Grantee Research Project Results
To view and apply for EPA's 2015-2016 SBIR Solicitation through FedConnect:
2016 SBIR PHASE I SOLICITATION
- Use the FedConnect search function to view Public Opportunities Only.
- Enter "2016 SBIR Phase I Solicitation" into the text box and select the search option.
- Select the SBIR solicitation title with Reference Number SOL-NC-16-00038.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
SMALL BUSINESS INNOVATION RESEARCH (SBIR) PROGRAM PHASE I SOLICITATION
SOL-NC-16-00038
ISSUE DATE: August 30, 2016
CLOSING DATE: October 20, 2016
*CAUTION - See Section VI., Paragraph J. j(c)(3), Instructions to Offerors, Concerning Late Proposals and Modifications. And Section VI., Paragraph J. j(d), offeror expiration date. Proposals submitted in response to this solicitation will be valid for 300 days.
Your proposal (including all appendices) shall be submitted in Portable Document Format (PDF), and shall be received via FedConnect by 12:00 p.m. (noon) Eastern Standard Time (EST) on October 20, 2016. Your entire proposal (including appendices) shall be submitted through FedConnect as ONE document in PDF. Only proposals received via FedConnect as ONE PDF by the deadline identified above will be considered for award.
Please read this entire solicitation carefully prior to submitting your proposal.
Proposals shall be submitted via the FedConnect web portal (www.fedconnect.net). In order to submit proposals, offerors must register in FedConnect at www.fedconnect.net, see main page of FedConnect website for registration instructions. For assistance in registering or for other FedConnect technical questions please call the FedConnect Help Desk at (800) 899-6665 or email at support@fedconnect.net.
IMPORTANT:
Please note Section VI., Paragraph J. j, Federal Acquisition Regulation Clause 52.215-1(c)(3), “Instructions to Offerors – Competitive Acquisitions” concerning Late Proposals, Modification of Proposals and Withdrawal of Proposals.
It is the responsibility of Offerors to submit proposals in FedConnect with sufficient time to ensure they are received by the date and time specified. Only proposals received by the date and time specified via FedConnect will be considered for award.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
-
Proposal Preparation Instructions and Requirements 21
Appendix 1 – Proposal Cover Sheet 52
Appendix 2 – Project Summary 54
Appendix 3 – SBIR Proposal Summary Budget 56
Appendix 4 – Representations and Certifications 57
Appendix 5 – Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) 64
Appendix 6 – Commercialization History 66
PHASE I SOLICITATION FOR SMALL BUSINESS INNOVATION RESEARCH
-
SBIR PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
-
Purpose of EPA’s SBIR Program
Every Federal agency with an extramural research and development (R&D) budget over $100 million is required by law to have a Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program. For the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the SBIR program provides one way it can directly award R&D funding to small businesses. The EPA SBIR program is very competitive. Each agency implements the program in a phased manner that follows the technology development continuum: research, development, demonstration, commercialization, and utilization. The number of phases an agency supports depends on its program needs and budget. Generally, there are two phases: the first is for proof of concept, and the second is intended to move the technology as far as possible toward full-scale commercialization. The objective of Phase III, where appropriate, is for the small business to pursue commercialization objectives resulting from the Phase I/II R/R&D activities. The SBIR program does not fund Phase III.
-
Importance of Commercialization
For the EPA, success of its SBIR program means that the technologies it supports will in fact be used to solve the problems for which they are being developed; therefore, from the outset of the selection process, the EPA will consider commercialization potential to be as important as technical potential, and it will evaluate proposals accordingly.
Successful commercialization usually results from reversing the technology development continuum. That is, first identifying a need that can be addressed by technology, then assessing whether that need provides a viable market opportunity, and, after that, identifying or inventing a technology that can be developed and commercialized to meet that need in a profitable manner. An offeror is encouraged to conduct market research before submitting their proposal to this solicitation to demonstrate that there is a viable market opportunity.
EPA also requires the offeror to provide commercialization history information if they have received one or more SBIR Phase II awards from any agency. A template is provided for the history in Appendix 6. This information is incorporated into the solicitation as part of the evaluation criteria in section V.B. Phase I Commercialization Criteria, (2) Management Capabilities and Principal Investigator (PI) Experience and Commitment.
-
Desire for Disruptive and Platform Technologies
The EPA’s needs result from its mission to protect human health and the environment. Because its needs are large and the available funding is small, the EPA seeks “disruptive” technologies that offer totally new approaches to meeting its needs—not incremental improvements of existing technologies. Such novel technologies could, for example, completely eliminate a seemingly intractable problem or provide performance at dramatically reduced costs and orders of magnitude better than existing technology. In addition, the EPA seeks “platform” technologies that have the potential for many future applications in addition to the proposed application.
-
Risk Taking is Essential
The EPA recognizes that supporting such ground-breaking technologies involves a high risk that projects will not meet their objectives. For the EPA, the potentially greater rewards of such technologies justify that larger degree of risk. The EPA welcomes and accepts such risks in the interest of fulfilling its mission.
-
Life Cycle Impacts must be Addressed
Proposals should also address the lifecycle environmental impacts of the technology, including (if applicable) minimizing resource use, minimizing toxicity of materials, efficient use of water and energy, minimizing pollution, and minimizing the impacts of disposal. A formal Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) is not required.
-
Demonstration is Encouraged
Demonstration is an important part of commercializing environmental technologies. This is because the effectiveness of the technologies in protecting human health and the environment is a critical consideration in the decision to adopt them. End users (e.g. companies and municipalities) are often reluctant to install innovative technologies that have not been demonstrated for extended periods of time. There may also be Federal, state and local regulations that only permit the use of technologies with demonstrated performance.
-
Competing Technologies
It is necessary to know what technologies are currently being used, their performance characteristics and costs. Proposals must compare the performance and cost of their innovative technology with that of currently used technologies. Generally, a significant improvement in performance and/or reduction in costs will be necessary for there to be any possibility of successful commercialization.
-
Two-Step Evaluation Process
The EPA will follow a two-stage application evaluation process to make funding decisions. The two stages are: external peer review and internal programmatic review. The review processes and the evaluation criteria that will be used in each stage are described later in the solicitation.
-
-
Phase I
The EPA anticipates making approximately eighteen (18) Phase I awards, each in the amount up to $100,000 and not to exceed a six (6) month term of performance. It is anticipated that these contracts will be awarded with a contract start date of June 1, 2017. The Phase I effort is for “proof of concept” of the proposed technology. All companies that successfully complete Phase I are eligible to compete for Phase II which is to further develop and commercialize the technology.
-
Performance Benchmark Requirements for Phase I Eligibility
Each year, the Small Business Administration (SBA) assesses the Performance Benchmark rates for all applicable SBIR or Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) awardees in the Company Registry. Rates are based on a company’s total SBIR/STTR awards, across all the participating agencies. Companies that fail to meet either of the two Performance Benchmark requirements are not eligible to receive a Phase I award for a period of one year from the assessment. Note that this does not affect a company’s eligibility for Phase II or Phase III awards.
All offerors for an SBIR or STTR award must be registered on www.SBIR.gov. Offerors should be sure to update their information on the Company Registry at least once per year. To open or update an SBIR/STTR Company Registry account, go to www.sbir.gov/user and register as a Small Business User. After the registration is complete, the SBA will issue your company a unique Small Business Concern (SBC) Control ID and .pdf file to be attached to this application.
NOTE: THE SBA NOTIFIES FIRMS EACH YEAR THAT DO NOT MEET THE ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS DESCRIBED BELOW WILL NOT BE ELIGIBLE TO RECEIVE A PHASE I AWARD FOR ONE YEAR AFTER THE SBA NOTIFICATION.
Before responding to this solicitation, all offerors should verify their Transition Rate and Commercialization Rate eligibility for Phase I awards. Each year, the SBA will perform an evaluation of companies and the SBA will notify the companies of their status. Phase I offerors that meet the below criteria must meet two Performance Benchmark requirements to be eligible for a new Phase I award: the Phase I to Phase II Transition Rate and the Commercialization Rate benchmarks. General information on the Performance Benchmark requirements is available on www.SBIR.gov on the “Performance Benchmarks” tab under the “Learn About” section.
The Phase I to Phase II Transition Rate requirement applies only to SBIR Phase I offerors that have received more than 20 Phase I awards over the past 5 fiscal years (excluding the most recent year). For these offerors, the ratio of the number of Phase II awards (awarded during the past 5 fiscal years) to the number of Phase I awards (awarded during the past 5 years excluding the most recent year) must be at least 0.25.
The Commercialization Rate requirement applies only to SBIR Phase I offerors that have received more than 15 Phase II awards over the past 10 fiscal years, excluding the last two years. These companies must have realized, to date, an average of at least $100,000 of sales and/or investments per Phase II award (awarded during this period), or have received a number of patents resulting from the SBIR work equal to or greater than 15% of the number of Phase II awards.
SBA sends three notifications each year to companies affected by the benchmark performance requirements and will also communicate these to the EPA SBIR program. The SBA will also notify the EPA SBIR Program of those companies that have met the benchmarks as detailed above.
When logged in to the Company Registry at www.sbir.gov, awardees can view their last assessed Transition Rate and Commercialization Rate by clicking on the “Performance Benchmark” side-bar. These company-specific rates appear under the heading “At Last Assessment.” A thumbs-up/thumbs-down indicator shows whether or not the company passed the benchmark rates at the last assessment. If at any time, a company believes the award information on SBIR.gov is not correct, it should notify SBA using the dispute link provided. If a company’s dispute of the data used for the rates is under review, it will see “TBD” under the “At Last Assessment” heading. Companies with less than the threshold number of awards (21 Phase I awards for the Transition Rate and 16 Phase II awards for the Commercialization Rate) will see “N/A” displayed because the requirement did not apply to them.
Under the heading “Current (On-Going)”, the page displays a running calculation of the benchmark rates using the next years’ time periods (each period moved up by one year) and current data in the system. Companies should monitor these rates to anticipate their standing for each upcoming June 1 Assessment. Prior to proposal preparation, all offerors to this solicitation that have received more than 20 Phase I awards across all federal SBIR/STTR agencies over the past five (5) years should verify that their company will not have a failing status on the Transition Rate Benchmark at the time of award. Offerors that have received more than 15 Phase II awards across all federal SBIR/STTR agencies over the past ten (10) years should verify that their company will not have a failing status on the Commercialization Rate benchmark at the time of award.
-
2016 SBIR Phase I Research Topics
Given EPA’s broad mission of protecting human health and the environment, it faces a broad range of problems that need solution and for which innovative technologies could help provide solutions. Each year EPA’s SBIR program selects from this broad range of problems a number of specific topics to include in its Phase I solicitation. The highest priority needs are identified and then the topics are written to address those needs. Many of the topics address more than one need – e.g., water and homeland security, and indoor air quality and reducing toxicity of
materials. Agency strategy documents, multi-year plans, peer-reviewed research needs assessment and other materials are used in identifying the highest needs and in crafting the topics.
For this solicitation, the EPA’s needs are being expressed through a variety of very specific topics. Offerors must directly address and select just one of the specific topics described below.
The topics for this solicitation are:
-
Air and Climate
Formaldehyde Sensor
Formaldehyde is a colorless, flammable gas at room temperature that has a strong odor. Indoor exposure can result from formaldehyde emissions from composite wood products, building materials, insulation, glues, paints and coatings, permanent press fabrics, cosmetics, dishwashing liquids, gas stoves, kerosene heaters, and cigarette smoke (https://www.epa.gov/formaldehyde/facts-about-formaldehyde).
Exposure to formaldehyde can cause adverse health effects, including (at 0.1-0.5 ppm) nasal and eye irritation, neurological effects, and increased risk of asthma and/or allergy, and (at 0.6-1.9 ppm) eczema and changes in lung function (http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaqs/tf.asp?id=219&tid=39). Formaldehyde is a known human carcinogen (http://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/substances/formaldehyde/formaldehyde-fact-sheet).
Exposure to formaldehyde can be reduced by opening windows, using fans to bring in outside air, and removing and/or avoiding products that are sources of formaldehyde emissions. Having a low-cost formaldehyde sensor would enable people to know when mitigation measures are warranted and how effective they are. As a result, EPA is seeking the development and commercialization of such sensors.
Topic Code 1A: Inexpensive Indoor Formaldehyde Sensor. Develop a simple sensor that can be used in homes and other indoor settings to detect formaldehyde at concentrations in air of 0.05-5.0+ ppm plus or minus 0.01 ppm. The sensor should be hand-held, have internal (downloadable) electronic data storage (be capable of storing at least 2,000 one minute data points), have data calibration capabilities, be able to operate for a minimum of 8 hours, and cost no more than $100.
Methane Sensor
Methane emissions from human activity are the second largest source of greenhouse gases emitted in the US. Pound for pound the impact of methane on climate change is more than 25 times greater than that of carbon dioxide. The largest sources of methane emissions are natural gas and petroleum systems, domestic livestock, and landfills for waste from homes and businesses (https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/gases/ch4.html). There is significant potential to reduce these emissions (https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/Downloads/EPAactivities/Non_CO2_US_Summary_Report_SinglePg.pdf)
. The US government has supported a number of such efforts—e.g., through the Global Methane Initiative (https://www.epa.gov/gmi). In May 2016, EPA issued a new source performance standard to reduce methane emissions from new, reconstructed, and modified sources in the oil and gas industry (https://www3.epa.gov/airquality/oilandgas/actions.html).
Identifying fugitive emissions from these sources can be an important step toward leak reduction and other mitigation measures. A methane sensor that could readily and affordably make such measurements in the field would have great utility. As a result, EPA is seeking the development and commercialization of sensors that can detect methane emissions from landfills, oil and gas operations and facilities, livestock operations, and natural gas distribution systems.
Topic Code 1B: Low-Cost Sensor for Identifying Fugitive Methane Emissions. Develop a sensor that can detect methane at concentrations in air of 2-250 ppm plus or minus 2 ppm. It should be hand- held and provide continuous readouts (it should not require collection of a sample that would be sent to a laboratory for analysis), provide electronic transmittal of the data, have data storage and calibration capabilities, and cost no more than $100 and preferably less than $50.
-
Manufacturing
Greener Plastics
Executive Order 13329 directs the EPA to properly and effectively assist the private sector in its manufacturing innovation in order to sustain a strong manufacturing sector in the U.S. economy. These innovations often involve engineering and technical solutions that make the manufacturing operation and/or the manufactured product both more environmentally and economically sound.
The EPA is seeking the development and commercialization of innovative technologies that, when compared with currently available technologies, have dramatically better performance, decreased cost of production, and reduced environmental impacts in both production and use.
The production, use, recycle/reuse, and disposal of plastic materials and products pose significant environmental and human health problems. The EPA is seeking innovative greener manufacturing of plastics and greener plastic materials and products.
Topic Code 2A: Greener Manufacturing of Plastics. Develop for a specific plastic or family of plastics that has significant negative public health and environmental impacts an improved manufacturing process that
(a) eliminates the use of one or more toxic chemicals in the process, (b) greatly reduces the amount of energy used to carry out the process, and/or (c) eliminates one or more toxic pollutants that currently result from the process. Comparison with the currently used manufacturing process and assessing the overall life cycle of the plastic(s) are integral to this topic.
Topic Code 2B: Greener Plastic Materials and Products. Develop for a specific plastic or family of plastics that has significant negative public health and environmental impacts alternative materials and products that (a) do not emit toxic fumes, (b) are not toxic if ingested, (c) rapidly biodegrade in soil and water, and/or (d) are easily recycled and reused. Comparison with the performance and cost of the currently-used plastic materials and products and assessing their overall life cycle are integral to this topic.
-
Toxic Chemicals
Cleaner Manufacturing of Dyes, Paints and Inks
Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) have extreme environmental persistence, the ability to bioaccumulate, and adverse human health effects (https://www.epa.gov/pcbs). They were used as insulation fluids in electrical
transformers and generators, as fluorescent lamp ballast, and in caulk. In 1979 the US banned their production under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).
PCBs continue to be generated and released into the environment as the unintended by-products of the manufacturing of certain dyes, paints, and inks (http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/121-a86/).
Studies have detected these PCBs in waterways across the U.S. and attribute their presence to this manufacturing by-product. This pollution source is causing water impairment and resulting in challenges to states and other entities in meeting water quality standards.
The EPA would like to see the development and use of dye, paint, and ink manufacturing processes that do not produce PCBs, as follows.
Topic Code 3A: Cleaner Manufacturing Processes for Dyes, Paints, and Inks. Develop cleaner manufacturing processes for dyes, paints, and inks that do not create unintentional undesirable by- products including PCBs. These proposed processes should also consider other lifecycle impacts of their manufacturing process including toxicity of feedstocks, energy consumption/carbon emissions, and end of life, etc.
Understanding the Chemical Composition of Consumer Products
Understanding human exposure to chemicals is central to EPA’s mission of protecting human health and the environment, but the lack of information on chemical safety remains an issue (https://www.epa.gov/chemical-research). In particular, there is a lack of information on exposure to toxic chemicals used in consumer products. This information gap could potentially be addressed through a citizen science approach by helping consumers understand and be aware of the toxic chemicals in the products they consider purchasing and to consider that information in their buying decisions. In order to increase awareness of human exposure to chemicals in consumer products, EPA is looking for:
Topic Code 3B: Novel Technologies to Help Consumers Understand the Chemical Composition of Consumer Products. Development of technologies that could scan product Universal Product Codes (UPC) codes to inform users of what chemicals are in the products that are of interest to health reasons (e.g., allergens such as nuts or chemicals of concern such as food dyes or Bisphenol A (BPA)). The technology could also indicate whether the products fall into certain categories (e.g., “organic” or “safer choice” https://www.epa.gov/saferchoice). The technology could calculate daily exposure based on typical product usage and other information of value to the consumer. The technology should be geared toward priority chemicals of interest to the EPA, which include endocrine disrupting compounds and phthalates. It should also address commercial sectors of interest to EPA, including consumer care products, cleaning products, and food and beverages.
-
Water
Water Treatment and Infrastructure
The Office of Water (OW) has the goal of being a catalyst for fostering the protection and sustainability of water resources in the U.S. and around the globe. It has produced two papers that are intended to help achieve this goal. The first is the March 27, 2013, “Blueprint for Integrating Technology Innovation into the National Water
Program.” The second is the April 2014 “Promoting Technology Innovation for Clean and Safe Water: WaterTechnology Innovation Blueprint—Version 2” (EPA 820-R-14-006). These papers identify 10 market opportunities for technology innovation. The following topics in the general areas of drinking water treatment, water infrastructure and point of use water monitoring, address these opportunities.
Topic Code 4A: Non-Reverse Osmosis Based Desalination Units for Small Communities: Develop non-reverse osmosis based desalination units that can provide sufficient potable water to meet the needs of small communities (those under 10,000 population). The units should be scalable for producing from 100,000 to 1,000,000 gallons per day of potable water. The units should be able to desalinate seawater and brackish water. They should be able to treat water that also contains other chemicals, biological materials, and organic and non-organic materials. They should be able to operate on a continuous
basis. They should be small, sturdy, highly resistant to corrosion and other degradation processes, easy to operate and maintain, long-lasting, use little energy, and be affordable in terms of capital and operating costs.
Topic Code 4B: Non-Toxic Coatings for Water Pipes that Prevent the Growth of Biofilms, Corrosion, Scaling, and Leaching of Lead: Develop non-toxic coatings (not inserts or sleeves) for the inside of water pipes that prevent the growth of biofilms, prevent corrosion and scaling, and prevent the leaching of lead from the pipes. The coatings should be easy to apply as retro-fits. They should be applicable to any size pipe. They should be resistant to scrapes and tears, long-lasting, and affordable.
Lead Test for Tap Water
There are many possible sources of lead in homes—e.g., lead paint, dust, pharmaceuticals, toys, dishes, and glasses. In addition, drinking water can contain lead from lead pipes and natural sources. Lead can cause serious health effects with young children being the most susceptible (https://www.epa.gov/lead).
While there is no safe level of lead in drinking water, EPA has set an “action level” of 0.015 milligrams per liter (mg/l), which is equal to 15 parts per billion (ppb) (https://www.epa.gov/your-drinking-water/table-regulated-drinking-water-contaminants). If someone finds that they have greater than this concentration of lead in their tap water, they can flush their line before use, only use cold water for eating and cooking, use a water filter, or use bottled water. They should also contact their water provider or local health department. If a water utility finds that more than 10% of sampled households exceed this level, it must take action to reduce the lead concentration throughout the system.
There are test kits on the market for measuring lead in tap water, but often they are expensive, require sending a water sample to a laboratory for analysis, and/or are not accurate. There is a need for a simple, inexpensive means for people to determine the level of lead in their tap water. It could, for example, be a strip of paper or plastic that turns from green to red when the concentration at the tap exceeds the action level.
Topic Code 4C: Simple Lead Test for Tap Water in Homes. Develop an extremely simple test strip that will indicate whether the lead concentration in tap water exceeds the EPA action level. The strip should give a visual determination within 30 seconds, cost less than $2 per strip, be stable for at least 5 years when stored, and be accurate to within plus or minus 0.5 ppb of the action level of 15 ppb.
-
Water and Homeland Security
EPA has been designated as the lead homeland security agency for water and is responsible for protecting water systems. A specific area of interest is innovative technologies that can prevent the trapping by and adhesion of contaminants to the inside of pipe walls or other such surfaces in the event that a drinking water system becomes contaminated. To achieve this goal EPA is interested in supporting the development and commercialization of the following innovative technology.
Topic Code 5A: Water Pipes that Prevent the Growth of Biofilms, Prevent Corrosion and Scaling, and Do Not Contain Lead: Develop water pipes that due to their composition alone (i.e., without the use of coatings or other surface treatment) prevent the growth of biofilms, prevent corrosion and scaling, and do not contain lead. The pipes should be lighter, stronger, more resistant to breaking, longer lasting, easier to install and maintain, and cost no more than currently used water pipes.
-
Greener Buildings
Interior Construction Materials
Floors, walls, and ceilings of homes are often made with materials that emit formaldehyde and other organic pollutants that are toxic to the people who live there. Developing non-toxic materials that can perform equally well in these interior construction applications will reduce the exposure to toxic off-gases by the residents. With this in mind, EPA is interested in supporting the development and commercialization of innovative technologies that address the following topic.
Topic Code 6A: Non-Toxic Interior Construction Materials for Homes: Develop non-toxic alternatives for materials commonly used in the composition of floors, walls, and/or ceilings in homes. The technology must be affordable and at least as rugged and long-lasting as currently used materials.
Exterior Construction Materials
The exterior of buildings could be constructed with greener materials. They could include, for example, solar skins that produce energy for the building, cladding made with materials that are non-toxic, structural elements that weigh less and have less volume, materials that are easily re-cycled and re-used and do not leave parts that have to be sent to landfills or otherwise disposed, etc. As a result, there is a need for the development and commercialization of the following:
Topic Code 6B: Greener Exterior Construction Materials: Develop construction materials for the exterior of buildings that are greener throughout their life cycle than currently used exterior construction materials. For example, the materials they are made of should be non-toxic, result from less polluting manufacturing processes than currently used, be easier to re-cycle and re-use than currently used materials. They should be stronger; more durable; last longer; weigh less; have lower volume; and cost less to produce, use in construction, re-cycle and re-use, and dispose than currently used materials.
Comparison with currently-used materials and a life cycle perspective are integral to this topic.
-
-
Phase II
(THIS SOLICITATION IS FOR PHASE I PROPOSALS ONLY)
Process
Upon completion of their Phase I project, Phase I awardees are eligible to submit for follow-on Phase II funding. Phase II offerors should have made significant progress in their commercialization planning and implementation during their Phase I project.
Phase II is the principal R&D effort. It should be completed in 24 months. It has two objectives. The first is to continue the R&D initiated under Phase I, and take it at least through full-scale testing of the technology. The second is to work with partners, investors, and customers to fully commercialize the technology and obtain widespread utilization.
The EPA recognizes that a full demonstration of a technology’s capability and full-scale commercialization may require, in effect, a Phase III that utilizes non-EPA Federal and/or private sector funds. Phase II projects should position their technologies to successfully move into and through such a Phase III.
The EPA anticipates making approximately eight (8) Phase II awards, each in the amount of $300,000 with a 24- month term of performance. In Phase II, the EPA is also offering a commercialization option of $100,000 to companies that can secure third-party investment of $100,000 or more for the commercialization of their technology. To implement this, the Agency requires a “Commercialization Option” under which Phase II offerors shall submit a proposal for up to $100,000 of additional EPA funding.
The small business concern shall document the receipt of these latter funds from one or more third-party investors, such as a venture capital firm, an individual "angel" investor1, a state or local funding source, another company under a partnership, licensing, or joint venture arrangement, or any combination of third parties. The EPA funds must be designated solely for support of the R&D-related elements of the project. The entire Phase II proposal, including the commercialization option, will be evaluated together.
The EPA anticipates issuing the follow-on Phase II Solicitation on or about December 14, 2017, with proposals due on/about February 1, 2018.
Evaluation
For Phase II, the EPA will use a two-stage evaluation process similar to that used for Phase I. There will be an external peer review, plus an internal review that considers programmatic balance, Agency priorities, and available funding. The following criteria will be used in the external peer review of the Phase II proposals.
Phase II Commercialization Criteria
-
Commercialization Plan: Completeness of market analysis. Goals that involve achieving by the end of Phase II full-scale commercialization and adoption. Thoroughness and convincing nature of the steps in the plan to reach those goals. Clearly delineated plans for field and full-scale demonstrations in the facilities of potential and already-committed partners using widely accepted evaluation criteria and processes.
-
Company/Team: Management Team demonstrated effective performance and good working relations in Phase I. Principal Investigator (PI), supporting staff, and consultants demonstrated commitment to the
1 An angel investor is an investor who provides financial backing for a business start-up.
project and have convincing plans to continue and enhance that commitment in Phase II. In Phase I, company effectively used external advisors such as leaders in technical, entrepreneurial, financial, and other relevant areas and has convincing plans to continue and strengthen these relationships in Phase II.
-
Partners/Investors: Demonstrated ability of company in Phase I in building relationships with commercial, distribution, investors, and/or other relevant partners. Convincing plans for moving in Phase II to more formalized relationships with these and other partners that will result in successful commercialization of the technology. Success in obtaining investment funds during Phase I and commitments of additional investment in Phase II and beyond.
Phase II Technical Criteria
-
Technical Soundness: Convincingly established proof of concept in Phase I. Clearly explained and convincingly demonstrated in Phase I the soundness of the scientific and technical principles underlying the technology that will apply in Phase II. Technology is ready to move from field/operational-setting demonstrations to initial production and then to full-scale commercialization and adoption to meet the goals of the Commercialization Plan.
-
Demonstrations and Performance Evaluation Criteria: Demonstrations carried out in Phase I in operational facilities of committed or potential manufacturing partners. Use of widely-accepted and environmentally-relevant performance evaluation criteria when conducting demonstrations. Relevance of the planned demonstrations to achieving the goals of the Commercialization Plan.
-
Life Cycle Impacts and Quality Assurance Plan: Completeness of the life cycle analyses performed in Phase I. Convincing plans for life cycle analyses in Phase II. Success in Phase I and convincing plans for Phase II to address potential negative environmental impacts of the technology. Adequacy of Quality Assurance Plan for Phase II and convincing plans for following that plan in Phase II.
Phase II Internal Programmatic Relevancy Review Criteria
-
The potential of the technology to meet Agency program priorities.
-
The potential of the technology to advance sustainability, including environmental, economic, and societal benefits.
-
The potential of the technology to be widely used, have broad application, and/or to impact large segments of the population.
-
-
Phase III
(THIS SOLICITATION IS FOR PHASE I PROPOSALS ONLY)
The EPA strongly encourages Phase II awardees who do not think they will be able to achieve full-scale commercialization by the end of Phase II to diligently plan for and pursue during Phase II non-EPA SBIR sources of funding to achieve full-scale commercialization and utilization of their technology. That third phase could be funded by:
-
Non-Federal sources of capital—including investors, commercial partners, licensing, etc.
-
Federal non-SBIR sources that support any necessary continued R&D and product development.
-
Federal non-SBIR funds for purchasing and/or domestic and international marketing of the technology.
The objective of Phase III, where appropriate, is for the small business to pursue commercialization objectives resulting from the Phase I/II R/R&D activities. The SBIR program does not fund Phase III.
-
-
Guidelines
Each offeror submitting a Phase I proposal must qualify as a small business for research or R&D purposes at the time of award of the Phase I and Phase II funding agreements. In addition, the primary employment of the principal investigator must be with the small business firm, both 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 offeror and a second employer must submit a letter from the second employer stating that, if awarded a SBIR contract, s/he will become a less than half- time employee of the second employer. Letters demonstrating that these requirements have been fulfilled shall be submitted prior to contract award to the EPA Contracting Officer via the FedConnect web portal (www.fedconnect.net). Failure to do so may jeopardize award. Also, for Phase I, the research or R&D work must be performed in the United States. (For the definition of the “United States”, see Section II. J.)
-
Inquiries
All inquiries concerning this solicitation shall be referred to the EPA Contracting Officer:
All inquiries concerning this solicitation shall be submitted to the EPA Contracting Officer Jeffery Clodfelter via the FedConnect web portal (www.fedconnect.net).
-
Fraud, Waste, and Abuse
To report fraud, waste, or abuse in EPA programs, contact the OIG Hotline by: E-mail: OIG_Hotline@epa.gov
Postal Mail:
EPA Inspector General Hotline
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Mail code 2431T
Phone: 1-888-546-8740
Fax: 1-202-566-2599
-
-
DEFINITIONS
For purposes of this solicitation, the following definitions apply:
-
Research or Research and Development (R/R&D)
Any Activity that is:
-
A systematic, intensive study directed toward greater knowledge or understanding of the subject studied;
-
A systematic study directed specifically toward applying new knowledge to meet a recognized need; or
-
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.
-
-
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.
-
Subcontract
Any agreement, other than one involving an employer-employee relationship, entered into by an awardee of a funding agreement for purpose of obtaining supplies or services for the performance of the original funding agreement.
-
Small Business Concern
A small business concern is one that, at the time of award of Phase I and Phase II contracts, meets all of the following criteria:
-
Is organized for profit, with a place of business located in the United States;
-
Is more than 50 percent owned and controlled by one or more individuals who are citizens of, or permanent resident aliens in, the United States, or by another for-profit business concern that is more than 50% owned and controlled by one or more individuals who are citizens of, or permanent resident aliens in, the United States; and
-
Has no more than 500 employees, including affiliates;
-
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.
-
-
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.
-
Socially and Economically Disadvantaged Individual
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.
-