The body must operate one or more schemes, evaluate against specified normative documents and explain their application impartially.
What applies today
The body must operate one or more certification schemes that cover its certification activities. The requirements against which a client's products are evaluated must be those in specified standards or other normative documents. Where an explanation is needed about how those documents apply to a particular scheme, it must be written by relevant, impartial people or committees with the necessary technical competence, and the body must make it available on request. A scheme can combine watching production with reviewing the client's management system, or use either on its own.
Why it matters
This clause establishes that certification is always certification against something. A body cannot invent its own requirements or leave the normative basis vague. It also anticipates the practical question every client asks: what does this standard mean for my product? The answer must come from a competent, impartial source and be available to others, not whispered by a salesperson.
The public FDIS contents lists clause 7.1 as General. This site uses the shorter label General process requirements for the page. The FDIS requirement wording is not held, so the requirement above is the 2012 text that applies until publication.
Where this clause lands in the revision
This is a process clause. The public record confirms the number and title, and the process as described today is what an assessment uses until publication. A first artefact an assessor commonly asks for here is scheme list with normative documents and versions. The party this touches first is The scheme owner and the certification manager who operate the process.
What the assessor asks for
| Category | Artefact to have ready |
|---|---|
| Scheme register | Scheme list with normative documents and versions |
| Application notes | Written explanations with author and review record |
| Impartial review | Evidence that the authors were competent and independent |
| Request route | Published or client-facing route to request an explanation |
One common question. pick a certificate and ask which normative document and which version it was assessed against. A register that lists the standard but not the edition is incomplete.
Common failures
- The scheme register names standards without editions
- Application notes were written by a consultant who also advises clients
- No route exists for a client to ask for an interpretation
Prepare before publication
Reconcile every live certificate with the scheme register and the edition used. Mark any certificate whose basis cannot be identified.
Dates that matter
The public record gives stage 50.20 on 4 August 2026 and voting to 27 October 2026. The planning date, 15 February 2027, is an estimate from that stage and not an ISO date, and clause 7.1 has no separate date.
Cross-references
7.2 Application · 7.4 Evaluation · 4.6 Publicly available information
Source
Source for 7.1: ISO/IEC 17065:2012, Clause 7.1, with the ISO/IEC FDIS 17065 public record. Our statement, not the instrument verbatim; the FDIS wording is not held.
Not legal advice; does not certify. A reading of the requirement and the evidence an assessor commonly samples, not a substitute for the standard or your accreditation body's rules.