Skip to main content

Final DOE report on WIPP blames LANL

Nothing much new here, other than the information on foaming and smoking drums that were apparently sent from LANL to WIPP.

http://www.abqjournal.com/570812/news/final-report-on-wipp-leak-blames-lanl-doe.html

Comments

Anonymous said…
"I just want to make it very clear that I had nothing to do with this mess. You can be be confident, however, that LANS will be vigilant about hunting down the low level culprits and making them pay dearly."

- Charlie "WINNING" McMillian
Anonymous said…
How the heck is LANS keeping the LANL contract.

Past performance has to be a heavily weighted evaluation criteria in the upcoming RFP.
Anonymous said…
"It's just the day-in and day-out safety and security issues at Los Alamos"

Dr. Victor H. Reis, Former Assistant Secretary for Defense Programs, DP-1 U.S. Department of Energy, 1997
Anonymous said…
April 18, 2015 at 4:40 PM

As has been pointed out repeatedly to April 18, 2015 at 4:40 PM, Reis never sad that. Either provide a citation or stop the lying.
Anonymous said…
4:40 is a born liar.
Anonymous said…
April 18, 2015 at 4:40 PM

Vic Reis also said that the privatization of the labs has been a failure.
Anonymous said…
Vic actually DID say that.
Anonymous said…
As has been pointed out repeatedly to April 18, 2015 at 4:40 PM, Reis never sad that. Either provide a citation or stop the lying.

April 18, 2015 at 5:14 PM

Who cares whether or not Reis said it, fact is, it's a true statement.
Anonymous said…
Who cares whether or not Reis said it, fact is, it's a true statement.

April 21, 2015 at 5:23 PM

No, it's an opinion. If it were Vic Reis' opinion it might be noteworthy. Anyone else's maybe not. These days, no one understands the difference between "truth" or "fact" or "opinion." Too bad for the state of public discourse and the intelligence thereof.
Anonymous said…
5:14 pm, I understand he did say that. Either provide a citation stating that he never said that, or stop the lying.
Anonymous said…
I understand he did say that.

April 22, 2015 at 5:26 AM

Well, that certainly convinces me!
Anonymous said…
Yes, just as much as, "Reis never sad [sic] that".
Anonymous said…
It seems it should be much easier to substantiate that he actually said it than to prove he didn't. It is usually the case that the burden of proof lies with the person who claims something exists, rather than the person who claims it does not.
Anonymous said…
Reis never said such a thing. Do not put words into his mouth.
Anonymous said…
Reis never said such a thing. Do not put words into his mouth.

April 25, 2015 at 9:11 PM

Why are you just perpetuating the nonsense about this? Shut up about it, already.
Anonymous said…
"Why are you just perpetuating the nonsense about this? Shut up about it, already.

April 25, 2015 at 9:25 PM"

Because what Reis did or did not say almost 20 years ago, or what context the alleged statement was made would be a huge game changer, that is why it is brought up over and over again.
Anonymous said…
April 26, 2015 at 8:18 AM

OCD much?
Anonymous said…
If you claim, "Reis never said such a thing", the burden is upon you to back up the statement with evidence, since "never" is exclusive and even one instance of saying "such a thing" under his breath in private is enough to refute it. On the other hand, all I need to say is, "Reis probably did say such a thing", and you are hosed, toast, utterly vanquished, because "probably" qualifies the statement and allows me a victory whether or not he actually said it.

So, "Reis probably did say such a thing".
Anonymous said…
So, "Reis probably did say such a thing".

April 26, 2015 at 1:24 PM

So now you go from a direct quote to "probably." Wow. Well, the only possible response is to note that if your "probability" is, say, .0001, then both statements are correct. Happy now?
Anonymous said…

"So, "Reis probably did say such a thing"."

No more likely Reis said something competently different which was totally misinterpreted by some people wishing to hear something else because they need to hear something else. In any case knowing Reis we would have actually said the opposite.
Anonymous said…

Let us summarize the probability of what Reis may or may not have said. (1) Reis never said such a thing. (2) What Reis meant to say was misinterpreted. (3) Reis said that but has changed his mind. (4) Reis did say that but it was just an exaggeration to make a long forgotten point. (5) Reis said that and still means that. So by the laws of probability there is only 20% chance that this was said and accurately quoted. I think we can all agree that we should bring this up again since it is most likely not representative of the the truth. Case closed.
Anonymous said…
April 27, 2015 at 8:26 PM

Did you mean "should NOT bring this up again"?? Proofread. Proofread. Or risk destroying your own point.
Anonymous said…
April 27, 2015 at 8:26 PM

The winner, ding, ding, ding....

(5) Reis said that and still means that.
Anonymous said…
"The winner, ding, ding, ding....

(5) Reis said that and still means that.

April 29, 2015 at 5:12 AM"

This simply does not sound like something Reis would ever say. It does sound like something a delusional person blinded by their own agenda would claim someone said to bolster their agenda.
Anonymous said…
Reis is pretty direct, and this sounds exactly like something he would say. I'm gonna go with (5).
Anonymous said…
If someone heard him say it personally, but it didn't get recorded or written down, it is the same as if he never said it. If it did get recorded or written down, it is up to the people who claim he said it to produce a source.
Anonymous said…

" If someone heard him say it personally, but it didn't get recorded or written down, it is the same as if he never said it. If it did get recorded or written down, it is up to the people who claim he said it to produce a source.

April 29, 2015 at 8:46 AM"

There will never be a source produced because it was never said.
Anonymous said…
There will never be a source for him not ever having said that, either.
Anonymous said…
Reis is pretty direct, and this sounds exactly like something he would say. I'm gonna go with (5).

April 29, 2015 at 6:57 AM

Funny Reis gave a talk at LANL lest than a year ago and never said such a thing.
Anonymous said…
Funny, I was talking to my wife the other day, and I didn't say "I do".
Anonymous said…
Are you saying Reis actually said it, but it was a one-time scripted ceremonial thing?
Anonymous said…
No, pointing out that once you say something, you usually don't have to keep repeating it especially a decade or more later.
Anonymous said…


No, saying something a long time ago and not repeating ever again likely means you never meant to say it in the first place or that you the situation has changed and you no longer believe it. Of course the other possibility is that he never said this. Again if you know Reis he would not say such a thing. He makes very pinpointed comments toward particulars, not vague sweeping statements.

Anonymous said…
Of course the other possibility is that he never said this.

April 30, 2015 at 5:47 PM

Again, to belabor the obvious, if no one can bring a citation or source for the comment he supposedly made, then HE DIDN'T SAY IT!! How is this even arguable??
Anonymous said…
Well lets belabor it a bit more. If no one can bring a citation or source supporting the claim that he did not say it, then he might have said it.
Anonymous said…
And April 30, 2015 at 9:53 PM might have to install a glass belly button to see where he is going.
Anonymous said…
"Well lets belabor it a bit more. If no one can bring a citation or source supporting the claim that he did not say it, then he might have said it.

April 30, 2015 at 9:53 PM"

The 9:53PM poster said he was a delusional weirdo, and that he lives in his mothers basement spending all day watching reruns of Gilligan's Island, and that he likes being cruel to flower pots. I cannot think of the exact post he said this and since I do not have the source than we can conclude that he may very well has said this.
Anonymous said…
And it might even be true!

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!