Checklist for Electrical Safety Audit in New Zealand | Carelabs
An electrical safety audit examines whether an installation is safe to keep operating, and whether the records supporting it would stand up to scrutiny. This is what a competent auditor works through on a New Zealand site, section by section.
It is written so you can run it as a pre-audit self-check. Where an item cannot be answered from your own records, that gap is itself the finding.
1. Documentation and certification
- Can you produce the Certificate of Compliance for electrical work carried out on the installation? The Electricity (Safety) Regulations 2010 require prescribed electrical work to be certified, and missing certification is the most common documentary gap on older sites.
- Is there a Record of Inspection where one is required, and an Electrical Safety Certificate where mains work has been done?
- Are as-built drawings current, or do they describe the installation as it was at handover? Most sites discover the answer is the latter.
- Is there a switchboard schedule, and does it match the labelling on the board?
- Are the people who carried out the work registered with the EWRB, and can that be evidenced?
2. The main switchboard
- Is the board in a condition consistent with its age, with no signs of overheating, tracking or moisture ingress?
- Are all covers, barriers and escutcheons in place, and are live parts shrouded so incidental contact is not possible during normal operation?
- Is labelling legible, accurate and durable? Faded or handwritten labels on a board fed at fault levels that have since increased are a recurring finding.
- Is there adequate clear working space in front of the board, unobstructed by storage?
- Is there evidence of thermographic survey, and were any anomalies closed out?
3. Protection and earthing
- Does protection discrimination appear to have been assessed at any point, or were devices selected individually as the site grew?
- Are RCDs installed where AS/NZS 3000 requires them, and are they tested at a defined interval with results recorded?
- Is the main earthing conductor sized correctly and its connection sound and accessible?
- Has earth resistance been measured, and is there a recorded value rather than an assumption?
- Is equipotential bonding present and continuous where required?
4. Circuits and final subcircuits
- Is cable sizing consistent with protective device rating and installation method, particularly where circuits have been extended?
- Are there signs of unauthorised modification: unlabelled circuits, junction boxes added without record, flexible cord used as fixed wiring?
- Are IP ratings appropriate to the environment, especially in wash-down, dusty or outdoor areas?
- Is segregation maintained between electrical and other services?
5. Equipment in service
- Is portable and in-service equipment inspected and tested to AS/NZS 3760, at intervals matched to the environment rather than a single site-wide default?
- Are records retained and does the tagging match them?
- Is damaged equipment removed from service, or does it continue in use with a tag that has expired?
6. Hazardous and special areas
- Where construction or demolition work is under way, does the temporary installation comply with AS/NZS 3012?
- Are any classified hazardous areas documented, with equipment selection matched to the classification?
- Are areas of elevated risk, such as plant rooms and battery rooms, ventilated and access-controlled appropriately?
7. Arc flash and energised work
- Has incident energy been calculated anywhere on the site, or is PPE assigned from a generic table?
- Does the safe working procedure align with AS/NZS 4836, and does it define when work may proceed energised?
- Are permits used for energised work, and do they reference the specific hazard at the equipment concerned?
- Do contractors receive the site's electrical hazard information before starting work?
8. Management systems
- Is there an owner for electrical safety, with defined responsibility rather than a shared assumption?
- Are findings from previous audits closed out, and is there evidence of closure rather than intention?
- Does the maintenance schedule include electrical infrastructure, or only production equipment?
- Are officers receiving information about electrical risk in a form that supports the due diligence duty under the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015?
Using the results
An audit that produces a long undifferentiated list is difficult to act on. Findings should be ranked by consequence, with the small number that represent genuine risk of injury separated clearly from the many that are administrative. The test of a useful audit is whether someone can read the first page and know what to do on Monday.
Related reading: why companies commission an audit covers the governance case, and arc flash analysis addresses section 7 in depth.
Frequently Asked Questions
For a single industrial site, typically two to four days on site plus a week for reporting, though documentation quality drives this more than site size. Where certification records and drawings are complete the audit moves quickly. Where the installation has to be traced because records do not describe it, the survey element expands considerably.
Generally no. Most of the audit is visual inspection, record review and discussion, carried out with the plant running. An outage is needed only where covers must be removed to inspect terminations or where testing requires isolation, and that scope is agreed in advance rather than discovered during the visit.
Every three to five years suits most installations, with the interval shortened where the environment is harsh, the plant changes frequently, or the previous audit found significant issues. Any major alteration, change of use or change of ownership is a reason to audit regardless of when the last one took place.
Need Expert Electrical Safety Support?
Carelabs provides arc flash studies, power system analysis, and AS/NZS 3000 compliance services across New Zealand.