LLNL - The True Story -

Gary Gwilliam contributed this video Elaine Andrews a former employee of Lawrence Livermore Laboratory who was fired in the wake of LLNL's transition from public to private control, shares her personal story of suffering and loss. She is one of 130 former workers of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory who claim that illegal widespread layoffs specifically targeted the highest salaried senior staff members who were closest to retirement. Their claims against Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory vary from wrongful termination to age, race and disability discrimination. The discrimination lawsuit against Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, which was filed May 2009, is set for trial October 2012 in the Alameda County Superior Court. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2dTzqzarnK0&list=PL84D52B6EABEBE75C&feature=mh_lolz

Anonymously contributed: From Weapons & Complex Monitor April 26, 2012 House Panel Seeks Sweeping Changes to Make NNSA More Independent In an effort to increase the National Nuclear Security Administration’s autonomy from the Department of Energy, the House Armed Services Strategic Forces Subcommittee is set to approve sweeping changes to the agency that would distance itself from its parent organization. The subcommittee will mark up its portion of the Fiscal Year 2013 Defense Authorization Act today and NW&M Monitor has learned it will authorize $7.9 billion for the agency’s weapons program, a massive increase over the Administration’s $7.58 billion request (though the panel has thus far been mum on the deferred Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement- Nuclear Facility, which Chairman Mike Turner (R-Ohio) plans to address at a full committee markup in early May) that mirrors the Administration’s previous modernization plan. Most notably, documents released yesterday...

Anonymously contributed: Excerpts from Parney's written text to the Senate Subcommittee on Strategic Forces, which is posted on senate.gov:

Anonymously contributed: http://www.ladailypost.com/content/doe-ig-again-calls-doe-closures-and-reprioritization-cleanup-projects?goback=.gmp_1236607

Anonymous said... Parney's opening and closing for the Senate Subcommittee on Strategic Forces last week; OPENING REMARKS AND SUMMARY Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today on the National Nuclear Security Administration Management of its National Security Laboratories. I am Parney Albright, Director of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL). LLNL is one of the Department of Energy’s (DOE) National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) nuclear design laboratories responsible for helping sustain the safety, security, and effectiveness of our nation’s strategic deterrent. In addition to our stockpile stewardship efforts, we also leverage our capabilities to develop innovative solutions to major 21st-century challenges in nuclear security, defense and international security, and energy and environmental security. I thank the committee for your continuing support for the important work we do. This is...

Anonymous said... Maybe not as interesting as Mara's hairpiece, but more on topic http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/nuclear-weapon-reductions-must-be-part-of-strategic-analysis/2012/04/22/gIQAKG4iaT_story.html

Gary Gwilliam said: Are Employees at Los Alamos National Laboratory Suffering Same Fate as Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Employees?

Anonymously contributed: A bit more on the WH study. Koonin understands the Lab's (he also oversaw CalTech's contract to run NASA's JPL), maybe something will actually come out of this. Nuclear Weapons & Materials Monitor April 6, 2012 White House Commissions Study of Laboratory Governance Structure -Todd Jacobson Former DOE Under Secretary for Science Koonin to Lead Institute for Defense Analyses Study. The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy has tasked the Institute for Defense Analyses’ Science and Technology Policy Institute to study the governance structure of the nation’s federal laboratories... The White House is believed to be keenly interested in preserving science and technology at the laboratories, especially on the heels of several reports that have been critical of the NNSA’s weapons laboratories. Two recent reports from the National Academy of Sciences—one on management of the laboratories and another on the Comprehensive Test-Ban Trea...

Anonymously contributed: *** LANL Director Makes $1M *** ----------------------------- By ABQ Journal Staff on Thu, Apr 19, 2012 The director of Los Alamos National Laboratory now makes more than $1 million a year — about three times what the position paid before the lab’s management was privatized in 2006. LANL director Charles McMillan’s compensation was $1,081,059 in 2011. The amount, which apparently includes health insurance, pension costs and other benefits, is public because the lab has to provide what’s paid to top officials as a condition of accepting money under the federal stimulus program. That’s up from the $800,348 for McMillan’s predecessor Michael Anastasio in 2009, the federal reports show. The Nuclear Watch New Mexico group called attention to the latest salary figures Wednesday. “We specifically call upon Los Alamos lab to fully explain to northern New Mexicans why it needs to cut some 600 jobs while at the same time the for-profit management corporation is en...

Anonymously contributed: Article from Physics World April 2012

Anonymously contributed Article by Kay Mathews of the La Jicarita newspaper and blog from Northern New Mexico? “Bechtel and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory: Another Privatization Story”: http://lajicarita.wordpress.com/2012/04/16/bechtel-and-lawrence-livermore-national-laboratory-another-privatization-story/

Gary Gwilliam of Gwilliam, Ivary, Chiosso, Cavalli, & Brewer wrote: Article by Gary Gwilliam of Gwilliam, Ivary, Chiosso, Cavalli, & Brewer in Oakland, CA.

Anonymously contributed: Fine Print: A Disconnect in Evaluating the Nuclear Weapons Labs By Walter Pincus, Published: April 9, The Washington Post The distance between Washington and reality is always hard to measure. But the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) for the first time has released performance evaluations of the nation’s eight nuclear weapons laboratories and production facilities. Until now, the reviews were held internally. The fiscal 2011 reviews let us measure what went on in the nuclear weapons programs against what’s said about them in the nation’s capital. “NNSA specifies ‘what’ it wants rather than dictating to the contractor ‘how’ to get it done,” according to the report. The reviews are important for many reasons, but one critical one is money. Built into the contract are incentive fees awarded based on results of these performance reviews. Continue reading article

Anonymously contributed: Los Alamos Manager’s (aka LANS) Performance on Plutonium Project Criticized By John Fleck / Journal Staff Writer on Wed, Apr 4, 2012 The contractor team that managers Los Alamos National Laboratory for the federal government did a poor job of managing the Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement Nuclear Facility, a proposed plutonium lab that the federal government said this year it was deferring indefinitely because of cost overruns. In its annual “Performance Evaluation Report” on the lab’s management, the National Nuclear Security Administration said the lab’s management failed to “effectively manage CMRR NF/SFE progress in support of NNSA strategic objectives”. NNSA made the Performance Evaluation Report public this week amid a battering, including litigation, over the agency’s policy of keeping its contractor performance evaluations secret. Here’s the document. I’ll have more in tomorrow’s newspaper (scroll down for a direct download if yo...

what happened to the new LANL BLOG? Hardly any activity. It is a more appropriate BLOG for LANL. Most LANL visitors fill our ears with Knapp, Mc Millan and Co. who we dont care about. I encourage LANL visitors to express their views about those 2 characters at: http://lanllayoffs2012.blogspot.com/ Those who have constructive contributions are welcome to continue visiting the llnl BLOG. Scooby

Anonymously contributed: UC pays 400K salary to Mara!! "The following appointment was approved by the UC Board of Regents today (March 29): Office of the President Glenn Mara, vice president, Laboratory Management Approval was requested for Mr. Mara as a term appointment effective on or about July 1, 2012, for a total compensation of $394,266. This request was in response to the impending departure of the incumbent. Mr. Mara will be responsible for management of the UC Laboratory Management Office in its efforts to support Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) and the Limited Liability Companies that manage Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) as well as the university's oversight of the Department of Energy (DOE) contractual agreements relating to science and technology research programs at the National Laboratories. Mr. Mara's annual base salary of $367,000 is 4.8 percent below the midpoint for the SLC...

Anonymously contributed: An article in the ABQ journal. Finally NNSA has released the performance reports. here are the links: http://www.nukewatch.org/ LANL documents reveal problems

Anonymously contributed: Another study that will lead to zero "positive" change at the labs... Btw, didn't Parney work at IDA? Weapons Complex Monitor April 4, 2012 White House Requests Study of National Lab Governance The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy has tasked the Institute for Defense Analyses’ Science and Technology Policy Institute to study governance of the nation’s federal laboratories, and former Under Secretary of Energy for Science Steve Koonin will head up the review effort, NW&M Monitor has learned. The study is expected to examine whether the governance structures in place at the laboratories—including the government-owned, contractor operated model in place at Department of Energy/NNSA labs—is appropriate to meet national security challenges into the future. OSTP and Koonin did not respond to requests for comment, but Koonin is expected to hold invitation-only information-gathering sessions over the next month to aid in the...

Anonymously contributed: More FAQs for LLNS Defined Benefit Plan A second round of answers to Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) has been posted on the LLNL TCP1 Benefits Web page. Frequently Asked Questions as of April 2, 2012 1. What is the ratio of employer vs. employee contributions? A. For FY12, the $20 million employer contribution equates to 17 percent as compared to the 5 percent employee contribution. For FY13, the employer contribution is projected to be $88 million, or 24 percent. 2. Why are contributions starting out at 5 percent? Why not a lower amount? A. Had contributions been approved two years ago, they would have begun at a lower rate and would have increased over time. Since DOE only recently approved starting contributions, it was necessary to begin at 5 percent because the obligations of the plan are higher than they were two years ago. 3. Are employee contributions capped at 5 percent or will they increase? A. The amount of future contributions wi...

Anonymously contributed: Note the last paragraph from this excerpt!! From Science Magazine: No Technical Reason to Avoid a Test Ban, NRC Panel Says by Daniel Clery on 30 March 2012 The United States' nuclear deterrent will remain safe and reliable without nuclear testing as long as the government keeps its weapons up to date with the so-called Stockpile Stewardship Program and fosters a scientific workforce capable of running the SSP, says a report from the U.S. National Academies released today. The report investigated technical issues surrounding the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) and also concluded that the treaty's monitoring system, along with America's own intelligence resources, have made huge strides in recent years in their ability to detect clandestine tests that could pose a military threat to the United States. The CTBT Organization's International Monitoring System (IMS) "has created a capability so that any potential tester woul...