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

Sunday, March 11, 2012

Legislation Would Formalize Obama Nuke Modernization Pledge

Anonymously contributed:

Interesting move, but doubt it goes anywhere in Congress...

----
Global Security Newswire
Legislation Would Formalize Obama Nuke Modernization Pledge
March 9, 2012

A key U.S. lawmaker on Thursday submitted a bill aimed at committing President Obama to fulfill nuclear weapons spending commitments while implementing a strategic arms control deal with Russia.

House Armed Forces Strategic Forces Subcommittee Chairman Michael Turner (R-Ohio) said his proposal would specifically connect U.S. nuclear arsenal cuts to the fulfillment of Obama's nuclear arms complex modernization pledge. The administration in 2010 announced a decade-long, $85 billion nuclear weapons spending plan amid efforts to secure Senate ratification of the New START treaty. ...

“The long-term health and credibility of our nuclear deterrent depends on this bill, as does our national security. During the Senate’s consideration of the New START treaty, the president made many promises to achieve support for Senate ratification. With the president’s [fiscal 2013] budget request, it is now apparent that those promises have been broken. This bill will correct that and ensure the promises are kept,” Turner said in a press release.

“This legislation is important not only to modernize our nuclear force, but also the infrastructure that supports it. But Congress must also fix the agency responsible for that infrastructure; the National Nuclear Security Administration," he added.

"It is clear that NNSA is broken and unable to carry out its mission. It appears to be unable to provide the warheads and infrastructure the military needs, despite receiving billions of dollars from the budget of the Department of Defense. One of the key reasons the administration is failing to meet its promises is that our nuclear weapons enterprise is broken,” Turner stated.

The release says the nuclear agency has wasted billions of dollars in Pentagon funding and curbed work on extending the service life of certain nuclear-warhead types. It notes the delay in work on the Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement (CMRR) facility at the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico. Turner plans to deal with those matters through the fiscal 2013 defense authorization act, according to the release.

In addition, the lawmaker's bill would defer funding for carrying out the directives of a forthcoming nuclear war strategy to better enable review of the plan by lawmakers, he said.

U.S. Representative Edward Markey (D-Mass) in a statement to Turner on Thursday advocated against plans to construct two new nuclear weapons sustainment sites. The two lawmakers are locked in a public debate over U.S. nuclear weapons spending levels. ...

“At a time when the Senate and president have formally committed to reducing our nuclear stockpile, it makes no sense to spend up to $5 billion to expand our capacity to produce components of nuclear weapons,” Markey said in a statement. “Given the budget constraints we currently face as a nation, we do not need to spend up to $7.5 billion to build a brand new facility at the Y-12 Security Complex".

14 comments:

Anonymous said...

CMRR's loss at LANL is only part of the funding fiasco. It seems that LANS managers have dropped the ball in several funding areas this year.

Just look at the $60 million in WFO project funds that was lost this year. You also have the funding for Life Extension Program (LEP) for several LANL-designed nuclear weapons that LANS passed off to other labs, thereby inducing even greater funding pain at Los Alamos.

The biggest enemy attacking the workforce at LANL, it seems, is the lab's own management team! Workers at LANL should start to seriously question why it is that LANS is actively working *against* the lab's own self interest.

Anonymous said...

Workers at LANL should start to seriously question why it is that LANS is actively working *against* the lab's own self interest.

March 11, 2012 8:39 PM

No. Workers at LANL should get the hell out. Now.

Anonymous said...

Workers at LANL should start to seriously question why it is that LANS is actively working *against* the lab's own self interest.

March 11, 2012 8:39 PM

I can think of a few reasons:

1. LANS Greed, self-interests
2. Former LLNL Managers (Anastasio, McMillan, and Knapp) have a personal agenda with LANL workers, particularly the weapon program employees.
3. Former LLNL Managers have no vested interest in the success of LANL, e.g., they are giving LLNL weapon system LEPs, hydros, etc.
4. Former LLNL Managers have no vested interest in the success of the community
5. LANS is relying on the personnel tactics of Bechtel, e.g., "Excluded Worker" concept.
5. LANS management is still relying on the tactics of Rich Marquez, a former bureaucrat
6. LANS perceives no monetary benefit of science
7. LANS has done a poor job of developing new programs
8. McMillan and Knapp have no experience and a poor reputation interacting with the DoD.

Anonymous said...

Note that LANL has the biggest annual management profit fee of any NNSA lab by a wide margin. If the annual LLC management profit is the same whether you succeed at science, or not, and all you really have to do is to keep the safety and security incidents to an absolute minimum.... well, then, your best strategy is to kill off programs and beat down the workforce so that no productive work (i.e., "risky stuff") ever gets done.

And that is exactly what the LANS management team is doing at Los Alamos. NNSA has set up a totally dysfunctional system that is guaranteed to kill off most of the meaningful programs at LANL once men with little integrity and much greed are allowed to fill the lab's highly lucrative top positions.


Any more questions?

Anonymous said...

Obama's pledge was simply pillow talk to get the treaty passed. Anyone who really believed it probably also believes there are great bargains on bridges for sale.

Anonymous said...

It's the Tea Party wing of the Republican party in the House that sunk this funding, not the President. The Senate backed increases to NNSA weapons complex modernization, while it was the Republican controlled House that killed it in last summer's budget debates.

Anonymous said...

Where 11:04 AM sees vast conspiracy, deep strategy and nefarious intent behind every decision, others just see inexperience, incompetence and ignorance.

Anonymous said...

It seems pretty simple to me. Domenici provided for LANL for many years. He's gone, and now the money is going too.

I don't think you need a conspiracy to explain the funding losses. LANL is far away from anything, by design, in a state with a population about the size of the greater Philadelphia area, and a correspondingly smaller impact on the national government. It's amazing that got so much money for so long.

Anonymous said...

It's amazing that got so much money for so long.

March 18, 2012 1:28 PM

Yeah, amazement often results from ignorance.

Anonymous said...

Yeah, amazement often results from ignorance.

March 18, 2012 7:29 PM

Ignorance? I used to work there. My comment stands. It's not a comment on LANL, which is a great lab, but a comment on the factors that drive our political process and hence spending decisions. Hint: science is not a driver.

Anonymous said...

Ignorance? I used to work there. My comment stands. It's not a comment on LANL, which is a great lab, but a comment on the factors that drive our political process and hence spending decisions.

Yeah well, if you think that the isolation of LANL, which as you point out was intentional, and the fact that it is located in a sparsely-populated state, should disqualify it from funding, as you indicated, you are more than a little ignorant about the US nuclear weapons program's origins and history. It sounds like you are a former disgruntled employee who just hates Los Alamos (the city) and New Mexico.

Anonymous said...

You seem to be deliberately missing my point. I don't think that those factors should disqualify LANL from funding. But the fact is that they *do*, as can be observed by what's happened in the last few years, because of the way DC works.

I'm hardly disgruntled :-) ... I'm just one of those guys who left for lots higher pay and benefits. It's hard to be unhappy in the circumstances.

But watching this blog sure makes it seem the really unhappy people are the ones still at LANL!

Anonymous said...

"I'm hardly disgruntled :-) ... I'm just one of those guys who left for lots higher pay and benefits. It's hard to be unhappy in the circumstances.

But watching this blog sure makes it seem the really unhappy people are the ones still at LANL!

March 21, 2012 8:42 AM"

I am calling troll on this guy. Someone nailed it saying this is a
former disgruntled LANL employee.
Every former LANL person I knew who went on to a nice jobs elsewhere still have good things to say about LANL and the people. On the other hand those who left who did not do as well and hang out in New Mexico are very bitter people. In most but not all cases they have only themselves to blame. Think about it, if this guy was so happy as he claims why would he be posting so much on this blog at all? Judging from the many troll comments he seems to be obsessed with LANL and how miserable it has made his life. Please get lost, get some facts and move on with your life.

Anonymous said...

I am calling troll on this guy.

March 21, 2012 9:19 AM

What are you, the frickin' umpire? Grow up.

Blog Archive