pass label. Instead it is
advised that the ‘the duty holder should
determine the date for the next inspection
and/or tests on a risk assessment basis…and
record this on their ‘Equipment formal visual
and combined inspection test record.’
Set against the principles of new riskbased
maintenance programmes, test record
keeping systems are therefore likely to take
on even greater importance as a valuable
management tool for reviewing the
frequency of inspection and testing – and
without records duty holders cannot be
certain that the inspection and testing have
actually been carried out.

Overall, the new IET Code of Practice
should therefore help all those involved in
maintaining electrical safety in the workplace
to better understand their obligations and to
make more informed decisions on the scope
of the electrical inspection and testing
required.