Law / Frameworks / NIST AI RMF / Manage
NIST AI RMF, ManageMANAGE 1.1
A determination is made as to whether the AI system achieves its intended purposes and stated objectives and whether its development or deployment should proceed.NIST AI Risk Management Framework, version 1.0, January 2023 (NIST AI 100-1), MANAGE 1.1
We read each law below as bearing on this control. That does not mean the control, done well, meets the law: what each law asks is on its own page. Law library as of .
- 6
- laws
- 3
- jurisdictions
- 0
- with court rulings behind them
- 3
- not yet in force
- 1
- proposed, not law
Related controls in other frameworks the same duties, in at least two laws we track, reach both
- NIST AI 200-24.3 Composing a TEVV Toolbox, 2 laws
A law in force is unmarked; the rest wear their state: not yet in force proposed
AI risk obligations
4 laws, 2 jurisdictions| Jurisdiction | Law | What it asks, as read here |
|---|---|---|
| AI Act, Article 16 (obligations of providers of high-risk AI systems) from , in 13 months |
Ensure the system undergoes the relevant conformity assessment procedure under Article 43 before you place it on the market or put it into service, draw up an EU declaration of conformity under Article 47, affix the CE marking under Article 48, and comply with the registration obligations of Article 49(1). |
|
| AI Act, Article 43 (conformity assessment procedures) from , in 13 months |
If your system is referred to in points 2 to 8 of Annex III, follow the conformity assessment procedure based on internal control in Annex VI, which does not involve a notified body: verify that your quality management system complies with Article 17, examine the technical documentation to assess the system's compliance with the Section 2 requirements, and verify that the design and development process and the post-market monitoring under Article 72 are consistent with the technical documentation. If your system is covered by the Union harmonisation legislation listed in Section A of Annex I, follow the conformity assessment procedure that legislation requires, with the Section 2 requirements as part of the assessment, and also undertake the assessment of the quality management system set out in Article 17, to which points 3, 4.3, 4.4 and 4.5, the fifth paragraph of point 4.6 and point 5 of Annex VII apply; if the system also falls within an Annex III category, follow the Section A procedure. |
|
| AI Act, Article 6(2) and Annex III, point 5(b) (creditworthiness and credit-scoring systems: provider duties) from , in 13 months |
Before you place the system on the market or put it into service, have it undergo the conformity assessment procedure of Article 43; for a point 5 system that is the procedure based on internal control in Annex VI, with no notified body. |
|
| AI-based electronic monitoring and automated employment decision systems in employment and public services (S4075 / A4981) proposed |
Do not use an electronic monitoring tool, an automated employment decision system, or an automated benefit or service decision system until an impact assessment has screened it and an independent auditor or, for governmental use, the Department of Labor and Workforce Development has approved it as compliant. |
AI sector rules
2 laws, 2 jurisdictions| Jurisdiction | Law | What it asks, as read here |
|---|---|---|
| MiFID II Algorithmic Trading Controls: Resilient Systems, Testing, Kill Functionality, Records and Notification (Article 17 and RTS 6) |
Before deploying or substantially updating an algorithmic trading system, trading algorithm or algorithmic trading strategy, establish clearly delineated methodologies to develop and test it, have a person designated by senior management authorize the deployment or update, and design the methodologies to ensure that the system, algorithm or strategy does not behave in an unintended manner, complies with your obligations and the rules and systems of the trading venues you access, does not contribute to disorderly trading conditions and continues to work effectively in stressed market conditions; the authorization and the testing methodologies of Article 5(2) to (5) apply only to trading algorithms leading to order execution (Article 5(1), (2), (4) and (6)). |
|
| FINRA Regulatory Notice 24-09, FINRA reminds members of regulatory obligations when using generative artificial intelligence and large language models |
FINRA says a firm should evaluate generative AI tools before deploying them and ensure that it can continue to comply with the FINRA rules that apply to the business use of those tools, whether it develops the tool for its own use or relies on a third party's technology, including embedded features in existing third-party products. |
Full text of the NIST AI Risk Management Framework, public domain (a US government work). Every control of the framework.