Lynntech Inc

Lynntech Inc.

7607 Eastmark Drive, Ste. 102 College Station, Texas 77840 979-693-0017

http://www.lynntech.com/

Interviewee: Oliver Murphy, President and Founder Time of phone interview: 3:00PM November 14, 2006

Technology: A New Chemical Process to Create Oxidizing Agent Potassium Fer-rate Technology Continuum Stage: Stage 5- Commercialization

Media: waste prevention EPA program(s): SBIR

Sources of funding: Lynntech received EPA SBIR funding totaling $295,000 (NCER SBIR Lynntech, 2006).

Regulation involvement: No regulation obstacles were mentioned in the interview.

Regulations of oxidizing agents used for environmentally-friendly remediation would only help this technology.

Environmental problem technology solves: Right now there are no cheap and

environmentally friendly oxidizing agents on the market. Oxidizing agents are used for industrial waste control, disinfection, and water treatment (NCER SBIR Lynntech PI, 2006). Potassium fer-rate is an environmentally-friendly and effective oxidizing agent.

Environmental impact: Potassium fer-rate is environmentally-friendly and does not have the adverse effects of other oxidizing agents. It replaces other oxidizing agents, therefore those agents adverse effects will no longer be a problem. The process that Lynntech uses to produce potassium fer-rate is also very environmentally-friendly.

Lynntech developed an environmentally benign process for the production of potassium fer-rate that uses low-cost starting materials, most of which are recyclable (NCER SBIR Lynntech PI, 2006). So not only is the end product good for the environment, the production process is too.

Summary: Lynntech has one or two US patents issued on this technology. Lynntech currently has an agreement with a potential supplier of their product. The potential supplier is considering becoming the sole licenser of the technology. Their name was not mentioned because of a mutual non-disclosure agreement. Lynntech has heard of the Environmental Technology Verification (ETV) program, but does not believe that it is suited to this particular technology. Lynntech has no designated marketing department.

Researchers and senior management do the marketing by attending exhibitions and tradeshows where they network.

Challenges along the way (at what stage): A challenge Lynntech faces is with the commercialization process. They have developed a process to manufacture potassium fer-rate, but only laboratory scale quantities. Now that there is an interested company wanting to license the technology they need to find the resources to scale up the product method.

Solutions to the challenges (resources used): Lynntech is looking for ways to fund the scale up of potassium fer-rate production. Lynntech is using their own resources to begin the process, but is waiting for support from the interested company.

Interviewee’s Suggestions to improve environmental technology commercialization:

No funding gap between Phase I ending and Phase II beginning is ideal. This is impossible, though a reasonable goal would be three to five months between Phase I ending and Phase II beginning. The reason to shorten the period of no funding is as follows. If there is a stoppage in funding between Phases I and II, companies lose momentum on their project. Most companies do not have the resources to fund the project themselves and at this early stage others are not willing to invest. Therefore the developers have to begin working on some other project. Companies then have to start back up on the project in nine months when Phase II funding starts. It is hard to switch your mind from one project to another, it takes time to remember and become

reacquainted with the material. You lose momentum on the project.

The one thing to make sure of is that Phase II proposals are only submitted after Phase I is completely done. Asking for Phase II proposals before Phase I is complete would effectively shorten Phase I. Six months for Phase I is already too short.

The government (EPA) should offer more support after Phase II. The area of little to no funding after Phase II is known to many as “the valley of death”. This is because SBIR funding of technologies usually ends after Phase II and the technology dies, or progresses no further. If a technology has market pull, then the government needs to get involved with Phase III. Even if the market pull is three years down the line, the government should support the company. This would provide a resource to overcome

“the valley of death” and thus aid in commercializing technology.

Major conclusions: EPA SBIR program was helpful to Lynntech. It helped get the technology going. Right now Lynntech is trying to commercialize their product. They know of a company that is interested in licensing their technology. This company verified their product and is passing along samples to end users. Lynntech is now just waiting to hear the word from the interested company to start scaled-up production.

Nugget of knowledge, interesting fact: “There is not (a) one size fits all means for technology commercialization.” You have to find your company’s niche.

Commercialization is going to be done by people that are good at it, not scientists and engineers.

A myth is that you receive two or three SBIR awards, manufacture and sell the product. This is not true 90% of the time. There is a continuum of companies that are good at a specific stage of the technology continuum. Companies are static; the

technology is dynamic and moves from one company to another along the technology continuum. Each company fits into a certain spot on the continuum.

Analysis: Oliver Murphy of Lynntech has had success commercializing technologies in the past. This technology has a company interested in it, who wants to become the sole license holder for the technology. The interested company is currently trying to make sure that the market is ready for this product. Since Lynntech is currently running production at a laboratory scale, even though they have a commercially interested party, government support for after Phase III to assist with the scale up would have a greatly beneficial impact. The assistance would help to push the product into the market sooner than if they have to wait for their interested company to provide the funding to create a full scale production apparatus.

Oliver thinks that it would be beneficial to companies if EPA did not have such a large gap in funding between Phase I and Phase II. Currently there is a large gap between EPA SBIR Phase I and Phase II funding. During this gap researchers usually work on a different project. When Phase II funding begins, the researchers start working on the initial project again. The problem with this is that the researchers lose momentum because they have to switch from one project to another. One thing Oliver points out for consideration is how DOD runs their SBIR program.

DOD’s program cuts the time of funding between Phase I and Phase II down substantially. They do it by requiring Phase II proposals four months in to Phase I, when the technology is not as developed as it could be before putting it up for judging and acceptance into Phase II. It is a tricky situation, because if a company does get accepted to Phase II based on the work that they have done, then they will be receiving their Phase II money much sooner than they would have otherwise. However, the downside is that if they are denied for Phase II funding because their technology was not developed enough at four months, but at six months, they had a product that would be accepted, then they have no chance to go back and try again without waiting much longer and re-applying during the next round of proposals.

4.2.7 Mide Technology Corporation