- Courses by Industry Authorities
- Self-paced & Instructor-led
ATEX, IECEx and CompEx are not three equivalent standards. ATEX is a European/EEA legal framework covering product conformity and workplace protection. IECEx is an international conformity-assessment system with schemes for equipment, service facilities, conformity marks and personnel competence. CompEx is a role- and module-specific personnel competency certification framework. A project may require more than one of them, and each answers a different inspection question.
For an E&I inspector, the practical task is not to recognise a logo. It is to confirm the jurisdiction and contract, read the approved hazardous-area classification, verify equipment certificates and marking, check special conditions and installation evidence, confirm task-matched personnel competence, and escalate any design or authority decision outside the inspection scope.
For the wider discipline lifecycle, see NTIA’s E&I inspection guide. This article focuses on hazardous-area regulation, conformity evidence and competence boundaries; it does not replace project specifications, legal review, approved Ex procedures or a competent Ex specialist.
| Project authority boundary The applicable law, adopted standard edition, project specification, area-classification dossier, manufacturer documentation and authorized project roles always control the acceptance decision. Generic category/zone/EPL mappings are aids only. |
The fastest way to avoid the category error is to identify the layer each framework controls. ATEX itself also has two distinct legal layers: product conformity and workplace protection.
| Framework | What it governs | Typical evidence | Who issues or enforces | Inspector question |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ATEX 2014/34/EU | Products placed on the EU/EEA market: equipment, protective systems, relevant safety/control devices and components | EU Declaration of Conformity, CE and Ex marking, technical/conformity documents and notified-body evidence where applicable | EU/EEA law; manufacturer and relevant conformity-assessment bodies; market-surveillance authorities | Does the product evidence satisfy the applicable ATEX route and match the installed item? |
| ATEX 1999/92/EC | Employer/workplace duties for protecting workers exposed to explosive atmospheres | Risk assessment, hazardous-area classification, explosion-protection documentation, procedures and competence arrangements | Implemented and enforced through national workplace law and authorities | Does the approved workplace and area-classification basis support the selection and work method? |
| IECEx | International conformity assessment for Ex equipment, service facilities, mark licensing and personnel competence | Online CoC, ExTR/QAR references, service-facility certificate, mark licence or personnel CoPC, depending on scheme | IECEx-approved Ex Certification Bodies under IECEx rules | Is the controlled online certificate current, relevant and consistent with the product, service or person? |
| CompEx | Defined knowledge, practical skills and behaviours of people working in hazardous areas | CompEx certificate showing holder, qualification/modules and validity | CompEx-approved providers and the CompEx certification framework | Does the person’s current qualification match the exact task, atmosphere and employer requirement? |
These layers can stack. For example, equipment supplied into an EEA project may need ATEX product conformity; the client may also request IECEx evidence; and the employer may require CompEx or IECEx CoPC for people carrying out specific Ex tasks.
ATEX is often discussed as one label, but inspectors need to separate the product directive from the workplace directive. They control different duty holders, documents and decisions.
Directive 2014/34/EU covers equipment and protective systems intended for use in potentially explosive atmospheres, certain safety, controlling and regulating devices, and components. It defines essential health and safety requirements and conformity-assessment routes before products are placed on the EU market. The directive has EEA relevance and has applied since 20 April 2016.
For inspection purposes, “ATEX evidence” is not always one certificate. The expected document set depends on the product, equipment group/category and conformity-assessment route. It commonly includes the manufacturer’s EU Declaration of Conformity, the required CE and specific explosion-protection marking, instructions, and notified-body documentation where that route requires it. An inspector should not assume that every Category 3 product has an EU-type examination certificate, or that a copied certificate alone proves the supplied item is acceptable.
| Evidence | Purpose | Inspector check |
|---|---|---|
| EU Declaration of Conformity | Manufacturer declaration identifying the product and applicable EU legislation/standards | Product/model identity, manufacturer, declaration reference, signatory/date and consistency with the supplied item |
| CE and Ex marking | Market-conformity and explosion-protection information on the product | Legibility, completeness and alignment with certificate/instructions and the approved selection |
| EU-type examination / notified-body evidence, where applicable | Third-party conformity evidence required by the selected route | Certificate/body identity, product scope, issue/supplements and any conditions or schedules |
| Instructions and technical conditions | Limits and requirements necessary for safe use | Ambient range, installation restrictions, accessories, special conditions and maintenance limitations |
Directive 1999/92/EC addresses minimum requirements for improving the safety and health protection of workers potentially at risk from explosive atmospheres. It sits on the workplace side: risk assessment, prevention and protection, classification of places where explosive atmospheres may occur, coordination and related organizational controls are employer responsibilities under the applicable national implementation.
This distinction matters because a correctly marked product can still be incorrectly selected or installed for a particular classified area. Product conformity does not replace the workplace area-classification dossier, the explosion-protection basis, installation design or employer competence controls.
Norway has national regulation for equipment and safety systems used in explosive atmospheres. The current Lovdata regulation FOR-2017-11-29-1849 applies in Norway and implements product requirements in the Norwegian legal context. For a specific project—especially where onshore, offshore, maritime or sector-specific rules interact—the responsible legal and technical authorities must confirm the exact route. This article does not provide a project-specific legal conclusion.
| ATEX document rule ATEX is not a universal synonym for “hazardous-area certificate.” It is a legal framework. The inspector must identify which ATEX duty and conformity route is relevant before deciding what evidence should exist. |
IECEx is an international conformity-assessment system under the IEC. It is broader than equipment certification. Its public system covers certified equipment, certified service facilities, conformity-mark licensing and certification of personnel competence.
| IECEx scheme | What it covers | Typical controlled record | What it demonstrates |
|---|---|---|---|
| Certified Equipment Scheme | Equipment, components, assemblies and certain unit-verification cases | Online Certificate of Conformity; supporting ExTR and QAR references | Product conformity to the stated IEC standards plus quality-system surveillance |
| Certified Service Facilities Scheme | Organizations providing defined Ex services such as installation, inspection, maintenance, repair or overhaul within the certified scope | Online service-facility certificate and supporting facility assessment report | The facility’s management system, capability and competence for the listed services |
| Conformity Mark Licensing | Authorized use of the IECEx conformity mark under scheme rules | Online mark licence | The holder is licensed for the stated scope; it is not a substitute for checking the underlying certificate |
| Certified Persons Scheme (CoPC) | Individuals assessed for defined IECEx units of competence | Online Certificate of Personnel Competence and related assessment record | Independent validation of the person’s competence for the listed units |
The IECEx On-Line Certification System is the controlled, publicly available master source for IECEx certificates. A PDF supplied by a vendor is useful evidence, but the inspector should search the official online record, confirm status and issue, and compare the complete scope and schedules with the product or person presented.
IECEx can support international acceptance and reduce duplicate testing, but it does not automatically replace national or regional legal requirements. In the EU/EEA, an IECEx certificate by itself should not be treated as proof that the ATEX legal route has been completed. The contract, jurisdiction and applicable conformity documents must be checked.
CompEx is a competency framework and certification scheme for people working in hazardous or potentially explosive environments. It does not approve equipment, classify an area or grant a universal legal licence to perform every Ex task. Its qualifications are role-, atmosphere- and module-specific.
For example, the CompEx Ex01–Ex04 qualification is aimed at technicians and engineers involved in installation, inspection and maintenance of Ex electrical equipment where gases or vapours may be present. Other pathways address dust, mechanical equipment, design, responsible-person duties and different industries. The inspector or employer must verify the actual qualification shown on the certificate rather than relying on the word “CompEx.”
CompEx states that its certificates are generally valid for a maximum of five years and must be refreshed before expiry. The controlled check is the official certificate-verification tool, which can confirm the holder, certificate details, modules and validity. The project should still confirm whether that qualification is accepted and sufficient for the assigned task.
| Comparison point | IECEx CoPC | CompEx |
|---|---|---|
| System owner | IECEx | CompEx |
| Credential | Certificate of Personnel Competence (CoPC) | CompEx qualification/certificate of competence |
| Scope format | IECEx units of competency listed on the certificate | CompEx qualification and modules listed on the certificate |
| Verification | IECEx On-Line Certification System | Official CompEx certificate-verification tool |
| What the inspector must not assume | Any CoPC unit authorizes all Ex work or satisfies every employer rule | Any CompEx certificate covers all atmospheres, roles or jurisdictions |
| Competence boundary A competence certificate is evidence of assessed competence for a defined scope. It does not by itself prove current experience, employer authorization, project appointment, medical/permit requirements or authority to make design decisions. |
Start with the requirement chain, not the equipment nameplate. The same product can be acceptable in one project and unacceptable in another because the jurisdiction, classified area, process conditions, adopted standards or client requirements differ.
| Decision step | Inspector question | Controlled evidence |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Jurisdiction and facility type | Which country, market and sector rules apply? Is the equipment being placed on the EU/EEA market, used in Norway, or accepted under another national route? | Applicable law/regulation register and project legal basis |
| 2. Contract and client requirements | Does the purchase order or specification require ATEX, IECEx, both, or a named national approval? Are additional competence credentials required? | Contract/PO, client specification, approved deviations |
| 3. Area classification | What zone, gas/dust group, temperature or surface-temperature limit, EPL and ambient/process conditions are approved for the location? | Approved hazardous-area classification dossier, drawings and equipment schedule |
| 4. Equipment selection basis | Which protection concept, equipment group/category/EPL and environmental limits were approved? | Datasheet, requisition, selection calculation and approved vendor documents |
| 5. Conformity and certificate evidence | Which ATEX declarations/certificates and/or IECEx records are required, and are they current and product-specific? | Controlled official documents and online database records |
| 6. Installation evidence | Do glands, adapters, stopping plugs, barriers, wiring, earthing and enclosure details preserve the certified protection? | Installation drawings, manufacturer instructions, inspection checklist and test records |
| 7. Personnel competence and authority | Does the person’s qualification, experience and employer authorization match the task? | CompEx/IECEx CoPC record, employer competence matrix and appointment |
If a required layer is missing or contradictory, do not compensate by interpreting the next layer more generously. A clear nameplate cannot repair an unapproved area classification; a valid certificate cannot authorize an undocumented modification; and a competence card cannot replace the employer’s task assignment.
Ex marking compresses several suitability decisions into one line. Read it field by field and compare it with the controlled certificate, instructions and approved area-classification documents. A generic illustrative string might look like “II 2G Ex db IIC T4 Gb” with an ambient range and a certificate number. The actual order and additional markings vary by product and certification route.
| Marking field | What it indicates | Inspector question |
|---|---|---|
| Equipment group | Where the equipment is intended to be used, such as mining Group I or other industries Group II under ATEX | Does the group match the facility/application? |
| ATEX category and G/D | Intended protection level and gas/vapour/mist or dust atmosphere designation | Is the category suitable for the approved zone and the project selection basis? |
| “Ex” and type of protection | The explosion-protection concept or concepts, such as flameproof, increased safety, intrinsic safety or protection by enclosure | Does the complete protection concept match the certificate and installed construction? |
| Gas or dust group | The subgroup of gas or dust for which the equipment is assessed | Is it suitable for the classified substance group? |
| Temperature class / max surface temperature | The permitted ignition-temperature relationship for gas or the maximum surface temperature for dust | Is it within the approved process and area-classification limit? |
| Equipment Protection Level (EPL) | Protection level designation such as Ga/Gb/Gc or Da/Db/Dc | Does it meet the approved zone and selection requirement? |
| Ambient range | Certified environmental temperature range, where stated | Will the installed location remain within this range, including solar/process effects? |
| Certificate suffix X | Specific Conditions of Use apply | Have all conditions been identified, engineered, installed and recorded? |
| Certificate suffix U | The item is an Ex component, not complete equipment for independent use | Is it incorporated into certified/assessed equipment exactly as permitted? |
ATEX categories, hazardous-area zones and IEC Equipment Protection Levels are related selection concepts, but they come from different parts of the legal and technical framework. A common high-level relationship is shown below only as a screening aid. The approved area classification and project selection documents remain controlling.
| Classified area | Common ATEX category relationship | Common EPL relationship | Use limitation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gas Zone 0 / Dust Zone 20 | Category 1G / 1D | Ga / Da | Continuous, long-period or frequent explosive atmosphere; verify exact project requirement |
| Gas Zone 1 / Dust Zone 21 | Category 2G / 2D | Gb / Db | Explosive atmosphere likely occasionally in normal operation; verify exact project requirement |
| Gas Zone 2 / Dust Zone 22 | Category 3G / 3D | Gc / Dc | Explosive atmosphere not likely in normal operation and, if present, only briefly; verify exact project requirement |
Do not select equipment from this table alone. Substance properties, temperature limits, ambient conditions, protection concept, installation details, equipment-specific conditions and national/project rules all remain part of the acceptance decision.
Certificate verification is an identity-and-conditions check, not a document-counting exercise. The inspector needs a traceable chain from the installed item to the controlled conformity record and every condition that affects safe installation or use.
| Check | Required action |
|---|---|
| 1. Identify the required route | Confirm whether the project requires ATEX, IECEx, both or another approval. Record the governing contract and jurisdiction. |
| 2. Use the controlled source | For IECEx, search the official On-Line Certification System. For ATEX, use the manufacturer’s controlled declaration and certificate/notified-body sources where applicable. |
| 3. Match product identity | Compare manufacturer, product family, model, variant, electrical ratings, enclosure, options and serial/batch information with the supplied item. |
| 4. Confirm certificate status and issue | Check current status, issue number, supplements, amendments and the accountable certification body. Do not rely on an old first-page PDF. |
| 5. Review standards and project edition | Identify the standards listed on the certificate and compare them with the project’s adopted edition and any transition or national-difference requirements. |
| 6. Read schedules, drawings and conditions | Review the complete certificate schedule, approved drawings and Specific Conditions of Use. A first page alone is not sufficient. |
| 7. Resolve X and U limitations | Confirm every X condition is addressed. Confirm a U-marked component is not treated as complete equipment. |
| 8. Compare marking and instructions | Check the nameplate against the certificate and approved datasheet: group, category/EPL, protection concept, gas/dust group, temperature and ambient limits. |
| 9. Verify accessories and interfaces | Confirm glands, stopping plugs, adapters, reducers, barriers, seals, cable type and wiring method are compatible with the certificate and protection concept. |
| 10. Link installation and records | Retain receiving, installation and initial-inspection evidence with tag/location identity, document revisions, findings, corrections and final status. |
| Acceptance test A certificate can be valid and still be irrelevant to the installed item. The model, variant, ratings, protection concept, conditions, accessories and installation must all match. |
Personnel evidence should be checked with the same discipline as equipment evidence. A copied card or certificate title is not enough. The task, person, qualification scope and employer authority must align.
| Competence evidence | Verification question |
|---|---|
| Identity | Does the name and other identifying information match the person assigned to the work? |
| Official status | Can the certificate be verified through the IECEx OCS or CompEx verification tool? |
| Qualification / units | Which exact IECEx units or CompEx modules are listed? Do they cover gas, dust, IS/non-IS, installation, inspection, maintenance, design or responsible-person duties as needed? |
| Validity | Is the certificate current on the work date? Are recertification or surveillance conditions satisfied? |
| Task match | Does the assessed scope match the actual assigned activity—not merely the general job title? |
| Experience and recency | Does the employer have evidence of relevant practical experience and recent performance for the task? |
| Employer authorization | Has the person been appointed or authorized under the employer/project competence system? |
| Limits and supervision | Are any restrictions, supervision requirements or escalation routes defined and followed? |
A project may accept CompEx, IECEx CoPC, a national qualification, an employer competence assessment or a defined combination. The E&I inspector should verify the approved competence matrix rather than deciding that one credential is universally equivalent to another.
The inspector’s normal role is to verify objective evidence against approved requirements, record the result and apply the contractual hold/release process. The role does not automatically include hazardous-area design, legal interpretation or approval of deviations.
| Area | Inspector may verify and record | Escalate / outside normal scope |
|---|---|---|
| Requirement documents | Verify current approved area classification, equipment schedule, datasheet, certificate/declaration and installation drawings are available and consistent | Define or change the hazardous-area classification |
| Product identity and marking | Compare manufacturer/model/ratings/marking with approved selection and controlled certificate records | Accept a different protection concept or rating without authorized technical approval |
| Physical installation | Inspect enclosure integrity, entries, glands, plugs, adapters, earthing, cable/wiring and environmental suitability against approved details | Engineer a modification or determine an unlisted repair method |
| Specific conditions | Confirm X conditions and manufacturer restrictions are visibly addressed and recorded | Interpret an ambiguous condition without the responsible Ex authority |
| Intrinsic safety evidence | Check that approved loop/entity documentation, barrier identity, cable data and installation records are present and match | Perform or approve the entity/system assessment unless specifically competent and authorized |
| Personnel evidence | Verify certificate status, module/unit, expiry and employer authorization | Declare a universal legal competence requirement or expand a person’s certified scope |
| Inspection records | Record asset identity, findings, photographs, document revisions, correction/reinspection and final status | Close a deviation, concession or design nonconformity without the assigned authority |
IEC 60079-14:2024 covers, among other topics, design, selection and erection of Ex electrical installations, documentation, personnel competence and initial inspection. IEC 60079-17:2023 covers inspection and maintenance of electrical installations in explosive atmospheres during operation. The project must define which lifecycle stage, procedure and competence requirements apply.
| Lifecycle point | Inspection focus | Controlling basis |
|---|---|---|
| Before energization / handover | Initial inspection of the completed installation against approved design, equipment documents and installation requirements | IEC 60079-14 plus project ITP/procedure and national requirements |
| In service | Periodic, sample, close or detailed inspection and maintenance under the facility’s inspection strategy | IEC 60079-17 plus site procedures, risk basis and regulatory requirements |
| After repair, modification or replacement | Reassessment of the affected protection features and restoration of traceable acceptance evidence | Applicable certificate/instructions, IEC 60079-19 where relevant, project change control and competent approval |
For project control points and retained records, connect these checks to the approved E&I ITP. The ITP should name the exact procedure, acceptance source, competent role and evidence required before release.
Escalation is required when the decision changes design, certification scope, legal applicability or the explosion-protection basis. The inspector should preserve the condition, identify the affected tag/system, record the evidence and route the decision to the authorized Ex specialist or technical authority.
| Red flag | Why escalation is required | Immediate control |
|---|---|---|
| Area-classification conflict or missing approved drawing | Equipment suitability cannot be determined without the approved zone/substance/temperature basis | Hold the affected acceptance step and request controlled classification evidence |
| Certificate cannot be found, is withdrawn/suspended, or identity does not match | Conformity evidence is not established for the supplied item | Quarantine/hold per project procedure; obtain controlled manufacturer/certification-body clarification |
| Unresolved X condition | Safe use depends on a specific condition that has not been engineered or demonstrated | Escalate to the responsible Ex engineer; do not assume a generic installation solution |
| U component used as complete equipment | A component certificate does not approve independent use | Stop acceptance and obtain the approved assembly/equipment certification basis |
| New hole, machining, enclosure damage or unapproved modification | The certified construction and protection concept may be compromised | Record and escalate for manufacturer/certification/repair assessment |
| Intrinsic-safety entity or system mismatch | Energy, cable and apparatus parameters require a competent design assessment | Do not approve by visual judgement; escalate to the authorized IS designer/engineer |
| Accessory or gland compatibility unclear | Entries and accessories are part of the protection method and environmental sealing | Obtain certificate/instruction evidence or technical disposition before release |
| Repair or overhaul outside approved process | Restored equipment may no longer comply with its original protection features | Use the approved repair route and competent facility/authority; retain repair records |
| Personnel certificate expired or wrong module | The assigned person’s assessed scope does not match the task | Reassign or obtain employer/technical authority resolution; do not expand the credential by assumption |
The following examples are common inspection failure patterns. The final disposition depends on the contract, equipment type, classified area and authorized technical review.
| Finding | Why it matters | Required action |
|---|---|---|
| IECEx PDF provided but online record not checked | The copy may be obsolete or incomplete | Search the OCS; record status, issue and scope |
| EU Declaration of Conformity missing or does not identify the supplied model | ATEX product evidence is incomplete or not traceable | Obtain a controlled manufacturer declaration and resolve identity |
| Nameplate differs from certificate schedule | Wrong variant, rating or protection scope may have been supplied | Hold and reconcile model/options with manufacturer and project approval |
| Category/EPL, group or temperature marking unsuitable for the area | Equipment selection may not control the identified ignition risk | Escalate selection conflict; do not use a zone table as the sole disposition |
| X conditions not included in the installation package | Mandatory special conditions may be missed | Retrieve full certificate schedule and demonstrate each condition |
| U-marked component installed independently | Component certification does not establish complete-equipment conformity | Obtain the certified assembly basis or replace the item |
| Uncertified or incompatible gland, adapter, reducer or stopping plug | The entry system may compromise the protection concept and ingress protection | Verify exact accessory certification/instructions and installation |
| Enclosure drilled, machined, painted over or damaged | Certified construction, flamepaths, clearances or bonding may be affected | Preserve evidence and obtain authorized repair/modification disposition |
| Ambient range or process temperature not checked | Equipment may operate outside certified limits | Compare location/process conditions with certificate and datasheet |
| Initial inspection record lacks tag, document revisions or close-out | The dossier cannot prove what was inspected or whether findings were resolved | Reconstruct traceability and re-inspect where evidence is insufficient |
| CompEx/CoPC certificate is current but does not cover the assigned task | Validity does not equal task suitability | Check modules/units and employer authorization; reassign or escalate |
ATEX, IECEx and CompEx are not mutually exclusive options. Use the requirement stack below to identify what must be verified. Final acceptance remains project- and jurisdiction-specific.
| Project situation | Primary requirement layer | Evidence to verify | Important limitation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Product placed on the EU/EEA market | ATEX 2014/34/EU conformity route and applicable national implementation | EU Declaration, required marking and conformity/notified-body evidence as applicable | IECEx evidence may support technical confidence but does not automatically replace ATEX |
| Workplace in an explosive atmosphere in the EU/EEA | ATEX workplace requirements as nationally implemented | Area classification, risk/protection documents, procedures and competence arrangements | Product marking alone does not satisfy workplace duties |
| International project specifies IECEx | IECEx scheme and certificate scope stated in the contract | Controlled OCS certificate, full schedule, status and installation evidence | Check national approvals or differences in addition to IECEx |
| Client requires both ATEX and IECEx | Both legal/commercial evidence sets | Consistent ATEX declarations/marking and IECEx controlled certificates | Resolve any marking, model or standard-edition discrepancy |
| Employer requires CompEx for the task | Employer/project competence matrix | Verified CompEx holder, correct modules, validity, experience and authorization | CompEx does not approve equipment or area classification |
| Employer accepts IECEx CoPC | Approved IECEx personnel units and task profile | Controlled online CoPC plus employer authorization and experience evidence | Confirm the listed units match the actual work |
| Norwegian project | Current Norwegian regulation, sector rules, contract and authority requirements | Norwegian/EEA product and workplace evidence plus project-specific approvals | Do not infer full applicability from a generic ATEX statement |
| No clear requirement stated | Contract clarification and responsible legal/technical decision | Formal query, approved basis and revised ITP/equipment schedule where needed | Inspector should not invent an acceptance route |
| Five-layer Ex evidence chain Jurisdiction → approved area classification → equipment conformity/certificate → marking and installation → records and personnel competence. Acceptance is defensible only when the five layers agree. |
ATEX is a European/EEA legal framework for products and workplaces. IECEx is an international conformity-assessment system for equipment, service facilities, marks and personnel competence. CompEx is a role- and module-specific personnel competency certification framework.
ATEX commonly refers to EU directives and their national implementation, not one technical standard. Harmonised standards may be used to support conformity, but the legal obligation comes from the applicable legislation.
Do not assume so. IECEx evidence does not automatically complete the ATEX legal conformity route. The manufacturer, project and responsible authority must confirm the required ATEX documentation and marking.
Yes. IECEx operates a Certification of Personnel Competence Scheme that issues CoPCs for defined units of competency through approved Ex Certification Bodies.
No universal statement is valid. The requirement depends on national law, employer policy, client specification, role and task. The project competence matrix must be checked.
Use the IECEx online system to confirm status, issue, manufacturer, product/model, certificate type, listed standards, schedule, drawings, X/U suffixes, conditions and consistency with the installed marking.
Use the official CompEx certificate-verification tool and compare the holder identity, certificate number, qualification/modules, issue and expiry with the assigned task and employer authorization.
They are related protection-level concepts from different frameworks. Neither should be used alone. Equipment selection must follow the approved zone, substance group, temperature, protection concept and project requirements.
X indicates Specific Conditions of Use that must be satisfied. U indicates an Ex component that requires incorporation into complete equipment or an assembly; it is not approved for independent use.
They must be consistent, but they answer different questions. The approved project and legal document-precedence rules control. A conflict must be stopped and escalated, not solved by choosing the most convenient document.
Escalate design or classification conflicts, ambiguous X conditions, intrinsic-safety assessments, repairs/modifications, certificate scope problems, component-use questions and any deviation requiring technical or legal authority.
No claim of CompEx or IECEx personnel certification should be made. NTIA’s E&I course supports structured learning in inspection principles, testing, standards, QA/QC, documentation and reporting. Formal Ex certification must be obtained through the relevant approved scheme providers or bodies.
Before accepting hazardous-area equipment or work, ask five questions: Which jurisdiction and contract requirement applies? What does the approved area classification require? Is the equipment identity, certificate and marking correct and current? Does the installation satisfy every condition and preserve the protection concept? Are the people performing and approving the task competent and authorized for that exact scope?
Use NTIA’s complete E&I inspection guide for the wider inspection lifecycle and the E&I Inspection Training Course for structured learning in E&I principles, testing, QA/QC, documentation and reporting. This training is not CompEx, IECEx CoPC or legal authorization for Ex work. Formal certification and project authority must come from the relevant approved bodies, employer and jurisdiction.
At NTIA (Norwegian Technical Inspection Academy), we specialize in delivering world-class training programs in vendor inspection, quality surveillance, and technical compliance – specifically tailored for professionals in the oil, gas, and energy industries.
Copyright © 2025 by NTIA. All Rights Reserved.
