Apr 24, 2007

GAO Audit

We've had several requests to post Congressman John D. Dingell's statement from Friday's hearings. Here is one, with apologies for minor editing.

After last weeks House subcommittee meeting, Dingell called for an audit of LANL by GAO.

In the end, Mr. Secretary, I think we may have to look beyond fines and penalties to fix the problems at Los Alamos. For that reason, I, along with the Chairman and my colleagues in the Minority, requested that the Government Accountability Office (GAO) conduct a comprehensive audit of Los Alamos to determine what functions are essential at that Lab. Their report will inform the options available to us.

A full statement can be found here: http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_110/110st37.shtml.

Furthermore, anyone who is still unsure about the future of LANL should check for example LANL job-ad #214164 with 51 openings for stockpile manager 3 positions.

Can you spell P-I-T?

Cheers (one of the arrogant and spineless Butthead Cowbowy Scientists)

We believe the audit Dingell referred to is the same one Pat the Dog mentions in one of his last posts.

LANL Security Probe Will Not Be Delayed

-John Arnold (Staff Writer, ABQ Journal, Santa Fe Edition, Saturday, March 31, 2007)

A powerful congressional committee has rejected a request from New Mexico lawmakers to delay a government inquiry into Los Alamos National Laboratory security problems. House Energy and Commerce Committee chairman Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., last month asked the Government Accountability Office to evaluate the feasibility of moving classified activities to other national laboratories "where there is a better track record with respect to security."

Earlier this month, Sens. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., and Pete Domenici, R-N.M., and Rep. Tom Udall, D-N.M., wrote to committee leaders, asking that the GAO hold off on the investigation for six months to allow lab managers time to implement new operating and security procedures. Dingell and ranking member Joe Barton, R-Texas, rejected the request this week, saying that the GAO study "will not interfere with any steps (LANL managers) may be taking to improve security."

"The national security failures at Los Alamos are a matter of the utmost urgency," Dingell and Barton wrote in a letter dated March 27. Dingell has asked GAO to evaluate how LANL can reduce and consolidate the volume of classified material and the "security footprint" of the lab. His request followed January's congressional hearing in which lawmakers grilled LANL and Department of Energy officials over the lab's most recent security breach— the discovery of hundreds of classified documents in the home of a former lab contractor.

Domenici said in a news release issued Friday that he is disappointed with Dingell's decision to move forward with the investigation. "However, if this GAO investigation goes forward, I believe it should focus on evaluating cost-effective security solutions at the lab, as opposed to solely focusing on punitive and unproductive assessments that would only lend themselves to breaking up the lab," Domenici said.
[The letter to GAO from Dingell can be viewed here.]


Anonymous said...

Cheers (one of the arrogant and spineless Butthead Cowbowy Scientists)

Hey now. You are supposed to be one of the best and the brightest in the country. Why not propose a solution. Stop focusing on science and develop a competent model to manage the laboratory.

Is that too much to ask?

Anonymous said...

The 56 openings for first line manager positions are not solely related to pit production.