An interesting item in the National Defense Authorization Act for FY
2013 signed this month by President Obama into law. This legislation
provides policy/budget guidance for the DOD and NNSA. No actual funding,
which is contained in the yet to be enacted FY 2013 Department of
Defense Appropriations Bill. Looks there’s congressional desire to turn
the Labs in to actual “national” labs.
SEC. 3148. STUDY ON A MULTIAGENCY GOVERNANCE MODEL FOR NATIONAL SECURITY LABORATORIES.
(a) INDEPENDENT ASSESSMENT.—
(1)
IN GENERAL.—The Administrator for Nuclear Security shall commission an
independent assessment regarding the transition of the national security
laboratories to multiagency federally funded research and development
centers with direct sustainment and sponsorship by multiple national
security agencies. The organization selected to conduct the independent
assessment shall have recognized credentials and expertise in national
security science and engineering laboratories.
(2) BACKGROUND MATERIAL.—The assessment shall leverage previous studies, including—
(A)
the report published in 2009 by the Stimson Center titled ‘‘Leveraging
Science for Security: A Strategy for the Nuclear Weapons Laboratories in
the 21st Century’’; and
(B) the Phase 1 report published in 2012 by
the National Academy of Sciences titled ‘‘Managing for High- Quality
Science and Engineering at the NNSA National Security laboratories’’.
(3) ELEMENTS.—The assessment conducted pursuant to paragraph (1) shall include the following elements:
(A) An assessment of a new governance structure that—
(i)
gives multiple national security agencies, including the Department of
Defense, the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Energy,
and the intelligence community, direct sponsorship of the national
security laboratories as federally funded research and development
centers so that such agencies have more direct and rapid access to the
assets available at the laboratories and the responsibility to provide
sustainable support for the science and technology needs of the agencies
at the laboratories;
(ii) reduces costs to the Federal Government
for the use of the resources of the laboratories, while enhancing the
stewardship of these national resources and maximizing their service to
the Nation;
(iii) enhances the overall quality of the scientific
research and engineering capability of the laboratories, including their
ability to recruit and retain top scientists and engineers; and
(iv) maintains as paramount the capabilities required to support the nuclear stockpile stewardship and related nuclear missions.
(B)
A recommendation as to which, if any, other laboratories associated
with any national security agency should be included in the new
governance structure.
(C) Options for implementing the new governance
structure that minimize disruption of performance and costs to the
government while rapidly achieving anticipated gains.
(D) Legislative changes and executive actions that would need to be made in order to implement the new governance structure.
(b) REPORT.—
(1)
IN GENERAL.—Not later than January 1, 2014, the organization selected
to conduct the independent assessment under subsection (a)(1) shall
submit to the Administrator and the congressional defense committees a
report that contains the findings of the assessment.
6 comments:
Here's the summary.
It is good enough like it is currently, because,
1. As long as there are a tsunami of regulations that must be adhered to and accounted for, there will be a sea of expensive employees, ensuring complaince and accountability, all on overhead.
2. Retention and recruiting can be fixed immediateley whenever you like with simple salary, compensation, benefits and work environment improvements. It simple, pay top 10%, employ the top 10%. Turn 'em lose with resources and admire the outcome of your genius. Want Google's IT team and CIA's counterintell? Hire 'em away.
3. It ain't gonna cost less, it will cost more.
4. Being under and responsive to three line organizations is impossible. They each have different objectives and fight with each other, and have no incentive to compromise. A support organization will be the unhappy husband who must satisfy three hateful, unhappy wives. Not a chance to satify Don Rumsfeld and Colin Powell at the same time unless you lie to both. Or like a good husband, ingnore both harridans.
5. So, put a really good person in charge, give her access to whatever additional money she requests and let her focus only on putting together a top team to accomplish well the labs core missions.
Never happen.
The Stimson Center report of 2009 hit a bull's eye on targeting the growing bureaucracy, high cost, withering scientific ability, risk avoidance and CIY management style at the NNSA labs. Unfortunately, no one paid it any attention.
I doubt that is about to change anytime soon. Too many people are vested through large financial rewards in the current dysfunctional system. That includes the new lab Directors and their executive management team, in particular.
Bechtel's control over the nuclear weapons complex has only grown stronger over the last few years! They are a secretive, corrupt and highly political company that usually gets their way.
LLNL could not survive in a management regime where the customer or sponsor has ultimate say in what work gets done at the lab. They are killing off programs that have very good visibility in other agencies, but are viewed as a competitor against NIF in a zero sum game. I see HEAF dying off over time, slowly suffocated. Even WCI is getting in the way of NIF and LIFE. Status quo is the best. NNSA/congress is the customer that Ed and his lackey mouthpiece Penrose can continue to lie to and deceive and they will get away with it. They always have and they always will, and NNSA/congress can't do anything about it.
It's very disappointing that Parney chose to double down on NIF and the Moses hype. Whatever chips we have, we keep shoving them all into the NIF basket...with no exit strategy.
Baring a major breakthrough (they happen occasionally and serendipitously in science)...this won't end well.
Lucky for us: LANL and our friends in TN seem to be determined to screw up every 3-6 months and shift the scrutiny away from us for a awhile each time.
Lucky for us: LANL and our friends in TN seem to be determined to screw up every 3-6 months and shift the scrutiny away from us for a awhile each time.
January 19, 2013 at 8:30 AM
If you think for one moment that you have friends at TN or LANL, you are very mistaken. It's every rat fighting for it's life now that we've been tossed to drown on the water.
I think the previous post meant not that TN or NM were amici, rather that they put bullseyes on their own backs more often than LLNL does. It doesn't matter though 'cause Congress can't shoot straight. The first poster has it right.
Post a Comment