Contact Us

Grantee Research Project Results

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Research and Development
National Center for Environmental Research
Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR)

CLOSED - FOR REFERENCES PURPOSES ONLY

Recipients List

SMALL BUSINESS INNOVATION RESEARCH PHASE I Program Solicitation
RFP# PR-NC-10-10251

  • Green Building
  • Innovation in Manufacturing
  • Nanotechnology
  • Greenhouse Gases
  • Drinking Water Monitoring and Treatment
  • Wastewater and Sustainable Infrastructure
  • Air Pollution Monitoring and Control
  • Biofuels
  • Waste Monitoring and Management
  • Homeland Security

ISSUE DATE: March 25, 2010
CLOSING DATE: May 11, 2010 *

* CAUTION - See Section V., Paragraph J.9(c), Instructions to Offerors, Concerning Late Proposals and Modifications.

Your proposal with an original and two (2) copies (including all appendices) shall be received at one of the following addresses by 12:00 p.m. (Noon) local time on May 11, 2010.  Offerors are encouraged to also include one CD-ROM with a Portable Document Form (PDF) copy of your proposal.

U.S. MAIL:

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Solicitation No. PR-NC-10-10251 - SBIR Phase I
Closing Date: May 11, 2010 at 12:00 p.m. (Noon)
Attention: Jennifer Hill, SBIR Phase I
RTP Procurement Operations Division (E105-02)
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711

HAND-CARRIED/COURIER ADDRESS:
(Includes U.S. Postal Service Express mail requiring delivery signature)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Solicitation No. PR-NC-10-10251 - SBIR Phase I
Closing Date: May 11, 2010 at 12:00 p.m. (Noon)
Attention: Jennifer Hill, SBIR Phase I
RTP Procurement Operations Division (E105-02)
4930 Old Page Road
Durham, NC 27703

Table of Contents

Section
I. Program Description
II. Definitions
III. Proposal Preparation Instructions and Requirements
IV. Method of Selection and Evaluation Criteria
V. Considerations
VI. Submission of Proposals
VII. SBIR Phase I Research Topics
  A. Green Building
  B. Innovation in Manufacturing
  C. Nanotechnology
  D. Greenhouse Gases
  E. Drinking Water Monitoring and Treatment
  F. Wastewater and Sustainable Infrastructure
  G. Air Pollution Monitoring and Control
  H. Biofuels
  I. Waste Monitoring and Management
  J. Homeland Security
VIII. Submission Forms and Certifications

APPENDICES
APPENDIX A - Proposal Cover Sheet
APPENDIX B - Project Summary
APPENDIX C - SBIR Proposal Summary Budget
APPENDIX D - Commercialization Fact Sheet/Patent Search

SBIR PHASE I SOLICITATION

I. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

  1. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) invites small business firms to submit research proposals under this Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) Solicitation. The SBIR program is a phased process across the Federal Government of soliciting proposals and awarding funding agreements for research (R) or research and development (R&D) to meet stated agency needs or missions.

    EPA is interested in advanced technologies that address priority environmental issues. The following topics are included in this solicitation: Green Building, Innovation in Manufacturing, Nanotechnology, Greenhouse Gases, Drinking Water Monitoring and Treatment, Wastewater and Sustainable Infrastructure, Air Pollution Monitoring and Control, Biofuels, Waste Management and Monitoring, and Homeland Security. The proposed research must directly pertain to EPA's environmental mission and must be responsive to EPA program interests included in the topic descriptions in this solicitation. (See page 2 for a summary listing of all research topics included in this solicitation.)

    In order to facilitate proposal reviews by external peer reviewers with specialized expertise and by EPA technical personnel with focused program needs and priorities, offerors must designate a research topic for their proposal. The same proposal may not be submitted under more than one topic. An organization may, however, submit separate proposals on different topics, or different proposals on the same topic, as long as the proposals are not duplicates of the same research principle modified to fit the topic. If such duplicates are submitted, only one will be reviewed. Refer to Sections IV, V, and VI for additional requirements. Where similar research is discussed under more than one topic, the offeror shall choose the topic most relevant to the proposed research. It is the complete responsibility of offerors to select and identify the best topic for their proposals.

    SBIR PHASE I RESEARCH TOPICS

    1. GREEN BUILDING
      • Building Materials
      • Energy and Indoor Environmental Quality
      • Water Use and Management
    2. INNOVATION IN MANUFACTURING
      • Green Manufacturing
      • Pollution Prevention
    3. NANOTECHNOLOGY
    4. GREENHOUSE GASES
    5. DRINKING WATER MONITORING AND TREATMENT
    6. WASTEWATER AND SUSTAINABLE INFRASTRUCTURE
    7. AIR POLLUTION MONITORING AND CONTROL
    8. BIOFUELS
    9. WASTE MONITORING AND MANAGEMENT
      • Hazardous Waste Monitoring
      • Waste-to-Energy Systems
    10. HOMELAND SECURITY
      • Decontamination and Decontamination Waste Treatment/Disposal
      • Detection
      • Drinking Water and Wastewater Security

  2. Offerors are responsible for submitting proposals, and any modifications or revisions, so as to reach the Government office designated in this solicitation by the time specified in this solicitation. See Section V, Paragraph J.9(c), Instructions to Offerors, concerning Late Proposals and Modifications.

    THIS SOLICITATION IS FOR PHASE I PROPOSALS ONLY.

    To stimulate and foster technological innovation, including increasing private sector applications of Federal research or R&D, EPA's program follows the SBIR program's uniform process:

    1. PHASE I. Phase I involves a solicitation of proposals to conduct feasibility related experimental research or R&D related to described agency requirements. The objective of this phase is to determine the technical feasibility and preliminary commercialization potential of the proposed effort and the quality of performance of the small concern with a relatively small agency investment before consideration of further Federal support in Phase II. The Government is not obligated to fund any specific Phase I proposal. The maximum dollar amount of awards under this Phase I solicitation is $80,000 and the term of performance should not exceed six months.
    2. PHASE II. Phase II proposals may only be submitted by Phase I awardees invited to submit proposals. Phase II is the principal research or R&D effort and Phase II projects should normally be completed in 24 months. The objective is to continue the research or R&D initiated under Phase I and work toward commercialization of the technology. Phase II awards are expected to include full scale testing of the technology, but may not necessarily complete the total research and development that may be required to satisfy commercial or federal needs beyond the SBIR program. Completion of the research and development may be through Phase III.

      It is anticipated that approximately 10 Phase II awards will be made, each with a dollar amount of $300,000 and a 24 - month term of performance. For Phase II, the Agency is planning to require a Phase II Commercialization Option under which Phase II offerors shall submit a proposal for $70,000 additional funding to expand R&D efforts to accelerate commercialization. EPA federal funds must be designated strictly for advancing the research related elements of the project. The entire Phase II proposal including the option will be evaluated together. The Agency would have a unilateral right to exercise the option after EPA's acceptance of the company's option documentation. Documentation for the Phase II Commercialization Option are receipts showing that at least $100,000 was transferred to the contractor from one or more third party investors, such as a venture capital firm, an individual "angel" investor, state or local funding source, or another company under a partnership, licensing or joint venture arrangement, or any combination of third parties.

      For technologies awarded Phase I contracts under this solicitation and invited to submit a follow-on EPA Phase II Proposal, the follow-on Phase II Solicitation will be issued on/about July 15, 2011, and proposals will be due on/about September 15, 2011. The EPA Phase II evaluation criteria will be as follows:

      PHASE II CRITERIA

      1. Results of Phase I and degree to which research objectives and identified customer needs were met. Demonstration of performance/cost effectiveness and environmental benefits associated with the proposed research, including risk reduction potential.
      2. Quality and soundness of the Phase II research plan to establish the technical and commercial viability of the proposed concept as evidenced through technology prototypes or initial commercial demonstrations.
      3. Qualifications of the principal investigator, supporting staff and consultants. Time commitment of principal investigator and project team, adequacy of equipment and facilities and proposed budget to accomplish the proposed research. Adequacy of Phase II Quality Assurance Summary.
      4. Potential of the proposed concept for significant commercialization applications. The quality and adequacy of the commercialization plan to produce an innovative product, process or device and getting technology prototypes or initial Phase II applications into commercial production and sales.
      5. The offeror's SBIR or other research commercialization record. Existence of second phase funding commitments from private sector or non-SBIR funding sources. Existence of third phase follow-on commitments and presence of other indicators of commercial potential of the idea.
    3. PHASE III. Where appropriate and needed in order to complete the research and development, there may be a third phase which is funded by:
      1. Non-federal sources of capital for commercial applications of SBIR funded research or research and development.
      2. Federal government with non-SBIR federal funds for SBIR derived products and processes that will be used by the federal government.
      3. Non-SBIR federal funds for the continuation of research or research and development that has been competitively selected using peer review or scientific review criteria.

  3. Each offeror submitting a proposal must qualify as a small business for research or R&D purposes at the time of award of Phase I and Phase II funding agreements. In addition, the primary employment of the principal investigator must be with the small business firm at the time of contract award and during the conduct of the proposed research. Principal investigators who appear to be employed by a university must submit a letter from the university stating that the principal investigator, if awarded a SBIR contract, will become a less-than-half-time employee of the university. Also, a principal investigator who appears to be a staff member of both the applicant and another employer must submit a letter from the second employer stating that, if awarded a SBIR contract, he/she will become a less than half-time employee of such organization. Letters demonstrating that these requirements have been fulfilled shall be submitted prior to contract award to the addressee stated in Section VI of this solicitation. Failure to do so may jeopardize award. Also, for both Phase I and Phase II, the research or R&D work must be performed in the United States. (For definition of the United States, see Section II. J.)

  4. For Phase I the Government anticipates the award of approximately $2.8M in firm fixed price contracts at approximately $80,000 each including profit, but reserves the right to change either the number of awards or the amount of the individual awards depending on the outcome of the selection process. The contractor’s period of performance is expected to be 6 months. Source selection will not be based on a comparison of cost or price. However, cost or price will be evaluated to determine whether the price, including any proposed profit, is fair and reasonable and whether the offeror understands the work and is capable of performing the contract.

  5. Potential offerors are encouraged to communicate via E-mail. All inquiries concerning this solicitation shall be submitted to Jennifer Hill (hill.jennifer@epa.gov).

    If E-mail is not available to you, written or telephone inquiries may be directed to:

    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
    Attention: Jennifer Hill, SBIR Phase I
    RTP Procurement Operations Division (E105-02)
    Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27711
    Telephone: (919) 541-3083
    Fax: (919) 685-3294

II. DEFINITIONS

For purposes of this solicitation, the following definitions apply:

  1. Research or Research and Development (R/R&D): Any activity that is:
    1. A systematic, intensive study directed toward greater knowledge or understanding of the subject studied;
    2. A systematic study directed specifically toward applying new knowledge to meet a recognized need; or
    3. A systematic application of knowledge toward the production of useful materials, devices, and systems or methods, including design, development, and improvement of prototypes and new processes to meet specific requirements.

  2. Funding Agreement: Any contract, grant, or cooperative agreement entered into between any Federal Agency and any small business concern for the performance of experimental, developmental, or research work, including products or services, funded in whole or in part by the Federal Government.

  3. Subcontract: Any agreement, other than one involving an employer-employee relationship, entered into by an awardee of a funding agreement calling for supplies or services for the performance of the original funding agreement.

  4. Small Business Concern: A small business concern is one that, at the time of award of Phase I and Phase II, meets all of the following criteria:
    1. Is organized for profit, with a place of business in the United States (US), which operates primarily within the US or which makes a significant contribution to the US economy through payment of taxes or use of American products, materials or labor;
    2. Is in the legal form of an individual proprietorship, partnership, limited liability company, corporation, joint venture, association, trust, or cooperative, except that where the form is a joint venture, there can be no more than 49 percent participation by business entities in the joint venture;
    3. Is at least 51% owned and controlled by one or more individuals who are citizens of, or permanent resident aliens in, the United States or it must be a for-profit business concern that is at least 51% owned and controlled by another for-profit business concern that is at least 51% owned and controlled by one or more individuals who are citizens of, or permanent resident aliens in, the US – (except in the case of a joint venture); and
    4. Has, including its affiliates, not more than 500 employees.

  5. Socially and Economically Disadvantaged Small Business Concern: A socially and economically disadvantaged small business concern is one that is at least 51% owned and controlled by one or more socially and economically disadvantaged individuals, or an Indian tribe, including Alaska Native Corporations (ANCs), a Native Hawaiian Organization (NHO), or a Community Development Corporation (CDC). Control includes both the strategic planning (as that exercised by boards of directors) and the day-to-day management and administration of business operations. See 13 CFR 124.109, 124.110, and 124.111 for special rules pertaining to concerns owned by Indian tribes (including ANCs), NHOs or CDCs, respectively.

  6. Socially and Economically Disadvantaged Individual: A member of any of the following groups:
    1. Black Americans;
    2. Hispanic Americans;
    3. Native Americans (American Indians, Eskimos, Aleuts, or Native Hawaiians);
    4. Asian-Pacific Americans (persons with origins from Burma, Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore, Brunei, Japan, China (including Hong Kong), Taiwan, Laos, Cambodia (Kampuchea), Vietnam, Korea, The Philippines, U.S. Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands (Republic of Palau), Republic of the Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, Samoa, Macao, Fiji, Tonga, Kiribati, Tuvalu, or Nauru);
    5. Subcontinent Asian Americans (persons with origins from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Bhutan, the Maldives Islands, or Nepal); and
    6. Other groups designated from time to time by SBA pursuant to Section 124.103 (d) of 13 CFR Ch.1(1-1-02 Edition).

  7. Women-Owned Small Business Concern: A small business concern that is at least 51 % owned by and controlled by a woman or women. Control includes both the strategic planning (as that exercised by boards of directors) and the day-to-day management and administration of business operations.

  8. Historically Underutilized Business Zone (HUBZone): A small business concern meeting the following requirements:
    1. Located in a HUBZone area located in one or more of the following:
      1. A qualified census tract (as defined in Section 42(d)(5)(C)(i)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986;
      2. A qualified "non-metropolitan county" (as defined in Section 143 (k)(2)(B) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986) with a median household income of less than 80 percent of the State median household income or with an unemployment rate of not less than 140 percent of the Statewide average, based on US Department of Labor recent data; or,
      3. Lands within the boundaries of federally recognized Indian reservations.
    2. Owned and controlled by one or more US Citizens; and,
    3. At least 35% of its employees must reside in a HUBZONE.

  9. Primary Employment: More than one-half of the principal investigator's time is spent in the employ of the small business concern.

  10. United States: The 50 States, the Territories and possessions of the Federal Government, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the District of Columbia, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, and the Republic of Palau.

  11. Commercialization: The process of developing marketable products or services and producing and delivering products or services for sale (whether by the originating party or by others) to Government or commercial markets.

  12. SBIR Technical Data: All data generated during the performance of an SBIR award.

  13. SBIR Technical Data Rights: The rights a small business concern obtains in data generated during the performance of any SBIR Phase I, Phase II, or Phase III award that an awardee delivers to the Government during or upon completion of a Federally-funded project, and to which the Government receives a license.

III. PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS AND REQUIREMENTS

  1. PROPOSAL PAGE LIMIT

    Proposals submitted in response to this Phase I of the SBIR program shall not exceed a total of 25 pages, one side only. The only exception would be regarding the requirements set forth in Section III.D.12, "Prior SBIR Awards". The 25 pages shall include the cover page, budget, and all enclosures or attachments. Pages (including enclosures or attachments such as letters of recommendation) should be of standard size (8 ½" x 11"; 21.6 cm x 27.9 cm) with 2.5 cm margins and type no smaller than 10 point font size. All pages shall be consecutively numbered. Proposals in excess of the 25 page limitation shall not be considered for review or award. Any additional attachments, appendices or references beyond the 25-page limitation shall result in the proposal not being considered for review or award. A letter of transmittal is not necessary. If one is furnished, it shall not be attached to every copy of the proposal. If a letter of transmittal is attached to every copy of the proposal, it will be counted as page 1 of the proposal. No binders are necessary. If binders are provided, they will be counted as pages even if no printing or writing is thereon.


  2. PROPOSAL COVER SHEET

    The offeror shall photocopy (or download from the Internet) and complete Appendix A of this solicitation which has the relevant solicitation number as page 1 of each copy of each proposal. No other cover shall be permitted. When downloading the solicitation from the Internet, Appendix A may print on no more than two pages, but will only count as one page per Appendix. If Appendix A exceeds two pages, any additional pages will count toward the 25-page limitation. Offerors may reformat the forms to correct spacing and pagination errors, however, identical information shall be provided.

    The original of the cover sheet shall contain the pen-and-ink signatures of the principal investigator and the corporate/business official authorized to sign the proposal.


  3. PROJECT SUMMARY

    The offeror shall complete Appendix B as page 2 of each proposal. Appendix B may be no more than two pages, but will only count as one page per Appendix. If Appendix B exceeds two pages, any additional pages will count toward the 25-page limitation. Offerors may reformat the forms to correct spacing and pagination errors, however, identical information shall be provided. The Project Summary shall include a technical abstract with a brief description of the problem or opportunity, the innovation, project objectives, and description of the effort. In summarizing anticipated results, the implications of the approach (for both Phases I and II) and the potential commercial applications of the research shall be stated. THE ABSTRACT (APPENDIX B) IS USED EXTENSIVELY DURING THE EXTERNAL PEER REVIEW AND EPA INTERNAL PROGRAMMATIC REVIEW. The project summary and proposal title (Appendix B) of successful proposals will be published by EPA and, therefore, must not contain proprietary information. No changes shall be allowed.


  4. TECHNICAL CONTENT

    Begin the main body of the proposal on page 3. As a minimum, the following shall be included:

    1. IDENTIFICATION AND SIGNIFICANCE OF THE PROBLEM OR OPPORTUNITY. A clear statement of the specific technical problem or opportunity addressed and the environmental benefits. INFORMATION ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS ASSOCIATED WITH THE TECHNOLOGY IS A VERY IMPORTANT PART OF THE EXTERNAL PEER REVIEW AND EPA INTERNAL PROGRAMMATIC REVIEW. Where appropriate, proposals should describe the positive and negative environmental impacts based on an assessment of the full life cycle of the new product or technology. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) refers to the analysis of impacts throughout all stages of a product or process from production to use to disposal. Integration of a live cycle perspective into the environmental analysis typically considers impacts from raw materials extraction, manufacture, packaging, distribution and disposal.
    2. PHASE I OBJECTIVES. State the specific objectives of Phase I research and development effort, including the technical questions it will try to answer to determine the feasibility of the proposed approach.
    3. PHASE I WORK PLAN. This section provides a detailed description of the work plan. The work plan should describe what will be done, where it will be done and how the R/R&D will be carried out. The work planned to achieve each task should be discussed in detail, to enable a complete scientific and technical evaluation of the work plan. A work schedule should also be provided.
    4. RELATED RESEARCH OR R&D. Describe significant research or R&D that is directly related to the proposal including any conducted by the project manager/principal investigator or by the proposing firm. Describe how it relates to the proposed effort, and any planned coordination with outside sources. Offerors must demonstrate their awareness of key recent research or R&D conducted by others in the specific topic area by providing appropriate references from the literature and other published documents.
    5. KEY PERSONNEL AND BIBLIOGRAPHY OF DIRECTLY RELATED WORK. Identify key personnel involved in Phase I including their directly related education, experience and bibliographic information. Where vitae are extensive, summaries that focus on the most relevant experience or publications are desired and may be necessary to meet proposal size limitations.
    6. RELATIONSHIP WITH FUTURE RESEARCH OR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT. State the anticipated results of the proposed approach if the project is successful (Phase I and II). A discussion of cost-effectiveness is paramount, especially comparing the state-of-the-art approaches with the proposed approach. Discuss the significance of the Phase I effort in providing a foundation for Phase II R/R&D effort.
    7. FACILITIES. A detailed description, availability and location of instrumentation and physical facilities proposed for Phase I shall be provided.
    8. CONSULTANTS. Involvement of consultants in the planning and research stages of the project is permitted. If such involvement is intended, it should be described in detail and vitae should be provided.
    9. COMMERCIALIZATION PLAN. Provide an abbreviated 2-3 page plan related directly to producing an innovative product, process or device and getting it into commercial production and sales. Comprehensive business plans (that are company rather than project oriented) are not desired. The Phase I plan is a roadmap toward producing a detailed Phase II Commercialization Plan which shall be required as part of the Phase II Application.

      NOTE: The Small Business Research and Development Enhancement Act of 1992 allows discretionary technical assistance to SBIR awardees. The Agency may provide up to $4,000 of SBIR funds for technical assistance per award. EPA intends to provide Phase I awardees with technical assistance through a separate EPA arrangement. For Phase I, this assistance will be in addition to the award amount. For Phase II, the law allows each awardee to expend up to $4,000 per year of the award amount for technical assistance services.

      The Phase I plan shall provide limited information on the subjects described below. Explain what will be done during Phase I to decide on applications, markets, production and financing. The Commercialization Plan shall address:

      1. SBIR Project: Brief description of the company, its principal field(s) of interest, size and current products and sales. A concise description of the SBIR project and its key technical objectives.
      2. Commercial Applications: Potential commercial applications of the research results specifying customers and specific needs that will be satisfied. Have you or do you intend to file for one or more patents as a result of the SBIR project?
      3. Competitive Advantages: What is particularly innovative about the anticipated technology or products? (Innovation may be expressed in terms of applications, performance, efficiencies or reduced cost. To determine if your innovation is likely to result in intellectual property that may be legally protected, it helps to conduct a patent search and look for related work being funded by EPA or another Federal agency. A fact sheet on how to search for patents and related federally-funded work is provided in Appendix D.) What significant advantages in application, performance, technique, efficiency, or costs, do you anticipate your new technology will have over existing technology? (In order to assess such advantages, it is useful to compare the anticipated performance of your technology against substitutable products currently being sold or emerging out of R&D. If regulations, industry standards or certifying requirements apply to your technology or product, these provide useful criteria for comparing your anticipated performance with potentially competing technology and products. However, other expressions of end-user needs may also contain important criteria).
      4. Markets: What are the anticipated specific markets for the resulting technology, their estimated size, classes of customers, and your estimated market share 5 years after the project is completed and/or first sales? Who are the major competitors in the markets, present and/or anticipated?
      5. Commercialization: Briefly describe how you plan to produce your product. Do you intend to manufacture it yourself, subcontract the manufacturing, enter into a joint venture or manufacturing agreement, license the product, etc.? Briefly describe the approach and steps you plan to take to commercialize the research results to significant sales. Do you plan to market the product yourself, through dealers, contract sales, marketing agreements, joint venture, sales representatives, foreign companies, etc.? How do you plan to raise money to support your commercialization plan?
    10. SIMILAR OR CLOSELY RELATED SBIR AWARDS. If the small business concern has received ANY prior Phase I or Phase II award(s) from EPA or any Federal agency for similar or closely related research, submit name of awarding agency, date of award, funding agreement number, amount and topic or subtopic title. DESCRIBE THE TECHNICAL DIFFERENCES AND REASONS WHY THE PROPOSED NEW PHASE I RESEARCH IS DIFFERENT FROM RESEARCH CONDUCTED UNDER PRIOR SBIR AWARDS. (This required proposal information shall be counted toward proposal pages count limitation.)
    11. DUPLICATE OR EQUIVALENT SBIR PROPOSALS. A firm may elect to submit essentially equivalent work under other Federal Program Solicitations. In these cases, a statement shall be included in each such proposal indicating: the name and address of the agencies to which proposals were submitted or from which awards were received; date of proposal submission or date of award; title, number, and date of solicitations under which proposals were submitted or awards received; specific applicable research topics for each proposal submitted or award received; titles of research projects; name and title of project manager or principal investigator for each proposal submitted or award received. (This information shall count toward proposal pages count limitation.)
    12. PRIOR SBIR AWARDS. If the small business concern has received ANY prior Phase II award from any Federal agency in the prior 5 fiscal years, submit name of awarding agency, date of award, funding agreement number, amount, topic or subtopic title, follow-on agreement amount, source and date of commitment and current commercialization status for each Phase II. (This required proposal information shall be included as an attachment to the proposals and shall not be counted toward proposal pages count limitation.) Information provided shall be limited to what has been requested. Proposals that contain information in the attachment beyond what is requested shall count toward the 25 page limitation.

  5. COST BREAKDOWN/PROPOSED BUDGET

    Complete the budget form in Appendix C and include the completed form immediately after proposal Section D.11. Photocopy the form for the required copies for submission. Incorporate the copy of the budget form bearing the original signature into the copy of the proposal bearing the original signature on the cover page. The completed budget form will count as one page in the 25 page limit. If budget explanation pages are included, they will count toward the 25 page limit. Offerors are encouraged to include the travel expenses on the budget form to attend a one-day SBIR Phase I Kick-Off Meeting in Washington, DC soon after the Phase I awards are made.


  6. PHASE I QUALITY ASSURANCE STATEMENT (QAS)

    Offerors must state whether or not their proposal involves data collection or processing, environmental measurements, modeling, or the development of environmental technology (whether hardware-based or via new techniques). The QAS describes processes that will be used to assure that results of the research satisfy the intended project objectives. EPA is particularly interested in the quality controls for data generation and acquisition, and how data validation and usability will be verified. This QAS should not exceed one page and will be included in the 25 page limitation for the proposal. The QAS should briefly address each of the sections below. If a section does not apply, provide a brief justification of why.

    1. Identify the individual who will be responsible for the quality assurance (QA) and quality control (QC) aspects of the research along with a brief description of this person’s functions, experience and authority within the firm. Describe the firm’s general approach for conducting quality research. (QA is a system of management activities to ensure that a process or product is of the type and quality needed for the project. QC is a system of activities that measure the attributes and performance of a process or product against the standards defined in the project to verify that they will meet those stated requirements.)
    2. Discuss project objectives, including quality objectives, any hypotheses to be tested, and the quantitative and/or qualitative procedures that will be used to evaluate the success of the project. Include any plans for peer or other reviews of the study design or analytical methods.
    3. Address the collection of new primary data, if applicable: (Note: In this case the word “sample” is intended to mean any finite part of a statistical population whose properties are studied to gain information about the whole. If certain attributes listed below do not apply to the type of samples to be used in the research, simply explain why those attributes are not applicable.)

      Discuss the plan for sample collection and analysis. As applicable, include sample type(s), frequency, locations, sample sizes, sampling procedures, and the criteria for determining acceptable data quality (e.g., precision, accuracy, representativeness, completeness, comparability, or data quality objectives). Describe the procedures for the handling and custody of samples including sample collection, identification, preservation, transportation, storage and how the accuracy of test measurements will be verified. Describe or reference each analytical method to be used, any QA or QC checks or procedures with the associated acceptance criteria, and any procedure that will be used in the calibration and performance evaluation of the analytical instrumentation. Discuss the procedures for overall data reduction, analysis and reporting. Include a description of all statistical methods to make inferences and conclusions, acceptable error rates and any statistical software to be used.

    4. Address the use of existing/secondary data (i.e., data previously collected for other purposes or from other sources), if applicable: Describe or reference each analytical method to be used, any QA or QC checks or procedures with the associated acceptance criteria, and any procedures that will be used in the calibration and performance evaluation of the analytical instrumentation. Discuss the procedures for overall data reduction, analysis and reporting. Include a description of all statistical methods to make inferences and conclusions, acceptable error rates and any statistical software to be used.
    5. Address method development, if applicable: (Note: The data collected for use in method development or evaluation should be described in the QAS as per the guidance in sections 3 and/or 4 above.) Describe the scope and application of the method, any tests (and measurements) to be conducted to support the method development, the type of instrumentation that will be used and any required instrument conditions (e.g., calibration frequency), planned QC checks and associated criteria (e.g., spikes, replicates, blanks), and tests to verify the method’s performance.
    6. Address development or refinement of models, if applicable: (Note: The data collected for use in the development or refinement of models should be described in the QAS as per the guidance in sections 3 and/or 4 above.)

      Discuss the scope and purpose of the model, key assumptions to be made during development/refinement, requirements for code development and how the model will be documented. Discuss verification techniques to ensure the source code implements the model correctly. Discuss validation techniques to determine that the model (assumption and algorithms) captures the essential phenomena with adequate fidelity. Discuss plans for long-term maintenance of the model and associated data.

    7. Address development or operation of environmental technology, if applicable: (Note: The data collected for use in the development or evaluation of the technology should be described in the QAS as per the guidance in sections 3 and/or 4 above.)

      Describe the overall purpose and anticipated impact of the technology. Describe the technical and quality specifications of each technology component or process that is to be designed, fabricated, constructed and/or operated. Discuss the procedure to be used for documenting and controlling design changes. Discuss the procedure to be used for documenting the acceptability of processes and components, and discuss how the technology will be benchmarked and its effectiveness determined. Discuss the documentation requirements for operating instructions/guides for maintenance and use of the system(s) and/or process(s).

    8. Discuss data management activities (e.g., record-keeping procedures, data-handling procedures, and the approach used for data storage and retrieval on electronic media). Include any required computer hardware and software and address any specific performance requirements for the hardware/software configuration used.

    A more detailed Proposal Quality Assurance Plan will be required in Phase II. The plan will be required as part of the first monthly report under the Phase II contract.

IV. METHOD OF SELECTION AND EVALUATION CRITERIA

All Phase I proposals will be evaluated and judged on a competitive basis by peer reviewers from outside EPA. Proposals will be initially screened to determine responsiveness. As noted in Section III, proposals exceeding the 25-page limitation will not be considered for review or award. Also, as noted in Section I, any proposal addressing more than one research topic and failing to identify the research topic by letter symbol on the cover page will not be considered for review or award. Proposals passing this initial screening will be reviewed for technical merit by external peer review meetings with technical experts, using the technical evaluation criteria described in A.1 below. Each of the criteria are equal in value. Peer reviewers will assign each proposal an adjectival rating of “excellent”, “very good”, “good”, “fair” or “poor”, using the specified criteria. Proposals rated “good”, “fair”, or “poor” will not be considered for award. The proposals assigned “excellent” and “very good” ratings, will then be subjected to the programmatic review within EPA, to further evaluate these applications in relation to program priorities and balance using the criteria specified in A.2 below. Each proposal will be judged on its own merit. The Agency is under no obligation to fund any proposal or any specific number of proposals in a given topic. It also may elect to fund several or none of the proposed approaches to the same topic or subtopic.

  1. TECHNICAL EVALUATION CRITERIA
    1. EXTERNAL PEER REVIEW. The external peer review meetings will utilize the following evaluation criteria to rate each proposal. The criteria are of equal importance.

      CRITERIA

      1. The scientific and technical significance of the proposed technology and its appropriateness to the research topic. Quality and soundness of the research plan to establish the technical and commercial feasibility of the concept.
      2. The uniqueness/ingenuity of the proposed concept or application as technological innovation. Originality and innovativeness of the proposed research toward meeting customer needs and achieving commercialization of the technology.
      3. Potential demonstration of performance/cost effectiveness and environmental benefits associated with the proposed research, including risk reduction potential.
      4. Qualifications of the principal investigator, supporting staff and consultants. Time commitment of principal investigator and project team, adequacy of equipment and facilities and proposed budget to accomplish the proposed research. Adequacy and quality of the Quality Assurance Statement.
      5. Potential of the proposed concept for significant commercial applications. Potential for the commercialization plan to produce an innovative product, process or device and to put it into commercial production and sales. Potential market and competition and other financial/business indicators of commercialization potential and the offeror's SBIR or other research commercialization record.

      Peer Review Panels exclude personnel from current Phase I contractors, Phase I offerors, and Phase II offerors from the panel. All peer reviewers will be queried on their SBIR contracts or proposals and will be required to sign an agreement to protect the confidentiality of all proposal material and to certify that no conflict of interest exists between the reviewer and the offeror. A copy of both forms is available upon request; however, the identity of the reviewers will not be released.


    2. EPA PROGRAMMATIC REVIEW. The proposals that received ratings of "excellent" or "very good" by the external peer reviewer panel will be subject to the programmatic review by EPA program managers using the criteria set forth below to select which of the “excellent” and “very good” proposals will be funded. Please note that not all of the proposals rated “Excellent” or “Very Good” will receive a contract award. Projects will not be funded where EPA determines the proposed research is already being supported by EPA or another known source. The evaluation criteria “a” through “c” are of equal value and will be used to evaluate the applications in relation to program priorities, balance and programmatic relevancy.

      CRITERIA

      1. The potential of the technology to meet Agency program priorities and to strengthen the overall balance of the SBIR program. How well the technology fits into EPA’s overall research strategy or program within the Phase I research topic.
      2. The potential of the technology for significant environmental benefits and for strengthening the scientific basis for risk assessment/risk management in the Agency research topic area.
      3. The potential of the technology to have broad application or to impact large segments of the population.

  2. RELEASE OF PROPOSAL REVIEW INFORMATION. After final award decisions have been announced, the technical evaluations of the offeror's proposal will be provided to the offeror. The identity of the reviewers shall not be disclosed.

V. CONSIDERATIONS

  1. The Program Solicitation is intended for informational purposes and reflects current planning. If there is any inconsistency between the information contained herein and the terms of any resulting SBIR funding agreement, the terms of the funding agreement are controlling.

  2. Before award of an SBIR funding agreement, the Government may request the offeror to submit certain organizational, management, personnel, and financial information to assure responsibility of the offeror.

  3. The Government is not responsible for any monies expended by the offeror before award of any funding agreement.

  4. This Program Solicitation is not an offer by the Government and does not obligate the Government to make any specific number of awards. Also, awards under the SBIR program are contingent upon the availability of funds.

  5. The EPA SBIR program is not a substitute for existing unsolicited proposal mechanisms. Unsolicited proposals shall not be accepted under the EPA SBIR program in either Phase I or Phase II.

  6. If an award is made pursuant to a proposal submitted under this Program Solicitation, the Contractor will be required to certify that he or she has not previously been, nor is currently being, paid for essentially equivalent work by any agency of the Federal Government.

  7. Notwithstanding the relatively broad definition of R/R&D in Section II, Definitions, hereof, awards under this solicitation are limited to APPLIED forms of research. Proposals that are surveys, including market, state-of the-art and/or literature surveys, which should have been performed by the offeror prior to the preparation of the proposal, or the preparation of allied questionnaires and instruction manuals, shall not be accepted. If such proposals are submitted, they shall be considered as not in compliance with the solicitation intent, and therefore, technically unacceptable.

  8. The requirement that the offeror designate a topic, and only one topic, (see page 1, Section I above) is also necessary. EPA receives hundreds of proposals each year and has special panels of reviewers for review of each research topic. In order to assure that proposals are evaluated by the correct panel, it is the complete responsibility of the offeror to select and identify the best topic.

  9. Instructions to Offerors - Competitive Acquisition (Jan 2004) FAR 52.215-1
    1. Definitions. As used in this provision- Discussions are negotiations that occur after establishment of the competitive range that may, at the Contracting Officer’s discretion, result in the offeror being allowed to revise its proposal.

      “In writing,” “writing,” or “written” means any worded or numbered expression that can be read, reproduced, and later communicated, and includes electronically transmitted and stored information.

      “Proposal modification” is a change made to a proposal before the solicitation’s closing date and time, or made in response to an amendment, or made to correct a mistake at any time before award.

      “Proposal revision” is a change to a proposal made after the solicitation closing date, at the request of or as allowed by a Contracting Officer as the result of negotiations.

      “Time,” if stated as a number of days, is calculated using calendar days, unless otherwise specified, and will include Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays. However, if the last day falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, then the period shall include the next working day.


    2. Amendments to solicitations. If this solicitation is amended, all terms and conditions that are not amended remain unchanged. Offerors shall acknowledge receipt of any amendment to this solicitation by the date and time specified in the amendment(s).

    3. Submission, modification, revision, and withdrawal of proposals.
      1. Unless other methods (e.g., electronic commerce or facsimile) are permitted in the solicitation, proposals and modifications to proposals shall be submitted in paper media in sealed envelopes or packages (I) addressed to the office specified in the solicitation, and (ii) showing the time and date specified for receipt, the solicitation number, and the name and address of the offeror. Offerors using commercial carriers should ensure that the proposal is marked on the outermost wrapper with the information in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) and (c)(1)(ii) of this provision.
      2. The first page of the proposal must show-

        (i) The solicitation number;

        (ii) The name, address, and telephone and facsimile numbers of the offeror (and electronic address if available);

        (iii) A statement specifying the extent of agreement with all terms, conditions, and provisions included in the solicitation and agreement to furnish any or all items upon which prices are offered at the price set opposite each item;

        (iv) Names, titles, and telephone and facsimile numbers (and electronic addresses if available) of persons authorized to negotiate on the offeror’s behalf with the Government in connection with this solicitation; and

        (v) Name, title, and signature of person authorized to sign the proposal. Proposals signed by an agent shall be accompanied by evidence of that agent's authority, unless that evidence has been previously furnished to the issuing office.

      3. Submission, modification, revision, and withdrawal of proposals.
        1. Offerors are responsible for submitting proposals, and any modifications or revisions so as to reach the Government office designated in the solicitation by the time specified in the solicitation. If no time is specified in the solicitation, the time for receipt is 4:30 p.m., local time, for the designated Government office on the date that proposal or revision is due.
        2.  
          1. Any proposal, modification or revision received at the Government office designated in the solicitation after the exact time specified for receipt of offers is “late” and will not be considered unless it is received before award is made, the Contracting Officer determines that accepting the late offer would not unduly delay the acquisition; and--
            1. If it was transmitted through an electronic commerce method authorized by the solicitation, it was received at the initial point of entry to the Government infrastructure not later than 5:00 p.m. one working day prior to the date specified for receipt of proposals; or
            2. There is acceptable evidence to establish that it was received at the Government installation designated for receipt of offers and was under the Government's control prior to the time set for receipt of offers; or
            3. It is the only proposal received.
          2. However, a late modification of an otherwise successful proposal that makes its terms more favorable to the Government, will be considered at any time it is received and may be accepted.
        3. Acceptable evidence to establish the time of receipt at the Government installation includes the time/date stamp of that installation on the proposal wrapper, other documentary evidence of receipt maintained by the installation, or oral testimony or statements of Government personnel.
        4. If an emergency or unanticipated event interrupts normal Government processes so that proposals cannot be received at the office designated for receipt of proposals by the exact time specified in the solicitation, and urgent Government requirements preclude amendment of the solicitation, the time specified for receipt of proposals will be deemed to be extended to the same time of day specified in the solicitation on the first work day on which normal Government processes resume.
        5. Proposals may be withdrawn by written notice received at any time before award. Oral proposals in response to oral solicitations may be withdrawn orally. If the solicitation authorizes facsimile proposals, proposals may be withdrawn via facsimile received at any time before award, subject to the conditions specified in the provision at 52.215-5, Facsimile Proposals. Proposals may be withdrawn in person by an offeror or an authorized representative, if the identity of the person requesting withdrawal is established and the person signs a receipt for the proposal before award.
      4. Unless otherwise specified in the solicitation, the offeror may propose to provide any item or combination of items.
      5. Offerors shall submit proposals in response to this solicitation in English, unless otherwise permitted by the solicitation, and in U.S. dollars, unless the provision at FAR 52.225-17, Evaluation of Foreign Currency Offers, is included in the solicitation.
      6. Offerors may submit modifications to their proposals at any time before the solicitation closing date and time, and may submit modifications in response to an amendment, or to correct a mistake at any time before award.
      7. Offerors may submit revised proposals only if requested or allowed by the Contracting Officer.
      8. Proposals may be withdrawn at any time before award. Withdrawals are effective upon receipt of notice by the Contracting Officer.

    4. Offer expiration date. Proposals in response to this solicitation will be valid for the number of days specified on the solicitation cover sheet (unless a different period is proposed by the offeror).

    5. Restriction on disclosure and use of data. Offerors that include in their proposals data that they do not want disclosed to the public for any purpose, or used by the Government except for evaluation purposes, shall-
      1. Mark the title page with the following legend: This proposal includes data that shall not be disclosed outside the Government and shall not be duplicated, used, or disclosed-in whole or in part-for any purpose other than to evaluate this proposal. If, however, a contract is awarded to this offeror as a result of-or in connection with-the submission of this data, the Government shall have the right to duplicate, use, or disclose the data to the extent provided in the resulting contract. This restriction does not limit the Government's right to use information contained in this data if it is obtained from another source without restriction. The data subject to this restriction are contained in sheets [insert numbers or other identification of sheets]; and
      2. Mark each sheet of data it wishes to restrict with the following legend: Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal.

    6. Contract award.
      1. The Government intends to award a contract or contracts resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror(s) whose proposal(s) represents the best value after evaluation in accordance with the factors and subfactors in the solicitation.

      2. The Government may reject any or all proposals if such action is in the Government’s interest.

      3. The Government may waive informalities and minor irregularities in proposals received.

      4. The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)). Therefore, the offeror’s initial proposal should contain the offeror’s best terms from a cost or price and technical standpoint. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary. If the Contracting Officer determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals.

      5. The Government reserves the right to make an award on any item for a quantity less than the quantity offered, at the unit cost or prices offered, unless the offeror specifies otherwise in the proposal.

      6. The Government reserves the right to make multiple awards if, after considering the additional administrative costs, it is in the Government’s best interest to do so.

      7. Exchanges with offerors after receipt of a proposal do not constitute a rejection or counteroffer by the Government.

      8. The Government may determine that a proposal is unacceptable if the prices proposed are materially unbalanced between line items or subline items. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one or more contract line items is significantly overstated or understated as indicated by the application of cost or price analysis techniques. A proposal may be rejected if the Contracting Officer determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

      9. If a cost realism analysis is performed, cost realism may be considered by the source selection authority in evaluating performance or schedule risk.

      10. A written award or acceptance of proposal mailed or otherwise furnished to the successful offeror within the time specified in the proposal shall result in a binding contract without further action by either party.

      11. If a post-award debriefing is given to requesting offerors, the Government shall disclose the following information, if applicable:
        1. The agency's evaluation of the significant weak or deficient factors in the debriefed offeror's offer.
        2. The overall evaluated cost or price and technical rating of the successful and the debriefed offeror and past performance information on the debriefed offeror.
        3. The overall ranking of all offerors, when any ranking was developed by the agency during source selection.
        4. A summary of the rationale for award.
        5. For acquisitions of commercial items, the make and model of the item to be delivered by the successful offeror.
        6. Reasonable responses to relevant questions posed by the debriefed offeror as to whether source-selection procedures set forth in the solicitation, applicable regulations, and other applicable authorities were followed by the agency.

  10. Organizational Conflicts of Interest (EPAAR 1552.209-71) (May 1994) Alternate I (May 1994)
    1. The Contractor warrants that, to the best of the Contractor's knowledge and belief, there are no relevant facts or circumstances which could give rise to an organizational conflict of interest, as defined in FAR Subpart 9.5, or that the Contractor has disclosed all such relevant information.
    2. Prior to commencement of any work, the Contractor agrees to notify the

Top of Page

The perspectives, information and conclusions conveyed in research project abstracts, progress reports, final reports, journal abstracts and journal publications convey the viewpoints of the principal investigator and may not represent the views and policies of ORD and EPA. Conclusions drawn by the principal investigators have not been reviewed by the Agency.

Site Navigation

Related Information

Contact Us to ask a question, provide feedback, or report a problem.
Last updated April 28, 2023