EN 17235:2024 The Changing Landscape for Safety at Height Systems

Why EN 17235:2024 was introduced

For many years, permanent anchor systems sat in a grey area between different standards and guidance documents. EN 795:2012 is frequently referenced, even though it was never designed specifically for permanently installed systems, while BS 7883:2019 provided system-level guidance as a UK code of practice rather than a harmonised European standard.

EN 17235:2024 was developed to address this gap by creating a dedicated, harmonised European product standard for permanent anchor devices, safety hooks and permanent lifeline systems. Importantly, it aligns the regulatory/market route of these systems with the Construction Products Regulation (CPR), as amended, placing them within the construction product framework, with CE marking and Declaration of Performance requirements set to apply.

Under EN 17235:2024, systems are assessed as complete kits – whether a single anchor, a safety hook, a horizontal wire lifeline or a rail system – rather than as interchangeable components.

A higher bar for manufacturers – and why it matters

EN 17235:2024 raises expectations for manufacturers by requiring them to demonstrate product performance through defined test regimes, including dynamic testing and testing to destruction.

Performance must be declared through CE marking and a Declaration of Performance, supported by documented quality and production controls.

To place compliant systems on the market, manufacturers will be required to establish and maintain processes such as:

• Assessment and Verification of Constancy of Performance (AVCP)
• Factory Production Control (FPC)
• Initial inspection of manufacturing processes
• Ongoing surveillance and audit testing
• Traceability of individual anchor devices and safety hooks back to their place of manufacture

The standard also recognises that certain components already assessed and CE-marked under other harmonised standards may be incorporated into anchor kits, provided their intended use and assessment methods align and their performance is fully documented. More clarity will be needed on how these components can be added to existing systems to ensure compliance.

The requirements of this standard on manufacturers represent a significant investment in testing, documentation and quality systems. Safety at height equipment manufacturers are by nature, a compliance and safety driven group. However, it is not yet clear if the manufacturers of all the permanent anchor or lifeline systems currently in use may be in a position to demonstrate EN 17235:2024 compliance by the adoption date or whether they intend to remain in the market.

Practical implications for duty holders

For duty holders, the implications of EN 17235:2024 are primarily practical.

Where an existing lifeline system becomes damaged, worn or deployed during a fall, replacement components may be required. If the original manufacturer has not achieved EN 17235:2024 compliance, those components may no longer be available or certifiable.

Because conformity assessment and declared performance attach to defined products or system kits as placed on the market, mixing components between different manufacturers is likely to compromise certification, conflict with manufacturer installation and use recommendations, and may be difficult to justify from both a compliance and liability perspective – duty holders should always follow manufacturer instructions and seek competent technical advice before modifying or replacing components within any fall protection system.

There is also a risk of supply pressure as demand increases for EN 17235:2024 – compliant systems. Limited availability or extended lead times could result in delays to remedial works or temporary restrictions on roof access while compliant solutions are sourced – duty holders should ensure contingency planning forms part of their asset management strategy.

EN 795:2012 – under review, with no confirmed public timetable

EN 795:2012 has historically been used as a broad reference standard for anchor devices, covering temporary, removable and, in some cases, permanent systems. This has contributed to long-standing ambiguity around scope and regulatory treatment.

EN 795:2012 is currently under review at BSI and European level. However, there is presently no clear visibility on when a draft revised standard will be published, nor on when any replacement standard would complete the harmonisation process. As a result, duty holders should be cautious about relying on EN 795:2012 as a long-term basis for new system selection, particularly where permanent installations are concerned.

EN 17235:2024 now provides a clearer and more robust route for permanent systems, while the future framework for temporary anchor devices remains in development.

The status of BS 7883:2019 in Ireland – context for duty holders

BS 7883:2019 is the current UK code of practice for the design, selection, installation, inspection, and maintenance of anchor systems conforming to BS EN 795. While it is widely adopted across the UK as best practice – particularly for system inspection – it is not a harmonised European standard. In Ireland, its use is voluntary and should be understood as a technical benchmark rather than a statutory requirement (unless compliance with the Code of Practice is specified in contract documents).

Developed to address system-level guidance gaps in EN 795:2012, the 2019 revision was informed by UK industry stakeholders and manufacturers, introducing a rigorous framework around technical documentation, inspection categories, and system lifecycle management. Central to the standard is the requirement for a System Technical File, which includes comprehensive design documentation, anchorage detail, inspection strategy, and evidence of installation compliance.

In practice, many legacy anchor systems in Ireland lack the documentation or access provisions required for compliance with BS 7883:2019. Typical challenges include:

• No existing technical file or as-built drawings
• Fixings concealed beneath roof finishes
• Undocumented or varied installation methods
• Uncertainty around post type, bracket layout, or substrate condition

BS 7883:2019 outlines a methodology for retrospective validation, which may include:

• Intrusive inspection (e.g. removal of roof fabrications to expose hidden fixings)
• Rigorous testing of a percentage of anchor types and substrates (which may result in destruction of anchors or substrates when manufacturer recommendations on test limits are not known)
• Generation of a new System Technical File
• Implementation of an inspection regime appropriate to residual risk

For many duty holders, the cost of this process—especially on older or undocumented systems—can exceed the cost of full replacement. As such, some building owners and safety managers are opting to decommission non-compliant legacy systems in favour of either:

• new systems designed and documented in line with BS 7883:2019 from the outset, or
• collective protection systems (e.g. fixed or freestanding counterweighted guardrails or scaffolds for temporary works), which avoid reliance on personal fall protection and align with the hierarchy of controls under Regulations 98, 100 and 109 of the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work (General Application) Regulations 2007.

As EN 17235:2024 now establishes a harmonised European standard for permanent anchor systems – linking these products to the Construction Products Regulation (CPR) and CE marking – duty holders in Ireland should continue to treat BS 7883:2019 as guidance for managing system performance, not a legal requirement. Where its application is impractical, uneconomic, or technically unfeasible, the removal and replacement of systems with solutions compliant with harmonised EU standards may be appropriate in certain circumstances following a documented risk assessment and cost-benefit analysis.

The emergence of BS 8681:2024 – competence of providers

Alongside EN 17235:2024 and BS 7883:2019, another important development for the safety-at-height sector is the publication of BS 8681:2024 – Personal fall protection anchor systems: Specification for provider competence.

Where EN 17235:2024 establishes product-level requirements for permanent anchor devices under the Construction Products Regulation (CPR), and BS 7883:2019 provides a system-level framework for design, installation, inspection and lifecycle management, BS 8681:2024 focuses specifically on the competence of the individuals and organisations carrying out those roles.

The standard sets out defined competency criteria for manufacturers, fabricators, designers, installers, inspectors and trainers involved in Personal Fall Protection Systems (PFPS). It addresses role-specific knowledge, experience, training, documented procedures and ongoing professional development, and may be used as a framework to verify that those undertaking safety-critical tasks are suitably qualified and experienced for the responsibilities they hold. A single organisation or individual may fulfil more than one role, but competence must be demonstrable for each.

BS 8681:2024 does not have harmonised status under EU law and is not a statutory requirement in the Republic of Ireland. However, it may be referenced as a benchmark for demonstrating “competent

person” in certain contexts. In UK and cross-border projects, it is likely to influence procurement criteria, inspection regimes and insurer expectations.

As a British Standard, BS 8681:2024 came into effect upon publication and, unlike harmonised EU standards, has no formal transition period. In practice, however, adoption is typically gradual, driven by increasing industry awareness, duty holder expectations and its inclusion within contract and procurement documentation.

Taken together, EN 17235:2024, BS 7883:2019 and BS 8681:2024 indicate a broader shift within the industry: not only must anchor systems be compliant as products and properly documented as systems, but the competence of those who design, install, inspect and certify them must also be demonstrable and structured. For duty holders, this reinforces the importance of engaging suitably qualified providers and retaining clear documentation to evidence both system compliance and professional competence.

Further guidance under EN 17235:2024

We hope that further guidance and clarification may emerge as EN 17235:2024 progresses through national adoption and practical implementation.

At this stage – and until further guidance is issued – duty holders should continue to rely on manufacturer information, competent advice and existing legal obligations when managing their systems while reviewing their safety at height needs whilst considering possible implications of the incoming standard.

At the time of writing, no official adoption date has been confirmed. Allenkey Fittings has contacted the National Standards Authority of Ireland (NSAI) for clarification and will provide further updates to clients once formal confirmation is issued.

The continued relevance of CEN/TS 16415

EN 17235:2024 does not replace CEN/TS 16415, which remains relevant where anchor systems are intended for use by more than one person at the same time.

EN 17235:2024 addresses whether a permanent anchor system is a compliant product, while CEN/TS 16415 addresses how that system behaves under multi-user loading conditions. Where multi-user use is intended, duty holders should expect explicit manufacturer justification and clear limitations on the number of permitted users.

Where LOLER fits into the picture

For UK and Northern Ireland projects, LOLER continues to apply where anchor systems are used as part of lifting, suspension, rope access or rescue operations. EN 17235:2024 does not remove or replace these obligations.

Instead, EN 17235:2024 raises the standard of evidence expected to demonstrate that an anchor system is suitable for such use. Anchors lacking clear testing, declared performance or traceability will become increasingly difficult to justify in lifting or suspension scenarios.

While LOLER does not apply in the Republic of Ireland, similar principles arise under Irish safety legislation, and LOLER considerations often remain relevant on cross-border or UK-governed projects.

Duty Holder legal duties remain unchanged

Despite changes to standards, the legal duties on duty holders remain unchanged.

Under the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act 2005 and the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work (General Application) Regulations 2007 – Part 4 (Work at Height), duty holders must carry out risk assessments, apply the hierarchy of controls, prioritise collective protection where reasonably practicable, and document the justification for their chosen equipment for the safety of persons working at height and the persons responsible for the selection process and equipment choice.

As EN 17235:2024 is implemented in practice, documenting any decisions around replacement of legacy systems etc will need to align with the requirements of the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act 2005 and the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work (General Application) Regulations 2007 – Part 4 (Work at Height) – Risk Assessment > Consult Hierarchy of Control > Justification of Equipment Choice > Document Process and Persons Responsible.

What Duty Holders should be doing now

In light of EN 17235:2024 and the uncertainty around the future of EN 795, duty holders should consider:

• Reviewing their safety-at-height asset registers and identifying system types and manufacturers.
• Engaging with manufacturers to understand EN 17235:2024 readiness and future support arrangements.
• Doing a cost-benefit analysis of remedials to legacy lifeline systems versus replacement with systems where manufacturers are actively working towards compliance, or considering alternatives such as collective protection to remove complexity and uncertainty – if collective protection is a viable solution for the roof.

The alternative for duty holders is to wait until EN 17235:2024 is officially in force and assess available options at the time their systems are due for inspection and recertification. Given the uncertainty around manufacturer readiness and lack of official guidance at this time, ‘wait and see’ may be the view taken by most. This approach, while understandable, is not without risk and duty holders requiring remedial works or installation of compliant systems may find themselves on a waiting list for works to be carried out.

The timing of your system recertification or planned works may also be a factor – if you have systems due for annual recertification or have large construction works planned (increased likelihood of systems damage) around or after the expected official adoption date your system may be in the first tranche through the EN 17235:2024 test.

The question – will system compatible CE marked replacement parts be available?

Awareness and planning are key to reducing costs and maintaining safe and compliant systems.

So are you a Duty Holder?

If you are an employer, designer, contractor, building owner, sub-contractor, in control of a workplace where injury may be caused by a fall from height etc. you are likely to fall under the category of duty holder with legal responsibility under Irish safety legislation to ensure that work at height is carried out safely.

In practice, most work at height projects involve several parties with overlapping legal responsibilities and statutory duties are not transferable – each duty holder is independently responsible for fulfilling their obligations under the law.

Allenkey Fittings’ approach

As the only installer in the Republic of Ireland in the SFS Approved Installer Network, Allenkey Fittings are working closely with our SFS on EN 17235:2024 implementation and monitoring developments relating to EN 795:2012, CEN/TS 16415, LOLER, associated guidance and Industry best practice.

We will continue to update clients as further information becomes available, via our website and our LinkedIn page.

Recap

EN 17235:2024 provides long-needed clarity for permanent anchor systems. However, with EN 795:2012 under review and limited visibility on its replacement timeline, duty holders must take a measured, forward-looking approach to system selection and asset management.

Early planning and informed decision-making will be key to ensuring long-term compliance and the safety of persons working at height on your buildings.

Remember – always consult the Hierarchy of Controls when selecting equipment for the safety of persons working at height and document the justification for the selection of the chosen equipment to align with your duties under the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act 2005 and the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work (General Application) Regulations 2007:Part 4 – Work at Height.

Seek project-specific advice

This update is intended to provide general guidance only. Duty holders should seek project-specific advice from competent professionals and manufacturers when making decisions regarding existing or new safety-at-height systems.

To purchase a copy of EN 17235:2024 or other standards:
https://www.nsai.ie/