Platform
Modules
By sector
By sector
By standard
Blog
News
Events
STANAG 2628
NATO nations and the forces they task with explosive ordnance disposal support to operations
STANAG 2628 is NATO's agreement committing member nations to implement AJP-3.18, the allied joint doctrine for explosive ordnance disposal support to operations.
STANAG 2628 is the NATO standardization agreement that gives force to AJP-3.18, the Allied joint doctrine for explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) support to operations, now in Edition B. A STANAG is not itself a technical specification: it is the agreement by which NATO nations commit to implement one, and the doctrine's actual content sits in the Allied Publication it covers. This edition's own stated purpose is "to describe the explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) area of expertise within military engineering function and how explosive ordnance disposal principles are applied during the planning and conducting of NATO operations." Read plainly, that means the STANAG covers how EOD, as part of the military engineering function, is planned for and carried out in NATO operations, not how a piece of equipment is designed, tested or bought.
This is Edition 2 (AJP-3.18 Edition B), promulgated 27 September 2023. It supersedes STANAG 2628 Edition 1, dated 6 March 2017.
The mechanism that matters here: a STANAG binds a nation, not a supplier. Nations "are invited to examine their ratification of the STANAG and, if they have not already done so, advise the NSO of their intention regarding its ratification and implementation," and their responses are recorded in the NATO Standardization Document Database (NSDD). "This STANAG is effective upon receipt for use by the participating nations and NATO bodies," but effective is not the same as implemented: a nation gives it domestic force only once "the necessary orders/instructions have been issued directing the forces concerned to put the content of the covered standard into effect." Ratification and implementation are separate steps, and a supplier meets this doctrine only where a contract or a tasking brings it in, not because the STANAG exists.
Beyond issuing orders, a nation implementing this STANAG folds EOD "into national education, training and exercise programmes" alongside command and control structures. Doing so, the document says, is what delivers interoperability during NATO operations. Reporting is not symmetric: Allies and NATO bodies "shall provide implementation details through the electronic reporting tool," a standing obligation, while partner nations "are invited to provide their implementation details through the electronic reporting tool" on the same channel, a lighter invitation rather than a requirement. No NATO effective date is set (the document records it as "Not applicable"), and no fixed review-due date is recorded here.
This STANAG "is to be reviewed in accordance with AAP-03," and "the result of the review is to be recorded within the NSDD." That is a standardization review, run by NATO's own machinery, not a certification: the document names no accredited body, no notified body and no audit against it as such.
STANAG 2628 and AJP-3.18 describe operational and training doctrine, not a management system: the actual work, EOD support to operations, sits in unit training and command structures, not in software. What that leaves to evidence is the paperwork around it: procedures that correctly reference AJP-3.18 and this STANAG, training and exercise records that show EOD fundamentals and command and control structures have genuinely been folded into a unit's programme, and the trail an internal or customer audit asks for afterwards.
ComplyTrain holds that evidence as a modern, auditable system: version-controlled procedures, training records tied to named individuals and dates, and corrective actions when a gap turns up, all searchable when a higher headquarters or a customer's quality clause asks for it. It does not perform explosive ordnance disposal, does not decide how a nation implements the doctrine, and does not replace the ratification and reporting nations carry out themselves through the NSDD and NATO's e-Reporting tool.
The applicable tier here, and whatever else it comes with, is set by the contract and the customer's quality clause. If you are working out what sits alongside STANAG 2628, the standards explorer covers the related NATO doctrine, and we are glad to talk through what that means in practice.
Tell us how you need to work with STANAG 2628 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 in general. It binds a nation once that nation ratifies it, and it reaches a supplier or a unit through a national order or a contract, not by existing on its own. Whether it applies to a given programme is set by the tasking or contract in front of you, not by the STANAG alone.
STANAG 2628 is the agreement: the letter of promulgation, the ratification record, and the reporting and review machinery. AJP-3.18 is the doctrine itself, the Allied Joint Publication for explosive ordnance disposal support to operations that the STANAG gives force to. The STANAG is the cover; AJP-3.18 is the content.
Edition 2 (AJP-3.18 Edition B), promulgated 27 September 2023. It supersedes STANAG 2628 Edition 1, dated 6 March 2017.
No. There is no accredited certification for STANAG 2628 or AJP-3.18 to hold, and ComplyTrain does not claim one. What we support is the evidence trail around implementing and training against the doctrine, at an informational level.
Allies and NATO bodies report implementation details through NATO's electronic reporting tool as a standing obligation. Partner nations are only invited to report the same way, through the same channel, which is a lighter obligation than the one Allies carry.
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.