Where data from a previous application falls short of the new safety objectives (for example developed at a lower level), the document's objectives are met while using the previous data; certification is based on the failure conditions and levels from the system safety assessment with the change impact analysed for deficiencies; previous data is evaluated to confirm verification objectives are met at the required level; reverse engineering may regenerate missing data; product service experience use follows 11.3; and the compliance strategy is stated in the PHAC.
This control maps to 1 controls across 1 other frameworks. If you already hold one of them, the evidence you collected for it is the starting point here rather than new work.
Every mapping shown was judged rather than inferred from wording similarity, and the ones that failed review are published too. See the coverage reports and what was rejected.
The graph holds this control, the 1 it maps to, and the evidence behind each claim, over MCP and REST.