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...
Comments
Did you intentionally use the double negative, thereby apparently killing your own point? Proofread!!
So do the LANL managers and Bechtel get more money?
"DOE Office of Enforcement issued a Notice of Intent to Investigate recent hazardous electrical energy events and potential deficiencies in implementing hazardous energy assessment and control requirements at the Los Alamos National Laboratory."
http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2015/05/f22/Enforcement%20Notice%20of%20Intent%20to%20Investigate%2C%20Los%20Alamos%20National%20Security.pdf
5-8-15: "LANL electrical systems were being probed before burning accident"
http://www.abqjournal.com/581839/news/lanl-electrical-systems-were-being-probed-before-burning-accident.html
LANL had a long history of numerous electrical near-miss accidents before the most recent one. NNSA did nothing serious about this, and then a near fatal one happened. The lingering issue is will there now be real consequences to LANL.
Yes like a contract extension and huge bonus. NNSA has to no choice but to reward LANS and that is how it is going to be.
Is LANS getting the extra year?
"Review of the management processes applicable to this work revealed procedures and policies are in place to govern electrical maintenance work. However, it has been demonstrated by this and other events at LANL in recent history that these procedures and policies are often applied at the minimum level possible to execute work, or in some cases not used at all."
LANS lost a year off of the current LANL contract for its contribution to the WIPP incident and shutdown. How in any way that is defendable to Congress can NNSA give LANS a contract extension the next year after a damming statement like the one above. Where's POGO and the other watchdogs that so criticized UC's management of LANL.
JAIT Report: "This report neither determines nor implies liability."
"And the band played on"