Platform
Modules
By sector
By sector
By standard
Blog
News
Events
AGeoP-14
NATO's Geospatial Maritime Working Group, the nations that produce maritime geospatial data, and the systems built to create or use AML+ datasets
AGeoP-14 defines DMGEM, NATO's framework for maritime geospatial data products built on IHO S-100 and NGIF, agreed by nations through STANAG 6503.
AGeoP-14 is the Allied Geographic Publication (AGeoP) that defines the Defence Maritime Geospatial Exchange Model, DMGEM: NATO's framework for building maritime geospatial data products on two civil and NATO standards at once, the IHO's S-100 Universal Hydrographic Data Model and NATO's own Geospatial Information Framework (NGIF). The resulting family of data products is called AML+, an evolution of the older Additional Military Layers (AML) concept carried by STANAG 7170. AGeoP-14 does not itself contain geospatial data. It sets the rules for how AML+ Product Specifications get written and maintained, and how the S-100 and NGIF sides of a data product stay consistent with each other.
AGeoP-14 is not written to a commercial supplier. Development of the DMGEM "is directed by the Geospatial Maritime Working Group (GMWG)", with every AML+ Product Specification endorsed by that group, which "is tasked by the NATO Geospatial Board (NGB) (through the Geospatial Requirements Working Group (GRWG) for NATO maritime geospatial requirements and the Joint Geospatial Standards Working Group (JGSWG) for NATO geospatial standardization)" (section 1.1). The publication itself was "approved by the nations in the Military Committee Joint Standardization Board", and the technical content is carried by this AGeoP while "the agreement of nations to use this publication is recorded in STANAG 6503". That is the standard NATO pattern: the Allied Publication is the specification, STANAG 6503 is where nations commit to it, and a company meets it only when a national programme or a contract invokes a specific AML+ Product Specification or the systems built to it. AGeoP-14 does address system builders directly on one point: "systems for the creation and use of AML+ datasets must adhere to the DMGEM Framework and AML+ Product Specifications" (section 3.7).
The DMGEM's scope is "the requirements for the creation and maintenance of AML+ Product Specifications, data products and software for the production and exploitation of AML+ data products," plus "the required mappings and their maintenance" (section 3.1). Three things sit inside that scope.
Product Specifications are the fundamental unit. Each one defines the content and structure of a dataset, and Product Specifications are "included by reference to a civilian standard or are documented in an Allied Geographic Publication" (section 3.4). A specification is either S-100 based or NGIF based. S-100 based specifications follow the structure of S-100 Part 11 (Annex A) and "include an application schema and feature catalogue," with an optional "portrayal catalogue and data capture guide". NGIF based specifications sit in Annex B, which Edition A leaves genuinely empty: "In Edition A of this AGeoP NGIF based AML+ Product Specifications are not defined", pending a Data Product Specification profile within NGIF itself. Concepts shared across specifications, such as features, attributes and symbols, live in a Register drawn from "both the IHO GI Registry and the NATO NGFCD" (section 3.4).
Concept Mapping keeps the S-100 and NGIF sides interoperable. "For each S-100 Based AML+ Data Product Specification a Concept Mapping to the NGIF NGIM shall be provided" (Annex C), recording Feature, Attribute and Attribute Value for each data model alongside a Mapping Status of Valid Mapping, Partial Mapping or No Mapping. NGIF based specifications need no such mapping, because they "use the items from the NGIM directly" (section 3.6). A mapping is maintained "as baseline versions based on versions of AML+ product specifications or baselines of the NGIM" (Annex C), and ownership sits with the custodian of the Data Product Specification it belongs to.
Data Products must conform to a governing Product Specification. Edition A currently defines exactly one: S-102, the IHO Bathymetric Surface Product Specification (Edition 1.0.0, April 2012), for "the provision of detailed bathymetric information" (section 3.5). The document is candid about a gap here rather than hiding it: "S-102 1.0.0 does not define Portrayal. This should be addressed separately" in a future version. No NGIF based data product is specified yet.
One thing an implementer commonly misses: conformance and certification are kept deliberately apart. Annex D sets out the test modules a Product Specification or a data product must pass to claim conformance, but the conformance of the software and systems that produce or use DMGEM data is stated to sit outside the standard's own scope (section 3.2) - passing Annex D's tests proves the data product or specification conforms, not the tooling used to build it.
DMGEM binds "NATO and contributing nations", who "need a coherent set of digital geospatial products and standards allowing for the dissemination and management of designated geospatial information meeting operational requirements within the maritime domain" (section 1.3). Implementation is uneven by nation in practice: at promulgation, Estonia recorded that implementing DMGEM depends on its own Maritime Administration producing data to the IHO S-100 standard, Slovenia recorded that it does not produce AML-type geospatial products itself though it can use them aboard its own vessels, and the United States recorded that full implementation depends on NGIF-based product specifications this edition does not yet define. AML+ also carries one explicit mandate beyond the DMGEM framework itself, tied to STANAG 4564: it "is a mandated product for WECDIS as defined in STANAG 4564" (section 3.7).
There is no certification against AGeoP-14. The document says so directly: "Certification is a process which generally involves performance tests (including the conformance tests documented herein) and quality assurance tests. This is also outside of the scope of this standard" (section 3.3). What exists instead is conformance testing under Annex D: a Product Specification "shall pass the test module defined in Annex D.2", and a data product claiming conformance to a Product Specification "shall pass the test module defined in Annex D.3" (section 3.2). Concretely, Annex D checks whether a Product Specification's content and structure are consistent with S-100 Part 11 and with this AGeoP's own Annex A, and whether a data product fulfils everything its Product Specification requires.
AGeoP-14 is an operational and technical standard, not a management system: the work of meeting it happens in how geospatial Product Specifications are written, mapped and tested, not in software a vendor sells. ComplyTrain's part is holding the evidence trail around that work. That means the procedures for producing and versioning an AML+ Product Specification, the Concept Mapping records and their Mapping Status against Annex C, the conformance test results a specification or data product needs on file for Annex D, and the training records for the people maintaining them. Where a national programme has adopted a specific AML+ Product Specification, or a contract invokes the WECDIS mandate in section 3.7, that is the point ComplyTrain's procedures and audit trail attach to.
What ComplyTrain does not do: it does not build, run or validate the Concept Mappings or the Annex D conformance tests, and it does not produce or certify geospatial data products itself - that is geospatial engineering work, carried out in the systems and processes AGeoP-14 describes. Which tier of NATO geospatial documents applies to a given programme is set by the contract and the customer's quality clause, not by us. The standards explorer shows what else sits alongside AGeoP-14 in the catalogue, including STANAG 6503 and STANAG 7170, and we are glad to talk through where a specific programme's obligations leave you.
Tell us how you need to work with AGeoP-14 and what you need from it. We will come back to you about what ComplyTrain can do.
Thank you. Your list is on its way to your inbox, and we will come back to you on what working with these standards in ComplyTrain involves, usually within one business day.
Not on its own. AGeoP-14 is the technical content; the agreement by which nations commit to using it is recorded in a separate document, STANAG 6503. Whether it binds a particular supplier depends on whether a national programme or a contract invokes the DMGEM framework or a specific AML+ Product Specification built under it.
AML+ is the family of maritime geospatial data products AGeoP-14 defines the rules for. It is described as an evolution of the older Additional Military Layers (AML) concept, extended to align with the IHO's S-100 data model and NATO's Geospatial Information Framework (NGIF).
No. The document states plainly that certification, including its own conformance tests and quality assurance testing, is outside its scope. What AGeoP-14 defines instead is conformance testing under Annex D, which checks a Product Specification or data product against the rules in the standard, not a certification scheme.
AGeoP-14 states that AML+, as it defines it, is a mandated product for WECDIS, the Warship Electronic Chart Display and Information System defined in STANAG 4564. A system built to STANAG 4564 is therefore one of the concrete places the DMGEM framework reaches a supplier.
Not in this edition. Edition A leaves Annex B, which would define NGIF-based AML+ Product Specifications, empty, and states that no NGIF-based product specifications or data products are defined yet. Only one product specification exists so far, S-102 for bathymetric data, and it is built on S-100.
One system for the whole compliance programme. Start with the module you need most.
Collect information the same way every time, and decide in advance what happens next.
Know whether your controls are operating, not just whether a policy says they exist.
Turn the compliance work you already know about into a plan with owners, dependencies and dates.
Know what you can offer, and hold the evidence behind every configuration you offer it in.
Eight built-in reports across every module, scheduled, delivered, and filed where the evidence lives.
The sector news that matters to your organisation - read and rated by AI, and delivered as a scheduled digest in your own language.
AI reads the tender pack and pulls out the requirements, deadlines and rules - then helps you draft the response from your own approved content, with you reviewing every step.
One current register of the suppliers and partners you depend on - each risk-assessed, re-assessing itself on schedule, and wired straight into your risk register.
See every requirement you face - across every standard, plus your own contracts and policies - traced to the documents, evidence and processes that satisfy it.
Identify, score, treat and review your risks in one place - with AI to help anyone run a proper assessment, and a defensible trail behind every decision.
Assign training, prove it was understood, and hold the competence records an auditor asks for.
Draft compliance documents with AI, keep every version under control, and export them beautifully branded - all in one place.
Audits, corrective actions, processes and approvals in one quality system, organised around ISO 9001.
Medical device manufacturers operate under more regulatory pressure than almost any other sector outside pharmaceuticals. The rules govern how you design a device, how you make it, how you track it after it ships, and how you respond when something goes wrong.
Learn how EU dual-use export controls apply to encryption, sensors, and software, how classification works under Annex I, and why sending source code by email can count as an export.
A practical way to turn in-your-head risk management into a register that survives staff turnover and answers the risk questions now showing up in tenders.