CEng Additional Evidence Required

Hi everyone, 

I wanted to have your with the ongoing review process of my application with the IET.

I submitted my application in May 2023, verified by three supporters. In August, I received a request for Further Evidence, specifically related to competencies A and B in the self-assessment section. In response, I submitted five new case studies, each tailored to address competencies A1, A2, B1, B2, and B3.

Recently, I received another communication from the IET, which posed several detailed questions seeking additional insights into my skills and knowledge. I have prepared my responses, but I find these queries somewhat repetitive, considering the comprehensive details about my professional roles are outlined in my CV, which has been shared with them.

The questions are as follows:

  1. Have you cited as a principal contractor role, and if so, can you explain about this specific role and who signed off your work?  
  2. As you have acted as a main contractor, have you done any detailed design for a contractor to the build against it, or is the design work you do conceptual? (i.e. the contractor works up the detailed design, and if so who signs off your work?)  
  3. Have you done conceptual design on behalf of a client, and if so, who signed off your work?  
  4. Can you provide a detailed short circuit and load flow analysis and generator sizing calculations? Did you do any protection settings as well as an earthing study?

Note: I have not worked as a principal contractor. However, I functioned as the main designer representing the principal contractor. And this was clearly indicated in my CV and my originally submitted application.

I have prepared a detailed response that I can share with anyone willing to review to ensure it adequately addresses the IET's queries.

Moreover, if you have any general recommendations that could be beneficial at this stage, I would appreciate to discuss them further.



  • I have prepared a detailed response that I can share with anyone willing to review to ensure it adequately addresses the IET's queries.

    Hi Ahmed,

    Did you consult a PRA? If not that would be the best thing to do - they are the best person to review your responses, and your original application, to spot what is missing, as they are trained in the review process.



  • Hi Andy,

    Thanks for your response.

    I have consulted a PRA but unfortunately his response was not very supportive. He gave me 2 unclear comments so I am trying to get some better guidance.



  • Hi Ahmed,

    Definitely in that case I'd suggest you ask for another PRA (if you are not comfortable discussing the comments with your existing one). The problem is that every case is very different, so evidence that worked for another applicant may not work for you. As PRAs we know what is being looked for and can advise on your particular case. (I would offer myself but I have too many cases on at the moment.)

    The reason the IET is asking for more evidence is because they are trying to help you get through the process, but if they have asked twice it suggests there are significant gaps between what is written in your original application and what is being looked for. (That isn't to say your application is "wrong", or that you don't have the competences, but it can be quite difficult to make them clear if you are not used to the process.) So this is good that you haven't been rejected, they are giving you more chances, but really I strongly suggest you get expert advice to make sure your responses this time precisely match what the assessors are looking for.



  • Thanks Andy

Reply Children
No Data