Online assistance for electrical trade people Login  |  Register  |   Forgot Password
Assistance for electrical trade people
 

 

 

 


Click here to send Ron a pdf document for publication on this Topic

Documents must be less than 200k in pdf format

Posted By Topic: ESC certification

Nickg
May 02 2018 17:12

I'm just trying to get my head around who exactly is meant to be signing an ESC in a new connection type situation, where the work done is high risk/mains work.

If for example, an electrician installs a mains cable between the network connection point and the main switchboard, then completes the wiring at the main switchboard. The whole current revenue metering is installed part way along the mains and is done by a separate electrician (meter installer). A pretty standard install. I understand both electricians will need to complete a COC, the electrician installing the mains and MSB COC being high-risk work, and the meter installer electricians COC being general (assuming the neutral integrity hasn't been compromised).

My understanding in this situation would be that neither electrician would sign an ESC, as they are not making the final connection to the network. Obviously the work requires inspection. So let's say the inspector makes the final connection at the network connection point and livens the installation. Is the inspector then required to sign the ESC for each electricians COC? (I would've thought so)

ESR74A (1) says, the ESC must be issued when the 'work is complete', referring to the work mentioned in ESR74A (1AA).

ESR74A (2) says, 'for the purpose of subclause (1)...the work is only complete once the installation or part installation is connected or reconnected to a power supply'. It appears this is applicable if an installation or part installation was disconnected from a power supply whilst PEW is done? My belief is the work in the example I've mentioned is disconnected whilst the PEW is being done, therefore this regulation does apply. However, I have heard differing opinions, where others interpret this regulation applying to installations that have been disconnected from a supply in order for PEW to take place, and then reconnected. Alteration type work to an existing install in other words.

So who is signing the ESC in this example? I have heard others saying each electrician is required to sign their own ESC and COC for their piece of work they're doing, even though they aren't making the final connection?

Any thoughts much appreciated. Sorry such a long question. Haha. Thanks.

   

gregmcc
May 02 2018 18:03

If it was me doing the metering, but not livening I would fill in the ESC section, but cross out the connection date, as the the esc states it is safe to liven, the ESR's allow other electricians to take this as true and correct.

If I was doing the mains I would insist on a COC and ESC for work done by other electricians unless I was directly observing their work.

Whoever does the final connection AKA "livening the installation" should also date the connection date box, reference other COC's on your COC, and keep a copy of the other COC's for your peace of mind.

I do remember (maybe in the past?) something about revenue metering not been PEW, but couldn't find it......maybe it was one of those long gone exemptions that lines companies used to have.

   

Nickg
May 02 2018 18:58

Yeah right. ESR74A(1) does say 'the person who completed the work must issue an ESC'. I seemed to have missed this point when first reading through it. I've just read in other places the person making the 'final connection' must issue the ESC. Can be a bit confusing at times. Thanks.
   

daniel2
May 02 2018 20:16

I still believe that there's is still a lot of confusion in the trade with the COC and ESC forms:

- how to use them correctly
- where to use them correctly (what situation)
- the difference between the two

Also, where there are two forms and not one for everything?
   

daniel2
May 02 2018 20:17

* why
   

AlecK
May 03 2018 07:47

In the example given, the ESC should be a separate form, issued by the person who made the last connection that allowed current to flow.
ESR 73A defines the connection that matters; so who must issue an ESC depends on the order:
"To avoid doubt, in this regulation connection refers to the prescribed electrical work that is the final step that will allow electricity to flow in the installation or part installation on which other prescribed electrical work has been done.things get connected in

Sometimes several ESCs will be needed; but if the entire installation (including metering) is connected to network as this "final step" then that ESC covers the entire installation.
   

Nickg
May 03 2018 11:31

Okay. Would it also be fair to say then, in this example, neither the electrician or the meter installer electrician could complete an ESC after doing their respective pieces of work, and provide this document to the inspector making the final connection.

As an ESC must be completed when the work is complete. And the work is not deemed to be complete until the installation is connected to a power supply.
   

Nickg
May 03 2018 11:35

...ie. Both electricians are only required to provide the inspector with their COCs for their respective pieces of work, prior to connection.
   

Andrew
May 03 2018 12:57

Yes. The people who do PEW that doesn't include connection provide CoCs only. For work that requires an RoI the inspector then checks it, issues an RoI, and attaches the CoC. Whoever then does the connection (the inspector in the example) checks the things required by 73A (including that the CoCs and RoIs needed have been issued), makes the connection, then issues the only ESC required for this piece of work.

An electrical safety certificate must "include a statement that the person issuing it is satisfied that the installation or part installation is connected to a power supply and is safe to use" (ESR 74A(3)(a)). If it's not connected to a power supply then it's a false declaration to say that it is (level 2 penalty).
   

Nickg
May 03 2018 14:15

Thank you for clarifying :)
   

zl2aj
May 03 2018 14:18

To extend on the example given in the opening post.

Say the installation is the mains, metering and one power point under the switchboard. All other circuits are disconnected (as not yet safe to connect).

CoC for the power point and mains. RoI covering the mains (and main earthing system etc). Possibly a separate CoC for the metering? (not 100% sure on this as metering has slightly different rules that I am not familiar with).

Inspector or approved connecting agent (depending on your networks rules) makes final connection to this installation IAW ESR 73A, issues ESC IAW ESR 74A.

New circuits then become safe to connect to supply. CoC issued (= safe to connect). Connection is made in switchboard (phases and neutrals connected to supply). ESC issued for the subcircuits that are connected.

What about subcircuit earths? As earths are not intended to carry current (in normal operation) they can be connected prior to defined connection (have I interpereted this correctly?) so long as they are connected before or during connection.

Key things to remember

CoC certifies it as being safe to connect (IAW AS/NZS 3000 and others as applicable)

ESC certifies it as connected safely (IAW ESR 73A) and safe to use.
   

DougP
May 03 2018 16:44

I'm sure someone will clarify this further, but the final "connection" can only refer to PEW. Not just the fitting of the supply fuse.

Regardless of it being a full installation, or just one circuit isolated at a circuit breaker.
   

Nickg
May 03 2018 19:26

If you were to be simply inserting a fuse to liven an installation, you wouldn't have to complete an ESC for this. If in the example mentioned the connection to the network was completed by a line mechanic and the inspector was simply inserting the fuse. Then the regulations allow for the inspector to rely on the veracity of the documentation from all parties involved in the work. All COCs and an ESC by the person who completed the work (made the final connections). Remembering the inspector would then need to complete the checks as per ESR73A and complete an ROI.

ESR74A has had me bogged down for a couple of days now. It does say the person who 'completed the work' must issue an ESC, and the work is not deemed complete until the power is connected. Therefore one could say, if an electrician installs a switchboard, he completed that work and must issue an ESC, regardless as to whether he is making the final connection or not. If however the statement 'the person who completed the work' was interpreted differently, it could also mean the person doing the final connection has completed the work and must issue an ESC. ie 'completed the work' and 'final connection' mean the same thing..? I think this is right anyway, the latter interpretation seems to fit better.
   

Andrew
May 04 2018 10:48

If the inspector was just inserting a fuse after the line mechanic has made the connection then they wouldn't have to complete an RoI because that should've been done (and sighted) before the line mechanic made the connection. All the inspector is doing is a job that can be done with no registration at all as long as the network authorised them - no paperwork required (except any network paperwork).

As far as 74A goes, (2) tells you that if things were disconnected then the work is complete when it's reconnected, so connection is the completion of work. (4) tells you that if things were connected the whole time then when the job is done is the completion of work. The definition of electrical installation, combined with (1AA), tells you that if something was not connected to a supply before you start and isn't going to be connected when you finish then 74A doesn't apply.

As I said earlier, you can't issue an ESC for something that's not connected.
   

Andrew
May 04 2018 10:57

That second paragraph should begin:
As far as 74A goes, (2) tells you that if things were disconnected then the work is complete when it's connected or reconnected...
   

AlecK
May 04 2018 10:59

now for a slightly different scenario:
1 Mains & MSB installed, c/w main earthing system. Also 1 final subcircuit to one socket. CoC issued.
Meters not yet installed.
2 Inspector inspects mains work, Roi issued.
3 Linesperson does pre-connection checks, sights CoC & RoI, ensures meter isolator is either locked off or has no conductor on load side (ie safe to connect despite no meter); then connects mains to network. No ESC yet because no current can flow even if fuse were to be inserted.
4 AMC installs meter; and issues CoC (yes, CoC is needed for installing meters; it's either "general" or "high risk" PEW depending on configuration).

Under this scenario the connection of the meter(s) is the "final connection" that would allow current to flow; so an ESC covering ALL of the above parts of the installation must be issued by the AMC.

Subsequent installation of other subcircuits will require further CoC(s) & ESC(s).
   

DougP
May 04 2018 11:50

Meanwhile back in the real world - it doesn't matter if the metering or the linesman is the last one to connect a wire, if there isn't an ESC issued by the electrician - the power won't be flowing any time soon.
   

DougP
May 04 2018 12:03

In my opinion, the clauses aren't well written and I don't think they effect their intended purpose.

Has there been any clarifications issued by EWRB?
   

Nickg
May 04 2018 13:10

As you say AlecK, the metering could be considered general or high risk depending on the configuration. How about the actual connections at the network connection point? Would this have to be considered high risk/mains work? Or would it fall under the realm of 'works' rather than 'installation'.

I guess the inspector couldn't complete an inspection and the subsequent ROI (if he were to make this connection), if this connection was to be deemed 'installation'?
   

gregmcc
May 04 2018 17:36

The point of supply, the pole or pillar would be works/network connection
   

nalla
May 04 2018 20:22

I find dealing with this often confusing on must jobs.
The guys installing meters don't carry paper work and have a box to tick on the hand held for an ESC if required . and always really quick to want to see my ROI. What concerns me is why so many people don't want to sign the ESC for there portion of a job. I see no problem in someone signing what they have done as safe to connect. So what if a job has multi ESCs.
   

Nickg
May 04 2018 20:38

However an ESC doesn’t say something is safe to connect. It declares an installation is connected and safe for use. Read the fine print at the bottom of an ESC form. Regulations say it must include this statement.
   

Nickg
May 04 2018 20:45

...and as Andrew said to complete an ESC without the work being connected would be a false declaration, subject to a level 2 penalty.
   

AlecK
May 07 2018 20:11

The "Installation" generally starts at the property boundary; but where there are "non-exclusive fittings" beyond that point, the installation starts at last non-exclusive fitting. IE for a property containing one or more installations, with supply fuse inside the boundary, then at the supply fuse.

Only PEW on an installation has any risk category under ESR 6A; so work on appliances, or work on "works", has no risk classification.
It follows that connecting "mains" to a supply fuse is either "high risk" if the fuse is inside the boundary, or "works if the fuse is outside the boundary.

Yes this is a bit confusing; and yes it could have been worded better; but if you follow it through it does mostly make sense.


   

Andrew
May 08 2018 11:25

Of course 74A (1AA)(c) means that even if the PEW is on works rather than an installation, it can still require an ESC, but it won't require a COC or ROI.
   

AlecK
May 08 2018 12:00

correct.
That bit was added solely to ensure that an ESC got issued by someone.

No point looking for clarification from EWRB, it's not their document and not their area of 9supposed) expertise - which is limited to licensing & competence of electrical workers. Of course that hasn't stopped them in the past, but their record on interpretations is woeful.

Clarification from ES (who did write it) might help - but every time anyone suggests ESRs could be improved, the reaction is either to deny there's a problem; to issue an "interpretation" that the words simply don't support; or to say "stop picking faults, get on and find a way to make it all work"
Which ignores the fact that if we get it wrong - or even if ewe get it right but EWRB thinks it's wrong - we can be punished.