ISO/IEC Directives, Part 1

Foreword

0.1 General

This document replaces the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 1:2024, including the ISO, IEC and JTC 1 Supplements.

For the first time in the history of ISO and IEC, a single common set of procedures for the technical work is applicable across ISO and IEC.

0.2 Purpose of the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 1

The World Trade Organization (WTO) Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) agreement assigns special status to International Standards. The WTO TBT Committee has defined six principles [1] for the development of International Standards that are used to determine if standards are International.

1. Transparency
2. Openness
3. Impartiality and consensus
4. Effectiveness and relevance
5. Coherence
6. Development dimension

For more details, see "Decisions and recommendations adopted by the WTO Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade since 1 January 1995" Annex 2 to Part 1 [2], and Annex G.

The ISO/IEC Directives, Part 1, define the procedures for the technical work to safeguard these fundamental principles in the development of International Standards and other documents.

The ISO/IEC Directives, Part 1 do not contain the principles and rules for the structure and drafting of ISO and IEC documents. These rules are provided in the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2.

NOTE Throughout this document, the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 1 and Part 2 are referred to collectively as "the ISO/IEC Directives".

0.3 Online resources for the technical work

The ISO and IEC websites provide supplementary guidance, tools and essential forms to support individuals engaged in technical work.

0.4 Terminology

ISO and IEC do not always use the same terminology. For example, ISO refers to its country members as "Member Bodies", whereas IEC uses the term "National Committees". In such situations, the ISO/IEC Directives use generic terms: "National Body" is used for the mentioned example.

A comprehensive list of these terms and their corresponding equivalents for ISO and IEC is provided in 0.7 e).

0.5 Maintenance of the ISO/IEC Directives

ISO/IEC Joint Directives Maintenance Team is responsible for the maintenance of the ISO/IEC Directives.

All recommendations for changes in the ISO/IEC Directives are approved by both ISO and IEC technical management boards.

0.6 Change requests to the ISO/IEC Directives

ISO and IEC are dedicated to the continual improvement of the procedures for development of ISO and IEC documents. ISO/IEC National Bodies, committees, and Office of the CEO staff can suggest revisions to the ISO/IEC Directives at any time using an online change request (CR) form [3], [4].

0.7 General Directives procedures

These procedures have been established by ISO and IEC in recognition of the need for International Standards to be cost-effective and timely, as well as widely recognized and generally applied. To attain these objectives, the procedures are based on the following concepts.

• a) Current technology and project management

Within the framework of these procedures, the work may be accelerated, and the task of Experts and secretariats facilitated both by current technology (e.g. IT tools) and project management methods.

• b) Consensus

Consensus, which requires the resolution of substantial objections, is an essential procedural principle and a necessary condition for the preparation of International Standards that will be accepted and widely used. Although it is necessary for the technical work to progress speedily, sufficient time is required before the approval stage for the discussion, negotiation and resolution of significant technical disagreements.

For further details on the principle of "consensus", see 2.5.7.

• c) Discipline

National Bodies need to ensure discipline with respect to deadlines and timetables to avoid long and uncertain periods of "dead time". Similarly, to avoid re-discussion, National Bodies have the responsibility to ensure that their technical standpoint is established, taking account of all interests concerned at the national level, and that this standpoint is made clear at an early stage of the work rather than, for example, at the final (approval) stage. Moreover, National Bodies need to recognize that substantial comments tabled at meetings are counter-productive since no opportunity is available for other delegations to carry out the necessary consultations at home, without which rapid achievement of consensus will be difficult. National Bodies are encouraged to abstain if there is a lack of national consensus or Expert input on a specific ballot.

• d) Cost-effectiveness

These procedures take into account the total cost of the operation. The concept of "total cost" includes direct expenditure by National Bodies, expenditure by the offices in Geneva (funded mainly by the dues of National Bodies), travel costs and the value of the time spent by Experts in working groups and committees at both national and international level.

Opportunities for remote participation at face-to-face meetings should be provided to the extent possible (see Clause 5).

• e) Terminology used in this document

Wherever appropriate in this document, for the sake of brevity, the following terminology has been adopted to represent concepts that are similar or identical within ISO and IEC.

In addition, the following abbreviations are used in this document.

IS

International Standard

IWA

International Workshop Agreement

JPC

joint project committee

JTC

joint technical committee

JWG

joint working group

PAS

Publicly Available Specification

PC

project committee

SC

subcommittee

SEG

Standardization Evaluation Group

SRD

Systems Reference Deliverable

SyC

systems committee

TC

technical committee

JSyC

joint systems committee

TR

Technical Report

TS

Technical Specification

WG

working group

• f) Code of ethics and conduct

Individuals participating in ISO and IEC activities must comply with the mandatory ISO Code of Ethics and Conduct [5] and the IEC Code of conduct [6] for technical work.

1 Organizational structure and responsibilities for the technical work

1.1 Role of the technical management board

The technical management board of the respective organization is responsible for the overall management of the technical work and, in particular, for:

• a) establishment of technical committees;
• b) appointment of Chairs of technical committees;
• c) allocation or re-allocation of secretariats of technical committees and, in some cases, subcommittees;
• d) approval of titles, scopes and programmes of work of technical committees;
• e) ratification of the establishment and disbandment of subcommittees by technical committees;
• f) allocation of priorities, if necessary, to particular items of technical work;
• g) coordination of the technical work, including assignment of responsibility for the development of standards regarding subjects of interest to several technical committees or needing coordinated development. To assist it in this task, the technical management board may establish advisory groups of Experts in the relevant fields to advise it on matters of basic, sectoral and cross-sectoral coordination, coherent planning and the need for new work;
• h) monitoring the progress of the technical work with the assistance of the Office of the CEO and taking appropriate action;
• i) reviewing the need for, and planning of, work in new fields of technology;
• j) maintenance of the ISO/IEC Directives and other rules for technical work;
• k) consideration of matters of principle raised by National Bodies and of appeals concerning decisions on new work item proposals, on committee drafts, on enquiry drafts or on final draft International Standards.

NOTE 1 Explanations of the terms "new work item proposal", "committee draft", "enquiry draft" and "final draft International Standard" are given in Clause 2.

NOTE 2 For detailed information about the role and responsibilities of the ISO and IEC technical management boards, see the terms of reference of the ISO/TMB [7] and of the IEC SMB [8], respectively.

1.2 Advisory groups to the technical management board

1.2.1 A group having advisory functions in the sense of 1.1 g) may be established

• a) by one of the technical management boards, or
• b) jointly by the two technical management boards.

1.2.2 A proposal to establish such a group shall include recommendations regarding its terms of reference and constitution, bearing in mind the requirement for sufficient representation of affected interests while at the same time limiting its size as far as possible to ensure its efficient operation. For example, it may be decided that its members be only the Chairs and Secretaries/Committee Managers of the technical committees concerned. In every case, the technical management board(s) shall decide the criteria to be applied and shall appoint the members.

Any changes proposed by the group to its terms of reference, composition or, where appropriate, working methods shall be submitted to the technical management board(s) for approval.

1.2.3 The tasks allocated to such a group may include the making of proposals relating to the drafting or harmonization of publications (in particular, International Standards, Technical Specifications, Publicly Available Specifications and Technical Reports), but shall not include the preparation of such documents unless specifically authorized by the technical management board(s).

1.2.4 Any document being prepared with a view to publication shall be developed in accordance with the procedural principles given in Annex A.

1.2.5 The results of such a group shall be presented in the form of recommendations to the technical management board(s). The recommendations may include proposals for the establishment of a working group (see 1.12) or a joint working group (see 1.12.7) for the preparation of publications. Such working groups shall operate within the relevant committee, if any.

1.2.6 The internal documents of a group having advisory functions shall be distributed to its members only, with a copy to the Office(s) of the CEO(s).

1.2.7 Such a group shall be disbanded once its specified tasks have been completed or if it is subsequently decided that its work can be accomplished by normal liaison mechanisms (see 1.16).

1.2.8 Standardization Evaluation Group (SEG): an open, potentially large group drawn from within and beyond the ISO and IEC communities, used in the first stage of systems development. Its role is to engage the community of Experts, identify the relevant stakeholders, define the general architecture and boundaries of the subject to be addressed and propose a possible work programme and a relevant roadmap for the implementation of the standardization activities.

1.2.8.1 Standardization Evaluation Groups and Joint Standardization Evaluation Groups (JSEG) are established and disbanded by the technical management board(s). They have a limited life, normally of 18 to 24 months and shall not have ongoing tasks.

A proposal for the establishment of an SEG can be made by:

• a National Body;
• the technical management board;
• the Chief Executive Officer.

A proposal for the creation of an SEG or JSEG should include information on as many of the following as relevant:

• market needs, market relevance and business drivers;
• regulatory demands or other restrictions in countries or regions;
• related work or other valuable information from other organizations or industries;
• list of already identified stakeholders, including IEC committees, ISO committees, fora and consortia outside of these organizations, which should be engaged in the work;
• recommendation of needed expertise and administrative structure of the SEG or JSEG;
• proposal for an appropriate name of the SEG or JSEG;
• proposal for a Convenor.

1.2.8.2 SEG or JSEG membership

The SEG or JSEG membership should have strong competence in all the issues within the scope of the SEG or JSEG. This may require the participation of Experts outside the normal standardization communities of ISO and IEC.

There shall be an open call for the participation of Experts from both within and outside ISO and IEC, but there is no definitive limitation on numbers. A JSEG, in its work, shall ensure that it is responsive to the needs of both organizations.

There is a need for representation from the committees concerned, as well as representation from interested technical management board members and National Bodies. Where appropriate, participation from conformity assessment bodies and external organizations is encouraged.

Experts can register through the online portal of the organization in which the SEG or JSEG proposal originated. As part of the open call for SEG or JSEG Experts, the National Body of new Experts (i.e. Experts who are not already registered in ISO or IEC), will be notified for information.

It is expected that all interested Experts be present and contribute constructively to the work.

A nomination for a Convenor or Co-Convenor of an SEG or JSEG should be suggested by the proposer and shall be approved by the technical management board of the organization in which the proposal for the SEG or JSEG originated. The Secretary is provided by the organization in which the proposal for the SEG or JSEG originated. On a case-by-case basis, Co-Convenors and/or Co-Secretaries from each organization may be decided by the corresponding technical management board.

1.2.8.3 SEG or JSEG tasks

The principal task of an SEG or JSEG is to evaluate whether there is a need for new standardization work or other technical activities within ISO and/or IEC. This entails the examination of the following factors:

• market needs, market relevance and business drivers;
• potential participants in the work from inside and outside ISO and/or IEC, including ISO and IEC technical bodies and, for example, ITU-T Study Groups (SGs), fora, consortia and other groups;
• related work or other valuable information from other organizations or industries;
• environmental, energy and safety conditions considerations for the systems work;
• regulatory demands or other restrictions in countries or regions;
• a relevant/suitable model or reference architecture;
• an initial set of use cases which can be mapped to the reference architecture or model to prove its validity;
• a gap analysis of existing work and activities.

1.2.8.4 SEG or JSEG deliverables

• Recommendations report to the technical management board(s), including minority views
• Pamphlet or brochure
• Web page document
• No consensus or voting is possible

An SEG or JSEG shall not develop IS, TS, PAS, TR and SRD.

1.3 Joint technical work

1.3.1 Joint technical committees (JTC) and joint project committees (JPC)

1.3.1.1 JTCs and JPCs may be established by a common decision of both technical management boards.

1.3.1.2 For JTCs, JTC subcommittees and JPCs, one organization has the administrative responsibility. This shall be decided by mutual agreement between the two organizations.

1.3.1.3 Participation in JTCs, JTC subcommittees and JPCs is based on the one member/country, one vote principle.

1.3.1.4 Where two National Bodies in the same country elect to participate in a JTC, JTC subcommittee or JPC, one shall be identified as having the administrative responsibility and only one national delegation is allowed. The National Body with the administrative responsibility has the responsibility to coordinate activities in their country, including the circulation of documents, commenting and voting. Otherwise, the normal procedures are followed.

1.4 Role of the Chief Executive Officer

The Chief Executive Officer of the respective organization is responsible, inter alia, for implementing the ISO/IEC Directives and other rules for the technical work. For this purpose, the Office of the CEO arranges all contacts between the committees, the council board and the technical management board.

Deviations from the procedures set out in this document shall not be made without the authorization of the Chief Executive Officers of ISO or IEC or the technical management boards.

1.5 Establishment of technical committees

1.5.1 Technical committees are established and disbanded by the technical management board.

1.5.2 The technical management board may transform an existing subcommittee into a new technical committee following consultation with the parent technical committee of the existing subcommittee.

1.5.3 A proposal for work in a new field of technical activity which appears to require the establishment of a new technical committee may be made in the respective organization by

• a National Body;
• a technical committee or subcommittee;
• a project committee;
• a policy-level committee;
• the technical management board;
• the Chief Executive Officer;
• a body responsible for managing a certification system operating under the auspices of the organization;
• another international organization with National Body membership.

1.5.4 The proposal shall be made using the appropriate form, which covers:

• a) the proposer;
• b) the subject proposed;
• c) the scope of the work envisaged and the proposed initial work programme;
• d) a justification for the proposal;
• e) if applicable, a survey of similar work undertaken in other bodies;
• f) any liaisons deemed necessary with other bodies.

For additional informational details to be included in the proposals for new work, see Annex C. The form shall be submitted to the Office of the CEO.

1.5.5 The Office of the CEO shall ensure that the proposal is properly developed in accordance with ISO and IEC requirements (see Annex C) and provides sufficient information to support informed decision-making by National Bodies. The Office of the CEO shall also assess the relationship of the proposal to existing work and may consult interested parties, including the technical management board or committees conducting related existing work. If necessary, an ad hoc group may be established to examine the proposal.

Following its review, the Office of the CEO may decide to return the proposal to the proposer for further development before circulation for voting. In this case, the proposer shall make the changes suggested or provide justification for not making the changes. If the proposer does not make the changes and requests that its proposal be circulated for voting as originally presented, the technical management board will decide on appropriate action. This could include blocking the proposal until the changes are made or accepting that it be balloted as received.

In all cases, the Office of the CEO may also include comments and recommendations on the proposal form.

For details relating to the justification of the proposal, see Annex C.

Proposers are strongly encouraged to conduct informal consultations with other National Bodies in the preparation of proposals.

1.5.6 The proposal shall be circulated by the Office of the CEO to all National Bodies of the respective organization (ISO or IEC), asking whether or not they

• a) support the establishment of a new technical committee, providing a statement justifying their decision ("justification statement"); and
• b) intend to participate actively (see 1.7.5) in the work of the new technical committee.

The proposal shall also be submitted to the other organization (ISO or IEC) for comment and for agreement (see Annex B).

The replies to the proposal shall be made using the appropriate form within 12 weeks after circulation. Regarding 1.5.6 a) above, if no such statement is provided, the positive or negative vote of a National Body will not be registered and considered.

1.5.7 The technical management board evaluates the replies and either

• a) decides the establishment of a new technical committee, provided that

1. a two-thirds majority of the National Bodies voting are in favour of the proposal; abstentions are excluded when the votes are counted, and
2. at least five National Bodies who voted in favour expressed their intention to participate actively,

and allocates the secretariat (see 1.9.1); or

• b) assigns the work to an existing technical committee, subject to the same criteria of acceptance.

1.5.8 Technical committees shall be numbered in sequence in the order in which they are established. If a technical committee is disbanded, its number shall not be allocated to another technical committee.

1.5.9 As soon as possible after the decision to establish a new technical committee, the necessary liaisons shall be arranged (see 1.15 to 1.17).

1.5.10 A new technical committee shall agree on its title and scope as soon as possible after its establishment and no later than 12 months, preferably by correspondence.

Agreement on the title and scope of the technical committee requires approval by a two-thirds majority of the P-members voting.

The scope is a statement precisely defining the limits of the work of a technical committee, see Annex J.

The definition of the scope of a technical committee shall begin with the words "Standardization of …" or "Standardization in the field of …" and shall be drafted as concisely as possible.

The agreed title and scope shall be submitted by the Chief Executive Officer to the technical management board for approval.

The Secretary/Committee Manager shall arrange for the first meeting of the technical committee to be held within six months following the approval of its establishment.

Following the initial establishment of the technical committee, but no later than 18 months, the committee is required to prepare a strategic business plan for review by the technical management board.

1.5.11 The technical management board or a technical committee may propose a modification of the latter's title and/or scope. The modified wording shall be established by the technical committee for approval by the technical management board.

1.5.12 To re-establish a disbanded committee, the proposer shall follow the process for the establishment of a new technical committee (see 1.5).

1.5.13 In principle, the technical management board shall assign the maintenance of documents developed by a disbanded technical committee to existing committees with appropriate scopes. The maintenance of documents developed by disbanded subcommittees is assigned to the parent technical committee.

For the maintenance of documents developed by a project committee, see K.7.

If the document has not been assigned to an existing committee, the technical management board is responsible for its maintenance in accordance with the procedures in Clause 4.

1.6 Establishment of subcommittees

1.6.1 Subcommittees are established and disbanded by a two-thirds majority decision of the P‑members of the parent technical committee voting, subject to ratification by the technical management board. A subcommittee may be established only on condition that a National Body has expressed its readiness to undertake the secretariat.

1.6.2 At the time of its establishment, a subcommittee shall comprise at least five members of the parent technical committee having expressed their intention to participate actively (see 1.7.5) in the work of the subcommittee.

1.6.3 Subcommittees of a technical committee shall be designated in sequence in the order in which they are established. If a subcommittee is disbanded, its designation shall not be allocated to another subcommittee unless the disbandment is part of a complete restructuring of the technical committee.

1.6.4 The title and scope of a subcommittee shall be defined by the parent technical committee and shall be within the defined scope of the parent technical committee, see Annex J.

1.6.5 The secretariat of the parent technical committee shall inform the Office of the CEO of the decision to establish a subcommittee using the appropriate form. The Office of the CEO shall submit the form to the technical management board for ratification of the decision.

1.6.6 As soon as possible after the ratification of the decision to establish a new subcommittee, any liaisons deemed necessary with other bodies shall be arranged (see 1.15 to 1.17).

1.6.7 To re-establish a disbanded subcommittee, the committee shall follow the process for the establishment of a new subcommittee.

1.6.8 Subcommittees shall respond to the parent committee's calls for input to the strategic business plan (see 2.1.2).

1.7 Participation in the work of committees

1.7.1 All National Bodies have the right to participate in the work of committees.

To achieve maximum efficiency and the necessary discipline in the work, each National Body shall clearly indicate to the Office of the CEO, with regard to each committee, if it intends

• to participate actively in the work, with an obligation to vote on all questions formally submitted for voting within the committee, on new work item proposals, enquiry drafts and all drafts for final approval (see 1.7.4), and to contribute to meetings (P‑members), or
• to follow the work as an observer, and therefore to receive committee documents and to have the right to submit comments and to attend meetings (O‑members).

A National Body may choose to be neither a P‑member nor an O‑member of a given committee, in which case it will have neither the rights nor the obligations indicated above with regard to the work of that committee. Nevertheless, all National Bodies, irrespective of their status within a committee, have the right to vote on enquiry drafts (see 2.6) and on final draft International Standards (see 2.7).

National Bodies have the responsibility to organize their national input in an efficient and timely manner, taking account of all relevant interests at their national level.

1.7.2 Membership of a subcommittee is open to any National Body, regardless of its membership status in the parent committee.

Members of a parent committee shall be given the opportunity to notify their intention to become a P‑member or O‑member of a subcommittee at the time of its establishment.

Membership of a parent committee does not imply automatic membership of a subcommittee; National Bodies shall notify their intended status in each subcommittee.

1.7.3 A National Body may, at any time, begin or end membership or change its membership status in any committee, subject to the requirements of 1.7.4.

Furthermore, a P-member may voluntarily downgrade to O-member if it consistently lacks expertise to vote at the committee level or to participate in working groups.

1.7.4 A committee secretariat shall notify the Office of the CEO if a P‑member of that committee has been persistently inactive or has failed to vote:

• a) persistently inactive criteria

• a P-member is considered persistently inactive by failing to attend two successive committee meetings (either in person or remote) and by failing to have any Expert(s) appointed to the technical work; or

• b) failing to vote criteria

• a P-member has failed to vote on any of the following document(s):

• proposal stage ballot;
• enquiry stage ballot;
• approval stage ballot (for IS, TS, PAS, TR, SRD and validation draft (VD)).

NOTE 1 Abstentions are taken into account when evaluating P-member participation.

Upon receipt of such a notification, the Chief Executive Officer shall remind the National Body of its obligation to take an active part in the work of the committee. In the absence of a satisfactory response to this reminder within four weeks, the status of the National Body shall, without exception, automatically be changed to that of an O‑member.

Even with the existence of a response within four weeks, should the member in question continue to be persistently inactive (see condition a) above) up to and including the next plenary meeting (or a minimum six months), the status of the National Body shall, without exception, automatically be changed to that of O‑member.

A National Body whose status is so changed may, after a period of 12 months, indicate to the Office of the CEO that it wishes to regain the P‑membership of the committee, in which case this shall be granted.

NOTE 2 1.7.4 does not apply to the development of Guides.

1.7.5 For votes by correspondence or during a committee meeting, a simple majority of the P‑members voting is required for approval unless otherwise specified in the ISO/IEC Directives.

For strategic matters (e.g. changing the scope of a document or the scope of a committee, change of allocation of a project), a discussion among committee members should first take place before a formal committee decision is taken.

When a document is out for ballot or for commenting at the committee stage, formal discussion during official meetings or distribution of positions using official ISO and IEC IT tools is prohibited. This does not prohibit discussion on sections of the document that are not out for ballot or comment.

In all votes, abstentions are not counted.

A vote by correspondence should include the possibility to abstain.

Proxy voting is not permitted.

1.7.6 In certain cases, consensus may be confirmed for questions which are expected to contain no controversial issues and for which agreement of the committee is foreseen in advance. Such questions may be distributed for a period of four weeks. If no objection is received during this period, the question is considered to be approved. If any committee P-member objects to the question during this period, the Secretary/Committee Manager shall withdraw the question immediately and resolve the question by vote, either at a meeting or by correspondence. P-members wishing to raise an objection to a consent question are requested to notify the responsible Secretary/Committee Manager as soon as possible to prevent undue delays.

1.8 Chairs of technical committees and subcommittees

1.8.1 Appointment

Chairs of technical committees shall be nominated by the secretariat of the technical committee and approved by the technical management board for a maximum period of six years or for such shorter period as may be appropriate. Extensions of up to three years are allowed.

Chairs of subcommittees shall be nominated by the secretariat of the subcommittee and approved by the technical committee for a maximum period of six years or for such shorter period as may be appropriate. Extensions of up to three years are allowed. The approval criterion for both appointment and extension is a two-thirds majority vote of the technical committee P‑members voting.

Secretariats are encouraged to consider a Chair candidate from a P-member other than their own. When choosing a Chair candidate, secretariats shall select the candidate in accordance with Annex L.

An individual is allowed to serve a maximum total of nine years as Chair of the same committee. 12 months before a committee Chair's term ends — or when a vacancy arises — the Office of the CEO asks the Secretariat if they will nominate a new candidate or propose an extension. When the Secretariat has no identified candidate, the Secretariat may issue a 12-week call for nominations, which will include a CV and a short motivation statement.

Secretariats of committees may submit nominations for new Chairs up to one year before the end of the term of existing Chairs. Chairs appointed one year before shall be designated as the "Chair elect" of the committee in question. This is intended to provide the Chair elect with an opportunity to learn before taking over as Chair of a committee.

1.8.2 Responsibilities

The Chair of a technical committee is responsible for the overall management of that technical committee, including any subcommittees and working groups.

The Chair of a committee shall

• a) act in a purely international capacity, divesting themselves of a national position; thus, the Chair cannot serve concurrently as the delegate of a National Body in their own committee;
• b) guide the Secretary/Committee Manager of that committee in carrying out their duties;
• c) conduct committee meetings with a view to reaching an agreement on committee drafts (see 2.5);
• d) ensure at meetings that all points of view expressed are adequately summarized so that they are understood by all present;
• e) ensure at meetings that all decisions are clearly formulated and made available in written form by the Secretary/Committee Manager for confirmation during the meeting;
• f) take appropriate decisions at the committee stage (see 2.5) and enquiry stage (see 2.6);
• g) advise the technical management board on important matters relating to that technical committee via the technical committee secretariat. For this purpose, the Chair shall receive reports from the Chairs of any subcommittees via the subcommittee secretariats;
• h) ensure that the policy and strategic decisions of the technical management board are implemented in the committee;
• i) ensure the establishment and ongoing maintenance of a strategic business plan covering the activities of the technical committee and all groups reporting to the technical committee, including all subcommittees;
• j) ensure the appropriate and consistent implementation and application of the committee's strategic business plan to the activities of the technical committee's or subcommittee's work programme;
• k) assist in the case of an appeal against a committee decision.

The Chair has no vote, and questions on which the vote is equally divided shall be subject to further discussion.

In case of unforeseen unavailability of the Chair at a meeting, an acting Chair may be proposed by the Secretary/Committee Manager and approved by the committee for the meeting. SC Chairs shall attend meetings of the parent committee as required and may participate in the discussion but do not have the right to vote. In exceptional circumstances, if a Chair is prevented from attending, the Chair shall delegate the Secretary/Committee Manager to represent the subcommittee. In the case where no representative from the SC can attend, a written report shall be provided.

1.8.3 Vice-Chair

The Chair and Secretary/Committee Manager may propose one or more Vice-Chairs to support the committee, to be approved by a two-thirds majority of the P-members voting.

Committees have flexibility in defining a Vice-Chair's role, but responsibilities shall be substantive, not ceremonial, and clearly outlined when nominating a candidate.

The Chair remains responsible for the tasks of Chair, and the Vice-Chair cannot assume the Chair's responsibilities. Appointment as Vice-Chair does not guarantee succession to Chair.

A Vice-Chair is initially appointed for a term of up to three years. The Chair and Secretary/Committee Manager may propose that a tenure as Vice-Chair be extended for one or two additional terms of up to three years each. An individual is allowed to serve a maximum total of nine years as Vice-Chair of the same committee.

1.9 Secretariats of technical committees and subcommittees

1.9.1 Allocation

The secretariat of a technical committee shall be allocated to a National Body by the technical management board.

The secretariat of a subcommittee shall be allocated to a National Body by the parent technical committee. However, if two or more National Bodies offer to undertake the secretariat of the same subcommittee, the technical management board shall decide on the allocation of the subcommittee secretariat.

For both technical committees and subcommittees, the secretariat shall be allocated to a National Body only if that National Body

• a) has indicated its intention to participate actively in the work of that committee, and
• b) has accepted that it will fulfil its responsibilities as secretariat and is in a position to ensure that adequate resources are available for secretariat work (see D.2).

Once the secretariat of a committee has been allocated to a National Body, the latter shall appoint a qualified individual as Secretary/Committee Manager (see D.1 and D.3).

Secretaries/Committee Managers shall have the competencies and attributes listed in L.3.3.

1.9.2 Responsibilities

The National Body to which the secretariat has been allocated shall ensure the provision of technical and administrative services to its respective committee.

The secretariat is responsible for monitoring, reporting, and ensuring the active progress of the work and shall use its utmost endeavour to bring this work to an early and satisfactory conclusion. These tasks shall be carried out as far as possible by correspondence.

The secretariat is responsible for ensuring that the ISO/IEC Directives and the decisions of the technical management board are followed.

A secretariat shall act in a purely international capacity, divesting itself of a national position.

The secretariat is responsible for the following (non-exhaustive list), to be executed in a timely manner.

• a) Working documents (see Annex I):

1. preparation of committee drafts, arranging for their distribution and the treatment of the comments received;
2. preparation of enquiry drafts and text for the circulation of the final draft International Standards or publication of International Standards.

• b) Project management:

1. assisting in the establishment of priorities and target dates for each project;
2. notifying the names, etc., of all working group Convenors and Project Leaders to the Office of the CEO;
3. proposing proactively the publication of alternative documents or cancellation of projects that are running significantly over time and/or which appear to lack sufficient support.

• c) Meetings (see also Clause 5):

1. establishing the agenda and arranging for its distribution;
2. arranging for the distribution of all documents on the agenda, including report/minutes of working groups, and indicating all other documents which are necessary for discussion during the meeting (see E.5);
3. regarding the decisions (also referred to as resolutions) taken in a meeting:

1. ensuring that the decisions endorsing working group recommendations contain the specific elements being endorsed;
2. making the decisions available in writing for confirmation during the meeting (see E.5); and
3. posting the decisions within 48 hours after the meeting in the committee's electronic folder;

4. preparation of the report/minutes of meetings to be circulated within four weeks after the meeting;
5. in case of unforeseen unavailability of the Secretary/Committee Manager at a meeting (if the Secretariat is unable to provide a replacement), an acting Secretary/Committee Manager may be appointed by the committee for the meeting.

• d) Decisions:

1. ensuring that:

1. all resolutions are clearly drafted, reviewed, and presented;
2. all decisions taken by the committee, whether at a plenary meeting or by correspondence, are documented and traceable through committee resolutions or numbered documents reporting the results of a committee decision.

• e) Advising:

1. providing advice to the Chair, Project Leaders, and Convenors on procedures associated with the progression of projects.

In all circumstances, each secretariat shall work closely with the Chair of its committee. The secretariat and the Chair are jointly responsible for the effective management of the committee.

The secretariat of a technical committee shall maintain close contact with the Office of the CEO and with the members of the technical committee regarding its activities, including those of its subcommittees and working groups.

The secretariat of a subcommittee shall maintain close contact with the secretariat of the parent technical committee and, as necessary, with the Office of the CEO. It shall also maintain contact with the members of the subcommittee regarding its activities, including those of its working groups.

The secretariat of a committee shall update in conjunction with the Office of the CEO the record of the status of the membership of the committee.

1.9.3 Change of secretariat of a technical committee

If a National Body wishes to relinquish the secretariat of a technical committee, the National Body concerned shall immediately inform the Chief Executive Officer, giving a minimum of 12 months' notice. The technical management board decides on the transfer of the secretariat to another National Body.

If the secretariat of a technical committee persistently fails to fulfil its responsibilities as set out in these procedures, the Chief Executive Officer or a National Body may have the matter placed before the technical management board, which may review the allocation of the secretariat with a view to its possible transfer to another National Body.

1.9.4 Change of secretariat of a subcommittee

If a National Body wishes to relinquish the secretariat of a subcommittee, the National Body concerned shall immediately inform the secretariat of the parent technical committee, giving a minimum of 12 months' notice.

If the secretariat of a subcommittee persistently fails to fulfil its responsibilities as set out in these procedures, the Chief Executive Officer or a National Body may have the matter placed before the parent technical committee, which may decide, by a majority vote of the P‑members voting, that the secretariat of the subcommittee should be re-allocated.

In either of the above cases an enquiry shall be made by the secretariat of the technical committee to obtain offers from other P‑members of the subcommittee for undertaking the secretariat.

If two or more National Bodies offer to undertake the secretariat of the same subcommittee or if, because of the structure of the technical committee, the re-allocation of the secretariat is linked with the re‑allocation of the technical committee secretariat, the technical management board decides on the re‑allocation of the subcommittee secretariat. If only one offer is received, the parent technical committee itself proceeds with the appointment.

1.10 Project committees

Project committees are established by the technical management board to prepare individual documents not falling within the scope of an existing committee.

Such documents carry one reference number but may be subdivided into parts.

Procedures for project committees are given in Annex K.

Project committees wishing to be transformed into a technical committee shall follow the process for the establishment of a new technical committee (see 1.5).

1.11 Editing groups

It is recommended that committees establish one or more editing groups for the purpose of updating and editing committee drafts, enquiry drafts and final draft International Standards and for ensuring their conformity to the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2 (see also 2.6.6).

Such groups should comprise at least

• one Expert fluent in English and having adequate knowledge of French;
• one Expert fluent in French and having adequate knowledge of English;
• other members at the discretion of the committee.

The Project Leader and/or Secretary/Committee Manager may take direct responsibility for one of the language versions concerned.

Editing groups shall meet when required by the respective committee secretariat for the purpose of updating and editing drafts which have been accepted by correspondence for further processing.

Editing groups shall be equipped with means of processing and providing texts electronically (see also 2.6.6).

1.12 Working groups

1.12.1 Committees may establish, by decision of the committee, working groups for specific projects (see 2.4, 2.5, 2.6, Clause 3 and Clause 4). Working groups shall be numbered in sequence in the order in which they are established. A new working group (WG) or joint working group (JWG) shall not be established for preliminary work items (see 2.2). A WG operates by consensus, reports and gives recommendations, if any, to its parent committee through a WG Convenor appointed by the parent committee. The Convenor shall act in a purely international capacity, divesting themselves of a national position.

WG Convenors shall be appointed by the committee for up to three-year terms. Such appointments shall be confirmed by their National Body (or liaison). The Convenor may be reappointed for additional terms of up to three years. There is no limit to the number of terms. Prior to the expiry of the term, the Secretary/Committee Manager shall issue a six-week minimum call to identify any candidates who wish to be considered for the position. If multiple candidates are nominated, the committee shall appoint a Convenor from among the candidates.

Responsibility for any changes of Convenors rests with the committee and not with the National Body (or liaison). When a WG Convenor's term ends or if the position becomes vacant, the Secretary/Committee Manager shall launch a six-week minimum call to identify new candidates. If a candidate is already known, the Secretary/Committee Manager may combine the decision of the committee to appoint the Convenor with the call to identify any additional candidates for the WG. If any additional nominations are made or if the appointment is not approved by the committee, the Secretary/Committee Manager shall launch a subsequent six-week ballot and the candidate with the highest number of votes will be appointed.

If a WG has an unexpected vacancy in the convenorship, the committee leadership may appoint an acting Convenor, while launching a call to identify candidates. Any such acting Convenor shall only be permitted for a maximum term of six months.

The Convenor may be supported by a WG Secretary as needed.

The nomination of the WG Secretary shall be confirmed by their National Body.

A WG comprises a number of Experts individually appointed by the P‑members, category A liaison and Liaison Representatives from committees in liaison (see 1.15 and 1.16) and category C organizations (see 1.17). The WG deals with a specific task allocated to it.

The Experts appointed by a P-member or category A liaison act in a personal capacity and not as the official representative of them. The Liaison Representatives appointed by a category C liaison or committees in liaison act as official representatives of the organizations by which they have been appointed. It is recommended that the Experts and Liaison Representatives keep close contact with that P‑member or liaison to inform them about the progress of the work and of the various opinions in the WG at the earliest possible stage.

It is recommended that WGs be reasonably limited in size. The committee may therefore decide upon the maximum number of Experts appointed by each P‑member and liaison organization.

Once the decision to set up a WG has been taken, P‑members and category A and category C liaisons shall be officially informed to appoint Expert(s) or Liaison Representatives.

When a committee has decided to set up a WG, it shall ensure that a Convenor or an acting Convenor is appointed at the same time the WG is set up. The Convenor shall arrange for the first meeting of the WG to be held within 12 weeks. This information shall be communicated immediately after the committee's decision to the P‑members and category A and category C liaisons, with an invitation to appoint Experts within six weeks. Additional projects may be assigned, where appropriate, to existing WGs.

WGs may establish subgroups.

1.12.2 The composition of the WG is defined in the ISO Global Directory (GD) or in the IEC Expert Management System (EMS) as appropriate. Experts not registered to a WG in the ISO GD or the IEC EMS, as appropriate, shall not participate in its work.

Convenors may invite a specific guest to participate in up to two meetings to provide relevant expertise to the WG and shall notify the guest's National Body of the invitation ahead of the meeting via the Office of the CEO (copying the Secretary/Committee Manager of the committee).

If the ongoing participation of a guest is necessary, such participation shall be as a WG Expert via the appropriate National Body or a liaison.

1.12.3 Convenors should review the participation in the WG at regular intervals to identify persistently inactive P-member Experts.

Convenors shall report inactive P-member Experts to the Secretary/Committee Manager for the follow-up action with the relevant P-members through the Office of the CEO. In the absence of satisfactory responses from the relevant P-members, the inactive P-member Experts shall be removed by the Office of the CEO. Such P-member Experts shall not be eligible for reappointment to the WG in which they were inactive by the respective P-member for a period of one year.

In case of lack of Experts from the required number of P-members in the WG to meet the minimum number (as defined in 2.3.5), the Convenor shall inform the committee secretariat, who shall launch another call for Experts.

If the subsequent call for Experts from the required number of P-members fails, the Convenor shall consult with the committee secretariat to decide if the project can or should continue.

If the decision is to continue with Experts from fewer than the required number of P-members, the committee secretariat shall request permission from the technical management board to proceed.

1.12.4 Six months after the completion of its last project, a WG shall be disbanded by the Office of the CEO unless a justification has been provided by the Secretary/Committee Manager regarding an ongoing preliminary work item or an upcoming new and maintenance project.

1.12.5 Distribution of the internal documents of a WG and of its report/minutes shall be carried out in accordance with 5.4.

1.12.6 WGs should use current electronic means to carry out their work wherever possible. For transparency and traceability, the electronic platform provided by the Office of the CEO shall be used for the circulation of WG documents and communication with members.

1.12.7 Joint working groups: In special cases, a joint working group (JWG) may be established to undertake a specific project (see 2.4, 2.5, 2.6, Clause 3 and Clause 4) in which more than one committee is interested. A JWG can be established between ISO committees, between IEC committees, between ISO and IEC committees and joint committees. Committees who receive requests to establish a JWG shall reply to such requests in a timely manner.

For specific rules concerning JWGs between ISO committees and IEC committees, see Annex B in addition to the following.

The decision to establish a JWG shall be accompanied by mutual agreement between the committees on the following:

• the committee/organization having the administrative responsibility for the JWG or for project(s) assigned to the JWG;
• whether the JWG will commence its work with a single Convenor or with Co-Convenors appointed from each committee;

Co-Convenors from each committee may be appointed at any time. The appointed (Co‑)Convenor(s) shall seek consensus from all Experts involved to organize the work and schedule meetings.

• the membership of the JWG.

Membership is open to P-members, representatives appointed by liaison committees in accordance with 1.15.4, category A liaisons of the respective committees, and category C liaisons that wish to participate. The number of representatives may be limited to an equal number from each committee if agreed upon by concerned committees.

The committee with the administrative responsibility for the project shall:

• record the project in their work programme;
• prepare drafts for the committee, enquiry, and approval stages;
• be responsible for addressing comments (usually referred back to the JWG) and ensuring that the comments and votes at all stages of the project are compiled and handled appropriately (see 2.5, 2.6 and 2.7 and 3.1.2, 3.2.2 and 0) — all comments are made available to the leadership of the committees;
• make available all relevant documents (for example, report/minutes, working drafts, drafts for the committee, enquiry and approval stages) to the secretariat of the other committee(s) for circulation in their respective committee and/or for action;
• be responsible for the maintenance of the publication.

Subsequent major changes to a jointly developed project, such as the change of scope, document, etc., shall be decided by all committees involved in the JWG.

For the proposal stage

• For JWGs where all involved committees are administered by the same organization, there shall be only one new work item proposal (NP) ballot. If an NP has already been approved or its ballot launched in one committee, it cannot be balloted again in another committee.
• For JWGs where the involved committees are administered by different organizations, there shall be an NP ballot in each organization (or a resolution, as appropriate, in each committee for a PAS or TR).
• It is possible to establish a JWG at a later stage, in which case its administrative responsibility will be confirmed by the committees concerned. In the case of an ISO/IEC JWG, the committee that is yet to join the work will still need to launch an NP ballot.
• Once the joint work is agreed upon, the committee with the administrative responsibility informs the relevant Office of the CEO of its administrative responsibility and of the committees participating in the work.
• The other committees launch a call for Experts for participation in the JWG.

For the preparatory stage

• The JWG functions any other WG: JWG consensus is required to advance to committee stage.

For the committee stage

• The committee draft (CD) is circulated for review and comment by each committee.
• After the CD consultation, the (Co-)Convenor(s) and the JWG shall address all the input received.
• The final CD requires consensus by all committees, as defined in the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 1.

For enquiry and approval ballots

• National Bodies are requested to consult all national mirror committees involved to define one position. A statement is included on the cover page to draw the attention of National Bodies.
• For an ISO/IEC JWG, two ballots are launched, i.e. one in each organization.
• For a JWG where all involved committees are administered by the same organization, a single ballot is launched in the committee having the administrative responsibility only.
• After the ballot, the (Co-)Convenor(s) and the JWG shall address all the input received.

The Foreword identifies all committees involved in the development of the document.

In cases when the ballot fails in one or both of the organizations, the committees shall attempt to reach an agreement on the next steps in accordance with 2.6 and 2.7. If an agreement cannot be reached, each committee shall decide how it will proceed with the project.

1.13 Groups having advisory functions within a committee

1.13.1 A group having advisory functions may be established by a committee to assist the Chair and secretariat in tasks concerning coordination, planning and steering of the committee's work or other specific tasks of an advisory nature.

1.13.2 A proposal to establish such a group shall include recommendations regarding its constitution and terms of reference, including criteria for membership, bearing in mind the requirement for sufficient representation of affected interests while at the same time limiting its size as far as possible to ensure its efficient operation. Members of advisory groups may include committee officers, individuals nominated by National Bodies (either individuals representing their own Expert opinion or individuals representing the interests of their National Body) and Liaison Representatives. The committee shall approve the appointment of the Convenor, the type of membership and the terms of reference prior to the establishment of the advisory group and nominations to it.

For advisory groups, consideration shall be given to the provision of equitable participation.

1.13.3 The tasks allocated to such a group may include the making of proposals relating to the drafting or harmonization of publications (in particular International Standards, Technical Specifications, Publicly Available Specifications and Technical Reports) but shall not include the preparation of such documents.

1.13.4 The results of such a group shall be presented in the form of recommendations to the committee. The recommendations may include proposals for the establishment of a working group (see 1.12) or a joint working group (see 1.12.7) for the preparation of publications.

1.13.5 The internal documents of a group having advisory functions shall be distributed to its members only, with a copy to the secretariat of the committee concerned and to the Office of the CEO.

1.13.6 Such a group shall be disbanded once its specified tasks have been completed and agreed upon by the parent committee.

1.14 Ad hoc groups

Committees may establish ad hoc groups to study a precisely defined problem on which the group reports to its parent committee.

Members of ad hoc groups may include committee officers, individuals nominated by National Bodies (as appropriate, either individuals representing their own Expert opinion or individuals representing the interests of their National Body) and Liaison Representatives. The committee shall approve the appointment of the Convenor, type of membership, terms of reference and target date for completion of the work prior to the establishment of the ad hoc group and nominations to it.

The committee shall disband the ad hoc group when it has completed its work.

1.15 Liaison between ISO committees or between IEC committees (internal liaison)

1.15.1 Committees working in related fields shall establish and maintain liaison. Liaisons shall also be established, where appropriate, with committees responsible for basic aspects of standardization (e.g. terminology, graphical symbols). Liaison shall include the exchange of documents, including new work item proposals and working drafts.

Committees shall take an official decision on the establishment or removal of an internal liaison. Following such a decision, the committee secretariat will inform the target committee of the request for liaison establishment and the Liaison Representative(s). Committees receiving requests for internal liaisons shall automatically accept such requests. A notification of this acceptance shall be forwarded to the Office of the CEO and the requesting committee.

1.15.2 The maintenance of such liaison is the responsibility of the respective technical committee secretariats, which may delegate the task to the secretariats of the subcommittees.

1.15.3 A committee should designate a Liaison Representative or Liaison Representatives to follow the work of another committee with which a liaison has been established or one or several of its subcommittees. The designation of such Liaison Representatives shall be notified to the secretariat of the committee concerned, which shall communicate all relevant documents to the Liaison Representative(s) and to the secretariat of that committee. The appointed Liaison Representative shall make progress reports to the secretariat by which they have been appointed.

1.15.4 Such Liaison Representatives shall have the right to participate in the meetings of the committee whose work they have been appointed to follow but shall not have the right to vote. They may contribute to the discussion in meetings, including the submission of written comments on matters within the competence of their own committee and based on feedback that they have collected from their own committee. They may also participate in working groups of the committee, but their involvement is limited to contributing the viewpoint of their own committee on matters within its competence.

1.15.5 Committees may establish liaisons with the IEC Conformity Assessment systems or ISO Committee on Conformity Assessment (CASCO) when appropriate. These liaisons shall be handled as described in 1.15.1 and 1.15.4.

1.15.6 Liaisons shall be reviewed at least annually, or at each plenary meeting for committees that meet less than once per year. The review includes determining that the liaison is still viable and the Liaison Representative role is fulfilled.

1.16 Liaison between ISO committees and IEC committees

1.16.1 Arrangements for adequate liaison between ISO and IEC committees are essential. The channel of correspondence for the establishment of liaison between ISO and IEC technical committees and subcommittees is through the Office of the CEO. As far as the study of new subjects by either organization is concerned, the Office of the CEO seeks agreement between the two organizations whenever a new or revised work programme is contemplated in one organization which may be of interest to the other so that the work will go forward without overlap or duplication of effort (see also Annex B).

Secretariats are responsible for the establishment and termination of liaisons between their committees and other committees of ISO and IEC but shall also inform the committee leadership.

1.16.2 Liaison Representatives designated by ISO or IEC shall have the right to participate in the discussions of the other organization's committee whose work they have been designated to follow and may submit written comments; they shall not have the right to vote.

They may also attend meetings of working groups of the committee, but only to contribute the viewpoint of their own committee on matters within its competence.

1.17 Liaison with other organizations

1.17.1 General requirements applicable to all liaisons with other organizations

To be effective, liaison shall operate in both directions, with suitable reciprocal arrangements.

The desirability of liaison shall be taken into account at an early stage of the work.

The liaison organization shall accept the policy based on the ISO/IEC Directives concerning copyright (see 2.10), whether owned by the liaison organization or by other parties. The statement on copyright policy will be provided to the liaison organization with an invitation to make an explicit statement as to its acceptability. The liaison organization is not entitled to charge a fee for documents submitted.

A liaison organization shall be willing to make a contribution to the technical work of ISO or IEC as appropriate. A liaison organization shall have a sufficient degree of representativity within its defined area of competence within a sector or subsector of the relevant technical or industrial field.

A liaison organization shall agree to ISO/IEC procedures, including copyright (see 2.10) and intellectual property rights (IPR).

Liaison organizations shall accept the requirements of 2.11 on patent rights.

Committees shall review all their liaison arrangements on a regular basis, at least every two years, or at every committee meeting.

1.17.2 Different categories of liaison

The categories of liaison are as follows.

• Category A: Organizations that make an effective contribution to the work of the committee for questions dealt with by this committee. Such organizations are given access to all relevant documentation and are invited to meetings. They may nominate Experts to participate in WGs (see 1.12.1).
• Category B: Organizations that have indicated a wish to be kept informed of the work of the committee. Such organizations are given access to the committee documents.

NOTE Category B is reserved for inter-governmental organizations.

• Category C: Organizations that make a technical contribution to and participate actively in only a specific working group.

The procedure for the establishment of liaisons is as follows:

• The organization wishing to create a liaison shall send a liaison application form to the Office of the CEO with copies to the committee officers.
• Invariably, the organization will have been in contact with the committee officers prior to submitting its application, and in these cases, the committee officers should ensure that the organization is aware of their obligations as given in 1.17.1, i.e. copyright, agreeing to ISO/IEC procedures including intellectual property rights, and patent rights.
• The Office of the CEO will confirm that the eligibility criteria have been fulfilled and then consult with the National Body of the country where the organization making the application has its headquarters.
• In case of objection from the National Body where the organization making the application has its headquarters, the matter will be referred to the technical management board for decision.
• If there is no objection from the National Body where the organization making the application has its headquarters, the application will be sent to the committee Secretary/Committee Manager with a request to circulate it for the vote.

The liaison application form is available on the ISO [3] and IEC [4] websites.

1.17.3 Acceptance

Agreement to establish category A, B and C liaisons requires approval of the application by a two-thirds majority of the P‑members voting. When deciding to establish category A, B or C liaison, committees should also nominate the Liaison Representative(s).

Committees are urged to seek out the participation of all parties at the beginning of the development of a work item. Where a request for category C liaison is submitted late in the development stage of a particular work item, the P‑members will consider the value that can be added by the organization in question despite its late involvement in the working group.

1.17.4 Rights and obligations

1.17.4.1 At the committee level (category A and B liaisons)

Liaison Representatives act in a pure Liaison Representative capacity and shall divest themselves of national positions.

Committees shall seek the full and, if possible, formal backing of the organizations having liaison status for each document in which the latter is interested.

Any comments from liaison organizations should be given the same treatment as comments from National Bodies. It should not be assumed that refusal by a liaison organization to provide its full backing is a sustained opposition. Where such objections are considered sustained oppositions, committees are invited to refer to 2.5.7 for further guidance.

1.17.4.2 At the working group level (category C liaisons)

Liaison Representatives act in a pure liaison capacity and shall divest themselves of positions other than those of their liaison organization. They may only attend committee plenary meetings if expressly invited by the committee to attend. If they are invited by the committee to attend, they may only attend as observers.

Category C Liaison Representatives have the right to participate in a working group (see 1.12.1) but not as Project Leaders or Convenors.

1.17.5 Carrying over liaisons when a project committee is converted into a technical committee or a subcommittee.

When a project committee is converted to a technical committee or a subcommittee, the new committee shall pass a resolution confirming which category A and B liaisons are carried over. Approval of the resolution requires a two-thirds majority of P‑members voting.

Table 1 presents a summary of the different categories of liaison with other organizations.

1.17.6 Eligibility

1.17.6.1 At the committee level (category A and B liaisons)

When an organization applies for a liaison with a committee, the Office of the CEO will check with the National Body in the country in which the organization is located. If the National Body does not agree that the eligibility criteria have been met, the matter will be referred to the technical management board to define the eligibility.

The Office of the CEO will also ensure that the organization meets the following eligibility criteria:

• it is not-for-profit;
• it is a legal entity — the Office of the CEO will request a copy of its statutes;
• it is membership-based and open to members worldwide or over a broad region;
• through its activities and membership, it demonstrates that it has the competence and expertise to contribute to the development of International Standards or the authority to promote their implementation; and
• it has a process for stakeholder engagement and consensus decision-making to develop the input it provides (see [9]).

1.17.6.2 At the working group level (category C liaisons)

When an organization applies for a liaison with a working group, the Office of the CEO will check with the National Body in the country in which the organization is located and will ensure that the organization meets the following eligibility criteria:

• it is not-for-profit;
• through its activities and membership, it demonstrates that it has the competence and expertise to contribute to the development of International Standards or the authority to promote their implementation; and
• has a process for stakeholder engagement and consensus decision-making to develop the input it provides (see [9]).

This can include, for example, manufacturer associations, commercial associations, industrial consortia, user groups and professional and scientific societies. Liaison organizations shall be multinational (in their objectives and standards development activities) with individual, company or country membership and may be permanent or transient in nature.

1.17.7 Periodic confirmation

Category A, B and C liaisons shall be reviewed at least annually, or at each plenary meeting for committees that meet less than once per year. The review includes determining that the liaison is still viable and the Liaison Representative role is fulfilled.

1.17.8 Termination

In the event that either organization (committee, committee subgroup, or the external organization) feels that the Category A, B and C liaisons should be terminated, this situation shall be immediately discussed with the other organization. If a satisfactory solution cannot be obtained, the committee, committee subgroup or the external organization may terminate the liaison unilaterally.

2 Development of International Standards

2.1 The project approach

2.1.1 General

The primary duty of a committee is the development and maintenance of International Standards. However, committees are also strongly encouraged to consider the publication of intermediate documents as described in Clause 3.

International Standards shall be developed on the basis of a project approach as described below.

2.1.2 Strategic business plan

Each technical committee shall prepare a strategic business plan for its own specific field of activity, which shall include inputs from its subcommittees if any:

• a) taking into account the business environment in which it is developing its work programme;
• b) indicating those areas of the work programme which are expanding, those which have been completed, those nearing completion or in steady progress, and those which have not progressed and should be cancelled (see also 2.1.10);
• c) evaluating revision work needed;
• d) giving a prospective view on emerging needs.

The strategic business plan shall be formally agreed upon by the technical committee and be included in its report/minutes for review and approval by the technical management board on a regular basis.

2.1.3 Project stages

Table 2 shows the sequence of project stages through which the technical work is developed and gives the name of the document associated with each project stage. The development of Technical Specifications, Technical Reports and Publicly Available Specifications is described in Clause 3.

2.1.4 Project description and acceptance

A project is any work intended to lead to the issue of a new, amended or revised document (see ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2:2021, 3.1.1). A project may subsequently be subdivided (see also 2.1.5.4).

A project shall be undertaken only if a proposal has been accepted in accordance with the relevant procedures (see 2.3 for proposals for new work items and Clause 4 for review and maintenance).

2.1.5 Work programme

2.1.5.1 The work programme of a committee comprises all projects allocated to that committee, including the maintenance of published documents.

2.1.5.2 In establishing its work programme, each committee shall consider sectoral planning requirements and requests for International Standards initiated by sources outside the committee, i.e. other committees, advisory groups of the technical management board, policy-level committees and organizations outside ISO and IEC (see also 2.1.2).

2.1.5.3 Projects shall be within the agreed scope of the committee. Their selection shall be subject to close scrutiny in accordance with the policy objectives and resources of ISO and IEC (see also Annex C).

2.1.5.4 Each project in the work programme shall be given a number and shall be retained in the work programme under that number until the work on that project is completed or its cancellation has been agreed upon. During the development of the project, the committee may decide to subdivide its number if it is subsequently found necessary to subdivide the project itself. The subdivisions of the work shall lie fully within the scope of the original project; otherwise, a new work item proposal shall be made. The original project shall be cancelled after subdivision. If the committee subsequently wishes to re-consolidate the subdivided parts into a single document, consolidation shall be done before the approval stage, at the latest.

2.1.5.5 The work programme shall indicate, if appropriate, the subcommittee and/or working group to which each project is allocated.

2.1.5.6 The agreed work programme of a new technical committee shall be submitted to the technical management board for approval.

2.1.6 Target dates

2.1.6.1 General

The committee shall establish, for each project in its work programme, target dates for the completion of each of the following steps:

• circulation of the first working draft (in the event that only an outline of a working document has been provided by the proposer of the new work item proposal — see 2.3);
• circulation of the committee draft (if any);
• submission of the enquiry draft;
• submission of the final draft International Standard;
• publication (in agreement with the Office of the CEO).

These target dates shall correspond to the shortest possible development times to produce International Standards rapidly and shall be reported to the Office of the CEO, which distributes the information to all National Bodies.

In establishing target dates, the relationships between projects shall be taken into account. Priority shall be given to those projects intended to lead to International Standards upon which other International Standards will depend for their implementation. The highest priority shall be given to those projects having a significant effect on international trade and recognized as such by the technical management board.

The technical management board may also instruct the secretariat of the committee concerned to submit the latest available draft to the Office of the CEO for publication as a Technical Specification (see 3.1).

All target dates shall be kept under continuous review and amended as necessary and shall be clearly indicated in the work programme. Revised target dates shall be notified to the technical management board.

All work items (excluding PWIs) which have been in the work programme for more than 36 months (limit date) and have not reached the approval stage (see 2.7) shall be automatically cancelled by the Office of the CEO. If the project has not reached the enquiry stage six months prior to the limit date, the project shall be automatically cancelled by the Office of the CEO.

A single extension of up to 12 months can be given for an International Standard project on request by the Secretary/Committee Manager of the committee to the Office of the CEO.

Committees should follow the good practices document [10] for effective management of projects.

Time spent on interlaboratory testing during the development of a document shall not be counted in the overall development time. The project is given the status "on hold" on request from the Secretary/Committee Manager of the committee. The status of interlaboratory testing shall be reviewed at each plenary meeting of the committee.

2.1.6.2 Project plan

When a proposed new project is approved (whether for a new document or for the amendment or revision of an existing document), when submitting the results to the Office of the CEO, the committee secretariat shall provide an appropriate project plan.

Committee secretariats are reminded to perform risk assessments during project planning to identify potential problems in advance and set the target dates accordingly. The target dates shall be kept under continuous review by committee secretariats, which shall ensure that they are reviewed and either confirmed or revised at each committee meeting. Such reviews shall also seek to confirm that projects are still market relevant. In cases in which they are found to be no longer required or if the likely completion date will be too late, thus causing market players to adopt an alternative solution, the projects shall be cancelled or transformed into another document.

If a committee intends to include graphical symbols in its project, it shall follow the process outlined in 2.5.2 as soon as possible.

2.1.7 Project management

The secretariat of the committee is responsible for the management of all projects in the work programme of that committee, including monitoring their progress against the agreed target dates.

If target dates (see 2.1.6) are not met, and there is insufficient support for the work (that is, the acceptance requirements for new work given in 2.3.5 are no longer met), the committee responsible shall cancel the work item.

2.1.8 Project Leader

For the development of each project, one Project Leader shall be appointed by the committee, taking into account the Project Leader nomination made by the proposer of the new work item proposal (see 2.3.4). The Project Leader can be the WG Convenor, a designated Expert or, if appropriate, the Secretary/Committee Manager.

The Project Leader is responsible for managing the project's development. The key responsibilities include:

• a) managing the overall development of the project;
• b) convening any group meetings related to the project;
• c) reporting on progress, delays, or significant issues;
• d) remaining as Project Leader until the completion of the publication stage (see 2.8).

If no Project Editor (2.1.9) is appointed, the Project Leader shall assume the responsibilities of the Project Editor.

A change of Project Leader for an active project shall be approved by the committee as soon as possible. The Project Leader shall act in a purely international capacity, divesting themselves of a national position.

The secretariat shall inform the Office of the CEO of the contact information of the Project Leader with identification of the project concerned.

2.1.9 Project Editor

A Project Editor may be appointed by the committee to a project from the membership of the relevant group. The Project Editor is responsible for updating and editing documents and for ensuring their conformity to the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2. The Project Editor shall follow the editing instructions given by the group.

Project Editors shall act in a purely international capacity, divesting themselves of a national position.

2.1.10 Progress control

Periodical progress reports to the technical committee shall be made by its subcommittees and working groups. Meetings between their secretariats will assist in controlling the progress.

The Office of the CEO shall monitor the progress of all work and shall report periodically to the technical management board.

2.2 Preliminary stage

2.2.1 This optional stage may be used for the elaboration of a new work item proposal (see 2.3) and the development of an outline or initial draft. Preliminary work items (PWI) may also study, for example, subjects dealing with emerging technologies which are not yet sufficiently mature for processing to further stages and for which no target dates can be established. Such subjects may include, for example, those listed in the strategic business plan, particularly as given under 2.1.2 d) giving a prospective view on emerging needs. A preliminary stage does not always result in a new project.

2.2.2 Committees may introduce a PWI into their work programmes by a committee decision, whether at the plenary meeting or by correspondence. The committee decision shall capture the following information items: title, scope, information on the justification for the proposed PWI, assignment of a PWI to a subgroup of the committee, and any other committee information that is relevant.

2.2.3 Approved PWIs shall be registered into the work programme.

2.2.4 All PWIs shall be subject to regular review by the committee. The committee shall evaluate the market relevance and resources required for all such items.

All PWIs that have not progressed to the proposal stage within 24 months will be automatically cancelled from the work programme.

2.2.5 Before progressing to the preparatory stage, all PWIs shall be subject to approval in accordance with the procedures described in Clause 2 or Clause 3 depending on the appropriate document.

2.3 Proposal stage

In the case of proposals to prepare management system standards, see Annex Q.

2.3.1 A new work item proposal (NP) is a proposal for:

• a new International Standard (IS);
• a new Technical Specification (see 3.1).

An NP shall be circulated for a new International Standard or a new Technical Specification that is either an individual document or part of an existing series.

2.3.2 An NP within the scope of an existing committee may be made in the respective organization by:

• a National Body;
• the secretariat of that committee;
• another committee;
• an organization in category A liaison;
• the technical management board or one of its advisory groups;
• the Chief Executive Officer.

2.3.3 Where both an ISO and an IEC committee are concerned, the Chief Executive Officers shall arrange for the necessary coordination (see also Annex B).

2.3.4 Each NP shall be presented using the appropriate form and shall be fully justified and properly documented (see Annex C).

The proposers of the NP shall do the following:

• indicate alignment with the committee's strategic business plan. If alignment is not possible, the reasons shall be explained;
• make every effort to provide a first working draft for discussion, or shall at least provide an outline of such a working draft;
• nominate a Project Leader;
• discuss the proposal with the committee leadership prior to submitting the appropriate form, in order to decide on appropriate key milestones and the proposed date of the first meeting. The form shall be submitted to the Office of the CEO or to the secretariat of the relevant committee for proposals within the scope of an existing committee.
• The NP form shall indicate the proposed allocation of the project to a WG. This allocation shall be approved as part of the NP ballot; National Bodies shall either agree with the proposed allocation or propose an alternative when responding to the ballot.

The Office of the CEO or the relevant committee Chair and secretariat shall ensure that the proposal is properly developed in accordance with ISO and IEC requirements (see Annex C) and provides sufficient information to support informed decision-making by National Bodies.

The Office of the CEO or the relevant committee Chair and secretariat shall also assess the relationship of the proposal to the scope of the committee and to existing work, and may consult interested parties, including the technical management board, its advisory groups or committees conducting related existing work. If necessary, an ad hoc group may be established to examine the proposal. Any review of proposals should not exceed two weeks.

In all cases, the Office of the CEO or the relevant committee Chair and secretariat may also add comments and recommendations to the proposal form.

See Annex K for NPs for project committees.

Copies of the completed form shall be circulated to the members of the committee for the P‑member ballot and to the O‑members and liaison members for information.

For NPs voted at the subcommittee level, a copy of the subcommittee-level NP shall be made available to the parent committee for information in parallel with the NP ballot.

The proposed date of availability of the publication shall be indicated on the form.

A decision upon an NP shall be taken by correspondence.

The default period for NP ballot is 12 weeks. However, if necessary, the period for NP ballot may be decreased to eight weeks as decided by the committee Chair in consultation with the Secretary/Committee Manager, the Office of the CEO and the proposer.

When responding to the NP ballot, National Bodies shall provide a statement justifying their decision for negative votes ("justification statement"). If no such statement is provided, the negative vote of a National Body will not be counted.

2.3.5 Acceptance of a new work item requires both a) and b) below to be met.

• a) Approval of the work item by a two-thirds majority of the P-members voting. Abstentions are excluded when the votes are counted as well as negative votes not accompanied by a justification statement. The secretariat shall not make any judgements about the validity of the justification statement.
• b) A commitment to participate actively in the development of the project by nominating Experts in order to make an effective contribution from at least four P-members in committees with 16 or fewer P-members, and at least five P-members in committees with 17 or more P-members.

Individual committees may increase this minimum requirement of nominated Experts.

In cases where it can be documented that the industry and/or technical knowledge exists only with a very small number of P‑members, the committee may request permission from the technical management board that the work item be accepted with participation from fewer than four or five P-members.

The commitment to an active participation expressed in b) is counted only when the P-member has approved the work item in a).

In the event that a ballot has met criterion a) but has failed because it has not met criterion b), the proposer may ask the Secretary/Committee Manager, within two weeks after the close of the NP ballot, to issue a four-week ballot to gather additional commitments to participate. If the required number of commitments, as specified in b), from the P-members who voted approval on criterion a) is met, the NP is considered as approved.

2.3.6 Once an NP is accepted, it is registered in the work programme of the relevant committee as a new project with the appropriate priority. The agreed target dates (see 2.1.6) are indicated on the appropriate form. An approved project shall be allocated to an existing working group or a new working group.

The voting results will be reported to the Office of the CEO using the appropriate form within six weeks after the close of the ballot.

2.3.7 The inclusion of the project in the work programme concludes the proposal stage.

2.4 Preparatory stage

2.4.1 The preparatory stage covers the preparation of a working draft (WD) conforming to the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2.

2.4.2 When a new project is accepted, the Project Leader shall work with the nominated Experts.

2.4.3 If there is consensus that a scope of the document requires expansion or significant technical changes, this shall be confirmed by committee decision with a two-thirds majority of the P-members voting.

2.4.4 In responding to the proposal to set up a working group, those P‑members having agreed to participate actively [see 2.3.5 a)] shall each confirm their Expert(s). Other P‑members or category A liaisons may also nominate Expert(s) and category C liaisons may nominate Liaison Representatives.

2.4.5 The Project Leader is responsible for the development of the project and will normally lead any discussions of the working group related to the project. The Project Leader reports to the Convenor of the WG. The Project Leader may invite a member of the working group to act as its Secretary.

The stage continues until a consensus is reached on the WD.

2.4.6 The preparatory stage ends when working draft is available for circulation to the members of the committee as a first committee draft (CD) and is registered by the Office of the CEO. The committee may also decide to publish the final working draft as a TS (see 3.1) or as a PAS (see 3.2) to respond to particular market needs.

2.5 Committee stage

2.5.1 The committee stage is the principal stage at which comments from National Bodies are taken into consideration, with a view to reaching a consensus on the technical content. National Bodies shall, therefore, carefully study the texts of committee drafts and submit all pertinent comments at this stage.

A decision to omit the committee stage may be made on a case-by-case basis, weighing the benefits of having a more developed draft for circulation as the enquiry draft against the potential costs and delays of additional drafting and meetings. However, if omitting the committee stage could compromise consensus or document quality, the committee stage should not be omitted.

The Convenor or Project Leader should propose omitting the committee stage after consulting working group Experts to confirm consensus.

The final decision of omitting the committee stage is made by the Chair of the committee, in cooperation with its secretariat and the Project Leader or working group Convenor.

2.5.2 Any graphical symbol shall be submitted to the relevant ISO or IEC committee responsible for the registration of graphical symbols.

• a) Proposals for new or revised graphical symbols may be submitted by a committee, any liaison member of the committee concerned or any National Body (hereafter jointly called the "proposer").
• b) Each approved graphical symbol will be allocated a unique number to facilitate its management and identification through a register that provides information that can be retrieved in an electronic format.
• c) Conflicts with the relevant applicable requirements and guidelines for graphical symbols shall be resolved through liaison and dialogue between relevant responsible committees concerned at the earliest possible stage (see the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2:2021, 28.6).

For the list of relevant responsible committees, see the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2:2021, 28.6.

Proposers shall consult the responsible committee website for detailed procedures on how to submit their proposals.

Proposers shall submit their proposals to the committee responsible as soon as possible to allow for timely review and comment. It is recommended that this submission be made at the committee stage, and, in the case of an International Standard, it shall be no later than the enquiry stage.

Prior to submitting a graphical symbol proposal, the proposer shall:

• a) be able to demonstrate the need for the proposed graphical symbol;
• b) review the relevant ISO and/or IEC standards on graphical symbols (see the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2:2021, 28.6) to avoid ambiguity and/or overlap with existing standardized graphical symbols, and to check for consistency with any related graphical symbol or family of graphical symbols already standardized;
• c) create the proposed graphical symbol in accordance with the relevant standards and instructions, as these include design principles and criteria of acceptance.

2.5.3 As soon as it is available, a committee draft (CD) shall be circulated to all P‑members and O‑members of the committee for consultation, with a clear indication of the latest date for submission of replies.

The minimum and default period for CD circulation is eight weeks. However, if necessary, the CD circulation may be increased to a maximum of 16 weeks as decided by the Chair of the committee, in consultation with the Secretary/Committee Manager and the Project Leader or working group Convenor.

Comments shall be sent for preparation of the compilation of comments in accordance with the instructions given.

2.5.4 No more than four weeks after the closing date for submission of replies for each CD, the secretariat shall prepare the compilation of comments and arrange for its circulation to all P‑members and O‑members of the committee. When preparing this compilation, the Secretary/Committee Manager shall indicate their proposal, made in consultation with the Chair of the committee and the Project Leader, for proceeding with the project:

• a) to discuss the CD and comments at the next meeting of the appropriate group, which would typically be the working group to which the project is assigned, as determined by the committee for this purpose, or
• b) to circulate a revised CD for consideration, or
• c) to register the CD or revised CD for the enquiry stage (see 2.6).

In the case of b) and c), the secretariat shall indicate in the compilation of comments the action taken on each of the comments received. This shall be made available to all P‑members, if necessary, by the circulation of a revised compilation of comments no later than in parallel with the submission of a revised CD for consideration by the committee (case b)) or simultaneously with the submission of the finalized version of the draft (either the CD or revised CD prepared by the secretariat) to the Office of the CEO for registration for the enquiry stage (case c)).

Committees are required to respond to all comments received.

If, within eight weeks from the date of dispatch, two or more P‑members disagree with proposal b) or c) of the secretariat, the CD shall be discussed at a meeting.

2.5.5 If a CD is considered at a meeting either

• as specified in case a) in 2.5.4, or
• in case of disagreement with the secretariat's proposal as specified in case b) or c) in 2.5.4 by at least two P-members,

but agreement on it is not reached on that occasion, then a further CD incorporating decisions taken at the meeting shall be distributed within 12 weeks as specified in 2.5.3.

2.5.6 Consideration of successive drafts shall continue until a consensus of the P‑members as judged by the Chair has been obtained, or a decision to abandon or defer the project has been made.

Consideration of successive committee drafts should be focused on resolving the comments raised by National Bodies and liaisons for the purpose of achieving consensus among the P-members (see 2.5.3).

2.5.7 The decision to circulate an enquiry draft (see 2.6.1) shall be taken by the Chair of the committee on the basis of the consensus among the P-members.

It is the responsibility of the Chair of the committee, in consultation with the Secretary/Committee Manager of the committee and, if necessary, the Project Leader, to judge whether there is consensus bearing in mind the definition of consensus given in ISO/IEC Guide 2:2004 [11].

"consensus": general agreement, characterized by the absence of sustained opposition to substantial issues by any important part of the concerned interests and by a process that involves seeking to take into account the views of all parties concerned and to reconcile any conflicting arguments

NOTE Consensus need not imply unanimity.

The following applies to the definition of consensus:

In the process of reaching a consensus, many different points of view will be expressed and addressed as the document evolves. However, "sustained oppositions" are views expressed at minuted meetings of the committee, working group (WG) or other groups (e.g. advisory groups) and which are maintained by an important part of the concerned interest and which are incompatible with the committee consensus. The notion of "concerned interest(s)" will vary depending on the dynamics of the committee and shall therefore be determined by the committee leadership on a case-by-case basis. The concept of sustained opposition is not applicable in the context of National Body votes on enquiry or approval ballots since these are subject to the applicable voting rules.

Those expressing sustained opposition have a right to be heard, and the following approach is recommended when a sustained opposition is declared.

• The leadership shall first assess whether the opposition can be considered a "sustained opposition", i.e. whether it has been sustained by an important part of the concerned interest. If this is not the case, the leadership will register the opposition (i.e. in the report/minutes, records, etc.) and continue to lead the work on the document.
• If the leadership determines that there is a sustained opposition, it shall try and resolve it in good faith. However, a sustained opposition is not akin to a right to veto. The obligation to address the sustained oppositions does not imply an obligation to resolve them successfully.

The responsibility for assessing whether or not a consensus has been reached rests entirely with the leadership. This includes assessing whether there is sustained opposition or whether any sustained opposition can be resolved without compromising the existing level of consensus on the rest of the document. In such cases, the leadership will register the opposition and continue the work.

Those parties with sustained oppositions may avail themselves of appeals mechanisms as detailed in Clause 6.

In case of doubt concerning consensus on a revised CD, approval by a two-thirds majority of the P‑members voting may be deemed to be sufficient for the revised CD to be accepted for registration as an enquiry draft; however, every attempt shall be made to resolve negative votes.

The secretariat of the committee responsible for the CD shall ensure that the enquiry draft fully embodies decisions taken either at meetings or by correspondence.

2.5.8 When consensus has been reached, the committee secretariat shall submit the finalized version of the draft in electronic form suitable for distribution to the National Bodies for enquiry (2.6.1), to the Office of the CEO (with a copy to the parent committee secretariat in the case of a subcommittee) within a maximum of 16 weeks.

2.5.9 The committee stage ends when all technical issues have been resolved, and a CD is accepted for circulation as an enquiry draft and is registered by the Office of the CEO. Texts that do not conform to the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2 shall be returned to the secretariat with a request for correction before they are registered.

2.5.10 If the technical issues with an International Standard project cannot all be resolved within the appropriate time limits, committees may consider publishing an intermediate document in the form of a Technical Specification (see 3.1) pending agreement on an International Standard.

2.6 Enquiry stage

2.6.1 At the enquiry stage, the enquiry draft shall be distributed by the Office of the CEO to all National Bodies for a 12-week vote. The enquiry draft shall be accompanied by a completed gender responsive standards (GRS) declaration form [3], [4].

For policy on the use of languages, see Annex E.

National Bodies shall be advised of the date by which completed ballots are to be received by the Office of the CEO.

At the end of the voting period, the Chair and secretariat of the committee will have access to the results of the voting, together with any comments received for further speedy action.

The stability date (4.2) shall be provided on the cover page of the enquiry draft.

2.6.2 Votes submitted by National Bodies shall be explicit: positive, negative, or abstention.

A vote may be accompanied by editorial or technical comments on the understanding that the Secretary/Committee Manager, in consultation with the Chair of the committee and Project Leader, will decide how to deal with them.

If a National Body finds an enquiry draft unacceptable, it shall vote negatively and state the reasons by submitting comments of a technical nature. A National Body shall not cast a positive vote which is conditional on the acceptance of modifications.

In the case where a National Body has voted negatively and has submitted technical comments that are not clearly of a technical nature, the Secretary/Committee Manager shall contact the National Body within two weeks of the ballot closure. If the committee leadership and the National Body do not find an agreement, the matter is escalated to the technical management board via the Office of the CEO.

2.6.3 An enquiry draft is approved if

• a) a two-thirds majority of the votes cast by the P‑members are in favour, and
• b) not more than one-quarter of the total number of votes cast are negative.

Abstentions are excluded when the votes are counted, as well as negative votes not accompanied by any comments of a technical nature. Comments received after the normal voting period are submitted to the committee secretariat for consideration at the time of the next review of the International Standard.

2.6.4 On receipt of the results of the voting and any comments, an appropriate group of the committee, which would typically be the working group to which the project is assigned, will, at a meeting, address any comments received and prepare, as needed, a revised version. The group will advise the Chair on the possible courses of action. The Chair of the committee, in consultation with the Secretary/Committee Manager and the Project Leader or working group Convenor, and the Office of the CEO, shall take one of the following courses of action:

• a) when the approval criteria of 2.6.3 are met, and no technical changes are to be included, to proceed directly to publication (see 2.8);
• b) when the approval criteria of 2.6.3 are met, but technical changes are to be included:

1. to register the revised enquiry draft, as modified, as a final draft International Standard, or
2. to circulate the revised enquiry draft for voting (see 2.6.1). The revised enquiry draft will be circulated for a voting period of eight weeks. Committees are limited to only one revised enquiry draft where the approval criteria are met in this case;

• c) when the approval criteria of 2.6.3 are not met:

1. to circulate the revised enquiry draft for eight weeks voting (see 2.6.1), or
2. to circulate the revised committee draft for comments, or
3. to circulate a revised draft as a draft Technical Specification, or
4. to cancel the project, subject to a decision by the committee.

In case 3), the project shall start at the approval stage (i.e. DTS: draft Technical Specification).

2.6.5 Not later than 12 weeks after the end of the voting period, a full report shall be prepared by the secretariat of the committee and circulated by the Office of the CEO to the National Bodies. The report shall

• a) show the result of the voting,
• b) state the decision of the Chair of the committee,
• c) reproduce the text of the comments received, and
• d) include the observations of the secretariat of the committee on each of the comments submitted.

Every attempt shall be made to resolve negative votes.

If, within eight weeks from the date of dispatch, two or more P‑members disagree with the decision of the Chair, the draft shall be discussed at a meeting (see Clause 5).

Committees are required to respond to all comments received.

2.6.6 When the Chair has taken the decision to proceed to the approval stage (see 2.7) or publication stage (see 2.8), the secretariat of the committee shall prepare, within a maximum of 16 weeks after the end of the voting period and with the assistance of its editing group, a final text and send it to the Office of the CEO for preparation and circulation of the final draft International Standard.

The secretariat shall provide the Office of the CEO with the text in a revisable electronic format and also in a format which permits validation of the revisable form.

Texts that do not conform to the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2 shall be returned to the secretariat with a request for correction before they are registered.

2.6.7 The enquiry stage ends with the registration, by the Office of the CEO, of the text for circulation as a final draft International Standard in the case of 2.6.4 b) or registration of the text for publication as an International Standard in the case of 2.6.4 a).

2.7 Approval stage

2.7.1 At the approval stage, the final draft International Standard (FDIS) shall be distributed by the Office of the CEO within 12 weeks to all National Bodies for a six-week vote.

National Bodies shall be advised of the date by which ballots are to be received by the Office of the CEO.

The stability date (4.2) shall be provided on the cover page of the FDIS.

2.7.2 Votes submitted by National Bodies shall be explicit: positive, negative, or abstention.

A National Body may submit comments on any FDIS vote.

If a National Body finds a final draft International Standard unacceptable, it shall vote negatively and state the reasons by submitting comments of a technical nature. It shall not cast a positive vote that is conditional on the acceptance of modifications.

In the case where a National Body has voted negatively and has submitted comments that are not clearly of a technical nature, the Secretary/Committee Manager shall contact the National Body within two weeks of the ballot closure. If the committee leadership and the National Body do not find an agreement, the matter is escalated to the technical management board via the Office of the CEO.

2.7.3 A final draft International Standard having been circulated for voting, is approved if

• a) a two-thirds majority of the votes cast by the P‑members are positive, and
• b) not more than one-quarter of the total number of votes cast are negative.

Abstentions are excluded when the votes are counted, as well as negative votes not accompanied by any comments of a technical nature.

2.7.4 The Secretary/Committee Manager has the responsibility to bring any errors that may have been introduced in the preparation of the draft to the attention of the Office of the CEO by the end of the voting period; further editorial or technical changes are not accepted at this stage.

2.7.5 All comments received will be retained for the next review and will be recorded on the voting form as "noted for future consideration". The Office of the CEO shall electronically archive these comments. However, the Secretary/Committee Manager, along with the Office of the CEO, may seek to resolve obvious editorial errors. Technical changes to an approved FDIS are not allowed.

At the end of the voting period, the result of voting, indicating either the formal approval by National Bodies to issue the International Standard or formal rejection of the final draft International Standard, is available to all National Bodies.

2.7.6 If the final draft International Standard has been approved in accordance with the conditions of 2.7.3, it shall proceed to the publication stage (see 2.8).

2.7.7 If the final draft International Standard is not approved in accordance with the conditions in 2.7.3, the document shall be referred back to the committee concerned for reconsideration in light of the technical reasons submitted in support of the negative votes.

The committee shall decide to:

• resubmit a modified draft as a committee draft, enquiry draft or final draft International Standard; or
• publish a Technical Specification (see 3.1); or
• cancel the project.

2.7.8 The approval stage ends with the circulation of the voting report (see 2.7.5) stating that the FDIS has been approved for publication as an International Standard, with the publication of a Technical Specification (see 3.1.2), or with the document being referred back to the committee.

2.8 Publication stage

2.8.1 Within six weeks, the Office of the CEO shall correct any errors indicated and validated by the secretariat of the committee and publish and distribute the International Standard.

Before publication, the document is sent to the Secretary/Committee Manager and Project Leader for final review.

2.8.2 The publication stage ends with the publication of the International Standard.

2.9 Registration authorities

When a committee has developed a document that includes registration provisions, a registration authority (RA) is required. Rules concerning the designation of registration authorities are given in Annex H.

2.10 Copyright

The copyright for all drafts and International Standards and other publications belongs to ISO, IEC, or ISO and IEC, as appropriate, as represented by the Office of the CEO.

The content of, for example, an International Standard may originate from a number of sources, including existing national standards, articles published in scientific or trade journals, original research and development work, descriptions of commercialized products, etc. These sources may be subject to one or more rights.

In ISO and IEC, there is an understanding that original material contributed to becoming a part of an ISO, IEC or ISO/IEC publication can be copied and distributed within the ISO and/or IEC systems (as relevant) as part of the consensus building process, this being without prejudice to the rights of the original copyright owner to exploit the original text elsewhere. Where the material is already subject to copyright, the right should be granted to ISO and/or IEC to reproduce and circulate the material. This is frequently done without recourse to a written agreement or, at most, to a simple written statement of acceptance. Where contributors wish a formal signed agreement concerning the copyright of any submissions they make to ISO and/or IEC, such requests shall be addressed to Office(s) of the CEO, as appropriate.

Attention is drawn to the fact that the respective members of ISO and IEC have the right to adopt and re-publish any respective ISO and/or IEC document as their national standard. Similar forms of endorsement do or may exist (for example, with regional standardization organizations).

2.11 Reference to patented items

2.11.1 If, in exceptional situations, technical reasons justify such a step, there is no objection in principle to preparing a document in terms which include the use of items covered by patent rights — defined as patents, utility models and other statutory rights based on inventions, including any published applications for any of the foregoing — even if the terms of the document are such that there are no alternative means of compliance. The rules given below shall be applied.

2.11.2 If technical reasons justify the preparation of a document in terms which include the use of items covered by patent rights, the following procedures shall be complied with:

• a) The proposer of a proposal for a document shall draw the attention of the committee to any patent rights of which the proposer is aware and considers to cover any item of the proposal. Any party involved in the preparation of a document shall draw the attention of the committee to any patent rights of which it becomes aware during any stage in the development of the document.
• b) If the proposal is accepted on technical grounds, the proposer shall ask any holder of such identified patent rights for a statement that the holder would be willing to negotiate worldwide licenses under their rights with applicants throughout the world on reasonable and non-discriminatory terms and conditions. Such negotiations are left to the parties concerned and are performed outside ISO and/or IEC. A record of the right holder's statement shall be placed in the registry of the Office(s) of the CEO, as appropriate. If the right holder does not provide such a statement, the committee concerned shall not proceed with the inclusion of an item covered by a patent right in the document without authorization from the council board(s), as appropriate.
• c) A document shall not be published until the statements of the holders of all identified patent rights have been received unless the council board(s) concerned give(s) authorization.

2.11.3 Should it be revealed after the publication of a document that licenses under patent rights, which appear to cover items included in the document, cannot be obtained under reasonable and non-discriminatory terms and conditions, the document shall be referred back to the relevant committee for further consideration.

2.11.4 The latest edition of the Guidelines for Implementation of the Common Patent Policy for ITU‑T/ITU‑R/ISO/IEC is available on the ISO [12] and IEC [13] websites (including the forms in Word and PDF formats).

3 Development of other documents

3.1 Technical Specifications (TS)

3.1.1 A committee may decide to prepare and publish a Technical Specification when:

• the subject in question is still under development, or
• the committee has developed a document it wishes to publish as specified in 2.6.4 and 2.7.7.

A Technical Specification may contain normative provisions.

3.1.2 The committee may decide for new projects to follow the procedure set out in 2.3 to initiate the development of a Technical Specification. The required stages for the preparation of a Technical Specification shall be the preparatory stage as set out in 2.4 and the approval stage for publication (eight-week DTS (draft Technical Specification) ballot). The DTS shall be accompanied by a completed gender responsive standards (GRS) declaration form [3], [4].

Committees may also choose to use an optional committee stage as set out in 2.5.

The decision to publish the resulting document as a Technical Specification shall require a two-thirds majority vote of the P-members voting. If technical changes are required following the ballot, a subsequent ballot is required to approve the revised draft.

Abstentions are excluded when the votes are counted, as well as negative votes not accompanied by any comments of a technical nature.

3.1.3 When the P‑members of a committee have agreed upon the publication of a Technical Specification, the draft specification shall be submitted electronically by the secretariat of the committee to the Office of the CEO within 16 weeks for publication. Competing Technical Specifications offering different technical solutions are possible, provided that they do not conflict with existing International Standards.

The stability date (4.2) shall be provided on the cover page of the DTS.

3.2 Publicly Available Specifications (PAS)

3.2.1 A committee may decide to publish a Publicly Available Specification when there is an urgent market need. It may be:

• a) a preliminary document to be prepared by the committee prior to the development of a full International Standard, or
• b) the adoption of an existing published document from an external organization.

A Publicly Available Specification may contain normative provisions. A Publicly Available Specification is not allowed to conflict with an existing International Standard. Competing Publicly Available Specifications on the same subject are permitted.

3.2.2 For 3.2.1 a), a committee decision to initiate the development of the preliminary document as specified in 3.2.1 a) is required by a simple majority approval of the P-members voting. The Secretary/Committee Manager shall ensure that the working group that will develop the document complies with the same requirement for P-member active participation specified in 2.3.5 b). The NP form may provide useful information for the P-members to consider when deciding to initiate a Publicly Available Specification.

For 3.2.1 b), the DPAS (draft Publicly Available Specification) ballot can be initiated by a Chair's decision.

The mandatory stage for a Publicly Available Specification is the approval stage for publication (eight‑week DPAS ballot). The DPAS shall be accompanied by a completed gender responsive standards (GRS) declaration form [3], [4].

Committees may also choose to use an optional preparatory stage as set out in 2.4 or an optional committee stage as set out in 2.5.

The decision to publish the document as a Publicly Available Specification shall require a simple majority vote of the P-members voting. Abstentions are excluded when the votes are counted, as well as negative votes not accompanied by any comments of a technical nature. If changes other than editorial changes are required following the ballot, a subsequent ballot is required to approve the revised draft.

The stability date (4.2) shall be provided on the cover page of the DPAS.

3.3 Technical Reports (TR)

3.3.1 A committee may decide to publish a Technical Report when it wishes:

• to publish information that is not normally published as an International Standard (this may include, for example, information obtained from a survey carried out among the National Bodies, information on work in other international organizations or information on the "state of the art" in relation to standards of National Bodies on a particular subject);
• to provide a rationale for specific requirements in a related International Standard.

A Technical Report shall be entirely informative in nature containing no requirements, recommendations or permissions and shall not contain matter implying that it is normative. It shall clearly explain its relationship to normative aspects of the subject, which are or will be, dealt with in International Standards related to the subject.

A committee decision to initiate the development of a Technical Report is required by a simple majority approval of the P-members voting. The Secretary/Committee Manager shall ensure that the document is developed in accordance with the same requirement for P-member active participation specified in 2.3.5 b). The required stages for the preparation of a Technical Report shall be the preparatory stage as set out in 2.4 and the approval stage for publication (eight-week DTR (draft Technical Report) ballot). The DTR shall be accompanied by a completed gender responsive standards (GRS) declaration form [3], [4].

Committees may also choose to use an optional committee stage as set out in 2.5.

3.3.2 The decision to publish the resulting document as a Technical Report shall require a simple majority vote of the P-members voting. If changes other than editorial changes are required following the ballot, a subsequent four-week ballot is required to approve the revised draft.

Abstentions are excluded when the votes are counted, as well as negative votes not accompanied by any justification.

When the P-members of a committee have agreed upon the publication of a Technical Report, the draft Technical Report shall be submitted electronically by the secretariat of the committee to the Office of the CEO within 16 weeks for publication.

The stability date (4.2) shall be provided on the cover page of the DTR.

4 Maintenance of documents

4.1 Review process

Each document published shall undergo regular review to ensure it remains globally relevant, fit for purpose, and that its development and maintenance processes are aligned with the six principles for the development of International Standards outlined in 0.2.

Committees are responsible for ensuring the timely review and maintenance of their documents.

4.2 Stability dates

The stability date marks the end of the period during which the document is expected to remain unchanged. It is indicated by a year, with the stability period concluding at the end of that calendar year.

The committee determines the stability dates based on the maturity of the subject matter and any foreseeable changes resulting from evolving practices, developments, or related publications. The purpose of the stability date is to provide consistency and predictability in the application of a document, allowing users to rely on the content without unforeseen changes during the defined timeframe.

The proposed stability date shall be indicated on the drafts at the enquiry and approval stages. The stability date of a published document is available on the ISO and IEC websites.

The committee is responsible for ensuring that all documents are reviewed in a timely manner, before their stability date expires.

A proposal to revise, amend, withdraw, or convert a document can also be made at any time before the stability date (see 4.6 and 4.7). The committee may decide to bring the stability date forward to an earlier date.

4.3 Review procedure

At the beginning of each calendar year, information about all documents due to reach their stability date within that year shall be distributed to all National Bodies for national consultation and consideration. National Bodies shall ensure that appropriate mechanisms are in place to gather and assess external stakeholder feedback, if any, in order to inform the review process and the setting of the stability date.

Prior to the stability date being reached, a recommendation shall be made to the committee on whether the document should be confirmed, revised, amended, or withdrawn, based on a review. This recommendation is normally prepared by the appropriate subgroup of the committee, or by the committee secretariat. This recommendation shall be submitted sufficiently in advance to allow for a committee decision before the stability date. The review should consider, among other factors, whether the document has become outdated.

The committee shall then decide whether to confirm, revise or amend, or withdraw the document.

• a) Confirmation

If it has been assessed that a document remains valid as specified in 4.1 and requires no change, the committee may decide to confirm it and extend its stability date accordingly.

• a) Revision or amendment

If it has been assessed that a document remains valid as specified in 4.1 but requires technical changes, the committee may decide to proceed to its revision or amendment.

A decision to revise or amend a document constitutes a new project that will be included in the committee's work programme. The corresponding procedure shall follow the steps outlined in 4.6.1 for revisions or 4.6.2 for amendments.

• a) Withdrawal

If it has been assessed that a document is no longer valid as specified in 4.1, the committee may decide to withdraw it.

4.4 Review requirements

For International Standards, Technical Specifications, Technical Reports, Guides, and Systems Reference Deliverables, the maximum stability date for a first edition is five years. There is no limit to the number of times these documents are confirmed. Each confirmation allows a new stability date of up to 12 years from the date of the confirmation. There is no fixed maximum lifetime for any of these document types.

Publicly Available Specifications and International Workshop Agreements (IWAs) are assigned a stability date reflecting their maximum six‑year lifespan, or an earlier date if determined by the committee. Before the end of its lifespan, the document shall either be converted into another type of document or automatically withdrawn.

4.5 Review process for documents not assigned to a committee

For documents published by a project committee that have not been allocated to another committee, see K.7. Other documents not allocated to a committee (e.g. disbanded committee) shall also follow the process described in K.7.

For Guides, see Annex A.

For IWAs, see Annex N.

4.6 Revision, amendment, correction and withdrawal procedures

4.6.1 Revision

A committee may decide to initiate revision at any time, if it considers a change necessary.

The committee decision shall include:

• a statement confirming that the scope remains unchanged or is to be modified;
• target dates for the project;
• update of the stability date;
• name of the Project Leader;
• working group to which the project is assigned.

If the revision implies an expanded scope of the document, approval by a two-thirds majority of the P-members voting is required.

If the revision is a conversion of a Technical Specification to an International Standard, approval by a two-thirds majority of the P-members voting is required.

Following the committee decision, a call for Experts shall be launched.

The stability date will be updated upon publication of the revision.

A revision may be started at the earliest when the current project is at the enquiry stage.

The procedure for developing and approving a revision shall be as described in 2.4, 2.5, 2.6, 2.7, 2.8, 3.1.2 and 3.3.2.

4.6.2 Amendment

Amendments are applicable to International Standards, Technical Specifications, Technical Reports and Systems Reference Deliverables only.

An amendment is considered a partial revision: the rest of the document is not open for comments.

The initiation of an amendment shall follow the same procedure set out in 4.6.1 for revisions.

The procedure for developing and approving an amendment shall be as described in 2.4, 2.5, 2.6, 2.7, 2.8, 3.1.2 and 3.3.2.

Before the approval stage (2.7), the committee may decide, in consultation with the Office of the CEO, bearing in mind both the financial consequences and the interests of users of the document, to ballot (2.7) and publish a new edition of the document, incorporating the amendment.

The stability date of the document will be updated upon publication of the amendment.

No more than two separate amendments shall be published modifying an existing document. The development of a third amendment shall result in the publication of a new edition of the document.

An amendment may be started at the earliest when the current project is at the enquiry stage.

4.6.3 Corrections

A correction is only issued to correct an error or ambiguity inadvertently introduced and which could lead to the incorrect or unsafe application of the document.

Corrections are not issued to update information that has become outdated since publication.

Suspected errors shall be brought to the attention of the secretariat of the committee concerned. After confirmation by the Secretary/Committee Manager and the Chair and, if necessary, in consultation with the Project Leader, Convenor and P-members, the secretariat shall submit to the Office of the CEO a proposal for correction, with an explanation of the need to do so.

The Office of the CEO shall decide, in consultation with the secretariat of the committee, and taking into account both the financial implications for the organization and the interests of users of the publication, whether to issue a correction. If a decision is made to issue the correction, the Office of the CEO shall publish both a corrigendum and a corrected version of the existing edition. The corrigendum lists the corrections, and the corrected version incorporates them into the text of the publication.

The secretariat of the committee will then inform the members of the committee of the outcome.

The corrections shall be listed in the Foreword of the corrected version.

4.6.4 Withdrawal

When withdrawal of a document is proposed, the committee shall confirm the withdrawal by a committee decision (minimum six-week ballot in the case of decision by correspondence).

4.7 Clarifications

4.7.1 Introduction

A clarification provides quick explanation for urgent requests related to the application of the document from users like testing laboratories, certification bodies, National Bodies, or any other relevant stakeholders.

4.7.2 Clarification request

Clarification requests, including draft text, may be submitted by bodies identified in 2.3.2 or organizations performing conformity assessment.

Requests shall be sent to the relevant committee's Secretary/Committee Manager.

The Chair and Secretary/Committee Manager shall assess, in cooperation with the Office of the CEO, whether the issue qualifies as a clarification or if it should be handled as a proposal for an amendment or revision or correction.

The Secretary/Committee Manager shall inform the requesting body of its conclusions.

4.7.3 Work on the clarification

Each request shall be submitted to the subgroup of the committee responsible for the maintenance of the document or, in its absence, to any other relevant subgroup of the committee identified by the committee's Secretary/Committee Manager and Chair. Committee may establish for this purpose an ad hoc group if no relevant subgroup of the committee exists or is identified.

The group may require that the request be reformulated. Once a clarification request has been accepted by the group, it shall be responded to within four weeks.

Responsible group shall agree on a common text for the clarification and inform the Secretary/Committee Manager of its findings.

If the group does not reach a consensus on the clarification, the subject shall be referred to the parent committee for resolution at the next meeting. The Secretary/Committee Manager shall inform the requesting body of the delay in the work on the clarification.

The clarification shall not add or change any normative content and shall not modify the document's provisions.

4.7.4 Distribution of the clarification

On completion of the clarification, the outcome shall be posted on the ISO or IEC website, as appropriate, and the Secretary/Committee Manager shall inform the requesting body of its conclusions together with the text of the clarification.

4.7.5 Clarifications as input to review of the document

The committee shall review the clarification together with the review of the document to which it applies. When a document is amended or revised, the clarification's content shall be incorporated, where applicable.

4.8 Maintenance agencies

When a committee has developed a document that will require frequent modification, it may decide that a maintenance agency is required.

Alternatively, the procedures in Annex R for developing and maintaining standards as databases can be used.

A committee developing a document that will require a maintenance agency shall inform the Office of the CEO at an early stage in order that a technical management board decision can be taken in advance of the publication of the document.

The technical management board designates maintenance agencies in connection with documents, including the appointment of their members, on the proposal of the technical committee concerned.

The secretariat of a maintenance agency should be allocated wherever possible to the secretariat of the committee that has prepared the document.

The Office of the CEO shall be responsible for contacts with external organizations associated with the work of a maintenance agency.

The rules of procedure of maintenance agencies shall be subject to the technical management board approval, and any requested delegation of authority in connection with the updating of the document or the issuing of amendments shall be specifically authorized by the technical management board(s).

Any charges for services provided by a maintenance agency shall be authorized by the council board.

5 Meetings

5.1 Meeting types and basic principles

There are two types of meeting:

• face-to-face meetings, where participants attend in person at the location set by the host;
• virtual meetings, where participants attend entirely online.

For face-to-face meetings, remote participation should be offered. However, where the ability to provide effective remote access is impacted by local conditions, costs, technical capacity, and other practical constraints related to organizing the meeting, it should be offered on a best-effort basis. When a meeting is designated as face-to-face, participants are normally expected to attend in person.

Where remote participation is not possible and a participant is unable to attend the face-to-face meeting due to unforeseen circumstances, comments may be submitted by correspondence. However, active P-member participation criteria are defined in 1.7.4.

The Chair and Secretary/Committee Manager shall attend in person in the case of face-to-face meetings. If they cannot attend in person, 1.8.2 and 1.9.2 apply (participants may elect an acting Chair or acting Secretary/Committee Manager).

For virtual meetings, meeting times between 00:00 and 05:00 local time should be avoided. To support this objective, time zones and meeting time rotation shall be taken into account when scheduling, so that any inconvenience is reasonably shared among participants.

5.2 Planning meetings

The choice of meeting type should take into account the nature of the work to be done, the need for interaction, the expected participation, and the practical constraints for participants and the host. Virtual meetings and online collaborative tools are encouraged when they help the work progress effectively and increase participation.

The committee secretariat should maintain a forward meeting plan for at least two years to help participants plan their work and availability. Meetings shall be held when needed to advance the work. Where appropriate, committee meetings and related working group meetings should be coordinated to limit unnecessary travel.

5.3 Organizing meetings

5.3.1 General

Committee and working group meetings may be held face-to-face or virtually (see 5.1). The meeting type shall be decided by the committee or working group leaders before registration and shall be clearly stated in the meeting notice.

The host coordinates with the committee Chair and the Secretary/Committee Manager or the working group Convenor about the organization of the meetings, as appropriate. The Office of the CEO shall be informed accordingly. The host shall provide clear logistical information, including the accessibility of the meeting facilities, and shall provide invitation letters upon request. Participants may indicate specific accessibility needs, and the host shall make reasonable efforts to accommodate them.

Meetings should, as a general rule, be organized in locations where entry restrictions or other constraints do not significantly limit the ability of participants to attend.

Meetings hosts shall not charge participants any sort of participation fee, nor require accommodation at specific hotels or hotel rates for any meetings. The basic meeting facilities shall be funded entirely by resources from a National Body or voluntary sponsors.

Large meetings can be expensive or complicated to stage and support, and the resource requirements may exceed those that the host can provide. It is, therefore, acceptable for a meeting to have one or more sponsors contributing to its organization and cost. Nevertheless, while it is acceptable for sponsors to be identified, and for their support to be recognized in the meeting, a meeting shall not be used as an opportunity for the promotion for commercial or other reasons of the products or services of any sponsor.

5.3.2 Committee meetings

Committee meetings bring together national delegations to discuss, coordinate, and take formal decisions on the work and direction of the committee.

Face-to-face committee meetings shall always be hosted by the National Body of the country in which the meeting takes place. Any organizational or logistical support provided by an organization shall be subject to the responsibility and approval of the National Body.

The date and time of a committee meeting are agreed between the committee Chair and the Secretary/Committee Manager, in consultation with the host.

The agenda shall clearly state the starting time and estimated finishing time. If the meeting extends beyond its estimated finishing time, the committee may either prolong the session with the unanimous agreement of the P-members present or continue the meeting with the understanding that any decisions taken after the estimated finishing time shall be confirmed by correspondence.

All participants shall be registered in the meeting registration system. Delegates and Heads of Delegation shall be designated by P- and O-members.

At committee meetings, only the Head of Delegation — or a person formally designated by the Head of Delegation — is authorized to cast votes on behalf of the P-member.

Every possible effort shall be made to avoid cancellation, postponement or changing the type of the meeting once it has been confirmed. Nevertheless, if the agenda and basic documents are not available within the time required in Table 3, then the Office of the CEO has the right to cancel the meeting.

5.3.3 Working group and other subgroups meetings

Working group meetings bring together Experts to draft, revise, and resolve technical content of documents.

For face-to-face meetings, the National Body of the country hosting the meeting shall be informed before the meeting is confirmed.

Working group members shall register in the relevant meeting registration system.

Where a working group meets in conjunction with its parent committee, the Convenor shall agree the date and time with the Secretary/Committee Manager, in consultation with the host, and ensure that working group members receive the meeting information.

5.4 Distribution of documents

The Secretary/Committee Manager or Project Leader/Convenor is responsible for ensuring that documents are distributed on time and for planning ahead to meet the applicable deadlines.

The document distribution deadlines for both committee and working group meetings are set out in Table 3. These deadlines represent minimum timeframes, and general practical considerations (for example, visa issuance and travel arrangements) shall be taken into account when planning and organizing meetings.

A committee, a working group or a committee subgroup may consider content, take decisions or make recommendations on matters for which documents were not distributed within the applicable deadlines. In such cases, the leadership shall ensure that all P-members or Experts present agree to proceed and are prepared to take such decisions or make recommendations.

Ad hoc groups are exempt from the deadline requirements set out in Table 3 and may organize themselves as needed, with appropriate flexibility.

Successive meetings operating from the same agenda (i.e. comments resolution on the same document) are also exempt from these deadline requirements.

5.5 Documenting decisions and meeting report/minutes

At the start of a meeting, a small drafting group may be created to help prepare and review the decisions and recommendations. Where possible, it should include at least one meeting participant fluent in English.

The Secretary/Committee Manager or Project Leader/Convenor shall ensure that meeting outcomes are properly documented and shared. Decisions shall be distributed within 48 hours after the meeting, and the meeting report/minutes shall be distributed within four weeks.

If no comments are received within four weeks after distribution, the meeting report/minutes is considered approved. If comments are received, they shall be addressed by the Secretary/Committee Manager or Convenor. If objections are received, the meeting report/minutes remains unconfirmed until the next meeting, and any approved changes are recorded in the meeting report/minutes of that next meeting.

5.6 Recording of meetings

Meetings may only be recorded or transcribed by the Secretary/Committee Manager and only if all participants are informed at the start of the meeting and no one objects. Any participant may ask for the recording or transcription to be switched off during their intervention.

Recordings and transcripts may only be used to support the preparation of the meeting report/minutes or to clarify what was said.

Recordings and transcripts remain in the custody of the Secretary/Committee Manager, shall be treated as confidential, shall not be shared with third parties, and shall be destroyed once the reports/minutes are approved.

Authorized artificial intelligence (AI) tools may be used to support the preparation of the report/minutes under the same conditions as recordings (refer to ISO Guidance [14] and IEC Guidance [15]).

For subgroup meetings (such as working groups, advisory groups, editing groups or ad hoc groups), recordings and transcripts may be made under the same conditions by the Convenor, Secretary/Committee Manager, Project Leader, Project Editor or other designated individual.

5.7 Media at meetings

Media representatives shall not attend any meetings, e.g. committee meetings, working group meetings.

Participants shall not comment publicly on the discussions, positions, or contributions made by others during meetings.

Only the meeting leadership may speak publicly on the consensus reached, and only in the context of an official press activity linked to the meeting.

All official press releases are prepared and issued by the Office of the CEO, which retains the final decision on their content.

6 Appeals

6.1 General

6.1.1 National Bodies have the right of appeal

• a) to the parent technical committee on a decision of a subcommittee;
• b) to the technical management board on a decision of a technical committee;
• c) to the council board on a decision of the technical management board,

within eight weeks of the decision in question.

The decision of the council board on any case of appeal is final.

6.1.2 A P‑member of a committee may appeal against any action, or inaction, on the part of the committee, when the P‑member considers that such action or inaction is

• a) not in accordance with

• the Statutes and Rules of Procedure [16], [17];
• the ISO/IEC Directives; or

• b) not in the best interests of international trade and commerce, or such public factors as safety, health or environment.

6.1.3 Matters under appeal may be either technical or administrative in nature.

Appeals on decisions concerning new work item proposals, committee drafts, enquiry drafts and final draft International Standards are only eligible for consideration if

• questions of principle are involved, or
• the contents of a draft may be detrimental to the reputation of ISO or IEC.

6.1.4 All appeals shall be fully documented to support the P‑member's concern.

6.2 Appeal against a subcommittee decision

6.2.1 The documented appeal shall be submitted by the P‑member to the secretariat of the parent technical committee, with a copy to the Chief Executive Officer.

6.2.2 Upon receipt, the secretariat of the parent technical committee shall advise all its P‑members of the appeal and take immediate action, by correspondence or at a meeting, to consider and decide on the appeal, consulting the Chief Executive Officer in the process.

6.2.3 If the technical committee supports its subcommittee, then the P‑member which initiated the appeal may either

• accept the technical committee's decision, or
• appeal against it.

6.3 Appeal against a technical committee decision

6.3.1 Appeals against a technical committee decision may be of two kinds:

• an appeal arising out of 6.2.3, or
• an appeal against an original decision of a technical committee.

6.3.2 The documented appeal shall, in all cases, be submitted to the Chief Executive Officer, with a copy to the Chair and secretariat of the technical committee.

6.3.3 The Chief Executive Officer shall, following whatever consultations they deem appropriate, refer the appeal together with their comments to the technical management board within four weeks after receipt of the appeal.

The technical management board shall address the appeal at its next meeting. Meetings to address the appeal shall invite representatives of the parties to the appeal to make their arguments virtually. The technical management board shall ensure that all parties are treated equally.

6.4 Appeal against a technical management board decision

An appeal against a decision of the technical management board shall be submitted to the Chief Executive Officer with full documentation on all stages of the case.

The Chief Executive Officer shall refer the appeal together with their comments to the members of the council board within four weeks after receipt of the appeal.

The council board shall make its decision within 12 weeks.

6.5 Progress of work during an appeal process

When an appeal is against a decision relating to work in progress, the work shall be continued up to and including the approval stage (see 2.7).

Annex A (normative) Guides

A.1 Introduction

In addition to International Standards, Technical Specifications, Publicly Available Specifications and Technical Reports prepared by committees, ISO and IEC publish Guides on matters related to international standardization. Guides shall be drafted in accordance with the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2.

Guides shall not be prepared by committees. They may be prepared by an ISO Policy Development Committee, a group reporting to the technical management board, or an ISO/IEC Joint Coordination Group. These bodies are referred to below as the "committee or group responsible for the project".

The procedure for the preparation and publication of a Guide is described below.

Guides may contain normative and informative provisions.

A Guide is voluntary unless all or part of it has been designated as mandatory by the technical management board.

A.2 Proposal stage

The technical management board(s) will approve proposals for new Guides or revisions of Guides and decide on the secretariat and composition of the committee or group responsible for the project.

Once a project is approved by the technical management board(s), the secretariat of the committee or group responsible for the project shall ensure that the appropriate interests of ISO and IEC are informed.

A.3 Preparatory stage

The committee or group responsible for the project shall ensure that the appropriate interests in ISO and IEC have the opportunity to be represented during the preparation of the working draft.

A.4 Committee stage

Once a working draft is available for circulation as a committee draft, the secretariat of the committee or group responsible for the project shall send it to the parent committee or technical management board(s) for a vote, comments and to approve its advancement to the enquiry stage.

A.5 Enquiry stage

A.5.1 The Office of the CEO shall circulate the English text of the revised draft Guide to all National Bodies for a six-week period for translation into French and other languages and for preparation prior to a 12-week vote.

A.5.2 The draft Guide is approved for publication as a Guide if not more than one-quarter of the votes cast are negative, abstentions being excluded when the votes are counted.

In the case of ISO/IEC Guides, the draft shall be submitted for approval to the National Bodies of both ISO and IEC. The National Bodies of both organizations need to approve the document if it is to be published as an ISO/IEC Guide.

If this condition is satisfied for only one of the organizations, ISO or IEC, the Guide may be published under the name of the approving organization only unless the committee or group responsible for the project decides to apply the procedure set out in A.5.3.

A.5.3 If a draft Guide is not approved, or if it is approved with comments the acceptance of which would improve consensus, the Chair of the committee or group responsible for the project may decide to submit an amended draft for an eight-week vote. The conditions for acceptance of the amended draft are the same as in A.5.2.

A.6 Publication stage

The publication stage shall be the responsibility of the Office of the CEO of the organization to which the committee or group responsible for the project belongs.

In the case of an ISO/IEC Joint Coordination Group, the responsibility shall be decided by agreement between the Chief Executive Officers.

A.7 Withdrawal of a Guide

The committee or group responsible for the Guide shall be responsible for deciding if the Guide shall be withdrawn. The formal withdrawal shall be ratified by the technical management board in accordance with its normal procedures.

Annex B (normative) ISO/IEC procedures for liaison and work allocation

B.1 Introduction

By the ISO/IEC Agreement of 1976, ISO and IEC together form a system for international standardization as a whole. For this system to operate efficiently, the following procedures are agreed upon for coordination and allocation of work between the committees of both organizations¹.

1 ISO Council resolutions 49/1976 and 50/1976 and IEC Administrative Circular No. 13/1977.

B.2 General considerations

The allocation of work between ISO and IEC is based on the agreed principle that all questions relating to international standardization in the electrical and electronic engineering fields are reserved for IEC, the other fields being reserved for ISO, and that allocation of responsibility for matters of international standardization where the relative contribution of electrical and non-electrical technologies is not immediately evident will be settled by mutual agreement between the organizations.

Questions of coordination and work allocation may arise when establishing a new ISO or IEC technical committee or as a result of the activities of an existing technical committee.

The following levels of coordination and work allocation agreement are available. Matters should be raised to the next higher level only after all attempts to resolve them at the lower levels have failed.

• a) Formal liaisons between ISO and IEC committees for normal inter-committee cooperation.
• b) Organizational consultations, including Experts and representatives of the Chief Executive Officers, for cases where technical coordination may have an effect on the future activities of the organizations in a larger sense than the point under consideration.
• c) Decisions on work allocation by the technical management boards.

B.3 Establishment of new technical committees

Whenever a proposal to establish a new technical committee is made to the National Bodies of ISO or IEC, as appropriate, the proposal shall also be submitted to the other organization requesting comment and/or agreement. As a result of these consultations, two cases may arise:

• a) the opinion is unanimous that the work should be carried out in one of the organizations;
• b) opinions are divided.

In case of a), formal action may then be taken to establish the new technical committee in accordance with the unanimous opinion.

In case of b), a meeting of Experts in the field concerned shall be arranged with representatives of the Chief Executive Officers with a view to reaching a satisfactory agreement for the allocation of the work (i.e. organizational level). If an agreement is reached at this level, formal action may be taken by the appropriate organization to implement the agreement.

In the case of disagreement after these consultations, the matter may be referred by either organization to the ISO and IEC technical management boards, as appropriate.

B.4 Coordinating and allocating work between ISO and IEC committees

B.4.1 Formal liaison at the committee level

Most coordination needs arising between individual ISO and IEC committees are successfully dealt with through formal technical liaison arrangements. These arrangements, when requested by either organization, shall be honoured by the other organization. Requests for formal liaison arrangements are controlled by the Office of the CEO. The requesting organization shall specify the mode of cooperation (see B.4.2.2).

B.4.2 Details of agreement

B.4.2.1 Continual efforts shall be made to minimize the overlap areas between ISO and IEC by entrusting areas of work to one of the two organizations.

For areas of work so entrusted, ISO and IEC shall agree through their technical management boards on how the views and interests of the other organization are to be fully taken into account.

B.4.2.2 Five working modes of cooperation have been established, as follows:

Mode 1 — Informative relation

One organization is fully entrusted with a specific work area and keeps the other fully informed of all progress.

Mode 2 — Contributive relation

One organization should take the lead of the work, and the other should make written contributions where considered appropriate during the progress of this work. This relation also includes the exchange of full information.

Mode 3 — Subcontracting relation

One organization is fully entrusted with the realization of the work on an identified item, but due to the specialization of the other, a part of the work is subcontracted and that part is prepared under the responsibility of the second organization. Necessary arrangements shall be made to guarantee the correct integration of the resulting subcontracted work into the main part of the work programme. The enquiry and approval stages are handled by the organization being the main contractor for the standardization task.

Mode 4 — Collaborative relation

One organization takes the lead in the activities, but the work sessions and meetings receive Liaison Representatives from the other. Such Liaison Representatives should have the right to intervene in the debate but have no right to vote. The full flow of information is oriented through this liaison.

Mode 5 — Integrated liaison

Joint working groups and joint committees ensure integrated meetings for handling together the realization of documents under a principle of total equality of participation.

Joint working groups between committees of the two organizations shall operate in accordance with 1.12.7.

For all the modes listed above, any change to the mode of cooperation shall be by mutual agreement.

B.4.2.3 The allocation of work between ISO and IEC for potentially overlapping areas will be set out as required in schedules or work programmes, which, when agreed by the relevant parties, will form addenda to this agreement.

A consequence of this agreement is that the parties agree to cross-refer to the relevant documents of the other in the respective competent fields of interest.

When the document being referred to is updated, it is the responsibility of the body making the reference to take care of the updating of the reference where appropriate.

B.4.2.4 For work for which one organization has assumed the responsibility and for which there will be subcontracting of work to the other, the fullest account shall be taken of the interests participating in the subcontracted work in defining the objectives of that work.

B.4.2.5 The necessary procedures for enquiry and approval shall be realized by the organization entrusted with a particular standardization task, except as otherwise agreed by the ISO and IEC technical management boards.

B.4.2.6 For documents developed under Mode 5 — Integrated liaison, the committee, enquiry and approval stages shall be carried out in parallel in both ISO and IEC in accordance with the rules of the organization with the administrative responsibility. The committee/organization with the administrative responsibility for the project shall submit drafts for the committee, enquiry and approval stages to the other organization two weeks prior to the circulation date.

B.4.2.7 When the enquiry draft has not fulfilled the approval criteria (see 2.6.3) in one of the organizations, then:

• the officers of the committees involved in the joint working group may select one of the options given in 2.6.4 c), or
• in exceptional circumstances, if agreed between the officers of the ISO and IEC committees involved in the joint working group and the Offices of the CEO, the project may proceed as a single logo document of the organization in which the enquiry draft was approved. The joint working group is automatically disbanded.

B.4.2.8 If the final draft International Standard is not approved in accordance with the conditions in 2.7.3 then:

• the committees involved in the joint working group may select one of the options given in 2.7.7, or
• in exceptional circumstances, if agreed between the officers of the ISO and IEC committees involved in the joint working group and the Offices of the CEO, the document may be published as a single logo document of the organization in which the final draft International Standard was approved. The joint working group is automatically disbanded.

B.4.2.9 Documents developed under Mode 5 — Integrated liaison via a joint working group between ISO and IEC are published by the organization of the committee having administrative responsibility. That organization assigns the reference number of the document and owns the copyright of the document. The document carries the logo of both organizations and may be sold by both organizations. The foreword of the International Standard will identify all the committees responsible for the development. ISO-lead documents are assigned numbers from 1 to 59999. IEC-lead documents are assigned numbers from 60000 to 79999. In the case of multi-part documents, some parts being under ISO responsibility and some being under IEC responsibility, a number in the 80000 series is assigned (e.g. ISO 80000-1, IEC 80000-6).

Table B.1 summarizes Mode 5 cooperation rules for assignment of document numbers.

B.4.2.10 The maintenance procedures to be used for documents developed under Mode 5 — Integrated liaison will be those currently applied in the organization that has the committee with the administrative responsibility.

B.4.2.11 If there is a reason, during the development of the project, to change from one mode of cooperation to another, a recommendation shall be made by both committees concerned and submitted to the ISO and IEC technical management boards for information.

B.4.3 Cooperation of secretariats

The secretariats of the relevant committees from the two organizations shall cooperate on the implementation of this agreement. There shall be a complete information flow on ongoing work and availability on demand to each other of working documents, in accordance with normal procedures.

Annex C (normative) Justification of proposals for the establishment of new work

C.1 General

C.1.1 Because of the large financial resources and manpower involved and the necessity to allocate these according to the needs, it is important that any standardization activity begins by identifying the needs, determining the aims of the standard(s) to be prepared and the interests that may be affected. This will, moreover, help to ensure that the standards produced will cover appropriately the aspects required and be market relevant for the affected sectors. Any new activity shall therefore be reasonably justified before it begins.

C.1.2 It is understood that, whatever conclusions may be drawn on the basis of this Annex C, a prerequisite of any new work to be commenced would be a clear indication of the readiness of a sufficient number of relevant interested parties to allocate necessary manpower and funds, and to take an active part in the work.

C.1.3 This Annex C sets out rules for proposing and justifying new work so that proposals will offer to others the clearest possible idea of the purposes and extent of the work to ensure that standardization resources are really allocated by the parties concerned and are used to the best effect.

C.1.4 This Annex C does not contain rules of procedure for implementing and monitoring the guidelines contained in it, nor does it deal with the administrative mechanism which should be established to this effect.

C.1.5 This Annex C is addressed primarily to the proposer of any kind of new work to be started but may serve as a tool for those who will analyse such a proposal or comment on it, as well as for the body responsible for taking a decision on the proposal.

C.2 Terms and definitions

proposal for a new field of technical activity or for a new work item

proposal for the preparation of a document(s) in a field that is not covered by an existing committee (such as a technical committee, subcommittee or project committee) of the organization to which the proposal is made

proposal for the preparation of a document or a series of related documents in the field covered by an existing committee (such as a technical committee) of the organization to which the proposal is made

C.3 General principles

C.3.1 Any proposal for new work shall lie within the scope of the organization to which it is submitted.

NOTE For example, the objects of ISO are laid down in its Statutes [16] and of IEC in Article 2 of its Statutes [17].

C.3.2 The documentation justifying new work shall make a substantial case for the market relevance of the proposal.

C.3.3 The documentation justifying new work shall provide solid information as a foundation for informed ISO or IEC National Body voting.

C.3.4 The onus is considered to be placed on the proposer to provide the proper documentation to support principles C.3.2 and C.3.3 stated above.

C.4 Elements to be clarified when proposing a new field of technical activity or a new work item

C.4.1 Proposals for new fields of technical activity and new work items shall include the following information (C.4.2 to C.4.13).

C.4.2 Title

The title shall be drafted in accordance with the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2.

C.4.3 Scope

C.4.3.1 For new fields of technical activity

The scope shall precisely define the limits of the field of activity. Scopes shall not repeat general aims and principles governing the work of the organization but shall indicate the specific area concerned.

EXAMPLE "Standardization of all machine tools for the working of metal, wood and plastics, operating by removal of material or by pressure".

C.4.3.2 For new work items

The scope shall be drafted in accordance with the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2.

C.4.4 Proposed initial work programme (for proposals for new fields of technical activity only)

C.4.4.1 The proposed work programme shall correspond to and clearly reflect the aims of the standardization activities and shall, therefore, show the relationship between the subjects proposed.

C.4.4.2 Each item on the work programme shall be defined by both the subject and aspect(s) to be standardized (for products, for example, the items would be the types of products, characteristics, other requirements, data to be supplied, test methods, etc.).

C.4.4.3 Supplementary justification may be combined with particular items in the work programme.

C.4.4.4 The proposed work programme shall also suggest priorities and target dates for new work items (when a series of standards is proposed, priorities shall be suggested).

C.4.4.5 At least one new work item shall be proposed within a year after their first meeting.

C.4.5 Indication(s) of the preferred type or types of document(s) to be produced

In the case of proposals for new fields of technical activity, this may be provided under C.4.4.

C.4.6 A listing of relevant existing documents at the international, regional and national levels

Any known relevant documents (such as standards and regulations) shall be listed, regardless of their source, and should be accompanied by an indication of their significance.

C.4.7 Relation to and impact on existing work

C.4.7.1 A statement shall be provided regarding any relation or impact the proposed work may have on existing work, especially existing ISO and IEC documents. The proposer should explain how the work differs from apparently similar work or explain how duplication and conflict will be minimized.

C.4.7.2 If seemingly similar or related work is already in the scope of other committees of the organization or in other organizations, the proposed scope shall distinguish between the proposed work and the other work.

C.4.7.3 The proposer shall indicate whether their proposal could be dealt with by widening the scope of an existing committee or by establishing a new committee.

C.4.8 Relevant country participation

C.4.8.1 For proposals for new fields of technical activity, a listing of relevant countries should be provided where the subject of the proposal is important to their national commercial interests.

C.4.8.2 For proposals for new work items within existing committees, a listing of relevant countries should be provided which are not already P‑members, but for whom the subject of the proposal is important to their national commercial interests.

C.4.9 Cooperation and liaison

C.4.9.1 A list of relevant external international organizations or internal parties (other than ISO and/or IEC committees) to be engaged as liaisons in the development of the document(s) shall be provided.

C.4.9.2 To avoid conflict with, or duplication of efforts of, other bodies, it is important to indicate all points of possible conflict or overlap.

C.4.9.3 The result of any communication with other interested bodies shall also be included.

C.4.10 Affected stakeholders

A simple and concise statement shall be provided identifying and describing relevant affected stakeholder categories (including small and medium-sized enterprises) and how they will each benefit from or be impacted by the proposed document(s).

C.4.11 Base document (for proposals for new work items only)

C.4.11.1 When the proposer considers that an existing well-established document may be acceptable as an International Standard (with or without amendments), this shall be indicated with appropriate justification and a copy attached to the proposal.

C.4.11.2 All proposals for new work items shall include an attached existing document to serve as an initial basis for the ISO or IEC document or a proposed outline or table of contents.

C.4.11.3 If an existing document is attached that is copyrighted or includes copyrighted content, the proposer shall ensure that appropriate permissions have been granted in writing for ISO or IEC to use that copyrighted content.

C.4.12 Leadership commitment

C.4.12.1 In the case of a proposal for a new field of technical activity, the proposer shall indicate whether their organization is prepared to undertake the secretariat work required.

C.4.12.2 In the case of a proposal for a new work item, the proposer shall also nominate a Project Leader.

C.4.13 Purpose and justification

C.4.13.1 The purpose and justification of the document to be prepared shall be made clear, and the need for standardization of each aspect (such as characteristics) to be included in the document shall be justified. Intended impacts of the implementation of the proposed document shall be presented. The intended impacts should be considered throughout the development process of the document, and an impact statement should be included in the introduction of the published document.

C.4.13.2 If a series of new work items is proposed, the purpose and the justification of which is common, a common proposal may be drafted, including all elements to be clarified and enumerating the titles and scopes of each individual item.

C.4.13.3 The list below represents a menu of suggestions or ideas for possible documentation to support the purpose and justification of proposals. Proposers should consider these suggestions, but they are not limited to them, nor are they required to comply strictly with them. What is most important is that proposers develop and provide purpose and justification information that is most relevant to their proposals and that makes a substantial business case for the market relevance and need of their proposals. Thorough, well-developed and robust purpose and justification documentation will lead to more informed consideration of proposals and, ultimately, their possible success in the ISO and IEC systems.

• a) A simple and concise statement describing the business, technological, societal or environmental issue that the proposal seeks to address.
• b) Documentation on relevant global metrics that demonstrate the extent or magnitude of the economic, technological, societal or environmental issue, or the new market. This may include an estimate of the potential sales of the resulting standard(s) as an indicator of potential usage and global relevance.
• c) Technological benefit — a simple and concise statement describing the technological impact of the proposal to support coherence in systems and emerging technologies, the convergence of merging technologies, interoperability, resolution of competing technologies, future innovation, etc.
• d) Economic benefit — a simple and concise statement describing the potential of the proposal to remove barriers to trade, improve international market access, support public procurement, improve business efficiency for a broad range of enterprises, including small and medium-sized ones, and/or result in a flexible, cost-effective means of complying with international and regional rules/conventions, etc. A simple cost/benefit analysis relating the cost of producing the document(s) to the expected economic benefit to businesses worldwide may also be helpful.
• e) Societal benefit(s) — a simple and concise statement describing any societal benefits expected from the proposed document(s).

One example of a societal benefit is how the new technical area or standards may support greater use by persons with accessibility limitations. Proposers of new technical areas or standards are recommended to consider and document in their purpose and justification statements how the proposed standards may be developed to improve accessibility. Further guidance for proposers as they consider this aspect can be found in ISO/IEC Guide 71 [18].

• f) Environmental benefit(s) — a simple and concise statement describing any environmental or wider sustainability benefits expected from the proposed document(s).

One example of such a benefit is the potential contribution that the new technical area or standards may make to sustainability. Proposers of new technical areas or standards are recommended to consider and document in their purpose and justification statements the relationship of their proposals to the concept of sustainability. Further guidance can be found in ISO Guide 82 [19] and on the IEC and the Sustainable Development Goals web page [20].

NOTE For ISO, the ISO/TMB confirmed the following recommendations: 1) When a committee (in any sector) develops a standard dealing with sustainability/sustainable development, the standard must remain within the context of the committee's scope of work; 2) The committee should also notify the TMB with the title and scope as early as possible; 3) The committee undertaking such work should clarify its intentions in the Introduction of the specific standard(s); 4) The most widely used definition of sustainable development is the one from the UN Brundtland committee on sustainable development: development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.

One key environmental benefit to consider is how the new technical area or standards address the issue of climate change. Further guidance can be found in ISO Guide 84 [21] and in the IEC and climate change briefing paper [22].

• g) A simple and concise statement clearly describing the intended use(s) of the proposed document(s), for example, whether the document is intended as requirements to support conformity assessment or only as guidance or recommended best practices; whether the document is a management system standard; whether the document is intended for use or reference in technical regulation; whether the document is intended to be used to support legal cases in relation to international treaties and agreements.
• h) A simple and concise statement of metrics for the committee to track in order to assess the impact of the published document over time to achieve the benefits to stakeholders is documented under C.4.10.
• i) A statement assessing the prospect of the resulting document(s) being compliant with, for IEC, the IEC Global Relevance Toolbox web page [23] and, for ISO, ISO's Global relevance policy [24] and the ISO/TMB recommendations (see NOTE below) regarding sustainable development and sustainability, where relevant.

NOTE For ISO, the ISO/TMB confirmed the following recommendations: 1) When a committee (in any sector) develops a document dealing with sustainability/sustainable development, the document must remain within the context of the committee's scope of work; 2) The committee should also notify the TMB with the title and scope as early as possible; 3) The committee undertaking such work should clarify its intentions in the Introduction of the specific standard(s); 4) The most widely used definition of sustainable development is the one from the UN Brundtland committee on sustainable development: development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.

• j) A statement assessing the proposal's compliance with the principles for developing ISO and IEC Standards related to or supporting public policy initiatives (see [25]) and the possible relation of the resulting document(s) to public policy, including a statement regarding the potential for easier market access due to conformity with appropriate legislation.
• k) A statement assessing any gender differences that can impact a proposed document. Guidance can be found in the ISO/IEC guidance on gender responsive standards [26].

Annex D (normative) Resources of secretariats and qualifications of Secretaries/Committee Managers

D.1 Terms and definitions

National Body to which has been assigned, by mutual agreement, the responsibility for providing technical and administrative services to a committee

individual appointed by the secretariat to manage the technical and administrative services provided

individual appointed by the secretariat to assist the Secretary/Committee Manager for the management of the technical and administrative services provided

Note 1 to entry: One or more Assistant Secretaries/Assistant Committee Managers may be appointed by the secretariat to have specific secretariat roles.

D.2 Resources of a secretariat

A National Body to which a secretariat has been assigned shall recognize that, no matter what arrangements it makes in its country to provide the required services, it is the National Body itself that is ultimately responsible for the proper functioning of the secretariat. National Bodies undertaking secretariat functions shall become party to the ISO Service Agreement or IEC Basic Agreement, as appropriate.

The secretariat shall therefore have adequate administrative and financial means or backing to ensure:

• a) facilities for word-processing in English and/or French, for providing texts electronically, and for any necessary reproduction of documents;
• b) preparation of adequate technical illustrations;
• c) identification and use, with translation where necessary, of documents received in the official languages;
• d) updating and continuous supervision of the structure of the committee and its subsidiary bodies, if any;
• e) reception and prompt dispatch of correspondence and documents;
• f) adequate communication facilities by telephone, telefax and electronic mail;
• g) access to the Internet;
• h) arrangements and facilities for translation, interpretation and services during meetings, in collaboration with the host National Body, as required;
• i) attendance of the Secretary/Committee Manager at any meetings requiring their presence, including technical committee and/or subcommittee meetings, editing group meetings, working group meetings, and consultations with the Chair when necessary;
• j) access by the Secretary/Committee Manager to basic International Standards (see the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2:2021, Annex D) and to International Standards, national standards and/or related documents in the field under consideration;
• k) access by the Secretary/Committee Manager, when necessary, to Experts capable of advising on technical issues in the field of the committee.

While the Chief Executive Officer endeavours to send their representative to the first meeting of a technical committee, to meetings of technical committees with new secretariats, and to any committee meeting where such presence is desirable for solving problems, the Office of the CEO cannot undertake to carry out the work for a secretariat, on a permanent or temporary basis.

D.3 Requirements of a Secretary/Committee Manager

The individual appointed as Secretary/Committee Manager shall

• a) have sufficient knowledge of English and/or French;
• b) be familiar with the Statutes and rules of procedure (see [16] and/or [17], as appropriate), and with the ISO/IEC Directives;
• c) be in a position to advise the committee and any subsidiary bodies on any point of procedure or drafting, after consultation with the Office of the CEO if necessary;
• d) be aware of any council board or technical management board decision regarding the activities of the technical committees in general and of the committee for which they are responsible in particular;
• e) be a good organizer and have training in and the ability for technical and administrative work, to organize and conduct the work of the committee and to promote active participation on the part of committee members and subsidiary bodies, if any;
• f) be familiar with the documentation supplied by the Office of the CEO, in particular, the use of electronic tools and services.

D.4 Requirements of an Assistant Secretary/Assistant Committee Manager

The individual(s) appointed as Assistant Secretary/Assistant Committee Manager shall

• a) have a defined role in supporting the Secretary/Committee Manager, and this role shall be defined by the secretariat;
• b) possess the knowledge and skills necessary for this defined role, ideally equal to those identified in D.3, but may be a subset of these requirements depending upon the role assigned;
• c) have the same authority as the Secretary/Committee Manager in the performance of the duties associated with the defined role;
• d) be appointed, taking into consideration increasing the gender and geographic diversity of the management team.

Annex E (normative) General policy on the use of languages

E.1 Expressing and communicating ideas in an international environment

At the international level, it is common practice to publish documents in at least two languages. There are a number of reasons why it is advantageous to use two languages, for example:

• greater clarity and accuracy of meaning can be achieved by expressing a given concept in two languages which have different grammar and syntax;
• if consensus is reached on the basis of a text drafted in only one language, difficulties may arise when it comes to putting that text into another language. Some questions may have to be rediscussed, and this can cause a delay if the text originally agreed upon has to be altered. Subsequent drafting into a second language of a text already approved in the first language often brings to light difficulties of expression that could have been avoided if both versions had been prepared at the same time and then amended together;
• to ensure that international meetings will be as productive as possible, it is important for the agreements reached to be utterly devoid of ambiguity, and there has to be no risk that these agreements can be called back into question because of misunderstandings of a linguistic nature;
• the use of two languages chosen from two linguistic groups widens the number of prospective delegates who might be appointed to attend the meetings;
• it becomes easier to express a concept properly in other languages if there are already two perfectly harmonized versions.

E.2 The use of languages in the technical work

The official languages are English, French and Russian.

The work of the committees and the correspondence are in English by default.

E.3 International Standards

International Standards are published by ISO and IEC in English and in French (and sometimes in multilingual editions also including Russian and other languages, especially in cases of terminology). These versions of a given International Standard are equivalent, and each is regarded as being an original-language version.

It is advantageous for the technical content of a document to be expressed in both English and French from the outset of the drafting procedure, so that these two versions will be studied, amended and adopted at the same time, and their linguistic equivalence will be ensured at all times (see also the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2:2021, 8.1).

This may be done

• by the secretariat or, under the latter's responsibility, with outside assistance, or
• by the editing group of the responsible committee, or
• by National Bodies whose national language is English or French and under an agreement concluded between those National Bodies and the secretariat concerned.

When it is decided to publish a multilingual International Standard (a vocabulary, for example), the National Body for the Russian Federation takes charge of the Russian portion of the text; similarly, when it is decided to publish an International Standard containing terms or material in languages other than the official languages, the National Bodies whose national languages are involved are responsible for selecting the terms or for drafting the portions of text which are to be in those languages.

E.4 Other publications developed by committees

Other publications may be issued in one official language only.

E.5 Documents for committee meetings

E.5.1 Drafts and documents referred to in the agenda

The documents prepared and circulated prior to a meeting are the following.

• a) Draft agendas

Draft agendas are prepared and distributed in the language(s) of the meeting (English by default) by the responsible secretariats.

• b) Committee drafts referred to in the agenda

It is desirable that versions of the committee drafts referred to in the agenda will be available for the meeting in the language(s) of the meeting (English by default).

E.5.2 Documents prepared and circulated during a meeting

The documents prepared and circulated during a meeting are the following.

• a) Resolutions adopted during the meeting

An ad hoc drafting group may be formed at the beginning of each meeting to support the Secretary/Committee Manager in the drafting and/or reviewing of resolutions and, whenever possible, should include one or more delegates fluent in English and/or French.

• b) Brief report/minutes, if any, prepared after each session

If such reports/minutes are prepared, they shall be drafted in English or French and preferably in both with, if necessary, the assistance of the ad hoc drafting committee.

E.5.3 Documents prepared and circulated after a meeting

After each committee meeting, the secretariat concerned shall draft a report/minutes of the meeting, which may be in only one language (English or French) and which includes, as annex, the full text of the resolutions adopted, preferably in both English and French.

E.6 Documents prepared in languages other than English or French

National Bodies whose national language is neither English nor French may translate any documents circulated by secretariats into their own national language to facilitate the study of those documents by the Experts of their country or to assist the delegates they have appointed to attend the meetings of the committees.

If one language is common to two or more National Bodies, one of them may at any time take the initiative of translating technical documents into that language and providing copies to other National Bodies in the same linguistic group.

The terms of the above two paragraphs may be applied by the secretariats for their own needs.

E.7 Technical meetings

E.7.1 Purpose

The purpose of technical meetings is to achieve as full agreement as possible on the various agenda items, and every effort shall be made to ensure that all delegates understand one another.

E.7.2 Interpretation of debates into English and French

Although the basic documents may be available in both English and French, it has to be determined according to the case whether the interpretation of statements expressed in one language should be given in the other language

• by a volunteer delegate,
• by a staff member from the secretariat or host National Body, or
• by an adequately qualified interpreter.

Care should also be taken to ensure that delegates who are not fluent in English or French can follow the meeting to a sufficient extent.

It is impractical to specify rules concerning the necessity of interpreting the debates at technical meetings. It is essential, of course, that all delegates are able to follow the discussions, but it may not be essential to have a word-for-word interpretation of each statement made.

In view of the foregoing, and except in special cases where interpretation may not be necessary, the following practice is considered appropriate:

• a) for meetings where procedural decisions are expected to be taken, brief interpretation may be provided by a member of the secretariat or a volunteer delegate;
• b) at working group meetings, the members should, whenever possible, arrange between themselves for any necessary interpretation of the initiative and under the authority of the Convenor of the working group.

To enable the secretariat responsible for a meeting to make any necessary arrangements for interpretation, the secretariat should be informed, at the same time as it is notified of attendance at the meeting, of the languages in which the delegates are able to express themselves and of any aid which delegates might be able to provide in the matter of interpretation.

In those cases where a meeting is conducted mainly in one language, the following practice should be adopted as far as is practicable to assist delegates using the other language:

1. the decision taken on one subject should be announced in both languages before passing to the next subject;
2. whenever a change to an existing text is approved in one language, time should be allowed for delegates to consider the effect of this change on the other language version;
3. a summary of what has been said should be provided in the other language if a delegate so requests.

E.7.3 Interpretation into English and French of statements made in other languages

When at a meeting of a committee, a participant wishes, in view of exceptional circumstances, to speak in any language other than English or French, the Chair of the session shall be entitled to authorize this, for the session in question, provided that a means of interpretation has been secured.

To give all Experts an equal opportunity to express their views at meetings of committees, a very flexible application of this provision is recommended.

Annex F (normative) Adoption process

F.1 Purpose

The adoption process aims to adopt an existing published document from an originating organization as an International Standard. The committee assesses the document's relevance to its work programme and its ability to effectively address a specific gap, thereby reducing the need for redundant development.

F.2 Types of adoption process

F.2.1 Proposal by committees and liaison organizations

The committee secretariat, any P-member, or a category A liaison organization of the relevant committee may propose the submission of an existing document from any source for voting as an enquiry draft. Before making a proposal, the proposer shall secure the consent of the originating organization that originally published the document. The proposer determines the criteria for selecting the document and decides whether to proceed with the proposal.

F.2.2 Proposal by Recognized Submitters

An organization (e.g. consortium) approved as a Recognized Submitter (see F.4.1) by a committee may submit document(s) for voting as enquiry draft(s).

Both the originating organization and the submitted document(s) will be evaluated for acceptance based on specific criteria — including organization acceptance criteria and document-related criteria (see F.4.2) — to determine their suitability for processing as an International Standard.

F.3 Procedure for proposals by committees and liaison organizations (F.2.1)

F.3.1 The proposer shall complete the adoption submission form and submit it, along with the document proposed for adoption, to the secretariat of the relevant committee.

The adoption submission form confirms that copyright, trademark, and patent issues are resolved, ISO/IEC intellectual property policies apply (see 2.10 and 2.11), there are no conflicts with existing International Standards, and maintenance arrangements are in place.

The originating organization may also request that the document does not proceed through the regular development process outlined in Clause 2. Such a request should be clearly stated in the adoption submission form.

A four-week ballot shall be conducted on the proposal to determine whether the committee supports initiating the adoption process. Approval requires a two-thirds majority of the P-members voting.

Following the closing of the voting period, the committee secretariat shall prepare a report and circulate it to the committee. The report shall present the results of the vote and share the comments received, together with the secretariat's observations on each comment.

Based on the outcome of the ballot and the report from the secretariat, the decision to initiate the enquiry stage shall be taken by the Chair, in accordance with 2.5.7.

F.3.2 The enquiry ballot process and approval criteria follow 2.6.

F.3.3 The Chair of the committee, in cooperation with its secretariat, shall review the voting results and the technical comments and, in consultation with the Office of the CEO, shall take one of the following courses of action.

• a) Where the approval criteria in 2.6.3 are met but technical comments are received:

1. If the technical comments do not require immediate changes to the text, they shall be retained for consideration during a future revision, and the document shall proceed directly to publication (see 2.8).
2. If the technical comments indicate that immediate changes to the text are necessary, the adoption process shall be terminated, or the document may proceed through the regular development process outlined in Clause 2, if this option was selected in the adoption submission form.

The Chair may decide, where appropriate, to discuss the outcome of the enquiry ballot and the technical comments at the next committee meeting.

• b) Where the approval requirements in 2.6.3 are not met, the adoption process shall be considered unsuccessful. If there is sufficient support for further development, the document may proceed through the regular development process outlined in Clause 2, if this option was selected in the adoption submission form.

F.3.4 The policies for patent rights, use of trade names and trademarks, copyright and neutrality principle with respect to conformity assessment in the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2 shall be respected. Other rules in the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2 are recommended but not required. Guidance is available from the committee secretariat or the Office of the CEO.

F.3.5 The document shall be published under ISO and/or IEC copyright and intellectual property policies whereas the originating organization retains the copyright for its original version.

F.3.6 The maintenance is either managed by the assigned ISO or IEC committee as specified in Clause 4 or handled by the originating organization. If the originating organization wishes to propose a revision, the adoption process shall be repeated.

F.4 Procedure for proposals by Recognized Submitters (F.2.2)

F.4.1 Key concepts, definitions and roles

The procedure for document proposals by Recognized Submitters is based on the following key concepts:

• a) Originating organization

An organization that has developed and owns a document intended for adoption as an International Standard.

• b) Recognized Submitter

An originating organization may apply to a committee for recognition as a Recognized Submitter. Upon approval, the originating organization is granted a Recognized Submitter status for the committee for an initial two-year term, with the possibility of extensions.

• c) Mentors

The Chair and Secretary/Committee Manager act as mentors and provide advisory support to the originating organization and the Recognized Submitter during the submission process. They offer guidance and may recommend collaborations with relevant subgroups when necessary.

The Chair and Secretary/Committee Manager may designate another qualified member of the committee to perform the mentor role.

• d) Explanatory report

Each document submitted for adoption shall be accompanied by an explanatory report prepared by the Recognized Submitter. The report shall include essential details to support the submission, such as statements on how the document meets the established criteria and clear explanations of its key technical concepts.

• e) Ballot for adoption

The document, along with its explanatory report, is circulated for an enquiry ballot.

F.4.2 General criteria for the procedure

Criteria are used to determine whether an originating organization can be approved as a Recognized Submitter and if its documents are suitable for adoption as International Standards. These criteria help both the committee and the originating organization assess the document's readiness for the standardization process. The criteria are grouped into two categories:

• organization-related criteria (organization acceptance criteria for Recognized Submitter applications form);
• document-related criteria (explanatory report form).

F.4.3 Procedure for proposals by Recognized Submitters

F.4.3.1 Acceptance of a Recognized Submitter

An originating organization seeking to submit a document for adoption shall apply to the relevant committee for recognition as a Recognized Submitter.

The application shall include the organization acceptance criteria for Recognized Submitter applications form, which outlines:

• statements addressing the organization-related criteria;
• details of the initial document(s) planned for submission, scope included.

The completed application is then submitted to the Secretary/Committee Manager and circulated to the committee for an eight-week ballot. Upon approval by a two-thirds majority of the P-members voting, the originating organization is granted the Recognized Submitter status for an initial two-year period, with the option for five-year extensions. Recognition will terminate under the following conditions:

• the committee does not approve the confirmation of the Recognized Submitter status, or
• the Recognized Submitter fails to submit a document for adoption within the expected timeframe (see F.4.3.2).

To accommodate the eight-week ballot, the application should be submitted well in advance of the planned first document submission.

Six months before the recognition period expires, the committee, with assistance from Mentors, will invite the Recognized Submitter to review its status and select one of the following options:

• revise (make significant changes, such as updating the scope, procedures, or intellectual property rights policy), or
• withdraw (terminate the status), or
• reaffirm (extend the current status without changes).

If the Recognized Submitter chooses to revise, they shall provide a document detailing the changes to the organization-related criteria. If they choose to revise or reaffirm, they shall also identify any additional documents they plan to submit. The necessary documentation shall be submitted no later than 12 weeks before the expiry of their status to allow for timely processing.

The Secretary/Committee Manager will issue an eight-week ballot to approve the request for revision or reaffirmation. Failure to respond to the review invitation will result in the automatic withdrawal of the Recognized Submitter's status at the end of the term. An originating organization that is no longer a Recognized Submitter may submit a new application.

F.4.3.2 Document submission

A Recognized Submitter may submit documents for adoption within the scope defined in their application. Each submission shall include an explanatory report, prepared using the explanatory report form.

The first document shall be submitted within six months of initial recognition. If more time is needed, a six-month extension may be requested by submitting the request at least six weeks before the deadline. Approval by the committee Chair and secretariat is required. Failure to meet the deadline will result in withdrawal of the Recognized Submitter's status.

The policies for patent rights, use of trade names and trademarks, copyright and neutrality principle with respect to conformity assessment in the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2 shall be respected. Other rules in the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2 are recommended but not required. Guidance is available from the committee secretariat or the Office of the CEO.

The Recognized Submitter is encouraged to consult the assigned Mentors for advice when preparing the Explanatory Report and throughout the process. This may include a review of the submission material before its formal submission to the committee.

The Recognized Submitter may also request that the document does not proceed through the regular development process outlined in Clause 2. Such a request should be clearly stated in the explanatory report form.

F.4.3.3 Adoption ballot process

The committee secretariat submits the document, along with the Explanatory Report and related documentation, to the Office of the CEO.

Prior to submission, the committee secretariat will:

• confirm with the Recognized Submitter that any copyright, patent and/or trademark permissions have been granted to ensure the document can be freely copied and distributed within ISO/IEC as specified in 2.10 and 2.11;
• confirm that the committee is the appropriate body to handle the proposed document and that it does not conflict with existing International Standards.

Once the submitter's recognition status has been verified and the Office of the CEO has been consulted, a four-week ballot shall be conducted on the proposal to determine whether the committee supports initiating the adoption process. Approval requires a two-thirds majority of the P-members voting.

Following the closing of the voting period, the committee secretariat shall prepare a report and circulate it to the committee. The report shall present the results of the vote and share the comments received, together with the secretariat's observations on each comment.

Based on the outcome of the ballot and the report from the secretariat, the decision to initiate the enquiry stage shall be taken by the Chair, in accordance with 2.5.7.

The committee secretariat will notify the Recognized Submitter of both the initiation and the results of the adoption ballot.

The adoption ballot process for approving a document as an International Standard follows the process for enquiry stage (2.6).

The Recognized Submitter may choose to withdraw the document at any time up until publication.

The Chair of the committee, in cooperation with its secretariat, shall review the voting results and the technical comments and, in consultation with the Office of the CEO, shall take one of the following courses of action:

• a) Where the approval criteria in 2.6.3 are met but technical comments are received:

1. If the technical comments do not require immediate changes to the text, they shall be retained for consideration during a future revision, and the document shall proceed directly to publication (see 2.8).
2. If the technical comments indicate that immediate changes to the text are necessary, the adoption process shall be terminated, or the document may proceed through the regular development process outlined in Clause 2, if this option was selected in the explanatory report form.

The Chair may decide, where appropriate, to discuss the outcome of the enquiry ballot and the technical comments at the next committee meeting.

• b) Where the approval requirements in 2.6.3 are not met, the adoption process shall be considered unsuccessful. If there is sufficient support for further development, the document may proceed through the regular development process outlined in Clause 2, if this option was selected in the explanatory report form.

If technical comments are received during the enquiry ballot, they will be shared with the Recognized Submitter for consideration in preparation of a future submission.

F.4.3.4 Publication

The document shall be published under ISO and/or IEC copyright and intellectual property policies whereas the originating organization retains the copyright for its original version.

The maintenance is either managed by the assigned ISO or IEC committee as specified in Clause 4 or handled by the Recognized Submitter. If the Recognized Submitter wishes to propose a revision, the adoption process shall be repeated.

Annex G (normative) Global relevance of ISO and IEC International Standards

G.1 Introduction

With the creation of the WTO and its Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Agreement, International Standards gained a special status in global trade. ISO and IEC therefore have a responsibility to ensure that the standards they develop are globally relevant. Global relevance means that an International Standard can be used as broadly as possible by affected industries and other stakeholders in markets around the world.

According to Annex 4, paragraph 10, of the Second Triennial Review of the WTO/TBT, international standards should:

• respond effectively to regulatory and market needs in different countries;
• reflect scientific and technological developments across various regions;
• avoid distorting the global market;
• not harm fair competition;
• not stifle innovation nor technological development;
• avoid giving preference to the characteristics or requirements of specific countries or regions when other countries have different needs;
• be performance-based whenever possible, rather than relying on design or descriptive characteristics.

If an International Standard does not meet these criteria, it risks creating a barrier to trade.

International Standards may include market differences (temporary, changeable) or essential differences (permanent) when needed, as long as these are clearly justified and presented on an equal basis. This Annex G provides principles and guidance to help committees ensure global relevance.

G.2 ISO/IEC global relevance principles and implementation guidance

Principle 1. Understanding the nature of an International Standard

An International Standard is intended to provide one common solution that can be used around the world. This "one standard, accepted worldwide" approach works when global markets have similar needs.

Where legitimate differences exist between markets, a standard may include justified options to address those differences. These options shall be clearly defined and treated as equally valid (see Principle 5).

Different countries or regions may use International Standards in different ways — for example, by adopting them as national or regional standards, using them alongside national or regional standards, or referencing them in regulation. However, these different uses do not give any country or region more influence or priority when developing the standard. All participants contribute on an equal basis.

Principle 2. Determining if global relevance is achievable at project initiation

When starting a new project, committees need to assess whether it is realistically possible to develop an International Standard that can be used in major markets around the world. This assessment should take place before work is proposed. The development process and the consensus built along the way will help the committee refine its understanding and work toward global relevance.

In practice, committees should consider three possibilities:

1. A single globally applicable solution is feasible.
2. A globally applicable solution is feasible, but justified options will be needed to address legitimate differences.
3. Global relevance is not feasible, in which case the project should not proceed as an International Standard.

Both the new work item proposal (NP) form and the acceptance criteria in 2.3.5 support this early assessment. The acceptance criteria further ensure that the proposal has sufficient international support and participation at the outset. When voting on an NP, National Bodies should also identify relevant national or regional documents and note any implications these may have for the proposal's global relevance.

Committees and proposers can use preliminary work items to assess whether one global solution is feasible and to identify stakeholders from different markets and regions before submitting a proposal.

Principle 3. Prioritizing performance-based requirements

Whenever possible, International Standards should be performance based rather than based on design or descriptive characteristics. Refer to the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2:2021, 5.4 for further guidance.

Performance-based requirements support global relevance by allowing innovation, accommodating different technologies, and avoiding unnecessary limitations.

Principle 4. Considering global market needs and use

Committees should take into account the needs of all markets when developing a standard. Even if some countries are not represented in the committee, their perspectives can still be considered through public enquiries, comments received at draft stages, liaison input, and information gathered by committee leaders and Experts about different market conditions.

In practice, many implementation issues only become visible when an International Standard is adopted at the regional or national level. Therefore, during the review of an existing standard, committees should examine how it has been used, whether countries introduced modifications, and why. Understanding these patterns helps identify gaps and determine whether changes are needed to improve the global relevance of the next edition.

Principle 5. Addressing market and essential differences through justified options

Committees should take market and essential differences into account when developing standards and include options only when they are clearly necessary.

Market differences are temporary or evolving differences between markets, based on factors such as legislation, economics, social conditions, trade patterns, or market needs. These should be addressed only when needed, with the expectation that they will diminish over time. When options are introduced to address market differences, they shall be clearly justified and presented as equally valid.

Essential differences are permanent differences that are not expected to change over time, such as embedded technological infrastructures (e.g. mains voltages or frequencies), climatic or geographical conditions, or anthropometric characteristics. Options addressing essential differences should be written as conditional provisions (e.g. "In regions where the average daytime temperature is below X °C, requirement Y applies.").

When the committee decides that options in an International Standard are necessary to address market or essential differences, these options should be limited in number, clearly defined, and represent only a minority of the requirements. Wherever possible, options should appear as parallel normative clauses in the main body of the standard; normative annexes should be used only when integration is not feasible. See the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2:2021, 5.3.

As markets evolve, market differences are expected to diminish. Committees should monitor these changes during the review of existing standards and consider whether revisions are needed to incorporate justified differences or remove those that are no longer relevant, supporting greater harmonization over time.

Annex H (normative) Registration authority (RA) policy

H.1 Scope

H.1.1 A number of International Standards developed by ISO and IEC committees require the assignment of unique registration elements and describe the methodology for the assignment of these registration elements. The registration elements themselves are not part of the document but are assigned by an appointed registration authority (RA), who also maintains an accurate register of the registration elements that have been assigned. The RA is a competent body with the requisite infrastructure that ensures the effective allocation of these registration elements and any other RA responsibilities that are described in the RA standard. These bodies are designated by ISO or IEC to serve as the sole RA for particular documents, which creates a de facto monopoly situation.

H.1.2 A committee developing an International Standard that will require an RA shall inform the Chief Executive Officer at an early stage, to permit any necessary negotiations and to allow the technical management board to take a decision in advance of the publication of the International Standard.

H.1.3 The technical management board designates RAs in connection with International Standards on the proposal of the committee concerned.

H.1.4 RAs should be qualified and internationally acceptable bodies; if there is no such organization available, such tasks may be conferred upon the Office of the CEO by the decision of the technical management board.

H.1.5 RAs should be required to indicate clearly in their operations that they have been designated by ISO or IEC (for example, by including appropriate wording on the letterhead of the designated body).

H.1.6 Registration functions undertaken by the RA under the provisions of the relevant International Standard shall require no financial contribution from ISO or IEC or their members. This would not preclude, however, the charging for services provided by the RA if duly authorized by the council board.

H.2 Compliance

Where the Office of the CEO becomes aware of an RA standard under development or under revision that has not followed this RA policy, it shall stop the publication process to allow time to implement this RA policy before the RA standard is published. For this reason, committees are encouraged to make the Office of the CEO aware of a project requiring an RA as early in the development process as possible to avoid delays in publication.

H.3 Terms and definitions

standard for which an RA is providing the Registration Services

services provided by the RA in the implementation of the RA standard and which are described in the RA standard

entity appointed by ISO or IEC to fulfil the registration services in an RA standard

third party (e.g. national or regional sub-entity) to which the RA may delegate some aspects of the registration services

Note 1 to entry Even when delegated to registration agencies, the registration services remain under the overall responsibility of the RA.

agreement based on the RAA template signed by the RA and the Office of the CEO, which details the functions, roles and legal obligations of the parties involved

unique identifiers or identifier code components, the methodology for which is described in the RA standard but which themselves are not part of the RA standard

H.4 Procedure

H.4.1 Chronology

This RA policy addresses the various aspects of an RA in the order of the life cycle of a typical RA, noting that some stages may be done in parallel. Each stage is addressed as follows:

• Declaring the need for an RA (H.4.2)
• Drafting an RA standard (H.4.3)
• Selecting an RA (H.4.4)
• Appointing an RA (H.4.5)
• Signing an RAA (H.4.6)
• Implementing an RA standard (H.4.7)

• Role of the RA (H.4.7.1)
• Role of the committee (H.4.7.2)
• Role of the Office of the CEO (H.4.7.3)

• Terminating an RA (H.4.8)

H.4.2 Declaring the need for an RA

A committee shall determine that an RA is required for a document as soon as the draft is sufficiently mature to make this decision, whether this is during the creation of a new document or the revision of an existing document involving material changes to its implementation. The committee confirms its decision that a document needs an RA for its implementation by way of a resolution.

The committee secretariat completes the RA confirmation (RAC) form and submits it to the Office of the CEO as soon as the resolution is approved.

H.4.3 Drafting an RA Standard

The following shall be included in all RA standards:

• a) a description of the identification scheme or the mechanism for generating unique registration elements;
• b) a description of the registration services, and the responsibilities of the RA;
• c) a link to the ISO or IEC webpage where the name and contact information of the RA for a given RA standard are published. The ISO or IEC webpage shall provide a link to the RA's website, which will contain more information on the registration services available.

The following shall not be included in RA standards:

• in accordance with the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2:2021, Clause 4, contractual or other legal aspects;
• procedures concerning the provision of the registration services (e.g. a handbook made available by the RA);
• the name of the RA. Instead, a link to the ISO or IEC website shall be provided (see H.4.3 c));
• references to the selection or reappointment process for the RA;
• details about any registration agencies. In case of delegation of registration services by the RA to third parties (e.g. registration agencies) as agreed under the RAA, the RA standard may mention the fact that some aspects of the registration services have been delegated.

The Office of the CEO is responsible for coordinating with the committee to ensure that the appropriate text is included in the RA standard. Any questions about what should be included in the RA standard are to be addressed to the Office of the CEO.

H.4.4 Selecting an RA

The selection process of the RA applies to new RA standards and existing RA standards.

In the case of revisions, the committee shall review and decide whether the existing RA should continue or if a selection process should be launched to select additional RA candidates. In their review, the committee shall consider the changes being made to the RA standard, particularly with regard to the responsibilities of the RA, and the goal of optimizing the implementation of the RA standards. The decision to launch a selection process should be supported by a rationale. The committee shall confirm its decision by resolution.

The committee shall establish a process so that an RA can be appointed or re-appointed before the publication of the RA standard. It is important that each draft of the RA standard contains details about the nature of the registration services needed and that these are shared with any current or prospective RA candidates.

The committee establishes the criteria for the application process and selection of the RA and confirms these by resolution. The minimum criteria for the selection process shall be as follows.

• a) Selection criteria – these must be clearly explained and with sufficient details for possible RA candidates to assess their ability to meet the criteria and apply on this basis. Included in the selection criteria shall be the requirement that the prospective RA candidate provide the following information in writing:

1. proof (e.g. statutes) that it is a legal entity, which means that is an organization formed under the laws of a jurisdiction and that it is, therefore, subject to governance-related rules;
2. expression of willingness to take responsibility for the registration services;
3. confirmation that it is technically and financially able to carry out the RA services described in the RA standard and the RAA on an international level, including, for example,

1. a financial plan for funding the expected volume of registrations,
2. a list of employees or third parties and their applicable background and skills,
3. a description of the physical facilities available to accomplish the work,
4. a demonstrated financial capacity to meet liability exposure for performing the services;

4. documentation and examples, where relevant, of its experience in the respective community of practice;
5. confirmation of whether it intends to delegate part of the registration services to registration agencies;
6. confirmation of whether it will charge fees for the RA services and, if it charges fees, confirmation that any such fees will be on a cost recovery basis;
7. expression of willingness to sign and execute an RAA, the ISO-IEC RAA template for which shall be shared with the RA candidate.

• b) Public call for RA candidates – committees shall take the appropriate steps needed to post the call for competent RA applicants to as broad a market as possible, also targeting possible organizations by inviting them to apply. The relative weighting of each evaluation criterion shall be published in the public call. Details of the registration services shall be made available to any current RA and any prospective RA candidates.
• c) Evaluation – Prospective RA candidates shall provide their responses in writing. The committee (or a subset thereof) shall determine the relative weight to be given to each selection criterion and shall evaluate the prospective RA candidates accordingly.
• d) Record-keeping – the committee secretariat shall keep records of all documents in the selection process, including the call for candidates, applications, evaluation, decision, etc.
• e) Professionalism – the selection process should be conducted in a professional manner, adhering to the principle of discretion among those involved.

The committee shall then confirm to the technical management board its recommendation for the appointment of the organization selected to be the RA via a resolution.

H.4.5 Appointing an RA

The information that is provided by the committee in the RAC form (see H.4.2) is needed to launch the technical management board ballot appointing the RA, as well as the council board ballot if the RA intends to charge fees. RA may charge fees for the registration services if authorized by the council board, and as long as the fees are charged strictly on a cost recovery basis. In the case of revisions, approval from the technical management board or council board is not needed if the committee decides that the same RA should continue (see H.4.4) and the required authorization to charge fees has already been given.

H.4.6 Signing an RAA

A signed RAA must have been executed using the latest RAA template before an RA standard is published (including revisions). In the case of revisions, the process to sign the RAA should begin at the time of the launch of the review process or the committee's decision to launch a revision to ensure the timely signature of the RAA and to avoid delays in publication.

Only after the technical management board (and council board if fees are charged) has appointed the RA can the RAA be signed. Signing an RAA based on the ISO/IEC template is mandatory for all RAs. The RAA shall be signed before the publication of a new or revised RA standard. If an RAA is not signed, the new or revised RA standard shall not be published.

In cases where there is a high market need, the technical management board(s) can exceptionally approve the publication of a revised RA standard to be published while an RAA is being negotiated. The committee responsible for the RA standard needs to submit a formal request to the technical management board(s) with a market need justification through the representative(s) of the Office(s) of the CEO of the committee. To ensure consistency and equality of treatment between the different RAs, any requested deviations from the RAA template which ISO and IEC consider to be significant in nature shall be submitted to the technical management board(s) for approval.

H.4.7 Implementing an RA standard

H.4.7.1 Role of the RA

The RA provides the registration services by:

• providing the registration services described in the RA standard, and
• respecting the provisions of the RAA.

H.4.7.2 Role of the committee

Although RAAs are signed by the RA and by the Office of the CEO, the signature of an RAA by the Office of the CEO binds all components in the ISO or IEC system, including ISO or IEC members and ISO or IEC committees. The central role is played by committees. In addition to declaring the need for an RA (H.4.2), drafting the RA standard (H.4.3) and selecting an RA (H.4.4) for both new and revised RA standards, the committee has the main responsibility for oversight of the RA as follows.

• a) Answering questions: The committee must be available to the RA to answer questions about the RA standard and clarify any expectations regarding its role in implementing the RA standard.
• b) Assessing RA's annual reports: The RAA requires the RA to provide the committee with annual reports by the date specified by the committee. The committee shall ensure that these annual reports are provided on time and shall read them.

The RA's annual report is to be divided into two parts:

The first part addresses the operational aspects of the RA as directly related to the RA services. The committee, ISO or IEC may request information about the activities of the RA that are not related to the RA services if there is reason to believe that these are interfering with the RA services. At a minimum, this first part of the RA report shall confirm:

1. that the RA is fulfilling the RA services described in the RA standard;
2. compliance with the signed RAA by the registration agencies designated by the RA;
3. that the RA is meeting user needs and providing users with guidance as needed.

The second part of the RA report provides information about any complaints received from users of the RA standard regarding, for example, fees, access to and use of data and/or information produced during the implementation of the RA standard, as well as the accuracy of the data and/or information. This part shall indicate whether the complaints remain outstanding at the time of the RA report and the efforts underway to resolve them.

• c) Monitoring: In addition to the annual RA report, the committee shall also analyse any feedback it receives from industry and users of the RA standard. Based on all of these elements (RA report and other feedback), the committee shall report to the Office of the CEO (see d)).
• d) Reporting to the Office of the CEO: At least once per year and based on the information collected under c), the committee shall provide a report to the responsible Office of the CEO using the annual committee report (ACR) form. The purpose of such reports is to confirm that the RA operates in accordance with the RAA or to raise any concerns (concerns can include RA not meeting industry or user needs, complaints about the quality of the registration services, etc.). Such reports shall be provided at least annually to the responsible Office of the CEO or more frequently if the committee deems it necessary. The Office of the CEO may also ask for ad hoc reports. If the report identifies concerns, it shall include the planned corrective measures (see f)) needed to address these concerns.
• e) Dispute resolution: The obligations of RAs to address complaints are contained in the RAA template. The role of the committee (and the Office of the CEO) is limited to advising the RA of any complaints it receives about the RA services and supporting the RA in addressing the dispute. The committee shall not assume responsibility for the dispute or become the appellate body for disputes between the RA and users of the RA standard, as this may inadvertently give the impression that ISO or IEC is responsible for the registration services.
• f) Corrective measures:

1. By the RA – the RA is responsible for implementing any corrective measures that are within its area of responsibility, which would include the registration services and the provisions described in the RAA.
2. By the committee – the committee is responsible for recommending possible corrective measures such as revising the RA standard, providing advice and guidance to the RA, carrying out audits or recommending the termination of the RAA to the Office of the CEO in severe cases.
3. By the Office of the CEO – the corrective measures that fall within the responsibility of the Office of the CEO (e.g. updating or overseeing the RAA) will be coordinated by the representative of the Office of the CEO. The representative of the Office of the CEO may also recommend corrective measures.

• g) Maintenance of records: The committee shall maintain and archive all key communications and documentation (e.g. correspondence between the RA and the committee regarding complaints) until at least five years after either termination of the RAA or withdrawal of the RA standard. The committee secretariat is responsible for ensuring that these are maintained.

The committee may create an advisory subgroup, with the appropriate terms of reference [often referred to as a registration management group (RMG)] to help them with the above. Committees (either directly or through the RMG) shall not participate or get involved in providing the registration services except in the supervisory roles specified in H.4.7.2.

H.4.7.3 Role of the Office of the CEO

The committee's interface with the Office of the CEO is through the responsible representative of the Office of the CEO. The role of the Office of the CEO includes:

• identification of RA standards during the development process if not done by the committee;
• providing guidance and advice for the drafting of RA standards;
• training committees on this RA policy;
• coordination with committees to ensure compliance with the RA policies, quality of RA services, appropriate handling of complaints, addressing industry and users' needs, including addressing the concerns raised in the annual reports provided by committees (using the ACR form) and recommending and assisting in the implementation of any corrective measures (see H.4.7.2).
• Maintenance of records in relation to their involvement.

H.4.8 Terminating an RA

Termination of RAs could occur when

• an RAA has expired, and the RA or ISO or IEC has given the required notice of its intent not to renew it, or
• the RAA is terminated for cause, or
• the RAA was terminated by mutual consent, or
• the RA standard is withdrawn, or
• the RAA goes into bankruptcy, liquidation or disbandment.

When an RA has been given notice of non-renewal or termination, the committee should exercise particular oversight to ensure that RA services are maintained during the notice period and change-over phase.

Unless the RA standard is withdrawn, the process detailed in H.4.4 should be followed in the selection of a replacement RA unless the committee has identified an alternative RA candidate that meets the selection criteria in H.4.4 and judges that going through the selection process for additional RA candidates would cause unacceptable disruption in the RA services.

Annex I (normative) Numbering of documents

I.1 Working documents

All documents distributed shall bear a reference. This reference is composed of three parts:

• a) a designation, indicating the committee or groups circulating the document;
• b) the serial number of the document with respect to the committee;
• c) a mnemonic indicating the type of document (optional).

The first page of the document shall also bear the date, written in format YYYY-MM-DD, on which the document was circulated.

The serial number is allocated at the time of circulation of the document, based on the register of all documents for the committee.

All documents intended for circulation shall use a standardized cover page.

Once a reference number is used for a working document, it cannot be used again for a document with different wording and/or different contents. If a document replaces an earlier one, the system generates a new reference number on the first page of the new document.

Subgroups of committee should use the same numbering scheme for their working documents.

EXAMPLE ISO/TC 121/SC 1 N1234 and 64/1007A/CD.

I.2 Allocation of project number

When a new project is registered by the Office of the CEO (see 2.3.5), the latter will allocate a reference number to the project. The number allocated will remain the same during the development of the project and for the published documents. The number allocated is purely a registration and reference number and has no meaning whatsoever in the sense of classification or chronological order. The number allocated to a withdrawn project or a published document shall not be used again except in the case of a cancelled project that is restarted or in the case of a change of document type (e.g. from a TS to an IS).

If the project represents a revision or amendment of an existing International Standard, the registered project will be allocated the same number as the existing International Standard.

For example, in a case of an amendment, a suffix indicating the nature of the document shall be added to the document number.

If, however, the scope is substantially changed, the document may be given a different number.

Annex J (normative) Formulating scopes of committees

J.1 Introduction

The scope of a committee is a statement precisely defining the limits of the work of that committee. As such it has a number of functions:

• it assists those with queries and proposals relating to a field of work to locate the appropriate committee;
• it prevents overlapping the work programmes of two or more ISO and/or IEC committees;
• it can also help guard against moving outside the field of activities authorized by the technical management board or the parent committee.

J.2 Formulation of scopes

Basic rules for the formulation of scopes of committees are given in 1.5.10, 1.6.4 and K.3.

The order of the elements of a scope shall be:

• basic scope;
• horizontal functions (see Annex M), where applicable;
• exclusions (if any);
• notes (if any).

J.3 Basic scope

Scopes of committees shall not refer to the general aims of international standardization or repeat the principles that govern the work of all committees.

In exceptional cases, explanatory material may be included if considered important to the understanding of the scope of the committee. Such material shall be in the form of "Notes".

J.4 Exclusions

Should it be necessary to specify that certain topics are outside the scope of the committee, these shall be listed and be introduced by the words "Excluded …"

Exclusions shall be clearly specified.

Where the exclusions are within the scope of one or more other existing ISO or IEC technical committees, these committees shall also be identified.

EXAMPLE 1 "Excluded: Those … covered by ISO/TC …".

EXAMPLE 2 "Excluded: Standardization for specific items in the field of … (ISO/TC …), … (IEC TC …), etc.".

It is not necessary to mention self-evident exclusions.

EXAMPLE 3 "Excluded: Products covered by other ISO or IEC committees".

EXAMPLE 4 "Excluded: … Specifications for electrical equipment and apparatus, which fall within the scope of IEC committees".

J.5 Scopes of committees related to products

Scopes of committees related to products shall clearly indicate the field, application area or market sector which they intend to cover, to easily ascertain whether a particular product is, or is not, within that field, application area or market sector.

EXAMPLE 1 "Standardization of … and … used in …".

EXAMPLE 2 "Standardization of materials, components and equipment for construction and operation of … and … as well as equipment used in the servicing and maintenance of …".

The limits of the scope can be defined by indicating the purpose of the products, or by characterizing the products.

The scope should not enumerate the types of products covered by the committee since to do so might suggest that other types can be, or are, standardized by other committees. However, if this is the intention, then it is preferable to list those items which are excluded from the scope.

The enumeration of aspects such as terminology, technical requirements, methods of sampling, test methods, designation, marking, packaging, dimensions, etc., suggests a restriction in the scope to those particular aspects, and that other aspects may be standardized by other committees. The aspects of the products to be standardized should, therefore, not be included in the scope unless it is intended that the scope is limited to those particular aspects.

If the scope makes no mention of any aspect, this means that the subject in its entirety is covered by the committee.

NOTE The coverage does not necessarily mean the need to prepare a document. It only means that documents on any aspect, if needed, will be prepared by that committee and no other.

An example of unnecessary enumeration of aspects is as follows:

EXAMPLE 3 "Standardization of classification, terminology, sampling, physical, chemical or other test methods, specifications, etc.".

Mention of priorities, whether referring to type of product or aspect, shall not appear in the scope since these will be indicated in the work programme.

J.6 Scopes of committees not related to products

If the scope of a committee is intended to be limited to certain aspects which are unrelated or only indirectly related to products, the scope shall only indicate the aspect to be covered (e.g. safety colours and signs, non-destructive testing, water quality).

The term "terminology" as a possible aspect of standardization should not be mentioned unless this aspect is the only project to be dealt with by the committee. If this is not the case, the mention of terminology is superfluous since this aspect is a logical part of any standardization activity.

Annex K (normative) Project committees

K.1 Proposal stage

A new work item proposal not falling within the scope of an existing committee shall be presented using the appropriate form and fully justified (see 2.3.4) by one of the bodies authorized to make new work item proposals (see 2.3.2).

The Office of the CEO may decide to return the proposal to the proposer for further development before circulation for voting. In this case, the proposer shall make the changes suggested or provide justification for not making the changes. If the proposer does not make the changes and requests that its proposal be circulated for voting as originally presented, the technical management board will decide on appropriate action. This could include blocking the proposal until the changes are made or accepting that it be balloted as received.

In all cases, the Office of the CEO may also include comments and recommendations in the proposal form.

For details relating to the justification of the proposal, see Annex C.

The proposal shall be submitted to the secretariat of the technical management board, which shall arrange for it to be distributed to all National Bodies for voting.

Proposers are also encouraged to indicate the date of the first meeting of the project committee (see K.3).

If the proposal was not submitted by a National Body, the distribution to the National Bodies shall include a call for offers to assume the secretariat of a project committee.

Votes shall be returned within 12 weeks.

Acceptance requires:

• approval by a two-thirds majority of the National Bodies voting;
• a commitment to participate actively by at least five National Bodies that approved the new work item proposal and nominated Experts.

K.2 Establishment of a project committee

The technical management board shall review the results of voting on the new work item proposal and, if the approval criteria are met, shall establish a project committee (the reference number shall be the next available number in the technical committee/project committee sequence).

The secretariat of the project committee shall be allocated to the National Body that submitted the proposal, or the technical management board shall decide on the allocation among the offers received if the proposal did not originate from a National Body.

National Bodies that approved the new work item proposal and nominated one or more Experts shall be registered as P‑members of the project committee and assigned it to the working group (see 1.12). National Bodies that approved the new work item proposal but did not make a commitment to participate actively shall be registered as O‑members. National Bodies that voted negatively, but nevertheless indicated that they would participate actively if the new work item was approved, shall be registered as P‑members. National Bodies voting negatively without indicating a wish to participate shall be registered as O‑members.

The Office of the CEO shall announce to the National Bodies the establishment of the project committee and its membership.

National Bodies will be invited to confirm/change their membership status by informing the Office of the CEO.

The secretariat will contact any potential liaison organizations identified in the new work item proposal or in National Body comments thereon and will invite them to indicate whether they have an interest in the work and, if so, which category of liaison they would be interested in. Requests for liaison will be processed in accordance with the existing procedures.

K.3 First meeting of a project committee

The procedure for calling a project committee meeting shall be carried out in accordance with Clause 5, with the exception that a six-week notice period may be used if the date of the first meeting was communicated at the time of submission of the proposal.

The Chair of the project committee shall be the Project Leader nominated in the new work item proposal or shall be nominated by the secretariat if no Project Leader was nominated in the new work item proposal.

The first meeting shall confirm the scope of the new work item. In case revision is necessary (for purposes of clarification but not an extension of the scope), the revised scope shall be submitted to the technical management board for approval. It shall also confirm the project plan and decide on any subgroups needed to carry out the work.

If it is determined that the project needs to be subdivided to produce two or more publications, this is possible provided that the subdivisions of the work lie fully within the scope of the original new work item proposal. If not, a new work item will need to be prepared for consideration by the technical management board.

NOTE Project committees are exempted from the requirement to establish a strategic business plan.

K.4 Preparatory stage

The preparatory stage shall be carried out in accordance with 2.4.

K.5 Committee, enquiry, approval and publication stages

The committee, enquiry, approval and publication stages shall be carried out in accordance with 2.5 to 2.8.

K.6 Disbanding of a project committee

Once the standard or standards are published, the project committee shall be disbanded.

K.7 Maintenance of document(s) prepared by a project committee

If a project committee has not been converted into a technical committee, the technical management board should, if possible, assign the maintenance of the document to an existing committee with an appropriate scope.

If no existing committee is assigned, the National Body that held the secretariat of the former project committee is asked to assume responsibility for enquiries on the document(s) for the period before a revision is started in accordance with the procedures outlined in Clause 4.

One year before the end of the stability period, the Office of the CEO shall discuss maintenance plans with the secretariat of the former project committee, as specified in Clause 4.

Annex L (normative) Selection criteria for people leading the technical work

L.1 Obligations of National Bodies

National Bodies are responsible for ensuring that candidates for leadership positions (i.e. Chairs, Convenors, and Secretaries/Committee Managers) meet the criteria in L.3. National Bodies are also responsible for ensuring that any gaps in skills or knowledge of the selected leaders, as well as Experts, are identified and filled through ongoing training.

L.2 Resources available to fill gaps in skills or knowledge

A number of resources are available to help National Bodies fill any identified gaps in skills or knowledge:

• Training and other materials are available from the Office of the CEO to ensure the effectiveness of the various roles in conducting/attending meetings, including understanding key concepts.
• To help train Experts, it may be useful to schedule committee pre-sessions and information on existing resources before or in conjunction with committee plenaries.
• The support of the Office of the CEO, particularly in the case of new committees, is available to train leaders and Experts. In the case of new committees, the representative of the Office of the CEO should attend the first meeting to provide an overall introduction of ISO or IEC and its processes.
• The services of an external facilitator for coaching and training could be considered as one of the options to assist the committee leadership to develop specific skills, such as the skills needed to run effective meetings, general leadership skills, etc.

L.3 Selection criteria for people leading the technical work

L.3.1 General

The success of any committee or working group is dependent on its leadership. These selection criteria apply to committee Chairs, working group Convenors and Secretaries/Committee Managers. National Bodies are therefore required to apply these criteria when nominating people to these roles to ensure that the ISO/IEC Directives are correctly applied.

L.3.2 Chairs and Convenors

L.3.2.1 Competencies and attributes of good Chairs and Convenors:

• existing role and good reputation in the sector
• relevant professional experience in chairing committees and other groups
• lead and inspire delegates and Experts from the sector towards consensus
• understand the international nature of standardization work and its resulting benefits
• commit time and resources to their role
• develop solutions through innovative and creative thinking in a consensus environment
• act proactively and communicate diplomatically
• foster and value cooperation with other ISO and IEC committees and partners, including those from regulatory bodies
• act in a purely international capacity, divesting themselves of a national position

L.3.2.2 Job specification for Chairs and Convenors:

• lead meetings effectively with a view to reaching an agreement and to ensure that positions and decisions are clearly understood
• ensure that all positions and views (at meetings and by correspondence) are given equal treatment
• manage projects according to agreed target dates in accordance with the project plan from preparation to completion
• work to ensure that a full range of technical competence is available to the group
• be fully knowledgeable of the subject and market needs
• propose decisions to progress or to stop work on the basis of its market or global relevance
• have basic knowledge of ISO or IEC and its procedures

L.3.2.3 Additional requirements for Chairs of committees:

• shall take responsibility for the overall management of the committee, including any subcommittees and working groups
• shall advise the technical management board on important matters relating to the committee
• shall ensure that the policy and strategic decisions of the technical management board are implemented by the committee
• shall think strategically to promote ISO's or IEC's work in the sector

L.3.2.4 Additional requirements for Convenors of working groups:

• shall have appropriate knowledge and capabilities in using drafting tools and the ISO or IEC web-based applications, including the required use of ISO or IEC applications for communications and document sharing, to support the working group's work

L.3.2.5 Supporting information

The following information should be considered by the National Bodies in the nominations for Chairs and Convenors:

• current role in the sector
• education
• professional career
• leadership experience
• similar activities
• language skills

L.3.3 Secretaries/Committee Managers and secretariats

L.3.3.1 Selection of Secretaries/Committee Managers and secretariats

The success of a committee or working group is dependent on its secretariat and Secretary/Committee Manager (or Convenor of a working group in case there is no Secretary/Committee Manager). The following list (L.3.3.2 to L.3.3.9) is based on the ISO/IEC Directives and shows the tasks expected to be performed in these roles. National Bodies should use this list when appointing organizations and professionals as secretariats and Secretaries/Committee Managers.

L.3.3.2 Good documents

Preparing drafts for the committee or working group, arranging for their distribution and treatment of the comments received. In the case of Secretaries/Committee Managers, preparing drafts, text and figures for circulation by the Office of the CEO for enquiry and final draft International Standards or for publication. Fulfilling the Office of the CEO submission requirements for such documents when sending them.

L.3.3.3 Excellent project management

Assisting in the establishment of priorities and target dates for each project. Notifying the names of all working group Convenors and Project Leaders to the Office of the CEO. Initiating ballots. Proposing proactive solutions for projects that are running significantly overtime, and/or which appear to lack sufficient support.

L.3.3.4 Well prepared meetings

Establishing the agenda and arranging for its distribution as well as the distribution of all documents on the agenda, including report/minutes of working groups, and indicating all other documents which are necessary for discussion during the meeting. Recording the decisions taken in a meeting and making these decisions available in writing for confirmation in the meeting. Preparing the report/minutes of meetings to be circulated within four weeks after the meeting.

L.3.3.5 Good advice on ISO and IEC processes

Providing advice to the Chair, Project Leaders, and Convenors on the ISO/IEC Directives and, in particular, the procedures associated with the progression of projects. Contacting any subcommittees and working groups regarding their activities.

L.3.3.6 Connecting and networking

Working closely with the Chair of the committee or Convenor of the working group. Maintaining close contact with the Office of the CEO and with the members of the committee or working group regarding its activities. Maintaining close contact with the Secretary/Committee Manager of any parent committee.

L.3.3.7 Proactive follow-up of actions

Ensuring that all actions agreed upon at meetings or by correspondence are completed on time and in a transparent manner.

L.3.3.8 Good with IT

Have appropriate knowledge and capabilities in using drafting tools and the ISO or IEC web-based applications, including the required use of ISO or IEC applications for communications and document sharing, to support the committee's work.

L.3.3.9 Supporting information

The following information should be considered by the National Body when appointing Secretaries/Committee Managers:

• education;
• professional career;
• experience in standardization work;
• participation in training programmes on standardization;
• experience with ISO's or IEC's IT tools and IT infrastructure;
• language skills.

Annex M (normative) Horizontal documents

M.1 Purpose of horizontal documents

A horizontal document is a document which other committees are required to take into account when developing their own (product/solution) documents. It is an important document that other committees use when they develop their documents; however, it also requires the input of the impacted committees to ensure the horizontal document is still valid and fit for purpose.

M.2 Definition of horizontal document

Document dealing with a subject relevant to a number of committees and of crucial importance to ensure the coherence among documents.

Horizontal documents may provide fundamental principles, concepts, graphical symbols, terminology or general characteristics.

M.3 Types of horizontal document

A horizontal document shall only be an International Standard or a Technical Report.

M.4 Criteria when considering horizontal documents in ISO and IEC

A consistent approach shall be used when considering the horizontal documents. The request for horizontal status shall be made for the development of a new project or for the revision of an existing document.

• For a request related to a new document or an existing document, the assessment by the approver bodies is based on the rationale provided by the requester.
• In the case of an existing document, the assessment by the approver bodies is based on the number of other committees referencing the document.

M.5 Horizontal approval in both ISO and IEC

For the cases of joint approval of both ISO and IEC, a consistent approach to the assessment needs to be managed and coordinated. In the case where an ISO or IEC committee requests horizontal status recognition in both ISO and IEC, it requires the approval of both technical management boards. In the case when only ISO or IEC approves the horizontal status, only the following options are possible:

• A proposed IEC horizontal document, which is only valid for IEC documents, shall be approved by the IEC SMB.
• A proposed ISO horizontal document, which is only valid for ISO documents, shall be approved by ISO/TMB.

In the case where horizontal recognition for an IEC document or ISO document is requested by both ISO and IEC, the approval approach should be made in series, starting with the originating organization (ISO or IEC). This will remove the possibility of the second organization making a request that has already failed.

M.6 Oversight of horizontal documents

An essential element to ensure consistency and awareness of horizontal documents to those impacted committees is oversight. Oversight is the supervision required to cover the full life cycle of the document, from proposal to development, publication and subsequent maintenance.

The following two areas of oversight are highlighted:

• the development of a new horizontal document;
• the revision of an established horizontal document.

In both cases, the host committee of the horizontal document is responsible for ensuring communication and coordination of the work with those identified impacted committees.

Oversight is provided by the Office of the CEO with intervention by the advisory groups or the technical management boards, as needed.

M.7 Handling of joint horizontal requests for a JTC or an ISO/IEC JWG under Mode 5

A JTC is a joint technical committee of both ISO and IEC and therefore both ISO and IEC have to approve the horizontal document for the JTC to declare that it is a horizontal document.

An ISO/IEC joint working group (JWG) in Mode 5 has its project approved by both ISO and IEC committees and therefore both ISO and IEC shall approve the horizontal document for that document to be declared a horizontal document.

In both cases, it is recommended that the approval process is carried out in parallel with disclosure of the same input material for approval by both technical management boards. Approval is therefore made for each document for joint horizontal requests. Nevertheless, it is preferred that applications group the requests for horizontal documents where possible.

M.8 Horizontal oversight in a JTC or an ISO/IEC JWG under Mode 5

Consideration on the horizontal nature is also required for revisions of documents with a horizontal status. In the JTC or ISO/IEC JWG in Mode 5, this oversight is carried out by the committee officers and reported back to the technical management boards.

Assistance to identify possible impacted committees could be provided using the existing IEC and/or ISO tools.

Annex N (normative) Procedure for the development of International Workshop Agreements (IWA)

N.1 Proposals to develop IWAs

A proposal to hold an ISO or IEC workshop for the purpose of developing one or more IWAs on a particular subject may come from any source, including National Bodies, liaison organizations, corporate bodies, etc. An organization that is not a National Body or liaison organization, or is not international in scope, shall inform the National Body in its country of its intent to submit such a proposal.

Whenever practicable, proposers shall provide details concerning

• purpose and justification of the proposal,
• relevant documents, and
• cooperation and liaison,

in accordance with Annex C.

Additionally, wherever possible, proposals shall include an indication of a National Body willing to provide secretariat support to the IWA workshop. If it is considered likely that participation in the workshop will need to be limited (see N.5.2), this shall also be indicated.

In some circumstances, it may be considered that several meetings will be needed to reach a consensus. In such cases, the proposer is encouraged, or may be required by the technical management board, to develop a business plan which would give details concerning meeting schedules, expected dates of availability of draft documents, the possibility that a workshop may establish project teams to progress work between meetings of the workshop, the expected date of availability of any IWA, etc.

N.2 Review of proposals

Proposals will be referred to the technical management board for approval. Proposals should contain an analysis of the global interest in the subject being proposed for the IWA in different countries and by stakeholders.

If the proposal is accepted, the technical management board will initiate consultations with National Bodies to identify a candidate willing to act as the organizer and to provide administrative and logistics support to the proposer. Preference will normally be given to:

• the National Body from the country of the proposer, if the proposer is not a National Body; or
• National Bodies holding secretariats in fields related to that covered by the proposal.

If there is more than one offer, the technical management board will formally designate the National Body assigned to act as the workshop secretariat. The assigned National Body may establish financial arrangements with the proposer to cover administrative and logistics support costs for the workshop. If a National Body is not willing to act as workshop secretariat, the technical management board may authorize the Office of the CEO to fulfil this role, provided all associated costs are recovered by workshop registration fees.

An informative checklist for estimating IWA workshop costs is provided in N.10.

The workshop secretariat and the proposer shall designate the Chair of the workshop.

N.3 Announcement

Once the workshop secretariat and the proposer have agreed on a date and venue for the first meeting of the workshop, these shall be communicated to the National Bodies. These details shall be further announced by the workshop secretariat, the Office of the CEO and by any other interested National Bodies in the most appropriate way(s) to achieve the widest possible circulation (e.g. a publicly accessible website). This may include a number of different announcement options and media, but the intent is to ensure that the broadest range of relevant interested parties worldwide are informed of the workshop and have the opportunity to attend.

The proposer and workshop secretariat will ensure that any committees with projects relevant to the subject will be invited to be represented at the workshop.

A registration fee may be applied to help support the preparation and hosting of the workshop. Any registration fees shall be stated in the workshop announcement.

When the subject matter of a workshop is likely to be of interest to developing countries, it is recommended either that a funding mechanism other than a registration fee be applied to facilitate participation from such countries, or that a number of "free" registrations be permitted.

The announcement shall be made at least 90 days in advance of the agreed date to allow potential attendees adequate time to plan on attending the workshop. The announcement shall be accompanied by a registration form to allow potential participants to register for the workshop. Registration forms shall be returned to the workshop secretariat.

N.4 Workshop information

A workshop programme detailing workshop objectives, documents, agenda, draft documents and any other relevant details for the workshop shall be available, and circulated to registered participants, no later than six weeks prior to the workshop date. Registered participants may submit their own contributions to the workshop secretariat for further distribution to other participants.

N.5 Participation

N.5.1 Workshop Chairs

The proposer and workshop Secretary shall designate the Chair of any particular workshop. The Chair shall act in a purely international capacity, divesting themselves of a national position and, in particular, shall

• ensure that all points of view expressed during a workshop are adequately summarized so that they are understood by all present,
• conduct the workshop with a view to reaching consensus,
• ensure that all decisions are clearly formulated and, if needed, made available to the participants before the closure of the meeting of the workshop.

N.5.2 Registered participants

Any organization may register as a participant in a workshop, and participation will be open to the registered participants only. Participants are not required to be appointed by the National Body in their country. The workshop secretariat, Chair and proposer shall endeavour to ensure that the broadest range of interests is represented in any workshop and that there is an appropriate balance of representation. If needed, this may require that some limitation be placed on participation (for example, no more than two registered participants from the same corporate body or organization). If the need to limit participation is expected at the outset, this shall be indicated in the proposal submitted to the technical management board. If a need for limitation becomes apparent after the announcement of the workshop, this shall be authorized by the technical management board secretariat following consultation with the technical management board Chair and, if needed, other technical management board members.

Workshop secretariats are responsible for ensuring that the outcome of the workshop is truly international, i.e. it is attended by more than one country.

N.5.3 Project teams

In cases in which more than one meeting will be required to reach a consensus, a workshop may establish one or more project teams to progress work between meetings of the workshop. The workshop shall designate the membership of such project teams, ensuring that their working methods will allow all interests to participate fully.

N.6 Workshop procedures and management oversight

Workshops will be permitted to work in a practically autonomous manner using very flexible procedures.

However, there are a number of general ISO and/or IEC policies which need to be respected, in particular those concerning intellectual property rights and the use of SI units. It shall be the responsibility of the workshop secretariat to ensure that the appropriate policies are known to registered participants and are respected.

Management oversight will be kept to the minimum required to ensure coordination with existing standardization activities if relevant and to ensure that appropriate resources are provided by the system of the Office of the CEO. It will be the responsibility of the workshop Chair to determine when consensus of the workshop participants has been reached on a particular item or document. For the purposes of determining consensus, the workshop Chair shall apply the definition of consensus in 2.5.7.

It should be noted that an IWA workshop may arrive at the consensus that an IWA document is not necessary.

The workshop documents shall contain a description of the workshop consensus achieved, including any recommendations for possible future actions or revisions to the workshop documents. The document resulting from the workshop will proceed to publication based on the consensus of the workshop without additional reviews or approvals by any other body, except in the case of an appeal on such a document (see N.7).

N.7 Appeals

Any parties affected by the document resulting from the workshop shall have the right of appeal for any of the following reasons:

• The workshop and the process to arrive at its document have not complied with these procedures.
• The document resulting from the workshop is not in the best interests of international trade and commerce, or such public factors as safety, health or the environment.
• The contents of the document resulting from the workshop conflict with existing or draft standard(s) or may be detrimental to the reputation of ISO and/or IEC.

Such appeals shall be submitted within eight weeks of the date of the workshop and shall be considered by the technical management board, which, in such circumstances, will take the final decision concerning the publication of an IWA.

N.8 Workshop documents and publication

Workshops will decide on the content of their own documents. Documents shall be sent to the Office of the CEO for publication as IWAs. They will be numbered in a special IWA series. Each IWA shall include the list of participants in the workshop that developed it. The list of participants should solely comprise the names of the organization/company and the country, without any additional information.

IWAs may be published in one of the official ISO and IEC languages only, and competing IWAs on the same subject are permitted. The technical content of an IWA may compete with the technical content of an existing ISO or IEC document, or the proposed content of an ISO or IEC document under development, but conflict is not normally permitted unless expressly authorized by the technical management board.

N.9 Review of IWAs

If there is an existing ISO or IEC committee whose scope covers the topic, the published IWA shall automatically be allocated to this committee for maintenance.

An IWA shall be reviewed three years after its publication. This review shall be organized by the National Body which provided the workshop secretariat, or the committee which has been allocated the responsibility for the maintenance of the IWA. The review shall include the consultation of interested market players. The result of the review may be to confirm the IWA for a further three-year period, to withdraw the IWA or to submit it for further processing as another ISO or IEC document in accordance with the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 1.

An IWA may be further processed to become a Publicly Available Specification, a Technical Specification or an International Standard, according to the market requirement.

An IWA may remain valid for a maximum period of six years, following which it shall either be transformed with or without change into another ISO or IEC document or shall be automatically withdrawn.

N.10 Checklist to estimate costs associated with hosting an IWA workshop

N.10.1 General

Completion of this checklist is NOT mandatory for the proposed hosting of an IWA. It is intended simply as a tool to assist proposers and assigned National Bodies in determining major costs associated with hosting an IWA workshop. Some of the sample costs provided may not be applicable to particular IWA workshops, or may be covered in a different manner than is described below.

N.10.2 Overall measures to consider

N.10.3 Planned resources – Human resource requirements and functions

N.10.4 Planned resources — Material resource requirements

Annex O (normative) Second (and subsequent) language texts for ISO and IEC documents

O.1 Introduction

Annex E specifies the general policy on the use of languages as applied in ISO and IEC. This Annex O describes additional requirements concerning obtaining subsequent language texts.

NOTE English, French and Russian are the official ISO and IEC languages.

O.2 English, French, Russian and other languages

O.2.1 Responsibilities

In general, it is the responsibility of the Secretary/Committee Manager to ensure the text is available in English at the committee stage (2.5), enquiry stage (2.6), approval stage (2.7) and publication stage (2.8).

When the responsible committee has decided to include language(s) other than the official languages (this is permitted only in the case of a vocabulary), the National Body supporting the related language is responsible for the text, and its timely delivery (i.e. at the latest before the approval ballot).

O.2.2 Equivalence of texts

The National Body supporting a language is responsible for ensuring the equivalence of the related language version to the official language text during the development of an ISO or IEC document.

O.2.3 Timely delivery of official language versions

In the case where a second or third official language version is required, the National Body supporting the related language shall provide the Office of the CEO with the related language version within six weeks of the submission of the first language version.

O.2.4 Timing of preparation of texts

The preparation of versions in different languages should be started as early as possible in the development process. It is preferable, but not required, that committee drafts are available in all envisaged language versions. This also serves to help avoid preparation-related delays at later stages.

Where a second or third official language version is required, the Office of the CEO will provide the National Body responsible for the second or third language with a copy of the first language version when the text is submitted to the Office of the CEO for processing as an enquiry draft.

If the second or third language version is submitted within four weeks after the distribution of the first language version, it will be distributed separately without changing the deadline for vote. The second or third language version will be distributed as received.

Different procedures will apply at approval stage depending on when the second or third language version is received.

• If received more than two weeks before the close of the approval ballot, it will be circulated for vote together with the first language version.
• If received less than two weeks before the close of the approval ballot but before it closes, it will be published at the same time as the first language version, but with a disclaimer noting that the second or third language version was not circulated for the ballot.

After the closure of the approval ballot, the second or third language version will be published when received, but with a disclaimer noting that the second or third language version was not distributed for the ballot.

O.3 Other languages

The National Body that will be responsible for providing the unofficial language shall submit a business case for the responsible committee's approval. The business case, explaining the rationale, shall then be submitted to the Office of the CEO.

Annex P (normative) Systems standardization

P.1 Introduction

The multiplicity of technologies and their convergence in many new and emerging markets, particularly those involving large-scale infrastructure, now demand a top-down approach to standardization, starting at the system or system architecture rather than at the product level. System standards are also increasingly required in sectors such as environment, energy efficiency, safety, and health. The intent of the systems committee (SyC) approach is to engage additional stakeholders and enhance collaboration across ISO and IEC.

In the context of standardization, a system is:

Interacting and interrelated standardization challenges that have a multidisciplinary and sector scope that requires holistic and cooperative work methods in order to strategically support applications and services relevant to stakeholders.

A systems approach to standardization is thus a fundamentally cooperative, multidisciplinary top-down (or holistic) approach to solve standardization challenges brought by the abundance of technologies and their convergence.

The structures and procedures needed to accommodate the systems approach are, as far as possible, the same as those already in place for more traditional standardization activity. However, some further provisions are required in order to ensure that a particular systems standardization programme:

• is fully market relevant;
• can be managed within clearly defined boundaries;
• engages all the appropriate interests, both within and beyond the ISO and IEC community;
• is meant to facilitate collaboration and communication between SyCs and all other committees; and
• does not duplicate, overlap, or conflict with other work being undertaken in the same area.

P.1.1 Definitions

P.1.1.1 Systems committee (SyC)

A systems committee is a specialized type of committee working at the systems level taking into account the needs and concerns of all stakeholders. SyCs develop reference architectures, use cases, and appropriate deliverables and guidance on the interfaces, functionality and interaction of a system within its agreed terms of reference. SyCs and technical committees will avoid duplication of each other's work while striving for close collaboration. A SyC can draft Systems Reference Deliverables (SRD) and in certain instances International Standards. It functions generally in a similar manner to a conventional technical committee, except as specified in this Annex P.

P.1.1.2 Systems Reference Deliverable (SRD)

A Systems Reference Deliverable (SRD) is a deliverable produced by a SyC, which provides guidance on the use and application of standards in the corresponding SyC's domain. An SRD can be a normative document which may be referenced in the same way as any other document.

The clauses of an SRD can be normative or informative, as appropriate.

P.1.1.3 R-member

A formally recognized organization or entity invited to participate in a SyC's work programme, without voting rights, for the purpose of contributing expertise, exchanging information, and supporting collaboration. R-members can be ISO or IEC technical entities or external legally recognized organizations and are approved by the SyC's P-members.

P.2 Establishment of systems committees

P.2.1 Systems committees are established and disbanded as specified in 1.5.1.

P.2.2 A proposal for the establishment of a new systems committee is made as specified in 1.5.3.

P.2.3 The proposal for a new systems committee shall address requirements in 1.5.4. The proposal shall be made using the appropriate form. Additionally, the proposal shall include:

• a possible work programme;
• a roadmap to be further detailed and updated by the SyC.

The roadmap shall identify any closely related systems activities to clearly position the expected new systems work with the active participation of existing SyCs and TCs. Such a mapping should be communicated to these SyCs and TCs.

P.2.4 The evaluation of the proposal shall be in accordance with the requirements of 1.5.5.

P.2.5 The circulation of the proposal shall be in accordance with the requirements of 1.5.6.

P.2.6 The technical management board evaluates the replies and, provided that a two-thirds majority of the National Bodies voting are in favour of the proposal, and at least five National Bodies who voted in favour expressed their intention to participate actively, decides either to:

• establish a new systems committee, or
• assign the work to an existing committee.

P.2.7 1.9.1 applies for the allocation of the secretariat of a systems committee and 1.9.3 applies for the re-allocation of the secretariat.

P.2.8 SyCs shall have a labelling assignment distinct from the TC numbering systems (e.g. SyC AAL, SyC Smart Energy, etc.).

P.2.9 As soon as possible after the decision to establish a new SyC, the necessary Registered members (R-members) and liaisons shall be arranged.

P.2.10 The scope of a SyC shall be established as specified in 1.5.10 with the following exceptions.

• The scope is a statement precisely defining the limits of the work of a SyC. The definition of the scope of a SyC shall begin with the words "Systems Standardization of …" or "Standardization of systems in the field of …" and shall be drafted as concisely as possible.
• A SyC shall prepare a strategic business plan for its own specific field of activity (see 2.1.2).

P.2.11 The modification of the scope or title of a SyC shall be as specified in 1.5.11.

P.3 Establishment of subcommittees of systems committees

1.6 and 1.9 apply.

P.4 Participation in the work of systems committees

P.4.1 General

All National Bodies have the right to participate in the work of systems committees.

The same processes for participation in a committee apply to systems committees, 1.7 applies.

In SyCs, decisions will continue to be made by P-members through votes in plenary or by correspondence. SyC plenary delegates should be assigned by their normal process by the National Body. National Bodies have the responsibility to reconcile all their concerned national stakeholders in whatever process they currently use to form a vote or position.

P.4.2 P-members and O-members

See 1.7.

P.4.3 Other types of participation

P.4.3.1 Registered members

P.4.3.1.1 General

Participation by TCs and non-IEC and non-ISO groups is strongly encouraged in the work of a SyC. In order to facilitate a more active exchange of information and work, further to the current liaison process, a type of membership for a SyC has been formed and is called Registered member (R-member).

R-membership provides the ability to represent an organization within the SyC for the purpose of contributing to the SyC work programme.

In order for an R-member organization to be included in a SyC, it shall be recognized and approved by a two-thirds majority of the SyC P-members. R-membership is for a term of two years and can be renewed.

The SyC shall regularly review the list of R-members for active participation and recommend any additions or removals. The SyC shall notify the technical management board of all approved R-members.

The R-member entity will have one (or more) formal representatives (R-Rp) who will designate R-member Experts (R-Exp) to join a "pool of Experts" associated with the SyC.

R-members do not have voting rights and may not submit proposals for new work.

P.4.3.1.2 to P.4.3.1.5 summarize the associated activities and responsibilities of both R-members and SyCs.

P.4.3.1.2 R-member role

The roles of the R-members are as follows.

• R-members comprise R-member representative(s) (R-Rp), and defined R-member Experts (R-Exp) allocated by the R-member representative(s).
• The activity of the R-member is bidirectional, i.e. the R-member is expected to contribute and report back developments from the committee as an effective communications pathway.
• R-member Experts' role is to contribute to the development process and to facilitate the flow of information between entities.

P.4.3.1.3 R-member responsibilities to systems committees

The R-member organization shall appoint R-member representative(s) (R-Rp), who in turn shall appoint R-member Experts (R-Exp).

The responsibilities of the R-members are as follows.

R-Rp shall:

• provide the administration and authorization of its R-member Experts (R-Exp);
• provide/share/facilitate access to shareable documents, and draft standardization activities ongoing at R-member level to the systems committee members and other R-members.

R-Exp shall:

• provide meaningful inputs to the work of the SyC (technical knowledge, market trends, etc.);
• provide the vision and standardization needs, and potentially standardization roadmap (if the R-member is involved in some kinds of standardization) as perceived by the R-member;
• provide detailed understanding of already published deliverables, and technical/standardization activities ongoing at the R-member.

P.4.3.1.4 Systems committee responsibilities regarding R-members

• SyC shall provide/share/facilitate access to shareable documents, and draft standardization activities ongoing at IEC and at ISO;
• SyC shall provide a global roadmap and synthesis of the standardization activities (not only in ISO and IEC but also other standards organizations) in the systems committee domain.

P.4.3.1.5 Expected activities of R-members and systems committees

R-Rp and R-Exp are responsible for contributing in the SyC representing their R-member organization and reporting SyC activities back to their organization.

• a) Actively contribute by representing the R-member in SyC activities.
• b) Report on the global ISO and IEC systems roadmap in the concerned domain of their R-member organization.
• c) Report on the IEC SyC activities.
• d) Notify the SyC as soon as the R-member starts working on a new activity in the scope of the SyC activity with the goal to:

1. ensure that the R-member activities seamlessly complement already known IEC and/or ISO activities;
2. prevent any risk of overlapping activities between R-member activities and the known IEC and/or ISO activities.

• e) R-Experts may be selected to participate in specific projects and working groups by invitation of the Convenor/Project Leader.
• f) SyCs shall take into account the inputs of the R-members:

1. take into consideration the expertise and vision of the R-members;
2. register R-member existing deliverables and ongoing activities into the roadmap the SyC is producing;
3. regularly update and publish the roadmap to expose these activities to the market and to the other R-members (through free access website and other types of publication, but also to the IEC and/or ISO internal information process);
4. monitor R-member participation to ensure principles of contributing R-members are upheld.

P.4.3.2 Pool of Experts

The pool of Experts is a group of Experts nominated by R-members or National Bodies who are expected to contribute to the committee by appointment as an Expert to a working group through National Body appointment, or through Project Leader/Convenor invitation.

Members of the pool of Experts only have access to documents provided by the SyC officers to the pool of Experts. Once appointed to a working group, the Expert will also have access to associated working group documents.

The National Bodies of Experts nominated by R-members shall be notified.

P.4.3.3 Open forum

Optionally, SyCs may establish open forums with even more flexible representation. Members of the open forum will consist of SyC participants appointed by the National Bodies as well as self-nominated individuals. The SyC Chair will be the Convenor of the open forum. The open forum will be used by the SyC leadership for consultation on topics of interest.

Members of the open forum only have access to documents provided by the SyC officers to the open forum participants.

P.4.3.4 Liaisons

A systems committee may establish liaisons through the normal process. See 1.15, 1.16 and 1.17.

P.4.3.5 Commenting process

For any document circulated by the SyC for vote or comment, the following points apply.

• Documents proposing new projects will be provided to the representative of the R-member; within two weeks, the representative shall respond to the SyC Secretary/Committee Manager indicating their support for or disagreement with the contents of the document.
• SyC officers will take feedback of the R-members into consideration when deciding whether to amend or advance the SyC document for circulation.
• Documents circulated by the SyC for voting or comment shall be shared for information to all R-members of the SyC.

P.5 Chairs of systems committees

P.5.1 Appointment

The same processes for appointment of Chairs apply to systems committees as described in 1.8.1.

P.5.2 Responsibilities

1.8.2 applies.

P.5.3 Vice-Chairs

Systems committees can choose to appoint one or more Vice-Chairs at their discretion.

The process for appointing Vice-Chairs shall be as specified in 1.8.3.

P.6 Secretariat of systems committees

P.6.1 General

The Secretariat of a SyC has the ability to add assistant secretaries as the specific situations warrant.

P.6.2 Responsibilities

1.9.2 applies.

P.7 SyC deliverables

P.7.1 General

Systems committees can publish Systems Reference Deliverables (SRD) and International Standards (IS).

P.7.2 Systems Reference Deliverable

The development, voting, and approval processes for an SRD shall be as defined in 3.1. The systems committee may use fragmented documents in the different stages to prepare an SRD. The decision to initiate a maintenance project for an SRD shall be as defined in Clause 4. Once approved, the development process of the maintenance project shall follow the regular SRD process.

SRDs may address (but are not limited to):

• standards mapping to provide a listing of the standards and potentially existing standards development activities relevant to the domain;
• roadmap(s) to provide forward-looking plans related to the evolution of standards applicable to the domain. Such roadmaps may identify gaps in the standards available;
• databases to support domain-specific information such as data dictionaries and registration mechanisms;
• architectures which are tailored to the viewpoints of the domain's stakeholders. These architectures may identify how identified standards will interface together to meet domain needs;
• profiles to identify groups of standards, and parameters and options within standards, specifically applicable to the domain. Profiles allow single standards (and options within a standard) or groups of standards to be identified which together will meet the domain needs;
• interfaces and transfer functions across the domain to identify any special interfacing and interworking functions needed by the domain;
• use cases to define domain needs documented from the viewpoints of the domain's stakeholders and users. Use cases define the various ways in which stakeholders and users are expected to operate within the domain. Use cases thereby define the range of requirements that must be addressed by domain standardization;
• domain definition to define the scope and understanding of the domain boundaries.

If the SyC would like to transform an SRD to an International Standard, the process outlined in P.7.3 shall be used.

P.7.3 International Standard process for systems committees

In exceptional circumstances, a SyC may develop an International Standard (IS). In such cases, the SyC shall request permission from the technical management board. The document shall follow the normal IS process. The process for initiating an IS in a SyC is shown in Figure P.1.

If a need for an International Standard is identified by a SyC, the SyC shall consult with related TC and SCs to determine whether they are willing to develop the IS within the defined timeframe.

TC/SCs and SyCs shall work together to determine the best method to resolve such gaps in standardization. TC/SCs may be unable to address the standards gap identified by the SyC or may raise concerns that such work may overlap or duplicate existing work. In these cases, both the TC/SC and SyC have an equal obligation to resolve the difficulty.

As one alternative to producing an IS, the SyC may propose the creation of a new TC/SC or PC. The SyC should communicate with the existing TC/SCs to have their support on the establishment of a new TC/SC or PC.

The process for SyCs developing an IS shall be:

• consultation with related TC and SCs as described above;
• a decision by the SyC P-members authorizing the request to the technical management board(s) for development of an IS;
• submission of a request to the technical management board(s) for approval to begin the process to develop an IS.

Annex Q (normative) Harmonized approach for management system standards

Q.1 General

The aim of this Annex Q is to enhance the interoperability, efficiency, and consistency of management system standards (MSS). The purpose is to form a consistent portfolio of MSS, better serving the needs of organizations whether they implement one or multiple MSS.

The harmonized approach involves thorough preparation for new MSS proposals. This includes assessing the scope and objectives of the new proposal, its compatibility with existing MSS, and the need for coordination with other committees to avoid overlaps and conflicts. The MSS justification covers these issues and others (see Q.3). Additionally, the harmonized approach provides a harmonized structure, including identical clause numbers in the same sequence, clause titles, text, common terms, core definitions and a guidance for application. See the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2, for the use of the harmonized structure. The harmonized approach also includes an MSS terminology guidance, and the deviation report template (see MSS resources [27]).

A new MSS, revision or amendment of an existing MSS shall be developed in accordance with this Annex Q. The procedures in this Annex Q apply to both Type A MSS and Type B MSS.

NOTE The committees responsible for MSS and committees that are responsible for documents that influence or are related to MSS are members of the ISO/IEC Joint Technical Coordination Group on MSS (ISO/IEC JTCG).

Q.2 Terms and definitions

set of interrelated or interacting elements of an organization to establish policies and objectives, as well as processes to achieve those objectives

Note 1 to entry: A management system can address a single discipline or several disciplines.

Note 2 to entry: The management system elements include the organization's structure, roles and responsibilities, planning and operation.

Note 3 to entry: This definition corresponds to definition 3.4 in the harmonized structure [28].

standard for a management system (Q.2.1)

MSS (Q.2.2) designed to be widely applicable across economic sectors, various types and sizes of organizations and diverse languages, geographical, cultural and social conditions

MSS (Q.2.2) that provides specific economic or business sector requirements or guidance based on an existing generic MSS (Q.2.3)

MSS (Q.2.2) providing requirements

Note 1 to entry: A Type A MSS can only be an International Standard (IS).

MSS (Q.2.2) providing guidance

Note 1 to entry: There are different categories of Type B MSS, including:

• the use, application or implementation of a Type A MSS (Q.2.5);
• the establishment, improvement or enhancement of a management system;
• a specific topic, requirement or set of requirements related to a Type A MSS;
• other guidance not directly related to a Type A MSS.

Note 2 to entry: A Type B MSS can be an IS, TS, PAS, or IWA.

methodology applied to the development of MSS (Q.2.2), including justification study, identical clause numbers, clause titles, text and common terms and core definitions and terminology

Note 1 to entry: The harmonized structure provides the identical clause numbers, clause titles, common terms and core definitions and the identical text.

MSS (Q.2.2) specific to the particular technical, economic, or business area to which an MSS (Q.2.2) applies

EXAMPLE Energy, quality, records, environment.

Note 1 to entry: Discipline-specific concepts are introduced to focus the harmonized structure to the needs of a defined subject area. These can include additional definitions, explanatory notes, or subordinate clauses that clarify or expand upon the core text without undermining its harmonization.

modification to the text of the harmonized structure

Note 1 to entry: Deviations from the harmonized structure are only permitted in exceptional circumstances. The addition of discipline-specific content in a management system standard is not considered a deviation.

Note 2 to entry: Examples of permissible deviations are given in the harmonized structure for MSS with guidance for use [28].

Q.3 Requirements to submit an MSS justification

An MSS justification shall be submitted and is needed for:

• a new MSS, including Type A MSS, Type B MSS or sector-specific MSS;
• revisions of existing MSS that do not have an approved MSS justification.

All MSS proposals requiring an MSS justification, including sector-specific MSS (Q.2.4), shall be identified by the relevant committee leadership. The MSS justification shall be sent to the Office of the CEO for evaluation by the ISO/IEC Joint Technical Coordination Group on MSS and decision by the ISO/IEC Joint Task Force on MSS, before the NP ballot takes place. It is the responsibility of the relevant committee secretariat to identify all MSS proposals.

No MSS justification is required for:

• a Type B MSS providing guidance on a specific Type A MSS for which an MSS justification has already been submitted and approved;
• a revision of an MSS with an approved MSS justification and scope that has been previously confirmed.

EXAMPLE ISO/IEC 27003 [29], a Type B MSS providing guidance on the implementation of a Type A MSS, did not need an MSS justification prior to its development because ISO/IEC 27001 [30], the related Type A MSS, had already had an MSS justification submitted and approved.

Q.4 MSS justification

The following general principles are used for the preparation of the MSS justification and to assess the market relevance of the proposed MSS. The MSS justification template [31] is based on these principles. The answers to the questions will form part of the MSS justification. An MSS should only be initiated, developed and maintained when the following have been addressed in addition to usual criteria for ISO and IEC documents (e.g. market relevance, alignment with WTO's six principles – see 0.2).

Q.5 MSS justification process

Q.5.1 General

This Clause Q.5 describes the MSS justification process for justifying and evaluating the market relevance of proposals for an MSS. The MSS justification complements the proposal stage (2.3 or K.1) with an additional MSS justification template which includes specific questions to be addressed within the MSS justification.

NOTE It is considered good practice that the proposing committee seeks endorsement of the MSS justification from its members before it is sent to the Office of the CEO.

Q.5.2 MSS justification

The MSS justification process consists of the following steps:

• a) the development of an MSS justification by (or on behalf of) the proposer of an MSS proposal;
• b) an evaluation of the MSS justification by the ISO/IEC Joint Technical Coordination Group on MSS and, if appropriate, an approval by the ISO/IEC Joint Task Force on MSS.

The MSS justification process is followed by the normal balloting procedure for new work item approval as appropriate.

Based on Annex C and the general principles in the MSS justification (Q.5), the MSS justification should demonstrate that all questions have been considered. If it is decided that a question is not relevant or appropriate to a discipline-specific area, then the justifications for this decision shall be stated. The unique aspect of an MSS may require consideration of additional questions to assess its market relevance.

Q.6 Deviation from the harmonized structure

Refer to the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2, for the drafting rules governing the use of the harmonized structure and the limitations and conditions under which such deviations may be introduced.

NOTE 1 The committee strives to avoid any non-applicability of the harmonized structure.

In exceptional discipline-specific circumstances, if text from the harmonized structure cannot be applied in a management system standard, the committee may amend the text and introduce a deviation which shall be documented in a deviation report.

The ISO/IEC Joint Technical Coordination Group on MSS and editorial staff may provide advice on deviations but do not have the authority to reject them. The committee shall consider this advice and respond to comments, while retaining final decision-making authority.

In cases where the circumstances are not discipline-specific, the committee shall raise the issue with the ISO/IEC Joint Technical Coordination Group on MSS, who will provide advice and take any necessary actions.

The committee shall use the Deviation Report Template. The deviation report shall contain the changes to the harmonized structure and any deletions. The report should also contain additions to facilitate trend analysis for future revisions.

NOTE 2 Sharing a draft deviation report with the ISO/IEC Joint Technical Coordination Group on MSS prior to the enquiry stage is encouraged to facilitate dialogue and clarify intent.

Consensus on all deviations from the harmonized structure shall be determined by the committee prior to submission of the deviation report, either during a committee meeting or through an internal ballot. The assessment of consensus shall follow the procedure outlined in 2.5.7.

The committee shall:

• submit an initial deviation report with the enquiry draft;
• submit a final deviation report with the final text for publication.

NOTE 3 The final deviation report can be an updated version of the initial deviation report.

NOTE 4 Any questions, concerns, suggestions on the use of the harmonized structure can be raised with the ISO/IEC Joint Technical Coordination Group on MSS at any time.

Deviation reports are retained by the ISO/IEC Joint Technical Coordination Group on MSS, which reviews them to identify trends and inform future revisions of the harmonized structure.

Q.7 Policy for the development of sector-specific MSS

Any sector-specific MSS shall build upon and align with the relevant generic MSS, without altering, duplicating, or contradicting its requirements.

The committee developing the sector-specific MSS shall demonstrate clear market relevance, and avoid unnecessary overlap with existing standards.

The committee developing the sector-specific MSS shall establish effective liaison with the committee responsible for the generic MSS. At a minimum, this should include a liaison from the sector-specific committee to the generic MSS committee. Ideally, a reciprocal arrangement should be in place to enable the generic MSS committee to actively contribute to the development work. See 1.15 and 1.16 for liaisons between committees.

Any requests for guidance or for interpretation of a related generic MSS or its terms and definitions shall be submitted to the relevant committee secretariat.

Annex R (normative) Procedures for standards as databases

R.1 Scope

This Annex R describes the procedures for both the management and the content of standards consisting of a "collection of standardized items" managed in a database, also known as standards as databases (SDBs).

The relevant procedures for a standard as database follow a three-tier structure:

• the SDB management procedure (R.3.3) for the creation, maintenance and decommissioning of an SDB;
• the SDB part management procedure (R.3.5) for creating a new part within an SDB;
• the SDB content procedure (R.3.4) for the development of the content of an SDB.

Procedures related to the database management system (R.2.1.4) are excluded from this Annex R as they are under the responsibility of the Office of the CEO; nevertheless, the SDB owner committees shall be consulted on proposed changes.

Any type of document, except an IWA, can be established as a database.

R.2 Terms and definitions

R.2.1 Entities and their management

abstraction of a property

EXAMPLE 'Having a cable for connecting with a computer' as a characteristic of the concept 'cord mouse'.

Note 1 to entry: Characteristics are used for describing concepts (R.2.1.2).

[SOURCE: ISO 1087:2019, 3.2.1]

unit of knowledge created by a unique combination of characteristics (R.2.1.1)

Note 1 to entry: Concepts are not necessarily bound to particular natural languages. They are, however, influenced by the social or cultural background which often leads to different categorizations.

Note 2 to entry: This is the concept 'concept' as used and designated by the term "concept" in terminology work. It is a very different concept from that designated by other domains such as industrial automation or marketing.

[SOURCE: ISO 1087:2019, 3.2.7]

collection of data organized according to a conceptual structure describing the characteristics (R.2.1.1) of the data and the relationships among their corresponding entities

Note 1 to entry: A database can support one or more domains.

[SOURCE: ISO/IEC 2382:2015, 2121413, modified – The last part of the definition has been transferred to a note to entry and "application areas" has been replaced by "domains".]

collection of integrated services that support database management and together support and control the creation, use and maintenance of a database (R.2.1.3)

[SOURCE: ISO/IEC TR 10032:2003, 2.41, modified – In the definition, "which" has been replaced by "that".]

standard for which a valid form of publication is a database

Note 1 to entry: A standard as database can contain, in addition to the concepts (R.2.1.2), non-normative equivalent terms and translations (where provided by appropriate National Bodies).

Note 2 to entry: The SDB management, the SDB part management and the SDB content procedure (R.2.2.3) are normally considered to be part of the SDB.

[SOURCE: ISO/IEC 11581-40:2011, 3.4, modified – The term has been revised and Note 1 to entry deleted; the abbreviation SDB has been added. In the definition, "in database format" and "publicly accessible" have been deleted and the second part of the definition has been transferred to new Note 1 to entry in which the term "icons" has been replaced by "concepts". Note 2 to entry has been added.]

unit of data that is considered, in context, to be indivisible

Note 1 to entry: A unit of data that is considered indivisible in one context (e.g. telephone number) can be divisible in another context (e.g. country code, area code, local number).

Note 2 to entry: The concept "data element" includes the concept "standardized item", where examples of standardized items are symbols (graphical or letter), terms and definitions, data element types, data sheets.

[SOURCE: ISO/IEC 2382:2015, 2121599, modified – A synonym has been added, and the domain has been omitted. Notes 1 to 3 to entry have been replaced.]

graphical, lexical or combined representation of data, specifying their properties, structure, and inter- relationships

[SOURCE: ISO/IEC 11179‑1:2023, 3.2.24]

computer-sensible description of a set of products by means of references to a data model

Note 1 to entry: In this Annex R, the term product is taken in its widest sense to include devices, systems and installations as well as materials, processes, software and services.

[SOURCE: IEC 61360-2:2012, 3.30 and 3.31, modified – The term "parts library" in 3.30 has been replaced with the new terms. The definition of 3.30 has been modified by deleting "product ontology and" and replacing "this ontology" with "a data model". Note 1 to entry is taken from 3.31.]

proposal to add, to change or to withdraw one or more data elements in an SDB (R.2.1.5)

Note 1 to entry: The CR is used as the basic element of the SDB content procedure (R.2.2.3).

Note 2 to entry: The complete process from CR proposal to publication is called the SDB content procedure.

[SOURCE: ISO/IEC 30122-4:2016, 3.6, modified – The definition has been adapted for the context of this Annex R. Note 1 to entry has been replaced by Notes 1 and 2 to entry.]

establishment and maintenance of baselines and the identification and control of changes to baselines that make it possible to return to a previous baseline

[SOURCE: ISO/IEC/IEEE 24765:2017, 3.4546]

R.2.2 Procedures and stages

development procedure outlined in Clauses 2 and 3, and based on the circulation of documents to the National Bodies

procedure for the creation, maintenance and decommissioning of an SDB (R.2.1.5)

procedure for the development of the content of an SDB (R.2.1.5)

stage of the SDB content procedure (R.2.2.3) comprising the registration and identification of a CR (R.2.1.9) in the database management system (R.2.1.4) by the CR proposer (R.2.3.4)

stage of the SDB content procedure (R.2.2.3) where the information provided at the CR proposal stage (R.2.2.4) is completed for setting the CR (R.2.1.9) into the CR evaluation stage (R.2.2.6)

stage of the SDB content procedure (R.2.2.3) during which the SDB team (R.2.3.3) members comment on the CR (R.2.1.9)

stage of the SDB content procedure (R.2.2.3) during which the SDB team (R.2.3.3) members submit their approval ballot on the CR (R.2.1.9)

stage of the SDB content procedure (R.2.2.3) where the result of the CR (R.2.1.9) is implemented

requirements and criteria that apply to a particular SDB

R.2.3 Roles

committee responsible for an SDB (R.2.1.5)

Note 1 to entry: In case of an SDB with no identified parts, the SDB owner committee is also acting as the SDB content owner committee.

person appointed by the SDB owner committee (R.2.3.1) to manage the associated aspects of an SDB in the SDB content procedure (R.2.2.3)

group of Experts of the SDB owner committee appointed by and acting as delegates on behalf of their National Bodies at the CR evaluation stage (R.2.2.6) and CR validation stage (R.2.2.7)

Note 1 to entry: For the purposes of communication and marketing, the SDB owner committee may give the SDB team a name.

Note 2 to entry: SDB team members act on behalf of their National Bodies either commenting or voting where applicable.

person (or body) authorized to submit a CR (R.2.1.9) in an SDB (R.2.1.5)

Note 1 to entry: The CR is submitted at the CR proposal stage (R.2.2.4).

committee responsible for the content of an SDB (R.2.1.5) or a part of it

person appointed by the SDB content owner committee (R.2.3.5) to manage the SDB content procedure (R.2.2.3)

group of Experts of the SDB content owner committee appointed by and acting as delegates on behalf of their National Bodies at the CR evaluation stage (R.2.2.6) and CR validation stage (R.2.2.7)

Note 1 to entry: An SDB content team can be a specific SDB content team or can be an SDB content team function inside an already existing working group

Note 2 to entry: Experts with voting rights are identified by their National Body.

Note 3 to entry: In case of an SDB with no identified parts, the SDB team acts both as the SDB team and the SDB content team.

R.3 Procedures

R.3.1 Overview

The procedures described in this Annex R are intended to be sufficiently generic and high level to be applicable to all SDBs, and to distinguish between the SDB management procedure, the SDB part management procedure (R.2.2.1) and the SDB content procedure (R.2.2.3). Figure R.1 gives the overview of the three procedures defined in this Annex R.

Note that at the operational level, in order to ensure transparency and traceability, and to enable common services to be provided for all SDBs, it is essential that certain procedural details are respected. For example, as an enabler for the integration of the SDB content procedure into the Office of the CEO systems (used for the management of the classic procedure), common forms have been created for the management of change requests (CRs) to complement the forms already available for the management of projects.

SDB supplementary procedures that apply to a particular SDB can be described in separate documents within the domain of the SDB owner committee, but such SDB supplementary procedures shall be consistent with the procedures specified in this Annex R. Such SDB supplementary procedures that apply to a particular SDB are subject to SDB owner committee approval (see R.3.3.2.3). These SDB supplementary procedures are normally considered to be part of the SDB (see Note 2 to entry to R.2.1.5).

R.3.2 SDB roles

R.3.2.1 SDB owner committee

The SDB owner committee (R.2.3.1) is responsible for the SDB (R.2.1.5) content as a whole. As such it is also responsible for the integration of any specialized technical content into the SDB. The tasks performed by the SDB manager (R.2.3.2) depend on the needs of the SDB, and in some cases can be fulfilled by more than one person. Details of additional roles specific to the SDB shall be provided in the supplementary procedural information. Note that the roles of committee "Secretary/Committee Manager" and "SDB manager" can be fulfilled by the same person, but this is not mandatory.

The process for appointing an SDB manager is analogous to that for a Convenor (as defined in 1.12). Such appointments shall be confirmed by the National Body. The SDB manager may be reappointed for additional terms of up to three years. There is no limit to the number of terms.

R.3.2.2 SDB team

The SDB team (R.2.3.3) reports to the SDB owner committee (R.2.3.1) and is managed by the SDB manager (R.2.3.2).

At the time of the establishment of an SDB, an SDB team shall comprise at least five members from the P-members of the SDB owner committee approving the creation of the SDB. Although it is recommended that all the SDB owner committee's P-members are present in the SDB team, it is not mandatory. An SDB team shall always be represented by at least five P-members of the SDB owner committee.

The SDB team can be a specific group inside the committee or be a task within an existing working group.

All P-members of the SDB owner committee have the right to appoint one or more Experts to the SDB team. These SDB team members act as Experts during the CR evaluation stage (by analogy with 1.12.1) and in the CR validation.

The SDB team might need to invite the CR proposer and/or the identified committees of interest to participate during the CR content procedure.

The technical aspects related to the data model capability and quality of the SDB content shall be considered by the SDB team.

R.3.2.3 SDB content owner committee

The SDB content owner committee (R.2.3.5) is responsible for the content within the SDB (R.2.1.5). As such, it is also responsible for the technical accuracy of the content. The content shall adhere to the SDB rules defined by the SDB owner committee.

Supplementary procedural information, requirements and criteria that apply to a particular SDB content can be described in separate documents within the domain of the SDB content owner committee, but such supplementary information, requirements and criteria shall be consistent with the procedures specified in this Annex and any supplementary procedural information defined for that SDB by the SDB owner committee. Such supplementary procedural information, requirements and criteria that apply to a particular SDB content are subject to SDB content owner committee approval (see R.3.3.2.3).

R.3.2.4 SDB content manager

The tasks performed by the SDB content manager (R.2.3.6) depend on the needs of the SDB content owner committee, and in some cases can be fulfilled by more than one person. Details of additional roles specific to the SDB content manager shall be provided in the supplementary procedural information. Note that the roles of committee "Secretary" and "SDB content manager" can be fulfilled by the same person, but this is not mandatory.

The process for appointing an SDB content manager is analogous to that for a Convenor (as defined in 1.12). Such appointments shall be confirmed by the National Body. The SDB content manager may be reappointed for additional terms of up to three years. There is no limit to the number of terms.

R.3.2.5 SDB content team

The SDB content team (R.2.3.7) reports to the SDB content owner committee (R.2.3.5) and is managed by the SDB content manager (R.2.3.6).

The SDB content team can be a specific group inside the committee or be a task within an existing working group. The creation of an SDB content team or task requires SDB content owner committee P-member approval with two-thirds majority approval criteria and representation of at least five P-members of the SDB content owner committee.

Although it is recommended that all the SDB content owner committee's P-members are present in the SDB content team, it is not mandatory. An SDB content team shall always be represented by at least five P-members of the SDB content owner committee.

All P-members of the SDB content owner committee have the right to appoint one or more Experts to the SDB content team. These SDB content team members act as Experts during the CR evaluation stage (by analogy with 1.12.1), but the voting carried out in the CR validation stage follows the one member/country–one vote principle, and votes submitted by National Bodies shall be explicit: positive, negative, or abstention (as defined in 2.7.2).

The SDB content team might need to invite the CR proposer and/or the identified committees of interest to participate during the CR content procedure.

R.3.3 SDB management procedure

R.3.3.1 General

The SDB management procedure refers to the creation, maintenance and decommissioning of the data models (R.2.1.7) that house the content of the SDB.

NOTE 1 SDB data models and metamodels can be limited depending on the structure and technology used for the database management system (DBMS).

NOTE 2 The SDB management procedure covers the interaction with the database management system but does not impose how a database is developed or implemented, nor have an influence on its daily operations. A high-level overview of the life cycle of the SDB management procedure is shown in Figure R.2.

The following high-level descriptions assume the existence of an SDB advisory group as defined in 1.2 to provide feedback and advice for committees wishing to create or modify an SDB. It is expected that this SDB advisory group is populated by Experts experienced in ISO/IEC SDBs and representatives of the Office of the CEO experienced in the DBMS.

A high-level overview of the life cycle of the SDB management procedure is shown in Figure R.2.

R.3.3.2 Creation of an SDB

R.3.3.2.1 Proposal stage: proposal for creation of an SDB (including conversion of one or more standards to an SDB)

The proposal for the creation of an SDB follows the same process as 2.3 and shall be prepared by the SDB owner committee. The formal proposal shall also include the following items a) to c), and shall be submitted for evaluation:

• a) market relevance – scope, business case, stakeholders, benefits, potential users, committees of interest, considerations on the licence model associated with needed information exchange interfaces (GUI languages, machine exchange formats);
• b) database draft definition – including data model, potential common shared content and interoperability relations with existing SDBs, data quality, and exchange format;
• c) content uniqueness – whether the proposed SDB content is already available in existing ISO or IEC standards or covered in existing SDBs.

A request for change of the underlying data model of the SDBs shall be submitted to the advisory group of digital content management for coordination of harmonization.

The proposal shall be circulated to the P-members of the proposing SDB owner committee, identified committees of interest and to the technical management board(s). See 2.3.5 for the acceptance criteria.

R.3.3.2.2 Committee stage

The committee stage is carried out in accordance with 2.5. At the committee stage, the proposing SDB owner committee shall develop the proposal and request feedback from all P-members and O-members of the SDB owner committee for the proposed SDB. The technical aspects related to harmonized data modelling and the capability of the DBMS shall be considered with the support of the SDB advisory group.

The committee stage ends when all technical issues have been resolved and the proposal is accepted for circulation as an enquiry draft and is registered by the Office of the CEO.

R.3.3.2.3 Enquiry stage

The enquiry stage is carried out in accordance with 2.6. At the enquiry stage, the proposing SDB owner committee shall request both comments and a vote on the proposed SDB to all National Bodies. At this stage the SDB definition shall include as a minimum:

• market relevance – scope, business case, stakeholders, benefits, potential users, identified committees of interest, considerations on the licence model associated with needed information exchange interfaces (GUI languages, machine exchange formats);
• database definition – including data model, potential common shared content and interoperability relations with existing SDBs, data quality, and exchange format;
• content uniqueness – whether proposed SDB content is already available in existing ISO or IEC standards or covered in existing SDBs;
• technical feasibility – whether the proposed SDB can be implemented on the current DBMS;
• set of data elements as a proof-of-concept and a DBMS feasibility report;
• proposed SDB manager and SDB team, and SDB supplementary procedures (R.2.2.9);
• proposed licence model associated with the information exchange interfaces.

R.3.3.2.4 Approval stage

The approval stage is carried out in accordance with 2.7. The approval stage requires the fulfilment of the three following actions.

• a) Approval at committee level in accordance with the criteria in 2.7.3.
• b) Preparation, by the proposing SDB owner committee in collaboration with the SDB advisory group, of a technical management board recommendation regarding the creation of the proposed SDB.

The recommendation shall include a confirmation that the proposed SDB is fit for purpose with respect to end user needs, together with a proposed implementation deadline to ensure that the SDB is created in time for the market needs.

• c) An approval by the technical management board, who might seek consultation with the SDB advisory group.

R.3.3.2.5 Publication (implementation) stage

The publication of the SDB refers to the setting up and putting into service of the SDB as defined in the approved documentation.

Where applicable, the publication requires various testing and associated implementation of any transition plan to a new or updated version of the SDB in accordance with the proposed implementation deadline in R.3.3.2.4 b).

R.3.3.3 Maintenance of the SDB

The maintenance procedures for the SDB are in accordance with Clause 4, with the exception that an SDB has no formal stability period. If the decommissioning of an SDB is being considered, then this shall follow the procedure described in R.3.3.4.

The SDB shall be continuously reviewed to assess whether modification of the SDB is needed. Proposals for modifying an existing SDB may be made by the bodies specified in 2.3.2. In all cases, modification proposals will be managed by the SDB owner committee.

A proposal for modification of the SDB requires consultation with the SDB owner committee members to validate that the proposed changes are appropriate and are within the capabilities of the DBMS. The technical aspects related to harmonized data modelling and the capability of the DBMS shall be considered.

The maintenance of an SDB could be made for changes to the data model or to the associated administration part of the SDB. A proposal for modification shall also include the transition plan from the old to the new instance of the SDB. The review report shall address the following points:

• market relevance – the rationale for the modification requested in response to market needs (business drivers);
• description of the modification – description of what modifications are proposed to the data model(s), data quality requirement and interfaces;
• database definition – impact analysis of the modifications, especially on common content and relations with existing SDBs, data quality, exchange format;
• content transition considerations – the proposed content transition plan, together with a set of data elements to illustrate the modifications;
• technical feasibility – described by the DBMS feasibility report.

If the proposal for SDB maintenance includes a change in the scope of the SDB, then further consultation is required with the Office of the CEO and the SDB advisory group in line with the principles outlined in R.3.3.2, including the feasibility, version control and transition.

The steps for the modification of the SDB are the same as those for SDB creation, omitting the proposal stage (R.3.3.2.1).

When the proposed maintenance is a minor change, which is confirmed by the SDB manager and the Office of the CEO, the SDB owner committee can use the SDB content procedure (CR process) defined in R.3.4. Consideration shall be given to which previous version(s) of the SDB need to be kept available.

R.3.3.4 Decommissioning of an SDB

R.3.3.4.1 Review

Proposals for decommissioning of an existing SDB may be made by the bodies specified in 2.3.2. In all cases the request will be managed by the SDB owner committee.

Input is required on the following:

• market relevance – rationale of the decommissioning request;
• transition considerations – business impact assessment on stakeholders, users and identified committees of interest, transition strategy;
• content considerations – content transition plan for its withdrawal;
• decommission plan.

The decommission of the SDB is decided by the P-members of the SDB owner committee. The approval criterion is a two-thirds majority of those in favour of decommissioning.

The decision to decommission the SDB is ratified by the technical management board (in consultation with the SDB advisory group).

R.3.3.4.2 Decommission

The SDB shall be decommissioned in accordance with the decommission plan. The action is fully under the management of the Office of the CEO.

R.3.4 SDB content procedure

R.3.4.1 General

The SDB content procedure (R.2.2.3) described in this Annex R is an adaptation of the classic procedure described in Clauses 2 and 3 to the development of SDBs as opposed to projects The SDB content procedure is designed for use with a standard as database (SDB), and as such the durations for the various stages are shorter than those for the classic procedure.

A high-level overview of the SDB content procedure, including that for editorial changes, and its relationship with the classic procedure is shown in Figure R.3.

The SDB content procedure comprises five stages:

• the CR proposal stage (R.3.4.2);
• the CR preparatory stage (R.3.4.3);
• the CR evaluation stage (R.3.4.4);
• the CR validation stage (R.3.4.5);
• the CR publication stage (R.3.4.6).

Figure R.4 shows a process map of the SDB content procedure, and indicates default durations.

• Figure R.5 shows the responsibilities for the SDB content procedure.

R.3.4.2 CR proposal stage

A change request is initiated by the CR proposer (R.2.3.4) through the appropriate CR form. The CR proposer shall complete all the required information in the CR form.

The required information includes a short title describing the scope of the CR as well as an identification of the data elements of the SDB content to which the proposal applies. The proposal encompasses the following information:

• scope of the CR;
• identification of the data elements in the SDB to which the proposal applies;
• purpose and justification of the CR;
• identification of other CRs that the current CR needs to be processed with;
• committees of interest;
• information relating to patents;
• information relating to trademarks and copyright;
• relationship with any United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

Proposals may be made by the bodies specified in 2.3.2.

Proposals are evaluated by the SDB content manager in consultation with the SDB manager to determine which route shall be used for the submitted proposal.

If the changes are considered as editorial only and accepted by the SDB manager and the SDB content manager, then the change request can move directly to the CR publication stage R.3.4.6, and the choice documented in the CR form. If the changes are considered to be unsuitable for the CR content procedure, as specified by the SDB supplementary procedures (R.2.2.9), the submitted proposal can be transferred to the SDB management procedure (R.3.3) when the data model of the SDB needs to be revised for handling the proposed content or to the SDB part management procedure (R.3.5) and the choice documented within the CR form.

For requests originating from committees other than the SDB content owner committee, a copy of the documented CR form is communicated to the committees concerned.

R.3.4.3 CR preparatory stage

At the CR preparatory stage, the SDB content manager (R.2.3.6), if needed in consultation with the SDB content team and the SDB manager, validates and completes the information provided by the CR proposer.

The proposal encompasses the following information using the respective CR form:

• scope of the CR;
• identification of the data elements in the SDB to which the proposal applies;
• purpose and justification of the CR;
• identification of other CRs that the current CR needs to be processed with;
• committees of interest;
• information relating to patents;
• information relating to trademarks and copyright;
• relationship with any United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

NOTE 1 More detailed information applicable to a specific SDB can be specified by the SDB owner committee (R.3.2.1).

If required, a working group can be set up to assist the SDB content manager in the preparation activities. When established, the MT has a one-to-one relation to an SDB and consists of members with expertise to assist the SDB content manager in managing the maintenance of the content of the SDB.

When the quality of the information provided at the CR preparatory stage is satisfactory, the SDB content team and SDB manager is informed (with copies to the CR proposer and identified committees of interest) and asked by the SDB content manager to make an evaluation and to comment.

The SDB content manager shall decide, if needed in consultation with the SDB content team and SDB manager, whether the CR is within the scope of the SDB and valid for further work and, taking into consideration the SDB supplementary procedures, whether the CR should be:

• a) handled with the SDB content procedure (R.2.2.3) and proceed to the CR evaluation stage (R.3.4.4); or
• b) handled with the SDB part management procedure (R.2.2.1); or
• c) handled as editorial changes (R.3.4.7) and proceed to the CR publication stage; or
• d) rejected altogether.

The decision shall be announced to the SDB content team, SDB content owner committee, the CR proposer and the identified committees of interest.

If, within two weeks from the date of the decision, two or more P-members of the SDB content team disagree with the decision a), b), c) or d) of the SDB content manager, the CR shall be discussed at an SDB team meeting².

NOTE 2 The duration required for preparatory work does not normally exceed four weeks but might exceptionally be longer if the original proposal is not sufficiently mature. In such a case, the preparation is comparable to the preliminary stage (2.2) and the time is counted from final agreement with the CR proposer.

2 Currently this action/decision can occur at the CR evaluation stage.

R.3.4.4 CR evaluation stage

The commenting is comparable to the commenting on a committee draft. The CR evaluation draft (ED) shall be submitted by the SDB content manager to the SDB content team and the SDB team for review. If the CR is satisfactorily defined, if this is in accordance with the SDB supplementary procedures, the SDB content team might have the option to evaluate the CR at an SDB content team meeting. If the CR ED is circulated, the default durations are four, six, eight, or more weeks (eight weeks being the default duration).

The final step of the CR evaluation stage comprises the resolution by the SDB content manager of the comments received. This shall be confirmed by the SDB manager. This is then followed by the conclusion whether the CR should be:

• a) continued with the SDB content procedure (R.2.2.3) and proceed to the CR validation stage (R.3.4.5); or
• b) continue with the SDB part management procedure (R.2.2.1); or
• c) improved and be re-evaluated; or
• d) handled as editorial changes (R.3.4.7) and proceed to the CR publication stage; or
• e) rejected altogether.

Such resolution shall be announced to the SDB content owner committee, the SDB team, the CR proposer and the identified committees of interest.

If, within two weeks from the date of announcement, two or more P-members disagree with proposal b), c), d) or e) of the SDB content manager, the CR shall be discussed at an SDB content team meeting.

NOTE 1 The entry of a new data element in the SDB is not seen as "new work", but rather as part of the continuous maintenance of the existing collection of data elements. Therefore, to arrive at a conclusion, a simple majority of the submitted votes can be used at the CR evaluation stage, applying the choice between continuation/rejection as well as between the SDB content procedure and the SDB part management procedure.

NOTE 2 If the CR references more than one data element, some of which are acceptable for continuation with the SDB content procedure whereas others are not, the original CR might be divided into two or more new CRs and processed separately. Such new CRs start at the SDB content procedure stage already achieved.

The SDB content manager revises the CR in line with the resolution of the comments received during the CR evaluation stage and checks that the data element(s) associated with the CR are, after the proposed revisions, still sufficiently and properly described, within the scope of the SDB and consistent with the data elements already existing in the SDB. If required, corrections are made. For this, the SDB content manager might seek assistance from a working group or from other internal or external Experts. The default duration for this preparation is up to four weeks.

R.3.4.5 CR validation stage

The duration for voting on a validation draft (VD) shall not exceed eight weeks (default six weeks). Approval criteria are defined in 2.7.3.

At the CR validation stage, the one member/country–one vote principle is followed, and votes submitted by National Bodies shall be explicit: positive, negative, or abstention. Meanwhile the SDB team, SDB content owner committee members and identified committees of interest are permitted to submit comments.

The report on the result of the vote shall indicate which data elements have been approved and for data elements that have been rejected, shall indicate the associated reasons in the observations. The report on the result of the vote shall be submitted by the SDB content manager to the SDB content owner committee, the SDB owner committee, the SDB team, the CR proposer and identified committees of interest within four weeks after closure of the vote.

Approved data elements shall advance to the CR publication stage (R.3.4.6).

If the CR is rejected due to rejected data elements and/or due to approved data elements that are dependent on unapproved data elements, the SDB content manager can decide to proceed with the CR as follows:

• a) refine the CR and re-submit to CR evaluation stage (R.3.4.4); or
• b) reject the CR.

If, within two weeks from the date of announcement, two or more P-members of the SDB content owner committee disagree with decision a) or b) of the SDB content manager, the CR shall be discussed at an SDB content team meeting.

R.3.4.6 CR publication stage

The SDB content manager prepares the final version of the approved data elements for final quality assurance and sends to the SDB manager for publishing:

• a) within two weeks of the date of announcement of the result of the vote at the CR validation stage; or
• b) when the CR is dependent on other data elements being approved in other CRs, within two weeks of the date of announcement of the result of the CR validation vote of these other CRs; or
• c) in accordance with the approved SDB supplementary procedures (R.2.2.9).

When the CR is published, the SDB manager shall inform the SDB content owner committee, the SDB content manager and the SDB team (with copies to the CR proposer and identified committees of interest).

R.3.4.7 Editorial changes to an existing data element

An editorial correction is only issued to correct an error or ambiguity inadvertently introduced either in drafting or in publishing and which could lead to the incorrect or unsafe application of the data elements.

Proposed changes to a data element that affect neither its use nor semantics (i.e. editorial changes) can proceed directly to the CR publication stage (as described in R.3.4.6), without passing through the CR preparatory, evaluation and validation stages. The SDB content manager prepares the CR with the affected data elements for final quality verification and sends this CR to the SDB manager for publication. Specific criteria on which changes are classified as editorial changes can differ, depending on the SDB, and are described in the approved SDB supplementary procedures (R.2.2.9) of the responsible SDB content owner committee.

R.3.4.8 Translation

National Bodies can provide translation of data elements at any time during the process or after the publication of the final draft. National Bodies are responsible for maintenance of the data elements which have undergone changes following the database procedure.

R.3.5 SDB part management procedure

R.3.5.1 General

The SDB part management procedure is recommended when an identified part of the SDB is required or the definition of a new domain, area, or subset where the content will be handled independently. The decision to use the SDB part management procedure and not follow the SDB content procedure (R.3.4) is made by the SDB content manager. The work initiated by the SDB content owner committee is carried out in a group belonging to that committee. A close cooperation shall then be established between the SDB content owner committee and the SDB owner committee; R.3.5 gives the rules to be followed in such a case. As such, the SDB owner committee shall be involved as a committee of interest for all stages of the project.

When the project does not correspond to the scope of a single committee, its preparation is entrusted to a lead committee covering the subject, which is responsible for managing its development.

The development stages are aligned with the standard processes as described in Clause 2. In addition to the standard processes, R.3.5.2 to R.3.5.9 apply.

A high-level overview of this procedure is shown in Figure R.6.

Figure R.7 shows the responsibilities for the SDB part management procedure.

R.3.5.2 Proposal stage

A new work item proposal (NP) is required for the development of a project which is developed by the SDB content owner committee. The NP and report on voting are circulated in the initiating SDB content owner committee.

The SDB owner committee, if different from the SDB content owner committee, is informed prior to the submission of the NP and identified as committee of interest. If the SDB owner committee has concerns with the proposal, the initiating committee shall resolve these issues before proceeding to the submission of the NP.

The NP shall provide all necessary information on the included SDB content, to enable its identification, consistency, and compatibility of the proposed developments. This is in particular for the case where the existing content of the SDB is subject to change requests made in parallel during the proposed project's development process.

Other content changes where the SDB content owner committee wishes to use this procedure shall be initiated as a revision, see R.3.5.9.

P-members of the proposing SDB content committee, the SDB owner committee, and identified committees of interest shall also be notified of the proposal. See 2.3.5 for the acceptance criteria.

R.3.5.3 Preparatory stage

During the preparatory stage, the SDB content owner committee shall consult periodically with the SDB owner committee and any other committee involved in the preparatory work.

R.3.5.4 Committee stage

The committee stage is carried out in accordance with 2.5. At the committee stage, the SDB content owner committee shall develop the proposal and request feedback from all National Bodies of the SDB content owner committee for the proposed SDB content. The technical aspects related to the data model capability and quality of the SDB content shall be considered with the support and validation from the SDB owner committee.

As part of the CD content, an extracted content document shall be made available from the system to allow for review as committee draft (CD).

The CD shall provide all necessary information on the included SDB content, to enable its identification, consistency, and compatibility of the proposed developments. Where necessary, the content of the project will be updated to reflect the current state of the associated area from the SDB.

The decision of proceeding to the enquiry stage remains with the committee which has been recognized as the initiating content owner committee at the proposal stage.

Once the comments of the committee stage have been addressed by the initiating committee, the enquiry draft shall be sent to the SDB owner committee for further confirmation. If the SDB manager of the SDB owner committee identifies any issues with the draft, they shall raise them for the initiating committee within eight weeks of receiving. If necessary, the initiating committee will repeat the committee (CD) stage until the identified issues are resolved, including any and all change requests occurring in parallel that impact the project.

The committee stage ends when all technical issues have been resolved, the proposal is confirmed by the SDB manager, impacting parallel change requests are put on hold or identified and incorporated in the project, and any associated testing has been performed. The project is then accepted for circulation as an enquiry draft and is registered by the Office of the CEO.

R.3.5.5 Enquiry stage

The enquiry stage is carried out in accordance with 2.6. At the enquiry stage, the proposing SDB content owner committee shall request comments and a vote from all National Bodies of the SDB content owner committee for the proposed SDB content (enquiry draft).

The enquiry draft is shared with the SDB owner committee and the committees of interest. These committees can provide comments on the enquiry draft.

Resolution of comments is done primarily in the SDB content owner committee for the area in their domain of expertise and the comments related to the content are subcontracted to the group in the initiating committee and confirmed by the SDB content manager.

Once the comments of the enquiry stage have been addressed by the initiating committee, the final draft International Standard (FDIS) shall be sent to the SDB owner committee for further confirmation. If the SDB manager of the SDB owner committee identifies any issues with the draft, they shall raise them for the initiating committee within eight weeks of receiving.

The enquiry stage ends when all issues have been resolved, the proposal is confirmed by the SDB manager, impacting parallel change requests are put on hold or identified and incorporated in the project, and any associated testing has been performed. The project is then accepted for circulation as an FDIS and is registered by the Office of the CEO.

R.3.5.6 Approval stage

The approval stage is carried out in accordance with 2.7 and the criteria in 2.7.3.

The FDIS shall be circulated in the SDB content owner committee and shared with the SDB owner committee and the committees of interest.

R.3.5.7 Publication stage

The SDB content owner committee provides the FDIS as well as the SDB content to the SDB manager for publication.

The publication of the SDB content refers to the setting up and putting into service of the SDB content as defined in the SDB supplementary procedures.

R.3.5.8 Translation

National bodies can provide translation of data elements, or parts that can be translated, at any time during the process or after the publication of the FDIS. National bodies are responsible for maintenance of the data elements which have undergone changes following the database procedure.

R.3.5.9 Revision

The maintenance procedures for International Standards including SDB content using the procedures based on Clause 2 are in accordance with Clause 4.

Proposals for modifying International Standards including SDB content can be made by the bodies specified in 2.3.2.

The steps for the revision of International Standards including SDB content are the same as those described in R.3.5, omitting the proposal stage (R.3.3.2.1).

The revision of International Standards including SDB content is initiated by the SDB content owner, with consultation with the SDB owner committee, and follows either the SDB content procedure described in R.3.4 or the procedure described in R.3.5. The latter requires P-member approval from the SDB content owner committee and then the circulation of the review report (RR) before initiating. The RR shall provide all necessary information on the included SDB content, to enable its identification, consistency, and compatibility of the proposed revision.

Referenced documents and resources

[1] WTO Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations. https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tbt_e/principles_standards_tbt_e.htm

[2] Decisions and recommendations adopted by the WTO committee on Technical Barriers to Trade since 1 January 1995. https://docs.wto.org/dol2fe/Pages/SS/directdoc.aspx?filename=q:/G/TBT/1R15.pdf&Open=True

[3] ISO forms web page, www.iso.org/forms http://www.iso.org/forms

[4] IEC forms web page https://www.iec.ch/standards-development/resource-area/forms_docs

[5] ISO Code of Ethics and Conduct https://www.iso.org/publication/PUB100011.html

[6] IEC Code of conduct for technical work https://www.iec.ch/basecamp/iec-code-conduct-technical-work

[7] ISO/TMB web page https://www.iso.org/committee/4882545.html

[8] IEC SMB web page https://www.iec.ch/smb

[9] Guidance for ISO liaison organizations — Engaging stakeholders and building consensus. http://www.iso.org/iso/guidance_liaison-organizations.pdf

[10] Project Management Methodology in the ISO and IEC environment — Good practices. https://www.iso.org/files/live/sites/isoorg/files/store/en/PUB100482.pdf

[11] ISO/IEC Guide 2:2004, Standardization and related activities - General vocabulary

[12] ISO Standards and Patents web page https://www.iso.org/iso-standards-and-patents.html

[13] IEC patent declarations web page https://www.iec.ch/standards-development/iec-patent-declarations

[14] Guidance on use of artificial intelligence (AI) for ISO committees. https://www.iso.org/files/live/sites/isoorg/files/developing_standards/who_develops_standards/docs/use%20of%20AI.pdf

[15] Guidance on use of artificial intelligence (AI) for IEC committees. https://iec.ch/system/files/2024-11/Guidance_on_use_of_AI_for_IEC_Committees.pdf

[16] ISO Statutes. https://www.iso.org/publication/PUB100322.html

[17] IEC Statutes and Rules of Procedure. https://www.iec.ch/news-resources/reference-material#governing

[18] ISO/IEC Guide 71, Guide for addressing accessibility in standards. https://isotc.iso.org/livelink/livelink/fetch/2000/2122/4230450/8389141/ISO_IEC_Guide_71_2014%28E%29_Guide_for_addressing_accessibility_in_standards.pdf?nodeid=8387461&vernum=-2

[19] ISO Guide 82, Guidelines for addressing sustainability in standards. https://isotc.iso.org/livelink/livelink/fetch/2000/2122/4230450/8389141/ISO_Guide_82_2019%28E%29_-_Guidelines_for_addressing_sustainability_in_standards.pdf?nodeid=16544468&vernum=-2

[20] The IEC and the Sustainable Development Goals https://www.iec.ch/sdgs

[21] ISO Guide 84, Guidelines_for_addressing_climate_change_in_standards. https://isotc.iso.org/livelink/livelink/fetch/2000/2122/4230450/8389141/ISO_Guide_84_2020%28E%29_-_Guidelines_for_addressing_climate_change_in_standards.pdf?nodeid=21325430&vernum=-2

[22] IEC and climate change. https://www.iec.ch/basecamp/iec-and-climate-change

[23] IEC Global Relevance Toolbox, www.iec.ch/grt http://www.iec.ch/grt

[24] ISO Global relevance policy https://www.iso.org/publication/PUB100463.html

[25] ISO and policy makers https://www.iso.org/iso-and-policy-makers.html

[26] Gender Responsive Standards: Guidance for ISO and IEC technical committees. Available at: https://www.iso.org/publication/PUB100474.html and https://www.iec.ch/basecamp/gender-responsive-standards³

[27] MSS related documents https://www.iso.org/committee/54996.html?t=aNMGQfQ4BO2WKIoU4bG4xvNvFF76Vq2Favj3V8rGuyMzum4z_lWXQ5g4j-qGYCSF&view=documents%23section-isodocuments-top

[28] Harmonized structure for MSS with guidance for use https://www.iso.org/sd/fetch/2EVmNRpfMEK8NcTL_uoAJceDlxYmmqpQWNk3r1MeLNWCXk6i10vZ-R5FEjIK-UOe

[29] ISO/IEC 27003, Information technology - Security techniques - Information security management systems - Guidance

[30] ISO/IEC 27001, Information security, cybersecurity and privacy protection - Information security management systems - Requirements

[31] MSS justification template https://www.iso.org/sd/fetch/LrkK5l9UorwlYGNV91PWuyBa4rTglVsn6BPaoyqoRcrYpBrub0KLuQxC6KbD4PVj

About ISO

ISO (International Organization for Standardization) is an independent, non-governmental organization with a membership of 167 national standards bodies. Through its members, ISO brings together Experts to share knowledge and develop voluntary, consensus-based, market-relevant International Standards that support innovation and provide solutions to global challenges. ISO has published more than 22 000 International Standards and related documents, covering almost every industry, from technology to food safety, agriculture and healthcare.

About IEC

The IEC (International Electrotechnical Commission) is a global, not-for-profit membership organization that brings together 173 countries and coordinates the work of 20 000 Experts globally. IEC International Standards and conformity assessment work underpins international trade in electrical and electronic goods. It facilitates electricity access, and verifies the safety, performance and interoperability of electric and electronic devices and systems, including, for example, consumer devices such as mobile phones or refrigerators, office and medical equipment, information technology, electricity generation, and much more.

International Organization
for Standardization

ISO Central Secretariat
Ch. de Blandonnet 8
Case Postale 401
CH – 1214 Vernier, Geneva
Switzerland

iso.org

International Electrotechnical
Commission

IEC Secretariat
3 rue de Varembé
Case Postale 131
CH – 1211 Geneva 20
Switzerland

iec.ch

3 ISO/IEC Guide 79, Gender responsive standards - Guidance for standards developers, is under preparation. Stage at the time of publication: ISO/IEC DGuide 79:2026.