DHS_DoD_FAA_Air_Domain_Awareness_and_Protection_in_the_NAS_RFI_Final.pdf

REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI)

Air Domain Awareness and Protection in the NAS 2019-2020 Equipment Demonstration and Evaluation

RFI Number: 70RSAT20RFI000001

1. BACKGROUND/PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

After years of close coordination, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Departments of Defense, Energy, Justice, and Homeland Security (DOD, DOE, DOJ, and DHS, respectively) obtained congressional relief1 to test, operate, and evaluate systems that detect, track, identify and mitigate unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) in the United States. The National Defense Authorization Acts of 2017 and 2018 granted the DOD and DOE counter-UAS (C-UAS) authorities and the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 provided DHS and DOJ with their authorities. FAA also received authority in the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 to employ C- UAS for test and evaluation. The Act became Pub. L. 115-254 and amends Titles 6 (Domestic Security), 14 (United States Coast Guard), and 49 (Transportation). The Preventing Emerging Threats Act of 2018 (“the Act”), Division H within the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018, authorizes DHS and DOJ to engage in certain C-UAS activities, notwithstanding provisions of Titles 18 and 49 that prohibit the interception of communications and interference with aircraft.

The Act authorizes DHS and DOJ to conduct C-UAS activities against UAS that poses a credible threat to the safety or security of a “covered facility or asset,” as defined by the Act.

The DHS Science and Technology Directorate (S&T), DOD, the FAA, other Federal Partners and other stakeholders of the Homeland Security Enterprise (HSE) (hereinafter referred to as the “Government”) are issuing this Request for Information (RFI) [Air Domain Awareness and Protection in the National Airspace (NAS)/2019-2020 Equipment Demonstration (hereinafter referred to as the “pilot program” or “program”)] to manufacturers, suppliers, and system integrators (hereinafter referred to as “respondents” prior to selection for participation and “participating organization” after selection) of manned systems and UAS detection, tracking, identifying and mitigation (UAS only) systems to apply for participation in the program. While a large part of the program will be focused on the Air Domain Awareness (ADA) and subsequent processing of UAS, other vehicles such as manned aircraft and marine vehicles will be included in the program (hereinafter all vehicles will be referred to as “MUMS” (manned and unmanned systems)).

For clarity, the following definitions are used throughout this RFI. Of note, the first three are codified in law:

• Counter Unmanned Aircraft System(s) (C-UAS) System: A system or device capable of lawfully and safely disabling, disrupting, or seizing control of an unmanned aircraft or unmanned aircraft system.

1 50 U.S.C. 2661 (DOE), 10 U.S.C. 130i (DOD), and 6 U.S.C. 124n (DOJ and DHS)

• Unmanned Aircraft (UA): An aircraft that is operated without the possibility of direct human intervention from within or on the aircraft.

• Unmanned Aircraft System(s) (UAS): An unmanned aircraft and associated elements (including communication links and the components that control the unmanned aircraft) that are required for the operator to operate safely and efficiently in the NAS.

• UAS Air Domain Awareness (ADA) Systems: Systems that may detect, identify, monitor, and/or track UAS. The observation of UAS operations by technical means such as, but not limited to, electro-optical/infra-red, acoustic, radar, RF receivers, and/or networked surveillance using shared positional and identification data.

Each respondent will be required to establish a Cooperative Research and Development Agreement (CRADA) with the Government prior to participating in any demonstration activities.

Further information is below:

• The Federal Technology Transfer Act of 1986, as amended (15 U.S.C. §3710a, et seq.), permits the Secretaries of Homeland Security and Transportation to authorize the Directors of Science and Technology and the William J. Hughes Technical Center to enter into a Cooperative Research and Development Agreement (CRADA) consistent with that Act, associated Executive Orders, departmental regulations and agency policies. Please note that the Government cannot provide funds under a CRADA, but can provide contributions such as technical know-how, equipment, and testing facilities.

The Government will share information derived from responses to this request and subsequently collected during demonstrations with other relevant Federal government partners. To protect the intellectual property of the manufacturers, as defined in the Agreements, results of demonstrations will be anonymized when, and if,2 made available for publicly releasable information.

The purpose of the above mechanism, (hereinafter referred to as the “Agreement”) is to serve as a way to safely explore systems, procedures and processes in varying live operational environments. The focus of the Government’s objectives for this program include evaluating products, systems, and services that detect, identify and track both the MUMS and pilot in command (PIC) (or ground controller) of UAS. The outcome will support the determination of the efficacy of MUMS detection, tracking, identification and mitigation (UAS only) equipment to develop performance standards to support a proactive security regime for air domain awareness. The information gleaned from these demonstrations will validate security response plans, procedures, procurements and actions.

2 C-UAS systems are used for security purposes, vulnerabilities of the systems are not appropriate for public release.

Prior to entering into an agreement, the Government will assess the maturity of respondent’s products, sensors, systems, and equipment to ascertain their technical readiness levels (TRLs) in civil/domestic environments. A TRL is a consistent nine-level maturity scale (Appendix A) that is ordered according to the characteristics of the demonstration or testing.

The Government plans to enter into Agreements with the participating organizations to demonstrate systems (not to exceed 6 months and not to exceed 3 locations).

The Government plans to evaluate sensors/systems capable of detecting, tracking and identifying MUMS.

The Government plans to evaluate UAS mitigation or countermeasures to include the capability to disrupt, disable, destroy, take control of, and/or provide alternate flight instructions to a UAS as defined in Table 2: Mitigation Types after detection capability validation demonstration.

Kinetic Non-Kinetic Hybrid Kinetic

(Non-Kinetic with Kinetic Effect)

Projectile RF C2 Jamming and spoofing Microwave

Net / Open Containment RF C2 Intercept and Control Acoustic

Closed / Sealed Containment GPS Jamming and spoofing Laser

Non-nuclear electromagnetic pulse

(NNEMP)

Table 1: Mitigation Types

Participants may be evaluated for two to three days in a specific environment for ADA and may also be requested to participate for a longer duration in a separate environment based on their capabilities for both ADA and mitigation. If the system performance matches the Key Performance Parameters (KPPs), the participating organization will be invited to participate in an evaluation of the system for specific environments (airport, urban, plains, mountainous, maritime). At the commencement of each demonstration and evaluation the participating organizations will assemble the system and for evaluations train the Government on use.

During the longer duration evaluations, the government will make the determination if the participating organization is present during the test event to support/operate the sensor system. If present, the participating organization will be excluded from test execution activities to the greatest extent possible. The participating organization, through the Agreement, may be required to transport, install, and train their capabilities in as many as three places.

At the conclusion of each field assessment and evaluation, the participating organizations must dismantle and remove their systems.

The terms “test,” “validation3,” and “verification4” will be used sparingly throughout this program; these terms have formal Government definitions. Since there were no formal “test” requirements, the terms “demonstrate”, “demonstration”, “assess,” “assessment,” and “evaluation” will be purposefully used, and are used interchangeably.

To conduct the assessments of the ADA systems, a wide range of MUMS will be flown as fictitious targets to represent nefarious MUMS. The scenarios are planned to be depicted as real-world MUMS detection scenarios. Although the targets will be mimicking non-cooperative MUMS, they will, in fact, be fully authorized to conduct flight operations under public aircraft operations through Certificates of Waiver or Authorization (COAs), under 14 CFR part 107 and part 91 where required.

For the demonstrations and evaluations, the Government will utilize several FAA designated UAS Test Site Operators to conduct actual flight operations for assessment and evaluation of the MUMS detection and UAS mitigation systems. The UAS Test Site Operators will be required to develop and adhere to a stringent safety management curriculum.

A series of controlled settings, hereinafter referred to as “test cards,” comprised of flight conditions and ground conditions, will be tailored for each deployment and will detail the conditions and procedures performed by assessment teams. Test cards will be categorized as “ground scenarios” and “flight scenarios.” Ground scenarios will be used to assess an ADA system’s capability to detect and locate MUMS upon initial activation, prior to takeoff. Flight conditions will be designed to reproduce flight patterns and characteristics that are typical of manned and unmanned aircraft (UA). In situations where actual flights cannot be conducted, 3 Validation. Confirmation that an end product or end product component will fulfill its intended purpose when placed in its intended environment. The methods employed to accomplish validation are applied to selected work products as well as to the end product and end product components. Work products should be selected on the basis of which [they] are the best predictors of how well the end product and end product component will satisfy the intended purpose and user needs. Validation may address all aspects of an end product in any of its intended environments, such as operation, training, manufacturing, maintenance, or support services.

4 Verification. Confirmation that selected work products meet their specified requirements. This includes verification of the end product (system, service, facility, or operational change) and intermediate work products against all applicable requirements. Verification is inherently an incremental process since it occurs throughout the development of the end product and work products - beginning with initial requirements, progressing through subsequent changes, and culminating in verification of the completed end product.

small UA will be mounted to surface vehicles to imitate flights and flight conditions. Test cards will not be shared with the participating organizations.

Several months of planning are required prior to the live demonstrations and evaluations.

Activities include the generation of program management artifacts, privacy plans, review of land and building ownership and lease agreements, engineering studies (e.g. spectrum analysis), site surveys for placement of MUMS ADA and UAS mitigation equipment, access to internet and electricity, procedures for safe flight operations, and airspace access analysis. The level of effort associated with conducting assessments is substantial.

Results of the evaluations will provide the Government three imperative results to develop standards:

1) Ensuring the efficacy of the system for local and federal agencies and law enforcement response.

2) Ensuring the systems do not adversely impact or interfere with on-board avionics, Communications, Navigation, and Surveillance (CNS) systems, Air Traffic Management (ATM) systems, and other ground-based infrastructure such as lighting and electrical systems and

3) Ensuring the systems do not interfere with agent, first responder, and law enforcement communications systems or adversely impact or interfere with the safe and efficient agent, first responder, and law enforcement operations.

2. OBJECTIVES

The Government intends to assess sensor capabilities, review systems and software integration, and evaluate human and environmental factors that relate to MUMS ADA and UAS countermeasure technologies (at altitudes from 0 to 8,000 feet above ground level) in rugged mountainous, flat plains and fluid U.S. border settings (including the Northern border), firefighting efforts and in and around critical infrastructure including airports. Furthermore, the Government expects to enhance processes, procedures, and best practices for differentiating between legitimate UAS and unauthorized UAS. These efforts will also help to ensure that the detection and mitigation systems do not interfere with agents, first responders and other communications systems or adversely impact or interfere with the safe and efficient operation of the NAS. The Government anticipates capturing data from the use of MUMS ADA systems and the engagement of C-UAS countermeasure technologies. The data captured is expected to include elements such as the engagement time, place, duration, power output levels, frequencies, mobile vs. steady state, accuracy of detection and other details to be determined in addition to detection, tracking, and identification details that were assessed to make the engagement. The information collected during this study will be used to help determine equipment and systems to be procured in future request for proposals to protect borders, ports, critical infrastructures and airports

A joint objective (Government and participating organizations) is to garner data from various equipment, training, and related materials over an extended period in unique environments with changing threat scenarios to represent the varying PIC. The Government, through cross-agency collaboration seeks to: develop threat modeling and risk analysis; combine risk assessment, consequence modeling, and dependency analysis to identify the highest priority risks in need of mitigation; assess functional security and resiliency of operations in addition to the security of specific assets; determine secure lifecycle management best practices of MUMS ADA and mitigation systems; and inform cross-agency concepts of operations (CONOPS).

The Science and Technology (S&T) Directorate is the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) primary research and development arm and participating in this joint effort to support the air domain awareness program. The DHS S&T Directorate’s mission is to provide Federal and local officials with state-of-the-art technologies, capabilities, and other resources to protect the homeland. The Borders, Immigration and Maritime Division (BIM) supports this mission by developing and transitioning technical capabilities, enhancing the Homeland Security Enterprise’s (HSE) mission of maintaining U.S. border security without impeding commerce and travel.

Along with DHS mission, this program will provide a timely and comprehensive approach to assist with some of the work contained in the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018, including the following sections:

• Section 1602 - Protection of certain facilities and assets from unmanned aircraft. “Sec.

210G. Protection of certain facilities and assets from unmanned aircraft.

• Section 383 - Airport Safety and Airspace Hazard Mitigation and Enforcement

• And other related sections

The program will additionally address the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 associated requirements set forth in the Joint Explanatory Statement HRPT 116-9 addressing interference with firefighting efforts.

This program will also help inform the FAA as it works towards developing standards and a plan for the certification, permitting, authorizing, or allowing of the deployment of technologies or systems for the detection, tracking and identification of manned and unmanned aircraft systems; mitigation of unmanned aircraft systems; an airspace hazard mitigation program to test and evaluate technologies or systems that detect and mitigate potential aviation safety risks posed by unmanned aircraft; and using manned and unmanned aircraft ADA and unmanned aircraft mitigation systems to detect and mitigate the unauthorized operation of an unmanned aircraft that poses a risk to aviation safety. Depending on the results of this program, the FAA may issue additional RFIs separately that will focus more specifically on UAS Detections Systems tailored to operate within other environments such as airports. Participation criteria for the FAA’s RFIs may vary significantly from that cited in this joint document.

2.1 Capabilities

Common Capabilities Requirements: Threshold (minimum) and Objective (preferred)

Parameter Description Threshold Objective The system shall be able to detect a probable group 1 unmanned aircraft vehicle and report its presence back to an operator (Detect)

Probability of detection is 85% or greater at distances of 2 km or less

Probability of detection is 85% or greater at distances of 20 km or less

The system shall be able to detect a probable group 1 unmanned aerial system affiliated ground controller and report its presence back to an operator (Detect)

Probability of detection is 85% or greater at distances of 2 km or less with clear line of sight conditions

Probability of detection is 85% or greater at distances of 10 km or less with clear line of sight conditions

The system shall be able to record data for a probable group 1 unmanned aerial system and report it back to the operator (Observe)

Percent of possible time observed shall be 85% or greater at distances of 2 km or less, while target is within line of sight

Percent of possible time observed shall be 85% or greater at distances of 2 km or less, while target is within line of sight

The system shall be able to dynamically observe the movement of an unmanned aircraft vehicle over time in two or more spatial dimensions (Observation Rate)

Location updates shall be provided at a rate of no less than 1/s

Location updates shall be provided at a rate of no less than 10/s in three dimensions

The system shall be able to dynamically track the movement of an unmanned aerial system ground controller over time in two or more spatial

Location updates shall be provided at a rate of no less than 1/s

Location updates shall be provided at a rate of no less than 10/s dimensions (Observation Rate)

The system shall be able to inform the operator of where the unmanned aircraft vehicle is located in two or more dimensions (Track)

Accuracy of reported location is +/- 50 meters for unmanned aircraft vehicles that are 2 km away from the protected site

Accuracy of reported location is +/- 3 meters for unmanned aircraft vehicles that are 3 km away from the protected site

The system shall be able to inform the operator of where the unmanned aerial systems ground controller is located in two or more dimensions (Track)

Accuracy of reported location is +/- 30 meters for unmanned aerial system ground controllers that are 2 km away from the protected site

Accuracy of reported location is +/- 3 meters for unmanned aerial system ground controllers that are 3 km away from the protected site

The system shall be able to report specific details (make/model) about the UAS system and/or its motives (Identify)

50% accuracy in reporting UAS make/model and/or its motives at distances of 2 km for protected site

90% accuracy in reporting UAS make/model and/or its motives at distances of 10 km for protected site

The system shall be able to render the UAS inoperable by the UAS controller or render the UAS system harmless (Mitigate)

The probability to render inoperable by the UAS controller or harmless shall be 70% or greater

The probability to render inoperable by the UAS controller or harmless shall be 90% or greater

Note: From group 1 through small manned fixed and rotary wing will be evaluated against the capability requirements.

2.2 Notional Scenarios (Day and Night Operations)

Detect, Track, and/or Identify at altitudes from ground level to 8000 feet;

1. UAS below 55 pounds

2. UAS above and including 55 pounds

3. Manned ultralight

4. Manned small aircraft (fixed and rotary wing)

5. Small manned and unmanned boats

The vehicles will be approaching at different angles, distances and elevations.

Mitigation with minimal or no collateral damage from ground level to 500 feet;

1. UAS below 55 pounds

2. UAS above and including 55 pounds

3. WHAT TO EXPECT

Invitations to participate will be based on product maturity, technical readiness level (TRL), availability, and suitability for addressing unique circumstances described throughout this RFI.

Only technology at a TRL of 7 or above will be considered.

Invitations will start to be sent out within 60 business days after the deadline for this RFI.

Afterwards, additional information will be collected to enter into a formal Agreement with the Government which is required for participation in the evaluations. The Agreements will indicate responsibilities and obligations between the Government and the participating organization. In addition, the Agreement will address examples of Government responsibilities (i.e. facility costs and logistics relating to the hosting of the evaluations) and a summary demonstration report and the responsibilities of participating organizations (i.e. paying for their own travel to the evaluations, installation, and materials costs).

Participating organizations should plan to deploy enough personnel and resources to install and setup their equipment and train Government designated personnel to successfully operate without further support during an extended evaluation period. The participating organization should have subject matter expertise readily answer questions throughout the process.

If the products or technologies being provided emit radio frequency (RF) or other energy they may require FCC spectrum or other approvals. Participating organizations or the Government are responsible for fulfilling any required approvals for each senor type and each location, predicated on the environment. Spectrum approval responsibility will be negotiated prior to deployment. The demonstrations phase will require several days, and evaluation phase is expected to span several months at each site. Information on the location, specific dates, evaluation scenarios, space layout, timeframes, and other logistical information will be shared at a later date with participating organizations.

This is a RFI only. Respondents must either (1) have ownership of any intellectual property submitted for the purposes of participating in the event or (2) possess sufficient rights to permit the use of the technology. The Government will not award a contract or grant based on this RFI.

Organizations that respond will not be paid for the information submitted and the Government will not pay for any submission preparation or related costs. Participating organizations are responsible for all costs associated with traveling to and from the evaluation location site(s), such as transportation, shipment, storage, lodging, and other related costs.

Documents submitted in response to this RFI will not be returned. The Government is under no obligation to provide feedback to respondents with respect to any information submitted under this RFI. There is no guarantee that any submission in response to this RFI will result in a Government invitation to participate in the evaluations. The Government may or may not use any responses to this RFI as a basis for a subsequent project.

For further questions, please follow the procedures in Section 9 of this document.

Participating organizations attend evaluations at their own risk. If an evaluation is canceled for any reason, the Government will not compensate respondents for any funds that may have been expended for the purposes of participating in that event. The Government will make its best efforts to provide timely notice of any cancellation to mitigate these situations.

4. SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

THE DEADLINES FOR PARTICIPANT APPLICATIONS is no later than 5:00 p.m. EST on December 12, 2019. Review of applications received after the deadline is not guaranteed.

All applications must respond to the questions provided in Attachment A: Air Domain Awareness and Protection in the NAS – RFI Response Template (in the sequence and order presented). Please ensure that all required fields are completed. Recognize that any answers of “No” for the following three questions will deem a respondent as ineligible for participation:

• Would your organization be willing to enter into a CRADA with the Government to allow unrestricted and independent Government use of your Counter-Unmanned Aircraft Systems (C-UAS) equipment, during demonstration and evaluation events, at no cost to the Government per the terms of a CRADA?

• Is your organization willing to provide your system for up to six months at up to three locations in the United States including territories to include providing specifications equipment transport, install and training at no cost to the Government per the terms of a CRADA?

• At the conclusion of each demonstration and evaluation, is your organization willing to dismantle and remove your systems at no cost to the Government per the terms of a

CRADA?

Further, the Government is under no obligation to review the remainder of a submission.

All application forms must be submitted in the Microsoft Excel (XLSX) file format.

All applications must be submitted to ADA@hq.dhs.gov and received by the Government no later than 5:00 p.m. EST on December 12, 2019.

All applications must include the following information in the subject or body of the email:

• Subject: (Organization Name) Application - the Air Domain Awareness in the NAS Evaluations mailto:ADA@hq.dhs.gov

• Organization Name

• Primary Point of Contact (POC) for the application:

o Name o Email o Phone numbers (Office & Mobile)

The POC will receive an email verifying receipt of the application. Each organization should submit one application. The POC will be notified by email if an organization’s application is deemed suitable for invitation to the Air Domain Awareness and Protection in the NAS Evaluations.

CLEARLY IDENTIFY ALL PROPRIETARY INFORMATION in the application. If proprietary information is required to adequately describe equipment, ensure that it is appropriately marked on the application form. If you must submit proprietary information as part of your application, you should be aware that despite all precautions, the Government can only protect the confidentiality of proprietary information contained in applications to the extent that it is exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA, 5 U.S.C. § 552). Generally, Exemption 4 of the FOIA [5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(4)] will protect from release information submitted to the Government that constitutes either (1) a trade secret or (2) commercial or financial information which is privileged or confidential.

Therefore, any such proprietary information contained in your application form must be clearly marked in accordance with the following directions:

1. Insert the following paragraph in the comments section on page 2 of the application form:

“This application includes data that shall not be disclosed outside the Government and shall not be duplicated, used, or disclosed-in whole or in part-for any purpose other than to evaluate this application or develop a subsequent CRADA for the C-UAS Systems Effects in the NAS Evaluations. This restriction does not limit the Government's right to use information contained in the data if they are obtained from another source without restriction.”

2. Application Form: In any equipment descriptions that contain restricted information on page 2, insert "(PROPRIETARY)" at the start of the section of text.

DO NOT SUBMIT CLASSIFIED INFORMATION in the application. If classified information is required to adequately describe a technology solution, submit an unclassified application with a request for a classified submission of supporting materials.

DO NOT SUBMIT ACQUISITION PROPOSALS. Only submit the participation application referenced in Appendix B and posted along with this RFI. No contracts will be awarded based on this announcement. However, selected participants will be asked to enter in to a CRADA with the Government. Submitting an application in response to this RFI does not guarantee an invitation to participate in the C-UAS Systems Effects in the NAS evaluations.

5. BASIS FOR SELECTION TO PARTICIPATE

The Government will review the applications for technical merit, range of capabilities, and applicability. The Government will notify selected participants via an emailed invitation to the Primary POC. No review outcomes or selection criteria will be made available to submitters.

6. SPECIAL NOTICE

While only federal employees will participate in the final selection process, Government support contractors may review and provide support during the application evaluation process.

All participants involved in the evaluation process, including those in support roles, will sign a Non-Disclosure Agreement prior to such involvement. Submission in response to this RFI constitutes approval to release the applications to the evaluation team that may include Government support contractors.

7. GOVERNMENT PLANS

This RFI is issued solely for market research, planning, research and exploration, and information purposes and is not to be construed as a commitment by the Government to issue a subsequent solicitation (Broad Agency Announcement, Request for Proposal, financial obligation, etc.).

8. CLASSIFIED SUBMISSION

It is preferred that response be unclassified. Any classified information regarding any proposed system must be omitted from the application materials. Limit your application materials and responses to the RFI to Sensitive Security Information (SSI), company proprietary or unrestricted information, and mark submissions appropriately. SSI submissions can be submitted as normal by password protecting the document, and then sending the password separately to the contract specialist.

The following is an abbreviated description of SSI:

“SSI is a control designation used by the Department of Homeland Security, and particularly the Transportation Security Administration. It is applied to information about security programs, vulnerability and threat assessments, screening processes, technical specifications of certain screening equipment and objects used to test screening equipment, and equipment used for communicating security information relating to air, land, or maritime transportation. The applicable information is spelled out in greater detail in 49 CFR 1520.7.

When transmitted by e-mail, SSI must be in a password-protected attachment. The password should be transmitted separately of the protected document.”

9. QUESTIONS AND REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

Questions and requests for additional information should be sent via email to ADA@hq.dhs.gov and received by the Government no later than 5:00 p.m. EST, November 12, 2019

10. ATTACHMENTS

Appendix A: Technical Readiness Levels

Appendix B: C-UAS Systems Effects in the NAS 2019/2020 Equipment Demonstration– RFI Response Template

Appendix A Technical Readiness Levels

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) describes a TRL within the construct of a technology readiness assessment:

“A technology readiness assessment (TRA) is an evaluation of the maturity of critical elements of a product’s technologies, often called critical technologies. It is a normal outgrowth of the system engineering process and relies on data generated during the course of technology or system development. The TRA frequently uses a maturity scale— technology readiness levels (TRLs)—that are ordered according to the characteristics of the demonstration or testing environment under which a given technology was tested at defined points in time. The scale consists of nine levels, each one requiring the technology to be demonstrated in incrementally higher levels of fidelity in terms of its form, the level of integration with other parts of the system, and its operating environment than the previous, until at the final level the technology is described in terms of actual system performance in an operational environment.5”

Though a technology readiness assessment isn’t a policy requirement, the GAO guidance draws heavily from DOD, NASA, and DOE best practices, terminology, and examples. Government agencies and other organizations commonly use TRLs to describe the maturity of a given technology within its development life cycle. Some organizations have tailored the TRL definitions to suit their product development applications. The performance of a technology is compared to definitions of maturity numbered 1-9 based on demonstrations of increasing levels of fidelity and complexity as shown in Table 1: Technology Readiness Levels.

TRL Definition Description

1 Basic principles observed and reported

Lowest level of technology readiness. Scientific research begins to be translated into applied research and development. Examples might include paper studies of a technology’s basic properties.

2 Technology concept and/or application formulated

Invention begins. Once basic principles are observed, practical applications can be invented. Applications are speculative, and there may be no proof or detailed analysis to support the assumptions. Examples are limited to analytic studies.

5 GAO Technology Readiness Assessment Guide, August 11, 2016 accessed on 7/24/2017 https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-16-410G https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-16-410G

TRL Definition Description

Analytical and experimental critical function and/or characteristic proof of concept

Active research and development is initiated. This includes analytical studies and laboratory studies to physically validate the analytical predictions of separate elements of the technology. Examples include components that are not yet integrated or representative.

Component and/or breadboard validation in laboratory environment

Basic technological components are integrated to establish that they will work together. This is relatively “low fidelity” compared with the eventual system. Examples include integration of “ad hoc” hardware in the laboratory.

Component and/or breadboard validation in relevant environment

Fidelity of breadboard technology increases significantly. The basic technological components are integrated with reasonably realistic supporting elements, so they can be tested in a simulated environment. Examples include “high-fidelity” laboratory integration of components.

System/subsystem model or prototype demonstration in a relevant environment

Representative model or prototype system, which is well beyond that of TRL 5, is tested in a relevant environment. Represents a major step up in a technology’s demonstrated readiness. Examples include testing a prototype in a high-fidelity laboratory environment or in a simulated operational environment.

System prototype demonstration in an operational environment

Prototype near or at planned operational system. Represents a major step up from TRL 6 by requiring demonstration of an actual system prototype in an operational environment (e.g., in an aircraft, in a vehicle, or in space).

Actual system completed and qualified through test and demonstration

Technology has been proven to work in its final form and under expected conditions. In almost all cases, this TRL represents the end of true system development. Examples include developmental test and evaluation of the system in its intended weapon system to determine if it meets design specifications.

Actual system proven through successful mission operations

Actual application of the technology in its final form and under mission conditions, such as those encountered in operational test and evaluation.

Examples include using the system under operational mission conditions.

Table 1: Technology Readiness Levels

Appendix B C-UAS Systems Effects in the NAS 2019/2020 Equipment Demonstration–

RFI Response Template: See Attachment on FBO