|
|
|
|
IEEE-SA Standards Board Procedures
Committee (ProCom)
APPROVED Minutes
8 December 2008
1:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m.
Delray Beach, Florida, USA
MEMBERS PRESENT
Jim Hughes
Rich Hulett, Chair
David Law
Glenn Parsons
Chuck Powers
Malcolm Thaden
MEMBERS ABSENT
Bill Goldbach
GUESTS
Chuck Adams
Satish Aggarwal
Clyde Camp
Clint Chaplin
Wael Diab
Chris Fitzgerald
Alex Gelman
Bob Grow
Michael Janezic
Bruce Kraemer
John Kulick
Hung Ling
Steve Mills
Jim Moore
Fran O'Brien
Ted Olsen
Ron Petersen
Jon Rosdahl
Sam Sciacca
Mike Seavey
Geoff Thompson
Claire Topp, Legal counsel
Jon Walz
George Willingmyre
Howard Wolfman
Don Wright
STAFF
Bill Ash
Kim Breitfelder
Rona Gertz
Judy Gorman
Jodi Haasz
Yvette HoSang
Karen Kenney
Bob LaBelle
Mary Lynne Nielsen
Moira Patterson
Dave Ringle, Administrator
Jennie Steinhagen
Susan Tatiner
Sue Vogel
Jerry Walker
1 CALL TO ORDER
Chair Hulett called the meeting to order at 1:05 p.m. There was a round of introductions by all present.
2 APPROVAL OF AGENDA
A clarification was given that the Style Manual does not require ProCom approval.
Agenda item 5.8 Definition of 'Standard' - Mills was added.
There was a motion to approve the agenda, as amended. The motion was unanimously approved.
3 APPROVAL OF THE 24 SEPTEMBER 2008 ProCom MINUTES
There was a motion to approve the previous meeting minutes. The motion was unanimously approved.
4 OLD/UNFINISHED BUSINESS
4.1 Status of ProCom Items Balloted by SASB - Ringle
4.1.1 Change A - SASB Bylaws and SASB OpMan RE: Copyright
4.1.2 Change B - SA OpMan and SASB Bylaws RE: Obligations/Code of Ethics
Dave Ringle reported that Changes A and B were not approved by the SASB. The relevant ad hocs convened after the close of the SASB ballot, reviewed the comments received, and proposed changes to the P&P text. These changes were discussed under agenda items 4.2 and 4.3.
4.2 Copyright Ad Hoc Update - Law
4.2.1 Policy Web Site - Law
4.2.2 FAQs - Law
David Law discussed the comments received during the SASB ballot and the proposed changes recommended by the Ad Hoc.
There was a motion to forward the wording changes [below] to the Standards Board for an approval vote. The motion was unanimously approved.
"IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws
7. Copyright
All contributions to IEEE standards development (whether for an individual or entity standard) shall meet the requirements outlined in this clause.
7.1 Definitions
The following term, when capitalized, has the following meanings:
"Published" shall mean material that has been distributed to the public by sale, license or transfer of ownership.
7.2 Policy
Participants are solely responsible for determining whether disclosure of any contributions submitted by them to the IEEE requires the prior consent of other parties and, if so, to obtain it.
7.2.1 Contributions from previously Published sources
All Contributions from previously Published <link to definition in paragraph> sources shall be accompanied by a Copyright Permission Form, which outlines the specific material being used and the planned context for its usage in the IEEE standard.
7.2.2 Contributions not previously Published
Any participant who submits contributions that have not been previously Published <link to definition in paragraph> conveys the following rights to the IEEE:
a) IEEE has the non-exclusive, irrevocable, royalty-free,
worldwide rights (a license) to use the Contribution in any format or media,
without restriction, and with the right to modify in any way:
(i) In connection with the proposed project to which the contribution was made;
and
(ii) Upon approval of the resulting standard, for any use or purpose and/or
in connection with any product or service.
Ownership of the copyright in the Contribution remains with the contributor
and is not transferred or assigned to the IEEE.
b) IEEE owns the copyright for the Work Product (i.e., the collective work of
all participants; for example, the draft standard and final approved standard).
c) The IEEE owns the copyright of any derivative works it develops based on
the Work Product.
d) Participants who compile contributions while acting in the role of Editor
(whether elected or assigned) do so with the understanding that IEEE owns the
compilation and will be the copyright owner of the final Work Product.
Participants whose contributions are owned by their employer or a third party are required to inform their employer or any applicable third party of the IEEE-SA Copyright Policy, and confirm their agreement. Participants shall actively determine that their employers or applicable third parties do in fact agree to the Copyright Policy prior to contributing to any Standards group.
Renumber:
78. Modifications to the IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws
78.1 Interpretations of the IEEE-SA Standards
Board Bylaws
IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual
6.1 Copyright
The IEEE owns the copyright of draft and approved IEEE standards.
All IEEE standards are copyrighted by the IEEE under the provisions of the US
Copyright Act.
Contributions made by participants in an IEEE-SA standards development meeting, whether the contributions are Published or not, are subject to the IEEE-SA Copyright Policy set forth in Clause 7 of the IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws. The Chair, or the Chair's delegate, of an IEEE-SA standards-development meeting shall inform the participants at the meeting of their duty to comply with the IEEE-SA Copyright Policy. The minutes of the meeting shall record that the participants were informed of this duty.
6.1.1 Project Authorization Request (PAR)
As part of the initial PAR procedure, the committee or working
group shall appoint a chair who shall sign a Copyright Agreement acknowledging
that the proposed standard constitutes a "work made for hire" as defined
by the Copyright Act, and that as to any work not so defined, any rights or
interest in the copyright to the standards publication is transferred to the
IEEE. Except as noted below, the IEEE is the sole copyright owner of all material
included in the standard.
At the time of a PAR is submitted for initial
approval completion, any known previously Published copyrighted
material intended for inclusion in the proposed IEEE standard shall
be identified on the PAR. The working group is responsible for receiving
written permission to use all previously Published copyrighted material
prior to the start of ballot invitation or prior to the next recirculation ballot
if the excerpted material is inserted during comment resolution. Sample form
letters are available in the IEEE Standards Style Manual.
6.1.2 Contributions from previously Published sources
Participants in an IEEE Standards group who submit contributions from previously Published sources shall notify the Chair of the need for permission, and should assist the Chair in obtaining that permission. Working Group Chairs are responsible for requesting permission from external entities and forwarding the completed response forms to the IEEE <insert link to stds-style@ieee.org>.
IEEE Permission Form Letters should be used to request and grant such permissions. Permission Form Letters to use material unchanged or modified are available online. Agreements that do not conform to the IEEE Permission Form Letters are possible, but such requests <insert link to stds-ipr@ieee.org> shall be in writing and shall be approved by the IEEE.
6.1.32 Drafts of proposed IEEE standards
All drafts of proposed IEEE standards shall contain the copyright statement provided in subclause 4.2.2 of the IEEE Standards Style Manual.
RATIONALE:
Implementation of the Copyright policy."
ProCom requested an implementation date of 31 March 2009 for the P&P changes, to allow time for BOG approval in February 2009 and to allow time for supplementary materials to be finalized.
The Policy web site and the FAQs need to be re-reviewed by the ad hoc to ensure consistency with the P&Ps.
4.3 Obligations of the Participant Ad Hoc Update - Law
4.3.1 Indemnification Text in the P&P - Law
4.3.2 myProject Web Page - Law
4.3.3 Implementation Plan - Law
David Law discussed the comments received during the SASB ballot and the proposed changes recommended by the Ad Hoc.
There was a motion to forward the wording changes [below] to the Standards Board for an approval vote. The motion was unanimously approved.
"IEEE Standards Association Operations Manual
4.2 IEEE-SA BOG membership
4.2.1 IEEE-SA BOG member qualifications
All members of the IEEE-SA BOG shall act in accordance with IEEE Standards policies and procedures, IEEE Policies including, but not limited to, Section 9.9 on Conflict of Interest, and the IEEE Code of Ethics. Members of the IEEE-SA BOG shall reflect the technical and global standards interests of the IEEE. No individual IEEE Society or council, or government, or industry should be over-represented in the structure of the IEEE-SA BOG.
5. Standing committees of the IEEE-SA BOG
All members of the standing committees of the BOG, as well as the members of any ad hoc committees appointed by the BOG, shall act in accordance with IEEE Standards policies and procedures, IEEE Policies including, but not limited to, Section 9.9 on Conflict of Interest, and the IEEE Code of Ethics.
IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws
4.2 Standing committees of the IEEE-SA Standards Board
All members of the standing committees of the IEEE-SA Standards Board shall be members of the IEEE Standards Association, and shall act in accordance with IEEE Standards policies and procedures, IEEE Policies including, but not limited to, Section 9.9 on Conflict of Interest, and the IEEE Code of Ethics.
5.2.1 Participation in IEEE standards development
Participants in the individual method of IEEE standards development shall act based on their qualifications, beliefs, and experience.
All participants in IEEE standards development are expected
to be familiar with, and act in accordance with, the IEEE Code of Ethics.
While participating in IEEE standards development, all individuals, entity representatives,
entity members, and entities participating indirectly in the individual process
shall act in accordance with all applicable laws (nation-based and international),
the IEEE Code of Ethics, and with IEEE Standards policies and procedures. Participants
in IEEE standards development who access any IEEE-SA database shall acknowledge
the Obligations for Participation and Code of Ethics.
Participants on standards committees or working groups with governance authority or the authority to enter into a financial transaction with another party shall also act in accordance with IEEE Policies Section 9.9 on Conflict of Interest.
IEEE Standards Sponsor chairs and Sponsor liaison representatives shall be members of IEEE-SA and shall also be either IEEE members of any grade or IEEE affiliates.
RATIONALE:
Implementation of the Obligations for Participation and Code of Ethics for participants
in IEEE standards development."
ProCom requested an implementation date of 31 March 2009 for the P&P changes, to allow time for BOG approval in February 2009 and to allow time for supplementary materials to be finalized.
The myProject web page needs to be re-reviewed by the ad hoc to ensure consistency with the P&Ps.
The ad hoc must still decide on a means of implementing the 'call for copyright' as discussed in the P&P changes under agenda item 4.2 [See SASB OpMan 6.1, paragraph 2].
4.4 Study Group Guidelines Ad Hoc Update - Powers
Chuck Powers stated that the ad hoc was unable to hold a meeting due to a lack of common available time and will try again prior to the March ProCom meeting.
A draft guidelines document had been circulated via email; comments were received.
AI - Chuck to verify the continued desire to participate for all listed ad hoc members.
4.5 Vote Change Ad Hoc Update - Thaden/Ringle
Dave Ringle reported that the work of this ad hoc had been taken on by the RevCom ad hoc that developed the proposed P&P changes in agenda item 5.2. Thus, this ad hoc has been overcome by events.
4.6 'Participant Database' SASB OpMan Coverage Ad Hoc Update - Parsons
Glenn Parsons stated that the ad hoc did not hold any meetings, as he was quite busy with a bunch of AudCom ad hocs this quarter. The ad hoc is expected to meet prior to the March 2009 ProCom meeting.
5 NEW BUSINESS
5.1 Proposed Changes to SASB OpMan RE: Consideration of Comments - Law
There was a motion to forward the wording changes [below] to the Standards Board for an approval vote. The motion was approved [Vote: Yes=4; No=0; Abstain=1].
"IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual
5.4.3 Conduct of ballot
A standards ballot shall be conducted by the Sponsor or Sponsor designee via the IEEE Standards Balloting Center when a proposed standard is ready for Sponsor balloting. Ballot group participants shall submit votes and comments in a manner and in a format compatible with approved IEEE Standards Balloting Center balloting tools. Sponsors shall provide evidence of the consideration of each comment via approved IEEE Standards Balloting Center tools.
5.4.3.1 Initial ballot
The ballot shall provide the following choices:
a. Approve (Affirmative). This vote may be accompanied
by comments suggesting corrections and improvements. All comments shall be
considered; making a change to the draft as a result of the comments is left
to the discretion of the Sponsor.Action on such comments is left to the
discretion of the Sponsor.
b. Do Not Approve (Negative with comment). This vote must be accompanied by one or more specific objections with proposed resolution in sufficient detail in a legible form so that the specific wording of the changes that will cause the negative voter to change his or her vote to "approve" can readily be determined. The Sponsor shall encourage the submission of comments with all negative ballots. If a negative vote unaccompanied by comments, or a negative vote accompanied by comments not related to the proposal under consideration, is received despite these instructions, the vote shall be counted in the total tally of votes as a "negative without comment." The Sponsor is not required to conduct a recirculation ballot of "negative without comment" votes.
Balloters who vote Do Not Approve (Negative with comment)
shall be permitted to differentiate those comments that caused their negative
vote from other comments that they may wish to submit. Any comments that are
explicitly identified not to be part of the negative vote shall be treated as
Approve (Affirmative) comments, and action on such comments is left
to the discretion of the Sponsor.
c. Abstain. This category is provided to allow for ballot returns from members who do not wish to review the document because of conflict of interest, lack of expertise, or other reasons.
RATIONALE:
The IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual was unclear as to how non-MBS
had to be processed. In order to make it clearer that written evidence of consideration
has to be provided for each comment, the proposal suggests the deletion of the
statement 'Action on such comments is left to the discretion of the Sponsor'
from two subclauses of the IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual."
5.2 Proposed Changes to SASB OpMan RE: Scope of Recirculation Ballots - Law
There was a motion to forward the wording changes [below] to the Standards Board for an approval vote. The motion was unanimously approved.
"IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual
5.4.3.2 Resolution of comments, objections, and negative votes
The Sponsor shall consider all comments and objections received before the close of ballot; and make a reasonable attempt to resolve all negative votes that are accompanied by comments. Comments that advocate changes in the document, whether technical or editorial, may be accepted, revised, or rejected.
Comments addressing grammar, punctuation, and style, whether attached to an affirmative or a negative vote, may be referred to the publications editor for consideration during preparation for publication. It should be borne in mind that documents are professionally edited prior to publication.
Comments received before the close of ballot from persons who are not in the balloting group, including from the mandatory coordination entities, require acknowledgement sent to the commenter and shall be presented to the comment resolution group for consideration. The Sponsor shall send an explanation of the disposition of the mandatory coordination comments to the commenter.
Comments received after the close of ballot will be forwarded to the Sponsor for consideration at the next update of the standard. If a comment is received as a result of a public review process, that comment will be addressed by the Sponsor and a disposition returned to the commenter, along with information concerning their right of appeal.
Negative voters may indicate acceptance of the response to any or all comments associated with their negative vote. If the negative vote is not satisfied, either entirely or in part, the negative voter shall be given an opportunity to review comment responses and either to change his or her vote to "approve", to "abstain", or to retain his or her negative vote during a recirculation ballot.
Changes may be made in the document to resolve negative votes that are accompanied by comments or for other reasons. All substantive changes made since the last balloted draft shall be identified and recirculated to the Sponsor balloting group. All unresolved negative votes with comments shall be recirculated to the Sponsor balloting group. The verbatim text of each comment, the name of the negative voter, and a rebuttal by the members conducting the resolution of comments shall be included in the recirculation ballot package. Responses to comments should include sufficient detail for ballot group members to understand the rationale for rejection of the comment or revision of the change proposed by the commenter.
During a recirculation ballot, balloting group members shall
have an opportunity to change their previously cast votes ballots.
Until the document has achieved 75% approval, a balloter's comments can be based
on any portion of the document. Once the document has achieved 75% approval,
A change to "do not approve," which is submitted with comments
in subsequent ballots, associated with a "do not approve"
vote shall be based only on the changed portions of the balloted document,
clauses portions of the balloted document affected by the changes,
or portions of the balloted document that are the subject of the unresolved
comments associated with negative votes. If comments associated with
a change to "do not approve" is vote are not
based solely on the above criteria comments concerning
previously approved portions of the balloted document, the balloter shall
be informed that the comments are out of scope of the recirculation
not based on the changed portion of the balloted document. Such comments
need not be addressed in the current ballot and may be considered for a future
revision of the standard. If (a) all comments associated with a "do
not approve" vote are out of scope and (b) the balloter is informed that
the comments are out of scope the balloter does not change the negative
ballot, then the Sponsor may submit the vote ballot may
be submitted to RevCom as an unresolved negative without comment.
Further resolution efforts, including additional recirculation ballots, shall be required if negative votes with new comments within the scope of the recirculation result. Once all required recirculations have been completed and 75% approval has been achieved, the IEEE requirements for consensus have been met. Efforts to resolve negative votes may continue for a brief period; however, should such resolution not be possible in a timely manner, the Sponsor should forward the submittal to RevCom because the IEEE has an obligation to the majority to review and publish the standard quickly.
Copies of all unresolved negative votes, together with the reasons given by the negative voters and the rebuttals by the Sponsor, shall be included with the ballot results submitted to RevCom. Copies of the written confirmations from voters that indicate concurrence with the change of their votes from negative to affirmative shall be included in the submittal to RevCom.
The Sponsor shall, if not included in a recirculation package, provide to the negative voter and to RevCom an explanation why any comments associated with a negative vote were not required to be recirculated. In order for a negative vote to be changed to an affirmative or abstention vote, the Sponsor shall obtain and provide to RevCom written confirmation from each voter (by letter, fax, or electronic mail) that indicates concurrence with any change of his or her vote. Any negative vote with comment that RevCom is to consider as a negative without comment shall be explained to RevCom.
Proposed standards receiving a significant number of unresolved negative votes should be considered by the Sponsor for trial-use (see 5.7).
RATIONALE:
The IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual was unclear as what the scope
of a recirculation was when the proceeding ballot failed to achieve a 75% approval
rate. This proposed change clarifies that the scope of a recirculation remains
the entire draft until a 75% approval rate has been achieved but that once this
has been achieved the scope narrows regardless of the approval rate achieved
in subsequent ballots. In summary, convergence starts only after a 75% approval
rate has been achieved, but once this is achieved convergence continues. Also,
it is currently not clear if a change from "do not approve (negative with
comment)" to "abstain" changes the status of the balloter's comments.
This proposal clarifies that such a change of vote associates comments with
the abstention category."
5.3 Proposed Changes to SASB OpMan RE: Maintenance Action - Ringle
There was a motion to forward the wording changes [below] to the Standards Board for an approval vote. The motion was unanimously approved.
"IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual
9. Maintenance of IEEE standards
Sponsors are required to undertake a maintenance action on
a standard within five years of its the IEEE-SA Standards
Board approval date of a standard's publication. Subsequent maintenance
actions on active standards are required within five years of the IEEE-SA Standards
Board approval date of the previous maintenance action. For standards with amendments
or corrigenda, the maintenance schedule for all components of the standard is
based on the schedule for the base document. Standards that meet the criteria
for stabilization (see 1.2) can be transferred to the stabilized standards process,
where the document is subject to the requirement of maintenance action every
ten years.
A maintenance action on an active standard can be an approved PAR for revision; an initiated reaffirmation ballot; an initiated Sponsor withdrawal ballot; or a request to stabilize. If the Sponsor does not undertake a maintenance action by the end of a standard's five-year maintenance cycle, or ten-year maintenance cycle for stabilization, the RevCom Administrator shall notify the Sponsor that the standard will be submitted to RevCom with a default recommendation of withdrawal. RevCom or the IEEE-SA Standards Board may decide to alter the default recommendation.
RATIONALE:
The proposed change will synch the P&P with how SA Governance staff searches
its database to generate the list of standards that are due for a maintenance
action in a given year."
5.4 Proposed Changes to SASB OpMan RE: AudCom Review of WG P&P - Parsons
There was a motion to forward the wording changes [below] to the Standards Board for an approval vote. The motion was unanimously approved.
"IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual
4.2.4 Audit Committee (AudCom)
This committee shall make routine reviews and inspections to assure that each standards-developing entity, through its Sponsor and Working Group policies and procedures (P&P), is adhering to the procedures described in the IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws and the IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual. It will make recommendations as appropriate to advise the standards-developing entities of changes that are needed. The committee shall periodically issue reports when requested by the IEEE-SA Standards Board, summarizing its findings and making recommendations as appropriate for Standards Board action.
The committee shall develop sets of basic Sponsor and Working
Group operating procedures for standards development and shall use such
operating procedures as a baseline when performing audits of Sponsor P
& P.
4.2.4.15.1.1.1 AudCom review of Sponsor P &
P
AudCom recommends to the IEEE-SA Standards Board the following actions concerning IEEE-SA Sponsor P & P:
- Accepted
- Not accepted
- Visibly under development
A Sponsor's P & P shall be determined by AudCom to be visibly under development or accepted by AudCom before performance of any standards work (including but not limited to: PAR actions, Sponsor ballot actions, interpretations, etc.) by that Sponsor is authorized by the IEEE-SA Standards Board to commence.
After a Sponsor's P & P have been submitted to AudCom and an AudCom member is assigned as mentor to review the document, the P & P may be determined by AudCom to be visibly under development. The P & P will remain in such a state until AudCom is either satisfied that they are complete and acceptable or that the Sponsor is no longer responsive to AudCom and that the P&P are not acceptable.
AudCom will ensure that each Sponsor has based its P & P on the appropriate Sponsor procedures (e.g., individual, entity, SCC Type 1, or SCC Type 2) available from the IEEE-SA.
Sponsor P & P shall be subject to review by AudCom every five years to ensure currency. However, if a Sponsor revises its P & P prior to its next scheduled AudCom review, the Sponsor shall immediately submit its revised P & P to AudCom for review and acceptance.
The IEEE Standards Sponsor P & P document accepted by AudCom shall be the official policies of that Sponsor and shall reside online on the IEEE-SA Standards Board AudCom website. No other copy shall be designated as the official copy. Links to the IEEE-SA Standards Board AudCom website are encouraged.
4.2.4.2 AudCom review of Working Group P & P
It is the responsibility of the Sponsor (see 5.1.2) to approve the P & P of its working groups involved in the technical development work of a standard. However, AudCom may request at any time to review one of a Sponsor's WG P & P. AudCom will select a working group on which to conduct the audit, from the various working groups that the Sponsor has active at the time. AudCom may request to review a Sponsor's WG P & P at any time. At least one of a Sponsor's WG P & P shall be subject to review by AudCom every five years to ensure currency. AudCom will conduct the review based on comparison to the then-current baseline WG P & P available from IEEE-SA.
AudCom will review the WG P & P of the selected working group and, if no issues are found, will report this to the IEEE-SA Standard Board. If issues are identified with the selected WG P & P, AudCom will suggest revisions. AudCom may also require review of additional WG P & P of other working groups for the Sponsor. If issues are not resolved in a reasonable time, or significant issues are found among the WG P & P of several working groups, AudCom may recommend to the IEEE-SA Standards Board that the Sponsor's Working Group P & P be considered "not accepted", and that Sponsor standards development activities be stopped. If issues exist but progress is being made, AudCom may recommend to the IEEE-SA Standards Board that the Sponsor's Working Group P & P be considered "visibly under development".
Stopping of standards development activities includes PAR submissions, Sponsor ballot activities, interpretation actions, etc.
5.1.2 Duties of the Sponsor
Supervision of a standards project by the Sponsor includes the following mandatory requirements:
a) Submit a properly completed Project Authorization Request
(PAR) for IEEE-SA Standards Board approval within six months of the first decision
to initiate the project. Forms and information may be obtained from the NesCom
Administrator (see 5.2).
b) After approval of the project, work with the IEEE Standards Department Staff
to give notice of the project in appropriate publications and to appropriate
entities, for the purpose of soliciting an expression of interest in the work
of the sponsoring committee.
c) Ensure that mandatory coordination requirements are accomplished (see 4.2.3.2
and 5.3.1).
d) Organize the technical development work on the standard.
e) If a working group (WG) was created for technical development work on
the standard, ensure that a written set of WG policies and procedures (P &
P) is created and approved by the Sponsor. Such P & P shall not be in conflict
with the IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual. Sponsors should note
that IEEE-SA Standards Board maintains a baseline WG P & P, and may occasionally
request to review a Sponsor's WG P & P for alignment.
RATIONALE:
The proposed change will allow for audits of WG P&Ps by AudCom."
ProCom requested an implementation date of 31 March 2009 for the P&P changes, to allow time for the baseline WG P&P document to be finalized.
ProCom also requested that AudCom not begin audits of WG P&Ps until after 31 December 2009.
5.5 Proposed Changes to SASB OpMan RE: AudCom 5-Year Review of Sponsor P&P - Parsons
There was a motion to forward the wording changes [below] to the Standards Board for an approval vote. The motion was unanimously approved.
"IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual
5.1.1 Responsibilities of the Sponsor
The Sponsor shall be responsible for the development and coordination
of the standards project, and for supervising the standards project from inception
to completion. The Sponsor also shall be responsible for the maintenance of
standards after their approval by the IEEE-SA Standards Board. As part of this
responsibility, each Sponsor shall operate in accordance with a written set
of policies and procedures (P & P) that have been accepted by the IEEE-SA
Standards Board. Such P & P shall not be in conflict with the IEEE-SA
Standards Board Operations Manual. Sponsors should note that there are model
operating procedures (e.g., individual, entity, SCC Type 1, or SCC Type 2)
available for use adoption by the Sponsor.
There are also operating procedures available for Sponsors
developing a standard using the entity method of participation, and Sponsors
shall utilize these procedures as the basis for entity standardization.
If a Sponsor's P & P has been in force for five years and the Sponsor determines that its standards activities should remain active, the Sponsor shall submit a revised P & P, or an extension request, to the AudCom Administrator. AudCom will make a recommendation to the IEEE-SA Standards Board whether or not to accept the revised P&P or the extension. An extension request may be granted for one or more years.
If the Sponsor does not submit a revised Sponsor P & P or an extension request, and the P & P has reached the deadline authorized in the P & P approval letter or a previous extension approval letter, the Sponsor P & P shall be subject to administrative withdrawal.
In the case of a Sponsor that is a committee of an IEEE Society, the Society may develop a common set of P & P for standards development that is applicable to all Sponsors in that Society. Individual Sponsors within the Society may have specific P & Ps in addition, but these shall not be in conflict with the Society P & P. The P&P for the Sponsor shall define the process by which the Sponsor handles appeals (see subclause 5.4 of the IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws and 5.8).
RATIONALE:
The proposed change discusses the AudCom 5-year review process for Sponsor P&P."
5.6 Proposed Changes to SASB OpMan RE: Annual Financial Report - Lewis
There was a motion to forward the wording changes [below] to the Standards Board for an approval vote. The motion was unanimously approved.
"IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual
5.3.6 Annual financial report
All Sponsors are required to submit an annual report (IEEE Form
L50-S) detailing financial activity for the previous fiscal year. The report
will be due within four three months of the completion of the
previous fiscal year. Failure to submit this report shall result in action from
the IEEE-SA Standards Board. Actions shall include, but not be limited to, suspension
of all activities until the report is filed and accepted as complete.
RATIONALE:
In order to have more time to comply with IEEE Accounting auditing requirements,
the L50-S reports need to be submitted to IEEE-SA for approval by March 31."
5.7 Proposed Changes to SASB OpMan RE: Reaffirmation Comments - Law
There was a motion to forward the wording changes [below] to the Standards Board for an approval vote. The motion was unanimously approved.
"IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual
9.1.2 Resolution of reaffirmation comments, objections, and negative votes
After clarifying the intent of a negative ballot, the Sponsor
shall respond to a negative ballot.
The Sponsor shall review all ballots received and shall respond
to the negative balloter stating either that the information in the document
is not obsolete and/or his or her comment may be included considered
in the next revision.
All unresolved negative ballots, together with the reasons of
the negative voters and any the rebuttal by the members conducting
the resolution of the ballot, shall be submitted to the members of the Sponsor
balloting group, providing each member an opportunity to change his or her ballot.
Names of the unresolved negative balloters are to be included with their negative
comments in the recirculation of negative comments.
Comments accompanying affirmative votes that advocate changes in the technical meaning of the document may be considered for a future revision of the standard.
RATIONALE: At the September RevCom meeting, there was discussion if reaffirmations require a rebuttal to negative comments. The proposed change to paragraph 3 clarifies that reaffirmations, like other types of ballots, require a rebuttal to be recirculated with negative comments. Changes to paragraphs 1 & 2 are intended to improve this section: due to other changes, paragraph 1 has become redundant; the wording change in paragraph 2 uses a clearer term."
5.8 Definition of 'Standard' - Mills
Malcolm Thaden stated that the Standards Education Committee was seeking a definition of 'standard'. ProCom was asked to create this definition.
An ad hoc [Chair: Chuck Powers; Members: David Law, Paul Nikolich, Malcolm Thaden, Kim Breitfelder, and Dave Ringle] was created to develop this definition.
Jim Moore suggested that the definition should be harmonized with the ISO definition.
AI - Jim to email the ISO definition to Dave Ringle.
6 NEXT MEETING
The next ProCom meeting will be Tuesday, 17 March 2009, in Piscataway, New Jersey, USA.
7 ADJOURNMENT
Chair Hulett thanked the 2008 ProCom members and all of the ad hoc participants for their work this year.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:03 p.m.
 |
|||
|
|||
