Friday, 11 April 2014

Offer of Fertilizer Production License and Turn-Key Installation

OFFER OF LICENSE FOR LIQUID ECOLOGICAL FOLIAR FERTILIZER INSTALLATION,

MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY

COMPLETE INSTALLATION HARDWARE

FORMULAE AND PROCEDURES FOR MAKING FERTILIZER

KNOW HOW

The fertilizers are a complex of mineral obtained via patented ecological procedure.
The contents: macro elements (Ammonia, Phosphorus, and Potassium ), together with micro elements : Fe, Zn, Cu , Mo , B, S , Co, Mg , Mn, Ni. Each of the above in the necessary concentrations benefits plants and, ultimately, for the consumers when they use agricultural products made using our fertilizers.

The fertilizer production installation will be assembled by us on-site and delivered to the buyer in working condition.

Our fertilizers are classified as “Millennium III Fertilizers”, as defined and described by the International Congress of Fertilizers, of which we and our company are members. Together, we represent the future of agriculture in the world, where the health and well-being of the people are recognized to begin with the quality and nutritional content of the foods they consume.

Our fertilizer characteristics conform to and comply with all the standards and other requirements established by the European Union:
Ph-active content in active substances , optimal concentrations , low costs of production and they are ecological in every respect. The contents are adapted to climate, land structure, plant variety etc.

We are selling licenses based on European patents held by us, which represent scientifically solutions for health of soil, plants and people.

The cost of one (1) license can be recuperated within 6-8 months of selling produced fertilizer, based on the manufacturing capacity of one installation, which is 600 liters / one hour per installation.

We also include and the licensee will have following:
1). The process and installation licenses, register in the name of client.
2). The fabrication technology,
3). The formulae and procedures required for the manufacturing of our fertilizer.
4). Patented design blueprints of the factory.
5). Starter kit in business to obtain profit.
6). Feasibility study for producers.
7).“Know-How”.
8). Marketing and managerial strategies and support.
9). Promotion and advertising support for these products through symposiums and other material presentations.
10). Technical support, which later the personal will offer to clients.
11). Complete project support data, including information concerning purchase of raw material, labels, recipients, etc.
12). Coding for registering production histories
13). Operational “franchise” regulations for proposed installations, including personnel protection rules for workers, and a list of known suppliers for various raw materials used in our production processes.
14). The branding to be included on every label.
15). The completed installation, in working condition.
16). Professional training, with books and other instruction materials needed in support of the business.

The liquid ecological foliar fertilizers are normally applied by spraying on leaves. The foliar fertilizers are green color, with precisely calculated contents in minerals ( macro elements and micro element ), in beneficial formulations for plants which are applied in important growth phases for plants, as needed, based on the moment of application in the life of the plant targeted.

- Applied quantity for one treatment is: 5 liters per hectare.
-For following crops : wheat , rice , maize (large-scale open-air agriculture ), vegetable gardens, fruits tree, vineyards , greenhouses , household plants of every size , and for all manner of landscaping and/or lawn care projects.

The minerals contents are taken-up by the plants and replace important elements often overlooked by agricultural producers.
Another important benefit for plants using ecological fertilizers is that they became very drought resistant, with leaves growing fast with good content in chlorophyll that means in photosynthesis process.

-There is a 100% correlation between public health and the mineral content of the agricultural products they consume. Literally, "You are what you eat".

-OVER THE PAST 10+ YEARS THAT WE HAVE BEEN IN THIS BUSINESS, ALL AREAS TREATED WITH OUR LIQUID ECOLOGICAL FOLIAR AND OTHER MINERAL FERTILIZERS HAVE CONSISTENTLY AND ECOLOGICALLY PRODUCED HIGH-QUALITY CROPS, WHICH COMMANDED THE BEST PRICES AND PRODUCED, DEMONSTRABLY MORE OUTPUT AND ANY COMPARABLE SOLID FERTILIZERS.

-THE COSTS OF OUR ECOLOGICAL LIQUID FERTILIZERS ARE ABOUT 33% THAT OF THE NEAREST COMPARABLE SOLID FERTILIZERS. THAT IS A HUGE DISCOUNT OF 67% OFF WHAT WOULD NORMALLY BE SPENT.

-THE PLANT-FERTILIZER ASSIMILATION PROCESS FOR OUR LIQUID FERTILIZERS IS 100 % SUPERIOR TO THAT OF ORDINARY SOLID FERTILIZERS, SINCE SOLID FERTILIZERS RELY ON ADDITIONAL IRRIGATION OR SOME ACT OF GOD (LIKE RAIN) TO MAKE THEM START TO WORK.


PRODUCTION EXAMPLE: CONSIDERING 600 LITERS OF FINISHED FERTILIZER PER ONE OUR, WITH PRODUCTION INSTALLATION WORKING 10 HOURS + 6000 LITERS /DAY, INONE MONTH OF 20 NORMAL WORKING (WEEKDAY) DAYS= 6000 LITERS X 20 DAYS = 120,000 LITERS PER MONTH.

APPLICATION DOSE IS 5 LITERS/HECTARE.

120,000 LITERS: 5 LITERS /Ha. = 24.000 HECTARES SELLING IN ONE MONTH, IN ONE TEAM (IN THIS EXAMPLE).

-IN ONE YEAR = 24.00 HA/MONTH X 12 MONTHS = 48,000 HECTARES
IN CONCLUSION: ONE PRODUCTION INSTALLATION WITH A CAPACITY OF 600 LITERS / ONE HOUR CAN PRODUCE FERTILIZERS FOR 48,000 HECTARES.

IN CASE WE ARE USING 2 TEAMS (20 MAN-HOURS) PER DAY , ONE PRODUCTION INSTALLATION CAN PRODUCE FERTILIZERS FOR 96,000 HECTARES OVER THE COURSE OF ONE (1) YEAR.

ALL THE ABOVE FIGURES USE A VERY CONSERVATIVE MARK-UP OF 1.00 EURO PER LITER ABOVE COSTS TO PRODUCE AND, THEREFORE, AFFORDING 1.00 EURO PER LITER OF PROFIT FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS CALCULATION.

That being said, the results are still astonishing. Look that what you get below!!!!

NET PROFIT (MINIMUM, USING THE 20 MAN-HOUR PER DAY, 20 DAY PER MONTH SCENARIO) 480,000.00 EURO. / YEAR.

EVEN THE SMALLEST FARMERS (e.g. 500 HECTARES OR LESS) CAN COMPLETELY SUPPORT DISTRIBUTORS FOR ALL THE AREA AROUND 96,000.HECTARES.

THE LIST PRICE PER ONE SITE LICENSE IS 300,000.00 EUROS.-

WE ACCEPT BITCOINS, CASH OR SOME COMBINATION OF THE TWO.

Contact us today:

Thomas L. Ketchum, Jr.
And Elena M. Ketchum, Administrators

e-mail:

For those using English instead of metric, 1 hectare is about 2.47 acres and one liter is about 1.057 quarts. 1 Euro was about $1.37 US dollar, when this was first offered on October 29, 2008. The Euro is now trading within a 3 cent range of that as of this posting.





Thursday, 10 April 2014

Outsourced Employment Repatriation / Consumer Credit Data Security Proposal


CONSUMER CREDIT DATA PROPOSAL
(First submitted to Congress and President Obama in Early 2009)
 
American Consumer Credit Data Security and Outsourced Employment Repatriation Act of 2014


Recent events in India and Pakistan as well as North Africa and the Middle East have, collectively, shown that hostility toward Western civilians, Western Institutions, and Western Nations is on the increase, as demonstrated by a seemingly endless parade of terrorist activities.

In many nations, terrorists have carried out attacks against Western interests through, not only bombings, kidnappings, and other acts of violence, but by internet-based attacks, which often exploit personal information from servers in the United States. One reason for such exploitation is to be found in the increasing access that English-speaking nations have to U.S. banking, finance and collection institutions, which have, increasingly “outsourced” everything from routine account creation and maintenance activities to collection of debts of every kind and character. As such, the same United States corporate entities have served to create opportunities for internet-based terrorism, which now includes running sophisticated embezzlement and other “scam” operations against unsuspecting Americans. The scams, not-unlike dealing drugs or prostitutes, are, in-turn, used to finance any number of nefarious schemes.

While some “outsourcing” of work to markets where labor costs are less may make some business sense, even if this practices reduces American jobs, there seems to be a limit where, exceeding said limit would put profits ahead of National Security, even if one has no regard for privacy or other consumer rights for Americans.

In sum, I submit that the curtailment of these opportunities for Internet-based terrorism is in the highest National Security Interests. In many ways, this objective is completely in line with those very few otherwise Constitutionally-legal ideas expressed within the U.S.A. Patriot Act. It is perhaps most ironic that, while the Patriot Act was passed in the alleged name of National Security, with all its banking limitations on ordinary citizens, that U.S. Banks and other large corporations, engaged in debt collections and other financial services operations have been permitted to EXPORT PRIVATE U.S. CITIZEN BANKING, CREDIT, AND PERSONAL DATA TO COUNTRIES KNOWN TO BE HARBOURING AL QAEDA OPERATIONS.

Accordingly, the solution seems simple enough:

Make it illegal for any U.S. Banking, collection agency, or other financial services company; together with any U.S.-based telecommunications or Internet service company, to use ANY Non-USA person or other entity, whether or not said person or business entity is employed by or under contract to any USA person or other entity.

Enforcement should be easy enough. The FED and the Treasury Department have largely taken control of many of the US banks and should give them 60 days to cease and desist from all foreign operations involving servicing United States citizens, whether for credit, collections, any other financial service or product, telecommunications account(s) or Internet Service Provider (ISP) accounts, together with any other forms of remote technical support.

Suggested penalties for failure to comply might include, but should not be limited to, (1) revocation of the violator’s bank or other institutional charter and (2) imprisonment and fines against any such violator institutions President, CEO, Board Chairman, and all Board members.

There is little doubt that many in the business community will be against this idea, since they will claim it will affect their bottom line. However, the National Security implications of this issue are real enough. Further and finally, businesses that voluntarily take steps to comply with these new measure, if enacted, will be perceived as being both patriotic and as good corporate citizens, since they will almost certainly re-employ some of the many, many thousands of Americans who have been displaced by these “outsourcing” practices over the recent years in the banking, collection, financial services, telecommunications, and ISP service industries, together with firms offering all forms of remote technical support.

One good policy measure to encourage voluntary compliance might be to offer a one-time tax incentive to US businesses who comply with this measure in less than the 60 days I have suggested. I would make them show and certify that ALL foreign operations had been terminated (verified by the US Commercial Services branch of the Embassies of the countries involved) and that they had created, one-for-one a like job in the United States, replacing, one-for-one, the job formerly outsourced in some foreign country. I would offer a one-time corporate tax credit of $14,560.00 (One person, at $7.00 per hour, for one normal year of employment) per person, per job, returned in this manner to the United States from some foreign jurisdiction, if and only if, the foreign jurisdiction operation is closed altogether (certified as mentioned above) and a corresponding new job in the United States is created to replace the former“outsourced” job (to be verified by the U.S. Department of Labor and co-coordinated with the State Department on the foreign side, for one-to-one correspondence verifications).

To review, the job areas targeted for“re-patriation”:

1. All servicing of U.S. citizen (personal and/or corporate) banking and other financial services accounts for U.S. citizens;
2.   ALL servicing of U.S. citizen(personal and/or corporate) collection activities carried out by any company or individual, whether or not organized, chartered or situated within the United States;
3.        ALL servicing of U.S. citizen (personal and/or corporate) telecommunications accounts;
4. ALL servicing of U.S. citizen (personal and/or corporate) Internet Service Provider (ISP) accounts and/or other forms of remote technical support.

It is my firm belief that these actions will increase the National Security Interests of the United States by denying opportunities for financing terror operations via various forms of internet and other identity fraud.

Further and finally, these measures will re-create U.S. jobs at a maximum cost to the American taxpayers of $14,560.00 per job. Under this plan, the entire 2.5 million new jobs targeted by the incoming Obama Administration could, theoretically, cost the taxpayers $36.4 Billion dollars, assuming there are 2.5 million outsourced service industry jobs that are covered by this proposal.

ADDENDUM:

While the basis for this proposed legislation was the idea that increasing U.S. national data security could become the basis for repatriation of millions of American jobs lost to this type of activity over the past decade, it is worth noting that similar, parallel legislation should be considered for enactment which similarly bars outsourcing of employment in other areas not covered by this proposed legislation.

I speak, specifically, here about the United States automotive industry and any other industry that has come to the U.S. taxpayers for some kind of “bail-out”. Right now, it is just the banks and financial institutions. However, if the Detroit automakers are to receive money or other help of any kind from the American taxpayers, they should berequired to eliminate jobs created in Mexico or Canada, which have displaced U.S. employees, on a similar basis to that proposed for the banks and other outsourced services proposed and covered, by the above proposed legislation.

Such a requirement would not have the effect of altogether negating N.A.F.T.A., but is a permissible activity since the United States does not offer national health insurance like the Canadians do, or pay no regard to environmental protection measures required by international treaties, like the Mexicans do. We only propose tax incentives to create a more “level playing field” for American workers and American Industries.

I would propose that any such legislation use the same target number ($14,560.00 per job) as an appropriate tax credit to repatriate U.S. automotive and other manufacturing jobs back into the United States as part of a general job re-creation program. While it is not necessarily so that any new jobs would be created immediately, it is equally true that any jobs re-patriated under this type of measure are bound to have existed, once-upon-a-time, in the United States. This just brings them home.
 
 





Proposal for a National Ecological Fertilizer Project

NATIONAL ECOLOGICAL FERTILIZER PROJECT
(First Proposed to the U.S. Congress and to President Obama in 2009)

We propose the nation-wide construction and deployment of liquid ecological fertilizer production units within each and every one of the 87,525 localities of the United States, as identified by the National League of Cities, according to a plan set forth below, which will eliminate the need for dangerous, explosive ammonium nitrate fertilizers within the United States, thus doing a major part to deter and eliminate possibilities for domestic terrorism through the use of home-made high-yield explosive devices such as were used in the 1993 WTC and Oklahoma City bombings. We expect some resistance from the American Fertilizer Industry on this, but, apart from the elimination of an explosive from farms everywhere, we are saving American natural gas for other purposes and we are protecting the environment from the many bad things that happen to soil and water when conventional chemical fertilizers are used. In any case, the plan is set forth, below.

(1) It directly employs a minimum of 787,725 persons on a permanent basis (9 per site), spread over the 87,525 local governments (as cited by the National League of Cities table) of the United States. We propose that funding for 12 months of this endeavor be covered by the stimulus bill, measured at $10.00 per hour, per person, per site, on an independent contractor basis, as opposed to ordinary IRS-defined employee basis. Using this calculation, salaries for twelve months of active employment would cost the taxpayers $16,384,680,000.00. We also recommend that money for an initial purchase of raw materials and other supplies be appropriated, on a one-time, non-renewable basis of a similar amount ($16,384,680,000.00), which works-out to $374,400.00 per locality ($32,769,360,000.00 divided by 87,525 localities) for combined permanent staff salaries, raw materials and other supplies. After the first year of incubation, the sites would have to self-finance both future raw material purchases and all future funding for personnel expenses. This can easily be achieved based on sales revenues as will be more fully outlined below.

(2) The proposal contemplates temporary employment of 4 skilled personnel per site for 60 work days of 8 hours per day at $20.00 per hour for the manufacturing, shipping and site-build-out phases for each of these sites. This will require using an estimated 105,030,000 man-hours in fields such as welding, carpentry, pipefitting, electrician and machine shop employment. The estimation of project costs for these personnel is based on $20.00 per person, per hour, per site, due to the skilled nature of their jobs. Since the average time allotted for equipment construction and site build-outs is fixed at 60 days per site, spread over 87,525 sites across the United States, we calculate 105,030,000 man-hours, times $20.00 per man-hour, on average, for a total of $2,100,600,000.00 for labor. We further recommend budgeting a like amount for raw materials and construction costs of every kind and character for an additional $2,100,600,000.00. Finally, we contemplate a block of an additional$52,000.00 per site for any materials or labor unavailable from local markets or other local resources. The total project cost for this additional$52,000.00 block expense is $4,551,300,000.00. The effect of this 60 day temporary activity will be to inject approximately$100,000.00 into each locality within the first 60 days. Put another way, the national economy will get an almost instant injection of$8,752,500,000.00.

(3) Since the proposal contemplates 9 permanent employees per site at $10.00 per hour, working an 8 hour day. Employment of the 9 permanent employees alongside the 4 temporary skilled employees would have the effect of injecting an extra$5,400.00 in locality salaries and another $5,400.00 in raw material purchases, for a per site total of $10,800.00 in the first 60 days. Multiplied by the number of sites, nationally (87,525), we realize an additional injection into the national economy of$945,270,000.00. Combined, these two groups would inject a total of$110,800.00 into each locality within the first 60 days. This translates to a national injection of $9,697,770,000.00. All of this would take place within 60 days of funding the project. Training expenses and other logistical issues are addressed elsewhere. However, the proposal, absent these costs and expenses, would inject into the local governments of the entire nation, a total of $41,521,860,000.00 in labor and material costs just to establish the 87,525 sites as operational for one year, after which time, they would become self-financing entities. This means they would not only pay the salaries and expenses of their operation in the future, but would, in all likelihood, become sources of revenue for the local governments involved. Structured correctly, these businesses could end-up saving tax-payers and local governments by earning non-tax revenues to support any number of operations or other projects.

(4) It is our proposal that each of these fertilizer manufacturing installations be ultimately owned by the local government entities in the locations wherein they will be situated. The National League of Cities counts cities, towns, villages, and even school districts in their calculations. We feel that this presents the fairest distribution of Federal spending in an economic development project. In any case, it cannot hurt your (the Obama) Administration to start on a winning note for many hundreds of thousands of Americans by doing that one grand thing about Homeland Security, Agriculture, Environmental Issues and Economic Development, all in one project. It would set an example of good governance by killing many birds with the same stone, so to speak.

(5) The list of possibilities for use of the installations is very long and includes, but is not limited to, funding public schools, funding any area of county government expected to experience revenue shortfalls, or (and this is my favorite) to the funding of a foreclosure relief fund to augment an existing $4 billion dollar federal program designed to give grants to local communities to buy and repair abandoned homes. One even better idea might be to use such funds to help people avoid foreclosure in the first place, but that is another policy argument for another day.

(6) Our profit projections for each of these sites are included in other parts of this correspondence and they show that, under normal circumstance, our products will sell well and created a lot of revenue for he owner of each site. However, we recognize that these are extraordinary times and that, to boost sales, state, county, and local governments could be mandated to purchase these fertilizer products in a similar fashion to the mandatory program used to purchase furniture manufactured by federal prison inmates.

The fertilizers have other great benefits as well. They include being environmentally “green” and permitting a method for the eventual complete removal of ammonium nitrate from the United States as a part of Homeland Security and as a general benefit to U.S. agriculture.

We feel there is a need to create at least two (maybe up to 12) training sites to spread this technology all over the United States. We propose a modest site here in Romania for use by the first to be trained. Those trained here would, in turn, return to the United States and train others, both at their respective sites and, possibly, at an academy to be constructed in the United States.

The outlay for training would need to be that a minimum of three (3) people per site got some kind of formal training for about 2 weeks. Since there are so many to be trained, almost certainly some would have to be trained at their respective sites. We estimate that the minimum number of people to require direct training in the production of these fertilizers is 262,575 (3 per site). Of this number, we would want to organize training at a large number of High Schools and Universities across the US. However, we would first want to train a core group of trainers, who would, themselves, become the core personnel, training trainers in the USA. Over a52 week period, we could train as many as 780 people in our main facility in Romania. Each class of thirty would leave and be tasked to train others, who would, in turn train still others until all that needed training had been trained. This process needs to be as quick as possible to take full advantage of the funding proposed above and to allow those trained employees to start producing fertilizers at a level to sustain self-financing at the end of the funded year proposed.

In Romania, we would have to build expanded facilities to accommodate the trainees and to feed and house them during training here. In the States, consideration should be given to either the construction of a dedicated facility for training or to the utilization of existing federal facilities such as the USPS Technical training center or the FAA Aeronautical training center, other sites and facilities found throughout the United States could work as well, such as former military bases, affected by one of the BRAC rounds of base closures.

Invariably, though, some training must be carried out in Romania, since that is where the technology comes from. As a working estimate of what it will cost to build enough space for training, feeding and housing 780 people, we recommend using the expenditure number we used for one locality in the United States (representing build and run costs for one year). This number is $287,200.00. Using $50.00 per person per day of training, we further calculate the expenses involved in food, transportation and other incidental expenses to be in the neighborhood of $1,170,000.00. This brings the total for Romania for training expenses for a one year academy to $1,457,200.00 US Dollars. The costs for conducting training in the United States would depend largely on the method and sites chosen for the training there.

As an additionally-offered continuing benefit to present and future U.S. Administrations, we offer to operate and maintain the proposed Romanian training site on an“at-cost” basis for all U.S. Agencies and International Organizations identified by present or future Administrations for the furtherance of International good will and in support of United States efforts at foreign aid.

Based on the estimated expenses we used for Romania ($1,868.21 per person), and applied to the remaining 261,795 persons who remain to be trained, we estimate that the budget for training those remaining personnel needs to be $489,088,036.95 US Dollars, excluding travel expenses, if any.Handled correctly, a HUGE portion of this amount could be spent in Michigan, Ohio, or some other high-unemployment state, for instance.

Finally, there is the matter of licensing fees for the use of this technology, which are normally fixed by us at $500,000.00 US Dollars per site. Using this number, times 87,525 installations, we get a target number of $43,762,500,000.00 U.S. Dollars. As will be more fully shown below, this is clearly not enough to cover all the known expenses. (The actual prices are quoted in Euros, but, on average, this is how it works out). In Romania, the average wage and material costs are much lower than in the United States. Accordingly, we feel that, since this enterprise will use American labor and materials at virtually each step in order to maximize the effect of the spending on the local economies, we should be able to adjust our funding request by an additional 35%, which is roughly equal to what we pay for Value added tax (19%), plus profit taxes here (16%). This would push up the price per installation to $675,000.00 US Dollars. However, the above number normally is the single price paid by someone for a turn-key business, including training here in Romania. Considering 87,525 sites at 1 per locality, this would normally work out to be $59,079,375,000.00 US Dollars. Further, this is the amount we are asking for you to help us to get funded. A significant management fee will be taken from this amount, as I have described, above.

As a review, let us look, again, at what we have proposed funding for, thus far:

1. Cost for labor and material for permanent staff: $32,769,360,000.00;

2. Cost for labor and material for skilled temporary staff: $8,752,500,000.00;

3. Cost of training 780 persons at Romanian Academy: $1,457,200.00

4. Cost of training 261,795 persons at U.S. Locations: $489,088,036.95
Sub-total (which excludes licensure fees): $42,012,405,236.95

We are recommending an additional “block grant” of $100,000.00, per locality, from the total funding request to be left to the discretion of each site manager for use in either building acquisition, renovation or bottling equipment acquisition, or any travel needed to obtain training for the site. Accordingly, the sub-total above needs to be adjusted to reflect the one, last “catch-all” block of funding to each site manager.

Here is the math:

$100,000.00 times 87,525 localities equals an additional amount of $8,752,500,000.00.

Therefore, the revised sub-total is actually $42,012,405,236.95 + $8,752,500,000.00, which gives us a running sub-total of$50,764,905,236.95.

As we have said, above, we do not know, as yet what costs will be associated with travel, per diem expenses and possible site rental expenses involved with the training. However, given that the difference between what we have suggested for funding ($59,079,375,000.00 US Dollars) and what we calculate our other listed expenses, other than intellectual property fees, would be works out to be $8,314,469,763.05 Dollars or $94,995.37 US Dollars per locality,

 

 WE ACCEPT BITCOINS
 
Just exactly how this projected intellectual property fee income gets treated is going to depend, directly, on how the money is treated for tax purposes. In a perfect world, this money gets paid to my company and I roll-over the investment into alternative energy stocks and/or municipal bonds. Obviously, the less cash I hold, the lower the taxes I pay. Accordingly, my wife and I want you to consider a range of options for compensation, instead of cash for either all or part of this money. These options include, but are not limited to, BITCOINS, assets seized in the war on drugs, any stocks still held by the Treasury Department or any other asset or combination of assets which is mutually agreeable and of approximately equal value to any intellectual property fees owed to us.

Thursday, 27 March 2014

Aid Proposal for Ukraine, Republic of Moldova, and the Republic of Georgia




Aid Proposal For Ukraine, Republic of Moldova and the Republic of Georgia



Thomas Lowell Ketchum, Jr.
Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 4:15 PM
To: roger_wicker@wicker.senate.gov, bob_foster@wicker.senate.gov, joseph_lai@wicker.senate.gov, kern_hoff@wicker.senate.gov, evelyn_fortier@wicker.senate.gov,
Dear Senator Wicker,

The following is a  proposal for aid and assistance to those Black Sea countries which border NATO member states. The countries affected are Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia and, as will be more fully shown below, these places are under direct threat from increased Russian aggression, as shown in the recent annexation of Crimea.

As I am sure you will fully appreciate, the enactment and deployment of a comprehensive and timely proposal to help our friends is vitally important at this moment in history. To delay now is to invite Russia to take further unacceptable steps which can only be met with a military response. What we propose here is intended to avoid this.
The proposed economic assistance will give aid and comfort to friendly nations within the region and do much to help them resist further Russian interference in their internal affairs.
The proposal is non-military in nature. However it does provide opportunities for professionals within the U.S. government to increase their civilian presence in the crisis area under the legitimate cover of a large-scale Agricultural/Economic Development Enterprise.

As you will see, the proposals also have National Security implications, domestically, as well as the potential for environmentally friendly economic development, both within Mississippi and the remainder of the United States, in the event that the anticipated successes in the Black Sea region get translated into domestic policy programs back in the States.

We offer here to prove a concept, while, at the same time, provide important and timely aid to friendly nations currently under threat from Russia.
Background:


My wife is an Agronomical Engineer with a PhD level education here in Romania. She has over 30 years of experience, including several years as a research scientist at the Romanian Academy of Agricultural and Forestry Sciences and the Research Institute for Plant Protection, and over two decades as a successful producer and distributor of liquid ecological fertilizers, which are both non-toxic and non-explosive. It is she that is behind what I am about to describe to you, below. I remain retired, but support her, completely, in this endeavor.

She also recently obtained a Romanian Patent for one of her more recently invented fertilizers, along with the process for manufacturing it (copy file attached).

Back in 2010, we had an exchange with James King, a Legislative Assistant with Senator Wicker at the time, where we gave some of the details regarding a large scale regional fertilizer production project which we had proposed as a method for re-purposing the Blue Springs, MS site at the time. While it turned out that Toyota came through on the site, we thought that maybe the Senator might want to take another look at a similar proposal from a different perspective - that of a potential aid package for one or more of several countries being directly threatened by recent Russian aggression.


We actually did make a proposal for the Republic of Georgia (pasted below) which we had originally proposed to be funded through the Millennium Challenge Corporation of the U.S. State Department. I think we included the text of a similar proposal (for the Republic of Moldova) in the exchange with Mr. King in 2010 (pasted at the very end of all this).

What we are now proposing is that something similar for either Ukraine, Moldova, and/or Georgia be revised and resubmitted for possible action by the U.S. Congress.


Because these proposals involve the elimination of explosive fertilizers from the zones to be served, we feel they directly benefit (1) Homeland Security in the United States, (2) U.S. Agriculture, (3) Environmental concerns, both in the USA and in foreign zones where deployment is proposed, and (4) Economic Stimulus and Development concerns.


Having an increased U.S. civilian presence in Ukraine, Moldova and/or Georgia under the cover of a substantial Agricultural development enterprise also is in the National Security interests of the United States.

We are fully prepared to consider changes in the price structure (licensure fees vs. outright intellectual property purchase) and we are also willing and eager to see the bulk of any potential profits from these enterprises re-invested, domestically, in the United States, and, in particular, in Mississippi. This is because we realize that the Senator is a wise steward of the People's money and would like, as we all would, to squeeze the absolute most out of every Federal dollar spent.


With the above in mind, please keep an open mind when it comes to our quoted numbers as to intellectual property fees as you read this.
What we have to offer is a 100% environmentally “green” liquid foliar fertilizer manufacturing installation and process, along with patented formulae, which produce liquid ecological foliar fertilizers (N-P-K, plus micro elements) using common non-toxic mineral compounds.

The formulations do NOT, per se, include any organic materials. However, here in Europe, these formulations are so ecologically friendly ("green") that they are certified for use in "organic" farming operations.

These machines produce N-P-K fertilizers WITHOUT EVER using dangerous, explosive, Ammonium Nitrate. Accordingly, you will find that a broad deployment of these machines, throughout North America can be a big help in the "War On Terror", since they form the basis of restricting Ammonium Nitrate to a very very few, large industrial farm operations. As such, terrorists will have a much harder time making Oklahoma City-styled bombs.

We have erected a pilot facility (for sales purposes, so as to not give away formulae secrets during actual operations) near the city of Buzau (about 100 km from Bucharest). We are prepared to allow close inspection of this facility by the U.S. Commercial Service of the U.S. Embassy in Bucharest, which could confirm any and all claims we make about this enterprise for anyone interested.

We are requesting that you undertake a “fact-finding” trip to Romania to witness the machinery and the processes after an initial evaluation by the U.S. Commercial Service, located at the U.S. Embassy in Bucharest.

Thereafter, we would ask you to propose legislation, which would place these machines in service throughout the United States in sufficient numbers and in broad enough distribution (as to area) so as to support subsequent legislation to strictly curtail and limit access to Ammonium Nitrate fertilizers, as a measure to assist in “the War on Terror”. The machines and processes are needed because, until now, no commercially-viable alternative existed to Ammonium Nitrate fertilizers.

With these machines, you eliminate a readily-available explosive from the public domain. This does not even touch the other benefits to be had from these remarkable fertilizers.

In exchange for mutually-agreeable terms, we offer to work with whomever the Congress designates to decide who gets licensed, trained and otherwise assisted in obtaining this technology for every location proposed in Ukraine, Moldova, and/or the Republic of Georgia.

Specifically, we offer to train trainers here in Romania and there, at the various sites and in the approved zones, once the proposal is funded and, otherwise, fully supported.

We have all information at the ready to support our proposal, immediately.

It is our belief that you could actually get the Congress to fully fund the manufacture and deployment of the needed equipment at the various sites in very short order, based on the fast-moving developments in the Black Sea Region of late. 

I have pasted an English translation of our sales literature here in Romania. As mentioned above, the price listed should be considered “negotiable”, especially in the event of large-scale federal funding such as might be encountered in a supplemental Homeland Security Spending Bill. or other legislative measure enacted to provide immediate relief to Ukraine, Moldova, and/or the Republic of Georgia, in response to Russian aggression in Crimea.

 

OFFER OF LICENCE FOR LIQUID ECOLOGICAL FOLIAR FERTILIZER INSTALLATION, 
MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY  
COMPLETE INSTALLATION HARDWARE 
FORMULAE AND PROCEDURES FOR MAKING FERTILIZER 
KNOW HOW 
The fertilizers are a complex of mineral obtained via patented ecological procedure.
The  contents:  macro elements (Ammonia,  Phosphorus, and  Potassium ), together with micro elements : Fe, Zn, Cu , Mo , B, S , Co,  Mg , Mn, Ni. Each of the above in the   necessary concentrations benefits plants and, ultimately, for the consumers when they use agricultural products made using our fertilizers. 
The fertilizer production installation will be assembled by us on-site and delivered to the buyer in working condition. 
    Our fertilizers are classified as “Millennium III Fertilizers”, as defined and described by the   International Congress of Fertilizers, of which we and our company are members. Together, we represent the future of agriculture in the world, where the health and well-being of the people are recognized to begin with the quality and nutritional content of the foods they consume.
Our fertilizer characteristics conform to and comply with all the standards and other requirements established by the    European Union:
Ph- active  content  in active  substances , optimal concentrations , low  costs  of  production and they  are  ecological in every respect. The contents are adapted to climate, land structure, plant variety etc.  
We are selling licenses based on European patents held by us, which  represent scientifically  solutions for  health of  soil, plants  and  people.
The cost  of one (1) license  can be  recuperated within 6-8  months  of selling  produced fertilizer, based on the manufacturing capacity of one installation, which  is 600 liters / one hour  per installation.
 
We also include and the licensee will have following:
1). The process and installation licenses, register in the name of client.
2). The fabrication technology,
3). The formulae and procedures required for the manufacturing of our fertilizer.
4). Patented design blueprints of the factory.
5). Starter kit in business to obtain profit.
6). Feasibility study for producers.
7). “Know-How”.
8). Marketing and managerial strategies and support.
9). Promotion and advertising support for these products through   symposiums and other material presentations.
10). Technical support, which later the personal will offer to clients.
11). Complete project support data, including information concerning purchase of raw material, labels, recipients, etc.
12). Coding for registering production histories
13). Operational “franchise” regulations for proposed installations, including personnel protection rules for workers, and a list of  known suppliers for various raw materials used in our production processes.
14). The branding to be included on every label.
15). The completed installation, in working condition.
16). Professional training, with books and other instruction materials needed in support of the business.
 
The liquid ecological foliar fertilizers are normally applied by spraying on leaves. The foliar fertilizers are green  color, with precisely calculated contents  in  minerals ( macro elements and  microelement ),  in  beneficial formulations  for  plants which  are applied in important  growth phases for plants, as needed,  based on the  moment of  application in the life of the plant targeted.
 
- Applied quantity for one treatment is: 5 liters per hectare.
-For  following  crops : wheat , rice , maize  (large-scale open-air agriculture ), vegetable gardens, fruits tree, vineyards , greenhouses , household plants of every size , and for all manner of landscaping and/or lawn care projects.
 
  The minerals contents are taken-up by the plants and replace important elements often overlooked by agricultural producers.
 Another important benefit  for  plants  using ecological  fertilizers is that they  became very drought  resistant, with leaves growing fast  with  good  content  in  chlorophyll that  means  in photosynthesis process.
 
-There is a 100% correlation between public health and the mineral content of the agricultural products they consume. Literally, "You are what you eat". 
 
-OVER THE PAST 10+ YEARS THAT WE HAVE BEEN IN THIS BUSINESS, ALL AREAS TREATED WITH OUR LIQUID ECOLOGICAL FOLIAR AND OTHER MINERAL FERTILIZERS HAVE CONSISTANTLY AND ECOLOGICALLY PRODUCED HIGH-QUALITY CROPS, WHICH COMMANDED THE BEST PRICES AND PRODUCED, DEMONSTRABLY MORE OUTPUT AND ANY COMPARABLE SOLID FERTILIZERS.
 
-THE COSTS OF OUR ECOLOGICAL LIQUID FERTILIZERS ARE ABOUT 33% THAT OF THE NEAREST COMPARABLE SOLID FERTILIZERS. THAT IS A HUGE DISCOUNT OF 67% OFF WHAT WOULD NORMALLY BE SPENT. 
 
-THE PLANT-FERTILIZER ASSIMILATION PROCESS FOR OUR LIQUID FERTILIZERS  IS 100 % SUPERIOR TO THAT OF ORDINARY SOLID  FERTILIZERS, SINCE SOLID FERTILIZERS RELY ON ADDITIONAL IRRIGATION OR SOME ACT OF GOD (LIKE RAIN) TO MAKE THEM START TO WORK.
 
PRODUCTION EXAMPLE:  CONSIDERING 600 LITERS OF FINISHED FERTILIZER PER ONE OUR, WITH PRODUCTION INSTALLATION WORKING   10 HOURS + 6000 LITRI /DAY, IN ONE MONTH OF 20 NORMAL WORKING (WEEKDAY) DAYS= 6000 LITRI X 20 DAYS = 120,000 LITERS PER MONTH.
 
APPLICATION DOSE IS 5 LITERS/HECTARE.
 
120,000 LITERS: 5 LITERS /Ha. = 24.000  HECTARS   SELLING IN ONE MONTH, IN ONE TEAM (IN THIS EXAMPLE).
 
-IN ONE YEAR = 24.00 HA/MONTH X 12   MONTHS = 48,000 HECTARES
IN CONCLUSION: ONE PRODUCTION INSTALLATION WITH A CAPACITY OF 600 LITERS / ONE HOUR CAN PRODUCE FERTILIZERS FOR 48,000 HECTARES.
 
IN CASE WE ARE USING 2 TEAMS (20 MAN-HOURS)  PER   DAY , ONE  PRODUCTION INSTALLATION CAN  PRODUCE  FERTILIZERS  FOR 96,000 HECTARES OVER THE COURSE OF ONE (1) YEAR.
 
ALL THE ABOVE FIGURES USE A VERY CONSERVATIVE MARK-UP OF 1.00 EURO PER LITER ABOVE COSTS TO PRODUCE AND, THEREFORE, AFFORDING 1.00 EURO PER LITER OF PROFIT FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS CALCULATION.
 
That being said, the results are still astonishing. Look that what you get below!!!!
 
NET PROFIT (MINIMUM, USING THE 20 MAN-HOUR PER DAY, 20 DAY PER MONTH SCENERIO) 480,000.00 EURO. / YEAR.
 
EVEN THE SMALLEST FARMERS (e.g.  500 HECTARES OR LESS) CAN COMPLETELY SUPPORT DISTRIBUTERS FOR ALL THE AREA AROUND 96,000.HECTARS.
 
THE LIST PRICE PER ONE SITE LICENSE IS 300,000.00 EUROS.-
 
Funding options exist, but the time is extremely limited.
         
For those using English instead of metric, 1 hectare is about 2.47 acres and one liter is about 1.057 quarts. 1 Euro is about $1.37 US dollar, as of March 27, 2014.
A PROPOSAL FOR A

 NATIONAL ECOLOGICAL FERTILIZER PROJECT

FOR THE REPUBLIC OF GEORGIA

We propose the construction and deployment of liquid ecological fertilizer production units within six (6) strategic agricultural localities of the Republic of Georgia, according to a plan set forth below, which will eliminate the need for dangerous, explosive ammonium nitrate fertilizers within the Republic of Georgia, thus doing a major part to deter and eliminate possibilities for domestic terrorism through the use of home-made high-yield explosive devices such as were used in the 1993 WTC , the Oklahoma City bombings, and  numerous other acts of terrorism throughout the world, including those very often observed during what might otherwise be described as insurrection or civil war.  
Apart from the elimination of an explosive from farms everywhere, we are saving the Georgian natural gas for other purposes and we are protecting the environment from the many bad things that happen to soil and water when conventional chemical fertilizers are used. In any case, the plan is set forth, below.
In dealing with the issue of compensation for the nation-wide use of our patented processes and formulae, we contemplate receipt of significant funds, which will require careful re-investment to legally limit our tax liabilities. 
Below, we more fully address how we come to these numbers and conclusions:
(1) It directly employs a minimum of 60 persons on a permanent basis (10 per site), spread over the cities of Tblisis, Gori, Poti, Batumi, Senaki, and Zugdidi, which constitute the most significant agricultural cities and towns within the Republic of Georgia. We propose that funding for 12 months of this endeavor be covered as training expenses from the appropriate Millenium Challenge Corporation Compact project account(s), measured at $10.00 per hour, per person, per site, on an independent contractor basis. Using this calculation, salaries for twelve months of active employment would charge the MCC Compact account a total of $1,248,000.00. We also recommend that money for an initial purchase of raw materials and other supplies be appropriated, on a one-time, non-renewable basis of a similar amount ($1,248,000.00), which works-out to $416,000.00 per locality ($2,496,000.00 divided by 6 localities) for combined permanent staff salaries, raw materials and other supplies. After the first year of incubation, the sites would have to self-finance both future raw material purchases and all future funding for personnel expenses. This can easily be achieved based on sales revenues which we will provide elsewhere.
(2) The proposal contemplates temporary employment of 4 skilled personnel per site for 60 work days of 8 hours per day at $20.00 per hour for the manufacturing, shipping and site-build-out phases for each of these sites. This will require using an estimated 1,920 man-hours in fields such as welding, carpentry, pipefitting, electrician and machine shop employment. The estimation of project costs for these personnel is based on $20.00 per person, per hour, per site, due to the skilled nature of their jobs. Since the average time allotted for equipment construction and site build-outs is fixed at 60 days per site, spread over 6 sites across the Republic of Georgia, we calculate 1,920 man-hours, times $20.00 per man-hour, on average, for a total of $38,400.00 for labor. We further recommend budgeting a like amount for raw materials and construction costs of every kind and character for an additional $38,400.00.00. Additionally, we contemplate a block of an additional $152,000.00 per site for any materials or labor unavailable from local markets or other local resources. This $152,000.00 amount includes the specialized, off-site manufacturing and delivery for each specialized fertilizer manufacturing unit from Romania to the Republic of Georgia (all set-up expenses are budgeted elsewhere). The total project cost, after adding these two (2) additional expenses (combined total $152,000.00 per site, times 6 sites), is $644,800.00 U.S. Dollars, per site.
(3) Training expenses and other logistical issues are addressed elsewhere. However, the proposal, absent these costs and expenses, would inject into the local governments of the entire nation, a total of  $3,268,800.00 in labor and material costs just to establish the six (6) sites as operational for one year, after which time, they would become self-financing entities. This means they would not only pay the salaries and expenses of their operation in the future, but would, in all likelihood, become sources of revenue for the local governments involved. Structured correctly, these businesses could end-up saving tax-payers and local governments by earning non-tax revenues to support any number of operations or other projects.
(4) It is our proposal that each of these fertilizer manufacturing installations be ultimately owned by the local government entities in the locations wherein they will be situated. We feel that this presents the fairest distribution of Enterprise Development Project funds.   
(5) The list of possibilities for use of the installations is very long and includes, but is not limited to, funding public schools, funding any area of county government expected to experience revenue shortfalls. One even better idea might be to use such funds to help rebuild infrastructure destroyed by the Russians in 2008, but that is another policy argument for another day.
(6) Our profit projections for each of these sites are included in other parts of this correspondence and they show that, under normal circumstance, our products will sell well and created a lot of revenue for he owner of each site. However, we recognize that these are extraordinary times and that, to boost sales,  local governments could be mandated to purchase these fertilizer products in a similar fashion to the mandatory programs used in the United States, which are utilized by government entities to purchase furniture manufactured by U.S. federal prison inmates.
The fertilizers have other great benefits as well. They include being environmentally “green” and permitting a method for the eventual complete removal of ammonium nitrate from the Republic of Georgia as a part of Homeland Security and as a general benefit to Georgian agriculture.
We propose a modest site here in Romania for use by the first to be trained. Those trained here would, in turn, return to the Republic of Georgia and train others, both at their respective sites and, possibly, at an academy to be constructed in the Republic of Georgia.
The outlay for training would need to be that a minimum of three (3) people per site got some kind of formal training for about 2-4 weeks. Since there are so many to be trained, almost certainly some would have to be trained at their respective sites. We estimate that the minimum number of people to require direct training in the production of these fertilizers is 18 (3 per site). A single class of eighteen (18) would leave and be tasked to train others, who would, in turn train still others until all that needed training had been trained.
In Romania, we would have to build expanded facilities to accommodate the trainees and to feed and house them during training here. Invariably, though, some training must be carried out in Romania, since that is where the technology comes from. As a working estimate of what it will cost to build enough space for training, feeding and housing 18 people, we recommend using the expenditure number we used for one locality in the Republic of Georgia (representing build and run costs for one year). This number is $644,800.00. Using $50.00 per person per day of training, times an estimated 2 weeks and 18 people to train, we further calculate the expenses involved in food, transportation and other incidental expenses to be in the neighborhood of $27,000.00. This brings the total for Romania for training expenses for a one month academy to $671,800.00 US Dollars.  The costs for conducting training in the Republic of Georgia would depend largely on the method and sites chosen for the training there. 
As an additionally-offered continuing benefit to present and future MCC Compact Countries, we offer to operate and maintain the proposed Romanian training site on an “at-cost” basis for all U.S. Agencies and International Organizations identified by present or future Administrations for the furtherance of International good will and in support of United States efforts at foreign aid, including the Millenium Challenge Corporation and the Peace Corps.
Finally, there is the matter of licensing fees for the use of this technology, which are normally fixed by us at $750,000.00 US Dollars per site. Using this number, times six (6) installations, we get a target number of $4,500,000.00 U.S. Dollars. This amount does not normally include any money for raw materials or for paying salaries for employees.
We believe that our proposal offers your government an outstanding value for $4,540,600.00 U.S. Dollars, exclusive of any taxes. This is especially true when you consider that we are specifically waiving any and all formal licensure (or any other form of intellectual property) fees, per se.
Here is how it breaks down:
Normally, your country would be getting just 6 installations delivered to the Republic of Georgia, with some minimal training, no raw materials and no money for salaries for a total cost of $4,500,000.00 U.S. Dollars.
Under our special proposal, your country gets 6 complete installations, full licensure for use of all formulae and brands used with our products, full training for 18 personnel, full site build-out for all 6 locations, full raw materials for an estimated first year production of 300,000 liters per site (total raw materials for 1,800,000 liters). You would get ALL this for NO MONEY out of any account except the $15,000,000.00 Agribusiness Development Activity MCC account and the $32.5 Million dollar Georgia Regional Development Fund Activity for areas outside of Tblisi. These two funds and activities are found under the section of the MCC Compact, which detail the “Enterprise Development Project” for the Republic of Georgia.
Finally, every penny spent would total less than what we normally charge just for the equipment and training, with permanent benefits accruing to the Georgian Society and the government.
Again, the MCC Compact funding proposed for this project is $4,540,600.00 US Dollars.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED BY:
THE FOLPLANT CONSORTIUM

 




Dear Mr. King,
Probably, a lot has happened since we last exchanged messages in November of 2009. Certainly, the Senator has experienced set-backs in Agriculture, as reflected in his statement of February 12, 2010.
We understand that what we proposed, earlier, may be too much to handle, so we would like to ask the Senator to consider a different path for bringing relief to Mississippi farmers.
We now propose a deal to re-invest in Mississippi a portion of funding derived from what you would probably consider a "foreign aid" activity.
Our company makes liquid ecological fertilizers and related production equipment. We also offer something of a "franchise" arrangement to clients, wherein we license and train them for production of our 20+ liquid fertilizers, provide the associated production equipment, and all needed training for a flat fee, which varies, depending on how far away the project is from Romania and how extensive the activity is proposed to be.
In our situation, we propose working with a U.S. government Corporation, known as "The Millennium Challenge Corporation", which is used by the United States (in conjunction with other entities such as USAID, The World Bank, IMF, and various UN entities, as well as private industry) to channel investments into various countries who have concluded what are called "MCC Compacts", designed to achieve specific goals.
In the instant circumstances, we are working under the newly-signed (January 22, 2010) MCC Compact for the Republic of Moldova and are seeking funding for a fertilizer project under their "Transition To High Value Agriculture Project" and related sub-activities.
Not all MCC Compacts have anything to do with Agriculture, but the one for the Republic of Moldova does.
What we offer is a deal with the Senator to divert a percentage of our fees (to be derived from the project we propose for the Republic of Moldova) and specifically agree, contractually, to re-invest said funding into a pilot project for Mississippi, which will demonstrate the value of our original proposal to the have a "National Ecological Fertilizer Project". In support of this idea, we propose to fund a pilot activity in North Mississippi.
What we seek from the Senator is any influence which he is lawfully allowed to bring to bear in order to have the Millennium Challenge Corporation people, both in Washington and in Moldova to bring our project to life and fully fund and execute the project, the general details of which are outlined below.
If the Senator does not wish to use the funding for our pilot project, then we still offer to have the money that might have gone to that end, to be used to fund what would have in better economic times been some agriculture "earmark" for Mississippi.
The proposal we have for funding under the MCC Compact for the Republic of Moldova calls for total funding of approximately $9,000,100.00 (just over nine million dollars), out of a fully-funded account in excess of $262,000,000.00 in available funding.
Most of this money will not go to us, directly, but is budgeted to pay employees at each of 12 sites, plus salaries for temporary workers, needed for the construction phase of the project.
We estimate that the portions over which we have direct control will permit us to offer approximately $400,000.00 (representing about 10% of our portion of gross sales of equipment and services, under our MCC Compact proposal).
No matter what anyone may have said about me or my ideas, I do not believe that Senator Wicker has forgotten that it was ME that helped get him elected to Jamies Whitten's old House seat in the first place and was the one who worked all night at the Tupelo Post Office as an Electronic Technician, then spent time that I should have been sleeping, running all over the First Congressional District, putting up signs for him and Trent Lott, together. I also wrote to every one of my Postal Union people and to all of Postal management (when I was President of APWU Local 1280 in Tupelo) and asked everyone to get on board with Roger and Trent, for the good of ALL Mississippians, and to suspend the customary and usual rancor between Union and Management in favor of getting something bigger accomplished.
Regardless of what has happened since that time in 1994, I am the same man I was then: I care about my State and my Country, even if I now spend most of my days on the other side of the planet. I believe in Roger Wicker, both as a man and as a Leader of Men. Certainly, I feel I understand him better than most Mississippians probably do.
Much like Roger, I care about "giving back" and in Public Service, in general, and I long for the day when something I can do over here is important enough to do good for, and be recognized by, the people of Mississippi, and the rest of our Nation, especially in these troubled times.
So, I hope you can understand why I persist in my connection with your office and will not dismiss my ideas out of hand, simply because of the scale that some of these ideas contemplate. After all, America is a big place and Mississippi is my home..even now, after all this time and all that has happened.
What we offer here is way to help both Mississippi, the Senator, and my own family. We see no reason why it cannot help the entire nation, once we get a shot at proving the concept, as we propose to do in Moldova, with money already spent.
Please try to keep an open mind, both about me and about what the wife and I propose.
We thank you, in advance, for listening.
A Copy of the MCC Compact for Republic of Moldova, is attached as a PDF file for your information.
Here are the pastes I mentioned, above:


From: Folplant@aol.com
To:
Chisinau-CA@state.gov
CC:
kyvinfo@usaid.gov
Sent: 2/22/2010 3:38:54 A.M. Pacific Standard Time
Subj: Request for Assistance On MCC Compact Proposal for Moldova

To Whomever This May Concern:
We are writing to you, today, because we have no idea who it is that we have to have a dialogue with in order to have our MCC Compact-funded proposal considered and acted-upon.
We hope that, by contact officials within my government, we have made some progress by way of this communication.
I am a United States citizen who has formed a company with my wife, who is a Romanian National.
Together, we are in the business of manufacturing and selling liquid ecological (organo-mineral, plus vitamin C) fertilizers. We also franchise manufacturing of our products in other markets.
We have formulated a draft proposal for our liquid ecological fertilizers to be manufactured in the Republic of Moldova, under the auspices of the Millennium Challenge Corporation, which recently signed a new compact with the government of the Republic of Moldova.
After reading the 69 page document, which details provisions of the new MCC Compact with the Republic of Moldova, we are convinced that every single aspect of our proposal is covered by some portion of the Compact.
For example, our project calls for salaried personnel at each of the eleven (11) irrigation sites mentioned in the Compact. Our portion of this project calls for hiring 110 full-time personnel to manufacture liquid fertilizers, for instance. We read, in Section 2.2 of the Compact, that up to $8 Million Dollars is allocated for what is called "Compact Implementation Funding".
Specifically included in the list of authorized purposes for the above funds is:
"(ii) start-up activities, including staff salaries and administrative support
expenses, such as office equipment, computers and other information technology or capital
equipment; and other Compact implementation activities approved by MCC."
As our proposal, which follows, below, indicates, our proposed budget for full-time staff salaries is $2,496,000.00, which includes the proposed 11 sites, plus staffing for a training academy, which we propose to be built and operated in Romania, in support of both this and any future US Government-sanction activities.
While we recognize that USAID, per-se, has ended its official activities with Romania, it is fair to say that the Romanian government retains a keen interest in maintaining good relations with the Republic of Moldova and would probably welcome the chance to be supportive of efforts by or on behalf of USAID and/or World Bank and/or any other international organization in fostering a climate of positive co-operation between Romania and the Republic of Moldova.
Having said the above, we suggest that, to the extent that the Academy would be at the disposal of US Government agencies under our proposal, the USAID (and other donor/investors) would have an opportunity to make use of this facility on an "at-cost" basis for the many listed activities in the MCC Compact for the Republic of Moldova.
 Elsewhere, within the newly-signed Compact, we see the possibility for covering our estimated temporary labor costs and construction costs (11/12 of which is co-located at the 11 proposed sites for the Centralized Irrigation System Rehabilitation Activity) can be covered by funding by this same activity.
What we are a bit unclear about, is how to proceed and get our proposal both seriously considered and, thereafter, funded and enacted.
Below, we offer some background on all this and then copies of what we would like the "right people" to consider and work with us to make into a reality.
My wife is the brains behind this project, since she is an Agronomical Engineer, with over 30 years of experience, both in Agricultural Sciences and in business. She has a very impressive CV, which includes her time as CEO of several SRL companies.
Her Academic credentials include more than 6 years in both Academy of Agricultural and Forest Sciences and within the Research-Development Department of the Institute for Plant Protection. 
She is Romanian, by birth, and is available to speak with you, in Romanian, about any more detailed information, which you may require concerning what we propose, below.
We recently sent a proposal to the listed contact persons, both in the Republic of Moldova and in Washington, DC, concerning the construction and operation of eleven (11) liquid ecological fertilizer production facilities at sites, specified in the recently-signed Millennium Challenge Corporation Compact for the Republic of Moldova.
The proposal was specifically designed to be integrated within the so-called “Transition to High Value Agriculture” Project, wherein eleven (11) specific sites were listed for restoration and improvement of the large-scale irrigation systems, used to support agriculture within the Republic of Moldova.
The eleven (11) sites were referred to as pumping stations and, since our liquid ecological fertilizer production facilities utilize considerable water in the production process and since the possibility exists for their use in “fertigation” (a process where irrigation and fertilization occur simultaneously, as it might, for example, in green houses), we saw an opportunity to enhance the overall value of the project envisioned by the Millennium Challenge Corporation when they signed this agreement, on or about 22 January 2010.
A bit more about our project:
We propose that our project will create a minimum of 110 new full-time positions(outside of the 10 we propose to be created at our proposed training academy), spread over the eleven (11) sites contemplated in our proposal. The project is fully-funded for the first year through the MCC Compact funds and is envisioned to be self-sustaining, thereafter, through product sales.
We propose funding for the construction of the equipment and modification of site facilities at the eleven (11) contemplated sites, plus funding for construction work on a training Academy, which we will keep in Romania and offer to other agencies for use on an “at-cost” basis, once this proposal has reached its end.
Here is a paste of some of the relevant e-mail traffic on this subject:
From: Folplant@aol.com
To: VPImplementation@mcc.gov, VPGeneralCounsel@mcc.gov, victor.bodiu@gov.md
CC: bucuresti@mfa.md, consulat.bucuresti@mfa.md
Sent: 2/4/2010 6:40:59 A.M. Pacific Standard Time
Subj: MCC Moldova Proposal for "Transition to High Value Agriculture Project"

TO:
Millennium Challenge Corporation

Attention: Vice President, Compact Implementation (cc: General Counsel)

875 Fifteenth Street, NW

Washington, DC 20005

United States of America

Facsimile: + (202) 521-3700

Telephone: + (202) 521-3600


AND TO:

State Chancellery

Attn: Minister of State

1, Piata Marii Adunari Nationale

Chisinau, MD-2033
Republic of Moldova
Facsimile: + (373) 22-242-696
Telephone: + (373) 22-250-104

AND TO:
 
Embassy of the Republic of Moldova in Romania
Chancery: 712 731 Aleea Alexandru  nr.40, Sector 1, Bucharest
Phone: (0040-21)230.04.74, 230.07.32
Fax: (0040-21) 230.77.90
E-mail:
bucuresti@mfa.md 

 
Consular Section: 762 432 Bd. Eroilor nr.8, Sector 5, Bucharest
Phone: (0040-21) 410.98.27
Fax: (0040-21) 410.98.26
E-mail:
consulat.bucuresti@mfa.md  

Charge d'Affaires a.i.:  H. E. Mr. Efim CHILARI
           Subject: Agricultural Development Proposal for MCC Funding
We are a liquid ecological fertilizer company, based in Bucharest, Romania, which is a joint U.S.-Romanian Company.
We hold patents for fertilizer production systems, and over 20 formulae which are manufactured and sold, at present, within the EU.
We also offer training, equipment, and franchise licensure for equipment, systems, and our brands to interested parties and we would like to discuss a proposal with you, which can be funded through your new MCC Compact, dated 22 January 2010.
Our proposal would immediately and permanently improve the production levels for agriculture within your country, in accordance with the requirements stated in the MCC Compact for the Republic of Moldova.
We are ready, immediately, to make this project work in your country and would welcome an opportunity to discuss it with and explain it to you in further detail.
We believe that your prompt reply will work to everyone’s advantage and hope to hear from you soon. 

Respectfully,

(Original signed and sealed )

Thomas L. and Elena M. Ketchum

Proposal Follows:

A PROPOSAL FOR A
 NATIONAL ECOLOGICAL FERTILIZER PROJECT
FOR THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA 
We propose the construction and deployment of liquid ecological fertilizer production units within eleven (11) strategic agricultural localities of the Republic of Moldova, according to a plan set forth below, which will eliminate the need for dangerous, explosive ammonium nitrate fertilizers within the Republic of Moldova, thus doing a major part to deter and eliminate possibilities for domestic terrorism through the use of home-made high-yield explosive devices such as were used in the 1993 WTC , the Oklahoma City bombings, and  numerous other acts of terrorism throughout the world, including those very often observed during what might otherwise be described as insurrection or civil war. 
Apart from the elimination of an explosive from farms everywhere, we are saving existing Moldovan natural gas for other purposes and we are protecting the environment from the many bad things that happen to soil and water when conventional chemical fertilizers are used. In any case, the plan is set forth, below.
In dealing with the issue of compensation for the nation-wide use of our patented processes and formulae, we contemplate receipt of significant funds, which will require careful re-investment to legally limit our tax liabilities.
Below, we more fully address how we come to these numbers and conclusions:
(1) It directly employs a minimum of 110 persons on a permanent basis (10 per site), spread over the cities of Chircani-Zirnesti, Blindesti, Grozesti, Leova Sud, Cahul, Jora de Jos, Lopatna, Cosnita, Criuleni, Puhaceni, and Roscani, which constitute the 11 MCC targeted Centralized irrigation systems agricultural cities and towns within the Republic of Moldova. We propose that funding for 12 months of this endeavor be covered as training expenses from the appropriate Millenium Challenge Corporation Compact project account(s), measured at $10.00 per hour, per person, per site, on an independent contractor basis. Using this calculation, per site salaries for twelve months of active employment would charge the MCC Compact account a total of $2,288,000.00 U.S. Dollars. We also recommend that money for an initial purchase of raw materials and other supplies be appropriated, on a one-time, non-renewable basis of a similar amount ($2,288,000.00), which works-out to $416,000.00 per locality ($4,576,000.00 divided by 11 localities) for combined permanent staff salaries, raw materials and other supplies. After the first year of incubation, the sites would have to self-finance both future raw material purchases and all future funding for personnel expenses. This can easily be achieved based on sales revenues which we will provide elsewhere.
(2) The proposal contemplates temporary employment of 4 skilled personnel per site for 60 work days of 8 hours per day at $20.00 per hour for the manufacturing, shipping and site-build-out phases for each of these sites. This will require using a per-site estimated 1,920 man-hours in fields such as welding, carpentry, pipefitting, electrician and machine shop employment. The estimation of project costs for these personnel is based on $20.00 per person, per hour, per site, due to the skilled nature of their jobs. Since the average time allotted for equipment construction and site build-outs is fixed at 60 days per site, spread over 11 sites across the Republic of Moldova. Accordingly, we calculate (per site) 1,920 man-hours, times $20.00 per man-hour, on average, for a total of $38,400.00 for labor. We further recommend budgeting a like amount for raw materials and construction costs of every kind and character for an additional $38,400.00.00. Further, we contemplate a block of an additional $152,000.00 per site for any materials or labor unavailable from local markets or other local resources. This $152,000.00 amount includes the specialized, off-site manufacturing and delivery for each specialized fertilizer manufacturing unit from Romania to the Republic of Moldova (all set-up expenses are budgeted elsewhere). Finally, we contemplate a block allocation of $100,000.00 per site, in order to pay for any building renovation, auxiliary equipment or other construction support costs (e.g. buying land or an existing building to house the manufacturing equipment). The total project cost, after adding these three (3) additional expenses, the combined, per-site total is $744,800.00 U.S. Dollars, per site.
(3) Training expenses and other logistical issues are addressed elsewhere. However, the proposal, absent these costs and expenses, would inject into the local governments of the entire nation, a total of  $7,092,800.00 in labor and material costs just to establish the eleven (11) sites as operational for one year, after which time, they would become self-financing entities. This means they would not only pay the salaries and expenses of their operation in the future, but would, in all likelihood, become sources of revenue for the local governments involved. Structured correctly, these businesses could end-up saving tax-payers and local governments by earning non-tax revenues to support any number of operations or other projects.
(4) It is our proposal that each of these fertilizer manufacturing installations be ultimately owned by the local government entities in the locations wherein they will be situated. We feel that this presents the fairest distribution of Transition to High Value Agriculture Project funds. 
(5) The list of possibilities for use of the installations is very long and includes, but is not limited to, funding public schools, funding any area of county government expected to experience revenue shortfalls.
(6) Our profit projections for each of these sites are included in other parts of this correspondence and they show that, under normal circumstance, our products will sell well and created a lot of revenue for the owner of each site. However, we recognize that these are extraordinary times and that, to boost sales,  local governments could be mandated to purchase these fertilizer products in a similar fashion to the mandatory programs used in the United States, which are utilized by government entities to purchase furniture manufactured by U.S. federal prison inmates.
The fertilizers have other great benefits as well. They include being environmentally “green” and permitting a method for the eventual complete removal of ammonium nitrate from the Republic of Moldova as a part of Homeland Security and as a general benefit to Moldovan agriculture.
We propose a modest site here in Romania for use by the first to be trained. Those trained here would, in turn, return to the Republic of Moldova and train others at their respective sites within the Republic of Moldova.
The outlay for training would need to be that a minimum of three (3) people per site got some kind of formal training for about 2-4 weeks. Since there are so many to be trained, almost certainly some would have to be trained at their respective sites. We estimate that the minimum number of people to require direct training in the production of these fertilizers is 33 (3 per site). A single class of eighteen (33) would leave and be tasked to train others, who would, in turn train still others until all that needed training had been trained. Of course, we could also break the group into 3 classes of 11 students, each, if this were more mutually agreeable.
In Romania, we would have to build expanded facilities to accommodate the trainees and to feed and house them during training here. Invariably, though, some training must be carried out in Romania, since that is where the technology comes from. As a working estimate of what it will cost to build enough space for training, feeding and housing 33 people, we recommend using the expenditure number we used for one locality in the Republic of Moldova (representing build and run costs for one year). This number is $744,800.00. Using $50.00 per person per day of training, times an estimated 2 weeks and 33 people to train, we further calculate the expenses involved in food, transportation and other incidental expenses to be in the neighborhood of $23,100.00. This brings the total for Romania for training expenses for a one month academy to $767,900.00 US Dollars.
In total, the proposed project will charge the MCC accounts a total of $9,000,100.00 U.S. Dollars, if carried-out as proposed, above. Discussion of the genuine value of this project follows:
As an additionally-offered continuing benefit to present and future MCC Compact Countries, we offer to operate and maintain the proposed Romanian training site on an “at-cost” basis for all U.S. Agencies and International Organizations identified by present or future Administrations for the furtherance of International good will and in support of United States efforts at foreign aid, including the Millennium Challenge Corporation and the Peace Corps.
Finally, there is the matter of licensing fees for the use of this technology, which are normally fixed by us at $750,000.00 US Dollars per site. Using this number, times eleven (11) installations, we get a target number of $8,250,000.00 U.S. Dollars. This amount does not normally include any money for raw materials or for paying salaries for employees.
We believe that our proposal offers your government an outstanding value for $9,000,100.00 U.S. Dollars, exclusive of any taxes. This is especially true when you consider that we are specifically waiving any and all formal licensure (or any other form of intellectual property) fees, per se.
Here is how it breaks down:
Normally, your country would be getting just 11 installations delivered to the Republic of Moldova, with some minimal training, no raw materials and no money for salaries for a total cost of $8,250,000.00 U.S. Dollars.
Under our special proposal, your country gets 11 complete installations, full licensure for use of all formulae and brands used with our products, full training for 33 personnel, full site build-out for all 11 locations, full raw materials for an estimated first year production of 300,000 liters per site (total raw materials for 3,300,000 liters). You would get ALL this for NO MONEY out of any account except the “Irrigation Sector Reform Activity”, Growing High Value Agriculture Sales Activity” (and related sub-activity) MCC accounts. These funds and activities are found under the section of the MCC Compact, which details the “Transition to High Value Agriculture Project” for the Republic of Moldova.
Finally, every penny spent would for the equipment and training, would permanently benefit accruing to the Moldovan Society and the government.
Again, the MCC Compact funding proposed for this project is $9,000,100.00 US Dollars.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED BY: 

THE FOLPLANT CONSORTIUM

00-40-73-100-3792
In a message dated 11/5/2009 6:58:26 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, James_King@wicker.senate.gov writes:

Mr. Ketchum,
Thank you for your email.  I also just received your fax which I am reviewing so that I can have a discussion with the Senator’s Chief of Staff on this issue.  I will keep you informed as to the progress of our talks. 
Thanks Again,
James

From: tomketchum7@aol.com [mailto:tomketchum7@aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2009 2:33 PMTo: King, James (Wicker)Subject: Re: Sen Roger Wicker
Dear Mr. King,

I will be happy to provide you with additional information.

Before I do that, though, I need for you to know that I have sent more than one proposal to Senator Wicker, involving the Blue Springs site.

Both submitted proposals were based, at least in-part, on the idea of passing a proposed "National Ecological Fertilizer Project" (details available) and that funding the Toyota Plant in one form or another would flow from proceeds from the Fertilizer Project.

Incidentally, the National Ecological Fertilizer Project would have employed around 787,725 new employees, on a permanent basis,, spread across virtually every municipality of the United States. That project, as originally proposed, would cost an estimated $59.1 Billion dollars.

Both proposals included substantial re-investment of intellectual property fees from us into a variety of job creation enterprises, including those covered in "The Pickens Plan". We also offered to fully fund ALL "earmarks" for Mississippi delegation members and up to a total of 20 other districts, with a cap on funding set at $1 Billion dollars.

We are able to scale-down our original proposal, if that is the desire of the Senator, and focus, exclusively on Mississippi. However, we felt that a grander project was in order since the entire country continues to wallow in crisis. Whatever we ultimately can agree upon, however, will require federal funding.

We also sent a proposal for a tax credit-based bill which would restore American jobs under the color of National Security concerns. That bill would cost a projected $36.4 Billion dollars and would restore about 2.5 million American jobs, if enacted. This proposal would not benefit us at all, but was made to let you understand that our hearts are in the right place. That is to say, that we want to help in this time of National Crisis.

Finally, we recently proposed a completely separate item, which was an offer to accept ALL Coal combustion products from the United States Coal Industry for recycling in Romania. That would remove about 75 million tons of coal waste from land fills and prevent future ecological disasters such as the Kingston/Emory River spill in Tennessee in 2008.

Of course, we are happy to have the Senator's attention. We just want to be sure about which proposal to send additional information.

You may call us if you like, here in Romania (011-40-73-100-3792) or we may continue to communicate via e-mail, if this is your preference.

We thank both you and Senator Wicker for your kind attention and response.

Please let us know, right away, what, precisely, the Senator needs the details on and we will both happily and promptly provide them.

Respectfully,

Tom Ketchum
Bucharest, Romania
(formerly of Saltillo, MS)
-----Original Message-----
From: King, James (Wicker) <
James_King@wicker.senate.gov>
To:
tomketchum7@aol.com< tomketchum7@aol.com>
Sent: Tue, Nov 3, 2009 6:23 am
Subject: Sen Roger Wicker

Mr. Ketchum,
My name is James King and I work in Senator Roger Wicker’s office in Washington D.C.  Recently a email sent to our office was passed on the me from you regarding the Toyota Project in North MS.  Can you Please forward me some details on what you would like to discuss so that I may be able to pull together some information for you on this project.  I look forward to hearing from you on this issue.

Thank you 
James King 

James R. King, Jr.
            Legislative Assistant
U.S. Senator Roger Wicker
555 Dirksen Building
Washington D.C.
202-224-8487 (phone)

 





 













Nr 123585 brevet inv.pdf