LLNL - The True Story -

Anonymous contributed: This article below from the ABQ Journal that came out today by John Fleck is a "must read": *** Bureaucracy Strangles National Laboratories *** By John Fleck / Journal Staff Writer on Tue, Feb 28, 2012 www.abqjournal.com/main/2012/02/28/news/ bureaucracy-strangles-national-laboratories-2.html

Anonymously contributed. USE CTRL+ to ZOOM IN

Anonymously contributed: Congressional Testimony Reinforces Picture Of Damage To Labs from Federal Micromanagement From the Independent 2/24/2012: Too big to post all here, see complete at: http://www.independentnews.com/news/article_897bb9ce-5e59-11e1-bf9f-0019bb2963f4.html posted: Friday, February 24, 2012 12:00 am | Updated: 12:05 pm, Thu Feb 23, 2012. By Jeff Garberson Critical Congressional testimony last week strongly reinforced concerns expressed only two days earlier in a national report about the damage that federal micromanagement is inflicting on the nation’s three national security laboratories, including Lawrence Livermore. The testimony was delivered to a subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee by several former laboratory directors, including Livermore’s George Miller and Michael Anastasio.

A message from the LLNL director on LANL workforce plan You may have seen that Los Alamos National Laboratory has announced it is working with NNSA to develop a workforce plan to help mitigate the impact of budget shortfalls at LANL for fiscal year 2012. Our Laboratory remains on a sound footing for FY12. As you know, there is still a great deal of uncertainty in Washington over final appropriations for FY13 and beyond, and LLNL senior leaders continue to work the situation very closely. The Laboratory can remain on a sound footing if final appropriations for FY13 are consistent with FY12. LLNL senior management is working proactively to maintain stability throughout the expected federal budget turmoil, to include a possible yearlong Continuing Resolution at the end of FY12, while keeping the entire institution fiscally sound and meeting the demands of our many missions. Parney Albright

Anonymously contributed: From Global Security Newswire Feb. 21, 2012 Budget Forced Delay of Los Alamos Plutonium Lab: DOE Secretary Spending restrictions forced the Obama administration to slash funding for a plutonium facility at the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, Energy Secretary Steven Chu said on Thursday (see GSN, Feb. 14). The Energy Department's semi-autonomous National Nuclear Security Administration plans a five-year delay in construction of the Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement site, which would supplant a decades-old facility that provides analytical chemistry and other research services for production of plutonium nuclear-weapon cores at Los Alamos. The replacement plant is now estimated to cost up to $6 billion. "Because of the budget constraints ... we have to look at all the other projects and we felt we could not simply start CMRR and the Uranium Processing Facility at Oak Ridge," the Albuquerque Journal quoted Chu as ...

Anonymously contributed: From: Charles F. McMillan Date: February 21, 2012 Subject: Cost Management and Workforce Planning On Thursday, the Laboratory submitted a plan to NNSA calling for a voluntary separation program (VSP) with a severance package based on years of service. There are three main reasons why we are taking this action now: * Our current budget and future financial outlook require significant cost-cutting to position the Lab for FY13 and beyond. In FY12 alone, we face a budget reduction of around $300 million across multiple programs. * By implementing a voluntary separation plan, we mitigate the possibility of an involuntary separation program later; and * We are positioning the Laboratory to meet future mission needs with a smaller workforce. For a variety of reasons, attrition has been low for the last three years, so we cannot rely on attrition alone to achieve workforce reductions. When I established the Laboratory Integrated Stewardship Cou...

What does the president's fy13 budget proposal mean for Llnl?

Anonymously contributed: THIS IS A NEW TOPIC, BUT I COULDN'T FIND ANOTHER WAY TO POST IT. Scooby's note: Please read. The very first post is for suggested new topics. I was laid off from Livermore Lab on May 22, 2008, after almost 20 years of service. The Lab denies age discrimination; however, time and time again they ignored their own lay-off policies. Instead of using an inverse order of seniority in which layoffs are determined by job classification based on the Lab's population as a whole, the Lab used a convoluted process in which the layoff decisions were made at the smallest possible level within each and every department (sometimes down to a unit of 2!). This made it easier to target who could be let go. Many older workers were "set up" by being moved into affected units prior to the lay-off, and their positions were then filled with much younger workers. There was also a large enough population of contract and supplemental workers that a lay-off of...

Anonymously contributed: HOUSE REPUBLICANS TO OBAMA: NUKE CUT PLAN IS ‘DANGEROUS’ BY: Bill Gertz - February 17, 2012 9:51 am http://freebeacon.com/house-republicans-to-obama-nuke-cut-plan-is-dangerous/

Anonymously contributed: Layoff Lawsuit Remember the lawsuit filed by 130 laid-off employees against LLNL? It's heating up a bit now... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5xc2TGJkX0 Scooby's note: Before anyone believes employees are LLNL's most precious asset, watch the video and see the suffering caused by the privatization.

Anonymously contributed: For what it's worth, which is not much in my opinion... ---------------------- NAS report released on lab management 02/15/2012 The National Academy of Sciences today has released a new report that evaluates how management and operations contracts of the National Nuclear Security Administration's national security labs are affecting the quality of science and engineering work. The report concludes that scientists and engineers at the three national security laboratories (Lawrence Livermore, Los Alamos and Sandia) appear committed to their work and core mission of maintaining the country's nuclear weapons stockpile. Recommendation 3-1: The study committee recommends that Congress recognize that maintenance of the stockpile remains the core mission of the Labs, and in that context consider endorsing and supporting in some way the evolution of the NNSA Laboratories to National Security Laboratories as described in the July 2010 four-agency ...

Anonymously contributed: I am hearing that Global Security, NIF and other departments are laying off small groups of people citing funding cuts. Does anyone informed or affected care to give detail?

CMRR and UPF from the Oak Ridge media's Frank Munger's Atomic City Underground Anonymously contributed: February 13, 2012 UPF tops Oak Ridge budget news The Obama administration has amped up support for a new production facility at the Y-12 nuclear weapons plant, proposing to boost funding in a big way and accelerate construction of the multibillion-dollar project. In the Fiscal Year 2013 budget request released today, the National Nuclear Security Administration seeks $340 million to jump-start construction of the Uranium Processing Facility. That's more than double this year's funding level on the Oak Ridge project and up significantly from an earlier plan to request $190 million for UPF in FY 2013, which begins Oct. 1.... The UPF currently is in the latter stages of design, with construction scheduled to start by year's end. The project is estimated to cost between $4.2 billion and $6.5 billion. Ramping up UPF comes as NNSA announced its intent to d...

Anonymously contributed: Seems like in the past few weeks there has been a growing level of talk in Congress (both Rep and Dem sides) that CMRR should not be built. So is there a really a good counter argument for CMRR, and if it is killed or significantly delayed what does this mean for de-inventory of SuperBlock at LLNL? -------------------- CMRR-NF: Delay Makes Sense by Lisbeth Gronlund by Stephen Young February 10, 2012 - Union of Concerned Scientist On Monday, when the Obama administration releases its FY13 budget request, it will announce a delay in the construction of a proposed new facility at the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL)—the so-called Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement-Nuclear Facility (CMRR-NF). As we discuss in a new UCS working paper [www.ucsusa.org/assets/documents/nwgs/cmrr-nuclear-facility-delay.pdf ] ,we think a delay is good. There are three possible reasons to build the CMRR-NF: 1. To allow an increase in pit production capacity. P...

Director Parney Albright opened his first all-hands meeting of the year with the observation that 2012 is "going to be a very busy year, and the next couple years are going to be very important for our Lab and how we contribute to the nation." He then presented his view of the Laboratory's mission, vision, values and priorities, noting the things he will focus on, as well as what he wants employees to focus on. (See the whole presentation). "Our mission is pretty much straight out of the LLNS Prime Contract," Albright noted. "Or as George Shultz put it during his recent visit here this week, our 'real mission is to make the world safer.' "We do this in a lot of different ways - our traditional focus on nuclear deterrence and our broadening efforts in national security. In fact, there's a lot of debate in Congress and elsewhere on how to move to a stable global environment." Turning to his vision for the Lab, Albright said that ...

Anonymously contributed: Weapons Complex Monitor February 6, 2012 NAS Lab Mgmt. Panel Report Expected This Week The National Academy of Sciences panel that for the last year has examined the impact of privatization on the nation’s nuclear weapons laboratories is expected to release its long-awaited report this week in advance of a Feb. 16 Congressional hearing. Chaired by former Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Director Charles Shank and UCLA professor Kumar Patel, the panel held a handful of meetings over the last year, traveling to Los Alamos, Lawrence Livermore and Sandia national laboratories to meet with lab employees and administrators and holding several hearings in Washington, D.C., with National Nuclear Security Administration and Department of Energy officials. After the report is released this week, Shank—and perhaps one more member of the panel—is scheduled to testify before the House Armed Services Strategic Forces Subcommittee Feb. 16. Former Los Al...

From Sandy Reese: My grandfather Herbert Moore worked at the Lawrence Livermore Lab Site 300 back in the late 1950's-early 60's. He passed away in 1962 from "leukemia" but it was later found out that he had been exposed to something on site and his true cause of death (radiation poisoning) was revealed in a private lawsuit that my grandmother received a small settlement from the government. Everything was very hush hush. I am trying to find out what possibly occurred at that site during that time frame that could have caused this. We are also trying to track down any information at all we can find on my grandfather as we are tracing our family history. At the time this happened the government must have wiped out all records to do with my grandpa because it's as if he doesn't exist. Any chance anyone has any information at all that might point me in the right direction? I think our family has a right to know. Thanks, Sandie Reese

Anonymously contributed: http://gbr.pepperdine.edu/2010/08/are-workplace-bullies-sabotaging-your-ability-to-compete