Anonymously contributed:
Weapons Complex Monitor
December 13, 2011
Final Version of Defense Auth. Bill Emerges From Conference
The funding picture for the National Nuclear Security Administration became a lot clearer yesterday as House and Senate lawmakers unveiled the conference version of the Fiscal Year 2012 Defense Authorization Act, which authorizes $7.27 billion for the agency’s weapons program and allows the Department of Defense to transfer an additional $125 million. The bill also authorizes $2.33 billion for the NNSA’s nonproliferation account, $216.8 million less than the Obama administration’s $2.55 billion budget request. In setting the $7.27 billion funding level for the NNSA’s weapons program—$355 million less than the $7.6 billion that the House and Senate Armed Services Committee provided for the program, matching President Obama’s $7.6 billion request—lawmakers said they reflected the funding levels in the conference agreement on the FY2012 Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee, which is set to be unveiled today as part of a nine-bill omnibus appropriations act. Under the provisions of the conference agreement, the Pentagon could boost funding for the agency’s weapons program by $125 million—mirroring legislation drafted by Sens. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) and Jon Kyl (RAriz.) that enjoyed the support of the Department of Defense but was excluded from the Senate version of the Defense Authorization Act due to a procedural issue.
Lawmakers backed off a House-crafted provision that would have tied stockpile reductions under the New START Treaty and in the future to progress on the Obama Administration’s $88 billion plan to maintain and modernize the nation’s weapons complex and nuclear arsenal over the next decade. The provisions, which were drafted by Rep. Michael Turner (R-Ohio), the chairman of the House Armed Services Strategic Forces Subcommittee, drew a veto threat from the Obama Administration, and were replaced in the conference agreement by a “sense of Congress that sustained investments in the nuclear weapons stockpile and the nuclear security complex are needed to ensure a safe, secure, reliable, and credible nuclear deterrent and that such investments could enable additional reductions in the hedge stockpile in the future.” The agreement, however, includes a provision requiring the President to report to Congress each year it is determined that the modernization plan isn’t adequately funded as well as a provision requiring the President to provide a net assessment of the nation’s nuclear forces if the Administration proposes reductions to the nation’s active or reserve stockpiles.
Wednesday, December 14, 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Blog Archive
-
►
2012
(37)
-
►
March
(11)
- LLNL's new mission statement
- Legislation Would Formalize Obama Nuke Modernizati...
- LANL Cuts Threaten Valley
- Double whammy blow to US nuclear science
- NIF TO TAKE A 20 MILLION DOLLAR HIT FOR 2013!
- LANL new BLOG
- New LANL BLOG
- LLNL pension explained
- LANL braces for deep cuts
- LANS Voluntary Separation Program - Excluded Categ...
- Weapons Lab and the inconvenient truth
-
►
February
(18)
- Bureaucracy Strangles National Laboratories
- DOE cowboy!
- Congressional Testimony Reinforces Picture Of Dama...
- A message from the LLNL director on LANL workforce...
- Budget Forced Delay of Los Alamos Plutonium Lab
- LANL Downsizing begins
- Fy13 budget proposal
- watch you tube video of 2008 laid off LLNL employe...
- HOUSE REPUBLICANS TO OBAMA: NUKE CUT PLAN IS ‘DANG...
- Layoff Lawsuit
- NAS report released on lab management!
- LLNL unofficial RIFs
- UPF tops Oak Ridge budget news
- CMRR-NF: Delay Makes Sense
- real mission is to make the world safer
- NAS Lab Mgmt. Panel Report Expected This Week
- Looking for Herbert Moore...
- DOES THIS DESCRIBE THE CULTURE AT LLNL?
-
►
January
(8)
- UC opening for Lab 'Management'
- Rally against Bechtel-Run Weapons Lab
- Hey LANS, where's the $65,725,677?
- Major Loss of National Security Expertise at Sandi...
- Comments on the revised LLNS 401 (k) plan
- LLNL RIFs in April
- Bechtel awarded but performance report not release...
- what happened to the LLNS 401k mutual fund dividen...
-
►
March
(11)
-
▼
2011
(162)
-
▼
December
(18)
- BLOG entering 5th year!
- Sandia retirees
- Let us make the BLOG more interesting to everyone
- Lab earns excellent marks for FY11 performance
- Decades later, a Cold War secret is revealed
- Message from "The administrator"
- Charlie "MIT" McMillan Holiday Message
- Y-12 squeezes benefits to save money
- Budget Deal Whacks LANL Nuke Lab
- Final Version of Defense Auth. Bill Emerges From C...
- Holiday wishes
- George Miller, delusional
- DOE Looks To Reduce Workforce By 1/3 Through Attri...
- LANL Director Forms Panel To Oversee Spending Cuts...
- Two Elements Named: Livermorium and Flerovium
- Analyst Sees Lasting Damage To Los Alamos, Livermo...
- New Livermore Lab director Albright starts job
- Voluntary separation?
-
▼
December
(18)
11 comments:
Looks like we'll go from planned increased funding of 10% to sudden funding cuts of at least 20% in record time.
Congress is giving the NNSA labs "budgetary whiplash" with their abrupt funding moves! Time to start creating those RIF lists in anticipating of approaching layoffs.
Time to start creating those RIF lists in anticipating of approaching layoffs.
December 17, 2011 7:49 PM
Those lists have been ready to go for months. Knapp's been adjusting and readjusting his for years. The only thing that McMillan needed was the "fall guy" Marquez.
Looks like same ol', same ol'.
It's time to get the Mythbusters team involved, so we can begin testing again.
Hope they can keep the blast on the test site grounds.
Why is a Bret Knapp, a man with no physics research in his limited background, only a master in mechanical engineering from a mediocre state university on his resume, and horrid management skills being allowed to head up the Los Alamos nuclear weapons research divisions?
And worse, this guy is obviously being groomed to be LANL's next Director!!!!!! It's sickening to watch.
Why is a Bret Knapp, a man with no physics research in his limited background, only a master in mechanical engineering from a mediocre state university on his resume, and horrid management skills being allowed to head up the Los Alamos nuclear weapons research divisions?
And worse, this guy is obviously being groomed to be LANL's next Director!!!!!! It's sickening to watch.
December 18, 2011 10:38 AM
We can blame Anastasio for this selection. Unfortunately, it was the "best" engineer Livermore had to offer.
We can blame Anastasio for this selection. Unfortunately, it was the "best" engineer Livermore had to offer.
December 18, 2011 7:28 PM
While LLNL and LANL are great physics institutions, they are physics labs, not engineering Labs. I mean, look at the engineering leadership at LANL, Bret Knapp, Steve Girrens, Paul Wantuck, all lousy leaders with no record of engineering R&D or publications. If you want top caliber engineering, go to Sandia.
It isn't complicated. Knapp is McMillan's hatchet man. The fact that he is an incompetent ass is of secondary importance. He has no idea what engineering is and he hates Los Alamos.
What the Bechtel-lead "for profit" LANS and LLNS LLCs have done to our national security labs is a real disgrace.
They've poisoned them beyond the point of return. The NNSA labs have become nothing more than expensive centers of risk aversion, bloated management and bureaucratic CYA policy creation.
It's been sad watching this fiasco play out over the last few years. Pretty much everything that the LLC "naysayers" said would happen has happened and then some!
If you want top caliber engineering, go to Sandia...
don't get around much?
If you want top caliber engineering, go to Sandia...
don't get around much?
December 21, 2011 7:35 PM
Sandia National Laboratories is THE Engineering National Laboratory.
I mean, look at the engineering leadership at LANL, Bret Knapp, Steve Girrens, Paul Wantuck, all lousy leaders with no record of engineering R&D or publications. If you want top caliber engineering, go to Sandia.
December 18, 2011 7:59 PM
Don't forget to throw John Benner into that mix. What awful and absolutely worthless W-Program and Division manager.
Post a Comment