Skip to main content

LANL accountability

The Energy Department’s internal watchdog has identified more than $470 million in unresolved and unaudited spending at the Los Alamos National Laboratory, with much of the total dating to 2003.

Deputy Inspector General Rickey R. Hass did not allege misuse of funds in the report Monday. Still, he said resolution of the reviews “ensures that costs charged to the government are allowable, makes certain that taxpayer’s money is spent wisely, and has the potential to free significant funds that would be better spent on Los Alamos' mission critical program activities.”

The department’s National Nuclear Security Administration, which manages the laboratory, did not challenge the findings and pledged to resolve the outstanding cost questions by next year.

A department spokesman offered no additional comment.

Read more:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/nov/27/nearly-a-decade-later-los-alamos-still-hasnt-accou/#ixzz2Eja2xJgA

Comments

Anonymous said…
Kinda sounds like LANS has a bit of explaining to do. $470 million is a good chunk of cash to be unaccounted for. Lets see what the "Spin" will be on this one.....
Anonymous said…
How many FTE's can 470 Mil support? Guess what? We are going to find out.
Anonymous said…
Lets be honest with ourselves. Most of LANL's problems are from within. The higher skilled folks either have moved to LLNL or retired. How else do you explain everything from bad science,Tc99 contamination, inability to build a simple fence, the CMRR fiasco,cost overruns, etc. Despite LANS best attempts to `right the ship' the problems on the hill continue.
Anonymous said…
How else do you explain everything from bad science,Tc99 contamination, inability to build a simple fence, the CMRR fiasco, cost overruns, etc?

December 13, 2012 11:11 AM

Simple, three reasons. 1. Mikey Anastasio 2. Brett Knapp, and 3. Charlie McMillan.
Anonymous said…
I'm sure Bechtel can figure a way to pay this huge amount by stealing it out of the employees' pensions.
Anonymous said…
Honestly, there was a 4th reason, Peter Nanos.
Anonymous said…
Honestly, there was a 4th reason, Peter Nanos.

December 14, 2012 2:42 AM

I stand corrected!
Anonymous said…
"...with much of the total dating to 2003."

If the majority of the spending was in 2003, it was during UC's operating LANL. Sounds like current LANS management can't be blamed for this one.

Anonymous said…
"...with much of the total dating to 2003."

If the majority of the spending was in 2003, it was during UC's operating LANL. Sounds like current LANS management can't be blamed for this one.


December 14, 2012 8:52 AM

Sure LANS is to blame! They have been ignoring the problem since 2006. What the hell have they been doing for 6-years, spending the profits?
Anonymous said…
LANL and Accountabiility, how do you spell oxymoron?

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.

LLNL un-diversity

Actual post from Dec. 15 from one of the streams. This is a real topic. As far as promoting women and minorities even if their qualifications are not as good as the white male scientists, I am all for it. We need diversity at the lab and if that is what it takes, so be it.  Quit your whining. Look around the lab, what do you see? White male geezers. How many African Americans do you see at the lab? Virtually none. LLNL is one of the MOST undiverse places you will see. Face it folks, LLNL is an institution of white male privilege and they don't want to give up their privileged positions. California, a state of majority Hispanics has the "crown jewel" LLNL nestled in the middle of it with very FEW Hispanics at all!