RAPPORT TECHNIQUE TECHNISCHER BERICHT FINAL DRAFT FprCEN/TR 17439 August 2019 ICS 35.240.67; 91.010.01 English Version Guidance on how to impleme nt… [619894]

TECHNICAL REPORT
RAPPORT TECHNIQUE TECHNISCHER BERICHT

FINAL DRAFT
FprCEN/TR 17439

August 2019
ICS 35.240.67; 91.010.01
English Version
Guidance on how to impleme nt EN ISO 19650-1 and -2 in
Europe
Conseils sur la mise en oeuvre des normes EN ISO
19650-1 et -2 en Europe Anleitung zur Umsetzung der EN ISO 19650-1 und -2 in
Europa

This draft Technical Report is submitted to CEN members for Vot e. It has been drawn up by the Technical Committee CEN/TC
442.

CEN members are the national standards bodies of Austria, Belgi um, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia,
Finland, France, Germany, Greece , Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, It aly, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway,
Poland, Portugal, Republic of North Macedonia, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and
United Kingdom.

Recipients of this draft are invited to submit, with their comm ents, notification of any relevant patent rights of which they are
aware and to provide supporting documentation.

Warning : This document is not a Technical Report. It is distributed for review and comments. It is subject to change without
notice and shall not be referred to as a Technical Report.
EUROPEAN COMMITTEE FOR STANDARDIZATION
COMITÉ EUROPÉEN DE NORMALISATION EUROPÄISCHES KOMITEE FÜR NORMUNG
CEN-CENELEC Management Centre: Rue de la Science 23, B-1040 Brussels
© 2019 CEN All rights of exploitation in any form and by any me ans reserved
worldwide for CEN national Members. Ref. No. FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 E

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
2 Contents Page
European foreword ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 4
Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 5
1 Scope ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 6
2 Normative references …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 6
3 Terms and definitions ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 6
4 Symb ols and abbreviations …………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 7
5 Explanation of vocabulary …………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 7
5.1 Appointment, appointing and appointed parties …………………………………………………………………….. 7
5.1.1 Appointment ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 7
5.1.2 Appointing party …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 7
5.1.3 Appointed party …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 8
5.2 Information requirements …………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 8
5.2.1 Introduction …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 8
5.2.2 Information Requirement (IR) ……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 8
5.2.3 Exchange Information Requirements (EIR) ……………………………………………………………………………… 9
5.2.4 Task Information Requirements (TIR) ……………………………………………………………………………………… 9
5.3 BIM Execution Plan (BEP) ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 9
5.4 Inform ation Delivery Plans ………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 10
5.5 Information model ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 10
5.6 Information container ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 11
5.7 Federation ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 11
5.8 Common data environment (CDE) …………………………………………………………………………………………… 11
6 Explanation of concepts and principles ………………………………………………………………………………….. 12
6.1 Appointment, appointing and appointed parties ………………………………………………………………….. 12
6.2 Information management function …………………………………………………………………………………………. 13
6.3 Info rmation delivery ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 13
6.4 Information checking during information exchange ……………………………………………………………. 15
6.5 Flexibility in how the different parties and teams may be set up to enable
information delivery according to EN ISO 19650 ………………………………………………………………….. 16
6.6 Families of information requirements and information models ………………………………………… 17
6.7 Level of Information Need …………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 19
6.8 Federation strategy ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 19
6.9 How to implement Task Information Delivery Plan (TIDP) and Master Information
Delivery Plan (MIDP) …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 20
6.10 Common Data Environment ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 21
6.11 Collaborative production of information ……………………………………………………………………………….. 22
6.12 Informa tion delivery cycle ………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 23
7 Explanation of EN ISO 19650-2 process ………………………………………………………………………………….. 26
7.1 Concept of process ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 26
7.2 Scalability to small and medium projects ………………………………………………………………………………. 27
7.3 Illustration of different aspects of EN ISO 19650 -2 process using a number of
different scenarios ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 28
7.3.1 The client (as the appointing party) and the supply chain are aware and motivated
and use EN ISO 19650 ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 28
7.3.2 The client is not aware of/or does not use EN ISO 19650 i.e. How to implement
without client participation ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 28
7.3.3 The appointing party is not the client …………………………………………………………………………………….. 28

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
3 7.3.4 The delivery team is either a small and simple structure or a large and complex
structure but is delivering a similar project …………………………………………………………………………… 29
7.3.5 Explanation of the EN ISO 19650- 2 process: The delivery team will continue through
to operation and maintenance ………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 31
7.4 The proj ect is mid – size and EN ISO 19650 is used for optimizing costs and the
delivery phase ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 34
8 Examples of implementing the EN ISO 1965 0-2 process ………………………………………………………. 35
8.1 Introduction …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 35
8.2 The supply chain is not aware of/or does not use EN ISO 19650 ………………………………………… 35
8.2.1 Introduction …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 35
8.2.2 The collaboration with Building Information Models …………………………………………………………… 36
8.2.3 Appointing the parties in the digital collaboration ……………………………………………………………….. 38
8.2.4 Planning the digital collaboration ……………………………………………………………………………………………. 40
8.2.5 Collaborative production of information and construction …………………………………………………. 41
8.2.6 Project close -out and handover ………………………………………………………………………………………………… 43
8.3 The project is complex with a range of different stakeholders and demanding
schedules with a multiple delivery teams ………………………………………………………………………………. 44
8.3.1 Introduction …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 44
8.3.2 The digital capability and capacity …………………………………………………………………………………………… 44
8.3.3 Description of project to design a public access building for the appointing party’s
overall rail improvement programme, following the Information management
process during the delivery phase of assets from EN ISO 19650 -2 …………………………………….. 45
8.3.4 Summary ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 51
8.4 The project is sma ll and straight forward and EN ISO 19650 seems too much effort ……… 51
8.4.1 First example of Implementing the EN ISO 19650-2 process: Th e project is small and
straight forward and EN ISO 19650 seems too much effort …………………………………………………. 51
8.4.2 Second example of Implementing the EN ISO 19 650-2 process: The project is small
and straight forward and EN ISO 19650 seems too much effort ………………………………………….. 56
8.5 Example of Implementing the EN ISO 19650-2 process: CDE-scenario demonstrating
the spatial coordination of information models with other information models
existing within the infrastructure Project’s Common Data Environment (CDE) ………………. 61
8.5.1 Introduction …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 61
8.5.2 The collaborative production of Information Models in the Common Data
Environment (CDE) …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 61
8.5.3 Collaborative production of information and construction …………………………………………………. 63
8.5.4 Project close -out and handover ………………………………………………………………………………………………… 64

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
4 European foreword
This document ( prCEN /TR 17439 :2019 ) has been prepared by Technical Committee CEN/TC 442
“Building Information Modelling”, the secretariat of which is held by SN.
This document is currently submitted to the vote on TR.
This document is intended to be a supporting document to the EN ISO 19650 -1 and EN ISO 19650 −2. It
is the CEN guidance on how to implement the EN ISO 19650 -1 and EN ISO 19650 −2. The aim is to create
a common understanding in digital collaboration within the industry across Europe.
It is hoped that this will be achieved this by fulfilling the following objectives:
— having a f ramework appropriate and adaptable across Europe for implementation according to
EN ISO 19650 -1 and EN ISO 19650 −2,
— delivering interpretation of EN ISO 19650 -1 and EN ISO 19650 −2 commonly applied and consistent
across Europe.

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
5 Introduction
It is important that this guidance is used as a supporting document to the original EN ISO 19650 -1 and
EN ISO 19650 −2 documents when implementing the standards. However, this guidance has been
prepared so that it can be read also as a standalone document to understand th e principles of
EN ISO 19650 −1 and EN ISO 19650 −2.
This guidance does not seek to duplicate, contradict or extend the meaning of EN ISO 19650 -1 and
EN ISO 19650 −2.
This guidance helps to describe the journey to a good digital collaboration based on the EN ISO 19650 -1
and EN ISO 19650 −2 standards, which are targeted at the whole of the built environment included
infrastructure as well as buildings. It describes some of the key parts of the journey to establish a common
understanding of the digital collaborat ion. The detailed description of how to achieve this is described in
the EN ISO 19650 -1 and EN ISO 19650 −2 standards.
The principle of EN ISO 19650 -1 and EN ISO 19650 −2 standards is a pragmatic approach to allow all
involved parties to collaborate on infor mation management using building information modelling for
projects and built assets as efficiently as possible. There should also be benefits relating to quality from
applying the principle of EN ISO 19650 -1 and EN ISO 19650 −2.
The first section (1 -6) of the guidance provides a description of what the key elements of the
EN ISO 19650 −1 and EN ISO 19650 −2 standards are. The second section (7) explains the
EN ISO 19650 −2 process, and the examples of section 8 are available for European market.

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
6 1 Scope
The scop e of this guidance is deliberately restricted only to refer to EN ISO 19650 -1 and EN ISO 19650 −2,
highlighting and describing the manner in which to use it – and not extending or contradicting the scope
and content of the standard. The document aims simply to provide minimum supporting text to achieve
a basic understanding and ability to implement EN ISO 19650 -1 and EN ISO 19650 −2. In each country,
each client, each team can use this guidance to provide the best response to information management in
each pr oject.
This document explains the terms and definitions, explains the concepts and principles and how to use
them, and gives typical examples with clear explanations.
It should be noted that in this guidance, Information Management is considered as a part of the Project
Management.
This guidance is intended to demonstrate how the standard works at European level, which is neutral, agnostic, and applicable to any of the following circumstances:
— the nature of contracts: e.g. public; private, alliances, glob al, partnership,
— the actors' functions: e.g. through the programming, design, construction phases, from small agencies, SMEs to large firms, large companies,
— the types of works: e.g. simple, complex, new, rehabilitated, housing, infrastructure.
2 Normati ve references
The following documents are referred to in the text in such a way that some or all of their content
constitutes requirements of this document. For dated references, only the edition cited applies. For
undated references, the latest edition of the referenced document (including any amendments) applies.
EN ISO 12006 −2, Non active surgical implants — Particular requirements for cardiac and vascular
implants — Part 2: Vascular prostheses including cardiac valve conduits
EN ISO 12006 −3, Non active surgical implants — Particular requirements for cardiac and vascular
implants — Part 3: Endovascular devices
EN ISO 19650 -1:2018 , Organization an d digitization of information about buildings and civil engineering
works, including building information modelling (BIM) — Information management using building
information modelling — Part 1: Concepts and principles (ISO 19650 -1:2018 )
EN ISO 19650 -2, Organization and digitization of information about buildings and civil engineering works,
including building information modelling (BIM) — Information management u sing building information
modelling — Part 2: Delivery phase of the assets (ISO 19650 -2)
3 Terms and definitions
For the purposes of this document, the terms and definitions given in EN ISO 19650 -1 and
EN ISO 19650 −2 and the following apply.
ISO and IEC maintain terminological databases for use in standardization at the following addresses:
— IEC Electropedia: available at http://www.electropedia.org/
— ISO Online browsi ng platform: available at http://www.iso.org/obp
NOTE Only necessary supplement terms for this guidance are listed below.

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
7 3.1
task information requirements
TIR
information requirement in relation to task team
4 Symbols and abbreviations
No symbols and abbreviations are listed in this document.
5 Explanation of vocabulary
5.1 Appointment, appointing and appointed parties
5.1.1 Appointment
EN ISO 19650 -1:2018 , 3.2.2 :
appointment: “agreed instruction for the provision of information c oncerning works, goods or services
Note 1 to entry: This term is used whether or not there is a formal appointment between the parties.”
Proper understanding of these terms requires consideration of them as a group and also collectively with
the terms “BIM Execution Plan (BEP)” and “Exchange Information Requirements (EIR)”. Fuller
understanding will be achieved through review of section 6 , Explanation of Concepts and Principles.
Within the context of EN ISO 19650 , appointment is used at the level of the app ointing party with the lead
appointed party and its delivery team, wherein an Exchange Information Requirements (EIR) is provided and a BIM Execution Plan (BEP) is provided in response. The agreed instruction will be cascaded to the
appointed parties by th e lead appointed party.
For a fuller explanation of what is an appointment, refer to 6.1 of this document and
EN ISO 19650 -1:2018 , 5.1.
5.1.2 Appointing party
EN ISO 19650 -1:2018 , 3.2.4 :
appointing party: “receiver of information concerning works, goods or services from a lead appointed
party
Note 1 to entry: In some countries[,] the appointing party might be termed client, owner or employer but the
appointing party is not limited to these functions.
Note 2 to entry: This term is used whether or not there is a fo rmal appointment between the parties.”
In the context of EN ISO 19650 , an appointing party has specific information requirements which the
party seeks to fulfil by providing clear requests via appointments of appropriate suppliers which set out
what, how a nd when information should be provided.
For a fuller explanation of what is an appointing party, refer to 6.1 of this document and
EN ISO 19650 -1:2018 , 5.1.

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
8 5.1.3 Appointed party
EN ISO 19650 -1:2018 , 3.2.3 :
appointed party: “provider of information concerning wo rks, goods or services
Note 1 to entry: A lead appointed party should be identified for each delivery team, but this might be the same
organization as one of the task teams.
Note 2 to entry: This term is used whether or not there is a formal written appoin tment in place."
An appointed party is part of a delivery team which is collectively responding to and delivering specific
information requirements allocated to that delivery team by an appointing party. This delivery team may
be comprised of a number of a ppointed parties, with a lead appointed party assigned to achieve overall
coordination of information production and delivery and will work to an agreed delivery plan (see 5.3 ,
BIM Execution Plan).
For a fuller explanation of what is an appointed party and lead appointed party, refer to 6.1 of this
document and EN ISO 19650 -1:2018 , 5.1.
5.2 Information requirements
5.2.1 Introduction
NOTE Information Requirement (IR), Exchange Information Requirements (EIR), Task Information
Requirements (TIR)
Information requirement s exist throughout the life cycle and shall be specified to ensure that all decisions
are well supported and well informed, at the right times and to the right people to allow efficient delivery and running of individual facilities, and ultimately integrat ed, smart infrastructure, cities and
communities. The information requirements specify what information the organization requires (e.g.
how many customers a particular facility is required to support to meet its business objectives) – the
Organisational In formation Requirements (OIR); what information is required during the running of the
asset (e.g. how many spare parts are required at what time to keep the facility running) – the Asset
Information Requirements (AIR); what information is required to delive r the overall project (e.g. when
will all parts of the facility/infrastructure be ready for commissioning, and go live, at what cost) – the
Project Information Requirements (PIR); and what information is needed from each delivery team/appointed party (e.g. what parts are required to construct this particular element of the facility) –
the Exchange Information Requirements (EIR).
The appointed party responds to the Exhange Information Requirements (EIR) through development and
implementation of the BIM Execu tion Plan (BEP) (see 5.3) which enables delivery of the required
information as set out in a Master Information Delivery Plan (MIDP) (see 5.4 ) brings together the
contributions of each task team as set out in the Task Information Delivery Plans (TIDP) (see 5.4).
5.2.2 Information Requirement (IR)
The umbrella term “Information Requirement (IR)” indicates a clear description of the information
required to support a decision. An Information Requirement is usually related to a specific question(s)
concerning organis ational objectives, operation of an asset, delivery of an asset, or in relation to a specific
appointment. The nature of the question helps to inform what information is needed, who will need to
understand it, when it will be needed, and how it should be p rovided. It should also help to inform the
framework for the level of information need.

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
9 5.2.3 Exchange Information Requirements (EIR)
The Exchange Information Requirements (EIR) bring together all the information required from a specific
appointment to support d ecision which may be at an organization asset or project level as explained in
5.2.1 above. Exchange Information Requirements (EIR) are set out in such a way that the appointed party
can respond though the BIM Execution Plan (BEP) in a clear and direct man ner allowing for robust
acceptance criteria to be developed, and in according to the plan of information exchange as Master Information Delivery Plan (MIDP).
5.2.4 Task Information Requirements (TIR)
It should be noted that it is most likely that appointed parti es within a delivery team will have their own
information requirements to fulfil their task – and this is recognized within EN ISO 19650 . This may be
described as Task Information Requirements (TIR) for convenience, although not specifically referenced
as such in EN ISO 19650 .
5.3 BIM Execution Plan (BEP)
EN ISO 19650 -2:2018 , 3.1.2.1 :
BIM execution plan (BEP): “plan that explains how the information management aspects of the
appointment will be carried out by the delivery team
Note 1 to entry: The pre -appointme nt BIM execution plan focuses on the delivery team’s proposed approach to
information management, and their capability and capacity to manage information.”
A BIM Execution Plan (BEP) is the response of a delivery team to the Exchange Information Requiremen ts
(EIR) of an appointment. It provides the framework that sets out how the appointed parties will work together as a delivery team, to enable delivery of the information in response to the Exchange Information
Requirements (EIR).
This captures what, when and how exchange of information is organized between task teams within a
delivery team to enable them to develop the information required by the Exchange Information
Requirements (EIR). The Master Information Delivery Plan (MIDP) can then be directly compared with
the Exchange Information Requirements (EIR) to ensure complete matching of deliverables with the information required.
The BIM Execution Plan (BEP) is developed in two steps, first before the appointment, the second to confirm and to update if nec essary after the appointment. During the second step associated to the BEP,
a Master Information Delivery Plan (MIDP) is developed.
Within this guidance the requirements for information by a task team as described here is referred to as
Task Information Re quirements (TIR). The content of BIM Execution Plans (BEP) is described in
EN ISO 19650 −2:2018 , 5.3.2 .
For a fuller explanation of what is an appointed party and lead appointed party, refer to 6.1 of this
document and EN ISO 19650 -1:2018 , 5.1
EN ISO 19650 -1:2018 , 3.2.6 :
delivery team: “lead appointed party and their appointed parties”

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
10 5.4 Inform ation Delivery Plans
Task Information Delivery Plan (TIDP), Master Information Delivery Plan (MIDP)
EN ISO 19650 -2:2018 , 3.1.3.3 :
master information delivery plan (MIDP): “plan incorporating all relevant task information delivery
plans”
EN ISO 19650 -2:2018 , 3.1.3.4 :
task information delivery plan (TIDP): “schedule of information containers and delivery dates, for a
specific task team”
A Task Information Delivery Plan (TIDP) is prepared by each task team to identify each of the information
deliverables it is responsible for and how they will be managed within their delivery team. A Master
Information Delivery Plan (MIDP) is prepared by each lead appointed party bringing together all of the Task Information Delivery Plans (TIDP) within their delivery team and resolving any conflicts, or
omissions. The Master Information Delivery Plan (MIDP) could be considered as a part of the BIM Execution Plan (BEP) and should fulfil delivery of the complete information to the appointing party as
required by the Exchange Info rmation Requirements (EIR). Therefore, the Master Information Delivery
Plan (MIDP) can be used to check that there is a complete match of the information delivered with that
specified in the Exchange Information Requirements (EIR).
NOTE 1 Where the deliver y team is small and there is only a single task team, the process of developing a Master
Information Delivery Plan (MIDP) will be more straightforward than described by the standard as it will not require
the compilation of a number of Task Information Del ivery Plans (TIDP).
NOTE 2 It can become apparent, when the lead appointed party reviews the Task Information Delivery Plans
(TIDP), that specific Task Information Requirements (TIR) can only be fulfilled by the appointing party, or by
another delivery tea m. In this case, the lead appointed party is expected to have a dialogue with the appointing party
to establish how this can be accomplished.
5.5 Information model
EN ISO 19650 -1:2018 , 3.3.8 :
information model: “set of structured and unstructured information c ontainers”
An information model within the context of EN ISO 19650 will be comprised of a planned and managed
set of structured and unstructured information containers which are produced in response to specific
Exchange Information Requirements (EIR).
It is likely that a number of information models, coming from different appointments, will contribute to
the overall Project Information Model (PIM). As a whole, the Project Information Model (PIM) should
collectively, as a result of each appointment following EN ISO 19650 -2, contain all the relevant
information identified through the organisational, asset and project information requirements (OIR, AIR,
PIR), which need to be sourced through that project.
In the same way, the Asset Information Model (AIM) will comprise an amalgam of information models,
some derived from Project Information Models (PIM) developed during the delivery phase, but some
during the operational phase. It shall be remembered that – in general – the Asset Information Model
(AIM) exists th rough the larger part of the asset life cycle and will through the correct management of
appointments through EN ISO 19650 contain all the relevant information identified through the overall
Organisational Information Requirements (OIR), Asset Information Requirements (AIR) and Project
Information Requirements (PIR).

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
11 5.6 Information container
EN ISO 19650 -1:2018 , 3.3.12 :
information container: “named persistent set of information retrievable from within a file, system or
application storage hierarchy; example i ncluding sub -directory, information file (including model,
document, table, schedule), or distinct sub -set of an information file such as a chapter or section, layer or
symbol
Note 1 to entry: Structured information containers include geometrical models, s chedules, databases.
Unstructured information containers include documentation, video clips, sound recordings.
Note 2 to entry: Persistent information exists over a timescale long enough for it to have to be managed, i.e. this
excludes transient information such as internet search results.
Note 3 to entry: Naming of an information container should be according to an agreed naming convention.”
An information model within the context of EN ISO 19650 -1 will be comprised of a planned and managed
set of structur ed and unstructured information containers which are produced in response to specific
Exchange Information Requirements (EIR).
The definition of information container recognizes that management of information using EN ISO 19650
goes a step beyond managemen t of documents and files and encompasses other forms and scale of
information such as objects, models and databases.
5.7 Federation
EN ISO 19650 -1:2018 , 3.3.11 :
federation: “creation of a composite information model from separate information containers
Note 1 to entry: The separate information containers used during federation might come from different task
teams.”
Federation is an aggregation of information models to describe the whole project and/or asset or a part
of it.
5.8 Common data environment (CDE)
EN ISO 19650 -1:2018 , 3.3.15 :
common data environment (CDE): "agreed source of information for any given project or asset, for
collecting, managing and disseminating each information container through a managed process
Note 1 to entry: A CDE workflow describes the processes to be used and a CDE solution might provide the
technology to support those processes."
It is important to understand that the definition of Common Data Environment (CDE) covers both the
process for collecting, managing and distributing informat ion, and the technology which supports this
process.
From the technological perspective, this means that there could be a number of technological solutions, distributed across organizations. These solutions are serving the Common Data Environment (CDE) and
collectively provide a consistent managed information process. This allows for unambiguous, logical and robust control of information production and exchange.
The process information management perspective relies on these technological solutions. The work flow
shall be embedded consistently across all the above technological solutions.

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
12 6 Explanation of concepts and principles
6.1 Appointment, appointing and appointed parties
An appointing party prepares Exchange Information Requirements (EIR) informed by the Organisational
Information Requirements (OIR), Asset Information Requirements (AIR) and Project Information
Requirements (PIR). The appointing party provides the Exchange Information Requirements (EIR) for that appointment to the lead appointed party of that delivery team, reviews and agrees the BIM Execution
Plan (BEP) provided by that lead appointed party and is then the receiver of information concerning
works, goods or services from that lead appointed party defined by the Exchange Information
Requirements (EIR).
NOTE 1 An appointing party can be instigating multiple appointments, and will be expected to ensure that in
aggregate, the Exchange Information Requirements (EIRs) for each of those appointments, addresses as a whole the
Organizational Information R equirements (OIR), Asset Information Requirements (AIR) and Project Information
Requirements (PIR).
NOTE 2 For a full explanation of what an appointing party is, refer to EN ISO 19650 -1:2018 , 5.1.
The lead appointed party receives Exchange Information Requ irements (EIR) from the appointing party.
It develops a BIM Execution Plan (BEP) in response to this Exchange Information Requirements (EIR) in
collaboration with the appointed parties which make up this delivery team. The BIM Execution Plan
(BEP) includes the Master Information Delivery Plan (MIDP) which brings together all of the Task
Information Delivery Plans (TIDP) for each task team which describe the information flows needed to
enable delivery of the overall Exchange Information Requirements (EIR). T his will include Task
Information Requirements (TIR), which can be managed through the Master Information Delivery Plan
(MIDP). There may be cases where those requirements can only be provided from outside of this delivery
team. The lead appointed party wi ll need to establish how these are provided for through discussion with
the appointing party.
NOTE 3 There could be cases where the lead appointed party receives a number of Exchange Information
Requirements (EIR) from the appointing party to support diffe rent service deliveries. In this case, the lead
appointed party could find it more efficient to combine the responding BIM Execution Plan (BEP). It is important in
this instance that the delivery of information in response to each Exchange Information Requ irements (EIR)
remains clear.
The appointed party is a part of the delivery team led by a lead appointed party who collectively respond
to and deliver to the specific Exchange Information Requirements (EIR) for that delivery team. Managed
by the lead appoi nted party, each appointed party prepares a task information delivery plan which may
incorporate its own Task Information Requirements (TIR) which is then combined to form the delivery
team’s Master Information Delivery Plan (MIDP). Once the delivery team has agreed the MIDP, and the
BIM Execution Plan (BEP) overall has been agreed with the appointing party, the lead appointed party
then instructs the appointed party proceeds to deliver information according to the agreed BIM Execution
Plan (BEP) in collabo ration with the rest of the delivery team.
NOTE 4 There could be cases where the lead appointed party receives a number of Exchange Information
Requirements (EIRs) from the appointing party to support different service delivery. In this case, the lead appointed
party can find it more efficient to combine the responding BIM Execution Plans (BEPs). It is important in this
instance that the delivery of information in response to each Exchange Information Requirements (EIR) remains clear.

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
13 6.2 Information management function
Different functions are involved in steering the management of information for the project, they are
necessary and shall be described and defined by the appointment, a special sheet matrix could be used.
They depend on it and are distinct from co nventional professions. These functions of information
management can be assigned in parallel to the project conventional actors.
Depending on the project, the same party or actor may perform one or more functions or conversely a
specific facilitation function to support the project teams may be necessary.
Each function of information management has tasks and responsibilities are associated, which should not
be confused with design tasks and responsibilities.
In this sense, we are talking about:
— Asset inf ormation management functions:
The function of asset information management is designed earliest and continues throughout the
asset life cycle. As the asset life cycle is a long long time, these functions are covered by a succession
of organizations or ind ividuals;
— Project information management functions:
The function of project information exists during all the project time and relies on the appropriate
cascade of appointments for information management for the function to be realized properly;
— Task information management functions:
Each task teams includes a function for management of information which needs to be coordinated
with the other task teams.
6.3 Information delivery
Figure 1 shows the information delivery process from lead appointed parties and their delivery teams to
the appointing party to help make key decisions.

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
14

Key
asset owner or project client key decision points
information exchange w ithin delivery team, into PIM or AIM
lead appointed parties and appointed parties (task teams and delivery teams)
information verification and validation
flow of information deliverables
Figure 1 — Information delivery details using EN ISO 19650
[SOURCE: EN ISO 19650 −1:2018 , Figure 9]

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
15 Information is delivered from within delivery teams, each led by a lead appointed party and consisting of
one or more appointed parties – the figure shows three complex delivery teams, across delivery phase
and operational phase, deliver ing information to a single appointing party (for example, a building owner,
infrastructure owner, who is developing a new building/infrastructure and will occupy it after handover).
However, a delivery team can be much simpler than this, and can just cons ist of a single organization –
see sections 6.5, 7.2, 7.3.4 and 7.4 .
Information is also delivered at predetermined points during the project through information exchange.
Some of the information exchange is between a delivery team and the appointing party (dark green solid
circles), while other information exchange is only within the delivery team (light green solid circles). Information exchange within a delivery team is defined by the lead appointed party through the
additional Exchange Information Requi rements (EIR) that the lead appointed party adds in to the
appointing party’s Exchange Information Requirements (EIR) when considering how to cascade the
Exchange Information Requirements (EIR) to the different appointed parties in his delivery team.
At ea ch information exchange with the appointing party, there is a formal review by the appointing party
of the information delivered against their Exchange Information Requirements (EIR). If the information
deliverables satisfy all the Exchange Information Req uirements (EIR) then the information is accepted,
but if there are errors or some information is missing, then the delivery team shall make some corrections and submit a revised information exchange.
When there is a change of lead appointed party from one project stage to the next, then it is important
that the second lead appointed party is given the time to review the information being provided to it by
the appointing party (this is termed reference information in EN ISO 19650 -2). This is especially
impor tant where this information has come from a previous lead appointed party. This is illustrated by
the two sets of circular arrows either side of a dark green information exchange in Figure 1.
6.4 Information checking during information exchange
Figure 2 (see b elow) shows information deliverables being exchanged from lead appointed party to
appointing party at the end of a project stage. The deliverables are in response to the information
requirements, which have been provided at the beginning of the appointed p arty’s appointment. The
requirements and the deliverables are represented by the vertical arrows in the figure.
The information exchange happens in two parts. The detail within part two depends on the circumstances
in the project. These are described separ ately below:
— Part one: At the date agreed in the Master Information Delivery Plan (MIDP), the deliverables are
received by the appointing party and checked against the requirements. If the deliverables are OK,
then this part of the exchange is complete. If the deliverables are not OK, then they are returned to
the lead appointed party to be revised and then re -submitted to the appointing party. This part of the
information exchange is represented by the circular arrows to the left of the vertical arrows.
— Part two: This takes place after part one is complete and when the next stage of the project is starting.
The appointing party provides the deliverables received from the previous stage to the lead
appointed party, along with any other reference and shar ed information
(see EN ISO 19650 −:2018, 5.2.2 ). The lead appointed party can be the same as for the previous stage
(see part one above) or can be different. If the lead appointed party is different, then this part two of
the information exchange is especially important. The lead appointed party reviews the deliverables
and shared information against what they need to start their work. If the deliverables and shared
information are OK, then the second part of the information exchange is complete. If the deliverables
and shared information are not OK, then the appointing party is asked to provide additional
information. This part of the information exchange is represented by the circular arrows to the right
of the vertical arrows.

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
16

Figure 2 — Information checking during information exchange
[SOURCE: EN ISO 19650 −1:2018 Figure 7]
6.5 Flexibility in how the different parties and teams may be set up to enable
information delivery according to EN ISO 19650
Figure 3 appears in the Introduction to EN ISO 19650 -2. It illustrates the relationships between different
organizations involved in a project team (1). This example of a project team shows that there is one
appointing party (A), and a number of lead appointed parties (B). Each lead appointed party is in charge
of a delivery team (2), even if this only has one appointed party (C) inside it. Delivery teams can also be
very complex with many different appointed parties in multi- layered hi erarchies. Within a delivery team
there will exist one or more task teams (3) and these can be any task -focused group or sub -set of
appointed parties within the delivery team.
Where a single organization is appointed to complete one specific task (such as architectural design) then
that same organization will be both the lead appointed party in the delivery team and the appointed party
(= task team). In other words, from the above diagram, the same organization will be B, C, 2 and 3.
On a small project (such as a simple refurbishment), it is possible that there is only one delivery team (B) who carries out all the tasks. Even where the appointing party and the lead appointed party are from the
same organization then A and B need to be identified separately s o that it is clear who is responsible for
setting requirements (A) and who is responsible for delivering information (B).
Lead appointed parties organize the distribution of Exchange Information Requirements (EIR) amongst
the appointed parties and also coo rdinate the information deliverables produced by the delivery team.
Where there are multiple lead appointed parties involved in a project, and therefore multiple delivery
teams, it is important that the lead appointed parties coordinate their information w ith each other. This
coordination is shown by the dotted curved arrows linking the B’s in Figure 2. This coordination will be
managed by the appointing party.

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
17

Key
A appointing party
B lead appointed party
C appointed party
… variable amount
1 project team
2 illustration of a delivery team
3 task team(s)
information requirements and information exchange
information coordination
Figure 3 — Interfaces betw een parties and teams for the purpose of information management
[SOURCE: EN ISO 19650- 2:2018, Figure 2]
6.6 Families of information requirements and information models
It is important to appreciate the inter -relationship – or hierarchy of the Information Requi rements (IR)
as described in EN ISO 19650 -1, since the way that this is then implemented can ensure that the right
information is available to support decisions throughout the whole life cycle of built environment assets,
and across the economic, social an d physical ecosystem within which they sit. Whilst full understanding
of how this can support the vision of smart cities and integrated digital twins is not yet fully
appreciated/realized across the built environment sector, the concepts and principles, wh ich need to
support such a vision, are encapsulated in EN ISO 19650 -1.

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
18 At its basic level, however, the principle of understanding what information the organization requires
(e.g. how many customers a particular facility is required to support to meet its business objectives) – the
Organisational Information Requirements (OIR); what information is required during the running of the
asset (e.g. how many spare parts are required at what time to keep the facility running) – the Asset
Information Requirements ( AIR); what information is required to deliver the overall project (e.g. when
will all parts of the facility/infrastructure be ready for commissioning, and go live, at what cost) – the
Project Information Requirements (PIR); and what information is needed f rom each delivery
team/appointed party (e.g. what parts are required to construct this particular element of the facility) –
the Exchange Information Requirements (EIR); and how this information needs to cascade up and down
the ecosystem to ensure that all decisions are well supported and well informed, at the right times and to
the right people, is the fundamental oil to allow efficient delivery and running of individual facilities, and
ultimately integrated, smart infrastructure, cities and communities.
It should be noted (as above in 5.2 ) that it is most likely that appointed parties within a delivery team will
have their own information requirements to fulfil their task – and this is recognized within EN ISO 19650 .
This may be described as Task Information Requirements (TIR) for convenience, although not specifically
referenced as such in EN ISO 19650 .
Although, this may seem complicated, in practice, it should support strategic thinking and business planning which already takes place at the organisational level, and technical and procurement planning
at the asset management and project delivery level. Therefore, the Organisational Information
Requirements (OIR) will be informed by the purpose and objectives of the organization. The questions
that the orga nization needs to consider in how it runs its business, the outcomes it needs to deliver, and
the built assets or infrastructure it needs to support this need not be complex – but it is vital that they are
identified to ensure that the information needed t o address these questions, and continually inform
decisions, including how the infrastructure is performing and delivering/supporting those desired
outcomes – on an on -going basis.
From this, it should be a fairly simple step to deduce the need for informa tion – and the questions that
need to be addressed to support the right decisions – at the asset management level, and at the project
level. The experts at each of these levels already know what questions they have to address – they have
just not been aske d to express them in this way before. This is what the Exchange Information
Requirements (EIR) should contain.
Looking at the hierarchy of IRs (see Figure 4) often raises awareness of gaps in the knowledge base –
where questions could have been addressed earlier, or in combination with others. This is one area in
which this approach to managing information using BIM can give rise to significant savings and
efficiencies.

Figure 4 — Hierarchy of Information requirements (IR)
[SOURCE: EN ISO 19650 −1:2018 , Figure 2]

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
19 6.7 Level of Information Need
In EN ISO 19650 , the principle of level of information need has been conceived as an approach for
framework to define how to meet the information requirement for a project. For each project or asset,
the level of information need provides an appropriate answer for each information requirement.
The need is the driver of this method of assignment.
The needs are d escribed through different topics or concepts, including metric -based, e.g. as a need of
geometry, a need of information, a need of documentation, and so on. These needs are, therefore,
managed for each of them differently, and independently.
The relevance of an information deliverable is not always correlated to its granularity.
EXAMPLE 1 If you consider a concrete wall, the geometry visible in the model is often very basic as a simple
parallelepiped.
EXAMPLE 2 Perhaps, the associated documentation is not existing, such as for a component made on site. But
the information associated could consider a lot of topics around the specific material, such as formulation,
mechanical properties, visual aspects, or attached as a part of a functional system: e.g. fire, space.
All these properties defined for this wall could be very detailed, but to be relevant for the project
information model, they shall be integrated into the overall project process of the Common Data
Environment (CDE): proposed (work in progress), sh ared (to be accepted) and published.
One purpose of defining the level of information need is to prevent delivery of too much or too little
information. The levels of information need are determined by the minimum amount of information
needed to answer eac h relevant requirement. Anything beyond this minimum is considered as waste.
Level of information need is, however, closely linked to the federation strategy.
6.8 Federation strategy
The purpose of the federation strategy and the information container breakdow n structure is to help plan
the production of information by separate task teams to the appropriate level of information need as
described in EN ISO 19650 -1:2018 , 11.2 .
It should explain how the information model is intended to be divided into one or more sets of
information containers.
The federation strategy and the information container breakdown structure explain the methodology to
manage interfaces associated with the asset during its delivery phase or operational phase. The capacity
of the technology and the level of information need as the appropriate answer for the Exchange
Information Requirements (EIR) are linked to this method.
Federation strategies are important concepts in managing federated information models. Implementing
the federation strategy is driven by the complexity of the project/asset and team -structure. A strategy
could be to federate the information models according to, for example, the disciplines, procurement, functions, systems, use cases, geographic localization. In one project o r asset, it is actually quite common
to use a combination of such approaches within the overall federation strategy to achieve the agreed objectives.
NOTE The federation strategy also depends on the possibilities of the software -technology (interoperability)
and amount of data.

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
20 In this way, a project could be considered:
— as the combination of several disciplines:
— project information model of structural,
— project information model of technical sets (e.g. ventilation, water and sewage),
— project informa tion model of architectural sets (e.g. facade, partitions, finishes),
— project information model of infrastructure functional sets (e.g. electrical, barrier system,
signalling, marking …).
— or a federation strategy could depend on a geospatial approach:
— project information model of south zone,
— project information of e.g. north territory.
— or yet:
— an approach of system,
— infrastructure highway,
— infrastructure electrical,
— infrastructure water.
— or most usually a mix of all these approaches.
6.9 How to implement Task Information Delivery Plan (TIDP) and Master Information
Delivery Plan (MIDP)
Each Task Information Delivery Plan (TIDP) summarizes the information containers that are within the
responsibility of a single task team. It is prepared during the appointment activities
(see EN ISO 19650 -2:2018 , 4.4, 5.4.4 and Figure 7). The Task Information Delivery Plan (TIDP) is
prepared in response to the information delivery milestones for the project, the task team responsibilities confirmed in the detail ed responsibility matrix and the information requirements relevant to the work of
the task team. As a minimum, it is suggested that the Task Information Delivery Plan (TIDP) should contain the following details about each information container:
— The infor mation container names (identification) for human handling and machine readability –
EN ISO 19650 does not require or recommend the use of a particular naming/identification
convention;
— Any logical dependencies between information containers;
— The level of information need, according to the way this has been defined for the project;
— The identification of the member of the task team in charge of producing the information; and
— Dates for the first time the information container is shared through the Com mon Data Environment
(CDE) and for the final delivery of the information container (see Note 1 below).
NOTE Is it not usually considered practical for the Task Information Delivery Plan (TIDP) to include all the
dates when successive versions of an informa tion container are going to be shared, between first sharing and final
delivery. If there is conflict between the delivery date from one appointed party and the date this information
container is needed by another appointed, then this is expected to be res olved by the lead appointed party.

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
21 The Master Information Delivery Plan (MIDP) summarizes all information containers of one project
delivery team. It is the compilation of all the separate Task Information Delivery Plans (TIDP) from within
the delivery tea m and is therefore first prepared during the appointment activities
(see EN ISO 19650 −2:2018 , 4.4, 5.4.4 and Figure 7). It does NOT list all information flows, but it should
include the dates for first sharing and final delivery of each information container. The Master
Information Delivery Plan (MIDP) will also identify the appointed part y responsible for each information
container.
The Master Information Delivery Plan (MIDP) should also indicate the information dependencies
between different task teams/appointed parties. Any conflicts will need to be resolved by the lead
appointed party.
The dates agreed in the Master Information Delivery Plan (MIDP) for delivery of information containers should take account of the time that will be needed by the lead appointed party to review and authorize
the information containers, and also should take account of the time that will be needed by the appointing
party to review and accept the information containers in the information model.
A Master Information Delivery Plan (MIDP) can be produced using a variety of tools including
spreadsheet, database and document but EN ISO 19650 does not require or recommend any particular
approach.
If the composition of a delivery team changes during the project, by task teams/appointed parties joining
or leaving the delivery team, then the Master Information Delivery P lan (MIDP) will need to change to
reflect this.
The arrangement of information containers across all the Master Information Delivery Plans, from all the
delivery teams, is defined by the information container breakdown structure that has been derived from
the federation strategy.
6.10 Common Data Environment
The concept of the Common Data Environment (CDE) includes both the collaborative process of managing the information containers, (also called the CDE workflow in EN ISO 19650 −1), and any
technical solution that can be used to support this process, (also called the CDE solution in EN ISO 19650 −1). See 5.8 explanation.
These two aspects of the Common Data Environment (CDE) are indivisible as far as EN ISO 19650 is
concerned. Any technological solutions serving the CDE shall be able to support the CDE workflow.
The principles of the Common Data Environment (CDE) are set out in EN ISO 19650 -1:2018 , Clause 12.
Each information container in use within the Common Data Environment (CDE) is in one of 3 in used
information states:
— Work in Progress – this information state is used for information containers while they are being
developed or amended by their authors/task teams. Information containers in this state cannot be viewed by any one else outside of that task team. Care needs to be taken of the interface between any
software tools being used and the CDE solution.
— For example:
— draft structural design which is not yet regarded as ready for sharing with other disciplines
such as a rchitectural design during the development for a new building/infrastructure
would be in a work in progress state.
— Shared – this information state is used for information containers while they are being shared as
reference information. Information contai ners in this state can be viewed and used collaboratively
by appointed parties in the delivery team and by the lead appointed party. Security or access controls
can manage this visibility.

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
22 — For example:
— reference information for task teams to develop th eir own information,
— information containers that are being used in a federation process
— an information model that has been authorized by the lead appointed party for submission
to the appointing party.
— Published – this information state is used for information containers that have been successfully
rewieved against the acceptance criteria by the appointing party. Information containers in this state
can be used by the appointing party or by any appointed party for subsequent project activities:
— For example:
— making appointments, further design work, construction, or project close -out. milestones,
stage of project.
The Common Data Environment (CDE) also maintains a record of all information container transactions
by using the Archive state. This prov ides an audit trail of information container development. Therefore,
it should usually record date and time when an information container changed state and status codes.
(For example, from Work in Progress to Shared). And it also should record the name of the information
providers and history of revison codes of the information containers.
The Common Data Environment (CDE) allows metadata to be associated with each information container.
In EN ISO 19650 -1 and EN ISO 19650 −2 this includes the revision code of the information container, the
status code of the information container and classification in accordance with EN ISO 12006 -2.
The appointing party initiates setup of the Common Data Environment (CDE). Appointed parties should
be prepared that if they are involved in a number of projects, they may therefore be required to use more
than one Common Data Environment (CDE).
Quality control and assurance of information is part of the information workflow in the Common Data Environment (CDE). There are two quality assurance processes between Work In Progress, Shared, and
Published:
— Between the work in progress state and shared state the quality assurance processes include the
check and the review for the information container s. Refer to EN ISO 19650 -2:2018 , 5.6.4 ;
— Between the shared state and published state, the quality assurance processes include the review
and the authorization for the information containers. Refer to EN ISO 19650 -2:2018 , 5.7.2 .
6.11 Collaborative production o f information
Clause 6.6 above describes the concepts and principles behind identifying the Information Requirement
(IR) and defining the information models. It is important that on a project level and therefore on each
appointment, that each deliverable i s defined within this context. The production of specific information
deliverables is the target of each appointment, informed by this process.
Having defined the Information Requirement (IR), the required information model can be defined and organized int o information containers. The organization of these information containers is defined by the
federation strategy which has been proposed within a delivery team. The allocation of information
containers to different task teams in the delivery team can be defined in the information container
breakdown structure, (see also Clause 6.8). In the nformation delivery plans, these information
containers can then be defined as specific deliverables, (as described in section 6.9).

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
23 To enable the collaborative handling of information containers throughout a delivery team, certain
common rules need to be applied. This is where the stages of Work In Progress, Shared, Published and
Archive, as described in subclause 6.10 , become important guardrails – and it is important th at the timing
and the level of information need at which information containers are shared across task teams or delivery teams is clearly established. Timely sharing of information is important to progress project
delivery. Hasty sharing of unchecked or im mature information represents risk and can result in major
impediments to project delivery.
The way that information containers are identified, needs to be implemented and managed through the
set up and maintenance of the Common Data Environment (CDE) (see section 6.10 ).
The following are required in EN ISO 19650 to ensure proper collaborative information management:
— identification of information containers:
To identify the “same” information container a “container identifier” is needed. EN ISO 19650 −2
specifies that an attribute according to EN ISO 12006 -3 be included. Its implementation and
management shall be defined with the setup of the Common Data Environment (CDE).
— information container states:
Information containers should progress in a controlle d manner through the production workflow,
referred to as states, and enabled by the Common Data Environment (CDE). EN ISO 19650 defines
the following generic information container states: work in progress, shared, and published and
archive as described in subclause 6.10 .
— revision and status codes:
As the production of information proceeds, the content change, for each information container needs
to be recorded, and this is done by way of revision and status (suitability) codes. This should be
reflected in the BIM Execution Plan (BEP) and be agreed between the appointing and lead appointed
party.
The content change and appropriate use of the information is captured using the combination of
revision and status codes, to record the different versions of the “ same” information container at
different times (i.e. before and after a content change) by providing an archive. This is covered by supplying a proper archiving function of the information management system.
— Level of Information Need:
According to EN ISO 19650 , a further important principle to specify is Level of Information Need.
Understanding how much information is needed at any particular step to support production, and
then on delivery to support decision making, as identified in the Information Requ irements (IR).
For each appointment, the Level of information need has to be defined and applied. The appointing party
has to communicate this clearly through the Exchange Information Requirements (EIR), and the delivery
team has to coordinate its response within the Master Information Delivery Plan (MIDP) and BIM
Execution Plan (BEP).
6.12 Information delivery cycle
Figure 5 appears at the end of EN ISO 19650 -1 to summarize many of the concepts and principles
described in the standard.

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
24

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
25 Key
information production
information management process
flow of information deliverables
iteration to complete information exchange
stakeholder decision point
delivery team decision point
information exchange
Figure 5 —Summary of concepts and principles of EN ISO 19650-1
[SOURCE: EN ISO 19650- 1:2018, Figure 11]
The middle s ection of Figure 5 represents the information models being managed and produced using
the Common Data Environment (CDE) workflow (the management process) and solution (the hardware
and software technologies). This section encompasses both the Project Infor mation Model (PIM) and the
Asset Information Model (AIM) – and that these information models include documentation,
alphanumerical and geometrical information. It also illustrates that at the beginning of a project, existing
relevant asset information shou ld be identified and made available for the Project Information Model
(PIM), and that at the end of a project relevant project information should transfer to the Asset
Information Model (AIM). Over the whole life of an asset these transfers back and forth can occur many
times as new projects are identified (for example, initial design and construction, first refurbishment,
second refurbishment, first extension, and so on). During the life cycle, the total available relevant
information will increase.
Around the Common Data Environment (CDE) is the representation of the generic, repeated cycle of
specification and delivery of information. Each cycle is started by a project or asset trigger event. On a
project, the first trigger is likely to be the confirmatio n that a project is required and the need to appoint
the first technical designer/adviser. Subsequent triggers will include the growth of the design team and appointment of subsequent designers and the appointment of the construction team. The precise natu re,
sequence and timing of these triggers will usually reflect typical project work stages. The information
delivery cycle includes the steps of identifying the appropriate information requirements, appointment
of information delivery teams, mobilization of those delivery teams and then production of the required
information deliverables. This involves compilation and agreement of delivery plans both within the
delivery teams and with the appointing party. The delivery plans respond to the needs of the proj ect, and
serve the needs of both the appointing party, and all those participating in the delivery team, to enable
the most efficient production of information relevant to the project need.
The multiple information needs which exist, and how these are serv ed through exchange of information,
are illustrated by the red and green diamonds and green circles at the bottom of the diagram. The red
diamonds represent the decision points of client and/or asset owner, users and authorities. The
information required f or these red diamond decision points will have been captured in the Project
Information Requirements (PIR) (identifying the high -level requirements to be addressed at each
decision point). The green diamonds represent the delivery team decision points in r elation to
information. The green circles represent information exchange between appointing and lead appointed parties, relating to all these decision points. The Exchange Information Requirements (EIR) for any one
appointment should identify the details o f information exchange for that appointment. The appointing
party needs to ensure that where there are multiple appointments for a given project, the federated
Exchange Information Requirements (EIRs) address the overall Project Information Requirements (P IR).

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
26 As explained in 6.4 above, the green arrows going in an anticlockwise direction to the left of the vertical
lines represent the iterative check, review and update of information delivered to inform the decision
points. The green arrows to the right of the vertical lines represent the iterative check, review and update
of information provided to inform the next stage of information production (either by the same delivery team or by a different team).
The exact stages and decision points of the life cycl e of an asset are not specified in EN ISO 19650 -2, and
it is left to the appointing party to define these. It is possible that different countries will want to
encourage adoption of a specific Plan of Work. If this is the case, this can be defined within a National
Annex or accompanying standard.
NOTE For example, in the UK a unified Plan of work was developed with the leading professional bodies to
replace the disparate plans of work previously championed by separate construction disciplines. This converge nce
in approach for project delivery across the UK construction industry was part of the BIM Level 2 mandate of the UK
Government, and the detail is defined in two British Standards.
The information delivery cycle may be repeated multiple times during a pr oject and needs to be
considered for every appointment within a project. The production and maintenance of information
during asset management is an essential part of the information delivery cycle, and the relationship
between the Project Information Models (PIM) and the Asset Information Model (AIM) is a critical
element. During the life of an asset it is feasible that there will be concurrent projects running. In these
cases, the timely supply of relevant information between the Project Information Model s (PIM) and the
Asset Information Model (AIM) will need to be considered to ensure coordination across all these
activities. This includes careful definition of the federation strategy and the information container
breakdown structure. This demonstrates th e importance of the information management function at
appointing party level to oversee the interface between delivery teams, and if they exist, multiple projects.
7 Explanation of EN ISO 19650 -2 process
7.1 Concept of process

Figure 6 —Flows of Information as information management processes [SOURCE: EN ISO 19650-
2:2018, Figure 3]
Flows of Information are illustrated as information management pro cesses (see Figure 6) based on the
principles introduced within ISO/IE C 19510 : presented in text below as Use Cases according to
EN ISO 19650 −2 (grouped in B Project, C Appointment, D -E-F for Information Procurement, Planning and
Production).

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
27 Symbols used in the process diagrams are:
start
end
collapsed sub -process
activity
Text used in the illustration is:
Activities
1 assessment and need A information model progressed by subsequent
delivery
2 invitation to tender team(s) for each appointment
3 tender response B activities undert aken per project
4 appointment C activities undertaken per appointment
5 mobilization D activities undertaken during the procurement
stage
6 collaborative production of information (of each appointment)
7 information model delivery E activities under taken during the information
planning
8 project close -out (end of delivery phase) stage (of each appointment)
F activities undertaken during the information
production
stage (of each appointment)
Management processes are split into their ac tivities. The activities used in this diagram are numbered 1
to 8 and both the course they are presented, and their numbering reflect the order in which they are
undertaken.
It is observed in the standard that if information management processes are undert aken within a single
organization, appointments can be supplemented by internal work instructions, followed by acceptance
of the work instruction and confirmation to proceed.
7.2 Scalability to small and medium projects
EN ISO 19650 -2 makes wide use of the phr ase “shall consider”, particularly in the requirements in
Clause 5. This phrase is used to introduce a list of items that the person in question shall think about
carefully in connection with the primary requirement described in the subclause. The amount o f thought
involved, the time taken to complete it, and the need for supporting evidence will depend on the
complexity of the project, the experience of the person(s) involved, and the requirements of any national
policy on introducing building information modelling (BIM). On a relatively small or straightforward
project, it might be possible to complete, or dismiss as not relevant, some of these “shall consider” items
very quickly.

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
28 One way to help identify which of the 'shall consider' statements are releva nt, might be to review each
statement and create templates for projects of different sizes and complexity.
[SOURCE: EN ISO 19650 -2:2018 ]
7.3 Illustration of different aspects of EN ISO 19650- 2 process using a number of
different scenarios
7.3.1 The client (as the ap pointing party) and the supply chain are aware and motivated and use
EN ISO 19650
In this scenario, the client and supply chain are able to adapt the different structure of delivery team and
different assets of projects for the whole lifecycle into operati on and maintenance.
The scenarios presented in Clause 8 (8.2 and 8.3 ) provide fuller descriptions of how EN ISO 19650 may
be implemented during the delivery phase of assets, through the EN ISO 19650 -2 process.
7.3.2 The client is not aware of/or does not use EN ISO 19650 i .e. How to implement without
client participation
There will be cases where the client either does not know about EN ISO 19650 or does not wish to
implement EN ISO 19650 . In this circumstance, the delivery teams can still implement the principle s of
EN ISO 19650 . This covers the scenario cited in subclause 8.2 below. There are a number of ways the
client might choose to do this:
1) Speak to the client, explaining the concepts and principles of EN ISO 19650and explore whether in
reality the client would like assistance in implementing EN ISO 19650 . This would require an
appointment to provide such a service.
2) The lead of the delivery team could decide that it is in their organizational interest to implement EN ISO 19650 and therefore to become th e appointing party, considering and interpreting the scope
of the project for which they have been appointed, to allow for better information management for the benefit of the delivery team, but also – as an option if following best practice or for commerc ial
advantage – for the benefit of the ultimate client.
3) The delivery team may collectively agree to implement EN ISO 19650 , with one of the team taking on
the equivalent of the appointing party, requiring at minimum development of the Exchange
Informati on Requirements (EIR). This allows for the delivery team to consider and develop their
response and development of an appropriate BIM Execution Plan (BEP).
7.3.3 The appointing party is not the client
In reality, it does not matter who acts as the appointing par ty, providing the Organizational Information
Requirements (OIR), Asset Information Requirements (AIR) and Project Information Requirements (PIR)
are captured appropriately in the Exchange Information Requirements (EIR) to provide the right and
appropriate information to all the relevant stakeholders. The approach is therefore similar to that
described in 7.3.1 .
As an example, consider the scenario below.
EXAMPLE Task: A national private client has heard of and seen the value of successful effective digital
collaboration. To the client, the main objective of the construction project is to enhance the design quality and to
expedite the project delivery. According to national habits, the clients awards peer contracts to an SME architect
and independent SME engi neers for HVAC and structural engineering. The client is requiring the architect to
establish a collaborative framework for the project with an overall information coordination and management of
the digital collaboration in accordance with EN ISO 19650 . Solution: The architect distinguishes the contractual
situation for the information delivery, in terms of contracting architect and engineers being appointed in parallel
where information is distributed according to EN ISO 19650 . The framework is implemented the same way as when
a lead appointed party is involved.

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
29 7.3.4 The delivery team is either a small and simple structure or a large and complex structure
but is delivering a similar project
7.3.4.1 General
The objective of a delivery team is to develop the appropriate level of response to the client’s Exchange
Information Requirements (EIR).
First a little reminder about delivery team.
Refer to Terms and definition EN ISO 19650 -1.
“A delivery team can be any size, from one person carrying out all the necessary functions through to complex, multi -layered task teams”.
We propose to analyse this use case with two situations in mind:
— The delivery team is one appointed party, and this appointed party is one person: as an Architect for
example,
— The delivery team is a lead appointed party and a set or cascade of appointed parties: as an architect and his technical design offices or, as a general contractor and his sub -contractors.
To deal with the client’s Exchange Information Requirements (EIR), the delivery team shall prepare a plan for the information management according to EN ISO 19650 -2:2018 , 5.3, 5.4 and 5.5 and
subsequently work with the project's information according to the aforementioned plan and framework
for the digital collaboration to ensure the quality of the i nformation, according to EN ISO 19650 -2:2018 ,
5.6 and 5.7 .
7.3.4.2 EN ISO 19650-2 :2018, 5.3: Tender response, 4 clauses, or criteria
The prospective “lead appointed party” compile (where available) the each delivery team’s tender
response.
This tender response con tent pre -appointment BEP, capability and capacity assessment summary,
mobilization plan and information delivery risk assessment.
This 4 clauses structure delivery team’s tender response to the client. For each clause, a to do list (shall
consider) is desc ribed. The delivery team keep in mind the primary requirement of the clause. “It can be
possible to complete, or dismiss as not relevant, some of these “shall consider” items very quickly”
introduction EN ISO 19650 -2.
For example, consider the delivery of the pre -appointment BEP: The pre -appointment BEP (clause
primary requirement) is always the answer to be done, but the appropriate answer (with the support of
the to do list) will be deliver.
Table 1 — Clause primary requirement: pre-a ppointment BEP: one answer to be done
clause primary requirement: pre -appointment BEP: one answer to be done
Subclause To-do Simple structure Complex structure
1 Propose name to undertake the
information function one nominates for the
alone delivery team several nominate for each delivery
teams
2 the delivery team’s information
delivery strategy, containing: Based on the appointment Based on the appointments
— the delivery team’s approach to
meeting the appointing party’s
exchange information same ans wer same answer
— a set of objectives/goals for the
collaborative production of
information, Only one person carries
the organization and
commercial aspects the lead of the delivery team carries
the organization and commercial
aspects

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
30 clause primary requirement: pre -appointment BEP: one answer to be done
Subclause To-do Simple structure Complex structure
— an overview o f the delivery
team’s composition, in the form of
one or more task teams; One team a tree or a cascade of multiple task
teams lead by a delivery team
3 the proposed federation strategy to
be adopted by the delivery team; A structured project
information m odel based
on whole functional
approach Based on the appointments, a
decomposition of the project
information model based on task
teams specialized by discipline
4 the delivery team’s high -level
responsibility matrix, containing
the allocated responsibili ty for each
element of the information model
and the key deliverables associated
to each element; The same person carries
different functions and
responsibilities allocated
and defines the
deliverable expected Based on the appointments, the lead of
the del ivery team designates in his
multi -layered task teams' persons
responsible for each element of the
information model and the deliverable
expected
5 any proposed additions or
amendments to the project’s
information production methods
and procedures that the delivery
team require to facilitate the
effective: Based on the appointment Based on the appointments
— capture of existing asset
information, Could stay strictly based
on the client’s
requirement Could stay strictly based on the client’s
requirement
— generation, review, approval
and authorization of information,
This proposition for the
project’s workflow could
be strictly based on the
appointing’s party
proposal for CDE This proposition for the project’s
workflow could be strictly based on
the a ppointing’s party proposal for
CDE. Some adaption to facilitate the
works in progress (WIP) between the
multiple task team could be proposed
— security and distribution of
information, and This proposition for the
project’s workflow could
be strictly ba sed on the
appointing’s party
proposal for CDE This proposition for the project’s
workflow could be strictly based on
the appointing’s party proposal for
CDE
— delivery of information to the
appointing party; could be a regular point
added in the projec t
review on specific
project‘s milestone could be a regular point added in the
project review on specific project‘s
milestone
A pre – review should be managed
before by the delivery team to
associate the multiple task teams
6 any proposed additions or
amen dments to the project’s
information standard that the
delivery team require to facilitate
the effective: Based on the appointment Based on the appointments
— exchange of information
between task teams, No effect The delivery team federates and
coordinat es the multiple task teams
and propose an adapted schedule and
plan of works
— distribution of information to
external parties, or Could stay strictly based
on the client’s
requirement Could stay strictly based on the client’s
requirement
— delivery of information to the
appointing party; could be a regular point
added in the project
review on specific
project‘s milestone could be proposed as an
implementation of specific review
“project information model”
7 a proposed schedule of software
(including versions), hardware and
IT infrastructure the delivery team
intend to adopt. The answer could propose
the implementation of
only software solution
based on open source
format and file A detailed and coordinate table of the
different solutions used by the
multiple task team is done by the
delivery team. All of them are based on
open source format and file

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
31 7.3.4.3 EN ISO 19650-2 :2018, 5.4: Tender response, 4 clauses
The elements of the response are:
— updated, and confirmed the delivery team’s BEP,
— and established: delivery team’ detailed responsibility matrix, the synthesis of the exchange
information requirements, the master information delivery plan with, if exist, the task information
delivery plan(s).
7.3.4.4 EN ISO 19650-2 :2018, 5.5: Mobilization, 3 clauses
Three cr ucial points are reviewed in this stage to ensure proper implementation on the project:
— the resources,
— the technologies,
— the methods.
7.3.4.5 EN ISO 19650-2 :2018, 5.6: Collaborative production of information, 4 clauses
Each task team produce, check, share an d review information according all the rules defined.
7.3.4.6 EN ISO 19650-2 :2018, 5.7: Information model delivery, 3 clauses
The set of information are submitted to be included, reviewed and accepted within the project's common
data environment.
7.3.4.7 Summary
Each phas e of the project's delivery contains few clauses to structure the process and provide assurance
on the quality of the information produced. All these clauses form the “information management” of the
project.
For each of these clauses, EN ISO 19650 -2 propos e a to -do list (shall consider).
The answers are directly linked to the client's requirements and are appropriate to the project and
project teams involved.
The response could be carried by a delivery team or also a set of task teams manage by a delivery t eam.
Template could be easily produced to support the whole process and be re use for different projects.
7.3.5 Explanation of the EN ISO 19650- 2 process: The delivery team will continue through to
operation and maintenance
7.3.5.1 General
The example here is of a local authority street -lighting project where the integrated design and
construction team has also been appointed to provide 10 years of operation and maintenance of the
lighting. The local authority defined the technical standard for the street -lighting and wi ll pay a monthly
charge for the lighting to be provided. The agreement is that if one or more street lights fail then the local authority will not pay that proportion of the monthly charge.
The local authority is the appointing party for the design and con struction of the street lighting, and also
for the operation and maintenance of the lighting. But the local authority has very little day -to-day
involvement with either the delivery phase (project) or the operational phase (asset management) of the lightin g.

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
32 There is one delivery team appointed by the appointing party, led by a construction and maintenance
contractor as lead appointed party. All the other organizations in the delivery team are appointed parties
appointed by the lead appointed party. See Fig ure 7.

Figure 7 — Organizations in the delivery team — Team structure
7.3.5.2 Information requirements
The design and construction of the street lighting follows the standard EN ISO 19650-2 process, with the
appointing party defining its Project Information Requirements (PIR) and its Exchange Information Requirements (EIR) to the Lead Appointed Party. The appointing party’s Project Information
Requir ements (PIR) and Exchange Information Requirements (EIR) will include the requirement for daily
information about whether each individual light is working or broken, as this is used to calculate the
monthly usage payments. This requirement will affect the design of the lighting control and monitoring
system and is made part of the appointing party’s Exchange Information Requirements (EIR) in the
invitation to tender, see Figure 8. Invitation to tender. The design phase contributes from step 7 to step
2, see Figure 8, with increased requirements to the construction work which thus gives a better basis for
the lighting control and operations.

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
33

Key
2.1 establish the appointing party’s exchange information requirements
2.2 assemble reference information and shared resources
2.3 establish tender response requirements and evaluation criteria
2.4 compile invitation to tender information
A informati on model progressed by subsequent delivery team(s) for each appointment
Figure 8 —Invitation to tender [SOURCE: EN ISO 19650- 2:2018, Figure 5]
This is an agreement for design, construction and maintenance and the Lead Appointed Party will remain
responsib le for the delivery and operation of the street lighting for 10 years. Therefore, the Lead
Appointed Party will add some more detailed and specific Exchange Information Requirements (EIR) into
each of the Appointed Party appointments. This particularly inc ludes information about the rapid repair
or replacement of broken lights from the designers and from the installer team, because of the payment
penalties for non -working street lighting. Information requirements about repair or replacement of lights
origin ate from the Maintenance team within the delivery team.
7.3.5.3 Information model delivery
The relevant parts of the information model are delivered by the Lead Appointing Party to the appointing
party at the end of the construction phase of the appointment. This corresponds to the Exchange
Information Requirements (EIR) provided by the appointing party. Other relevant parts of the
information model are retained within the Lead Appointed Party for the use of the Operation Team and
the Maintenance Team during the op erational phase of the appointment. The remaining information in
the information model, which is not relevant for the appointing party or for the continuing operation of
the street lighting, such as interim designs or unsuccessful manufacturer quotations, is retained for
archive purposes only. This is in case there is a future dispute regarding the design or construction work.
7.3.5.4 Summary
The key learning points from this case study are as follows:
— It is possible for one appointing party to move from delivery phase to operational phase very easily,
provided this is properly planned from the beginning,
— Within a delivery team, it is possible to have appointed parties involved in both delivery phase and operational phase activities,
— The important and valuable learning here is that timely incorporation of a business need and the
information requirements created value for the project partners without necessarily providing an
additional cost.

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
34 7.4 The project is mid – size and EN ISO 19650 is used for optimizing costs and the
delivery phase
This example concerns a digital practice on a student housing project where the professional client and
the architect have estimated that a structured digital collaboration in accordance with EN ISO 19650 will
ensure a financial suc cess when applying for subsidies and will accelerate the project. This example
assumes that the architect has strong capability in the implementation of EN ISO 19650 .
The architect – as the information management function of the lead appointed party – sets out the
framework for the exchange of information according to the client’s Exchange Information Requirements
(EIR) to specify the information required for the realization of the project (Project Information Model
(PIM)).
A part of the Exchange Informatio n Requirements (EIR) is to provide information which enables a
decision as to whether approval for providing subsidies from funding bodies is appropriate.
As the architect is the lead appointed party for design and construction work, there will be only one
Master Information Delivery Plan (MIDP), which addresses the information requirements for both
phases. It includes the information basis for application for subsidies.
The architect uses a framework for the exchange of information within the design team including structural and MEP engineers based on the project’s cross -disciplinary coordination model. The aim is to
deliver to the Exchange Information Requirements (EIR) using the collaborative unified processes
provided by the project’s Common Data Environment (CDE).
As the design phase is completed, it provides information which helps to form the contractual basis for
the construction phase in the tender documents.
During this tendering phase the prospective appointed parties are asked to establish their p re-
appointment BIM Execution Plan (BEP) and their capability, their capacity and mobilization plan. They
are allowed to appoint subcontractors which have to prove their necessary digital competencies and tools
supporting the digital collaboration on the pr oject. They also have to prove a common understanding of
the objective of the digital collaboration as described in the introduction to EN ISO 19650 −2 and in
EN ISO 19650 -1.
The lead appointed party accepts that some subcontractors that they choose to appoint, do not have the skills to compile a Task Information Delivery Plan.
This is then included in the risk register with appropriate mitigation measures. and included in the delivery team’s tender response.
After the mobilization stage, each appointed party of the delivery team should have established the process of collaborative production of information according to the Task Information Delivery Pla n
(TIDP). However unfortunately this did not happen and as a result some of the sub contracted appointed parties found that they had to repeat the quality assurance check.
Close to the end of the delivery phase the appointed parties are requested to feed t he information model
for the architect’s (providing the lead appointed party) approval. Thus, the client’s need for information
to support approval of the subsidies is fulfilled by the handover of the information model to the funding
bodies.
The funding bo dies receive the completed information model in the published state for
public/governmental approval.

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
35 8 Examples of implementing the EN ISO 19650 -2 process
8.1 Introduction
These examples are provided to demonstrate how the standard may be utilized in a flexible way for
various scenarios:
1) Where the supply chain is not aware of or does not use EN ISO 19650 ;
2) Where the project is complex with a range of different stakeholders and demanding schedules, with
multiple delivery teams;
3) The project is small and st raightforward and EN ISO 19650 seems to be too much effort;
4) Demonstrating the spatial coordination of information models with other information models
existing within the Project’s Common Data Environment (CDE).
Clearly, these examples do not cover ever y possibility, but they do explore how EN ISO 19650 allows for
different scenarios to implement the process of EN ISO 19650 -2 in a flexible way so as to accommodate
the wide range of approaches taken across the industry, and around the world, whilst enabli ng efficient
delivery of information in each case.
Each of the examples follows the steps defined by the EN ISO 19650 -2 process and as described in 7.1
above. They do not seek to duplicate, contradict or extend the meaning of EN ISO 19650 .
Further, the examples try to cover different aspects of an implementation of EN ISO 19650 according to
differences in team structure, appointment and supply chain, which can be identified across Europe, and in doing so to assist in understanding how to apply EN ISO 19650 for real world projects.
8.2 The supply chain is not aware of/or does not use EN ISO 19650
8.2.1 Introduction
This example concerns a digital practice, like the one described in EN ISO 19650 -2, used on a residential
building project where the majority of the project participants are either not aware of, or are ignorant of,
the EN ISO 19650 standards. On this project, none of the appointed designers or contractors have
previously worked in accordance with EN ISO 19650 .
The international private client has heard of and seen the value of successful effective digital
collaboration. To the client, the objective of the construction project is to protect and, in the long term,
add to the value of the built asset through documentation and certification of the solutions chosen . The
certification requested by the client is an internationally recognized environmental and sustainability certification.
From previous construction projects, the client knows that thorough preparations and a subsequent
systematic approach to analyses, solutions and documentation are exactly what is required to achieve
enhanced project economy for all parties and a good residential building. The client sees that one means
to this end is digital collaboration, which can also reduce the risk of additional costs and delays. At an
early stage, the client converts, among other things, his environmental and sustainability certification
objective into Asset Information Requirements (AIRs) which address the commercial and technical
aspects of the certification.
Instead of requiring the project participants to study EN ISO 19650 , the client (the appointing party)
chooses to establish a collaborative framework for the project with an overall information coordination
and management of the digital collaboration in acc ordance with EN ISO 19650 . At the same time, the
client exploits the fact that in part of the construction and civil engineering industry; it is good practice to be able to meet project -specific requirements in relation to the participation in digital coop erative
teams on projects.

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
36 In connection with the construction project, the client (the appointing party) wishes to obtain an
environmental and sustainability certification. This means that the construction process shall meet
certain requirements, among ot her things that construction waste shall be sorted, and all choices of
solutions shall be properly documented. These documentation requirements shall be managed by the project participants throughout the project process, and therefore, the requirements bec ome part of the
tender documents and the contractual basis for the project with respect to digital collaboration and in
the form of Exchange Information Requirements (EIRs).
8.2.2 The collaboration with Building Information Models
The client’s information requir ements set the framework for the exchange of information between the
project participants. The agreement between the parties concerning the digital collaboration on the project is based on EN ISO 19650 -2, and its purpose is to provide a clear framework for the digital
collaboration addressing both project realization and roles as well as the responsibility allocated to each
party to the project. In this way, the client’s information requirements set the framework for the exchange
of information between the project participants. In the form of information requirements for the
operation of the built asset (Asset Information Requirements (AIRs)) and project information
requirements (Exchange Information Requirements (EIRs)). EIRs specify the information require d for
the realization of the project (Project Information Model (PIM)) which includes both the information
basis for the construction project and subsequently contributes to forming the digital basis for the
operation of the built asset in an Asset Information Model (AIM). For this case, it will subsequently be
described in the following structure:
— The collaboration with Building Information Models (BIM). Asset Information Requirements (AIRs) are defined by the client.
— Appointing the parties in the digital collaboration. The client’s Asset Information Requirements
(AIRs) are converted into Exchange Information Requirements (EIRs) and thereby into an
elaboration of the information requirements necessary to meet the client’s information needs.
— Planning t he digital collaboration. Determining the framework for the digital collaboration based on
Exchange Information Requirements (EIRs) which are to contribute to the creation of accurate
information and BIM in the project (Project Information Model (PIM)).
— Collaborative production of information and construction. Both the digital and physical execution on
site contributes to the ongoing development of the project (Project Information Model (PIM)).
— Project close -out and handover. As part of the handover of the built asset, the Project Information
Model (PIM) is converted into the digital basis for the operation of the built asset Asset Information
Model (AIM).
The above process is illustrated in Figure 9.

Activities
1 assessment and need A information model progressed by subsequent delivery

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
37 2 invitation to tender team(s) for each appointment
3 tender response B activities undertaken per pro ject
4 appointment C activities undertaken per appointment
5 mobilization D activities undertaken during the procurement stage
6 collaborative production of information (of each appointment)
7 information model delivery E activities undertaken during the information planning
8 project close -out (end of delivery phase) stage (of each appointment)
F activities undertaken during the information production
stage (of each appointment)
Figure 9 —Information management process during the delivery phase of the asset
[SOURCE: EN ISO 19650- 2:2018, Figure 3]
The client’s requirements and requests for systematic information management throughout the project
process in compliance with EN ISO 19650 -2 also underpin the cross -disciplinary co -ordination of the
design in BIM based on the project’s cross -disciplinary coordination model through the digital
collaboration on and around the project’s Common Data Environment (CDE), etc.
The commercial requirements as to information to be exchanged and the syste matic validation and
quality assurance ensure that the basis for design, construction and operation of the building is both the
right one and accurate.
In the early framing of the digital collaboration, the client will focus on establishing the project’s information requirements and the cooperative platform in the form of the project’s Common Data
Environment (CDE), using a process that provides the client with the requested information in time and in a usable quality, see Figure 10 information assessment a nd need.

Key
1.1 appoint individuals to undertake the information management function
1.2 establish the project's information requirement s
1.3 establish the project's information delivery milestones
1.4 establish the project’s information standard
1.5 establish the project's information production methods and procedures
1.6 establish the project’s reference information and shared resour ces
1.7 establish the project's common data environment
1.8 establish the project's information protocol
A information model progressed by subsequent delivery team(s) for each appointment
Figure 10 —Information assessment and need [SOURCE: EN ISO 19650− 2:2018, Figure 4]

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
38 The client makes the digital collaborative work between the project participants possible by requiring
them to establish and use the information management processes and tools applied in EN ISO 19650 −2,
see Figure 10 – Information assess ment and needs, and by requiring the designers to always share their
designs in both an open data exchange format (in this case IFC) and the original format.
The client wishes to realize its commercial objectives using digital collaboration (the Asset Info rmation
Requirements (AIRs)) and to implement the project through an effective collaborative process. The
client’s objective of the interaction between the digital tools is the refinement of information and BIM
throughout the project process.
The informati on management process is a part of the collaboration that seeks to minimize wasteful
activities and make the different parties work together in the most efficient way, wasting as little data
and information as possible, with an effective exchange of data b etween the various digital tools
throughout the construction process. The client’s requirements and framing result in a collaborative process like the one described in EN ISO 19650 -2 that enables the reuse of data and reduces errors and
workload. The proce ss underpins an effective digital collaboration when the right tools and competencies
are available.
The client knows that a successful collaboration requires the parties to be on the same level in terms of
skills and competencies, which is also the case f or the digital collaboration in which it is a prerequisite
that all parties have the necessary BIM competencies – as a party weak on competencies will have a
negative impact on the other parts of the project. For this reason, the client chooses to demand
documentation for the tenderers’ experience in comparable digital collaborative teams and is also
prepared to offer individuals the necessary BIM skills enhancement through learning sessions and start –
up workshops for the digital collaboration.
8.2.3 Appointing t he parties in the digital collaboration
The client is aware that it does not suffice that the project participants have the necessary digital
competencies and tools supporting the digital collaboration on the project. It is also necessary to have a common understanding of the objective of the digital collaboration as described in the introduction to
EN ISO 19650 -2 and in EN ISO 19650 −1.
The client transforms its information needs to requirements that form an integral part of the tender
documents together with requirements for documentation for the participation in the digital
collaboration in line with this project, see Figure 11 – Invitation to tender.

Key
2.1 establish the appointing party’s exchange information requirements
2.2 assemble reference information and shared resources
2.3 establish tender response requirements and evaluation criteria
2.4 compile invitation to tender informatio n
A information model progressed by subsequent delivery team(s) for each appointment
Figure 11 —Invitation to tender [SOURCE: EN ISO 19650- 2:2018 , Figure 5]

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
39 In the course of the preparation of the project tender documents, the client’s Asset Information
Requirements (AIRs) are converted to establish the appointing party’s Exchange Information
Requirements (EIRs), see Figure 11 – Invitation to tender.
It is a prerequisite for the sustainability certification of the building that the client requires the contractors (the appointed parties) on the project to create and use the following information on the
basis of the project BIM. The building components of the project BIM shall clearly form part of Exterior,
Interior or Foundation:
— External walls = Exterior ,
— Internal walls = Interior,
— Ground floor = Exterior,
— Other floors = Interior,
— Windows = Exterior,
— External doors = Exterior,
— Other doors = Interior,
— Foundations = Foundation.
The client thus knows his information needs and consequently infor mation requirements before the
invitation to tender is issued and the project participants are selected. Likewise, the client knows what
he requires in terms of drawings, BIM, information and documentation throughout the project in order
to choose solution s, apply for certification and regulatory approvals and to subsequently operate the built
asset.
In the invitation to tender, the tenderers are requested to describe how they (the lead appointed parties)
relate to the above, for instance how the tenderer i ntends to ensure interoperability by establishing and
using the information requirements and framework in the BIM Execution Plan (BEP) for a digital
collaboration, see Figure 12 – Tender response.

Key
3.1 nominate individuals to undertake the information management function
3.2 establish the delivery team's (pre -appointment) BIM execution plan
3.3 assess task team capability and capacity
3.4 establish the delivery team's capability and capacity
3.5 establish the proposed delivery team’s mobilization plan
3.6 establish the delivery team’s risk register
3.7 compile the delivery team's tender response
A information model progressed by sub sequent delivery team(s) for each appointment
Figure 12 —Tender response [SOURCE: EN ISO 19650- 2:2018, Figure 6]

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
40 The environmental and sustainability certification ties in well with the general contractor’s (the lead
appointed party) BIM practices. Detailed BIM combined with the capabilities of the project participants
form the basis for reusing the dug -out materials and minimize the extent to which interim on -site
depositing is required. This way, machine hours and transport to and from the site are reduc ed to an
absolute minimum, and it also means a reduced carbon footprint.
The general contractor (the lead appointed party) appoints people with good BIM and digital
collaboration skills for his project management as it brings success to both the project ex ecution phase
and the subsequent digital handover, and documents subcontractors (the appointed parties) and the staff’s digital skills and experience as part of the tender submitted to the client (the appointing party).
8.2.4 Planning the digital collaboration
The general contractor (the lead appointed party) ensures that the information deliveries are being
planned for each of the project participants (the appointed parties) on the basis of the information
requirements from the client (the appointing party). In the planning, there is not only a link between the
commercial needs and requirements in terms of the information required from the project participants,
but also a requirement for temporal correlation between the project procurement and execution plan
and the related i nformation deliveries. The collaboration on the project’s Common Data Environment
(CDE) determining the structure and process for the exchange and release of the project BIM − both
internally in the project organization (the appointed parties) and to the c lient (the appointing party) − is
key to the digital deliveries, see Figure 13 – Appointment.

Key
4.1 confirm the delivery team's BIM exec ution plan
4.2 establish the delivery team’s detailed responsibility matrix
4.3 establish the lead appointed party’s exchange information requirements
4.4 establish the task information delivery plan(s)
4.5 establish the master information delivery pla n
4.6 complete lead appointed party’s appointment documents
4.7 complete appointed party’s appointment documents
A information model progressed by subsequent delivery team(s) for each appointment
Figure 13 —Appointment [SOURCE: EN ISO 19650-2 :2018, Figure 7]

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
41 The general contractor (the lead appointed party) handles the client’s (the appointing party) Exchange
Information Requirements (EIR) by using its own information management manager on the project. The
general contractor (the lead appointed party) u ses among other things a Master Information Delivery
Plan (MIDP) for the management of their own information deliveries and subcontractors (the appointed parties). The Master Information Delivery Plan MIDP) enables the general contractor (the lead appointe d
party) to clearly state the possible uses and limitations of the BIM. This is done by describing the
development of the relevant building component in terms of both geometry and information (properties).
Before project initiation, the general contractor (the lead appointed party) makes sure that the above will
support the digital collaboration on the project and the client’s requirements, see Figure 14 –
Mobilization of the information management process.

Key
5.1 mobilize resources
5.2 mobilize information technology
5.3 test the project’s information production methods and procedures
A information model progressed by subsequent delivery team(s) for each appointment
Figure 14 —Mobilization of the information management process
[SOURCE: EN ISO 19650- 2:2018, Figure 8]
As part of the mobilization of the information management process, the general contractor (the lead
appointed party) chooses to buy and study the contents of both the EN ISO 19650 -1 and EN ISO 19650 −2
standards. The reason for this is the positive experience from the initiation of the digital collaboration on
the project and a belief that with more insight, the general contract or will be able to gain more
commercial value from the collaboration on this and subsequent projects.
8.2.5 Collaborative production of information and construction
In the digital collaboration, see Figure 15 – Collaborative production of information, the general
contractor (the lead appointed party) has focus on both complete quality assurance check and when a new information container revision can be used for analysis, simulation and as a basis for procurement
and production, as it partly provides an effective project process and successful production on site, but
also contributes to the information deliveries required by the client.
The BIM on the project is used as the basis for more structured quality documentation to allow the project
participants to keep tr ack of the checking process.

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
42

Key
6.1 check availability of reference information and shared resources
6.2 generate information
6.3 compl ete quality assurance check
6.4 review information and approve for sharing
6.5 information model review
A information model progressed by subsequent delivery team(s) for each appointment
B new information container revision
Figure 15 —Collaborative pr oduction of information [SOURCE: EN ISO 19650− 2:2018, Figure 9]
The client’s (the appointing party) framing using Common Data Environment (CDE) is not immediately
accepted by all project participants. For example, a single early digital analysis is performed on a design
which is categorized as Work in Progress (WIP) in the project’s Common Data Environment (CDE). When
it is later established during the subsequent technical quality assurance (QA) that several external walls
have been categorized as interior, the design will be modified before it is app roved and formally used by
the other project participants, see Figure 15 Collaborative production of information. This means that the
before -mentioned analysis shall be performed again. The digital rework is carried out at the expense of
the individual par ty (appointed party) and luckily before it had an impact on the project.
Together with the client (the appointing party) the general contractor (the lead appointed party) makes
sure that all disciplines (the appointed parties) involved in the project under stand that the organization
of information about construction works with information management using BIM has become the
cornerstone of the digital collaboration on the project, and it is no longer possible to work according to
old procedures. After that, the project’s information management and the three quality control processes
“Approved”, “Authorised” and “Verified” are respected, see Figure 16 – Information model delivery.

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
43

Key
7.1 submit information model for lead appointed party authorization
7.2 review and authorize the information model
7.3 submit information model for appointing party acceptance
7.4 review and accept the informati on model
A information model progressed by subsequent delivery team(s) for each appointment
B information model rejected by lead appointed party
C information model rejected by appointing party
Figure 16 —Information model delivery [SOURCE: EN ISO 19650 -2:2018 , Figure 10]
The production of information within the Project Information Model (PIM) for the project and thus the
digital information deliverables to the client mature in the course of the project. The general contractor
(the lead appointed party) and the client (the appointing party) see value in a common coordination and
prioritization of their respective efforts in terms of review and authorization of the information model
and review and acceptance of the information model. Ensuring that the cli ent receives the most important
information first and reducing digital rework when the project information model is rejected, see
Figure 16 – Information model delivery.
The use of Common Data Environment (CDE) and the cross -disciplinary coordination is gr adually being
seen by the project participants (the appointed parties) as a strength in their work efforts and the
project’s basis for decisions and production. Likewise, it is acknowledged that the management of the
client’s information requirements is a natural part of the process on the project, and consequently, it has,
in no way, involved the additional work feared by some parties.
8.2.6 Project close -out and handover
As part of the project close -out, see Figure 17 – Project close -out, the efforts to obtain a sustainability
certificate were naturally supported by information and BIM from the Project Information Model (PIM)
and Asset Information Model (AIM). To the client, this added value to the digital project and operational
documentation from the very begi nning. Not least because the digital operational documentation did not
only include the building’s geometry as -built drawings and BIM, but also the requested operational
drawings and BIM with the requested information.

Key
8.1 archive the project information model
8.2 compile lessons learned for future projects
A information model progressed by subsequent delivery team(s) for each appointm ent
Figure 17 —Project close -out [SOURCE: EN ISO 19650-2 :2018, Figure 11]

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
44 The project’s systematic approach to the digital collaboration and the client’s clear collaboration
objectives and the digital deliveries benefited all parties as their roles and re sponsibilities fell into place.
The client achieved a coherent digital collaboration where the commercial objectives for the project were
underpinned by the digital deliveries. In the course of the project, several parties chose to buy and study
the relevant parts of the EN ISO 19650 -1 and EN ISO 19650 -2 standards, which gave them a better
understanding of the commercial opportunities offered by digital collaboration.
8.3 The project is complex with a range of different stakeholders and demanding
schedules with a multiple delivery teams
8.3.1 Introduction
This scenario is provided to demonstrate how the standard may be utilized in a flexible way and is not
meant to cover every eventuality. The following scenario is provided to demonstrate how EN ISO 19650
can be imple mented to enable efficient delivery of information during the Delivery Phase of a major
infrastructure rail improvement project with EN ISO 19650 -2.
In this scenario, the project is so large and complex that a separate organization (the appointing party)
has been created to commission and oversee the construction of this infrastructure project. At the end of
the project, all the completed facilities will be handed over to the ultimate operating organization. The
planning, design, construction and commission ing of this work will involve multiple contracts and is
being run as a long -term programme of multiple projects.
To ensure that the right information is obtained from all of these projects, it is important that the
appointing party is able to identify the information that will be required from an organizational
perspective, through the life of the running of the facility – bearing in mind all the relevant stakeholders
– such as the planning authorities, the owner -operator, and customers.
It is also importan t – in planning the overall infrastructure – that the appointing party is able to consider
what information is required to plan and design the assets and how they will be integrated, how the
infrastructure as a whole will be constructed, within the context of a busy city environment, and how they
will be integrated to enable smooth operation and running of the service. With a programme of this scale,
a great deal of planning and thought will be necessary before appointments can proceed and will require
cont inual re -evaluation.
On a project of such scale and complexity, it should be clear that there is a lot of work that needs to occur – informed by EN ISO 19650 -1 – before beginning the processes described in EN ISO 19650 −2. Within the
appointing parties' organization, an information management function is set up to oversee all the separate projects involved in delivering the infrastructure. This function is developing the overall
information and data management strategy, which will guide implementation of the processes set out in
EN ISO 19650 .
— Two of the aims of managing information in this way are to:
— Reduce risk resulting from unmanaged or poorly controlled data,
— Improve efficiency in workflows and data access thro ugh the implementation of spatial technology.
8.3.2 The digital capability and capacity
The number of parties on the programme and the risks of badly managed data have made the business
case for the comprehensive implementation and use of a Common Data Environment (CDE), hosted by
the appointing party. The appointing party is implementing, configuring and supporting the programme’s
Common Data Environment (CDE) to serve the overall requirements of the programme, and is cascading
this to all the projects supportin g it. The Common Data Environment (CDE) is also supporting the
collaborative production of information, see step 1.7 in Figure 18 – Assessment and need.

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
45 In this particular scenario, the appointing party has decided to provide industry leadership in enablin g a
substantial increase in the capability and capacity of the supply chain in digital transformation. Thus, the
appointing party, as the appointing party, provides licences and training for the system to all parties
working on projects across the programme. The required skills and knowledge of the delivery team
members is thereby delivered through education and training; see step 3.4 in Figure 20.
The appointing party of the programme is also acting as appointing party for each separate project within
the programme and each project is following the processes described in EN ISO 19650 -2.
This scenario now focuses on one of these projects: (the design of a public- access building as part of the
infrastructure) with a large international contractor acting as th e lead appointed party.
8.3.3 Description of project to design a public access building for the appointing party’s overall
rail improvement programme, following the Information management process during the
delivery phase of assets from EN ISO 19650-2
8.3.3.1 Step 1 Inf ormation management process – Assessment and need

Key
1.1 appoint individuals to undertake the information management function
1.2 establ ish the project's information requirements
1.3 establish the project's information delivery milestones
1.4 establish the project’s information standard
1.5 establish the project's information production methods and procedures
1.6 establish the project’ s reference information and shared resources
1.7 establish the project's common data environment
1.8 establish the project's information protocol
A information model progressed by subsequent delivery team(s) for each appointment
Figure 18 —Assessment and need [SOURCE: EN ISO 19650- 2:2018 , Figure 4]
“The appointing party shall establish the project’s information requirements as described in
EN ISO 19650 −1 to address the questions to which the appointing party needs answer(s) at each of the
key decision points throughout the project. In doing this, the appointing party shall consider the intended
purpose for which the information will be used by the appoi nting party”
(SOURCE: EN ISO 19650 −2:2018 , 5.1.2 – Establish the project’s information requirements), see step 1.2
in Figure 18 – Assessment and need.
It is important that the appointing party ensures that the Project Information Requirements (PIR) for
design and construction of the public -access building fully takes into account the Organizational
Information Requirements (OIR) and the overall Asset Information Requirements (AIR). This means that
the information requirements of all relevant stakeholders – both at the programme and at this project
level – shall be included within the Project Information Requirements (PIR). This will include the planning
authorities, regulators, local residents and businesses, transportation authorities, and ultimately users of
the building, estates management, health and safety, and the legal team. The Project Information
Requirements (PIR) for this project also needs to take account of how it is will be coordinated with the

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
46 other projects across the appointing party’s progra mme. It is particularly important to consider how
information will need to be exchanged spatially across projects located close -by or interdependent with
the project. It is also important to consider how information will need to be exchanged over time, when
relevant projects will be running at different rates and delivery dates.
For the appointing party, it is also vital that all elements of the project, see step 1.4 – 1.8 in Figure 18 –
Assessment and need, are consistent and workable with the rest of the p rogramme. For instance,
consideration of how the common data environment is configured and made available to the delivery
team is important in ensuring that there will be a smooth and controlled flow of relevant information
across appointments, and across projects, so that the programme as a whole can be run efficiently and
effectively.
Finally, consideration needs to be given to how the overall information model for the appointment will be progressed by subsequent delivery teams – in this instance the construction contractor – enabled by
the Common Data Environment (CDE) spanning across appointments and across the projects.
8.3.3.2 Step 2 Information management process: Invitation to tender

Key
2.1 establish the appointing party’s exchange information requirements
2.2 assemble reference information and shared resources
2.3 establish tender response requirements and evaluation criteria
2.4 compile invitation to tender information
A information model progressed by subsequent delivery team(s) for each appointment
Figure 19 —Invitation to tender [SOURCE: EN ISO 19650- 2:2018 , Figure 5]
Having identified the Organizational Information Requirements (OIR ), Asset Information Requirements
(AIR) and Project Information Requirements (PIR), the appointing party then identifies the specific
Exchange Information Requirements (EIR) for each appointment within this particular project, see
Figure 19 – Invitation to tender. For each appointment, they think through and provide the reference
information and resources that need to be shared to allow the appointed delivery team to provide the
right information for which they are going to be appointed. They are able to do this through the Common
Data Environment (CDE).

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
47 8.3.3.3 Step 3 Information management process: Tender response

Key
3.1 nominate individuals to un dertake the information management function
3.2 establish the delivery team's (pre -appointment) BIM execution plan
3.3 assess task team capability and capacity
3.4 establish the delivery team's capability and capacity
3.5 establish the proposed deliver y team’s mobilization plan
3.6 establish the delivery team’s risk register
3.7 compile the delivery team's tender response
A information model progressed by subsequent delivery team(s) for each appointment
Figure 20 —Tender response [SOURCE: EN ISO 19650- 2:2018, Figure 6]
At this point, the scenario focuses on a particular appointment for the public access building, the
provision of retail units. In responding to the tender documents, the prospective lead appointed party,
who we will refer to as “Contra ctor ABC”, identifies who will fulfil their own information management
function. These individuals are developing the responding BIM Execution Plan (BEP) in response to the Exchange Information Requirements (EIR) issued in the appointing party’s tender doc uments. These
include the documents identified in Figure 20 – Tender response, and include the information identified
within step 3.3 to 3.6. Collectively, this allows “Contractor ABC” to compile the delivery team’s response
addressing the appointing party ’s requirements but also considering the requirements of the delivery
team as a whole.
“Contractor ABC” has a choice here. To continue to fulfil the lead appointed party role, for the whole of
the delivery team, or to lift himself into the role of appointi ng party. In this case, he would go back to step
1 and supplement the Exchange Information Requirements (EIR) of the appointing party with his own
Exchange Information Requirements (EIR).
This choice needs to take into consideration whether this is really necessary – in particular, how closely
the team will collaborate.
In this scenario, “Contractor ABC” decides to keep things simple and take a lead appointed party position,
preparing the pre -appointment BIM Execution Plan (BEP) in response to the Appointin g Party tender
documents and Exchange Information Requirements (EIR).

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
48 8.3.3.4 Step 4 Information management process: Appointment

Key
4.1 confirm t he delivery team's BIM execution plan
4.2 establish the delivery team’s detailed responsibility matrix
4.3 establish the lead appointed party’s exchange information requirements
4.4 establish the task information delivery plan(s)
4.5 establish the mast er information delivery plan
4.6 complete lead appointed party’s appointment documents
4.7 complete appointed party’s appointment documents
A information model progressed by subsequent delivery team(s) for each appointment
Figure 21 —Appointment [SOURC E: EN ISO 19650-2 :2018, Figure 7]
“Contractor ABC”’s tender response is successful, and the appointment of ABC is made by the appointing
party, after taking account of the capability and capacity of the “Contractor ABC” as the lead appointed
party to work on the project.
“Contractor ABC” now continues to plan the detailed information delivery for the project, see Figure 21 –
Appointment. This includes requiring the Appointed Parties to prepare Task Information Delivery Plans
(TIDP) which Contractor ABC, as lead appointed party, then amalgamates into the Master Information
Delivery Plan. Contractor ABC as the lead appointed party then negotiates the final terms of the
appointment with the appointing party such that all necessary documents are in place to enab le
mobilization and the start of the appointment.
8.3.3.5 Step 5 Information management process: Mobilization
These requirements and agreed instructions are then cascaded by the lead appointed party to the other appointed parties within the delivery team for this appointment, see Figure 22 – Mobilization.

Key
5.1 mobilize resources
5.2 mobilize information technology
5.3 test the project’s informa tion production methods and procedures
A information model progressed by subsequent delivery team(s) for each appointment
Figure 22 —Mobilization [SOURCE: EN ISO 19650-2 :2018 , Figure 8]

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
49 The Common Data Environment (CDE) has become the focal point of the digital collaboration not only on
this project and its appointments, but for the whole of the programme, as it is becoming apparent just
how vital to the success of the programme that data and information is readily available to all parties
working on the programme, across all the projects, and that the design, data and information is reviewed
and quality ensured before it is updated.
The centralized management of design standards, design and information synchronizes the digital
collaboration between all th e parties through the EN ISO 19650 -based workflow. The workflow is
illustrated in Figure 23 – Collaborative production of information.
The appointment to provide for retail units within the public access building is initiated. Time is spent to
ensure that configuration of the Common Data Environment (CDE) supported collaboration across the
project team is properly set up, and the Common Data Environment (CDE) process is properly
understood. Generation of information, checking, review and approval proceeds w ithout substantive
challenges.
8.3.3.6 Step 6 Information management process: Collaborative production of information

Key
6.1 check availability o f reference information and shared resources
6.2 generate information
6.3 complete quality assurance check
6.4 review information and approve for sharing
6.5 information model review
A information model progressed by subsequent delivery team(s) for ea ch appointment
B new information container revision
Figure 23 —Collaborative production of information [SOURCE: EN ISO 19650-2 :2018, Figure 9]
The digital collaboration resulting from EN ISO 19650 -2.
All the parties on the appointing party’s programme ar e being required to work within the Common Data
Environment (CDE) to ensure they meet the information requirements and the workflow. Automatic data
quality checking procedures are able to flag specific non -conformities; see step 6.3 in Figure 23 –
Collabora tive production of information.
However, in practice, the delivery team finds that it takes time for all the appointed parties to fully
understand and appreciate this way of working, and there are some challenges when sufficient training
and induction of new personnel is overlooked. It becomes apparent that one of the task teams (referred
to here as “Team PQR”) has not shared their design and has continued to develop their design in the
Work -In-Progress information state. This leads to a technical clash bet ween the amount of electrical
power required for the retail units and the provision of mains power to the whole building. Whilst the
first instinct is that “Team PQR” should bear the cost of re -design, it is recognized that “Contractor ABC”
should have ens ured proper task team induction, and “Contractor ABC” as the lead appointed party
agrees to cover the extra cost of re- work. As the design process proceeds, it becomes easier to train new
personnel and appointed parties.

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
50 At a higher level, the appointing p arty also finds that it becomes easier for new delivery teams to be
inducted for different appointments within projects, and for projects as a whole. One of the successes of
the appointing party’s programme is the recognition that information other than CA D and 3D models can
be integrated into the process, perhaps most notably, geospatial information.
It is becoming apparent that incorporation of information models from each of the projects, in a
coordinated and integrated way is vital to the successful pro gress of the overall programme. Many
projects are running simultaneously, and at different phases – so having a strategic federation strategy,
not just at project level but also at programme level, is an important feature of the appointing party’s
programm e.
8.3.3.7 Step 7 Information management process: Information model delivery

Key
7.1 submit information model for lead appointed party authorizati on
7.2 review and authorize the information model
7.3 submit information model for appointing party acceptance
7.4 review and accept the information model
A information model progressed by subsequent delivery team(s) for each appointment
B information model rejected by lead appointed party
C information model rejected by appointing party
Figure 24 —Information model delivery [SOURCE: EN ISO 19650-2 :2018 , Figure 10]
In this example, see Figure 24 – Information model delivery, each task team within the delivery team
submits their information deliverables to “Contractor ABC” repeatedly during the time the design is being refined. When the information from the design reaches the point where it meets the Exchange
Information Requirements (EIR) for the curr ent project stage, then “Contractor ABC” as the lead
appointed party submits the information model to the appointing party to be checked. If this check is
successful, then the information model is accepted by the appointing party.
The information model is now able to be used as the starting point for the next iteration of the project –
the next stage of design, or construction. This next stage of work can be by the same delivery team or the
same task team or can be by a newly appointed delivery team under t he direction of a different lead
appointed party.

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
51 8.3.3.8 Step 8 Information management process: Project close -out

Key
8.1 archive the project inf ormation model
8.2 compile lessons learned for future projects
A information model progressed by subsequent delivery team(s) for each appointment
Figure 25 —Project close -out [SOURCE: EN ISO 19650-2 :2018, Figure 11]
“Contractor ABC” recognizes that prob lems did ensue with on -boarding new personnel and appointed
parties, and that the lead appointed party needs to be proactive in providing sufficient instruction,
support and supervision. The lessons learned are compiled and passed to the appointing party for the
benefit of future projects on the programme, see Figure 25 – Project close -out.
8.3.4 Summary
For the appointing party, understanding the challenges around on -boarding new personnel and
appointed parties is important. Problems have incurred in setting up appointments for the construction
phase. One of the delivery teams has not been mobilized onto the programme Common Data Environment
(CDE) and clashes in the construction sequence between a neighbouring project has been experienced.
The overall procedure f or assessing how to coordinate across appointments and across projects is
reviewed to mitigate against this risk in the future.
One of the key principles has been to establish the information requirements at business and project level
and to create a progr amme -wide Common Data Environment (CDE). Implementing the Common Data
Environment (CDE) has allowed quality ensured information to be managed and shared efficiently and
accurately between all the team members of the programme.
8.4 The project is small and stra ight forward and EN ISO 19650 seems too much effort
8.4.1 First example of Implementing the EN ISO 19650-2 process: The project is small and
straight forward and EN ISO 19650 seems too much effort
8.4.1.1 Introduction
This example concerns a digital practice on a reside ntial building project where the client and the design
team has estimated that a structured digital collaboration as an extra needless cost on a project as small and straight forward as the actual case. But some of the subcontractors and the general contractor are
aware of and have previously worked in accordance with EN ISO 19650 with success.
The client and the design team on a small residential building project decided very early that making
digital exchange information requirements part of the tender wo uld just be an extra cost to the project.
The tender documents and the contractual basis for the project focus therefore primarily on the cost and
the handling of delays.

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
52 8.4.1.2 The collaboration with Building Information Models
After the tender and the contract have been concluded, the general contractor (the lead appointed party)
contacts the client (the appointing party) and requests a copy of the architect's digital basis for the
drawings in the tender documents. The general contractor (the lead appointed part y) uses digital basis
(BIM) for the drawings as part of the digital basis in a framework for the exchange of information between the project participants.
The general contractor’s (the lead appointed party) framework for the exchange of information only
specify the information required for the realization of the project (Project Information Model (PIM))
which includes the information basis for the construction work. The agreement between the general
contractor (the lead appointed party) and the subcontracto rs (the appointed parties) concerning the
digital collaboration on the project is based on EN ISO 19650 -2, and its purpose is to provide a clear
framework for the digital collaboration addressing a cross -disciplinary coordination of the design in BIM
and t hereby project realization with less rework and delays.
The general contractor (the lead appointed party) and the subcontractors (the appointed parties) have
the necessary digital competencies and tools supporting the digital collaboration on the project – and a
common understanding of the objective of the digital collaboration as described in the introduction to EN
ISO 19650 -2 and in EN ISO 19650 -1. In the framing of the digital collaboration, the general contractor
(the lead appointed party) focus on establishing the project’s information requirements and the
cooperative platform in the form of the project’s Common Data Environment (CDE) using a process that
provides the general contractor (the lead appointed party) and the subcontractors (the appointed
parties) with a coordinated design in a usable quality, see Figure 26 – Information assessment and need.

Key
1.1 appoint individuals to unde rtake the information management function
1.2 establish the project's information requirements
1.3 establish the project's information delivery milestones
1.4 establish the project’s information standard
1.5 establish the project's information producti on methods and procedures
1.6 establish the project’s reference information and shared resources
1.7 establish the project's common data environment
1.8 establish the project's information protocol
A information model progressed by subsequent delivery team(s) for each appointment
Figure 26 —Information assessment and need [SOURCE: EN ISO 19650- 2:2018, Figure 4]
The information management process is a part of the collaboration that seeks to minimize wasteful
activities and make the different parties wor k together in the most efficient way and enables the reuse of
data and reduces errors and workload.

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
53 8.4.1.3 Planning the digital collaboration
The general contractor (the lead appointed party) makes the digital collaborative work with the
subcontractors (the appoi nted parties) possible by using its own information management manager on
the project and requiring the subcontractors (the appointed parties) to establish and use the information
management processes and tools applied in EN ISO 19650 -2, see Figure 27 – Appointment.

Key
4.1 confirm the delivery team's BIM execution plan
4.2 establish the delivery team’s detailed responsibility matrix
4.3 establish the lead appointed party’s exchange information requirements
4.4 establish the task information delivery plan(s)
4.5 establish the master information delivery plan
4.6 complete lead appointed party’s appointment documents
4.7 complete appointe d party’s appointment documents
A information model progressed by subsequent delivery team(s) for each appointment
Figure 27 —Appointment [SOURCE: EN ISO 19650-2 :2018, Figure 7]
Before project initiation, the general contractor (the lead appointed party) mobilize the information
management process and makes sure that the BIM Execution Plan (BEP) and the appointed party’s appointment documents will support the digital collaboration on the project and the client’s
requirements, see Figure 28 – Mobilization of the information management process.

Key
5.1 mobilize resources
5.2 mobilize information technology
5.3 test the project’s information production methods and procedures
A information model progressed by subsequent delivery team(s) for each appointment
Figure 28 —Mobilization of the information management process
[SOURCE: EN ISO 19650- 2:2018, Figure 8]

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
54 8.4.1.4 Collaborative production of inform ation and construction
The general contractor’s (the lead appointed party) requirements and requests for systematic
information management throughout the project process in compliance with EN ISO 19650 -2 also
underpin the cross -disciplinary coordination of the design in BIM based on the project’s cross –
disciplinary coordination model.
In the digital collaboration, see Figure 29 – Collaborative production of information, the general
contractor (the lead appointed party) has focus on complete quality assuranc e check and when a new
information container revision can be used as a basis for procurement and production, as it partly provides an effective project process and successful production on site. The BIM on the project is used as
the basis for more structur ed quality documentation to allow the project participants to keep track of the
checking process.

Key
6.1 check availability of reference information and shared resources
6.2 generate information
6.3 complete quality assurance check
6.4 review information and approve for sharing
6.5 information model review
A information model progressed by subsequent delivery team(s) for each appointme nt
B new information container revision
Figure 29 —Collaborative production of information [SOURCE: EN ISO 19650-2 :2018, Figure 9]
The general contractor’s (the lead appointed party) framing using Common Data Environment (CDE) is accepted and used by all the subcontractors (the appointed parties), see Figure 29 – Collaborative
production of information.

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
55

Key
7.1 submit information model for lead appointed party authorization
7.2 review and authorize the information model
7.3 submit information model for appointing party acceptance
7.4 review and accept the information model
A information model progressed by subsequent delivery team(s) fo r each appointment
B information model rejected by lead appointed party
C information model rejected by appointing party
Figure 30 —Information model delivery [SOURCE: EN ISO 19650-2 :2018 , Figure 10]
The general contractor (the lead appointed party) and the subcontractors (the appointed parties) see
value in a common coordination and use of Common Data Environment (CDE), see Figure 30 –
Information model delivery. Likewise, it is acknowledged that the reduced amount of rework has
contributed to the good q uality of the construction and no delays in handing over the residential building.
8.4.1.5 Project close -out and handover
During the project close -out the client chose to buy and study the EN ISO 19650 -1 and 19650 -2 standards.
As part of the project close -out, see Figure 31 – Project close -out, the client acknowledge that the project
is not delayed and also in good quality because of the reduced number of reworks. The client will
therefore on the next project have a systematic approach to the digital collaboration.

Key
8.1 archive the project information model
8.2 compile lessons learned for future projects
A information model progressed by subsequ ent delivery team(s) for each appointment
Figure 31 —Project close -out [SOURCE: EN ISO 19650-2 :2018, Figure 11]

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
56 8.4.2 Second example of Implementing the EN ISO 19650-2 process: The project is small and
straight forward and EN ISO 19650 seems too much effort
8.4.2.1 Introduction
In this example, the project is a refurbishment (energy retrofit) of an individual private house. The project
is undertaken on behalf of a private client (an individual) by a company grouping. The client had
published an offer to refurbish his in dividual house, and the company grouping, and an architect put
forward a bid. The company grouping won for financial reasons but as a building permit was not required,
the architect was not taken on.
The company grouping is a permanent grouping linked by a partnership agreement, composed of:
— A masonry/isolation specialist company who is the joint representative and mandated to ensure joint
representative’s missions on behalf of the client,
— A carpentry company,
— A plumbing company.
There are four major milestones for this project: Planning phase; Design phase; Construction phase;
Delivery phase, with secondary milestones, such as construction meetings.
NOTE 1 It would be possible to add an architect in a classic project management role, but the BIM manag ement
could still fall to the company grouping.
NOTE 2 In France, for SMEs this kind of project is quite common.
8.4.2.2 The collaboration with Building Information Models
In this example, the implementation of EN ISO 19650 mainly follows EN ISO 19650 -2:2018 , 5.1.1 to 5.8.2 .
The implementation of EN ISO 19650 is not instigated by the client, but by the company grouping. The
plumbing company volunteers to lead the initiative, as it is the only party with experience of
EN ISO 19650 , and the client does not recognize this as being a necessary effort. Implementation
proceeds as follows:
— The Client delegates to plumbing company the appointing party function.
— Plumbing company as the appointing party has foreseen one necessary appointment.
— During activities from 1 to 3 and because of his project role, plumbing company as the appointing
party considers the prospective lead appointed party as itself.
— There is only one appointment: the appointing party which is the plumbing company appoints itself as the lead appointed party.
Because it is the plumbing party who has taken the initiative to implement EN ISO 19650 , the Information
Requirements IR (OIR, AIR, PIR) by necessity, are drafted and agreed during the project, and not before.
The Organizational Information Requir ements (OIR), Asset Information Requirements (AIR) and Project
Information Requirements (PIR) are drawn up by the plumbing company as the appointing party for the
client and subsequently agreed with the client.

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
57 The plumbing company considers the Organizational Information Requirements (OIR), Asset Information
Requirements (AIR) and Project Information Requirements (PIR) to consist of the following:
— Objectives of using EN ISO 19650 for the project: Introduce and establish a BIM methodology to
enable collab oration within the company grouping and with the client. Detailed as following:
— Define properly needs and/or BIM requirements of each party,
— Make the exchanges easier between company grouping and the client and within company
grouping,
— Delivery to cl ient an information model of his refurbished house in order to operate it and
maintain it easily.
— BIM use cases for the project: Three proposals have been made to client by the plumbing company (BIM Use Cases):
— Make the client aware of BIM uses and its benefits, communicate through.
— Digitize the existing building so as to produce an information model of the existing assets/house
and to collaborate on it during the project to enable a number of useful purposes and project
applications.
— Deliver an information model of the refurbished house to the client.

Key
1.1 appoint individuals to undertake the information management function
1.2 establish the project's information requirements
1.3 establish the project's information delivery milestones
1.4 establish the project’s information standard
1.5 establish the project's information production methods and procedures
1.6 establish the pro ject’s reference information and shared resources
1.7 establish the project's common data environment
1.8 establish the project's information protocol
A information model progressed by subsequent delivery team(s) for each appointment
Figure 32 —Informa tion assessment and need [SOURCE: EN ISO 19650- 2:2018, Figure 4]

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
58 Before the appointment and during the first activity (assessment and need, see Figure 32) a Common
Data Environment (CDE) is enabled by the plumbing company as the appointing party. Configuri ng and
testing Common Data Environment (CDE) is done before and during the appointment. The rules pre-
defined by the CDE are followed during the project, and for the delivery phase of data dropping, and are
as follows:
— Storage rules and files classificat ion,
— Common Data Environment (CDE) validation functions,
— Common Data Environment (CDE) communication tools (e.g. Chat, visioconference, mail
notifications),
— Common Data Environment (CDE) schedule function.
In this example reflecting the early level o f maturity of the parties involved, a Common Data Environment
(CDE) folder hierarchy is used.
The plumbing company as the appointing party issues an Exchange Information Requirements (EIR) to the lead appointed party, which incorporates all the Information Requirements (IR) (OIR, AIR and PIR).
In this example, given the small scale of the delivery team, as part of the appointment, there are 2
appointed parties who are actually also the task teams:
— the plumbing company,
— the masonry company.
Hence, the delivery team is composed of:
— the plumbing company as the lead appointed party,
— the plumbing company as an appointed party and a task team,
— the masonry company as an appointed party and a task team.

Key
4.1 confirm the delivery team's BIM execution plan
4.2 establish the delivery team’s detailed responsibility matrix
4.3 establish the lead appointed party’s exchange information require ments
4.4 establish the task information delivery plan(s)
4.5 establish the master information delivery plan
4.6 complete lead appointed party’s appointment documents
4.7 complete appointed party’s appointment documents
A information model progressed by subsequent delivery team(s) for each appointment
Figure 33 —Appointment [SOURCE: EN ISO 19650-2 :2018, Figure 7]

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
59 During the appointment process, see Figure 33 (activities from 1 to 2) the plumbing company as the lead
appointed party has made a pre- appoi ntment BIM Execution Plan (BEP) first. At this point, a high -level
responsibility matrix is compiled by the plumbing company as the lead appointed party, by reference to
the delivery plan which is linked to project’s milestones.
Once activity 3 has begun, a BIM Execution Plan (BEP), the updated and complete responsibility matrix
and the mobilization plan are agreed with the delivery team. As part of this activity 2 Task Information
Delivery Plan (TIDP) prepared by:
— the plumbing company as an appointed par ty and a task team,
— the masonry company as an appointed party and a task team.
The two Task Information Delivery Plan (TIDP) are compiled into a Master Information Delivery Plan (MIDP) by the plumbing company as the lead appointed party. In its capacity as the appointing party, the
plumbing company also fixes the information delivery strategy, education and training and project’s
information production methods and procedures.
In this example, the Common Data Environment (CDE)E has offered a 95 % complete information
container management system as described in EN ISO 19650 -2. It does n ot provide for the classification
as defined in ISO 12006 -2. The Model exchange format external to the task teams was IFC. Because of the
straightforward nature of the project, federation strategy is implicit.

Key
5.1 mobilize resources
5.2 mobilize information technology
5.3 test the project’s information production methods and procedures
A information model progressed by subsequent deli very team(s) for each appointment
Figure 34 —Mobilization of the information management process
[SOURCE: EN ISO 19650- 2:2018, Figure 8]
Information production is done according to the mobilization plan (see Figure 34).
The project delivery happens accordi ng to activities 6 and 7 (see Figure 35 and Figure 36) and the project
is closed -out (see Figure 37) at the end of the delivery phase of Project Information Model (PIM). In
addition, an archive is built on Common Data Environment (CDE).

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
60

Key
6.1 check availability of reference information and shared resources
6.2 generate information
6.3 complete quality assurance check
6.4 review informat ion and approve for sharing
6.5 information model review
A information model progressed by subsequent delivery team(s) for each appointment
B new information container revision
Figure 35 —Collaborative production of information [SOURCE: EN ISO 19650-2 :2018, Figure 9]

Key
7.1 submit information model for lead appointed party authorization
7.2 review and authorize the information model
7.3 submit information model for appointing party acceptance
7.4 review and accept the information model
A information model progressed by subsequent delivery team(s) for each appointment
B information model rejected by lead appointed party
C informatio n model rejected by appointing party
Figure 36 —Information model delivery [SOURCE: EN ISO 19650-2 :2018 , Figure 10]

Key
8.1 archive the p roject information model
8.2 compile lessons learned for future projects
A information model progressed by subsequent delivery team(s) for each appointment
Figure 37 —Project close -out [SOURCE: EN ISO 19650-2 :2018, Figure 11]

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
61 8.4.2.3 Summary
Some lessons captur ed by the plumbing company as the appointing party are as follows:
The advantages of using the Common Data Environment (CDE) for the project are:
— Information elements are factual, and it is easy to check and trace the elements communicated (both
chat elements and validations),
— find information faster and less time wasted.
Relevant points to note:
— Each stakeholder of project collaborated on Common Data Environment (CDE) but at different
knowledge levels. In the end, each stakeholder has acquired his necessary knowledge level in order
to collaborate,
— The client validated every deliverable given by the appointed parties,
— Use a classification as described in ISO 12006 -2.
8.5 Example of Implementing the EN ISO 19650- 2 process: CDE -scenario demonstrating
the spatial coordination of information models with other information models existing
within the infrastructure Project’s Common Data Environment (CDE)
8.5.1 Introduction
This example concerns a digital practice as described in EN ISO 19650 -2, used on a public infr astructure
project where the public client (the appointing party) requirements systematic information management
throughout the project process in compliance with EN ISO 19650 -2.
On this project, the majority of the project participants are aware of the EN ISO 19650 standards and all
of the appointed designers and contractors (the appointed parties) have previously worked on projects
in accordance with EN ISO 19650 or in a digital collaboration as described in EN ISO 19650 .
From previous construction projects, the lead appointed party knows that thorough preparations and a
subsequent systematic approach to design are what are required to achieve a good project economy and
a high -quality infrastructure.
8.5.2 The collaborative production of Information Models in th e Common Data Environment
(CDE)
After the tender and the contract have been concluded, the lead appointed party establish the cross –
disciplinary co -ordination of the design based on the project’s cross- disciplinary coordination model
around the project’s C ommon Data Environment (CDE). The lead appointed party introduces the project
participants (the appointed parties) to Common Data Environment (CDE) with a quote from the guide
regarding EN ISO 19650 , in order to focus on that this project is a joint digita l collaboration, and says that
the “definition of Common Data Environment (CDE) covers both the process for collecting, managing and disseminating information, and the technology which supports this process”. The production of
deliverables is the target of the digital collaboration, organization and digitization of information about
the public infrastructure, including Building Information Modelling (BIM).
The information requirements from the client regarding the geometry are stated in the project -specific
level of information need. These information requirements can only be achieved if the information model
has a high -quality and a good information management with the project participants (the appointed
parties). In this example the lead appointed party decides to use geometry to define the information
container break down structure. This allows the delivery team to agree how to produce different levels
of information need across the information model in accordance with the different information
requirement s of the appointing party. This approach allows the delivery team to coordinate and share
information across the task teams to enable efficient collaborative production of information.

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
62 The lead appointed party ensures the coordination of the digital collaboration and thus the construction
project, this in relation to the project's design, purchase and production of prefabricated bridge deck and
barrier system, each planned in their own Task Information Delivery Plan (TIDP) with the respective
manufacturers. The Task Information Delivery Plans (TIDP) are coordinated so the timing of design,
purchasing and production are coordinated in the Master Information Delivery Plan (MIDP). The coordination contributes to that there are no delays and rework in the produc tion, both offsite and on the
construction site. This is captured in the Task Information Delivery Plans (TIDP) which combined into a Master Information Delivery Plan (MIDP) that could be considered as a part of the BIM Execution Plan
(BEP), as described i n EN ISO 19650 -1 and EN ISO 19650 −2.

Key
3.1 nominate individuals to undertake the information management function
3.2 establish the delivery team's (pre -appointment) BIM execution plan
3.3 assess task team capability and capacity
3.4 establish the delivery team's capability and capa city
3.5 establish the proposed delivery team’s mobilization plan
3.6 establish the delivery team’s risk register
3.7 compile the delivery team's tender response
A information model progressed by subsequent delivery team(s) for each appointment
Figure 38 —Tender response [SOURCE: EN ISO 19650-2: 2018, Figure 6]
The lead appointed party configures and tests the project’s Common Data Environment (CDE), see
Figure 38 – Tender response. The lead appointed party knows that the exact stag es and decision points
of the life cycle of the design are not specified in EN ISO 19650 -2 and makes framework coordinated with
the client (the appointing party).
Before project initiation, the lead appointed party mobilize the information management proce ss and
makes sure that the BIM Execution Plan (BEP) and the Common Data Environment (CDE) is understood
as “the single source of information” for all participants and it is, among other things, required that the various project participants (the appointed parties) make use of open formats like the Industry
Foundation Class (IFC) format for BIM. These requirements are stated in the Exchange Information
Requirements (EIRs) as acknowledged in the BIM Execution Plan (BEP), see Figure 39 – Mobilization of
the in formation management process.

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
63

Key
5.1 mobilize resources
5.2 mobilize information technology
5.3 test the project’s information production methods and procedures
A information model progressed by subsequent delivery team(s) for each appointment
Figur e 39 —Mobilization of the information management process
[SOURCE: EN ISO 19650-2: 2018, Figure 8]
8.5.3 Collaborative production of information and construction
Within the BIM Execution Plan (BEP) the lead appointed party sets out the use of revision and status
codes to control how the check review and authorize process is captured and quality assurance is enabled
and underpin the cross -disciplinary coordination of the design.

Key
6.1 check availability of reference information and shared resources
6.2 generate information
6.3 complete quality assurance check
6.4 review information and approve for sharing
6.5 information model review
A information model progressed by subsequent delivery team(s) for each appointment
B new information container revision
Figure 40 —Collaborative production of information [SOURCE: EN ISO 19650-2: 2018, Figure 9]
The information management process seeks to reduce wasteful activities and make the designers and the contractors (the appointed parties) work together in the most effic ient way by coordinating the
appointment’s information model with other appointment’s information models shared within the project’s Common Data Environment (CDE), see Figure 40.

FprCEN/TR 17439:2019 (E)
64 8.5.4 Project close -out and handover
The lead appointed party’s framing of the digi tal collaboration reduces errors and workload in the
regarding the design of the public infrastructure. The lead appointed party emphasizes several times for
both the client (the appointing party) and the designers and the c ontractors (the appointed parties) that
the key to the success is the information quality as described in EN ISO 19650 -1:2018 , 11.3 and the use
of the Common Data Environment (CDE).