Arkansas Lithium Innovation Summit — Strategic Discussions

(Editor’s note: This is the first of a two-part commentary on the lithium play in south Arkansas.) The Arkansas Lithium Innovation Summit Feb. 15-16 serves as an excellent opportunity to let the rapidly growing U.S. battery industry know that Arkansas is the “Lithium State” and is open for business. The idea for this event was first instigated by Arkansas native and Director of Government Relations for Standard Lithium, Jesse R. Edmondson, who is a critical minerals geologist passionate about establishing sustainable domestic supply chains. Mr. Edmondson detailed his goals, “The two goals of this event are to: 1) Plant the flag of Arkansas into the middle of the US lithium-ion battery and EV supply chain, so that this entire industry sees that Arkansas should be considered a top state for building out this new industry, leveraging the globally significant lithium resource from the Smackover formation, and 2) To get the state internally firing on all cylinders so that our federal/state/local officials, academia, infrastructure managers, and existing industries are working together to seize this incredible opportunity and moment in time.” Hugh McDonald serves our great State as the Secretary of our Department of Commerce and has been an integral part of the Arkansas Lithium Innovation Summit. Secretary McDonald masterfully captured the value of the Lithium Summit, “In Arkansas, we have the raw materials that will make our state a focal point for the lithium industry. Prominent companies, like Albemarle, Standard Lithium, Tetra, and ExxonMobil, have already established operations in Arkansas and are continuing to build out with production dates set at the end of the decade. Arkansas is on the verge of being a major player in this industry, which will have global implications and impact. We look forward to more companies doing business in our state, and they will find a favorable business environment with low taxes, pro-industry public policy, and a strong workforce. During the Arkansas Lithium Innovation Summit, global experts, policymakers, and industry experts will highlight the opportunities that our state has in the lithium industry and will show the advantages of doing business in Arkansas.” As a refresher, Arkansas provides environmentally responsible Lithium that supports the production of batteries for use in homes and cars. Our lithium boom goes beyond batteries in homes and EV cars, because it ties into our National Security, Military Industry, Energy Security, Electric Distribution, etc. I hope this 2-part series provides a view of what is at stake and the strategic issues for leaders to discuss in productive conversations at this important Summit.  Strategic discussion and even difficult subjects have to be on the table when this many of our State’s leaders are in the same room.  We must take advantage of this opportunity so that we do not allow another FedEx to slip through our fingers. Part 1 Overview ExxonMobil, Tetra, Albemarle, Lanxess and SLI have all set their sights on the unique lithium resources found within the Smackover formation in South Arkansas. As an Arkansan with roots back to 1828 in our state, I am thankful Lanxess and Standard Lithium partnered to prove a new technology would provide environmentally responsible access to the lithium in South Arkansas. Standard Lithium’s entry into South Arkansas in 2017, followed by a partnership with Lanxess in 2018, marked a transformative period for the local lithium industry. This alliance enabled the use of Lanxess’s South Facility near El Dorado, where Standard Lithium could undertake the development and implementation of a pioneering Direct Lithium Extraction (DLE) pilot facility. Since becoming operational in May 2020, the DLE pilot facility has been instrumental in trialing and optimizing the extraction process. The facility’s purpose extends to providing the necessary technical data to develop and accurately estimate the costs for a scalable Direct Lithium Extraction process suitable for the unique composition of Smackover brine. SLI’s initial “brownfield advantage” uses existing brine wells and direct lithium extraction (DLE) that is environmentally responsible and dramatically reduces upfront costs and commercialization time. The environmentally responsible combination of brine from wells and DLE to extract and process lithium sets us apart from the typical damage of lithium strip mining and evaporation ponds. Arkansas’ brine well-based lithium resources, first-to-market capabilities, and minimal environmental impact are some of the reasons that behemoths ExxonMobil, and Koch Industries have invested in the Smackover formation. Exxon, Tetra and SLI are at a point of critical mass within the Arkansas Lithium opportunity. SLI has cleared the important hurdle of a successful validation of their DLE technology. SLI is also in the latter stages of Mineral Royalty hearings at the Arkansas Oil & Gas Commission (AOGC). We are at a point that SLI has set its sights on scaling up production facilities, with Exxon and Tetra developing their own plans. As the opportunity has become credible, we need to understand that our nation is watching us pioneer a new market segment, new technology, new production model, and new royalty structure. There is no precedent for us to copy, so we must be objective and fair so Arkansas can benefit from a new economic engine. The whole nation can benefit from our impact upon National Security, Defense weaponry, Battery Supply Chain, Power Grid, Geothermal, etc. Please review the strategic issues below for part 1 that details the border states that want to take our Lithium opportunity, and the royalty structure that appears to be causing a disconnect. Part 1 and part 2 will support strategic discussions at the Summit, so that more of Arkansas’ batteries are connected and fully charged to propel us to a better future. Competition The world has become aware of the great lithium resource in the Smackover formation over the last 6 months, but it is also bringing competitors to the table. Based on reports to date, the most prospective areas of the Smackover formation for lithium production are southern Arkansas, northern Louisiana, and eastern Texas. Arkansas and particularly El Dorado and Magnolia are poised to attract most of the economic development related to lithium production because of the Smackover formation, existing network of brownfield brine wells and processing infrastructure. Our unique brownfield infrastructure is very important as a means to reduce the expense of developing the new DLE process. Louisiana has brownfield wells so they can be a competitor for Lithium investment. They don’t have our large bromine processing infrastructure which is extremely valuable. Louisiana has recruited battery companies to locate in Louisiana and tried to get Tesla. Louisiana is rumored to be working very hard to create incentives for Lithium companies. SLI has tested their wells in Arkansas and Texas for Lithium content, and the Texas fields contain higher concentrations of raw Lithium. Texas is in a position to be the more cost-effective greenfield location because of the higher lithium content and more straight-forward royalty structure. Petroleum and Chemical companies in Texas and Louisiana have been immensely powerful entities, which have funded academic research and worked closely with government to support the industry. Obviously, Louisiana and Texas would be incredibly happy to see us price Arkansas into a weak position. Lithium Royalty Oil & gas can be sold from the well head, but raw Lithium requires expensive development of new technologies and processing at numerous levels to create a finished product to sell. SLI has been in El Dorado developing this new DLE + brine well model since 2017, so it has taken them about 7 years to develop and prove the technology. Mineral recoveries with high cost and risk typically allow the mineral company to keep more of the proceeds to reward the mineral company and provide a lower royalty to land and mineral rights owners. Mining royalties are typically single digit % and mining companies don’t need to invest in new technologies. The Salton Sea Lithium project was also a single digit royalty at 2% yet Berkshire Hathaway still backed away from the table. Currently, the AOGC and SLI are awaiting the next royalty hearing to continue discussions from the December hearing. The December hearing detailed the South Arkansas Minerals Association request for a high royalty of 12.5% for the landowner, which is in the range of a typical oil & gas royalty. The requested royalty is much higher than anyone in the lithium industry expected, which appears to be causing serious concern within the Lithium industry. In our case, the Lithium company develops new technologies and processes that require much higher expenses and risk than traditional oil & gas encounters, but our Lithium companies are expected to receive far less of the proceeds (87.5%) while the landowner receives a high 12.5% royalty. Ironically, AOGC testimony disclosed that the current Brine-Bromine royalty per acre converted to a % equates to a 1% to 2% royalty. The brine is the base material for extraction of both bromine and lithium. SLI has offered what appears to be a 1.5% royalty (mirrors the 1% to 2% royalty) on what will be the lowest grade lithium project they will develop in Arkansas.  The DLE + Brine well production model is far more expensive to develop, prove and scale to production. There is a large difference between 98.5% versus 87.5% of the proceeds for the Lithium companies, so 11% can have a dramatic impact upon the project ROI. Why does the South Arkansas Minerals Association think that our Lithium companies deserve a far smaller reward for the additional risk and expenses to create a new refined product? Furthermore, the Austin, Texas-based firm Applied Economics Consulting Group, Inc. provided a University of Texas educated expert to make the argument that the Arkansas royalty should be based on what a project can afford, essentially a profit-sharing model with only one side providing upfront monies and exposed to high risk.  Arkansas is in a capitalist society, and mineral royalties in this country are tied to the value of a mineral as it comes out of the ground, not after its gone through a series of advanced processing steps to make a final value-added product. Oil and gas does not pay a royalty based on jet fuel or specialty plastics, copper mines do not pay a royalty based on the price of copper wire and copper pipes, etc. Oil and gas is marketable as a raw product at the wellhead, but the brine operator has to invest a lot in additional processing and lithium-extraction infrastructure to create a refined marketable product. SLI has pioneered the expensive development of the model over 7 years, but each company will have a different DLE technology that creates risk and requires investment. Please keep in mind that the DLE + Brine well production model is environmentally responsible and the brine well process has been continuously improved for 60+ years. As the barrel equivalent graphic above shows, raw Lithium is found in miniscule concentrations that are 1/20 th compared to that of the bromine found in the brine at the wellhead.  Please consider the fact that the same brine at the wellhead provides 20 times more bromine than lithium. Additionally, the mineral rights owners will be paid their existing bromine royalty and now an additional royalty from the same unit of brine for the subsequent extraction of lithium. The testimony also confirmed our current brine-bromine royalty per acre equates to 1% to 2% royalty.   Now let’s go a few steps further: Per the testimony graphic, the same barrel of brine is comprised of 1.9 lbs of bromine and .1 bs or 1/10 th of a pound of raw lithium. The bromine processor pumps a barrel of brine and pays the current mineral rights owner a royalty payment for 1.9 lbs of bromine. After bromine extraction, the bromine processor sells the same brine to one of our Lithium companies to extract 1/10 th of a pound of raw lithium. The mineral rights owner is receiving 2 royalty payments from the same barrel of brine, but the bromine royalty is based on 1 to 2% and the other royalty for lithium is proposed to be 12.5% from the same barrel. As stated above, SLI has proposed what appears to be a 1.5% royalty for the same brine. Why does the South Arkansas Minerals Association and their expert witness (Austin, Texas-based firm Applied Economics Consulting Group, Inc.) think the Arkansas lithium companies need to be penalized with a 12.5% royalty that reduces their proceeds by 11%? Please review the testimonial slide below from the AOGC hearing, and you will see that SLI has proposed higher per acre royalties (bold numbers) for all but 2 of the lowest production levels. As agreed in the December AOGC hearing, Arkansas is a pioneer for our Nation to develop the first royalty structure for lithium extraction via a DLE brine well production model. This is a time for trust on both sides of the table and both must accept that the lack of precedence leads to a lack of knowledge on both sides of the table. Fair and equitable principles are needed for both sides. We must also remember that our success or failure leads to National Security and Domestic Supply Chain implications. SLI and Industry partners (Tetra, Exxon, Albemarle, etc.) need to recognize that the Arkansas Oil &Gas Commission (AOGC) must protect its position and landowners despite limited knowledge of this new production model. The AOGC needs to respect SLI as a good corporate citizen since 2017, SLI’s desire to create a simple transparent royalty structure and how each decision impacts Tetra, SLI, Exxon, Albemarle, etc. The South Arkansas Minerals Association must recognize this is not a fracking oil & gas field with front loaded peak production, because our Lithium is a relatively stable production field with a long stable royalty. Conversely, the DLE + Brine well production model utilizes new complex technologies and processes that increase the cost of maintaining the structure over the longer production life; which impacts the justification of later investments for process optimization. The State of Arkansas, AOGC, SLI and industry partners are not only pioneering a new royalty structure, new technologies and processes, but also dealing with a more complex, lengthy investment and cost structure. Lithium extraction and processing from a DLE + Brine well production model cannot be compared to oil wells, lithium evaporation ponds or lithium mines. It was agreed in the AOGC hearing that the landowners of the brine already receive a royalty on the bromine from the same brine. Said landowners will now receive an additional royalty on lithium without having to spend any money or take any risks on existing wells. SLI proved to a skeptical world that their new DLE extracts Lithium in the Smackover formation with impressive performance data. Other Lithium companies like ExxonMobil, Tetra, etc. would not be as confident to invest in Arkansas lithium if SLI had not assumed the risk, considerable time, and money to prove this innovative technology works with Smackover brine. Tetra believes in the new Lithium extraction DLE- Brine well model, but it must make financial sense to invest more in Arkansas as Alicia Boston, General Counsel for Tetra provided testimony at the Royalty hearing, “From our perspective, we share the same view that it is important to distinguish an oil and gas royalty from a royalty on brine production. While oil and gas has value and available customers at the wellhead, brine does not. There is not a market where someone can buy or sell a barrel of brine. Unlike an oil and gas operator, a brine operator must invest beyond those wells and pipelines to also install processing and lithium-extraction facilities that can remove the lithium from within that brine and then create a marketable product.” ExxonMobil has joined SLI and Tetra to create a Lithium industry in Arkansas, but the royalty structure must be competitive to reward the investment. “Establishing a clear and consistent royalty structure is in everyone’s best interest whether you’re a mineral owner, developer, or regulator,” said Patrick Howarth, ExxonMobil Lithium Global Business Manager. “The AOGC and Arkansas government have been welcoming of the lithium industry and recognize the potential economic impact it can have. It’s essential they put forward a competitive royalty structure that creates a fair and equitable plan for mineral owners while also recognizing the contributions, risk management and value a developer brings to support the viability of the mineral resource.” The existing Oil and Mining technologies have been proven over many decades, so there is no need to develop a new drilling technology for a typical oil well. Conversely, SLI has spent the last 7 years and over $40 million dollars to develop Lithium extraction and processing from a DLE Brine well model without revenues over that time. Furthermore, it could be another 7 years before their first project, Lanxess 1A, has turned a profit. It is well established that research and development (R&D) costs will be much higher for a new technology, but in this case, we also have risk in a new Lithium sector, new end-product segments, and the need for continuous improvement of the new processes. The Arkansas Lithium opportunity is truly a disruptive market force. Alicia Boston, General Counsel for Tetra added, “From our own engineering and financial studies, as well as those published by Standard Lithium, the amount of capital investment to extract the lithium and convert it to a sellable product is estimated to be more than four times the amount of capital just to drill and complete the wells. In addition, even after the lithium is extracted from the brine, significant operating expenses still require to process that lithium into a refined specialty product that can be sold.” As discussed in the hearing, Oil projects have about a 1-year ROI payback timeline while a new technology for Lithium extraction is much longer than a year as it is influenced by so many variables. Additionally, Tetra, SLI, Exxon, Albemarle, etc. will not have comparable R&D expenditures because every DLE technology is new/different with plenty of refinements and field resource differences. Boston broached the subject of a new technology, market volatility, and appropriate royalty structure in her testimony as well, “while oil and gas and mining markets are mature, it is important to recognize that lithium production from brine is in its infancy. In fact, at this time, there are no direct lithium extraction projects producing commercial quantities of lithium products anywhere in the U.S. A royalty structure for lithium needs to take into account the substantial risk and uncertainty that is being taken on by potential lithium projects. The technologies required, higher cost structure, brine concentration uncertainty, and limited customer base indicate that any royalty for lithium should be significantly less than oil, natural gas, or even bromine. The 12-and-a-half-percent proposal fundamentally fails to recognize this market reality. Both other jurisdictions and private parties impose royalties at rates similar to those proposed by Standard Lithium. We found ten-plus lithium royalties in other jurisdictions, and none of those royalties for extracting lithium from brine have a 12-and-a-half-percent royalty rate on gross revenues. Lithium derivatives are a commodity, and as we know from every other commodity, they are subject to high price and volatility. For instance, in the past 12 months, lithium carbonate prices have fallen 78 percent. Just three years ago in November of 2020, lithium prices were $4,100 per metric ton, a price that would be less than the processing, operating costs as estimated and before accounting for the capital investment. Under such extreme pricing volatility, which is likely to persist in illiquid markets, a royalty of 12-and-a-half percent of gross proceeds from the sale of lithium products will make these projects, in our opinion, uninvestable.” It appears the royalty structure proposed by SLI is transparent and flexible enough to cover variations in market price, process efficiency variations, and variations in raw lithium content in different locations. The proposed royalty structure appears to be quite fair, but the opposition’s requested 12.5% royalty raises questions. Once again, considering the current brine-bromine royalty per acre equating to a 1% to 2% royalty and the same barrel of brine is comprised of 1.9 lbs of bromine and .1 bs or 1/10th of a pound of raw lithium – how is this 12.5% royalty fair and equitable for each Lithium company to develop and prove their expensive DLE process? The Arkansas Lithium opportunity is truly disruptive and creates more risk and costs. In addition to the expense and risk of the last 7 years, SLI’s scaling activities will expose more systemic issues with added throughput volumes that will create more changing timelines and costs. As detailed in AOGC testimony, SLI has been using a 50 gallons per minute supply line for tail brine to the demonstration plant, but the new commercial plant will need 60x times scale-up to 3,000 gallons a minute. Scaling activities require financing. SLI is smaller than the other companies, thus it has financing costs and risks that exceed those of the other industry partners. The financing risks for SLI create costs because of lithium price volatility, lithium demand volatility, economic factors, and of course interest rate volatility. ExxonMobil can self-finance their projects, so they have an advantage. After reading the AOGC hearing transcript, I have a few concerns about the hearing in December that focus upon unrealistic requests during the hearing. I’m quite experienced with technology startups and an IPO on the Toronto Stock Exchange’s (TSX) venture exchange. SLI is a pre-revenue TSX traded company governed by Canadian stock exchange laws, thus they are in a particularly vulnerable position of disclosing more technical and financial details than required by the US security and exchange commission (SEC). SLI’s details have been used by the opposing party to make it appear they are hiding details. The AOGC asked SLI to disclose competitive advantage details like the brine fee. SLI and Lanxess have a confidentiality agreement for the brine fee for feed stock from Lanxess, so that isn’t included in that study. The US companies will not disclose competitive advantages so why should SLI? ExxonMobil, Albemarle, and Tetra are all much larger companies that are not required to disclose these types of reports publicly and so one can safely assume they will not provide any sort of similar level of project economics details to the AOGC when they apply for a royalty. It definitely feels like SLI is at a disadvantage as the smallest company in multiple ways. How can Tetra, SLI, Exxon, Albemarle, etc. protect their confidential information, yet submit enough information in a royalty hearing with a new technology in a new production and market segment? Confidentiality boundaries are a legitimate protective element that any company would require. In this case it is more critical with a publicly held company with specific IP and cost models that give them a competitive advantage. Another concern from the hearing was evident as I reviewed the 160+ page AOGC hearing transcript as the Definitive feasibility study was misconstrued by the South Arkansas Minerals Association as if it was a typical proforma financial feasibility study. Technology companies are only as valuable as their intellectual property (IP) so they use the moniker of a definitive feasibility study to prove the efficacy of their technology and how the efficacy supports commercialization estimates. SLI had to determine the improved efficacy of their new DLE technology with the addition of Koch’s technology. Companies will not disclose confidential business model information in a public press release about a technology feasibility study. The Definitive study is to prove the performance of a technology to extract Lithium from brine, not formally pursue financing or engage regulatory negotiations. I reiterate, this is a time for trust on both sides of the table and both must accept that the lack of precedence leads to a lack of knowledge on both sides of the table. Fair and equitable principles are needed for both sides. Robert Mintak, CEO of Standard Lithium Ltd. has concerns about various points of disconnect, “In framing the royalty analysis using the results from our Phase 1A Definitive Feasibility Study, it is important to clearly distinguish the study’s intended its primary function for assessing project finance viability from its use in establishing royalty rates on mineral extraction. The DFS is a comprehensive assessment of the project’s economic viability, including both lithium extraction and the conversion processes to a highly refined final product. The DFS thoroughly details both the Direct Lithium Extraction from an existing Smackover brine supply and the subsequent conversion of the extracted lithium to a battery-quality lithium carbonate, a sophisticated engineering endeavor, far beyond the extraction step. This distinction is significant as the royalty structure for oil and gas typically pertains to the raw product, not the refined end product. Each stage presents its own complexities, and the DFS captures the necessity and details the intricacies of these sophisticated operations. While not a direct comparison, the refined lithium product’s value and market position can be conceptually compared to that of jet fuel as opposed to crude oil, highlighting the need for a tailored royalty approach.” SLI-Lanxess Phase 1A is the first of 3 SLI phases, yet Phase 1A is the only Brownfield site while the other 2 SLI phases are relatively Greenfield phases. There is a potential to underrepresent the cost and investment structure with SLI-Lanxess Phase 1A as the initial Royalty submission. Per AOGC testimony, a greenfield phase will cost about $5 Million to drill each operable well and each re-injection well is a lesser additional expense. The distribution pipelines and infrastructure are specialized and expensive before you even talk about greenfield processing facility investments. SLI along with Exxon, Tetra, Albemarle, etc. will be impacted by a ruling that is not fair and equitable. Both sides of the table must consider this unique production model and DLE technology plus the added layer of difference between brownfield versus greenfield investment. Alicia Boston added, “We encourage the Commissioners to set a lithium loyalty that encourages investments in leading-edge lithium extraction technologies and infrastructure in Arkansas that will create a significant number of new jobs, provide mineral owners royalty income, and create more tax income to the state, counties, and cities in Southwest Arkansas. In order for the state of Arkansas to compete for investment dollars and be the first state with direct — commercial direct lithium extraction operations, supported by billions of dollars of investment and great jobs, a reasonable royalty structure is required. Tetra believes the Standard Lithium royalty proposal is fair and equitable and will attract investment, add significant jobs, and reward landowners appropriately. The suggested 12-and-a-half-percent royalty will not encourage lithium producers to take the risk on new leading-edge technologies. Adopting a 12-and-a-half-percent royalty rate on gross proceeds instead can create the environment where lithium will continue to be sourced from other parts of the world to meet our nation’s new energy demands and leave Arkansas’ mineral and landowners on the sidelines.” I really want to know the basis used by the South Arkansas Minerals Association to request that our Lithium companies deserve a far smaller reward for the additional risk and expenses that are far beyond what oil & gas or even mining companies encounter? A higher raw lithium content in the brine equates to more production from a brine unit. The SLI Texas fields have almost 4 times more raw lithium content than their brine concentration in their Arkansas royalty submission. The Arkansas brownfield advantage of existing brine wells and infrastructure at Lanxess offset the lower lithium content in SLI’s first Arkansas royalty submission. SLI has 3 projects with 1 brownfield (current royalty submission) and 2 greenfield projects in the future. Tetra and ExxonMobil will both be greenfield projects. As far as I am concerned, If the aspiring lithium producers are all on the same page in terms of what is a fair lithium royalty, which they appear to be, perhaps it makes the most sense for these parties to join together and propose one state-wide royalty agreement that would apply to all projects. This structure could find a way to account for the different volumes and different lithium grades that would be unique to each project. I think this would send a clear message to the AOGC, state officials, and land/mineral rights owners what industry agrees is a sensible framework for providing the incentive and certainty necessary for the massive investments these projects will require. Arkansans must realize that not only are these companies/projects in competition amongst themselves but with others globally for financial resources and customers necessary to build out successful projects. Arkansas is also in competition with Texas and Louisiana regarding development of the Smackover, as well as with other states that are trying to develop their lithium assets. Keep this in mind, Louisiana and Texas would be very happy to see us price Arkansas into a weak position with an exponentially high royalty. As my grandfather said, “Half of nothing is…nothing”. The Arkansas Lithium opportunity is truly a disruptive market force with no precedence to lead our designs. The DLE + Brine well production model is far more expensive to develop, prove and scale to production. The DLE + Brine well production model is environmentally responsible and the brine well process has been continuously improved for 60+ years. SLI has pioneered the expensive development of the model over 7 years so this isn’t a quick and easy development. Our critical action point is creation of a fair royalty for this unprecedented Lithium model.  The Smackover brine is the base material for extraction of both bromine and raw lithium.  AOGC testimony disclosed that the current Brine-Bromine royalty per acre converted to a % that equates to a 1% to 2% royalty.  SLI has proposed a 1.5% royalty that mirrors the 1% to 2% royalty.  Lithium companies will financially suffer from the large difference of 11% of the proceeds (98.5% versus 87.5% of the proceeds) because the loss of 11% can have a dramatic impact upon the project ROI. How is the requested 12.5% royalty and less proceeds fair and equitable for each Lithium company to develop and prove their expensive DLE technology and process? I think the Lithium industry needs to come together and propose a unified royalty that is fair and equitable while also leading to future investment and growth. Mr. Edmondson is correct that we need to plant the Arkansas flag into the middle of the US lithium-ion battery and EV supply chain; so Arkansas is the premier source of environmentally responsible Lithium. He is also right that we can only reach our full potential if all our batteries are connected and fully charged to propel us to a new future. Next week’s part 2 will detail our impact upon national security and the power grid. We will detail how we will create jobs, create geothermal power generation and our need for education to support the lithium companies and vertical integration. Brian Umberson is a native Arkansan and the principal of Umberson Technology Solutions, LLC.  He has worked with venture capital startups in the biotech fields of diagnostics, food-borne pathogens, oil and gas microbes, biofuels, and medical devices.  He previously gained experience in the automotive, steel and aerospace segments.  He is active as a National Science Foundation I-Corps mentor, board member of the Arkansas Association for Food Protection, and a committee member of the International Avian Influenza Summit and co-founder of Bio+Nano+Ark.