Skip to main content

Sandia lawsuit update

Image
By

 Sandia lawsuit claiming research misconduct proceeds to federal court:

https://nationworldnews.com/sandia-national-labs-nuclear-scientist-sued-after-being-fired/

Comments

Anonymous said…
4 Investigates: Scientist fired after raising questions about safety at nuclear waste plant

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=z8LAg3q3OqE
7/07/2022 1:43 PM
Anonymous said…

Hard to say whatis what, Sandia claims he had inappropriate interactions with other workers. He claims he was fried for raising concerns about WIPP. Maybe he is just after a payday, maybe he is legit. From the youtube you cannot really be ceratin.
7/07/2022 3:11 PM
Anonymous said…
your assessment is reasonable and fair, but of course we don’t know what editing occurred or what info was not available for the video.
7/07/2022 9:25 PM
Anonymous said…
If Sandia fired everybody who had "inappropriate interactions with other workers", they would have to fire almost everybody at the lab. I think their excuse right there tells you his claims are legit.
7/08/2022 6:19 PM
Anonymous said…
“If Sandia fired everybody who had "inappropriate interactions with other workers", they would have to fire almost everybody at the lab. I think their excuse right there tells you his claims are legit.”

Probably correct, but one must take into account NNSA lab contracts don’t have language to define or score contractor management to employee abuse, bullying, harassment, or working in good faith. So, when you stir up that alphabet soup, the only words that form are “employee insubordination” in one form or another. This would appear to run counter to a federal agency claiming to be a good steward of the environment and concern for employee treatment and safety.
7/09/2022 4:25 AM
Anonymous said…
WIPP looks obviously safe, as it is almost half a mile underground, and groundwater doesn't really flow through there, as there is a huge salt deposit around it older than the dinosaurs.
7/09/2022 7:24 PM
Anonymous said…
The geologic history of the WIPP salt deposit location being older than the dinosaurs is an interesting factoid, but totally irrelevant to the safety issues at hand. You see, the LANS 90% award fee haircut from the NNSA, did not occur because someone selected the wrong site to deposit radioactive waste. The LANS 90% award fee haircut occurred because the 2014 WIPP accident was preventable with appropriate LANS oversight. According to a 2016 LA Times article, the WIPP ~2 billion dollar accident, "ranks among the costliest in U.S. history". According to the DOE WIPP Release Report, there was a deteriorated safety culture and employees feared reprisals for reporting WIPP issues. Therefore, its a very high stakes situation all around if safety reporting reprisals are reoccurring or STILL occurring at the WIPP.
7/11/2022 7:24 AM
Anonymous said…
video on data integrity problems related to this case. Not the ABQ news video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSmBNDnLt00
4/20/2024 5:04 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Plutonium Shots on NIF.

By scooby
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...
155 comments
Read more

Trump is to gut the labs.

By scooby
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.
124 comments
Read more

tcp1 looking good

By scooby
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...
105 comments
Read more