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.
Tuesday, January 23, 2018
Savannah River Site news
Savannah River Site has some advantages in fight for pit production
The report does say one thing that is right in that NNSA does not leak something unless they have opinion on what they want and what they want is to not have pits being made at LANL. The money savings may be one part but the bigger issue is that LANL has shown that it has serious issues in terms of safety, work efficiency, and declining quality of the workforce. This is on top of issues that Santa Fe will fight tooth and nail against pit production at LANL. Things have been falling apart at LANL and everyone knows it, do you really think it is good idea to have them now run a large risky facility that can only function well if it has top people working in at it? This is a serious question can we trust the modern LANL to do this? The sad thing is that NNSA no longer trusts LANL but the NNSA is partially to blame for making LANL what it is today.
LANL will shrink to a quarter of its current size if the weapons operations is moved. The first step is pits. The second step is accelerators (already happening so maybe this is the first step). The next step is explosives ( that will go to NTS).
Welcome to the future of LANL where it looks more and more like LLNL.
Welcome to the future of LANL where it looks more and more like LLNL.
January 27, 2018 at 4:48 PM
In case you have noticed LLNL just got the highest score possible, maybe just maybe if LANL became more like LLNL it would also get a good score. Just something to think about.
Everyone seems to have forgotten that under the old "Complex 2020" plan pit production at LANL was only suppose to be temporary until a permanent facility was built, which NNSA was leaning towards Idaho as the site.
So moving pit production to a NNSA Production site has always been in the cards - keeping it at LANL was never the plan.
If the cost to complete the MOX Facility is estimated at $10 to $17 billion dollars, how can the NNSA say with a straight face that pit production at SRS will cost less than $7 billion? Add to that fact the concept of work that the work is something that SRS has never eve4 performed. Finally, who in their right mind thinks the capability can simply be picked up and moved 2000 years and be ready and available to build 80 pits per year when the military wants them?
Let’s evaluate this for what it actually is: incompetent NNSA middle managers who have consistently lied to the DoD and have neither the budget, abilities or skills to do their jobs.
January 31, 2018 at 3:33 AM: "SRS will cost less than $7 billion"
I agree. The simple rule of thumb is take the NNSA number and multiply by PI (3.14159...) to get the actual cost. I have found this to be correct in many cases over the years. The simple reason why is that the NNSA forgets to add a factor for putting up with the oppressive oversight and ridiculous requirements it imposes just for reporting work (not actually doing work).
7 comments:
The report does say one thing that is right in that NNSA does not leak something unless they have opinion on what they want and what they want is to not have pits being made at LANL. The money savings may be one part but the bigger issue is that LANL has shown that it has serious issues in terms of safety, work efficiency, and declining quality of the workforce. This is on top of issues that Santa Fe will fight tooth and nail against pit production at LANL. Things have been falling apart at LANL and everyone knows it, do you really think it is good idea to have them now run a large risky facility that can only function well if it has top people working in at it? This is a serious question can we trust the modern LANL to do this? The sad thing is that NNSA no longer trusts LANL but the NNSA is partially to blame for making LANL what it is today.
LANL will shrink to a quarter of its current size if the weapons operations is moved. The first step is pits. The second step is accelerators (already happening so maybe this is the first step). The next step is explosives ( that will go to NTS).
Welcome to the future of LANL where it looks more and more like LLNL.
Welcome to the future of LANL where it looks more and more like LLNL.
January 27, 2018 at 4:48 PM
In case you have noticed LLNL just got the highest score possible, maybe just maybe if LANL became more like LLNL it would also get a good score. Just something to think about.
LLNL has the multi-billion dollar, exotic, one-of-a-kind NIF and LANL will have, uh, uh, uh... MaRIE !!!!
Everyone seems to have forgotten that under the old "Complex 2020" plan pit production at LANL was only suppose to be temporary until a permanent facility was built, which NNSA was leaning towards Idaho as the site.
So moving pit production to a NNSA Production site has always been in the cards - keeping it at LANL was never the plan.
If the cost to complete the MOX Facility is estimated at $10 to $17 billion dollars, how can the NNSA say with a straight face that pit production at SRS will cost less than $7 billion? Add to that fact the concept of work that the work is something that SRS has never eve4 performed. Finally, who in their right mind thinks the capability can simply be picked up and moved 2000 years and be ready and available to build 80 pits per year when the military wants them?
Let’s evaluate this for what it actually is: incompetent NNSA middle managers who have consistently lied to the DoD and have neither the budget, abilities or skills to do their jobs.
January 31, 2018 at 3:33 AM: "SRS will cost less than $7 billion"
I agree. The simple rule of thumb is take the NNSA number and multiply by PI (3.14159...) to get the actual cost. I have found this to be correct in many cases over the years. The simple reason why is that the NNSA forgets to add a factor for putting up with the oppressive oversight and ridiculous requirements it imposes just for reporting work (not actually doing work).
Post a Comment