BLOG purpose

This BLOG is for LLNL present and past employees, friends of LLNL and anyone impacted by the privatization of the Lab to express their opinions and expose the waste, wrongdoing and any kind of injustice against employees and taxpayers by LLNS/DOE/NNSA. The opinions stated are personal opinions. Therefore, The BLOG author may or may not agree with them before making the decision to post them. Comments not conforming to BLOG rules are deleted. Blog author serves as a moderator. For new topics or suggestions, email jlscoob5@gmail.com

Suggest new topics here

SUGGEST NEW TOPICS HERE

Submit candidates for new topics here only. Stay on topic with National Labs' related issues. All submissions are screened first for ...

Monday, January 14, 2013

LANL contract extension questionnable

Los Alamos paper breaks story on LANL contract extension


"There is more to the National Nuclear Security Administration’s 2012 performance evaluation of the Los Alamos National Laboratory than meets the eye.

According to documents obtained by the Los Alamos Monitor, the lab received a one-time waiver from the NNSA fee determining official — principal deputy administrator Neile Miller.

In a letter from former Los Alamos Site Office head Kevin Smith to Miller, the award term (one-year contract extension) originally was not granted. But at the bottom of the letter, the no is scratched out with a notation, “Yes. Contingent on LANS letter attached.”

That LANS letter was written by DOE Senior Procurement Executive Joseph Waddell to lab director Charlie McMillan, dated on Dec. 7. The letter stated that Los Alamos National Security had been granted a waiver for the FY-12 NNSA fee by the Fee Determining Official (Miller).

According to the letter, LANS met two of the three criteria but earned less than 80 percent overall at-risk fees."

20 comments:

Anonymous said...


What does this mean? Can someone please explain?

Anonymous said...

There appeared to be more to the article behind the LA Monitor pay wall. This is all one could rip off for free.

Anonymous said...

It must be nice to be awarded a billion dollar contract by someone scratching out "no" penciling-in "yes" and then attaching a handwritten note with on the back of a dirty envelop with scotch on it. The note had to been written by Riley Bechtel while he was on his yacht off the coast of Cabo San Lucas smoking Cubanos. Folks, you can't make this stuff up.

Anonymous said...

This story has all the elements of scandal and coverup. Would not be surprised to see national media pick up on it and run with it to see if there are any previous examples where this kind of recommendation was reversed. There does not appear to be a valid reason for Miller to insert herself into the decision, which adds fuel for an investigation.

Anonymous said...

McMillan is always "pounding" LANL staff about formality of operations and the like. Meanwhile, every conceivable practice that cannot be accomplished in a nuclear facility like scratching-out changes (probably in pencil) without initialing the change was done here. Where's the Office of the Attorney General or Inspector General when you need them, probably beating up some staff member at TA-55 for missing the urinal.

Anonymous said...

Charlie McMillan actually sent an memo to everyone at LANL boasting about being granted an extra year. This development certainly puts it in a new light. It's a bit like cheating on a test and then going around boasting about the high score you got.

And wasn't Kevin Smith then reassigned to manage rivers or something? That's surely a good way to deal with a troublemaker whistleblower.

Anonymous said...

And wasn't Kevin Smith then reassigned to manage rivers or something? That's surely a good way to deal with a troublemaker whistleblower.

January 15, 2013 at 8:41 AM

No, he got a promotion. He's inside one the Hanford tanks with a mop.

Anonymous said...

Yes, the director's memo was issued on december 21, just before the break.

"As a premier national security laboratory, we are held to very high standards for safety, security and mission performance -- and rightly so.

These expectations are reflected in NNSA's evaluation of our performance for Fiscal Year 2012, which we received last week. While we fell short in some areas, I can report that NNSA gave us a final score of 80% and -- I'm very pleased to say -- did the award us an additional contract year. "

Anonymous said...

"I'm very pleased to say that we get our contract extended even if we fail to build a fence."

Anonymous said...

I'm very pleased to say ... that we were able to cover-up Annie "Maestas" Oakley firing randomly on one of our tanks.

Anonymous said...

If he stretched the truth on the 80% score it makes it hard to believe Charlie on other topics. So much for being a "trusted advisor".

Anonymous said...

Really makes you wonder why NNSA is so "keyed" to ensure LANS is awarded the contact. Someone, somewhere high is benefiting from this contact.

Anonymous said...

It sounds like little Charlie (i.e. LANS) was a bad boy this quarter, that he's been hitting other kids on the playground (e.g. Brett Knapp), not doing good in school (e.g. not passing his class on building fences), and needs a handwritten note from his mommy (NNSA) and daddy (Riley Bechtel) saying he'll do better next quarter. So give him a few "extra" points showing he passed the quarter.

Sounds like little Charlie needs a good ole fashioned whipping and needs his nice toys (allowances, Porsches, bonuses, flight benefits) taken away from him instead.

Anonymous said...

This should not be surprising to anyone. The "do-over" that the Y-12 guards got on their exam originates in the same culture that gave Charlie his "do-over" on the contract extension.

Anonymous said...

Now that Charlie has cost the corporate partners 10M in his first year, they might be reconsidering how his selection was done by UC.

Anonymous said...

Now that Charlie has cost the corporate partners 10M in his first year, they might be reconsidering how his selection was done by UC.

January 16, 2013 at 7:22 PM

I wonder what Charlie thinks now when he says "follow the money" when he sees it swirling in the toilet bowl just before he can't see it anymore.

Anonymous said...

When dollars are lost to the management team, the screws will only be turned tighter on the remaining staff. Count on it.

Anonymous said...

When dollars are lost to the management team, the screws will only be turned tighter on the remaining staff. Count on it.

January 18, 2013 at 3:38 PM

That's been happening since LANS "took over'. Come out and visit the Facility Operations at TA-55, WETF, and Waste Programs. A bunch of "sweat shops".

Anonymous said...

That's been happening since LANS "took over'. Come out and visit the Facility Operations at TA-55, WETF, and Waste Programs. A bunch of "sweat shops".

January 18, 2013 at 7:28 PM

The LANS Facilities (e.g. Weapon Facility Operations, TA-55, Waste Facility Operations, etc.) are not sweat shops but "cesspools". The Facility Operations Directors (FODs) for example, Steve Henry, Hugh McGovern are viscous and abusive examples of so called "managers". These are horrible places to work at LANL.

Anonymous said...

Oh hell, give it to 'em. If the bungling D'Agostino and the deepmeddling Chu can keep their positions, LANL leaders are secure.

There are layers of rivals, infighting, incompetence and dalliance in DOE, another layer is immaterial.

An 80% score in Congress requires an exorcist.

Posts you viewed tbe most last 30 days