Online assistance for electrical trade people in New Zealand and Australia Login  |  Register  |   Forgot Password
Assistance for electrical trade people




Click here to send Forum Admin a pdf document for publication on this Topic

Documents must be less than 200k in pdf format

Posted By Topic: sDOC and Medium Risk Articles

Oct 29 2012 12:18

I am hoping someone can clear some confusion regarding supplier declarations of conformity.

In the Electrical Safety Regulations 2010, Reg 83(2) mentions medium risk articles must have a supplier declaration of conformity.

Medium risk articles are defined in the energy safety website under gazette notice “Supplier declaration required for certain types of electrical appliances & fittings – 23 November 2006”.
This gazette notice is still current and lists all the medium risk articles.

In the schedule it contains light fittings with the following description: “A fitting that is intended to produce light for illumination purposes, in domestic or similar applications, having a rating up to and including 500 watts and is for use with tungsten filament, light emitting semiconductors, tubular fluorescent or other discharge lamps and includes fittings also incorporating automatic controls, such as passive infrared motion detectors.”

My understanding of the above is that a supplier declaration of conformity for a light fitting is only required if it is to be installed in a domestic or similar application.

If the light fitting is to be installed in an industrial workshop or warehouse then no sDOC required as it is not a residential or similar application?

Is my interpretation correct or have I missed something.

I have forwarded the query to Energy Safety so will be interested to see what they think too.

Thanks in advance.

Oct 29 2012 18:00

Just to be clear, it\'s not where it\'s used but what sort of fitting it is.

Oct 30 2012 07:33

Hi AlecK, thanks for the reply. If that is the case then I would interpret it as, for example, recessed fluoro pan fittings are not generally used in domestic so no sDoC required? I\'m still not convinced there is a clear explanation and the whole clause is open to interpretation. Cheers.