LLNL - The True Story -

Contributed by John: ------------- July 29, 2009 Presented at U.S. Strategic Command’s Strategic Deterrence Symposium - "The Nuclear Security Enterprise and Our Strategic Deterrent" Presented by Thomas D'Agostino, Administrator, NNSA Good afternoon. Let me begin by echoing so many other speakers and thanking STRATCOM for organizing this symposium, and all of you for being here. In his Prague speech, President Obama charted a new course for the United States. Like President Reagan before him, he spoke of a long-term glide slope to zero nuclear weapons. But he also made clear that, “[a]s long as these weapons exist, the United States will maintain a safe, secure and effective arsenal to deter any adversary, and guarantee that defense to our allies . . .” In pursuit of this agenda, there are two efforts currently underway – both of which will have major implications for the U.S. nuclear deterrent and for the infrastructure we employ to support that deterrent. First, as was...

Anonymously asked: Anyone have any information on developments, comments,status on the ongoing NLRB hearing that started on the 27th Jul in Oakland for the illegally laid-off skilled crafts workers? Sounds as if UPTE is actually doing something and standing up for workers rights.

In the last 3 months, I relied heavily on a co-blogger who helped me tremendously. I am very thankful for that. When he left, I received very nasty emails and comments calling me all kinds of names. So, I decided to comb the Blog to see why people were so outraged. Here it was, a side bar link for political views that was filled with hate and bigotry. This one slipped through. I will not apologize on behalf of someone else BUT I went ahead and removed it. No more political views!

This is who runs the Lab! Scroll down to middle of page http://www.multinationalmonitor.org/mm2006/012006/lines.html

From the LANL BLOG: Consider the current political situation. NNSA is in the fourth year of its plan to reconfigure the nuclear weapons complex. The plan is oriented toward retrenching and down sizing probably requiring closing one weapons lab. Since some of the weapons work is being consolidated at LANL but none at LLNL, it is clear which lab they will chose to close. The move of Anastasio to LANL and putting Miller in charge at LLNL was another indicator. Miller was the also ran in every selection of a new director during my time at LLNL. He is a prime choice to preside over the dismemberment of LLNL. The NNSA reconfiguration plan was predicated on Congress approving the Reliable Replacement Warhead and scheduling 5-year upgrade cycles. Not only is that not going to happen, Obama has promised to quit paying for the unused weapons of the Cold War. Guess what weapons are on the top of the list. That leaves NNSA with no weapons programs to fund the weapons labs. The way the government w...

Anonymously contributed: When I came to this place 30 plus years ago there was hardly any landscaping. Didn't bother me. Didn't bother anyone else I worked with (unless they were just keeping mum).I don't think anyone really cared. We were there to do R&D, not admire the landscape. Today, it is a different story.I have no idea how much this beautification project cost or how much it will cost to maintain but I agree it is a serious waste of taxpayer money.

Anonymously contributed: The 5% tax is being used to cover the cost of NIF Dedication and Family Day. A ridiculous amount of money was spent on these activities. Trees, roads, bark, paint, shrubs, more bark, a water conservation project (complete with amphitheater), grass, irrigation, signs, pavement, and oh, was there a spot that didn't get bark? Hopefully someone will shine the light of truth on the games that are being played with our tax dollars. How do you think all of this work was paid for?? What Science? We have become an arboretum. It does look nice, no?

Anonymously contributed: I was just wondering how many folks actually got this Audit of Dependent Eligibility letter? It says that if I do not prove that I am married to my husband of 40 years that he and I will BOTH be de-enrolled from insurance coverage for a period of 12 months. I had to go to my bank safe deposit box and get a copy of my marriage license and give that to benefits. If a person has other dependents such as children, birth certificates of all dependents would have to be provided. I don't understand why this is necessary since my husband and I have BOTH gone through the Lab Q Clearance process since 1991 and many re-investigations and have never been asked to provide a copy of our marriage license. Never in my 40 years of marriage and many loans and even a passport have I been asked to prove that I was married. What about all of the retirees? I know my mother-in-law didn't have to prove she was married to her husband to collect his retirement after he passed a...

I admit that this year, moderation of this BLOG has been a little relaxed, in the interest of freedom of speech. It was hard to publish some views and not publish opposing views. It is time to go back to the purpose of the LOG. From here on, I will not publish anything not related to: 1) Impact of privatization of the Lab on employees, past and present and friends and families. 2) Opinions on LLNS operation of the Lab 3) reports of waste, wrongdoing and any kind of injustice against employees and taxpayers by LLNS/DOE/NNSA. or criticism without suggested solutions and remember: The BLOG author(s) do not have to agree or disagree with any post or comments before publishing them. They serve as impartial moderators.

Anonymously contributed: This blog is a joke. Either nobody reads it, nobody cares to comment on it, or the moderator doesn't care/is lazy/whatever. There are few relevant posts and even fewer relevant comments. Sad. The blog HAD noble goals out the outset.......you should read the LANL blog instead....at least it's active, at least it's relevant. And the info often applies to LLNL/LLNS as well as LANL/LANS. Unless somebody breathes some life into this one, it ought to be terminated. Sorry for the harsh opinion, but it's just a waste of time to come here.

Anonymously contributed in the LANL Blog: I never signed any contract to work for DOE or the Federal government. I signed up as a UC employee. No different than if I worked as a researcher at UC working on a CONTRACT for NASA, NIH, etc. I was a UC employee. Payed into and was promised the UC retirement system. Retired under UC BEFORE LANS was even a thought in someone's mind. Remain retired under UCRP. But now my medical benefits are provided by some company I never worked for, while other UC retirees from other institutions are treated differently and better. How can DOE allow one entity (UC) to get off the hook and assign their obligations to their retirees to a new company that can downgrade and eliminate those obligations at will? Crap, it's one think to be traded when you are still playing....it's quite another to be promised one thing, devote your entire working career to it, and then have it yanked out from under you. Legal or not, it's not fair. Mark my words, t...

Anonymously contributed in the LANL BLOG: OK, it's understood that retiree medical benefits are not vested or guaranteed. But nobody has answered these questions: Why, having retired under UCRP as a UC employee who worked at the Lab for 30 years, are my retiree medical benefits substantially different (worse) than those being provided to UC retirees from other campuses? They are paying less, and getting more services (and choices), than we are. Why must we be subjected to the whims of LANS and LLNS, companies we never worked for, companies that didn't even exist when we were employed by UC? We were sold on the concept that we were UC employees, that the Labs were basically like UC research "campuses". Heck, we were all UC, all the way, all the time. That is, until it came time to deliver our retiree medical benefits. Then the rules changed, and we became "second-class" UC retirees. Again, it's understood that retiree medical benefits could be reduced or ...

Anonymous said... From The Daily Californian via the LANL blog: Livermore Lab Retirees Criticize Reductions to Health Benefits By Javier Panzar Contributing Writer Monday, July 20, 2009 Retirees from Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory are voicing concerns over their health benefits, which they say have been reduced since new management took over the labs in 2007. The retirees went before the UC Board of Regents last week, claiming that they retired before the switch in management occurred in 2007 and that their benefits should be consistent with retired employees under UC management. Joseph Requa retired from the lab in 1999 and is the organizer of UC Livermore Retiree Group. "What we want is that UC takes back responsibility for determining our health benefits and that the levels are consistent with what other UC retirees receive ," Requa said. The laboratory was run by the University of California until October 2007 when Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC took ov...

Flawed program for protecting Livermore lab workers from beryllium comes under federal scrutiny By Suzanne Bohan, Contra Costa Times Kelye Allen still speaks with pride about her 18-year career with Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, where she worked as a machinist helping to build components for nuclear weapons. A feeling of patriotism and duty animates the workforce there, Allen said. "You want to protect the country," she said. "Stuff we do there directly affects national security." Along with her enduring pride, however, Allen is left with a permanent health condition from her work with a prized but hazardous metal called beryllium. The Department of Energy, which oversees the lab, is currently conducting an enforcement investigation into whether the lab violated health and safety regulations related to its chronic beryllium disease prevention program. On Aug. 3, lab officials will respond during an enforcement conference to preliminary findings by the National Nu...

I saw the bomb squad at NIF on Friday. What's up with that?

Robert said: Raytheon is hiring High Performance Computing Computation Scientists. The locations vary but most are on the east coast. Go out to http://rayjobs.com http://rayjobs.com and do a search with the Keyword "HPC" If you would like a referral, email me @ rggleason at gmail dot com and I can send you a referral link. I worked in Comp for a lot of my stint at the lab so I am familiar with that environment.

Blogger PJB said... It may not make headlines like healthcare reform, but there are some things going on in the House and Senate that will directly impact the Department of Energy, NNSA and the labs. I posted a few weeks ago about the The National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2010 (H.R. 2647) that had been passed by the House Armed Services Committee... It has now been overwhelmingly passed by the House. The Senate Armed Services Committee is now working on their version of the bill. The House version of this bill includes a provision that takes $369 Million from NNSA in order to fund F-22 Raptor fighter jets that the Pentagon has said they don't want or need. President Obama has said that he would veto any bill that includes increased funding for the F-22 program, but this has not deterred members of the House. There was an article summarizing the mechanics of this process on the news wires today: http://pubfiles.computersforpeace.net/2009_07_08_f22_obama.html ...

Anonymous said... FR was escorting uncleared personel through a Q only area the other day, this person was busy taking pictures when FR left them alone in the area; the FPOC found the person wondering around with the camera and ask them who was escorting them, they replied FR; when FR return the fpoc then asked him why he wasn't notified of such activity and why the proper signs where not put out to notify building personal of the uncleared visitor; FR blamed his secretary for the mix up. AGAIN IS ULM ABOVE THE LAW??????? July 12, 2009 2:37 PM

Results: NNSA 58 voters Bechtel 24 UC 7 LLNS 23

From the fcnl.org calendar, today at 10:00 a.m: Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water, markup of the energy and water appropriations bill, which includes the nuclear weapons programs of the Energy Department. 124 Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington. Video webcast on OpenHearings.org and audio webcast on CapitolHearings.org.

So, it seems that the rumors that have turned out not to be rumors has dried up. So, you have any rumors to share?

Institute for Policy Study article

So, I hear that the programs are being charged a 5% retroactive (back to October 1, 2008) tax to help pay for a shortage in the "management fee". My first question is this true? My second question if true, does NIF have to pay, or do they get off the hook again?

Sophia Kazmi Valley Times Posted: 06/29/2009 12:29:58 PM PDT Updated: 06/29/2009 01:38:41 PM PDT LIVERMORE — A 58-year-old Dublin man struck by his runaway pickup truck at Lawrence Livermore Laboratory has died of his injuries. James Leadstrom died Sunday at Eden Medical Center in Castro Valley, according to the California Highway Patrol. He was flown there Friday morning after he received head trauma and internal injuries trying to stop his 2008 Chevrolet Silverado. According to accident investigators, Leadstrom had parked his pickup truck in a lab parking lot near Vasco Road and East Avenue around 10:30 a.m. Friday. but the truck had been left in reverse gear and it began to roll backward. Leadstrom partially entered the truck to apply the brakes, but instead hit the accelerator, according to the CHP. The truck accelerated backward, struck a parked Chevrolet Impala, then a Toyota Celica. Leadstrom was thrown behind the truck after the second car was hit and was run over by the pickup...

Major posts need to be related to LLNL, NNSA, DOE, LLNS in some way. Comments must be on the topic. I will no longer post ANYONE'S political trashing and thrashings - no more name calling. There are other blogs and venues for such antics.