Approved Minutes
Meeting on 02 February 2016
ISCC
INDUSTRY STANDARDS CO-ORDINATION COMMITTEE (ISCC)
Approved Minutes of meeting held on 02 February 2016
Conference Room Simplon, RSSB’s offices, London
Present
Representing
Status
Jane Simpson (JS)
Mark Phillips (MPh)
Laurence Gregory (LG)
Mark Molyneux (MMo)
Neil Whisler (NW)
Malcolm Beard (MBe)
Ian Jones (IJ)
Paul Hooper (PH)
Tim Shakerley (TS)
Ian Dougherty (ID)
Barny Daley (BD)
Vaibhav Puri (VP)
Jason Saxon (JSa)
David Gill (DG)
David Knights (DK)
Independent
RSSB
ROSCOs
Passenger Train Operators
Infrastructure Contractors
NOBOs
Department for Transport (DfT)
Office of Rail and Road (ORR)
Freight Operators
Non-passenger Train Operators
Infrastructure Manager
RSSB
Network Rail
Network Rail
Chairman Energy Standards
Committee
Chairman Traffic Operation and
Management Standards
Committee
CCS Engineer, RSSB
Chairman
Member
Member
Member
Member
Co-opted Member
Observer
Observer
Member
Alternate Member
Member
Alternate Member
Guest (for item 4)
Guest (for item 4)
Guest (for item 6)
Infrastructure Manager
Suppliers
Passenger Train Operators
Alternate Member
Member
Alternate Member
Gary Portsmouth (GP)
Maria Vigliotti (MV)
Marie Marks (MM)
Apologies
Martin Biggin (MBi)
Jim Lupton (JL)
Neil Ovenden (NO)
Page 1 of 18
Guest (for item 7)
Guest (for item 9)
Secretary
Approved Minutes
Meeting on 02 February 2016
Number
Minute
1
Introductions
1.1
Introductions were made for the benefit of new members.
2
Minutes of meeting of 12 November 2015
The minutes for 12 November 2015 were agreed with the following
amendments:
2.1
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
3
3.1
5.2d) add ‘making clear which is rolling stock and which is
trackside’ to the end of this paragraph.
9.4 – Robin Groth’s name spelt incorrectly.
11.1: ‘from equipment’ should read ‘from poorly designed and/or
maintained equipment’.
Actions table: Farha Sheikh – name spelt incorrectly.
10.2h): should read ‘Ultimately the Railway Undertaking is
responsible for ensuring that the vehicles are compatible and
safely integrated with the infrastructure, and the Infrastructure
Manager is responsible for ensuring that the infrastructure is
compatible and safely integrated with the vehicles that operate on
it.’
Review of actions arising from previous meetings’ minutes
Refer to the actions table at Appendix B.
For Discussion
4
Register of Infrastructure briefing
4.1
Introduction:
This item was presented by Jason Saxon (JSa) and David Gill (DG) from
Network Rail. Its purpose was to brief ISCC on progress with
implementing the Register of Infrastructure (RINF).
4.2
ISCC comments/observations:
a) Comment: The value of the RINF is in being able to assess
compatibility and identify what routes are open to what vehicles.
How far away from that are we?
Response: There are only 170 fields in the ERA system – most are
the maximum or minimum value and, though some are blank, it is
because there is nothing to show. It is 80% populated and it is not
possible to populate anything for which there is not a field. For
end users and from the point of view of compatibility, the RINF
should only be seen as an initial tool for assessing feasibility.
Page 2 of 18
ISCC
Action
Approved Minutes
Number
Meeting on 02 February 2016
Minute
ISCC
Action
b)
Question: Is the information available on different gauges?
Response: The only options are interoperable, other and national –
so, no.
Response: There are on-going discussions with ERA about how the NR/DG
information held and the tool itself can be made more useful. ERA
is now using an end user group – which starts on 11 February –
aimed at ROSCOs and train operators. DG will forward the
invitation.
c)
Question: How does it interact with the national sectional
appendix – is there any duplication or interaction?
Response: It is the same data – but may be better to use the
sectional appendix currently.
d)
Question: Is there anything about fire performance?
Response: Yes – for tunnels.
e)
Question: Does GM/RT2130 need to be updated to reflect the TSI
in terms of categories of infrastructure (table 1)?
Response: MM will follow-up.
Comment: DG agreed to forward the conversion information.
f)
RSSB/MM
NR/DG
Question: What is the position with other member states?
Response: Other member states are not as far forward as GB in
terms of populating the RINF. The ERA’s position is they are
hoping that operators will want to use the RINF and that they will
put pressure on the Infrastructure Operators to populate it.
4.3
Decisions:
a) ISCC NOTED the progress with populating the RINF.
4.4
Actions:
a) RSSB to check what is happening with GM/RT2130 in terms of
reflecting the TSI categories of infrastructure (Table 1).
RSSB/MM
b)
NR to forward the invitation (to the ERA’s RINF end user group) to
Marie Marks.
NR/DG
c)
NR to forward the conversion information between GM/RT2130
and the RINF categorisation of tunnels for fire performance.
NR/DG
d)
Using 4.2(e) fire categories of infrastructure and rolling stock as an
example ORR suggested a piece of work needed to be performed
to map each RINF parameter to the corresponding requirement in
a standard in order to provide a harmonised guide between the
two.
Page 3 of 18
Approved Minutes
Meeting on 02 February 2016
Number
Minute
5
Strategy for Standards Update
5.1
Introduction:
This item was introduced by Vaibhav Puri (VP), RSSB’s Head of
Standards Policy. Its purpose was to report on progress of the
implementation of the Standards Strategy. Three big areas were:
5.2
ISCC
Action
-
National Safety Rules (NSRs)
-
National Technical Rules (NTRs)
-
Communications
ISCC comments/observations:
a)
Comment: in 3.4.1 regarding maintaining guidance and influencing
provision of TSIs: the various pieces of guidance on RSSB’s website
should indicate other pieces of domestic legislation that affect the
TSIs.
Response: Yes – that is part of the work planned.
b)
Comment: In appendix B, please add M&EE group. (NW will
forward details.)
c)
Question: What does ‘clean up complete’ mean? It implies that
the standards have been updated to align with TSIs.
Response: It means that the review has been done. Will change
wording to ‘gap analysis complete’.
d)
IC/NW
RSSB/VP
Question: What does the yellow indicate?
Response: it indicates that the date may not be met.
e)
Question: Is there a more detailed plan for 3.4.1: what’s changing
when?
Response: Yes – There is a list of standards that are being identified RSSB/VP
and a plan is being put in place. In terms of NSRs, the list can be
provided immediately. For NTRs, it is contingent on the analysis to
identify problem/priority areas and how to address them. This is
likely to be ready for ISCC in March or May. VP will supply list of
NSRs asap and update ISCC on NTRs at the earliest available
opportunity
5.3
Decisions:
a) ISCC NOTED the content of the presentation.
5.4
Actions:
a) NW to forward contact details for the M&EE group to be included
in Appendix B.
IC/NW
b)
RSSB/VP
Page 4 of 18
Change ‘clean-up complete’ to ‘gap analysis complete’.
Approved Minutes
Meeting on 02 February 2016
Number
Minute
6
Report from the Chairman of the Energy Standards Committee (ENE
SC)
6.1
Introduction:
This item was presented by David Knights (DK), Chairman of ENE SC. Its
purpose was to update ISCC on the activities of ENE SC over the past six
months and provide a look ahead at the priorities of the committee.
6.2
ISCC comments/observations:
a)
Question: Could DfT ensure timely of notification of standards to
the ERA?
Response: There were some issues with electrification which held
up the notification of the energy standards. Hopefully this will not
be an issue in the future.
b)
Comment: It would be helpful if a non-passenger representative
could be nominated to attend ENE SC.
Response: RDG Freight is considering this but it is difficult to find
people; TS will raise again.
c)
Question: What is happening with the deviations on the three car
units?
Response: A deviation application from NR proposed a design
configuration of the OLE that would have rendered some
combinations of vehicles (for example three car units)
incompatible with the OLE and thus prevented their operation on
the specific route(s). This was seen as not ‘being in the long term
best interest of the railway system’ by the SCs and adequate
consultation with affected parties had not been undertaken. The
deviation application was subsequently withdrawn.
d)
Question: In 2.2d) of the strategy – a lot more thought needs to go
into insulated pantographs. Only series 2, version 6 of the OLE
design will be compatible with insulated pantographs – it will not
be suitable for use everywhere. There is a wider question about
each scheme/project developing their own unique solutions
thereby creating further diversity on the network. How will Rail
Industry Standards reduce the need for company standards in such
areas?
Response: There was agreement that pantographs with insulated
horns would create further incompatibilities and can only ever be a
localised solution. On the wider question, RSSB can only promote
the fact that there is a mechanism via Rail Industry Standards
(where a common approach is deemed to be beneficial by the
industry) to capture good practice or a particular design solution
for specific circumstances. This may provide an opportunity to
develop and agree solutions to such issues collectively at an
industry level.
Page 5 of 18
ISCC
Action
FOC/TS
Approved Minutes
Number
Minute
e)
6.3
Action
Question: Have any of the proposed TSI amendments come from
projects?
Response: There is an open point in the TSI that must be addressed
next year. This gives an opportunity for improvements to the
wording where it may perhaps be ambiguous. Other than that
most of the changes proposed are from other member states and
not all relevant to GB.
NOTED the content of the presentation and ENDORSED the
updated ENE SC Strategic Plan.
Actions:
a)
TS to raise the need for a non-passenger train operator
representative to attend ENE SC with RDG Freight.
7
Report from the Chairman of the Traffic Operation and Management
Standards Committee (TOM SC)
7.1
Introduction:
This item was introduced by Gary Portsmouth (GPo), RSSB’s
Professional Head of Operations. Its purpose was to advise the ISCC of
activities of the TOM SC during the last six months.
7.2
ISCC comments/observations:
7.3
ISCC
Decisions: ISCC:
a)
6.4
Meeting on 02 February 2016
a)
Question: Does Keith Shepherd still attend TOM SC?
Response: Yes.
b)
Question: Can ISCC see a draft of the implementation plan before it
is published?
Response: Yes – a copy of the plan will be circulated to ISCC
members for noting prior to being issued to the DfT.
Decisions: ISCC:
a)
NOTED the content of the presentation.
8
Standards Activities Report
8.1
Introduction:
This item was introduced by Mark Phillips, RSSB’s Director of Research
and Standards. Its purpose was to report the highlights of work done in
support of the purpose of ISCC as set out in the Railway Group
Standards (RGS) Code. The report also provides data, analysis and
actions taken on:
a)
Proposals for change to RGSs
b)
The work being undertaken by Standards Committees and
c)
Deviations.
Page 6 of 18
FOC/TS
Approved Minutes
Meeting on 02 February 2016
Number
Minute
8.2
ISCC comments/observations:
a) Comment: In 3.2.2 f) engineering conformance certificate –
clarification is needed – why are there two certificates?
ISCC
Action
Response: The two certificates in question are for different
purposes. One is used to demonstrate conformity to engineering
requirements pertaining to On-Track Machines (OTMs) as
machines, while the other is around what is needed by vehicles to
get registered on the Rolling Stock Library (RSL).
b) Comment: New equipment coming in in July – now at Engineering
Acceptance Certificate (EAC) stage, but will the new certificate
need to be applied in July? There is confusion in the industry
about what applies when.
c)
Comment: GM/RT2453 – still proposes that an intermediate
statement of verification will continue to be needed. The standard
in most places will still read ‘…. Or ISV’. There is also a problem
with the definition of ISVs in the current standard. Any references
to ISVs should also be removed for consistency, especially if an
amendment is being pursued.
Response: VP agreed to establish the position with Hugh O’Neill
and report back.
8.3
Decisions: ISCC:
a) NOTED the content of the report.
8.4
Actions:
a) VP will raise issues regarding what (engineering
acceptance/conformity) certificates are required, and when, with
Hugh O’Neill at RSSB.
9
Update on Cyber Security work
9.1
Introduction:
This item was presented by Maria Vigliotti (MV), Control Command and
Signalling Engineer from RSSB. Its purpose was to update ISCC on
progress with the Cyber Security strategy and work-stream. MV
highlighted that two events are planned to provide engagement and
awareness for industry; A ‘hacker’ event in March – where students will
demonstrate how to hack systems; and an event to engage with TOC
executives in early May.
9.2
ISCC comments/observations:
a) Question: The representatives should include ROSCOs.
Response: Will be amended.
9.3
Decisions: ISCC:
a) NOTED progress with work on cyber security.
Page 7 of 18
RSSB/VP
Approved Minutes
Meeting on 02 February 2016
Number
Minute
10
Industry implementation and HSE consultation on Electromagnetic
Fields (EMF) directive
10.1
Introduction:
This item was presented by Mark Molyneux from ATOC. Its purpose
was to:
a)
Highlight a potential problem for train operators with proposals
contained in the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) EMF Directive
Consultation issued in October 2015.
b)
Provide an update on activities undertaken to date.
Provide ISCC with the opportunity to discuss and suggest additional
activities to address the issues.
ISCC comments/observations:
a) Comments and observations were taken with item 11 (below).
c)
10.2
10.3
Decisions: ISCC:
a) NOTED the issues raised in the paper.
11
Electromagnetic Fields (EMF) directive presentation
11.1
Introduction:
This item was presented by David Knights, the Chairman of the ENE SC.
Its purpose was to provide information on work done to influence the
EMF Directive.
11.2
ISCC comments/observations:
a) Question: The approval strategy for new plant did not have this in
before. Now it is implemented it would be helpful to have some
guidance on how. Have asked Plasser to evaluate this for Amey
but, with VP’s help, would like to introduce EMF assessment into
the CSM RA process.
b)
Question: Is it known how much of the equipment will need a site
specific risk assessment?
Response: Specific pieces of large equipment (eg welding
machines) are likely to need it but are also likely to already have
precautions in place. Anything with a large magnet or a large
current will need to be looked at. Even for equipment that does
not need it, there will still be the task of writing down that it is
okay; doing nothing is not an option.
c)
Question: Could ORR describe how they are going to approach this
in a pragmatic way?
Response: Darren Anderson and Dawn Russell are the ORR
contacts but the overall approach has not yet been decided.
d)
Question: have there been any conversations about exemptions?
Response: No – but the legislation does provide for seeking an
exemption.
Page 8 of 18
ISCC
Action
Approved Minutes
Number
Meeting on 02 February 2016
Minute
e)
Question: What could we do better next time?
Response: The considerable differences of opinion that existed
across Europe have resulted in a less than ideal outcome for the
UK, who favoured a less prescriptive style of legislation.
Response: The consultation on the draft UK implementing
regulations was delayed until after the UK general election. The
timing of a referendum on Europe has the potential to make this a
bigger issue than it already is; it also depends on the style of
regulation.
f)
Question: When will the RSSB guidance be published
Response: Before 01 July 2016.
g)
Question: Who is the industry owner for EMF? Where do HSE
issues fit?
Response: We all have an individual duty as employers; we can ask
RSSB to support and help us to make it more efficient to comply
but the duty rests with us.
11.3
Decisions: ISCC:
a) NOTED the issues raised in the paper.
b) ORR agreed to address the question raised at 11.2(c) and report
back to the next meeting
12
Requirements Management Database (RMDB) Demonstration
12.1
Introduction:
This item was presented by Marie Marks, Head of Stakeholder and
Standards Management at RSSB. Its purpose was to demonstrate the
implementation of the RMDB.
12.2
ISCC comments/observations:
a) Question: Will it include TSI clauses?
Response: Possibly in the longer term, but not initially.
b)
Question: When will it be available to stakeholders?
Response: RSSB needs to get a critical mass into the RMDB before
it can be made available externally. It has made the decision not to
stop current work in order to populate the RMDB (and re-write
existing standards) so it is likely to be at least two to three years
before stakeholders have access.
c)
Question: When topics are published (rather than standards), how
will the standards cut-off and briefing process work.
Response: Instead of a number of standards needing to be briefed,
it will be a number of topics. This should aid the briefing process
as there will be no need to identify which parts of standards have
changed. It is intended that this will still be done on a three
monthly cycle.
Page 9 of 18
ISCC
Action
Approved Minutes
Meeting on 02 February 2016
Number
Minute
12.3
Decisions: ISCC:
a) NOTED the content of the presentation and the implementation of
the RMDB.
13
CSM RA: how it fits in the regulatory framework
13.1
Introduction:
This item was removed from the agenda and will be tabled next time.
14
Any other business
14.1
AOB item 1: ORR review of safety guidance documents.
PH mentioned that he would like to submit a paper for comment to
ISCC on this in March. MM to add to forward agenda.
14.2
AOB item 2: Infrastructure authorisation: staged approach
PH offered to present on this at the May ISCC meeting. MM to add to
forward agenda.
14.3
AOB item 3: UIC training on ETCS
NW advised that he had attended a UIC meeting in Germany with
regulators from various countries. A training package will be available
on ETCS in March and NW agreed to provide a presentation. MM to
add to forward agenda.
Items proposed as ‘not for discussion’
None proposed.
15
Next meeting
15.1
15 March 2016 at The Helicon in Moorgate.
Page 10 of 18
ISCC
Action
Approved Minutes
Meeting on 02 February 2016
ISCC
Appendix A: Forward Agenda Items
A.1
Report from Chairman of Plant (PLT) Standards Committee – March
RSSB/NH
A.2
Report from Chairman of Control Command and Signalling (CCS) Standards
Committee and EOSRG – March and September
RSSB/TL
A.3
2016 ISCC survey results (March)
JS
A.4
ISCC’s remit and purpose (March)
JS
A.5
2016 proposed annual report from ISCC’s chairman to RSSB Board (March)
JS
A.6
Presentation on progress with European Train Control System (ETCS) –
March 2016
ORR/PH
A.7
Strategy for Standards (update) May 2016
RSSB/VP
A.8
Presentation on the use of CSM RA and how it fits in the regulatory
framework – May 2016 (action no. 2015-11-12 – 15 refers)
ORR/PH
A.9
Report from Chairman of Infrastructure (INS) Standards Committee –May
and November
RSSB/BE
A.10
Report from Chairman of Rolling Stock (RST) Standards Committee – May
and November
RSSB/HO’N
A.11
Presentation on Infrastructure Authorisation – staged approach - May
2016
ORR/PH
A.12
Presentation on UIC training package for ETCS.
IC/NW
A.13
RSSB Standards and Deviations Update report - July 2016 and January 2017
RSSB/MP
A.14
Report from Chairman of Energy (ENE) Standards Committee –and July
2016 and January 2017.
RSSB/DK
A.15
Update on cyber security work –July 2016 and January 2017
RSSB/MV
A.16
Report from Chairman of Traffic Operation and Management (TOM)
Standards Committee – July 2016 and January 2017
RSSB/GP
Page 11 of 18
Approved Minutes
Meeting on 02 February 2016
ISCC
Appendix B: Actions Table
Action Number
Description of action (updates in blue)
2015-08-12 - 01
RSSB to produce a short briefing note and, subsequently, a more detailed guidance note setting out:
a)
how to use the CSM-DT
b)
how not to use it and
c)
how to best navigate through this complex area.
Owner
Status
RSSB/GB
Open –
to be
reviewed
in June
2016
ORR/PH
Closed
RSSB/BE
Closed
Timescale to be advised.
Update: 09-09-2015: David Griffin reported that the short briefing note should be available by 11
September 2015.
Update: 12-11-2015: It’s not likely that any draft revisions of the CSM RA GNs will be ready before
around June 2016. There is now an internal working group looking at all material relating to Taking
Safe Decisions, CSM for Risk Assessment and CSM for Monitoring, with the aim of ensuring that they
are consistent with each other and are as effective as possible. The revision of the six CSM RA GNs
will form a key part of the strategy that’s being developed, but we’ll also be looking at other potential
communications channels such as the website, briefing/training, videos, etc.
There will be a need for a MFSC to be convened at some point, but it is unlikely to be required before
June 2016.
2015-11-12 - 01
Check whether the recommended solutions suggested in the TSI implementation issues log were
applied on the recently authorised switches and crossings project on the West Coast Main Line, and
confirm whether the solutions worked.
Update: 02-02-2016: Yes applied – but project added solution into the log.
2015-11-12 - 02
Draft an entry for the TSI implementation issues log addressing the potential very narrow
interpretation of Traffic Codes being used to rule projects out of scope.
[Post meeting note: BE has drafted an entry and forwarded to Paul Hooper for agreement.]
Update: 02-02-2016: yes wording is accepted - closed
Page 12 of 18
Approved Minutes
Meeting on 02 February 2016
Action Number
Description of action (updates in blue)
2015-11-12 - 03
Confirm timescales for production of the complete list of NTRs for ERTMS and whether the work will
be broken down by on-board and trackside.
ISCC
Owner
RSSB/VP
Status
Closed
[Post meeting note: Email sent 11/01/2016 with details. Closed]
2015-11-12 - 04
Discuss with ROSCOs (LG), NoBos (MB) and NR (MPe) how to hold effective lessons learned in terms of RSSB/MPh
the standards and deviations processes for both infrastructure and rolling stock projects.
Closed
[Post meeting note: meeting went ahead on 07 December.]
2015-11-12 - 05
Respond to the DfT Newsflash consultation asking for comments on the draft list of projects at an
advanced stage: by 01 December 2015.
Update: 02-02-2016: Date passed – closed.
All
Closed
2015-11-12 - 06
Brief constituency about the list of projects to be notified as being at an advanced stage in accordance
with the Interoperability Directive.
All
Closed
DfT/IJ
Closed
RSSB/HO’N
Open
RSSB/MM
Closed
Update: 02-02-2016: Completed – closed.
2015-11-12 - 07
Ask Jason Saxon to present to ISCC on the process for populating the RINF.
[Post meeting note: J Saxon presentation on the agenda for 02 February 2016.]
2015-11-12 - 08
Report back on the scope and focus of RSSB’s interest in the review of deviations for the Sheffield
tram-train project.
Update: 02-02-2016: A risk paper has been prepared by the Rolling Stock team, and shared with all SC
Chairs for comment. A finalised version will be available on 5th February. Open.
2015-11-12 - 09
Send a link to the final draft of RIS-2700-RST as published on the consultation and stakeholder
register.
Update: 02-02-2016: RST SC approved draft forwarded to ISCC on 01 February 2016. Closed.
Page 13 of 18
Approved Minutes
Meeting on 02 February 2016
Action Number
Description of action (updates in blue)
2015-11-12 – 10
Let ISCC know how workshop comments were managed and dealt with in relation to general
consultation comments received during the formal consultation of RIS-2700-RST.
ISCC
Owner
Status
RSSB/HO’N
Closed
DfT/IJ
Closed
All
Closed
All
Closed
Update: 02-02-2016: More than 1000 comments were received on the first draft of RIS-2700-RST. Two
workshops were held, ensuring that those parties who objected were represented. In December 2016,
draft 2d of the amended RIS was sent to those parties who had objected to the first draft (10 in all),
with a response deadline. Four responded to say they now supported the standard, there was no
response from the other six. RST SC were satisfied with this process and approved draft 2e for
publication on 15th January 2016.
2015-11-12 - 11
Report on how safe integration is being managed and clarify DfT’s role as the body that is funding the
work in general.
Update: 02-02-2016: Need to follow-up with ORR. ROGS and CSM will apply – but no point doing
double process. One overall hazard log Stagecoach are in the lead as the proposer under CSM.
2015-11-12 - 12
Encourage projects to approach SC Chairmen/committee members early regarding potential
deviations.
Update: 02-02-2016: Completed – closed.
2015-11-12 - 13
Provide comments to HO’N regarding the alternative format for reporting from SCs to industry.
Update: 02-02-2016: Completed – closed.
2015-11-12 - 14
Identify what is being done about the recent spate of damage to vehicles from trackside equipment.
[Post meeting note: MPe provided lessons learned briefing on 14 December 2015. Closed.]
NR/MPe
Closed
2015-11-12 - 15
Provide a presentation on the use of CSM RA and how it fits in the regulatory framework.
ORR/PH
Closed
ORR/PH
Closed
[Post meeting note: On agenda for 02 February 2016]
2015-11-12 - 16
Arrange a presentation on progress with European Train Control System (ETCS) at a future meeting.
Update: 02-02-2016: Added to the forward agenda for March. Closed.
Page 14 of 18
Approved Minutes
Meeting on 02 February 2016
Action Number
Description of action (updates in blue)
2015-11-12 – 17
Clarify the work being done by Dr Shackleton.
ISCC
Owner
Status
RSSB/MM
Closed
RSSB/MPh
Closed
[Post meeting note: Dr Shackleton is retained on the basis of 12 days per year (9 days for Standards
and 3 days for research). Some of his costs for this financial year have not yet been paid as they
referred to an old purchase order number.]
2015-11-12 - 18
MPh to discuss DfT representation at SCs with Robin Groth.
[Post meeting note: MPh raised the issue with Robin Groth. DFT doesn't have resource to attend all
the meetings we would like but will focus on those where they can best add value.]
2016-02-02 – 01
RSSB to check what is happening with GM/RT2130 in terms of reflecting the TSI categories of
infrastructure (Table 1).
RSSB/MM
Open
2016-02-02 – 02
NR to forward the invitation (to the ERA’s RINF end user group) to Marie Marks.
NR/DG
Open
2016-02-02 – 03
NR to forward the conversion information between GM/RT2130 and the RINF categorisation of
tunnels for fire performance.
NR/DG
Open
2016-02-02 – 04
NW to forward contact details for the M&EE group to be included in Appendix B of the Standards
Strategy. [Post meeting note: completed – closed.]
IC/NW
Closed
2016-02-02 – 05
Change ‘clean-up complete’ to ‘gap analysis complete’ – in dashboard supporting the Standards
Strategy.
RSSB/VP
Open
[Post meeting note: completed – closed.]
2016-02-02 – 06
TS to raise the need for a non-passenger train operator representative to attend ENE SC with RDG
Freight.
FOC/TS
Closed
2016-02-02 – 07
VP will raise issues regarding what (engineering acceptance/conformity) certificates are required, and
when, with Hugh O’Neill at RSSB.
RSSB/VP
Closed
[Post meeting note: completed via email on 01 March 2016 – closed.]
Page 15 of 18
Approved Minutes
Meeting on 02 February 2016
Action Number
Description of action (updates in blue)
2016-02-02 – 08
MM to add the following presentations to the forward agenda:
a)
ORR review of safety guidance – March
b)
ORR presentation on Infrastructure Authorisation – staged approach - May 2016
c)
UIC training on ETCS – Neil Whisler – May 2016
[Post meeting note: all now on the forward agenda. Closed.]
Page 16 of 18
ISCC
Owner
RSSB/MM
Status
Closed
Approved Minutes
Meeting on 02 February 2016
ISCC
Appendix C: Future meeting dates:
Mar
2016
Apr
2016
May
2016
Jun
2016
Jul
2016
Aug
2016
Sep
2016
Oct
2016
Nov
2016
Dec
2016
Jan
2017
Feb
2017
Mar
2017
Apr
2017
May
2017
Jun
2017
Jul
2017
Aug
2017
ISCC
15
--
18
--
14
--
15
--
17
--
24
--
21
--
16
--
12
--
RSSB Board
03
05
30
01
03
APPROVED
______________________________
Jane Simpson, Chairman
Marie Marks, Secretary, ISCC
Page 17 of 18
Tel: 020 3142 5575
Date_____________________
Fax: 020 3142 5669
Email: marie.marks@rssb.co.uk
Approved Minutes
Meeting on 02 February 2016
Appendix D – attachments to minutes
Attachment 1
Populating the Register of Infrastructure (presentation, briefing note and overview)
Attachment 2
Strategy for Standards (paper and dashboard)
Attachment 3
Report from ENE SC (presentation)
Attachment 4
ENE SC revised strategic plan
Attachment 5
Report from TOM SC (presentation)
Attachment 6
Standards Activities Report
Attachment 7
Update on Cyber Security (presentation)
Attachment 8
HSE EMF Consultation (paper)
Attachment 9
EMF directive (presentation)
Attachment 10
Requirements Management Database (RMDB) (presentation)
Page 18 of 18
ISCC