Skip to main content

LLNL at the top, LANL at the bottorm

LLNL gets top marks, while LANL gets lowest score of all of DoE in first annual report on nuclear crit safety to DNFSB.

https://ehss.energy.gov/deprep/2016/TB16A19A.PDF

Comments

Anonymous said…
It doesn't say that LLNL got top marks.

DOE concludes that LANL is performing adequately, that's just dereliction of duty by DOE; LANL is understaffed, LANL has relied on external bodies to find criticality safety problems, and LANL has had a large number of events. What does DOE find? DOE found that LANL has a very large number of "opportunities for improvement".

The real problem here is the DOE/NNSA. With problems like these, in an area like criticality safety where mistakes can be catastrophic, DOE should have replaced LANS management - it seems that DOE is just whitewashing problems, some quite severe.
Anonymous said…
I can think of four individuals from Livermore that have been responsible for the demise of Los Alamos National Laboratory.
Anonymous said…
Rumors of LANL's demise have been greatly exaggerated. Don't confuse LANS's demise with LANL's.
Anonymous said…
Great data. All it shows is that the places that do the most work in support of national missions are understaffed. Those sites with the fewest infractions best exemplify the DOE work-free safe zones that have been created by the constantly deneutering actions of the DNFSB. Does Livermore really need all of those people when the do very little work with SNM?

As for the comments regarding the demise of LANL, the LANS model is working perfectly if your goals are a lack of leadership and decades to resume operations at the nations only full service plutonium facility.
Anonymous said…
The DNFSB should be ashamed of themselves and the damage they've done to the nuclear facilities in this country and the personnel that staff those facilities.
Anonymous said…
As for the comments regarding the demise of LANL, the LANS model is working perfectly if your goals are a lack of leadership and decades to resume operations at the nations only full service plutonium facility.

April 27, 2016 at 4:11 AM

LANS is gone. Only a matter of time. The nation's plutonium needs will remain, and LANL will meet them, given Congressional support. It is not an issue of any management "model," it is an issue of national need that must be addressed. And of the people who were, and are, willing and able to meet that need. Despite their recent inane and incompetent management.
Anonymous said…
Amen!! to 9:33 PM

You hit it.
Anonymous said…
April 26, 2016 at 5:34 AM

"I can think of four individuals from Livermore that have been responsible for the demise of Los Alamos National Laboratory."

Now you can see why LLNL ushered them out the door. They couldn't meet LLNL standards and went to the second string lab. LLNL got it right as you so deftly illustrate.
Anonymous said…
So your weapons directorate head "couldn't meet LLNL standards"? Yeah right. Bechtel sent them over because they could, not because of any particular ability, or lack of such, on their parts. They simply were given an offer they couldn't refuse.
Anonymous said…
"Lowest score of all DOE"? What, you mean yellow?

Popular posts from this blog

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.

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...

Rumor corner

LLNS may have excluded the wrong people in last VSSOP? The exclusions were based on outdated job categories and related skills. ULM are now thinking that in the future, job categories and functional areas will have to be re-defined. The next VSSOP/ISP will be based on the new categories and functional areas. The questions I have are: 1) Why didnt they think of that before the transition. It seems like their style is “change things as you go”. Planning is out the window! 2) Who will give input on the new changes? The next RIF apparently is going to be more lucrative than the VSSOP. Depending on the length of employment, a RIFed person, not only gets their 1 week pay per year of service but also from 30 to 120 days notice, essentially 30 to 120 days pay. Please feel free to comment on the rumors or add new ones you actually heard.