DEA Technical Bulletin
For NHER Accreditation Scheme Members
S pec ia l Issue 33 | November 2012
Al l c o ntent © N atio nal Energ y S ervic es, Ltd
Welcome to the latest issue of the DEA Technical Bulletin. In this issue you will find information on RDSAP
conventions, data collection systems and software. Please note that the contents of this technical bulletin may supersede
certain scheme rules or requirements appearing in the Product Rules, Inspection and Reporting Requirements, training manuals or
elsewhere. Members must therefore ensure that they have read and understood this document.
In this issue:
 The Scheme Operating
Requirements and auditing
your EPC
 Green Deal Quick Guides
 Shower or not a shower?
 EPC and recommendation for
floor insulation
 Insulated external doors
 Dated photo requirements
 Loft spaces and insulation
 NES one Uploadr
 Audit timelines
 Quiz-did you know...?
 A note about Addenda
 Recommendations for
 Ask our Experts
 Heating controls not
available
WWHRs
The Scheme Operating Requirements and auditing your EPC
The EPC plays a major role in promoting
the Green Deal and it forms the basis
for any Green Deal plan a customer
enters in to. More than ever, it is
important that the EPCs on the Central
Register are accurate and that DEAs can
substantiate any decisions they make in
creating the EPCs.
The DCLG Scheme Operating
Requirements (SORs) states that:
“5.1.2 Defective EPCs identified by QA
procedures are replaced in so far as it
is possible to do so, and within
defined timescales.
“Appendix 5, 3.1.5 Table 1, in this
appendix indicated the minimum
level of evidence Schemes shall
demand from EAs for QA purposes.
“Appendix 5 3.1.3 Schemes shall
require their members to provide
sufficient material to their Scheme
such that the EPC can be recreated
by an independent QAA.
“Appendix 5 11.3.1 Where a Scheme
QAA is unable to audit an EPC due to
unsatisfactory evidence such as poor
photographs or site notes the
Scheme shall fail the audit and mark
the EPC as defective.”
With respect to the minimum evidence
requirements, fundamentally, this
means providing a full set of dated
photographic evidence and full site
notes. (See also the article on page 9 of
this bulletin).
The mandatory list of photos, as set out
in SORs Appendix, 5 Table 1, required
for any assessment is as follows:
 Front elevation
 Rear elevation
 Side elevation
 Cavity wall insulation evidence
 Roof construction
 Openings–including windows (to
show gap between glazing and date
stamp where possible) and open
fireplaces
 Primary heating system, e.g. boiler
and key features
 Secondary heating system
 Loft insulation, including evidence of
the depth of insulation (showing
measurement where possible and/
or wide context of insulation
coverage across loft area)
(Continued on page 2)
Page 1 of 10
DEA Technical Bulletin
(Continued from page 1)

Evidence of wall thickness (tape
measure to wall reveal)

Conservatories (to indicate
separation and height)

Heating system controls (all
controls are mandatory)

Hot water cylinder and thermostat

Electric and gas meters

LPG containers

Fixed low energy light fittings; any
other features that might affect the
SAP rating, including limitations
If you fail to provide enough information
to allow us to complete an audit and to
verify all your data inputs, this means
that along with an audit fail and the
required two targeted audits, you will be
asked to provide the necessary
information to substantiate your
decision. Furthermore, if any of the
required two target audits also fail
because of lack of evidence or poor
evidence, you will be suspended from
the scheme.
Re-instatement will only occur if either
new, satisfactory evidence is provided,
or if you can demonstrate that the
reason for the lack of evidence was
beyond your control and that you have
taken steps to ensure that further
instances will not occur. EPCs are to be
audited on the basis of the evidence
supplied.
A recent audit of the NHER Accreditation
Scheme by the government, confirmed
I s s u e 33
29 | N
Deo cve
e mb eer 2 01
0 112|| ©
© NNat
a ti ioonnal
al EEnneerg
rgyy SSeerrvi
v icceess
that when auditing EPCs, we must not
allow the subsequent submission of
missing evidence. In other words, EPCs
will be audited on the basis of the
evidence supplied at the time of the
audit. If a particular feature that has
been included in the assessment was not
supported by sufficient evidence, the
audit will be carried out on the basis that
that particular feature was not present.
Subsequently, if either the description of
the dwelling on Page 2 of the EPC or the
recommended measures are incorrect
when audited on this basis, the audit will
automatically be marked as defective,
irrespective of whether the SAP
tolerances have been met or not.
Consider the following description of a
dwelling from page 2 of the EPC (Figure
1 below). If you are unable to supply a
photo to substantiate the inclusion of a
room thermostat, the auditor will
assume that there is none in the
property. The resulting change in SAP
might be 3 points (within our Quality
Standard). However, because of the
change in the property description and
the likely change to the recommendation
to include the improvement of the
heating controls, the EPC will be deemed
to be defective (note that previously the
heating controls would have been
deemed satisfactory).
The steps we will now ask you to take
are:
1. Provide information to substantiate
that the EPC is correct within two
working days, or confirm that you
have arranged a re-visit with the
homeowner within two working days.
2. If you have arranged a re-visit you
must supply the required evidence
or re-lodge a new EPC within ten
working days of receiving the
compliance team’s feedback.
3. If no re-visit is arranged after two
working days, the compliance team
will write to the occupant, informing
them that you need to re-visit and
collect further information. The
letter will give your contact details
but the onus is on you to continue
trying to make an appointment.
Your account will be debited with
£10 to cover the cost of sending this
letter.
4. If no new evidence or no new EPC is
available after ten working days,
you will be suspended until you
provide a summary of the steps you
have taken to provide the required
evidence.
We must be assured that you have
made best endeavours to provide
the evidence required. Under this
scenario no new EPC will be lodged.
5. Any new EPC will be checked by the
compliance team. In the event that
you can supply the required
information after a re-visit, the audit
of the original EPC will still be
marked as a fail.
Two targeted audits will be called after
an audit fail due to poor or missing
evidence.
(Continued on page 3)
Figure 1
Click on a headline to rea d othe r a rticles in this bulle tin:
| Scheme operating Requirements and auditing your EPC | Heating controls not available
| Audit timelines | EPC and recommendation for floor insulation | Recommendations for WWHRs | Green Deal Quick Guides | Shower or not a shower? | Insulated external doors
| Loft spaces and insulation | | Quiz–Did you know...? | Ask our Experts | Dated photo requirements | NES one Uploadr | A note about Addenda
Page 2 of 10
DEA Technical Bulletin
I s s u e 33
29 | N
Deo cve
e mb eer 2 01
0 112|| ©
© NNat
a ti ioonnal
al EEnneerg
rgyy SSeerrvi
v icceess
(Continued from page 2)
Audit timelines
If either of your targeted audits also fails
because of poor evidence, we will insist
that you go through steps 1 to 4 but you
will also be suspended at step 1.
To help ensure that the homeowner and any Green Deal Advisor have a correct
EPC, strict timelines have been set to ensure that we, i.e., the Scheme, audit an
EPC in a timely fashion. Appendix 5 Table 2 of DCLGs SORs list the deadlines and
these are summarised in the table below.
Failed cameras/low batteries etc. are not
sufficient excuses. Regardless of the
reason, if the evidence is not provided,
you will risk failing the audit and the EPC
being marked as defective. Now is a
good time to ensure that you have spare
batteries, back up cameras, etc..
Time limits for EPC audit work
Several of our members use a photo
checklist. Given the importance of
providing a full set of evidence we would
recommend you also use one. We have
provided such a checklist on NES one
under Useful documents.
Heating controls not
available?
Some of you may come across heating
controls in a property that are not
available options you can select for the
EPC. An example of this would be room
thermostat and TRV’s. All of the currently
available heating control options for
RDSAP are listed in SAP 2009 table 4e.
The available options are reviewed
whenever there is a SAP revision, for
example the control option TRVs and
bypass was not in SAP 2005, but was
introduced in SAP 2009.
If you come across a situation that
cannot be accurately assessed in RDSAP,
such as TRVs and a room thermostat
with no programmer, our advice would
be to opt for the worst case scenario and
select the option that gives the lower
SAP rating.
From
To
Maximum
Period
Exceptions
EPC
lodgement
Scheme first calls
for evidence
25 working days
Audits requirements associated
with the minimum sampling rate
of 1 EPC lodged per quarter.
Scheme calls
for evidence
Evidence received
15 working days
This period can be extended by
up to 5 working days under extraordinary circumstances.
Evidence
received
Auditing work
completed
15 working days
Auditing work
completed
Feedback to DEA
5 working days
Feedback
provided to
DEA
Lodgement of new
EPC if required
10 working days
Scheme makes other
arrangements*
You will be suspended if you fail to re-lodge an EPC within 10 working days once we have
identified it as defective. We will then take steps to ensure that the homeowner has a
correct EPC by sending out another DEA and you will only be re-instated once you reimburse
any costs we have incurred during this process.
EPCs and recommendations for floor insulation
On many occasions, DEAs have queried the indicative costs for floor insulation
and asked about the appropriateness of the figures quoted on the EPC.
It should be noted and clarified with occupants that any such costs are just
indicative costs across a reasonable range for the measures concerned. Accurate
costs can only ever be established by an installer producing a formal quotation
after a site survey.
Indicative costs do not take into account any variation in the size or area covered
by the measure. In the case of floor insulation, they relate only to the costs
associated with installing the insulation and do not include any costs for the
removal and replacement of any of the floor structure and surface finishes etc.;
these could be quite substantial.
We acknowledge that the description on
the EPC will not be entirely accurate and
that the recommendations are likely to
include a heating control that is already
present. You will need to explain this to
your client and also ensure that you
provide a full explanation on your site
notes.
Click on a headline to rea d othe r a rticles in this bulle tin:
| Scheme operating Requirements and auditing your EPC | Heating controls not available
| Audit timelines | EPC and recommendation for floor insulation | Recommendations for WWHRs | Green Deal Quick Guides | Shower or not a shower? | Insulated external doors
| Loft spaces and insulation | | Quiz–Did you know...? | Ask our Experts | Dated photo requirements | NES one Uploadr | A note about Addenda
Page 3 of 10
DEA Technical Bulletin
Recommendations for
WWHRS
Some DEAs have queried why it is that
WWHRS rarely appear in the domestic
EPC recommendations. This article aims
to explain the reasons for this and aims
to identify when recommendations for
WWHRS are more likely to occur.
Property size
It is important to remember that hot
water usage in SAP is directly related to
the assumed number of occupants in the
dwelling, which is itself directly related to
the measured floor area of the property.
Hot water consumption is therefore a
function of property size and the larger
the property, the higher the hot water
consumption and the greater the
potential for energy savings through the
use of WWHRS.
I s s u e 33
29 | N
JDe
aoncve
uear
mb
y ee2r01
2 01
2|
0 112|
©| ©
N©atNNiat
oa nti io
aolnnEal
aln eEErnngeeyrg
rgSyye SrSveeirrcvi
veicsceess
Baths versus showers
Oder of recommendations
Where rooms contain both a bath and a
shower, the software automatically
assumes that some hot water
consumption will be via the bath and not
the shower. Therefore the assumed
effect of installing a WWHRS in a room
with a bath and mixer shower will be less
than that associated with a room that
has a mixer shower but no bath.
When assessing a property for
recommendations in RDSAP, the
measures are always assessed in the
same fixed order as defined by SAP 2009
Appendix T.
WWHRS recommendations are therefore
more likely to be present for properties
where there are more rooms with mixer
showers and no baths or where there are
mixer showers present and no baths is
present at all.
This second data set (see Screenshot 2
below) would benefit more from a
WWHRS than that shown in the example
in Screenshot 1.
This order dictates that solar water
heating is assessed before WWHRS and,
if the recommendation is maintained,
there is a much reduced potential for
WWHRS to deliver the required SAP
increment; therefore the
recommendation is unlikely to appear.
Conclusion
Our experience is that for most existing
domestic property EPC assessments, the
recommendation for WWHRS is unlikely
to occur and will only do so when:

there are mixer showers but no
baths present or when there is a
high proportion of mixer showers
versus baths over a large number
of bathrooms, and

there is a high cost water heating
fuel present such as on-peak
electricity, and

the recommendation for solar
water heating has not been
included, i.e. it is not applicable to
that particular property.
Bathrooms and mixer showers
Given an assumed amount of hot water
consumption for a particular property
size, the potential for savings through
the use of WWHRS will be further
affected by the number of mixer showers Screenshot 2
present in the property. Assuming that a
Remember that the hot water fuel usage
property is being assessed for an EPC
has already been derived from the
and no WWHRS are already installed, the
property’s floor area and that therefore
RDSAP procedure will assess the effect
the total number of bathrooms will not
of installing a WWHRS on each available
affect the recommendation for WWHRS;
mixer shower.
rather it is the proportion of bathrooms
In the example shown in Screenshot 1
that contain mixer showers, and in
the software would assume that two
particular the proportion of the rooms
mixer showers are present and would
that have a mixer shower and no bath,
calculate the effect of both mixer
that will have the most effect.
showers being connected to a WWHRS.
Hot water fuel cost
It therefore follows that the higher the
Given that a recommendation for a
number of bathrooms with mixer
WWHRS will appear if a SAP increment of
showers, the greater the potential for
0.95 is achieved, this is more likely to
savings with WWHRS.
occur where the fuels used for the hot
water generation are the more expensive
types such as on-peak electricity, LPG,
oil, etc. (and in some cases, off-peak
electricity).
Screenshot 1
The recommendation is also more likely
to occur when assessing properties
where the hot water cost is more
influential, i.e., where the property is
well insulated and has a low cost heating
system and where the water heating
costs account for a higher proportion of
the total energy demand.
Click on a headline to rea d othe r a rticles in this bulle tin:
Example
As a an example, we have assessed a
1970s detached property (with cavity
wall insulation, loft insulation and a
modern condensing boiler) under a
number of different circumstances and
identified when the WWHRS
recommendation would appear in the
EPC recommendations.
For the purposes of this assessment we
have identified that the property has a
roof area suitable for solar water heating
and one bathroom with a mixer shower
which may or may not have a bath as
shown.
Tables 1 and 2 over the page identify
under which sets of circumstances the
recommendation for WWHRS will appear.
(Continued on page 5)
| Scheme operating Requirements and auditing your EPC | Heating controls not available
| Audit timelines | EPC and recommendation for floor insulation | Recommendations for WWHRs | Green Deal Quick Guides | Shower or not a shower? | Insulated external doors
| Loft spaces and insulation | | Quiz–Did you know...? | Ask our Experts | Dated photo requirements | NES one Uploadr | A note about Addenda
Page 4 of 10
DEA Technical Bulletin
I s s u e 33
29 | N
JDe
aoncve
uear
mb
y ee2r01
2 01
2|
0 112|
©| ©
N©atNNiat
oa nti io
aolnnEal
aln eEErnngeeyrg
rgSyye SrSveeirrcvi
veicsceess
When is a shower not a
shower?
(Continued from page 4)
The additional figures in brackets are the
SAP increments and the typical annual
savings achieved in each case.
One of our DEAs sent us an image (see
photo on the left) showing a bathroom
installation incorporating two showers.
Both showers are wall mounted on
brackets and are located behind a shower
screen. The shower on the left is fed via a
mixing arrangement of hot and cold water
supplies, whilst the shower on the right is
an instantaneous electric shower. How
should these showers be interpreted for
RDSAP data collection?
Case A–with the solar water heating
recommendation in place
Water
Heating Fuel
Bath
No Bath
Mains gas
heating boiler
No
No
Off-peak
electric
immersion
No
No
On-peak
electric
immersion
No
WWHRS
(1 SAP/£35)
Case B–without the solar water
heating recommendation
For RDSAP data collection, we are
interested in identifying the following:

Number of rooms with a bath and any type of shower installed

Number of rooms with a bath and a mixer shower installed

Number of rooms without a bath but with a mixer shower
installed
Clearly, the electric instantaneous shower is not a mixer shower and would be
identified as such.
Water
Heating Fuel
Bath
No Bath
Mains gas
heating boiler
No
No
Off-peak
electric
immersion
No
WWHRS
(1 SAP/
£36)
On-peak
electric
immersion
WWHRS
(1 SAP/
£36)
WWHRS
(2 SAP/
£56)
Please note that whilst most properties
will follow a similar pattern, other
properties with varying datasets may
have varying results, i.e., the above
should only be taken as a general guide.
The second shower has the credentials of a mixer shower, i.e., it has a hot
and cold feed, a permanent wall mounting and screen but is mounted at a
relatively low height.
The issue of mounting height is currently being considered by the RDSAP
Conventions Group, but in the meantime, we would advise that for a mixer
shower to have effective usage and therefore to be identified as a mixer
shower with potential for waste water heat recovery, it should be mounted at
a height at least 1.5 m above the base of the bath.
In the example installation shown in the photo above, the shower on the left
would not be identified as a mixer shower and the data entry would be as
shown in Screenshot 1).
Screenshot 1
Green Deal Quick Guides
DECC has published recently published
a set of quick guides on the Green Deal
for householders, owners, tenants and
landlords. They are available on the
DEEC website: www.decc.gov.uk/en/
content/cms/tackling/green_deal/
gd_quickguides/gd_quickguides.aspx)
If the shower was mounted at the required distance, it should be identified
as a mixer shower and the data recorded in the software as shown
Screenshot 2.
Click on a headline to rea d othe r a rticles in this bulle tin:
Screenshot 2
| Scheme operating Requirements and auditing your EPC | Heating controls not available
| Audit timelines | EPC and recommendation for floor insulation | Recommendations for WWHRs | Green Deal Quick Guides | Shower or not a shower? | Insulated external doors
| Loft spaces and insulation | | Quiz–Did you know...? | Ask our Experts | Dated photo requirements | NES one Uploadr | A note about Addenda
Page 5 of 10
DEA Technical Bulletin
Insulated external doors
DEAs will already be aware that for an insulated
external door to be entered into RDSAP, it must be
accompanied by a U-value that can be evidenced
accordingly. In some cases the design specification
information will be fully available but in many
cases it will not. However, if a DEA can make an
appropriately evidenced identification of a serial
number, part number or type number of a door on
site, which can then subsequently be linked to a
design specification and a U-value, then this would
also constitute an appropriate evidence record.
However, caution is required: some door
specifications will quote a U-value performance of
a door without including any glazing present. For
example:
I s s u e 33
29 | N
JDe
aoncve
uear
mb
y ee2r01
2 01
2|
0 112|
©| ©
N©atNNiat
oa nti io
aolnnEal
aln eEErnngeeyrg
rgSyye SrSveeirrcvi
veicsceess
The actual performance of such a door will vary
greatly dependent upon the proportion and type of
glazing panels present in the door. The sketches 1
to 4 below illustrate the potential variations which
may be seen with a number of manufacturers.
Note that the actual U-value must be obtained
from the manufacturer’s specification.
As an example, a DEA on site may identify a door
visually as a ‘D04’. However, before the U-value
can be used, the DEA must link an appropriate
part number, serial number or identification number on the door with a link to the manufacturer
and their appropriate specification.
This must also be supported by the use of appropriate site notes and include appropriate images of
the door and the specification material.
High performance composite external
in glass reinforced polymer (GRP):
Comply with PAS 23/24 Secured by Design
Thermal Performance

High performance insulating cores

U-value of 0.55W/m K,

Draught proofing

High quality compression weather-strip

Weather guard threshold
Hinges
Security interlocking hinges to BS EN 1935
Glazing
Sketch 1: U-value = 1.9
Sketch 2: U-value = 1.1
Glazing options conform to BS 6206 and BS
EN 1279
Decoration
Supplied primed or pre-finished in a range of
standard colours
Building Regulations

Comply with Part M of the Building Regulations

Door widths of 845 mm and 914 mm provide the correct clear minimum openings
required for traditional new build, local authority and housing association projects
Secured by Design

The doors have been tested at a UKAS accredited test laboratory for compliance with
PAS 23 and PAS 24

The range of doors carry independent approval from the British Board of agrément
(BBA)
Sketch 3: U-value = 1.4
Click on a headline to rea d othe r a rticles in this bulle tin:
Sketch 4: U-value = 1.7
| Scheme operating Requirements and auditing your EPC | Heating controls not available
| Audit timelines | EPC and recommendation for floor insulation | Recommendations for WWHRs | Green Deal Quick Guides | Shower or not a shower? | Insulated external doors
| Loft spaces and insulation | | Quiz–Did you know...? | Ask our Experts | Dated photo requirements | NES one Uploadr | A note about Addenda
Page 6 of 10
DEA Technical Bulletin
Loft spaces and
insulation
The RDSAP methodology contains a
number of options for dealing with loft
spaces and associated insulation levels
and there are also specific conventions
for data entry when dealing with certain
circumstances.
DEAs are sometimes unsure as to which
options to pick in particular
circumstances, especially when the loft is
only partially insulated or when there is
only limited insulation present in
different portions of the dwelling.
I s s u e 33
29 | N
JDe
aoncve
uear
mb
y ee2r01
2 01
2|
0 112|
©| ©
N©atNNiat
oa nti io
aolnnEal
aln eEErnngeeyrg
rgSyye SrSveeirrcvi
veicsceess
The software then defaults the insulation
to an assumed
U-value based on the age of the property
and suppresses any recommendations
for improvement.
Thatched roofs
If you assess a thatched roof, you must
specify the construction type as Pitched
(thatch) regardless of access. You will
then have the option of entering Joists,
Unknown or None for the roof insulation
itself.
To record loft insulation as being
present, you will need to have access to
the loft to visually inspect it. You will
also need to take relevant photos (see
also article on page 9 in this bulletin) or
have documentary evidence (invoices for
installation or similar).
If the loft hatch is painted shut, does not
exist, or for health and safety reasons is
inaccessible, the Pitched no loft access
option should be used. If there is
appropriate documentary evidence for
insulation contained within an
inaccessible space, this should be used,
otherwise the roof insulation should be
identified as Unknown.
A photo to record this limitation of the
assessment should also be included.
Screenshot 1 shows the data entry with
Pitched no access to loft and unknown
roof insulation.
Calculate an area weighted average
for the overall insulation thickness,
OR

Divide the property into extensions
in order to account for the parts
that have different insulation levels.
This procedure should also be used
where insulation is located in different
positions within the loft space, e.g. one
part has insulation between the joists
and another part has insulation between
the rafters; i.e., the roof insulation type
varies.
Lofts with partial access
In some cases access to the assessment
of loft insulation may be partially
restricted within the space, e.g., full
access to the loft is possible but the loft
insulation is partially hidden and
therefore only partially assessable.
The aim of this article is to identify and
review the correct procedures to be
taken and to identify the associated data
entry items. Note that these procedures
will also apply to residual loft areas
and roof room components.
Dealing with no access

Screenshot 2
Accessible loft spaces
For all other pitched roofs, if access to
the loft is possible, the construction type
Pitched access to loft should be used. In
these circumstances Unknown roof
insulation should be used, if there is
contradictory or inconclusive evidence
with respect to the position and extent of
insulation material present. For example,
if the roof was completely boarded and it
was impossible to establish whether
insulation was present or not between
the joists in the roof space, Unknown
should be selected (see Screenshot 3).
Lofts with varying levels of insulation
In some cases, insulation will be present
but may vary in thickness in different
parts of the loft space. In these
circumstances you should either:
Screenshot 1
Click on a headline to rea d othe r a rticles in this bulle tin:
In these circumstances you should again
make use of the extensions facility to
divide the property into those sections
where loft insulation can be identified
and assessed fully and those where
restricted access determines that the loft
insulation thickness is unknown.
If all else fails
If variations in loft insulation are present
but restrictions are such that the
calculation of an area weighted average
or the use of extensions is not possible,
you may adopt, as a last resort, a 50%
rule approach for the loft or loft section
concerned.
In these circumstances you can base the
assessment on the evidence available as
long as at least 50% of the area of the
element can be supported by visual
evidence.
(Continued on page 8)
Screenshot 3
| Scheme operating Requirements and auditing your EPC | Heating controls not available
| Audit timelines | EPC and recommendation for floor insulation | Recommendations for WWHRs | Green Deal Quick Guides | Shower or not a shower? | Insulated external doors
| Loft spaces and insulation | | Quiz–Did you know...? | Ask our Experts | Dated photo requirements | NES one Uploadr | A note about Addenda
Page 7 of 10
DEA Technical Bulletin
I s s u e 33
29 | N
JDe
aoncve
uear
mb
y ee2r01
2 01
2|
0 112|
©| ©
N©atNNiat
oa nti io
aolnnEal
aln eEErnngeeyrg
rgSyye SrSveeirrcvi
veicsceess
(Continued from page 7)
Quiz-did you know...?
For example, if joist insulation can be
viewed and assessed for a residual loft
area but only 50% is accessible for
assessment, you can assume that the
whole of the residual area is insulated at
the same level.
A recent study based on analysis of approximately 200k EPCs revealed
some interesting facts regarding construction type and popularity of
dwellings sold or let in the UK. As an experienced DEA, test your
knowledge in this quiz and see if you can get the facts right.
Remember that this rule must only be
used as a last resort when neither the
use of an area weighted average nor the
splitting of the area into extensions are
possible.
Evidence requirements
If you specify a thickness of insulation,
be it at rafters or at joists, it is important
to substantiate this choice with
photographs. It is recommended that
two photos are taken:

One wide-angle photo to
demonstrate the insulation coverage
AND

A second photo to demonstrate the
insulation thickness.
We also recommend that photos should
show some form of scaling device (either
a tape measure folded over the
insulation or a ruler sticking through).
Question 1: Which is the most common age band for a solid walled two-bedroom
detached bungalow?
1.
2.
3.
4.
C: 1930-1949
D: 1950-1966
B: 1900-1929
G: 1983-1990
Question 2: Approximately what proportion of EPCs were done on three-bedroom
semi-detached properties?
1.
2.
3.
4.
20%
10%
25 %
35%
Question 3: Which is the third most common dwelling type?
1.
2.
3.
4.
Two-bedroom semi detached
Three-bedroom detached
One-bedroom terraced
Three-bedroom terraced
Question 4: What is more common, a two-bedroom top-floor flat or
a one-bedroom mid-floor flat?
Question 5: What is the most common age band for a two-bedroom detached
house with a cavity wall construction?
1.
2.
3.
4.
E: 1967-1975
G: 1983-1990
I: 1996-2002
D: 1950-1966
Question 6: For three-bedroom end-terrace houses, which is more common solid
brick or cavity construction?
Question 7: What is the most common age band for a one-bedroom ground-floor
flat with solid wall construction?
1.
2.
3.
4.
B: 1900-1925
A: Pre 1900
C: 1930-1949
F: 1976-1982
Question 8: What is the most common dwelling type, a two-bedroom semidetached bungalow or a four-bedroom detached house?
Question 9: Which is the more common construction for two-bedroom ground-floor
flats, solid brick or cavity construction?
Question 10: Which are more common two- or three-bedroom mid-terrace
houses?
For answers turn to page 10.
Click on a headline to rea d othe r a rticles in this bulle tin:
| Scheme operating Requirements and auditing your EPC | Heating controls not available
| Audit timelines | EPC and recommendation for floor insulation | Recommendations for WWHRs | Green Deal Quick Guides | Shower or not a shower? | Insulated external doors
| Loft spaces and insulation | | Quiz–Did you know...? | Ask our Experts | Dated photo requirements | NES one Uploadr | A note about Addenda
Page 8 of 10
DEA Technical Bulletin
Ask our Experts
I s s u e 33
29 | N
Deo cve
e mb eer 2 01
0 112|| ©
© NNat
a ti ioonnal
al EEnneerg
rgyy SSeerrvi
v icceess
Dated photo
requirements
Question: I have studied
your flowchart in the previous issue of the
DEA Technical Bulletin (32) which outlines
a number of scenarios and considers
whether or not floor areas should be
included within the footprint of the
property and subsequently in the EPC.
All DEAs are required to ensure that
they provide dated photographs as
part of their site notes. Many cameras
have the function to date-stamp the
date within the image automatically at
the time the picture is taken and you
should check to see if your camera is
capable of doing so.
Could you please clarify whether I can
ignore an external unheated porch, if
there is a door at each end of the porch?
If it cannot do this, there are some
additional requirements you should be
aware of:
Answer: If the porch is unheated and
there is a door at each end of the porch,
the porch can be ignored regardless of the
quality of the separating door.
All heated porches are to be included in
EPC assessments.
Question: I have done an EPC on a
 You must still ensure that the time
and date settings on your camera
are correct as this information is
embedded into the properties of the
photograph and can be viewed by
our compliance team to ensure the
guidelines are being followed.
 You will need to upload each original
Victorian house with a detached brick
building in the garden. It has a large room
(with a base unit and sink) which is used
as a photographic studio, a bedroom and a
shower room.
photograph individually and this will
allow NES one to import the
embedded EXIF* data stored in your
camera which in turn verifies the
date and time the photo was taken.
There is no fixed heating, only electric
portable heating. It is on the same electric
meter as the house. Do I include it in the
EPC?
* Exchangeable image file format (Exif) is a
standard that specifies the formats for
images, sound, and ancillary tags used by
digital cameras (including smart phones),
scanners and other systems handling image
and sound files recorded by digital cameras.
Answer: If the building is not thermally
attached to the main house, it does not
need to be considered, especially if it is
unheated and not being supplied by
heating from the main dwelling.
 The photos cannot be inserted into
Additionally, it does not constitute a
dwelling in its own right as it does not
have all the attributes of an individual
dwelling, i.e., it does not have any cooking
facilities. Therefore, it can therefore be
ignored.
 You should not manually manipulate
another document (i.e., MS Word,
PDF etc.) as this stops NES one
reading the EXIF data.
the date/time/address onto the
picture image as this cannot be
accepted in evidence.
This is because when resizing or
editing photos in this way, (depending
on which software you use) it can
delete the EXIF data and the auditor
will be unable to verify the date and
time the photo was originally taken.
The auditor must be able to verify the
EXIF data and if a photo has been
manually manipulated, this will not be
the case and you will not meet the
Scheme Quality Standards. Auditors
will therefore have to ask you to
upload your original photos a second
time.
If you have any concerns about losing
this data when resizing photos, you
can upload your photos directly to NES
one using NES one Uploadr. This
software will automatically resize your
photos without losing the EXIF data
(see below).
NES one Uploadr
In order to help you upload your
supporting evidence to NES one, NES
one Uploadr is available to download
and install from the NES website at:
www.nesltd.co.uk/sites/default/files/
documents/software/
NesOneUploadrInstaller.zip
After installing the tool, files can be
dragged onto the main area (1) and
uploaded to a report that you have
started. Simply enter your Membership
Number and the PRRN of the report
and click the upload button (2) and
any files that have been dragged to the
tool will be uploaded to NES one
automatically.
Details required to upload to a report:
Files to upload to your report:
Menbership number:
PRRN:
2
upload
1
Clear all
Drag files to upload here...
Click on a headline to rea d othe r a rticles in this bulle tin:
| Scheme operating Requirements and auditing your EPC | Heating controls not available
| Audit timelines | EPC and recommendation for floor insulation | Recommendations for WWHRs | Green Deal Quick Guides | Shower or not a shower? | Insulated external doors
| Loft spaces and insulation | | Quiz–Did you know...? | Ask our Experts | Dated photo requirements | NES one Uploadr | A note about Addenda
Page 9 of 10
DEA Technical Bulletin
I s s u e 30
29 | N
33
Deo cve
e mb eer 2 01
0 112|| ©
© NNat
a ti ioonnal
al EEnneerg
rgyy SSeerrvi
v icceess
A note about addenda
Recent additions to the addenda available for domestic EPCs have prompted questions as to when they should be used and
what particular circumstances they are covering. The following is intended to clarify the situation regarding these addenda.
Addendum 6
6. Storage heater or dual immersion, and single electric meter
A dual rate appliance (s) is present with a single-rate supply. As single-rate appliance has been used for the assessment. Changing the
electricity tariff to an off-peak (dual rate) supply is likely to reduce fuel costs and improve the energy rating.
In this instance the DEA will only have been able to identify a single rate, i.e. an on-peak meter but off-peak appliances
may also be present at the property. This might be storage heaters but is more likely to be an off-peak immersion heater.
As only a single-rate meter has been identified, energy cost calculations for all appliances will be calculated on the basis of
a single-rate on-peak supply and this addendum should be selected to inform the client accordingly.
Addendum 8
8. PVs or wind turbine present on the property (England, Wales or Scotland)
The assessment does not include any feed in tariffs that may be applicable to this property.
This addendum should be added to the EPC whenever a PV system or a wind turbine is actually present at a property, regardless of whether a Feed-in-Tariff arrangement is in place or not.
Quiz Answers
Q1:
Q2:
Q3:
Q4:
Q5
Q6:
Q7:
Q8:
Q9:
Q10:
C: 1930-1949
10%
Two-bedroom semi-detached
Two-bedroom top-floor (5%); one bedroom mid-floor (4%)
E:1967-1975
Cavity wall construction
A Pre-1900
A four- bedroom detached house (4%); Two-bedroom semi-detached bungalow (2%)
Cavity wall construction
Two-bedroom mid-terrace houses
ABOUT OU R BU LLE T INS
We trust you find this edition of the technical bulletin useful. If there
are any areas you would like to see covered in future editions drop us
a line at bulletins@nesltd.co.uk
Back copies of all bulletins are available in the Useful Documents
The content of this technical bulletin is protected by copyright and any unausection of NES one.
Registration 01908 442277 registration@nesltd.co.uk
Compliance 01908 442288 compliance@nesltd.co.uk
Technical Support Helpdesk 01908 442105 support@nesltd.co.uk
thorised use, copying, lending or making available of it, howsoever defined,
which is not specifically authorised by National Energy Services Ltd., is strictly
prohibited.
©National Energy Services Ltd. 2012
Support Website support.nesltd.co.uk
Assessment Support 01908 442240 assessment@nesltd.co.uk
Training enquiries 01908 442254 training@nesltd.co.uk
NES one Credit Top up line: 01908 442299
Page 10 of 10