Federal Laboratory

Technology Transfer 

Fiscal Year 2008

Prepared by:

National Institute of

Standards and Technology

U.S. Department of Commerce

March 2010

Summary Report to

the President and the Congress
This page intentionally left blank

 
ii

FOREWORD

The Department of Commerce is pleased to submit this fiscal year 2008 Technology 

Transfer Summary Report to the President and the Congress in accordance with 15 USC 

Sec 3710(g)(2) for an annual summary report on the implementation of technology 

transfer authorities established by the Technology Transfer Commercialization Act of 

2000 (P.L. 106-404) and similar legislation. This report highlights the achievements of

Federal technology transfer and partnering programs of Federal research and 

development agencies.

Technology transfer promotes the commercialization of government funded research and 

development resulting from Federal laboratories’ internal research and from collaborative 

research programs, conducted jointly with other public and private sector organizations. 

Effective technology transfer is an important part of Federal laboratories’ missions. 

Today, Federal laboratories reach out to industry, academic institutions, non-profit 

foundations, state and local governments, and international institutions through external 

collaborations and partnerships, thereby leveraging the Federal investment in research 

and development. The Federal investment in research and development serves as an 

engine to keep the United States a leader in technology advancement and innovation and 

stimulates economic growth. This report provides a summary of the results of Federal 

technology transfer in fiscal year 2008.
iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER 1........................................................................................................................1

Scope.....................................................................................................................................1

Technology Transfer Principles and Approach..................................................................2

CHAPTER 2........................................................................................................................5

Strengthening Performance Metrics....................................................................................5

CHAPTER 3......................................................................................................................17

Department of Agriculture (USDA) .................................................................................17

Department of Commerce (DOC).....................................................................................20

Department of Defense (DoD) ..........................................................................................22

Department of Energy (DOE) ...........................................................................................24

Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).........................................................27

Department of Homeland Security (DHS) .......................................................................29

Department of the Interior (DOI)......................................................................................30

Department of Transportation (DOT)...............................................................................32

Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) ..............................................................................34

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ........................................................................35

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)..............................................37

Conclusion .........................................................................................................................40

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Collaborative Relationships for Research and Development .................................7

Table 2: Invention Disclosure and Patenting..........................................................................9

Table 3: Profile of Active Licenses.......................................................................................11

Table 4: Characteristics of Licensing Bearing Income ........................................................14

Table 5: Income from Licensing (Dollars reported in thousands) ......................................15
iv

This page intentionally left blank
1

CHAPTER 1

Overview of Federal Technology Transfer

Federal laboratories continue to actively partner with numerous and diverse non-federal 

organizations in industry, academia, the non-profit sector, and state and local 

governments. Through these partnerships Federal agencies are better able to transform

the results of their research into economic and social value. Agencies utilize a wide 

variety of authorities and agreements to evaluate, protect, transfer, and monitor the 

utilization and commercialization of technologies developed in whole or in part by 

Federal laboratories. While focusing on important national interests, Federal laboratories 

continue to develop many new technologies, products, and applications that solve many 

of our greatest challenges. By making these discoveries accessible to private, academic 

and other government entities, Federal research and development (R&D) provides 

expertise and resources resulting in viable products that give the United States a 

competitive edge in today’s global market and improve the quality of life for all 

Americans.

This report summarizes information from individual reports prepared by each Federal 

agency conducting R&D within its laboratories and provides an overview of activities 

across agencies. This summary report has been organized and prepared by the 

Department of Commerce (DOC) National Institute of Standards and Technology 

(NIST). An electronic version of this report is available on the internet at: 

http://patapsco.nist.gov/ts/220/external/index.htm. 

Scope

This report summarizes the technology transfer achievements of the eleven Federal 

agencies that have significant Federal laboratory operations:

Department of Agriculture (USDA) 

Department of Commerce (DOC)

Department of Defense (DoD) 

Department of Energy (DOE) 

Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) 

Department of Homeland Security (DHS) 

Department of the Interior (DOI) 

Department of Transportation (DOT)

Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) 

All of these agencies have established programs for transferring the technology and 

intellectual property arising from their laboratory science and technology endeavors.
2

Technology Transfer Principles and Approach

Promoting U.S. economic growth and creating jobs through the transfer and 

commercialization of Federally-developed technologies is a high priority for Federal 

technology transfer offices. Collaboration amongst Federal laboratories, industry, 

academia, non-profit organizations, and state and local governments play an important 

role in the efficient and timely development of innovative technologies, new products and 

new and promising research opportunities. Efficient Federal technology transfer 

activities ensure that tax payer investments in leading edge and fundamental research and 

development significantly benefit the domestic economy through the transfer of rights to 

develop, refine, use and market new technologies for the benefit of the public. Since 

Federal research activities are often driven by a specific need, many economically viable 

advancements might otherwise be overlooked, shelved or otherwise go unused without 

dedicated efforts by Federal technology transfer offices to promote the dissemination and 

utilization of the results of such research activities. Effective technology transfer

promotes real economic growth through the development of new products, medical 

treatments, services, and other innovations that reach the market, and through the creation 

of the jobs resulting from the manufacturing and marketing these new goods. In addition 

to strengthening the domestic and regional economies, successful partnerships with nonFederal entities provide additional benefits including:

• Stimulating the flow of ideas between the government and other research sectors

• Creating new businesses, especially small businesses 

• Attracting and retaining talented scientific personnel within the Federal 

laboratories

• Providing support to the mission of each agency

• Accelerating the development and reducing the costs of products and services to 

reach the marketplace

• Supporting further research by generating licensing revenue 

• Rewarding innovative accomplishments of Federal inventors through royalty 

sharing

• Creating a wide variety of new and efficient products in health care, defense,

domestic security and many other sectors of the economy.

Federal technology transfer offices typically rely on the following principal mechanisms

to facilitate the transfer of Federally-developed technologies:

Cooperative Research and Development 

Relationships for cooperative research and development between Federal laboratories and 

non-Federal collaborators are widely viewed as effective and economical means of 

technology transfer and joint research. Cooperative research and development efforts 

confer a mutually advantageous leveraging of Federal agency and collaborator resources 

and technical capabilities, as well as provide avenues for both the partner and the Federal 

laboratory to gain new competences and develop new skills. 
3

One frequently used mechanism for establishing these joint relationships is the 

Cooperative Research and Development Agreement (CRADA). CRADAs are 

agreements between a Federal laboratory and one or more collaborators to work together 

on a R&D project with a defined scope of work. CRADAs were created by the Congress, 

in part, to encourage Federal laboratories to participate in R&D partnerships for the 

purpose of developing and advancing promising new technologies toward 

commercialization. Most agencies have other authorities which also facilitate 

cooperative R&D. Some of those authorities are unique, such as NASA’s Space Act 

authority, and some are more generally available to other Agencies, such as various 

“work for others” authorities.

 Intellectual Property Management

Invention Disclosure and Patenting

The protection of intellectual property can be vital to attracting the additional investment 

and product development resources necessary for early stage research products to be 

brought to their full commercial potential. Federal laboratory achievements in the areas 

of invention disclosures, general publications and patents obtained are often cited as 

metrics of the active management of intellectual assets and technical know-how by 

Federal agencies. 

Licensing

Licensing is one of the primary mechanisms to create incentives for industry to further 

develop and commercialize leading edge technologies. Successful development and 

commercialization benefits the economy generally and contributes to competitiveness 

and economic growth. Without the ability to grant licenses to develop and commercialize

government-owned technologies and inventions, many innovations would languish on 

laboratory shelves and would not be further developed into products or services. The 

terms and conditions under which Federal intellectual property is licensed varies, based 

on many factors including the state of readiness for the market place, the financial 

resources needed to further develop the technology for consumer use, fields of use,

projected market impact and other factors.

Other Commercialization Mechanisms

Other than licensing, there are a wide variety of technology transfer methods used by 

Federal agencies. Different mechanisms are used when licensing may not be necessary to 

efficiently or effectively transfer the technology. Some of the mechanisms used by 

Federal laboratories are tailored to support the specific focus, needs and mission of a 

particular Federal laboratory and/or a particular technology. Some of these other 

technology transfer mechanisms include:

• Presentations at conferences, workshops, and inquiries

• Utilization of guest researchers and facilities users

• Outreach to trade and technical media

• Technical publications and other reports 

• Development of Standard Reference Materials

• Development of Standard Reference Data
4

• Development of documentary standards

• Material transfer licenses

• Calibration services

• Collaborative research agreements (e.g., Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), 

Clinical Trial Agreements)
5

CHAPTER 2

Performance in Fiscal Year 2008

Strengthening Performance Metrics

Each Federal research and development agency is required to prepare and submit an 

annual report of its technology transfer activities as described in 15 USC 3710(f). These 

reports include details on each agency’s technology transfer program and plans to use 

technology transfer to advance the agency’s mission and to promote U.S. 

competitiveness. In addition, specific data is provided to demonstrate the level of basic 

technology transfer, including:

• Number of patents filed

• Number of patents granted

• Number of licenses and details regarding the license

• Earned royalty income and other royalty statistical information

• Disposition of royalty income

• Number of licenses terminated for cause

• Discussion of other relevant parameters unique to the agency

The tables below present a brief cross-agency summary of the utilization of the above 

technology transfer tools. It is evident from this data that technology transfer activities

and practices are widely used across the agencies. However, measuring the overall 

impact of technology transfer continues to be challenging. It remains far easier to 

assemble statistics on technology transfer activities than to quantify actual downstream 

benefits and effectiveness of the transfers because of the many variables and factors

involved in commercializing nascent technologies. For example, knowledge gained from 

initial research may not make an immediate impact on the public, but may open new 

avenues for discoveries that lead to future products, medical treatments, and services.

To improve and develop better measures of the effectiveness of Federal technology 

transfer, the Federal Interagency Working Group on Technology Transfer (IWGTT) 

meets regularly and is attended by agency representatives and technology transfer experts 

from across the Federal government. The IWGTT serves as a broad forum to identify 

and discuss emerging concerns and technology transfer practices and trends through the 

process of dialogue, interagency comparisons and experience sharing. Through the 

IWGTT, Federal agencies jointly discuss and review new and better means to improve 

both quantitative and qualitative measurements of technology transfer activities and 

means to improve dissemination of Federally-developed technologies. In 2009, the 

Government Accountability Office (GAO) conducted a study of the effectiveness of

technology transfer at DOE laboratories. The IWGTT is examining the GAO’s findings 

and recommendations, including those for technology transfer performance measures. 

The IWGTT will draw upon the GAO recommendations to look for ways to improve 

metrics and to enhance technology transfer efforts.

Anecdotal evidence and success stories demonstrating the broad range of successful

outcomes of technology transfer such as life-saving treatments, increased security or
6

awareness about dangers and hazards, and new business start-ups provide a few examples

of outcomes. Chapter 3 of this report provides a small sampling of the numerous positive

impacts and outcomes of Federal technology transfer activities.

The following tables summarize the technology transfer activities compiled from each 

agency’s report, for a five year period from fiscal year 2004 to through fiscal year 2008. 

The total figures from the eleven agencies indicate that licenses, income bearing licenses, 

income from licenses, and earned royalty income generally trended upward over this 

period. However, invention disclosures, patent applications filed, and patents issued

remained steady over the same period. The number of active CRADAs declined slightly 

in fiscal year 2008 but still remained higher than 2004 and 2005 levels. These total 

figures and trends from the technology transfer activities of the Federal government 

represent steady, mature programs, as shown by the volume of CRADAs, licensing, 

patenting, and earned royalty income activities. 

In Table 1, “Traditional CRADAs” refer to collaborative research and development by a 

Federal laboratory and non-Federal partners. “Non-traditional CRADAs” are used with 

non-Federal collaborators for special purposes such as material transfers, specialized 

equipment calibrations or other technical assistance which may produce information

which needs to be protected from disclosure. In table 3, “other IP licenses” include 

licenses for copyrighted software (not including open source software licenses, which are 

also copyrighted software), open channel-web and noncommercial software, biological 

materials, and other forms of intellectual property.
7

Table 1: Collaborative Relationships for Research and Development

.

FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008

DHS ● CRADAs, total active in the FY - - - - 23

 - New, executed in the FY - - - - 8

 ▪ Traditional CRADAs, total active in the FY - - - - 21

 ▪ Non-traditional CRADAs, total active in FY - - - - 2

 ▪ Other collaborative R&D relationships - - - - 3

DOC ● CRADAs, total active in the FY 1,969 1,904 3,008 2,778 2,390

 - New, executed in the FY 1,790 1,764 2,158 1,865 1,583

 ▪ Traditional CRADAs, total active in the FY 67 80 149 154 131

 ▪ Non-traditional CRADAs, total active in FY 1,902 1,826 2,859 2,624 2,259

 ▪ Other collaborative R&D relationships 2,301 2,714 2,769 3,414* 3,476

DOD ● CRADAs, total active in the FY 2,833 2,736 2,999 2,971 2,596

 - New, executed in the FY 786 679 705 641 745

 ▪ Traditional CRADAs, total active in the FY 2,425 2,736 2,424 2,383 1,993

 ▪ Non-traditional CRADAs, total active in FY 408 474 575 588 603

 ▪ Other collaborative R&D relationships 0 0 0 0 3

DOE ● CRADAs, total active in the FY 610 644 631 697 711

 - New, executed in the FY 157 164 168 182 178

 ▪ Traditional CRADAs, total active in the FY 610 644 631 697 711

 ▪ Non-traditional CRADAs, total active in FY n/r n/r n/r n/r n/r

 ▪ Other collaborative R&D relationships 0 0 0 0 0

DOI ● CRADAs, total active in the FY 61 70 82 170 170

 - New, executed in the FY 16 21 38 112 98

 ▪ Traditional CRADAs, total active in the FY 45 49 31 20 33

 ▪ Non-traditional CRADAs, total active in FY 16 21 51 150 137

 ▪ Other collaborative R&D relationships 0 0 0 0 0

DOT ● CRADAs, total active in the FY 0 57 59 36 23

 - New, executed in the FY 0 5 6 7 6

 ▪ Traditional CRADAs, total active in the FY 0 55 59 36 23

 ▪ Non-traditional CRADAs, total active in FY 0 2 0 0 0

 ▪ Other collaborative R&D relationships 0 0 0 0 0

EPA ● CRADAs, total active in the FY 104 107 94 84 112

 - New, executed in the FY 23 33 16 18 49

 ▪ Traditional CRADAs, total active in the FY 82 95 83 67 74

 ▪ Non-traditional CRADAs, total active in FY 22 12 11 17 38

 ▪ Other collaborative R&D relationships 0 0 0 0 0
8

Table 1: Collaborative Relationships for Research and Development (continued)

FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008

HHS ● CRADAs, total active in the FY 220 215 164 284* 453

 - New, executed in the FY 95 101 66 68* 83

 ▪ Traditional CRADAs, total active in the FY 119 117 92 206 295

 ▪ Non-traditional CRADAs, total active in FY 101 98 72 79 158

 ▪ Other collaborative R&D relationships 0 0 0 0 0

NASA ● CRADAs, total active in the FY 0 1 1 1 1

 - New, executed in the FY 0 1 0 0 1

 ▪ Traditional CRADAs, total active in the FY 0 1 1 1 1

 ▪ Non-traditional CRADAs, total active in FY 0 0 0 0 0

 ▪ Other collaborative R&D relationships 3,987 4,025 3,492 2,666 2,463

USDA ● CRADAs, total active in the FY 205 199 195 230 252

 - New, executed in the FY 44 55 57 69 76

 ▪ Traditional CRADAs, total active in the FY 185 171 163 184 202

 ▪ Non-traditional CRADAs, total active in FY 20 28 22 23 28

 ▪ Other collaborative R&D relationships 1,166 5,028 3,477 4,084 5,466

VA ● CRADAs, total active in the FY 13* 14* 35* 75 192

 - New, executed in the FY 4* 3 24 47* 134

 ▪ Traditional CRADAs, total active in the FY 13* 14* 33* 71* 180

 ▪ Non-traditional CRADAs, total active in FY 0 0 2* 4* 10

 ▪ Other collaborative R&D relationships 0 0 0 0 0

TOTALS ● CRADAs, total active in the FY 6,015* 5,947* 7,268* 7,326* 6,923

 - New, executed in the FY 2,915* 2,826 3,238 3,009* 2,961

 ▪ Traditional CRADAs, total active in the FY 3,546* 3,962* 3,666* 3,819* 3,664

 ▪ Non-traditional CRADAs, total active in FY 2,469 2,461 3,592* 3,485* 3,235

 ▪ Other collaborative R&D relationships 7,454 11,767 9,738 10,164* 11,411

- DHS began compiling and reporting data in 2008.

n/r = Data not reported. 

* Reflects data correction from FY 2007 Summary Report.
9

Table 2: Invention Disclosure and Patenting

FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008

DHS ● New inventions disclosed in the FY - - - - 10

● Patent applications filed in the FY - - - - 0

● Patents issued in the FY - - - - 1

DOC ● New inventions disclosed in the FY 25 21 14 32 40

● Patent applications filed in the FY 12 12 5 8* 21

● Patents issued in the FY 12 10 7 3* 2

DOD ● New inventions disclosed in the FY 1,369 534 1,056 838 1,018

● Patent applications filed in the FY 517 354 691 597 590

● Patents issued in the FY 426 191 472 425 462

DOE ● New inventions disclosed in the FY 1,617 1,776 1,694 1,575 1,460

● Patent applications filed in the FY 661 812 726 693 904

● Patents issued in the FY 520 467 438 441 370

DOI ● New inventions disclosed in the FY 6 4 5 7 7

● Patent applications filed in the FY 6 3 2 5 7

● Patents issued in the FY 9 9 5 6 1

DOT ● New inventions disclosed in the FY 0 4 3 2 3

● Patent applications filed in the FY 2 5 3 2 0

● Patents issued in the FY 0 2 0 3 2

EPA ● New inventions disclosed in the FY 18 12 12 16 9

● Patent applications filed in the FY 12 13 13 15 6

● Patents issued in the FY 11 9 10 10 4

HHS ● New inventions disclosed in the FY 461 452 442 447 437

● Patent applications filed in the FY 216 230 166 261 164

● Patents issued in the FY 167 154 164 379 278

NASA ● New inventions disclosed in the FY 1,612 1,678 1,705 1,268 1084

● Patent applications filed in the FY 207 202 196 105 110

● Patents issued in the FY 189 133 144 93 112

USDA ● New inventions disclosed in the FY 142 125 105 126 133

● Patent applications filed in the FY 81 88 83 114 123

● Patents issued in the FY 50 27 39 37 30
10

Table 2: Invention Disclosure and Patenting (continued)

FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008

VA ● New inventions disclosed in the FY 204 165 157 175 164

● Patent applications filed in the FY 54 26 27 25 13

● Patents issued in the FY 7 10 5 8 10

TOTALS ● New inventions disclosed in the FY 5,454 4,771 5,193 4,486 4,365

● Patent applications filed in the FY 1,768 1,745 1,912 1,825* 1,938

● Patents issued in the FY 1,391 1,012 1,284 1,405* 1,272

- DHS began compiling and reporting data in 2008.

* Reflects data correction from FY 2007 Summary Report.
11

Table 3: Profile of Active Licenses

FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008

DHS ● All licenses, number total active in the FY - - - - 18

 ▫ New, executed in the FY - - - - 0

 ▪ Invention licenses, total active in the FY - - - - 0

 ▫ New, executed in the FY - - - - 0

 ▪ Other IP licenses, total active in the FY - - - - 18

DOC ● All licenses, number total active in the FY 125 133 111 222* 29(1)

 ▫ New, executed in the FY 100 108 83 187 2(1)

 ▪ Invention licenses, total active in the FY 125 133 111 222 29(1)

 ▫ New, executed in the FY 100 108 83 187 2(1)

 ▪ Other IP licenses, total active in the FY 0 0 0 0 0

DOD ● All licenses, number total active in the FY 369 412 444 460 342

 ▫ New, executed in the FY 60 60 56 67 52

 ▪ Invention licenses, total active in the FY 364 406 438 460 351

 ▫ New, executed in the FY 60 60 56 67 52

 ▪ Other IP licenses, total active in the FY 5 6 6 35 14

DOE ● All licenses, number total active in the FY 4,345 5,677 5,916 5,842 6,196

 ▫ New, executed in the FY 616 750 652 606 685

 ▪ Invention licenses, total active in the FY 1,362 1,535 1,420 1,354 1,418

 ▫ New, executed in the FY 168 198 203 164 177

 ▪ Other IP licenses, total active in the FY 2,983 4,142 4,496 4,488 4,748

DOI ● All licenses, number total active in the FY 13 20 21 15 19

 ▫ New, executed in the FY 3 5 1 1 1

 ▪ Invention licenses, total active in the FY 12 19 20 15 18

 ▫ New, executed in the FY 3 5 1 0 1

 ▪ Other IP licenses, total active in the FY 1 1 1 0 1
12

Table 3: Profile of Active Licenses (continued)

FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008

DOT ● All licenses, number total active in the FY 1 5 5 5 5

 ▫ New, executed in the FY 0 4 0 0 0

 ▪ Invention licenses, total active in the FY 1 5 5 1 5

 ▫ New, executed in the FY 0 4 4 0 0

 ▪ Other IP licenses, total active in the FY 0 0 0 0 0

EPA ● All licenses, number total active in the FY 38 39 35 38 37

 ▫ New, executed in the FY 7 4 2 5 2

 ▪ Invention licenses, total active in the FY 38 39 35 38 37

 ▫ New, executed in the FY 7 4 2 5 2

 ▪ Other IP licenses, total active in the FY 0 0 0 0 0

HHS ● All licenses, number total active in the FY 1,424 1,532 1,535 1,418 1,675

 ▫ New, executed in the FY 288 349 290 293 277

 ▪ Invention licenses, total active in the FY 1,173 1,237 1,213 915 1,376

 ▫ New, executed in the FY 249 291 253 234 233

 ▪ Other IP licenses, total active in the FY 251 295 322 460 352

NASA ● All licenses, number total active in the FY 861 1,338 1,675 1,883 2,296

 ▫ New, executed in the FY 423 505 375 261 307

 ▪ Invention licenses, total active in the FY 338 441 477 461 457

 ▫ New, executed in the FY 107 129 73 28 26

 ▪ Other IP licenses, total active in the FY 523 897 1,198 1,422 1,839

USDA ● All licenses, number total active in the FY 296 320 332 339 328

 ▫ New, executed in the FY 29 33 25 25 28

 ▪ Invention licenses, total active in the FY 296 320 332 339 328

 ▫ New, executed in the FY 29 33 25 25 28

 ▪ Other IP licenses, total active in the FY 0 0 0 0 0

VA ● All licenses, number total active in the FY 95 101 112 130 153

 ▫ New, executed in the FY 9 6 11 18 23

 ▪ Invention licenses, total active in the FY 95 101 112 130 153

 ▫ New, executed in the FY 9 6 11 18 23

 ▪ Other IP licenses, total active in the FY 12 0 0 0 0
13

Table 3: Profile of Active Licenses (continued)

FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008

TOTALS ● All licenses, number total active in the FY 7,567 9,577 10,186 10,352* 11,098

 ▫ New, executed in the FY 1,535 1,824 1,495 1,463 1,377

 ▪ Invention licenses, total active in the FY 3,804 4,236 4,163 3,935 4,172

 ▫ New, executed in the FY 732 838 711 728 544

 ▪ Other IP licenses, total active in the FY 3,775 5,341 6,023 6,405 6,972

- DHS began compiling and reporting data in 2008.

* Reflects data correction from FY 2007 Summary Report.

(1) The number of licenses for FY 2008 has decreased because the Institute for 

Telecommunication Sciences (ITS) no longer licenses Video Quality Metric Technology 

(VQM). Instead ITS made this software widely available via open source download.
14

Table 4: Characteristics of Licensing Bearing Income

FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008

DHS ● All income bearing licenses, number - - - - 0

 ▫ Exclusive - - - - 0

DOC ● All income bearing licenses, number 23 25 30 35 25

 ▫ Exclusive 11 12 17 16 14

DOD ● All income bearing licenses, number 103 110 112 194 210

 ▫ Exclusive 48 59 64 84 70

DOE ● All income bearing licenses, number 3,236 2,549 2,822 3,291 4,397

 ▫ Exclusive 255 248 353 352 372

DOI ● All income bearing licenses, number 14 18 18 14 16

 ▫ Exclusive 8 9 9 4 5

DOT ● All income bearing licenses, number 1 5 4 4 4

 ▫ Exclusive 1 2 3 2 1

EPA ● All income bearing licenses, number 38 39 35 38 37

 ▫ Exclusive 8 5 6 6 7

HHS ● All income bearing licenses, number 758 816 849 901 1057

 ▫ Exclusive 121 127 134 144 149

NASA ● All income bearing licenses, number 225 235 244 236 248

 ▫ Exclusive 103 103 106 106 112

USDA ● All income bearing licenses, number 294 318 330 337 313

 ▫ Exclusive 200 220 233 241 223

VA ● All income bearing licenses, number 74 82 93 115 137

 ▫ Exclusive 9 14 24 44 61

TOTALS ● All income bearing licenses, number 4,766* 4,197* 4,537* 5,165* 6,444

 ▫ Exclusive 764* 799* 949* 999* 1,014

- DHS began compiling and reporting data in 2008.

(*) Reflects data correction from FY 2007 Summary Report.
15

Table 5: Income from Licensing (Dollars reported in thousands)

FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008

DHS ● Total income, all licenses active in FY - - - - $0

 ▪ Invention licenses - - - - $0

 ▪ Other IP licenses, total active in the FY - - - - $0

● Total Earned Royalty Income, (ERI) - - - - $0

DOC ● Total income, all licenses active in FY $203 $147 $194 $225 $293

 ▪ Invention licenses $203 $147 $194 $225 $293

 ▪ Other IP licenses, total active in the FY $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

● Total Earned Royalty Income, (ERI) $170 $139 $170 $217 $293

DOD ● Total income, all licenses active in FY $9,204 $10,650 $10,963 $14,246 $16,057

 ▪ Invention licenses $9,199 $10,637 $10,961 $14,240 $16,048

 ▪ Other IP licenses, total active in the FY $5 $13 $2 $6 $9

● Total Earned Royalty Income, (ERI) n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

DOE ● Total income, all licenses active in FY $27,252 $27,382 $35,572 $39,165 $49,318

 ▪ Invention licenses $23,321 $24,226 $32,211 $34,933 $43,108

 ▪ Other IP licenses, total active in the FY $3,931 $3,156 $3,362 $4,233 $6,210

● Total Earned Royalty Income, (ERI) $10,882 $12,443 $18,332 $18,759 $31,718

DOI ● Total income, all licenses active in FY $48 $71 $47 $57 $79

 ▪ Invention licenses $48 $71 $47 $57 $79

 ▪ Other IP licenses, total active in the FY n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

● Total Earned Royalty Income, (ERI) $45 $68 $46 $57 $79

DOT ● Total income, all licenses active in FY $0 $37 $22 $34 $18

 ▪ Invention licenses $0 $22 $22 $34 $18

 ▪ Other IP licenses, total active in the FY $0 $15 $0 $0 $0

● Total Earned Royalty Income, (ERI) $0 $22 $22 $34 $9

EPA ● Total income, all licenses active in FY $762 $666 $632 $544 $1,038

 ▪ Invention licenses $762 $666 $632 $544 $1,038

 ▪ Other IP licenses, total active in the FY $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

● Total Earned Royalty Income, (ERI) $205 $34 $29 $107 $571

HHS ● Total income, all licenses active in FY $56,479 $98,542 $83,097 $88,799 $97,609

 ▪ Invention licenses $56,170 $96,485 $82,187 $67,108 $94,712

 ▪ Other IP licenses, total active in the FY $309 $2,057 $909 $19,128 $2,897

● Total Earned Royalty Income, (ERI) $39,456 $76,695 $63,250 $70,743 $80,805
16

Table 5: Income from Licensing (Dollars reported in thousands) (continued)

FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008

NASA ● Total income, all licenses active in FY $3,124 $3,935 $4,862 $2,912 $2,395

 ▪ Invention licenses $3,036 $3,935 $4,726 $2,912 $2,395

 ▪ Other IP licenses, total active in the FY $89 n/a $136 n/a n/a

● Total Earned Royalty Income, (ERI) $929 $1,333 $2,162 $1,352 $1,159

USDA ● Total income, all licenses active in FY $2,164 $3,315 $3,162 $3,588 $3,953

 ▪ Invention licenses $2,164 $3,315 $3,162 $3,588 $3,953

 ▪ Other IP licenses, total active in the FY $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

● Total Earned Royalty Income, (ERI) $1,427 $2,089 $2,337 $2,682 $3,010

VA ● Total income, all licenses active in FY $279 $117 $138 $358 $141

 ▪ Invention licenses $279 $117 $138 $358 $141

 ▪ Other IP licenses, total active in the FY n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

● Total Earned Royalty Income, (ERI) n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

TOTAL ● Total income, all licenses active in FY $99,515* $144,862* $138,689* $149,928* $170,901 

 ▪ Invention licenses $95,182* $139,621* $134,280* $123,999* $161,785 

 ▪ Other IP licenses, total active in the FY $4,334 $5,241* $4,409 $23,367 $9,116 

● Total Earned Royalty Income, (ERI) $53,114 $92,823* $86,348* $93,951* $117,644 

- DHS began compiling and reporting data in 2008.

n/a = Data not available from agency.

(*) Reflects data correction from FY 2007 Summary Report.
17

CHAPTER 3

Outcomes and Impact of Technology Transfer Activities

Reports of the successful commercialization of Federally-developed technologies cut 

across industrial sectors and demonstrate the broad reach of technology transfer into the 

lives of American citizens. The cases provided below are examples of the downstream 

outcomes arising from technology transfer activities.

Department of Agriculture (USDA) 

The Agriculture Research Service (ARS) conducts research to develop and transfer 

solutions to agricultural problems of high national priority to:

• ensure a high-quality, safe, abundant food supply;

• assess the nutritional needs of Americans;

• sustain a competitive agricultural economy;

• enhance U.S. natural resources and the environment; and to

• provide economic opportunities for rural citizens, communities, and society as a whole

In fiscal year 2008, ARS established a new initiative to promote adoption of agricultural 

research results in a manner that supports local/regional economic development. 

Traditionally, innovation and small business development have been critical to the 

nation’s global competitiveness and in achieving sustainable local/regional economic 

development. The global economic downturn of 2008 has further highlighted the 

urgency to focus on innovation, competitiveness, and job creation. Thus, to help meet 

these challenges and enhance partnering with small businesses, ARS has initiated an 

Agricultural Technology Innovation Partnership (ATIP) program to facilitate adoption of 

ARS research outcomes by private sector companies for commercial production of goods 

and services. Key to this initiative is the use of Partnership Intermediary Agreements 

(PIA) with technology-based economic development entities. Intermediaries are 

strategically chosen by geographic region and for their ability to serve small businesses 

by providing assets complementary to ARS’s research and innovation capacities. 

More information about USDA technology transfer please visit:

ARS: http://www.ars.usda.gov/partnering

Forest Service: http://www.fs.fed.us

• Improving Dairy Products Using Hi-Tech Tools

In order to assure high quality beef and dairy products, the existing genetic makeup of 

cattle must be evaluated. The genetic traits of cattle directly affect the quality of beef 

and dairy products. 

“Progeny testing,” the method now used to determine a bull’s genetic merit, is timeconsuming and costly. Because a bull cannot be evaluated directly for the milk 

production traits or meat quality traits of its offspring, like tenderness or flavor, a ranch 

owner must generate many cows from a single bull, wait for the cows to mature and have 
18

a calf, to begin producing milk. Ultimately a rancher must wait years to see how 

different cows compare to offspring from competing bulls.

ARS researchers in Maryland and Nebraska are trying to speed this process, and make it 

more efficient, by using more precise techniques to look at a cattle’s genetic makeup—

DNA markers. Using technology originally developed in the human genome project—

the BeadChip—ARS scientists worked with university professors and Illumina (the San 

Diego firm that manufactures BeadChip) to design a chip for genomics-based studies on 

dairy cattle. The researchers developed a new genomic method—called “genomeenhanced improvement”—to identify bulls that produce progeny with optimum milk 

production and other traits. 

The BeadChip can be used to specifically characterize single DNA markers over 58,000 

locations, distributed relatively evenly across the bovine genome. The researchers are 

using this tool to examine DNA from 15,000 cows and bulls, representing several 

commercial dairy and beef breeds and ARS populations. This technology has 

revolutionized breeding efforts. The information is used to correlate DNA data to traits 

of interest, such as milk, fat, and protein production. Eventually, information derived 

from the markers will help dairy and beef producers streamline their identification and 

breeding efforts. Cutting test costs, while increasing genetic improvement in dairy cattle, 

will help make the U.S. breeding industry more globally competitive, and will benefit the 

domestic economy.

ARS researchers worked with Illumina to commercialize a new hi-tech tool, the 

BovineSNP50. Since its commercial availability in early 2008, sales of the 

BovineSNP50 total more than 200,000 samples (approximately $25 million) for 23 

scientific locations in 11 countries. The research was so intriguing and valuable to 

scientists worldwide that the researchers formed the iBMC consortium—(a consortium 

consisting of Illumina, Beltsville (ARS), Missouri University and Clay Center (ARS))—

to continue sharing and exploring genetic data generated using the BeadChip. In 

addition, other consortiums have been formed to evaluate using the technology to identity 

genetically important traits in sheep and pigs.

The iBMC Consortium team won one the USDA’s 2008 Outstanding Effort Technology 

Transfer Awards for this work, and a 2009 Federal Laboratory Consortium (FLC) Annual 

Award for Excellence in Technology Transfer. 

• Protecting U.S. Troops Against Insect-Borne Illness

ARS researchers in Gainesville, FL, teamed with the U.S. Marine Corps (USMC) to help 

solve a key problem—improving uniforms’ mosquito protection capabilities. Diseases 

transmitted by mosquitoes, like Malaria, West Nile virus, and Yellow Fever have a 

significant impact on military operations, both today and historically. 

Traditional methods of evaluating the efficacy of bug repellants applied to Army 

uniforms were not good indicators of how protective a uniform was, nor were they 

precise enough to qualify or disqualify uniforms factory-treated with bug repellent. 
19

Treating military uniforms is a multi-billion dollar industry, and properly treated 

uniforms can save the military time and money in medical expenses and disease 

treatment and can improve the efficacy of military units. 

ARS researchers devised a rigorous protocol to assess the ability of repellent-treated 

uniforms to protect from mosquito bites—a novel and logical indicator of disease risk. 

The process determines the number of bites received by a volunteer wearing a treated 

uniform and corrects for the untreated uniform to provide a more realistic and valid 

indicator of repellent efficacy. The USMC adopted ARS’s procedure as the “standard” 

for qualifying companies that factory-treat uniforms with repellent. 

In 2007, qualified contractors treated the USMC’s entire stock of 384,000 Marine Corps 

Combat Utility Uniforms. The treated uniforms provide more than 90% bite protection 

for more than 50 wash cycles—exceeding uniforms’ maximum life. The Natick Soldier 

Center, which oversees development of U.S. Army uniforms, is now using the ARS 

technology to evaluate uniform treatment and to guide development of more than four 

million uniforms—including new Fire Resistant Army Combat Uniforms, manufactured 

from flame-resistant fabrics.

Medical treatment of individual personnel infected with diseases obtained from insects 

can cost over 100 times more than a properly treated uniform. ARS’s technological 

contributions have had a significant impact in protecting American service personnel 

from illness, and have resulted in cost savings to the Federal government and U.S. 

taxpayers.

• Nutritious Food Based Wraps

A rainbow of new flavorful, healthy sushi-type wraps will be appearing soon on a menu 

near you. Food technologists at ARS’s Processed Foods Research Unit in Albany, CA, 

developed (and filed for patent protection) fruit and vegetable sheet wraps, or sheets that 

can be used in the culinary arts and food preparation. Along with CRADA partner 

Origami Foods, LLC of Pleasanton, CA, ARS developed a variety of food based wraps to 

envelop any number of fillings, including bright-orange carrot-based wraps, deep-red 

tomato and basil wraps, pineapple-apricot-ginger wraps, broccoli wraps, and even 

blueberry and strawberry wraps for desserts. 

All the wraps are at least 75 percent vegetable or fruit, and include other wholesome 

natural ingredients. Besides being fun to eat, the sushi-style delicacies are ideal for 

weight-conscious Americans trying to control portion size. 

The researchers perfected the formulations—with culinary input from two well-known 

sushi chefs and other food industry experts—and techniques for making the wraps at 

ARS’s pilot plant at the Western Regional Research Center in California. Origami 

recently opened a factory with six full-time employees in Stockton, California, a rural 

area in need of new employment opportunities, to mass-produce the product. The San 

Joaquin County Revolving Loan Fund (local government unit), approved financing for 

the factory and provided assistance in selecting a site and providing permits. 
20

The carrot wraps are available on Sunny California Roll sushi products around the 

country in Trader Joes stores, and the apple wraps are available on spiral cut hams as 

glaze sheets.

Department of Commerce (DOC) 

At the Department Commerce, R&D in numerous areas of science and technology is 

conducted at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and the Institute for 

Telecommunication Sciences (ITS) within the National Telecommunications and 

Information Administration.

More information about DOC technology transfer is available on the following websites:

NIST: http://patapsco.nist.gov/ts/220/external/index.htm

NOAA: http://www.noaa.gov/

ITS: http://www.its.bldrdoc.gov/programs/tech_transfer/

National Institute of Standards and Technology

NIST’s mission is to promote U.S. innovation and industrial competitiveness by 

advancing measurement science, standards, and technology in ways that enhance 

economic security and improve quality of life. NIST laboratories develop and 

disseminate measurement techniques, reference data, test methods, standards, and other 

infrastructural technologies and services that support U.S. industry, scientific research, 

and the activities of many federal agencies. In carrying out its mission, NIST works 

directly with industry partners (and consortia), universities, associations, and other 

government agencies.

• World Trade Center Study Inspires Strengthened International Building, Fire 

Codes

Future buildings, especially tall structures, will be increasingly resistant to fire, more 

easily evacuated in emergencies, and safer overall thanks to 23 major and far-reaching 

building and fire code changes approved recently by the International Code Council 

(ICC). These changes are based on recommendations from NIST. The recommendations 

were part of NIST’s investigation of the collapses of New York City’s World Trade 

Center (WTC) towers on Sept. 11, 2001.

The changes, adopted at the ICC hearings held Sept. 15-21, 2008, in Minneapolis, Minn., 

will be incorporated into the 2009 edition of the ICC’s I-Codes (specifically the 

International Building Code, or IBC, and the International Fire Code, or IFC), a state-ofthe-art model code used as the basis for building and fire regulations promulgated and 

enforced by U.S. state and local jurisdictions. Those jurisdictions have the option of 

incorporating some or all of the code’s provisions, but historically adopt most provisions.

The new codes address areas such as increasing structural resistance to building collapse 

from fire and other incidents; requiring a third exit stairway for tall buildings; increasing 

the width of all stairways by 50 percent in new high-rises; strengthening criteria for the 
21

bonding, proper installation and inspection of sprayed fire-resistant materials (commonly 

known as “fireproofing”); improving the reliability of active fire protection systems (i.e., 

automatic sprinklers); requiring a new class of robust elevators for access by emergency 

responders in lieu of an additional stairway; making exit path markings more prevalent 

and more visible; and ensuring effective coverage throughout a building for emergency 

responder radio communications.

• Building Software Offers Green Product Advice

NIST has developed a powerful technique for selecting cost-effective, environmentallypreferable building products. Known as BEES® (Building for Environmental and 

Economic Sustainability), the Windows-based decision support software, aimed at 

designers, builders, and product manufacturers, includes actual environmental and 

economic performance data for over 230 building products. The tool is based on 

consensus standards and designed to be practical, flexible, and transparent. BEES reduces 

complex, science-based technical content (e.g., over 500 material and energy flows from 

raw material extraction through product disposal) to decision-enabling results and 

delivers them in a visually intuitive graphical format. 

BEES 4.0 (Building for Environmental and Economic Sustainability version 4) measures 

both the environmental and economic performance of building products with life-cycle 

assessment techniques developed respectively by the International Organization of 

Standardization (ISO) and American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) 

International.

• American Society for Testing and Materials

With BEES a user can ascertain, for instance, the environmental impact of a product at 

any stage of its existence—raw material acquisition, manufacture, transportation,

installation, use, and recycling and waste management. The environmental ramifications 

of the product at each of these stages are provided for each of 12 categories: global 

warming, acidification, eutrophication, fossil fuel depletion, indoor air quality, habitat 

alteration, human health, ecological toxicity, ozone depletion, smog, criteria air pollutants 

and water intake. The new consensus weight option, developed by a panel of building 

product manufacturers, green building designers and environmental assessment experts, 

allows users to evaluate environmental impacts considering short-, medium- and longterm effects.

Comprehensive economic performance data are similarly available for the costs of initial 

investment, replacement, operation, maintenance and repair, and disposal. 

Environmental and economic performances are combined into an overall performance 

measure using the ASTM standard for Multi-Attribute Decision Analysis. For the entire 

BEES analysis, building products are defined and classified according to the ASTM 

standard classification for building elements known as UNIFORMAT II.

BEES 4.0 includes a number of new non-biobased products, including carpeting from 

several manufacturers who agree to purchase carbon credits to offset the product’s lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions. These and other products, such as biobased carpets, roof 
22

coatings, building maintenance products and fertilizers that qualify for a government 

“green” preferential purchase program, could increase builder participation in the 

nation’s general push for green buildings. 

The U.S. Department of Agriculture Chief Economist’s Office of Energy Policy and New 

Uses supported NIST’s BEES research on biobased products. The U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency also makes BEES available through its website.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

The mission of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is to 

understand and predict changes in the Earth’s environment and conserve and manage 

coastal and marine resources to meet the Nation’s economic, social, and environmental 

needs. This mission will become ever more critical in the 21st century as national needs 

intensify concerning global warming, freshwater supply, ecosystem management, and 

homeland security.

• Deep-ocean Assessment and Reporting of Tsunamis (DART®)

The first Deep-ocean Assessment and Reporting of Tsunamis (DART®) station was 

launched in the Indian Ocean in December 2006. In FY2008, NOAA’s Pacific Marine 

Environmental Laboratory (PMEL) continued to support efforts to transfer tsunamidetection related technology used to improve warnings world-wide. Familiarization and 

training were provided to the Science Applications International Corporation DART® 

team from September 22 through Oct 3, 2008 in support of the Special Studies 

Agreement to assist the technology transfer to the commercial sector. Two separate

Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) in place with Indonesia and Australia, resulted in 

Australia’s establishment of a second DART® station supported by Australia, located in 

the Coral Sea. A training deployment cruise from Indonesia was undertaken by PMEL 

and Indonesian engineers in June, 2008 under the auspices of the U.S. Agency for 

International Development (USAID) MOU. Data from all DART® buoys is available on 

line in real-time: http://www.ndbc.noaa.gov/dart.shtml.

Department of Defense (DoD)

The purpose of the Office of Technology Transition is to ensure, to the maximum extent 

practicable, that technology developed for national security purposes is integrated into the 

private sector of the United States in order to enhance national technology and industrial 

base, reinvestment and conversion activities.

Each of the military services, defense agencies, and Office of the Secretary of Defense

(OSD) maintain technology transfer websites to inform the public and make available 

general information. 

The websites are:

http://www.acq.osd.mil/ott/techtransit
23

http://www.arl.army.mil/main/Main/default.cfm?Action=6

http://www.onr.navy.mil/sci_tech/3t/transition/tech_tran/

http://www.wpafb.af.mil/library/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=6026

http://www.mda.mil/mdalink/html/transfer.html

http://www.nsa.gov/techtrans/index.cfm

http://www.jfcom.mil/about/industry.htm

• U.S. Army’s Bleeding Simulation System Goes Commercial

The Field Expedient Bleeding Simulation System is an interactive casualty simulation 

tool that, when coupled with professional educators and exercises, provides a chaotic, 

hectic, yet controlled learning environment for Combat Medics. The Field Expedient 

Bleeding Simulation System was developed by former Army Medic Trainer Sergeant 

Lynn Randall King at the U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command Center 

and School’s Fort Carson 91W School satellite program. 

Existing training tools didn’t sufficiently recreate the stress and difficulty of managing 

hemorrhaging from wounds and shock control on the battlefield. Making training as real 

as possible is a key to having trainees be as prepared as possible before they face the 

intensity of treating actual casualties with severe bleeding. To this end, the Field 

Expedient Bleeding Simulation System can be installed or retrofitted into training 

mannequins or sewn into apparel worn by training personnel. Bladder bags can pump 

simulated blood from tubes placed throughout the system. Through the use of a wireless 

remote control, the amount of bleeding from “wounds” can vary and differ in terms of 

intensity, pressure, and location.

The U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command (AMEDD) signed a CRADA 

and facilitated a license of the FEBSS technology with SKEDCO, Inc. of Tualatin, 

Oregon. SKEDCO has delivered over 100 units to train Combat Medics and is starting to 

make sales to schools for paramedic training.

• Trivalent Chromium Processes

Researchers at the Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division, Patuxent River, MD, 

developed a suite of patents that provide non-carcinogenic anti-corrosion coatings for 

multiple finishes collectively known as Trivalent Chromium Processes (TCP). Originally 

TCP were developed to protect Navy aircraft at sea as an alternative to hexavalentchromium (HC), a widely used but toxic corrosion inhibitor.

The vast potential in the private sector for TCP led the Navy technology transfer team to 

begin a multidisciplinary effort to get it to market. The effort included establishing a 

standard of licensing multiple patents to multiple companies in both national and 

international markets.

The enormous effort paid off as TCP was licensed to four companies that have already 

earned millions in sales of TCP-based products and are now reaching new markets. TCP 

is now being used throughout the military, including the new Marine Corps 
24

Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle, H-64 helicopter, Navy H-60R/S helicopter, and the 

Marine Corps H-53K helicopter.

• Ultra High-Pressure (UHP) Water Firefighting Technology

Researchers at the Air Force Research Laboratory Materials and Manufacturing 

Directorate developed an ultra high-pressure water fire-fighting apparatus designed with 

an emphasis on extinguishing hydrocarbon fuel fires. The Air Force needed a reliable, 

lightweight, compact fire truck that could easily fit into a C-130 aircraft.

The First Response Expeditionary Vehicle, an air-deployable All-Terrain Vehicle with a 

mounted Ultra High-Pressure system, was developed by the Air Force Fire Research 

Group and currently is the only fire fighting asset in the Air Force inventory capable of 

being dropped from an aircraft. Coupled with a Ultra High Pressure P-19 turret that is 

capable of supporting Ultra High Pressure water technology, compressed air foam, and 

dry chemical agent, the First Response Expeditionary Vehicle allows the application of 

the agent more efficiently while improving visibility for the firefighters because they can 

see both the agent stream as well as the target from one vantage point. 

After extensive testing and system optimization, the First Response Expeditionary 

Vehicle was transitioned for commercial production through Rosenbauer America and 

HMA Fire by way of a CRADA. The Air Force plans to procure an initial order of 90 

units, with a grand total of 200 units projected. 

Department of Energy (DOE) 

The Department of Energy’s seventeen national laboratories conduct much of its 

fundamental and applied research, and they license to and collaborate with industry and 

academia to develop and commercialize energy products and processes for commercial 

use. Technology partnering in a broad sense has been an important focus for DOE 

technology transfer, and it is a significant means for DOE laboratories and facilities to 

engage Federal, private and academic entities in arrangements to advance the process of 

technology development and commercialization. These arrangements leverage 

capabilities found in DOE facilities, including national user facilities, computational 

facilities, and science laboratories, with industrial research and production facilities. 

The Department oversees the construction and operation of some of the Nation's most 

advanced research and development user facilities, located at national laboratories and 

universities. These state-of-the-art facilities are shared with the science community 

worldwide and offer some technologies and instrumentation that are available nowhere 

else. These facilities include particle and nuclear physics accelerators, synchrotron light 

sources, neutron scattering facilities, genome sequencing facilities, supercomputers, and 

high-speed computer networks. In the 2007 fiscal year, these facilities were used by 

more than 21,000 researchers from universities, national laboratories, private industry, 

and other federal science agencies. One of the newest is the Spallation Neutron Source, 

an accelerator-based neutron source in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, a one-of-a-kind facility 

that provides the most intense pulsed neutron beams in the world for scientific research 
25

and industrial development. The most recent facility to come on line is the National 

Ignition Facility. As the world's largest and highest-energy laser, this facility will 

provide the scientific community with an unprecedented capability for studying materials 

at extreme pressures, temperatures and densities. 

In an effort to enhance technology transfer activities and facilitating access to its 

facilities, the Department recently instituted two new model agreements available to 

academia and industry. These are pre-approved, standardized model agreements, one for 

proprietary research, and the other for non-proprietary research. The agreements are 

authorized for use at all designated DOE user facilities at all DOE laboratories.

Prospective users may use the same applicable general agreement at every facility. The 

agreements are intended to require minimal, if any, further negotiation and to be quickly 

executable. This new approach will allow both university and industrial researchers 

greater access to the DOE specialized facilities across the DOE laboratory system, 

permitting them to work more closely with scientists at the national laboratories.

More information about the DOE technology transfer program and the new model 

agreements can be found at:

http://www.science.doe.gov/Technology_Transfer/overview.htm

• Inexpensive Fuel Cell Catalysts

Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) researchers have developed innovative methods of 

producing platinum catalysts that offer much greater control over the shape, size, 

porosity, composition, stability, and other functional properties of platinum 

nanostructures than those achieved by existing methods. Most fuel cells use platinum or 

platinum alloys as catalysts. However, the limited supply of platinum is a potential 

barrier to widespread fuel cell use. These highly efficient and durable nanostructured 

catalysts are expected to reduce the amount of platinum needed and thus reduce the cost 

of platinum catalysts for use in fuel cells, solar cells, and other applications in the 

renewable energy sector. SNL has licensed these platinum catalysts for use in the fuel 

cell field to Compass Metals, Inc.

Under a multi-year cooperative research and development agreement, Sandia and 

Compass Metals are also collaborating to improve further the synthesis of platinum 

nanomaterials in large-scale preparations, to determine the best methods for incorporating

these new nanomaterials in the fabrication of fuel cell electrodes and to discover new 

nanomaterials. 

Compass Metals is scaling up preparation of the existing SNL catalysts, and those 

developed through the collaboration, and will work with established fuel cell 

manufacturers in the United States to evaluate these new catalysts and integrate them into 

existing fuel cell designs. 

SNL is managed and operated under contract to the DOE National Nuclear Security 

Administration by the Sandia Corporation, a Lockheed Martin company.
26

• Optical Furnace Technology Sparks Solar Industry Interest

Advanced optical furnace technology for manufacturing thin-film silicon solar cells, 

developed by the Department of Energy’s National Renewable Energy Laboratory

(NREL), has been recognized by Applied Optical Systems for its great potential in 

developing such solar cells with up to 15 to 18 percent higher efficiencies than presently 

available. This optical furnace technology will also make it possible to process a thinfilm solar cell in only a few minutes, which reduces manufacturing costs. This advanced 

optical furnace is highly energy efficient, and it can be used to manufacture any type of 

thin-film solar cell; it can benefit any solar cell manufacturer.

Each type of solar cell or manufacturing process typically requires a different furnace 

configuration and temperature profile. With NREL’s new optical furnace system, a solar 

cell manufacturer can ask a computer for any temperature profile needed for processing a 

solar cell, and the same type of furnace is suitable for several solar cell fabrication 

process steps.

For manufacturing these thin-film silicon cells, Applied Optical Systems and NREL have 

developed a partnership through a cooperative research and development agreement to 

construct an optical furnace system prototype. The U.S. Department of Energy has 

recognized the significant potential of this technology, and has provided funding through 

the Technology Commercialization Deployment Fund (TCDF) to develop the prototype 

design. The TCF Program has provided NREL with additional funds to expand such 

collaborative efforts between NREL researchers and companies.

“In the future, solar cell manufacturers will only need this one optical furnace because it 

can be used for any process, including diffusion, metallization and oxidation,” says 

Bhushan Sopori, a principal engineer at NREL, “This helps reduce manufacturing costs.”

NREL is managed and operated under contract to the DOE Office of Energy Efficiency

and Renewable Energy (EERE) by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC, a joint 

venture between the Midwest Research Institute and the Battelle Memorial Institute.

• Solid Electrolyte for Rechargeable Lithium Batteries

Nanostructured polymer electrolyte (NPE) developed at the Department of Energy’s 

Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) is a solid electrolyte designed for use in 

rechargeable lithium batteries. Using this technology, which it has licensed from LBNL, 

Seeo, Inc., LBNL is now developing a completely solid-state rechargeable Li battery with 

the potential to overcome the energy density – or energy storage capacity - limitations 

and improve the safety and lifetime of rechargeable batteries. These batteries could be 

employed in electric and hybrid vehicles, cell phones, laptops, and medical devices, 

among other applications.

Solid-state batteries containing Berkeley Lab’s NPE would introduce a radically new 

architecture with the potential to enable electric battery-driven transportation technology. 

LBNL’s NPE exhibits high ionic conductivity and can be engineered to be mechanically 

rigid enough to resist the growth of dendrites, which cause batteries to short and 

sometimes explode. NPE-based batteries are inherently safe because they lack the 

reactive and flammable organic liquid electrolytes of conventional lithium ion batteries. 
27

The safety of the new NPE may enable the use of a lithium metal anode in place of a 

traditional lithium ion anode, which would significantly enhance the energy density of 

the battery. Another advantage of LBNL’s NPE is that it can readily be incorporated into 

casting and roll-to-roll processing methodologies already used in current lithium battery 

manufacturing.

Solid-state lithium ion batteries made possible by LBNL’s NPE are expected to meet the 

energy density goal established by the Department of Energy for electric vehicles – the 

highest hurdle for battery technology. In addition, predictions based on recent tests 

indicate that the Seeo batteries will achieve the United States Advanced Battery 

Consortium (USABC) goal of 5,000 cycles.

LBNL’s nanostructured polymer electrolyte technology as a basis for Seeo’s batteries 

provides a strong opportunity to achieve vehicles that can be powered from the electric 

grid due to increasing quantities of mobile energy production, while also reducing 

greenhouse gas emissions.

LBNL is managed and operated under contract to the DOE Office of Science by the 

University of California.

Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)

Research at the Department of Health and Human Services is conducted by the Center for 

Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Federal Drug Administration (FDA), and the 

National Institutes of Health (NIH). 

The NIH has as its mission the conduct and support of biomedical research to improve 

the public health. The Office of Technology Transfer (OTT), Office of the Director, 

NIH, is responsible for identifying, evaluating, protecting and marketing technologies 

derived in NIH intramural laboratories. OTT transfers these technologies through 

licenses to the private sector, where they can be further developed into products used in 

the prevention, diagnosis, or treatment of disease.

Effectively measuring the public health outcomes that result from such technologies is 

challenging and complex. Traditionally, efforts to measure the effect of technology 

transfer activities focus on outputs such as the number of patents and licenses or the 

amount of royalties generated. However, this approach does not depict the full scope of 

activities, and may, in fact, distort the importance of ensuring that novel biomedical 

inventions are commercialized.

Therefore, NIH has a method for measuring technology transfer outcomes that focuses on 

the manner and extent to which technologies developed in NIH laboratories and 

transferred to commercial partners are meeting the NIH mission of improving the public 

health. NIH conducted ten case studies using this method. These case studies are a part 

of a series. The full ten case studies are available at: 

http://www.ott.nih.gov/about_nih/success_stories.html#pdfLink
28

For more information about the HHS technology transfer program please visit: 

CDC: http://www.cdc.gov/od/science/techTran 

FDA: http://www.fda.gov/ScienceResearch/CollaborativeOpportunities/default.htm

NIH: http://www.ott.nih.gov/about_nih/about.aspx

• Efficient Production Method Developed For Hib and Meningitis Vaccines (FDA) 

A new FDA technology provides for a rapid high efficacy conjugation method developed 

for production of polysaccharide-protein conjugate vaccines. Polysaccharide-protein 

conjugate vaccines are a new class of vaccines designed to immunize infants and healthy 

children against diseases caused by invasive bacteria, including H influenzae type b (Hib) 

and meningitis. Bacteria such as these are often difficult to vaccinate against effectively 

as their polysaccharide outer coats are poorly immunogenic. By linking these outer coats 

to proteins, the immune system can be led to recognize the polysaccharide as if it were a 

protein antigen and generate protective antibodies against it. The NIH Office of 

Technology Transfer licensed this technology for use for commercialization by 

organizations in India and South Africa.

• New Treatment Licensed for Rare Disease Disorder in Children (NIH)

New inventions at the NIH provide for a potential gene therapy treatment for a rare 

disease, Glycogen Storage Disease (GSD) Type I. GSD Type I is an inherited disorder 

that affects the metabolism - the way the body breaks food down into energy. Although 

is not known how many children die without ever having been properly diagnosed, 

children born with GSD I typically exhibit low blood sugar, an enlarged liver, failure to 

thrive, developmental delay and seizures. This technology, licensed to small business for 

commercial development, is an excellent example of a license agreement that supports 

the NIH’s role in trying to address all categories of disease states, i.e., novel technologies 

are developed and licensed for small patient populations and not just for the blockbuster 

drugs. The NIH Office of Technology Transfer and the NIH intramural research program 

are particularly focused on meeting unmet health needs and these types of agreements are 

typical of their licensing efforts.

• New Live Attenuated Vaccine against All Four Types of Dengue Infection (CDC)

Vaccine discoveries at the CDC have formed the basis for a new live attenuated dengue 

fever vaccine. Dengue fever and dengue hemorrhagic fever are viral diseases that are 

among the most significant viral illnesses transmitted by mosquitoes to humans 

worldwide. Over 2.5 billion people, including travelers, are at risk of contracting dengue 

illness in countries in tropical regions of the world. The case fatality rate for dengue 

infections is about 5% in most countries, with most fatal cases occurring among children 

and young adults. This new vaccine discovery, along with new safety assays for it, has 

been licensed to a small biotechnology company for manufacture and testing in humans. 

The license agreement was completed by the CDC Office of Technology Transfer with a 

goal of bringing a safe and effective tetravalent dengue vaccine to save millions of lives 

and decrease the economic burdens cause by dengue disease. 
29

Department of Homeland Security (DHS) 

The Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Research and Technology 

Applications (ORTA) was established in February 2008. Housed in the Science and 

Technology Directorate, the ORTA is responsible for developing and instituting policies 

to facilitate technology transfer in accordance with 15 USC 3710 throughout DHS and its 

laboratories. The ORTA’s responsibilities include:

- Standardizing and approving DHS Cooperative Research and Development 

Agreements (CRADAs), licensing, and other technology transfer agreements;

- Preparing application assessments for selected research and development projects 

in which the DHS Laboratory is involved and may have commercial application;

- Providing and disseminating information on Federally owned or originated 

technologies which have potential application to State and local governments and 

private industry;

- Preparing and providing an annual report to Congress and the President through 

submission to the National Institute of Standards and Technologies (NIST);

- Developing training programs on technology transfer and intellectual property for 

DHS employees; and

- Establishing an intellectual property program for DHS to track and prosecute 

patents and other intellectual property, and to develop a royalty and rewards 

policy.

The Department of Homeland Security has laboratories with varying capabilities 

throughout the United States. With the exception of the Coast Guard Research and 

Development Center, the DHS laboratories listed are within the Science and Technology 

Directorate. DHS Laboratories included in 2008’s reported data are: 

- Chemical Security Analysis Center (CSAC)

- Coast Guard Research and Development Center

- Environmental Measurements Laboratory (EML)

- National Biological Analysis and Countermeasures Center (NBACC)

- Plum Island Animal Disease Center (PIADC)

- Transportation Security Laboratory (TSL).

In addition, the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC) provided data. The 

FLETC has the authority to conduct technology transfer.

For more information on DHS laboratories and their capabilities, visit the website at

http://www.dhs.gov/xres/labs/

• Trademark Licensing Program

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has several trademarks that have been 

licensed to third-parties for use although no revenue is generated from such licensing. 

DHS has several programs that interface directly with the public and has developed 

names and logos to identify these programs. DHS claims common law trademark rights 

to several of these public facing program names and logos and has sought Federal 

protection through registration with the United States Patent and Trademark Office 

(USPTO). Federal registration is an important tool for DHS to legally protect itself 
30

against those seeking to appropriate the DHS marks or use them for unauthorized 

endorsements. The DHS marks include TWICTM, E-VERIFY®, READY®, ESTATM, 

FLUXTM, CYBER CORPTM, GRaDERTM, among many others. DHS’ intellectual 

property policy, which is accessible on the dhs.gov website, provides notice to the public 

that authorization is needed to use any of the DHS marks. 

The E-VERIFY® mark, for example, is one of the DHS marks that have been licensed to 

third parties. The E-VERIFY® mark is currently licensed to approximately 16 E-Verify 

participants. The E-Verify program is an internet based system operated by DHS in 

partnership with the Social Security Administration (SSA) that allows participating 

employers to electronically verify the employment eligibility of their newly hired 

employees. The E-VERIFY® license authorizes the participating employers to use the EVERIFY® logo on their respective company advertising or marketing materials. Another 

example of DHS marks that are licensed to third parties are the Ready Campaign marks. 

The Ready Campaign is a national public service advertising campaign developed in 

partnership with the Advertising Council to educate and empower Americans to prepare 

for and respond to emergencies including natural disasters and potential terrorist attacks. 

DHS has a suite of logos and characters associated with the public service campaign and 

has granted at least one commercial entity and various state and local governmental 

organizations the limited right to use the READY® marks on products intended to 

support National Preparedness Month. 

Department of the Interior (DOI) 

The United States Geological Survey

The United States Geological Survey (USGS) is a bureau of the Department of the 

Interior. The mission of the USGS is to serve the nation by providing reliable scientific 

information to describe and understand the Earth, minimize loss of life and property from 

natural disasters, manage water, biological, energy, and mineral resources, and enhance 

and protect our quality of life.

Since delivery of science information is a primary purpose of the agency, technology 

transfer activities with the public sector and the private sector, including academia and 

non-profits, typically support the collection and transference of scientific data

(knowledge dissemination). The USGS cooperates with its public and private 

collaborators to help them maintain necessary services, better understand the 

environmental consequences of their commercial and non-commercial activities, and to 

develop new products and services.

For more information please visit:

http://www.usgs.gov/tech-transfer/contacts.html
31

• CRADA Underway to Control Invasive Aquatic Species in Great Lakes and 

Upper Mississippi

The USGS Upper Midwest Environmental Science Center (UMESC) and Advanced 

BioNutrition Corp. (ABN) have entered into a traditional CRADA for the development of 

integrated delivery mechanisms to control aquatic invasive species and their pathogens. 

Today, there are over 180 invasive species that have been introduced into the Great Lakes 

and the Upper Mississippi River System. One new invasive species is added every 8 

months. ABN is a U.S. company with proprietary technology in a product called 

MicroMatrixTM, capable of delivering a broad range of biological and chemical products, 

including vaccines and probiotics, orally to specific aquatic species while minimizing 

harmful effects to other species. The USGS and ABN have negotiated a five year 

CRADA to research and develop methodologies to deliver a variety of bioactive 

compounds to control invasive organisms and their pathogens. 

At the outset, their research will focus on the control of Asian carp including silver and 

bighead carp. Later, the parties plan to focus their research on tools to control zebra and 

quagga mussels, faucet snails or hosted trematode parasites, larval sea lamprey, and 

common carp. Their research will focus on the unique feeding strategies of these 

invasive species to target specific oral, mucosal or gastrointestinal sites for delivery to 

them of specific pathogenic compounds. 

• Innovative, Cost-Effective Well Profiling Technology

In 2004, the USGS licensed two sister patents disclosing an apparatus and process to 

evaluate well bore water flow and obtain ground well water chemistry data. In brief, the 

inventions offered a way to sample well water and profile wells without removing large 

turbine pumps, a costly endeavor that, prior to the introduction of the USGS-patented 

technology, was the only way to obtain the needed data. These wells have limited access, 

e.g., clearances as small as 1 inch that can be exploited by applying the teachings of the 

patents without having to remove the pumps. Thus, sampling can take place much more 

easily and cheaply. Over the past four years, the licensee has successfully introduced this 

technology in several Western states and is growing the market by educating potential 

customers about the cost savings they may realize through its use.

Bureau of Reclamation

The Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) is responsible for water and hydropower 

deliveries for Reclamation projects throughout the 17 Western states. Reclamation 

manages several research programs that provide advanced solutions to a broad range of 

water and power management issues. The research results serve to improve Reclamation 

water management practices, increase water supply, and ensure cost-effective power 

generation operations to benefit Reclamation’s stakeholders. 

The Reclamation Research and Development (R&D) programs that participate in federal 

technology transfer legislative activities are the Science and Technology Program, the 

Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program, and the Operations and Maintenance 

Program. 
32

The broad scope of some of Reclamation research solutions can be viewed from the link:

http://www.usbr.gov/research/science-and-tech/research/results/index.html

• Cellulose Acetate Membrane 

In collaboration with Separation Systems Technology Inc. (SST), Reclamation 

researchers have developed new cellulose acetate membranes that perform better than 

existing cellulose acetate membranes by removing more salts at lower operating 

pressures. Reclamation’s patented membrane manufacturing process incorporates a 

solvent processing step that is more effective at removing impurities than previous 

methods. Initial tests of new cellulose acetate membranes were conducted at SST, and 

testing of additional membranes is ongoing. Further long-term tests will be conducted at 

Reclamation’s Water Quality Improvement Center in Yuma, AZ and/or its Brackish 

Groundwater National Desalinization Research Facility in Alamogordo, NM.

Currently, flat sheets of cellulose acetate membrane are being tested. The next step is to 

conduct testing on commercial reverse osmosis membrane prototypes. This 2” diameter 

by 40” long spiral-wound membranes will be tested under a range of water salt 

concentrations and operating pressures. Reclamation is currently seeking an industry 

partner(s) to cooperate in further testing and commercialization of these new cellulose 

membranes. 

Department of Transportation (DOT) 

The Department of Transportation (DOT) is the Federal steward of the nation’s 

transportation system. DOT is made up of many transportation agencies and programs, 

all of which seek to apply innovations from the research and development (R&D) 

programs to fulfill the key goals of the Department: safety, mobility, global connectivity, 

environmental stewardship, security, and organizational excellence. Technology 

Transfer is carried out in all of laboratories in the Department. They include the Federal 

Aviation Administration’s (FAA) William J. Hughes Technical Center, the Federal 

Highway Administration’s (FHWA) Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center, and the 

Research and Innovative Technology Administration’s (RITA) Volpe National 

Transportation Systems Center (Volpe Center). Beginning in 2004 the Research and 

Innovative Technology Administration was charged with the coordination of technology 

transfer efforts across the Department. 

For more information about the DOT technology transfer please visit:

FAA: http://faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ato/tc/initiatives/ttp

FHWA: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov

RITA: http://www.volpe.dot.gov/ourwork/techtrns.html

• State-of-the-Art Vehicle Safety Systems

The Volpe Center serves as the independent evaluator of the Integrated Vehicle-Based 

Safety Systems (IVBSS) project, the first large-scale initiative for both light vehicle and 

heavy truck platforms focused on safety system integration. IVBSS technologies warn 
33

drivers in crash-imminent situations, helping to prevent rear-end, lane-change, and roaddeparture crashes.

IVBSS is a cooperative effort by an industry team led by the University of Michigan 

Transportation Research Institute and the U.S. DOT. The team includes the National 

Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), the Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration (FMCSA), and the Research and Innovative Technology Administration 

Intelligent Transportation Systems Joint Program Office (RITA JPO).

The IVBSS research initiative seeks to accelerate the introduction and commercialization 

of integrated vehicle-based crash warning systems for light vehicles and heavy trucks. 

The objective is to assess potential safety benefits and driver acceptance of the integrated 

safety systems. These integrated systems are expected to prevent conflicting warnings, 

reduce false alarms, enhance consumer and fleet operator acceptance, and boost product 

marketability.

The Volpe Center team worked closely with U.S. DOT and industry team members and 

provided expert input to the IVBSS program, including:

• IVBSS system design and functionality.

• Verification of test procedures for track and public road tests for cars and trucks.

• Test-track and public road verification testing of prototype IVBSS on both cars and 

trucks.

• Evaluation of verification test results.

• Recommended system performance enhancements prior to the field trials.

Based on test results, the project will proceed with large field operational tests (FOTs) of 

IVBSS-equipped light vehicles and heavy trucks in 2009.

The Volpe Center team prepared an independent evaluation plan for IVBSS based on 

data to be collected in the FOTs in 2009, developed data mining algorithms, and devised 

analytical techniques to forecast the safety benefits likely to accrue from widespread 

national IVBSS deployment.

• Integrated Electronic Flight Data Interface (EFDI)

Dr. Todd Truitt, an engineering research psychologist with the Federal Aviation 

Administration's (FAA) William J. Hughes Technical Center in Atlantic City, N.J., and 

member of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, has created "Concept 

Development and Design Description of Electronic Flight Data Interfaces for Airport 

Traffic Control Towers."

Dramatic projected increases in air traffic and focused modernization efforts have led the 

FAA to consider replacing paper flight progress strips with an electronic alternative. 

Electronic flight data (EFD) interfaces can potentially increase a controller's ability to 

acquire, track and record information, as well as communicate and coordinate that 

information with others. More importantly, EFD can improve controller efficiency by 

providing new methods of flight data management that integrates information into a 

single source, enhancing safety.
34

The first prototype interface, the Integrated EFDI, combines textual EFD with an airport 

surface situation display provided by Airport Surface Detection Equipment - Model X 

(ASDE-X) radar. The second prototype interface, the Perceptual-Spatial (P-S) EFDI, 

combines textual EFD with an airport surface map, without using ASDE-X radar. This 

interface also functions as a backup flight data management system to the Integrated 

EFDI if ASDE-X capabilities were to fail.

"We were excited to demonstrate the effectiveness of electronic flight data interfaces to 

such an influential target audience," said Deborah Germak, the FAA's Technology 

Transfer Program Manager. "This new design and technology has the potential to 

enhance the performance of air traffic controllers and the National Airspace System, 

overall."

• The Next Generation Simulation Community Concept

Transportation professionals use traffic simulation models to design, evaluate, and

optimize existing and planned transportation facilities and systems. With today’s 

congested and complex transportation facilities, it is critical that traffic simulation models 

be accurate and trustworthy so that sound transportation decisions can be made. To help 

address this issue, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Turner-Fairbank 

Highway Research Center launched the Traffic Analysis Tools Program to develop new 

and improved analysis methods and facilitate deployment of existing tools. As part of this 

effort, FHWA sponsored the Next Generation Simulation (NGSIM) program to improve 

the quality of traffic simulation tools and promote the use of simulation research. The 

NGSIM program has had a significant impact on the traffic simulation community. One 

significant shift included a change in the role of FHWA within the community. Rather 

than continuing its traditional role developing, distributing, and supporting simulation 

tools as a competitor in the marketplace of traffic analysis tools, FHWA instead chose a 

new role of market facilitator.

The NGSIM trajectory data sets have been utilized by researchers world-wide in a variety 

of other research efforts outside the scope of the NGSIM program. In addition to 

providing valuable data sets, driver-behavior algorithms and some research funding, the 

NGSIM program has actively engaged traffic simulation vendors to accelerate the 

validation and implementation of these advanced and improved algorithms in the 

commercial models used across the nation. The NGSIM program has resulted in 

unprecedented collaboration between software developers, researchers, and software tool 

end-users. The end result is that almost five years after the inception of the NGSIM 

program, there is a critical mass of individuals composing an NGSIM community – a 

diverse and collaborative collection of academics, public sector staff, consultants and 

other analysts seeking to improve the underlying fidelity and accuracy of traffic 

simulation analysis. 

Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)

The mission of VA’s Technology Transfer Program (TTP) is to serve veterans and the 

American public by commercializing worthy discoveries made by VA employees in 
35

furtherance of VA’s research mission. This requires a program that educates inventors 

concerning their rights and obligations, rigorously evaluates all inventions, obtains 

patents, and assists in the commercialization of new products. It also requires consistent 

policies that govern the necessary relationships between investigator (i.e., inventor), 

academic partners, local VA medical centers, VHA-affiliated non-profit corporations, 

industry, and the Department of Commerce.

More information is available on the VA's Technology Transfer Program website:

http://www.research.va.gov/programs/tech_transfer/default.cfm

• Soft Suicide Prevention Door

One of VA’s licenses this year was The Soft Suicide Prevention Door (SSPD). This 

technology was invented as a result of the increased awareness to improve the physical 

safety of acute Mental Health Units and is non-exclusively licensed to Kennon Aircraft 

Covers. The SSPD was created by VA employees at the Sheridan, Wyoming VAMC 

specifically for acute psychiatric units. The design of the door is such that it provides 

privacy for the patient when using the bathroom or shower, yet does not provide the 

anchor points that a hard core door or shower curtain provides that are used for suicide. 

Recently, National Center for Patient Safety (NCPS), an arm of the VA, publicized 

information that stated 75% of inpatient suicides involved hanging. The VA continues to 

maintain a strong position as a leader in Suicide Prevention and the SSPD has great 

potential to help reduce suicides in VA and all other Mental Health facilities. 

• Genetic Basis of Alzheimer's Disease and Diagnosis and Treatment Thereof

This invention describes genetic variations (polymorphisms) which, in combination, 

predict risk for Alzheimer’s disease. The invention is exclusively licensed to Perlegen 

Sciences, Inc. This invention can be used for predictive testing for drug trials to 

determine if specific groups respond preferentially to a drug and for the diagnosis of 

subjects in a drug trial. The genetic profile of these specific polymorphisms can be used 

to diagnose Alzheimer’s disease. The invention can help to develop genetic markers that 

may be useful for stratifying and predicting susceptibility to Alzheimer’s. It is 

anticipated that the diagnostic will be offered broadly in the market with the potential for 

preventing or delaying the onset of Alzheimer’s disease.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

EPA’s Federal Technology Transfer Act (FTTA) Program was established to promote 

collaboration between private and federal research. EPA offers exceptional opportunities 

to develop and commercialize new technologies. Through the authority given to EPA by 

the Federal Technology Transfer Act, EPA facilitates the transfer of new technologies to 

the marketplace while protecting intellectual property rights of all parties.

Partners in the FTTA Program will have the benefit of collaborating with world class

EPA scientists involved in leading-edge research. Collaboration enhances the quality of 

research projects and helps move the environmental technologies into the marketplace 

more quickly, resulting in better protection of human health and the environment.
36

Highlights of several outcomes of the Agency’s technology transfer activities are 

provided below. For more information please visit: http://www.epa.gov/osp/ftta.htm

• A New Age for Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance: 

Development of Portable, Plug-and-Plan Device Technology for On-Board Diagnostic 

Based Inspection and Maintenance Programs

The second generation of On-Board Diagnostic (OBD) Technology has been required by 

the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on Light-Duty Vehicles and 

Trucks (LDV/Ts) since the 1996 model year (MY) vehicles. OBD is designed to 

monitor, detect and indicate faults in critical emission control components/systems and 

emission-related components.

Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) Programs are currently present in 36 states in the 

U.S.A., the British Columbia and Ontario Provinces in Canada, and in several European 

Union countries. As a result of increasingly stringent emission standards, OBD has been 

implemented in existing I/M Programs to replace traditional, tailpipe emission 

measurement equipment. This paradigm shift represents an opportunity to streamline I/M 

Programs further by conducting remote vehicle inspections of OBD-equipped vehicles.

To support our I/M stakeholders, the EPA’s Office of Transportation and Air Quality 

(OTAQ) examined the possible methods of performing remote vehicle inspections: 

cellular- or satellite-based, long-range data transmission; wireless, short-range data 

transmission; and portable, plug-and-play device. Based on this examination, the EPAOTAQ determined that the plug-and-play device option needed to be further examined 

since other options have previously been or are being explored and due to privacy 

concerns associated with other methods.

As a result, the EPA-OTAQ’s National Vehicle Fuel Emissions Laboratory (NVFEL) 

collaborated with Davis Instruments, Inc., a U.S. company based out of Hayward, 

California to develop a portable, plug-and-play OBD device. Based on Davis 

Instruments’ Carchip, OBD-compatible flight recorder, EPA and Davis Instruments 

created the Carchip Green designed to retrieve and transfer OBD I/M parameters needed 

to perform remote OBD I/M vehicle inspections.

The Carchip Green connects to the standardized OBD connector on all OBD-equipped 

vehicles and collects the status checks (i.e., readiness status), the condition (i.e., pass or 

fail), and the presence of fault codes for the monitored emission control 

components/systems. The Carchip Green can be connected to a desktop or laptop 

computer with resident Carchip software to retrieve, format, store and transmit the OBD 

I/M related data. Several possible scenarios for integrating the CarChip Green into 

existing OBD I/M Programs include:

• Point-to-Point Delivery (State→vehicle owner→State→owner notification);

• Third-Party Distribution (vehicle owner→gas station, motor club, mall, etc.

→State→Owner notification); and/or
37

• Wireless Access Point using Carchip Green with wireless capability (vehicle 

owner→wireless kiosk, gas pump, electronic toll, road-side receiver, etc.,

→State→owner notification)

The Carchip Green will significantly enhance OBD I/M programs by reducing 

administrative costs while increasing public convenience, fleet coverage, and acceptance 

of OBD I/M Programs by reducing administrative costs while increasing public 

convenience, fleet coverage, and acceptance of OBD I/M Programs and remote vehicle 

inspections.

• Enhancing Medical Research

Advancements in Electromagnetic Therapy

Research often has unexpected and far-reaching benefits. This method to enhance tissue 

growth was an outcome from EPA’s research into the health effects of chemicals 

introduced into drinking water by the disinfection process (disinfection byproducts).

EPA research focused on the underlying molecular targets responsible for cancer 

induction in animal models. EPA scientists designed and conducted a series of tests of 

disinfection by-products and closely related chemicals that revealed different 

concentration response curves but otherwise exhibited no additional characteristics upon 

which to develop a mode of action (MoA). The principal investigator decided to use 

magnetic fields and melatonin, which had been shown to enhance the tumor-suppressor 

function, as tools to reveal underlying characteristics that would aid in the development 

of a MoA. Results with both tools allowed for segregation of the chemicals into 

otherwise indistinguishable subgroups. The investigator, aware of activities in other 

research areas where these tools were beginning to be used, inadvertently discovered 

treatment conditions that allowed for more refined and precise methods and applications 

for healing bones and enhancing tissue growth in human and animal models.

This patented methodology describes how to preferentially stimulate certain ions within 

tissues or cells. Clinical and animal research has shown that ionic stimulation by 

magnetic fields has increased the rate of cellular activity or bone growth in broken or 

damaged bones. In some cases, ionic stimulation has improved or increased the total 

amount of bone density. The methodology also has application in nervous system 

processes including nerve growth. Based on these features, researchers at Indiana 

University Medical School established a cooperative research and development 

agreement (CRADA) with the EPA to determine whether immunological cells can be 

altered by the patented methodology to ameliorate disease states or make normal cellular 

immunity more robust. 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) 

Since its creation in 1958, NASA has been charged with disseminating the results of its 

research broadly for public benefit. The organization responsible for technology transfer 

within NASA is the Innovative Partnerships Program (IPP). With offices at HQ and all 

ten of NASA’s field centers, IPP seeks to develop technology to meet NASA’s needs 

through partnerships with industry, academia, government agencies, and national 
38

laboratories, and facilitates intellectual property protection and transfer out of NASA 

developed technology for commercial application and broad public benefit. IPP also 

works through its center offices to foster collaboration with state and local governments 

involved in public benefit and local economic growth through technology development 

and technology transfer. 

Each year, NASA documents some notable successes from technology transfer efforts in 

the annual Spinoff publication. It is available online at http://www.sti.nasa.gov/spinoff,

and hard copies are available upon request. More than 1,600 spinoff successes have been 

documented in the publication and are all searchable by keyword on the website. In 

addition, NASA has established a website called NASA@Home, NASA City, located at 

http://www.nasa.gov/city which helps the public understand how NASA technologies are 

present in and contributing to the quality and safety of their everyday life. NASA is also 

participating, along with several other federal agencies, in using RSS feeds to highlight 

technologies available for licensing to the commercial and research communities; details 

are made available on the IPP web site.

More information about the NASA Innovative Partnership Program can be found at:

http://www.ipp.nasa.gov; http://www.sti.nasa.gov/spinoff; http://www.nasa.gov/city

 

• Treatment Prevents Corrosion in Steel and Concrete Structures

To protect concrete launch structures at Kennedy Space Center from corrosion, NASA 

developed an electromigration technique that sends corrosion-inhibiting ions into rebar to 

prevent rust, corrosion, and separation from the surrounding concrete. Kennedy worked 

with Surtreat Holding LLC, of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, a company that had developed a 

chemical option to fight structural corrosion, combining Surtreat's TPS-II anti-corrosive 

solution and electromigration. Kennedy's materials scientists reviewed the applicability 

of the chemical treatment to the electromigration process and determined that it was an 

effective and environmentally friendly match. 

NASA has also developed a new technology that will further advance these efforts-a

liquid galvanic coating applied to the outer surface of reinforced concrete to protect the 

embedded rebar from corrosion. Surtreat licensed this new coating technology and put it 

to use at the U.S. Army Naha Port, in Okinawa, Japan. The new coating prevents 

corrosion of steel in concrete in several applications, including highway and bridge 

infrastructures, piers and docks, concrete balconies and ceilings, parking garages, cooling 

towers, and pipelines. A natural complement to the new coating, Surtreat's Total 

Performance System provides diagnostic testing and site analysis to identify the scope of 

problems for each project, manufactures and prescribes site-specific solutions, controls 

material application, and verifies performance through follow-up testing and analysis.

• NASA Technology Protects Deep-Sea Divers

Paragon Space Development Corporation is a woman-owned small business, specializing 

in aerospace engineering and technology development, and is a major supplier of 

environmental control and life support system and subsystem design for the aerospace 

industry. Paragon has proven itself expert in thermal control for spacecraft in orbit and 
39

during reentry, as well as for hypervelocity aircraft. In recent years, Paragon has worked 

on several different projects that benefit NASA and the space community. Through a 

NASA-funded Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) contract, Paragon utilized its 

unique thermal analysis and structural design capabilities to develop a new, reducedweight radiator system for use on space vehicles designed to transport crew. Paragon’s 

extensive experience providing life support in extreme environments assisted in the 

development of a line of such products to protect Navy divers against hazardous 

materials; in particular, the successful design of a diving suit that now also has the 

potential for use in commercial diving. In designing the suit, Paragon applied its 

understanding of air flow in a space suit helmet, use of an umbilical to support an 

astronaut during a space walk, cooling undergarment systems to remove excess body 

heat, computer codes for thermal and airflow analysis, and materials that have been 

developed for the aerospace industry that are resistant to extreme chemical and 

temperature environments.

• Aerogels Insulate Missions and Consumer Products

Aspen Aerogels, of Northborough, Massachusetts, an independent company spun off 

from Aspen Systems Inc., rose to the challenge of creating a robust, flexible form of 

aerogel by working with NASA through a Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) 

contract with Kennedy Space Center. That contract led to further partnerships for the 

development of thermal insulation materials, manufacturing processes, and new test 

methods. 

Aspen responded to NASA’s need for a flexible, durable, easy-to-use aerogel system for 

cryogenic insulation for space shuttle launch applications. For NASA, the final product 

of this low thermal conductivity system was useful in applications such as launch 

vehicles, space shuttle upgrades, interplanetary propulsion, and life support equipment. 

The company has since used the same manufacturing process developed under the SBIR 

to expand its product offerings into the more commercial realms, making aerogel 

available for the first time as a material that can be handled and installed just like 

standard insulation. 
40

Conclusion

Technology transfer is an active and essential mission of Federal laboratories. By 

leveraging our nation’s innovative nature and investing in science and technology, we

strengthen our economy and American competitiveness in world markets. This report 

details the results of technology partnering activities cultivated in the Federal sector. The 

statistical data provided in this report indicate that over the five-year span of 2004 

through 2008, licenses, income bearing licenses, income from licenses, and earned 

royalty income trended upward. The total number of patent applications by internal 

research programs in the eleven agencies rose between fiscal year 2004 and 2008 to

1,938, an increase of 9.6 percent. The number of licenses jumped to 11,098 from fiscal 

year 2004 to 2008, an increase of 46.6 percent, and the number of income bearing 

licenses increased to 6444, a 35 percent rise. Federal revenues from these licenses grew

from fiscal year 2004 through fiscal year 2008 to $170.9 million, a 71.7 percent jump and 

total earned royalty income reached $117.6 million, a 121.5% gain. 

The success stories in this report provide examples of how society benefits from 

technology transfer activities across the Federal laboratories. As technology advances 

and the needs of the economy change, Federal laboratories will continue to play a vital 

role in keeping America in the forefront of innovation and in supporting our economy 

and our international competitiveness by successfully transferring and facilitating 

commercialization of Federally created technologies.