I was chatting with another inspector the other day and was asked my opinion on a situation.
Lines company was removing a distribution pole and moving the already existing under ground (it went up the pole to the LV distribution lines) house service line to the newly installed service pillar. Line company had requested an inspection of the work done by the line worker.
Right off the bat it's "Works" so it shouldn't need an inspection or CoC, but it should have an ESC for the final connection, but when asked to do an "inspection" what kind of paperwork should be submitted?
Inspection of General/Low risk work
-
Sarmajor
- Posts: 8
- Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2020 6:57 pm
- Location: Morrinsville
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 1 time
Re: Inspection of General/Low risk work
I have come across this very type of thing in the past.
The first one was where a pillar was removed and the mains were extended into the LV Cubicle of the TX that supplied the Pillar.
The Lines company did all of the work but still required the customer to pay for an Inspection of the Mains work.
An inspection was clearly (in my Mind) required because the mains had been extended and reconnected to new supply fuses. The cable from the POS was mains and not works. The annoying thing for me is that the line company took no responsibility for there work and expected the customer to provide an Inspection on a Sunday. I spoke to a supervisor and he was adamant that the customer had to arrange the Inspection and that there would be no supply without it. Supervisor wasn’t interested in the fact that it was his staff that did the work. To give the crusty old demon Inspector credit he demanded a COC from the line company guys. They weren’t happy but managed to sort something out for him so he could issue an ROI. The same guys that did the work fitted the fuses to relivened.
The other was a conversion of several supplies from overhead fusing to a new pillar at the base of the pole. Still works from the top of the pole to the new pillar and definitely mains from the new pillar to the installation.
I did argue that as the mains had been completely disconnected and reconnected to the new pillar that they required Inspection. Didn’t win that one either and I worked for the Lines Company that did the work.
As far as the work on the cables down the pole to the pillar they are works.
If they want an ROI then they will have to give me a COC/ESC so that it can be attached to the ROI.
The first one was where a pillar was removed and the mains were extended into the LV Cubicle of the TX that supplied the Pillar.
The Lines company did all of the work but still required the customer to pay for an Inspection of the Mains work.
An inspection was clearly (in my Mind) required because the mains had been extended and reconnected to new supply fuses. The cable from the POS was mains and not works. The annoying thing for me is that the line company took no responsibility for there work and expected the customer to provide an Inspection on a Sunday. I spoke to a supervisor and he was adamant that the customer had to arrange the Inspection and that there would be no supply without it. Supervisor wasn’t interested in the fact that it was his staff that did the work. To give the crusty old demon Inspector credit he demanded a COC from the line company guys. They weren’t happy but managed to sort something out for him so he could issue an ROI. The same guys that did the work fitted the fuses to relivened.
The other was a conversion of several supplies from overhead fusing to a new pillar at the base of the pole. Still works from the top of the pole to the new pillar and definitely mains from the new pillar to the installation.
I did argue that as the mains had been completely disconnected and reconnected to the new pillar that they required Inspection. Didn’t win that one either and I worked for the Lines Company that did the work.
As far as the work on the cables down the pole to the pillar they are works.
If they want an ROI then they will have to give me a COC/ESC so that it can be attached to the ROI.
Re: Inspection of General/Low risk work
In my experience linsecos generally have a poor understanding of the ESRs, and are very willing to apply little extra 'requirements" of their own.
My local one "requires" an inspection for low risk work on mains, eg replacing o/h mains entry box , or replacing MSB. What's more, they only accept RoIs issued by inspectors they approve of. I understand (and agree with) their claim that there's a long history of people getting polarity wrong; but that's a reason to insist on testing rather than insisting on an inspection.
ESR 73A specifically requires pre-connection checks, including polarity; and they should be happy with evidence of those checks.
All three cases aboive are about works. Only in Sarmajor's 2nd example was there any PEW on an installation; so only that part of one job has a risk-rating.
Being work on "mains", that's "mains work"; and being alteration of mains from o/h to u/g it's not maintenance / replacement, so can't be low risk mains work. Therefore this part is the ONLY bit that required inspection under ESRs.
All the rest was PEW on works. Being works, and not part of an installation; the conductors involved ar4e not "mains', even where they are an extension of the same cable as the 'mains' inside the boundary. No CoC or RoI is ever needed for PEW on works.
However in all three cases an ESC is required, as a (re)connection to supply was made.
There's nothing to prohibit an RoI being issued for general or even low risk PEW. Or even for work with no classification eg PEW on works.
As long as the correct procedures are followed (so yes, need a CoC) and the mandatory declarations about safety & compliance can be properly made.
It's not clear how much responsibility would fall in the issuer from issuing such an RoI ; but should asume just as much as for a normal, mandated, RoI.
My local one "requires" an inspection for low risk work on mains, eg replacing o/h mains entry box , or replacing MSB. What's more, they only accept RoIs issued by inspectors they approve of. I understand (and agree with) their claim that there's a long history of people getting polarity wrong; but that's a reason to insist on testing rather than insisting on an inspection.
ESR 73A specifically requires pre-connection checks, including polarity; and they should be happy with evidence of those checks.
All three cases aboive are about works. Only in Sarmajor's 2nd example was there any PEW on an installation; so only that part of one job has a risk-rating.
Being work on "mains", that's "mains work"; and being alteration of mains from o/h to u/g it's not maintenance / replacement, so can't be low risk mains work. Therefore this part is the ONLY bit that required inspection under ESRs.
All the rest was PEW on works. Being works, and not part of an installation; the conductors involved ar4e not "mains', even where they are an extension of the same cable as the 'mains' inside the boundary. No CoC or RoI is ever needed for PEW on works.
However in all three cases an ESC is required, as a (re)connection to supply was made.
There's nothing to prohibit an RoI being issued for general or even low risk PEW. Or even for work with no classification eg PEW on works.
As long as the correct procedures are followed (so yes, need a CoC) and the mandatory declarations about safety & compliance can be properly made.
It's not clear how much responsibility would fall in the issuer from issuing such an RoI ; but should asume just as much as for a normal, mandated, RoI.