Recent "High Risk" Events at LANL
All LANL employees are being
formally "warned" in lab-wide briefings from the PADS, that as a result
of the Tc-99 Exposure, NUSSUP debacle, and other Security issues that
LANL is facing a potential Labwide "stop work". Any more details?
15 comments:
Where is the all-hands memo you are referring to? Please put it on the blog.
There was no formal memo on this, however, there were briefings (which continue next week) across the Lab by the Principal Lab Directors informing employees of these "severity" of these events. Bishop (S&T PAD) indicated the possibility of a Lab "safety/security" stand down. It's all part of a "coverup" by Senior Management and a "takeover" by the LANS Board. They wouldn't dare advertise in a memo what is behind this.
It looks like the ice that McMillan and Knapp have been standing on is beginning to "crack".
Does McMillan even have experience working in projects that deal with experiments and radiological safety procedures? I thought he was from the design community, where the main hazard is the paper cut and carpal tunnel syndrome.
Does McMillan even have experience working in projects that deal with experiments and radiological safety procedures? I thought he was from the design community, where the main hazard is the paper cut and carpal tunnel syndrome.
November 17, 2012 1:21 AM
You got that right. When McMillan testified to the DNFSB in Santa Fe a few months ago on the Plutonium facility, the only thing he conveyed was what classes he took at MIT, stated he had other commitments, and made a fast exit out the back door. He did indicate "he would rather be sitting in PF-4 having a cup of coffee than his living room during an earthquake". You could see through his lack of knowledge and experience with High Hazard and Nuclear Facilities. To make matters worse, he read his testimony from a sheet a paper, still tripping over his words. It was in one word the testimony was a "disgrace".
Bishop (S&T PAD) indicated the possibility of a Lab "safety/security" stand down.
November 16, 2012 6:23 PM
Did anyone catch Carol Burns complaining to Bishop about the number of Senior Managers at LANL? Is Carol Burns still married to Mike Burns who is the Deputy Principal Lab Director for National Security who makes at least $650,000 a year and is she still the Division Leader for Chemistry? Combined income is upwards of near $1M per year. Carol is a really smart woman, but she doesn't know when "to keep her mouth shut".
When LANS management screws up they then immediately throw their employees under the bus.
The environment at LANL has become positively poisonous of late. LANL ULM is getting very nervous.
Sounds like an implied threat to C. Burns! Takes guts to stand and and be counted, huh? Of course, there are to many "managers" at lanl. They are just following the dismantling scrip written a long time ago. One of the first signs is the management "bloatment". I am certain CB is standing up for LANL science, and I appreciate that. For what it's worth, LOL, go INC-4!
There is a BIG difference in a stand down and a stop work. Staff historically got paid during a stand down that is ordered by internal management. When the government issues a stop work order it is not so comfortable.
That being the case, ULM may order a preemptive stand down just to avoid the stop work.
Just got back from an LANL all-hands briefing for PADOPs led by Carl Beard. It took almost 2-hours to seat everyone in the NNSB auditorium to hear the PADOP take 5-minutes to tell us to: 1. Think Carefully, 2. Don't Take Risks, and 3. Be Conservative. Now the PADs are telling us to live by the LANS Management foundation of "do nothing". There was absolutely no substance to this "meeting", what an absolute waste of time!
Seems to me the LANL ULM would actually prefer some sort of "stand down". That lays the responsibility for systemic management failures on the workers. That was Nanos's trick (and think what fiasco that ended up being). The alternative is to change the contractor and kick LANS out, which is what they are really afraid of.
Regarding the radiologic release, it is management who must take the bulk of the blame. Management is responsible and accountable for effective policies and controls to prevent such events from happening. Ineffective controls simply reflects an ineffective management. Blaming employees dodges this crucial point. I hope the employees can get help from lawyers or policymakers to put pressure on LANS.
The alternative is to change the contractor and kick LANS out, which is what they are really afraid of.
November 21, 2012 8:14 AM
The next step i fixing all of these high-risk problems will be to federalize the labs, putting them under direct control of DOE or DOD. We've already got the right badges. That's what's got LLNS/LANS and their managers running scared.
I almost have to feel bad for McMillan. Almost. A designer not suited for a role to lead an organization with many high-hazards operations and facilities. The problem is that I'm just not sure who (in the current organization) is fit to take his spot. Maybe some of the previous suggestions of rolling large parts of the lab under DoD might make sense, and leave the rest like the science to NNSA or whatever.
“The next step i fixing all of these high-risk problems will be to federalize the labs, putting them under direct control of DOE or DOD. We've already got the right badges. That's what's got LLNS/LANS and their managers running scared.”
Just what America needs – more public sector union employees.
Post a Comment