Submitting Your IEEE Standards Project for Approval Consideration RevCom Presentation PE/IC Meeting 9 November 2009 Prepared by Moira Patterson

Overview Background on RevCom RevCom Timeline Common Pitfalls to Avoid 5-Year Maintenance Actions Questions 2

Standards Review Committee (RevCom) Committee of the IEEE-SA Standards Board Primary responsibilities: –Make recommendations to the IEEE-SA Standards Board for the approval of:  New standards projects  Revision standards projects  Reaffirmation of existing standards  Withdrawal of existing standards –Review 5-year maintenance actions –Ensure that procedural requirements of the IEEE-SA are met 3

2009 RevCom Roster David Law, Chair (Computer) Phillip Barber (Computer) John Barr (Communications, Computer) Victor Berman (Computer) Ted Burse (Power & Energy) Clint Chaplin (Computer) Wael Diab (Computer) Andy Drozd (Electro- Magnetic Compatibility Society) Alex Gelman (Communications) John Kulick (Electron Device Society, LEOS) Glenn Parsons (Computer) Jon Rosdahl (Computer) Sam Sciacca (Power & Energy) Howard Wolfman (Industry Applications Society) 4

2009/10 RevCom Meeting Schedule Submittal Deadline: 19 October 12 February 7 May 20 August 18 October Meeting Date: 8 December 24 March 16 June 29 September 7 December 5

RevCom Submittal Timeline Unlike PAR submittal, not in myProject Submittal Form gets project on agenda –The Administrator will contact you for any missing materials (e.g. source files, signature page) The Administrator sends preliminary dispositions and comments to the submitter (~ a week before the meeting) –To allow time for dialogue and resolve issues prior to a formal vote by the committee Staff may recommend Sponsor representation 6

Common Pitfalls - PAR Title of draft –Must be within scope stated on most recently approved PAR Scope and purpose –Have to match the PAR (for PARs approved after 1 January 2007) Modified PAR can be submitted concurrently 7

Common Pitfalls – Consideration of Comments All comments shall be considered, and evidence of consideration provided –Sponsor rebuttal to negative ballot comments  requires recirculation  should be clear  expresses position of a ballot resolution group –Out of scope comment in last round of balloting  requires that balloter be notified of reason why no recirculation is necessary –Last round comment consideration – No promise of action can be made 8

Common Pitfalls – Submitting Form for submittal of proposed standards –Must be completed by the submittal deadline Intellectual Property Rights –Submit copyright release letters Electronic source files of last balloted draft –No changes can be made to the draft –Editorial changes can be made by editorial staff prior to publication, at their discretion 9

Common Pitfalls – Preliminary Comments Stage Dialogue with RevCom members happens by Administrator records this dialogue for the committee Confidentiality notices –Disable confidentiality notices and legal disclaimers in communications intended for RevCom 10

February/March: List of standards due for action sent to Sponsor Possible Actions: –Concur with administrative withdrawal –Revise – Obtain PAR from NesCom –Reaffirm – Initiate reaffirmation ballot –Extension - Send to Administrator with plan for action and extension request Extensions and withdrawals will be considered at the December meeting 5-Year Maintenance Cycle 11

Relevant Sites & Documents RevCom Home Page ( Working Guide for Submittal of Proposed Standards ( Form for Submittal of Proposed Standards [RevCom Submittal Form] ( Standards Development Online ( IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws ( IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual ( IEEE Standards Style Manual ( RevCom Conventions [Internal Committee Rules] ( 12

RevCom Administrator Moira Patterson IEEE Standards Association 445 Hoes Lane Piscataway, NJ PH: FX: