DOE report on LANL conduct of engineering Appendix C has the summary of the 11 Deficiencies found in May 2018 report by the Office of Nuclear Safety and Environmental Assessments Office of Environment, Safety and Health Assessments Office of Enterprise Assessments U.S. Department of Energy
https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2018/05/f51/Conduct%20of%20Engineering%20at%20LANL.pdf
8 comments:
No surprises here. LANL has a crappy QA Program and the culture makes change impossible. Some programs have it, some groups have, many view it as not necessary. After all, it is a component of ESH&Q and LANL sucks equally in all. It’s a continuing management problem that one hopes will be corrected under the new contract. Let’s hope they start cleaning house with the management at TA55. Many believe that Yarbrough and his division management team (although Mack hasn’t been there long enough to cause significant damage) are shown the exit.
What is more troubling are rumors of poor implementation of MC&A requirement causing problems and a recent assessment by DOE suggesting sloppy efforts in recent readiness efforts and a return of poor ConOps issues on the floor.
No "Findings" in the assessment. The ES-DO (and Lab) considers any assessment that does not have Findings as an absolute and resounding success. I expect big raises for the ES-DO this year (again) for this "glowing" report. The current ES-DO division leader has been in place for about 6 years, don't expect any changes here in view of this. Business as usual.
Yarbrough is BWXT. Of course he won't be continuing. Based on the fact that this is a conduct of engineering report, not QA per se or ESH&Q, and your half-truths with MC&A, it tells me you are really not in the know of what goes on at TA-55.
The fact that DOE/NNSA could not identify one Finding in this assessment is a appalling. They didn't look hard, had pressure from "above" to go easy on LANS, or caved-in to LANS managers to remove Findings or convert Findings to deficiencies or opportunities for improvement (OFIs). Another weak and perfunctory DOE/NNSA assessment.
Yarbrough is BWXT. Of course he won't be continuing. Based on the fact that this is a conduct of engineering report, not QA per se or ESH&Q, and your half-truths with MC&A, it tells me you are really not in the know of what goes on at TA-55.
June 28, 2018 at 8:34 AM
Speaking of "not being in the know," Yarbrough was a LANL/UC employee way before LANS (and BWXT), back in the early 2000's when I met him. If he changed to join BWXT as an employee, I'm not aware of it. Prove your statement.
I think you have your Yarbrough's confused. Prior to coming to LANL in 2012, Jeff Yarbrough spent 29 years at Pantex. There was a Steve Yarbrough at LANL back in the early 2000's...
Looks like 29 years with BWXT. That seems like reasonable proof.
https://www.linkedin.com/in/jeffrey-c-yarbrough-0268357a/
I know for a fact that the ES-DO Division Leader received praise and a bonus from the ADNHHO for this assessment which had no Findings. I love the smell of victory! ES-DO Division Leader.
Post a Comment