Skip to main content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Here’s how you know

Dot gov

Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

HTTPS

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock (LockA locked padlock) or https:// means you have safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

  • Environmental Topics
  • Laws & Regulations
  • Report a Violation
  • About EPA
Contact Us

Grantee Research Project Results

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

SMALL BUSINESS INNOVATION RESEARCH (SBIR) PROGRAM PHASE I SOLICITATION

SOL-NC-17-00028

ISSUE DATE: October 31, 2017

CLOSING DATE: December 19, 2017

*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 December 19, 2017. 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

  1. SBIR Program Description 8

    1. Purpose of EPA’s SBIR Program 8

      1. Importance of Commercialization 8

      2. Life Cycle Impacts nust be Addressed 8

      3. Demonstration is Encouraged 8

      4. Two-Step Evaluation Process 9


    2. Phase I 9

    3. Performance Benchmark Requirements for Phase I Eligibility 9

    4. 2017 SBIR Phase I Research Topics 10

      1. CLEAN AND SAFE WATER 10

      2. AIR QUALITY 12

      3. LAND REVITALIZATION 14

      4. HOMELAND SECURITY 15

      5. MANUFACTURING 17

      6. BUILDING CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS 18


    5. Phase II 18
      1. Process 18
      2. Evaluation 19
      3. Phase II Technical Criteria 19
      4. Phase II Commercialization Criteria 20
      5. Phase II Internal Programmatic Relevancy Review Criteria 20
    6. Phase III 20

    7. Guidelines 20

    8. Inquiries 20

    9. Fraud, Waste, and Abuse 21


  2. Definitions 21

    1. Research or Research and Development (R/R&D) 20

    2. Funding Agreement 21

    3. Subcontract 21

    4. Small Business Concern 22

    5. Socially and Economically Disadvantaged Small Business Concern 22

    6. Socially and Economically Disadvantaged Individual 22

    7. Woman-Owned Small Business Concern 22

    8. Historically Underutilized Business Zone (HUBZone)23

    9. Primary Employment 23

    10. United States 23

    11. Commercialization 23

    12. SBIR Technical Data 23

    13. SBIR Technical Data Rights 23


  3. Certifications 23

  4. Proposal Preparation Instructions and Requirements 24

    1. Proposal Page Limit and Cover Sheet 24

    2. Project SummarY 24

    3. Technical and Commercial Content: Phase I Proposal 25

      1. Technical Requirements 25
      2. Commercialization Requirements 26
      3. Other Requirements 27
    4. Attachment 1: Phase I Quality Assurance (QAS) 28
    5. Attachment 2: Phase I Cost Breakdown/Proposed Budget 29
    6. Attachment 3: Representations and Certifications 30
       
  5. Method of Selection and Evaluation Criteria 30
      1. External Peer Review 30
      2. Phase I Evaluation Criteria 30
        1. Phase I Technical Criteria 31
        2. Phase I Commercialization Criteria 31
      3. EPA Programmatic Relevancy Review 31
        1. Phase I Internal Programmatic Relevancy Review Criteria 31
      4. Release of Proposal Review Information 32
      5. Company Registry Requirements 32
  6. Considerations 32
      1. Awards 32
      2. Phase I Contract Reporting Requirements 32
      3. Payment Schedule 33
      4. Innovations, Inventions, and Patents 33
      5. Cost Sharing 35
      6. Profit or Fee 35
      7. Joint Ventures or Limited Partnership 36
      8. Research and Analytical Work 36
      9. Contractor Commitments 36
      10. Additional Information 37
  7. Submission of Proposals 52
  8. Scientific and Technical Information Sources 53
  9. Submission Forms and Certifications 54

Appendix 1 Proposal Cover Sheet 55

Appendix 2 Project Summary 57

Appendix 3 SBIR Proposal Summary Budget 59

Appendix 4 - Representations and Certifications 60

Appendix 5 Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) 69

Appendix 6 Commercialization History 71

PHASE I SOLICITATION FOR SMALL BUSINESS INNOVATION RESEARCH

  1. SBIR PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    Phase II Commercialization Criteria

    Stage two is the programmatic or relevancy review which will be conducted by EPA representatives using the
    criteria below.

    Phase II Internal Programmatic Relevancy Review Criteria

    1. 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 goal of
      EPAs SBIR Program is to support commercialization of innovative technologies the help support EPA''s mission
      of protecting human health and the environment. 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.

      1. Importance of Commercialization

      2. 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.

        Having had previous experience taking an innovative technology to market can be a positive indicator of future
        commercialization success and is factored into the commercialization requirements in Section IV. Having received
        an SBIR award to help do so is a special case. If a company receives an SBIR award from EPA or another agency,
        it gains an element of commercial legitimacy that can be helpful when the company seeks private investment,
        manufacturing partners, etc.

        Having in the past received one or more SBIR awards is not in and of itself evidence of successful
        commercialization. Success is when those technologies achieve commercialization after completing Phases I and
        II.

        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 PI Experience and Commitment.

      3. Life Ccle Impacts must be addressed

        In order to support the Agencys mission of protecting human health and the environment, 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 should
        be considered. A formal Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) is not required.

      4. 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.
      5. 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.


    2. Phase I

      The EPA anticipates making approximately twelve (12) 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 August 01, 2018 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.

    3. Performance Benchmark Requirements for Phase I Eligibility

      Each year, 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 companys 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 companys 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 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 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 the Phase I to Phase II Transition Benchmark requirements
      to be eligible for a new Phase I award. 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.

      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 companys 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) 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.

    4. 2016 SBIR Phase I Research Topics

      Given EPAs 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 EPAs 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 EPAs 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:

      1. CLEAN AND SAFE WATER

        Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are a large family of man-made, globally-distributed chemicals. They
        include perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS). PFAS have been widely used in
        consumer products such as non-stick cookware, carpets and carpet treatment products, food packaging, aqueous
        firefighting foams, and in the aerospace, automotive, construction, and electronics industries.

        Once released into the environment, some PFAS are not easily broken down when exposed to air, water, or sunlight.
        Thus people can be exposed to PFAS that were manufactured months or years in the past. PFAS can travel long
        distances in the air and water with the result that people may be exposed to PFAS manufactured or emitted from
        production facilities many miles away from the point of exposure. Human exposure can also occur through contact
        with products containing PFAS.

        A recent study of the effectiveness of currently-used treatment technologies for removal of PFAS from raw water
        or potable reuse sources found that granular activated carbon and anion exchange can under certain conditions treat
        long-chain PFAS and that costly nanofiltration and reverse osmosis could potentially treat most PFAS.

        Removal of PFOA/PFOS from Drinking Water
        In 2012, EPA included six PFAS compounds, including PFOA and PFOS, among the contaminants that were
        monitored under the third Unregulated Contaminants Monitoring Rule list. Results of this monitoring can be found
        on the publicly-available National Contaminant Occurrence Database.

        In 2016, EPA established a lifetime health advisory (LHA) level of 70 parts per trillion (ppt) for individual or
        combined concentrations of PFOA and PFOS in drinking water. This amount is equivalent to 0.07 parts per billion
        (ppb) or 0.07 micrograms/liter.

        EPA would like to improve and advance processes, technologies, and treatment systems for the removal of the
        PFOA and PFOS families of PFAS from drinking water. As a result, EPA is interested in the following topic:

        Topic Code 1A: Removal of PFOA/PFOS from Drinking Water. Innovative technologies that can remove
        PFOA and PFOS families of PFAS from drinking water. The technology should reduce the
        combined PFOA/PFOS concentration to below 0.07 ppb and be compatible with other water
        treatment processes, be affordable, and be easily used and maintained.

        Removal of PFOA/PFOS from Wastewater
        Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) have been detected in the effluent of municipal. industrial, and military
        wastewater treatment plants.

        In addition, a recent study found PFAS in the effluent of on-site septic systems, which serve about 25% of the US
        population.

        The predominant compounds found in wastewater effluent have been perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and
        perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS), which are degradation products of PFAS. PFOA and PFOS are persistent,
        bioaccumulative, and toxic.

        EPA would like to improve and advance processes, technologies, and treatment systems for the removal of the
        PFOA and PFOS families of PFAS from wastewater. As a result, EPA is interested in the following topic:

        Topic Code 1B: Removal of PFOA/PFOS from Wastewater. Innovative technologies that can remove PFOA
        and PFOS families of PFAS from PFAS from wastewater treatment plant effluent. The technology
        should consistently reduce the combined PFOA/PFOS concentration to below 0.07 ppb and be
        compatible with other water treatment processes, be affordable, and be easily used and maintained.

        PFAS

        Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are a large family of man-made, globally-distributed chemicals. They include
        perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS). PFAS have been widely used in consumer products
        such as non-stick cookware, carpets and carpet treatment products, food packaging, aqueous firefighting foams, metal
        plating operations and in the defense, aerospace, automotive, construction, and electronics industries.

        Once released into the environment, some PFAS are not easily broken down when exposed to air, water, or sunlight.
        Thus, people can be exposed to PFAS that were manufactured months or years in the past. PFAS can travel long distances
        in the air and water with the result that people may be exposed to PFAS many miles from their point of release. Human
        exposure can also occur through contact with products containing PFAS.

        Water resources (i.e., surface water and groundwater) are susceptible to contamination by PFAS release from
        manufacturing sites, industrial use, aircraft fire and emergency response training areas, and industrial or municipal waste
        sites where products are disposed of or applied.

        To provide Americans with a margin of protection from a lifetime of exposure to PFOA and PFOS from drinking water,
        EPA has established the health advisory levels at 70 parts per trillion (ppt) for combined
        PFOA/PFOS. https://www.epa.gov/ground-water-and-drinking-water/drinking-water-health-advisories-pfoa-and-pfos.
        For these reasons, EPA is looking for both detection and treatment technologies for PFAS as described here.

        Topic 1B: Novel technologies for the rapid detection of total PFAS in water. Technologies should be field ready and
        should be able to detect PFAS in drinking water, groundwater, surface water and/or wastewater. Ideally, sensor
        technologies could detect PFAS at the health advisory level of 70 ppt or less.

        Replacements for PVC and PE Water Pipes
        Since ancient times, people have used pipes to transport water from source to point of use. The pipes have been
        made of many materials, including stone, concrete, wood, metal (lead, iron, copper) and, most recently, plastic.

        Plastic pipes made of rigid polyvinyl chloride (PVC) are now widely used to carry drinking water and waste water
        in homes and other buildings, and sometimes outside of buildings, because they have many practical advantages.
        For example, they are derived from abundant petrochemicals and sodium chloride salt; their characteristics can be
        modified by the addition of various chemicals; they are light weight, non-corroding, chemically-resistant, non12
        conducting, easy to cut and join, and cost-less to transport and handle than other types of pipes; and they seem to
        be long-lasting compared with pipes made with other commonly-used materials.

        Considering the whole life cycle of PVC plastic pipes, however, there are many disadvantages in using them. For
        example, they require large amounts of energy to make; the source materials and intermediate products, including
        chlorine gas, are toxic; some chemical additives used in the manufacturing process are harmful and have the
        potential to leach into drinking water; the additives make recycling nearly impossible, with the result that nearly all
        discarded PVC goes to landfills; incineration creates dioxin; and high temperature and exposure to sunlight can
        result in degradation.

        Recently, various forms of flexible polyethylene (PE), high density polyethylene (HDPE), and cross-linked
        polyethylene (PEX) pipe have been used to carry water in buildings because they can be used in confined areas and
        can be curved to change direction rather than cut and joined. It has been found, however, that they cause odor
        problems and can release regulated and unregulated contaminants into the water.

        For these reasons, EPA is seeking innovative materials that can be used to make drinking water and waste water
        pipes for buildings and perhaps outside that have the advantages of PVC and PE, HDPE, and PEX pipes without
        their disadvantages across their entire lifecycle.

        Topic Code 1C: Replacements for PVC and PE Water Pipes. Innovative pipes for drinking water and waste
        water in buildings and perhaps outside of buildings that are made from materials that have the
        advantages and not the disadvantages of currently-used plastic pipes.

         

      2. AIR QUALITY

        Reducing Vehicle Emissions
        There are more than 250 million vehicles in the United States that transport people and goods. Primarily powered
        by internal combustion engines, they emit 1.8 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide per year. A typical passenger
        vehicle emits 4.7 metric tons of carbon dioxide per year. The many older vehicles still in use are the major emitters,
        although newer, more fuel efficient vehicles still produce some emissions.

        While technologies are being used to reduce emissions of other pollutants from vehicles, this is not the case for
        carbon dioxide emissions.

        The main technological approaches for reducing carbon dioxide emissions are capture and conversion. Capture
        involves long-term sequestration or use of the captured carbon dioxide in a manner that will not later result in the
        release of carbon. Conversion can be accomplished using catalysis, non-catalytic synthesis, or other means. Both
        capture and use and conversion can result in the creation of various compounds and products that have economic
        value—e.g., urea, salicylic acid, cyclic carbonate, polyols, and ethanol.

        Capture and conversion technologies are being used to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from stationary sources.

        Because capture and conversion technologies for carbon dioxide emissions from gasoline or diesel-powered motor
        vehicles are not commercially available, there is potentially a market opportunity both domestically and world-wide
        for cost-effective retrofit technologies that can capture or convert carbon dioxide emissions from such vehicles.

        EPA is interested in innovative technologies that can reduce carbon dioxide emissions from vehicles. The vehicle
        could use either gasoline or diesel fuel. The technologies would likely be drop-in components that are installed on
        a vehicle after the combustion emissions pass through other on-board catalytic and filter systems. EPA is most
        interested in the applicability to highway vehicles such as diesel-powered long-haul trucks.

        Topic Code 2A: Capturing Carbon Dioxide from Vehicles. Innovative technology that captures or otherwise
        sequesters carbon dioxide emissions from mobile sources that use internal combustion engines.
        Important parameters include: types of vehicles being addressed the technologys interactions with
        other on-board emission treatment devices and exhaust gases, the target percentage of carbon
        dioxide captured or converted, the substances and products to be produced, the technologys
        durability and longevity, operation and maintenance requirements, cost, effect on vehicle mileage
        and fuel usage, and treatment and disposal of the technology and any wastes produced.

        Topic Code 2B: Converting Carbon Dioxide from Vehicles. Innovative technology that converts carbon dioxide
        emissions from mobile sources that use internal combustion engines into harmless substances
        and/or materials and products that have economic value. The conversion can be achieved using
        catalysis, non-catalytic synthesis, or other means. Important parameters include: the types of
        vehicles being addressed, the technologys interactions with other on-board emission treatment
        devices and exhaust gases, the target percentage of carbon dioxide captured or converted, the
        substances and products to be produced, the technologys durability and longevity, O&M
        requirements, cost, effect on vehicle mileage and fuel usage, and treatment and disposal of the
        technology and any wastes produced.

        Product Loss Prevention and/or Mitigation in the Oil and Natural Gas Sector
        The oil and natural gas industry includes a wide range of operations and equipment, from wells to natural gas
        gathering lines and processing facilities, to storage tanks, and transmission and distribution pipelines. During these
        operations and uses of equipment, the industry loses—through leaks, temporal events, and other means—a
        significant amount of beneficial product that could otherwise go to market.

        Associated with these product losses are releases of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs). VOCs contribute to the
        formation of ground-level ozone (smog). Exposure to ozone is linked to a wide range of health effects, including
        aggravated asthma, increased emergency room visits and hospital admissions, and premature deaths. Other product
        losses release “air toxics, such as benzene, ethylbenzene, and n-hexane. Air toxics are chemicals that are known
        or suspected of causing cancer and other serious health effects.

        Topic Code 2C: Product Loss Prevention and/or Mitigation in the Oil and Natural Gas Sector. EPA is seeking
        innovative technologies that can prevent and/or mitigate the loss of valuable product and the
        associated releases of VOCs and air toxics. More specifically, EPA is seeking prevention and/or
        mitigation technologies that can be used at well sites, natural gas gathering and processing
        facilities, storage tanks and sites, or transmission facilities. The prevention and/or mitigation
        technology implementation should cost less than $2,700 per ton of reduced product loss. The
        technology may be targeted at but not limited to specific equipment such as natural gas driven
        equipment; maintenance activities such as the maintenance of compressors; design improvements
        to storage tank emission points such as thief hatches; and temporal emission events such as liquids
        unloading, blowdowns, and pigging.

        Developing More Stable Metal Alloy Tubes for Use in High Temperature Processes
        Recently it has been found that metal alloy tubes used in industrial processes that operate at high temperatures can
        degrade and emit toxic metals.

        As a case in point, ethylene (C2H4) is widely used in the chemical industry as a feedstock in the production of
        industrial chemicals and consumer goods—e.g., plastics, antifreeze, solvents, and detergents. Ethylene is produced
        in furnaces by “cracking—i.e., breaking apart—simpler hydrocarbons.

        The hydrocarbons to be cracked are mixed with steam and quickly run through tubes that are inside the furnace,
        which operates at about 850 degrees Centigrade. The combination of high temperature and steam “steam cracks
        the hydrocarbons inside the tubes. The tubes are made of an alloy consisting of the toxic metals Nickel (Ni) and
        Chromium (Cr) mixed with Iron (Fe).

        Recent stack testing on cracking furnaces has revealed higher than expected emissions of Ni and Cr. This is probably
        due to the severe conditions in the furnaces degrading the Fe-Ni-Cr alloy tubes used in the furnaces.

        The recent stack testing also found high Ni and Cr emissions during de-coking operations. De-coking is necessary
        because over time coke will build up inside the tubes, causing facilities to operate less and less efficiently until they
        reach a point of needing to remove the coke (via burning it off through the injection of steam and air into the tubes)
        before returning to normal cracking operations.

        There are 400-500 ethylene cracking furnaces in the US. Due to the availability of cheap feedstocks from fracking
        and shale gas, the industry is undergoing rapid growth with new facilities being built.

        There may be other industrial processes that use metal alloy tubes in a high temperature environment. Those tubes
        could also be degrading and emitting toxic metals. With this in mind, EPA is interested in the following topic:

        Topic Code 2D: Developing More Stable Metal Alloy Tubes for Use in High Temperature Processes.
        Innovative degradation-resistant tubes for use in ethylene cracking furnaces and other high
        temperature processes to replace tubes that are made with toxic metals. The tubes could be made
        of alternative metals, different percentages of the currently-used metals and/or other compounds,
        or non-metals. Compared with the currently-used tubes, the new tubes should produce lower or
        no Ni, Cr, and/or other toxic emissions during operation, last longer before needing to be replaced,
        reduce the down time necessary for de-coking and other intra-tube treatments, and cost less.

      3. LAND REVITALIZATION

        EPA administers Superfund, the federal government's program to clean up the nation's uncontrolled hazardous
        waste sites.

        Remediation of PFAS-Contaminated Soil and Sediment
        Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are a class of man-made chemicals not found naturally in the
        environment. Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS)have been the most extensively
        produced and studied of these chemicals. Both chemicals are very persistent in the environment and in the human
        body. To provide Americans, including the most sensitive populations, with a margin of protection from a lifetime
        of exposure to PFOA and PFOS from drinking water, EPA has established the health advisory levels at 0.07ppb.

        PFAS have been used to provide water, oil, and stain repellency to textiles, carpets and leather; to create greaseproof
        and water-proof coatings for paper plates and food packaging; and to aid processing in fluoropolymer manufacturing
        among many other commercial and consumer applications. They also have been used in chrome plating, firefighting
        foams, liquid carpet and textile care treatments, and floor waxes and sealants.

        The PFAS emitted or disposed into various media from these manufacturing processes resulted in PFAS
        contamination of soil and sediment. To date, soil contamination has been removed via excavation. EPA would like
        to improve and advance processes, technologies, and treatment systems for the sampling, analysis, and cleanup of
        PFAS in soil and sediment. As a result, EPA is interested in the following topic:

        Topic Code 3A: Remediation of PFAS-Contaminated Soil and Sediment. Innovative technologies that can
        sample, detect, analyze, remove, or destroy PFAS in and from soil and sediment. The technologies
        should be widely applicable—i.e., able to address various combinations of PFAS present; various
        soil types and other matrices to be remediated; and other types of contaminants present. The
        technologies should be effective, easy to use and maintain, and affordable.

        Proposed projects can be either ex situ (analyzing or treating excavated or extracted media or
        waste above ground) or in situ (analyzing or treating in place). For sampling and analysis,
        technologies can either detect contamination for the purpose of identifying the presence of and
        delineating the extent of PFAS, or produce data to support various decisions at sites where PFAS
        is present. For cleanup, the technologies can address contamination by reducing its toxicity,
        mobility, or volume by removing, destroying, or immobilizing PFASs and co-occurring
        contaminants from the target media. Evaluating remediation performance using accepted criteria
        and procedures is a critical element. The overall life cycle should be addressed—e.g., showing
        that remediating contaminated soil at one site will not result in transferring the risk to other media
        or locations.

      4. HOMELAND SECURITY

        The emergence of stateside Ebola cases highlighted the need for environmental cleanup methods for Category A
        pathogens in settings outside of the hospital as well as means to perform on-site waste management activities while
        minimizing worker exposure risk.

        As a result, a National Security Council-led interagency group consisting of the U.S. Department of Transportation,
        U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Department of Labor, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
        Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response drafted in January 2017 an “Interim - Planning Guidance for the
        Handling of Solid Waste Contaminated with a Category A Infectious Substance
        .

        The following two topics address these needs.

        Products for Category A Virus Inactivation that are Effective for Porous Surfaces and Suitable for Sensitive
        Equipment

        There are decontamination products for Ebola and other Category A viruses that are registered under the Federal
        Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). They can kill viruses and other Category A pathogens
        including Ebola. They are approved, however, for use on hard, non-porous surfaces, while not approved (with
        unknown levels of effectiveness) for use on porous surfaces. They are also typically corrosive, which makes them
        not suitable for use on many likely materials and on sensitive equipment. The destructiveness, and inability to
        effectively decontaminate porous materials and sensitive equipment results in large volumes of waste being
        generated, which may be contaminated.

        FIFRA: All pesticides distributed or sold in the United States must be registered (licensed) by EPA. Additional
        information on FIFRA can be found in Section VIII. Scientific and Technical Information Sources.

        Topic Code 4A. Decontamination of Category A Viruses on Porous Surfaces and Sensitive Equipment.
        Develop a virus inactivation product that is capable of a 4-log inactivation of Category A viruses
        on a range of porous materials (e.g., upholstery, bedding, fabric, carpet, unpainted wood) and is
        non-corrosive to a range of potentially reusable household materials.

        Waste Packaging Materials to Facilitate On-Site Fumigation and Transport of Items that Have Been Contaminated
        by Ebola Virus and Other Category A Infectious Agents

        Currently available packaging for non-hospital Ebola and other Category A wastes is impermeable to fumigants,
        and not amenable to large and bulky items, which limits the ability to use on-site waste treatment. There needs to
        be a way to package large and small contaminated items in a building (either with bagging or wrapping) and take
        them to where they can be treated without workers having to re-open the bags.

        On-site treatment would dramatically reduce the need for special transportation permits to access off-site treatment
        facilities. This would reduce the number and size of packing containers; the effort to pack, load, and unload them;
        the number, size, and fuel usage of transport vehicles; landfill usage; incineration operation; risk associated with
        transporting the waste; and costs.

        There are three components of an on-site treatment system:

         

        1. The first is having a semi-permeable packaging material that will enable the entry and exit of fumigants, be
          non-bulky, be flexible, be able to withstand the fumigation conditions, and not permit contaminants (viral
          and/or bacterial) to escape. An analogous material could be the bags used for ethylene oxide sterilization
          chambers.
        2. The second is having effective fumigants that can pass through the packaging material and disinfect the
          contaminated thing in the package. (Examples of Class A fumigants include: chlorine dioxide, hydrogen
          peroxide, methyl bromide, and formaldehyde.)
        3. The third is having a fumigant delivery and removal system that includes both effective fumigants and the
          equipment and other materials required to deliver, treat, recover, and dispose of used fumigants. The design
          of the delivery system would depend on the fumigant that is used.

         

        Demonstration of this technology is an important step towards commercialization. Demonstration of the desired performance of the materials, using the criteria described above, using wastes contaminated with Category A infectious agents or appropriate surrogates thereof, appropriate fumigants, and one or more delivery systems. To validate performance, EPA testing procedures can be used.

        Demonstrations should use bags made of the developed material that have been filled with contaminated items that
        are larger (and preferably a lot larger) than a bread box or a doll house.

        Topic Code 4B: Packaging for On-Site Fumigation and Transport of Category A Virus Contaminated
        Materials
        . Develop non-bulky waste packaging materials for on-site waste treatment that enable
        penetration of gaseous decontaminants and high temperature steam into the waste packages while
        preventing escape of the contaminants (viral and/or bacterial) (without requiring workers to open
        the waste packages).

        The membrane/packaging material must not allow minor amounts of liquids or solids to escape.
        It should be rugged enough for normal handling procedures by workers in personal protective
        equipment (PPE). It should survive external decontamination with a dilute (10%) bleach solution.
        It should maintain its integrity after fumigation. It should be cost effective—i.e., marketable. The
        on-site treatment should dramatically reduce transportation requirements for waste requiring off17
        site treatment and disposal. It should reduce the size of the waste containers and special permits
        required for off-site transportation.

      5. MANUFACTURING/h4>

        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 innovative technologies that, when compared with currently available technologies, have
        dramatically better performance, decreased cost of production, and reduced health and environmental impacts.

        Greener Plastics
        “Plastics is a broad category of polymeric substances that have varied applications and widespread use. Typically
        derived from petroleum, natural gas, and coal, they generally contain carbon and hydrogen along with added
        nitrogen, oxygen, chlorine, and sulfur. Plastics can be made to have different characteristics by modifying the
        structure of the polymer and adding other substances. Examples of plastics include: polyvinyl chloride, polystyrene,
        acrylics, polypropylene, polyethylene, and composites such as fiber-reinforced plastic.

        Plastics are used in the building construction, electronics, medical, packaging, consumer, transportation, and
        aerospace sectors. They constitute one of the largest US industrial sectors, which has been faring well economically
        in recent years—e.g., shipping more than $500 billion worth of materials per year. Plastic products are so widely
        used because they have many advantageous properties—they can be durable, long-lasting, lightweight, corrosion
        resistant, easy to cut and join, easy to install and remove, different colors, and nonconductive.

        Plastics can, however, have negative health and environmental effects throughout their life cycle. They are generally
        made with toxic materials in very energy-intensive processes, toxic fumes are often emitted during their
        manufacture and use, they can be hazardous when they come in contact with food and potable liquids that people
        ingest, they can degrade during use, they can trap and be ingested by wildlife on land and in the ocean, they can be
        difficult to recycle and reuse, they are a significant component of landfilled material, and they do not easily
        biodegrade.

        Because of their economic importance, widespread utility, and possible negative health and environmental impacts,
        EPA is seeking greener plastics, as follows:

        Topic Code 5A: Greener Plastics Manufacturing. For a specific type of plastic develop a greener manufacturing
        process that (a) eliminates the use of one or more toxic source materials, (b) eliminates toxic
        chemicals used in the manufacturing process, (c) greatly reduces the amount of energy used to
        carry out the process, and/or (d) eliminates one or more toxic pollutants that result from the
        process. Examples include: using non-petrochemical source materials and using biological rather
        than chemical transformation processes. Comparison with the currently used sources and
        manufacturing processes and assessing the overall life cycle of the plastic(s) are integral to this
        topic.

        Topic Code 5B: Greener Plastic Products. For a specific type of product that is made with plastic, develop a
        greener version of the product that (a) is not made with toxic materials, (b) does not emit toxic
        fumes, (c) is not toxic if ingested, (d) is easily recycled and reused, and/or (e) rapidly biodegrades
        in soil and water. Examples include: alternatives to products made with polyvinyl chloride or
        polystyrene. Comparison with the performance and cost of the currently-used plastic product and
        assessing its overall life cycle are integral to this topic.

      6. BUILDING CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS

        Greener Interior Construction Materials
        There is a need to use greener materials in constructing the interior floors, walls, and ceilings of buildings. “Greener
        considers the whole life cycle of the materials that are used. The following are examples of this need:

      • Many indoor construction materials emit toxic gases such as formaldehyde and produce airborne fine
        particles. It would be more protective of human health if greener materials were used that did not emit
        toxic fumes or fine particles.
      • Flexible and laminate vinyl materials and rigid polyvinyl chloride (PVC) are made with toxic materials
        and processes, are difficult to recycle, and do not biodegrade. It would be more protective of the
        environment if greener materials were used.

      With this in mind, EPA is interested in innovative technologies that address the following topic:

      Topic Code 6A: Greener Interior Construction Materials: Greener materials for construction of floors, walls,
      and/or ceilings in buildings. Compared with currently-used materials, these materials should be
      less toxic, stronger, more durable, longer lasting, lower weigh, lower in volume, easier to re-cycle
      and re-use, more biodegradable, and more affordable. The use of a life cycle perspective that
      embodies these and other related aspects is integral to this topic.

      Greener Exterior Construction Materials
      Materials used in constructing the exterior of buildings wind up creating a large portion of the waste materials in
      the United States. These materials include concrete, wood, metal, glass, and plastic. Much of this material goes to
      landfills because they cannot be easily or cost-effectively re-cycled or reused. For example, nearly all polyvinyl
      chloride construction materials go to landfills. There is a need for greener materials that can be used in constructing
      the exterior of buildings. “Greener considers the whole life cycle of the materials that are used.

      With this in mind, EPA is interested in innovative technologies that address the following topic:

      Topic Code 6B: Greener Exterior Construction Materials: Greener materials for use in constructing the
      exteriors of buildings. Compared with currently-used materials, these materials should be less
      toxic, stronger, more durable, longer lasting, lower weigh, lower in volume, easier to re-cycle and
      re-use, more biodegradable, and more affordable. The use of a life cycle perspective that embodies
      these and other related aspects is integral to this topic.

    5. 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 technologys capability and full-scale commercialization may
      require, in effect, a Phase III that utilizes non-EPA Federal and/or private sector funds; therefore, Phase II projects
      should work to establish strategic partners necessary to commercialize their technology.

      The EPA anticipates making approximately six (6) 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 March 2019, with proposals due
      on/about May 2019.

      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.

      Stage one is the peer review process. The following three (3) technology criteria and three (3) commercialization
      criteria will be used to evaluate Phase I proposals during peer review. All six (6) criteria are of equal importance.
      These criteria directly align with the requirements in the solicitation.

      Phase II Technical Criteria

      1. The Innovation Degree to which proposal addresses the innovation including such factors as: why
        technology is innovative and how it could benefit target customers; what must be done to reach the next
        stage of development; identification of key technical challenges for bringing the technology to market and
        how they will be overcome; and the intellectual property associated with this project and how it will be
        protected.
      2. Technical Approach Degree to which proposal addresses the technical approach including factors such
        as: what questions must be answered to determine the technical feasibility of the proposed concept and how
        these will be addressed; and adequacy of Quality Assurance Statement.
      3. Technical Challenges Degree to which proposal addresses the technical challenges including factors
        such as: key performance characteristics including costs, necessary to meet customer needs; description of
        competing technologies; a lifecycle approach to solving the problem addressing environmental benefits and
        costs associated with the inputs, manufacture, use, and reuse/recycle/treatment/disposal of the technology.
      1. Market Opportunity Degree to which the proposal addresses the market opportunity including factors
        such as: target market for the innovation and how market was validated; the drivers for and barriers to
        selling to target market; description of customers and basic business model; and description of competition
        and how the competitive landscape is expected to change by the time product enters the market.
      2. Company/Team Degree to which proposal addresses the company/team (including Principal Investigator
        (PI)) and factors such as: how qualified company/team is to carry out the proposed work and is balanced
        between technical and business skills; has adequate resources available to carry out the proposed activities;
        and has a track record taking similar technologies (including SBIR-funded projects) to market.
      3. Commercialization Approach Degree to which proposal presents a commercialization approach that
        can successfully take technology from its current stage of development to market.
      1. The potential of the technology to meet Agency program priorities.

      2. The potential of the technology to advance sustainability, including environmental, economic, and societal
        benefits.

      3. The potential of the technology to be widely used, have broad application, and/or to impact large segments
        of the population.

        F. 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:

      1. Non-Federal sources of capital—including investors, commercial partners, licensing, etc.

      2. Federal non-SBIR sources that support any necessary continued R&D and product development.

      3. 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.

    1. 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 halftime employee of the second employer. Letters demonstrating that these requirements have been fulfilled shall be submitted prior to contract award to the Contract Specialist 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.)

    2. 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 Contract Specialist Adrianne Wells, via the FedConnect web portal (www.fedconnect.net).

    3. 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

  2. DEFINITIONS/h3>

    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 for purpose of obtaining 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 contracts, meets all of the following criteria:

      1. Is registered in System for Award (SAM) under North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code
        541715.
      2. Is organized for prof

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

  • Grantee Research Project Results Home
  • Grantee Research Project Results Basic Search
  • Grantee Research Project Results Advanced Search
  • Grantee Research Project Results Fielded Search
  • Publication search
  • EPA Regional Search

Related Information

  • Search Help
  • About our data collection
  • Research Grants
  • P3: Student Design Competition
  • Research Fellowships
  • Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR)
Contact Us to ask a question, provide feedback, or report a problem.
Last updated April 28, 2023
United States Environmental Protection Agency

Discover.

  • Accessibility
  • Budget & Performance
  • Contracting
  • EPA www Web Snapshot
  • Grants
  • No FEAR Act Data
  • Plain Writing
  • Privacy
  • Privacy and Security Notice

Connect.

  • Data.gov
  • Inspector General
  • Jobs
  • Newsroom
  • Open Government
  • Regulations.gov
  • Subscribe
  • USA.gov
  • White House

Ask.

  • Contact EPA
  • EPA Disclaimers
  • Hotlines
  • FOIA Requests
  • Frequent Questions

Follow.