I don’t usually get too wrapped up in such considerations. Most of my clients find It helpful if I take a general view on electrical safety as they want to ensure compliance with EAW Regs 1989. Having said that, my NICEIC inspecting engineer wasn’t in agreement as he felt I was straying from the strict confines of the EICR. My clients are more important to me than NICEIC! 
By the way, if, for example, we had the power off and emergency lighting failed, I point that out as a note on my EICR.

It would be unprofessional to do the electrical equivalent of the cops stopping at the county line in American films. If there is something that is dangerous, either because it exposes a shock risk, or if the ADS is compromised because the box is full of birds nests or something then it would be churlish to say ‘not listed in BS7671, not my problem’

You may then have a ‘see accompanying letter/notes’  that can say non BS7671 things like 

XYZ is dangerous because whatever, or perhaps something is a technical non-compliance but most unlikely to be  dangerous,  or  

'this concerns  us, but is outside of our area of professional expertise,  so we strongly recommend that XYZ is further inspected by a mechanical engineer/ bomb disposal expert/ gas fitter/lift expert/ member of the institute of Feng Shui practitioners"… delete as applicable..

Mike.

Exactly Mike! But neither should we be admonished for issues resting outside of the EICR that we may have missed. I think that is what concerns some!

Upfront, I have no idea what you are talking about -

Cat 3 environment? What's that? 

How does a BS 60898 device not comply? Other than perhaps some jobsworth moaning about the panel it is fitted to is a homebrew item without the CE (chinese export) mark?

In what way is a mcb sitting in a panel ‘polluting’?

Personally, I would confine myself to more pressing issues required by the eicr, namely, the usual inspection & testing etc, and wouldn't give a second thought to whatever is a Cat 3 or any other environment.

whjohnson: 
 

Upfront, I have no idea what you are talking about -

Cat 3 environment? What's that? 

How does a BS 60898 device not comply? Other than perhaps some jobsworth moaning about the panel it is fitted to is a homebrew item without the CE (chinese export) mark?

In what way is a mcb sitting in a panel ‘polluting’?

Personally, I would confine myself to more pressing issues required by the eicr, namely, the usual inspection & testing etc, and wouldn't give a second thought to whatever is a Cat 3 or any other environment.

Hi, 

I think you are thinking the wrong way around, it‘s about the effects certain environment have on devices and their individual certification within a standard.
 

Pollution categories or levels if you prefer relate to the environment  In which equipment is used. 

60898 devices only being suitable for up to level 2

60947-2 devices being required for level 3. 
 

Here is a link to a PE article by Napit

Cheers 

Martyn

Thank you Martin.

Apologies for the rather terse response - just highlighting my ignorance on what has been something of a day I'd rather not repeat in a hurray!

The definitions of ‘pollution level’, defined by  IEC 62368-1  are used to decide permitted creepage distances and clearances.

more on that and figures for level 3 as well 

herehttps://www.powerctc.com/en/node/4757

Pollution Degree 1: No pollution or only dry, nonconductive pollution occurs. The pollution has no effect.

Pollution Degree 2: Normally only nonconductive pollution occurs. Temporary conductivity caused by condensation is to be expected.

Pollution Degree 3: Conductive pollution or dry nonconductive pollution that becomes conductive due to condensation occurs. To be found in industrial environment or construction sites (harsh environments).

Pollution Degree 4: The pollution generates persistent conductivity caused by conductive dust, rain, or snow.

Using kit of the wrong level is a case of keeping the potential contamination out. Even  a simple enclosure or at a push a tent, can reduce a problem by 1 or 2 levels, so long as the door stays shut, similarly if ventilation is needed,  fan grilles should have basic sponge or paper filters and louvers.

Mike

mapj1: 
 

herehttps://www.powerctc.com/en/node/4757

You have to laugh, from their site: - "We aim to give you all the best components you need to

sell your products in whatever you want. Conveters and

transceivers are the best items for you guys to sell. We also

hever a fair and reasonable price for you. That's why we

need you to press the subscribe button right down below.

Subscrible to get the latest news! Don't worried, we won't

let you down (winked-eyes)"

One might find that the environment is not aligned to the components selected, but that is not dangerous as such is it? Comments and a C3 appear to be indicated. If the situation is actually dangerous (water pouring over equipment for example) then we have C1 or C2. In principle, I do not see the problem. An EICR is not an exercise to find non-compliance with some standard, it is exclusive to BS7671, although many people attempt to expand it, usually to charge money. See 651.2.

I would add another point. The OP says a “full site inspection”, just what does that mean. Are you qualified, have PI insurance etc. I rather doubt it? It is very unwise to go outside scope, as you will see if you watch some of the Grenfell inquiry, where just about everyone concerned has operated outside of their zone of competence, even the fire brigade! Full knowledge and experience of the machinery regulations, for example, requires a lot of experience across quite a wide range of disciplines, and control panels would be here not BS7671.