Skip to main content

Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP21)

Image
By scooby
MAP-21 Buried in a transportation bill called MAP-21 (passed last June by Congress) is the root of the confusion regarding pension valuation/liability. Link below is an analysis from vanguard explaining details. Key Points: - Congress changed the interest rate used to project pension liabilities from a 2-year avg to a 25-year average. - They required a significant increase in PBGC contributions. https://institutional.vanguard.com/iam/pdf/REGC21.pdf

Comments

Anonymous said…

Good news that they're finally going to up the PBGC contributions. That was sorely needed. And if I read this right, sounds like a 40% increase over a couple of years.

Need to keep an eye on that and make sure it actually happens...if it does, it's a very good thing.
5/09/2013 4:34 PM
Anonymous said…

Reading this, it doesn't seem to be as simple as just 2-year average vs 25-year average, but that is the general shape and direction of the change. And it does explain the very different sets of numbers in the recent mailer on the pension. Strange that this was in a transportation bill, but I guess these are the ways of washington.
5/11/2013 2:49 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Plutonium Shots on NIF.

By scooby
Tri-Valley Cares needs to be on this if they aren't already. We need to make sure that NNSA and LLNL does not make good on promises to pursue such stupid ideas as doing Plutonium experiments on NIF. The stupidity arises from the fact that a huge population is placed at risk in the short and long term. Why do this kind of experiment in a heavily populated area? Only a moron would push that kind of imbecile area. Do it somewhere else in the god forsaken hills of Los Alamos. Why should the communities in the Bay Area be subjected to such increased risk just because the lab's NIF has failed twice and is trying the Hail Mary pass of doing an SNM experiment just to justify their existence? Those Laser EoS techniques and the people analyzing the raw data are all just BAD anyways. You know what comes next after they do the experiment. They'll figure out that they need larger samples. More risk for the local population. Stop this imbecilic pursuit. They wan...
155 comments
Read more

Trump is to gut the labs.

By scooby
The budget has a 20% decrease to DOE office of science, 20% cut to NIH. NASA also gets a cut. This will  have a huge negative effect on the lab. Crazy, juts crazy. He also wants to cut NEA and PBS, this may not seem like  a big deal but they get very little money and do great things.
124 comments
Read more

LLNL un-diversity

By scooby
Actual post from Dec. 15 from one of the streams. This is a real topic. As far as promoting women and minorities even if their qualifications are not as good as the white male scientists, I am all for it. We need diversity at the lab and if that is what it takes, so be it.  Quit your whining. Look around the lab, what do you see? White male geezers. How many African Americans do you see at the lab? Virtually none. LLNL is one of the MOST undiverse places you will see. Face it folks, LLNL is an institution of white male privilege and they don't want to give up their privileged positions. California, a state of majority Hispanics has the "crown jewel" LLNL nestled in the middle of it with very FEW Hispanics at all!
79 comments
Read more