UNI 12010:2026: who is the qualified technician for periodic inspections of lifting accessories?

What changed on 12 March 2026

UNI 12010:2026 came into force on 12 March 2026. It defines competence requirements for qualified technicians who carry out periodic inspections of chains, ropes, lifting slings and lifting accessories. These are the items that connect the load to the lifting equipment, or work within the equipment as transmission components, and whose condition can change through use, damage, wear or storage.

The standard gives purchasers and employers a common way to discuss the technician's knowledge, skills, autonomy and responsibility. That matters because the phrase "competent person" is easy to place in a procedure or purchase order but harder to assess consistently when appointing a supplier.

UNI 12010 sits within the field of non-regulated professions. Publication of the standard does not, by itself, introduce a statutory authorisation scheme. It is a voluntary competence benchmark, although a company may choose to refer to it in a contract, purchasing specification or supplier-qualification process. It can also support internal qualification requirements and checks on whether the person assigned to an inspection is suited to the equipment in scope. None of those uses transfers the employer's decisions or responsibilities to the standard.

What UNI 12010 does, and what it does not do

The standard concerns the professional activity of technicians who perform periodic inspections independently or within an organisation. Public UNI information describes work carried out against the applicable procedures, technical references, manufacturers' instructions for use and maintenance, and relevant guidance.

It also draws a clear boundary around that activity. Inspections and checks carried out by operators and maintenance personnel are outside its scope. Daily or pre-use observations by the operator, maintenance work, and periodic inspection by a qualified technician remain different activities. One does not become unnecessary because another has taken place.

For employers and purchasing teams, four limits are especially important:

• Publication of UNI 12010 does not, by itself, introduce a new licence to inspect lifting accessories.
• It does not, by itself, create a new legal duty for the employer.
• It does not, by itself, set a new inspection interval.
• It does not turn a technical standard into an Annex VII statutory verification.

The applicable frequency still has to be determined from the legal framework, the manufacturer's instructions, relevant technical references, the conditions of use and the equipment's history. A standard focused on technician competence should not be used as a shortcut for that assessment.

Three profiles for different inspection scopes

UNI's public description classifies the qualified technician into three profiles: Senior, Junior SG for below-the-hook slings and accessories, and Junior FC for chains and ropes installed on lifting equipment as transmission components.

Profile map

Three profiles for different inspection scopes

The profile indicates the professional scope described in UNI’s public material. Experience, procedures and suitability for the assignment still need to be assessed separately.

SENIOR01

Senior technician

Chains, ropes, slings, and lifting accessories across the full scope described by UNI.

JUNIOR SG02

Below-the-hook specialist

Slings and lifting accessories.

JUNIOR FC03

Rope and chain specialist

Ropes and chains installed on lifting equipment as transmission components.

Outside the standard’s scope

Inspections and checks performed by operators and maintenance personnel.

This diagram is a scope map, not a competence matrix. It helps a purchaser separate the three areas of activity described publicly by UNI before asking which profile is appropriate for the work being commissioned.

UNI's public pages do not reproduce the detailed requirements for knowledge, skills, autonomy, responsibility or conformity assessment contained in the standard. We do not reproduce those protected contents here. Appointments and supplier qualification should be based on the current official text and evidence relevant to the actual inspection scope.

Article 71 remains the legal starting point

For equipment used at work in Italy, the employer's responsibilities under Article 71 of Legislative Decree 81/2008 remain in place.

Article 71 requires the employer to organise the controls needed to keep work equipment in a safe state of conservation and efficiency. The controls covered by paragraph 8 must be carried out by a competent person. For those paragraph 8 controls, paragraph 9 requires the results to be recorded in writing and at least the records for the last three years to be retained and made available to the supervisory authorities.

UNI 12010 can provide a useful benchmark when the employer assesses competence for the periodic inspection activities within its scope. It does not replace the employer's responsibility to:

• identify the equipment and accessories that require control;
• establish the applicable type and frequency of control;
• appoint people whose competence matches the assigned work;
• make equipment and records available for an effective inspection;
• act on defects, restrictions and rejection decisions;
• retain at least the records relating to the previous three years for the controls under Article 71, paragraph 8, as required by paragraph 9.

This distinction also matters when a provider works to a well-defined method. A consistent inspection method and a competent technician support the employer's control system, but the employer still owns the organisation of that system and the decisions that follow from its results.

Controls are not Annex VII statutory verifications

Article 71 uses both "controls" and "periodic verifications", but they are not interchangeable labels.

The controls under paragraph 8 form part of the employer's arrangements for maintaining equipment in a safe condition. They cover situations such as installation-dependent checks, controls needed because equipment can deteriorate, and controls following exceptional events where applicable. They are performed by a competent person and documented by the employer.

Paragraph 11 adds a separate statutory verification regime for the equipment listed in Annex VII. The Annex identifies the equipment subject to verification and the applicable frequency, while D.M. 11 April 2011 sets out the implementation arrangements. INAIL handles the first verification; subsequent verifications involve the public bodies or authorised parties provided for by the legal framework.

An inspection of below-the-hook accessories under the employer's control programme does not replace an Annex VII verification due on a crane or other listed item of equipment. The reverse is also true: completion of an Annex VII verification does not remove the employer's obligations for maintenance and controls. A plant may need both activities, with different scopes, records and competent parties.

Procurement documents should name the required service accurately. Asking only for a "periodic inspection" leaves room for a serious scope mismatch, particularly when a crane and its accessories are discussed together.

Questions to ask before commissioning the work

A useful technical offer should make the scope visible before anyone arrives on site. Purchasing, HSE and maintenance teams can ask:

1. Which equipment families and individual assets are included? Separate loose accessories, slings, installed chains and ropes, and lifting equipment where necessary.
2. Which UNI 12010 profile is proposed for each part of the scope, and why does it fit?
3. Which manufacturers' instructions, technical standards, company procedures and acceptance criteria will be used?
4. What identification system will connect each inspected item to its result and previous history?
5. How will inaccessible, unidentified or undocumented items be treated?
6. How will defects be classified and communicated, especially when immediate removal from service may be required?
7. What will the final record contain, and how will it support retention of at least the records relating to the previous three years for Article 71, paragraph 8 controls?
8. Which activities are excluded, including operator checks, maintenance work and Annex VII verifications?

Clear answers protect both sides. The supplier knows what must be planned; the employer can compare offers on method and competence instead of comparing a price per item with no common definition of the work.

The May 2026 errata

UNI metadata records EC 1-2026 to UNI 12010:2026, effective from 21 May 2026. The public record confirms the errata's status and effective date but does not expose the correction details. We therefore do not describe or interpret those corrections here.

Anyone applying the standard should consult the current official UNI text, including the applicable errata, rather than relying on a summary.

How to use UNI 12010 when commissioning inspections

Use UNI 12010 to make the competence requirement in the brief more specific. Define the equipment and inspection scope first, identify the relevant profile from the current official standard, and ask for evidence that the proposed technician is suited to the assigned work. Keep the basis for inspection intervals separate: publication of UNI 12010 does not set the frequency and does not change the employer's responsibilities under Article 71.

The purchase order should also state the references to be used, the expected records, how defects will be communicated and which activities are excluded. If equipment is subject to Annex VII, describe the statutory verification separately from the employer's control programme. This gives purchasing, HSE and plant teams a common scope for comparing offers without treating UNI 12010 as a licence or a substitute for a legal duty.