Inshore Vessel Monitoring System (I-VMS)
Approval Programme
Approval Policy & Technical Validation
13th October 2014
1
Notices
DOCUMENT SUBJECT TO CHANGE
This document and the technical information it contains is subject to change by the
UK Fisheries Department at any time.
NO WARRANTY OR LICENSE
ALL INFORMATION IN THIS DOCUMENT IS PROVIDED “AS IS”, WITHOUT ANY
EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTY, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO A
WARRANTY THAT IT IS ACCURATE OR COMPLETE, MERCHANTABILITY,
FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE OR A WARRANTY AGAINST
INFRINGEMENT. THIS DOCUMENT GRANTS NO RIGHT OR OTHER LICENSE,
WHETHER EXPRESSLY OR BY IMPLICATION.
Author(s):
Katie Hill (Marine Management Organisation)
Andy Wills (Marine Management Organisation)
Revision History:
Revision
KH
Date
23/08/2013
KH
KH
KH
KH
11/09/14
09/10/2014
10/10/2014
10/10/2014
Comments
Corrections to v.1 draft
doc
Wording consistency
Add process map 2
MC and AW comments
Final formatting
Contents
2
1.
Introduction and Scope .................................................................................... 4
2. Approval Programme Policies .......................................................................... 4
2.1.
Introduction ................................................................................................... 4
2.2.
Award of ‘Approved Product’ ......................................................................... 5
2.2.1
Result Description .................................................................................. 5
2.4
Confidentiality................................................................................................ 6
2.5
Freedom of Information ................................................................................. 6
2.6.
Approval Programme Data Retention Policy ................................................. 6
2.7 Fees and Costs .................................................................................................. 6
2.7.1 Technical Test Costs...................................................................................... 6
2.7.2
Postage Costs ....................................................................................... 7
2.7.3
Product Re-test....................................................................................... 7
3. Technical Validation Procedures ..................................................................... 7
3.1.
Submission Review Procedures................................................................... 7
3.2.
Technical Review Procedures ...................................................................... 8
4 Test failures and product retesting ..................................................................... 9
4.1
Problem Reporting Process .......................................................................... 9
4.1.1
Resolution of Problem Reports ............................................................... 9
4.2 Device Failure ................................................................................................. 10
5. Post Approval Policy ......................................................................................... 11
5
5.1.
Approved Product Register ......................................................................... 11
5.2
Marketing & Press Release Policy .............................................................. 11
5.3
Device upgrade or change .......................................................................... 12
5.4
Removal of Approved Product Status ......................................................... 13
4.5.
Approved Product Re-validation Requirements .......................................... 14
Appeals Procedure .......................................................................................... 14
6. References ....................................................................................................... 14
6.1.
Normative References ............................................................................... 14
6.2
Definitions .................................................................................................. 15
7. Appendix A: Process Map 2 (Device Test Failures) ...................................... 16
8. Appendix B: I-VMS Approval Programme Problem Report Template ........ 17
9. Appendix C: I-VMS Programme Change Analysis Template ...................... 18
3
1.
Introduction and Scope
This document defines the Approval Programme policies and validation procedures
that govern the operation of the Inshore Vessel Monitoring System (I-VMS) Approval
Programme [hereafter: Approval Programme]. This document defines what can be
approved and what it means to be approved.
This document is intended primarily for a product supplier who would like to submit
their product for approval against the I-VMS specification of requirements and should
be read in conjunction with the I-VMS Approval Programme Guide
The goal of the Approval Programme is to ensure that software suppliers providing IVMS products to UK fishing vessels fishing in English waters implement the I-VMS
specification of requirements correctly and consistently.
This document describes the Approval Programme policies and validation
procedures which apply to the device suppliers product in order to assess if the
product meets the approval criteria. To become an Approved Product, a product
supplier must submit their product to independent validation by the approval panel
made up of MMO and IFCA representatives.
When approval has been confirmed, products are listed by the MMO as an ‘MMO
and IFCA IVMS Approved Product’ on the approved products register which can be
found at:
https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/inshore-vessel-monitoring-system-project
2.
Approval Programme Policies
2.1. Introduction
The section provides reference to the policies governing the Approval Programme.
These policies do not provide an exhaustive set of rules. A product supplier wishing
to submit a product to the Approval Programme who is not able to fulfil all the
guidelines, requirements and objectives described in this document, needs to raise
the issue to the approval panel for clarification prior to beginning the Approval
Programme process.
The operation of the Approval Programme is based on the following principles:
 The Approval Programme is operated in an open and transparent manner,
avoiding conflicts of interest or the award of approval other than for relevant
technical considerations;
 The Approval Programme shall not practice any form of discrimination such
as hidden discrimination by speeding up or delaying the processing of product
applications;
 The Approval Programme will not be used to fix prices, lessen competition or
have the effect of boycotting or excluding competitors;
 The Approval Programme will provide equal due process to all parties
interested in or affected by the programme, including the conduct of timely
4
hearings, with prompt decisions on claims respecting the denial or
discontinuation of approval.
2.2. Award of ‘Approved Product’
The Approval Program validation procedures require that a product is assessed
against the approval criteria defined by the MMO and IFCA I-VMS specification of
requirements and Section 3 of this document.
There are two possible results of participating in the Approval Programme:
2.2.1 Result Description
The product is assessed to pass the approval criteria as validated by
the approval panel. The product has met the approval criteria for the
I-VMS specification of requirements.
The product is assessed to fail the approval criteria as validated by
the approval panel. The product has failed to meet the approval
criteria for the I-VMS specification of requirements.
Note that the product supplier is permitted, within specific guidelines
and with the approval panel approval to re-submit their product in
subsequent test windows.
Using the supplier declaration form the product supplier is required to describe how
the mandatory requirements are to be met by the product, and specify any additional
functionality.
The approval criteria as validated by the approval panel are defined as follows:

Product is validated to support all mandatory aspects of the I-VMS
specification of requirements;
Approval shall not be granted until all validation criteria are met. Test and audit
failures which raise any doubt as to the compliance of a suppliers product must be
corrected and the correction verified by the approval panel before approval is
granted. The test failures and their resolution are documented by the approval panel
2.3.
Approval Programme Administration
5
This Approval Programme shall be administered by the approval panel, made up of
MMO and IFCA representatives. Product suppliers can participate in the Approval
Programme privately and beyond the awareness of other product suppliers. The
approval panels role is to uphold the policies and procedures defined in this
document.
2.4
Confidentiality
All information relating to a product supplier and the product to be approved is held
confidentially during the approval process, that is, prior to the successful completion
of the Approval Programme. If products are not successful all information will remain
confidential.
All technical and commercially sensitive information relating to a product supplier
and their product submission details always remain confidential within the Approval
Programme with the exception of the product and product supplier details that are
published on the approved product register. This includes information related to the
product submission information, supplier declaration form, technical audit reports
and problem reports.
The MMO has contracted an external organisation which will carry out a number of
technical tests on the device in line with the specification of requirements. They will
be bound by the same confidentiality requirements.
2.5
Freedom of Information
Product suppliers should be aware that the MMO and IFCAs are subject to the
requirements of the UK Freedom of Information Act 2000 and the Environmental
Information Regulations 2004 and any other applicable legislation governing access
to information (“FOI Legislation”).
The MMO and IFCAs shall be responsible for determining in its absolute discretion
whether the commercially sensitive information and/or any other information is
exempt from disclosure in accordance with the provisions of the Secretary of State
for Constitutional Affairs' Code of Practice on the Discharge of Functions of Public
Authorities under Part I of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 or the Environmental
Information Regulations.
2.6. Approval Programme Data Retention Policy
All product submissions and the validation reports for the Approval Programme will
be archived by the MMO. The archives are kept for a minimum of 6 years to provide
an audit trail for Approved Products.
2.7
Fees and Costs
2.7.1 Technical Test Costs
The product supplier will be required to meet any costs associated with:
6





provision of 2 devices and associated components
integration with the EU VMS hub,
transmission of positional reports and status codes throughout the Approval
Programme
installation of device B on the IFCA vessel
Costs to repair/replace devices if test failures are identified.
There will be no costs for testing when a device is submitted for the first time. If test
failures are identified and cannot be rectified within a reasonable time (see s4.2 for
more details) the approval panel may close the test programme.
If the product supplier wishes, the device can be re-submitted in the next test window
however in this instance all testing fees will be met by the product supplier. The fee
covers the costs associated with formal independent validation of the product.
2.7.2 Postage Costs
The product supplier will cover the following postage costs:
 Submission of 2 devices to the MMO
 All postage costs associated with rectifying test failures (if device cannot be
fixed remotely)
2.7.3 Product Re-test
If an approved device requires re-testing as a result of a major change to the
software or version of the device it may have to be re-tested (see s.5.3 for more
details) All testing costs will be met by the product supplier.
The approval panel may re-test approved devices to ensure that they still meet the
specification requirements. Product suppliers will be expected to meet the costs of
this quality assurance practice
3.
Technical Validation Procedures
For a product to be approved, a product supplier must submit their device to an
independent validation by the approval panel .This section defines the technical
validation procedures to be performed by the approval panel.
3.1.
Submission Review Procedures
Prior to testing any device suppliers will be asked to provide a number of
submissions. All submissions to the Approval Programme are reviewed as a paper
based exercise by the approval panel based on the following review criteria:
Test
Item
1
Audit Step
Audit Actions
Conditions of Participation
and Confidentiality
agreement
Validate that a signed conditions of
participation and a confidentiality agreement
are in place between the approval panel and
the I-VMS product supplier before the formal
7
Supplier Declaration Form
(SDF)
technical audit of the device.
Note that both documents must be signed
(the confidentiality agreement is an annex to
the conditions of participation)
Review and verify that all mandatory fields
required have been completed correctly.
3
Product Identification and
Commercial Description.
Ensure the SDF confirms the device meets
all mandatory features of the I-VMS
specification of requirements.
Verify that information has been completed
by the submitter
4
Statement of
Conformance
6
Approval panel fee
2
Verify that all information has been included
and that there is either an electronic
signature or physical signature.
Where applicable. This will only be required
where a device is re-submitted in a new test
window after failing a prior approval process.
3.2.
Technical Review Procedures
The technical review consists of a system examination by the approval panel of the
supplier’s I-VMS product. This involves testing of the product with the objective to
verify that the features of the product defined in the supplier declaration form have
been implemented as stated in the I-VMS specification of requirements.
A technical audit report is written by the approval panel detailing the objective
evidence collected and reviewed during the submission and technical validation
supporting the product supplier’s compliance claim. This report will detail if a device
has passed or failed and the supplier will be sent an email notification.
The product supplier should facilitate the technical validation as follows:
 provide a technical contact to assist with the smooth running of the testing
process able to answer queries and respond to issues.
 Ensure an engineer is available to install a device onto a vessel at a given
location within the timescales provided (the installation location may be
anywhere in England)
 perform a dry-run of the geofence tests, as provided in the supplier
declaration form, to ensure the product can fully demonstrate the compliance
prior to submission of the device for final testing.
The technical validation is conducted by the approval panel and consists of the
following audit actions:
Test
Item
1
Validation Step
Two Devices submitted for
testing within test window
Validation Actions
 Visual external check of both devices
8
2
3
timescales
MMO and IFCA technical
testing of product
 Installation and configuration procedures
for the supplier product by witnessing a
clean install and tamper test of the product
by an approved engineer within given
timescales.
 Witness and document the configuration of
product to connect to the EU VMS Test
hub.
 Witnesses the generation of the I-VMS
reports to the EU VMS test hub
 Validation of I-VMS data transmission
functions through at-sea testing and test
hub tests ensuring conformity to the I-VMS
specification of requirements.
External organisation
Tests, carried out by the external testing
technical testing of product organisation, demonstrate the following
device functionality is in line with the
specification of requirements:
 GNSS augmentation and positional
accuracy
 GNSS roaming capabilities and multi
constellation GNSS performance
 GNSS blackout testing
 Tampering prevention
 Power management
4 Test failures and Product Re-testing
4.1
Problem Reporting Process
The MMO and IFCAs recognise that during the approval process, issues with the
audit and validation procedures or interpretation of the I-VMS specification of
requirements may occur. If a product supplier encounters a problem that inhibits or
will inhibit the approval of their product an applicant may raise a problem report (PR).
The problem report is used specifically for errors which are inhibiting the approval
effort. A problem report template can be found in appendix B of this document. And
can be submitted to the approval panel at: IVMS@marinemanagement.org.uk
4.1.1 Resolution of Problem Reports
Each PR is assigned a unique number so that tracking is possible. Sufficient
information related to the issue should be included with the submission of the PR in
order for the approval panel to be able to analyse and review the issue. Failing to do
so may lead to rejection of the PR.
9
The approval panel is responsible for reviewing each problem report submitted by a
product supplier. An initial response provided to the submitter within 5 working days
of submission to allow simple problems to be dealt with quickly.
A formal review by the approval panel will be undertaken for issues that are more
complicated or when the preliminary review does not resolve the issue. Final
resolution will be provided within an additional 10 working days.
Non-rejected PRs will be actioned and where necessary proper corrections will be
inserted into revisions of I-VMS specification of requirements and the Approval
Programme documents.
If the product supplier is not satisfied with the final resolution of the PR, they may
invoke the appeals process.
4.2 Device Failure
The process map in Annex A: Process Map 2 (Device Failures) details actions to be
taken in the case of a device test failure.
The intention of the formal testing is to allow a product supplier to demonstrate
compliance with the I-VMS functional requirement specification. Formal testing is not
intended to be part of the I-VMS product supplier’s development process or
debugging process. As a result only minor test failures will be allowed to be rectified
and continue within the test window
The approval panel will consider all incidents of test failure to decide if the testing
can continue within the window. Length of time required to complete testing, impacts
of problem resolution on tests already completed, severity of test failures, number of
previous test failures and any other issues the approval panel consider relevant will
be taken into account in making this determination.
If a test failure is identified the initial 6 week testing process may be suspended
(although, where possible, tests against other specification elements will be carried
out) but will resume if the failure can be resolved within 30 calendar days.
If possible issues should be rectified remotely but if this is not possible suppliers are
responsible for arranging for the collection of the device and subsequent return to
the appropriate location once the issue has been resolved.
Testing should not exceed a 10 week period in total or continue more than 6 weeks
after the window has closed. If the failure cannot be rectified the test programme will
close and the supplier can, if they wish, resubmit their device in the next test window.
Timescales should act as a guide only and the approval panel reserve the right to
close the test programme at any time. If product supplier is required to and wishes to
resubmit the device in the following window and undergo the full technical validation
the full costs will be met by the supplier.
If the approval panel close the test programme the device is deemed to have failed
the Approval Programme. The decision can be reviewed through the appeals
10
process if a product supplier disagrees with the grounds for denying approval. The
product supplier must inform the approval panel within 10 working days if they wish
to appeal the decision.
5. Post Approval Policy
This section provides reference to the policies governing post approval requirements
5.1. Approved Product Register
The MMO will maintain an approved product register consisting of a record of all
approved products on the MMO website (IFCA’s will also be able to display a link to
the register on their website).
The approved product register contains the name of the supplier, name and version
of the product,
I-VMS products that have been successfully validated against the I-VMS
specification are listed will be listed on the following website:
https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/inshore-vessel-monitoring-system-project
IFCAs may display a link to this page on their own website.
The first publication of the Approval Product Register will be on completion of the
first 6 week test period1. Suppliers will be notified by email within 5 working days if
their product has passed the approval process.
Products which are approved in subsequent testing windows will be added to the
Approval Products Register and suppliers notified by email within 10 working days of
the device receiving approval.
5.2
Marketing & Press Release Policy
On successful completion of the Approval Programme, a product supplier may issue
a press release for their product. Companies are required to send their
announcement to media@marinemanagement.org.uk for review.
The MMO will return the press release with comments and edits to the company
within 5 working days from when press release was received.
It is the responsibility of the MMO to review each press release using the following
criteria:
 The press release is reviewed to ensure that it does not contain untruths
pertaining to the activities of the Approval Programme or functionality of the
product or product supplier.
1
Any devices submitted in the November 2014 test window between 10th November and 24th
December will be subject to a 7 WEEK test window to allow for the Christmas holiday period
11



The press release is reviewed for accuracy of any statements and copyrights
pertaining to the Approval Programme.
The press release is reviewed to ensure that it references only the submitter's
company and product and does not add or use comparisons to other
participants or products that were involved in the Approval Programme.
The press release is reviewed to ensure that it does not breach the NDA
signed by all participants of the Approval Programme
5.3
Device upgrade or change
When a product goes through its cycle of upgrades, fixes, marketing changes and
major revisions, a product supplier may need to re-test and re-submit the product as
an Approved Product. The policies for re-testing / re-certification are as follows:
Category
Major change in software or
version1 with changes to
mandatory requirements as
detailed in the I-VMS specification
of requirements
Description and requirement
 Product is required to be submitted for retesting
 All submission documents must also be resubmitted.
 The product details are listed as a new entry
in the approved product register.
1
Versioning is from 1.x to 3.x. A
minor change is a point increase,
e.g. 1.n to 1.m.
Minor change in the software or
version with no changes
mandatory requirements as
detailed in the I-VMS specification
of requirements
Changes in Product Details
 If there are no changes in the I-VMS
specification of requirements features then no
formal re-testing or re-submission is
required.
 A completed I-VMS programme product
change analysis form must be submitted to the
approval panel detailing the changes between
the current listed version(s) and the new
software version(s) to be listed.
 A new supplier declaration form may be
requested by the approval panel.
 The product details in the approved product
Register on the MMO website are updated as
appropriate based on the details in the Product
Change Analysis document.
 If there are no changes in software or
operating environment (e.g. change in product
name only), then no formal re-testing or resubmission is required.
 A completed I-VMS Programme Product
Change Analysis document must be submitted
to the approval panel detailing the changes in
product details.
12
All other situations
 The product details in the Approved Product
Register on the MMO web site are updated as
appropriate based on the details in the Product
Change Analysis document.
 Complete product change analysis document
to the approval panel detailing change in
situation.
 On review of the change analysis the panel will
make a decision if a full formal validation is
required
 Product details are listed as a new entry in the
approved product register on the MMO web
site.
The product change analysis form can be found in appendix C of this document.
All product change analysis forms or any queries regarding product changes should
be submitted by to the approval panel using the following email address:
IVMS@marinemanagement.org.uk
5.4
Removal of Approved Product Status
If an approved product is found by any means to no longer conform with the I-VMS
specification of requirements, the approval panel will notify the I-VMS product
supplier who shall do one of the following:



Within 20 working days rectify the non-conformity and satisfy the approval
panel of the integrity of the rectification.
Within 20 working days satisfy the approval panel that there is no nonconformity in the Approved Product.
Within 10 working days invoke the appeals process as described in this
document (see s. 5).
Only products meeting the Approval Programme validation procedures are included
on the approved product register. The MMO will remove the I-VMS product from the
approved product register within 20 working days of finding that an approved device
is no longer a compliant product and informing the product supplier.
Once a product ceases to be an approved product, all rights to refer to the product
as an ‘MMO and IFCA I-VMS Approved’ ends and the product supplier must remove
all references to the device as ‘Approved’ within 10 working days
A product supplier MUST inform the approval panel immediately if a product listed on
the approval product register is to be removed (for example if the product is no
longer commercially available or obsolete) or upgraded to a new version.
13
5.5.
Approved Product Re-validation Requirements
When a product has met the Approval Programme validation and test procedures,
details are posted on the MMO website on the I-VMS approved product register and
remain there until the expiry of the Approval Programme.
An I-VMS product supplier must submit a completed product change analysis form to
the approval panel for all subsequent versions of their validation product that are
deployed on ‘live’ vessels
The approval panel reserves the right to require a product be submitted for reapproval.
6
Appeals Procedure
If the product supplier’s complaint meets one of the following situations, then the
decision can be reviewed through the appeals process:



The product supplier disagrees with the grounds for denying approval.
The product supplier disagrees with the resolution of a problem report
The product supplier disagrees with a formal notification to rectify nonconformance (that is, a product supplier is representing a product as being an
approved product that no longer meets the audit and validation criteria for
approval)
The supplier should notify the approval panel of their intention to appeal within 10
working days of being informed of a decision by emailing:
IVMS@marinemanagement.org.uk
An independent panel will deal with appeals:
 Within 10 working days of receiving a product suppliers grounds of appeal the
appeal panel will indicate whether further information is required and/or expert
evidence is required.
 Within 6 weeks of receiving the product suppliers grounds of appeal the
appeals panel will meet to consider the appeal.
 Identifying information is removed and the appeals panel meets formally to
review the request including any additional material either provided by the
supplier or requested by the committee. Experts may be invited as needed.
 The decision of the panel is final.
6.
References
6.1.
Normative References
1. I-VMS specification of requirements
2. Supplier declaration form.
3. I-VMS Approval Programme. Programme Guide.
14
4. Product change analysis form
5. Problem report form
6.2
Definitions
Approval Panel
Made up of MMO and IFCA representatives
appointed to conduct validation of the submitted
product against the audit and test procedures.
External testers and facilities have been employed
for some aspects of the approval process
procedures.
Approved Product Register
A web-based record of all approved products,
which is maintained by the MMO.
External Testing Organisation
A organisation contracted by the MMO to provide
expertise and a robust testing method for the
technical elements of the specification of
requirements which cannot be carried out in an ‘atsea’ environment
Geofence
A geofence is a defined spatial perimeter for realworld geographic areas
Supplier Declaration
A statement made by the supplier of an
implementation or system claimed to conform to
the I-VMS specification, stating which capabilities
have been implemented, including which optional
features are supported.
Technical Validation
The operation of independently validating the
product submitted for approval through auditing
and testing.
Working day
Monday to Friday inclusive, excluding English
public and bank holidays
6.2.3 Acronym Definition
I-VMS
MMO
IFCA
SDF
PR
Inshore Vessel Monitoring System
Marine Management Organisation
Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authority
Supplier Declaration Form
Problem Report
15
Appendix A: Process Map 2 (Device Test Failures)
I-VMS Approval Process: Map 2 (Device Test Failures)
Please refer to IVMS Approval
Process: Map 1
Yes
Has device
passed tests?
No
MMO to contact
device supplier
Is this 1st incident of
non conformance?
No
Close test programme. Supplier
informed. Device can be
resubmitted in next window
Yes
Can the problem be
rectified within a
reasonable time
frame?1
MMO will consider on a
case by case basis (in
collaboration with supplier
and external tester) to
determine if testing can
continue3
Testing Resumes
No
Supplier to rectify
issue
Yes
No
Yes
Is there still reasonable
time within the test
window once the test
failure is rectified?
Testing to
continue where
possible
Yes
Yes
On resubmission will
complete or significant
retest be required?
No
Can the problem be
fixed remotely?
No
Device returned to
supplier2
1
As a guide; if the failure can be resolved within 30 calendar days of the test failure being identified, then the
Contractor shall resume testing with no loss of time to the six week test programme. If there are continuing issues
each test failure will be considered on a case by case basis and the testing should not exceed a 10week period or
continue more than 6weeks after the window has closed.
2.
Postage is at the suppliers cost. Fix, return and delivery must be done within 30 calendar days of the test failure
being identified. Supplier can request tester return the device. (Contractor can invoice MMO for postage costs)
3
Factors considered include. Length of time required to complete testing, time already spent testing device, severity
of non conformance, number of previous non conformances and any other issues the MMO consider relevant. The
intention of the formal testing is to allow a product supplier to demonstrate compliance with the I-VMS functional
requirement specification. Formal testing is not intended to be part of the I-VMS product supplier’s development
process or debugging process. At this stage only minor non conformances will be allowed to be rectified and
continue within this test window.
Purple Boxes = supplier action
16
8.
Appendix B: I-VMS Approval Programme Problem Report Template
Problem Report No:
Date:
Summary:
Detailed Description:
XXXXX
<YYYY-MM-DD>
<Provide a one line summary of the Problem>
<Provide a detailed description of the Problem>
Specification Reference:
<Specification - {Version|Section|Page|Line}>
Process Reference
:<Process Document - {Version|Section|Page|Line}
Additional
>
Information/Attachments:
<Yes>||<No>
Submitters Details (will be removed for confidentiality)
Company Name:
Contact Name:
Contact E-mail address:
Contact Telephone:
Device relating to Problem
Report:
Internal Use Only
Responder
Response
Days Open:
Date Resolved:
<##>
<YYYY-MM-DD>
Notes on submitting a Problem Report:
 The submitter should only complete the areas of the proforma that are not
greyed out. The greyed out areas will be completed in response to the
Problem Report.
 The submitter's details will be removed by the Problem Report Handler to
maintain confidentiality of the issue.
 The Problem Report Handler will assign a Problem Report number.
 The submitter should provide a one-line summary of the issue and a more
detailed description of the issue.
 If the submitter wishes to provide additional information, they should indicate
that information has been submitted with the Problem Report, and include the
additional information as an e-mail attachment. The Problem Report Handler
will keep all vendor specific material confidential
17
9.
Appendix C: I-VMS Programme Change Analysis Template
This template is to be used for minor changes where there is no impact to I-VMS
functional requirements. For major changes the product must be re-submitted for a
new formal validation.
Change Analysis Submission
Date
Supplier Name: (as currently listed)
Supplier E-mail address:
Supplier Telephone:
Name of Product: (as currently listed)
Versions: (as currently listed)
Date Approved: (as currently listed)
Version of Approval process applied:
(as currently listed)
Proposed Version(s) for Listing
(relating to this Change Analysis):
High level description of changes
between listed version(s) and proposed
version(s):
<YYYY-MM-DD>
Description of changes in the proposed
version(s):
Do changes impact I-VMS functionality?
Details of any I-VMS functional
requirements impacted by the changes :
Yes [ ] No [ ]
Description of testing performed by
vendor to validate that I-VMS functional
requirements are not negatively
impacted:
Description of how the changes fits into
vendor’s versioning methodology,
including how this version number
indicates that this is a “minor” change:
Any additional supporting information
relating to the changes:
Notes on submitting the change analysis:
 This change analysis form should be completed and submitted to the
Approval panel detailing the changes between the current listed version(s)
and the new software version to be listed.
 This change analysis form should be submitted in conjunction with an updated
Supplier Declaration Form
18
19