Limitations on electrical installation certificates

[DTM20]

Hi,<br> <br>I have had an issue with a supply provided by another contractor. We are carrying out an installation on an extension to an existing building/installation. The other contractor has provided the supply to the new area. On there certificate it says limitation on a few key areas. As far as I understand you aren't allowed limitations on an installation certificate, if this is the case is there anywhere this is written down I can refer to. Also there is a limitation on the bonding connection to the main water. Again I assume this means they can't find it, I'm sure the nic would consider this a major non compliance ? Again is there something I can refer to in writing for this. <br>I sympathise with the other contractor as if is an extremely large building and I imagine the bonding is very difficult to find, however I imagine there is no instance where it is permissible to not verify a main bonding connection.<br><br>thanks in advance

 

[Richard Burns]

The electrical installation certificate cannot have limitations on it.
Guidance note 3 under "electrical installation certificate" states that and defects or omissions revealed by the inspection shall be made good and inspected and tested again before the EIC is issued.

For bonding if the connection could not be found then testing for continuity and getting a low reading would be a way of testing to be able to expect that the bonding conductor was connected. (though in a large building this result may be suspect because of the likelihood of parallel paths).

However your installation will also require you to test the bonding so it may become moot if you have done this already.

 

[Meggerman]

Of course you can put limitations, put what you like, it is an EIC based on a model form in a non-statutory guidance book.

 

[SirKit Breaker]

Of course you can put limitations, put what you like, it is an EIC based on a model form in a non-statutory guidance book.

I wont enter the argument.

Cheers...........Howard

 

[trev]

I'd say that if you can't find it to verify it's existence then you should run new in.

 

[DTM20]

Thanks for the replies gents. I think any responsible contractor would agree the main bonding conductors must be verified. In this case as the supply was provided by others, we wanted their certification to verify the existing installation was satisfactory in terms of bonding, however I suppose this should of been verified at design stage, however this project has been designed by a specialist who I suspect never took the main bonding in to consideration.

 

[Engineer54]

First off, it doesn't matter a hoot what the NICEIC think, they don't make the rules!!

You say this is a large building that you are adding an extension too, what are we talking about here an office building, multiple dwelling building, factory building?? Does it have it's own distribution TX, Multiple DNO LV supplies (more than one DNO LV service head)??

 

[DTM20]

It's a hospital with one dno supply to the building we are adding an extension too. I'm sure it's not acceptable to not verify main bonding or have a limitation on an EIC,in anyone's eyes, not just the NIC's. Just wondering what people's opinions are on here, it's always good to get other sparks opinions on matters like this I find

 

[Engineer54]

The Hospital Engineer (Engineering Manager) will /should be able to officially provide you with this information, as well as any other details of the main electrical distribution system, such a Ze or Zdb values etc...

 

[Eddiesparks]

I may be way off but if the main water was running in to the building in plastic pipe then it would be unable to introduce earth potential. In this case it wouldnt need bonding. Despite what niceic say!

 

[londonlec]

I have written Lim on EIC's before.

For example, working at a large shopping centre in central London where I wasn't even allowed in the switch room to verify supply details.

I would always try and verify main bonding.

Tin hat on.

 

[Zebra Stripe]

I suppose Ive done the same, but I call it NV (not verified)

 

[davek]

Well I bought the part p doctor book from niceic book and in ther example of certification I stated .water bonded out of sight under sink, this is in departure is that not what it's for

 

[trev]

Well I bought the part p doctor book from niceic book and in ther example of certification I stated .water bonded out of sight under sink, this is in departure is that not what it's for

Eh? any chance of that in English mate? Sorry but it doesn't make any sense

 

[Engineer54]

I may be way off but if the main water was running in to the building in plastic pipe then it would be unable to introduce earth potential. In this case it wouldnt need bonding. Despite what niceic say!

If you are talking about a typical domestic house you may well be correct, but in a multi storey block of flats, or in this case a hospital, the original metallic pipework can very easily become extraneous, from the fabric of the building itself.

Hospitals tend to have a higher requirement with regards to the bonding of metallic services, there are also many more such services that will be found in hospital buildings, medical gases being just one example!!