Kris, My recollection on this point is that the word "extreme" was inserted before "hazard" by the British National Committee many many years ago (as in a couple of decades or so) following the instance of the government department responsible for overseeing health and safety in the workplace (the HSE). If memory serves, there used to be a note in earlier versions of EN 60950 saying that in the UK the words "extreme hazard" had legal significance. Some time later (another decade, or there about) it was discussed whether to remove or explain the word "extreme". The outcome was that it was decided to retain the word but not to explain it: the UK explanatory note was removed about this time also. Again going on personal recollection rather than minutes of meetings, I think that the HSE view of things was that if a person were to come into contact with an "extreme hazard" then the likely result would be loss of life or limb, whereas contact with a "hazard" would result in a lower probability of serious injury, or a reasonably high probability of a less serious injury. Of course, is always difficult to quantify injuries in absolute terms: how is a permanent loss of hearing of, say, 10%, to be equated to loss of part or all of an arm or leg? Now the focus in TC108 is on the development of the new "Hazard Based" standard rather than the maintenance of IEC 60950-1 and IEC 60065 we may need to address again this topic - but I wouldn't bet a limb on it! All the best, Richard Hughes In a message dated 05/04/2004 18:15:49 GMT Standard Time, [email protected] writes:
Dear group, In 60950-1, Clause 2.8.4 and 2.8.6, the wording "extreme hazard" is used, while other parts of the standard just mention the word "hazard". Is there a definition of "extreme hazard" ? Is there a difference between "hazard" and "extreme hazard"? Vriendelijke Groeten, Meilleures salutations, mit freundlichen Gruessen, Best regards, Kristiaan Carpentier
