Rail suppliers providing certain safety-critical products and services are being urged to review their certification after RSSB clarified that verified RISQS status alone does not provide the level of assurance required for some activities.
RSSB is updating the Railway Industry Commodity Classification List (RICCL) to make clearer where additional third-party certification is required, while some products and services are moving from ‘verified’ to ‘witnessed’ status.
The changes follow concerns that some suppliers may have allowed relevant certification or approvals to lapse because of a misunderstanding over what verified status demonstrates.
While the requirement for third-party certification itself is not new, the clarification could have practical consequences for affected suppliers and the organisations procuring safety-critical products from them.
Verified status does not cover safety-critical processes
At the heart of the update is an important distinction between different forms of supplier assurance.
Verified status confirms that checks have been undertaken against evidence supplied by an organisation and supports requirements associated with procurement regulations and individual buyers.
However, RSSB has stressed that this does not assess the processes, procedures or operating environment used to manufacture, overhaul, procure or deliver safety-critical products and services.
That additional assurance is particularly important where failures could have direct consequences for railway safety.
RSSB said organisations need appropriate status demonstrating that the processes, procedures and operating environment involved in delivering safety-critical products or services have been satisfactorily assessed.
The RICCL is therefore being updated to make clearer which products and services require additional assurance evidence.
Some suppliers moving to ‘witnessed’ status
A review of safety-critical products and activities within the Railway Industry Supplier Qualification Scheme (RISQS) has also resulted in some activities moving from verified to witnessed status.
Witnessed status assesses the management systems, processes and procedures used to deliver a product or service. However, it does not constitute certification of the final product itself.
The changes were reviewed by the Assurance Impartiality Committee, which oversees whether RISQS assurance processes remain effective and appropriate.
It recommended that a number of specific products and activities currently carrying verified status should instead move to witnessed status, making the need for any additional third-party certification clearer to buyers and suppliers.
Suppliers urged to check RICCL codes
The immediate message for the rail supply chain is to establish whether the changes apply to the products and services they provide.
Affected suppliers should review their RICCL codes and check the scope of any existing third-party certification.
Those already holding suitable certification through a UKAS-accredited or approved organisation, or an equivalent certification route, may simply need to provide evidence to their approved Supplier Assurance Provider (aSAP).
Where suitable certification is not currently held, suppliers can obtain additional third-party certification or remove affected RICCL codes from their scope.
Suppliers can also choose to take no action, but this could result in a limitation being applied to their record, alerting prospective buyers that further audits, assessments or assurance may be required before procurement.
That could create a commercial incentive for affected businesses to address any certification gaps quickly, particularly where they regularly compete for safety-critical rail contracts.
Buyers will need to understand limitations
The clarification is equally relevant to infrastructure managers, operators, Tier 1 contractors and other rail organisations purchasing safety-critical goods and services.
Where a limitation appears against a supplier, buyers will need to consider whether additional assurance is required before placing work.
Conversely, where suppliers provide appropriate certification and limitations are removed, buyers can use that evidence when assessing supply chain risk.
The underlying principle dates back to Recommendation 24 of Lord Cullen’s inquiry into the Ladbroke Grove rail accident, which called for suppliers of safety-critical railway products and services to hold appropriate accreditation as a condition of undertaking that work.
Third-party certification also supports railway undertakings in managing their obligations under the Railways and Other Guided Transport Systems (Safety) Regulations 2006.
More than an administrative change
For affected suppliers, the update should therefore not be treated simply as another RISQS administrative exercise.
The distinction between being recognised as a supplier and demonstrating that safety-critical processes have been independently assessed is fundamental to effective supply chain assurance.
Smaller suppliers in particular will need to check their position carefully. Obtaining additional certification can involve time, cost and internal resource, while allowing certification to lapse could result in limitations that make procurement more complicated for potential customers.
For buyers, meanwhile, the changes provide greater visibility of where additional scrutiny may be necessary.
The practical priority for the supply chain is now relatively straightforward: check the latest RICCL codes, understand exactly what existing accreditation covers and resolve any gaps before they become a barrier to winning or delivering safety-critical railway work.
