Is this drawing correct in regards to the comment about the submain earthing?
Or is this another error by EWRB?
https://www.ewrb.govt.nz/resources-2/to ... =safe-work
Cheers
Peter
Hi Risk Work-EWRB drawing
Hi Risk Work-EWRB drawing
Last edited by PeteRig on Mon Mar 18, 2024 8:42 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
gregmcc
- Site Admin
- Posts: 192
- Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2020 4:45 pm
- Has thanked: 19 times
- Been thanked: 50 times
Re: Hi Rsik Work-EWRB drawing
IMO there it is vague around submains and earthing, Electricians and Inspectors tend to hold different views on this.
I think what is needed either a clarification in law (.....yeah right we all know how slow the legislation changes move) or Worksafe/MBIE/EWRB issue a clarifying statement around the issue.
I think what is needed either a clarification in law (.....yeah right we all know how slow the legislation changes move) or Worksafe/MBIE/EWRB issue a clarifying statement around the issue.
Re: Hi Rsik Work-EWRB drawing
We can only deal with the rules as they have been written.
Opinion as to what was intended, or what "should" be classified as HRPEW, are speculation at best, and certainly can't be relied on.
The best you can say for the EWRB info is that it's how they are likely to enforce it.
Doesn't make it correct.
But the "question" about whether a Main earthing system at an outbuilding DB need inspection is not a grey area at all.
It's not a matter of opinion or interpretation; it's a matter of 3 simple facts.
fact 1
definition of 'main earthing system" in ESR 4 is such that the earthing system at a DB supplied by a submain with no PEC is a "main earthing system.
fact 2
any work on any MES is "mains work", as defined in ESR 4.
fact 3
If maintenance / repair, it's classified as low risk. Anything else is classified high risk.
There's no way around these facts.
What they add up to is that inspection is clearly required when such a MES is installed.
Whether that was the intent when the ESRs were drafted doesn't change the facts.
Whether this work should be classified as high risk is a matter of opinion.
but fact 4 is that the risks arising from getting it wrong are exactly the same, regardless of whether the MES in question is at MSB or a DB.
Opinion as to what was intended, or what "should" be classified as HRPEW, are speculation at best, and certainly can't be relied on.
The best you can say for the EWRB info is that it's how they are likely to enforce it.
Doesn't make it correct.
But the "question" about whether a Main earthing system at an outbuilding DB need inspection is not a grey area at all.
It's not a matter of opinion or interpretation; it's a matter of 3 simple facts.
fact 1
definition of 'main earthing system" in ESR 4 is such that the earthing system at a DB supplied by a submain with no PEC is a "main earthing system.
fact 2
any work on any MES is "mains work", as defined in ESR 4.
fact 3
If maintenance / repair, it's classified as low risk. Anything else is classified high risk.
There's no way around these facts.
What they add up to is that inspection is clearly required when such a MES is installed.
Whether that was the intent when the ESRs were drafted doesn't change the facts.
Whether this work should be classified as high risk is a matter of opinion.
but fact 4 is that the risks arising from getting it wrong are exactly the same, regardless of whether the MES in question is at MSB or a DB.
- Rating: 33.33%
Re: Hi Risk Work-EWRB drawing
I've never understood why so many practitioners willfully avoid the relatively small cost & inconvenience of having an independent pair of eyes.