Skip to main content

One year and counting............

March 7, 2014
SANTA FE — Los Alamos National Laboratory Deputy Director Beth Sellers, the second-highest ranking administrator at the lab, has resigned over failure to properly report a potential conflict of interest when a relative of hers, apparently her husband, received a lab consulting contract in 2012.

The resignation of Sellers, whose compensation for the 2012-13 fiscal year was $335,834, follows an investigation by the Department of Energy’s Inspector General that substantiated allegations of conflict of interest involving a senior female manager at the lab and a consultant married to that manager.

A lab spokesman said he was not authorized to say whether Sellers was the focus of the investigation, but the facts outlined in the IG’s report dovetail with a statement she released on Friday.

On Friday, the lab issued statements from both Sellers and LANL Director Charlie McMillan.

“You may soon read news coverage about an issue involving the Laboratory,” Sellers stated in a message to lab employees. “A family member of mine was awarded a consulting agreement with the Lab in the fall of 2012. At the time, this was not properly disclosed for full evaluation of potential conflict of interest. I realized this mistake several months later and immediately requested a review from Lab Counsel and Audits and Ethics.”

She went on to say she realized the matter would be a distraction for the lab.

“This is unacceptable to me as a Laboratory leader, so I have decided to voluntarily step down,” she said.


http://www.abqjournal.com/364443/abqnewsseeker/deputy-director-of-los-alamos-national-laboratory-resigns-over-conflict-of-interest-in-consulting-contract.html

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Plutonium Shots on NIF.

Tri-Valley Cares needs to be on this if they aren't already. We need to make sure that NNSA and LLNL does not make good on promises to pursue such stupid ideas as doing Plutonium experiments on NIF. The stupidity arises from the fact that a huge population is placed at risk in the short and long term. Why do this kind of experiment in a heavily populated area? Only a moron would push that kind of imbecile area. Do it somewhere else in the god forsaken hills of Los Alamos. Why should the communities in the Bay Area be subjected to such increased risk just because the lab's NIF has failed twice and is trying the Hail Mary pass of doing an SNM experiment just to justify their existence? Those Laser EoS techniques and the people analyzing the raw data are all just BAD anyways. You know what comes next after they do the experiment. They'll figure out that they need larger samples. More risk for the local population. Stop this imbecilic pursuit. They wan...

Trump is to gut the labs.

The budget has a 20% decrease to DOE office of science, 20% cut to NIH. NASA also gets a cut. This will  have a huge negative effect on the lab. Crazy, juts crazy. He also wants to cut NEA and PBS, this may not seem like  a big deal but they get very little money and do great things.

tcp1 looking good

I just received my annual TCP-1 letter from LLNS and a summary of the LLNS Pension Plan. Looked in pretty good shape in 2013. About 35% overfunded (funding target attainment percentage = 134.92%). This was a decrease from 2012 where it was 51% overfunded (funding target attainment percentage = 151.59%). They did note that the 2012 change in the law on how liabilities are calculated using interest rates improved the plan's position. Without the change the funding target attainment percentages would have been 118% (2012) and 105% (2013). 2013 assets = $2,057,866,902 2013 liabilities = $1,525,162,784 vs 2012 assets = $1,844,924,947 2012 liabilities = $1,217,043,150 It was also noted that a slightly different calculation method ("fair market value") designed to show a clearer picture of the plan' status as December 31, 2013 had; Assets = $2,403,098,433 Liabilities = $2,068,984,256 Funding ratio = 116.15% Its a closed plan with 3,781 participants. Of that number, 3,151 wer...