This discussion is locked.
You cannot post a reply to this discussion. If you have a question start a new discussion

Implications of changes in standards and regulations.

This a general question regarding all standards, not just BS 7671.


Until recently I've always understood that if a project was designed/quoted prior to changes in standards/regulations that it was allowed to install to the old regs and not the new regs.


Recently I have been made aware of the advice by the NICEIC which states: "All amendments to regulations are applicable at the point in time/date that the main contract is executed/signed."


Taking that advice literally, this means that that any project quoted before the changes but due to be executed after the changes will need to comply with the new regs. Therefore the line in the sand for compliance is the date the contract is let, not the date it was designed.


A lot of the projects I work on have a long lead time between quote and order (sometimes 18-24 months) and I currently have a few due to drop that require compliance with BS 5839-6, BS 6701, and BS 7671, all of which have been amended since the original design/quotes.


Any advice or your experience of this matter greatly received.


TIA. Simon.
  • This is actually a very tricky question as it is contract law rather than engineering. The general rule with standards is that they, of themselves, are not mandatory, so just because there is a standard does not mean it has to be complied with. What makes a standard mandatory is either the contract or appropriate legislation. (A good example I tend to use is that there are a multitude of standards, national and international, for domestic plugs and sockets. I am pretty sure there is even an international IEC Standard. However from memory there are only two countries in the whole world that use the international standard, and in the UK the British Standard for plugs and sockets (BS1363) is mandated by regulations. Other standards may be used for particular circumstances where the regulations aren't applicable but this is between the supplier and customer.)

    In most instances the use of specific standards, where not mandated by national legislation, will be specified in the contract between the supplier and customer. This contract will dictate what revision of the standard and the cut off date, the cut off date commonly being the date at which the contract is signed. However it may specify a particular stage in construction or a particular drawing approval, since when you are half way through construction of a big project it is impractical to go back and do a redesign. As an example, the latest UK aircraft carrier project was started about 20 years ago and there have been many changes in the standards since it started. However the date at which the standard list was frozen (in common with all other ship construction - this is not a special case) would have been the date on which the keel was laid, still more than ten years into the project but it prevents cost over-run due to changes in standards (being a military project they find all sorts of other ways to over-run the cost!)

    If you need to find out what amendments are applicable you need to find out what is calling up the standard (contract, national regulation, etc.) and see what is said about what version of the standard is to be used and at what stage the changes are frozen.

    If this is a common problem it may be worth getting involved with the committee that updates the standard so that you are aware of what changes are coming through ahead of time (and may even be able to influence the changes).

    Alasdair
  • Just to add to Alasdair's excellent answer: Of course there will be cases where the contract doesn't specify the standard version. And may not even specify the standard, but you may still need to comply to a standard to meet statutory requirements.


    Fortunately for these cases most standards, including most BSs, have a transition period between the application of the new standard and the withdrawal of the old standard. As long as your project finishes within that period you're ok, if it doesn't you will either have to comply to the new standard or argue a case as to why meeting the old standard still meets your legal and contractual obligations (which is not the best way to go but sometimes there's no other real way out - this is likely to need someone who really know what they're doing to argue this).


    BUT sometimes the old standard just gets withdrawn when the new one is issued. This, frankly, is a right pain in the bottom. My industry, which tends to have projects measured in years rather than months, has recently been hit with this one with one of our key standards.  Often the only solution you're left with is to argue why you've still met your legal requirements under (e.g.) HASAWA (or whatever the relevant legislation is) AND get your client to agree in writing that you're ok to hand over the job to the old standard.


    Hate to say it, but the best thing to do if you're often delivering to standards is, as Alasdair suggests, to do everything you can to make sure you hear about any changes the moment they happen, or preferably before they happen. But it's not easy and we all get caught out sometimes. So keep your eye on what the standard is actually there to achieve just in caseyou do need to make an argument to a client or (even more fun) an independent assessor.


    On that note, as an independent assessor myself, I can say that just saying "we did it to the old standard because we couldn't afford to meet the new standard" doesn't go down at all well (heard that one before). But saying, as you suggest here, that the project was designed and installed to the current standard at the time, but that by sign-off / handover the new version was in place, AND (this is the important bit) you've checked against the new standard, you can list the big differences, and then explain why you believe there's no big safety or compatibility risk by not meeting them, then at least you've got a good chance of being taken seriously.   



    Altogether it's a VERY good question! You won't be alone in wondering about this. I seem to have spent years and years digging companies out of the manure when they've realised they've been complying to out of date standards - it's not fun and I wouldn't recommend it as a career path. I think I'm reasonably good at rescuing this situation, but there have certainly been a (fortunately very small) number of times when I've had to give the bad news to organisations that they basically need to shut the offending part down until it does comply, which for business reasons meant assessing and showing compliance immediately (that day) to the new standard. When there was a (say) three year transition period, and that transition period expired (say) five years ago, and it's a safety standard, the company really doesn't have much of a leg to stand on...


    Cheers,


    Andy