§ 37.205 What judgments must I make about the nature of the project?
FederalRegulations
Ask Donna
How this section applies to your facts.
Title 32—National Defense > Subtitle A—Department of Defense > CHAPTER I—OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE > SUBCHAPTER C—DoD GRANT AND AGREEMENT REGULATIONS > PART 37—TECHNOLOGY INVESTMENT AGREEMENTS > Subpart B—Appropriate Use of Technology Investment Agreements
Text
You must:
(a) Conclude that the principal purpose of the project is stimulation or support of research (i.e., assistance), rather than acquiring goods or services for the benefit of the Government (i.e., acquisition);
(b) Decide that the basic, applied, or advanced research project is relevant to the policy objective of civil-military integration (see appendix A of this part); and
(c) Ensure that, to the maximum extent practicable, any TIA that uses the authority of 10 U.S.C. 2371 (see appendix B of this part) does not support research that duplicates other research being conducted under existing programs carried out by the Department of Defense. This is a statutory requirement of 10 U.S.C. 2371.
(d) When your TIA is a type of assistance transaction other than a grant or cooperative agreement, satisfy the condition in 10 U.S.C. 2371 to judge that the use of a standard grant or cooperative agreement for the research project is not feasible or appropriate. As discussed in appendix B to this part:
(1) This situation arises if your TIA includes a patent provision that is less restrictive than is possible under the Bayh-Dole statute (because the patent provision is what distinguishes a TIA that is a cooperative agreement from a TIA that is an assistance transaction other than a grant or cooperative agreement).
(2) You satisfy the requirement to judge that a standard cooperative agreement is not feasible or appropriate when you judge that execution of the research project warrants a less restrictive patent provision than is possible under Bayh-Dole.
This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.