Hi Frank,Big news. I am attaching a preliminary report on what will bring back some memories for you. It came from a colleague who was told by management to stay quiet.
Anyhow, remember how the lab officials all said the water was good to drink? Trust us! Well, CMR's water is really crapped up and people have been forced to drink it for months now. All this to save money so that Mikey and friends could get bigger bonuses. Was it worth it in the end? How many people are pregnant and drinking this water, could get cancer, etc. Are they going to provide full disclosure testing for all the inhabitants and visitors of the CMR? In how many other buildings is this going to find duplication? Anyhow, shit is going to hit the fan.
-Anonymous
Anonymous,
Yes, it does bring back some memories. Extrapolating from my experience, people who drank the water will not be told for years, if ever, what contaminants were in it. If, as it appears, someone made the decision to pull bottled water from CMR without checking first if the building water was safe, that person will never be held accountable. And finally FOIA requests or complaints to the Ombuds office or DOE IG will be a waste of time. LANS will never pay more than lip service to safety because nobody who could make them will. I'd love to be proven wrong someday. LANS could start by answering my question.
Frank
[View the preliminary report here.]
Update, 8-7-2009: Somebody in the Senate
has taken an interest in You-Know-Who this morning.
Click to enlarge.
wanna bet there will be a senior management meeting tomorrow with Lab Legal to figure out a way to manage damage control on this secret getting leaked? FYI - Mary Neu is the RAD in charge of this facility.
ReplyDeleteJust remember, LANS may not care about human life if they can profit from it ... just wear shoes that grip to get them a bigger bonus.
Hello. Direct Line to Washington? This is the LANL blog calling...
ReplyDeleteOne Ringie Dingie...
Two Ringie Dignies...
From first hand experience I had an inexplicable complication from my pregnancy 4 years ago at age 32. My specialist (had to travel to Boston) confirmed that I had a gestational cancerous pregnancy. My physicians tried to obtain what I was exposed to while working at the laboratory and were shut off. In the end I was diagnosed with gestational trophoblastic disease with twins, both died, I ended up with Stage 3cancer and I continue to have treatment although at this point it hurts to make keystrokes and I have a few months to live, BUT I WILL FIGHT TO SURVIVE. The lab denied all responsibility. If any of the females at the lab have had this diagnosis HYDATIDIFORM MOLE please write here. Blessings and forever, continue the fight and even if I am not of this world, please continue to obtain justice.
ReplyDelete9:54,
ReplyDeleteIf you'd like I can ask around for the information you sought. Do you recall a specific incident where you were exposed to possible contaminants? Which building was it in? Just email me if you are interested.
I'd also suggest you have a friend with a video camera or tape recorder spend a few sessions recording your oral history.
Sorry but I had to laugh when I read that the lab denied all responsibility. Imagining how that denial was worded I came up with these two possibilities:
"We deny any and all responsibility to inform this employee what contaminants she was exposed to at work."
or perhaps
"We deny all responsibility for this employee's illness. We don't need to disclose what she was exposed to. You can trust us."
Thanks for your comment and I wish you luck in the months ahead. Please check back in with us!
Oh, remember the radioactive germanium release from the TA-48 Hot Cells? Well, Neu is the RAD in charge of TA-48 and now we here she is the RAD in charge of the CMR facility. Nice. I can't wait until the management horns come-a-hollering "lies, all lies, there was never any contamination in the water!" She is going to brutalize people who work at CMR for letting this get out - gird your groins.
ReplyDeletethere is a reason why bottled water was distributed in the first place. does anyone know that reason?
ReplyDeleteNeu should be sent packing for this one.
ReplyDeleteThe EPA action levels were exceeded, but for what? I'm betting lead.
ReplyDeleteAs I recall, some writers to this blog predicted this.
Neu should be sent packing for this one.
ReplyDeleteTo 4:45 AM: They won't do that, she just bought a beautiful McMansion on Yucca AND Mikey really, really likes Neu.
And might I add, got it for a steal after what LANS has helped to do to the housing market up here. can't blame her, but it is rather icky.
Anyone who has ever tasted the water in LANL's older facilities could have predicted this outcome. Fortunately, we have FODs that are more concerned with making new policy, dotting i's, and pretending to be responsible instead of actually taking responsibility. It will happen again...and again...and again. I've seen it a dozen or more times myself for uranium, beryllium, fluorine gas, lead, triclor, asbestos, and others. I'm sure some punishment will be meted out to those who actually dared to drink water without an IWD. I'm also sure rewards will be assured for those who do nothing but have executive meetings and CYA paperwork without doing ANYTHING.
ReplyDelete"8/6/09 9:54 PM"
ReplyDeleteThat it so sad.
God bless you.
Someone in CMR should sue Neu and other relevant managers personally. Some personal liability would get some action.
ReplyDeleteIf DOE truly says that bottled water is not an allowable expense, then why does Sandia still provide bottled water?
ReplyDelete"If DOE truly says that bottled water is not an allowable expense, then why does Sandia still provide bottled water?"
ReplyDeleteBottled water is a reward for labs that do not have major security incidences. :)
It's good to know that the U.S. Senate has to get information about what is going-on at the LANS just like the rest of us.....from the Blog. I have no idea what we would do without this source of information. Good job to all of you guys who help maintain this critical communication resource. All my co-workers at LANL really appreciate it!!!
ReplyDelete"Bottled water is a reward for labs that do not have major security incidences. :)"
ReplyDeleteSandia has had plenty they just do not make the news.
If the water is so unsafe, then somebody should issue a "stop work" order. Not that anyone would notice a difference.
ReplyDeleteI think a quick clarification is needed here. ""Bottled water" is a terrible misuse of the English language in this case. What we are talking here are not plastic bottles. We are talking 5 gallon water cooler jugs. These were returned to Water Man when empty and reused (DOE: that's even better than recycled). Some manager decided to call it "bottled water", so that it would look better on paper and he'd get his bonus.
ReplyDeleteHow about getting our terminology straight: "the clean water removal edict", or "the drinkable water ban"?
Why not have the CMR water bottled and used for drinking water for Neu and all of the 7th Floor managers? After all according to all the above it is safe to drink!!!
ReplyDelete"We are talking 5 gallon water cooler jugs. These were returned to Water Man when empty and reused (DOE: that's even better than recycled)."
ReplyDeleteThis is a good point. We're not complaining about 20 oz bottles of water. After the initial set-up cost, water refills/gallon cost between $0.25-0.41, depending on where you go. Since the lab was one of the water man's biggest contract, the price was probably pretty good. It's all a bunch of bullshit to me. And yes, some of us DO go out to Smiths and fill up our 1 gallon containers because we KNOW the water isn't safe to drink. We just shouldn't be told that it's safe when there was no testing done beforehand.
The drinkable water ban is a classic example of a manager knowingly risking workers' health in order to earn a bigger bonus. Really, this case should be in textbooks when all is said and done.
ReplyDeleteCan we find out the name of the manager personally responsible for this? Please post it here.
if i remember correctly, it came from the laso. i believe this was in one of the "morale boosting emails" from sue seestrom that was posted here. was it "shocking news"?
ReplyDelete8/7/09 12:28 PM ...."
ReplyDeleteCan we find out the name of the manager personally responsible for this? Please post it here."
For the CMR, the responsible AD is Mary Neu. The buck stops with her but she will abuse her position and cover that up just like she has with all the security infractions and contamination incidents that involved either herself, her team, or her husband (W. Runde).
yep, perhaps this will help.
ReplyDelete"Safe Drinking Water
AD Bob McQuinn presented information on drinking water at our LANL team meeting on May 29. In April, LASO directed that bottled water is an unallowable expense if safe drinking water is available. LANL and LA County both comply with the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1994. In 1993 LANL extensively evaluated drinking water and found trace levels of lead due to soldered joints in some water fountains. All of these have been removed from service. Since the LASO direction, safe drinking water access has been defined as a drinking fountain or kitchen sink. Access to only restroom supply is not considered acceptable. Bottled water can only be supplied if access to safe water is not available, and the FODs will work these issues. The Lab is analyzing water in buildings where there is some suspicion there might be a problem; none have been found. Although the origin of this issue was in the LASO determination on unallowable cost, this is a reasonable decision. for many other reasons. At a time of budget pressure there is no reason to spend money buying water when safe drinking water is available to us. Using the public water supply is more environmentally conscious than buying water and transporting it from other locations."
At TA-51, yes downhill from the source, the water test said our water was just fine and dandy, but you can smell it from across the room.
ReplyDelete"All my co-workers at LANL really appreciate it!!!"
ReplyDeleteSpeak for yourself. This blog does nothing to enhance communication. This post is just another in an endless series of breathless announcements which are hyped as the latest in a never-ending parade of sky-is-falling diatribes.
You want to test water for contiminants? Head up to the hot springs at Ojo. There, you'll conveniently find them labeled (try the Arsenic pool if you will) and a never ending stream of Santa Feans ready to pay $25 day to jump in.
As usual, the lemmings here jump on the bandwagon without the first clue as to critical thought or analysis. You can't begin to talk about the harmful effects of anything without also talking about the dose and concentration. Some very-nasty sounding metals are actually essential trace chemicals in the body, while you can poison yourself with water if you drink enough.
9:54 PM, it´s called water intoxication, water poisoning, or hyper-hydration.
ReplyDeleteLANS solution for this water contamination problem? That easy to predict, just shut down all the water fountains.
ReplyDeleteIn many areas of the lab, you'll find water fountains that have been shut down for well over a year. No one ever bothers to come in and fix them.
LANL is beginning to fall apart in terms of basic necessities and services within many of the older lab buildings. LANS doesn't give a shit about it.
Some very-nasty sounding metals are actually essential trace chemicals in the body, while you can poison yourself with water if you drink enough.
ReplyDelete8/7/09 9:54 PM
You're smoking your own farts fumes, 9:54 pm. Better go outside and get some fresh air!
9:54 PM sounds like a manager, or our friend Kevin trying to do damage control.
ReplyDeleteThis is one building at LANL. Several have been tested over the past few months. What do those reports reveal? What else could management be hiding?
Another example of inept LANS management. It's sometimes embarassing, but the staff have to point out the most obvious things to these Bechtel morons - Step 1. Test the tap water. Step 2 - if the tap water is safe, THEN remove the bottled water.
ReplyDeleteI had a meeting last week in a building where the bottled water had been removed. No drinking fountain, but there was a kitchenette with a sink. But no cups. NO CUPS. So now we have to remember to bring our own cup from building to building.
Congress, please fire LANS.
"You can't begin to talk about the harmful effects of anything without also talking about the dose and concentration."
ReplyDeleteRight, so why isn't CMR facility management giving residents this information?
And why did LANS declare all of the Lab's water supply fit to drink, before actually testing it?
8/7/09 9:54 PM - of course, and the TA-48 HotCells never had a radioactive germanium release, labs in RC-1 were never shut down, and access to parts of the building was never denied. Shut your lying ADCLES management hole.
ReplyDeleteI'm currently buying about two cases of water and Gatorade per day for the people building my house. At Lowes the Gatorade is $9.97/case and each case comes with a Lowes $10 discount card. The water is cheap. The extra productivity is priceless.
ReplyDeleteYou're smoking your own farts fumes, 9:54 pm. Better go outside and get some fresh air!
ReplyDelete8/8/09 12:25 AM
How literate. I don't suppose you're interested in facts, either. The claim "nasty metals" as "essential trace chemicals" is actually quite accurate. To cite one example, selenium. An essential brain chemical.
http://www.goatbiology.com/selenium.html
"Selenium and the brain
Selenoproteins play an essential role in the normal development and protection of brain cells. The brain is resistant to deficiencies in dietary selenium and levels of selenium in the brain are independent of serum selenium levels. This may be explained by recent studies which suggest that the brain synthesizes its own unique selenoproteins which may serve as a storage for selenium for use by brain cells."
I can't wait to hear about the plutonium proteins.
ReplyDeleteThis thread speaks to a larger and misunderstood topic at the core of public life: the perception of risk. Whether something is dangerous and should be controlled or limited is just a small subset of this problem. And often, the counter-arguments to regulation and oversight are missing or ignored.
ReplyDeleteIf your goal is improving human health and increasing the quality of life, then there's a few important macroeconomic impacts to consider. A useful, integrating metric for any risk is the impact on human life span. And the single most-influential predictor for a drop in lifespan for a US citizen is simply being poor. Living below the poverty line shortens your life by about 8 years on average. Another important risk is stress. How does this apply to this discussion? Well-meaning but short-sighted advocates are constantly lobbying for limits and regulations. Pesticides. Preservatives. Genetically-engineering crops. It all sounds horrible. Really? These methods can increase productivity and lower food costs, allowing poor families access to nutrition at lower costs. Not to mention the anxiety and stress you engender in championing your pet cause. Some posters on this blog sound pretty stressed, do you think this can impact your health? You simply have to look at the whole picture. Many, many studies show that the benefits of things like pesticides far outweigh the risks in terms of impact on human lifespans.
Same with control of contaminants in the environment. A common arsenic-containing lumber preservative was banned about 20 years ago. This increased the price of processed lumber on the order of 10%. This made it more expensive to build homes, of course. How many poor families didn't get adequate housing because of this ban? How much life was shortened because of this? Is anyone marginally homeless because of this action? And the estimate of the risk eliminated by this ban was that the cost to save one human life (via an avoided cancer death) was over $13 TRILLION dollars. To avoid one cancer death. Is this sound public policy? No, but the risk was easy to describe (arsenic!), while the benefit hidden and diffuse (higher-priced construction materials).
To cite another example mentioned on this blog a few years ago, the reduction in arsenic in drinking water in New Mexico. In Albuquerque alone, it will cost well over a $1B to build the treatment facility, and a UNM study showed you'd kill more people in traffic accidents hauling chemicals to the treatment plant than you'd save by removing the arsenic.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
8/7/09 9:54 PM
ReplyDeleteWhat does safe drinking water in the workplace have to do with a spa in Ojo Caliente? No one has to drink spa water.
Who's the lemming without any critical thought or analysis here? Read the preliminary report, the water exceeded EPA Action Levels for contamination - Action Levels are concentration and injestion hazard based.
Do us all a favor, read more and write less, preferably a whole lot less.
It was LASO that ordered the bottled water be immediately removed.
ReplyDeleteHowever, it was LANS upper management that probably replied:
"Yes sir. Right a way, sir! Anything you say, sir.
Are there any other basic services we can remove for you at the lab? Toilet paper? Soap? Trash bags?
Just let us know and we'll get right on it!"
LASO managers are a bunch of D-grade idiots and LANS upper management are boot licking lackies.
Together, they make quite a team.
I was a staffer in John Browne's office around 2000-2003. Someone wrote a letter to the readers' forum suggesting that cutting out bottled water would save money. John wrote back saying that this is a morale issue - people enjoy it, and therefore he was going to continue its supply.
ReplyDelete10:42 PM, the days of a Director (or a PAD or even an AD) actually giving two shits about how people feel are gone. This is why Mike limits any contact with the regular worker and only wants to hear good things blown up his about the morale at LANL. He knows he has to watch his back. You don't see him in public alone, he always has a posse of protections. Mike must really love that paycheck and those bonuses. In contrast, both Browne and Hecker could be seen running alone during the day.
ReplyDeleteThe report that the water exceeded action levels was issued by John Auxier. Unless there is another person by the same name, he is a renowned health physicist. What does that suggest about the nature of the action levels exceeded.
ReplyDelete2:59 PM, I just hope they take it out of Neu's hide. You would not believe the carnage she is leaving at the CMR and the things she is making people do for her under the radar. People are terrified of her.
ReplyDeleteFuck-wad yourself. A manager that bad deserves to be sued, not run away from. I still say you are all a bunch of cowards. The only LANL staff that I know who have had to guts to publically stand up to any of the bad managers at LANL are John Horne, Todd Kauppila, Brad Holian, Doug Roberts, and Tom Meyer. There might be others, but if so they had their fights in private, and I never heard about it.
ReplyDeleteThe rest of you are just a bunch of anonymous cowards. You deserve to live in your little cesspool. Go ahead and continue to bitch and whine anonymously, for all the good that will do.
4:19 PM, There might be others, but if so they had their fights in private, and I never heard about it.
ReplyDeleteYes, there are, and they have had their fights publicly. Just ask the blog masters. So why don't you tone down your widespread, shot-gun vitriol a bit. Thank you.
Hey Mr. 4:19, you forgot to add the mustang lady and Mary Hockaday to your list.
ReplyDeletewhat about Martha Zumbro? that poor lady went through professional and public hell at the hands of Nanos and Seestrom because she dared to stand up for the people in her group.
ReplyDeleteI concede Mary Hockaday, 5:00, but that whole business with the "accidentally purchased" Mustang was just too unbelievable. Even though the Mustang Lady was eventually vindicated, I suspect it was because of the same reasons that Wen Ho Lee was vindicated: incompetence on the part of the investigators. Nobody, not even a LANL purchasing agent can "accidentally" purchase a Ford Mustang. Besides, the mustang thing happened on John Brown's watch, and John was a decent person.
ReplyDelete-4:19
"The only LANL staff that I know who have had to guts to publically stand up to any of the bad managers at LANL are John Horne, Todd Kauppila, Brad Holian, Doug Roberts, and Tom Meyer." (4:19 PM)
ReplyDelete...and none of the people you just listed still work at LANL today. One of them is dead. Lesson learned.
Point taken, 6:00. Anybody with any sense at all has left.
ReplyDeleteSo, please: everybody fee free to resume your whining about that "terrifying" Mary Neu.
You've got to be kidding about Martha Zumbro. While Martha is a well-meaning soul, her backbone is essentially gone. I've worked with her at least a dozen years and have NEVER seen her stand up to a single one of her superiors. Never. I'll add that she has quietly advanced right along with the rest, just without as much fanfare.
ReplyDelete"THat is why she replaced the C, EES, and B division leaders with "yes men"...she essentially fired Kevin John...and Carol Burns"
ReplyDeleteHuh? I don't follow you. Kevin is the yesiest of yes men I have ever seen. Carol is a don't rock the boat person as well.
8/9/09 6:41 PM ... Kevin is the yesiest of yes men I have ever seen. Carol is a don't rock the boat person as well.
ReplyDeleteSuffice it to say, even with their combined spineless tendencies, neither could stay in the boat with Neu at the risk of being "rocked out".
Tom Meyer did not stand up to anyone -he wrote his letter to spite the management who actually dared to fire him. It was perfect timing- he could say anything and the majority of people would believe him over anything management (Nanos) said. Nanos was bad news but that fact does not negate the fact that Meyer was not a good manager. Meyer was mean spirited; thought he was better and brighter than anyone else; and therefore, the rules did not apply to him. He yelled, cursed, and generally treated his staff like they were nothing and only there to serve him. Meyer looked down on most of the scientists at the Lab because they did not have the number of publications he claimed. Please do not put Meyer in the same category as John Horne, Todd Kauppila, Brad Holian, and Doug Roberts- he does not deserve to be ranked with these individuals!
ReplyDelete8/9/09 7:15 PM ... "Suffice it to say, even with their combined spineless tendencies, neither could stay in the boat with Neu at the risk of being "rocked out"."
ReplyDeletePlease, Neu would not "rock" them out, she would put an anchor around their necks and push them out of the boat. Let's keep our facts straight on who we are dealing with here folks.
If the astronauts can drink their own recycled urine, we should be able to do as much at Los Alamos. Ok you best and brightest out there, go to it! Design us a pee recycling facility that will be the envy of the DOE complex. Think of it as a national security imperative.
ReplyDelete8:48,
ReplyDeleteYour suggestion for a new "national security imperative" sounds like it might be prone to leaks...
How bright can these folks be anyway if they're the ones that contaminated their own drinking water to begin with? Not sure they're the solution.
ReplyDeleteI was curious what the term "action level" meant. A bit of searching the EPA website returns the following:
ReplyDelete"Action Level: The level of lead or copper which, if exceeded, triggers treatment or other requirements that a water system must follow."
Elsewhere, you see reference to action level regarding the need to conduct further tests and potentially implement further controls. Apparently, it's specific to lead and copper.
Another definition of action level was "level of exposure to a harmful substance or other hazard (present in a work environment or situation) at which an employer must take the required precautions to protect the workers. It is normally one half of the permissible exposure limit."
FYI.
There are action levels for other things besides lead and copper. And here is another definition from the EPA web site.
ReplyDeleteaction level - chemical concentration in food above which consumption of that food would pose a health risk
With respect to drinking water, the EPA definition was specific. It's found here:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.epa.gov/safewater/contaminants/index.html
I don't see a definition on that page.
ReplyDeleteFrank - I would guess 11:03 AM refers to Footnote 8 of said document.
ReplyDeleteMaybe. Maybe I misread 10:05 and 11:03. I thought they meant nothing besides copper or lead had action levels, therefore the unnamed contaminants must be copper and lead.
ReplyDeleteThe term "action level" as applied to drinking water standards is only applicable to copper and lead.
ReplyDeleteYou can deduce this from the tables in the link that was posted. It lists "MCLG" and "MCL or TT". The first is maximum contaminant level goal. These are not legally binding. The "MCL" indicates the maximum contaminant level and is legally binding. For certain contaminants, the "TT" applies, meaning "treatment technique".
For lead and copper alone, an "action level" also applies. The widespread use of copper pipes and in older applications, lead solders, makes control of this contaminant a cost/benefit type decision. An action level measurement determines when further treatment must be investigated and possible remediation applied.
The direct definition of "action level" is given at the link below. It does apply exclusively to copper and lead.
http://www.epa.gov/ogwdw000/glossary.htm
The LANL water quality report with the measurement of several sources above "action levels" is most-certainly a problem with lead in these 60-year-old buildings, most probably due to leaded solders, but also having some contribution from possible lead piping.
And note that the EPA has a legal terms and definitions page, which gives the following definition for "action level" as applied to drinking water.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.epa.gov/ogwdw000/pubs/gloss2.html
"action level. The concentration of lead or copper in water specified at Code of Federal Regulations 141.80(c) which determines, in some cases, the treatment requirements contained in subpart I of this part that a water system is required to complete."
8:28,
ReplyDeleteThis is a little confusing. What am I to deduce from the action level for PFOA in drinking water?
"The widespread use of copper pipes and in older applications, lead solders, makes control of this contaminant a cost/benefit type decision."
ReplyDeleteWell, now we know our answer. LANS has tagged out the contaminated water fountains in CMR, along with all the fountains that have not been tested. And it will stay that way. It's a cost/benefit type decision after all.
So why is our esteemed management keeping so mum about what is in the water? Why the silence? Chris Chandler why don't you come over to the CMR and have sip you spineless, back-stabbing, manipulative cow? Lab-legal and the senior executive team should come on over to the CMR and have some water? What the fuck is going on? Why the drop-dead silence? I have been forced to drink that shit for months since Neu took away our bottled water. I wnat some fucking answers. John Fleck, where are you??
ReplyDelete8:53 wails, "John Fleck, where are you??"
ReplyDeleteJohn Fleck is probably wondering about Chu's upcoming experiment regarding centers of excellence: "The key would be the management team and whether they are willing to take on this task," he said. "There are a couple of experiments I want to do in this regard."
Are you still worried about the water? Oh, the water's fine! Come on in!
What more is there to say? LANS tagged out the suspect water sources. A job well done by our fine construction company M&O. Bonuses all around!
Umm, bonuses to top management, not the rest of you.
Look upon this embarrassing "bad water" episode as just another means for LANS upper management to reach NNSA goal of a 5% attrition rate for this next year. Drink up!
ReplyDeleteSM-40 just turned up with high coliform bacteria in their drinking water. Coliform comes from human feces.
ReplyDeleteAs usual, LANS hasn't been open and honest.
Honestly, folks, if you care about your health then please DON'T DRINK THE WATER AT LANL!!!!
ReplyDeleteThis is particularly true if you are working in one of the many decrepit 1950's style buildings that litter the lab.
You can't trust the water any longer or, more precisely... you can't trust LANS.
CMR has bottled water again!
ReplyDeleteHow about day care?
ReplyDeleteyep, 6:16 PM, right from the ADCLES check book. Neu is making sure people don't look to her when the lawsuits start.
ReplyDeleteSay, why hasn't Neu announced what the contaminants are in her CMR's water?
Must be a "radical" announcement coming....
CMR has bottled water again!
ReplyDelete8/12/09 6:16 PM
Hmmmmm, I wonder why?
8/9/09 2:59 PM, CMR facility management has a John Auxier who would have written the PADOPS notification. His title is Shift Operations Manager or some such. I really doubt he's the "renowned health physicist" you are thinking of.
ReplyDelete8/12/09 6:17 AM ... SM-40 just turned up with high coliform bacteria in their drinking water. Coliform comes from human feces.
ReplyDeleteOK, this is simply disgusting. No pun intended, but why is all this water shit being kept so quiet.
It is like the LANS version of Love Canal ... Rad and lead in the CMR water, poop in the SM-40 water ... what is next? Seriously, why aren't even the local newspapers picking up these stories?
"8/12/09 6:17 AM ... SM-40 just turned up with high coliform bacteria in their drinking water. Coliform comes from human feces."
ReplyDeleteWe needed to save some money for our executive bonuses, so I had the fresh water lines connected directly to the sewer lines.
If you don't like the water, then please leave. I need to achieve a 5% attrition goal at LANL for this next year to please NNSA.
Oh, and you can pretty much ignore all the recent PR crap that NNSA is putting out about how they "value our lab scientists". It's being done for the consumption of the media and Congress. If you work at LANL, you know the real story by now.
- MIKEY
Regarding the SM-40 water, I heard in a recent all-hands Q&A that the old water fountains are being replaced (some in the building were nonfunctioning, some had been removed years ago) and some fancy filters will be added to all. The work's underway or soon to be. Seems pretty reasonable to me.
ReplyDeleteActually - FECAL coliform comes specifically from feces. TOTAL coliform is a rough measure of whether your water treatement is working, but doesn't necessarily mean you have fecal matter contamination.
ReplyDelete4:00PM - What seems reasonable about LANS taking the clean drinking water away first, testing the tap water second, and then fixing the contaminated tap water third after the staff has been forced to drink it?
ReplyDeleteWill these new filters a) remove the fecal coliform bacteria and b) get replaced regularly when they're plugged with feces?
No problem. If the filter gets dirty simply swish it around in the toilet a bit. We'll institute a new mandatory training program to show you how (for only a slight increase in overhead rates).
ReplyDeleteHow about we get NMED to test the water?
ReplyDeleteI read that the DOE/NNSA bottled water policy restricts the use of the small individual sized bottles that come in a case and NOT the big water cooler type. Think that LANS will reverse the decision? Probably not because then they will look stupid. Oh wait - LANS already has the stupid part down.
ReplyDelete"So, please: everybody fee free to resume your whining about that "terrifying" Mary Neu."
ReplyDeleteAhhh! "We've traced the Neu, it's coming from inside the lab!"
(With apologies to "When a Stranger Calls")
No soap in the rest rooms today. Paper towels also running out. This place is rapidly falling apart.
ReplyDeleteNo towels in the Bathroom, No soap, and a dumb Science / engineer taking a dump and then not washing his hands. Out the door he went. You wonder about the water? think again?
ReplyDeleteIf you work in Bldg 200 wear gloves!!!!