Letter to Brookhaven National Laboratory

February 17, 1999

Mike Schlender
Brookhaven National Laboratory
Box 5000
Upton, NY 11973

RE: PECONIC RIVER REMEDIATION

Dear Mike,

    The awarding of the CRADA contract to Phytoworks is of great concern to Fish Unlimited. First, no mention of it was ever made to me until you casually mentioned it at the Peconic River Show on February 9th. As one of the primary stakeholders in this process, and certainly the one that has driven the issue of remediation of the Peconic River, I find this inexcusable.

    One of my many concerns is that the CRADA contract with Brookhaven Lab could effectively delay any real remediation efforts for the length of the agreement, typically several years. It would be easy for Brookhaven Lab to point to this relatively insignificant 1.5 million dollars, being spent on this CRADA project over several years as an indication that BNL/DOE was initiating remediation of the Peconic River, when in fact just the opposite is true. Additionally, another serious concern we have is that Brookhaven Lab has selected a company with very limited, if any, actual field experience and no demonstrated results with radionuclides or heavy metals remediation.

    Specifically, our concerns are as follows. We hope they can be addressed expeditiously:

  1. Where has PhytoWorks worked before? Who have they worked for? And what technologies were used?
  2. Which demonstration/ Validation programs have they completed or participated in?
  3. Have they ever done anything with radionuclides, or performed any field projects that address particular metals and radionuclides?
  4. Why are they using genetically altered plants?
  5. Have they ever received permission from the appropriate regulatory agencies to deploy genetically mutated plants into the environment?
  6. PhytoWorks' genetically manipulated plants purportedly release mercury into the atmosphere. Is this acceptable to the community/regulators and will their plants release radioactive waste into the atmosphere?
  7. While a field ready technology already exists for deployment and potential clean-up of the Peconic river, why is the DOE spending time and money on unproven technology that will, in all likelihood, face regulatory approval without allocating the appropriate funds for proven technology, such as that demonstrated by PhytoTech?

    Fish Unlimited feels that there is a real risk that PhytoWorks will borrow heavily from existing patents pursuing metals and particularly radionuclides from which they have limited or no experience. Is it appropriate in your mind to spend taxpayer money to fund research that can never be commercialized because it infringes on existing intellectual property protection? We feel the answer to that is no and that the proven technology of PhytoTech deserves immediate attention by the department of energy.

Sincerely,

Bill Smith

[contact the webmaster at [email protected]]