What's LLNL Real Future

Nuclear labs face weapon reductions, layoffs
Plans reveal sites such may see 20 to 30 percent reduction in workforceBy Betsy Mason, STAFF WRITER

Article Last Updated: 12/20/2007 06:29:21 AM PST LIVERMORE

The Department of Energy revealed draft plans Tuesday to consolidate nuclear weapons work at eight sites, including Lawrence Livermore and Sandia national laboratories, a move that could result in a 20 to 30 percent reduction in workforce and the closing of 600 buildings.

At the same time, President Bush announced a 15 percent reduction in nuclear weapons, which along with a previous 50 percent cut that will be complete by the end of the year, would bring the stockpile down to 25 percent of the peak Cold War size.

The smaller stockpile could be maintained by a smaller weapons complex, Thomas D'Agostino, head of the DOE's National Nuclear Security Administration, said in a news conference Tuesday.

"We must act now to adapt to the future and stop pouring money into an old Cold War nuclear weapons complex," he said.

The proposal includes four possible plans, including the DOE's preferred strategy which would consolidate missions and facilities to create a smaller, safer and more secure complex that would be less expensive to run, D'Agostino said.

"Things will be done differently, and they will be done better," he said. Ideas for reducing the weapons stockpile and shrinking the complex have been much discussed for more than a year.

The full draft of the plans will be made public in mid-January, followed by a 90-day public comment period.

Eighteen public hearings will be held during that period, including one in Livermore on March 19.

None of the eight major weapons facilities would be closed, but redundancies would be eliminated. In September the DOE had announced plans to move the plutonium out of Livermore by 2014.

The new consolidation proposal would move the timetable up to 2012 and would include moving plutonium and weapons-grade uranium to just five sites by 2012, in order to reduce the costs of securing the special nuclear materials.

The total square footage dedicated to weapons work would be reduced by a third to 26 million square feet.

Explosives testing would be stopped at two facilities including Livermore's Site 300 near Tracy.

Bruce Goodwin, head of Weapons and Complex Integration at the lab, said that other work would continue at Site 300, including work for agencies other than the DOE such as the Departments of Defense and Homeland Security.

"The development of that site is a work in progress," he said. Livermore Lab would close two other testing facilities, at Site 300 and at the Plutonium Facility, that simulate the environmental conditions the stockpile is likely to experience to ensure the weapons will last.

That work will move to the Pantex Plant in Texas.

Livermore would continue to be a center for supercomputing, for high-energy and density physics at the National Ignition Facility and for high explosives research and development. "We're going to be one of the two weapons and design centers of excellence," Goodwin said.

Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico is the other. D'Agostino said he expected the planned workforce reduction to be largely taken care of through attrition.

Last month, Livermore Lab announced it would lay off 500 temporary and supplemental workers, and that as many as 300 more layoffs could be needed early next year due to potential federal budget cuts.

Livermore Lab had beaten out Los Alamos Lab for work on developing a new, more reliable and robust warhead that the administration hoped would eventually replace the existing, aging warheads.

But the broad omnibus spending bill expected to be approved by Congress eliminated money for the Reliable Replacement Warhead for the current fiscal year.

The administration had asked for $88 million for design and preliminary work on the proposed warhead.

"This (warhead) would have sent the wrong signal around the world encouraging the very proliferation we are trying to prevent," Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., a critic of the new warhead program said.

The Energy Department had argued the new warhead would be easier to maintain than the current aging warheads without the need for actual nuclear testing.

The Associated Press contributed to this story.

Reach Betsy Mason at bmason@bayareanewsgroup.com or 925-952-5026.

Letter from a congressman

An anonymous contributor received this letter from his/her congressman

Dear xxxxxxxxx,

Thank you for sharing your concerns about issues affecting Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) employees. I appreciate learning
your views, and I would like to update you on my work related to the
lab.

As you know, LLNL recently completed a transition to new management.
As part of this transition, federal officials mandated a new set of
benefits packages for lab employees. Following this announcement, I
received hundreds of letters, emails, and phone calls from lab
employees raising important concerns about the proposal. Many
employees expressed frustration that the benefits were less than those
offered at other laboratories and also worried that these decreased
benefits might hurt retention, recruitment, and morale at the lab.

In response to the outpouring of concern I heard, I hosted a town hall
meeting on July 2 to discuss the benefits package with lab employees
and their families, and nearly 300 people attended. I also helped lead
an effort by several of my Congressional colleagues from Northern
California to deliver a message to Secretary of Energy Samuel Bodman
expressing our concerns about the proposal, and included comments from
lab employees.

While I have serious concerns about the privatization of the lab, this
change was mandated by a law that passed before I entered Congress.
However, I remain committed to using my position to assist lab
employees during the adjustment phase. I spent much of my career as an
engineer, including time working as a contractor at Sandia National
Laboratory. From personal experience, I know how important national
laboratories are to our country's security and scientific advancement,
and I am dedicated to ensuring that our laboratories are able to
recruit and retain a talented workforce.

While I believe that we have made significant progress for LLNL
employees, I remain in close contact with federal officials, lab
administrators, and employees to make sure that Livermore remains an
important part of the community. I strongly urge you to stay in touch
with me if you have concerns about your benefits or other issues at
LLNL.

Thank you again for sharing your views. Please do not hesitate to
contact me if I can be of additional assistance. To learn about other
issues that I am working on in Congress, I encourage you to visit my
website at www.mcnerney.house.gov.

Sincerely,

Jerry McNerney
Member of Congress

Please do not reply to this message as the mailbox is unattended.
If you wish to contact me again, please visit my website at
http://mcnerney.house.gov

Poll results

Out of 52 voters,

- 28 have never contacted their congress person in 2007
- 20 did it fewer than 5 times
- 2 did it 5 to 10 times
- 2 were a pest!

The sad truth is
- There were only 52 voters? When the blog was started, I expected a traffic jam!
- 20 people would not even care if they were run over by a bulldozer.

The plan for LLNL by DOE is....

Click here

Remember her statement?

We did it. Today is the first day of our new contract under the management of Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC.

When we stood up the transition team in May 2006, my team agreed on three important measures of success:

We would transition people, programs and processes without adverse effect on safety, security or programmatic deliverables.

We would lead our colleagues through the transition and engage the workforce in embracing our collective future.

We would establish disciplined and responsive communications with the workforce, the Laboratory Site Office. and the incoming M&Ocontractor. I am very proud to say that we measured up.

There are so many people who ensured the transition went as smoothly as possible in a period of unprecedented change for our Laboratory. Thanks go not only to my team and the many employees who supported them, but also to the team at the University of California Office of the President who worked closely with us throughout the transition to sort through benefits, contracts, communications and legal issues and to the Laboratory Site Office who helped identify and resolve issues dealing with changing from a public to a private entity. And of course I am forever grateful to have had the pleasure of working with Tom Gioconda and his LLNS transition team, which led us to the finish line.

Transitioning a contract that has been in place for 55 years is a very challenging task at best and I can't imagine what it would have been like without Tom at the helm.My deepest appreciation goes to my team, which worked many, many long, hard hours for 18 months identifying, debating and resolving every detail needed to ensure a smooth transition. I'm proud to have worked with the Laboratory's communication team who created multiple communication venues and documented, recorded and shared our progress with the workforce, providing factual information as quickly as it became available.

And on a very personal note, I want to give a very special thank you to Kathy Cruz-Glasgow, my deputy, and Sharon Bertram, myadministrator, who stood by me through it all, keeping me sane and on track, allowing me the space to express my own issues and concerns and encouraging me forward. They also took on an enormous workload working the logistics for the LLNS team, supporting the frequently asked questions efforts, and maintaining transition records.

It's with an odd sadness I say goodbye to you as transition manager. This assignment has been challenging, frustrating and stressful, butmost importantly rewarding. I'm honored that Director George Miller asked me to take on this task, and I take personal pride in knowing I contributed to helping us all through this part of the formal transition. And now the real transition begins.

I ask you to join me in moving forward as we adjust to the change together and prepare for the opportunities and challenges that lie ahead. I do believe asGeorge so often tells us, we have a bright future our outstanding workforce ensures us of that.

For the curious, courtesy: Eric: * * * Updated 12/18

http://workingatlanl.blogspot.com

Budgets flat for decades to come

The Cost of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Other Global War on Terror Operations Since 9/11 June 28, 2007

Please note how many years they project the war in the middle east may go one. This being the case I'll bet that budgets at LLNL and LANL will be reduced every year for the next ten years. If the budgets stay flat I'd be amazed having seen this information.

The Congressional Budget Office estimates that additional war costs for the next 10 years could total about $472 billion if troop levels fall to 30,000 by 2010, or $919 billion if troop levels fall to 70,000 by about 2013. If these estimates are added to already appropriated amounts, total funding for Iraq and the GWOT could reach from about $980 billion to $1.4 trillion by 2017. This report will be updated as warranted