Skip to main content

Y-12 guards given cheat sheets by contractor

Y-12 guards given cheat sheets by contractor
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Not on the same level as the LANL scandals, but still raises questions about culture.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/31/usa-security-nuclear-idUSL1E8LV89B20121031

Comments

Anonymous said…
From the Inspector General Report “Review of the Compromise of Security Test Materials at Y-12”

“A high-ranking staffer for the Y-12 site's contract operator, Babcock & Wilcox Technical Services Y-12, implied he had provided advance examination details to personnel not approved specifically to receive them at another sensitive DOE facility, the investigators added.”

“National Nuclear Security Administration head Thomas D'Agostino, though, disputed the link between the testing incident and his agency's oversight of companies operating on its behalf. The evaluation shortcomings stemmed from “the abuse of discretion (or disregard of controls for further distribution) on the contractor’s part in releasing the materials to a broader group of employees,” not from the basic practice of providing hired firms with advance access to such details, the official said in a statement to auditors.”

A few years ago after observing an M&O Contractor manager falsify a Security Performance Test result, I brought it to the attention of the local NNSA Oversight manager who promptly dismissed my observation telling me that it was necessary to avoid “improper/unrealistic” test results. Being the coward I am, I let it go as my family’s wellbeing was more important. Believe me or not, doesn’t matter. This “good o boy” practice among s&S site mgrs & M&O has been going on for a long time & it will continue. I think Mr. D’Agostino believes what he said is true but it’s not.

Any wonder why our National Labs are in such disarray?
Anonymous said…
From the accounts in the aftermath of the Y-12 breach it looks like that they had a system in place - they just didn't follow the system, or it was in need or repair.
Contrast with LANL where it looks like that they do not have a working system in place.
Existing systems can be repaired if it is a few cameras out of service, or replacing federal and contractor staff with properly trained individuals, as emerged in the Y-12 Congressional hearings.
Not defending what happened at Y-12, but adding some perspective that it can be repaired.
The required repair at LANL appears to be more complicated.
Anonymous said…
Y-12 and cheating is an oxymoron.
Anonymous said…
Barney Fife could have done a better job protecting the dangerous nuclear materials at Y-12.

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.

Rumor corner

LLNS may have excluded the wrong people in last VSSOP? The exclusions were based on outdated job categories and related skills. ULM are now thinking that in the future, job categories and functional areas will have to be re-defined. The next VSSOP/ISP will be based on the new categories and functional areas. The questions I have are: 1) Why didnt they think of that before the transition. It seems like their style is “change things as you go”. Planning is out the window! 2) Who will give input on the new changes? The next RIF apparently is going to be more lucrative than the VSSOP. Depending on the length of employment, a RIFed person, not only gets their 1 week pay per year of service but also from 30 to 120 days notice, essentially 30 to 120 days pay. Please feel free to comment on the rumors or add new ones you actually heard.