Morale is low at LLNL. Too many layers of management to tell you what to do that results in a 300% overhead (4.0 multiplier). Young and bright engineers and scientists are going to the Silicone Valley.
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
Home to really delicious apricot and prune orchards (I mean the fruit) in the 40's, 50's and early 60's. Some of the richest and most fertile farmland in CA !
October 26, 2013 at 9:42 PM
We as a nation are to far in debt to afford this anymore. We must use what we know to get by for the next two to five decades until we're debt free and can afford luxuries like LANL, LLNL, LBL, ORNL, etc. Keep the gates open but at a very reduced population. Cuts must be made and taxes reduced.
October 27, 2013 at 4:50 AM
You do understand that it is the "population" that is the important national asset, not the facility? If the expertise goes away, it can not be replaced in less than a generation. The facility can be rebuilt quickly in time of serious national need. Unless you are assuming the national security of the US will never require the expertise of the "population" of the labs during your "two to five decades." Pretty short sighted and dangerous, I'd say. In the last two or three decades, the number of nations with nuclear weapons, friendly and unfriendly, has quadrupled.
I'm totally amazed that a man of his low caliber could rise to the high rank that he has over the last few years. It speaks very poorly of the current management team running the NNSA labs.
Money certainly played a part in this BUT this "fear of failure" started well before the country started suffering from our failed policies.
----
I also agree that the high overhead costs have increased to the point that a decision has to be made between administering science or doing science.
As it stands we have Ph.D's with 10+ managers and no actual assistance with their various projects beyond the paperwork that 10+ managers generate.
Agreed. There are two types of overhead costs. There are the direct costs (e.g., 4x multiplier) because we need to pay for the 10 managers. Then there are the indirect costs because those 10 managers create and force unfunded work on to project personnel.
During my LLNL career, I have brought in enough sponsor funds to pay for myself and a little more. Now, I often avoid this due to the high "hassle factor." It becomes too much when one is required to write 5 ongoing progress reports each month (or quarter), with only 1 of the 5 going to the sponsor. The rest are required by different management entities at the Lab (all in different formats, of course).
Spot on!
The system:
- Get your own funds (despite OSO's constant interference, reporting demands, and refusal to support simple request like travel/proposal funding).
- Have them taxed by 80%
- Which pays for a bunch of people on overhead (beyond OSO) who are somehow empowered to demand a bunch of unpaid work from you, all of which delivers zero benefit to the sponsor.
If we could break this cycle, the lab would save a ton of money, and all the PIs and folks who actually bring in the money would be significantly more productive.
As it stands we have Ph.D's with 10+ managers and no actual assistance ...
At least you have PhDs in LLNL! Adam Rowen (manager of the Materials Chemistry department) from Sandia National Laboratories does not have a Ph.D. (he has a masters from the prestigious University of New Mexico!)
That said: It is kind of interesting how so few managers left during the last financial incentive. Perhaps that's because they're not having to hustle for their paycheck like most of us.
(2) End up with more managers, fewer staff to bring in lab funding
(3) This causes the overhead tax burdens to go up even further with the remaining pot of funds
(4) Dismal budget situation then leads back to (1)
It's called a Death Spiral.
http://llnlthetruestory.blogspot.com/2013/07/sandias-fee-penalties.html?showComment=1378966217910#c7620251885107437128