The new EAS rules bind the business.The new EAS rules bind
the business

From 1 October 2026, a business assessed under the Electrotechnical Assessment Specification for EV charging equipment installation, solar photovoltaic systems, electric energy storage systems or micro wind turbine installation has to be able to show, at assessment, that the qualified supervisors responsible for that work and the employed persons undertaking it meet the mandatory technical competence set out in Tables A4.3 to A4.6 of the specification. That is four parts, not one: underpinning core technical competence, a BS 7671 award, an initial verification award, and the qualification specific to the category. Trainees and apprentices may carry on doing the work under close supervision. The specification’s own supervision model still governs less experienced people. Nothing in it says every person on site needs a certificate.

That paragraph is the whole rule. Everything below is the detail that decides whether it applies to you, and the detail is where the money is.

Start with something that surprises anyone who goes looking. The string “1 October 2026” does not appear in the current edition of the Electrotechnical Assessment Specification. The current edition, June 2026, cover reference EAS 26-016, carries the requirement, at Appendix 1 printed page 21 and Tables A4.3 to A4.6 printed pages 26 and 27, and states no commencement date for it at all.

The date is in the edition it replaced. The October 2024 edition, cover reference EAS 24-527B, has a Schedule of Changes at printed page 2 with three rows dated 01/10/2026: the additional work categories, the additional technical reference documents, and the new competence tables. That is the primary source for the date, and it sits in a superseded document.

The better provenanced statement, and the one to use with a client or a certification body, is the publisher’s own page for the specification, which says it covers “the competence requirements for qualified supervisors, electrical inspectors and from October 2026, persons undertaking installation of electric vehicle charging equipment, solar photovoltaic systems, electric energy storage systems and micro wind turbines.”

Two citation traps before you quote page numbers at anybody. First, 52 of the 53 pages of the June 2026 PDF carry the running header “Electrotechnical Assessment Specification October 2024”. Only the cover reads June 2026, so cite a page of it without saying so and whoever checks you will conclude you cited the superseded edition. Second, the publisher’s link text for that file reads “EAS-26-27”, its web address contains “eas-26-027”, and the cover of the file itself reads “EAS 26-016”. Three references for one document. Cite it as the June 2026 edition, cover reference EAS 26-016.

One thing you may have read about the date is no longer safe. The October 2024 edition carried a footnote permitting bodies to adopt the changes voluntarily before the implementation dates. The June 2026 edition drops that footnote while still printing the asterisk that pointed at it. It may still be how bodies behave; it is no longer a published rule.

The Electrotechnical Assessment Specification is not legislation. It is an industry specification “intended for use by Certification and Registration Bodies undertaking the Assessment of Enterprises carrying out Electrotechnical work” (EAS 26-016, §1.1, p.3). It “sets out the minimum requirements to be met by an Enterprise in order to be recognized by a Certification or Registration Body as technically competent”, and those bodies “will need to develop their own Scheme requirements around the minimum Criteria set out in this Specification” (§1.3, p.3).

So it binds a business that seeks or holds recognition. It does not bind the trade at large, and your scheme’s rules can be stricter than it.

Inside a business being assessed, the competence tables for the four low carbon categories reach two populations. The introduction to Appendix 4 at printed page 25 says so, in words identical in the June 2026 and October 2024 editions:

“Tables A4.3 – A4.6 define the applicable mandatory technical competence requirements for Qualified Supervisors and Employed Persons responsible for and undertaking Electric Vehicle Charging Equipment (EVCE) Installation, Solar Photovoltaic (PV) Systems Installation, Electric Energy Storage Systems (EESS) Installation and Micro Wind Turbine Installation.”

The contrast on the same page is the point of the whole rule. Table A4.1, general electrical installation work under category A1, is scoped to qualified supervisors alone. For the four low carbon categories, and for periodic inspection and testing under Table A4.2, the tables reach the people doing the work as well as the person responsible for it.

“Employed Persons” is a defined term, and it is wider than a payroll. The definition at page 8:

“Employed Persons - Individuals engaged by the Enterprise to perform Electrotechnical work which may include directly employed staff, temporary, agency and/or subcontracted labour including self-employed individuals and sole-traders.”

Read that twice if you use subcontract or agency labour. It is the sentence that makes the second half of this document necessary.

Three limits travel with it and get dropped constantly. The same page 25 paragraph ends: “This requirement does not preclude trainees and apprentices from undertaking installation under close supervision to enable experience to be gained.” Appendix 11 at page 48 has the assessing body audit “the Qualifications, where required, of Skilled Persons (electrically)”, which is not the same as every person. And Appendix 10 is unchanged between editions and still runs the supervision apparatus, grading employed persons at Level 1, 2 or 3 and crossing that grade against the risk of the work.

NICEIC puts the practical boundary better than the specification does: “if an employed person is simply putting the supply cable out for an EV charging point and it’s going to be installed by others, the requirements won’t affect them … But if they’re installing or replacing the equipment or systems, then these competence requirements apply.”

The specification lists six work categories at Appendix 1, Table A1.1, printed page 21, identically in both editions.

The four low carbon categories are A3 to A6, and they were added by the October 2024 edition, not by June 2026. They are printed unchanged in both.

Now the part that is routinely misunderstood. The sub-category is not a separate “scope” bolted onto a category; it is the work category, at the level you are certificated for. Appendix 5 at page 29 requires the certificate to state the “Category(s) of work, as defined in Appendix 1, for which the Enterprise has been assessed”, which is one identifier, A3.1 or A3.2. Extending it needs a fresh written application and a technical assessment (§13.6, p.12), and §18.7 requires an enterprise “not to claim competence under this Specification for categories of work other than those for which it holds a current Assessment Certificate”.

That matters practically, because the sub-category decides which underpinning competence table applies to your people: a dwellings sub-category routes to Table A4.7, an other than dwellings sub-category to Table A4.8, which is a superset. Be aware that the specification names A4.8 two ways: the Appendix 4 introduction calls it the underpinning core competence for work other than dwellings, while the table’s own heading at page 28 reads all electrotechnical work. The routes are the same either way. Deciding you will also do commercial work is not a commercial decision, it is a qualification decision and an application.

Tables A4.3 to A4.6 each set out the same four part requirement. This is the most useful table in the specification and almost nobody reproduces it.

Two things about that table save real money.

The first almost never gets mentioned. The specification at page 28 says: “Unless achieved within a formal qualification defined in Tables A4.7 or A4.8, the applicant shall hold the following qualifications.” A modern apprenticeship route can already contain BS 7671 and initial verification. If it does, those two awards are not separate certificates to go and buy. Check what is inside the apprenticeship before anyone books a course. The guide expands the Table A4.7 and A4.8 routes into named qualifications with awarding body codes and numbers at its printed pages 6 to 8 and 9 to 12, which is what to hold a certificate up against.

The second is that the category qualification is not the whole of the requirement, and this is the error that will cost the most. Much of what is being marketed is the category award on its own, because that is the short course. Buy it for somebody with no underpinning core competence qualification and they are still short of Tables A4.3 to A4.6. The next section deals with the one sentence that might soften that, and with why nobody should yet rely on it.

Note also what the specification does not do. It prints only table numbers for the category qualifications and defers to the guide (p.28), and twelve times across Appendix 4 it repeats “Please refer to the EAS Qualifications Guide (as amended) for details of the suitable Qualifications”. That “as amended” is why a committee amendment to the guide binds without the specification being reissued at all.

One sentence bearing on these four categories is genuinely new in the June 2026 edition, with no counterpart in October 2024. At page 25:

“Where an Employed Person or a Qualified Supervisor does not meet the requirements from Table A4.3 – A4.6 as a minimum each Employed Person and Qualified Supervisor will be required to hold the relevant Qualification from Tables A4.12 – A4.15.”

Read it carefully. It is a relaxation, not a tightening. The trigger is failing to meet the full four part requirement, and the floor it then sets is the category qualification alone. On the specification’s own wording, the category qualification is the one component that cannot be dispensed with.

How far that goes is the one substantive question this document will not answer, because the published guidance does not settle it. The Qualifications Guide in force is dated June 2025 and is keyed on its own cover to the October 2024 specification. It frames the same structure the other way round: at page 5, “The applicant shall hold the following qualifications, in accordance with the requirements of Tables A4.1 to A4.6”; and at page 20, “Qualifications detailed in Tables A4.9 to A4.11 may be relevant, for a valid application they must accompany a suitable core competence qualification in Table A4.7 or A4.8, relevant to the work category applied for.”

The guide cannot have addressed a sentence introduced a year after it was published, and no scheme body has published anything on the point. So do not plan on the basis that the category qualification alone is sufficient, and do not let anyone sell you a course on that basis either. If it matters to your business, put the question to your certification body in writing and keep the answer.

These lists come from the EAS Qualifications Guide, June 2025, printed pages 18 and 19. They are transcribed exactly as printed, including the guide’s own inconsistent capitalisation, because those strings are what a candidate’s certificate says.

Only the EV charging table is split by scope. For solar PV, electric energy storage and micro wind there is a single list covering both the dwellings and the other than dwellings sub-categories.

The two lists are identical but for one row. City & Guilds 2921-33 appears only on the all electrotechnical work list; it does not appear on the dwellings only list.

Two more qualifications were added to the EV charging list by an EAS Management Committee amendment on 9 March 2026: City & Guilds 2919-01, 600/7756/6, and City & Guilds 2919-02, 600/7374/3. Before anybody goes looking for them, read the next paragraph.

A qualification being on the accepted list does not mean you can still go and get it. The Ofqual register records both qualifications added by the March 2026 amendment as no longer awarded, with certification ending on 30 June 2024. The amendment recognises certificates people already hold; it does not open a route anyone can take. The same is true of City & Guilds 2921-31, which sits on the current accepted list for both EV charging scopes and is recorded on the Ofqual register as no longer awarded, and of all three older solar PV qualifications. Listed and accepted, and still obtainable, are two different questions.

Two defects in the guide will trip you up if nobody warns you. Its summary table at page 5 swaps A4.13 and A4.14; everything else in the guide, and the specification at page 28, makes A4.13 solar PV and A4.14 electric energy storage, so identify the list you need by category name rather than table number. And its page 4 overview prints “Table A4.9” in the initial verification column for micro wind where the other three print “Table A4.10”. The specification prints A4.10.

On evidencing what someone holds: the guide allows qualifications in Tables A4.7 to A4.14 to be evidenced from ECS card information, checked through ECS Check or the CSCS Smart Check app, and that range takes in the EV charging, solar PV and energy storage category lists. It stops short of A4.15, micro wind. The card is never evidence on its own: at page 3, “the JIB/SJIB ECS card alone is not sufficient evidence of meeting the qualification requirements, the card will need to be verified via ECS, and evidence retained.” A Gold Card is a narrower provision again, reaching only Tables A4.7 to A4.10, so it does not by itself answer the low carbon question. The category award still has to be evidenced, and the guide expressly allows that through ECS Check or through the certificate itself.

Table A4.15 is the scope specific criterion for micro wind turbine installation, category A6. It has one row, and the row is a sentence: “No Qualifications Currently Available”.

A6 is a mandatory category in the structure for which the published guidance lists nothing that satisfies it. That is not a reading between the lines, it is what is printed.

Of the six entries on the EV charging list, the Ofqual register records City & Guilds 2921-31 as no longer awarded and the SQA entry sits outside that register entirely, so four are recorded as available to learners. The two qualifications added by the March 2026 amendment are not counted and are both recorded as no longer awarded.

We looked in four further places and found no route. The Ofqual register returns nothing for “micro wind” or “micro-wind”. NICEIC’s renewable technologies list has sections for the other three categories and no micro wind section at all. NAPIT’s registration qualifications guide contains the word “wind” nowhere in its 17 pages. The ECA’s member facing questions cover the other three only. Two honest gaps: SQA qualifications are not on the Ofqual register and SELECT could not be reached, and the MCS standard for micro and small wind installation has a staff competence appendix we did not open.

The escalation route exists for exactly this, at guide page 3: if an applicant’s qualifications are not listed, “please contact the relevant Certification / Registration Body for further guidance”, and “any exceptions should be reported to the EAS Management Committee for consideration via the Certification / Registration Body. If a qualification is valid it will be added to this Qualifications Guide … and published at the earliest opportunity.” That route produced the March 2026 amendment. It is the answer for anyone whose qualification is not on a list, and if you install micro wind it is where to start.

If somebody is part way through, the published position comes from NICEIC rather than the specification, and the exact words matter: “Booking onto the right course is usually accepted as evidence of progress, as is evidence you are booked on the EWA or AM2 which may be needed to meet the Level 3 course prerequisite requirements.” That is NICEIC, “EAS changes: what you need to know”, in the answer to what happens if you cannot get qualified in time, a block its own page marks as updated 10 June 2026.

Keep the hedges. “Usually accepted”, not “will be accepted”. That is one certification body saying how it will exercise judgement, not a rule you can hold anyone to.

Note what it implies about lead times. The category awards have explicit entry requirements: a Level 3 electrotechnical apprenticeship with end point assessment, a historical apprenticeship or recognised equivalent, the Electrotechnical Experienced Worker Assessment, or an Installation or Domestic Electrician ECS Gold Card. NICEIC publishes a list of qualifications that are not sufficient for entry, including City & Guilds 2330, 2351, 2365 and 8202, EAL 9331, BTEC, and, held on their own, the BS 7671 and inspection and testing awards. For somebody without one of those routes the real lead time is the Experienced Worker Assessment first, which NICEIC describes as taking “as little as three months but there is a maximum allowance of 18 months”, and the category award after it. That is the number that should drive your planning, not the length of the short course.

For trainees and apprentices the position is better than most have been told. The specification provides for it expressly, in the same paragraph that imposes the requirement, and Appendix 10 grades a Level 1 person as one who “would generally be apprentices, labourers, electrician’s mates or electrical improvers”, adding that “others that fall within this category are career changers who may have training and/or Qualifications but lack experience”. A trainee under close supervision is a state the specification provides for, not a breach of it.

Understanding the enforcement shape stops both panic and complacency.

Surveillance visits are “normally at annual intervals” (§14.1, p.12), but a body “may at its discretion, following risk assessment … vary the interval between surveillance visits. The interval shall not exceed three years” (§14.2). An enterprise off the annual cycle must always ensure compliance, demonstrated by physical assessment or by self declared information. So “you will be looked at next assessment” can mean a long way off, and it does not mean the requirement is not biting meanwhile.

At the assessment, the business states the categories it seeks for each contracting office (§13.1, p.12). The qualified supervisors for those categories “shall be required to be present throughout the Assessment process” (§15.7, p.14) and are themselves assessed. Records demonstrating that all employed persons are competent or adequately supervised, and records of qualifications, training including continuing professional development, and experience, must be available (§16.1.3 and §16.1.5).

Where something is missing, the report records “all observed Non-conformities and improvement actions including a requirement for their completion, where appropriate, in a time not exceeding three months” (§17.1, p.15), after which the body decides whether certification is granted or maintained. NICEIC calls the same thing “an action plan. This will be recorded as part of your assessment report.” That is the scheme’s word, not the specification’s.

At the serious end, §20.1 lists eleven grounds on which an assessment certificate may be cancelled, withdrawn or amended. Where a body intends to withdraw or amend it, it must give written notice with full reasons, and the enterprise has 21 days from that notice to object in writing (§20.2, p.17). A separate 21 day window applies to serving a written appeal (§21.3).

Two precision points worth more than they look. Those 21 days attach to the assessment certificate, not to Competent Person Scheme registration, for which the specification sets no withdrawal procedure at all; but because scheme registration is built on the assessment certificate, losing the certificate is what puts registration at risk. And the specification contradicts itself on suspension: §18.6 says a body “may suspend, cancel or reduce the scope of certification or registration”, while Appendix 8 §7.3 at page 39 says “There is no provision for suspension in this Specification. Any Certification Body may have procedures that allow suspension and shall allow appeals in line with Section 21 of this Specification.” Both sentences are in both editions. Treat suspension as something your own body’s scheme rules may contain, not as a specification power.

One provision runs the other way. If at a surveillance visit the enterprise “is unable to offer sufficient examples of work for evaluation purposes in a category included in its scope of certification”, the body “may suspend, cancel or reduce the scope of certification or registration accordingly” (§18.6). Holding a category you rarely work in is not free.

Two short deadlines people miss: if you lose your qualified supervisor, notify the body within 30 days (§11.8, p.11), and a replacement assessed as competent for the categories undertaken must be in place within 120 days (§19.1, p.16), with a surveillance visit to assess them (§14.3).

This is the most useful table in the document. Every row on the left is something being said publicly, in trade press, in course marketing or in careful internal summaries. Every row on the right is what the published documents say.

One structural warning to go with that table. The Qualifications Guide in force is dated June 2025 and keyed to the October 2024 specification. Amendments to it are published by the trade bodies, not by the Institution of Engineering and Technology, whose specification page carries no amendment or errata section at all. An installer following the specification’s own publisher would never have learned of the March 2026 amendment. If you want to know what your assessor will assess against, the answer is your certification body, in writing, and you should keep the reply.

Everything above is a rule about one specification, on one date, in one country’s electrotechnical work. It is worth getting right, and getting it right will save some businesses the cost of courses they did not need.

But if that is all you take from it, you will be back here in eighteen months.

Look at what the rule actually asks a business to do. It does not ask you to be more competent. It asks you to be able to show, to a third party, on a day they choose, that specific people held specific things at a specific time, for the specific categories of work on your certificate. That is not a competence problem. It is an evidence problem, and it is the same evidence problem as scheme registration, as your insurer’s renewal questions, as the pre qualification pack a main contractor sends you, as the client who asks at the door who this person is and what they are qualified to do, and as whatever the next requirement turns out to be.

Each of those asks for a subset of the same underlying record, in a different shape, on somebody else’s timetable. Most businesses answer each one from scratch.

A filing cabinet and an email folder are not bad at storage. They are perfectly good at storage. They fail at a different job, and being precise about which one is what decides whether anything needs to change. They fail at production on demand, by somebody who is not you.

The record is only as current as the last person who remembered. A certificate that expired in March is still in the folder in November, looking exactly like one that is current. Nothing in a folder tells you what is no longer true.

The record is scattered across the places it arrived. The apprenticeship certificate is in a box at somebody’s mother’s house, the BS 7671 award came as an attachment in 2019, the category award is a photograph on a phone, the Experienced Worker Assessment result is a letter. None is wrong; they are simply not in one place, and assembling them is a day’s work every time somebody asks.

The record cannot be checked without you. Every request routes through one person, usually the owner or the office administrator, usually on the day they are least free. And it does not survive that person: when somebody leaves, what you can prove about the work they did for you leaves with them, and last year’s work is exactly what an assessor is entitled to ask about. The assessor is owed the records themselves. A main contractor or a client at the door is sometimes owed less, what is held and when it is next due for review, and that much could be shown without anybody opening the folder.

None of that is a failure of diligence. It is a structural property of keeping evidence in the shape it happened to arrive in.

Here is the structural difficulty underneath all of it, and the specification states it more plainly than most notice.

The obligation sits on the business. “The Enterprise, not the Certification or Registration Body, has the responsibility of fulfilling the requirements for certification/registration” (§1.4, p.3). The enterprise must employ people who are competent or adequately supervised, and must hold the records that demonstrate it (§11.1; §16.1.3; §16.1.5).

The qualification sits with a person. They earned it, they hold the certificate, they take it with them, and the specification’s own definition of “Employed Persons” makes explicit that they may be temporary, agency, subcontracted, self employed or a sole trader.

So the business carries an obligation whose evidence it does not own, about people it may not employ. Somebody who worked for you for three weeks in February is inside your assessment. If they also worked for four other firms that quarter, every one of those firms is separately assembling the same evidence about the same person, by email, from scratch, and getting a different answer.

That is not an argument about software. It is an argument about where a fact should live. A person’s qualification is a fact about that person, currently stored as many partial copies, each held by a different business, each ageing at a different rate, none of them able to say when the underlying fact changed. Held once, against the person, it would need matching once, and each further firm would only have to confirm that it had the right person, while still holding its own record for its own assessment.

The subcontract case makes it sharpest, and two things the specification treats differently are worth separating. Engaging somebody to do the work brings them inside your assessment as an employed person. Sub letting work to another business is governed separately by Section 6, and that work must be carried out or certified by an enterprise holding its own assessment certificate for that category. Which of those you are doing is a question of fact about the engagement, not about what you call it, and it changes whose evidence problem it is.

Suppose what a person holds is recorded once, against that person, with the dates, in a form that can be produced on demand by anybody entitled to see it, and suppose the same record is what the business uses to decide who goes to which job. “Entitled” is doing work in that sentence: some of the record is fit for anybody who asks, some only for the people the business chooses, and some only for the business.

Currency stops being somebody’s memory. A record with dates on it can tell you what is about to stop being true; a folder cannot. The difference between renewing in good time and finding out at assessment is not diligence, it is whether the information was in a shape that could raise its hand. Compared against the calendar every day, it can say so before anybody has asked.

Production stops being a project. When the assessor, the insurer, the main contractor and the client at the door all want different subsets of the same record, the cost of answering collapses once the record exists in one place. The cost of answering from a filing cabinet does not, however tidy the cabinet.

The decision and the evidence stop being two systems. The common failure is not that a business cannot prove competence; it is that the proof lives in a folder while the choice of who goes to the job is made from somebody’s head. If one record does both, “was that person qualified for that job on that day” has an answer rather than a recollection. And evidence attached to a person survives their leaving, and survives the four other firms engaging them at the same time.

Be clear about what that is: an argument about how the work should be organised, not a claim about a rule. Nothing in the Electrotechnical Assessment Specification requires you to hold records any particular way. You could satisfy it entirely with a good filing cabinet and a very organised administrator. The argument is that the cabinet costs you a day every time a third party asks, that the number of third parties asking is going up rather than down, and that the day is spent by exactly the person who can least afford it.

The rule arriving in October is the occasion for making that change. It is not the reason.

Onroute Intelligence is field service management software. It is not a certification body, it does not assess anybody’s competence, and nothing it does substitutes for your certification or registration body, which remains the only authority on whether you meet the specification.

What it holds, and what bears on any of the above:

Qualifications are recorded per person, with their issue and expiry dates. An expiry is flagged thirty days ahead and again once it has passed.

Trades and qualifications decide who is eligible for a job, so the record of what someone holds is the same record that shapes the diary.

Competent Person Scheme accounts and operative IDs sit on file, so a building control notification goes in under the right operative and membership number.

The job records an assessor asks to see stay on the job: certificates, photographs, signatures and the handover pack, kept with the job rather than in somebody’s camera roll, and available to the customer through the customer portal.

The record of people is kept in the Trust Centre. A person is added with a role, with how they are engaged, and with the categories they work in.

Micro wind is held in the record but is never offered as a choice, because there is no qualification to match against.

When a certificate is uploaded, its qualification code and award date are read and matched against the accepted list for that category and scope, and its qualification number is checked against Ofqual’s register of regulated qualifications. The result is either “certificate on file, matches the accepted list”, or unmatched, with the reason and what to supply instead. Nothing ambiguous is guessed, and no reviewer stands between the upload and the result. A match says the category certificate is on the accepted list. It does not say the person meets the whole requirement, which has four parts, and that remains for your certification body.

A course, an Experienced Worker Assessment or an AM2 booked for a date shows as booked, with the date it completes; whether a booking is accepted remains your certification body’s call. Trainees are recorded and never counted as a gap. From the first person added, each category shows how many people have a certificate on file, how many are booked and how many have nothing yet.

The accepted list is a dated, versioned record of its own. It follows the June 2025 Qualifications Guide and the March 2026 amendment, separates current qualifications from older ones that are still accepted, and records whether each can still be obtained. Changes to the published lists are watched for automatically, and none applies until it has been approved.

Checks run continuously, and each one that finds something raises a task with a deadline: a category somebody works in without evidence for them, a review date sixty days away, a booking whose date has passed, a qualification taken off the accepted list by a later change, a category without a qualified supervisor to cover it, a credential or an insurance policy about to expire.

A person is matched once. When a second firm adds somebody already matched under another, they show as matched without anything being uploaded again, once the second firm has confirmed that it is the same person. Nothing merges silently, and no firm learns which other firms engage that person. Certificate numbers and documents are seen only by a firm’s owners, admins and qualified supervisors, and a person’s documents can be erased.

Each business publishes a trust page from the Trust Centre, at an address of its own, to share when it bids for work. Anybody with the address sees the business’s name and logo; the titles, kinds and dates of the documents it has chosen to show, insurance included; its scheme registrations and credentials, each with a link to check it on the scheme’s own register where the scheme publishes one, and marked “Declared by the business. Check with the issuing scheme.”; and, for each category, how many people have a certificate on file that matches the accepted list and how many are booked, with the completion date. Those are counts, never names, never a score, a badge or a total, and the page explains how each one is arrived at.

Opening a document takes a link from the business, issued for a client, a site or a job, each with its own QR code and each withdrawable on its own. Anybody else can request access, and the business answers the request itself. Review dates are compared every day and every time the page loads, a document drops off the page by itself when its review date passes, and the page says when the daily check last ran.

On site, the engineer can show the customer the documents the business shows and their own qualifications, full screen in the app, without signal, a person’s own documents only from their own phone; or show the QR code, so the site contact opens the trust page on theirs.

The compliance modules are country specific, and the UK set is what is built today.

That is what it does. The record shows what is on file; whether that is enough is for your certification body. The argument above is about how a business organises its evidence, and no software answers the whole of that on its own; presenting it as though it did would be the same kind of overreach this document has spent the preceding pages correcting.

If you install EV charging, solar PV, battery storage or micro wind, do three things before your next assessment. None of them costs anything.

• First, write down the sub-categories you actually want on your certificate, A3.1 or A3.2 and so on, and check them against what your certificate says today. Adding one is an application, not a decision.
• Second, for every person who will be responsible for or undertaking that work, write down what they hold against the four parts: underpinning core competence, BS 7671, initial verification, category qualification. Check what is already inside their apprenticeship before you book anybody on anything.
• Third, put your specific case to your certification body in writing and keep the answer, particularly if you install micro wind, if somebody is mid course, or if you rely on subcontract or agency labour.

If you want to talk about where that evidence lives afterwards, we would like to hear what you found, especially where the published guidance left you without an answer. Onroute Intelligence is at onrouteintelligence.ai.

Primary documents:

Electrotechnical Assessment Specification for use by Certification and Registration Bodies, June 2026, cover reference EAS 26-016, published by the Institution of Engineering and Technology, 53 pp. https://electrical.theiet.org/media/qetbddje/eas-26-027-june-2026.pdf. Note that only the cover page is headed June 2026; the remaining 52 pages carry a running header reading October 2024.

Electrotechnical Assessment Specification for use by Certification and Registration Bodies, October 2024, cover reference EAS 24-527B, published by the Institution of Engineering and Technology. https://electrical.theiet.org/media/mntdpbis/eas-october-2024-24-527b.pdf. Superseded, but it is the only document that states the 1 October 2026 implementation date.

Electrotechnical Assessment Specification (EAS) Qualifications Guide, Appendix 4, Mandatory Technical Competence Requirements by Work Category, June 2025, produced by The Electrotechnical Skills Partnership on behalf of the EAS Management Committee and published by the Institution of Engineering and Technology, 21 pp. https://electrical.theiet.org/media/4k4bw244/eas-qualifications-guide-june-2025.pdf. This is the current guide, and it is keyed on its own cover to the superseded October 2024 specification.

Institution of Engineering and Technology, “Electrotechnical Assessment Specification” (the publisher’s index page, and the source of the “from October 2026” statement). https://electrical.theiet.org/bs-7671-18th-edition-wiring-regulations/building-regulations/electrotechnical-assessment-specification/

Secondary sources. Everything below is that body’s own interpretation of the specification, not the specification itself.

• ECA, “EV charging installations: qualifications update” (the 9 March 2026 committee amendment), 24 March 2026. https://www.eca.co.uk/news/2026/mar/ev-charging-installations-qualifications-update
• ECA, “EAS changes to competence requirements for periodic inspection & testing and low carbon technologies”, 6 October 2025. https://www.eca.co.uk/news/2025/oct/eas-changes-to-competence-requirements-for-periodic-inspection-testing-and-low-carbon-technologies
• NICEIC, “EAS changes: what you need to know”, FAQ block marked updated 10 June 2026. https://niceic.com/eas-changes-what-you-need-to-know/
• NICEIC, “Unlocking Level 3: routes to achieving low-carbon qualifications required by the EAS”, 8 April 2026. https://niceic.com/views/unlocking-level-3-routes-to-achieving-low-carbon-qualifications-required-by-the-eas/
• NICEIC, “Acceptable qualifications, renewable technologies”, undated PDF. https://niceic.com/NicEic/media/PDF-s/schemes/EAS/Acceptable-qualifications-renewable-technologies.pdf
• TESP, “TESP statement on EV charging and Solar PV apprenticeship units”, 18 March 2026. https://www.the-esp.org.uk/tesp-statement-on-ev-charging-and-solar-pv-apprenticeship-units/
• TESP, “Wiring Regulations Amendment 4 qualification changes”, 1 April 2026. https://www.the-esp.org.uk/wiring-regulations-amendment-4-qualification-changes/
• NAPIT, “EAS Update, Effective 1st October 2026”, undated. https://www.napit.org.uk/changes-to-eas-qualifications-guide/
• Ofqual Register of Regulated Qualifications (qualification status and dates), queried 18 September 2026. https://register-api.ofqual.gov.uk/api/Qualifications

All addresses fetched 17 and 18 September 2026.