United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Research and
Development
Washington, DC 20460
EPA/600/R-00/021
March 2000
www.epa.gov/ncerqa
SMALL BUSINESS
INNOVATION RESEARCH
PHASE I
Program Solicitation No. PR-NC-00-10483
ISSUE DATE: March 30, 2000
CLOSING DATE: May 25, 2000
* CAUTION - See Section VI, Paragraph J.9(c), Instructions to Offerers,
Concerning Late Proposals and Modifications.
-------
EPA Small Business Innovation Research Phase 1 FY01 Program Solicitation No. PR-NC-00-10483
Table of Contents
Page
I. Program Description 3
II. Eligibility 4
III. Definitions 5
IV. Proposal Preparation Instructions and Requirements 6
V. Method of Selection and Evaluation Criteria 9
VI. Considerations 10
VII. Submission of Proposals 17
VIII. Scientific and Technical Information Sources 17
IX. FY2001 SBIR Phase I Research Topics 17
A. Nanomaterials and Clean Technology 18
B. Clean Air 20
C. Clean Water 22
D. Waste Management and Site Remediation 25
E. Monitoring and Measurement Technologies 28
X. Submission Forms and Certifications 33
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A - Proposal Cover Sheet 35
APPENDIX B - Project Summary 36
APPENDIX C - SBIR Proposal Summary Budget 37
APPENDIX D - Scientific and Technical Information Sources 39
APPENDIX E - Commercialization Fact Sheet 40
-------
EPA Small Business Innovation Research Phase 1 FY01 Program Solicitation No. PR-NC-00-10483
-------
EPA Small Business Innovation Research Phase 1 FY01 Program Solicitation No. PR-NC-00-10483
1PA Small Business
I
Solicitation No. PR-NC-00-10483
ISSUE DATE: March 30, 2000
CLOSING DATE: May 25, 2000 *
* CAUTION - See Section VI, Paragraph J.9.(c), In-
structions to Offerers, Concerning Late Proposes and
Modifications.
I. PROGRAM
DESCRIPTION
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) invites
small business firms to submit research proposals under
this program solicitation entitled "Small Business Innova-
tion Research (SBIR) Program." The SBIR program is a
phased process uniform throughout the Federal Govern-
ment of soliciting proposals and awarding funding agree-
ments for research (R) or research and development (R&D)
to meet stated agency needs or missions.
EPA is interested in advanced technologies in pollu-
tion prevention, air and water pollution control, solid and
hazardous waste management, environmental monitoring
and analytical technologies where the research will serve
as a base for technological innovation and commercializa-
tion. The proposed research must directly pertain to EPA's
environmental mission and must be responsive to EPA
program interests included in the topic descriptions of this
solicitation.
In order to facilitate proposal reviews by external
peer reviewers with specialized expertise and by EPA tech-
nical personnel with focused program needs and priorities,
offerers must designate a research topic, and only one
tcpLc, farthsirprqrEal. Only proposals indicating a
single research topic by letter symbol on the cover sheet
will be reviewed. The same proposal may not be submit-
ted under more than one topic, but an organization may
submit separate proposals on different topics or different
proposals on the same topic as long as the proposals are
not duplicates of the same research principle modified to
fit the topic. If such duplicates are submitted, only one will
be reviewed. Refer to Sections IV, V, and VII for additional
requirements. Where similar research is discussed under
more than one topic, the offerer should choose the topic
most relevant to the proposed research. It is the complete
responsibility of offerers to select and identify the best
topic for their proposals.
Offerers are responsible for submitting proposals, and
any modifications or revisions, so as to reach the Govern-
ment office designated in this solicitation by the time
specified in this solicitation. See Section VI, Paragraph
J.9(c), Instructions to Offerers, Concerning Late Proposals
and Modifications.
This solicitation is for Phase I only.
To stimulate and foster technological innovation,
including increasing private sector applications of Federal
research or R&D, EPA's program follows the SBIR
program's uniform process:
PHASE I. Phase I involves a solicitation of proposals to
conduct feasibility related experimental research or R&D
related to described agency requirements. The objective of
this phase is to determine the technical feasibility and pre-
liminary commercialization potential of the proposed ef-
fort and the quality of performance of the small concern
with a relatively small agency investment before consider-
ation of further Federal support in Phase II.
PHASE II. Phase II proposals may only be submitted by
Phase I award winners within the same agency. Phase II is
the principal research or R&D effort and should not nor-
mally exceed 24 months. Funding shall be based upon the
results of Phase I and the scientific and technical merit and
commercial potential of the Phase II proposal. The objec-
tive is to continue the research or R&D initiated under
Phase I and work toward commercialization of the technol-
ogy. Phase II proposals can only be submitted to the Fed-
eral participating agency that awarded Phase I of the effort.
Phase II awards may not necessarily complete the total
research and development that may be required to satisfy
commercial or federal needs beyond the SBIR program.
Completion of the research and development may be
through Phase III. The Agency is under no obligation to
fund any proposal or any specific number of proposals in a
given topic. It also may elect to fund several or none of the
proposed approaches to the same topic or subtopic.
It is anticipated that approximately 10-15 Phase II
awards with a dollar amount of 5225,000 each will be
-------
EPA Small Business Innovation Research Phase 1 FY01 Program Solicitation No. PR-NC-00-10483
made. For Phase II, the Agency is planning to offer a Phase
II Option under which Phase II offerers may submit a pro-
posal for $70,000 additional funding to expand R&D ef-
forts to accelerate commercialization. The purpose of the
additional funding is to accelerate the project to the com-
mercialization stage. EPA federal funds must be designated
strictly for advancing the research related elements of the
project. No automatic preference shall be given to offers
which address the option; however, in the case where an
offerer addresses the option in its proposal, the entire pro-
posal including the option shall be evaluated. The Agency
would have a unilateral right to exercise the option after
EPA's acceptance of the company's detailed commercial-
ization plan, including information on any commercializa-
tion funding from third party investors, such as another
company, venture capital firm or "angel" investor. The
Government is not obligated to fund any specific Phase II
proposal.
It is anticipated that the follow-on Phase II Solicita-
tion will be issued on/about March 1, 2001, and that pro-
posals will be due on/about April 19, 2001. EPA expects to
allow companies submitting unsuccessful FY 2001 Phase II
proposals to submit a revised proposal of the same technol-
ogy in the next Phase II (FY 2002) Solicitation. It is ex-
pected that each Phase II proposal will be evaluated in
accordance with the following criteria to determine the
results of Phase I and the scientific and technical merit and
commercial potential of the proposal.
PHASE II CRITERIA
1. The scientific and technical quality and signifi-
cance of the proposed technology as applied R/R&D.
Credibility and overall soundness of the research
plan to establish the technical and commercial feasi-
bility of the proposed concept as evidenced through
technology prototypes or initial commercial demon-
strations.
2. The originality, uniqueness, and ingenuity of the
proposed concept as a technologically innovative
and commercially viable application as evidenced
through technology prototypes or initial commercial
demonstrations.
3. Results of Phase I and degree to which research
objectives and identified customer needs were met.
Demonstration of performance/cost effectiveness and
environmental benefits associated with the proposed
research, including risk reduction potential.
4. Qualifications of the principal/key investigator,
supporting staff and consultants. Time commitment
of principal/key investigator, adequacy of equipment
and facilities and proposed budget to accomplish the
proposed research. Adequacy of Phase II Quality
Assurance Summary.
5. Potential of the proposed concept for significant
commercialization applications. The quality and
adequacy of the commercialization plan to produce
an innovative product, process or device and getting
technology prototypes or initial Phase II applications
into commercial production and sales. Expected
market and competition and other financial/business
indicators of commercialization potential and the
offerer's SBIR or other research commercialization
record.
PHASE in. Where appropriate and needed in order to
complete the research and development, there may be a
third phase which is funded by:
1. Non-federal sources of capital for commercial
applications of SBIR funded research or research and
development.
2. Federal government with non-SBIR federal funds
for SBIR derived products and processes that will be
used by the federal government.
3. Non-SBIR federal funds for the continuation of
research or research and development that has been
competitively selected using peer review or scientific
review criteria.
II. ELIGIBILITY
Each concern submitting a proposal must qualify as a
small business for research or R&D purposes at the time of
award. In addition, the primary employment of the princi-
pal investigator must be with the small business concern at
the time of award and during the conduct of the proposed
research. Principal investigators who appear to be em-
ployed by a university must submit a letter from the uni-
versity stating that the principal investigator, if awarded an
SBIR contract, will become a less-than-half-time employee
of the university. By the same token, a principal investiga-
tor who appears to be a staff member of both the applicant/
offerer organization and another employer must submit a
letter from the second employer stating that, if awarded an
SBIR contract, he/she will become a less than half-time
employee of that organization. Letters demonstrating that
these requirements have been fulfilled must be submitted
prior to contract award to the addressee stated in Section
-------
EPA Small Business Innovation Research Phase 1 FY01 Program Solicitation No. PR-NC-00-10483
VII of this solicitation. Failure to do so may jeopardize
award. Also, for both Phase I and Phase II, the research or
R&D work must be performed in the United States.
"United States" means the 50 states, the Territories and
possessions of the United States, the Commonwealth of
Puerto Rico, the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, and
the District of Columbia.
INQUIRIES. All inquiries concerning this solicita-
tion shall be submitted to the following E-mail address:
johnson.marsha@epa.gov
If E-mail is not available to you, written or telephone
inquiries may be directed to:
Marsha Johnson/SBIR-I
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Contracts Management Division (MD-33)
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
(919)541-0952
Potential offerers are encouraged to communicate via
E-mail.
III. DEFINITIONS
For purposes of this solicitation, the following defini-
tions apply:
Research or Research and Development: Any activ-
ity 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.
(3) A systematic application of knowledge toward the
production of useful materials, devices, and systems
or methods, including design, development, and im-
provement of prototypes and new processes to meet
specific requirements.
Funding Agreement: Any contract, grant, or coop-
erative agreement entered into between any Federal
Agency and any small business concern for the perfor-
mance of experimental, developmental or research work
funded in whole or in part by the Federal Government.
Subcontract: Any agreement, other than one involv-
ing an employer-employee relationship, entered into by a
Federal Government funding agreement awardee calling
for supplies or services required solely 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
funding agreements, meets the following criteria:
(1) Is independently owned and operated, is not
dominant in the field of operation in which it is pro-
posing, has its principal place of business located in
the United States and is organized for profit;
(2) Is at least 51 percent owned, or in the case of a
publicly owned business, at least 51 percent of its
voting stock is owned by United States citizens or
lawfully fully admitted permanent resident aliens; (if
this applies, appropriate documentation must be sub-
mitted).
(3) Has, including its affiliates, a number of employ-
ees not exceeding 500, and meets the other regula-
tory requirements found in 13 CFR Part 121. Busi-
ness concerns, other than investment companies
licensed, or state development companies qualifying
under the Small Business Investment Act of 1958, 15
U.S.C. 661, et. seq., are affiliates of one another when
either directly or indirectly:
(A) one concern controls or has the power to con-
trol the other; or
(B) a third party or parties controls or has the
power to control both.
Control can be exercised through common owner-
ship, common management, and contractual relationships.
The term "affiliates" is defined in greater detail in 13 CFR
121. The term "number of employees" is defined in 13
CFR 121. Business concerns include, but are not limited
to, any individual, partnership, corporation, joint venture,
association or cooperative.
Socially and Economically Disadvantaged Small
Business Concern: A socially and economically disadvan-
taged small Business concern is one that is:
(1) At least 51 percent owned by (i) an Indian tribe or
a native Hawaiian organization, or (ii) one or more
socially and economically disadvantaged individu-
als, and
-------
EPA Small Business Innovation Research Phase 1 FY01 Program Solicitation No. PR-NC-00-10483
(2) Whose management and daily business operations
are controlled by one or more socially and economi-
cally disadvantaged individuals.
Socially and Economically Disadvantaged Indi-
vidual: A member of any of the following groups:
(1) Black Americans;
(2) Hispanic Americans;
(3) Native Americans (American Indians, Eskimos,
Aleuts, or Native Hawaiians);
(4) Asian-Pacific Americans (persons with origins
from Burma, Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia,
Singapore, Brunei, Japan, China, Taiwan, Laos, Cam-
bodia (Kampuchea), Vietnam, Korea, The Philippines,
U.S. Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands (Republic of
Palau), Republic of the Marshall Islands, Federated
States of Micronesia, the Commonwealth of the
Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, Samoa, Macao,
Hong Kong, Fiji, Tonga, Kiribati, Tuvalu, or Nauru);
(5) Subcontinent Asian (Asian-Indian) Americans
(persons with origins from India, Pakistan,
Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Bhutan, the Maldives Islands,
or Nepal);
(6) Other groups designated from time to time by
SBA to be socially disadvantaged; or
(7) Any other individual found to be socially and
economically disadvantaged by SBA pursuant to
Section 124.103 of 13 CFR.CH.l (1-1-99 edition).
Women-Owned Small Business Concern: A small
business concern that is at least 51 percent owned by a
woman or women who also control and operate it. "Con-
trol" in this context means exercising the power to make
policy decisions. "Operate" in this context means being
actively involved in the day-to-day management.
Primary Employment: More than one-half of the
principal investigator's time is spent in the employ of the
small business.
United States: The 50 States, the Territories and pos-
sessions of the United States, the Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico, the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, and the Dis-
trict of Columbia.
Commercialization: The process of developing
markets and producing and delivering products for sale
(whether by the originating party or by others); as used
here, commercialization includes both government and
commercial markets.
IV. PROPOSAL
PREPARATION
INSTRUCTIONS AND
REQUIREMENTS
A. PROPOSAL PAGE LIMIT
Proposals submitted in response to this Phase I of the
SBIR program shall not exceed a total of 25 pages, one
side only, except for the requirements set forth in Section
IV.D.l 1, "Prior SBIR Awards". Pages should be of standard
size (8 Vi" x 11"; 21.6cm x 27.9 cm) with 2.5 cm margins
and type no smaller than 10 point font size. All pages must
be consecutively numbered. Proposals in excess of the
page limitation shall not be considered for review or award.
A letter of transmittal is not necessary. If one is furnished,
it must not be attached to every copy of the proposal. If a
letter of transmittal is attached to every copy of the pro-
posal, it will be counted as page 1 of the proposal. No
binders are necessary. If binders are provided, they will be
counted as pages even if no printing or writing is thereon.
B. PROPOSAL COVER
SHEET
The offerer shall photocopy (or download from the
Internet) and complete Appendix A as page 1 of each copy
of each proposal. No other cover is permitted. When
downloading the solicitation from the Internet, Appendix A
may print on two pages, but will only count as one page
per Appendix. Offerers may reformat the forms to correct
spacing and pagination errors, however, identical informa-
tion must be provided.
The original of the cover sheet must contain the pen-
and-ink signatures of the authorized negotiator and the
person authorized to sign the proposal.
C. ABSTRACTOR
SUMMARY
The offeror shall complete Appendix B as page 2 of
each proposal. Appendix B is limited to 1 page. The tech-
nical abstract should include a brief description of the
problem or opportunity, the innovation, project objectives,
-------
EPA Small Business Innovation Research Phase 1 FY01 Proaram Solicitation No. PR-NC-00-10483
and description of the effort. In summarizing anticipated
results, the implications of the approach (for both Phases I
and II) and the potential commercial applications of the
research shall be stated. THE ABSTRACT IS USED EX-
TENSIVELY DURING THE EXTERNAL PEER RE-
VIEW AND EPA INTERNAL REVIEW. The project sum-
mary of successful proposals will be published by EPA and,
therefore, must not contain proprietary information.
D. TECHNICAL
CONTENT
Begin the main body of the proposal on page 3. As a
minimum, the following shall be included:
1. IDENTIFICATION AND SIGNIFICANCE OF
THE PROBLEM OR OPPORTUNITY. A clear
statement of the specific technical problem or oppor-
tunity addressed and the environmental benefits.
2. PHASE I TECHNICAL OBJECTIVES. State
the specific objectives of the Phase I research and
development effort, including the technical questions
it will try to answer to determine the feasibility of the
proposed approach.
3. PHASE I W'ORK PLAN. A detailed description
of the Phase I R/R&D plan. The plan should indicate
what will be done, where it will be done and how the
R/R&D will be carried out. The work planned to
achieve each objective or task should be discussed in
detail, to enable a complete scientific and technical
evaluation of the work plan. A work schedule should
also be provided.
4. RELATED RESEARCH OR R&D. Describe
significant research or R&D that is directly related to
the proposal including any conducted by the project
manager/principal investigator or by the proposing
firm. Describe how it relates to the proposed effort,
and any planned coordination with outside sources.
Offerers must demonstrate their awareness of key
recent research or R&D conducted by others in the
specific topic area by providing appropriate refer-
ences from the literature and other published docu-
ments.
5. KEY PERSONNEL AND BIBLIOGRAPHY OF
DIRECTLY RELATED WORK. Identify key per-
sonnel involved in Phase I including their directly
related education, experience and bibliographic in-
formation. Where vitae are extensive, summaries that
focus on the most relevant experience or publications
are desired and may be necessary to meet proposal
size limitations.
6. RELATIONSHIP WITH FUTURE RESEARCH
OR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT. State the
anticipated results of the proposed approach if the
project is successful (Phase I and II). A discussion of
cost-effectiveness is paramount, especially compar-
ing the state-of-the-art approaches with the proposed
approach. Discuss the significance of the Phase I
effort in providing a foundation for Phase II R/R&D
effort.
7. FACILITIES. A detailed description, availability
and location of instrumentation and physical facili-
ties proposed for Phase I should be provided.
8. CONSULTANTS. Involvement of consultants in
the planning and research stages of the project is
permitted. If such involvement is intended, it should
be described in detail and vitae should be provided.
9. COMMERCIALIZATION PLAN. Provide an
abbreviated 2-3 page plan related directly to produc-
ing an innovative product, process or device and
getting it into commercial production and sales.
Comprehensive business plans (that are company
rather than project oriented) are not desired. The
Phase I plan is a roadmap toward producing a de-
tailed Phase II Commercialization Plan which will be
required as part of the Phase II Application.
NOTE: The Small Business Research and Develop-
ment Enhancement Act of 1992 allows discretionary tech-
nical assistance to SBIR awardees. The Agency may pro-
vide up to $4,000 of SBIR funds for technical assistance
per award. EPA intends to provide Phase I awardees with
technical assistance through a separate EPA arrangement.
For Phase I, this assistance will be in addition to the award
amount. For Phase II, the law allows each awardee to ex-
pend up to $4,000 per year of the award amount for techni-
cal assistance services.
The Phase I plan should provide limited information
on the subjects described below. Explain what will be
done during Phase I to decide on applications, markets,
production and financing. The Commercialization Plan
should address:
a. SBIR Project: Brief description of the company,
its principal field(s) of interest, size and current
products and sales. A concise description of the
SBIR project and its key technical objectives.
-------
EPA Small Business Innovation Research Phase 1 FY01 Program Solicitation No. PR-NC-00-10483
b. Commercial Applications: Potential commer-
cial applications of the research results specifying
customers and specific needs that will be satisfied.
Do you have or intend to file for one or more pat-
ents as a result of the SBIR project?
c. Competitive Advantages: What is particularly
innovative about the anticipated technology or
products? (Innovation may be expressed in terms
of applications, performance, efficiencies or re-
duced cost. To determine if your innovation is
likely to result in intellectual property that may
be legally protected, it helps to conduct a patent
search and look for related work being funded by
EPA or another Federal agency. A fact sheet on
how to search for patents and related federally-
funded work is provided in Appendix E.) What
significant advantages in application, perfor-
mance, technique, efficiency, or costs, do you
anticipate your new technology will have over
existing technology? (In order to assess such
advantages, it is useful to compare the anticipated
performance of your technology against substitut-
able products currently being sold or emerging
out of R&D. If regulations, industry standards or
certifying requirements apply to your technology
or product, these provide useful criteria for com-
paring your anticipated performance with poten-
tially competing technology and products. How-
ever, other expressions of end-user needs may also
contain important criteria. A fact sheet on how to
identify potentially substitutable products and to
locate relevant regulations, standards, certifica-
tion requirements and expressions of end-user
need is in Appendix F.)
d. Markets: What are the anticipated specific
markets for the resulting technology, their esti-
mated size, classes of customers, and your esti-
mated market share 5 years after the project is
completed and/or first sales? Who are the major
competitors in the markets, present and/or antici-
pated?
e. Commercialization: Briefly describe how you
plan to produce your product. Do you intend to
manufacture it yourself, subcontract the manufac-
turing, enter into a joint venture or manufacturing
agreement, license the product, etc.? Briefly de-
scribe the approach and steps you plan to take to
commercialize the research results to significant
sales. Do you plan to market the product yourself,
through dealers, contract sales, marketing agree-
ments, joint venture, sales representatives, foreign
companies, etc.? How do you plan to raise money
to support your commercialization plan?
10. SIMILAR OR CLOSELY RELATED SBIR
AWARDS. If the small business concern has received
ANY prior Phase I or Phase II award(s) from EPA or
any Federal agency for similar or closely related re-
search, submit name of awarding agency, date of
award, funding agreement number, amount, topic or
subtopic title, follow-on agreement amount, source
and date of commitment and current commercializa-
tion status. DESCRIBE THE TECHNICAL DIF-
FERENCES AND REASONS WHY THE PRO-
POSED NEW PHASE II RESEARCH IS
DIFFERENT FROM RESEARCH CONDUCTED
UNDER PRIOR SBIR AWARDS. (This required
proposal information shall be counted toward pro-
posal pages count limitation.)
11. DUPLICATE OR EQUIVALENT SBIR PRO-
POSALS. A firm may elect to submit essentially
equivalent work under other Federal Program Solici-
tations. In these cases, a statement must be included
in each such proposal indicating: the name and ad-
dress of the agencies to which proposals were submit-
ted or from which awards were received; date of pro-
posal submission or date of award; title, number, and
date of solicitations under which proposals were sub-
mitted or awards received; specific applicable re-
search topics for each proposal submitted or award
received; titles of research projects; name and title of
project manager or principal investigator for each
proposal submitted or award received. (This informa-
tion shall count toward proposal pages count limita-
tion.)
12. PRIOR SBIR AWARDS. If the small business
concern has received ANY prior Phase II award from
any Federal agency in the prior 5 fiscal years, submit
name of awarding agency, date of award, funding
agreement number, amount, topic or subtopic title,
follow-on agreement amount, source and date of com-
mitment and current commercialization status for
each Phase II. (This required proposal information
shall be included as an attachment to the proposals
and .shall not be counted toward proposal pages
count limitation.)
E. COST BREAKDOWN/
PROPOSED BUDGET
Complete the budget form in Appendix C and in-
clude the form immediately after proposal section D. 11.
-------
EPA Small Business Innovation Research Phase 1 FY01 Program Solicitation No. PR-NC-00-10483
Photocopy the form for the required copies for submission.
Incorporate the copy of the budget form bearing the origi-
nal signature into the copy of the proposal bearing the
original signature on the cover page. The budget form will
count as one page in the 25 page limit. If budget explana-
tion pages are included, they will count toward the 25 page
limit.
F. PHASE I QUALITY
ASSURANCE NARRATIVE
STATEMENT
Offerers must state whether or not their proposal
involves technology-specific testing or environmentally
related measurements. This quality assurance narrative
statement should not exceed two pages and will be in-
cluded in the 25-page limitation for the proposal. The
narrative statement should, for each item, either address the
required information or explain why the item does not
apply to the proposed research.
1. The activities to be performed or hypothesis to be
tested (reference may be made to the specific page
and paragraph number in the application where this
information may be found); criteria for determining
the acceptability of data quality in terms of precision,
accuracy, representativeness, completeness, compara-
bility. (Note: these criteria must also be applied to
determine the acceptability of existing or secondary
data to be used in the project.)
2. The study design including sample type and loca-
tion requirements and any statistical analyses that
were used to estimate the types and numbers of
samples required for physical samples.
3. The procedures for the handling and custody of
samples, including sample identification, preserva-
tion, transportation, and storage.
4. The procedures that will be used in the calibration
and performance evaluation of the sampling and ana-
lytical methods used or equipment developed during
the project.
5. The procedures for data reduction and reporting,
including a description of statistical analyses to be
used and of any computer models to be designed or
utilized with associated verification and validation
techniques.
6. The quantitative and/or qualitative procedures
that will be used to evaluate the success of the
project, including any plans for peer or other reviews
of the study design or analytical methods prior to
data collection.
A more detailed Proposal Quality Assurance Plan will
be required in Phase II. The plan will be required as part of
the first monthly report under the Phase II contract.
V. METHOD OF
SELECTION AND
EVALUATION CRITERIA
All Phase I proposals will be evaluated and judged on
a competitive basis by external peer reviewers. Proposals
will be initially screened to determine responsiveness. As
noted in Section IV, proposals exceeding the 25-page limi-
tation will not be considered for review or award. Also, as
noted in Section I, any proposal addressing more than one
research topic, or failing to identify the research topic by
letter symbol on the cover page, will not be considered for
review or award. Proposals passing this initial screening
will be reviewed for technical merit by external peer panels
of technical experts, using the technical evaluation criteria
described in A.I below. Each of the criteria are equal in
value. These panels will assign each proposal an adjecti-
val rating of "excellent", "very good", "good", "fair" or
"poor", using the specified criteria. The proposals as-
signed "excellent" and "very good" ratings, will then be
subjected to the relevancy review within EPA, to further
evaluate these applications in relation to program priorities
and balance using the criteria specified in A.2 below. Each
proposal will be judged on its own merit. The Agency is
under no obligation to fund any proposal or any specific
number of proposals in a given topic. It also may elect to
fund several or none of the proposed approaches to the
same topic or subtopic.
A. TECHNICAL EVALUATION
CRITERIA
1. EXTERNAL PEER REVIEW. The external peer
review panels will utilize the following evaluation
criteria to rate each proposal. The criteria are of equal
importance.
CRITERIA
a. The scientific and technical significance of the
proposed technology and its appropriateness to
the research topic. Quality and soundness of the
-------
EPA Small Business Innovation Research Phase 1 FY01 Program Solicitation No. PR-NC-00-10483
research plan to establish the technical and com-
mercial feasibility of the concept.
b. The uniqueness/ingenuity of the proposed
concept or application as technological innova-
tion. Originality and innovativeness of the pro-
posed research toward meeting customer needs
and achieving commercialization of the technol-
ogy.
c. Potential demonstration of performance/cost
effectiveness and environmental benefits associ-
ated with the proposed research, including risk
reduction potential.
d. Qualifications of the principal/key investigator,
supporting staff and consultants. Time commit-
ment of principal/key investigator, adequacy of
equipment and facilities and proposed budget to
accomplish the proposed research. Adequacy and
quality of the Quality Assurance Narrative State-
ment.
e. Potential of the proposed concept for signifi-
cant commercial applications. Potential for the
commercialization plan to produce an innovative
product, process or device and getting it into com-
mercial production and sales. Potential market
and competition and other financial/business
indicators of commercialization potential and the
offerer's SBIR or other research commercialization
record.
All peer reviewers will be required to sign an agree-
ment to protect the confidentiality of all proposal material,
and to certify that no conflict of interest exists between the
reviewer and the offerer. A copy of both forms is available
upon request; however, the identity of the reviewer will not
be released.
2. EPA RELEVANCY REVIEW. The proposals
that received ratings of "Excellent" or "Very Good"
by the External Peer Review Panel, will be subject to
the relevancy review by EPA program managers using
the criteria to select which of the "Excellent" and
"Very good" proposals will be funded. Projects will
not be funded where EPA determines the proposed
research is already being supported by EPA or an-
other known source. The evaluation criteria "a"
through "d" are of equal value and will be used to
evaluate the applications in relation to program pri-
orities, balance and relevancy.
CRITERIA
a. How the proposed study fits into EPA's overall
research strategy or program within the Phase I
research topic.
b. Whether the technology has the potential for
significant environmental benefits and for
strengthening the scientific basis for risk assess-
ment/risk management in the Agency research
topic area.
c. How the proposed study meets Agency program
priorities and strengthens the overall program
balance.
d. Whether the results of the study will have
broad application or impact large segments of the
population.
B. RELEASE OF PROPOSAL
REVIEW INFORMATION
After final award decisions have been announced, the
technical evaluations of the offerer's proposal will be pro-
vided to the offerer. The identity of the reviewer shall not
be disclosed.
VI. CONSIDERATIONS
A. AWARDS
The Government anticipates award of approximately
40 firm-fixed-price contracts of up to $70,000 each includ-
ing profit. It is expected that these contracts will be
awarded on March 30, 2001. The period of performance
for the contracts should not normally exceed six (6)
months except where agency needs or research plans re-
quire otherwise. Exceptions should be minimized. The
primary consideration in selecting proposals for award will
be the technical merit of the proposal. Proposals shall be
evaluated in accordance with the Technical Evaluation
Criteria stated in V.A. above. Source selection will not be
based on a comparison of cost or price. However, cost or
price will be evaluated to determine whether the price,
including any proposed profit, is fair and reasonable and
whether the offerer understands the work and is capable of
performing the contract.
This current solicitation is for Phase I only, and the
Government is not obligated to fund any specific Phase I
proposal.
10
-------
EPA Small Business Innovation Research Phase 1 FY01 Program Solicitation No. PR-NC-00-104S3
Funds are not presently available for this contract.
The Government's obligation under this contract is contin-
gent upon the availability of appropriated funds from
which payment for contract purposes can be made. No
legal liability on the part of the Government for any pay-
ment may arise until funds are made available to the Con-
tracting Officer for this contract and until the Contractor
receives notice of such availability, to be confirmed in
writing by the Contracting Officer.
B. REPORTS
1. The Contractor shall furnish two (2) copies of a
monthly letter report stating progress made. One (1)
copy of the report shall be submitted to the Project
Officer with one (1) copy to the Contracting Officer.
The reports shall be submitted within 7 calendar days
after the end of the reporting period. Specific areas of
interest shall include progress made and difficulties
encountered during the reporting period, and a state-
ment of activities anticipated during the subsequent
reporting period. The report shall include any
changes in personnel associated with the project.
Also, the first month's report shall contain a work
plan and schedule of accomplishments for the subse-
quent months of the project. The Monthly Report
shall include, as an attachment, a copy of the
monthly voucher for the same period.
2. Two (2) copies of a comprehensive final report on
the Phase I project must be submitted to the Project
Officer by the completion date of the contract. The
Contracting Officer shall receive one copy. This final
report shall include a single-page project summary as
the first page, identifying the purpose of the research,
a brief description of the research carried out, the
research findings or results, and potential applica-
tions of the research in a final paragraph. The bal-
ance of the report should indicate in detail the re-
search objectives, research work carried out, results
obtained, and estimates of technical feasibility. A
copy of the detailed commercialization plan devel-
oped during Phase I should be included in the final
report. The final report will be required as part of the
Phase II proposal submitted in response to the Phase
II solicitation.
3. Two (2) hard copies (and one copy on a disk in
Word Perfect or ASCII format) of a publishable
(cleared for the general public) 2-3 page Executive
Summary of the final report for Phase I must be sub-
mitted to the Project Officer by the completion date
of the contract. This special report should be a true
summary of the report, including the purpose of the
project, work carried out and results. The summary
should stress innovativeness and potential commer-
cialization. The Executive Summary will be placed
on the EPA SBIR website, and therefore, it should
include the specific results the company is willing to
release to the public.
C. PAYMENT SCHEDULE
Phase I payments will be made as follows:
Eighteen percent (18%) of the total contract price
upon receipt and acceptance of a proper invoice with each
of the first five monthly reports. The remainder shall be
paid upon receipt and acceptance of the final report. Pur-
suant to the provisions of FAR 52.232-25, "Prompt Pay-
ment", payment will be rendered within thirty (30) days
after receipt of a proper invoice.
D. INNOVATIONS,
INVENTIONS AND
PATENTS
1. LIMITED RIGHTS INFORMATION AND DATA
a. Proprietary' Information
Information contained in unsuccessful proposals
will remain the property of the offerer. The Gov-
ernment may, however, retain copies of all propos-
als. Public release of information in any proposal
submitted will be subject to existing statutory and
regulatory requirements.
If proprietary information is provided by an off-
eror in a proposal which constitutes a trade secret,
proprietary commercial or financial information,
confidential personal information or data affect-
ing the national security, it will be treated in con-
fidence to the extent permitted by law, provided
this information is clearly marked by the offerer
with the term "confidential proprietary informa-
tion" and provided the following legend appears
on the title page of the proposal:
"For any purpose other than to evaluate the pro-
posal, this data shall not be disclosed outside the
Government and shall not be duplicated, used, or
disclosed in whole or in part, provided that if a
funding agreement is awarded to this offerer as a
result of or in connection with the submission of
this data, the Government shall have the right to
duplicate, use, or disclose the data to the extent
11
-------
EPA Small Business Innovation Research Phase 1 FY01 Program Solicitation No. PR-NC-00-10483
provided in the funding agreement. This restric-
tion does not limit the Government's right to use
information contained in the data if it is obtained
from another source without restriction. The data
subject to this restriction is contained in pages
of this proposal."
Any other legend may be unacceptable to the
Government and may constitute grounds for re-
moving the proposal from further consideration
and without assuming any liability for inadvertent
disclosure.
b. Alternative to Minimize Proprietary Informa-
tion
Offerers shall limit proprietary information to
only that absolutely essential to their proposal.
c. Rights in Data Developed Under SBIR Funding
Agreements: The Contract will contain a data
clause which will provide the following:
SBIR RIGHTS NOTICE (MAR 1994)
These SBIR data are furnished with SBIR rights
under Contract No. (and subcon-
tract if appropriate). For a period of
four (4) years after acceptance of all items to be
delivered under this contract, the Government
agrees to use these data for Government purposes
only, and they shall not be disclosed outside the
Government (including disclosure for procure-
ment purposes) during such period without per-
mission of the Contractor, except that, subject to
the foregoing use and disclosure prohibitions,
such data may be disclosed for use by support
Contractors. After the aforesaid 4-year period the
Government has a royalty-free license to use, and
to authorize others to use on its behalf, these data
for Government purposes, but is relieved of all
disclosure prohibitions and assumes no liability
for unauthorized use of these data by third parties.
This Notice shall be affixed to any reproductions
of these data, in whole or in part.
d. Copyrights
With prior written permission of the Contracting
Officer, the Awardee normally may copyright and
publish (consistent with appropriate national se-
curity considerations, if any) material developed
with EPA support. EPA receives a royalty-free
license for the Federal Government and requires
that each publication contain an appropriate ac-
knowledgment and disclaimer statement.
e. Patents
Small business concerns normally may retain the
principal worldwide patent rights to any invention
developed with Governmental support. The Gov-
ernment receives a royalty-free license for Federal
Government use, reserves the right to require the
patent holder to license others in certain circum-
stances, and requires that anyone exclusively
licensed to sell the invention in the United States
must normally manufacture it domestically. To
the extent authorized by 35 U.S.C. 205, the Gov-
ernment will not make public any information
disclosing a Government-supported invention for
a 4-year period to allow the Awardee a reasonable
time to pursue a patent.
E. COST SHARING
Cost sharing is permitted for proposals under this
Program Solicitation; however, cost sharing is not required
nor will it be an evaluation factor in consideration of your
proposal.
F. FEE OR PROFIT
Reasonable fee (estimated profit) will be considered
under this solicitation. For guidance purposes, the amount
of profit normally should not exceed 10% of total project
costs.
G. JOINT VENTURES OR
LIMITED PARTNERSHIPS
Joint ventures and limited partnerships are eligible
provided the entity created qualifies as a small business as
defined in this Program Solicitation.
H. RESEARCH AND
ANALYTICAL WORK
1. For Phase I, a minimum of two-thirds of the re-
search and/or analytical effort must be performed by
the proposing small business concern unless other-
wise approved in writing by the Contracting Officer.
2. For Phase II, a minimum of one-half of the re-
search and/or analytical effort must be performed by
the proposing small business concern unless other-
wise approved in writing by the Contracting Officer.
12
-------
EPA Small Business Innovation Research Phase 1 FY01 Program Solicitation No. PR-NC-00-10483
I. CONTRACTOR
COMMITMENTS
Upon award of a funding agreement, the Awardee
will be required to make certain legal commitments
through acceptance of numerous clauses in Phase I funding
agreements. The outline that follows is illustrative of the
types of clauses to which the Contractor would be commit-
ted. This list should not be understood to represent a com-
plete list of clauses to be included in Phase I funding
agreements, nor to be specific %vording of such clauses.
Copies of complete terms and conditions are available
upon request.
1. INSPECTION. Work performed under the con-
tract is subject to Government inspection and evalua-
tion at all times.
2. EXAMINATION OF RECORDS. The Comptrol-
ler General (or a duly authorized representative) shall
have the right to examine any directly pertinent
records of the awardee involving transactions related
to this contract.
3. DEFAULT. The Government may terminate the
contract if the Contractor fails to perform the work
contracted.
4. TERMINATION FOR CONVENIENCE. The
contract may be terminated at any time by the Gov-
ernment if it deems termination to be in its best inter-
est, in which case the Contractor will be compensated
for work performed and for reasonable termination
costs.
5. DISPUTES. Any dispute concerning the funding
agreement that cannot be resolved by agreement shall
be decided by the Contracting Officer with right of
appeal.
6. EQUAL OPPORTUNITY. The awardee will not
discriminate against any employee or applicant for
employment because of race, color, religion, sex, or
national origin.
7. AFFIRMATIVE ACTION FOR VETERANS.
The awardee will not discriminate against any em-
ployee or application for employment because he or
she is a disabled veteran or veteran of the Vietnam
era
8. AFFIRMATIVE ACTION FOR HANDI-
CAPPED. The awardee will not discriminate against
any employee or applicant for employment because
he or she is physically or mentally handicapped.
9. OFFICIALS NOT TO BENEFIT. No Govern-
ment official shall benefit personally from the con-
tract.
10. COVENANT AGAINST CONTINGENT
FEES. No person or agency has been employed to
solicit or secure the contract upon an understanding
for compensation except bonafide employees or com-
mercial agencies maintained by the Contractor for the
purpose of securing business.
11. GRATUITIES. The contract may be terminated
by the Government if any gratuities have been of-
fered to any representative of the Government to se-
cure the contract.
12. PATENT AND COPYRIGHT INFRINGE-
MENT. The Contractor shall report each notice or
claim of patent or copyright infringement based on
the performance of the contract.
13. AMERICAN MADE EQUIPMENT AND
PRODUCTS. When purchasing equipment or a prod-
uct under the SBIR funding agreement, purchase only
American-made items whenever possible.
J. ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION
1. The Program Solicitation is intended for informa-
tional purposes and reflects current planning. If there
is any inconsistency between the information con-
tained herein and the terms of any resulting SBIR
funding agreement, the terms of the funding agree-
ment are controlling.
2. Before award of an SBIR funding agreement, the
Government may request the offerer to submit certain
organizational, management, personnel, and financial
information to assure responsibility of the offerer.
3. The Government is not responsible for any monies
expended by the offerer before award of any funding
agreement.
4. This Program Solicitation is not an offer by the
Government and does not obligate the Government
to make any specific number of awards. Also, awards
under the SBIR program are contingent upon the
availability of funds.
13
-------
EPA Small Business Innovation Research Phase 1 FY01 Program Solicitation No. PR-NC-00-10483
5. The SBIR program is not a substitute for existing
unsolicited proposal mechanisms. Unsolicited pro-
posals shall not be accepted under the SBIR program
in either Phase I or Phase II.
6. If an award is made pursuant to a proposal submit-
ted under this Program Solicitation, the Contractor
will be required to certify that he or she has not previ-
ously been, nor is currently being, paid for essentially
equivalent work by any agency of the Federal Gov-
ernment.
7. Notwithstanding the relatively broad definition of
R/R&D in Section III, Definitions, hereof, awards
under this solicitation are limited to APPLIED forms
of research. Proposals that are surveys, including
market, state-of the-art and/or literature surveys,
which should have been performed by the offeror
prior to the preparation of the proposal, or the prepa-
ration of allied questionnaires and instruction manu-
als, shall not be accepted. If such proposals are sub-
mitted, they shall be considered as not in compliance
with the solicitation intent, and therefore, technically
unacceptable.
8. The requirement that the offeror designate a topic,
and only one topic, (see page 1, Section I above) is
also necessary. EPA receives hundreds of proposals
each year and has special teams of reviewers for re-
view of each research topic. In order to assure that
proposals are evaluated by the correct team, it is the
complete responsibility of the offeror to select and
identify the best topic.
9. Instructions to Offerers - Competitive Acquisition
(Feb 2000) FAR 52.215-1
(a) Definitions. As used in this provision—Discus-
sions are negotiations that occur after establish-
ment of the competitive range that may, at the
Contracting Officer's discretion, result in the off-
eror being allowed to revise its proposal.
In writing or written means any worded or num-
bered expression which can be read, reproduced,
and later communicated, and includes electroni-
cally transmitted and stored information.
Proposal modification is a change made to a pro-
posal before the solicitation's closing date and
time, or made in response to an amendment, or
made to correct a mistake at any time before
award.
Proposal revision is a change to a proposal made
after the solicitation closing date, at the request of
or as allowed by a Contracting Officer as the result
of negotiations.
Time, if stated as a number of days, is calculated
using calendar days, unless otherwise specified,
and will include Saturdays, Sundays, and legal
holidays. However, if the last day falls on a Satur-
day, Sunday, or legal holiday, then the period
shall include the next working day.
(b) Amendments to solicitations. If this solicita-
tion is amended, all terms and conditions that are
not amended remain unchanged. Offerers shall
acknowledge receipt of any amendment to this
solicitation by the date and time specified in the
amendment(s).
(c) Submission, modification, revision, and with-
drawal of proposals.
(1) Unless other methods (e.g., electronic com-
merce or facsimile) are permitted in the solicita-
tion, proposals and modifications to proposals
shall be submitted in paper media in sealed enve-
lopes or packages (i) addressed to the office speci-
fied in the solicitation, and (ii) showing the time
and date specified for receipt, the solicitation
number, and the name and address of the offerer.
Offerers using commercial carriers should ensure
that the proposal is marked on the outermost
wrapper with the information in paragraphs
(c)(l)(i) and (c)(l)(ii) of this provision.
(2) The first page of the proposal must show-
(i) The solicitation number;
(ii) The name, address, and telephone and
facsimile numbers of the offeror (and elec-
tronic address if available);
(iii) A statement specifying the extent of
agreement with all terms, conditions, and
provisions included in the solicitation and
agreement to furnish any or all items upon
which prices are offered at the price set oppo-
site each item;
(iv) Names, titles, and telephone and fac-
simile numbers (and electronic addresses if
available) of persons authorized to negotiate
14
-------
EPA Small Business Innovation Research Phase 1 FY01 Program Solicitation No. PR-NC-00-10483
on the offerer's behalf with the Government
in connection with this solicitation; and
(v) Name, title, and signature of person au-
thorized to sign the proposal. Proposals
signed by an agent shall be accompanied by
evidence of that agent's authority, unless that
evidence has been previously furnished to the
issuing office.
(3) Submission, modification, revision, and with-
drawal of proposals.
(i) Offerers are responsible for submitting
proposals, and any modifications or revisions
so as to reach the Government office desig-
nated in the solicitation by the time specified
in the solicitation. If no time is specified in
the solicitation, the time for receipt is 4:30
p.m., local time, for the designated Govern-
ment office on the date that proposal or revi-
sion is due.
(ii)(A) Any proposal, modification or revision
received at the Government office designated
in the solicitation after the exact time speci-
fied for receipt of offers is "late" and will not
be considered unless it is received before
award is made, the Contracting Officer deter-
mines that accepting the late offer would not
unduly delay the acquisition; and—
(1) If it was transmitted through an elec-
tronic commerce method authorized by the
solicitation, it was received at the initial
point of entry to the Government infra-
structure not later than 5:00 p.m. one work-
ing day prior to the date specified for re-
ceipt of proposals; or
(2) There is acceptable evidence to estab-
lish that it was received at the Government
installation designated for receipt of offers
and was under the Government's control
prior to the time set for receipt of offers; or
(3) It is the only proposal received.
(B) However, a late modification of an
otherwise successful proposal that makes
its terms more favorable to the Govern-
ment, will be considered at any time it is
received and may be accepted.
(iii) Acceptable evidence to establish the time
of receipt at the Government installation in-
cludes the time/date stamp of that installation
on the proposal wrapper, other documentary
evidence of receipt maintained by the instal-
lation, or oral testimony or statements of Gov-
ernment personnel.
(iv) If an emergency or unanticipated event
interrupts normal Government processes so
that proposals cannot be received at the office
designated for receipt of proposals by the
exact time specified in the solicitation, and
urgent Government requirements preclude
amendment of the solicitation, the time speci-
fied for receipt of proposals will be deemed to
be extended to the same time of day specified
in the solicitation on the first work day on
which normal Government processes resume.
(v) Proposals may be withdrawn by written
notice received at any time before award. Oral
proposals in response to oral solicitations
may be withdrawn orally. If the solicitation
authorizes facsimile proposals, proposals may
be withdrawn via facsimile received at any
time before award, subject to the conditions
specified in the provision at 52.215-5, Fac-
simile Proposals. Proposals may be withdrawn
in person by an offerer or an authorized repre-
sentative, if the identity of the person request-
ing withdrawal is established and the person
signs a receipt for the proposal before award.
(4) Unless otherwise specified in the solicitation,
the offerer may propose to provide any item or
combination of items.
(5) Offerers shall submit proposals in response to
this solicitation in English, unless otherwise per-
mitted by the solicitation, and in U.S. dollars,
unless the provision at FAR 52.225-17, Evalua-
tion of Foreign Currency Offers, is included in the
solicitation.
(6) Offerers may submit modifications to their
proposals at any time before the solicitation clos-
ing date and time, and may submit modifications
in response to an amendment, or to correct a mis-
take at any time before award.
(7) Offerers may submit revised proposals only if
requested or allowed by the Contracting Officer.
15
-------
EPA Small Business Innovation Research Phase I FY01 Program Solicitation No. PR-NC-00-10483
(8) Proposals may be withdrawn at any time be-
fore award. Withdrawals are effective upon receipt
of notice by the Contracting Officer.
(d) Offer expiration date. Proposals in response to
this solicitation will be valid for the number of
days specified on the solicitation cover sheet (un-
less a different period is proposed by the offerer).
(e) Restriction on disclosure and use of data.
Offerers that include in their proposals data that
they do not want disclosed to the public for any
purpose, or used by the Government except for
evaluation purposes, shall-
(1) Mark the title page with the following legend:
This proposal includes data that shall not be dis-
closed outside the Government and shall not be
duplicated, used, or disclosed—in whole or in
part—for any purpose other than to evaluate this
proposal. If, however, a contract is awarded to this
offerer as a result of—or in connection with—the
submission of this data, the Government shall
have the right to duplicate, use, or disclose the
data to the extent provided in the resulting con-
tract. This restriction does not limit the
Government's right to use information contained
in this data if it is obtained from another source
without restriction. The data subject to this re-
striction are contained in sheets [insert numbers or
other identification of sheets]; and
(2) Mark each sheet of data it wishes to restrict
with the following legend: Use or disclosure of
data contained on this sheet is subject to the re-
striction on the title page of this proposal.
(f) Contract award.
(1) The Government intends to award a contract
or contracts resulting from this solicitation to the
responsible offeror(s) whose proposal(s) represents
the best value after evaluation in accordance with
the factors and subfactors in the solicitation.
(2) The Government may reject any or all propos-
als if such action is in the Government's interest.
(3) The Government may waive informalities and
minor irregularities in proposals received.
(4) The Government intends to evaluate propos-
als and award a contract without discussions with
offerers (except clarifications as described in FAR
15.306(a)). Therefore, the offerer's initial pro-
posal should contain the offerer's best terms from
a cost or price and technical standpoint. The Gov-
ernment reserves the right to conduct discussions
if the Contracting Officer later determines them to
be necessary. If the Contracting Officer deter-
mines that the number of proposals that would
otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the
number at which an efficient competition can be
conducted, the Contracting Officer may limit the
number of proposals in the competitive range to
the greatest number that will permit an efficient
competition among the most highly rated propos-
als.
(5) The Government reserves the right to make an
award on any item for a quantity less than the
quantity offered, at the unit cost or prices offered,
unless the offerer specifies otherwise in the pro-
posal.
(6) The Government reserves the right to make
multiple awards if, after considering the addi-
tional administrative costs, it is in the
Government's best interest to do so.
(7) Exchanges with offerers after receipt of a pro-
posal do not constitute a rejection or counteroffer
by the Government.
(8) The Government may determine that a pro-
posal is unacceptable if the prices proposed are
materially unbalanced between line items or sub-
line items. Unbalanced pricing exists when, de-
spite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price
of one or more contract line items is significantly
overstated or understated as indicated by the ap-
plication of cost or price analysis techniques. A
proposal may be rejected if the Contracting Of-
ficer determines that the lack of balance poses an
unacceptable risk to the Government.
(9) If a cost realism analysis is performed, cost
realism may be considered by the source selection
authority in evaluating performance or schedule
risk.
(10) A written award or acceptance of proposal
mailed or otherwise furnished to the successful
offerer within the time specified in the proposal
shall result in a binding contract without further
action by either party.
16
-------
EPA Small Business Innovation Research Phase 1 FY01 Program Solicitation No. PR-NC-00-10483
(11) The Government may disclose the following
information in postaward debriefmgs to other
offerers:
(i) The overall evaluated cost or price and
technical rating of the successful offerer;
(ii) The overall ranking of all offerers,
when any ranking was developed by the
agency during source selection;
(iii) A summary of the rationale for award;
and
(iv) For acquisitions of commercial items,
the make and model of the item to be de-
livered by the successful offerer.
VH. SUBMISSION OF
PROPOSALS
A. Your proposal with an original and nine (9) copies
shall be received at one of the following addresses by
4:30 p.m., local time, on May 25, 2000.
U.S. MAIL ADDRESS:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Solicitation No. PR-NC-00-10483; SBIR Phase I
Closing Date: May 25, 2000 at 4:30 p.m.
Contracts Management Division (MD-33)
Attn: Marsha Johnson
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
HAND CARRIED/COURIER ADDRESS:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Receptionist, EPA Administration Building
Solicitation No. PR-NC-00-10483; SBIR Phase I
Closing Date: May 25, 2000 at 4:30 p.m.
Attn: Marsha Johnson/Contracts Mgmt. Division
79 T.W. Alexander Drive
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
IMPORTANT!!! Please note Section VI, Paragraph
J.9(c) concerning Late Proposals, Modifications of Pro-
posals and Withdrawal of Proposals.
Telegraphic, telecopied or facsimile proposals will
NOT be considered for award.
B. Please do not use special bindings or covers.
Staple the pages in the upper left corner of the cover
sheet of each proposal.
C. All copies of a proposal shall be sent in the same
package.
D. The proposal should be self-contained and written
with the care and thoughtfulness accorded papers for
publication.
SCIENTIFIC AND
TECHNICAL
INFORMATION
SOURCES
(See Appendix D)
IX. FY2001 SBIR PHASE I
RESEARCH TOPICS
Program Scope: The objective of this solicitation is
to increase the incentive and opportunity for small firms to
undertake cutting edge, high-risk, or long-term research
that has a high potential payoff if the research is successful.
Federal support of the front-end research on new ideas,
often the highest risk part of the innovation process, may
provide small businesses sufficient incentive to pursue
such research.
EPA's SBIR program does not fund basic research or
literature searches. It is recognized that any research and
development project starts out as a concept of the inventor.
Basic theoretic research studies and preliminary laboratory
testing of the concept are often needed to develop an idea.
Literature and other surveys and questionnaires are also
needed to rule out duplication and inappropriate research
study and process detail, finally leading to the process
design of a prototype apparatus or process that could be
tested to show the feasibility of the innovation. These
basic research activities and preliminary studies should be
completed before preparing an SBIR proposal.
Proposals only offering computer expert systems,
computer models, and computer aided design activities are
unacceptable. Computer activities may be helpful tools in
the early identification of pollution problems and possible
solutions, but they do not directly reduce pollution. They
17
-------
EPA Small Business Innovation Research Phase 1 FY01 Program Solicitation No. PR-NC-00-10483
cannot be used in lieu of applied laboratory research to
determine the feasibility of a pollution control process.
Also, proposals which only offer the performance of a de-
sign activity cannot be judged as it is impossible to guess
what sort of apparatus or process will result. Without a
straight-forward description of the process and/or apparatus
to be tested, there can be no determination of the scientific
and technical quality of the work plan. Proposals only
offering such design activities are unacceptable.
Program Topics: The proposed research must di-
rectly pertain to EPA's environmental mission and must be
responsive to EPA program interests included in the topic
descriptions of this solicitation. The research should be
the basis for technological innovation resulting in new
commercial products, processes, or services which benefit
the public and promote the growth of the small business.
The Agency's SBIR program is concerned with air and wa-
ter pollution control, solid and hazardous waste manage-
ment, nanomaterials and clean technology, environmental
monitoring and analytical technologies. In order to facili-
tate proposal reviews by external peer reviewers with spe-
cialized expertise and by EPA technical personnel with
focused program needs and priorities, offerers must desig-
nate a research topic, and only one topic, for their proposal.
It is the complete responsibility of the offerer to select and
identify the best topic for the proposal.
Technologies featuring conservation, reuse, recy-
cling, increased efficiencies, waste minimization and
nanotechnologies are of special interest. Processes involv-
ing anthropogenic radioactive materials or the application
of fertilizers are addressed by other Agencies and are not
included in this solicitation. Technologies that only in-
volve energy efficiency, where the pollution reduction
benefit is indirect reduction of power plant emissions, are
also addressed by other Agencies and are not included in
this solicitation. Specific focus areas of this solicitation
include:
A. NANOMATERIALS AND
CLEAN TECHNOLOGY
Research is needed to apply the principles of
nanotechnology to the areas of environmental monitoring
and pollution control. Nanotechnology is defined as the
creation of functional materials, devices and systems
through control of matter at the scale of 1 to 100 nanom-
eters, and the exploitation of novel properties and phenom-
ena at the same scale. Nanotechnology is emerging as a
field critical for enabling essential breakthroughs that may
have tremendous potential for affecting several environ-
mental areas. Moreover, nanotechnologies developed in
the next several years may well form the foundation of
significant commercial platforms. This nanomaterials
topic area is closely related to other topics in the solicita-
tion. Specific areas of interest include, but are not limited
to:
• Development of nanoporous filters for removal of
gaseous pollutants and particulates from
contaminated air streams.
• Development of nanofiltration membranes for
organic solvent recovery and similar applications.
• Development of nanoparticulate catalysts for
utilization in VOC treatment devices and related
applications.
• Development of microelectromechanical systems
(MEMS) and nanotechnology based devices for use
in environmental analytical and monitoring
instrument devices including sensors and nano
plumbing components.
• Development of hazardous metal free nano
laminated pigments and coatings.
• Development of technology for solvent free
production of nano size high performance ceramic
powders and similar materials.
• Development of coatings and high surface area
nano materials for environmental applications.
• Technology for the synthesis, assembly and
processing of nano structured materials and devices
for environmental applications.
Clean Technology, the second part of this topic, in-
cludes pollution prevention, waste minimization, green
chemistry and several industry-specific engineering inter-
ests. Pollution prevention includes source reduction prac-
tices which reduce the release of any hazardous or non-
hazardous substance, including fugitive emissions. This
topic includes equipment or technology modifications,
process or procedure modifications, reformulation or rede-
sign of products, and substitution of raw materials. While
improvements in housekeeping, maintenance, training or
inventory control may result in pollution prevention, these
activities are outside the scope of EPA's SBIR program.
Green chemistry involves reducing or eliminating the
use or generation of hazardous substances, including feed-
stocks, reagents, solvents, products, and byproducts. Green
chemistry involves the design, manufacture, and use of
18
-------
EPA Small Business Innovation Research Phase 1 FY01 Prosram Solicitation No. PR-.NC-00-104S3
chemical products and processes and includes chemical
synthesis, catalysis, detection, analysis, monitoring, sepa-
ration processes, and reaction conditions. Of particular
interest are green chemistry projects that reduce the genera-
tion of pollutants that contain persistent, bioaccumulative
and toxic (PBT) chemicals. EPA published a draft list of
PBT chemicals found in industrial hazardous waste in
November, 1998 (www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/
minimize/chemlist/index.htm). Projects that help achieve
EPA's national goal of reducing PBT chemicals in hazard-
ous waste by 50% by 2005 are of particular interest. Ex-
amples of pollution prevention and green chemistry areas
of interest include, but are not limited to:
• In-Process Recycling: Potential wastes or their
components can be reused within existing
operations.
• Novel cost-effective separation methods that result
in highly effective separation of useful material
from other components in a process stream.
• Development of new bulk materials and coatings
with long life that have reduced environmental
impact in manufacture or use.
• Improved sensor and multivariate control of
manufacturing equipment and systems to reduce
waste or emissions. Advancements in intelligent
controls.
• Changes in the composition of end products that
allow fundamental changes in the manufacturing
process or in the use of raw materials or that reduce
the relative environmental impact resulting from the
use and/or disposal of such end products. Of
particular interest are low cost, mercury-free
products for hospitals and medical applications,
including cleaning agents, fixatives and hospital-
specific products. More information is available at
the following website: http://www.uml.edu/centers/
LCSP/hospitals.
• Alternative Synthetic Pathways: The use of: (1)
catalysis/biocatalysts; (2) natural processes such as
photochemistry and biomimetic synthesis; (3)
alternate feedstocks that are more innocuous and
renewable (e.g., biomass, solar energy).
• Alternative Reaction Conditions: The use of
solvents which have a reduced impact on human
health and the environment. The use of solvents
with increased selectivity that reduce waste and
emissions are a priority.
• New, cost-competitive technologies that reclaim
and reuse foundry sand.
• New and non-toxic anti-bacterial cleaning products
that sanitize food processing equipment with
minimal use of water.
Another part of this topic includes engineering pro-
posals that focus on industry-specific process technology
and production equipment, including modernization,
modification, or better control of process equipment. Pro-
cess inputs, including changes in raw materials, either to
different materials (e.g., water instead of organic solvents)
or materials with different specifications (e.g., lower con-
taminant levels) are also of special interest. Priority sectors
include industries under EPA's Sector-Based, Environmen-
tal Action Plan (See the EPA website: http://www.epa.gov/
sectors) and the Design for the Environment/Small Busi-
ness Partnership, including metal finishing, printing, elec-
tronics, garment and fabric care, adhesives manufacturing
and safer chemicals and processes for automotive repair
facilities and automobile and appliance assembly plants.
Examples of industry priorities include, but are not limited
to:
• Metal Finishing: EPA is interested in cleaner
technologies that result in closed loop or low/no
emission techniques for hard chrome plating, use of
trivalent chromium and other metallic and non-
metallic coating techniques that can replace hard
chrome plating, and simple, inexpensive detectors
that can monitor the amount of chromium in the air-
especially in the presence of other pollutants (e.g.,
other heavy metals and fine paniculate matter).
Technologies that reduce the use of cadmium, lead
and other heavy metals that have low or no
economic recycling value are of interest. New low/
no emission chlorinated solvent vapor degreasing
systems and technologies that eliminate the need
for cyanide are of particular interest.
• Printing: EPA's Design for the Environment
Program (DfE) has partnered with four sectors of the
printing industry—screen printing reclamation
products, lithography press cleaning solvents
(blanket washes), flexography ink, and gravure
technologies. Additional cleaner technologies are
needed for these industry sectors so that printers
have a cleaner, safer, and more efficient way of
doing business.
• Electronics and Printed Wiring Boards: The DfE
Printed Wiring Board (PWB) Project is evaluating
lead-free alternatives to the standard hot air solder
19
-------
EPA Small Business Innovation Research Phase 1 FY01 Program Solicitation No. PR-NC-00-10483
leveling surface finishing process. Additional
cleaner technologies are needed to reduce the
number and amount of toxic chemicals used and the
amount of hazardous waste generated, and to reduce
water and energy use.
• Garment and Fabric Care: Dry cleaners are small
businesses that are dependent on solvent
technologies, including chlorinated and aliphatic
hydrocarbon solvents. Emerging and innovative
technologies include liquid carbon dioxide and
commercial wet cleaning. More innovation in this
small business sector is needed. A related area of
interest is commercial laundries. Partnerships in
commercial laundries are looking for alternatives to
toxic and persistent surfactants, chlorine bleaches,
and ecological undesirable builders.
• Adhesives: Development of low VOC adhesives,
caulks and sealers for automotive body assembly
operations and/or for the building construction
industry are needed.
B. CLEAN AIR
This topic includes new, innovative and cost effec-
tive technologies that prevent and control air pollution
from mobile sources and emissions of nitrogen oxides
(NOX), fine particles, volatile organic compounds (VOC), or
toxic air pollutants (TAP) from stationary sources. Technol-
ogy needs for mobile source emissions include fuel modifi-
cations that reduce emissions and technologies forparticu-
lates, hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, oxides of nitrogen
and toxic air pollutants (TAP). Areas of interest include,
but are not limited to:
• Technologies for improved evaporative emission
control systems in the areas of low leak/no leak
fittings and connectors and lines and hoses with
reduced or eliminated fuel seepage and permeation.
• Innovative and cost effective techniques for the
control of particulate emissions from diesel engines
including on-road engines used in passenger
vehicles and trucks, and non-road engines used in
farm, construction, industrial, lawn care and other
non-road applications.
• New control technologies for controlling NOx
emissions from both diesel-fueled and gasoline-
fueled engines of all types.
• Innovative technologies to control a method of
combustion in eneines known as Homogeneous
Charge Compression Ignition (HCCI). The HCCI
combustion method can result in low NOx emissions
and low particulate emissions at the same time and
this combustion method has been demonstrated
with a variety of fuels. The Agency is interested in
innovative ways to control this combustion type in
a practical and cost-effective manner. It is expected
that actual engine testing will be needed to
demonstrate the effectiveness of any control
approach.
• High pressure fuel pumps for direct injection (DI)
engines. Many clean fuels that could be used in
direct injection (DI) engines (e.g., dimethyl ether,
methanol, and ethanol) present serious challenges
for the design and operation of high pressure fuel
pumps due to the low lubricity and corrosive nature
of alternate fuels. New pumps should be able to
demonstrate durable performance with low lubricity
fuels and be of a practical manufacturable nature for
potential cost-effective implementation.
• Innovative and cost effective technologies to
control directly emitted submicron size particles,
secondary particles and organic compounds from
internal combustion and diesel engines. Innovative
NOx controls for mobile sources and systems for
reducing or eliminating mobile source cold start
emissions.
• Fuel sulfur removal: Sulfur-containing components
of fuels can produce sulfur oxides and other
pollutants when the fuel is burned. Sulfur
compounds in the fuel can interfere with the
effective operation of exhaust emission control
equipment that might otherwise be used on diesels
or gasoline-fueled vehicles. What is needed is a
novel cost-effective way to remove sulfur from fuels
used in mobile sources. Approaches with the
capability to control sulfur to less than 100 ppm
will receive the greatest interest.
• Novel, cost-effective ways to remove benzene, 1-3
butadiene, and other toxics from gasoline and
diesel fuel. Reducing or eliminating these fuel
elements would reduce the exposure to people
during the distribution and refueling process.
• Real-time particle sizer: As the interest grows in
understanding the size distribution of particulate
emissions below 2.5 microns, analytical instruments
have become available that can measure the size
distribution of particulates emitted from mobile
sources. What is needed is a particle sizer that
20
-------
EPA Small Business Innovation Research Phase 1 FY01 Program Solicitation No. PR-NC-00-10483
could operate in real time to measure particle size
distributions during actual engine and vehicle use.
Research is also needed on new, innovative and cost-
effective approaches that prevent or control emissions of
nitrogen oxides (NOj), fine particles, volatile organic com-
pounds (VOC), or toxic air pollutants (TAP) from stationary
sources. Systems that can be used to control combinations
of these pollutants are of particular interest. Areas of inter-
est include, but are not limited to:
• Innovative and cost-effective techniques to control
directly emitted submicron size particles, secondary
particles and organic compounds from stationary
sources. Sources of particular interest include
boilers, smelters and animal waste operations.
• Innovative NOx controls for stationary sources and
cost effective techniques to control emission
streams with low concentrations of TAPs. VOC and
TAP emission controls and prevention technologies
for area sources, such as gasoline marketing
operations, surface coating operations and solvent
usage related to consumer and commercial
products.
• New, cost-effective sulfur oxides control techniques
for the large number of smaller SO2 emitters targeted
for regulation by States as impacting short-term air
quality standards from their relatively high
concentration of SO, in stack gases.
• Advanced systems to capture gaseous contaminants
such as acid gases, dioxins, and volatile metals
simultaneously with SO2. Techniques that control
multiple pollutants, such as SO, and NOx, or SO2
and toxic metals, with one process step are of
special interest.
• Cost-effective techniques to control and/or remove
toxic air emissions, such as heavy metals,
nitroaromatics, and other extraordinarily active
mutagens in vent and flue gases from combustion
and/or industrial sources. Mercury from coal-fired
combustors is of special interest. Also included are
isocyanates from auto refinish spray painting and
brominated flame retardant dust from plastics
manufacturing operations.
• Innovative clay-based or other inexpensive
sorbents for selective removal of toxic and other air
pollutants from coal-fired power plant emissions.
Control of mercury is of special interest.
• Technologies that allow leaking valves to be safely
repaired on-line.
This topic also includes indoor environmental qual-
ity engineering research directed at: (1) determining the
nature of indoor air emissions and surfaces and how they
contribute to human exposure, and (2) developing cost-
effective tools, techniques, and technologies necessary to
prevent or reduce individual exposure to indoor environ-
mental pollutants. Areas of interest include, but are not
limited to, development of:
• Methods to prevent biocontaminant growth in the
indoor environment.
• Techniques to prevent/avoid dermal and/or
ingestive exposure to hazardous chemicals on
surfaces found in the indoor environment. Avoiding
exposure by children and infants is of special
interest.
• Air cleaners with improved ability to remove
volatile organic compounds and small particulates
from indoor air.
• Improved paniculate air Filters for residential and
commercial heating, ventilating, and air-
conditioning (HVAC) systems.
• Innovative, cost-effective techniques for
conditioning outdoor ventilation air.
• New consumer/commercial products, building
materials, or equipment that reduce the availability
of harmful contaminants within the indoor
environment. This could include reformulation or
redesign of products, materials, equipment or
substitution with lower-emitting raw materials. For
example, a consumer interior paint or household
cleaning product might be reformulated with lower-
emitting raw materials so that it emits less into the
indoor environment.
EPA is also interested in new technologies and alter-
natives for ozone depleting compounds. EPA is interested
in replacing substances that harm the stratospheric ozone
layer (such as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and halon fire
suppressants) with safer alternatives and technologies.
Research is needed to continue the process of finding non-
ozone depleting substances to replace CFCs and other
ozone depleting substances (ODS). Many commercial
sectors are affected by the phaseout of ODS, including the
refrigeration, air conditioning, fire extinguishing systems
21
-------
EPA Small Business Innovation Research Phase 1 FY01 Program Solicitation No. PR-NC-00-10483
and foams industries. Examples of areas where research is
needed include, but are not limited to:
• Development of systems to reduce the amount of
hydrogen fluoride generated during the use of
hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) fire-suppressants.
• Development of better and more efficient fire
suppressants and systems, including compounds
that meet weight restrictions, use available
substitutes in a more efficient manner, technologies
more efficient for putting out fires, delivery
enhancement, and optimizing the amount of agent
delivered.
• Development of cheaper, more reliable fire
detection methods and systems.
• Development of alternatives to adhesives in
industrial applications.
• Development of low-ozone depleting substances in
coatings and inking applications.
• Alternatives to methyl bromide, particularly non-
chemical alternatives such as steam sterilization
and solarization for soil fumigation or irradiation
and CCVheat treatment.
• Development of very-low-temperature (e.g., -50° C)
refrigerants or alternative technologies.
• Development of manufacturing techniques and/or
processes to increase the insulation value and
improve the dimensional stability of foam
manufactured with non-ozone depleting substances.
• Development of air-conditioning and refrigerant
technologies that reduce system leaks (e.g., using
hermetic systems instead of open systems for end
uses where leaks are significant, or by incorporating
self-sealing additives into air-conditioning
components which would minimize leaks).
• Development of systems that would enable use of
smaller refrigerant charge or appropriate use of
flammable refrigerants (e.g., the use of
hydrocarbons or ammonia with secondary loops).
Another priority for EPA is reducing Greenhouse Gas
(GHG) emissions. Gases of concern are methane, carbon
dioxide, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluoro-
carbons, and sulfur hexafloride. EPA is interested in pre-
vention and control technologies for GHGs where there are
multiple pollution reduction benefits for GHGs and other
pollutants such as toxic metals, mercury and hazardous air
pollutants. Technologies that only involve energy effi-
ciency, where the pollution reduction benefit is indirect
reduction of power plant emission, are addressed by other
agencies and are technically unacceptable. Of high interest
are areas for which little success has been achieved, for
which little is being done, or where a significant improve-
ment can be made over an existing or developing way to
reduce GHG and other pollutant emissions. Some of these
areas include, but are not limited to:
• New, environmentally safe chemicals (e.g., blends of
chemicals to reduce flammability of potential
refrigerants) and intelligent controls (e.g., fuzzy
logic and neural networks) to reduce GHG
emissions.
• Ways to reduce, detect, collect, and utilize waste
methane from various sources including animal
husbandry.
• Improved instruments and methods to measure GHG
emissions (e.g., from area sources such as rice
patties and urban transportation).
• New ways to improve control of aluminum
production to reduce perfluorocarbon emissions.
• Improved processes or process modules for utilizing
biomass or other renewable energy sources (e.g.,
better conversion efficiency of biomass to liquid
fuels for transportation to provide co-control of
environmental burdens).
• New insulation materials or processes to replace
uses of sulfur hexafluoride.
C. CLEAN WATER
The Clean Water topic includes technologies for
drinking water, municipal and industrial wastewater treat-
ment, stormwater management and rehabilitation of urban
infrastructure systems.
The Safe Drinking Water Act requires that public
water supplies be disinfected and that EPA set standards
and establish processes for treatment and distribution of
disinfected water to ensure that no significant risks to hu-
man health occur. The EPA Science Advisory Board has
ranked pollutants in drinking water as one of the highest
health risks meriting EPA's attention due to the exposure of
large populations to contaminants such as arsenic, lead,
MTBE, disinfectant by-products (DBPs), and disease-caus-
-------
EPA Small Business Innovation Research Phase 1 FY01 Program Solicitation No. PR-NC-00-10483
ing organisms. Disinfectants are used by virtually all sur-
face water systems in the U.S. and many systems that rely
on ground water. Chlorine has been the most widely used
and most cost effective disinfectant. However, disinfection
treatments can produce a wide variety of by-products,
many of which have been shown to cause cancer and other
toxic effects. There is also concern that water quality can
deteriorate dramatically during distribution unless systems
are properly designed and operated. Innovation is needed
to upgrade existing techniques as well as to develop new
approaches to address these problems. Areas of interest
include, but are not limited to:
• New, innovative treatment methods or techniques
that improve performance of existing drinking
water treatment plants for removal of methyl tertiary
butyl ether (MTBE) and other oxygenates and by-
products associated with petroleum product
releases.
• Alternatives to chlorine disinfection for removing
pathogenic microorganisms, including innovative
applications of ultraviolet radiation and processes
that improve overall effectiveness while using
reduced amounts of disinfectant.
• Development of innovative unit processes,
particularly for small systems, for removal of
organic, inorganic and radionuclide contaminants
(such as perchlorate, aluminum, pesticides, arsenic,
nitrate, radium, etc.), particulates, and pathogens
(e.g., cyst-like organisms [Cryptosporidium] and
emerging pathogens like caliciviruses,
microsporidia, echoviruses, coxsackieviruses,
adenoviruses, and others on the Drinking Water
Contaminant Candidate List). More information is
available from the following website:
(http://www.epa.gov/OGWDW/ccl/
cclfs.htm#tablel).
• Development of efficient, cost-effective treatment
processes for removing disinfection by-product
precursors and innovative methods that minimize
their formation.
• Controls for drinking water contamination between
the treatment plant and the user. EPA is concerned
about potential chemical leaching (copper and
lead) from distribution system materials and
surfaces and biological regrowth in the distribution
system.
• Implementation of centrally-managed Point-of-Use
drinking water control methods, especially for
control of arsenic.
• New methods to manage residuals from drinking
water treatment, including coagulant recovery and
beneficial reuses. Membrane brines and treatment
of backwash are a concern. Reuse of regenerant
brines and their ultimate disposal is also a concern.
• Small, effective, inexpensive water purification
devices are needed for home use. Recent research
indicates that most ground water and surface water
in the U.S. contains one or more pesticide related
compounds. Current water treatment technology
may not remove these compounds. In addition, a
large percentage of the U.S. population receives
their drinking water from small sources or private
wells that are not regulated under the Safe Drinking
Water Act. Home water purification capable of
removing polar and non polar pesticides are needed
to ensure that safe drinking water is available.
Research is needed to improve existing municipal
wastewater treatment processes and treatment and manage-
ment of septage and sewage sludge (biosolids). Existing
treatment and management systems often fail to perform as
intended due to unforeseen factors not considered in the
plant design, usually related to upsets in the process itself
or inefficiencies in ancillary treatment and control pro-
cesses. Specific areas of interest include, but are not lim-
ited to:
• Process technologies and cost-effective
modifications to enhance reliability of achieving
secondary and reuse quality effluent from
municipal treatment facilities with design flows less
than 5 million gallons per day.
• New, cost-effective technologies that improve
treatment efficiency at municipal wastewater
treatment facilities with design flows less than
50,000 gallons per day.
• Cost-effective alternatives to the chlorination of
outfalls from municipal wastewater treatment
plants, emphasizing the identity and characteristics
of by-products associated with the alternative
treatments.
• Innovative, cost effective techniques for removing
phosphorus and nitrogen nutrients from municipal
wastewater, particularly in small (<10,000
population) or decentralized systems.
23
-------
EPA Small Business Innovation Research Phase 1 FY01 Program Solicitation No. PR-NC-00-10483
• Nontoxic anti-biofoulers are needed for exotic
biological species such as the zebra mussel.
Development of nontoxic methods to control such
species would be a major contributor to the
protection of the Great Lakes and many inland
waterways.
• Innovative methods to manage and treat septage.
• New treatment techniques for unsewered residential
and commercial wastewaters to permit onsite reuse,
thus reducing the demand for larger centralized
sewage systems.
• Process concepts and modifications to enhance
reliability of achieving Class A biosolids quality
and biosolids vector attraction requirements of 40
CFR Part 503. Methods to control pathogenic
bacteria, enteric viruses and viable helminth ova to
below analytical detection levels.
• Process concepts and modifications to create or
enhance the use of natural systems (e.g., constructed
wetlands, land treatment), especially for use with
small flows.
• Cost effective treatment technologies for removal of
pesticides from discharges to surface waters.
Research is needed to address environmental and
public health problems associated with industrial sources
including mining and animal feeding operations. Innova-
tive methods are needed to improve existing industrial
wastewater treatment processes which often fail to perform
as intended due to unforeseen factors not considered in the
plant design, usually related to upsets or inefficiencies in
the treatment processes. Mercury contaminated surface
waters and ground waters and technologies that remove oil
and other contaminants from surface waters are of special
interest. Areas of interest include, but are not limited to:
• Technologies to contain and treat uncontrolled air
and unsewered wastewater from animal waste from
large animal husbandry operations including pig,
chicken, and turkey farms. Development of
methods that complement or replace existing
lagoon and field spraying operations that release
ammonia to the atmosphere, saturate and
contaminate ground water and overflow into
waterways during periods of heavy rainfall.
• Technologies that minimize adverse environmental
impacts associated with cooling water intake
structures that direct water into a facility to the first
intake pump(s). The primary concern is the
impingement and entrainment offish and other
aquatic organisms in the facility's intake structure.
Impingement refers to the trapping of fish and other
aquatic life against cooling water intake screens.
Entrainment occurs when aquatic organisms, eggs
and larvae are sucked into the cooling system,
through the heat exchanger and then are pumped
back out. New and cost-effective technologies
should focus on the location, design, construction
and capacity of the cooling water intake structure to
minimize adverse environmental impacts.
• Process concepts and modifications to enhance
reliability of achieving high efficiencies for
industrial wastewater treatment systems from
facilities with design flows less than 50,000 gallons
per day.
• Economical processes for treating drainage from
abandoned factories, coal mines, etc., including
low-cost treatment of drainage and coal mine spoils.
• Innovative techniques and technologies for
management of runoff from mine wastes (i.e.,
overburden, leachate and solids from tailings).
• Low cost processes for controlling wastewater
discharges containing volatile or toxic organic
pollutants or pesticides.
• Innovative technologies are needed to monitor and
treat bilge/ballast water within vessels, especially
important for residual chemicals and oily wastes
entering the Great Lakes, Houston Ship Channel,
Baltimore Harbor, etc.
• Cost-effective alternatives for treating and
recycling animal manure, including use of these
organic residues as a source for methane-rich fuel
gas for combustion and/or protein or fiber as
feedstocks for construction materials and other
specialized products.
• Mercury contaminated surface water and ground
water is of special interest. Technologies are
needed to remove mercury in its various forms
including methylmercury. Also needed are
innovative technologies and robust extractants (i.e.,
cross-linked polystyrene polymers, selective ion-
exchange resins, special membranes) that
selectively remove mercury even in the presence of
competing metal ions (e.g., Hg(II), Cd).
24
-------
EPA Small Business Innovation Research Phase 1 FY01 Program Solicitation No. PR-NC-00-10483
• Technologies are needed to remove oil, fuels and
other contaminants from surface waters. Special
attention is needed to remove dilute wastes,
especially in remote areas.
Research is also needed to improve the treatment
and control of urban storm water runoff from transporta-
tion corridors carrying trash, sediment, oil and grease,
nutrients, metals, and petroleum hydrocarbons. Many
densely urbanized areas are not suitable for the applica-
tion of land-intensive storm water control measures such
as wet ponds, vegetated swales, and infiltration trenches.
Alternative technologies fall into a number of categories,
including catchment inlet traps or inserts, oil/grease and
debris separators, sedimentation chambers, filtration cham-
bers, and detention/exfiltration systems. The development
of innovative technologies to treat urban runoff from roads,
bridges, and other impervious surfaces will improve the
quality of storm water discharges. Areas of needed research
and interest include, but are not limited to:
• Development of cost-effective technologies for
preventing toxic substances and pollutants from
entering storm or combined sewer/drainage systems.
• Development of monitoring technologies and
equipment to measure the characteristics and
impacts of wet weather flows (WVVF), including
pathogenicity.
• Development of high-rate and high-efficiency
WWF treatment technologies suitable for
retrofitting existing wastewater treatment plants as
well as for new installations.
Rehabilitation of urban infrastructure systems is also
a priority. The aging condition of our cities and deteriora-
tion of infrastructure includes water distribution and sewer-
age systems. This provides an important research area ad-
dressing how to repair and maintain this infrastructure.
The costs are staggering; the national investment in sewers
alone approaches SI.8 trillion. Excessive flow to the sewer
system from infiltration and inflow (I/I) robs the capacity of
the sewer system and negatively affects proper operation of
the entire sewerage system. I/I has caused surcharging of
sewers, wastewater treatment plants and pumping stations.
Building connections to the street sewers or laterals can
contribute as much as 70 - 80% of the infiltration load.
With current technology, building connection rehabilita-
tion may not be economically feasible because of the sheer
number of connections. Less expensive technologies other
than acoustic approaches are needed to detect leaks, fore-
cast structural failures, and repair/rehabilitate sewers and
other utility pipelines such as municipal pressurized water
distribution and possibly heat distribution systems. Areas
of needed research and interest include, but are not limited
to:
• New sewer materials and construction/maintenance
techniques and new technologies to repair existing
sewer infrastructure at an acceptable cost.
• New technologies to construct, maintain, and repair
new and existing urban utility/steam and water
distribution systems infrastructure at an acceptable
cost.
• New pipe materials, relining techniques and
innovative materials for water distribution systems.
D. WASTE MANAGEMENT
AND SITE REMEDIATION
This topic includes municipal solid waste recycling,
management of hazardous and non-hazardous solid waste
and sediments, and remediation of contaminated sites,
soils, sediments and ground water.
The nation's municipal solid waste (MSW) recycling
infrastructure includes more than 12,000 drop-off sites and
some 9,000 curbside programs that collect recyclable mate-
rials. Over 27% of MSW was recycled in 1996 and more
than 57 million tons of recyclable materials re-entered
manufacturing processes to make new products and pack-
aging. MSW recycling is a complex and growing industry
ripe for innovation both in the collection of recyclable
materials and in the processing of those materials into us-
able goods. Areas of interest for innovation include, but
are not limited to:
• Storage, collection, and transport of recyclables
from multi-family and single family residences,
including high-rises, and from commercial
establishments such as stores, restaurants,
construction sites, etc.
• Processes to separate recyclables (e.g., various
plastic resins) and to remove contaminants (e.g.,
adhesives not soluble in water) from recyclable
materials.
• On-site or en route processing of recyclables (e.g.,
bottle crushing at bars or restaurants, paper
processing at offices or print shops, plastics
shredding on collection trucks).
25
-------
EPA Small Business Innovation Research Phase 1 FY01 Program Solicitation No. PR-NC-00-10483
• Technologies for improving quality control for
recyclable materials or to identify the extent to
which contaminants are present.
• Alternative or new uses and products for recyclable
materials (e.g., using recycled glass bottles to
produce something other than glass bottles, using
recycled newspaper to produce something other
than newsprint, using plastic bottles to produce
something other than bottles).
• Innovative recycling of organics (e.g., using the
compost process to treat manures, composting of
restaurant wastes, using compost for
bioremediation).
• Re-designing products to enhance their
recyclability (e.g., recycling-friendly adhesives,
bottle coatings to substitute for colored glass).
Innovative approaches are needed for hazardous and
non-hazardous wastes, including incineration and other
treatment, and disposal in conventional or special landfills.
Contaminated sediments now appear to be the main source
of toxic contaminants in many bays, lakes, and rivers. Ar-
eas of interest include, but are not limited to:
• Improved treatment and disposal of solid and/or
liquid wastes or sediments, including
detoxification, solidification, chemical treatment,
neutralization, or otherwise fixing organic waste
prior to disposal in landfills. New methods are also
needed for cost-effective treatment and removal of
PCBs from contaminated sediments.
• Multiple recover)' and recycling of different plastic
materials in automobile salvage operations.
• Innovative methods for the operation and control of
high temperature waste combustion incinerators
that lead to reduced contaminant release through
air, water, or residual ash streams. Of special interest
is mercury, one of the worst emission problems for
waste incinerators. The current technology for
capturing mercury is injection of sorbents/reactants
into the flue which results in the capture of mercury
along with fly ash in electrostatic precipitators or
baghouses. This creates a problem with disposal of
the mercury-contaminated fly ash or scrubber
solution. Improved technologies are needed to
retrofit incinerators for optimum capture of the
mercury and minimization of mercury-
contaminated waste by-products.
• Advanced hazardous constituent destruction
technologies using cost-effective thermal, chemical
and biological detoxification methods.
• Improved methods that control odor and air
emissions from municipal landfills.
• Advanced physical separation techniques that make
wastes easier to treat or destroy by moving the
metal/organic constituents from one medium to
another.
• Recovery processes which may enable the
economic recovery of valuable components from
solid waste that may then be sold and/or recycled
off site.
• Innovative new uses for waste materials from
industrial sources, particularly for materials of
which large amounts are not being recycled
presently, to reduce landfill and disposal costs.
• Innovative ways of preventing or treating/
detoxifying wastes prior to land disposal,
particularly those containing highly persistent,
bioaccumulative and toxic constituents (e.g.,
improved means of leaching toxic constituents from
wastes in a landfill environment to render the wastes
innocuous within the period of operation and post-
closure care). Of particular interest are
immobilization technologies suitable for mercury-
bearing wastes. More information on the Agency's
strategy for "PBT Chemicals" is available at the
following website: http://www.epa.gov/pbt.
• An improved technique for the rapid removal of the
paint from a variety of architectural surfaces. The
system should soften and/or loosen the paint film
and physically strip it from the surface to comply
with the Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
cleanliness standards. The method should
minimize the generation of small dust or fume
particles while capturing the paint film as it is
removed. It should be four or five times faster than
existing techniques and avoid the use of toxic and/
or hazardous chemicals, especially volatile organic
compounds. The system must produce a surface
that can be repainted or include an inexpensive
refmishing step to permit refinishing.
This topic also includes remediation of organically
contaminated soil, sediments and ground water and treat-
ment or removal of heavy metals at contaminated sites.
Certain locations within the United States have become
26
-------
EPA Small Business Innovation Research Phase 1 FY01 Program Solicitation No. PR-NC-00-I0483
contaminated with heavy metals and hazardous and toxic
organic substances. Contaminants have permeated and
adsorbed onto soils, diffused to interstitial saturated zones,
dissolved into ground waters and migrated to subsurface
aquifers. In many instances, contaminants have exhibited
physical and chemical properties that make them difficult
to remove from the environment. Contaminants may exist
in subsurface deposits as immobile gums or sludges diffi-
cult to access. They may be resistant to normal subsurface
chemical and biological degradation processes. They may
strongly adsorb on soil structures and be only slightly
soluble in aqueous concentrations.
Proposals are solicited that will result in the develop-
ment of innovative, cost-effective methods for the in-situ
or ex-situ treatment or control of heavy metals and hazard-
ous organic wastes. Also needed are in-situ technologies
that mobilize contaminants to make them more amenable
to subsequent ex-situ or in-situ treatment or extraction.
Biological techniques that utilize genetically engineered
microorganisms can be included in this solicitation, but
will require the proposer to provide any special clearances
needed for such projects. Clearance information on geneti-
cally engineered bioremediation microorganism use can be
obtained from EPA's Office of Pollution Prevention and
Toxics (contact Jim Alwood at (202) 260-1857). Informa-
tion on the EPA biotechnology program is available at the
following website: http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/biotech/.
Innovative and cost effective technologies are
needed in areas including, but not limited to:
• Innovative ex-situ and in-situ treatment
technologies for mercury-contaminated soil,
sediments and ground water are of special interest.
Mercury exists as organo-mercury complexes,
phenyl mercury, methyl mercury and mixed
mercury wastes. Cost effective, innovative
technologies are needed to treat, remove, or
immobilize these forms of mercury.
• Cost effective techniques and technologies are
needed to clean up ground water and sites
contaminated by oxygenates that are currently used
or are likely to be used in reformulated gasoline and
oxygenated winter fuels. Improved leak detection
methods and better site characterization tools are
also needed. These substances include methyl
tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) and other fuel
oxygenates (e.g., ethers, alcohols and alkylates).
Fuel oxygenates are used in gasoline in numerous
states for CO and ozone precursor reduction and
may enter the environment through leaking fuel
storage tanks, spillage and emissions from
passenger vehicles and watercraft. Detection and
characterization proposals should consider the
problem that oxygenates like MTBE do not have
the same plume profile as monoaromatic
hydrocarbons (benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and
the three isomers of xylene [BTEX]). Treatment
technology proposals should consider cost
effectiveness and recognize that leaks often occur
in densely urban areas.
• Chemical detoxification, such as neutralization and
dehalogenation or electrochemical decomposition.
• Physical methods for subsurface mixing to enhance
mobilization and mass transfer.
• Biotreatment methods in the saturated and
unsaturated zone.
• Approaches for detecting, degrading and removing
dense non-aqueous phase liquids (DNAPL) from
ground water. DNAPLs are usually highly
concentrated, small pockets or strands of semi-pure
VOCs. Special needs include better methods for
locating DNAPL pockets and cost-effective in-situ
destruction technologies.
• Improvement in nutrient and chemical reagent
delivery systems for biological or chemical
methods.
• Innovative physical separation, thermal processing
(i.e., in-situ or high vacuum thermal desorption),
electrokinetics and hydrometallurgical processing
technologies are needed to separate and recover
mercury. Ex-situ/in-situ remediation of mercury in
ground water or surface water including low cost
ion exchange resins, polymers, ligands or ceramic
media are of interest to EPA.
• Physical methods for subsurface mixing to enhance
mobilization and mass transfer of heavy metals.
• Improved methods for treatment of heavy metals by
reduction of their bioavailability in soils.
•Improvement in nutrient and chemical reagent
deliver)' systems for biological or chemical
methods for heavy metals removal.
• Improvement in heavy metal reaction product re-
covery and separation systems that enhance the com-
mercial value of these products.
27
-------
EPA Small Business Innovation Research Phase 1 FY01 Program Solicitation No. PR-NC-00-10483
E. MONITORING AND
MEASUREMENT
TECHNOLOGIES
New approaches are needed to solve environmental
monitoring and measurement problems. EPA is interested
in both remote and in-situ measurements approaches. EPA
is also interested in the adaptation or extension of existing
techniques from other, non-environmental fields that can
provide significant improvements in current environmental
measurements. Specific areas of interest include, but are
not limited to:
• Portable measurement technologies that can be used
in the field to eliminate packaging and shipping
samples to distant laboratories, and yield real time
information at a lower cost. Such technologies need
to be rugged, sensitive, and suitable for the wide
variety of samples that are commonly analyzed,
including industrial wastes, incinerator stack
emissions, industrial waste waters, and drinking
water (source water assessment and for use in the
distribution system). Ability to measure multiple
pollutants simultaneously would be a plus factor.
Rapid field tests are also needed by personnel
responding to crisis situations such as spills and
accidents.
• Improved measurement of microbial pathogens in
drinking water systems is of special interest.
Improved methods for Cryptosporidium are a
priority. Better methods are also needed for
measuring other cyst-like organisms and emerging
pathogens like caliciviruses, microsporidia,
echoviruses, coxsackieviruses, adenoviruses, and
others on the Drinking Water Contaminant
Candidate List. Inaccurate and highly variable
methods contribute to uncertainty of the extent of
health risks from exposure to drinking water
containing these pathogens including the viability
of cysts, oocysts and viruses found in drinking
water systems. Research is needed to develop
practical, low cost, accurate, and specific methods
to identify and quantify viable pathogens in raw
and finished drinking water systems.
• Research is needed to develop sensitive, accurate
and specific rapid screening technologies and
methods to detect algal neurotoxins and cytotoxins
in source water and drinking water. The analytical
techniques should be appropriate for use in
measuring algal toxin occurrence at or shortly after
the time of sample collection.
• On-line, in-situ monitors for drinking water,
including source water monitoring and protection,
treatment and distribution system monitoring.
• Improved measurement of disinfection by-products
(e.g., for ozonation: bromate, aldehydes; for
chlorination: chloropicrin, haloacetonitriles; for
chloramination: organic chloramines, cyanogen
chloride). Innovative approaches for disinfectants
(in particular ozone) and precursors are needed, as
well as portable measurement technologies and
rapid field test kits.
• Measurement of physical, chemical, and biological
water quality parameters. Instream water
monitoring devices that economically record
physical parameters and specific chemicals in situ
and send information in real time to receiving
stations.
• Continuous monitors of organic and inorganic
toxicants in municipal and industrial waste water
and their toxic effects on receiving waters.
Major improvements in process control, compliance
monitoring, and environmental decision making could be
made if more accurate, less costly, more rugged techniques
were available, including remote sensing devices, that
would yield continuous data on pollutant concentrations
in environmental media. Examples of situations where
advances are needed include, but are not limited to:
• Continuous monitors of toxic metals (particularly
mercury) and/or organic compound emissions from
high temperature, complex matrix sources such as
incinerators, fossil fuel based power plants, cement
kilns, and smelters.
• Continuous monitors of release of volatile
compounds from complex point sources or area
sources such as tanks, pipes, valves, landfills, and
contaminated soils under ambient conditions.
• New on-line measurement techniques for
continuous monitoring and process control of metal
or trace organic air pollution emissions.
Instruments to measure air quality from nonpoint
sources such as pesticide drift and construction-
related dust.
• Alternative monitors that provide similar data to
expensive monitoring wells of ground water
resources, including refinements of CPTY
hydropunch techniques.
28
-------
EPA Small Business Innovation Research Phase 1 FY01 Program Solicitation No. PR-NC-00-I0483
• Development of a portable, integrated system that
can capture and measure in real time large leaks
from refineries and other oil and gas or chemical
process equipment flanges, valves, and pump seals.
• Technologies that detect leaks of organic and
inorganic chemicals from the perimeter of the
process unit. Technologies with the ability to
detect leaks of a variety of chemicals, at least as
sensitive as the current Method 21, the ability to
operate from the perimeter of a chemical process
unit, and technologies with a sufficient resolution
to identify the specific component that is leaking.
• Cost-effective monitoring technologies which are
capable of monitoring multiple toxic air pollutants
(TAP), ambient monitoring techniques for TAP and
technologies that can be used for compliance
monitoring purposes.
• Measurement of the size distribution and dry mass
of inhalable paniculate matter (PM 2.5 and PM 10),
including semi-volatile organic toxicants and
ammonium nitrate in air.
• Mass measurements of particle-bound water in
airborne inhalable particulate matter (PM 2.5 and
PM 10).
• Analytical monitors for hazardous air pollutant
emissions from curing coatings based on the resin
and hardener chemical properties, including the
analytical procedures for their measurement.
1 Cost-effective continuous emission monitoring
system that can be installed on industrial process
emissions vents and stacks to measure continuously
concentrations of heavy metals (e.g., mercury) or
organic hazardous air pollutant compounds.
Devices must be rugged, sensitive, and yield real-
time data for multiple or single pollutants.
• Cost-effective technology for the measurement of
particulate emissions concentrations in industrial
process and combustion stack or vent exhaust gases
on a continuous basis.
• Technology for measuring opacity of emissions
from combustion and other industrial processes at
levels less than 10 percent opacity. Technology
will include development of calibration standards
and techniques for opacities down to zero percent
and data quality criteria suitable for operating
continuous opacity monitoring systems.
• Infrared absorption spectra for use in calibrating
FTIR devices for measurements of concentrations of
hazardous air pollutants from combustion and
industrial processes.
1 Technology for collecting and assuring
representative sampling and loss minimization for
particulate air toxics emissions from combustion
and industrial process emissions stacks and vents.
1 Technology for determining the species
composition of particulate matter samples from
combustion and industrial process emissions stacks
or vents.
1 Technology transfer from ambient monitoring to
continuous monitoring of combustion or industrial
process stack or vent emissions for criteria or
hazardous air pollutants.
1 Innovative and cost-effective measurement
technologies to characterize activity patterns and
ways in which mobile sources are used, such as
specialized urban operations such as truck
terminals, delivery truck terminal patterns, and
weekend traffic patterns for all road vehicle types
by time of day. For trucks, coupling the above data
with roadway grade and truck loaded vehicle
weight are also of interest. For non-road mobile
sources such as those used in construction,
industrial, and lawn care applications, technologies
are needed for measuring activity patterns with high
geographical resolution.
Cost-effective, rapid, broadly inclusive
measurement techniques for emissions from in-use
vehicles and engines. In order to assess the
effectiveness of the controls used on mobile
sources, measurement technologies are needed that
can measure emissions from engines and vehicles in
use. Measurement approaches fall into two broad
classes: 1) for the measurement of emissions that
would permit recall or other enforcement actions
and 2) for the measurement of emissions that would
allow gross emitters to be identified for necessary
corrective action. Instrumentation which could be
temporarily attached to a vehicle and
instrumentation which can be operated remotely
from the vehicle are both of interest.
Instrumentation is needed that will measure
hydrocarbons, CO, NOx, particulates, and smoke for
both gasoline-fueled and diesel-fueled vehicles and
engines, including those engines and vehicles used
for over-the-road cars and trucks and those used for
29
-------
EPA Small Business Innovation Research Phase 1 FYOI Program Solicitation No. PR-NC-00-I0483
construction equipment, lawn and garden
equipment, and other small engines.
• Nitrous oxide instruments. In addition to carbon
dioxide (CO,) and methane (CH4), nitrous oxide
(N,0) is a greenhouse gas which is emitted from
mobile sources and which may be a concern. The
Agency already has analytical capability to
measure CO, and CH_, using acceptable laboratory
methods. What is needed is an instrument that can
measure N,O that would be more cost-effective than
the current FTIR method.
• Source apportionment for particulates. When
samples are taken of the particulate material in the
atmosphere, it is of great interest to the Agency to
know which sources contributed to the overall
particulate material measurements. To the extent
that the Agency's ability to apportion the overall
result to the sources that caused it improves then
control strategies can be refined to be more cost
effective. What is needed is a source apportionment
methodology (including instrumentation) that is
rapid, cost-effective, and unambiguous. It would be
desirable to be able to determine what percent of
the ambient particulate came from mobile sources
and of that how much came from diesel-fueled
vehicles and how much came from gasoline-fueled
vehicles. Further apportionment within the mobile
source fraction would also be desirable. To the
extent that the methodology and instrumentation
can also be applied to source apportionment for
stationary sources of emissions, the Agency's
interest would, of course, increase.
• Development of a small, portable analytical
instrument that can be transferred between mobile
emissions sources, such as construction equipment
or lawn and garden equipment engines during their
actual use to measure CO, CO, NO, and
hydrocarbons.
• Development of a small, portable analytical
instrument and procedures for measuring fine
particulate matter less than or equal to 2.5 microns
aerodynamic diameter from mobile emission
sources, such as construction equipment or lawn
and garden equipment engines.
This topic also includes priority problems associated
with developing new systems for monitoring hazardous
waste sites, technologies and alternatives foro/.one deplet-
ing compounds, prevention and control of greenhouse gas
emissions and indoor air pollution and reduction of envi-
ronmental and human health risks from pesticide use.
EPA's Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
(OSWER) is interested in technological advances in chemi-
cal constituent identification, quantification and geophysi-
cal analysis that will improve capabilities to characterize
hazardous waste sites, monitor remedial activities and pro-
vide long term monitoring for closed sites. OSWER's
Monitoring and Measurement Technologies for the 21st
Century or 21M2 initiative will identify and support prom-
ising measurement and monitoring technologies in re-
sponse to waste management and site cleanup program
needs. EPA has identified areas where significant technol-
ogy needs or gaps exist and, thus, require research to help
address these needs. EPA is seeking research proposals for
in-situ sensors for monitoring ground water contamination
and treatment system performance and technologies in-
cluding, but not limited to:
• As more and more pump-and-treat (and other water
treatment) systems enter the operations and
monitoring phase of implementation, techniques
which either effectively monitor the behavior of the
contamination plume or the performance features of
the system are essential. In-situ sensor technologies
or techniques are needed which either improve the
capacity to monitor the presence and concentration
of contaminants, particularly chlorinated solvents,
in the saturated zone or significantly decrease the
cost of existing techniques for monitoring these
contaminants. Techniques which allow for remote
operations through telemetry are also of interest as
are techniques, which in conjunction with
modeling processes, allow for optimization of
monitoring and/or operating treatment systems.
• Federal and state underground storage tank (UST)
cleanup programs need remote-telemetry
compatible sensors that measure reductions in
BTEX or MTBE levels in soil and ground water at
several hundred thousand ongoing and new UST
cleanup sites. These sensors should produce either
continuous or statistically-determined periodic
signals indicating BTEX or MTBE levels or both.
Each sensor should have a self-contained power
source with a life of 3 to 5 years and be capable of
interfacing with either remote-telemetry data-
capture systems or hand-held data-capturing
devices applied on-site.
EPA has also identified significant technology needs
for research proposals for continuous emissions monitors
for use with thermal hazardous waste treatment systems,
30
-------
EPA Small Business Innovation Research Phase 1 FY01 Program Solicitation No. PR-NC-00-10483
remote sensing for fugitive emissions, new monitoring
methods for cyanides and cyanide speciation, leak detec-
tion technologies for small landfills, monitoring for mining
waste sites, technologies for locating and monitoring
DNAPL contamination, UST internal inspection methods
and non-invasive monitoring technologies for mercury and
heavy metals in soil. Technologies are needed as follows:
• Compliance with air emission standards or
limitations has traditionally been determined by
initial and periodic 'stack tests', and establishment
of operating parameters with the goal of ensuring
day-to-day compliance. This approach involves
long time intervals, uncertainties that day-to-day
emissions are meeting acceptable limits and
questions about measuring all of the potential
'products of incomplete combustion' (PICs).
Technologies or techniques are needed which allow
real-time/near real-time ability to measure stack
emissions for toxic organic and heavy metal air
emissions. The current standard for dioxins and
furans is 30 ng TEQ/dscm. According to EPA's
combustion strategy (November 1994), the
proposed new performance standard for Municipal
Waste Combustors is 0.2 ng TEQ/dscm.
Technologies and techniques for dioxin and furan
monitoring are needed which address the problem
that these contaminants can occur in both gaseous
form and attached to paniculate matter.
• Remote optical sensing is needed for fence-line
monitoring for fugitive emissions and enforcement
activities. Emergency response/removal operations,
compliance/enforcement functions, and operation
of treatment technologies in both the Superfund
and corrective action programs require systems that
effectively monitor for fugitive emissions of
hazardous air pollutants along the "fence-line" of a
site. The effectiveness of a fence-line monitoring
technique is a function of the length of the fence
line, number of monitoring points, the receptors'
locations, the source size and strength, and the
compounds of concern. Real time/near real-time
monitoring of toxic organic pollutants is needed at
all points downwind at the fence-line of a facility
using remote optical sensing technology.
• EPA needs more accurate, reliable, and enforceable
technologies, techniques and tests to monitor for
total cyanides and to speciate cyanides. The
Agency is particularly interested in techniques
based on alkaline digestion and ion
chromatography.
1 Cost-effective technologies are needed which allow
for protective methods to verify the integrity of
and/or detect leaks from municipal landfills,
focusing on the special needs of smaller capacity
facilities. Examples may include (but are not
limited to) remote platforms that provide cost-
effective monitoring of the integrity of engineered
covers. In addition, sensors are needed to monitor
the integrity and effectiveness of slurry walls and
liners. This need includes systems designed for
containment purposes and systems designed for
containment and passive treatment (e.g., permeable
reactive barrier systems). Such platforms/sensors,
with appropriate telemetry, should allow timely
remedial action that minimizes the frequency and
extent of contaminant releases from the
containment system and reduces the potential for
human and environmental exposure.
' Monitoring technologies are needed for mining
waste sites. Superfund mining sites pose a unique
and significant challenge because they often cover
a large geographic area and include a very large
volume of contaminated media resulting from
mining operations (e.g., waste materials from mine
excavation or mineral separation activities or
contaminant releases from such activities). The
Agency needs low-cost, low maintenance monitors
and advanced remote-sensing based tools (i.e., air
and space-borne) for characterizing the extent of
contamination at very large mining waste sites,
monitoring releases, assessing risks, and planning
and implementing remediation measures. These
tools should provide information on the location
and areal extent of mining activities and related
waste piles: on the nature and extent of releases
from active and inactive mines; and on
contaminants, particularly metals, and their
concentrations.
1 Technologies are needed for locating and
monitoring DNAPL contamination. Monitoring for
the presence and persistence of non-aqueous phase
liquids (NAPLs), particularly dense non-aqueous
phase liquids (DNAPLs), presents a continuing
challenge to the operation and effectiveness of
remedial systems for treating contaminated ground
water. EPA needs non-invasive or minimally
invasive technologies or techniques which can
locate, identify, and characterize DNAPL
contamination in the subsurface. Technologies
should be capable of locating small volumes of
DXAPL, assisting with the characterization ot the
contamination, assisting with the visualization of
31
-------
EPA Small Business Innovation Research Phase 1 FY01 Program Solicitation No. PR-NC-00-10483
the DNAPL relative to the feature of the subsurface
hydrogeology, and supporting the optimization of
treatment systems.
• Internal Inspection Methods are needed for
Internally-Lined Underground Storage Tanks
(USTs). EPA estimates that 50,000 to 100,000 USTs
are internally-lined and will need to be periodically
inspected in order to continue to meet State and
Federal UST requirements. States have expressed a
concern over how these inspections will be
conducted as tank linings become 10 years old.
Currently, the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) is aware of only one code of practice for
conducting the internal inspection, National Leak
Prevention Association (NLPA) Standard 631,
Chapter B. NLPA 631 requires human entry into
the UST to measure thickness, hardness, conduct a
holiday (spark) test, and perform ultrasonic
measurements on the steel tank shell. State
inspectors and owners/operators of lined USTs
would benefit from having multiple technologies
available for internally inspecting internally-lined
USTs. EPA is seeking technologies/methods for
conducting the inspection that can meet the
regulatory language at 40 CFR part 280.21 which
requires the following be done (for petroleum and
hazardous substance tanks) in accordance with a
code of practice developed by a nationally
recognized association or independent testing
laboratory: Within 10 years of lining and every 5
years thereafter, the lined tank is internally
inspected, the lined tank is found to be structurally
sound, and 3/4 of the lining is still performing in
accordance with original design specifications.
• New, leak detection technologies that are more
sensitive, less prone to human error and cost
effective are needed for detecting releases from
underground storage tanks (UST) and pipes. Over
800,000 UST systems must conduct leak detection.
While there are multiple leak detection
technologies in use, most only detect a release once
it exceeds a certain threshold (e.g., flow rate). In
addition, the regulated community, which includes
many small businesses and governments, is
frequently stymied by the complexity of current
technologies. The Agency is concerned that current
technologies and thresholds may not be effective,
given the prevalence of substances, such as MTBE,
that are more mobile and persistent in the
subsurface than BTEX.
• EPA needs field instrumentation to enhance
characterization of soil at sites in the U.S. that have
become contaminated with mercury and heavy
metals. Of special interest are new, non-invasive
technologies such as electromagnetic radiography
that eliminate core sampling, save time and reduce
monitoring costs.
The last part of this topic involves pesticides. Under
the authority of The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), The Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), and The Food Quality Protection
Act of 1996 (FQPA), the EPA Office of Pesticide Programs
(OPP) is charged with protecting public health and the
environment from risks posed by pesticides, and with pro-
moting safer means of pest control. To carry out this mis-
sion OPP must be able to measure the effects of pesticides
and their degradation products. This topic relates to that
mission by requesting research aimed at increasing OPP's
ability to monitor occurrence and movement of pesticides
and their degradation products in the environment. Ex-
amples of research needed include, but are not limited to:
• Equipment and methods are needed for in-situ
monitoring of non-persistent pesticides and
pesticide degradation products in soil, water and air.
Time delays for collecting and transporting samples
to laboratories for analysis reduce our ability to
track the occurrence and movement of pesticide
compounds in the environment.
• Simple, accurate pesticide and pesticide
degradation product detection methods are needed
for individual homeowner use.
• Technologies and methods are needed for detecting
pesticides and pesticide residues on food and plant
surfaces in the field.
• Technologies and methods are needed that allow
consumers to check produce for the presence of
pesticides and pesticide residues on fruit and
vegetables at the point of purchase. This would
allow consumers to make an informed decision
before buying agricultural products that may
contain pesticide chemicals.
• Technologies and methods are needed for
evaluating the effects of chemical mixtures. For
example, alachlor, atrazine and aldicarb show little
individual toxicity in concentrations currently
observed in the environment. When multiple
pesticides are present, the toxicity of the mixture is
significantly greater. Currently, regulatory
32
-------
EPA Small Business Innovation Research Phase 1 FY01 Proeram Solicitation No. PR-NC-00-I0483
decisions are made based on single compounds and
additive or synergistic effects are not considered.
New technologies and methods are needed for
mixtures.
•New test systems are needed for evaluating
hormonal disruption potential for new and existing
pesticides and pesticide degradation products in
non-mammalian species. Under FQPA, EPA is
required to establish an endocrine disruption
screening and testing program for pesticides. New
technologies and better tests are needed for non-
mammalian species (i.e., fish, amphibians and
reptiles).
1 Technologies and in-situ methods are needed for
monitoring lethal and sub-lethal effects of
pesticides and pesticide residues on birds, fish and
other organisms. For example, it is difficult to
determine if a pesticide application has had an
effect on local bird populations. A method for
detecting bird kills would allow better evaluation
of environmental risks of a pesticide.
X. SUBMISSION FORMS
AND CERTIFICATIONS
The attached forms, Appendix A - Proposal Cover
Sheet, Appendix B - Project Summary, and Appendix C -
SBIR Proposal Summary Budget, should be downloaded
and printed from the Internet or photocopied, and com-
pleted as indicated under Section IV, Proposal Preparation
Instructions and Requirements. The purpose of these forms
is to meet the mandate of law or regulation and simplify
the submission of proposals.
33
------- |