tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post7479647842945276398..comments2023-08-27T06:53:36.768-06:00Comments on LANL: The Rest of the Story: "pleased with their report card"Frank Younghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02134775226991383924noreply@blogger.comBlogger33125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-88571398061950551852008-12-20T13:30:00.000-07:002008-12-20T13:30:00.000-07:0012/16/08 1:36 PM, you are absolutely correct! Mr. ...12/16/08 1:36 PM, you are absolutely correct! Mr. D'Agostino is in fact grading himself. A good score shows things improved compared to the UC years. A good score it will be. <BR/><BR/>The only things they care about at this point are no scandals in the press and fewer reported safety and security incidents. Both are easily achievable. Impose draconian security measures, which make work impossible (less work, fewer troubles!) and scare people into underreporting incidents, injuries, etc. Voila, a great score!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-15256614599261686532008-12-16T13:36:00.000-07:002008-12-16T13:36:00.000-07:00A low LANS score would reflect poorly on Tom D'Ago...A low LANS score would reflect poorly on Tom D'Agostino's sole decision to choose LANS for the management contract. Therefore, a low score for LANS will never happen. LANS will continue to see improving scores as long as DOE and NNSA manage LANL. <BR/><BR/>Of course, rumors are flying around that the nuclear weapons complex is about to be moved over to DOD control. That would be a game changer to this situation.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-3526039621815084812008-12-16T10:47:00.000-07:002008-12-16T10:47:00.000-07:006:37, there's nothing fishy about the extension, i...6:37, there's nothing fishy about the extension, it's been part of the deal all year. If LANS had failed to "make the grade" this year, NNSA would have automatically been able to exercise the option to rebid the contract. (IIRC, the threshold was 70%). That's why you hear so many sighs of relief from ULM... they were all worried they'd have to go get real jobs.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-33210720689667816992008-12-15T21:51:00.000-07:002008-12-15T21:51:00.000-07:00I'm betting that most Democratic politicans will e...I'm betting that most Democratic politicans will enjoy pocketing Bechtel's lobby money as much as the Bush and Cheney crowd. <BR/><BR/>It's also important to note one very critical fact.. the Democrats don't like nuclear weapons or the nuclear weapon labs!!!<BR/><BR/>If you think it was bad at LANL under Bush, just wait until you see what Obama has planned for LANL. Can you spell R-I-F?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-91747654200878921422008-12-15T18:37:00.000-07:002008-12-15T18:37:00.000-07:00This whole one year extension sounds and smells li...This whole one year extension sounds and smells like Bush/Cheney politics, like federal employees get one extra holiday (day) this year, LANS gets one entire extra holiday (year). Consider this "bonus year" equivalent to a presidential pardon for lack of contract performanceAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-72397869650448031442008-12-15T11:31:00.000-07:002008-12-15T11:31:00.000-07:00At least you can count on one constant: It's only...At least you can count on one constant: <BR/><BR/>It's only going to get worse at LANL with LANS (aka Bechtel) running the lab to pocket an $80 million per year profit fee and make 20% executive bonuses.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-18383096676747051732008-12-15T07:40:00.000-07:002008-12-15T07:40:00.000-07:00Any takers? Just one improvement?After a serious e...Any takers? Just one improvement?<BR/><BR/>After a serious effort trying to identify any improvements I can think of only two. 1) The lab no longer closes the roads down for nuclear material transfers. The road closures were costly, counter-productive, and created security risks. 2) Its easier to find parking at TA-3.<BR/><BR/>On the negative side, I can think of several dozen things that work less well now than before LANS took over. <BR/><BR/>DOE paying LANS an award fee is testimony to DOE's complete and total incompetence.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-50001115413423999482008-12-14T17:46:00.000-07:002008-12-14T17:46:00.000-07:00....an improvement. Well, we no longer have to co.......an improvement. Well, we no longer have to compete with Livermore. The fix is on before we even start. In addition, they no longer need to travel to Washington to cry about how LANL got all the good work. God I miss Agnew with his, "let them eat walnuts" stance.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-32830513770506549602008-12-14T12:28:00.000-07:002008-12-14T12:28:00.000-07:00Anonymous at 12/14/08 12:16 PM asks for "just one ...Anonymous at 12/14/08 12:16 PM asks for "just one improvement"<BR/><BR/>Doesn't my bonus count as an improvement?<BR/><BR/>MikeyAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-44109620445242023522008-12-14T12:16:00.000-07:002008-12-14T12:16:00.000-07:00As emotions aside, the situation at LANL today is ...As emotions aside, the situation at LANL today is really considerably worse than when LANS took over. In fact, the work environment is the worst I've seen in 24 years. And that includes the reign of Vice Admiral Nanos. (<I> BTW, looks like we are getting another one of those "Rear Admirals" to manage us. </I>)<BR/><BR/>Science is objectively dying, the buildings and infrastructure are in a terrible shape, and the business side of things has gotten even more convoluted and confusing. In fact, it's hard to pinpoint a <B>single</B> improvement. (<I>Any takers? Just one improvement?</I>)<BR/><BR/><BR/>I guess what DOE is saying by this reward is that this is exactly what they want to see. LANS is just doing exactly what they are paid to do, no more, no less.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-81766439331789539702008-12-14T11:21:00.000-07:002008-12-14T11:21:00.000-07:00Actually, 6:39 AM, the non-profit UC method only c...Actually, 6:39 AM, the non-profit UC method only cost about 5% of what the new for-profit system of management costs at LANL. NNSA and Congress have managed to increase the costs of running LANL 20 fold!<BR/><BR/>UC handled LANL for $8 million per year while the LLC profit fee is about $80 million. <BR/><BR/>On top of that, you have all the local Northern NM politicos being paid off with the new GRT tax of around $80 million per year. LANS has managed to mitigate the GRT from the original projections of $120 million per year.<BR/><BR/>Finally, you have new taxes added on to pay Bechtel and company for all the WFO work that comes into LANL. That comes out to roughly $8 million per year. <BR/><BR/>Add it all up and the total for-profit costs runs to about $170 million per year verses the $8 million with the old non-profit system. <BR/><BR/>You also need to factor in non-economic issues that the for-profit system has created, such as the steeply declining morale, the bitter "us vs. them" attitude between workers and top management, and the decline of science at this national science lab. <BR/><BR/>All this during a time when the deficit is growing at an enormous rate, our enemies are praying for greater US weakness, and the US government is literally bankrupt! <BR/><BR/>One solution to this financial mess would be to hand LANL back to a suitable non-profit. There are still non-profits running some of the DOE labs (i.e., Battelle Institute at PNNL). Doing so would save the US government a wad of money, make LANL more competitive at bringing in WFO projects, and go a long way towards salvaging the science done at LANL.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-55104525936998833462008-12-14T06:39:00.000-07:002008-12-14T06:39:00.000-07:00So, LANS gets its award fees.Still, UC did all of ...So, LANS gets its award fees.<BR/>Still, UC did all of that for about 10% of what LANS is getting paid.<BR/>The difference went to paying for actual work.<BR/><BR/>Somebody needs to do a comparision of scientific output in 2004 verese 2008. A totaling of publications would be a measure.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-52361307887499844822008-12-13T23:47:00.000-07:002008-12-13T23:47:00.000-07:00Whom would someone try to impress in Los Alamos?Whom would someone try to impress in Los Alamos?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-71416642027144793322008-12-13T23:35:00.000-07:002008-12-13T23:35:00.000-07:00Ohhh, nooooo! Here we go again! blog.wired.com/d...Ohhh, nooooo! Here we go again! <BR/><BR/>blog.wired.com/<BR/>defense/2008/12/<BR/>air-force-flunk.html<BR/><BR/>********<BR/>Air Force Flunks Another Nuke Inspection? <BR/>********<BR/>(Wired, December 13, 2008)<BR/><BR/>This isn't confirmed, yet. So take it with all the usual caveats. But we're hearing that a third Air Force nuclear team has flunked a critical test.<BR/><BR/>The 90th Missile Wing, operating out of F.E. Warren Air Force Base, is still in the midst of its "nuclear surety inspection," or NSI. But already, the wing has failed the test of its readiness to handle atomic arms, a source close to the test tells Danger Room. Problems with the "personal reliability program," which ensures that only the most highly-qualified, highly-trained individuals are working anywhere near a nuclear arsenal, doomed the wing's chances. Representatives from the 90th Missile Wing and from Air Force Space Command were not available for comment.<BR/><BR/>If confirmed, this would be the third Air Force nuclear unit to fail an inspection this year. In May, the 5th Bomb Wing at Minot Air Force Base flunked its test, when security personnel couldn't be bothered to stop playing videogames on their cellphones. Six months later, Malmstrom Air Force Base's the 341st Missile Wing, had problems with its weapons storage area and its personnel reliability program, which prevented the unit from passing its exam. A testing team returns in about two months, to take a fresh look at the missileers.<BR/><BR/>The NSIs have been much harder to pass in recent months, after a series of nuclear-handling screw-ups stung the Air Force. Last fall, the 5th Bomb Wing lost track of six nuclear warheads. Then, in March, the service discovered that it had inadvertently shipped four Minuteman nuclear warhead nosecone fuses to Taiwan, thinking they were helicopter batteries. By June, Defense Secretary Robert Gates had sacked the top civilian and military leaders of the Air Force. A total of 15 officers (including six generals) were disciplined, over the mishaps.<BR/><BR/>********<BR/><BR/>The story has a nice pic of a soldier standing at attention next to a bunch of MIRV war heads.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-91856696492429588102008-12-13T22:34:00.000-07:002008-12-13T22:34:00.000-07:00"1. Old people who worked at the lab for 30 years ..."1. Old people who worked at the lab for 30 years and retired under UC." (4:22 PM)<BR/><BR/>Nah, I doubt it. Old people on retirement have to live off fixed incomes. They don't want to suddenly take on huge debts. Also, most old folks have a hard time keeping up with maintenance and don't want the hassle of running a mega-mansion.<BR/><BR/>My guess is 2 and 3, but mostly 3 (upper level LANS managers). There is a good reason why LANS salaries are now considered proprietary information and held from the public. You can see it in those new mega-mansion out at Quemazon.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-29692204213206905742008-12-13T21:23:00.000-07:002008-12-13T21:23:00.000-07:004:22 pm: ""Some people in town obviously aren't hu...4:22 pm: ""Some people in town obviously aren't hurting a bit for money. I wonder who they are?"<BR/><BR/>1. Old people who worked at the lab for 30 years and retired under UC."<BR/><BR/>59 years old and retired (under UC) happy and well-to-do. Not building in Quemazon, though - too smart for that.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-56148017228424329422008-12-13T16:22:00.000-07:002008-12-13T16:22:00.000-07:00"Some people in town obviously aren't hurting a bi..."Some people in town obviously aren't hurting a bit for money. I wonder who they are?"<BR/><BR/>1. Old people who worked at the lab for 30 years and retired under UC.<BR/><BR/>2. Stupid people who spend all thier income on spectacular houses to impress people.<BR/><BR/>3. Upper-level managers.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-4664616873163102202008-12-13T15:18:00.001-07:002008-12-13T15:18:00.001-07:00There are a bunch of mega-mansions either still go...There are a bunch of mega-mansions either still going up or recently completed in the final section of Quemazon. <BR/><BR/>Some people in town obviously aren't hurting a bit for money. I wonder who they are?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-1437669022833201102008-12-13T10:48:00.000-07:002008-12-13T10:48:00.000-07:00Q: Who owns RE/MAX?A: Each office is independently...<A HREF="http://www.agenthere.com/faq.html#4" REL="nofollow"><B>Q:</B> Who owns RE/MAX?</A><BR/><BR/><B>A:</B> Each office is independently owned and operated. RE/MAX is a franchise. It is the world's largest real estate network. The RE/MAX system has International, Regional and local offices worldwide.<BR/><BR/>RE/MAX International Franchise is owned by co-founders and Realtors Dave and Gail Liniger of Denver, Colorado. They serve respectively as Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer for RE/MAX International, Inc. Dave Liniger is a native of Marion, Indiana.<BR/><BR/>RE/MAX is "main street" - not "wall street". Our primary customer is the RE/MAX Sales Associate. RE/MAX is the only leading real estate system owned and managed by Realtors!Frank Younghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02134775226991383924noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-73846172752156767582008-12-13T10:27:00.000-07:002008-12-13T10:27:00.000-07:0010:44 PM, intrguing rumor, but I can find no evide...10:44 PM, intrguing rumor, but I can find no evidence that it's true. Can you?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-2784742161060988002008-12-12T22:44:00.000-07:002008-12-12T22:44:00.000-07:00Did I understand correctly that Bechtel owns REMAX...Did I understand correctly that Bechtel owns REMAX, a leading real estate company? If so, I now understand the connection with much of the recent Los Alamos real estate activity with transient Bechtel carpetbaggers.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-81952946788650717292008-12-12T12:12:00.000-07:002008-12-12T12:12:00.000-07:00But, he said, “building and repairing nuclear faci...But, he said, “building and repairing nuclear facilities is a very challenging business. (Van Prooyen)<BR/><BR/>That comment by Van Prooyen sounds so much like a typical LANS Bechtel executive. <BR/><BR/>Constructing buildings and repairing them -- the future of LANL! And why not? After all, this once great lab is now being run by a CONSTRUCTION company.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-39562105161229806772008-12-12T11:40:00.000-07:002008-12-12T11:40:00.000-07:00To get of score of 90%, NNSA is going to want to s...To get of score of 90%, NNSA is going to want to see LANS engage in worker layoffs. <BR/><BR/>Once LANL has become nothing but support and management, with no production or research, LANS will make a perfect score of 100% and finally arrive at the fabled "Work Free Safety Zone" level. <BR/><BR/>NNSA and LANS will both be so proud on that day!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-41990234511673631512008-12-12T09:46:00.000-07:002008-12-12T09:46:00.000-07:007:03 am: Funny, you didn't mention Science - a sig...7:03 am: Funny, you didn't mention Science - a sign of the times for LANL...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-63350382375171804952008-12-12T07:03:00.000-07:002008-12-12T07:03:00.000-07:00if it weren't so true...1. Put 400 bricks in a cl...if it weren't so true...<BR/><BR/><BR/>1. Put 400 bricks in a closed room.<BR/>2. Put your new employees in the room and close the door.<BR/>3. Leave them alone and come back after 6 hours.<BR/>4. Then analyze the situation:<BR/><BR/>a. If they are counting the bricks, put them in the Accounting Department.<BR/>b. If they are recounting them, put them in Auditing.<BR/>c. If they have messed up the whole place with the bricks, put them in Engineering.<BR/> d. If they are arranging the bricks in some strange order, put them in Planning.<BR/> e. If they are throwing the bricks at each other, put them in Operations.<BR/> f. If they are sleeping, put them in Security.<BR/> g. If they have broken the bricks into pieces, put them in Information Technology.<BR/> h. If they are sitting idle, put them in Human Resources.<BR/> i. If they say they have tried different combinations, they are<BR/> looking for more, yet not a brick has been moved, put them in Sales.<BR/>j. If they have already left for the day, put them in Marketing.<BR/>k. If they are staring out of the window, put them in Strategic Planning.<BR/>l. If they are talking to each other, and not a single brick has been moved, congratulate them and put them in Top Management .<BR/><BR/><BR/>Finally, if they have surrounded themselves with bricks in such a way that they can neither be seen nor heard from, put them in Government.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com