Platform
Modules
By sector
By sector
By standard
Blog
News
Events
AOP-4382
National Authorities and Project Teams producing and reviewing evidence of how a munition responds to slow heating, under STANAG 4382
AOP-4382 is NATO's test procedure for producing evidence of how munitions respond to a slow, prolonged heat source, feeding insensitive-munitions and hazard-classification decisions made elsewhere.
AOP-4382 is the NATO Allied Ordnance Publication that specifies the test requirements and procedures used "to provide evidence of the response of munitions and weapon systems to the threat represented by a heat source that slowly heats a nearby or adjacent storage hold (magazine), such as on a ship, in a depot or on a railcar." It is covered by STANAG 4382: nations agree in that STANAG to use the requirements and methods in this AOP for determining a munition's response to a gradually increasing thermal environment, and to reference STANAG 4382 in whatever national standard, order, manual or instruction implements it.
The document is built around a single physical test, the Slow Heating Test, run on a munition or weapon system in the condition or configuration a National Authority approves as representative, often, the document notes, in the munition's own logistical or storage configuration. It sets out three test methods (a Standard method, an Alternative method whose heating rate follows a Threat Hazard Analysis, and a Hazard Classification Alternative), the test facility and set-up requirements for whoever runs the test, how many tests are normally expected, and the minimum observations and records to keep. This page names what those chapters cover and stops there: the heating rates, temperatures, oven dimensions and instrumentation counts that make the test reproducible are operational detail for whoever runs it, not something a reader here needs reproduced to understand what the document is.
Force runs through STANAG 4382, not through this AOP existing on its own. A nation that implements STANAG 4382 agrees "that the requirements and methods incorporated in this AOP will be used for determining the response of munitions and weapon systems," and commits to referencing STANAG 4382 "for purpose of identification" in whatever national instrument carries the requirement forward. No departure from that agreement is permitted "without consultation with the NATO Tasking Authority." AOP-4382 never speaks to a company directly - it addresses National Authorities and the Project Teams that run its tests - so a company meets it because a national requirement or a specific contract calls up STANAG 4382 or this AOP, not because the document exists.
A National Authority approves the test item's configuration, the test directive and test plan before testing starts, and any deviation from what was agreed along the way. The Project Team that runs the test is responsible for confirming it followed the agreed directive. Because the test item "shall be the final production standard," the work this AOP describes usually happens once a design is at or near production, not while it is still open to change: it produces evidence for an insensitive-munitions assessment, and, on the document's own cross-reference, can also feed a hazard classification decision taken under AASTP-03. AOP-4382 assumes that wider framework - the IM policy in AOP-39 and STANAG 4439, and the guidance on organising full-scale tests in SRD AOP-39.1 - is already the reason the test is being run, rather than setting out that reasoning itself.
AOP-4382 carries no certification of any kind: no accredited body, no notified body, no product certificate. What it produces is a test directive, test plan, test report and a defined set of observations, all reviewed and agreed by a National Authority. The document is explicit that judging what the result means is somebody else's job: "Policy and procedures for evaluation of test results are given in" AOP-39, NATO's insensitive-munitions policy, and AASTP-03, its hazard classification manual. AOP-4382 sets no review cycle of its own; whatever cycle applies comes from the assessment or classification programme the evidence is feeding.
AOP-4382 is covered by STANAG 4382, the agreement nations ratify that this AOP puts into technical effect. It sits alongside STANAG 4439 and AOP-39, NATO's insensitive-munitions policy and assessment publications, cited to inform the reader rather than as a requirement this AOP itself imposes, and AASTP-03, NATO's manual for hazard classification of ammunition and explosives, since a Slow Heating Test's evidence can feed a classification decision made under it. Two further documents it names sit outside our catalogue: SRD AOP-39.1, the Systems Reference Document carrying detailed guidance on full-scale testing, and the United Nations Manual of Tests and Criteria (ST/SG/AC.10/11), which governs hazard classification and labelling separately from the NATO IM process.
AOP-4382 describes a physical test - an oven, a munition, and a National Authority reviewing the result - and none of that is something a compliance platform runs. The work itself happens in a test facility, not in software.
Where ComplyTrain's kind of work fits is the paperwork the AOP itself makes central: a controlled test directive and test plan with the approval history a National Authority expects to see, a record of who signed off any deviation from the agreed plan and why, and a place to hold the completed test report alongside the wider assessment or hazard-classification file it feeds. That is the same document control, sign-off trail and version history ComplyTrain provides for any compliance programme, not a mapping to this AOP's own clauses.
What we do not do: run a slow heating test, set or interpret a heating rate or a reaction threshold, or stand in for the National Authority that approves the test item, the test directive or the result. Which tier of this framework applies to a given programme, and which sibling test-procedure publications come with it, is set by the contract and the customer's quality clause. See what sits alongside AOP-4382 in the standards explorer, and talk to us about the paperwork behind it.
Tell us how you need to work with AOP-4382 and what you need from it. We will come back to you about what ComplyTrain can do.
Thank you. Your list is on its way to your inbox, and we will come back to you on what working with these standards in ComplyTrain involves, usually within one business day.
Not on its own. It binds a nation once that nation implements STANAG 4382, and a company meets it when a national requirement or a specific contract calls up STANAG 4382 or this AOP directly, not because the document names companies.
It produces evidence of how a munition or weapon system responds when exposed to a heat source that slowly heats a nearby storage area over a prolonged period, such as a fire near a magazine on a ship, in a depot or on a railcar. AOP-4382 itself does not set out what counts as an acceptable response; that is decided under AOP-39 and AASTP-03.
No. AOP-4382 has no certification scheme, accreditation body or product certificate. What exists is a National Authority reviewing and approving a test directive, test plan and test report against this AOP, not a credential a company or its quality system can hold.
AOP-39 sets NATO's policy for assessing and reporting how a munition responds to insensitive-munitions threats. AOP-4382 is one of several companion test-procedure publications that supply the actual method for one specific threat, slow heating. Reading AOP-4382 alone will not tell you when an assessment is required in the first place.
No. STANAG 4382 is the agreement nations ratify; AOP-4382 is the current technical publication that puts that agreement into practice, and the AOP's own text ties the two together for identification purposes.
One system for the whole compliance programme. Start with the module you need most.
Collect information the same way every time, and decide in advance what happens next.
Know whether your controls are operating, not just whether a policy says they exist.
Turn the compliance work you already know about into a plan with owners, dependencies and dates.
Know what you can offer, and hold the evidence behind every configuration you offer it in.
Eight built-in reports across every module, scheduled, delivered, and filed where the evidence lives.
The sector news that matters to your organisation - read and rated by AI, and delivered as a scheduled digest in your own language.
AI reads the tender pack and pulls out the requirements, deadlines and rules - then helps you draft the response from your own approved content, with you reviewing every step.
One current register of the suppliers and partners you depend on - each risk-assessed, re-assessing itself on schedule, and wired straight into your risk register.
See every requirement you face - across every standard, plus your own contracts and policies - traced to the documents, evidence and processes that satisfy it.
Identify, score, treat and review your risks in one place - with AI to help anyone run a proper assessment, and a defensible trail behind every decision.
Assign training, prove it was understood, and hold the competence records an auditor asks for.
Draft compliance documents with AI, keep every version under control, and export them beautifully branded - all in one place.
Audits, corrective actions, processes and approvals in one quality system, organised around ISO 9001.
Medical device manufacturers operate under more regulatory pressure than almost any other sector outside pharmaceuticals. The rules govern how you design a device, how you make it, how you track it after it ships, and how you respond when something goes wrong.
Learn how EU dual-use export controls apply to encryption, sensors, and software, how classification works under Annex I, and why sending source code by email can count as an export.
A practical way to turn in-your-head risk management into a register that survives staff turnover and answers the risk questions now showing up in tenders.