Call for Industry regarding Maritime Autonomous Systems
Buyer: Allied Command Transformation – NATO’s Strategic Warfare Development Command, Norfolk Virginia
Request for Information (RFI) call to industry for their input to NATO’s requirement for testing the implementation and performance of Maritime Autonomous Systems Capabilities.
Industry wishing to respond to this RFI should read this document carefully and follow the guidance for responding.
Due date for submission of requested information: 9:00 AM EST 24 January 2025
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. Summary: Headquarters Supreme Allied Commander Transformation (HQ SACT) is issuing this Request for Information (RFI) to engage with Industry on Maritime Autonomous Systems (MAS) capabilities. The intention is to evaluate what could be immediately available and what is state-of-the-art with respect to systems, products, services, technologies, and methodologies pertaining to Autonomous systems that can operate in the maritime domain. This includes surface, underwater and aerial systems. HQ SACT is interested in looking at the full spectrum of autonomy with this RFI, as well as systems with the potential to become autonomous can be included.
1.2. This RFI involves Industry in an examination of Alliance-wide current capabilities related to MAS. HQ SACT has not made a commitment to procure any of the systems, products, services, or technology described herein, and the release of this RFI shall not be construed as such a commitment, nor as authorization to incur cost for which reimbursement will be required or sought. Further, respondents are advised that HQ SACT will not pay for any information or administrative costs incurred in responding to this RFI. The costs for responding to this RFI shall be borne solely by the responding party. Not responding to this RFI does not preclude participation in any subsequent Request for Proposal (RFP), if issued in the future.
1.3. This is an RFI ONLY. This RFI DOES NOT constitute a current RFP nor a commitment to issue a future RFP, nor does it constitute the commencement of any other type of procurement process for the Project. Therefore, those choosing to respond to this RFI will not, merely by virtue of submitting such a response, be deemed to be “bidders” on the Project in any sense, and no such respondent will have any preference, special designation, advantage or disadvantage whatsoever in any subsequent procurement process related to the Project. HQ SACT is not seeking proposals at this time; therefore, HQ SACT will not accept unsolicited proposals in respect to this RFI.
Further, respondents are advised that HQ SACT will not pay for any information or administrative costs incurred in responding to this RFI. The costs for responding to this RFI shall be borne solely by the responding party. Not responding to this RFI does not preclude participation in any subsequent RFP if issued in the future. All information shared with ACT might be shared with contracted third parties to support the capability development process as needed. Provision of data, or lack of, will not prejudice any respondent in the event that there is a competitive bidding process later as part of NATO Common-Funded Capability Development.
2. BACKGROUND
2.1 HQ SACT Framework for Collaborative Interaction (FFCI)
2.1.1. HQ SACT has implemented a Framework of Collaborative Interaction (FFCI) to increase opportunities for Nations, Industry and Academia to contribute to HQ SACT’s capability development efforts through collaborative work. Such collaboration enables HQ SACT, and NATO, to benefit from National, Industrial and Academic models, advice, capabilities and experience in the course of this work. In addition to the benefits HQ SACT gains from such projects, this collaborative effort will provide Nations, Industry, and Academia with an improved understanding of NATO’s Capability Requirements (CRs) and associated issues and development challenges that need to be addressed by HQ SACT. Potential collaborative projects are on specific topics that are of mutual interest to all parties but shall be restricted to collaborations in non-procurement areas. Several mechanisms have been developed to support the initiation of collaborative projects between Nations, Industry and Academia and HQ SACT ranging from informal information exchanges, workshops, studies or more extensive collaboration on research and experimentation.
2.1.2. Depending on the level and type of interaction needed for a collaborative project, a specific agreement may be required between parties. The FFCI agreement for any specific project, if required by either party for the project to proceed, will range from “Non-Disclosure Agreements” (NDA) for projects involving exchange of specific information to more extensive “Declaration of Mutual Collaboration” to address intellectual property and other issues.
2.1.3. More extensive information on the HQ SACT FFCI initiative can be found on the ACT website being developed to support FFCI projects at http://www.act.nato.int/ffci. Note that respondents of this RFI are not required to initiate an FFCI agreement to respond to this RFI.
2.2. The Common Funded Capability Delivery Governance Model (CFCDGM)
2.2.1. The CFCDGM aims to accelerate the delivery of capabilities required by NATO commanders and the NATO Enterprise. It consists of six stages across the capability development life cycle, four NATO Governance level decision points, or Gates, and two optional decision Gates.
2.2.2. At the first decision Gate, the Military Committee (MC) approves the Operational Requirements (ORs) and determines if the submission of a Capability Requirements Brief (CRB) is required at the first optional decision Gate. Factors that may lead the MC to require governance approval of this product include anticipated capability type, the expected level of complexity and/or likely existence of more than one viable alternative for filling the ORs.
2.2.3. During stage 2 (Requirements Development), a CRB is developed to identify the specific CRs and potential courses of action, also to examine and confirm the courses of action that are best suited to deliver the capability within scope, cost and schedule.
2.2.4. During stage 3a (Capability Programme Planning), a Capability Programme Plan (CPP) is created, which includes details about the programme scope, schedule, risks and through-life costs. An Analysis Of Alternatives (AOA) occurs during this stage that involves an analytical comparison of the operational effectiveness, risk and lifecycle cost of alternatives that are under consideration to satisfy ORs as described in the Operational Requirement Statement and CRs articulated in the CRB. Alternatives identified can involve combinations of materiel and non-materiel solutions from multiple Nations, Industry and/or Academic sources. The intent of this RFI is to collect the information required to conduct these stage 3a activities and inform the development of the CPP.
2.2.5. This is not a formal request for proposal and it does not constitute the commencement of any other type of procurement process for the CPP; but rather a general request intended to determine if any possible solutions exist that should be included in one or many alternatives during the development of the CPP. Discussions related to the specific CPP requirements and related procurements should not occur during the RFI solicitation to avoid any conflict of interest or unfair competitive advantage.
3. PROGRAMME DESCRIPTION
3.1. Vision
3.1.1. The strategic significance of the sea to the Alliance cannot be overstated. It serves as a vital thoroughfare for trade, energy transportation, and communication, making it central to our prosperity and security. The maritime domain is undergoing an enormous change due to the new threats and opportunities that are being introduced by autonomous systems.
3.1.2. Recent conflicts have demonstrated the significant impact MAS can have on conventional maritime forces. NATO needs to start developing concepts and techniques, tactics and procedures that can be used to mitigate these new threats in all domains.
3.1.3. NATO should maintain and enhance its ability to operate effectively in the Maritime domain to prevent, detect, counter and respond to the full spectrum of threats using all available tools necessary. This will lead to the establishment of adequate training, operational advice and risk assessments pertaining to Autonomous systems.
3.1.4. As a priority, NATO is seeking industry solutions that can be used to facilitate the training of NATO forces and the development of techniques, tactics and procedures to defend against MAS in all domains (surface, underwater and air).
3.2. Objectives
3.2.1. Allied Command Transformation is NATO’s Strategic Warfare Development Command. Its mission is to contribute to preserving the peace, security and territorial integrity of Alliance member states by leading the strategic warfare development of military structures, forces, capabilities and doctrines.
3.2.2. ACT aims to support the CD&E activities in the Maritime domain of NATO commands by leveraging on Capabilities, Assets and Resources coming from Industry.
3.2.3. Allied Command Transformation (ACT) is surveying Industry to understand what solutions may be available and under which framework they might be provided to the Commands that operate in the Maritime domain.
3.3. Capability Requirements
3.3.1. The MAS Capabilities may deliver the following: new concepts and TTP’s to deter and mitigate the use of MAS by opposing forces, a better awareness of strengths and weaknesses of these platforms, increased training capabilities for surface fleets and help inform the requirements process on the requirements for operating a fleet of MAS’s.
Leave a Reply