Repairs of 'Mains Work' Fittings

Post Reply
Sparkybatman
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2020 12:23 pm
Answers: 0
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Repairs of 'Mains Work' Fittings

Post by Sparkybatman »

For example ; Can an electrician replace a main earth electrode, or an overhead mains entry without Inspection.
Is there a clause for Repairs which do not need inspection? Not altering the electrical situation in any way (like for like).
Can anyone point me in the right direction where i can find the relevant standard or regulation.

Cheers
JamieP
Posts: 478
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2020 11:08 am
Answers: 0
Has thanked: 92 times
Been thanked: 18 times

Re: Repairs of 'Mains Work' Fittings

Post by JamieP »

Screenshot_20200518-153612_Drive.jpg

"(a) means prescribed electrical work that comprises the maintenance or
replacement of a fitting in an existing installation; and
(b) includes relocation or extension of a conductor to facilitate replacement
of a fitting;"

This work is low risk, hence not needing inspection
AlecK
Posts: 912
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2020 11:24 am
Answers: 5
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 351 times

Re: Repairs of 'Mains Work' Fittings

Post by AlecK »

Exactly.
ESR 6A (1) says all maintenance / replacement of existing installations is classified as low risk PEW
- the ONLY exception is item (1)(c) -
Nothing anywhere else changes that fundamental rule

Doesn't have to be "like-for-like".
Those words do not appear anywhere in ESRs (nor in any Regs for at least 40 years),
and they are very misleading because everyone has their own interpretation of just how "like" the replacement has to be.

Until these risk classification were introduced, the key issue governing inspection was whether the work needed a CoC.
If the work was listed as possibly needing inspection, but didn't need a CoC; then it didn't need to be inspected.
And the key factor in whether a CoC was need was whether the replacement fitting was "of an appropriate size, type, and rating for the electrical circuit". (If we still had those words, it would save a lot of arguments about the phantom "like for like"!)


ESR 6A gets us to exactly the same situation; just arrives by a different pathway because it's now a high-level statement in Part 1 of ESRs;
instead of buried in the details about inspection & other paperwork.


Yes, "mains work" is listed in clause (2) - along with a lot of other activities - as being classified as high risk PEW;
but the opening of that clause includes the words "(not being high risk prescribed electrical work)".
The ONLY possible interpretation of this is that (for ALL these activities that could be high risk):
- if the work is maintenance / replacement, then it's low risk;
- if it's more than maintenance / replacement (ie if it amounts to an alteration of the installation) then it's high risk.


Despite this, some networks insist on an inspection for eg replacement of fittings related to mains;
based on the known risk of polarity reversal with such work.
However if everyone - both sparkies & lines staff - did their job properly; any errors would be found & fixed before livening.
Sparkybatman
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2020 12:23 pm
Answers: 0
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: Repairs of 'Mains Work' Fittings

Post by Sparkybatman »

Do we draw a line at any point at say..switchboard replacement? Does this require inspection? As far as er6a is concerned is this is just replacement of a fitting in an existing installation? (Main switch, MEN point, main earth etc)
User avatar
Sarmajor
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2020 6:57 pm
Answers: 0
Location: Morrinsville
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Repairs of 'Mains Work' Fittings

Post by Sarmajor »

As long as the replacement doesn’t add anything more to the installation then it is Repairs / Maintainence of an existing installation and therefore low Risk. So an ESC is all that is required.
If you add things to an installation it is general risk work. Ie: more things, circuits, RCD protection, Upgrade from SERF’s to MCB’s.
If you install an MEN point when you replace the switchboard and there wasn’t one in the existing installation then you are into high risk and COC/ESC inspection with ROI is required.

From memory I believe that the EWRB has taken at least one electrician to task for replacing a switchboard with more bigger better and possibly an MEN link where there wasn’t one before.

It is important to note that there is a definition of the words Install & Maintainence In section 4 of ESR 2010. The various requirements that define the Risk levels for electrical work are also defined in Reg 6A and the words mean exactly what they say. The sequence that they are set out in Reg 6A is important so the first category that your work falls into sets the risk level. Repairs are always low risk (except for 6A(1)(c) (for obvious reasons).

The other side:
Went to a job today to downgrade the metering and was informed that the Inspector would be along shortly.

NO MAINS work at all. Supply isolated at the main switch. Replaced the CT’s by removing bus bar links and refitting them. When the Inspector arrived he was slightly bemused about why he was there. Never mind he sucked it up, did some tests, took some pictures issued an ROI for the job and left.
AlecK
Posts: 912
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2020 11:24 am
Answers: 5
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 351 times

Re: Repairs of 'Mains Work' Fittings

Post by AlecK »

I agree with Sarmajor's list of "general" PEW; except for replacing SERFs with MCBs.
That's still replacement of a fitting, both old & new fittings being overcurrent protection devices.
As long as the rating is suitable for the circuit (including for any BTI that's been added & may have reduced the CCC).

I did a switchboard change recently, and the only "general" work was adding RCDs.
Everything else was replacement of various fittings; no high risk PEW at all.

-----------------
Yes EWRB appear to have have delivered a "guilty" verdict for a switchboard change.
Far from the only instance of their decisions appearing dodgy (on the limited info provided) .
The ESRs in current form certainly do not support their interpretation based on the facts as reported by EWRB.
Maybe the investigator - or the members of the Board - were thinking back to earlier times when mains of increased size, and switchboards of larger capacity, were listed as requiring inspection.
Maybe the "complainee" just put his hands up, & may have been found innocent if he'd had proper representation.
Or maybe he actually did breach ESRs and / or Wiring Rules in some way that just wasn't made clear .
There's never enough detail published about their cases / decisions to allow proper analysis.

There's certainly no shortage of people about who'll lodge a complaint about things they think are wrong;
and then a lot depends on the knowledge - or otherwise - of whoever gets appointed to investigate.
After that comes the legal-skill plus ignorance-of-electrical-matters of the prosecutor; vs whatever combination the defence - if any - may have.
Then the board reach a decision - which may or may not be right; but it's very expensive to challenge.

Probably the only valid lesson we can take is that being right is no guarantee of going unpunished.
Even being "let off" amounts to a significant punishment due to the stress & costs of defending yourself.
User avatar
DougP
Posts: 242
Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2020 10:11 pm
Answers: 3
Has thanked: 19 times
Been thanked: 31 times

Re: Repairs of 'Mains Work' Fittings

Post by DougP »

AlecK wrote:
Tue May 19, 2020 9:56 am
Probably the only valid lesson we can take is that being right is no guarantee of going unpunished.
Even being "let off" amounts to a significant punishment due to the stress & costs of defending yourself.
How do we fix this?

They use investigators who aren't qualified electrical workers, then the board makes a decisions which has no relevance to the requirements of the act, regulations or standards.

Surely as a qualified trade, we should have better processes in place to treat qualified workers fairly, by utilising the most qualified people to investigate any complaints. Meanwhile, complaints against unqualified people carrying out electrical work, or even advertising services, go mostly unpunished.

I tried reporting one such instance through the report a cowboy, and after 3-4 weeks, EWRB came back and said I needed to fill out the full written complaint report including evidence of the work. Meanwhile, the person was still advertising. (it was an EST advertising for rewiring & switchboard replacements).
User avatar
Sarmajor
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2020 6:57 pm
Answers: 0
Location: Morrinsville
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Repairs of 'Mains Work' Fittings

Post by Sarmajor »

I am not sure why I included upgrades from SERF’s to MCB’s as general work. Must have been having a senior moment.
Post Reply