Regulations re buried loop connections 1980

[JohnW2]

But I will 95% guarantee that the contractor in the OP was not aware of the safe practices so had not gone to the trouble of obtaining plans or used a cable locating device to check the work area for the presence of cables. .... simple question if you have a supply of gas, electricity, water and a telephone and can see no overhead lines they will be underground! So why do so many folk not join the dots and think before they start digging (including flowerbeds)

Now hang on - we're talking about gardeners and tree surgeons, not to mention small children and 'little old ladies' with their gardening tools - with no knowledge of 'safe practices', 'plans' or 'cable locating devices'. There's not even any guarantee or requirement that these people will be literate or possessing of a reasonable IQ, or 'all of their faculties'. It surely is incumbent, morally if not also legally, upon a DNO to ensure a 'reasonable level of safety' for such people?

Kind Regards, John.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Now hang on - we're talking about gardeners and tree surgeons, ... with no knowledge of 'safe practices', 'plans' or 'cable locating devices'.

Completely disagree regarding the first two.

They are professionals, and they must behave with professionalism and to know about and observe all safe practices, checking of plans, use of detecting equipment etc which are relevant to the activities they undertake.

No exceptions, no excuses for not doing it.

There's not even any guarantee or requirement that these people will be literate or possessing of a reasonable IQ, or 'all of their faculties'.

If they are insufficiently literate or intelligent to be able to successfully operate to the standards required of a professional then they should not be offering their services.

No exceptions, no excuses.

 

[westie101]

We know and that is my whole point.

In 38 years in the industry I have NEVER ** seen a cable laid shallow by any of our staff or contractors!

I have dealt with numerous cases where cables have been found shallow or deep for reasons detailed above. I have attended instances where I witnessed cables laid at the correct depth based on levels provided by others that are no longer at that depth following subsequent level changes by those others.

We do act within our legal requirements and do operate to our CoP's, which following investigations into this sort of incident is a whole lot more than a lot of contractors do!

** Except in specific circumstances where we have provided additional protection and recorded the actual depth on our records as we are required to do.
In one of these cases an operative was seriously injured when a cable was damaged, the operatives employer was prosecuted by the HSE and fined a considerable sum.

And never forget that we get far more cable damages where the cable is at the correct depth and in the correct position, it's just that those digging prefer to operate outside Health and Safety legislation (as do folk who feel that it is OK to remove cut-out fuses without proper training and authorisation!)

 

[JohnW2]

Now hang on - we're talking about gardeners and tree surgeons, ... with no knowledge of 'safe practices', 'plans' or 'cable locating devices'.

Completely disagree regarding the first two. They are professionals, and they must behave with professionalism and to know about and observe all safe practices, checking of plans, use of detecting equipment etc which are relevant to the activities they undertake. No exceptions, no excuses for not doing it.

It's really moot, since you presumably don't disagree about the need to protect the small children and 'little old ladies with diminished faculties' (whom you did not include in my quote) - and, once you've protected them , you've protected everyone.

Whilst you may be right in relation to tree surgeons (whom I only mentioned because of the context of the thread), I really don't think it's reasonable to say what you do of 'gardeners'. For a start, 99%+ of them are amateurs (most Joe Publics have a garden). Even for those making a living (or pocket money) out of it, for most it's not a 'profession' or something they've been trained to do, and not an occupation which has any real requirements in terms of intelligence, literacy or anything much else. Very few of these people will even have considered the possibility that a potentially lethal threat could be lurking a few inches down in their flower bed or lawn, and I think they can reasonably expected to be protected (as best as can be done) against the risk of such hazards.

Kind Regards, John.

 

[westie101]

And as far as I know we have never killed or injured one of the groups of people you mention on here so where is the issue?

How do you suggest we protect them, we lay the cable in accordance with legal requirements protect it as required so what more shall we do?
Legislate that every time anyone excavates a hole of digs a flower bed that they have to contact us and we visit site to supervise, or should we do it for them?

Again, once it is laid to our requirements we have no control over it, legislation has provided a safety fence, how much more bum wiping do people need?

 

[JohnW2]

And as far as I know we have never killed or injured one of the groups of people you mention on here so where is the issue?
How do you suggest we protect them, we lay the cable in accordance with legal requirements protect it as required so what more shall we do?
Legislate that every time anyone excavates a hole of digs a flower bed that they have to contact us and we visit site to supervise, or should we do it for them?
Again, once it is laid to our requirements we have no control over it, legislation has provided a safety fence, how much more bum wiping do people need?

Yes, I understand the problem, and there clearly is no complete solution - and, no, in general I would not expect a DNO to be able to do anything about (or even become aware of) changing ground levels.

However, at least as far as I am concerned, I think you have somewhat 'brought this discussion onto yourself'. Although you have subsequently talked about 'recommended depths', and of people being disciplined for not adhering to them, your initial post gave the impression (at least to me) that DNOs were free to (and sometimes did) bury cables as shallow as they wished. It now seems that you are saying that there are very definite, and enforced. guidelines.

As for 'what I would expect a DNO to do', I think all I could reasonably expect would be for them to be required to bury their cables at a 'reasonable depth' (I would think at last 450mm) below what they believed would be the ultimate finished ground level. After that, as you say, it's next-to-impossible to 'police' the situation, and I would not consider it reasonable for them, in general, to have any such obligation.

Kind Regards, John.

 

[westie101]

I was initially answering the OP in that there are not any legally specified depths which was the question answered and that cables can be found at any depth following installation.

I have at time said or, intentionally implied, that we would lay cables at shallow depth except in the circumstances I have mentioned!

In terms of the CoPs for the DNO I work for we would be looking at: -

LV and services .45m
HV (up to 33kV) 0.6m

All road crossings 0.6m

Agricultural land 1.0m

Voltages of 33kV and above are laid a greater depths than above.

But, and this is a big BUT, this only applies in this DNO, in others it may differ in different circumstances

As I have stated elsewhere this side of the meter sets it's own specifications based on the legal requirements that govern us so each DNO is free to set their own standard. (the only legally defined dimension is the minimum height of overhead lines at 6.0m for those built or modified since 2002)

 

[securespark]

This reminds me of this from an old thread:

it is up to the End User to maintain there house and make sure it is damp free ,

I agree with Plug here.

The GPO should have fitted equipment suited to the conditions in the first place (just as we have to). The regs apply to GPO as well, don't they?

I'd like to see BT try this on me. They'd get very short shrift indeed!

It reminds me of one of my customers who had a new drive. In scraping up the old surface, they cut the NTL cable. NTL went ballistic & told the customer if he wanted it re-instating, he would have to pay some astronomical fee....

The cable, BTW, was only 2" down. And the customer worked for NTL...

 

[JohnW2]

I was initially answering the OP in that there are not any legally specified depths which was the question answered and that cables can be found at any depth following installation.
I have at time said or, intentionally implied, that we would lay cables at shallow depth except in the circumstances I have mentioned!

I presume that there is a 'no' missing from that last sentence

As I said, I think there's been a misunderstanding. I think all of the 'adverse' reactions (included mine) resulted from the fact that your initial post appeared (undoubtedly unintentionally on your part) to be implying that DNOs could, and sometimes did, bury cables at as shallow a depth as took their fancy.

In terms of the CoPs for the DNO I work for we would be looking at: -
LV and services .45m
HV (up to 33kV) 0.6m
All road crossings 0.6m
Agricultural land 1.0m

That all sounds perfectly reasonable. If that had been clear from the start, I think things might have been a little quieter

But, and this is a big BUT, this only applies in this DNO, in others it may differ in different circumstances

Sure, but I suspect that they will all be similar, certainly 'no worse', than yours.

Kind Regards, John.

 

[westie101]

to be implying that DNOs could, and sometimes did, bury cables at as shallow a depth as took their fancy.

No, just that they can be found at any depth!

 

[JohnW2]

to be implying that DNOs could, and sometimes did, bury cables at as shallow a depth as took their fancy.

No, just that they can be found at any depth!

I think we now all understand that - but, initially, some of us misunderstood you.

The lynch mob commissioned by the small children and little old ladies has now been called off

Kind Regards, John.

 

[Lectrician]

Westie - On several occasions when we have been involved in service alterations, we have requested plans to enable us to have trenches excavated etc. We have even had WPD out who then spray positions.

On each occasion plans have either not shown the service to the property, just the main cables in the street, or the positions sprayed by WPD have been incorrect!

Plans cannot be trusted!

 

[holmslaw]

..

 

[TonyNorton]

Sorry Guys,

didn't mean to start a punch-up, and Westie, I didn't mean to imply that all DNOs are tossers, only the person/people who originally laid the cable.

I will say, however, that if there are not hard and fast legally enforceable regulations governing the depth at which cables should be laid then there damned well should be.

There is no question, because of the local topography, of our ground level having been lowered since the installation of said cable, in fact it is more likely to have been raised. This means that the cable was possibly laid in an even shallower trench than the 250mm depth at which we found it.

Somthing that you guys could hopefully explain to me: -

We live at No.8 on the even numbered side of a short cul-de-sac. Round the corner from No.2 in the 'main' road is a small building (not a box) which houses a "substation"/"transformer"/"distribution point" (?). The guys from the SEB told me that our supply comes via a loop from the fusehead at No.6 to our fusehead. Judging from the fact that there are also 2 cables going into our fusedhead, there is also a loop from us to No.10.

If it is the case that the whole cul-de-sac is wired via 'loops' is it wired: -

(a) Like a domestic ring main, in which case I would have expected, when our supply from No.6 was broken, to receive power via the loop with No.10. Or.....

(b) Is it a spur from the main road via Nos.2, 4 and 6, in which case I would have expected Nos.10, 12 and 14 (the last in the line) to go off when our connection was severed, which they didn't.

If it were a 12V/5V DC circuit, with which I am familiar, I could have explained it away by the presence of diodes between each property. Are there such things that can cope with 230V AC? I'm well confuddled

Thanks for your helpful, and interesting comments.

Regards

Tony N

 

[IJWS15]

There is recent case law which confirms that a contractor cannot assume that cables will be at a set depth. The case related to a phone cable buried at less than 100mm.

it is normally assumed that the only ones you can claim are too shallow are the ones laid in the asphalt instead of under it.

In soft ground expect the unexpected - it could have been laid 70-80 years ago.