Reno
The means of marking on tape next to the breakers will not stand up to the test of time. I agree that it should not have to be marked on the door, but for now that is the requirement. Remember some panels have no doors.

I'm not sure the "test of time" is relevant here.

Many panel schedules are unreadable after a few years.

Even this panel has had two changes to it since the pic was taken...less than a month ago!

Finally, only with the lable ON the breaker can you ID the breaker when the cover is off for servicing, and keep track of it as you shift thing around.

Look at that panel schedule....just how well can you ID the breakers on it, even in just one language?

I work in a facility that is getting ready to celebrate its 25 year of processing. The original panel schedules were typed (yes, with a typewriter) on the supplied white cards and installed behind the supplied plastic windows. They are perfectly legible today. Your arguments smack of situational ethics - it is going to be screw up anyway so why should I follow the rules? Personally, I use Excel templates and can create a new shedule for a panel I've done before in just seconds and only use a few minutes to create a new one from scratch. We can not asume the future, we must do our work to the current standards.

One thing I will not accept is folded up panel schedules cut out from the plans. Most of the time these aren't accurate anyway, due to field changes.
I insist that the directory be readable without taking it out. I've seen too many boards with no directories. I also insist they remove the old one when they do a TI. It is a bit more than the code addresses, but I'm an electrician who used to work on panels with no directories and it was not easy tracing everything out.
I don't have the time to check out every circuit to see it does what the directory says, but I spot check a few. I always take the cover off to see there is a wire where the directory says there is a load. I find lots of mistakes here.
I will accept sharpie on deadfront next to C/B's as long as it's readable.
OK, fire slings and arrows at will.

Sometimes I wonder if would be best to take a few minutes of time to sweep the floor an a couple of bucks worth or that black and bright yellow striped sticky backed warning tape to mark the boundary on the floor in front of the panels. People have no clue what the code requirements for working space is and will almost always stack stuff in front of the panels. By marking a barrier there is a remote possibility that they may wonder why someone put it there.
Taking care of details as well as a neat on professional installation provides an opportunity for one to differentiate you from the competitor.

Fire regulations alone mean that stuff can't be piled in front of the DBs

Big Jim is right when he says that door charts can be produced quickly and easily in Excel. Whether the existing charts are accurate or not is another matter and should be factored into the quote (bid).

At some stage the owner is going to have to take responsibility for inaccurate switchboard door chats.

It's been my experience that people might not know the details, but they know that there is, in general, a requirement for access to these panels. They just don't care. We see our slice and our job, they see theirs- and as their viewpoint is that they never have problems and never have to get into that panel, they weigh that against the convenience factor of being able to pile up stuff and up it goes.

I've been in rooms piled so high and so tight with junk that I literally didn't even know a panel existed, letalone that there was a hidden MBT and 5kVA transformer bank under there too! And this was a a room that was supposed to be kept clear of stuff like that for completely unrelated reasons and the electronic techs were the guilty party, which made it even worse.

It all comes back around- how many times have the carpenters and masons cursed you all behind your backs for putting holes in their critical structure?

Back on subject, I come from a highly documented corner of the industry and don't see why it isn't absolutely required to not only label the breakers, but also the cables and to include the drawings of the entire electrical system- so you can tell exactly what is on what breaker and what all else is tied to it. I mean, we almost always have them on hand already, it's a simple matter to bag it to the door.

Personally John,
From an electrician's point of view, I'd mark both.
I use a Label-maker that prints self-adhesive labels that I use to stick to the dead-front next to the breakers.
I also make up my own panel schedule that goes on the inside of the door.
But for speed, I prefer the labelled breakers, provided of course that you can read the writing of the Electrician that wrote on the dead-front in the first place.
That's the reason why I use the label-maker.

You probably should not lable breakers. If you replace one the label is gone. Not all electricians carry a lable maker on thier truck. But they do have a pen.
Same with lableing the dead front with labels or perminant marker.

Steve, the day will come when all new houses have to have wiring schematics and a bill of materials. Sparkies may not agree with this "over the top" practise but I think that as house wiring gets more complex and compliance liability becomes more important, its inevitable.

I think the demand for this will come from Insurers, architects and regulatory bodies.

As an electrician I would welcome any sort of aid to fault-finding. Wouldn't it be nice to turn up to a job at a house that had accurate documentation of all the services ?

Of course this means a whole heap of extra work for tradesmen. More work is desirable though isn't it ? And if documentation is made mandatory then explaining the extra cost to customers is easy.

Lets hear some thoughts on this from those that it would affect.

The labeling wouldn't be all that difficult to do- we practically have to do it anyhow. But it WOULD become a big liability to both label and maintain; the first time someone secures breaker #5 because it's on the marking and gets a shock because he forgot to frisk and it was actually on breaker #6, people will get sued. But man oh man it helps in lifecycle work! A little extra drafting dollars up front can save untold man-days in trying to trace circuits out later.

When the electrician comes after the fact, it will be easy for him to red-line changes he's made to the drawings; even easier if an electronic copy is left (I saw a $10 thumb drive left in a PLC box yesterday with all the docs and software for the PLC on it; what a great idea!). Whether or not you can get the building contractors to create the installation drawings up-front (and the electrician to red-line his deviations!) with no cost benefit to him is another story entirely.

[This message has been edited by SteveFehr (edited 12-09-2005).]

Steve,
This isn't a personal attack on you Steve, but I thought that that was why they made test equipment?.
If a person isn't competent enough to use such gear, should they even be messing with electrical circuits?.

Who the heck is going to enforce such a draconian measure? That's just nuts, IMO.

Paperwork does not equal safety.

Trumpy, I come from a niche of the industry where the circuits are so complex that they MUST be labeled or you will NEVER find out where it's going; even when they are properly labeled, you still need a drawing to find where the heck the other end is supposed to be. Only careful adherence to the drawings and labeling keep a handle on the problem. We've had people get *killed* because of mislabled circuits and pipes. Also, test equipment fails when switches and valves are involved. As such, there are procedures in place that involve not just looking at labels but positive verification (through various methods) before anyone can so much as start work. Only the very last one is the frisking, but electricians can easily get lazy and complacent...

George: Inspectors, that's who!

"We've had people get *killed* because of mislabled circuits and pipes."

I don't see how you can blame mislabeled circuits for people being killed. I don't know what they teach in engineering school but the first thing most electricians learn is to test everything before you touch it. If someone relies on circuit labeling to keep them alive then they are either an idiot or they are not qualified to work on that piece of equipment.

When going into a panel I figure that one of two things will happen.
1. There will be no panel schedule
2. If there is one, it will be inaccurate.
They are usually at best a general guide, and anyone that doesn't verify the information is a fool.

I've got one customer that does require any modification to the system to be documented by red lining the complete, accurate, up to date blueprints that they keep. Working there is a pleasure. I wish they were all that way.

I like the use of pencil on panel schedules. That way old info can be erased and new info can be read by the next guy.
I can't stand the use of the word "new" when describing loads. Things don't stay new for any appreciable amount of time, and an electrician may not need to read the panel schedule for years.

George, I'm not saying that documentation should replace safety, but rather documentation should augment safety.

The regulatory bodies that already govern the electrical industry will police these documentary requirements.

Sometimes the word "Draconian" is used unwisely. Earlier this century a government registered electrical inspector may have been viewed as "Draconian"