Elaine Andrews' personal 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

House Panel Seeks Sweeping Changes to Make NNSA More Independent

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 indicate that the panel will move to create more autonomy for the agency, giving NNSA’s Administrator full responsibility for all NNSA programs, policies, rules and regulations and “complete authority to establish and conduct oversight of policies, activities and procedures of the NNSA without direction or oversight by the Secretary [of Energy].” The bill would leave the Secretary of Energy only with disapproval authority of the agency’s decisions, while revamping and streamlining work within the NNSA with a host of other provisions. Includes language that would: * Shift health, safety and security oversight from the Department of Energy to NNSA while requiring the NNSA to adopt Occupational Safety and Health Administration standards for non-nuclear operations and establish its own policies to ensure the protection of special nuclear material, sensitive assets and classified information; * Require the NNSA to revise its regulations, rules, directives, orders, and policies in order to streamline the agency’s operations; * Establishing a new system of governance, management and oversight of NNSA M&O contracts that transitions from transaction-based oversight to performance-based oversight that uses national and international standards and best practices where applicable; * Gradually decrease the number of employees in the NNSA’s Office of the Administrator to 800 by Oct. 1, 2014 (and 1,300 180 days after the enactment of the bill, and 1,000 starting Oct. 1, 2013) to help propel the transition from transaction-based to performance based oversight; * Require the NNSA to prepare a cost-benefit analysis prior to any management and operating contract competition during Fiscal Years 2012 to 2017, which would be reviewed by the Government Accountability Office; * Create a National Nuclear Security Administration Council that would include the heads of the agency’s nuclear weapons laboratories and production facilities in order to establish a communication pipeline for mission and operational concerns; and * Allow the NNSA to authorize weapons complex officials to design and build prototypes of nuclear weapons “to further intelligence assessments of foreign nuclear weapons activities” while helping to maintain the proficiency of current weapons designers.

Excerpts from Parney's written text to the Senate Subcommittee on Strategic Forces :

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

Closing national Labs?

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

Parney's opening and closing for the Senate Subcommittee on Strategic Forces

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 a challenging period for the federal government, with many priorities that require attention at a time of budget austerity. This is also the case for the nation’s Stockpile Stewardship Program, including the activities at Livermore. We are very excited about recent and prospective major accomplishments, which I will highlight, but we are also very concerned about impediments to current programs and long-term success in stockpile stewardship. In particular, I stress four points: - Without sustained support for nuclear weapons science, stockpile stewardship will eventually fail. - We remain optimistic about the prospect of long-term success of ―science-based‖ stockpile stewardship provided that support is sustained. The skills deriving from a solid science base will enable stockpile stewards to maintain a safe, secure, and effective deterrent and deliver on challenging life-extension programs. - Recognition of and support for the NNSA laboratories serving as ―national security laboratories‖ will better help the United States meet a broad set of 21st-century security challenges. These broader activities complement our nuclear weapons responsibilities, adding depth, breadth, and strength to the laboratories’ capabilities. - The NNSA laboratories would perform their vital national security mission much more effectively if they were managed as trusted partners of the federal government and governed in a more streamlined/cost-effective way, consistent with the original intent of the federally-funded research and development center (FFRDC) construct. CLOSING REMARKS My overall message is a ―good news‖ story with a note of caution. With continuing investments in HPC and with NIF coming on-line as a unique experimental facility to gather necessary input and validation data for nuclear weapons science simulation codes, science-based stockpile stewardship is on the path to success. However, vigilance and strong partnerships are required to sustain program support so that there will be skilled and motivated stockpile stewards as long as the nation relies on nuclear deterrence. All of us at LLNL look forward to serving as a trusted partner in the nation’s national security enterprise and are proud to provide innovative science and technology to meet a broad set of national security needs. We thank you for your continuing support

Nuclear weapon reductions must be part of strategic analysis

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

Are Employees at Los Alamos National Laboratory Suffering Same Fate as Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Employees?

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