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

Monday, February 22, 2016

NNSA to build new facility in NM for 1,100 employees

ALBUQUERQUE -- On Thursday, Feb. 18, the Administrator of the Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), Lt. Gen. Frank G. Klotz (Ret.), Sen. Martin Heinrich (N.M.), and Rep. Michelle Lujan Grisham (NM-01) will visit the NNSA’s Albuquerque Complex and discuss the status of the current NNSA administrative workspace in Albuquerque and the proposal to construct a new facility for the 1,100 employees who work there. 

BACKGROUND: The Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) proposes to construct a new facility for the 1,100 employees who work at the agency’s Albuquerque Complex at Kirtland Air Force Base. The existing site does not meet the same facility standards maintained at other NNSA facilities. Portions of the current facility, a former military barracks, are more than 60 years old with a number of safety, health, and quality of life issues.

NNSA leadership is committed to the safety and well-being of its employees. New construction would allow for a modern and efficient facility suited for NNSA’s needs in Albuquerque. The NNSA Albuquerque Complex Project is a top priority for the NNSA Administrator, and NNSA is requesting funding authority from Congress for this construction.

46 comments:

Anonymous said...

What do those 1100 people do?

Anonymous said...

Why does NNSA in Albuquerque need new offices? Really? Why don't move their office to the beautiful, plush, spacious, new offices they build (and paid for) at Sandia, New Mexico? Move over Sandia, make some room for the customer!

Anonymous said...

February 23, 2016 at 9:12 AM

Why didn't Lt. Gen. Frank G. Klotz (Ret.), Sen. Martin Heinrich (N.M.), and Rep. Michelle Lujan Grisham (NM-01) come up with this idea? No; more money spent by the U.S. government to add to our huge national debt. And by the way, Sandia has the space but will not come forward to assist their key customer, who makes it sound (i.e. NNSA) like their offices are a "slum". While the outside NNSA offices are not new, the inside has been renovated, it's very contemporary, with color schemes and new carpeting.

Another "bilking of the U. S. taxpayers".

Anonymous said...

1,000 bureaucrats stopping work and adding no value whatsoever. Awesome!

Anonymous said...


What on earth do these people do? I understand you need some NNSA people but 1000 on a completely separate site?

Anonymous said...

What on earth do these people do? I understand you need some NNSA people but 1000 on a completely separate site?

February 24, 2016 at 5:48 AM

What they don't do is handle two contract competitions at the same time (Sandia and LANL). Life must be good in there!

Anonymous said...

There job is to make certain contract company CEOs very very rich.

Anonymous said...

Hey, those NNSA folks need state of the art digs to shuffle those papers and push those pencils. They don't like being in barracks? Neither do a number of LLNL folks.

Anonymous said...

Hey, those NNSA folks need state of the art digs to shuffle those papers and push those pencils. They don't like being in barracks? Neither do a number of LLNL folks.

February 24, 2016 at 3:43 PM

I doubt much paper is being shuffled or pencils being pushed. I doubt much is going on at all.

Anonymous said...

1100 people to oversee sites involving over 30,000 employees and contracts worth several Billions? Yeah, I'm ok with that. Whether they need new digs, that's up to the feds, and no one at SNL or LANL has any right to complain about wasting Federal dollars.

Anonymous said...

1100 people to oversee sites involving over 30,000 employees and contracts worth several Billions? Yeah, I'm ok with that. Whether they need new digs, that's up to the feds, and no one at SNL or LANL has any right to complain about wasting Federal dollars.

February 24, 2016 at 9:23 PM

Yes but you are missing out on the 1000 in DC, 500 in California and 1000 elsewhere so it is more like 5000 to oversee 30000 people and yes there are many people at SNL and LANL that have the right to complain about wasting Federal dollars.

Anonymous said...

Besides the employee ratio, what is the NNSA value added compared to the pre-NNSA era? How are we better off?

Anonymous said...

It was not the purpose of the creation of NNSA to make "you" better off.

Anonymous said...

Nice try, but get to the NNSA purpose and their actual value added to the nation, or would "you" rather dance around the question a little more.

Anonymous said...

NNSA's purpose was to remedy what was seen at the time as a DOE management that was ignorant of nuclear weapons issues. The hope was to see the "semi-autonomous" agency as essentially separate from DOE's heavily politicized leadership. Many hoped it would be the genesis of a new AEC. Of course, DOE responded by grudgingly letting go of some, but definitely not all, of the strings. Most of the technical program management side (at least for weapons) is now fairly separate, but many functions, such as health, safety, environment, and parts of security have been and still are, essentially controlled by DOE.

"Value added to the nation" remains a meaningless question.

Anonymous said...

The value added of the semi-autonomous NNSA agency is an open question. "Was to remedy" and "many hoped" is too qualitative. What has actually improved (not hoped for) at the labs under NNSA direction? What has gotten worse at the NNSA labs? Unless one believes the Federal budget is infinite, the term "value added" is meaningful indeed.

Anonymous said...

"Was to remedy" and "many hoped" is too qualitative.

February 25, 2016 at 3:21 PM

Those words applied to the first question (purpose) not the second (value added). Simple history vs subjective value judgement. Reading comprehension is important.

Anonymous said...

Still dancing. Good for you.

Anonymous said...

Still dancing. Good for you.

February 25, 2016 at 5:34 PM

Dancing? Do you mean actually caring about words and what they mean, as opposed to having an agenda and rejecting anything that doesn't agree with it? Woo Hoo, you win.

Anonymous said...


Ok, let us spell it out for you; there is no value added with the creation of NNSA. There is value subtracted.

Anonymous said...

NNSA is the very embodiment of useless Federal bureaucracy.

Anonymous said...

The topic question is the new NNSA facility proposal yes? Therefore it would seem the posts would revolve around the need or justification for this new facility. If there are facility safety, health, and quality of life issues with the old and unacceptable NNSA facility, how are the same concerns being addressed by other essential organizations in the complex? History lessons on what the NNSA was to accomplish in the year ~2,000, the architectural theme of the new NNSA facility, or its lobby paintings, are off topic. Directing more resources to the NNSA in the form of a new facility is the topic. Is the NNSA a success story worth devoting additional resources to? A question for Congress to answer.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for your input.

Anonymous said...

The topic question is obviously irrelevant to the discussion, as decided by a majority vote of the participants. This is the American way, as defined by our constitution. So, Feb 26, at 11: AM, go soak your head!

Anonymous said...

1100?! Dog chip 'em. Send 'em home.

Anonymous said...

"Portions of the current facility, a former military barracks, are more than 60 years old with a number of safety, health, and quality of life issues."

NNSA makes it sound like they are in a "projects" slum shanty houses. Oh BS! They recently had the entire interiors completely re-modeled costing several $M. In fact, I seem to recall new red carpeting to make every NNSA employee feel like a king or queen when they walk in. The place looks brand new inside with real wood paneling, huge offices, oak desks, etc. Furthermore, many employees at the sites (e.g. LLNL, LANL) are in rat infested 50-year old single-wide trailers. Considering the non-value added of NNSA employees to National Security, this is defintely NOT NEEDED. Come on man!

Anonymous said...

"The NNSA Albuquerque Complex Project is a top priority for the NNSA Administrator, and NNSA is requesting funding authority from Congress for this construction."

I think the most important question Congress should be asking is not whether NNSA needs a a new facility, but, is the NNSA Agency needed! It's very apparent NNSA is trying "to sneak one in" in an election year before Obama is ousted. Contact your Congressman to get this STOPPED!

Anonymous said...

You have to understand that, in the eyes of the denizens of the Forrestal Building, the wants of the Feds in the hinterlands are a much higher priority than the needs of the lowly contractors running the nuclear weapons labs for them.

Anonymous said...

Why doesn't NNSA Albuquerque just move into the LANL facilities after LANL is shut down? The privatization of LANL by NNSA is creating new space for NNSA; "the government" as Charlie stated it. Government "gone wild"!

Anonymous said...

"The Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) proposes to construct a new facility for the 1,100 employees who work at the agency’s Albuquerque Complex at Kirtland Air Force Base."

Really! NNSA has 1,100 employees in Albuquerque? What do they do, count money?

Anonymous said...

Really! NNSA has 1,100 employees in Albuquerque? What do they do, count money?

February 27, 2016 at 10:05 AM

Can't be that, they can't count.

Anonymous said...

Furthermore, many employees at the sites (e.g. LLNL, LANL) are in rat infested 50-year old single-wide trailers.

February 27, 2016 at 5:05 AM

If LANS does not ask for budget to address substandard working conditions at LANL, you really can't expect NNSA to force it on them. Sure, NNSA owns the facilities, but upkeep and health/safety issues are LANS's responsibility while they hold the contract. Besides, employees have worked in "rat infested trailers" since I came to LANL in 1977. UC didn't do anything about it either.

Anonymous said...

If LANS does not ask for budget to address substandard working conditions at LANL, you really can't expect NNSA to force it on them. Sure, NNSA owns the facilities, but upkeep and health/safety issues are LANS's responsibility while they hold the contract. Besides, employees have worked in "rat infested trailers" since I came to LANL in 1977. UC didn't do anything about it either.

February 27, 2016 at 1:55 PM

The so called scientists live in rat infested trailers. The real work is done in nice facilities. We try everything we can do to get rid of the dam scientists but they persist.

Anonymous said...

Continuing to reward mediocracy, cronyosm, incompetence and the waste of precious resources. This Staff should be cut to 700 or less. Less bureaucracy means less contractor bureaucracy.

How did 1100 watchers not catch the use of the wrong kitty litter? What can 1100 watchers watch? Eavh other?

Cut 'em in half and keep in lowly digs. This is not an enterprise to encourage.

Anonymous said...

...unless the employment of 1000 NNSA employees adds no value to the nation, then the question has meaning. Since terminating them saves millions either for more important uses or to avoid expanding the national debt. So the question and the answer may have meaning, your amateur sophisty not withstanding.

Anonymous said...

Tyler is that you? Only one man so hate LANL folks as to not only undermine their employment, but to have a watcher for every 30 employees...a ratio not achieved by prison guards. Pryzbylek you cur.

Anonymous said...

The new Albuquerque NNSA Facility will become yet another porkbarrel expenditure by Obama.

Anonymous said...

It is simply the government taking care of its employees when it sees a need, as opposed to contractor employees, which it takes care of only through contract terms. Get a clue who you work for.

Anonymous said...

Federalize the weapons labs and fix many problems at one time. Then the employees will be government workers and will be placed in nice shiny new buildings. Otherwise, remain contractor employees working in rat infested trailers.

Anonymous said...

I want to know what any of this has to do with LLNL? Isn't this the LLNL blog? Looks like the LANL blog. Why don't you guys start your own blog and leave us alone.

Anonymous said...

Yeah, spam every thread with the same comment. Troll.

Anonymous said...

And hand over your lunch.

Anonymous said...

I want to know what any of this has to do with LLNL? Isn't this the LLNL blog? Looks like the LANL blog. Why don't you guys start your own blog and leave us alone.

March 2, 2016 at 4:06 PM

Payback for sending us (LANL) Mara, Knapp, Anastasio, and McMillan.

Anonymous said...

Payback for sending us (LANL) Mara, Knapp, Anastasio, and McMillan.

March 3, 2016 at 4:54 AM

Is anyone from LLNL going to respond to this? Anybody? That's the problem with LLNL they have no "backbone", unless it's overselling Congress bad science and technology.

Anonymous said...

Is anyone from LLNL going to respond to this? Anybody?

March 5, 2016 at 7:43 AM

Hey. Give the dudes out west a break! They are really, really busy trying to draft the next Phys Rev Letter announcing breakeven (or something, anything) on NIF.

Anonymous said...

What will it take to get through to some of you? DOE has a long memory and did not like the LANL end runs for new building construction under St. Pete. It will be many, many years before any new buildings are seen going up at LANL.

Blog Archive