EvidenceSheet
NIST AI RMF 1.0 · GOVERN - NIST AI RMF 1.0

GV-1.7 Processes and procedures are in place for decommissioning and phasing out of AI systems safely and in a…

Processes and procedures are in place for decommissioning and phasing out of AI systems safely and in a manner that does not increase risks or decrease the organization’s trustworthiness. Retirement is a governed event with retention, user notification and downstream dependency steps, rather than deletion at the point the system stops being useful.

Source: NIST AI RMF 1.0, GV-1.7. The statement above is our statement of the clause, read from the published text and cited so you can check it against the official text, not the instrument verbatim. Open NIST AI RMF 1.0 in the compliance library.

4
artefacts
0
held by a system
3
at each review
hard
to go live
Document repository
where the evidence lives
teal = a system already holds it · olive = produced at each review. To go live: easy when half or more of the artefacts are already held by a system, moderate from a quarter to a half, hard below a quarter.

These are the artefacts auditors commonly ask for on this requirement, our guidance rather than text from the standard. Your assessor decides what is sufficient in your context, and asks for samples across the period when a report covers one.

system holds itEvidence a system already holds

none for this control

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

  • User and downstream consumer notification records for retired systems · Document repository
  • Dependency analysis showing what consumed the system before it was withdrawn · Document repository
  • Completed decommissioning records for systems actually retired · Document repository

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

  • The documented decommissioning procedure, including retention and legal hold steps · Policy repository / GRC workspace

First move

No system holds this evidence for you: it is people and documents. Reminders and routing to the owner still save time. Put the document under version control with an owner and review date, and log each review as a record with reviewer and date.

Common gaps auditors find

Do this for your whole sheet

Paste the rows you run your controls from and get this mapping for every control at once, with the periodic-review ones flagged and a first move per row. No account for the first run.

Build my evidence sheet

GV-1.6 Mechanisms are in place to inventory AI systems and are resourced according to organizational risk priorities · GV-2.1 Roles and responsibilities and lines of communication related to mapping, measuring, and managing AI risks…