Why is taxpayer money being wasted by funding less efficient and more expensive projects (1000 times more expensive) and medical equipment that does not save lives, while my 3D-Flow OPRA and 3D-CBS inventions supported by 59 quotes from reputable industries could have saved and still can save taxpayer money and millions of lives but is not addressed analytically, based on calculations and scientific evidence in a PUBLIC scientific review as was my previous invention at FERMILAB by a major scientific review panel?
Dear Secretary of Energy, Dr. Ernest Moniz, President Obama, Vice President Biden, leaders at the U.S. DOE,
Please provide a status update of Case No. EXEC2016003098; first assigned from the Secretary of Energy, Dr. Ernest Moniz on 7/8/2016 to Dr. Jim Siegrist to address:
- Crawford’s 8-line email to Crosetto in which he revealed corruption in assigning taxpayer money to research projects, and essentially incriminated himself. What Crawford states at the beginning of a sentence in his email is the opposite of what he states at the end of the same sentence and in following sentences, where he refers to non-existent DOE rules to deny implementing a scientific procedure based on analytical thinking, calculations and scientific evidence. (See Crawford’s 8-line email on page 7 and the facts related to his email on pages 2 to 6 in PDF format at: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxWfo2ViJ6r5b0FydURNeHRfSlE/view?usp=sharing)
- The wasted hundred million dollars of taxpayer moneyby building the CMS level-1 Trigger (and others) with 4,000 electronic data processing boards housed in hundreds of crates, knowing from the official report dated January 31, 1994, of FERMILAB (see 56-74), that my 3D-Flow invention would have provided higher performance at zero dead-time and that many opportunities have been lost in the past (see pp. 102-117),
- The continuing wastage of millions of dollars of taxpayer money after I have proved with the 3D-Flow OPRA invention supported by 59 quotes from reputable industries (see 1-36, and pp. 125-271), that the 4,000 electronic data processing boards housed in hundreds of crates (or the new 100 SWATCH electronic boards installed on February 26, 2016) of the CMS Level-1 Trigger can be replaced with 9 electronic data processing boards housed in one crate of the 3D-Flow OPRA system with a staggering improvement not only in performance but at 1/1000 the cost of the 4,000 CMS electronic data processing boards.
- My legitimate request to organize a major PUBLIC scientific review of my breakthrough 3D-Flow OPRA and 3D-CBS inventions (…and let science happen) similar to the major scientific review of my basic 3D-Flow invention requested in 1993 by the Director of the Superconducting Super Collider (see 56-74), who appointed Andy Lankford to define the “charges to the reviewers” and then charged Joe Butler to organize the PUBLIC scientific review at FERMI National Laboratory on December 14, 1993.
Dr. Siegrist sent back the case the same day to the Secretary of Energy, copying me, stating: “I am not authorized to speak for the Secretary’s office”.
The office of the Secretary of Energy therefore made a second assignment of the same case with the same case number, to Ms. Laurie Hakes at (202-586-0505) on 7/13/2016 requesting who would be the right office and person to address the above issues with, and one additional issue involving the DOE IT department to investigate why, after sending one email from one of my accounts, any subsequent emails will not reach any office at DOE but do reach other recipients at NIH, IEEE, etc. When I want to communicate with DOE, I now need to use a new account every time. I have had this problem since September 10, 2015, when I sent material requested by Jim Siegrist. Ultimately, to receive confirmation that my material was received by DOE, I had to send it via the U.S. Postal service. Since May 16, 2016, I have been addressing this issue with Dr. Daniel at the DOE IT department at firstname.lastname@example.org; however, to date, he has not provided an explanation to the communication problem, and so it has not been resolved.
My several requests to Ms. Hakes to provide information in this regard have so far not resulted in any specific date or person responsible to address all the above issues.
On behalf of taxpayers and cancer patients who I serve with my work and inventions, I look forward to addressing these issues with DOE as soon as possible.