Summary

The Defence and Security Accelerator (DASA) is scoping the potential for follow-on opportunities to develop a mobile forward surgical capability to support military operations in the land domain.

On behalf of the United Kingdom (UK) Ministry of Defence (MOD), we want to better understand the current market capability for the provision of mobile surgical facilities, specifically required to conduct Damage Control Surgery (DCS) to stabilise patients for onward transport to more comprehensive care facilities. This will provide us with knowledge of what potential solutions already exist, novel solutions in development and areas that may require further investment by MOD.

This request for information is not a commitment to subsequently launch a formal DASA competition.

Background

The traumatic injuries sustained during military operations require increasingly complex medical treatment from the point of wounding right the way through to comprehensive surgical and intensive care facilities. One of the first medical interventions critical to a patient’s outcome is DCS. Efficacy of DCS is directly impacted by the time elapsed between trauma to DCS occurring, with the UK Army focussed on DCS within the “golden hour”.

The golden hour is the period of time following a traumatic injury during which there is the highest likelihood that prompt medical and surgical treatment will prevent death.

Due to the nature of the future battlefield, transit times from point of wounding to traditional deployed medical facilities may lead to golden hour targets not being achieved. The UK Army is therefore considering an alternative medical facility laydown including a small, rapidly deployable, mobile surgical capability. The mobile surgical facility could be located closer to potential areas of conflict (front line or forward) and enable DCS nearer to the time of wounding.

The UK Army’s current deployable medical facilities rely on a combination of tented solutions that require significant logistic and engineering support in order to deploy. Deployment of these solutions is likely to be too time-consuming and resource demanding in order to meet the operational demands anticipated in a forward surgical capacity. Additionally, these capabilities are not designed or optimised to the requirement, do not come as self-contained, and do not take advantage of the latest technology opportunities. Therefore, we would like to explore whether the external supply base can support better meeting this mobile surgical capability requirement.

Essential requirements

• minimum capacity to conduct 1x DCS at a time (surgical intervention where the completeness of the immediate surgical repair is sacrificed to achieve haemorrhage and contamination control, in order to avoid a deterioration in the patient’s condition.)
• minimum capacity to handle any combination of 2x pre or post-operative patients
• medical equipment required for 12x DCS in a 48 hour period
• rapidly deployable: ability to fully deploy the capability in under 2 hours once on location
• fully self-sufficient: capable of operating at full capacity for 48 hours without resupply – including power, medical equipment and consumables
• mobile: should be a self-contained mobile solution, or be readily transportable in a palletised/containerised form
• robust: should be “ruggedised”, suitable for transport over challenging terrain and able to operate in temperatures from -20C to 60C

Desirable requirements

• complete solution: fully integrated solution, including transportation, which is fully self-sufficient
• low personnel demands: deployable by 2 or 3 personnel, with low training demand
• modifiable: Army has certain technologies that will need to be integrated into the solution, such as medical equipment and machines, and communication devices

What we want

We are particularly interested in turn-key, fully-integrated solutions which provide mobile surgical capabilities designed for deployment in austere environments, such as those with very limited access to infrastructure, utilities and resupply. We are also interested in solutions with the potential to be developed into fully-integrated solutions.

What we don’t want

We are not interested in solutions that will require sophisticated infrastructure, logistical chain or need a high degree of training in order to deploy.

How to submit a Capability Submission Form

Responses to this market exploration must be submitted via the DASA submission service, for which you will be required to register.

There are 6 questions relating to your capability, where we are seeking to understand what and how much further development is required for a complete solution to all requirements, or whether a combination of separate solutions is required. The information you provide will assist in developing a statement of requirements for potential future activities. You will not be held to deliver to any of the timescales or cost estimates that you may give.

This is not a competition and therefore we are not asking for costed proposals at this stage. However, we have asked for your estimated cost range to inform future activities. This is a market exploration exercise and we do not commit to subsequently launch a formal DASA competition.

Submissions must be submitted by midday on Thursday 3rd September 2020.

Please only provide details of one product/capability per form. If you have a number of potential solutions, then please submit multiple forms. If you have any questions, then please email accelerator@dstl.gov.uk with ‘Forward Surgical Capability’ in the subject line.

How we use your information

Information you provide to us in a Capability Submission, that is not already available to us from other sources, will be handled in-confidence. By submitting a Capability Submission Form you are giving us permission to keep and use the information for our internal purposes, and to provide the information onwards, in-confidence, within UK Government. The Defence and Security Accelerator will not use or disclose the information for any other purpose, without first requesting permission to do so.

Thank you, Chair.

The United Kingdom continues its support for this proposal for the launch of the selection process and we refer to our previous statement on this agenda item. We also support the statement made by Mexico on behalf of all co-sponsors.

The United Kingdom is a strong supporter of the WTO dispute settlement system, as a central pillar of the rules-based multilateral trading system. An effective and binding dispute settlement mechanism ensures that the rules we have negotiated are enforceable, preserving the rights and obligations of all Members.

We continue to be concerned that the WTO Membership has not been able to launch the selection process for new Appellate Body members, with the result that the Appellate Body is unable to hear new appeals. We are seeing the concrete impairment of rights which is arising from this situation.

We also wish to reiterate that the United Kingdom is committed to finding a resolution to the impasse with the Appellate Body which carries the support of all WTO Members. We understand the long-standing concerns that have been raised, and we recognise that in a consensus-based organisation like the WTO, any dispute resolution mechanism must carry the trust of all Members. We stand ready to play a full role in future discussions on dispute settlement reform.

However, we also consider that finding a solution should not stand in the way of the continued functioning of the system and the launch of the Appellate Body selection process. We therefore call on all Members to act to restore the system to full functioning, whilst we prioritise discussions on a long-term solution.

Development is proposed for ‘The Sizewell C Project’, a new nuclear power station in Suffolk, on the East coast of England, United Kingdom (UK). An application for development consent has been accepted for examination by the UK’s Planning Inspectorate, on behalf of the Secretary of State.

The proposed Sizewell C Project includes two UK European Pressurised Reactor (EPR™) units with an expected net electrical output of approximately 1,670 megawatts (‘MW’) per unit, giving a total of approximately 3,340MW. The Sizewell C Project comprises the main nuclear power station facility, offshore works, and associated development in order to facilitate construction and operation of the nuclear power station. The Sizewell C Project also includes the relocation, demolition and replacement of certain existing ancillary facilities associated with the operational Sizewell B nuclear power station. Phased construction of the Sizewell C Project is anticipated to take 9-12 years. Once completed, the new nuclear power station has an operational design life of 60 years followed by a period of decommissioning.

Further information about the Sizewell C Project can be found in the development consent application documents which are available on the Planning Inspectorate’s website

In accordance with the Infrastructure Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017, the Secretary of State has carried out a screening assessment of likely significant effects on the environment in other states under those Regulations.

The Secretary of State is of the view that the Proposed Development is not likely to have significant effects in any other states outside of the UK.

Taking into account the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in a Transboundary Context (the Espoo Convention) and the UNECE Convention on access to information on environmental matters (the Aarhus Convention), the UK Government has chosen to inform all signatory states and their public of the Proposed Development and invite their participation in the decision making process.

The public in any other state who may be interested in this Proposed Development can provide their representation(s) to the examination of any application by registering as an ‘interested party’. The easiest way to do so is to complete the electronic registration form online.

The electronic form will automatically navigate users through each of the required sections that a representation must contain. The form contains boxes where users are able to put forward their views about the application and the main issues and impacts of the development. The information provided must be submitted to the Planning Inspectorate by the deadline specified below.

By registering as an ‘interested party’, members of the public in any other state are afforded the same ability as the UK public to participate in the process should they wish to do so. Anyone registered as an ‘interested party’ will be automatically kept up to date with the progress of the Examination including any deadlines for making further representations.

The closing date for registration as an ‘interested party’ is on 30 September 2020 at 11:59 pm (Greenwich Mean Time)

Notes for Editors

Planning Inspectorate role

On 1 April 2012, under the Localism Act 2011, the Planning Inspectorate became the agency responsible for operating the planning process for nationally significant infrastructure projects (NSIPs) in England and Wales.

NSIPs are usually large scale developments such as new harbours, power generating stations (including wind farms and nuclear power stations), and electricity transmission lines, which require a type of consent known as ‘development consent’ under procedures governed by the Planning Act 2008 (and amended by the Localism Act 2011).

In England, the Planning Inspectorate examines applications for development consent from the energy, transport, waste, waste water and water sectors. In Wales, it examines applications for energy and harbour development, subject to detailed provisions in the Act; other matters are for Welsh Ministers.

Any developer wishing to construct an NSIP must first apply for consent to do so. For such projects, the Planning Inspectorate examines the application and will make a recommendation to the relevant Secretary of State, who will make the decision on whether to grant or to refuse development consent.

The Espoo Convention

The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in Transboundary Context was adopted in 1991 in the Finnish city of Espoo and entered into force on 10 September 1997.

The Espoo Convention sets out the obligations of signatory parties to assess the environmental impact of certain activities and in doing so, notify and consult other parties on all major projects where the project under consideration is likely to have a significant adverse environmental impact in that state.

The Aarhus Convention

The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters was adopted on 25 June 1998 in the Danish city of Aarhus (Århus) at the Fourth Ministerial Conference as part of the “Environment for Europe” process. It entered into force on 30 October 2001.

The Aarhus Convention establishes a number of rights of the public (individuals and their associations) with regard to the environment. The Parties to the Convention are required to make the necessary provisions so that public authorities (at national, regional or local level) are able to participate in environmental decision making.