LANL changes story on Pu shipping mistake
When their initial story of attempting to blame LLNL for the mistake fell apart, LANL was left scrambling to come up with another excuse for who to blame.
When will LANL learn that the cover-up is always worse than the crime?
"Normally, a shipment of plutonium would take shape over the course of three months and be delivered by ground, Los Alamos's June 23 report to the NNSA said, "however, LLNL [Livermore] advised they needed this delivered within three days." But Livermore spokeswoman Seaver disputed Los Alamos's excuse for making the mistake. Seaver said, "We have a single point of contact here who worked with LANL [Los Alamos] regarding this shipment and at no time was any urgency expressed."
Asked about the discrepancy, Los Alamos spokesman Nerzig said in an email that "after a thorough internal investigation of the event, we found no evidence of time pressure to make the shipment." But he did not provide any other explanation for the mistaken shipment or explain why Los Alamos initially told the government that it was only responding to Livermore's urgent demands.
Referring to the incident, Nerzig emailed that "the Laboratory has acknowledged this as a mistake, taken an initial set of actions to address the situation, and plans on taking additional measures to dramatically reduce the possibility of something like this from happening again."
NNSA spokesman Gregory Wolf said the agency is looking closely at "the accuracy of initial reporting" by Los Alamos. He said a shipping facility employee had "failed to follow established procedures that would have prevented the improper shipments," and that a thorough review by the lab of what it was about to send out "was bypassed." In addition, checklists that FedEx requires customers to complete for dangerous goods "were not filled out properly," he said.
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 firstname.lastname@example.org
- WHY SHOULD THE NNSA LABS BE DIFFERENT?
- How competitive is LLNS as an employer?
- DOE moving away from for-profit lab management.
- Will any competent contractors be willing to bid o...
- When Charlie met Janet.
- Hey moderators!
- Steve Younger
- Time to get serious
- LANL employees worried
- Another Near Miss at Los Alamos National Laborator...
- Pu contamination at UNM covered up by LANL
- UC System President to address LANL staff
- Opinion about commentors' anonymity.
- Anonymous comments and posts: has the time come?
- Bechtel was never worth a damn
- Who runs Los Alamos?
- Question for Goldstein.
- Soon. a very very beautiful golf course in Los Ala...
- They do this every place they go.
- Why blame Bechtel?
- Oakridge official convicted of murder.
- Senator Claire McCaskill letter to NNSA
- It all comes down to this
- Top award winners
- LANL fines of $10,000 per day
- N.M. Delegation Says Rebid Is Opportunity For DOE ...
- Production question
- LANS misses yet another EM contractual milestone
- Listen up Trump!
- North Korea forcing US tests?
- Both Brookhaven and Oak Ridge reducing headcount.....
- Pressure cookers
- Is LLNL competitive?
- Blunders at LANL
- Why does the lab (LANL) exist?
- Future of for-profit LANL
- Senator asks NNSA about PF-4 operational status......
- How is DoE doing under Trump?
- Letter To The Editor...
- LANL changes story on Pu shipping mistake
- Nuclear weapons contractors repeatedly violate shi...
- Energy Department Scientists Barred From Attending...
- ▼ August (42)
- ► 2016 (295)
- ► 2015 (330)
- ► 2014 (309)
- ► 2013 (431)
- ► 2012 (258)
- ► 2011 (162)
- ► 2010 (157)
- ► 2009 (231)
- ► 2008 (374)