+Članak 40. Usklađene norme i normizacijski dokumenti
---+Članak 40. 1.
---+Članak 40. 2.
---+Članak 40. 3.

Članak 40. Usklađene norme i normizacijski dokumenti

-

1. Pregled

,
Članak 40. 1.
Za visokorizične UI sustave ili UI modele opće namjene koji su sukladni s usklađenim normama ili dijelovima usklađenih normi na koje su objavljena upućivanja u Službenom listu Europske unije u skladu s Uredbom (EU) br. 1025/2012 pretpostavlja se da su sukladni sa zahtjevima utvrđenima u odjeljku 2. ovog poglavlja odnosno, ovisno o slučaju, s obvezama utvrđenima u poglavlju V. odjeljcima 2. i 3. ove Uredbe, u mjeri u kojoj te norme obuhvaćaju te zahtjeve ili obveze.
Članak 40. 2.
U skladu s člankom 10. Uredbe (EU) br. 1025/2012 Komisija bez nepotrebne odgode upućuje zahtjeve za normizaciju koji obuhvaćaju sve zahtjeve utvrđene u odjeljku 2. ovog poglavlja i, ovisno o slučaju, zahtjeve za normizaciju koji obuhvaćaju obveze utvrđene u poglavlju V. odjeljcima 2. i 3. ove Uredbe. U okviru zahtjeva za normizaciju također se zahtijeva izrada dokumenata u vezi s procesom izvješćivanja i dokumentiranja kako bi se poboljšala resursna učinkovitost UI sustavâ, primjerice kako bi visokorizični UI sustav smanjio potrošnju energije i drugih resursa tijekom svojeg životnog ciklusa, te u vezi s energetski učinkovitim razvojem UI modelâ opće namjene. Pri izradi zahtjeva za normizaciju Komisija se savjetuje s Vijećem za umjetnu inteligenciju i relevantnim dionicima, uključujući savjetodavni forum.

Pri upućivanju zahtjeva za normizaciju europskim organizacijama za normizaciju Komisija navodi da norme moraju biti jasne i usklađene, među ostalim i s normama razvijenima u raznim sektorima za proizvode obuhvaćene postojećim zakonodavstvom Unije o usklađivanju navedenim u Prilogu I., i da se njima mora osigurati da visokorizični UI sustavi ili UI modeli opće namjene koji se stavljaju na tržište ili u upotrebu u Uniji ispunjavaju relevantne zahtjeve ili obveze utvrđene u ovoj Uredbi.

Komisija također zahtijeva od europskih organizacija za normizaciju da dostave dokaze o svojim nastojanjima da ispune ciljeve iz prvog i drugog podstavka ovog stavka u skladu s člankom 24. Uredbe (EU) br. 1025/2012.

Komisija u skladu s Uredbom (EU) br. 1025/2012 Europskog parlamenta i Vijeća ( 1 ) i bez nepotrebne odgode zahtijeva od europskih organizacija za normizaciju da izrade normizacijske dokumente, uključujući, prema potrebi, usklađene norme, kako bi se omogućila zajednička sukladnost i pretpostavka sukladnosti sa zahtjevima ili obvezama utvrđenima u poglavlju III. odjeljcima 2. i 3. ove Uredbe te relevantnim zahtjevima i obvezama utvrđenima u zakonodavstvu Unije o usklađivanju navedenom u Prilogu I. ovoj Uredbi.
Članak 40. 3.
Sudionici u procesu normizacije nastoje promicati ulaganja i inovacije u području umjetne inteligencije, među ostalim povećanjem pravne sigurnosti, kao i konkurentnosti i rasta tržišta Unije, te doprinositi jačanju globalne suradnje u području normizacije, uzimajući u obzir postojeće međunarodne norme u području umjetne inteligencije koje su u skladu s vrijednostima, temeljnim pravima i interesima Unije, i poboljšati višedioničko upravljanje osiguravanjem ujednačene zastupljenosti interesa i djelotvornog sudjelovanja svih relevantnih dionika u skladu s člancima 5., 6. i 7. Uredbe (EU) br. 1025/2012.

1.1 Reference

1.2 Utvrđeni zahtjevi

1.3 Povezani standardi

2. Utvrđeni zahtjevi

Zahtjevi

3. Povezani standardi

Standardi
SCF Statutory, Regulatory & Contractual Compliance

Description

Mechanisms exist to facilitate the identification and implementation of relevant statutory, regulatory and contractual controls.

Possible Solutions & Considerations

Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2

∙ SCF Security, Compliance & Resilience Management System (SCRMS)
∙ Governance, Risk and Compliance (GRC) solution (e.g., SCFConnect, SureCloud, Ostendio, SimpleRisk, Ignyte, ZenGRC, Galvanize, MetricStream, Archer, etc.)

Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4

∙ SCF Security, Compliance & Resilience Management System (SCRMS)
∙ Governance, Risk and Compliance (GRC) solution (e.g., SCFConnect, SureCloud, Ostendio, SimpleRisk, Ignyte, ZenGRC, Galvanize, MetricStream, Archer, etc.)

Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6

∙ SCF Security, Compliance & Resilience Management System (SCRMS)
∙ Governance, Risk and Compliance (GRC) solution (e.g., SCFConnect, SureCloud, Ostendio, SimpleRisk, Ignyte, ZenGRC, Galvanize, MetricStream, Archer, etc.)
∙ Steering committee

Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8

∙ SCF Security, Compliance & Resilience Management System (SCRMS)
∙ GRC solution (e.g., SCFConnect, Cyturus, SureCloud, SimpleRisk, Ignyte, ZenGRC, Galvanize, MetricStream, Archer, etc.)
∙ Steering committee

Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9

∙ SCF Security, Compliance & Resilience Management System (SCRMS)
∙ GRC solution (e.g., SCFConnect, Cyturus, SureCloud, SimpleRisk, Ignyte, ZenGRC, Galvanize, MetricStream, Archer, etc.)
∙ Steering committee

SCR-CMM

Level 0 Not Performed

Practices are non-existent, based on the inability to demonstrate an implemented and operational capability. A reasonable person would conclude the control is not being performed.

Level 1 Performed Informally

Compliance (CPL) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include:
▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with CPL domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation.
▪ Compliance management-related activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices.
▪ Compliance efforts are narrowly-limited to certain compliance requirements.
▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel use an informal process to govern statutory, regulatory and contractual compliance obligations.

Level 2 Planned Tracked

Compliance (CPL) capabilities are requirements-driven, but are not standardized across the entity (e.g., local/regional level consistency). Capability criteria associated with this control reasonably expect the following criteria to exist:
▪ Policies and standards associated with CPL domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with CPL domain capabilities are documented and maintained by process owners.
▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel work with business stakeholders and process owners to appropriately scope and reasonably implement cybersecurity and data protection controls associated with CPL domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Compliance management controls-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines).
▪ Compliance management may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel.
▪ External compliance requirements for cybersecurity and data privacy are identified and documented, based on applicable laws, regulations and contractual obligations.
▪ IT and/or cybersecurity perform an informal annual review of existing compliance requirements and research evolving or new requirements.

Level 3 Well Defined

Compliance (CPL) capabilities are standardized across the entity for applicability to People, Processes, Technologies, Data and/or Facilities (PPTDF) to ensure consistency for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). Capability criteria associated with this control reasonably expect the following criteria to exist:
▪ Policies and standards associated with CPL domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity's Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with CPL domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain CPL domain capabilities.
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of governance, risk management and compliance operations (e.g., GRC platform).
▪ The entity's Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function, works with business stakeholders and process owners to appropriately scope and reasonably implement cybersecurity and data protection controls associated with CPL domain capabilities to address Minimum Compliance Requirements (MCR) (e.g., applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements) and Discretionary Security Requirements (DSR) (e.g., entity-required controls).
▪ An implemented and operational capability exists to facilitate the identification and implementation of relevant statutory, regulatory and contractual controls.

Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled

Utilize SCR-CMM Level 3 criteria definitions:
▪ There are no defined Level 4 criteria, since it is reasonable to assume a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to operationalize this control.
▪ While it may be possible to develop “metrics-driven” capabilities for this control, the criteria would be organization-specific to define.

Level 5 Continuously Improving

Utilize SCR-CMM Level 3 or Level 4 (if available) criteria definitions:
▪ There are no defined Level 5 criteria, since it is reasonable to assume a continuously-improving process is not necessary to operationalize this control.
▪ Level 5 capabilities should be considered “world-class” where the control builds on Level 4 capabilities, but are continuously improving through Artificial Intelligence (AI) and/or Machine Learning (ML) technologies.
▪ While it may be possible to develop responsive capabilities for this control through the use of AI and/or ML technologies, the criteria would be organization-specific to define.