What this guide decides.
This page decidesWhether offered evidence is relevant, current and traceable to the proposed system.
This page does not decideProject compliance or equivalent performance where the offered configuration differs from the certified scope.
Read the certificate before the badge.
Record the issuing body, scheme and issue, certificate holder, exact product designation, security classification, validity or listing status and referenced reports. Marketing shorthand is not evidence, and a generic 358 panel must not be described as approved because a different complete system has a listing.
Match the configuration line by line.
Check panel height and construction, post type and centres, fixings, foundations or support conditions, corners, gradient limits, gate and lock arrangements and any topping. Substitutions require documented review; visual similarity is not equivalence.
Keep classifications in their own lanes.
Forced-entry or delay classifications do not prove hostile-vehicle resistance, ballistic performance, structural adequacy, corrosion life or electrical safety. Each objective needs its own requirement and admissible evidence.
Use current scheme language.
For UK-oriented projects, NPSA now directs fence and gate selection through an Operational Requirement and recognized independent test standards; from 1 January 2026 fences and gates are removed from the NPSA Catalogue of Security Equipment. LPS 1175 Issue 8.2 is a separate LPCB certification route for listed intruder-resistant products and free-standing barriers. Neither source makes an unnamed 358 system compliant.
Record the approval decision.
The submittal should show requested requirement, offered evidence, exact match or deviation, reviewer, decision and date. Preserve superseded documents so later inspections can identify the approved basis.
Separate five evidence questions.
A document can be genuine and still be irrelevant to the offered system. Review identity, status, scope, configuration and project applicability separately.
Build a traceable evidence crosswalk.
Keep the requirement, source document, offered configuration and approval decision on one controlled record.
- 01
Copy the requirement exactly
Record the named scheme, classification, edition, jurisdiction, asset or perimeter role and any project-specific configuration limits.
- 02
Retrieve the issuing-source record
Use the current certificate, listing or guidance page rather than relying on a distributor summary. Save the reference and access date.
- 03
Map the offered system
Compare product designation and every component or interface named by the evidence. Mark matches, partial matches and omissions.
- 04
Resolve each deviation
Request a documented supplier response and route it to the responsible reviewer. Similar appearance, heavier material or a newer drawing does not close the deviation by itself.
- 05
Freeze the approved basis
Reference the accepted evidence and drawings in the supply release and retain later revisions or superseded documents in the project record.
Project-input schedule.
Carry these fields into the enquiry, drawing review and approval record. Mark unknowns as open items instead of guessing.
Evidence questions for the supplier and reviewer.
- Can the certificate or listing be opened at the issuing source today?
- Does the offered product name exactly match the listed designation?
- Are the fence height, posts, fixings, supports, gates and toppings within the stated scope?
- Which project requirement does each document actually satisfy?
- What changed between the tested configuration and the commercial offer?
- Who has authority to accept, reject or qualify each deviation?
Verify at the issuing source.
These links establish terminology and verification routes; they do not prove that a XIEHENG offer holds a named approval.