17R4022_0410-02_-_JECP_TIC_Filter_-_SOW.docx
DOCX document 47 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Joint Expeditionary Collective Protection (JECP) Toxic Industrial Chemical (TIC) Filters
- Solicitation number
- N0017817R4022
About this file
Statement of Work (SOW)
View the file
Other files
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
GUARD BED PROGRAM
SPECIFICATIONS/DELIVERABLES
1.0 BACKGROUND
The Naval Surface Warfare Center, Dahlgren Division (NSWCDD), Chemical, Biological and Radiological (CBR) Defense Division (B20)/ CBR Protection and Integration Branch (B23) have responsibility as Principal Investigator (PI) in support of a Joint Expeditionary Collective Protection (JECP) proposal for research and development into expanding the protective capabilities of the JECP filtration systems in coordination with the Edgewood Chemical Biological Center (ECBC) CBR Filtration Branch. A new layered Guard Bed filter was developed under funding from the Joint Science and Technology Office (JSTO) at Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) to augment existing M98 filter installations on ships to increase M98 filter service life and to increase filtration capacity for certain chemical gases. This new Guard Bed technology can be incorporated into existing M98 filter housings on JECP shelter systems and other expeditionary systems. The current collective protection M98 filters for JECP shelters would benefit from improved toxic industrial chemicals (TICs) filtration performance. The Guard Bed media type can be optimized for the filtration of various TICs of interest by using basic activated carbon, ASZM-TEDA carbon, CO-ZZaT, and other sorbent materials.
2.0 APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS
| 2.1 | JECP Capability Production Document (CPD) |
| 2.2 | JECP System Performance Specification (SPS) |
| 2.3 | ECBC-TR-872, Single Pass Breakthrough Test Methodology for Collective Protection Air Purification Technologies dated June 2011; |
| 2.4 | MIL-PRF-51527D, Filter Set, Gas-Particulate, 200 CFM, M98, dated 6 October 2016; |
| 2.5 | MIL-PRF-51525D, Filter, Gas, 200 CFM, dated 9 July 2015; |
| 2.6 | MIL-PRF-51526D, Filter, Particulate, 200 CFM, dated 22 December 2014; |
| 2.7 | HDTRA1-13-C-0070, Final Technical Report – Guard Bed to Enhance M98 Lifetime; and |
| 2.8 | NSWC/TR-14/279, Scaling of Dosage and Concentration for Toxic Industrial Chemical Incidents, dated March 2013. |
3.0 REQUIREMENTS
The contractor shall perform research and development into expanding the chemical filtration capabilities of a fielded JECP filtration system. Research and development activities will focus on utilizing a novel Guard Bed technology to meet the additional threats posed by toxic industrial chemicals.
| 3.1 | Task #1: The contractor shall perform research and development into utilizing the Guard Bed material as a supplemental filter(s) to the current M98 filter in JECP filtration systems. The contractor shall perform all requirements specified in Section 3.1 through coordination with the technical POC listed in Section 9.1. The contractor shall document all work performed to complete the following tasks to be included in a final technical report. |
| 3.1.1 | The contractor shall analyze the Guard Bed material and M98 filter carbon from the 21 month shipboard test. This effort is a continuation of previous research performed under the DTRA/JTSO contract HDTRA1-13-C-0070 as detailed in the Guard Bed to Enhance M98 Lifetime Report. The effect of operational testing on the Guard Bed filters shall be evaluated for any increased pressure drop, shedding of the fiber material or granules, and any visual deterioration. The residual capacity of the Guard Bed filters shall be determined. The M98 carbon shall be evaluated separate from the Guard Beds to determine the residual life of the M98 filters. The carbon from the M98 filters “unprotected” by the Guard Beds shall be compared to the M98 filter carbon “protected” by the Guard Beds. The samples shall be provided by the technical POC listed in Section 9.1. Results and analysis along with any challenges and/or design, test, performance, and procedural evaluations learned from the test shall be documented and included in the report. Further, information from these tests will be used to optimize the design parameters for the shipboard Guard Beds. |
| 3.1.2 | The contractor shall develop standardized lab test methods for Guard Bed sample analysis with chemical break through testing as identified in Section 3.1.6. The contractor shall conduct at least one (1) visit to NSWCDD in coordination with the technical point of contact (TPOC) to evaluate and develop a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) which consists of test methodologies across labs (CDRL A003). |
3.1.3 The contractor shall evaluate and determine the filtration media composition (carbon, Co-ZZaT, etc) of the FFA supplemental filter to provide increased TIC protection against the TICs specified in Section 3.1.6.
3.1.4 The contractor shall incorporate the filtration media into the webbed material of the Guard Bed and determine the optimal number of plies and/or thickness for each TIC of concern listed in Section 3.1.6 for the FFA supplemental filter. The contractor shall evaluate a universal media composition or layered filter with different media types that optimize TIC protection, pressure drop, and producibility of each FFA supplemental filter.
| 3.1.5 | The contractor shall propose FFA supplemental filter designs for use in conjunction with the FFA400-326 from HDT Expeditionary Systems Incorporated. The contractor shall produce at least three designs in conjunction with the FFA400-326. One (1) design shall evaluate and focus on positioning a filter preceding the M98 filter. The other two (2) designs shall focus on adding a downstream filter inline on the FFA effluent lines without modifying the FFA. The proposed design considerations will include any necessary housing elements required to connect the Guard Bed to each FFA system, if applicable based on design, and be optimized to eliminate leakage around the filter. The design will be limited to a threshold value of no greater than 2.8 inch water gauge (iwg) pressure drop across the filter at the rated airflow of 400 cfm at standard conditions. The design will be limited to an objective value of no greater than 1.0 iwg pressure drop. The design shall emphasize simplicity; connecting to the FFA system with minimal parts and requiring no special tools for installation. The design will be optimized to provide protection against the TIC challenge criteria detailed in Section 3.1.6 while taking into consideration the trade-off between cost, performance, and logistical footprint. The design will be coordinated with the technical point of contact (TPOC) identified below. |
| 3.1.6 | The contractor shall design the FFA supplemental filter at a minimum to meet the following TIC challenge and failure criteria: |
| Chemicals | |
| Conditions |
Ammonia Initial Threshold: 8,600 Ct Initial Objective: 60,000 Ct After 1 year Threshold: 8,600 Ct After 1 year Objective: 60,000 Ct Challenge concentration: 1,000 mg/m3 End Point concentration: 35 mg/m3 Flow: 400 cfm total or 200 cfm per M98, constant Temperature: 24º ± 3º C Relative Humidity: 15 ± 3 percent Pre-equilibrium: None
Nitrogen Dioxide Initial Threshold: 4,720 Ct Initial Objective: 53,800 Ct After 1 year Threshold: 4,720 Ct After 1 year Objective: 53,800 Ct Challenge concentration: 375 mg/m3 (NO2) End Point concentration: 9 mg/m3 NO2 and 30 mg/m3 NO Flow: 400 cfm total or 200 cfm per M98, constant Temperature: 24º ± 3º C Relative Humidity: 80 ± 3 percent Pre-equilibrium: 80 ± 3% RH @ 27º ± 5º C If the filter design is posterior to the M98 filters, the design must be evaluated in-line with ASZM-TEDA representative of the two M98 filters.
Formaldehyde Initial Objective: 75,000 Ct After 1 year Objective: 75,000 Ct Challenge concentration: 1,000 mg/m3 End Point concentration: 1.2 mg/m3 Flow: 400 cfm total or 200 cfm per M98, constant Temperature: 24º +/- 3º C Relative Humidity: ≤15 percent Pre-equilibrium: None
Methyl Bromide Initial Threshold: 17,000 Ct Initial Objective: 102,000 Ct After 1 year Threshold: 17,000 Ct After 1 year Objective: 102,000 Ct Challenge concentration: 1000 mg/m3 End Point concentration: 28.6 mg/m3 Flow: 400 cfm total or 200 cfm per M98, constant Temperature: 24º ± 3º C Relative Humidity: 80 ± 3 percent Pre-equilibrium: 80 ± 3% RH @ 27º ± 5º C The threshold and objective values represent full system performance (dual M98s and supplemental filter)
| 3.1.7 | The contractor shall provide laboratory samples of the proposed FFA supplemental filter designs originating from Section 3.1.5 for government verification testing. The samples will be prepared as test tube, IP (C2A1) style filters, or other appropriate laboratory samples capable of being evaluated at operationally realistic flows rates and bed depths for lab scale testing. The contractor will provide 30 samples of each proposed design from Section 3.1.5 to the TPOC identified below. |
| 3.1.8 | The contractor shall draft conceptual level (Level 1) engineering drawings for all FFA supplemental filter designs (CDRL A002). |
| 3.1.9 | The contractor shall document all research and provide a final data analysis report (CDRL A001) including a lab scale test report. |
| 3.2 | Task #2: The contractor shall perform research and development to design a new radial filter to replace the current M98 gas filter and/or the M98 gas/particulate filter pair. The contractor shall perform all requirements specified in Section 3.2 through coordination with the TPOC listed below. The contractor shall document all work performed to complete the following tasks to be included in a final technical report: |
| 3.2.1 | The contractor shall evaluate design concepts which include using sorbents immobilized into fibrous media. The benefit of this approach is that each layer of fibrous media can be the same, or a different sorbent, which allows for modularity to design filters based on specific threat. |
| 3.2.2 | The contractor’s design approach shall evaluate replacing the M98 particulate filter. The M98 particulate filter redesign approach shall focus on meeting aerosol protection requirements specified in Section 3.2.6 and 3.2.7 by the fibrous media in two concepts. The first concept will have a thinner fiber mat in between each layer of fiber/sorbent, tuned to high efficiency particulate removal. The second concept shall have an electro-spun nanofiber-based filter on the inside of the gas filter layer, but within the same filter footprint. |
| 3.2.3 | In the radial filter design process, the contractor shall maintain the current filter interface dimensions of the M98 filter as specified in MIL-PRF-51527D. |
| 3.2.4 | For redesign approaches that modify the gas filter and/or the particulate filter, the contractor shall limit the pressure drop to no greater than the pressure drop of the M98 filter as specified in MIL-PRF-51527D. |
| 3.2.5 | The contractor shall design the new radial filter, at a minimum, to meet the following overall chemical filtration performance requirements: |
| Agent |
| Conditions |
Agent: Sarin (GB) Initial: 200,000 Ct, minimum After 1 year: 50,000 Ct, minimum Challenge concentration: 4,000 ± 200 mg/m3 Flow: 200 cfm, constant Temperature: 24º ± 3º C Relative Humidity: 50 ± 5 percent End Point concentration: 0.04 mg/m3 Pre-equilibrium: None
Simulant: Dimethylmethylphosphonate (DMMP) Initial: 200,000 Ct, minimum After 1 year: 75,000 Ct, minimum Challenge concentration: 3,000 ± 400 mg/m3 Flow: 200 cfm, constant Temperature: 24º ± 3º C Relative Humidity: ≤15 percent End-Point concentration: 0.04 mg/m3 Pre-Equilibrium: None
Agent: Mustard (HD) Initial: 200,000 Ct, minimum After 1 year: 40,000 Ct, minimum Challenge concentration: 91 ± 5 mg/m3 Flow: 200 cfm, constant Temperature: 24º ± 3º C Relative Humidity: ≤15 percent End-Point concentration: 0.05 mg/m3 Pre-Equilibrium: None
Agent: Soman (GD) Initial: 175,000 Ct, minimum After 1 year: 40,000 Ct, minimum Challenge concentration: 393 ± 20 mg/m3 Flow: 200 cfm, constant Temperature: 24º ± 3º C Relative Humidity: ≤15 percent End Point concentration: 0.01 mg/m3 Pre-equilibrium: None
Agent: (VX) Initial: 200,000 Ct, minimum After 1 year: 40,000 Ct, minimum Challenge concentration: 1.3 mg/m3 Flow: 200 cfm, constant Temperature: 24º ± 3º C Relative Humidity: ≤15 percent End Point concentration: 0.003 mg/m3 Pre-equilibrium: None
Agent: Cyanogen Chloride (CK) Initial: 100,000 Ct, minimum After 1 year: 20,000 Ct, minimum Challenge concentration: 4,000 ± 200 mg/m3 Flow: 200 cfm, constant Temperature: 24º ± 3º C Relative Humidity: 80 ± 3 percent End Point concentration: 8 mg/m3 Pre-equilibrium: 80 ± 3 % RH @ 27º +/- 5º C
Agent: Hydrocyanic Acid (AC) Initial: 80,000 Ct, minimum After 1 year: 20,000 Ct, minimum Challenge concentration: 4,000 ± 200 mg/m3 Flow: 200 cfm, constant Temperature: 24º ± 3º C Relative Humidity: 50 ± 5 percent End-Point concentration: 4 mg/m3 (AC) and/or 8 mg/m3 (Cyanogen) Pre-Equilibrium: None
Agent: Phosgene (CG) Initial: 165,000 Ct, minimum After 1 year: 40,000 Ct, minimum Challenge concentration: 20,000 ± 500 mg/m3 Flow: 200 cfm., constant Temperature: 24º ± 3º C Relative Humidity: 50 ± 5 percent End Point concentration: 8 mg/m3 Pre-equilibrium: None
Ammonia Initial Threshold: 8,600 Ct Initial Objective: 60,000 Ct After 1 year Threshold: 8,600 Ct After 1 year Objective: 60,000 Ct Challenge concentration: 1,000 mg/m3 End Point concentration: 35 mg/m3 Flow: 200 cfm, constant Temperature: 24º ± 3º C Relative Humidity: 15 ± 3 percent Pre-equilibrium: None
Nitrogen Dioxide Initial Threshold: 4,720 Ct Initial Objective: 53,800 Ct After 1 year Threshold: 4,720 Ct After 1 year Objective: 53,800 Ct Challenge concentration: 375 mg/m3 (NO2) End Point concentration: 9 mg/m3 NO2 and 30 mg/m3 NO Flow: 200 cfm, constant Temperature: 24º ± 3º C Relative Humidity: 80 ± 3 percent Pre-equilibrium: 80 ± 3% RH @ 27º ± 5º C
Chlorine Initial: 125,000 Ct, minimum Challenge concentration: 4,000 mg/m3 End Point concentration: 1.5 mg/m3 Flow: 200 cfm, constant Temperature: 24º ± 3º C Relative Humidity: 15 ± 3 percent Pre-equilibrium: None
Sulfur Dioxide Initial: 100,000 Ct, minimum Challenge concentration: 4,000 mg/m3 End Point concentration: 5 mg/m3 Flow: 200 cfm, constant Temperature: 24º ± 3º C Relative Humidity: 15 ± 3 percent Pre-equilibrium: None
Formaldehyde Initial Objective: 75,000 Ct After 1 year Objective: 75,000 Ct Challenge concentration: 1,000 mg/m3 End Point concentration: 1.2 mg/m3 Flow: 200 cfm, constant Temperature: 24º +/- 3º C Relative Humidity: ≤15 percent Pre-equilibrium: None
Methyl Bromide Initial Threshold: 17,000 Ct Initial Objective: 102,000 Ct After 1 year Threshold: 17,000 Ct After 1 year Objective: 102,000 Ct Challenge concentration: 1,000 mg/m3 End Point concentration: 28.6 mg/m3 Flow: 200 cfm, constant Temperature: 24º ± 3º C Relative Humidity: 80 ± 3 percent Pre-equilibrium: 80 ± 3% RH @ 27º ± 5º C
Agent: Arsine (SA) Initial: 100,000 Ct, minimum After 1 year: 20,000 Ct, minimum Challenge concentration: 4,000 ± 200 mg/m3 Flow: 200 cfm, constant Temperature: 24º ± 3º C Relative Humidity: 15 ± 3 percent End Point concentration: 0.2 mg/m3 Pre-equilibrium: None
3.2.6 If during the redesign process of the M98 filter, modifications are made to the M98 particulate filter, the contractor shall design the new radial filter, at a minimum, to meet the following overall particulate and aerosol efficiency requirements:
3.2.6.1 Protection efficiency shall be measured using aerosolized polyalphaolefin or other appropriate simulant as the simulant challenge aerosol.
3.2.6.1 The air purification components shall be conditioned at room temperature and subjected to airflow within 10% of its intended use.
| 3.2.6.2 | The airflow rate shall be maintained while efficiency is recorded. |
| 3.2.6.3 | The system shall be challenged with a polydispersed aerosol whose count mean diameter is 0.3 microns and whose particle size standard deviation is no greater than 2.0. This method shall use a particle analyzer for size and count determinations. If particle size test data are log normally distributed, then geometric mean and standard deviation should be computed instead of arithmetic mean and standard deviation. |
| 3.2.6.4 | The air purification components shall meet the efficiency requirement of at least 99.97 percent using the verification test method described above. The verification method shall be repeated three additional times, one time each for a polydispersed aerosol whose count mean diameter is 1 micron, 0.6 microns, and 0.1 microns, respectively. |
| 3.2.6.5 | For all particulates and aerosols less than 1 micron mean diameter, the system shall be greater than 99.97 percent. |
| 3.2.6.6 | The system shall be at least 99.9999 percent efficient at removing all particulates and aerosols of 1 micron mean diameter or greater. |
| 3.2.6.7 | For each test, the particle size standard deviation shall be no greater than 2.0. |
| 3.2.6.8 | Failure to meet these requirements shall constitute failure of this verification. These requirements originate from the JECP System Performance Specification with higher particulate and aerosol requirements than M98 filter. |
| 3.2.7 | If during the redesign process of the M98 filter, modifications are made to the M98 particulate filter, the contractor shall design the new radial filter at a minimum to meet the particulate and aerosol dust loading requirements of the M98 filter as specified in MIL-PRF-51527. |
| 3.2.8 | The contractor shall provide laboratory samples of the proposed radial filter bed designs for government verification testing. The samples shall be prepared as test tube or IP (C2A1) style filters for lab scale testing. The contractor will provide 15 samples of each particulate filter design and 55 samples of each gas filter bed design to the TPOC below. |
| 3.2.9 | The contractor shall provide draft conceptual level (Level 1) engineering drawings for all radial filter designs (CDRL A002). |
| 3.2.10 | The contractor shall document all research and provide a final data analysis report (CDRL A001). The report shall include details on materials, dimensions, estimated performance, a discussion on the designs impact to full scale production, and the estimated production cost. The report shall also include interface issues and proposed solutions and JECP system performance impacts (positive and negative). |
| 3.3 | The contractor shall coordinate with the TPOC below to attend one (1) review of research at Dahlgren, Virginia, two (2) reviews of research at Edgewood Chemical Biological Center (ECBC), Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, and provide one (1) visit in order to coordinate for Section 3.1.2. The reviews of research will consist of a presentation (CDRL A004) on all research and development activities conducted during the period of performance. |
| 3.4 | The contractor shall invoice on a bi-weekly basis. |
| 4.0 | DELIVERABLES |
| 4.1 | The contractor shall document all research tasks derived from Task #1 in Section 3.1 and provide a final technical report with analysis of all findings (CDRL A001). The report shall include details on materials, dimensions, estimated performance, estimated production cost, and a discussion on the design impact to full scale production. The report shall specify the optimal filtration media composition for use against each TIC and the required media bed depth. The report shall specify the required thickness and/or number plies specific to each TIC after incorporating the media into the webbed material. The report shall also include interface issues and proposed solutions and system performance impacts (positive and negative). The contractor shall include a lab scale test report on the FFA supplemental filter designs in the final technical report. The report shall emphasize the lab scale test results on the chemical removal performance of the proposed FFA supplemental filter designs against the TICs specified in Section 3.1.6. |
| 4.2 | The contractor shall provide laboratory samples of the proposed FFA supplemental filter designs for government verification testing. The samples will be prepared as test tube, IP (C2A1) style filters, or other appropriate laboratory samples capable of being evaluated at operationally realistic flows rates and bed depths for lab scale testing. The contractor will provide 30 samples of each design to the TPOC below as per Section 3.1.7. |
| 4.3 | The contractor shall provide draft conceptual level (Level 1) engineering drawings for all FFA supplemental filter designs as per Section 3.1.8 (CDRL A002). |
| 4.4 | The contractor shall document all research tasks derived from Task #2 in Section 3.2 and provide a final technical report with analysis of all findings (CDRL A001). The report shall include details on materials, dimensions, estimated performance, a discussion on the design impact to full scale production, and the estimated production cost. The report shall also include interface issues and proposed solutions and system performance impacts (positive and negative). The contractor shall include a lab scale test report on the new radial filter design in the final technical report. The report shall emphasize the lab scale test results on the chemical, and particulate, if applicable, removal performance of the modified filter bed design evaluated against the requirements specified in Section 3.2. |
| 4.5 | The contractor shall provide laboratory samples of the proposed radial filter bed designs for government verification testing. The samples will be prepared as test tube or IP (C2A1) style filters for lab scale testing. The contractor shall provide 15 samples of each particulate filter design and 55 samples of each gas filter bed design to the TPOC below per Section 3.2.8. |
| 4.6 | The contractor shall provide draft conceptual level (Level 1) engineering drawings for all radial filter designs as per Section 3.2.9 (CDRL A002). |
| 4.7 | The contractor shall deliver a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) (CDRL A003). |
| 4.8 | The contractor shall provide a presentation on all research and development activities conducted during the period of performance (CDRL A004). |
| 5.0 | GOVERNMENT FURNISHED EQUIPMENT (GFE) |
| 5.1 | FFA400-326 from HDT Expeditionary Systems Inc. (Serial #:570107161110000064), quantity 1 each, cost $20,000.00 |
| 5.2 | Guard Bed and M98 carbon samples from a 21 month shipboard test (non-serialized testing samples), quantity 11 each, cost $5,000.00. |
| 5.3 | All GFE will be provided immediately after award of the order. GFE to be utilized for SOW tasking as outlined in paragraphs 3.1.3, 3.1.4, 3.1.5, 3.1.6, 3.1.7, 3.1.8 for FFA and 3.1.1 for Guard bed and M98 carbon samples. |
| 6.0 | TRAVEL |
The contractor will be required to travel in performance of this contract. The number of trips and types of personnel traveling shall be limited to the minimum required to accomplish work requirements and shall be coordinated with the TPOC. All travel shall be conducted in accordance with the Federal Travel Regulations (FTR). The following travel is anticipated: One (1) person for one (1) trip to Dahlgren, Virginia for a final review of research; One (1) person for two (2) trips to Edgewood Chemical Biological Center (ECBC), Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland; and one (1) person for one (1) trip to Dahlgren, Virginia to standardize the test methodology between labs.
7.0 TECHNICAL POINT OF CONTACT
The Technical Point of Contact information will be given at the issuance of the award.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .