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 email@example.com
- Stay on topic.
- No foul, vulgar, or inflammatory language.
- No name calling.
- No personal attacks or put-downs of other blog users.
- Be patient. Moderator checks and approves new posts several times a day.
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 ...
Monday, May 28, 2012
Anonymously contributed: Bechtel Bringing in the Bacon! From the Huffington Post. "The House deliberations gave us a great example. Leading up to the NDAA vote, the House and Senate Appropriations Committees had already canceled funding for a $6 billion plutonium laboratory . The committees agreed with a Pentagon and the National Nuclear Security Administration recommendation that the proposed facility at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico was unnecessary. For once, it seemed reasonable heads had prevailed. It made no sense to put money toward a facility that would produce nuclear warhead components when we already have more than enough components stockpiled, and we're operating under treaties that call for the U.S. to reduce its nuclear arsenal. Then Rep. Mike Turner (R-Ohio) added provisions to the NDAA that took the money for the plutonium lab that had been cut from the Department of Energy's budget and added it to the Department of Defense's budget. Project On Government Oversight (POGO) Executive Director Danielle Brian and Nickolas Roth of the Center for International Security Studies wondered on The Hill's Congress Blog why Turner worked so hard to save a facility that no one else seemed to want. However, if you follow the money, you can see why Turner might have an interest in what happens at Los Alamos. A cursory look at Turner's contributions on OpenSecrets.org during this election cycle show he has received at least $70,000 from companies that either have ties to the Los Alamos National Laboratory or do work in related areas and could conceivably work on future projects with the lab. His contributors include Bechtel and Babcock & Wilcox, which manage the Los Alamos lab." See people stop complainin about Bechtel and others as they are trying to bring in the money for ya all. Democracy at works. You want a piece, than shut up and so nobody com snoopin n nothin.
By scooby at May 28, 2012
Saturday, May 26, 2012
Anonymously contributed ************************** - Russia turns up the nuclear rhetoric - Financial Times of London - May 24, 2012 Before Dmitry Medvedev’s valedictory speech earlier this month, the outgoing president awarded medals to dozens of Russians, including a theatre director, a policewoman and the chairman of the Russian hockey federation. Then, taking the podium in a glittering Kremlin ballroom, Mr Medvedev declared that Russia’s younger generation needed positive role models to inspire them towards “success in literature, art, education, and” – he paused wistfully – “nuclear weapons”. “They may still come in handy,” he said, apropos, seemingly, of nothing. “We’re not going to use them, but let’s still keep them around, because we have a big country, a complex country. We must value it and protect it.” ....In speech after speech this month, Russian officials have tried to out-Dr Strangelove each other in warning of a potential nuclear conflagration. The rhetoric, which US analysts tend to dismiss as harmless, coincided with the test launch on Wednesday of a new generation of strategic missiles.... http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/698334c8-a4d9-11e1-9908-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1vzcccVVc
By scooby at May 26, 2012
Friday, May 25, 2012
Anonymously contributed: Hey LLNS management! That is how you motivate workers, with gestures like these! http://finance.yahoo.com/news/apple-ceo-cook-gives-75m-150805401.html
By scooby at May 25, 2012
Monday, May 21, 2012
Anonymously contributed: Looks like there will be a fight between the Republican controlled House and White House over the restructuring of NNSA in the FY13 budget. From the WH Statement late last week on H.R. 4310 – National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2013... "Department of Energy (DOE) and Contractor Management Relationships: The Administration strongly objects to elements of sections 1061 and 1062 and certain provisions of Title 31 that change the responsibilities, authorities, and reporting requirements between and among DOE, the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), contractors managing and operating the national laboratories, the President, and the Congress. Some of these changes fundamentally alter the relationship between DOE and NNSA by restricting the authority of the Secretary of Energy and transferring responsibilities from DOE to NNSA. The bill also: (1) legislates the establishment of a council of the national laboratory contractors with the authority to make unrestricted recommendations to NNSA, which then mandate a response by NNSA; (2) takes authority for final approval of the NNSA budget submission away from the President; (3) requires NNSA to submit a cost-benefit analysis to the Congress before competing a management and operating contract, which would undermine a long-standing and bipartisan effort to increase competition in government contracting; and (4) authorizes unrestricted access for the contractors to report to the Congress on Administration activities. Health and Safety at DOE and NNSA: The Administration strongly opposes sections 3202, 3115, 3113, and 3151. These provisions severely hamper external, independent oversight by the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board; move regulatory authority from independent offices and agencies to the NNSA Administrator; require a weaker standard of contractor governance, management, and oversight; and eliminate DOE's flexibility to determine the appropriate means of assessing the unique risks that it confronts in its facilities. By lowering safety standards for the nuclear weapons complex and reducing requested funding for health, safety, and security, these provisions would weaken protections for workers and the general public. NNSA Staffing: Section 3111 would direct the Administration to make large reductions within the NNSA in its number of Federal employees. The NNSA is undertaking major, complex efforts to move to a more efficient and effective management of the nuclear security complex while maintaining the safety, security, and effectiveness of our nuclear arsenal. The Administration believes that the NNSA is best positioned to prescribe the proper level of staffing to fulfill those missions effectively within the budget appropriated by the Congress."
By scooby at May 21, 2012
Wednesday, May 16, 2012
Tuesday, May 15, 2012
Anonymously contributed: Former Commander of STRATCOM recommends smaller US nuclear stockpile. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/16/world/cartwright-key-retired-general-backs-large-us-nuclear-reduction.html?_r=1&hp
By scooby at May 15, 2012
Sunday, May 13, 2012
Anonymously contibutedL In the recent House Armed Services Committee proposed changes to NNSA, the strangest item seems to have attracted the least amount of attention. In the final bill that was passed last week --- SEC. 4509. DESIGN AND USE OF PROTOTYPES OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS FOR INTELLIGENCE PURPOSES. (a) PROTOTYPES. - The Administrator shall develop and carry out a plan for the national security laboratories and nuclear weapons production plants to design and build prototypes of nuclear weapons to further intelligence estimates with respect to foreign nuclear weapons activities. (b) PROHIBITION ON PRODUCTION OF NUCLEAR YIELDS. - In carrying out subsection (a), the Administrator may not conduct any experiments that produce a nuclear yield. ----- What the Heck?! This appears as an unnecessary action by Congress. Did one of the Lab Directors corner some overworked congressional staffer at a cocktail party and say; "Hey, you know what will really help me improve the talent pool working on our weapons? Letting them dream up completely wild eyed guesses as to what a North Korean nuke looks and feels like in person." Or maybe... "Hi there Congressman, that CIA spy over in the corner by the dessert table... oh by the way, definitely you should try the apple caramel tarts... just told me she has some stolen, I mean clandestinely acquired before the Israeli GBU-28 bunker buster we loaned them destroyed the underground floor safe they were in, Iranian nuclear bomb blueprints. Sure would be nice if my lab could try building what they had in mind to see if it would have worked...what do you think?" May 12, 2012 2:43 PM Anonymous Anonymous said... Not the 1st time we've mocked up some strange looking nukes :) May 12, 2012 4:23 PM Anonymous Anonymous said... May 12 4:23 pm is absolutely correct. This is simply a codification of what the NNSA labs have been doing for years. The "prototypes" are used for detection system development, yield estimation, support for intelligence estimates of technological advancement, and aiding attribution if anyone actually achieves a hostile attack on the US or its allies. Of course, we are prohibited already from obtaining nuclear yield from any testing. No big news here. May 12, 2012 9:07 PM
By scooby at May 13, 2012
Thursday, May 10, 2012
Anonymously contributed: There are no future or current jobs in the nuclear field. Is DOE setting people up to fail ? http://chronicle.augusta.com/news/education/2012-05-08/doe-investing-47-million-stimulate-nuclear-careers?v=1336509903
By scooby at May 10, 2012
Tuesday, May 8, 2012
Anonymously contributed: *** NNSA could soon face workforce gaps but struggles to monitor them *** NNSA faces challenges in recruiting young workers May 1, 2012 - By Molly Bernhart Walker The National Nuclear Security Administration and the contractors who operate the national lab sites for NNSA may soon face a workforce shortage, according to an April 26 Government Accountability Office report (.pdf). NNSA's hiring and retention efforts have typically focused on "attracting early career hires with competitive pay and development opportunities," but the positions may not be appealing to today's young workers, say report authors.... read more.... http://www.fiercegovernment.com/story/nnsa-could-soon-face-workforce-gaps-struggles-monitor-them/2012-05-01
By scooby at May 08, 2012
Posts you viewed tbe most last 30 days
A Lessons Learned Organization? Thom Mason presented an-all hands meeting on Tuesday. No coronavirus known in New Mexico, he announced. By W...
Some strange things are going on at LANL as whole ares of the lab have been suddenly shut down to non-US citizens. Could be corona virus cou...
Livermore Moving to Minimum Safe Operations as Surrounding County Locks Down to Combat COVID-19 https://www.exchangemonitor.com/livermore-mo...