Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts you viewed tbe most last 30 days
-
LGBT intolerance problem at Sandia? I was just checking glassdoor.com and noticed several comments suggesting intolerance to LGBT at Sandia...
-
So did you SSVSP and why? Give details.
-
“Raise a concern, get blackballed then lose your job and benefits…” “…instead of raising your concerns just leverage on your skills and go t...
34 comments:
"In particular, his office questions whether "(i) the benefits of a semi-autonomous NNSA outweigh the additional costs; and, (ii) this costly arrangement can be sustained given the likelihood of future budget reductions.""
This has been brought up time and time again. It is a good idea, however what happens when there is another security or safety incident? They will just say send it back to NNSA. As for closing the labs I don't think they are talking about LLNL, LANL, or Sandia but rather some of the smaller DOE labs.
Also what are all those NNSA people going to do now, work of the GSA or the secret service?
I find it ironical that the most USELESS organization within the DOE (i.e. Inspector General) is requesting that the DOE "close" some National Laboratories. The first agency that the DOE should close is ...... The DOE Inspector General!
Cabinet Agency IGs work for the President, not for the Secretaries. DOE can't touch its IG.
This fellow is a DOE political appointee. You are hearing what the Obama administration has planned for America if he wins a 2nd term. Obama is already on record saying he wants to unilaterally bring our US nuclear arsenal down to only 300 weapons from the current START II agreement of 1500. He's also lied about supporting LANL and the CMRR if the Senate would pass START II.
Heather Wilson and Mitt Romney, where are you? Jump on this issue about DOE pushing for national lab closings, weapon lab staff layoffs and Obama's push for America's decine coming from his far left-leaning administration!
So which one goes LLNL or LANL?
Hmmm, I see points on both sides.
"Obama is already on record saying he wants to unilaterally bring our US nuclear arsenal down to only 300 weapons from the current START II agreement of 1500"
He has said no such thing.
"The White House never asked for options about shrinking the U.S. nuclear arsenal to just 300 deployed warheads, a former senior official says.
"The Pentagon was never asked to look at options for going to 300," says Steven Pifer, a former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, citing conversations with Defense Department officials."
--US News & World Report. John Bennett. April 3, 2012.
The House Armed Services Committee is working on a funding bill for FY13 that would for all intent and purpose remove NNSA from DOE.
Basically DOE would no longer have any direct oversight or influence on NNSA. The only link between DOE and NNSA would be the Secretary of Energy who would only have the power to veto decisions made by the NNSA Administrator. The various DOE HQ offices (safety, security, HR, IG, etc) that now regulate NNSA would be stripped of this authority, and NNSA would have to standup its own limited oversight structure. DOE Orders and Directives would be made null and void - NNSA would have to start from scratch creating regulations. OSHA would take over safety oversight with the exception being safety over nuclear facilities.
NNSA oversight would flow through a new governance model - a single Governing Council composed of all the contractor NNSA Lab and Plant Directors, and NNSA senior managers. This council would then oversee the mission and operation of NNSA sites. The Site Offices would basically be castrated and out of the daily site auditing business of everything going on at the site.
What the House is working on is very similar to what Parney discussed in front of the Senate Armed Services Committee last week. Which would seem to indicate that the two sides of Congress are talking and sharing notes. If both the House and Senate are already thinking about the same idea, there is less to slow it down.
Given the mood in Congress and the White House to make changes to "fix" NNSA, this could very well happen... and soon!
Aside from attempting to shut everything down, what is the DOE-IG "product"? Someone needs to to take a hard look at the value of this organization and shut them down. What goes around, comes around.
I much preferred the AEC to ERDA/DOE. However, this subject comes up every election year & whatever the outcome of the discussions, things seem to only become worse. I’m not optimistic about any real improvement.
Aside from attempting to shut everything down, what is the DOE-IG "product"? Someone needs to to take a hard look at the value of this organization and shut them down. What goes around, comes around.
April 27, 2012 1:51 AM
You're joking, right? Every cabinet department and major agency has an independent IG, who works directly for the President, not the agency head. If you have no clue about why these posts are necessary, or the history of rampant corruption and illegal behavior at the tops of the agencies that necessitated their creation, you need to study up.
You're joking, right? Every cabinet department and major agency has an independent IG, who works directly for the President, not the agency head. If you have no clue about why these posts are necessary, or the history of rampant corruption and illegal behavior at the tops of the agencies that necessitated their creation, you need to study up.
April 27, 2012 9:05 AM
Name one "rampant corruption" that the DOE Inspector General has identified and corrected. One. I want to hear all about it.
Do your own homework.
Do your own homework.
April 27, 2012 7:27 PM
The usual rejoinder when the debater has no clue, and can't prove their point.
Does Google count as homework:
Nov 15, 2011 – A report from the Energy Department's Inspector General raises concerns about the Government's exposure to risk inherent in the loan program ...
If you read the post at 4/27 9:05 am, the poster was not specifically referring to the DOE IG, but to government agency IGs in general. That make your homework assignment any easier?
I'm still waiting to hear about all the rampant corruption and illegal corruption that the DOE-IG has identified. The only issues they jump on are the one's the media identifies for them. Other than that.... they are worthless.
I'm still waiting to hear about all the rampant corruption and illegal corruption that the DOE-IG has identified. The only issues they jump on are the one's the media identifies for them. Other than that.... they are worthless.
May 4, 2012 6:10 AM
Re-read the 4/28 9:06 am post. Very carefully. Get it yet?
I'm still waiting to hear about all the rampant corruption and illegal corruption that the DOE-IG has identified. The only issues they jump on are the one's the media identifies for them. Other than that.... they are worthless.
May 4, 2012 6:10 AM
Unfortunately, this is the case. I've been interviewed by the DOE-IG and they are just of bunch non-technical incompetent bureaucrats. I say non-technical because they are way over their heads on some technical issues.
I've been interviewed by the DOE-IG and they are just of bunch non-technical incompetent bureaucrats. I say non-technical because they are way over their heads on some technical issues.
May 5, 2012 7:48 AM
They are not supposed to be "technical." They are cops. Cops get expert witnesses whenever they need them to prosecute. It doesn't take someone "technical" to see when a law or regulation has been violated, or corruption has occurred. If you think you are smarter than them, you are mistaken. Intelligent in different areas, maybe. But the same "blind spots" that allowed you to excel in science will cause you to fail miserably as a crook.
They are not supposed to be "technical." They are cops. Cops get expert witnesses whenever they need them to prosecute. It doesn't take someone "technical" to see when a law or regulation has been violated, or corruption has occurred. If you think you are smarter than them, you are mistaken. Intelligent in different areas, maybe. But the same "blind spots" that allowed you to excel in science will cause you to fail miserably as a crook.
May 5, 2012 9:19 PM
Thank you Joe Friday.
Thank you Joe Friday.
May 7, 2012 5:49 PM
You are welcome. Anything I can do to provide clarification and realism to the debate.
They are not supposed to be "technical." They are cops.
May 5, 2012 9:19 PM
Yeah they are "cops" alright, Keystone cops. The DOE-IG make Inspector Clouseau look competent.
Yeah they are "cops" alright, Keystone cops. The DOE-IG make Inspector Clouseau look competent.
May 8, 2012 3:49 AM
You can denigrate the IG all you want. It's free until they have a reason to focus on you. Then you are toast no matter what. Your "competence" will not save you.
You can denigrate the IG all you want. It's free until they have a reason to focus on you. Then you are toast no matter what. Your "competence" will not save you.
May 8, 2012 7:24 PM
I must be a "bitch" working for the DOE-IG. How long have you been working for this incompetent "organization"?
I must be a "bitch" working for the DOE-IG. How long have you been working for this incompetent "organization"?
May 9, 2012 5:59 PM
Scooby can delete this (again) but I'll post it again. Your comment is unintelligible, apparently due to a typo. Please repost or clarify. I guess the "bitch" comment is ok with him though. Go figure.
While I doubt that any NNSA lab will completely close down, it's beginning to look like LANL will be severely down-sized to about half of its peak size in the next few years. Perhaps only around 4500 employees left including contractors by the end of this decade. The loss of New Mexico's Senator "St. Pete" and the lack of strong political support for LANL in the liberal NM Democratic delegation will sink this lab's prospects.
LLNL will likely be down-sized too, but perhaps not as aggressively as LANL.
Sandia (SNL) had the foresight over a decade ago to start finding other sponsors for their research so they should be OK.
The loss of New Mexico's Senator "St. Pete" and the lack of strong political support for LANL in the liberal NM Democratic delegation will sink this lab's prospects.
May 12, 2012 9:04 PM
A good reason to vote for Heather Wilson in the coming weeks.
Having a supporter in Washington could help both of the NM Labs. Having a Director that was held in high regard by others in Washington would help LANL.
Parney should take the ball and run while the field is still open.
Having a supporter in Washington could help both of the NM Labs. Having a Director that was held in high regard by others in Washington would help LANL.
Parney should take the ball and run while the field is still open.
May 14, 2012 3:34 AM
You got that right. This would be a great time for LLNS (i.e. Parney) to run the ball right up the wide open hole that LANS is leaving open. MacMillan and Knapp are sitting in the stands eating hot dogs (heavy on the chili and cheese for Knapp), peanuts, popcorn, and cotton candy. They don't want to get on the field and their uniforms dirty.
I don't expect Charlie McMillan will do much to defend LANL from the approaching draconian budget cuts coming from Washington DC. From his perspective, it's much easier to manage things when iLANL has fewer employees eating away at the lab's shrinking budgets. With severance accumulations now magically reduced by LANS (and with more severance reductions likely), it will become easier in the future to lay off regular lab staff on a whim.
Besides, McMillan makes the same large salary and benefits whether there are 7,000 employees or only 4,,000 employees left at Los Alamos. He'll choose the latter and simply go with the flow.
Some people just don't get the message. LANL could be in a much worse position. The only reason that things are as good as they are is due to Charlie and his 'sets of relationships'. Remember his first interview after being named to replace Mike last year? Recall the press releases from UC about him?
People should just be glad that he was available at the time and sleep well knowing that this was the outcome of the UC run selection process.
May 15, 6:46 am:
Ha! Good one! You crack me up!
May 15, 2012 6:46 AM
Thanks Charlie, we needed that explained to us. And then, what were your other two points?
Post a Comment