SIS Call for Solutions (CFS) 05MAY2026 FINAL.pdf

DISTRIBUTION: DoW COMMUNITY ONLY

CALL FOR SOLUTIONS

Call for Solutions (CFS) Number: W911QY-26-S-SBIS-01

Issuing Office: U.S. Army Contracting Command-Aberdeen Proving Ground (ACC-APG), Natick Contracting Division

(NCD)

Date Issued: 05 May 2026

TITLE: Shipboard Isolation System (SIS)

SECTION A: GENERAL INFORMATION

1. 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.

2. 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.

3. This CFS invites interested parties to submit a “Solution Brief” for a prototype SIS.

SECTION B: PROBLEM STATEMENT / CAPABILITY GAP

The Department of War has an urgent need for a Shipboard Isolation System (SIS) to rapidly test and evaluate viable solutions to mitigate, contain, and prevent the spread of communicable disease on United States Navy (USN) vessels.

SIS will provide the capability to temporarily isolate or quarantine personnel, effectively preventing the spread of biological threats. The SIS will align with the United States Navy (USN) and United States Navy (USAF) priorities of enabling isolation capabilities for individuals who are experiencing symptoms of a communicable disease (i.e., biological warfare agent (BWA) or infectious disease) and/or have been exposed, or presumed to have been exposed, but are asymptomatic. Isolation and/or quarantine in the SIS will commence based on intelligence and warning, or upon detection for presence of a biological agent and in accordance with (IAW) guidelines defined in NTRP 4-02.10 para 4.3.3.O.

This SIS project will focus on delivering a rapid, readily available solution to address the USN and USAF requirements for an Individual Isolation and Quarantine capability. The SIS program developed requirements based on the Concept of

Employment provided by USN and USAF

SECTION C: SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

1. Interested offerors shall submit a Solution Brief in accordance with (IAW) the procedures outlined in the parent

AOS, W9128Z-25-S-A002 and IAW 10 U.S.C. 4022.

• 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.

• The Solution Brief shall provide a concise narrative addressing the Statement of Objectives (SOO)

• File 2: Supporting Data Package

• The Supporting Data Package contains all the evidence and verifiable data referenced in the Solution brief.

• 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 offeror must provide sufficient data to substantiate all claims. Submission Deadline & Method:

• Submission Deadline & Method:

• Both files shall be submitted in PDF format no later than 19 MAY at 1600 EST. Submissions shall be sent via email to christine.m.halamoutis.civ@army.mil and peter.w.stahley.civ@army.mil . The email subject line shall be: " CFS W911QY-26-S-SIS-01 Submission - [Offeror Name]".

• The two files shall be named as follows:

• [Offeror Name] SIS_Solution_Brief.pdf

• [Offeror Name] SIS_Supporting_Data.pdf

Call for solution briefs shall include:

Within the initial solution briefs, contractors should focus on the technical approach, innovation, capabilities, 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 or non-standard test methods required to assess the performance of their solution. Offerors shall 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 SIS. The Government's preference is for Unlimited Rights for all technical data, software, and associated intellectual property developed under this effort. for all technical data and software developed with Government funding under this effort, for technical data related to interfaces

(physical, electrical) necessary to comply with Modular Open System Approach (MOSA) requirements including to connect the SIS to shipboard and medical systems, and also for technical data related to form, fit and function (FFF) and operation, maintenance, installation, and training (OMIT). The specific data deliverables (e.g., as-built drawings, operations manuals, specifications) and IP licenses will be negotiated for each phase.

Offeror’s shall include in the solution brief 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 SIS, described herein, negatively and use that information as part of its selection decision(s).

In the solution brief 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 Estimated costs for full-scale production, including materials, labor, and compliance with FDA Marketing

Authorization and Berry Amendment requirements.

2. Life-Cycle Cost Estimate (LCCE)

A comprehensive assessment of the system's affordability and long-term sustainment costs, including maintenance, operational support, and disposal.

3. Additional Costs

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

The solution briefs MUST assert to meeting or exceeding the stated Prototype Criteria – Minimum Threshold

Requirements to be invited to submit a full proposal. Support of assertions may be included in Supporting Data file, to be excluded from the page limitation within the Solution brief. Supporting documentation for all performance claims, should include but are 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.

Prototype Criteria - Minimum Threshold Requirements

Requirement Threshold

Operational Size System will fit a regular sized hospital ICU bed

Operational and Storage Weight

Individual components will comply with the person-portable lifting and carrying limits specified in

MIL-STD-1472.

Patient Access

System must provide visibility of the occupant from head-to-foot.

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

Utility ports for cables/hoses.

Power 3-pronged plugs with capabilities to support 120v power.

Biocontainment

0.01 inches of water gauge / 2.5 Pascal.

Airflow into containment and exhausted out through HEPA filter

Greater than or equal to 12 air changes per hour (ACH)

99.97% at 0.3-micron particle diameter.

Air Filtration System

The system must be able to visually and/or audibly indicate system operations.

Shipboard Adaptability

The system must remain stable throughout maritime conditions and have provisions to secure the bed to D-rings embedded in the ship deck.

Packaging The SIS shall be packaged in accordance with MIL-STD-2073-1

Storage Size Storage containers shall fit through quick acting water-tight doors (26 inches wide x 66 inches tall).

Protection during storage

The SIS storage containers shall be watertight when tested in harsh environments per MIL-STD-

FDA

The system shall be authorized for marketing by the US FDA for an indication that aligns with the CPE-CBRND objective intended use by completion of Phase II testing

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: Detailed instructions for full proposals will be provided within the Government’s Request for Proposal (RFP).

• A 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.

• 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.

Offerors shall use the SIS SOO as a basis for preparing the Statement of Work (SOW), which will be included as an integral part of their proposal. Offerors shall propose a delivery schedule in the SOW to include the number of systems that can be produced per month. Offerors 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 this Call for 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, 12pt font

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.

Part 1: Initial solution Brief Evaluation and RSP Invitation

Solution briefs will be evaluated based on their demonstrated ability to meet or exceed the Prototype Criteria – Minimum

Threshold Requirements, 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.

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 three (3) 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.

Part 2: RSP Evaluation and Award

Initial Downselect (RSP to Award)

The Government intends to make up to three (3) SIS prototype awards under Title 10 Section 4022 based on availability of Government funding. All awards will undergo Phase I prototype performance testing. Upon completion of Phase I testing, the Government will downselect offeror(s) to continue to Phase II. This decision will be based on final Phase I criteria testing results, early user feedback, affordability of the prototype, and the availability of funds. Upon completion of testing on the Phase II prototypes, up to two (2) solutions will be selected to move forward into production based on

Phase II testing results, early user feedback, affordability of the prototype, and the availability of funds.

RSP Full proposals submitted in response to this CFS will be evaluated against the OTA award criteria below. The

Government reserves the right to use external market research in the evaluation of an offeror. In the event multiple submissions are received for this Call, the Government reserves the right to select all, some, or none of the solution submissions submitted in response to this CFS. Submissions will be evaluated based on the merit of the proposed solution in addressing the Call, not against other submissions in response to this Call. The Government intends to evaluate the full proposal submissions to determine which proposed solutions have the potential to best meet the

Government’s needs utilizing the evaluation criteria below.

OTA Award Criteria

The SOO has a complete list of SIS requirements (see SOO Attachment 1) that will be evaluated throughout the program.

These requirements include Key Performance Parameters (KPPs), Key System Attributes (KSAs), and Additional

Performance Attributes (APAs). Threshold and objective values are specified for each parameter.

Technical maturity, item cost and performance will be assessed during the evaluation of the full proposals. The Government will evaluate proposals for the initial Phase I award based on the following factors, listed in descending order of importance:

1. Performance Evaluate how the proposed prototype shall meet the KPP threshold requirements in Attachment 1 of the SOO’s, delivery schedule from the Statement of Work (SOW), logistics details, and data rights and assertions

2. Technical Maturity Evaluate the readiness level of the proposed solution, including prior laboratory or operational testing, Technology Readiness Level (TRL), and supporting documentation

3. Item Cost The proposed price for the prototype system includes supporting cost breakdowns. The cost will be evaluated to determine if prices are fair and reasonable.

Performance is significantly more important than technical maturity, which is more important than cost. The Government will select up to three (3) offerors for Phase I award based on the evaluation of these factors. The evaluation of proposed solutions will be conducted in accordance with the criteria and methodologies described in this solicitation.

Phase I Prototype Performance Testing Objective

The offeror shall deliver fifteen (15) of the same prototype systems for Phase I testing within 90 days after award. Following verification of biocontainment requirements and a user touch point to down select prototypes to continue on to Phase II.

Table 1 below outlines the test objectives and methodologies and the criteria for downselect.

If an offeror does not currently have FDA authorization, they shall provide supporting documentation of their request for authorization submission.

The Government will evaluate Phase I prototypes to determine which candidates will continue to Phase II, based on the following factors, listed in descending order of importance:

1. Performance The extent to which the prototype meets or exceeds the requirements and test objectives outlined in Table 1, Phase I Criteria, as demonstrated by Government test results, data, and analysis.

2. Technical Maturity The readiness level of the prototype, including prior laboratory or operational testing with the Government’s validation, TRL, and supporting documentation that demonstrates the system’s ability to meet the KPP threshold requirements in Attachment 1.

3. Item Cost The proposed price for the prototype system, including supporting cost breakdowns.

The Government plans to take up to two (2) vendors into Phase II.

The Government reserves the right to update or refine evaluation criteria prior to Phase II award to ensure alignment with program objectives and operational needs, provided such updates do not alter the requirements specified in Attachment 1 of the SOO.

Table 11: Phase I Test Criteria

Requirement Test Objective Test Method (or

Equivalent) Primary Criteria Secondary Criteria

Operational Size

Evaluate system operational size. Verify ICU bed

(NSNs 6530-01-690-8324 & 6530-01-527-3820) enclosure and surrounding space.

Laboratory Testing/EUT*

Pass/fail at Threshold

Operational Weight

Evaluate individual component weight

MIL-STD-1472 Pass/fail at Threshold

Negative Pressure

Assess pressure during mission operations

Test Plan, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Morbidity and Mortality Weekly

Negative pressure differential of 2.5

Pascals

Higher than 2.5 Pascals but not to exceed 12.5 Pascals

Air Exchange Assess air changes per hour

(CFM x 60min)/Volume

Report, Vol. 54 No. RR- 17, 30 December 2005 ≥12 ACH More is best

Directional Airflow Assess airflow direction Laboratory Testing/EUT Pass/fail

Filtration Efficiency

Assess filtration efficiency during mission operations

DOE-STD-3025-2022

99.97% at 0.3-micron particle diameter More is best

System Interruption Alert

Evaluate alarm(s) when pressure increases above limits Laboratory Testing/EUT

Alert system visually and/or audibly when pressure differential is not within limits

Visual and audible alerts

Liquid Containment

Demonstrate containment Laboratory Testing/EUT No leakage

Set up Demonstrate set up requirements Laboratory Testing/EUT 2-person

Access

Evaluate patient entry and exit

Laboratory Testing/EUT Pass/fail at Threshold

Evaluate patient access through glove and trunk ports

Laboratory Testing/EUT;

ASTM D1003; ASTM

F1671; test method 2 of

NFPA 701; ASTM

D1922; ASTM F1342.

Full patient access

Evaluate Patient Visibility Full patient visibility

Evaluate Equipment ports ≥5 cable/hoses; equipment/food

Power

Demonstrate power connectivity. Minimum battery operation of60 minutes and rechargeable in 4 hours.

Laboratory Testing/EUT Pass/fail at Threshold

Electromagnetic Effects

Assess electromagnetic interference (EMI)

MIL-STD-461G Less is best

Noise Evaluate Noise level MIL-STD-1474 ≤60 dBa

Continuous Operation

Demonstrate continuous operation

Laboratory Testing/EUT 2-weeks

Maritime Stability Demonstrate bed security Laboratory Testing/EUT Must be secured Multiple fastening locations

Storage Size

Evaluate total storage size of all containers and that they can be transported throughout the ship.

Laboratory Testing/EUT

MIL-STD-2073-1

Smaller is best with the fewest storage containers

Storage Weight Demonstrate packed, individual storage containers MIL-STD-1472 Meet MIL-STD-1472

Lighter is best with the fewest storage containers.

Vibration of packed storage containers Demonstrate

MIL-STD-167-1,

MIL-STD-810

Pass/fail at Threshold

Environmental Conditions

Demonstrate protection from corrosive environments

MIL-STD-810H: Salt fog, hot/cold, sand/dust, humidity, fungus

Minimal damage, no operational impact

No physical or operational change

Shelf Life Verify shelf life ASTM F1980 5 years Longer is best

Disinfection Demonstrate material compatibility Laboratory Testing/EUT

Compatibility with 9% calcium hypochlorite

Longer is best

Human Systems Integration (HSI)

Assess HSI EUT User feedback Numerical comparison between prototypes

*EUT – Early User Touchpoint: Structured event where representative users interact with a system or prototype to provide practical feedback that informs usability, human-systems integration, and acquisition decisions

The Government reserves the right to update or refine evaluation criteria to ensure alignment with program objectives and operational needs, provided such updates do not alter the requirements specified in Attachment 1 of the SOO.

Phase II Prototype Performance Testing Objective:

Offerors selected for Phase II shall deliver fifteen (15) of the same prototype systems for testing within 60 days after notification of successful downselect. Phase II testing will include a logistics and maintenance demonstration conducted during an operational evaluation by the designated Lead Operational Test Agency (LOTA). While specific testing activities for the operational demonstration have not yet been finalized, the Government will provide detailed evaluation criteria and testing requirements to offerors at the time of Phase II award. All testing conducted during Phase II will focus on verifying that the prototype systems meet the requirements outlined in Attachment 1 of this solicitation, specifically those requirements that were not tested during Phase I.

Final Prototype Selection Criteria:

The evaluation factors for the final selection (following completion of Phase II testing) will include, at a minimum:

1. Performance

Results of all testing conducted in Phases I and II, as measured against the requirements in Attachment 1 of the SOO and successful FDA marketing authorization.

2. User Feedback Usability and human systems integration, as assessed during operational evaluation and user touchpoints.

3. Affordability Overall cost, including production cost, life-cycle cost, and sustainment.

The relative order of importance for these factors will be provided prior to Phase II award. At this time, performance is anticipated to be the most important factor, followed by user feedback, then affordability. The Government reserves the right to update or refine evaluation criteria prior to Phase II award to ensure alignment with program objectives and operational needs, provided such updates do not alter the requirements specified in Attachment 1 in the SOO. The Government reserves the right to award one (1) or more production follow on contracts or transactions.

SECTION E: ANTICIPATED PHASED EFFORT

1. Phase I: Award of up to three (3) prototype OT Agreements. Performers will develop their initial system designs and demonstrate progress towards key performance objectives; with a specific focus on the proposed path for meeting criteria in Attachment 1 of the SOO: Offered prototype solution restrictions and defined problem statement/capability gap requirements in Attachment 1. SIS Requirements. The anticipated time frame for Phase I testing may take up to one (1) year. After testing on Phase I prototypes is complete, the Government will downselect offerors to continue to Phase II.

2. Phase II: Downselect up to two (2) prototypes. All testing conducted in Phase II will focus on verifying the prototype systems meet the requirements outlined in SOO Attachment 1 –. Considerations for downselect include, but are not limited to, test results, affordability of the prototype, and the availability of funds. The anticipated time frame for Phase II testing may take up to one (1) year. Upon completion of testing on Phase II prototypes, one or more solution(s) may be selected to move forward to Follow-on Production contract.

3. In accordance with 10 U.S.C. 4022, and upon a determination that the prototype project for this transaction has been successfully completed, any competitively awarded prototype Other Transaction Authority (OTA) as a result of this Call for Solutions may result in a single award of a follow-on production contract, or transaction without the use of competitive procedures. If follow-on production is pursued, the potential magnitude could include up to 150 systems in support of operations and sustainment.

SECTION F: INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

The Government desires, at a minimum, Government Purpose Rights for all technical data and computer software developed with Government funding under this effort, for technical data related to interfaces (physical, electrical) necessary to comply with MOSA requirements and to connect the SIS to shipboard and medical systems and also for technical data related to form, fit and function (FFF) and operation, maintenance, installation, and training (OMIT). Special consideration will be given to IP strategies that facilitate the rapid and affordable achievement of biocontainment requirements. The path for intellectual property will be assessed during submission evaluation, including the impact of the offeror’s data rights assertions and how they may affect initial deployment, maintenance and sustainment efforts.

SECTION G: SUCCESSFUL COMPLETION CRITERIA FOR FOLLOW-ON PRODUCTION

To be eligible for a non-competitive follow-on production award, the final selected prototype must be determined by the Government to have “successfully completed” the project. A prototype is considered successful if it, at a minimum, meets the KPP threshold requirements outlined in Attachment 1 in the SOO and the offeror has a vendor sponsored FDA marketing authorization (ie. 510(k)), or the prototype must have accomplished a particularly favorable or unexpected result that justifies the transition to production.

SECTION H: POINT OF CONTACT (POC)

Agreements Officer (AO): Pete Stahley Email: peter.w.stahley.civ@army.mil

Agreements Specialist: Christine Halamoutis Email: christine.m.halamoutis.civ@army.mil