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
A few statements from all-hands...
Parney said that events of the past year, had caused him to be in an "adversarial" relationship with some sponsors.
He said that LLNL has burned through all of its reserves, and the highest priority must be to correct the current chaotic support.
He said that he wants to make sure that this process goes as quickly as possible.
He said he's stepping down effective 11/1.
October 24, 2013 at 1:05 PM
Anonymous said...
A few statements from all-hands...
Parney said that events of the past year, had caused him to be in an "adversarial" relationship with some sponsors. Pissed off someone by saying he was going to use fully funded projects money to pay people that were not working on those project
He said that LLNL has burned through all of its reserves, and the highest priority must be to correct the current chaotic support. no money left, pot is dry, DOE can I have some more, answer, NO, deal with it
He said that he wants to make sure that this process goes as quickly as possible. Brett Knapp, hatchet man sent in to make all the cuts that need to be made by making $$- people count correct
He said he's stepping down effective 11/1 Ed Moses
Have fun all...
Too bad Brett is not going back to LLNL permanently. We are sick of him at LANL.
October 24, 2013 at 3:36 PM
Anonymous said...
To be a fly on the wall in the first meeting between Bret and Moses! Priceless!
October 24, 2013 at 3:42 PM
Parney was in less than two years. I think this is the shortest run ever. Something must have happened, even Nanos was around longer than that. Crazy stuff is going on for sure.
All I ever hear are really bad things about Knapp, I have yet to meet someone who anything good to say about him.
October 24, 2013 at 7:46 PM
Anonymous said...
October 24, 2013 at 7:28 PM
Don't worry brett is going to balance LLNL budget. It's easy. Just fire one person for every $300K you need to do experiments for the rest of FY-14 and that's how many people have to go out the gate before Dec 25th.
October 25, 2013 at 11:32 AM
This may be true and I'll give him that. he was a people person but that's not what ULM is allowed to be. They have to follow company rules and be heartless. When they see shortfalls in the budget that have to put the projects and company first and shit-can as many people as fast as possible to stay on budget no matter how small it is or how small it's going to get. This is why Parney is gone and Brett Knapp is in. Brett's new job is to balance the budget before the new director is appointed / elected. This way the new guy can come in and all the dirty work will be done. I'd venture to say they need to work fast and have the house cleaned before Dec 25th and especially before congress realizes that Odumbocare is going to absorb all the funds that will be made by those who will be shown the gate plus a lot more. It’s for this reason I suspect budgets for LLNL and LANL will be reduced even more over the next few decades. Brett will then go back to LANL and start raising hell there too. It's all so very simple people.
POS
Welcome to AmeriKa!!!!
A main reason we cannot grow our revenue is because our overhead is so high. High overhead creates high explicit costs. Who will do business with us when we are so expensive? More significantly, high overhead creates high implicit costs. As implemented, high overhead (i.e., management) reduces the productivity of the people who have the potential to bring in new revenue. People produce less when they are required to spend half of their time on administrative processes created by a bloated and dysfunctional management structure that does nothing more than invent useless work.
Exactly right, and the "scrappy entrepreneurs" are utilizing NNSA-owned infrastructure, from offices, desks, and computers, to lights, heat, and yes, toilets, and object to paying for it. Just another government-subsidized boondoggle, payed for by unwilling, and unfortunately unwitting, taxpayers.
Parney will be remembered for several things. On the positive side, he cared for the people that worked for him, and often went to great length to make things better for them. In the neutral category, he inherited a dance card filled by NIF, and played out the hand that he was dealt. Balancing this out, his most obvious failure was the creation of the Office of Strategic Outcomes.
October 26, 2013 at 8:30 AM
Parney did a great job for Livermore in a stressful period; however, he may be remembered most for the total disaster of the Office of Strategic Outcomes.
Not that that's the only reason but I can't help but to believe that it played a part in this change.
Parney did a great job for Livermore in a stressful period; however, he may be remembered most for the total disaster of the Office of Strategic Outcomes.
October 26, 2013 at 10:33 AM
Remember that Miller brought Albright to LLNL to boost the GS numbers and it did not produce the desired results, despite his often mentioned experience with the sponsor set. Indeed, OSO was a bad idea and failed at LLNL. Then LANL copied it and turned in even worse results. The funding numbers tell the story for WFO, and LLNL was bested by LANL for the years when Albright had GS. While LLNL has gained some in WFO in the past two years, the increase is due more to the migration of projects away from LANL under their current GS management.
OSO in a nutshell...
Problem:
It was a dumping ground for high-salary, otherwise-EBAs who could not bring in funding / build programs.
What they should have done:
Taken people who were successful program builders and incentivized them to join OSO to do that at a larger scale and mentor people around the lab to be future program builders.
Concept was not so bad, execution and personnel selection was dismal.
Final Point:
Parney said repeatedly that he would clean house of anyone in OSO who didn't make their goals. He never did so. In practice, this just led to OSO folks relentless bugging PIs for status and then taking credit for a lot of hard work by PIs who could have done more *without* OSO in the mix.
October 26, 2013 at 11:18 PM
Yikes! Too much information!!
October 27, 2013 at 7:53 PM
You mean, who will replace Penrose? HeHeHeHeHe. Why didn't his parents call him "Penny", or maybe "Rosie"?? To be saddled with such an absurd name that you had to think of an equally absurd "diminutive" like "Parney" probably wounded the poor fellow's psyche for life. Hence LLNL's problems, I'm sure.
October 28, 2013 at 4:57 PM
Ooo, just a little thin skinned, are we? Making fun of someone deserves hatred and violence? Are you holed up in your parents' basement, planning to shoot up your middle school? Sounds like the type. Get help for your anger issues.
October 28, 2013 at 5:26 PM
Yes, the experience we've all had of seeing the sociopaths in our society plot and carry out horrendous violent attacks on innocent people, because they were made fun of, or the new buzzword, "bullied." Intense embarrassment and shame produces intense hatred and violence. A totally inappropriate response, fueled by parenting that teaches kids that they are the most important people in the world.
October 28, 2013 at 9:59 PM
Are you really sure it's two clowns? It could be one multiple peronality clown talking to itself, y'know. It's happened before on this blog.
Again who is Penrose? The persons name is Parney. For people that are suppose to smart you sure are dumb.
He could not grow LLNL programs, the most important role of a new director and LLNL is suffering the consequences. He tried.
There is a lesson here for both Pattiz and future candidates.
Knapp is the caretaker who will rearrange the deck chairs. He is qualified to do this. LLNL needs a captain who can plot successful passage and inspire the crew to follow him in uncertain seas.
October 30, 2013 at 1:04 PM
Uh, you posted anonymously also, so that makes you...?? Oh, you weren't "shooting arrows" so it's ok? Wait, didn't you shoot an arrow at October 30, 2013 at 9:12 AM? (i.e., "That would be you.") Oh, so it's ok as long as the person shot at isn't a public figure?? I sense just a teeny bit of hypocrisy here. Get over yourself.
I agree with the content of your post, but why in hell did you use the plural "they" and "their"?? You admit it is just one person ("this person is making negative comments"), so why not use the inclusive "he" and "his"?? If you are so politically correct that you cannot bring yourself to use correct grammar, why not just admit that in order to then be grammatically correct, you have to use "he or she" and "his or her." My God man, either own up to the requirements of your politically correct stupidity, or give it up!
He is the one who resigned. He tried hard, but did not grow work and according to his statement, he alienated key sponsors. Paisner, Kilkenny and Cambell left NIF under similar circumstances. All four are good people, but all needed to be replaced for LLNL to thrive.
Just as Jerry McInery needs to be replaced. Have you seen this addlepated dullard during the ACA hearings?
He is as effective as a pot of daisies.
That he represents a top scientific community is ironic. Our cleaning lady has more chops.
Uh, you posted anonymously also, so that makes you...?? Oh, you weren't "shooting arrows" so it's ok? Wait, didn't you shoot an arrow at October 30, 2013 at 9:12 AM? (i.e., "That would be you.") Oh, so it's ok as long as the person shot at isn't a public figure?? I sense just a teeny bit of hypocrisy here. Get over yourself.... I didn't post anonymously to trash someone. You are the one who needs to get over themselves. Look up hypoctisy in the dictionary - since you obviously like using words you don't understand.
Sorry, I couldn't find "hypotisy" in the dictionary. You obviously like using words you can't spell.
LOL - if all you have is correcting typos, no wonder you are such a loser. Thanks for making that abundantly clear - not that you needed to do so.