DB checks

Could  the doors be lifted off if you needed to get in more than just to look at the breakers ?

How did they fit that lot and not notice ?
Its certainly a C3, though unless it has potential to become dangerous in some way that a properly installed one cannot , rather than just bleep stupid, its not really a C2..
Mike.
PS I'd be wondering if the hinges could be slotted down a bit and the light moved.

Mihaita - Sorin Dan said:

Large panel distribution board, with all three front doors not opening fully because they hit the tray and lights.

Would you classify it as C2 or C3? 

More importantly, this situation might well constitute a breach of legislation ... Regulation 15 of the Electricity at Work Regulations and/or Regulation 9(2) of the CDM Regulations.

It can lead to a LIM for a periodic inspection and test ... The inspection and test is an activity within the scope of the CDM Regulations.

Legislation over-rides BS 7671, and this situation should be addressed with the dutyholder as a matter of urgency. 

C3 for me, installation needs improvement and full access to the distribution board is required. 

I’d classify this as C3, provided the front of the distribution board can be removed to allow safe access for testing. It’s not ideal, and it does need correcting, but it’s not an immediate danger if testing can still be carried out safely.

If the front cannot be removed and there’s genuinely no way to access the internals for inspection or testing, then I’d record it as LIM, because you can’t verify compliance. In that case, I’d also note the installation issue as a concern.

I agree with mapj1`s point it’s surprising this wasn’t picked up during installation. At least the doors haven’t been cut down  but the clearance issue definitely needs addressing.

Additionally, I’d advise getting the fittings moved to allow proper door clearance and checking whether the tray and the door are at the same potential. This will help ensure safety and compliance with bonding requirements.

"At least the doors haven’t been cut down "

I have clearly led a sheltered life, that was not even something I thought of as a possibility.
There is also I suppose the option of doing it like "The Italian job" & removing the doors permanently..  Though then it cannot be locked! 

Mike
you do wonder who was thinking what... 

Wonder what's on the floor above? Wonder if there's any fire stopping in the big hole above the D/B .  

CPC. 

Not sure they have taken account of the manufacturers instruction on this one or BS 7671 Regulation 134.1.1 thus my vote is a C3 for recommend improvement 

BUT

As an EICR or periodic inspection&test C3 it will probably left as is so this needs extra weight added to the argument

Thus it is a C3 plus the following

BS 7671 mandates that "adequate working space" must be provided for the operation, inspection, testing, and maintenance of all electrical equipment to prevent injury.  This requirement is reinforced by Regulation 15 of the statutory Electricity at Work Regulations 1989 (EAWR), which requires "adequate working space, adequate means of access, and adequate lighting"

It is not ideal, but I do not think that the photograph gives enough detail.

R15. of EAWR 1989: For the purposes of enabling injury to be prevented, adequate working space, adequate means of access, and adequate lighting shall be provided at all electrical equipment on which or near which work is being done in circumstances which may give rise to danger. (my emphasis)

BS 7671 132.12 Accessibility of electrical equipment Electrical equipment shall be arranged to provide:

(i) sufficient space for the initial installation and later replacement of individual items of electrical equipment

(ii) accessibility for the operation, inspection, testing, fault detection, maintenance and repair.

There appears to be ample working space and access to the area in front of the DB, and there is a luminaire immediately adjacent.

Although the door opening is restricted, there appears to be enough space to reach in and operate the breakers, so I do not think that ordinary operation of the DB is a problem.

That leaves testing and maintenance. If the hinges would normally allow the door to be lifted off, but there is inadequate room, then access to the fastenings which secure the front panel may be impaired. Even if it is possible to get a tool in, the door and panel together could be rather unwieldy. This may present a risk, but perhaps a one-man job has just become a two-man one.

Once the front panel has been removed, there appears to be no further obstruction to the innards of the panel.

So, I am struggling to find any reason on the available evidence for giving either code.

At least it's not as bad as the domestic CU with a gas pipe run so close across the front of it that the fuse carriers couldn't be pulled...

Was the light there when the DB was installed or last worked on? If so there must be enough space to allow access.

Maybe just a C3 for the light as it's unsuitable for the conditions in that location - i.e. likely to be damaged by being hit by the DB door.

  - Andy.