Log in to the online community

Want to post a reply? You'll need to log in
DPC. Is it commercially driven?
Jon Steward
20 Posts
We are not given any facts, statistics, evidence by the IET and expected to comment.
I'm no scientist but can apply some common sense.
Specifically AFDD, Foundation Earthing, Surge Protection.
I noticed that Kirsty from Surge Protective Devices Ltd is on the JPEL panel as an advisor. (No vested interest there!)
How many manufacturers are there in JPEL?
Can we have the facts please.
3 Replies
There are a large number of all kinds of representations on JPEL/64. The manufacturers are represented by a number of people under the Umbrella of BEAMA. You can see the 18th edition list on page 9. What it doesn't say is how all these different groups form up to vote on new equipment. I cannot comment on your assertion but if this were parliament any external influence or payment would have to be declared. I think that might be a good idea, and vested interests should be made public. For the record, I have none whatsoever!
393 Posts
This is a hugely important question and probably needs a comprehensive response from someone who has experience in JPEl 64 and who is willing to be candid about the prevailing situation. I suspect that considerable weight is brought to bear by commercial interests but I would like to think that the IET and BSI are robust enough to remain impartial to any such pressures. Who knows what happens further upstream as the waters may have already been polluted at the IEC and CENELEC feeder rivers! Maybe some kind of investigation exercise is needed to reassure those of us who depend on the water quality in the lower reaches.
What would perturb me is the possible diminution of respect that BS7671 has always seemed to be able to maintain. As the document’s scope is growing in perennial fashion, it seems to be straying in to areas that perhaps it has no business being, like energy efficiency, I would argue, so it is bound to run headlong in to obstinate and dissenting opinion which could lead to the evaporation of the wide support that it currently has.
We are lucky as an industry that we have a single regulatory document that most people are happy to anchor to. I do hope that doesn’t change!
45 Posts
Makes you wonder doesn't it. Especially when they struggle to say how many fires would have been stopped annually by the installation of AFDD's, and the board members are made up from some manufacturers of these products 


Log in

Want to post a reply? You'll need to log in