Skip to main content

Labs may face $1M fine for handling of information, materials

JF said:
http://www.abqjournal.com/596251/news/labs-may-face-1m-fine-for-handling-of-information-materials.html

Comments

Anonymous said…
Sandia Corp., the private operator of Sandia National Laboratories in Albuquerque, was assessed the biggest fine, $577,500, for violation of control of nuclear weapons data.
Anonymous said…
LANS has no shame or integrity.
Anonymous said…
And they are laughing all the way to the bank.
Anonymous said…
Sandia Corp., a Lockheed Martin company, was cited for four “Level 1″ violations, said to “involve the actual or high potential for adverse impact on national security,” and two lesser errors.

The violations notice says that, in 2012, a Sandia supervisor discovered that a lab employee had been making presentations at “unclassified settings” at Sandia and at least three times in public venues, dating as far back as 2003. The presentation also was uploaded to a shared server but never had been submitted to Sandia’s classification office for review.

Adam Rowen, who does not have a Ph.D., is no longer the manager of the materials chemistry department at Sandia. You should hear what the staff members in his former department have to say about him.

“Due to Sandia’s failure to identify and remove all the classified information contained in the presentation and video, it remained stored and unprotected on this unclassified shared server for over eight years,” says the DOE notice.
Anonymous said…
Can't wait for the comments of the "does not have a PhD" jerk about his new lab president!

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.

tcp1 looking good

I just received my annual TCP-1 letter from LLNS and a summary of the LLNS Pension Plan. Looked in pretty good shape in 2013. About 35% overfunded (funding target attainment percentage = 134.92%). This was a decrease from 2012 where it was 51% overfunded (funding target attainment percentage = 151.59%). They did note that the 2012 change in the law on how liabilities are calculated using interest rates improved the plan's position. Without the change the funding target attainment percentages would have been 118% (2012) and 105% (2013). 2013 assets = $2,057,866,902 2013 liabilities = $1,525,162,784 vs 2012 assets = $1,844,924,947 2012 liabilities = $1,217,043,150 It was also noted that a slightly different calculation method ("fair market value") designed to show a clearer picture of the plan' status as December 31, 2013 had; Assets = $2,403,098,433 Liabilities = $2,068,984,256 Funding ratio = 116.15% Its a closed plan with 3,781 participants. Of that number, 3,151 wer...