Final Call for Solution PPTS (19May2026).docx

Final Call for Solutions

Call for Solutions (CFS) Number: W911QY-26-S-PPTS-01 Issuing Office: U.S. Army Contracting Command-Aberdeen Proving Ground (ACC-APG), Natick Contracting Division (NCD)

Date Issued: 14 May 2026

TITLE: Portable Patient Transport System (PPTS)

SECTION A: GENERAL INFORMATION

· This Call for Solutions (CFS) is issued under the authority of 10 U.S.C. § 4022, "Authority of the Department of Defense to carry out certain prototype projects", against the Army Open Solicitation (AOS) W9128Z-25-S-A002 under BAA authority.

· The Government intends to award multiple Prototype Other Transaction (OT) Agreements to the offerors whose Solution Briefs are determined to be most advantageous to the Government based on the evaluation criteria outlined in Section D.

· This CFS invites interested parties to submit a "Solution Brief" for a prototype PPTS. Based on the evaluation of Solution Briefs, the Government may issue a Request for Solution Proposal (RSP) to selected offerors for a more detailed submission.

SECTION B: BACKGROUND / PROBLEM STATEMENT / CAPABILITY GAP

The Program Executive Office for Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear Defense (PEO-CBRND) and Joint Project Manager for CBRN Protection are seeking solutions for a single, non-ambulatory patient system to support the Biocontainment, Isolation, and Quarantine (BIQ) PPTS program. This man-portable system will control and prevent the spread of biological threats (biothreats) while transporting a single, non-ambulatory infectious patient by air, rail, ground, or sea.

The Department of War has an urgent need for a Portable Patient Transport System (PPTS) to provide safe, contained, and regulated intra- and inter-theater transport of patients with highly infectious diseases. The system must be certified for flight on multiple military airframes, be capable of being transported in select ambulances, and be operable and sustainable in austere environments. The system must protect the force, the platform, and the crew from contamination while allowing a high standard of medical care to the patient.

This effort will follow a multi-phased acquisition strategy as detailed in the Statement of Objectives (SOO) and Section E of this CFS. Key objectives include achieving airworthiness certification, ensuring robust bio-containment, enabling long-duration patient sustainment, and acquiring vendor sponsored FDA marketing authorization. A detailed breakdown of all performance requirements is provided in the associated SOO, AOS Statement of Objectives PPTS_.docx.

SECTION C: SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

· Initial Submission: Solution Brief

· Submission Format: The total submission shall consist of two (2) separate files:

1. File 1: Solution Brief

2. File 2: Supporting Data Package

· File 1: Solution Brief

. The Solution Brief is the core of the offeror's proposal. In accordance with the parent Army Open Solicitation (AOS), the Solution Brief is limited to fifteen (15) pages.

. This page limit includes the cover page, table of contents, and the completed CFS Attachment 0002, "PPTS Capabilities Assertion Matrix."

. The Solution Brief should provide a concise narrative addressing the technical approach, innovation, IP strategy, and business information. The Assertion Matrix must be fully completed, with the "Supporting Data Reference" column clearly pointing to the specific location of the evidence in File 2 This Matrix will only count as one (1) page of the fifteen page limitation regardless of length.

. The initial solution briefs MUST assert to meeting or exceeding the stated Threshold Requirement in Table 1 below to be considered for a request for proposal submission.

. Additionally, the offeror must identify how they meet one of the conditions under 10 U.S.C. § 4022(d)(1), with a focus on significant participation from non-traditional defense contractors and/or small businesses.

· File 2: Supporting Data Package

. The Supporting Data Package contains all the evidence and verifiable data referenced in the Assertion Matrix.

. There is no page limit for the Supporting Data Package.

. This package should be clearly organized (e.g., with a table of contents and bookmarks) to allow for easy navigation and verification of claims.

. Acceptable supporting data includes but is not limited to: third-party test reports from accredited laboratories, detailed engineering analyses, modeling and simulation data, white papers with supporting calculations, videos of internal testing, or existing commercial/government certifications. The burden of proof rests with the offeror.

· Submission Deadline & Method:

. Both files shall be submitted in PDF format no later than 03 June 2026 at 1600 EST.

. Submissions shall be sent via email to christine.m.halamoutis.civ@army.mil and dan.l.adams2.civ@army.mil. The email subject line shall be: "CFS W911QY-26-S-PPTS-01 Submission - [Offeror Name]".

· The two files shall be named as follows:

. [Offeror Name] PPTS_Solution_Brief.pdf . [Offeror Name] PPTS_Supporting_Data.pdf

Call for solution briefs should include:

Within the initial solution briefs, offerors should focus on the technical approach, innovation, capabilities assertion matrix, IP strategy, and a Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) cost estimate.

Offerors shall include test plans and reports and any other relevant documentation to support claimed performance characteristics including maintaining negative pressure, filtration, patient and equipment access, and operational size and weight. In addition, offerors shall disclose any unique test methods required to assess the performance of their solution. Offerors shall include the FDA number associated with marketing authorization or the regulatory approach that identifies and rationalizes a marketing pathway in alignment with ISO 13485:2016. Offerors shall also provide support to their approach to meeting one of the conditions at 10 U.S.C. 4022(d)(1).

The Government requires sufficient data rights to operate, maintain, and sustain the PPTS. The Government’s strong preference is for Unlimited Rights for all technical data, software, and associated intellectual property developed under this effort. Special consideration will be given to IP strategies that facilitate the rapid and affordable achievement of military airworthiness certification. As part of this effort, the Government requires delivery of a complete Bill of Materials (BOM) for all prototype systems. The Government will evaluate the impact of any proposed data rights restrictions, and proposals that hinder future competition for sustainment may be evaluated negatively.

The offeror shall include in a table form, its data rights assertions for all technical data and computer software (including non-commercial technical data and non-commercial computer software as well as commercial technical data and commercial computer software) being provided to the Government with less than an unlimited or unrestricted rights license and explain how the approach will result in the best approach, considering life cycle costs. The Government will consider the impact of the data rights assertions in making selection decision(s). Please note that the Government reserves the right to evaluate any proposed approach that provides less than Government Purpose Rights (GPR) for the prototype design documentation and/or does not facilitate competitive procurement of hardware maintenance/sustainment services for PPTS, described herein, negatively and use that information as part of its selection decision(s).

The offeror shall provide the cost estimate in a format that allows for clear evaluation and comparison, ensuring completeness and accuracy. If possible, include assumptions, methodologies, and any relevant supporting documentation used to derive the estimate.

1. Production Costs

a. Estimated costs for full-scale production, including materials, labor, and compliance with applicable Good Manufacturing Requirements (ie., 21 CFR 820) and Berry Amendment requirements.

2. Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM)

a. A cost estimate for the Segment I prototype effort. The ROM should be broken down by major cost drivers (e.g., labor, materials, testing support

3. Additional Costs

a. Any other costs associated with meeting the requirements outlined in the Statement of Objectives (SOO) and achieving successful completion criteria for follow-on production.

Technical maturity, item cost and performance will be assessed during submission evaluation.

Follow-on Submission: Request for Solution Proposal (RSP)

· Offerors whose Solution Briefs are selected will be invited to submit a full proposal in response to an RSP.

· The full proposal will require a comprehensive submission, including but not limited to:

· A draft Statement of Work (SOW).

· A detailed Master Delivery Schedule for all hardware and data deliverables.

· The total firm-fixed-price for all prototypes and associated deliverables.

· The Performer’s projected unit cost and maximum monthly production rate for a potential Full Rate Production (FRP) quantity.

· A complete Bill of Materials (BOM) down to the raw material level.

· A table detailing the Performer’s data rights assertions for any technical data or software with less than Government Purpose Rights. The Government’s preference is for Unlimited Rights for all technical data, software, and associated intellectual property developed under this effort

· Supporting documentation for all performance claims, including but not limited to: test plans and reports, biological protection data, patient care (e.g., glove ports, visibility, waste storage, patient restraint) maintainability/reliability data, and platform integration analysis.

· Disclosure of any unique or non-standard test methods required to assess the proposed solution.

· Details on any special logistical requirements (e.g., decontaminability, maintainability, reliability, size, weight, power, operating environmental conditions, setup time, platform integration, and storage) and estimated shelf-life/service-life.

· A preliminary Life-Cycle Cost Estimate (LCCE) that provides a comprehensive assessment of the system's long-term sustainment costs, including maintenance, operational support, and disposal.

The offeror will use the PPTS SOO as a basis for preparing a draft Statement of Work (SOW), which will be included as an integral part of the proposal. The offeror shall propose a delivery schedule in the SOW to include the number of systems that can be produced per month. The offeror shall also provide logistic details including packaging, handling, storage, and transportation requirements, as well as logistical footprints and shelf-life estimates

SECTION D: EVALUATION PROCESS & CRITERIA

Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in Proposal Evaluation

Use of AI tools in Support of Evaluations: The Government may employ AI as a tool to assist in the analysis and review of offeror proposals. AI tools may be used to support tasks such as summarizing proposal content, identifying compliance with request for task order proposal / solicitation requirements, and highlighting areas of potential strength, weakness, or risk.

Maintaining Inherently Governmental Functions: Notwithstanding the use of AI tools to support the evaluation process, all final evaluation judgements, including the assignment or assessment of adjectival ratings, best value determinations, and source selection decisions, will be made exclusively by duly appointed Government personnel. The Government retains sole responsibility for all inherently governmental functions and will not delegate decision making authority to any AI tool.

Offeror Confidentiality and Data Protection: The AI tools utilized by the Government will be employed in a manner consistent with applicable regulations that govern the protection of proprietary and source selection sensitive information. The AI tool will be an output-only system. Any generated report data is not saved. No proposal data will be transmitted to or processed by external, non-Government systems without appropriate safeguards and authorizations in place.

Offerors shall submit proposals that are clear, concise, and readily readable. To ensure accurate analysis by automated evaluation tools and maintain the integrity of the source selection process, the following restrictions apply:

Visible Text Only: All proposal content must be presented as visible text. The inclusion of any concealed text is strictly prohibited. Concealed text includes but is not limited to:

o Micro-text (text with a font size below 10pt);

o White text on a white background.

o Text utilizing colors that render it indistinguishable from the background.

o Text hidden within images or graphics.

CFS must adhere to the following font and size requirements: Times New Roman or Arial] Formatting Consistency: All text must apply uniform formatting throughout the proposal. Variations in font size, color, or style that the Government deems manipulate or obscures the readability of content are prohibited.

Compliance Verification: The Government may conduct technical verification to ensure compliance with these requirements. Proposals found to contain concealed or manipulated text will be considered non-compliant and may be rejected.

Non-Government advisors may be used in support of the evaluation of Solution Briefs, and during the Request for Solution Proposal phase and negotiations.

The Government will evaluate submissions using a phased approach.

Initial solution Brief Evaluation and RSP Invitation

The initial solution briefs MUST assert to meeting or exceeding the stated Minimum Threshold Requirements in Table 1 below to be considered for a request for proposal submission for Phase 1. Support of assertions may be included in Supporting Data file, to be excluded from the page limitation within the Solution brief.

Solution briefs will be evaluated based on their demonstrated ability to meet or exceed the threshold requirements in the chart below, as substantiated by the supporting documentation provided. Evaluation will also consider the completeness, relevance, and credibility of the supporting data in relation to the stated performance claims.

Table 1: Minimum criteria for consideration for a request for proposal submission

Minimum Threshold Requirement

Air Flow Direction. Head to Foot.

Air Exchanges. 12 Exchanges / Hour.

Filtration Efficiency. 99.97% of 0.3 micron particles.

Filter Certification. Meet or exceed National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) HE certified filters.

Liquid Containment. The PPTS shall hold at least 3 liters of liquid contamination inside the containment enclosure without leaking.

Additionally, the Government will assess whether the offeror meets one of the conditions under 10 U.S.C. § 4022(d)(1), with a focus on significant participation from non-traditional defense contractors and/or small businesses. Offerors shall provide support to their approach to meeting one of the conditions at 10 U.S.C. § 4022(d)(1).

The Government will evaluate Solution Briefs to identify the most promising solutions. Up to five (5) of the most advantageous offerors will be invited to submit a full proposal in response to a Request for Solution Proposal (RSP). To be considered for an RSP invitation, the Solution Brief must provide a credible approach to meeting the project's core objectives. The following criteria will be used to evaluate Solution Briefs:

Part 1: RSP Evaluation and Segment I Award Initial Downselect (RSP to Segment I Award)

Performance requirement are identified in Attachment 1 of the SOO. Provided that minimum threshold criteria are met, the Government encourages solutions, even if they do not meet all requirements. All proposals will be considered. Requirements in each phase are listed in order of priority within the SOO (Table 2-4). Additional criteria are detailed in Table 5 and will also be taken into consideration

Offerors' RSP will be assessed to select up to five (5) of the most promising solutions for a Segment I OT Agreement award. To be considered, the RSP must demonstrate a credible approach to meeting the project's core objectives. In addition to the affordability of the prototype and availability of funds, the following criteria will be used to determine the solutions to be most advantageous to the Government:

** After receiving the lifecycle cost estimate, the Government will perform a detailed analysis of the submitted lifecycle estimated proposal. For purposes of this analysis, the Agreement Officer and/or a representative of the Agreement Officer shall have the right to examine the supporting records and/or request additional information as needed.

Part 2: Downselect from Segment I to Segment II

Evaluation criteria for potential selection for the Segment II option will be based on an integrated assessment of the following:

· Prototype performance in Segment I testing against the SOO requirements.

· User feedback from government-witnessed demonstrations.

· Overall Affordability, considering the firm-fixed-price for Segment I, the projected Full Rate Production (FRP) unit cost, and the preliminary Life-Cycle Cost Estimate (LCCE) submitted in the RSP.

· Availability of funds.

Evaluation criteria for potential selection for the Segment II option will be based on the affordability of the prototype, availability of funds and the prototypes ability to meet the threshold requirements and user feedback in Segment I testing.

At the conclusion of Segment I, the Government will select up to two (2) performers to proceed to Segment II based on the affordability of the prototype, availability of funds, assessment of their progress, prototype performance against the requirements in the SOO (Attachment 1). The Government reserves the right to update or refine evaluation criteria prior to the Segment II award to ensure alignment with program objectives and operational needs, provided such updates do not alter the requirements specified in the SOO.

Part 3: Final Candidate Selection (End of Segment II)

At the end of all Segment II activities (which includes the completion of both Phase II and Phase III), the Government will perform a final, comprehensive evaluation. This evaluation will lead to a formal, unilateral decision on whether the prototype meets the Phase III Objectives, whether the prototype has been "successfully completed" as required by 10 U.S.C. § 4022(f), and will determine which candidate has performed best when assessed against the key technical goals in the evaluation areas below. This evaluation will determine the final candidate for any non-competitive follow-on production award. The Government reserves the right to update or refine this evaluation criteria to ensure alignment with program objectives and operational needs, provided such updates do not alter the requirements specified in the SOO.

This "successful completion" determination is a mandatory prerequisite for awarding any non-competitive follow-on production contract.

Phase III Objectives

To proceed to the final evaluation, the prototype must first meet the following objectives during Phase III:

· Achieve a minimum Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of 8.

· Support Government-led flight testing on operational aircraft to validate performance in an aeromedical evacuation mission profile.

· Provide all necessary data and support to achieve a formal Airworthiness Certification.

· Be SAE J3027 crash-compliant for DOT vehicle transport

· Acquire FDA Marketing Authorization.

The Government's assessment of "best performance" will be based on the following evaluation areas, which directly incorporate the objectives from Phase III:

SECTION E: ANTICIPATED PHASED EFFORT

Evaluation Criteria. At each segment of testing the government plans to make downselect decisions as to which proposals will move on to the next segment. In each phase the agency will evaluate the proposals in their ability to meet key technical goals and criteria as stated in the SOO. Downselect decisions will be made based on meeting the primary criteria first and then secondary criteria, if applicable. The proposals who meet all the primary criteria for each phase and are assessed as the best in the secondary criteria, where applicable, may be selected to move on to the next phase. A trade off analysis between evaluation criteria will be considered.

The Government intends to enter negotiations for the follow-on production effort with all remaining participants following Phase II down selection with the full understanding that any potential award can only be made after successful completion and is expected to occur after the completion of Phase III Testing and final down selection.

· Segment I (Phase I): Initial System Delivery & Evaluation

· Award of up to five (5) OT agreements.

· Deliverable: Thirty (30) prototype systems per awardee.

· Goal: Achieve minimum Technology Readiness Level (TRL) 5. Performers will develop initial designs and support Government-led testing.

· Downselect to up to two (2) systems at the end of Segment I (Phase I)

· Segment II (Phases II & III): Advanced Integration & Certification

· Deliverable: Ten (10) additional prototype systems per awardee.

· Phase II Goal (TRL 6): Focus on hardware integration with aircraft and ambulances, environmental testing, and RAM data collection.

· Phase III Goal (TRL 8): Focus on operational flight testing and maturation of the data package to achieve formal Airworthiness Certification, SAE J3027 crash-compliance for DOT vehicle transport and FDA marketing authorization.

· Follow-on Production

· Upon successful completion of the prototype project by the final selected performer or performers, the Government may award a non-competitive Follow-on Production OT or FAR-based contract, in accordance with 10 U.S.C. § 4022(f), for up to 476 units over four years.

SECTION F: INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

The Government’s strong preference is for Unlimited Rights for all technical data, software, and associated intellectual property developed under this effort. Special consideration will be given to IP strategies that facilitate the rapid and affordable achievement of military airworthiness certification. As part of this effort, the Government requires delivery of a complete Bill of Materials (BOM) for all prototype systems. The Government will evaluate the impact of any proposed data rights restrictions, and proposals that hinder future competition for sustainment may be evaluated negatively.

SECTION G: SUCCESSFUL COMPLETION CRITERIA FOR FOLLOW-ON PRODUCTION

The Government will make a formal determination of "successful completion" for the final selected prototype.

Criteria for "Successful Completion"

A prototype project is considered "successfully completed" only after a written determination is made by the responsible approving official. This determination must state that the prototype has either:

1. Met the stated Threshold Requirements; and satisfied success metrics incorporated into the Prototype OT

OR

2. Accomplished a particularly favorable or unexpected result that justifies a transition to production.

To be deemed "successfully completed" and therefore be eligible for a non-competitive follow-on production award, the prototype must be judged by the Government to have met all minimum threshold requirements outlined in the SOO or accomplished a particularly favorable or unexpected result that justifies a transition to production. The key criteria that will inform the Government's final determination include, but are not limited to, the following, as verified by government-conducted or government-witnessed testing and analysis:

Head to foot airflow

12 Air Changes per Hour (ACH)

99.97% at 0.3-micron particle diameter

System shall provide a low battery warning

During battery hot swap, power interruption shall be less than or equal to 1 minute

System will have pass-through interfaces from the system exterior to the system interior

System will include glove ports located near patient head, torso, and feet to enable proper patient care

The System must meet all military, federal, and international airworthiness and transport requirements for airlift in accordance with: MIL-HDBK-516 for C-17, C-130, KC-135 and HH-60.

The PPTS shall have restraint straps for safe physical patient restraint inside the containment enclosure appropriate to the manner of movement regardless of state of attachment to a vehicle.

The PPTS restraint straps shall accommodate 90% of personnel for all key sizing dimensions (5th to 95th percentile, male and female body dimensions).

The PPTS restraint straps shall be in the vicinity of the patient’s chest, waist, and legs.

(Note to Offerors: Specific performance values and detailed test criteria are contained in the Statement of Objectives (SOO) and Attachments)

SECTION H: POINT OF CONTACT

Agreements Officer: Dan L. Adams, Jr.

Email: dan.l.adams2.civ@army.mil Agreements Officer Agreements Specialist: Christine Halamoutis Email: christine.m.halamoutis.civ@army.mil