Skip to main content

NNSA manager optimistic about LANL budget

http://www.lamonitor.com/content/nnsa-manager-optimistic-about-lanl-budget

Comments

Anonymous said…
Read the quotes attributed to her in the story. She sounds like a teenager, not the senior government official in charge of a multibillion dollar nuclear weapons manufacturing facility.
Anonymous said…
Affirmative Action at work in NNSA!
Anonymous said…
Women in science.
Anonymous said…
Women in science.

May 9, 2016 at 8:36 PM



She has a Bachelor’s degree in mechanical engineering from West Virginia University and a Master’s in environmental engineering from Clemson. Whatever gave you the idea she's a woman in science? Your comment is unfair towards all women scientists working at LANL.

A woman in politics, maybe. “That a nice, strong hardy budget,” Lebak said. “Our friends in Congress are doing their work was we speak... it’s a good solid budget, it’s strong, and we have tons of scope to do.” She does sound like the former governor of the great state of Alaska.
Anonymous said…
The story of Dee Kotla vs. UC/LLNL is "unfair" to women too:


http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/dee-kotla-v-the-regents-of-the-university-of-california-dba-lawrence-livermore-national-laboratory-sexual-harassment-whistleblower-case-76421092.html
Anonymous said…
Women in science.

May 9, 2016 at 8:36 PM

Wow, I wish I was your daughter. You'd pay for my obedience training school wouldn't you? kind man that you are.
Anonymous said…
Anonymous said...
Women in science.

May 9, 2016 at 8:36 PM


And misogyny in the Labs, alive and well. Another reason I told my daughter she'd be better off working elsewhere.
Anonymous said…
...like fashion mart.
Anonymous said…
Anonymous said...

...like fashion mart.

AAAhhhh, sounds like someone needs a date cause Mary and her four sisters don't do much anymore. Poor little man.
Anonymous said…
Yes, all you politically correct dopes, is it in fact true that women managers in science can be ineffective, poorly educated, unprepared for their positions, blatantly trivial in approach, and just plain incompetent, just like men. Are we not allowed to say so?
Anonymous said…
Yes, well, and when you encounter one of those numerous "ineffective, poorly educated, unprepared for their positions, blatantly trivial in approach, and just plain incompetent" dudes who manage LANL, do you go: "Men in science!" ? Why not?

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...