So, I see regulations required these as "Safety Checks" under the 1993 and 1997 Regulations, R39 and 46 respectively but this was taken off as an item requiring Periodic Assessment when the 2010 Regulations came into play so interestingly enough as others have noted, no longer a requirement under NZ Regulation.
However, NZS6116 still calls for periodic inspections (as defined in 1.4 but also throughout uses terms such as periodic reinspections and even periodic verification in 4.3) and many sites are still asking for these regardless of not being required by Regulation.
My question is should these be treated as a pass/fail arrangement in which all items must be met before a certificate can be issued or should they be treated like an assessment in which regardless of the current state a certificate is issued along side the report detailing recommendations or items that need attention/fix ups?
Looking at 4.3 I feel like when the inspection is completed, regardless of outcome, that the cert is still issued as the inspection has been completed. Alongside report, with issues and attention needed noted. Although the certificate of reinspection in Appendix A (called a Statement of Periodic Verification in 4.3) uses the word certify in the final statement and 4.2 doesn't allow certifications for items that do not meet the requirements of this section.
NZS6116 Periodic Inspections
Re: NZS6116 Periodic Inspections
As I've said before, this Standard is not very well written
Also - simply due to age (17 years old, predating ESRs) - it uses outdated terminology.
And - again partly due to age, and partly due to being NZS - it reflects the NZ regulatory regime of the time.
Where it sits now is that, other than when working to a Part 1 certified design, the relevant part(s) of the installation must be installed to comply with it.
So the requirements set for installation work are mandatory; while the rest - as you've noted - used to be but now isn't.
As such, whether , and how, any periodic assessment is undertaken is really up to the owner / operator.
If they choose to have it done, they get to decide who does it, and how thoroughly, and what sort of report / certificate they want;
and whether they do anything about what you tell them (in whatever form).
The Standard can serve as available guidance for this; but there's no point getting hung up on procedural details.
Would be nice if Section 4 clearly separated provisions relating to initial verification from those relating to periodic.
But they're all jumbled together, with no discernable pattern.
All we can go by is the words of each clause.
From that, I believe 4.1 - 4.4.1 all relate to initial verification, part of requirements when PEW is done.
Same for 4.6.2.
4.4.2 is a mix; para 1 is about initial verification; the rest is periodic.
And note that it offers continuous supervision as an alternative to periodic.
I view 4.4.3 as the overall description; which would normally be at beginning,
and would include pointers to the relevant clauses for each type of inspection.
Also - simply due to age (17 years old, predating ESRs) - it uses outdated terminology.
And - again partly due to age, and partly due to being NZS - it reflects the NZ regulatory regime of the time.
Where it sits now is that, other than when working to a Part 1 certified design, the relevant part(s) of the installation must be installed to comply with it.
So the requirements set for installation work are mandatory; while the rest - as you've noted - used to be but now isn't.
As such, whether , and how, any periodic assessment is undertaken is really up to the owner / operator.
If they choose to have it done, they get to decide who does it, and how thoroughly, and what sort of report / certificate they want;
and whether they do anything about what you tell them (in whatever form).
The Standard can serve as available guidance for this; but there's no point getting hung up on procedural details.
Would be nice if Section 4 clearly separated provisions relating to initial verification from those relating to periodic.
But they're all jumbled together, with no discernable pattern.
All we can go by is the words of each clause.
From that, I believe 4.1 - 4.4.1 all relate to initial verification, part of requirements when PEW is done.
Same for 4.6.2.
4.4.2 is a mix; para 1 is about initial verification; the rest is periodic.
And note that it offers continuous supervision as an alternative to periodic.
I view 4.4.3 as the overall description; which would normally be at beginning,
and would include pointers to the relevant clauses for each type of inspection.