September 2020 DOE IG Report on "The Department of Energy's Management of Explosive Materials at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory".
Procedural issues again a concern as cited in the September 2013 DOE IG Report on HEAF. (Listed under "Prior Reports" on page 11)
"We interviewed eight officials responsible for the explosives management at HEAF and Site 300, and upon our request none provided us with detailed inventory procedures..."By not requiring custodians to follow property management regulations and without the custodian knowing the requirements, LLNL is not in compliance with 41 CFR, Subpart 109".
https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2020/09/f78/DOE-OIG-20-53.pdf
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts you viewed tbe most last 30 days
-
LGBT intolerance problem at Sandia? I was just checking glassdoor.com and noticed several comments suggesting intolerance to LGBT at Sandia...
-
So what do the NNSA labs do under the the 2nd Trump administration ? What are the odds we will have a test?
-
So did you SSVSP and why? Give details.
11 comments:
Will LLNS get a PER award fee haircut for this? Are WCI Site 300 or HEAF leadership changes coming?
"Will LLNS get a PER award fee haircut for this? Are WCI Site 300 or HEAF leadership changes coming?"
The answer is probably no to both questions, unless NNSA leadership declares it a "significant" matter. I don't think there was any LLNS award fee haircut or leadership changes after LLNS learned an employee had stole 43.000 pounds of lab copper over a 3 year period. This may be an example of the reoccurring frustration DOE has when trying to investigate and correct chronic NNSA and NNSA lab problems, and probably the reason for bills like H.R. 8159.
Isn't LLNL the NNSA Lab where the NNSA on an annual basis, wants to substantially increase the number and magnitude of explosive testing?
Site 300 is a welfare state.
Maybe the solution is to promote more LLNL security guards to explosive testing Facility Manager positions that have zero hard science degrees, are full of themselves, but are politically important to attracting military funding at the expense of safety, procedural consistency, or the suggestions of experienced HE employees. Not.
4:07 nailed it. Very insightful. Unfortunately, the National Labs have become dumping grounds for ex-military “experts” in explosives. Knowing how to pull the pin on a grenade does not make anyone an expert in explosives.
Knowing how to pull the pin on a grenade does not make anyone an expert in explosives.
9/24/2020 6:45 PM
...but actually pulling the pin and surviving probably does!
"...but actually pulling the pin and surviving probably does"
Sorry, but it doesn't appear your line of reasoning is in agreement or acceptable with either the 2013 or 2020 DOE IG found disparities under LLNS leadership in this situation.
Sorry, but it doesn't appear your line of reasoning is in agreement or acceptable with either the 2013 or 2020 DOE IG found disparities under LLNS leadership in this situation.
9/25/2020 9:51 PM
I agree. My line of reasoning is rational, the IG's is unashamed CYA.
"I agree. My line of reasoning is rational, the IG's is unashamed CYA."
If the IG roots out chronic problems with LLNS managed HE facilities over ~7 years, it is "unashamed CYA". Bills like H.R. 8159 are getting traction because the NNSA and NNSA Labs have given the finger to DOE concerns too many times.
Let me point out the obvious, "getting traction" does not equate to "law of the land."
Post a Comment