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. Opinions not conforming to BLOG rules are deleted. Blog author serves as a moderator. For new topics or suggestions, email jlscoob5@gmail.com

Tuesday, February 17, 2015

Whistle-blower fired from Hanford nuclear site

Whistle-blower fired from Hanford nuclear site" (a subcontractor of Bechtel National Inc.) 

http://www.komonews.com/news/local/Whistleblower-fired-by-Hanford-contractor-246022351.html?mobile=y

13 comments:

Anonymous said...

Video on this topic:

"Whistleblowers and Hanford Nuclear Site, Managers Panel"

"Energy Department officials and executives from URS Corporation and Bechtel National testified at a hearing assessing the safety concerns"

http://www.c-span.org/video/?318226-2/hanford-nuclear-site-safety-hearing

Anonymous said...


".. DOE Office of Inspector General Rewards Contractors for Non-Cooperation on Donna Busche’s Whistleblower Termination, Abdicates their Charter

Secretary of Energy On the Spot to Hold Contractors Accountable, Senator McCaskill Sends Letter, Requests DOE Briefing..."

"...According to the Inspector General, Bechtel and URS, the contractors involved in the matter, have refused to provide more than 4,500 documents to the Inspector General, claiming attorney-client privilege. I understand that the contractors have refused to provide these documents despite a clause in both the prime contract and subcontract which expressly consents to the provision of attorney-client privileged material to the Inspector General. I request that the Department provide a briefing to the Subcommittee about DOE's plans to address the contractors' lack of cooperation with the Inspector General's request. The briefing should also include the mechanisms that are available to the Department to hold the contractors accountable for their noncompliance, including withholding of fees and recovery of costs incurred by the Office of Inspector General. I request that this briefing be provided as soon as possible, but no later than October 31, 2014..."

http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2014/10/21/doe-office-inspector-general-rewards-contractors-non-cooperation-donna-busches

Anonymous said...

"...Energy Department inspector blocked from probing dismissal of Hanford engineer..."

"...In a telephone interview, Busche said she is satisfied that the inspector general tried “diligently” to get the documents. But she said that in her experience, this was “exactly how Bechtel and URS operated at Hanford..."

http://www.publicintegrity.org/2014/10/21/15993/energy-department-inspector-blocked-probing-dismissal-hanford-engineer

Anonymous said...

Relating to this and other topics on this blog, here are three DOE sites under Bechtel National and URS Corporation management:

1. Hanford Washington
2. LANL
3. LLNL

Anonymous said...

Anyone at the LLC-run facilities of the NNSA who actually believe the promises that they will not be retaliated against by their management for whistle-blowing is a fool.

Anonymous said...

"...Anyone at the LLC-run facilities of the NNSA who actually believe the promises that they will not be retaliated against by their management for whistle-blowing is a fool.."

A fool? A little harsh. Those that enable or observe the retaliation and do nothing about it get to keep their jobs and perhaps advance for being compliant if not complicit. I don't think this creates a platform of virtue from which to make disparaging remarks of fellow DOE Contractor employees that are trying to do the right thing.

Anonymous said...

A fool? A little harsh. Those that enable or observe the retaliation and do nothing about it get to keep their jobs and perhaps advance for being compliant if not complicit. I don't think this creates a platform of virtue from which to make disparaging remarks of fellow DOE Contractor employees that are trying to do the right thing.

Huh?

Anonymous said...

"...Huh?..."

DOE Contractor workers reporting whistleblower defined concerns are courageous, and they shouldn't be called "fools" by DOE Contractor employee onlookers.

Anonymous said...

No, they should be called "trouble-makers" and "rabble-rousers."

Anonymous said...

"...No, they should be called "trouble-makers" and "rabble-rousers.".."

What they should call you is part of the problem.

Anonymous said...

If the "problem" is continuing garbage from left-wingers causing untold difficulties retaining our national nuclear deterrence, while trying to gain protected status to absolve themselves from never doing a lick of work while complaining they are "mistreated," well, then, I guess I am part of the problem for pointing out the truth.

Anonymous said...

"...If the "problem" is continuing garbage from left-wingers causing untold difficulties retaining our national nuclear deterrence, while trying to gain protected status to absolve themselves from never doing a lick of work while complaining they are "mistreated," well, then, I guess I am part of the problem for pointing out the truth..."

"Truth"? The "our mission trumps mismanagement or misconduct" argument does not float. Just ask those directly involved with the Sandia noncompetitive contract extension or Beth Sellers.

Congresswoman Heather Wilson was a Republican not a "left winger", and Beth Sellers was the Deputy Director at LANL.

Perhaps you should worry less about "left wingers" on the outside, and concentrate more on your inner circle that display failed ethics, poor management, and illegal conduct to the public and to the DOE IG.

Anonymous said...

Perhaps you should worry less about "left wingers" on the outside, and concentrate more on your inner circle that display failed ethics, poor management, and illegal conduct to the public and to the DOE IG.

February 24, 2015 at 8:01 AM

"Perhaps..." Or, perhaps not. Quien sabe?

Blog Archive