17th Edition Seminar

[GaryMo]

That'll stop fails but LIMS on an EIC? If you're installing and certifying why would there be any limitations?

Not talking about installing and certifying, but inspecting and testing an existing installations.

If an installed cable is not visible, then you can't say that it complies, so LIM is all you can put down.

Just replying to your quote. No mention of anything but EIC and them no longer containing fails or LIMs.....

What is their view on the debate surrounding testing of existing circuits and EICs for replacement CUs given that EICs may no longer contain Fails or LIMs.

 

[GaryMo]

That means ALL defects and omissions if it's a board change as an EIC is required.

So are you saying that you won't change a CU if you can't first issue an EIC for the existing wiring?

Ideal world......
Personally I carry out a PIR, repair defects to bring installation to the required minimum standard, change CU, issue EIC covering just the CU & tails and note the reference number of the associated PIR for existing circuits.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Just replying to your quote. No mention of anything but EIC and them no longer containing fails or LIMs.....

The issue is this.

There is a long-held and widely held belief that if you replace a CU you must test the entire installation and issue an EIC for the entire installation, complete with a schedule of results for the entire installation. You must have heard a variation of the saying "If you replace the CU you become responsible for the entire installation"?

The problem with that is if you are not allowed to record a LIM or an N/A on an EIC, how do you deal with concealed cables? How can you honestly put your name to a document certifying that the routing of cables which you can't see is compliant? Ditto screwed joints.

 

[GaryMo]

I totally agree but believe that issuing an EIC for the whole installation is unreasonable which is why I do what I do (post above yours).

 

[Norv]

For my NIC assessment I changed the CU in my house. Where it asks if cables had been routed in safe zones I put N/A. In the comments on existing installations box I put a note to say wiring was present before CU change so cannot guarantee cables have been run in safe zones.

The assessor was happy with this

 

[ppuch1]

Ask them if they intend to publish new/updated 'Guidance notes' books to reflect all the changes. And why are these books so expensive!!!

 

[Pensdown]

Just replying to your quote. No mention of anything but EIC and them no longer containing fails or LIMs.....

The issue is this.

There is a long-held and widely held belief that if you replace a CU you must test the entire installation and issue an EIC for the entire installation, complete with a schedule of results for the entire installation. You must have heard a variation of the saying "If you replace the CU you become responsible for the entire installation"?

I agree that after reading posts on various forums, including the "big one", it's very easy to come to that conclusion, but, it's never been the case..unless of course sparks are ignoring Regulation 130-07-01