Blog purpose

This BLOG is for LLNL present and past employees, friends of LLNL and anyone impacted by the privatization of the Lab to express their opinions and expose the waste, wrongdoing and any kind of injustice against employees and taxpayers by LLNS/DOE/NNSA. The opinions stated are personal opinions. Therefore, The BLOG author may or may not agree with them before making the decision to post them. Comments not conforming to BLOG rules are deleted. Blog author serves as a moderator. For new topics or suggestions, email jlscoob5@gmail.com

Blog rules

  • Stay on topic.
  • No profanity, threatening language, pornography.
  • NO NAME CALLING.
  • No political debate.
  • Posts and comments are posted several times a day.

Monday, June 13, 2011

Chu, white House Expected to Play Larger Role in LLNL Director Search

Contributed by John:

This is also long but a very interesting read if true...


Nuclear Weapons & Materials Monitor
June 10, 2011
Chu, white House Expected to Play Larger Role in LLNL Director Search
-- Todd Jacobson

Energy Secretary Steven Chu and officials at the White House are expected to assert themselves in the search for a new director at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, strongly pushing for candidates with more of a basic science and energy background after similar concerns raised during the recently completed Los Alamos National Laboratory director search came too late to influence the selection. Chu was lukewarm about the selection of Charlie McMillan as Los Alamos National Laboratory’s next director, NW&M Monitor has learned, initially favoring a candidate with more of a basic science and energy background before signing off on the choice.

Several officials with knowledge of the search have confirmed that White House Science and Technology Policy advisor John Holdren also contacted Chu to make the case that Los Alamos would be best served by a lab director without a weapons program pedigree. One official said that Holdren did not suggest a particular candidate, but wanted “somebody who was safe and reliable and not of the weapons program,” though that input came near the end of the search process. “They’re not going to make that mistake again,” the official said, referring to the fact that the White House became involved in the LANL search late in the process. DOE and the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy did not respond to a request for comment. Potential intervention by the White House has stoked speculation that the University of California, which has the responsibility to conduct the search for lab contractor Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC, could veer from the weaponeer profile embodied by retiring director George Miller, former LANL Director Mike Anastasio and McMillan in favor of a director with a more basic science-based resume. More than at Los Alamos, Lawrence Livermore’s mission is evolving toward energy and threat reduction, though it will still play a significant role in weapons design and maintaining the nation’s nuclear weapons arsenal. Chu and Holdren are believed to favor a lab director that better represents the evolving mission.

UC Turning Attention to LLNL Search
With the Los Alamos search out of the way, UC in recent weeks has turned its focus to the Livermore search. In a June 3 message to Livermore employees, Norman Pattiz, the chairman of the Board of Governors for Lawrence Livermore National Security LLC and the director of the Livermore lab director search committee, said the search will be very similar to the hunt for Los Alamos’ director that officials said drew approximately 150 applicants.

Pattiz said membership of the search committee hasn’t been finalized, but he said the panel will meet at the laboratory “within the next two months … to hear from various constituencies and to determine the criteria that we will use to evaluate candidates for the next director.” A screening task force will also be formed to recommend a pool of candidates to the search committee, though the committee could add additional names before bringing in candidates for interviews. He encouraged lab employees to submit potential candidates to the search committee

Different Approach, Different Candidates
If the search committee goes in the direction of a weaponeer, then Bruce Goodwin, the head of Livermore’s weapons program, is the front-runner, according to weapons complex observers. But if the committee were to seek a candidate with more of a science background, Under Secretary of Energy for Science Steve Koonin and Livermore Deputy Director for Science and Technology Tomas Diaz de la Rubia would be natural candidates, though there are likely many others in the scientific community that could draw interest. “Holdren really wants the Livermore director to be a nationally recognized scientist, as does Chu, and not someone from the nuclear weapons community,” another official told NW&M Monitor, adding: “There’s no doubt that if Holdren and Chu were picking, it would be someone that people in the [weapons] community had never heard of.” That potential approach has generated concern from some in the weapons community, given the central role of the weapons laboratory directors in annually certifying the nation’s nuclear stockpile. Though Livermore’s showpiece project, the National Ignition Facility, is up and running and eventually could lead to advances in clean energy, its primary mission involves maintenance of the nation’s nuclear weapons stockpile. Livermore will also have its hands full over the next decade as the lead laboratory for the W78 warhead refurbishment, which is expected to be the first refurbishment that will create a common warhead that can be used on intercontinental ballistic missiles and submarine-launched ballistic missiles.

Stockpile a Priority in Procurement Docs
Procurement documents from the competition for the lab’s management in 2007 also place a premium on certifying the stockpile in the discussion of requirements for key personnel, listing it first among the experience demanded for potential lab directors in a list that also includes leading “a broad-based and world-class scientific organization” and leading “an organization that includes multiple operations and business functions.” Certifying the stockpile “is the main mission,” another industry official said. “That’s where all the money goes, and they can try to change that all they want, but that remains the most important thing.”

At Los Alamos, McMillan suggested in a recent interview with NW&M Monitor that his background within the weapons program would help the laboratory meet the large list of weapons-related challenges it is facing over the next decade, which includes work on several life extension programs, a busy experimental schedule, and construction work on a new Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement-Nuclear Facility. “The labs have different needs at different times in their histories,” McMillan said.

“My view is today many of the deliverables that we face are in the weapons area and so someone who brings not only knowledge of that area, but also the sets of relationships with DoD and DOE/NNSA is the right kind of person today to be able to help ensure that we deliver on the kinds of commitments we have particularly in that area.”

54 comments:

Anonymous said...

Just like Secretary Chu, he let's McMillan slide-through and stops Yucca Mountain because "we can do better". No leadership!

Anonymous said...

“The labs have different needs at different times in their histories, my view is today many of the deliverables that we face are in the weapons area and so someone who brings not only knowledge of that area, but also the sets of relationships with DoD and DOE/NNSA is the right kind of person today to be able to help ensure that we deliver on the kinds of commitments we have particularly in that area.” ... Charlie McMillan

Hey Charlie. Have you heard of self-aggrandizement? I know it may be hard to believe but you were not the most qualified person on earth for the job you were appointed to.

Anonymous said...

Barf bag! Barf bag!

Anonymous said...

Livermore will also have its hands full over the next decade as the lead laboratory for the W78 warhead refurbishment, which is expected to be the first refurbishment that will create a common warhead that can be used on intercontinental ballistic missiles and submarine-launched ballistic missiles.

Following (and ongoing) the multi-billion program to refurbish the W76, the U.S. is now refurbishing the W78 to also be loaded into SLBMs! The Life Extension Programs (LEPs) at the Labs have become nothing more than unregulated slush funds. Incidentally, doesn't LANL have the expertise on the W78, or did Bret Knapp successfully run-off all the LANL weapon engineers and design physicists? All of this is one word: stupid. The Labs are sucker punching the government for all it's worth.

Anonymous said...

I do not know if all of it is true. I do wonder how MacMillan can come to work and face people that know he was not the result of a full and open competition. How he can take a job knowing that he does not have the confidence of his own department's leadership.

Anonymous said...

If Chu can't persuade Hazel O'Leary to take over LLNL, then he'll have to find someone in Bechtel who knows how to spell windmill.

Methinks we are circling the drain.

Anonymous said...

Betcha the UC legal staff has their panties in a wad that The True Story of LANS Director coronation stays buried. Hurts to see the truth out in public.

Anonymous said...

Incidentally, doesn't LANL have the expertise on the W78, or did Bret Knapp successfully run-off all the LANL weapon engineers and design physicists?

June 13, 2011 6:41 PM

Not the first time. LANL also gave LLNL the W80 responsibilities to keep them alive. LLNL warheads were first to hit the scrap heap.

Anonymous said...

“The labs have different needs at different times in their histories, my view is today many of the deliverables that we face are in the weapons area and so someone who brings not only knowledge of that area, but also the sets of relationships with DoD and DOE/NNSA is the right kind of person today to be able to help ensure that we deliver on the kinds of commitments we have particularly in that area.” ... Charlie McMillan

Hey Charlie. Have you heard of self-aggrandizement? I know it may be hard to believe but you were not the most qualified person on earth for the job you were appointed to.

June 13, 2011 6:26 PM

Can you say "Destiny's Child"?
Qualifications had nothing to do with it. Just family business.

Anonymous said...

There are nine or fifteen national labs that are already playpens for physics egos, like that idiot savant Hawking, including an existing coven on the hill in Berkeley. There is no need for another expensive scientific coffee shop in Livermore.

The DoE has already gone a long way to ruin LLNL and LANL with their idiotic ideas.

One place should make damn sure weapons work properly.

Anonymous said...

Not the first time. LANL also gave LLNL the W80 responsibilities to keep them alive. LLNL warheads were first to hit the scrap heap.

June 13, 2011 7:25 PM

For the record, LANL has not given LLNL anything. DOE/NNSA gave LLNL the W80 and W78. On the other hand, LLNL has given LANL Anastasio, McMillan, and Knapp. I would say that LANL got the shaft on that deal!

Anonymous said...

Why the hell is a person of Chinese descent picking the leader of a nuclear weapons lab? Do we want the damn things to fail when they are needed most?

The most likely target of a US nuclear response will be a runaway conflict over Taiwan. Who trusts any leader to plan to nuke his own relatives? More likely he will pick a lab leader to insure failure; thus continuing the legacy of Bodman, D'Agostino and Pryzbylek to destroy the US weapons complex.

And no one in Congress will notice. The men are mesmerized by anyone who will spread their legs and the women are so wrapped up in getting power by pushing the feminist agenda that no one cares about strategic defense nor effective government.

Anonymous said...

Bug-off, Dr. Chu. LANL is now owned by Bechtel Incorporated and they will not easily give up their handsome profits which they can make by directing this lab to mostly weapons-flavored "refurb" work.

The future at LANL involves endless construction projects (Bechtel's favorite!), modifying the B61 and maybe some side work for ASC.

Unfortunately, if you are not in one of these three prime "thrust" areas then you have no future at LANL. Diversified science at LANL is now officially dead in the water with McMillan's rise to Director.

Anonymous said...

NOW they get concerned?

Where was Dr. Chu when all the reports came out over the last few years discussing the 'death of science' at the NNSA labs after their "for profit" corporate takeovers? Even both retiring Directors Miller & Anastasio aired their concerns over this issue during the recent NAS visits/report on the labs' condition that took place this winter. Geeze!

Anonymous said...

It sure does look bad for UC. They took an unqualified candidate and rammed him down the throat of Dr. Chu, who is now choking over it. Come to think of it, looks bad for Dr. Chu also, he didn't put up enough of a fight to prevent it happening.

Anonymous said...

I can’t fully believe this article. To say the Whitehouse “influence came too late to influence the selection” is a bit disingenuous. Anytime the Whitehouse gets involved DOE/NNSA pays attention. I think the Administration is just trying to distance itself from the process.

thief said...

White House Science and Technology Policy advisor John Holdren also contacted Chu to make the case that Los Alamos would be best served by a lab director without a weapons program pedigree.

Yeah.....you wouldn't want that at a weapons lab.

Anonymous said...

"White House Science and Technology Policy advisor John Holdren also contacted Chu to make the case that Los Alamos would be best served by a lab director without a weapons program pedigree."

It might be possible that what he is saying is code for "we want someone who is a good scientist".

thief said...

"It might be possible that what he is saying is code for "we want someone who is a good scientist".

Why not a good manager from silicon valley....or the best social worker......or "a good" fast food worker. At one time LLNL was a weapons lab.....you might want someone who is comfortable with the weapons complex and the various and sundry weirdness that is DOE/NNSA as opposed to a "good scientist" who won't be doing "science".

Anonymous said...

"Though Livermore’s showpiece project, the National Ignition Facility, is up and running and eventually could lead to advances in clean energy, its primary mission involves maintenance of the nation’s nuclear weapons stockpile."

Having actually been involved in NIF since the mid-1990s, I've never really understood how its main selling point was "maintenance of nuclear weapons." A better understanding of fusion implosion physics and Supercomputer Code validation performed by NIF seems to be an order of magnitude removed from actual "design validation" and verification of the real inner workings within a weapon system.

NIF seems to be about "basic" scientific knowledge and not actual weapons design work. Is Ed Mosses a weapons guy?

thief said...

NIF seems to be about "basic" scientific knowledge and not actual weapons design work. Is Ed Mosses a weapons guy?

True enough...but why throw three times (maybe more) the money at NIF when basic science flows better in an academic setting? Why shackle "science" with DOE/NNSA work control, safety practice and paperwork burden? Fundamental science is really working with a handicap at the DOE labs....maybe in the sixties and seventies you could do cutting edge work without the staggering extraneous costs.....those days are no more.

Anonymous said...

When he was 'introduced' to the Lab, Charlie gave his vision and it was about weapons production. Now in an interview he reinforces that his vision is about weapons production. LANL was once known as a national security science lab. Under Charlie there will be no science and no national security that isn't weapons production. Unless you work for Brett, better start dusting off the ole resume.

Anonymous said...

I see the need for LLNL to have a Director that has personal background in nuclear weapons. George and Mike were both good Lab Directors, and Bruce or Charlie would have made a good Director for LLNL. We need to hold focus on this area or give it up completely. LANL is in a different situation. They require a Lab Director that is a good scientist with experience in national security, not restricted to nuclear weapons. Different Labs and different needs. Albright, Reese and Romig come to mind as better choices from UC for the LANL position.

Anonymous said...

Found this nugget from Tom D’Ag in the NNSA Strategic Plan released last month: ‘The NNSA is truly moving from a nuclear weapons complex to a 21st century Nuclear Security Enterprise, addressing the nuclear and national security challenges of the 21st century.’

Guess that UC and MacMillan didn't get that message, since they are taking LANL backward in time. Can you say 'Rocky Flats, New Mexico'?
Just look at what MacMillan has to say: all national security is centered on nuclear weapons production.

Anonymous said...

"White House Science and Technology Policy advisor John Holdren also contacted Chu to make the case that Los Alamos would be best served by a lab director without a weapons program pedigree."

It might be possible that what he is saying is code for "we want someone who is a good scientist".

June 14, 2011 7:19 AM

Duh!

Anonymous said...

The LANS press room was busy force feeding stories to all employees when MacMillan was crowned. Full of quotes from the local politicians (written of course by LANS) about how great he was. Funny that this story which is more truthful hasn't been broadcast to all employees.

Wasn't a key early step for both Hitler and Stalin to only let good news press get out and repress unfavorable stories? The US won both WW II and the Cold War with its strategic nuclear forces, yet LANS doesn't have the guts to tell the workforce that just about everyone except UC thinks the new guy is unqualified. Sad, but true.

Anonymous said...

Charlie? Unqualified for lab Director?

Just wait until Brett Knapp takes up the Director's crown in a couple of years at LANL!!!! The fix is already in for this boy.

Anonymous said...

Gotta wonder how much longer the losers in this LANL Director search charade will be staying around now that they've been made to look like fools in this UC "competition" run by Pattiz.

Wallace, Rees, Seestrom? Who will be first to leave and look elsewhere for a more promising environment?

Anonymous said...

Secretary of Energy Chu couldn't even direct the Labs to freeze the salaries of it's employees and now he wants to dictate who is the next LLNL Director. Dr. Chu, read my lips, you are NOT a leader!

Anonymous said...

Unless you work for Brett, better start dusting off the ole resume.

June 14, 2011 11:00 AM

Me thinks that you had better dust off your resume working for Bret Knapp as well. If you think for one moment that you are "stable" working for Knapp, just ask the 25 engineers he "gave the boot to". Why? Just because "he felt like it".

Anonymous said...

Why the hell is a person of Chinese descent picking the leader of a nuclear weapons lab? Do we want the damn things to fail when they are needed most?

June 13, 2011 9:10 PM

Bret Knapp is doing a fine job ensuring the damn things fail on his own, thank you very much. All Chu has to do is watch.

Anonymous said...

Gotta wonder how much longer the losers in this LANL Director search charade will be staying around now that they've been made to look like fools in this UC "competition" run by Pattiz.

Wallace, Rees, Seestrom? Who will be first to leave and look elsewhere for a more promising environment?

June 14, 2011 6:27 PM

Seriously, the losers are the US taxpayers. The winners are yet to be determined, but you might vote for construction contracts. You pegged the charade alright. Guess that science is now officially RIP at LANL.

Anonymous said...

Seriously, the losers are the US taxpayers. The winners are yet to be determined, but you might vote for construction contracts.

June 14, 2011 7:06 PM

No. The winners have been announced! Didn't you hear? Both McMillan and Knapp gave themselves big fat raises the past 2 weeks. Yeah, again!

Anonymous said...

"Wallace, Rees, Seestrom? Who will be first to leave and look elsewhere for a more promising environment?

June 14, 2011 6:27 PM"

I heard Wallace will be going to something in the UC system. I heard Reese will also be leaving but I am not sure where. Nothing about Seestom. I also know that at the end of the summer several younger staff members will be leaving for university positions. Winning!!!

Anonymous said...

Wouldn't it be wonderful if a real scientist led LLNL?! Look at the management at LBL - all distinguished scientists. LLNL? A bunch of hacks. Tomas? Please! Albright? Triumph of the Rolodex.

Anonymous said...

It's Goodwin's. No other viable candidate since Emmett and AQ Khan have taken themselves out of the running.

Anyone who has spent time in DC is tainted by the libertine outrages that Congressmen fall temptation to. Meanwhile congresswomen vie to push the feminist agenda of kill or be killed.
Only a matter of time before O'bama succumbs to temptation.

Best to keep away from that cess pool until after it self destructs. Goodwin is a safe choice.

Anonymous said...

What? Are you crazy? libertine de Sade is so old school.

Postmodern Washington heros are Clinton, Weiner, Rockefeller, JFK, MLK, Condit, Spitzer, Hart, the late great insatiable Teddybear and him binge buddy Chris Dodd. Gingrich and Edwards too, can't pass up an opportunity to score a friendly that presents herself. Not libertine, rather boring post-adolescent bed hoppers, wasting the public trust to "have a spring awakening on the old Appalachian trail".

Washington is overrun with scum. No surprise that governance suffers and we get deadheaded synchophants like Bodman, Pryzbylek and D"Agostino.

Like the ribald Roman senate under the empire, no one cares, except to score.

Anonymous said...

Washington is overrun with scum. No surprise that governance suffers and we get deadheaded synchophants like Bodman, Pryzbylek and D"Agostino.

June 14, 2011 10:42 PM

Don't forget O'Leary, Richardson, and JaraPena. Another bunch of bloodsucking egocentric synchophants.

Anonymous said...

It looks like the rats are fleeing a sinking ship. Heard that MacMillan will have 10 AD slots to fill in next few months. Maybe LANL staff are smart after all.

Anonymous said...

One or more posters keep trying to move the discussion away from the issue of Lab Director to the sordid state of DC politics. In DC it is common to cut your loss and move on. Does UC have the courage to admit that they made a mistake with LANL and now get a Director that has widespread respect inside and outside the Lab?

Anonymous said...

One or more posters keep trying to move the discussion away from the issue of Lab Director to the sordid state of DC politics.

June 15, 2011 6:08 PM

Bingo! Common thread: Sorbid Lab politics and sorbid D.C. politics. So much politics for so little at stake.

Anonymous said...

Bingo! Common thread: Sorbid Lab politics and sorbid D.C. politics. So much politics for so little at stake.
June 15, 2011 7:20 PM

Shucky darn! You cracked the code that everyone else missed.

Yep, you got it right, brother. LANS has little at stake. Just look at the words of the Dear Leader -- LANS is a weapons production plant. That is little at stake, ... indeed.

Dear Leader:
“My view is today many of the deliverables that we face are in the weapons area and so someone who brings not only knowledge of that area, but also the sets of relationships with DoD and DOE/NNSA is the right kind of person today to be able to help ensure that we deliver on the kinds of commitments we have particularly in that area.”

Anonymous said...

Well since LLNL has not exactly been operating particularly well for many years now, and the lab was lead by nuclear weapons folks, sounds like time to try someone with a different background. Perhaps they will do a better job at managing the place.

Anonymous said...

Well since LLNL has not exactly been operating particularly well for many years now.....

June 15, 2011 10:46 PM

Anastasio, MacMillan, and Knapp sure have given LANL employees the different impression that past 5-years. They constantly refer back to the "excellence" back at Livermore. I hear "at Livermore, at Livermore, .." reverberating in my ears. I think we've been "snookered" at LANL by these con artists.

Anonymous said...

I hear that Charlie wants his LANS provided automobile upgraded to a Bentley. No cheap Audi for this crowned royalty, no sir!

Anonymous said...

Has Brett Knapp been given his 'royalty rights' to McMillan's former PAD position along with a big, fat raise, yet? Then, again, perhaps his coronation to that position is considered by LANS to be corporate proprietary information.

Anonymous said...

Anastasia, McMillion, and "knap" are giving a whole new meaning to the concept of "Entitlement".

Anonymous said...

So the truth is now out that McMillan does not have the support of Chu and the other science types in DC. What does that to to science based stockpile stewardship when UC puts someone in charge of a science lab that has no respect as a scientist? Senator Kyl where are you when the country needs you?

Anonymous said...

We now know that McMillan does not have support from external to LANL. What might be a 'metric' of his support internal to LANL? How about how much money he can get staff to give to the employee scholarship fund? Seeestrom did good at this. Wallace exceeded the goal. So, how is Dear Leader doing? Well he was less than half way to the goal on closing day, he left it open for twice the intended period, and he still can't seem to get it up. Poor fellow, metric is red for internal support. Maybe if you had asked LLNL staff for support it would have turned out better?

Anonymous said...

I don't give Charlie much credit for what he's accomplished in the weapon program or for being a force at DOE/NNSA either. It wasn't until recently that Anastasio "held his hand" around DOE/NNSA. I also reviewed his technical papers which were less than impressive with lot's of editorial issues. It's become obvious to me that something went wrong here.

Anonymous said...

It's become obvious to me that something went wrong here.

June 17, 2011 5:40 AM


Went wrong? No, it all went according to plan. Pattiz and his Bechtel friends got exactly who they wanted in the crowning of McMillian as LANL Director... a strong supporter of construction work along with weapon refurbishment for this former "science lab", diversified science be damned!

I fully expect McMillian to make it abundantly clear over the next few months that unless you are involved in the above two areas, your services at LANL will not be needed for much longer.

Chu is an idiot for showing concern on this important issue at such a late date! Los Alamos will be Pantex-ized by the "for profit" LANS crew.

Bechtel.... WINNING!

Anonymous said...

Some recent comments by Charlie MacMillion on Bret Knapp.

"Throughout his career, Bret has established an outstanding record of programmatic achievements while demonstrating technical depth, honest, and open communication and fostering internal collaboration".

Anastasio, MacMillion, and Knapp just can't help but say enough about their respective adoration for each other. In terms of what MacMillion said about Knapp above. BS!

Anonymous said...

I worry that the safety, security and reliability of the US strategic deterrent is now under the directorship of someone who does not have the confidence of scientific leaders. As a country, we should demand better, and UC should be capable of finding someone more qualified for such a position.

Anonymous said...

"the safety, security and reliability of the US strategic deterrent" don't really figure into international politics anymore, only the illusion of same. The US taxpayer would be well served by disbanding NNSA and hiring Industrial Light and Magic to do the same job at a fraction of the cost. Hey, John Boehner! Here is a REAL contribution to reducing the deficit !

Posts you viewed tbe most last 30 days