EICR Classification codes Main bonding

[serpico4321]

Hello all,

i failed a periodic inspection today and am still in debate with the client. He's obv not happy.

An NICEIC registered electrician terminated the bonding into a metal back box of a socket outlet connected to the CPC of the radial s/o circuit.

the regs say protective conductors for main bonding should run from point of entry into MET

What would you do?

i said the above and he didn't believe me. Shall I just show him the regs book or am I interpreting wrong?

P.s shocking niceic man to not bond to met

 

[Plonker 3]

You are correct. Stand by your report as you are signing it.

 

[telectrix]

do you mean he took the bonding from water/gas to a socket? if so he's a numpty.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

No none of the Regs that I'm aware of state any such thing.
The Regs as far as I'm aware stipulate that the bonding conductors should be connected to the main earth terminal.
However, that does not mean that the conductor has to be continuous, or even of the same material through out.
The Regs, actually allow for a protective conductor to be part of the structure of the building, and even in some instances pipework, as long as certain conditions are met.

 

[Octopus]

You are right. How easy would it be to extend the bonding to the CU/met?

 

[serpico4321]

Thanks,


For remedial works he's looking at board upgrade in August (it's about 1965 - pre met)


He would like the cert changing from C2 to C3. Would this be ok? (In your opinion)

 

[Octopus]

Thanks,


For remedial works he's looking at board upgrade in August (it's about 1965 - pre met)


He would like the cert changing from C2 to C3. Would this be ok? (In your opinion)

You are the one signing the document, that said you've signed it so stick to your guns or go down the slippery slope of dodgy EICR's

 

[somersetsparks]

Not really, stick with your coding, it may be worth checking wheter the main bonding is actually required, i .e. plastic incomer/plastic pipes.
This bond though were does it run from? from the fuseboard to a pattress, or from the incoming service to a pattress?

 

[Plonker 3]

Thanks,


For remedial works he's looking at board upgrade in August (it's about 1965 - pre met)


He would like the cert changing from C2 to C3. Would this be ok? (In your opinion)

What reason has he given for wanting it changing to a C3?

 

[Andy78]

C2 - potentially dangerous i.e. dangerous under fault conditions.

I'd say that pretty much describes lack of adequate main bonding.
In fact it's one of the examples of a C2 on the ESC EICR guidance.

 

[simpson93]

No none of the Regs that I'm aware of state any such thing.
The Regs as far as I'm aware stipulate that the bonding conductors should be connected to the main earth terminal.
However, that does not mean that the conductor has to be continuous, or even of the same material through out.
The Regs, actually allow for a protective conductor to be part of the structure of the building, and even in some instances pipework, as long as certain conditions are met.

im pretty sure it does have to be continuous with no breaks in the cable, for example if you were using the same peice of cable for 2 pipes you would cut the insulation off instead of cutting. trying too find my osg at the moment too make sure but its hiding >.< , could be wrong

 

[somersetsparks]

im pretty sure it does have to be continuous with no breaks in the cable, for example if you were using the same peice of cable for 2 pipes you would cut the insulation off instead of cutting. trying too find my osg at the moment too make sure but its hiding >.< , could be wrong

That is a reccomendation, as is the 'within 600mm of the point of entry'. You couldn't really code bonding (i.e. to gas and water) that was cut and joined. Spin is right although certain conditions need to be met and it is inlikely they could be met in a house.

 

[Guest55]

im pretty sure it does have to be continuous with no breaks in the cable, for example if you were using the same peice of cable for 2 pipes you would cut the insulation off instead of cutting. trying too find my osg at the moment too make sure but its hiding >.< , could be wrong

myth / fake reg / old wives tale im afraid.

 

[Tuttle]

What cross sectional area does the cpc have? Probably too small for main bonding anyway?

 

[Guest55]

What cross sectional area does the cpc have?

probably 1.5mm if relying on the socket cpc.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

Yes the CPC may well be under sized as a bonding conductor.
If that is the case, then it will warrent an observation and a code.
However the fact that a bonding conductor is neither continuous or direct from a to z, does not warrent an observation or a code.

 

[serpico4321]

Thank you,

The main bonding conductor has been correctly selected but is not continuous to the MET. It travels 1m from the main gas to the earth lug of a metal back box which has the 1.5mm CPC of a radial socket circuit terminated into.

Does anyone know if this Ok with NICEIC? doesn't seem specifically so with regs?

 

[Deleted member 26818]

What is the wiring system?
Is it metal conduit?
If no, then the 1.5mm is undersized.

 

[D Skelton]

myth / fake reg / old wives tale im afraid.

Just throwing it out there, but some may argue that if you run a main bonding conductor to your water, cut it and join your water and gas together, technically that's supplementary bonding

 

[Tuttle]

Thank you,

The main bonding conductor has been correctly selected but is not continuous to the MET. It travels 1m from the main gas to the earth lug of a metal back box which has the 1.5mm CPC of a radial socket circuit terminated into.

Does anyone know if this Ok with NICEIC? doesn't seem specifically so with regs?

Does the bonding conductor actually fit into the earth lug of the metal back box properly or is there another bodge lurking there?