Skip to main content

DOE was warned - twice - in 2010 about Y-12 security issues.

Anonymously contributed: ============================================================================================ DOE was warned - twice - in 2010 about Y-12 security issues. How many other safety and security warnings have been ignored by DOE in the past four years? ============================================================================================ http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/security-lapses-at-nuclear-complex-identified-two-years-before-break-in/2012/09/11/7cd3d5fa-fc5e-11e1-a31e-804fccb658f9_story.html?hpid=z4

Comments

Anonymous said…
Those warnings must have gotten lost in the rush to send money to Solyndra.
Anonymous said…
The difference is stunning in how Gates handled the AF nuclear security issue a few years ago. Not only did he quickly hold a large number of high level staff accountable, but he was personally engaged on the issue. He did all this even though the weapons were never out of sight of armed guards, but were not at their correct location.
Chu can't even be bothered to show up for hearings on the NNSA security breach. He sends lower level substitutes in his place. He was personally at all the Solyndra hearings. Actions like who shows up for hearings on what issues say more about Dr. Chu's priorities and attention that all the memos, directives and guidance combined.

Popular posts from this blog

Plutonium Shots on NIF.

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...

Trump is to gut the labs.

The budget has a 20% decrease to DOE office of science, 20% cut to NIH. NASA also gets a cut. This will  have a huge negative effect on the lab. Crazy, juts crazy. He also wants to cut NEA and PBS, this may not seem like  a big deal but they get very little money and do great things.

Why Workplace Jargon Is A Big Problem

From the Huffington Post Why Workplace Jargon Is A Big Problem http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/25/work-words_n_5159868.html?utm_hp_ref=business&ir=Business When we replace a specific task with a vague expression, we grant the task more magnitude than it deserves. If we don't describe an activity plainly, it seems less like an easily achievable goal and more like a cloudy state of existence that fills unknowable amounts of time. A fog of fast and empty language has seeped into the workplace. I say it's time we air it out, making room for simple, concrete words, and, therefore, more deliberate actions. By striking the following 26 words from your speech, I think you'll find that you're not quite as overwhelmed as you thought you were. Count the number that LLNLs mangers use.  touch base circle back bandwidth - impactful - utilize - table the discussion deep dive - engagement - viral value-add - one-sheet deliverable - work product - incentivise - take it to the ...