At first glance, TS and codification can look like one unified process for any defense-purpose product. In practice, the regulatory basis branches out by equipment category, and using the wrong track is one of the most common reasons a document package gets sent back for revision.
Three resolutions that set the rules
Most equipment categories fall under Resolution No. 345 — the baseline procedure for supplying defense-purpose goods during martial law. UAVs, ground robotic complexes, unmanned maritime systems, and tactical-level electronic warfare equipment fall under Resolution No. 1275 — the one that carries the 2026 simplifications: manufacturers approve their own TS, and proof of urgent state need is no longer required. Domestically produced unmanned systems have an additional separate track under Resolution No. 256. Codification itself, depending on the product, can also involve Resolution No. 902.
If a manufacturer prepares documents under the "standard" No. 345 track for a product that actually falls under No. 1275 or No. 256, the package will most likely be sent back for revision — even if the technical content of the TS itself is flawless.
10 equipment categories and what makes each one different
Here is the applicable regulatory basis and the key TS/testing specifics for each category we work with.
| Equipment category | Regulatory basis | TS & testing specifics |
|---|---|---|
| UAS / UAVs | No. 1275 (+ No. 256 for domestic production) | The most dynamic category; includes distinct subclasses (strike, reconnaissance, interceptor) |
| EW & ESM equipment | No. 1275 (tactical level) | TS must fix frequency ranges and power output; testing includes EMC and EW trials at an accredited lab |
| Ammunition & components | No. 345 | Elevated safety requirements; demonstration testing under a dedicated program |
| Initiation boards & detonation means | No. 345 | Adjacent to ammunition; separate safety protocols for testing |
| Electronic modules & components | No. 345 | Often supplied as part of another product — the TS scope (module vs. finished product) needs to be defined clearly |
| Small arms | No. 345 | Ballistic and durability testing, separate operational safety requirements |
| Ground vehicles | No. 345 (conventional) / No. 1275 (UGVs) | Splits into conventional vehicles/armor and ground robotic complexes (UGVs) |
| Communications equipment | No. 345 | Testing for interference resistance and compatibility with other communication systems |
| Protective equipment | No. 345 | Ballistic testing (body armor, helmets) under separate standards |
| Dual-use products | No. 345 (+ additional export requirements) | Civilian and military applicability adds an extra layer of requirements |
We covered the two fastest-growing categories of 2026 in dedicated pieces: read more on TS and testing for ground robotic complexes in our UGV article, and on interceptor drones in our interceptor drone article.
What stays the same across categories
Despite the differences in regulatory basis, part of the process is identical for any equipment category: an individual checklist for your specific product at the initial consultation, TS registration with the Ministry of Economy within 4–5 business days, mandatory factory testing with a formal report and protocols — without which the Ministry of Defense won’t accept a codification package — and submission of the full package to obtain a NATO stock number.
DOPUSK identifies the applicable track — No. 345, No. 1275, or No. 256 — at the first free consultation and puts your product on the right track from day one, regardless of equipment category.