Anonymously contributed?
Anyone notice an increase of LANL TSMs going on overhead? That 2% retroactive tax on programs to pay for the VSP seems like a huge management mistake.
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...
Comments
Many projects are beginning to feel the pain of declining budgets to pay for their staff. People are scrambling around like mad at LANL to find codes to work on as fear of an involuntary layoff grows.
Of course, if you're in management, then don't sweat it, LLNS and LANS have your back.
May 9, 2012 9:00 PM
As opposed to actually having value? Yeah, great advice. How to survive as dead wood. The problem in a nutshell.
May 9, 2012 9:00 PM
As opposed to actually having value? Yeah, great advice. How to survive as dead wood. The problem in a nutshell.
May 9, 2012 9:32 PM
"Yeah uhhh everyone, just follow the money baby , uhhh, follow the money, uhmmm" McMillan
May 10, 2012 8:16 AM
"And don't forget the bonuses" McMillan
The programs pay for everything. The NNSA funds programs. They accept indirect as part of maintaining the institution.
It will have to be made up by less travel, less equipment and in the end.... fewer employees (i.e., future RIFs).
May 12, 2012 9:51 PM
I don't know the details of WFO contracts. I think it likely they contain (from the NNSA side) some wording about escalating or unforeseeable costs. DOE provides special rules for DHS contracts. Unfortunately, DOE Orders are no longer available on the public web, so maybe someone in the know can fill us in. In any case, it is not a matter of legality, but what is specified in the contracts.
No, they did not. Now shut up and keep bringing in the funds so they can be taxed and frittered away by your lab executive management team.