PME Bonding help!

[dlt27]

More experienced help needed please. Scenario is Mains intake and MET(PME) outside the building in cupboard with KMF's (80A fuse) feeding flats via 16mmT+E. 2 flats gas meters are in cupboard at mains with 10mm bonds. 1 flat has gas meter in flat with no 10mm bond. Also no 10mm bonds to water. All flats have local 6mm bonding to gas and water from flat DB.
To run 10mm bonds to water and 1 gas meter will be a nightmare as being listed etc also would have to be run outdoors because would need access through others flats . Also loads of electrical work has been done without this being picked up.
All I wanted to know is what code to give this on EICR (I will probably be doing work). NAPIT tech guy said code 2 or 3, but wouldn't commit to one. I have heard others say if no signs of overheating on 6mm then no code. I asked NAPIT guy if i could give code 3 and satisfatory report he then said code 2.
Please help. Thank you.

 

[Midwest]

NIC/Elecsa changed their recommendations for upgrading gas & water bonds to 10mm recently, there was a thread here recently. Seems Napit suggesting the same?

Do the said pipes require bonding, are they extraneous? Sounds as if the main gas & water enter property in the mains cupboard, just a thought?

PS: what about the earthing conductor to each flat?

 

[Octopus]

Its all very well these organisations changing their recommendations BUT they do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to inform the public and leave us to delivery the "news" and some customers simply think we are ripping them off by recommending unnecessary work!

 

[Midwest]

Its all very well these organisations changing their recommendations BUT they do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to inform the public and leave us to delivery the "news" and some customers simply think we are ripping them off by recommending unnecessary work!

But in fairness Murdoch, they are only quoting BS7671.

 

[Octopus]

But in fairness Murdoch, they are only quoting BS7671.

And how many people know what this is?

They are just trying to justify their cushy lives, and pensions

 

[dlt27]

So do you recommend code 2 then? Thanks

 

[dlt27]

Earthing conductor is 16mm to kmf switch and cpc in 16mm T+E submain to flat db is 6mm.

 

[davesparks]

Earthing conductor to each flat is undersized to operate as a main bond for that installation.
Confirm whether or not water services are extraneous.

 

[dlt27]

Yes I gathered that. What is the process to check if it's extraneous. Is it if its less than 23k ohms? Also if you get a reading of less than 0.05 ohms can you presume bonding is on even though you can't see bonding conductor. Thank you

 

[Midwest]

Good explanation for your first question; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5JOTA-mJ4A

What about the EC? If you comply with the reg for that, your bonding locally in each flat for water/gas won't be an issue?

 

[Midwest]

And how many people know what this is?

They are just trying to justify their cushy lives, and pensions

Time to climb down off the soapbox, it is what it is, perhaps Brexit might change things

 

[davesparks]

Yes I gathered that. What is the process to check if it's extraneous. Is it if its less than 23k ohms? Also if you get a reading of less than 0.05 ohms can you presume bonding is on even though you can't see bonding conductor. Thank you

No you cannot presume that bonding is there. You can only state that a low resistance connection to the MET exists.

What you can presume is something about the person carrying out the report if they are so unsure about how to test an extraneous part and how to code such a common observation on the report.

 

[dlt27]

No you cannot presume that bonding is there. You can only state that a low resistance connection to the MET exists.

What you can presume is something about the person carrying out the report if they are so unsure about how to test an extraneous part and how to code such a common observation on the report.

Thank you for your helpful reply. Much appreciated..

 

[dlt27]

No you cannot presume that bonding is there. You can only state that a low resistance connection to the MET exists.

What you can presume is something about the person carrying out the report if they are so unsure about how to test an extraneous part and how to code such a common observation on the report.

Im going to take the Mrs to bed know, not my regs. book....

 

[sparksburnout]

Im going to take the Mrs to bed know, not my regs. book....

Will there be any bonding involved??