'Electrical Bonding Notice'

[SUNRAY]

I've been asked to sort out yet another gas fitters 'Electrical Bonding Notice', this time issued by Worcester/Bosch Engineer.
Having spoken to the householder there appears to be a 'green wire' on the steel pipe between the main valve and the regulator and another on the 'copper pipe before the boiler', they also state the gas feed was installed a couple of years ago, at the same time the boiler was installed and there's several inches of yellow plastic pipe visible before the valve. It seems all services rise in the same cupboard as the boiler and no other gas appliances.

I haven't been there yet to see for myself.

My current interpretation is that bonding is not required if all of the above is correct. I've seen many different opinions on here in the past, how have these opinions developed recently?

 

[EFLImpudence]

Extraneous-conductive-parts require main bonding. Other parts do not.

The only developments have been some corrected errors.

 

[JohnW2]

My current interpretation is that bonding is not required if all of the above is correct. I've seen many different opinions on here in the past, how have these opinions developed recently?

You are right that there have been differing opinions voiced, but I would suggest that those only represent differences between those who understand the concept and purpose of main bonding, and those who don't. The wording of the regs certainly has (particularly prior to most recent changes) not helped those who are incapable of thinking for themselves.

As EFLI has written very succinctly, "Extraneous-conductive-parts require main bonding. Other parts do not." - and that's really all there is to it!

If someone doesn't understand what is, and what is not, an 'extraneous-c-p', then they should not have anything to do with bonding - including not having any thing to do with deciding whether bonding is required.

Kind Regards, John

 

[AndyPRK]

As I have mentioned twice on here that gas safe engineers have a box to tick that bonding is satisfactory in rental properties.

If they aren’t trained. It’s not their fault.

 

[JohnW2]

As I have mentioned twice on here that gas safe engineers have a box to tick that bonding is satisfactory in rental properties. If they aren’t trained. It’s not their fault.

You have indeed - and I don't think anyone is 'blaming' Gas Safe engineers, per se, for anything - it is the system, not the individuals, which appears to be broken.

In relation to the matter we are discussing, the training is probably 'worse than inadequate', since those who receive the training very probably end up sincerely believing that their understanding of electrical bonding is adequate and correct.

It's very fortunate that virtually all internal gas pipework is 'incidentally earthed' (via boilers etc.). Were that not the case, then the unnecessary installation (when it was unnecessary) of bonding to gas pipes would increase the risk of potentially fatal electric shocks, which clearly would be a much more serious situation.

I fail to see what electrical bonding (even when required) has got to do with 'gas safety'. That being the case, I don't see why Gas Safe trainers/trainees /regulations don't stick to just those safety issues that they hopefully do understand (i.e. matters of gas safety), leaving matters of electrical safety to others who understand about that.

Put more simply in terms of what you say above, a person who does not have adequate understanding and training to be competent to do so should not be expected to 'tick a box' in relation to a matter of electrical safety.

Kind Regards, John