18th.Edition 411.3. 1.2 Doubts in my mind !

[gerry whitwham]

You can’t plan for every future scenario and in the case of a plastic insert on an incoming service the regulation regarding protective bonding and if it’s required in that scenario is quite clear.
We can only work with what’s in front of us.

To sum up on this scenario, it seems to me this particular Regulation has been badly drafted or rather "worded". It seems obvious to most of us that metallic service pipes will still be required to be bonded but to me the wording could be misconstrued as if implying "bonding not required".

I honestly believe that the I.E. should clarify the situation so as retain bonding on metallic service pipes above and beyond the point of entry.

 

[westward10]

To me it is clear, if the service is plastic bonding is not required.

 

[Ian1981]

To sum up on this scenario, it seems to me this particular Regulation has been badly drafted or rather "worded". It seems obvious to most of us that metallic service pipes will still be required to be bonded but to me the wording could be misconstrued as if implying "bonding not required".

I honestly believe that the I.E. should clarify the situation so as retain bonding on metallic service pipes above and beyond the point of entry.

If the service is metallic after the plastic coming into the building then unless deemed extraneous then it does not need to be bonded at all.
To bond it is simply introducing a potential that need not have existed.
Regulations on it are quite clear really and this new one will hopefully stop people unnecessarily bonding pipes for the sake of it due to confusion