SUGGEST NEW TOPICS HERE

Submit candidates for new topics here only. Stay on topic with National Labs' related issues.

All submissions are screened first for compliance with blog rules. Blog moderator checks queue roughly every 2 to 3 hours daily between 8:00 and 20:00.

Question About LLNL Retiree Senior Advantage Plan (TCP1)

I'm turning 65 and signed up for Kaiser Permanente Senior Advantage through Empyrean benefits services. I noticed that I’m being billed $290 per month for KP Senior Advantage by going through Empyrean, whereas I can pay either $0 or $70 per month (depending on the tier of coverage) by just going to Kaiser Permanente directly. Granted, the Empyrean option sets up an HRA for me with an annual funding of $2450 by the Lab, but that would still mean my having to pay a net cost of about $1000 per year for signing up through Empyrean rather than going directly to Kaiser for their Senior Advantage plan.

Anyone know what's going on here? Is there any advantage to signing up for KP Senior Advantage by going through Empyrean as opposed to dealing directly with Kaiser?

AI is getting better

 These are interesting articles from a few weeks ago, AI is getting better at solving hard problems:

https://fortune.com/2025/02/12/openai-deepresearch-humanity-last-exam/

https://www.techradar.com/computing/artificial-intelligence/could-you-pass-humanitys-last-exam-probably-not-but-neither-can-ai

Wen Ho Lee Part II at LANL?

U.S. Says Decision to Turn Back French Scientist Had Nothing to Do With Trump

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/21/world/europe/us-france-scientist-entry-trump.html

https://dnyuz.com/2025/03/21/u-s-says-decision-to-turn-back-french-scientist-had-nothing-to-do-with-trump/

The French government’s claim that a scientist was denied entry into the United States because of an opinion he expressed about the Trump administration is “blatantly false,” a U.S. official has said.

Even as the authorities in France continued to call the case a concerning violation of academic freedom, the U.S. official, Tricia McLaughlin, who is a spokeswoman for the Department of Homeland Security, said the scientist had been turned away for reasons unrelated to his personal beliefs.

“The French researcher in question was in possession of confidential information on his electronic device from Los Alamos National Laboratory — in violation of a nondisclosure agreement — something he admitted to taking without permission and attempted to conceal,” Ms. McLaughlin said late Thursday.

Philippe Baptiste, the French minister for higher education, said this week that the scientist, who has not been publicly identified and who specializes in outer space research, was traveling to a conference near Houston earlier this month.

The scientist was not allowed to enter the United States, Mr. Baptiste said, because his phone contained message exchanges with colleagues and friends in which he gave his “personal opinion” on President Trump’s scientific and research policies.

But Ms. McLaughlin rejected that assessment. “Any claim that his removal was based on political beliefs is blatantly false,” she said. She did not provide further details.

It was unclear when or how the scientist might have worked at or interacted with the laboratory at Los Alamos, N.M.

Los Alamos National Laboratory is best known as a place that was crucial to the development of the atomic bomb.

Today, it is a top research facility for the National Nuclear Security Administration, but it also conducts scientific work on other topics. Representatives for the laboratory were not immediately reachable for comment.

The scientist was working for France’s publicly funded National Center for Scientific Research. Representatives for the center said that he did not wish to speak to the media, but they did not immediately respond to the Department of Homeland Security’s allegations against him.

Neither did the office of Mr. Baptiste, who used to lead the French National Center for Space Studies before he became minister in 2024.

But on Friday, Mr. Baptiste repeated his claim that the scientist had been targeted because of private discussions and opinions about the Trump administration’s policies.

He told Sud Radio in an interview that he had not spoken with the scientist directly but that his ministry was in touch with him.

“Each country is free to regulate their borders,” Mr. Baptiste acknowledged. But he said the scientist’s case was “extraordinarily atypical” and a “subject of concern.”

That concern was shared by the French Academy of Sciences, which said in a statement on Thursday that the scientist’s deportation “seriously undermines the fundamental freedoms of the academic world: freedom of thought, expression and travel.”

Pit production at LANL

 

Comments on SUGGEST NEW TOPICS HERE : LLNL - The True Story -

From the Santa Fe reporter. I am not convinced that Mello is some kind
of LANL/NNSA or neocon plant pushing to grow LANL even larger. I simply cannot believe this guy is that dumb to write this kinda or crap. Literally every time his says this stuff it increases New Mexicos support for LANL and expanding the mission. Who is the audience for this stuff?

Greg Mello
2 days ago
Chris is correct. And as the White House NNSA budget examiner said to me years ago, LANL's pit program is being pursued for one reason: to enable a new warhead program at Livermore in California. That single justification was a little exaggerated but it's not far off. Actually, it supports the entire NNSA complex, which has doubled in staffing over recent years, during a period when there would be little new warhead work to do otherwise. LLNL would not have a new warhead to design without LANL being ready to make the pits for it, and with NIF getting long in the tooth, LLNL could actually have to...wait for it....downsize. The whole warhead complex could get out of its dangerous "sorcerer's apprentice" mode, in which expanding workloads lead to even more expanding workloads. But as for the pits, is LANL ready? No. Is it otherwise logical to pump up LANL to do make pits? Not in the least. LANL pit production is a tottering jenga tower, undermined not just by incapacity but by an eroding facade of "mission need". Many people err in thinking there are exalted, logical reasons for the programs at these two physics labs, which have enormous political power to shape their own work programs amid the general dysfunction of Congress. The lab directors say NIF is necessary (LANL and Sandia used to have NIF critics but they have long been silenced.) So ignorant congresspersons fork over the money. It works the same for MANY lab programs. You may observe that California has 52 congresspersons. And -- oh the shock -- California wants pork-barrel jobs at Livermore. As always, ignorant people believe there is some exalted higher purpose in all this waste and high-level "control fraud," some kind of magical "science" which will usher in a new Golden Age. Current responsibilities at the two labs could be accomplished with half their remaining staff, after taking away LANL's ridiculous pit program. So said an NNSA lab director to me, which is also my estimate. This would be the staffing level needed without any disarmament. Frankly, LANL should simply be closed, as Chris has said before and as AEC Commissioner Hamilton said in 1950. There would be some adjustments, let's say, but those adjustments are the very ones we need. Every town in northern New Mexico would be better off without LANL. The U.S. would be better as well.

AI leadership at LANL?

 Claude said:

AI leadership?

Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) is claiming a leadership role in developing AI for national security applications. However, a glaring inconsistency emerges when we examine its operational practices. By neglecting to implement AI technologies to optimize its own business operations, especially project management, procurement and financial operations, LANL undermines its credibility and raises questions about its genuine commitment to innovation. If LANL truly believes in the transformative power of AI for national security, it should first harness that power internally to improve operational efficiency, reduce costs, and enhance decision-making processes. The apparent reluctance to adopt AI in its own business model suggests a lack of confidence in the technology or a disconnect between its lofty goals and practical applications. This inconsistency not only jeopardizes LANL operational effectiveness but also casts doubt on the authenticity of its mission to contribute to national security through AI.

Taxpayers pay for LLNS legal fees!

While seeking out Federally funded waste, will DOGE audit DOE/NNSA past and present history of bankrolling contractor legal fees so they can defend against at the taxpayer expense, whistleblowers and other self-serving contractor expenses (2008 “Gray March”)?

Still a relevant concern in 2025:

“You’ve probably heard of the government’s, “War on Whistleblowers… But what you probably didn’t know is that these vendettas against truth-tellers are routinely funded with your tax dollars… the government managed to turn four dollars worth of unauthorized phone calls into a ten million dollar bill for taxpayers.”

“Legal Swindle”

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=D6JDZvPvV4g&pp=ygUXbGVnYWwgc3dpbmRsZSBsaXZlcm1vcmU%3D

Enter Comment

Publish

Notify Me

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

©2025 Blogger - Privacy Policy

Elon reviews nuclear contractors

 

"Department heads have been asked to justify the roles of the contractors on their team in one-sentence summaries describing why they should be kept on" one of the officials working for the National Nuclear Security Administration" said .

https://www.yahoo.com/news/doge-reviews-nuclear-contractors-212923306.html