I wonder why it was not adopted in Ukraine. Instead we have постано́ва (regulation) by Ukrainian government which contains somewhat controversial (and lossy) mapping. It doesn't even mention previously active (or still active?) standard for transliteration – ГОСТ 16876-71.
While researching this I've stumbled upon second draft of reworked transliteration standard. The most interesting part in it is the answer of Ministry of internal affairs in which they point to ICAO requirements for machine readable travel documents, that is (page 18):
To achieve global interoperability, the primary and secondary identifiers in the MRZ shall be printed using upper-case OCR-B characters, illustrated in Figure 4, without diacritical marks, and conform to the number of character positions available. As such, names in the MRZ are represented differently from those in the VIZ. The issuing State or organization shall transliterate national characters using only the allowed OCR-B characters and/or truncate, as specified in the form factor specific Parts 4 to 7 of Doc 9303. Transliteration tables for the most commonly used Latin, Cyrillic and Arabic families of languages are provided in Section 6.
Those characters are A-Z, 0-9 and <.
It seems to me that authors of the regulation tried to achieve 100% compatibility with ICAO requirements. If so, then the question is why the ICAO regulations should supersede our national standard? Not to mention that countries that adopted ISO 9 should've confirm to ICAO anyway.