Home / LEV Testing / Guide
LEV testing - checking competence
The law requires your LEV to be examined by a competent person - but it puts the responsibility for choosing a competent one on you. So you are entitled, and well advised, to satisfy yourself that whoever tests your system genuinely is competent. What competence looks like in practice, and how you can check it, is worth knowing before you appoint anyone.
The short answer
A competent LEV examiner combines recognised qualification, genuine knowledge and practical judgement. In practice that means someone who holds the recognised qualification for LEV testing - typically BOHS P601 - so their competence is certified, not just claimed; who understands LEV and the processes and hazards it controls, so they know what the system should be achieving; and who can exercise judgement to assess whether the system is actually controlling exposure, not merely record readings. You are entitled to satisfy yourself of this, and can do so by asking about qualifications, experience and professional standing. Since you are responsible for choosing a competent examiner, checking is both your right and worth doing.
Choosing competently is your responsibility
The requirement is that LEV controlling a health hazard is examined by a competent person - but the duty to arrange that, and therefore to choose a competent examiner, falls on the duty holder. It is not enough that competent examiners exist; you have to appoint one, which means the responsibility for judging competence rests with you. That makes satisfying yourself that your chosen examiner is genuinely competent not just reasonable but part of meeting your own duty. Appointing someone and simply hoping they are competent leaves the responsibility unmet if they turn out not to be.
This is why it is worth knowing what competence looks like and how to check it, rather than taking a claim of competence at face value. Anyone can describe themselves as an LEV tester; the question is whether they meet a real standard, and you are entitled to establish that before appointing them. Far from being awkward, asking about someone's qualifications and competence is exactly what a responsible duty holder does - it is how you discharge the responsibility the law places on you to choose a competent person. So the practical question is what to look for and ask, so that your choice is an informed one rather than a hopeful one.
Recognised qualification
The first and most concrete marker of competence is holding the recognised qualification for LEV testing. For thorough examination and testing, that is typically BOHS P601 - the recognised level 4 qualification covering the knowledge and skills a proper examination requires. An examiner who holds it has had their competence assessed and certified against a defined standard, rather than simply asserting it. So asking whether an examiner holds P601 or an equivalent recognised qualification is the most direct way to check that their competence is real and certified, not just claimed.
This matters because a qualification turns competence from a matter of trust into a matter of evidence. Without it, you are relying on the person's own account of their capability; with it, you have an assessed, recognised standard they have met. It is a fair and normal thing to ask about - a competent professional will expect the question and be able to answer it, and reluctance to discuss qualifications is itself informative. So the recognised qualification is the anchor of checking competence: it is the concrete, verifiable thing that underpins the more general qualities of knowledge and judgement, and the natural first thing to establish.
Knowledge and judgement
A qualification is necessary but competence is more than a certificate - it also rests on genuine knowledge and practical judgement. Knowledge means understanding LEV and the processes and hazards it controls: a competent examiner knows what a given system should be achieving to control a particular contaminant, because they understand both the ventilation and the hazard. This understanding is what lets them judge a system against what it actually needs, rather than against a generic expectation. Without it, readings are just numbers with no informed sense of whether they are good enough for the specific situation.
Judgement is the ability to interpret and assess, not merely measure. A competent examiner does not just record airflows and capture velocities; they assess whether the system is genuinely controlling exposure - weighing the measurements, the physical condition, the nature of the process and the hazard, and reaching a sound conclusion about whether the control is adequate. This is the difference between someone who can operate a meter and someone who can examine a system. The examination is fundamentally a judgement about control, informed by measurement, and making that judgement well is central to competence. So knowledge and judgement are what turn a qualified person into a genuinely competent examiner.
How to satisfy yourself
Satisfying yourself that an examiner is competent is a matter of asking sensible questions and looking for the right signals. Ask about qualifications - whether they hold P601 or an equivalent recognised qualification for thorough examination and testing. Ask about experience - their track record examining systems, particularly systems like yours or in your kind of setting. Look for professional standing - membership of the relevant professional body, which recognises demonstrated competence. And notice how they talk about the work: a competent examiner discusses your processes and hazards and what your system needs to achieve, not just the mechanics of taking readings.
None of this is difficult, and all of it is fair. A reputable, competent examiner will welcome these questions and answer them readily, because demonstrating competence is part of offering the service. Evasiveness about qualifications or experience, or an approach that treats the examination as purely a matter of readings with no engagement with your actual hazards, are signals worth heeding. The aim is not to interrogate but to satisfy yourself - to make an informed choice rather than a hopeful one. Since choosing a competent examiner is your responsibility, taking a little care to check is simply doing that responsibility properly, and it is the surest way to get an examination worth having.
The takeaway
A competent LEV examiner combines three things: a recognised qualification - typically BOHS P601 - so their competence is certified rather than merely claimed; genuine knowledge of LEV and the processes and hazards it controls, so they know what your system should be achieving; and the practical judgement to assess whether the system is actually controlling exposure, not just to record readings. Qualification anchors it, but knowledge and judgement are what turn a certificate-holder into a genuinely competent examiner.
Because the responsibility for choosing a competent examiner falls on you, you are entitled and well advised to satisfy yourself of these - by asking about qualifications and experience, looking for professional standing, and noticing whether they engage with your actual hazards or just the mechanics of measurement. A competent professional welcomes these questions. Checking is not awkward; it is how you meet your own duty to choose competently, and the surest way to get an examination genuinely worth having.
Questions
Because the duty to arrange examination by a competent person, and therefore to choose one, falls on the duty holder. It is not enough that competent examiners exist - you have to appoint one, so the responsibility for judging competence rests with you. Satisfying yourself of it is part of meeting your own duty.
For thorough examination and testing, typically BOHS P601 - the recognised level 4 qualification covering the knowledge and skills a proper examination requires. An examiner who holds it has had their competence assessed and certified against a defined standard, rather than simply asserting it. It is the most direct thing to check.
It is necessary but not sufficient. Competence also rests on genuine knowledge - understanding LEV and the processes and hazards it controls, so the examiner knows what your system should achieve - and practical judgement - the ability to assess whether the system is actually controlling exposure, not just to record readings.
Measuring is taking the airflows and capture velocities; judging is assessing whether the system is genuinely controlling exposure - weighing the measurements, the physical condition, and the nature of the process and hazard to reach a sound conclusion. The examination is fundamentally a judgement about control, informed by measurement.
Ask about qualifications - whether they hold P601 or equivalent; ask about experience with systems like yours; look for membership of the relevant professional body; and notice whether they engage with your actual processes and hazards or just the mechanics of readings. A competent professional welcomes these questions.
Not at all - it is fair and normal, and a reputable examiner will expect the questions and answer them readily. Demonstrating competence is part of offering the service. Evasiveness about qualifications or experience is itself informative. Checking is simply doing your responsibility to choose competently, properly.
We are glad to answer any question about our qualifications, experience and standing - because satisfying yourself that your LEV examiner is genuinely competent is your right, and part of choosing well.
