LLNL - The True Story -

I took a look. Too bad my post never got posted.

Another anonymous letter to Dr Chu: Dear DR.Chu, Ask George about the glove box explosion at 695. Ask him about th 60 lbs of explosive that where dropped at site 300 Aske him about the gas leak at 241 wich would have resulted of the building blowing up Ask him about the Be contamination at 298 and 321:which resulted in personell who are now dying of chronic Be disease Ask him how LLNS spent 10 million on trees and grass after Bechtel ran the place into the ground. But most of all ask George what bechtel is doing to keep the lab safe and secure for the 70million a year they are getting in pay.

Anonymously contributed: Dear Dr. Chu, Welcome to LLNL. Look closely. Too bad it isn't what you expected. Ask George why he thinks costs are going up only 4%,when his pricing tools show 10%. Ask him if Russo and Liedle serve him as well as Kuckuck and Mara served Anastasio. Ask his why he degraded engineering from two strong independent departments to a single weak job-shop. Ask him why his people are so demoralized. Ask him why he put a 150% tax on travel costs. Ask him what DoE get from Bechtel for $40M per year? Where is the new accounting system, where is the promised project management system? Ask him why he lies to his employees so regularly. Ask him why the Bechtel business operations folks make declarations without bothering to leave their offices to see how things work. Ask him how he can retroactively bill sponsors for rate increases for work that was contracted for at a lower rate? Ask him why he hasn't aplogized publically for the "substantially equivalent in t...

I expected B123 to be overflowing! I expected dozens of questions! I expected the contributors of the "open letter to Dr Chu"s to be there to ask the questions, didn't you?

I was laid off due to the ISP. Unable to find work I have taken another job at LLNL at half my old pay. To my shock my old departments org chart is as big as it was before the ISP. LLNS has filled all the laid off workers positions with matrixed engineering people. I have the proof! How can they do that? What happened to callbacks? Is anyone looking into this? Does DOE provide any oversight for LLNS and if so who can be contacted?

Anonymously contributed: Hey, how about those new medical plan premiums? I'm a UC retiree forced to have my medical benefits provided by LLNS, and my premium is going up almost 50% next year (and benefits are being reduced). Add to this the fact that UC retirees from "other campuses" continue to enjoy the same benefits that they always received from UC (way, way better than ours), while we Lab types bite the big one again. I know some retirees are organizing and perhaps planning to sue, but I'm afraid that won't pan out, or at least it won't be resolved any time soon. It's a travesty, I tell you. We, who put in all those years in support of the Lab, the University, and the COUNTRY, we who were instrumental in the country's defense and helped win the Cold War, are being sold down the river by DOE, NNSA, UC, and the Bechtelians. Legal or not, it just isn't right, and it smacks of discrimination to me. George (and the rest of you ULM Bechtelian suck-u...

Anonymously contributed: No pun intended! There were some people fired at NIF for mismanagement. Finally, someone had the courage to clean house. If this is done on a larger scale, in other directorates, some managers will have an incentive to rise above mediocrity! The good old boys culture (scratch my back and I will scratch yours) is beginning to crumble!

Anonymous contribution (edited): Two things came out of G.M.'s all hands today that were pretty significant. One is that UC will be asking LLNL employees to contribute to the UC retirement fund to help cover lab retiree annuities. The other is that DOE/NNSA is thinking about raiding the LLNS defined benefit fund to help solve underfunded defined benefit plans of other national labs.

Anonymously contributed: Last week GM revealed that the Lab's operating budget for FY10 is expected to be $100M or so less than FY09. Not only is this bad for the real programs, but it means the indirect (overhead) budget will be less also, since there is less money to tax. Since GM has promised to avoid a layoff this year, does this mean (1) IAP and flex term employees need to update their resumes, (2) buyouts look possible, (3) NIF will have to pull its own weight, or (4) CFO can follow the Obama example and spend more than it collects?

I'm a typical LLNL employee. I came to the lab about a decade ago as I was convinced by a friend (maybe not such a friend) to come work here. I went through the interview process, then the "seemed to take forever" hiring process. Nine months after I was hired, I finally received my security clearance - It seemed like a long time to take considering I had a DoD TS at my old company. I was quite happy with the benefits provided by UC even though they did not provide "stock options" as did my old company. I did the math and figured that I could retire a 60 quite comfortably without having to stick about 8% of my pay in the old 401K. Not having to contribute to the 401K meant I had more spending money - something my family really needed for the move to California. I found over the next few years that LLNL had way too many rules and doing any kind of work was VERY expensive and took way to long to get anything done. I worked on one project that the paperwork ju...

Contributed anonymously and moved here, as its own post from the "look in your mail box" post: What is it about Business Operations that makes it the enemy of those of us trying to get work done? 1. Higher medical costs,and higher deductibles and copays so they can give more fee to LLNS? 2. Cheating employees out of benefits, such as dumping medicare age retirees? 3. Being unforgiving of mistakes? 4. Retroactively raising mnapower burden rates after long after contracts with sponsors have been signed because they can't do arithmetic. Then forcing that engineering employees families to pay the bill as the employees have to work harder, with less support and much longer OT hours and longer to get contracted work done: again so that Business Operations metrics are made so Frank and senior management can make their bonus? 5. Increasing the burden rates on personnel by 15% in one year. 6. The fact that none of the Business Operations Division Leaders and above have even worked...

Anonymously contributed: Everyone look in your mailboxes because coming soon, in a big white envelope, is more good news pertaining to our benefits. Once everyone has some time to do the math I suggest we open up a new post pertaining to the subject. I gave it a once over after a couple glasses of my favorate beverage and decided perhaps a better frame of mind was needed before getting serious about the increases, after all is said and looking at my glass as half full, the only good thing that comes to mind is we still have some choices. We may not like them but they are choices! FEELIN bruzed again all over!!

Please read the article and don't forget the anonymous contributor's comments below it: Las Vegas Review Journal October 7, 2009 Test site will get name change Revision to reflect its 'expanded mission' Keith Rogers Congress set out to modernize the mission of the Nevada Test Site and eventually change the name it's had for the past 57 years with Senate passage Tuesday of the defense authorization bill. The 93-7 vote sent the measure to President Barack Obama with an amendment by Nevada's senators that charges the head of the Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration with "renaming the site to reflect the expanded mission." That "expanded mission," according to the amendment by Sens. Harry Reid, D-Nev., and John Ensign, R-Nev., will focus on developing methods to verify treaties and reduce nuclear security threats "while continuing to support the nation's nuclear weapons program and other national security p...

Hopefully, this will be a trend: Short article from: http://dirtdiggersdigest.org http://dirtdiggersdigest.org/archives/815

Anonymously suggested: Dave Leary, one of the last true UC folks!

Anonymously contributed: NNSA Press Release LLNL de-inventory project moves ahead Oct. 1, 2009 The National Nuclear Security Administration on Wednesday announced that the Laboratory has removed about two thirds of its special nuclear material requiring the highest level of security protection. LLNL has completed shipments to five different receiver sites, including Los Alamos National Laboratory, the Nevada Test Site, the Savannah River Site, Y-12 Security Complex, and the Idaho National Laboratory, since the de-inventory project was initiated in October 2006. These shipments were completed in full compliance with existing safety and environmental laws and procedures. All federal and receiver site requirements were met for these shipments. “The removal of two thirds of LLNL’s nuclear material demonstrates real progress and is the result of some very hard work,” NNSA Administrator Thomas D’Agostino said. “NNSA continues to make tremendous strides in transforming a Cold War nuclear weap...