Inspection after livening

Post Reply
Biner
Posts: 9
Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2020 8:27 pm
Answers: 0
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Inspection after livening

Post by Biner »

A bit of a interesting one however possibly all to common.

I have been requested by the network and electrician to sign off a house from going from a builders temporary supply to a permanent house connection. Driving by one day I noticed that the house appeared to be well and truly finished, knocked on the door and the owners said that they have been living in the house for two years. It appears that the electrician has relocated the builders temporary meter into the house msb. Customer informs me that my involvement in the job only stems because they are wanting a smart meter.

I have done a little research, found an old colleague file shows BTS was beside network pillar so either the mains have been extended or there was a large coil of cable buried in the ground, and therefore shifted. New main earth, new switchboard. There is no ROI for this work. I confronted the electrician who didn't think that there is a problem, and apparently this is what electricians down in the deep south do, which possibly stems from their inspectors miseducating what is high risk PEW and not.
The following week I have found another job he has done the same thing.

I have approach the network already, they are not happy but prefer me to complete the job.

For me to move forward to at least give assurances to the homeowners of a compliant install and possibly make their insurance valid. Do I proceed with an inspection and at the same time report him to the EWRB? Would my actions still be in breach of the Regulations. I would need a COC no less than 6 months and ESC not signed until the day of inspections. Accepting documents that I am aware are fraudulent put me in trouble?








I
AlecK
Posts: 912
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2020 11:24 am
Answers: 5
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 351 times

Re: Inspection after livening

Post by AlecK »

An interesting example; and I understand that yes, this sort of thing has been going on in the "deep south" for years.
Until recently, with knowledge and support of the network; though that may now be changing.
Certainly Powernet has tightened up on who can access the network assets under their control and under what "permissions", for example to isolate by removing supply fuses and / or liven by placing them.
Whereas historically my understanding is that it's been every sparky just did it themselves.

Yes the change form builder's supply to final installation always involves mains work; both the relocation / extension of mains, and the installation of (generally) a completely different main earthing system but at minimum extension / relocation of MEC, plus a completely different MEN link.
Where metering is not part of MSB there's also the section(s) of mains between meterbox and MSB.
As "mains work" that isn't repair / maintenance; this work is classified as high risk; so inspection is mandatory before connecting the new installation to supply.

Under ESRs, no individual is responsible for ensuring that inspection required by ESR 70 actually happens (same for issuing the necessary CoCs required by ESR 65).
Instead it comes down to ESR 73A requiring the "person connecting" to sight these documents, as well as undertake their own final checks.
That same person is then required to issue an ESC; and is the one who commits an offence if the documents have not been issued prior to connection.

Going all the way back to 1976 (at least), this sort of work has always been required to be inspected.
It seems both the sparkies and the network have been generally ignoring the Regs for many years.
If Inspectors don't know that then my opinion is they simply are not fit to be Inspectors.
However the ones I know from that area do know and are frustrated by the fact that such illegal practices continue.

So yes an offence has been committed; so the question is what to do about it.


If your task relates solely to metering, then what went on before is not your direct concern.
Other than that the metering changes are PEW, so if you find an immediate danger to life or property; ESR 19 requires you to report it to both owner / occupier & Worksafe.

But of your task is - as you say - to "sign off a house from going from a builders temporary supply to a permanent house connection"; then you must first get hold of the CoC for the work. You need that to - at minimum - identify the facts relevant to Inspecting the high-risk PEW. IE the location of the high risk work, exactly what high-risk PEW was done (including what type, eg mains work, or PV, or mains parallel), whether it's Part 1, whether there's any other certified design involved, and who certified it (and when). Those matters are either the basis of the contract for Inspection work; or are required to be recorded to the HRW Database.

As an Inspector; you don't have any formal right to request any documentation; but ESR 72 requires the Inspector to attach a copy of the CoC to the RoI, and that can't be done unless you have a copy to attach. The date on it doesn't matter as far as Inspecting to ESR 70 goes.
It's not as if you can legally rely on it anyway. ESR 665 allows a person issiong a CoC to rely on another CoC less than 6 months old; but nothing formally allows an Inspector to rely on any other document. However in practice, we must rely on some of the data from a CoC, like those listed above.

You then have to inspect the high risk aspects of the work as per ESR 70; in order to become satisfied that has been done in accordance with ESRs and will be safe when connected. After that you can issue an RoI.
Schedule 1, clause 1 (1)(g) means that Inspection of PEW is PEW; so again you have an obligation to report any immediate danger.

The fact that it has already been connected to supply is a breach of the requirements; but it doesn't affect whether can be satisfied about the work. And it doesn't put you in breach of any requirement.
So while getting a copy of the ESC would be useful, it's not relevant to you doing your inspection.

The documents you get aren't fraudulent just because the inspection part of things was missed.
There's nothing to suggest that any direct claim made in them will be incorrect. The CoC will state that the work listed was done lawfully and safely and when it was done (but not who did it), and which parts are safe to connect.
The ESC will simply state that it was connected, when, and by whom; and that it is safe.
The certs may be evidence of a breach by someone else; but I can't see any breach by you in accepting them.
Even if any of the info proves later to be false; it's not your job to check the truth of the info provided.
An Inspector is tasked with checking that High Risk PEW is safe & compliant; and issuing documents has never been listed as high risk work (or, previously, as work requiring inspection). So checking documents isn't part of our job.
That said, a recent decision of EWRB found someone guilty of "failing to certify" despite the fact that there's NO specific obligation on anyone to certify PEW. They should have convicted him of connecting without sighting the CoC; but they got it completely wrong.
Similarly they have been claiming for a long tie that Inspectors must check that the person who issued the CoC actually has a current PL. That may be a useful thing to do; but it's certainly NOT a requirement of ESRs.

Whether you report the (apparently) clear breach - connecting without sighting an RoI - to Worksafe / EWRB is then up to you.
Obviously this longstanding illegal practice is unlikely to change unless a few examples are made; so the trade as a whole would benefit from it being reported to EWRB. But you're under no direct legal obligation to report unless there's an immediate danger.
Dan L
Posts: 158
Joined: Tue May 19, 2020 10:00 pm
Answers: 0
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: Inspection after livening

Post by Dan L »

This is very interesting and also just happened to me yesterday exact same situation. House has been livened for 6 weeks.

However to throw a spanner in the works and add to this scenario the earth electrode was installed with in 100mm of gas cylinders. Note the cylinder and electrode was installed at same time. Between the gas man and electrician they decided a removable cap over the electode was acceptable, however I don't see how this makes a difference as when you need to test it will need to be removed anyway. ( this is according to owner)

Didn't seem correct to me on some research on if an electrode is alowed in the area as per fig 4.2.

I had mixed views from other inspectors.

I suppose it comes down to if electrode counts as electrical equipment which I think it def does

Then if its classed as a source of ignition which I can not find anything in writing however potentially I feel it could be for example missing neutral fault of the network as and a loose connection could make it spark and less common if seen few fried earth pins after lightning hits a house.

1- can the electrode be installed with in fig 4.2 zone

2- what the best way to handle the situation. Because I'm not 100% sure if the electrode is non compliant or not it makes things tricky.
AlecK
Posts: 912
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2020 11:24 am
Answers: 5
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 351 times

Re: Inspection after livening

Post by AlecK »

Yes, an electrode is electrical equipment.

It's not equipment that would be classed as a source of ignition; but while that wording is used in Clause 4.18; that';s not the rule we have to apply.
Schedule 2 of ESRs changes this clause (and several others); so that only electrical equipment that is directly associated with the gas supply can be in the Zone.

Accordingly the electrode is not allowed to be in the Zone.
Dan L
Posts: 158
Joined: Tue May 19, 2020 10:00 pm
Answers: 0
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: Inspection after livening

Post by Dan L »

Your knowledge consistently impresses me.
Thanks
User avatar
DougP
Posts: 242
Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2020 10:11 pm
Answers: 3
Has thanked: 19 times
Been thanked: 31 times

Re: Inspection after livening

Post by DougP »

How do you plan on inspecting the installation of the mains? Do you have a spade in the truck?
Dan L
Posts: 158
Joined: Tue May 19, 2020 10:00 pm
Answers: 0
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: Inspection after livening

Post by Dan L »

I do but unfortunately it's a concrete drive...

It's vary rare to see an open trench or photos on new connections..

With 5-- 10 jobs a day ( bts and new connections) received that morning it's a fast paced industry built for the main purpose of making money.
AlecK
Posts: 912
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2020 11:24 am
Answers: 5
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 351 times

Re: Inspection after livening

Post by AlecK »

So the driveway has been concreted.
That's NO reason not to inspect.
In fact it is reason to be suspicious that the cable-laying isn't right.

There's only two possible reasons why they didn't ask for inspection until this late.
Either they're trying to hide something; or they are - as you suggest - more interested in keeping costs down than in doing a good job.
In which case chances are good that they've taken some short-cuts in the installation.

When you issue a "pass" RoI; you're accepting personal responsibility for whatever they have done.
If you inspect properly; you reduce the risk of being held responsible for cock-ups made by the installer.
If you don't; but accept the increased risk without charging (heaps) more; then you're a fool.

As inspectors, we are supposed to be finding installers' mistakes (for high risk PEW) and getting them corrected before connection
So up to us to train them to arrange inspection at appropriate time(s).
If we just accept the traditional "inspect the lot in only one visit, immediately before connection";
then we become part of the problem instead of being part of the solution.
And the end result will be that inspection ceases to be seen as useful - in which case there will be no need for "Inspectors"

Remember that while we only have to keep CoCs, RoIs, & ESCs for 7 years; the entry in the high risk work database - that has our name on it - is forever.
Dan L
Posts: 158
Joined: Tue May 19, 2020 10:00 pm
Answers: 0
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: Inspection after livening

Post by Dan L »

I fully agree but I'm part of an established company and nothing will change.

Well I know the reason the inspection is only at this stage is because wait time for inspection and livening is months so the electrician did this to get power to house so people could move in.
Dan L
Posts: 158
Joined: Tue May 19, 2020 10:00 pm
Answers: 0
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: Inspection after livening

Post by Dan L »

Does 4.2 distance count where there is a corner? So gas on one wall and electrode on another wall round the corner but if you drew a straight line through wall woukd it woukd be within the Zone?
AlecK
Posts: 912
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2020 11:24 am
Answers: 5
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 351 times

Re: Inspection after livening

Post by AlecK »

Doesn't seem relevant to the topic?
Maybe should have started a new thread?
---------------------

Unclear what your reference "4.2 distance" refers to.
Clause 4.2 is about thermal effects
fig 4.2 is about installation wiring vs equipment wiring.

Clearances between gas & electricity are covered by clause 4.18 and Figs 4.10 & 4.11;
but none of the dimensions is "4.2" .

Gas bottle / regulator Zones use radial distance for the horizontal dimensions.
So if close to a corner they wrap around - just like wet area Zones.
Measure from centre of bottle direct to corner; then along other wall for remaining distance.

For an item at ground level; the total dimension will be the "B" figure in Fig 4.10.
For a fitting at height 500 mm above top if bottle; it will be the "A" figure.
In between these heights, you have to calculate the radius of the cone at that height.

Under "3000"; all this only applies to "electrical equipment that is a source of ignition".
Earth electrodes are not a source of ignition, so can be within the Zone.
This is consistent with the gas rules (AS/NZS 5601.1), which is where the requirements were copied from.
However for NZ, ESRs citation in Schedule 2 re-writes both these clauses,
so that only electrical equipment "directly associated" with the gas supply can be in Zone.
That excludes almost all electrical equipment; and there's no direct association between the gas installation and an earth electrode.
It also means that different rules apply for installers of electrical equipment than for installers of gas equipment;
so it matters who was there first
Dan L
Posts: 158
Joined: Tue May 19, 2020 10:00 pm
Answers: 0
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: Inspection after livening

Post by Dan L »

Yes prob could be a seperate topic as useful to know.

Yes sorry for incorrect ref.
Post Reply