MSIAC survey on E3 policy

​​The objective of this survey is to identify the E3 policies of MSIAC member nations, with particular emphasis on munitions safety. The study focuses on the internal organisation within each country, as well as on how E3 considerations are addressed in defence acquisition activities. 

​This study is intended to support member nations that do not yet have a dedicated E3 policy in developing their own. It also provides the opportunity for MSIAC to establish a comprehensive overview of the E3 landscape across its member nations, particularly in light of the recent creation of the role of E3 on Munitions TSO. 

​The development or assessment of an E3 policy framework may draw upon the underlying philosophy of the HERO domain. Indeed, HERO is commonly regarded as a discipline structured around three main pillars, the scope and implementation of which may vary between nations, but whose fundamental principles generally rely on the conduct of testing activities, the establishment of safety procedures and operating restrictions, and the characterization of electromagnetic environments. Addressing all of these aspects is necessary to ensure comprehensive coverage of the HERO domain. It may also be considered that these pillars partly depend on appropriate acquisition and procurement processes. Accordingly, the present survey addresses these different aspects. 

Basic Information / Identification

Name (First and Last) *

Email Address *

Nation *Please select an optionAustraliaBelgiumCanadaDenmarkFinlandFranceGermanyItalyNetherlandsNorwayPolandSpainSwedenSwitzerlandTürkiyeUnited KingdomUnited States

Organization *

Position *

How would you like your response to be included in an MSIAC technical question report (TQ) or open/limited report? *Please select an optionAs provided (verbatim) + a summary prepared by MSIACSummary only (reformulated by MSIAC)

Are you willing to share the following information? *Please select an optionFull contact detailsCountry onlyNo information

​​Please specify any additional considerations related to shareability that are not covered by the previous questions​For example: provision of specific documents to MSIAC that should not be further disseminated, etc

Part I – Organization of E3 activities

​Does your nation have an E3 policy – i.e. an internal organization framework to address this issue, including applicable standards and guidance documents, as well as dedicated procurement processes? *Yes (fully or partially)No

Please provide additional details *

​​Which documents define the E3 policy, particularly with regard to munition safety (HERO, EMV, ESD, lightning, ...)?​ *

​​Which standards and guidelines do you apply?​ *

​​How are roles and responsibilities distributed among the various stakeholders (services / armed forces, and where applicable, industry) in the development of the E3 policy and associated standardization activities?​ *

How are roles and responsibilities distributed among the various stakeholders (services / armed forces and industry) throughout the lifecycle of a defence acquisition program (e.g. requirements definition, qualification, and in-service support, including the implementation of operational safety guidance)?​ *

To what extent is industry involved in the E3 assessment process for munitions (e.g. ad hoc support, subcontracting, or outsourcing), including activities such as expertise and modelling/simulation, electrical characterisation (e.g. in accordance with AOP-43), instrumentation of test mock-up, and the conduct of testing? *

Part II – E3 considerations in procurement

Do your defence acquisition contracts include any E3-specific contract clauses? Or any generic E3-specific annexes? If so, are they shareable? *Yes, we have specific contract clauses and/or generic E3 annexes, which may be shareable with other MSIAC member nations (generic annexes only)Yes, we have specific contract clauses and/or generic E3 annexes, which are not shareableNo

Please provide additional details

​​Do your defence acquisition contracts specify particular electromagnetic environments (e.g. level and waveform for HERO and HPM) against which the contractor must demonstrate system compliance? If so, in what form is this information – typically classified – provided (e.g. explicitly defined within requirements and/or through reference to standards or handbooks)?​ *YesNo

Please provide additional details

How is E3 assessment managed in the context of acquiring off-the-shelf munitions from foreign suppliers? In particular, to what extent do you rely on information provided by the manufacturer and / or by the national authorities of the supplying nation? *

​In the case of an off-the-shelf acquisition, what approaches are adopted when E3 testing is required to account for electromagnetic environments (levels and waveforms) against which the system robustness has not been demonstrated by the manufacturer or the relevant national authority (e.g. in case of nation-specific electromagnetic environments or a limited qualification basis)? *Situation not yet encounteredSituation encountered

Please provide additional details

Part III – Contribution of MSIAC to E3 activities

Apart from its current contributions in the E3 domain, how could MSIAC enhance its support to your national activities and needs (e.g. development of E3-specific software and databases, support to standardisation groups beyond E3AT and E3 RADHAZ WG, professional development seminars ...)? *

Other considerations

​Please feel free to provide any other relevant information regarding the scope of the survey *

Submit