This BLOG is for LLNL present and past employees, friends of LLNL and anyone impacted by the privatization of the Lab to express their opinions and expose the waste, wrongdoing and any kind of injustice against employees and taxpayers by LLNS/DOE/NNSA.
The opinions stated are personal opinions. Therefore,
The BLOG author may or may not agree with them before making the decision to post them.
Comments not conforming to BLOG rules are deleted.
Blog author serves as a moderator.
For new topics or suggestions, email jlscoob5@gmail.com
Blog rules
Stay on topic.
No profanity, threatening language, pornography.
NO NAME CALLING.
No political debate.
Posts and comments are posted several times a day.
"In its response to the Environment Department regarding WIPP, the Energy Department appeared to shift responsibility for the radiation leak to Los Alamos or its contractors, arguing that “some other person or entity ... caused such violation in whole or in part.”
Sure does look like DoE just threw LANL under the bus.
With both the State of NM and DoE gunning for LANL, it looks to cost the contractor upwards of 100M$ this year alone. What is still murky is where they will get the funds to pay up.
The good and righteous people people of DOE weaseling… gasp. It could never be! And that anyone might speak evil our lady of the Site Office. Hold your tongues you vermin!
Only goodness and feral, oops, federal wisdom flow from them. They are the anointed representatives of the people, sanctified in the service of national security.
Once there is an obvious breach in the NNSA Field Office/DOE Contractor "circle the wagons" "shhh" effort, it is game over. That is when the throw each other "under the bus" theatrics gets started. This is just "act 1".
The government (DOE) contests fines levied on them by the state of New Mexico -> BUT, The government itself levies fines on LANL (punitively - and rightly so - by withholding 90% of the contract fee)) for the WIPP disaster(?). Folks, do you sense something here of the pot calling the kettle black? Evidently what is good for the goose aint' good for the gander. Sheeeeeeesh...
Was the $36 million fine issued to LANS LLC or DOE?
If DOE drags this through the courts it could be many years before its resolved.
So if the fine is against LANS LLC, and if DOE loses the battle to void the fine after a new contractor takes over LANL - who pays the fine since the LANS LLC will have been dissolved?
"...So if the fine is against LANS LLC, and if DOE loses the battle to void the fine after a new contractor takes over LANL - who pays the fine since the LANS LLC will have been dissolved?.."
Ultimately you do (taxpayer). The LANS collective will be a memory and the elements of the LLC don't count.
LANSLLNS doesn't need "for profit" training wheels. They can bicycle with training wheel free pride. If they detect a significant fall, they can just pop out of existence before they ever hit the ground. Rewards without risks. Sure, LANSLLNS is exactly like Google and other companies in Silicon Valley(?).
And the local NNSA "Field Office" staff? They just become the 2 dimensional shepherd of the next Contractor, or pack up and seek out another Contractor host in another state. No worries.
All this bashing of the Field Office is just noise in the system, attempting to distract from the monumental failures of the contract operators.
"Honest teacher, it can't be my fault that I hit the kid in the face and broke their nose. You never stopped me from striking them, and you did not grab my arm when I pulled back with a fist aimed at their face. Really, you must see it my way. This is all your fault."
LANS has much of the WIPP disaster ownership without a doubt.
A "teacher" that claims to have explicit classroom rules, educational oversight, educational guidance, proactive student involvement, and enforcement for non-compliance to said rules, but in reality does NONE of the above, and instead allows the students to run the class at their discretion, is not much of a teacher, independent of the problem kids in the room. If you knew this as a parent, you would probably select another teacher, another school, or at least request an assessment or track record of the teacher in question.
"Honest teacher, it can't be my fault that I hit the kid in the face and broke their nose. You never stopped me from striking them, and you did not grab my arm when I pulled back with a fist aimed at their face..."
January 13, 2015 at 11:24 AM
Really? He hit "the kid" and broke "their" nose, and struck "them" and aimed at "their" face??? If it was "the" kid then why did you make it sound like there was more than one involved? Is it possible that you do not know the proper English for referring to subjects of unknown gender? Hint: plural is not the correct method. Were you sleeping in English grammar class??
Really? He hit "the kid" and broke "their" nose, and struck "them" and aimed at "their" face??? If it was "the" kid then why did you make it sound like there was more than one involved? Is it possible that you do not know the proper English for referring to subjects of unknown gender? Hint: plural is not the correct method. Were you sleeping in English grammar class??
January 14, 2015 at 9:49 PM
A new low for relevance of a comment to the posted topic.
100% the blame of Pedro, the night janitor who cleans the bathrooms over in TA-55. Definitely his fault. No doubt about it. Guess I'll have to fire him.
20 comments:
How does the NNSA LANS field office "oversight" responsibility headed by Kim Davis Lebak fold in here?
Oversight? Cricket.
Intervention? Cricket.
Preventive Measures? Cricket.
Early assessment (pre-DOE IG)? Cricket.
NNSA LANS Field Office "value added" ? ______
Objectivity of NNSA "field office" to assigned DOE Contractor over time?
Best part of the article:
"In its response to the Environment Department regarding WIPP, the Energy Department appeared to shift responsibility for the radiation leak to Los Alamos or its contractors, arguing that “some other person or entity ... caused such violation in whole or in part.”
Sure does look like DoE just threw LANL under the bus.
With both the State of NM and DoE gunning for LANL, it looks to cost the contractor upwards of 100M$ this year alone. What is still murky is where they will get the funds to pay up.
This doesn't look like DOE is trying to weasel out at all. Rather, it seems that they are putting the blame where it belongs - right on LANL.
Who pays? The "Google" want-to-be LANS "for profit" LLC or the taxpayer? The taxpayer of course. What a joke.
The good and righteous people people of DOE weaseling… gasp. It could never be! And that anyone might speak evil our lady of the Site Office. Hold your tongues you vermin!
Only goodness and feral, oops, federal wisdom flow from them. They are the anointed representatives of the people, sanctified in the service of national security.
Weasels, really!
Once there is an obvious breach in the NNSA Field Office/DOE Contractor "circle the wagons" "shhh" effort, it is game over. That is when the throw each other "under the bus" theatrics gets started. This is just "act 1".
The government (DOE) contests fines levied on them by the state of New Mexico -> BUT, The government itself levies fines on LANL (punitively - and rightly so - by withholding 90% of the contract fee)) for the WIPP disaster(?). Folks, do you sense something here of the pot calling the kettle black? Evidently what is good for the goose aint' good for the gander. Sheeeeeeesh...
DOE/LANS only ploy is to tie this whole thing in court. This will end up costing us more money. More money for the lawyers. They love it. Really!
Question here if anyone knows the answer...
Was the $36 million fine issued to LANS LLC or DOE?
If DOE drags this through the courts it could be many years before its resolved.
So if the fine is against LANS LLC, and if DOE loses the battle to void the fine after a new contractor takes over LANL - who pays the fine since the LANS LLC will have been dissolved?
"...So if the fine is against LANS LLC, and if DOE loses the battle to void the fine after a new contractor takes over LANL - who pays the fine since the LANS LLC will have been dissolved?.."
Ultimately you do (taxpayer). The LANS collective will be a memory and the elements of the LLC don't count.
LANSLLNS doesn't need "for profit" training wheels. They can bicycle with training wheel free pride. If they detect a significant fall, they can just pop out of existence before they ever hit the ground. Rewards without risks. Sure, LANSLLNS is exactly like Google and other companies in Silicon Valley(?).
And the local NNSA "Field Office" staff? They just become the 2 dimensional shepherd of the next Contractor, or pack up and seek out another Contractor host in another state. No worries.
All this bashing of the Field Office is just noise in the system, attempting to distract from the monumental failures of the contract operators.
"Honest teacher, it can't be my fault that I hit the kid in the face and broke their nose. You never stopped me from striking them, and you did not grab my arm when I pulled back with a fist aimed at their face. Really, you must see it my way. This is all your fault."
LANS has much of the WIPP disaster ownership without a doubt.
A "teacher" that claims to have explicit classroom rules, educational oversight, educational guidance, proactive student involvement, and enforcement for non-compliance to said rules, but in reality does NONE of the above, and instead allows the students to run the class at their discretion, is not much of a teacher, independent of the problem kids in the room. If you knew this as a parent, you would probably select another teacher, another school, or at least request an assessment or track record of the teacher in question.
When backed into a corner, the teachers association will simply move the problem teacher to another school.
"Honest teacher, it can't be my fault that I hit the kid in the face and broke their nose. You never stopped me from striking them, and you did not grab my arm when I pulled back with a fist aimed at their face..."
January 13, 2015 at 11:24 AM
Really? He hit "the kid" and broke "their" nose, and struck "them" and aimed at "their" face??? If it was "the" kid then why did you make it sound like there was more than one involved? Is it possible that you do not know the proper English for referring to subjects of unknown gender? Hint: plural is not the correct method. Were you sleeping in English grammar class??
Really? He hit "the kid" and broke "their" nose, and struck "them" and aimed at "their" face??? If it was "the" kid then why did you make it sound like there was more than one involved? Is it possible that you do not know the proper English for referring to subjects of unknown gender? Hint: plural is not the correct method. Were you sleeping in English grammar class??
January 14, 2015 at 9:49 PM
A new low for relevance of a comment to the posted topic.
Ownership of NM WIPP Disaster (select one or more)
DOE HQ
NNSA HQ
NNSA Field Office
LANS
LANS Subcontractor
January 15, 2015 at 7:49 AM
Directly: 100% LANS
Indirectly:
10% each for
-Pattiz and Anastasio for insisting on Mcmillan as Director
-D'Agastino and Chu for going along with the poor choice
30% each for Mcmillan and Wallace for the post accident Keystone Kops response.
100% the blame of Pedro, the night janitor who cleans the bathrooms over in TA-55. Definitely his fault. No doubt about it. Guess I'll have to fire him.
- Charlie "I Will Never Resign" McMillan
Post a Comment