What part is connection? ESR73A

[JamieP]

In regards to ESR 73A (5)

"To avoid doubt, in this regulation connection refers to the prescribed electrical
work that is the final step that will allow electricity to flow in the installation or
part installation on which other prescribed electrical work has been done."

This was clearly meant to clarify things and maybe I'm overthinking things which is not uncommon but I just want to know exactly what part is "connection" and by understanding this, who becomes responsible for issuing the ESC by making the connection

Example 1: Locked out protective device, one person connects the conductors, another unlocks and switches on, who has made the "connection"?

Example 2: Unlocked protective device, same scenario as above but what if person one connected walked away and left turned off and a non-electrical worker turned on

Is it the person who physical connects the conductors to the installation for electricity to flow? Or the person who switches it on?

[PeteRig]

Hi Jamie, I think the keys words are "PEW in the final step ...... " so terminating the conductors is the final connection in your scenario, operating a switch is not, its the same as installing a fuse, its not.
Operating a "locked off" switch would go against ASNZS4836 and probably the H&S requirements for an organisation.

[AlecK]

Exactly.
The key thing in this clarification is that "connection" is PEW.
Operating a switch isn't PEW, so can't be 'connection.
Same for inserting a fuse carrier.

If you make carry out PEW such that someone else can energise without any further PEW, you've connected.
That includes connecting a neutral; because could be energised under fault conditions.

[JamieP]

Thank you both, much appreciated

It was just in regards to accepting responsibility for things

I've had a number of time I've been asked to do things by those higher up that I haven't agreed with and wanted to avoid personal responsibility by seeing if getting them to switch it on meant I didn't have the responsibility of the ESC and connection but it seems, based above that unless I refuse to connect and get someone else to physically make the connection then I guess I am liable regardless

[AlecK]

ESRs make connection to a supply of electricity the key issue for responsibility / liability.
It's the person (about to connect who is required to ensure that CoC(s) & RoI(s) have been issued, and for pre-connection checks in addition.
And then, after connection, they issue the ESC.

which is why ESR 73A is very careful to specify which acts of connection all this relates to.

[JamieP]

Understood and that person, is the one who does the final PEW to let that electricity flow

So basically if I don't agree with something, I need to make sure I leave the conductor connection to someone else and not just connect and leave locked out for someone else to turn on, otherwise if I connect those conductors, I take responsibility

Thanks again, good to understand this properly

[AlecK]

Simply avoiding doing the connection won't fully absolve you.

We all carry responsibility for safety & compliance of the PEW we do.
Issuing a CoC is the formal declaration & acceptance of this.
On many jobs there will have been more than one person doing PEW, but often only one issues a single CoC to cover the lot.
That person is formally accepting responsibility for all the PEW described on the CoC.

Important that ESRs do not make any particular person responsible for issuing a CoC.
Instead the system is simply that it is unlawful for uncertified PEW to be connected to a supply
(because the person connection must either sight or issue a CoC [ESR 73A]).
Also important that while work must always include declaration of being done lawfully & safely [ESR 66(1)];
it can be certified as either safe to connect to a supply, or not safe to connect [ESR 67(1)(f)].

If there's high risk PEW, then that must be inspected.
The Inspector also formally accepts responsibility for safety & compliance of the work.

Similar for connection; the person connecting formally accepts responsibility via the ESC.

Bit while there can be documents at all 3 levels formally accepting responsibility, it's not sole responsibility but shared.
And there's still some residual responsibility remaining with those who carried out work that was then certified by others
(though somewhat harder to prove who).

The entire registration & PL system is based on responsibility of the individual electrical worker; completely separate from employer / employee relationships. Commercially the contract to do work may be between a business and their customer;
but it's the individual workers who are legally responsible for compliance & safety.
So if unhappy with a proposed way of doing PEW, you need to object right at the start, and if necessary refuse.
Which of course could risk your employment.

Short of that, never issue CoC for any PEW you're not happy about.

[JamieP]

There are a few things that still trying to make sense of

If I connect and lock out a circuit at switchboard until work has been finished on the circuit have I technically committed an offense? Only compliant method would be to leave the live conductors disconnected until work on circuit is finished

What about when you lock out a circuit or part circuit to work on but don't actually disconnect or connect?

[AlecK]

Q
If I connect and lock out a circuit at switchboard until work has been finished on the circuit have I technically committed an offense? Only compliant method would be to leave the live conductors disconnected until work on circuit is finished
A
Yes that would be an offence

Q
What about when you lock out a circuit or part circuit to work on but don't actually disconnect or connect?
A
you've isolated; which is what's required for safe working.
After that, depends what the PEW to be done is.
The circuit / part circuit remains connected to supply.
But eg if you replace a fitting, then that fitting is disconnected & the new one is connected (or old one re-connected).
Note that ESR 73A applies to any part of the installation / part installation, right down to a single fitting.

[JamieP]

Thank you Alec, very interesting

I assume the same case with situations such as high risk work and RoIs being completed at the right time

To be compliant I gather you'd have to first complete all work but have the conductors for connection to supply disconnected again after testing and issue of CoC, inspection would then take place and they would connect and disconnect again after testing, then you'd have the relevant paperwork to connect finally and after such, issue an ESC

I gather the inspector could rely (having inspected said system would give him even more confidence) on your CoC and after his inspection and RoI could liven the installation himself and issue the ESC?

Obviously it's just hard to get your head around the way some of these things are meant to work when the real work is some times very different in the actual process

[AlecK]

The Act does allow for connection for purposes of testing
Eg you can't test installation of an RCD without connecting some sort of supply.
And all required testing must be completed before CoC is issued, else the work hasn't been done 'lawfully & safely".

So I am forced to conclude that connecting-for-testing is different from the final connection referred to in 73A.
And that - at least in theory - connecting-for-testing must be disconnected immediately after testing.

Agree that there can be significant differences between the way ESRs say things are supposed to be dine; and what's practicable in reality.

As far as inspection goes; an Inspector can't rely on a CoC for establishing either compliance or safe-to-connect.
They have to do their own checks and tests, sufficient to satisfy themselves on these points
They may have to rely on what the CoC records as location and what (high risk) PEW was done.

[JamieP]

Yes I understand the inspection must be completely independent but more what I was getting at above is there is nothing that stops them from doing the connection IAW ESR 73A after they have finished there inspection and issued their RoI, correct? Rather than having to get the original contractor back to liven after the inspection has been completed

[PeteRig]

An inspector cant do the connection and inspection as the connection is PEW (ESR 73A and 71) if for example it is "works" and the inspector is authorised to work on the network or installing a revenue meter he could do both, connection and inspection?

[JamieP]

Disagree Pete, ESR 73A (1)(d) indicates this is fine

Also backed by the fact although connection is PEW it's not part of the PEW that required inspection

A CoC had been completed by others and the work was left disconnected to the supply as required as it can be connected until inspected

The inspector didn't do any of the things in relation to ESR71 (2) in regards to the PEW or CoC

The inspector can then complete an inspection

After inspection is completed and RoI is issued the person who inspected follows ESR73A, makes sure the CoC and RoI is present and makes the final connection then issues an ESC accordingly

That makes sense to me and seems compliant, do you disagree?

[PeteRig]

Fair call Jamie on ESR 73A, so yes probably agree with you, good discussion though but unable to answer your question sorry.

[AlecK]

Both CoC & RoI effectively say "this PEW is OK to be connected to a supply".
CoC doesn't say who dod it, just that an identified person is certifying it.
RoI also doesn't say who did it, just who certified it and who inspected it.
Final connection can then be done by anyone, including by either the electrician or the inspector.
The ESC says "this was connected, by me, on this date"

If final connection is to network conductors, then it's PEW; but not PEW on an installation (because upstream of PoS for the installation.
Also not 'mains work", because not PEW on "mains"; for same reason.
Therefore not PEW that needs to be either certified or inspected (but ESC may be required).
No problem for inspector making this connection, because this connection is not high risk PEW.

If connection to network is done before CoC & RoI covering the work on "mains" are issued, and meters not yet installed;
then what's been connected is generally the entire installation on the N side, but on the A side only to load side of (absent) meter(s).
But so far no electricity can flow, so not a final connection requiring ESC.
That's assuming "flow" of electricity refers to load current only.
Also disregarding that return current from other installations can be flowing in the N under some conditions.
If "flow" refers to fault current; then that fundamentally changes how the ESR applies.

After meters installed, electricity can flow even if nothing else yet connected
(meters are loads as well as measuring devices, and a ripple is also a load)
So ESC required; which must also cover up to MSB and any loads connected at that time.
This connection would also not be high risk PEW, because installing meters is not "mains work".

Then as additional circuits are added, ESC each time.

But there are many different sequences these things can happen in, which affects which actions amount to a connection requiring an ESC.
And in some cases a connection requiring ESC could be "mains work" and therefore require inspection in its own right.