Skip to main content

Augustine's interim report to congress

Augustine's interim report to congress


http://docs.house.gov/meetings/AS/AS29/20140326/101946/HHRG-113-AS29-Wstate-AugustineN-20140326.pdf

Comments

Anonymous said…
Would you look at the last page of this?

"Neither Mr. Norman Augustine nor ADM (Ret) Richard Mies have had federal grants, sub- grants, contracts or sub-contracts with the federal government over the last three fiscal years.
David Graham"

BUT, on the previous page one can see that all may not be as it appears.

"Admiral Mies serves as ..., a member of the Boards of Governors of Los Alamos National Laboratory and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, and a member of ..."

Being on the boards of LLNS and LANS may be a non-paid position these days, but it carried a hansom compensation a few years ago when published by UCOP. Sure, sure, some would say that he got his money from the LLC and not from the federal government, but that is splitting hairs, since the government is the sole funding for the labs.

Mies had a distinguished military career and should know better than to cut corners. The issue of reforming the NNSA labs is urgent and the hard working staff at those locations are running on empty. They deserve better.
Anonymous said…
Sure, sure, some would say that he got his money from the LLC and not from the federal government, but that is splitting hairs, since the government is the sole funding for the labs.

March 29, 2014 at 3:20 PM

This statement is misleading at best and disingenuous at worst. It is true that the government is the sole source of funding for the labs, but it is not the sole source of funding for the LLNS/LANS LLCs and their boards. Those receive fusing from the parent companies, including the board members, and the salaries and bonuses for the senior managers.
Anonymous said…
Can you say "laundering"?
Anonymous said…
There is nothing illegal or unethical about the funding arrangement mentioned by March 29, 2014 at 7:32 PM. Your use of the term "laundering" suggests you are a simple rabble rouser and not a serious thinker. Or very bright.
Anonymous said…
Sez who?
Anonymous said…
Whom...
Anonymous said…
'Those receive fusing from the parent companies'

March 29, 2014 at 7:32 PM

It could be entertaining to see some of them receive a fuse.
Anonymous said…
The annual spelling bee is upon us!
Anonymous said…
"Fuse" vs "fuze" vs "funding"? You've got to be kidding. One case is a spelling error (depending which side of the Atlantic you reside on), the other is obviously a typo.

Popular posts from this blog

Plutonium Shots on NIF.

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...

Trump is to gut the labs.

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.

tcp1 looking good

I just received my annual TCP-1 letter from LLNS and a summary of the LLNS Pension Plan. Looked in pretty good shape in 2013. About 35% overfunded (funding target attainment percentage = 134.92%). This was a decrease from 2012 where it was 51% overfunded (funding target attainment percentage = 151.59%). They did note that the 2012 change in the law on how liabilities are calculated using interest rates improved the plan's position. Without the change the funding target attainment percentages would have been 118% (2012) and 105% (2013). 2013 assets = $2,057,866,902 2013 liabilities = $1,525,162,784 vs 2012 assets = $1,844,924,947 2012 liabilities = $1,217,043,150 It was also noted that a slightly different calculation method ("fair market value") designed to show a clearer picture of the plan' status as December 31, 2013 had; Assets = $2,403,098,433 Liabilities = $2,068,984,256 Funding ratio = 116.15% Its a closed plan with 3,781 participants. Of that number, 3,151 wer...