RFI for IWTD Laboratory Testing for Microbio and TIC-TIM Purification.docx

Request For Information for Individual Water Treatment Device (IWTD) – Validation Testing for Microbiological and Toxic Industrial Chemicals/Toxic Industrial Materials (TIC/TIMs) Purification

General Information

· Contract Opportunity Type: Sources Sought (Original)

· Original Published Date: TBD

· Original Response Date: TBD

· Inactive Policy: 10 days after response date

· Original Inactive Date:

Classification

· Product Service Code: B533 - Special Studies/Analysis - Water Quality

· NAICS Code: 541380 - Testing Laboratories

· Place of Performance: Natick, MA 01760

DESCRIPTION

Synopsis:

Product Manager Soldier Clothing and Individual Equipment (PdM SCIE) is seeking laboratories that can validate the capabilities of individual water purifiers. This is not a request for proposal. This is a request for information (RFI) to identify laboratories that can validate purification capabilities of individual water treatment devices. Key desired capabilities for laboratories include certification to ISO 17025:2017 or equivalent and the equipment and personnel required to conduct validation testing according to National Sanitation Foundation (NSF) Protocols P248.01 and P248.02. Information gathered under this RFI will inform a future request for proposal.

PdM SCIE requests laboratories to provide the following information:

1. Is your laboratory certified to ISO 17025:2017 or equivalent? Yes/No

2. Is your laboratory equipped to evaluate individual water treatment devices against the NSF P248.01 and P248.02 protocols?

3. What is your estimated timeline for executing this validation testing, assuming an award in May 2026?

4. Must be able to draft product specific test plans in accordance with P248 scheme of validation protocols.

5. Must be able to provide all raw data, test data, and internal standard data.

These water purification devices could potentially provide clean drinking water for Soldiers using any indigenous fresh water source. They may offer as much as 135 liters of purification capacity. This technology could enhance Soldier lethality by reducing Soldier load and increasing the duration of autonomous squad-level operations. This effort seeks to validate the ability of devices to perform clearance of TIC/TIMs to the military-specific NSF P248.02 purification standard. Included as attachments 0001 and 0002 are the purifier specific protocols.

Please refer to the attachments “NSF P248.01 - Military Operations Microbiological Water Purifiers” and “NSF P248.02 - Military Operations Chemical Water Purifiers”.

Interested parties are invited to submit a response to this Sources Sought Announcement. THIS IS A SOURCES SOUGHT ANNOUNCEMENT ONLY.

RESPONSES:

Interested parties may identify their interest and capability by sending responses with information on how they might address the Military requirement via e-mail ONLY to Blaise Liess, blaise.p.liess.civ@army.mil and Carla Gorton, carla.f.gorton.civ@army.mil, no later than 23 March 2026 by 5:00 p.m. EST. Interested parties shall include information regarding a firm's experience, personnel, and facilities. Information should include cost, technical information (i.e., technical literature, test data and illustrations, photographs, patents), and relevant company background/experience. Firms responding shall indicate whether or not they are a small business. The U.S. Government will not pay for any information or administrative cost incurred in response to this notice. All costs associated with responding to this notice will be solely at the expense of the interested party.

Please provide business size (indicate your socioeconomic status), applicable NAICS code, and CAGE code. If you hold a GSA Federal Supply Schedule contract, please identify your contract number.

QUESTIONS:

Any questions for clarification may be emailed to Blaise Liess, blaise.p.liess.civ@army.mil and Carla Gorton, carla.f.gorton.civ@army.mil no later than 20 March 2026 by 5:00 p.m. EST. Verbal questions will NOT be accepted. Questions shall NOT contain proprietary or classified information. An unattributed list of questions and answers will be published at the same web location of this Sources Sought Announcement.

Attachments/Links:

NSF P248.01 - Military Operations Microbiological Water Purifiers

NSF P248.02 - Military Operations Chemical Water Purifiers

CONTACT INFORMATION

Contracting Office Address

· NATICK DIVISION

GENERAL GREENE AVE

NATICK, MA 01760-5011

Primary Point of Contact

· Blaise Liess blaise.p.liess.civ@army.mil Phone Number: 703-223-1993

Secondary Point of Contact

· Carla Gorton carla.f.gorton.civ@army.mil Phone Number: 571-474-7869 image2.emf

P248.02 2025 Final.pdf

NSF Confidential

NSF Protocol

NSF P248.02-2025

Military Operations Chemical Water Purifiers

NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION OR SALE

Since 1944, NSF International (NSF) has stood at the forefront of global efforts to improve human and planet health.

As an independent, internationally recognized organization, we play a pivotal role in the development of robust public health standards.

NSF engages in the rigorous testing, auditing, and certification of an array of products and services. The NSF mark serves as an emblem of assurance, signifying to consumers, retailers, and regulatory bodies that our certified products meet or exceed requisite standards.

This protocol is subject to revision.

Contact NSF to confirm this revision is current.

Users of this protocol may request clarifications and interpretations, or propose revisions by contacting:

NSF

789 North Dixboro Road, PO Box 130140 Ann Arbor, Michigan 48113-0140 USA

Phone: (734) 769-8010 Email: info@nsf.org Web: <nsf.org>

NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION OR SALE

mailto:info@nsf.org https://www.nsf.org/

NOT FOR

DISTRIBUTION

OR SALE

i

NSF P248.02-2025

for Water Systems –

Protocol Developer

Defense Health Agency – Public Health US Army Combat Capabilities Development Command – Soldier Center ii

Prepared by NSF staff with assistance from The NSF Protocol Review Panel on NSF P248.02

Todd Alexander, DEVCOM Mike Blumenstein, NSF Eric Brack, US Army Mandy Huntoon, NSF Art Lundquist, US Army

Adopted by

March 2025

Published by NSF, PO Box 130140, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48113-0140, USA

For inquiries regarding this protocol, please reference the designation: “NSF P248.02-2025.”

Copyright 2025 NSF International

NSF developed this protocol for all manufacturers wishing to obtain this voluntary certification with NSF.

Manufacturers and resellers/retailers may use this protocol only for their internal purposes in connection with the certification process of and by NSF.

Unless otherwise specified, no part of this publication may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and microfilm, without permission in writing from

NSF.

Without the written permission of NSF, it is strictly prohibited to use this designation in whole or in part, to indicate conformance with this protocol through the marking of products or packaging, or by any other means.

Printed in the United States of America.

iii

Disclaimers

NSF, in performing its functions in accordance with its objectives, does not assume or undertake to discharge any responsibility of the manufacturer or any other party. NSF shall not be responsible to anyone for the use of or reliance upon this protocol by anyone. NSF shall not incur any obligation or liability for damages, including consequential damages, arising out of or in connection with the use, interpretation of, or reliance upon this protocol. It is the responsibility of the user of this protocol to judge the suitability of the protocol for the user’s purpose.

Participation in NSF protocol development activities by regulatory agency representatives (federal, state, or local) shall not constitute their agency's endorsement of NSF or any of its protocols. NSF’s protocol development process is consensus driven, seeking input from all interested parties. Use of this protocol is strictly voluntary.

Preference is given to the use of performance criteria measurable by examination or testing in NSF protocol development when such performance criteria may reasonably be used in lieu of design, materials, or construction criteria.

A dual-unit protocol may use both non-SI (English System of Measurement) and SI units of measure (SI is the International System of Units, commonly known as the metric system). Unless stated otherwise, whichever system provided in the primary position is the official and normative unit value. Units may be provided in parentheses immediately following the primary units when required for clarity or informational purposes. As such, these values stated are not interchangeable, should be regarded separately, and used independently.

Interchanging values from both unit systems may result in errors.

The illustrations, if provided, are intended to assist in understanding their adjacent protocol requirements.

However, the illustrations may not include all requirements for a specific product or unit, nor do they show the only method of fabricating such arrangements. Such partial drawings shall not be used to justify improper or incomplete design and construction.

At the time of this publication, examples of programs and processes were provided for general guidance. This information is given for the convenience of users of this protocol and does not constitute an endorsement by NSF. Equivalent programs and processes may be used.

Unless otherwise referenced, the annexes are not considered an integral part of NSF protocols. The annexes are provided as general guidelines to the manufacturer, regulatory agency, user, or certifying organization.

NSF developed this protocol for all manufacturers wishing to obtain this voluntary certification with NSF.

Manufacturers and resellers/retailers may use this protocol only for their internal purposes in connection with the certification process of and by NSF. The protocol may not be used by others to certify or evaluate compliance with this protocol, and this protocol and its content may not be reproduced, disseminated, published, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning, or otherwise), except with the express, written permission of NSF.

The objective of this protocol is to set forth basic requirements for standardizing verification of manufacturer performance claims, label/packaging claims, and for evaluating material composition and construction. This protocol is not a guarantee or warranty of the quality or fitness of the product. NSF does not assume, displace, or undertake to discharge any obligations or responsibilities of the manufacturer or any other party, including but not limited to those responsibilities and obligations arising from the other certifications or standards incorporated into this protocol. Under no circumstances shall NSF be liable for direct, indirect, incidental, consequential, special, punitive, or any other use of this protocol. This protocol may be revised from time to time.

iv

Unit abbreviations

The following table is provided as a reference for unit abbreviations for common forms of measurement used within NSF documents.

Time second s minute min hour h day d week wk month mo year yr

Length inch in.

foot ft yard yd micrometer µm nanometer nm millimeter mm centimeter cm meter m kilometer km

Liquid measure milliliter mL liter L liters per day LPD liters per minute LPM ounce oz pint pt quart qt gallon gal gallons per minute GPM gallons per day GPD

Weight microgram µg picogram pg nanogram ng milligram mg centigram cg gram g kilogram kg pound lb ton t metric ton mt

Miscellaneous inch of mercury inHg kilopascal kPa negative log of hydrogen ion concentration pH pounds per square inch psi v

Acronyms

The following list is provided as a reference for acronyms used within this document.

A2LA American Association for Laboratory

Accreditation

ANSI American National Standards Institute

APHC US Army Public Health Center

CONUS continental United States

COTS commercial-off-the-shelf

DEVCOM Combat Capabilities Development Command

DOD Department of Defense

DHA-PH Defense Health Agency – Public Health

DI deionized

ETO equipment testing organization

GRA Government Review Agency

IAW in accordance with

ISO International Organization for Standardization

IWP individual water purifier

MCL maximum contaminant level

MEG Military Exposure Guideline

NELAP National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program

NPDWR National Primary Drinking Water Regulations

OCONUS outside continental United States

POC point-of-contact

PE performance evaluation pH negative log of hydrogen ion

PSTP product-specific test plan

PWP platoon water purifiers

QA Quality Assurance

QC Quality Control

R&D Research and Development

RO reverse osmosis

SAL single agar layer

SC Soldier Center

SUWP small unit water purifier

SWP small water purifier

SWPS squad water purification system (includes fire team)

TDS total dissolved solids

TG technical guide

TIC toxic industrial chemicals

TOC total organic carbon

TDS total dissolved solids

US EPA US Environmental Protection Agency

UV ultraviolet

UVV unit void volume

VOC volatile organic compound

WHO World Health Organization vi

Table of contents

1 General 1

1.1 Purpose 1

1.2 Scope 1

1.3 Parties and responsibilities 2

1.4 Evaluation steps 3

1.5 Product-specific test plan development, review, and approval 3

2 Normative references 4

3 Definitions 5

4 Performance requirements 5

4.1 Chemical reduction requirements 5

4.2 Operational capability 7

5 Evaluation procedure 8

5.1 Purpose 8

5.2 Apparatus 8

5.3 Test water properties 9

5.4 Product-specific test plan 9

5.5 Product-specific test plan – Individual water purifier 10

5.6 Product-specific test plan – Small unit water purifiers 12

5.7 Analytical procedures 13

5.8 Scaling 14

6 Product literature 14

6.1 Instructions 14

6.2 Packaging 14

6.3 Performance data sheet 14

7 Government review agency compliance 15

7.1 GRA NSF P248.02 Compliance 15

Normative Annex 1 Suggested outline for a product-specific test plan 17 vii

Foreword

This document, NSF P248.02: Military Operations Chemical Water Purifiers, is a follow-on to NSF P248.01: Military Operations Microbiological Water Purifiers, which has a scope that is limited to microbiological contaminants (bacteria, virus, protozoan cysts). The US Department of Defense (DOD) set forth to develop NSF P248.02 out of the recognized need to develop a chemical reduction test protocol so that all small water purifiers (SWPs) to be developed by or marketed to the DOD could be evaluated against to determine their effectiveness in providing reduction of targeted chemicals from source water. Devices that successfully completed the test protocol could then be used by deployed personnel with a greater measure of assurance that the water they obtain by using the devices would be of acceptable chemical quality and protective of Warfighter health.

This protocol has been developed with the firm hope that vendors who desire to market their SWPs to the DOD will use it to develop, evaluate, and improve their devices. Additionally, it is recommended for reference in requirements documents, use during government down-selection, and during combat development efforts to determine device capabilities. The ultimate goal is to provide our Warfighters the capability to produce sustainable quantities of chemically safe drinking water from any freshwater source that may be available to them during deployments.

This protocol was developed by the DOD, Defense Health Agency – Public Health (DHA-PH), Defense Centers for Public Health – Aberdeen, Environmental Health Sciences and Engineering Directorate/Field Water Branch and US Army Combat Capabilities Development Command (DEVCOM) – Soldier Center (SC), Individual Hydration Program during FY 2023 to 2025. The development was in coordination with personnel from NSF, who provided guidance and assistance in developing the protocol and offered to publish, maintain, and distribute the document.

DHA-PH and DEVCOM-SC also solicited and received input from many other DOD organizations who contributed significantly to the refinement of this protocol, including the US Army DEVCOM – Ground Vehicle Systems Center, US Army Program Executive Office – Soldier, US Air Force Medical Command, US Navy and Marine Corps Force Health Protection Command, US Navy Naval Facilities Engineering Command, and the US Marine Corps Systems Command whose many efforts of individuals from all of these and other organizations across DOD Services are greatly appreciated. As such, this protocol was finalized through the Joint Medical Field Water Subgroup to the Joint Environmental Surveillance Working Group, Defense Health Agency, as a multi-Service-endorsed testing protocol.

This protocol is intended to provide a framework of procedures for evaluating chemical water purifiers that are of importance to military operations. Testing must follow the prescribed procedures, or others pre-approved as necessary to thoroughly evaluate unique technologies. The developers and secretariats of this recognize the “living” nature of this protocol. As such, the scope of chemicals evaluated may expand with time and improved or alternate methods of analyses may be referenced. Modifying the list of test chemicals is encouraged if mission dictates or as threats to water supplies change, while keeping with the intent and rigor of the protocol.

This is the first edition of the protocol.

This protocol was developed in collaboration with NSF and an external review panel for the Water Program.

The review panel membership includes representation of equipment manufacturers, users, and public health regulators.

This protocol and the accompanying text are intended for voluntary use by certifying organizations, regulatory agencies, users, and equipment manufacturers as a basis for providing assurances that adequate public health protection exists for products covered by the scope of this document.

viii

Suggestions for improvement of this protocol are welcome. This protocol is maintained on a continuous maintenance schedule and can be opened for comment at any time. Comments should be sent to military@nsf.org, or c/o NSF, Standards Department, PO Box 130140, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48113-0140, USA.

mailto:military@nsf.org

© 2025 NSF NSF P248.02-2025

for Water Systems –

1 General

Entrepreneurs and manufacturers have developed a number of SWPs intended to reduce the risk of known or unknown chemical contamination in source water of varying physical, chemical and microbiological quality.

SWPs may include IWPs, SWPS, and SUWPs/PWPs. Insofar as these devices are intended for military field use, their performance must be thoroughly evaluated to allow informed product selection, and to protect the health of the Warfighters that use them.

This protocol was derived and adapted primarily from existing publications of the NSF. It describes the procedures to be used to test SWPs designed to achieve reduction of chemical contaminants, including organics and metals, from virtually any fresh water source likely to be encountered by military personnel during training exercises and deployments both within CONUS and OCONUS.

Execution of this protocol for acceptance of an SWP for military use will be administered and monitored by a GRA, currently designated as the DHA-PH, who can be contacted at dha.apg.pub-health-a.list.ehed@health.mil, or <ph.health.mil>. Only the GRA, or delegates thereof, may grant “compliance” with the requirements of this protocol.

1.1 Purpose

For the purposes of this protocol, and with reference to their use by deployed military personnel, SWPs intended for the reduction of chemical contaminants (TICs, or chemical warfare agents) are not necessarily effective for microbiological reduction performance. Claims made by vendors concerning microbiological contaminant reduction efficiencies are not tested and will not be verified by following this protocol.

Microbiological reduction testing should follow NSF P248.01. SWPs tested using this protocol are intended for use by individual, squad, or unit/platoon level addressed by devices smaller in size than military-fielded bulk water systems. Devices will be tested for the reduction of one or more of the chemical contaminants identified within the scope of this protocol.

1.2 Scope

Application of SWPs intended for use in non-military operations is within the scope of this protocol.

Organizations may request assistance from the GRA for non-military applications.

A PSTP will be developed for each product or type of product based on this protocol and the manufacturer’s use instruction and stated claims. The PSTP should be designed to provide a conservative evaluation of the performance of the SWP against the claims made by the manufacturer.

The protocol is intentionally general in nature to be applicable to all SWPs, irrespective of physical construction or technology employed. If users find procedures described in this protocol inappropriate or inapplicable to mailto:dha.apg.pub-health-a.list.ehed@health.mil https://ph.health.mil/ adequately test their particular product or technology, they shall describe proposed deviations and document the reasons for modifying or departing from the protocol in the PSTP. Such deviations and departures will be evaluated by the GRA and judged acceptable as long as the level of testing rigor is not decreased, nor the intent of the protocol altered. Test conditions and procedures shall be designed to specifically challenge the particular technology under evaluation.

1.3 Parties and responsibilities

1.3.1 Test sponsors

Test sponsors (to include vendors/manufacturers/non-government and government organizations) whose devices successfully comply with the performance criteria of this protocol will receive a GRA P248.02 Letter of Compliance stating that the device meets the military requirements of NSF P248.02: Military Operations Chemical Water Purifiers for the specific chemical(s) tested. Without the Letter of Compliance, test sponsors shall not claim or market their device as being compliant with this protocol. Information on requirements for GRA compliance can be found in Section 7 of this document.

The test sponsor is responsible for:

• notifying the GRA of the intent to test equipment using this protocol

• developing the PSTP (with assistance from the ETO)

• submitting the PSTP to the GRA for review and comment

• selecting, negotiating with, and obtaining the concurrence of the GRA for the third-party ETO

• providing new, commercially packaged purifiers to the ETO for testing, complete with instructions

• providing all necessary resources, including monetary, logistical, and technical support to the ETO to enable testing to proceed on schedule

• ensuring that the final report of testing, in its entirety, is forwarded to the GRA (it is expected that test results will be provided to the GRA regardless of device performance so that the GRA can inform potential users of the health benefits/risks of using the device).

1.3.2 Government Review Agency

The GRA is responsible for:

• assisting test sponsors and ETOs in interpreting and complying with this protocol

• assisting test sponsors, if necessary, in identifying and selecting qualified ETOs

• reviewing and approving PSTPs

• reviewing the laboratory test results and providing a Letter of Compliance to the test sponsor explaining the basis for determining compliance or non-compliance with protocol requirements

• coordinating with the appropriate military offices/officials to distribute the results of testing throughout the US Department of Defense (DOD), as appropriate.

1.3.3 Equipment Testing Organizations

To promote consistent, accurate, and comparable results across laboratories, all laboratories performing testing of water treatment equipment for US Military application under NSF P248.02 are required to possess/obtain accreditation based on the current version of ISO/IEC 17025, 1 by a recognized third-party accrediting organization (e.g. A2LA, 2 NELAP, 3 etc.). “Scope of Accreditation” for the laboratory must list methods and capabilities equivalent or closely related to the methods and procedures conducted during protocol execution for reporting. All analytical procedures conducted during protocol execution for reporting must be listed on the laboratory’s “Scope of Accreditation” except for those methods that are of “non-routine” nature. These requirements also apply to sub-contract laboratories conducting analyses on behalf of the primary testing laboratory. If the contract laboratories are not accredited to ISO/IEC 17025, the laboratories must demonstrate ISO/IEC 17025 compliance through internal audits by the primary testing laboratory. ISO/IEC 17025 is an internationally accepted standard for developing laboratory management systems for quality, administrative, and technical operations and an accreditation is a crucial requirement for acceptance of test data by the US Military.

The ETO is responsible for:

• providing documentation on accreditation to ISO/IEC 17025, IAW this section

• assisting the test sponsor in developing the PSTP and having it approved by the GRA

• coordinating with the GRA to resolve product- and technology-driven modifications to the protocol

• conducting the testing IAW the GRA-reviewed and approved PSTP

• managing, documenting, evaluating, interpreting, and reporting all test results

• providing a written report documenting the test procedures, deviations from this protocol, results of testing, and the performance evaluation of the SWP as directed in the PSTP

• providing quality assurance and documentation as requested by the GRA.

1.4 Evaluation steps

The testing of SWPs performance involves five sequential steps:

1) Development, submission to GRA, and approval of the PSTP.

2) Execution of third-party testing IAW the PSTP.

3) Data reduction and analysis.

4) Report preparation and information transfer.

5) Performance review by GRA and issuance of a Letter of Compliance (if applicable).

1.5 Product-specific test plan development, review, and approval

1.5.1 The ETO and the test sponsor must adhere to the requirements of this protocol in developing the PSTP.

The final draft PSTP submitted to the GRA for review and approval shall:

• include the information requested in this protocol

• conform to the format identified herein

• conform to the testing procedures described herein

1 International Electrotechnical Commission. 3 rue de Varambé, 1st floor, P.O. Box 131, CH-1211 Geneva 20, Switzerland. <iec.ch> 2 A2LA (formerly American Association for Laboratory Accreditation). 5202 Presidents Court, Suite 220, Frederick, MD 21703. <a2la.org> 3 The NELAC Institute. P.O. Box 2439, Weatherford, TX 76086. <nelac-institute.org> https://www.iec.ch/ https://a2la.org/ https://nelac-institute.org/

• include any unique requirements identified by the GRA during initial coordination.

1.5.2 Specifically, the PSTP shall include the following essential elements (see Annex N-1 for a PSTP template):

• the test sponsor’s name and address, and a POC name, email address, and telephone number

• the name, address, email address, and phone number of the ETO, and a list of designations, recognitions, certifications, etc., that qualify the ETO to perform the testing

• the names and model numbers of the tested IWPs

• the manufacturer’s operating instructions (as an attachment)

• a description of the roles and responsibilities of the testing participants

• a description of the SWP, the basic technologies it uses, and its advertised capabilities

• a list of materials for all parts that contact water, to include certifications as acceptance of materials for contact with drinking water or sufficiently detailed material specifications so that a toxicological analysis can be performed

• the experimental design for the actual testing of the SWP, including any variations from the protocol requirements

• a description of the procedures governing testing activities such as equipment operation and process monitoring; sample collection, preservation, and analysis; and data collection and interpretation.

Once the ETO and the test sponsor have an agreed-upon draft PSTP, it shall be submitted to the GRA for technical review and approval prior to initiation of any testing.

2 Normative references

The following documents contain requirements that, by reference in this text, constitute requirements of this protocol. At the time of publication, the indicated editions were valid. All of the documents are subject to revision and parties are encouraged to investigate the possibility of applying the recent editions of the documents indicated below. The most recent published edition of the document shall be used for undated references.

APHA/AWWA/WEF, Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater (hereinafter referred to as Standard Methods), 21st edition 4

ISO/IEC 17025:2017, General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories 1

NSF P248.01, Military Operations Microbiological Water Purifiers

NSF/ANSI 53, Drinking Water Treatment Units – Health Effects

NSF/ANSI 58, Reverse Osmosis Drinking Water Systems

US EPA, Guide Standard and Protocol for Testing Microbiological Water Purifiers 5

4 American Public Health Association, American Water Works Association, and Water Environment Federation. <standardmethods.org> 5 US Environmental Protection Agency. 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20004. <epa.gov> https://www.standardmethods.org/ https://www.epa.gov/

US Army Public Health Center, Technical Guide 230: Environmental Health Risk Assessment and Chemical Exposure Guidelines for Deployed Military Personnel 6

3 Definitions

Terms used in this protocol that have a specific technical meaning are defined here.

equipment testing organization (ETO): An appropriately accredited organization qualified to conduct independent studies and testing of SWPs IAW protocols and test plans. The role of the ETO is to assist with developing the PSTP in collaboration with the test sponsor, conduct all performance tests, and report results against the requirements of the protocol.

individual water purifier (IWP): A device capable of reducing waterborne contaminants that is designed to be carried and used by an individual.

protocol: A written document of procedures for testing that applies to all makes and models of SWPs.

product-specific test plan (PSTP): A written document of procedures for performance and reliability testing that apply to a specific make and model of SWP.

report: A written document that includes data, test results, findings, and any pertinent information collected IAW the protocol and the PSTP.

small unit water purifier (SUWP): A system capable of reducing waterborne contaminants that is designed to be used by a group (unit, platoon, team) of military personnel.

small water purifier (SWP): A generic term used to describe a device/system that is designed to reduce waterborne contaminants and smaller in size than the bulk water systems currently fielded by the US Military.

squad water purification system (SWPS): A system capable of reducing waterborne contaminants that is designed to be used by a squad or fire team.

test sponsor: A manufacturer, vendor, non-government, or government organization wanting to test SWPs.

The role of the test sponsor is to supply devices/systems, fund, and collaborate with the ETO in preparation and execution of the PSTP.

4 Performance requirements

4.1 Chemical reduction requirements

An SWP must be able to demonstrate the chemical reduction capabilities of one or more chemicals shown in Table 4.1 when tested to an approved PSTP developed IAW this protocol as described in Section 5. Each effluent sample for each unit must continuously meet or exceed the identified reduction requirement of Table 4.1, with the exception that up to 20% of effluent samples for each unit may vary from the required reduction provided the average of all samples by unit meet the criteria.

6 Defense Health Agency – Public Health. Defense Centers for Public Health – Aberdeen, 8300 Ricketts Point Road, Building E-2850, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21010. <phc.amedd.army.mil> https://phc.amedd.army.mil/Pages/default.aspx

Table 4.1 provides each chemical target influent challenge concentration and minimum required percent reduction. Chloroform shall be used as a surrogate for VOCs for systems that use activated carbon filter components to accomplish the organic chemical reduction. In validation studies completed by NSF, 0.3 mg/L influent challenge of chloroform was demonstrated to be adequately protective against 0.1 mg/L concentration (contamination) for a select VOC listed as covered by the surrogate. The VOC influent levels of the study varied, informed by occurrence data when available, and the actual average influent levels can be seen in the claims table of NSF/ANSI 53, Table 7.6: Organic chemicals included by surrogate testing and NSF/ANSI 58, Section 7.1.1: Volatile organic chemical reduction claims. Table 4.2 provides the analytical methods and reporting limits.

Table 4.1 Challenge concentrations and reduction requirements

Class/Group Chemical (CASRN)

Target influent challenge

(mg/L ± 20%) a

Minimum required percent reduction inorganic arsenic V (pentavalent) (7778-43-0) 0.6 ≥ 90% inorganic arsenic III (trivalent) (7778-43-0) 0.6 ≥ 90% inorganic cyanide b (143-33-9) 2 ≥ 90% inorganic mercury c (7487-84-7) 0.02 ≥ 90% VOC surrogate d chloroform (67-66-3) 0.3 ≥ 95% gasoline/diesel e benzene (71-43-2) 0.05 ≥ 90% toluene (108-88-3) 5 ≥ 90% 1,3,5-trimethylbenzene (108-67-8) 0.06 ≥ 90% naphthalene (91-20-3) 0.1 ≥ 90% carbamate aldicarb (116-06-3) 0.14 ≥ 90% organophosphate methamidophos (10265-92-6) 0.04 ≥ 90% herbicide paraquat dichloride (1910-42-5) 0.467 ≥ 90% radionuclide uranium f (7440-61-1) 0.3 ≥ 90% dissolved solid total dissolved solids g (7647-14-5) see footnote g N/A g a Refer to Section 5.7.3.1. Refers to the chemical concentration, not including the salt, where applicable.

b Added as sodium cyanide.

c Adsorptive technologies shall be evaluated for mercury reduction performance at pH’s 6.5 and 8.5. RO technologies shall be evaluated at pH 7.5.

d Systems that incorporate activated carbon for the reduction of VOCs may be tested against chloroform IAW NSF/ANSI 53/ NSF/ANSI 58 and claims made based on the appropriate standard.

e Representative gasoline and diesel chemicals selected due to percent composition, solubility, and toxicity. Toluene represents the organic load contributed by other fuel components based on occurrence data. All listed components tested together.

f Using uranyl nitrate hexa-hydrate, a depleted uranium.

g All membrane systems capable of reducing dissolved solids will be evaluated for TDS (as NaCl) reduction IAW Section 5.6.2.2.1.

For informational purposes only; no pass/fail criteria.

Table 4.2 Challenge chemicals analytical methods and reporting limits

Chemical Analytical Method Reporting limit (mg/L) chloroform EPA 524.2 0.0005 cyanide EPA 335.4 0.005 methamidophos a LC/MS 0.0007 mercury EPA 200.8 0.0002 benzene EPA 524.2 0.0005 toluene EPA 524.2 0.0005 1,3,5-trimethylbenzene EPA 524.2 0.0005 naphthalene EPA 524.2 0.0005 paraquat dichloride EPA 549.2 0.001 arsenic V (pentavalent) b EPA 200.8 0.001 arsenic III (trivalent) b EPA 200.8 0.001 aldicarb EPA 531.2 0.001 uranium EPA 200.8 0.001 total dissolved solids (calculated) EPA 120.1 2 a No EPA Method is available.

b Measured as Total Arsenic. Required to verify arsenic speciation of ionic form.

Devices that incorporate uncommon or multiple technologies for chemical reduction may require different procedures than described in this protocol to fully demonstrate device capabilities. Unless it has been shown that a listed surrogate is an acceptable chemical alternative for the given technology, the use of the actual contaminant is required. The PSTP will provide a forum for the manufacturer to provide specific testing procedures for these technologies to the GRA for approval. NSF/ANSI 53, NSF/ANSI 58, or other recognized national standards may be consulted for the selection of appropriate surrogates or procedures to conduct testing.

4.2 Operational capability

Complete systems shall be watertight and shall not leak during performance testing operation.

4.2.1 While this protocol does not presume to dictate the physical characteristics of SWPs that make them useful to or desirable by Warfighters – those characteristics are defined by units, unit commanders, and missions – there are desirable characteristics and operational capabilities that will be considered in the final recommendation as to device suitability for use during military operations.

4.2.2 The characteristics listed below have been selected from current and draft operational requirements documents, and are considered desirable, if not required by the US Military. Commanders planning to purchase specific SWPs will consider these or similar criteria and how they relate to the mission for which the SWPs are to be selected in their decisions. Not all of the following are evaluated by this protocol. The ideal SWP would, in no particular order of importance:

• allow filling and servicing without contaminating the purified water or surfaces that contact the purified water

• be able to be worn with, attached to, or carried on or in current and future load bearing equipment

• be capable of operation by Warfighters in any terrain type and climatic condition (Basic and Hot)

• be fully operational after freeze/thaw cycles

• be compatible with standard military-approved personal hydration systems

• be easily cleaned and disinfected

• be operable by military personnel of all sizes, strengths, and physical conditions

• have a shelf life of 5 yr

• have a treat-to-drink time of less than 20 min

• provide an explicit indication or assurance of the unit’s effective use lifetime (in terms of volume purified) to warn the consumer of potential diminished treatment capability through one or more of the following:

o cessation of water flow o a visual change o simple, explicit instructions for servicing and replacing components within the recommended use life (measurable in terms of volume throughput, specific time frame, or other appropriate method).

• require little or no training to operate and maintain

• resist mold, fungus, and biofilm growth

• use readily available and easily installed replacement filters and parts.

Additional characteristics specific to IWPs:

• have a functional life after initial use of at least 120 d

• have a minimum flow of 200 mL/min at 3 psi vacuum (in-line IWP only)

• treat at least 135 L of water as packaged.

5 Evaluation procedure

5.1 Purpose

The candidate SWP is tested to substantiate its chemical reduction capabilities over the test capacity as defined in Table 4.1 using the analytical methods of Table 4.2.

5.2 Apparatus

Two production units of each candidate SWP will be tested simultaneously. The units should be new and removed from the commercial packaging just prior to beginning testing or, if appropriate, shall be “reset” with new, production components to perform as new systems in the existing commercial configuration.

Manufacturers are welcome to test R&D or “Beta” devices against this protocol; however, GRA involvement, including PSTP and subsequent laboratory data review, will be at the GRA’s discretion and protocol compliance will not be granted. This does not apply to government-directed testing of R&D devices.

5.3 Test water properties

Test water shall be prepared using NSF/ANSI 53 or NSF/ANSI 58 test waters, unless deemed inappropriate due to type of technology or interactions with the test chemicals. No disinfectant of any kind shall be present in any of the test waters prior to treatment.

5.4 Product-specific test plan

5.4.1 The following requirements apply to testing of all SWPs. Additional requirements specific to IWPs and SUWPs are provided in subsequent sections. SWPs designed for squads and fire teams will follow either IWP or SUWP requirements based on device configuration.

5.4.2 The test sponsor, together with the ETO, will produce a written PSTP and forward it to the GRA for review and comment prior to beginning testing. It is preferred that the PSTP template provided in Annex N-1 be used to expedite GRA review and be submitted in Microsoft Word to allow for GRA commenting. Specific questions and PSTP submissions should be directed to the Defense Health Agency, Environmental Health Sciences and Engineering Directorate/Field Water Branch. 7

5.4.3 The ETO will maintain the specified test water quality throughout the test, not just at sample points.

The laboratory will verify the test water composition for each test water batch prepared daily to ensure compliance with Section 5.3. Water quality compliance with Section 5.3 is also to be verified at the end of daily testing unless otherwise specified and approved in the PSTP. Details on how the test water was prepared and transferred to the devices for processing shall be included in the final report.

5.4.4 Testing procedures must replicate field use.

5.4.5 In general, devices should be tested without any prior conditioning or seasoning with test water or any other water. Should conditioning be required the PSTP must clearly explain the procedures, including conditioning water quality, and conditioning steps must be provided to the user in the supplied device instructions. Conditioning steps must be executable in field environments. Conditioning volume does not accumulate towards the test volume.

5.4.6 If the SWP can be operated in more than one way, all methods of operation should be evaluated.

Alternatively, if one method can be demonstrated to be the most rigorous of the method options, only that method need be used during testing.

5.4.7 If the SWP uses a cleanable element with a finite number of cleanings, testing must demonstrate that the device meets the chemical reduction requirements after the element has been cleaned the maximum number of times allowed in the manufacturer’s directions (if applicable).

5.4.8 Influent chemical concentrations must be maintained IAW Section 5.7.3.1 and the specified influent concentrations of Table 4.1. Proper procedures must be in place to ensure a homogeneous test solution.

5.4.9 The performance of adsorptive chemical reduction technologies varies based on the number of active adsorptive sites and on reaction kinetics (speed of the adsorptive chemical reaction). It is highly recommended that testing is not terminated until at least three consecutive failing sample points are demonstrated. As adsorptive sites become less available, testing to three consecutive failing sample points verifies the end of device life. For devices where the kinetics are insufficient to meet reduction requirements, testing to three consecutive failing sample points (or longer) allows for the demonstration of device capabilities that may not meet protocol requirements but can help direct device redesign and may still have value to the US Military.

7 <dha.apg.pub-health-a.list.ehed@health.mil>

Conditions triggering end of test shall be described in the PSTP.

5.5 Product-specific test plan – Individual water purifier

5.5.1 Operation of devices may be as batch or continuous flow mode IAW the instructions contained in the commercial package. For batches where effluent samples are collected, the entire contents of the batch shall be collected, and sub-samples analyzed.

If continuous-flow testing is preferred by the test sponsor and ETO, the reasoning, proposed plumbing, and test procedures must be specified in the PSTP.

Laboratory evaluations are typically 4.5 d in duration. Two replicate devices will be tested for reduction of each chemical challenge or, when feasible, two or more chemicals can be evaluated in a combined challenge. Each replicate device will be subjected to only one test. For each test a minimum of 135 L per replicate shall be processed, using a daily test volume of 30 L per replicate processed per day for 4 d and 15 L on Day 5. Total test volumes will be adjusted based on device capacity but should not be less than 135 L, unless specified by a military end user or requirements document.

5.5.1.1 Mouth-drawn operation

Products designed such that the only method to generate treated water for consumption is by drawing from the unit by the user’s mouth (by creation of a vacuum) shall be evaluated using the test setup of NSF/ANSI 53, Annex N-3: Test method for evaluating mouth-drawn water treatment units, Section N-3.2.1: Set-up with the exception that the test rig configuration shall be capable to maintain a flow rate of at least 200 mL/min at -3 psi (20.7 kPa vacuum, 6 inHg).

The flow rate shall be maintained at 200 mL/min up to a maximum of -3 psi. If the vacuum to maintain this flow is greater than -3 psi, the flow rate shall be reduced to maintain a vacuum of -3 psi. If flow cannot be maintained at or above 50 mL/min at -3 psi, the test will be stopped.

5.5.1.2 Squeeze bottle operation

Products designed to have a single outlet and a flexible liquid-holding bottle in which the contents can be forced out by squeezing shall be operated according to NSF/ANSI 53, Annex N-4: Test method for evaluating squeeze bottle water treatment units, Section N-4.2: Method – Mechanical gripper apparatus or Section N-4.3:

Alternate method – Pressurized bottle.

5.5.2 Batch processing and sampling procedures

Influent and effluent samples shall be collected at start up, and every 10% of capacity. A single influent sample shall be collected to represent the water applied to all replicate devices.

Two example basic sampling schedules are shown in Tables 5.1 and 5.2. Test plans for a specific model may require variations from the plan shown and should be designed to provide realistic worst-case testing.

Table 5.1 IWP sampling schedule (continuous flow)

Daily procedure Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day 4 Day 5 collect 0% sample (first 1-L draw) collect 30% collect 50% collect 70% collect 90%

(first 1-L draw)

2 collect 10% collect 40% collect 60% collect 80% collect 100%

3 collect 20% process water to 45% capacity (no sample)

65% capacity

90% capacity

Note. Between each sample point, test water will be processed to reach shown percent capacity. Samples will be collected as a minimum 1-L volume, then aliquots drawn for analysis.

Table 5.2 IWP sampling schedule (example 135-L batch flow)

Daily batch # Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day 4 Day 5

1 0% sample 1 to 3 L no sample 31 to 33 L

61 to 63 L

91 to 93 L

90% sample 121 to 123 L

2 no sample 4 to 6 L

34 to 36 L

64 to 66 L

70% sample 94 to 96 L

124 to 126 L

3 no sample 7 to 9 L

37 to 39 L

50% sample 67 to 69 L

97 to 99 L

127 to 129 L

4 no sample 10 to 12 L

30% sample 40 to 42 L

70 to 72 L

100 to 102 L

130 to 132 L

5 10% sample 13 to 15 L

43 to 45 L

73 to 75 L

103 to 105 L

100% sample 133 to 135 L

6 no sample 16 to 18 L

46 to 48 L

76 to 78 L

80% sample 106 to 108 L —

7 no sample 19 to 21 L

49 to 51 L

60% sample 79 to 81 L

109 to 111 L —

8 no sample 22 to 24 L

40% sample 52 to 54 L

82 to 84 L

112 to 114 L —

9 20% sample 25 to 27 L

55 to 57 L

85 to 87 L

115 to 17 L —

10 no sample 28 to 30 L

58 to 60 L

88 to 90 L

118 to 120 L —

Note. Applies to batch flow testing, represented here as 3-L batches. Samples shall be collected as entire batch, then aliquots drawn for analysis.

5.6 Product-specific test plan – Small unit water purifiers

5.6.1 Operation of devices shall be IAW the instructions contained in the commercial package. The plumbing and recommended locations of sampling should be specified in the PSTP.

5.6.2 Testing shall be designed to provide the worst-case scenario. The operation, test duration, and sampling schedule will be dependent on technology type, including, but may not be limited to, adsorption, membrane filtration (including RO), and systems that employ multiple technologies as a treatment train.

5.6.2.1 Physiochemical technologies (e.g. activated carbon) shall be evaluated to the manufacturer’s stated treatment capacity or until performance failure (if capacity is unknown), operated continuously for 6 h/d, excluding start-up procedures, and have a rest period of 12 to 18 h/d. Influent and effluent samples shall be collected at the start of testing then every 10% of the tested capacity. For test Day 1, and for each day where a sample collection occurs at the start of a test day, sample collection will take place after the passage of 10 UVVs) (see Section 5.6.2.2.1.c.2-3 to determine void volume). Influent and effluent samples will be collected at each sampling point as a minimum 1-L volume then aliquots drawn for analysis.

5.6.2.2 Water systems using only membrane technologies to reduce the chemical challenge will be evaluated as follows.

5.6.2.2.1 Conditioning, membrane performance verification, and void volume determination

a) On test Day 1, operate the system on NSF/ANSI 58 TDS test water (sodium chloride, NaCl) until TDS reduction has stabilized or a minimum of 1 h, whichever is longer. Continuously monitor TDS to show stabilization.

b) Consult the membrane specification sheet to determine the conditions used (e.g. temperature, water quality, recovery, pressure) to demonstrate manufacturer-claimed percent TDS reduction. Using those conditions, operate the system until the TDS reduction has stabilized. Continuously monitor TDS to show stabilization. Report stabilized percent TDS reduction in comparison to manufacturer claim and if not within 1% then contact the test sponsor before proceeding.

Note 1. Refer to the manufacturer membrane specification sheet to define stabilized TDS reduction, and if not defined use less than 4% change over 5 min.

Note 2. If the membrane specification sheet only defines test water TDS concentration, then use NSF/ANSI 58 TDS test water with TDS concentration set at the manufacturer specification.

Note 3. Some membranes may use a challenge other than NaCl to verify performance. In those cases, use the manufacturer specified challenge.

Note 4. If possible, operate the system at the membrane specification recovery and pressure during this performance verification.

c) The void volume must be determined to ensure that the…