The value of NNSA Field Offices at LANL and LLNL?
What is the value added of the NNSA Local Field Offices at LANL and LLNL? How have LANS and LLNS operations, efficiencies, and business practices materially improved with NNSA on site presence? Are the NNSA Field Office staff active and impartial evaluators, or passive transcribers of lab contractor activities? Does it take DOE IG investigations (LANS Deputy Director, WIPP, etc.) to get the NNSA Field Offices to finally act against "established relationships" with their assigned contractor?
19 comments:
"Are the NNSA Field Office staff active and impartial evaluators, or passive transcribers of lab contractor activities? "
Neither. They' don't know what they are doing.
Not knowing what they are doing is different from being incapable of doing what they are assigned to do. They need extensive training for most of the positions they are assigned, and they do not receive it. This is a significant DOE/NNSA failure.
"...Neither. They' don't know what they are doing..."
And who benefits from that?
Field Offices are worthless. They are incompetent people in a management scheme that makes no sense.
The current concept of Field Offices resulted from the downsizing of the useless DOE Operations Offices. Unfortunately, the next step-- downsizing the Field Offices--never happened due to unplanned changes in senior DOE management.
"And who benefits from that?"
No one. They just do a bunch of stupid stuff that impairs everyone.
The field offices are great! They are good places to park friends of people important to the bureaucracy. We all love big government. We need more field offices, not less, in my opinion. And we need a structure to enable and encourage nepotism and cronyism in government because that's how we do things. And that will never change.
LAFO - "Laugh Ohh".
Every person at the field offices could fall off the earth and productivity would increase dramatically.
The government owned contractor operated JPL, has a larger budget than LLNL and staff just a bit smaller. Yet it has a resident NASA federal oversight staff at the lab less than half the size of the fed staff at LLNL.
A better model for running an FFRDC - hire a real contractor and hold the contractor responsible for the FFRDC's operations.
LLNL CONTENT ONLY
The local field office is essential for rapid approvals of essential programmatic activities that now require NNSA approval.
The new contact and its implementation policies, along with department orders, require many approvals. Local presence speeds the review and approval process,
Haha. The NNSA Livermore Field Office has oversight and evaluation functions, on paper anyway. You think LLNS provides the pen when the NNSA Livermore Field Office Manager is asked to sign the largely LLNS composed annual evaluation?
The Los Alamos Field Office (LAFO) doesn't even review or approve any Engineering Authorization System (EAS) documents that LANL sends to the NWC Production Plants. Why. Why you ask? Because they don't have a classified computer. They consider it "plausible deniability" if there is an explosion or disaster at the Plants caused by LANL input. LAFO is not a stupid as they look!
"...They consider it "plausible deniability" if there is an explosion or disaster at the Plants caused by LANL input. LAFO is not a stupid as they look!..."
Cushy profit without the risk. Where have we heard that before? The field offices and the labs are only separated by a few sheetrock walls and unique stationary logos.
If you think LANS and LAFO have anything other than an adversarial relationship, you are blissfully ignorant. LAFO sees LANS people as overpaid, arrogant and ungovernable. LANS sees LAFO people as jumped-up C students with narrow bureaucratic minds.
Both are correct, 2:50.
"...LAFO sees LANS people as overpaid, arrogant and ungovernable. LANS sees LAFO people as jumped-up C students with narrow bureaucratic minds..."
Before or after the WIPP spotlight was shining unbearably bright on both the LAFO and LANS? There is a difference you see.
Before or after the WIPP spotlight was shining unbearably bright on both the LAFO and LANS? There is a difference you see.
January 24, 2015 at 5:27 PM
Nope. It's been that way for at least 15 years that I can attest to. The WIPP thing is a drop in the bucket.
The Los Alamos Field Office (LAFO) doesn't even review or approve any Engineering Authorization System (EAS) documents that LANL sends to the NWC Production Plants. Why. Why you ask? Because they don't have a classified computer. They consider it "plausible deniability" if there is an explosion or disaster at the Plants caused by LANL input. LAFO is not a stupid as they look!
January 24, 2015 at 9:10 AM
One of the reasons the LANL Weapon Program has been successful is that LAFO has no weapon expertise to oversee (i.e. pester) the LANL weapon program. The reason the LANL facilities are so screwed up, is that you have folks like Chris "Viscous" Fischahs (LAFO) beating on the staff at the LANL nuclear facilities. The Field Office leader Kim Davis Lebak is even afraid of him and known to make her cry; literally. The LANL management has done nothing to control this tyrant.
Post a Comment