REVIEW COMMITTEE (REVCOM)
Approved Meeting Minutes
16 June 2010
9:00 a.m. – 2:00 p.m.
Piscataway, NJ, USA
|Masayuki Ariyoshi||Peter Cassidy||Bill Ash|
|Peter Balma||Clint Chaplin||Kathryn Bennett|
|Phil Barber||Bob Grow||Christina Boyce|
|Victor Berman||Steve Mills||Kim Breitfelder|
|Wael Diab||Jim Moore||Matt Ceglia|
|Paul Houzé||Paul Nikolich||Terry deCourcelle|
|Bruce Kraemer||Glenn Parsons||Judy Gorman|
|David Law, Chair||Alan Storms||Jodi Haasz|
|Oleg Logvinov||Claire Topp [legal counsel]||Mary Ellen Hanntz|
|Narayanan Ramachandran||Don Wright||Yvette HoSang|
|Gary Robinson||Dongmei Xu||Noelle Humenick|
|Sam Sciacca||Karen Kenney|
|Curtis Siller||Soo Kim|
|Geoff Thompson||Mike Kipness|
|Members Absent:||Jennifer McClain|
|Ted Burse||Don Messina|
|Moira Patterson, Administrator|
1 CALL TO ORDER
Chair Law called the meeting to order at 9.00 a.m. There was a round of introductions by all present.
2 REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF AGENDA
There was a motion to approve the agenda. The motion was unanimously approved.
3 APPROVAL OF THE 24 March 2010 RevCom MINUTES
There was a motion to approve the 24 March 2010 RevCom Minutes. The motion was unanimously approved.
4 ProCom LIAISON REPORT
David Law, ProCom member, delivered the report. [Please see the ProCom meeting minutes for further information.]
5 CONDITIONAL APPROVAL REPORT
The report was given as an information item.
P11073-30400/D12 (EMB/11073) Standard for Health Informatics - Point-of-care Medical Device Communication - Interface Profile - Cabled Ethernet
Conditions met: 26 April 2010
6 PROPOSED STANDARDS FOR REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION
[All votes unanimous unless noted otherwise.]
P671-1985/Cor1/D2 (AES/GA) IEEE Standard Specification Format Guide and Test Procedure for Nongyroscopic Inertial Angular Sensors: Jerk, Acceleration, Velocity, and Displacement - Corrigendum 1: 22.214.171.124 Short-Term Stability and Annex A Sensor Dynamic Block Diagrams
Action Item - Staff will look into providing documents for balloting purposes that do not contain the restricted use language added by Xplore.
David Law asked Gary Robinson to chair during the discussion of the next project, as David is the chair of the 802.3 working group.
P802.3ba/D3.2 (C/LM) IEEE Standard for Information Technology - Telecommunications and Information Exchange Between Systems - Local and Metropolitan Area Networks - Specific Requirements Part 3: Carrier Sense Multiple Access with Collision Detection (CSMA/CD) Access Method and Physical Layer Specifications - Amendment: Media Access Control Parameters, Physical Layers and Management Parameters for 40 Gb/s and 100 Gb/s Operation
David Law recused himself from the vote on this item, as he is the working group chair.
P802.11p/D11.0 (C/LM) IEEE Standard for Information Technology - Telecommunications and Information Exchange Between Systems - Local and Metropolitan Area Networks - Specific Requirements - Part 11: Wireless LAN Medium Access Control (MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY) Specifications - Amendment 6: Wireless Access in Vehicular Environments
Bruce Kraemer recused himself from the vote on this item, as he is the working group chair.
P802.16h/D15 (C/LM) IEEE Standard for Local and Metropolitan Area Networks - Part 16: Air Interface for Fixed Broadband Wireless Access Systems - Improved Coexistence Mechanisms for License-Exempt Operation Amendment
Phil Barber recused himself from the vote on this item, as he is a working group member.
P1601/D13 (PE/PSIM) Trial-Use Standard for Optical AC Current and Voltage Sensing Systems
P1679/D13 (PE/SB) Recommended Practice for the Characterization and Evaluation of Emerging Energy Storage Technologies in Stationary Applications
Recommendation: APPROVE [Yes = 10; No = 3 (Barber, Siller, Thompson); Abstain = 0]
P1709/D1.1 (IAS/PCI) Recommended Practice for 1 to 35kV Medium Voltage DC Power Systems on Ships
P1815/D5 (PE/T&D + PE/SUB) Standard for Electric Power Systems Communications - Distributed Network Protocol (DNP3)
Recommendation: Conditional approval [Yes = 12; No = 1; Abstain = 0]
Approve contingent on SASB approval of the modified PAR.
P11073-10420/D9 (EMB/11073) Health Informatics - Personal Health Device Communication - Device Specialization - Body Composition Analyzer
P14102/D1 (C/S2ESC) Adoption of ISO/IEC 14102:2008 Information Technology - Guideline for the Evaluation and Selection of CASE Tools
P14471/D1 (C/S2ESC) Adoption of Guide ISO/IEC TR14471:2007 Information Technology - Software Engineering - Guidelines for the Adoption of CASE Tools
Recommendation: Conditional approval
Approve contingent on SASB approval of the modified PAR.
Initially, there was a motion to recommend approval of P14471. After it was noted that a modified PAR under consideration at the concurrent NesCom meeting, the motion was amended to recommend approval contingent on SASB approval of the modified PAR. The amendment was unanimously accepted.
PC37.13.1a/D3 (PE/SWG) IEEE Standard for Definite-Purpose Switching Devices for Use in Metal-Enclosed Low-Voltage Power Circuit Breaker Switchgear - Amendment: Revise Short-Circuit Rating and Test Requirement
PC37.46/D6 (PE/SWG) Standard Specifications for High Voltage (> 1000 V) Expulsion and Current-limiting Power Class Fuses and Fuse Disconnecting Switches
Recommendation: APPROVE [Yes = 12; No = 0; Abstain = 1 (Thompson)]
PC57.12.30/D5 (PE/TR + PE/SWG) Standard for Pole-Mounted Equipment - Enclosure Integrity for Coastal Environments
There was discussion about whether it was permissible to change the format of a list in the scope or purpose, as there is a requirement for these two sections to match between the PAR and the draft. The ‘Matching Requirement Ad Hoc’ was formed with the aim of recording that formatting differences may be acceptable, possibly as a new RevCom Convention. (Chair: Wael Diab; Members: Peter Balma, Matt Ceglia, David Law, Moira Patterson, Sam Sciacca, and Michelle Turner.)
There was also discussion about whether comments that are submitted with new or different remedies from earlier rounds can be deemed re-statements of earlier comments. After some discussion, the question was called and the vote taken.
P7-4.3.2/D4 (PE/NPE) Standard Criteria for Digital Computers in Safety Systems of Nuclear Power Generating Stations
Recommendation: APPROVE [Yes = 12; No = 0; Abstain = 1 (Thompson)]
P336/D2009-e (PE/NPE) Recommended Practice for Installation, Inspection, and Testing for Class 1E Power, Instrumentation, and Control Equipment at Nuclear Facilities
P1241/D6.10 (IM/WM&A) Standard for Terminology and Test Methods for Analog-to-Digital Converters
Recommendation: APPROVE [Yes = 12; No = 0; Abstain = 1]
P1329/D31 (COM/SC) Standard Method for Measuring Transmission Performance of Speakerphones
P1517/D3 (C/S2ESC) Standard for Information Technology - System and Software Life Cycle Processes - Reuse Processes
P1641/D4 (SCC20) Standard for Signal and Test Definition
PC57.12.00/D5 (PE/TR) Standard for General Requirements for Liquid-Immersed Distribution, Power, and Regulating Transformers
PC57.12.31/D5 (PE/TR + PE/SWG) Standard for Pole-Mounted Equipment - Enclosure Integrity
PC57.12.90/D14 (PE/TR) Standard Test Code for Liquid-Immersed Distribution, Power, and Regulating Transformers
Recommendation: Conditionally approve
Motion to approve contingent on the approval of PC57.12.00.
PC57.113/D4 (PE/TR) Recommended Practice for Partial Discharge Measurement in Liquid-Filled Power Transformers and Shunt Reactors
PC57.123/D2.9 (PE/TR) Guide for Transformer Loss Measurement
There was discussion about the footnotes that have been added to the scope in the draft. RevCom provided the following statement for this submittal: For the purposes of the matching requirement, the scope is considered equivalent. This is not a precedent. The footnotes are editorial, are required by editorial convention, and would have put in during publication.
292-1969 (R2005) (AES/GA) IEEE Specification Format for Single-Degree-of-Freedom Spring-Restrained Rate Gyros
293-1969 (R2005) (AES/GA) IEEE Test Procedure for Single-Degree-of-Freedom Spring-Restrained Rate Gyros
There was a motion to recommend approval of 488.2-1992 (R2004), 634-2004, 820-2005, 1120-2004, 1227-1990 (R2001), C57.13.2-2005, and C57.13.6-2005. The motion was unanimously approved.
488.2-1992 (R2004) (IM/AI) IEEE Standard Codes, Formats, Protocols, and Common Commands for Use With IEEE Std 488.1-1987, IEEE Standard Digital Interface for Programmable Instrumentation
634-2004 (PE/IC) IEEE Standard Cable-Penetration Fire Stop Qualification Test
820-2005 (PE/PSC) IEEE Standard Telephone Loop Performance Characteristics
1003.13-2003 (C/PA) IEEE Standard for Information Technology - Standardized Application Environment Profile (AEP) - POSIX® Realtime and Embedded Application Support
1003.26-2003 (C/PA) IEEE Standard for Information Technology - Portable Operating System Interface (POSIX®) - Part 26: Device Control Application Program Interface (API) [C Language]
1120-2004 (PE/IC) IEEE Guide for the Planning, Design, Installation, and Repair of Submarine Power Cable Systems
1227-1990 (R2001) (PE/T&D) IEEE Guide for the Measurement of DC Electric-Field Strength and Ion Related Quantities
1278.3-1996 (R2002) (C/SI) IEEE Recommended Practice for Distributed Interactive Simulation - Exercise Management and Feedback
1278.4-1997 (R2002) (C/SI) IEEE Recommended Practice for Distributed Interactive Simulation - Verification, Validation, and Accreditation
Prior to the motion to recommend approval, there was a motion to recommend disapproval, which failed (yes = 0; no = 12; abstain = 1).
1428-2004 (PE/IC) IEEE Guide for Installation Methods for Fiber-Optic Cables in Electric Power Generating Stations and in Industrial Facilities
Recommendation: Disapprove [Yes = 10; No = 3 (Berman, Logvinov, Ramachandran); Abstain = 0]
RevCom has not accepted the vote change from balloter Bayer, because there is evidence in the email chain that promises were made to elicit the vote change. Therefore his comments have to be rebutted and recirculated.
Legal counsel requests that the following text from a comment by balloter Byrd should be treated as a negative comment and be recirculated: Part 5 of the Proposed Change in comment #1.
Sam Sciacca was assigned as mentor.
1497-2001 (C/DA) IEEE Standard for Standard Delay Format (SDF) for the Electronic Design Process
It was noted that the boilerplate text in the recirculation announcements contains a note that does not apply to reaffirmation ballots:
“NOTE: To show our appreciation of your effort, the names of all voters will be listed in the front matter of the published standard. Your vote and your contact information will *not* be included.”
Staff will update the boilerplate language.
C57.13.2-2005 (PE/TR) IEEE Standard Conformance Test Procedure for Instrument Transformers
C57.13.6-2005 (PE/TR) IEEE Standard for High-Accuracy Instrument Transformers
7 EARLY CONSIDERATION PROCESS
No Early Consideration Cycle will be held this quarter.
8 OLD BUSINESS
8.1 Comment Resolution Status Ad Hoc Update – Law
David Law reported on the activities of the ad hoc, and presented a proposal to align the comment resolution statuses in the myBallot system more closely with the IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual.
During discussion, one of the proposed statuses was modified. The below text reflects the final version:
The comment resolution status options offered by myBallot, and provided on the comment resolution spreadsheet, would be:
The comment resolution status help text in respect to the comment resolution detail options above used in myBallot, and provided on the comment resolution spreadsheet, would be changed to read:
- Accepted - The ballot resolution committee accepts the suggested remedy verbatim.
- Revised - Accept in principle, the ballot resolution committee will make a change to the draft based on a revision of the suggested remedy. The Resolution Detail field shall provide sufficient detail for ballot group members to understand the revision of the suggested remedy provided by the commenter.
- Rejected - The ballot resolution committee does not accept the suggested remedy. The Resolution Detail field shall provide sufficient detail for ballot group members to understand the rationale for this rejection.
Notes: The comment resolution statuses ‘Out of Scope’ and ‘Unresolvable’ would be removed, without equivalents provided, as these are effectively ‘Rejected’ and so would be marked as such with a Resolution Detail that would explain why the comment was ‘Out of Scope’ or ‘Unresolvable.’
There was a motion to approve the proposal as amended. The motion was unanimously approved.
The next steps will be to submit this into the myProject/myBallot ticketing system and to develop an implementation plan.
9 NEW BUSINESS
9.1 Proposal for Standards Development between C/S2ESC and ISO/IEC JTC1/SC7 – Haasz
Jodi Haasz presented a proposal to help the C/S2ESC committee with comment resolution in its standards development activities with ISO/IEC JTC1/SC7 (SC7). SC7 allows comments to be rejected without an explanation, whereas the IEEE process requires explanations for rejecting negative comments. When comments are received on an IEEE ballot, these comments are forwarded to SC7 for resolution.
The proposal contained a comment resolution statement that C/S2ESC can use in the IEEE balloting process to explain the rejection of comments that did not receive a rebuttal during SC7 comment resolution. During discussion, some modifications were made to the proposed language.
“Since this project is being developed with ISO/IEC JTC1/SC7, ballot resolution is done between the IEEE Computer Society/Software & Systems Engineering Committee and ISO/IEC JTC1/SC7. Your comment was forwarded to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC7 for review. Your comment was reviewed and was rejected by ISO/IEC JTC1/SC7 in accordance with their comment disposition process.”
The URL for the website that contains the ISO/IEC JTC1/SC7 comment disposition process should also be provided to the balloters.
Jodi sought agreement from RevCom that this will be an acceptable comment resolution detail statement, and there was no objection from RevCom.
9.2 Errata in Reaffirmation Ballots – Thompson
Geoff Thompson presented a proposal that is intended to clarify the procedures. Known errata are in scope for reaffirmation ballots. However, it is not clearly stated whether these errata have to be included in the ballot packages. The following proposed change to the IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual, 9.1, makes it clear that they need to be included.
9.1 Reaffirmation Standards that contain no identified significant obsolete or erroneous information may be submitted by the Sponsor for reaffirmation when accompanied by a ballot indicating approval by at least 75% of the interested and affected parties. When the Sponsor ballots a standard for reaffirmation, the entire standard, including approved amendments, corrigenda, and known errata, is subject to review by its balloters. Objections may indicate the need to revise the standard rather than to reaffirm it. If any approved amendments or corrigenda or known errata are omitted during a reaffirmation ballot, a recirculation shall be required to present them to the balloting group. Sponsors shall not conduct a reaffirmation ballot for standards with three or more amendments. In such situations, the Sponsor shall revise the standard instead (see 8.1.2).
There was a motion for RevCom to forward the proposal to ProCom. The motion was unanimously approved.
10 NEXT MEETING
The next RevCom meeting will be Wednesday, 29 September 2010, in Berlin, Germany. The submittal deadline for this meeting is 20 August 2010.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 1.40 p.m.