Anonymous said...
How come no one is talking about Ed Moses getting kicked out of Forrestal recently?
March 20, 2009 7:17 PM
Blogger Neko said...
Do you have any proof?
March 20, 2009 8:23 PM
Anonymous said...
What would constitute proof?
Start asking around; you should be able to collect enough to substantiate the allegation.
Perhaps Ed was foaming at the mouth when he understood the NIF (and TSF) hits coming in 2010.
March 21, 2009 4:20 PM
Anonymous said...
What is Forrestal?
March 21, 2009 6:23 PM
Anonymous said...
Perhaps Ed was foaming at the mouth when he understood the NIF (and TSF) hits coming in 2010.
I hope this doesn't mean he'll have less money to run the place then he does now because I'll tell you they have not allocated enough to even do required maintenance no longer if they have a mishap or have to replace vital parts. I'll bet they are under funded by at least a factor of four or more.
March 21, 2009 8:09 PM
17 comments:
Bye, bye LLNL.
Yes, NIF has problems. It has reliability issues that will take time and money to work through, and that looks to be in jeopardy.
The computer infrastructure is ill-prepared. I am talking storage.
Heard it from reliable sources. EM lost his cool with DOE.
Not long till NIF crashes and burns.
The FY10 budget for LLNL is looking very bleak. GM's demand not to have layoffs in 09 does not help. Be prepared for a real whacking sometime after October. Considering the economy, take any other job you can and get out of Dodge.
EM kicked out of the Forestal building? That is not good. I agree....bye, bye LLNL.
All you "bye bye" people have it backwards.
Long live LLNL, "bye bye Ceaucescu" Long live LLNL, "bye bye Pol Pot"
Perhaps it is really time to move beyond the current regime's reign of terror.
It will be nice seeing NIF finally getting a bite of the sheet sandwich the rest of us had to take.
Don't worry, Its not over until the big boned person sings. LLNS is not about to see their cash cow sink out of sight....they want that management fee to keep going and going as long as possible! After all its a business, so let's all pull together and be happy.
NIF needs a new funding source or it is dead.
With Weapons and TSF taking a big hit next year, the Lab will not be able to subsidize this money sink. Besides, since NIF is no longer a construction project, even the DOE bean counters will be able to the money laundaring that has enabled NIF to get where it is.
If EM can't control his temper, maybe NIF should be declared a violent workplace.
If the Congress decides to keep a US strategic nuclear deterrent while we work with other nuclear powers to secure the goal of worldwide nuclear disarmament over the next 20-50 years then both NIF and LLNL will be adequately funded, because they are essential for certification and safe and effective rebuilds without testing.
If Congress decides to unilaterally disarm or to disarm gradually through neglect, we are not needed and democracy is in jeopardy.
Given the incompetence that Congress has exhibited over the past 10-20 years, nothing would surprise me. I pray for my children and grandchildren.
"..even the DOE bean counters will be able to (sic) discover the money laundering that has enabled NIF to get where it is.."
You misunderstand history.
When the original NIF projected overruns were presented to Secretary Richardson, he publicly directed Director Tarter to make up the difference "out of hide", with no new DOE funds.
This was DOE direction to reduce the overheads on NIF.
(No Director has $2.0B in discretionary funds.)
There are no surprises here. Favorable construction overhead rates were required on PACE (Plant and Capital Equipment) Projects until 1989, when they were banned by DOE. ATA, Nova and MFTF, MTX were built this way.
NIF was the first project since then where this direction was restored.
Similar favorable rates are not allowed even today on other comparable PACE projects.
maybe NIF should be declared a violent workplace...
rather an ultraviolet workplace
After reading this rumor when it was first published, though I had already heard it on the street, I thought I'd write to the Director and ask. I received a reply this afternoon and George says that 1.) a RIF is not planned for 2010, Directorates are changing as the lab's priorities are changing. and 2.) Ed did not have a confrontation with anyone and was not kicked out of anywhere.
I had gone on to comment about other things that are bothering me about my read on the current state of lab affairs as most of my career has been WFO's and that's now pretty much in the past. I'm a 28 yr. FTE, last 3 NIF'n, with 5 Director's awards. His responses to me lead me to believe that he was sincere in his answers.
Somebodies misinterpreted something.
April 1, 2009 5:39 PM
"His responses to me lead me to believe that he was sincere in his answers."
If GM's lips are moving, he's lying.
"2.) Ed did not have a confrontation with anyone and was not kicked out of anywhere."
And we are to believe that this assertion was just invented? And after being in NIF for three years, you believe Ed is a Saint and this could not possibly happen?
You have to understand how ATDs (Ask The Director) questions are handled. They are passed back to the owning organization for the question and have to provide a response. You think anyone in NIF is going to admit Ed was shown the door? You think George would admit a senior manager pissed off someone in DOE?
I need to correct my only entry to this blog. My share of the response by the Director was incorrect. I put my own spin on it by mistake. So, to quote it "no major reductions are planned", so there's an out for 2010 possibilities. Wouldn't matter what he said, or really what I thought was worth commenting with. Some would rather attack the messenger regardless. But I do need to set my comments straight. He was guarded with his language as he'd have to be. What's on the net....
Hey guys/gals, it is what it is.
Post a Comment