BLOG purpose

This BLOG is for LLNL present and past employees, friends of LLNL and anyone impacted by the privatization of the Lab to express their opinions and expose the waste, wrongdoing and any kind of injustice against employees and taxpayers by LLNS/DOE/NNSA. The opinions stated are personal opinions. Therefore, The BLOG author may or may not agree with them before making the decision to post them. Comments not conforming to BLOG rules are deleted. Blog author serves as a moderator. For new topics or suggestions, email jlscoob5@gmail.com

Tuesday, January 1, 2019

SUGGEST NEW TOPICS HERE


Submit candidates for new topics here only. Stay on topic with National Labs' related issues.

All submissions are screened first for compliance with blog rules. Blog moderator checks queue roughly every 2 to 3 hours daily between 8:00 and 20:00.

Sunday, January 14, 2018

Texas A&M

Texas A&M nonexclusive partnership with multiple companies is one version of why they refuse to go public on LANL bid teams. If this is correct, that is some messed up situation. 

Friday, January 12, 2018

Nuc review

Trump has been busy today. Exclusive: Here Is A Draft Of Trump’s Nuclear Review. He Wants A Lot More Nukes. His first Nuclear Posture Review: more nukes, more posturing. 

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-nuclear-posture-review-2018_us_5a4d4773e4b06d1621bce4c5?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009 

n October, NBC reported that President Trump had told a gathering of high-ranking national security leaders that “he wanted what amounted to a nearly tenfold increase in the U.S. nuclear arsenal.” While the report doesn’t nearly go that far, it does call for the development of new, so-called low-yield nuclear weapons — warheads with a lower explosive force. The logic of those pushing for the development of smaller nukes is that our current nuclear weapons are too big and too deadly to ever use; we are effectively self-deterred, and the world knows it. To make sure other countries believe that we’d actually use nuclear force, the thinking goes, we need more low-yield nukes. 

Wednesday, January 10, 2018

NNSA semi autonomy questioned.

NNSA Could Do With Less Semiautonomy, DOE No. 2 Tells Congress

https://www.exchangemonitor.com/nnsa-less-semi-autonomy-doe-no-2-tells-congress/

Regulators reject Perry's subsidies!

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2018/01/08/regulators-reject-rick-perrys-plan-to-prop-up-coal-and-nuclear-plants.html

Klotz retiring.

NNSA Administrator Klotz To Retire Jan. 19 Defense Daily 01/09/2018 National Nuclear Security Administrator Frank Klotz told sister publication Weapons Complex Morning Briefing on Tuesday he will retire from the semi-autonomous Department of Energy nuclear-weapon agency on Jan. 19. 


http://www.defensedaily.com/nnsa-administrator-klotz-retire-jan-19/

Monday, January 1, 2018

LLNL Retiree Group

What is happening with the LLNL Retire group suing UC to restore the health benefits to retirees? Apparently the Retiree Website is no longer being updated. See: http://llnlretiree.com/ Why did the judge decertify the retiree list? 

http://www.independentnews.com/news/surprise-ruling-decertifies-retiree-class-in-lawsuit/article_7b76ca3e-d541-11e7-9c6c-47e48d1fdcf4.html

Yet I got an E-mail that included: " The order decertifying the class will result in our having to fight harder. There will be added expense. But we are determined to do the right thing for retirees who spent their lives worked at the Laboratory assuming they would get the benefits promised by the Regents, which we all understood were protected and guaranteed. It is not acceptable that retirees in our class (now including over 9,000 people when surviving spouses and dependents are counted). We must continue the fight! So we have to ask for your help again. Please give what you can afford. Every 

Saturday, December 30, 2017

LLNS Pension Recalculation

LLNS Pension Recalculation - May 2017 Hello LLNS Pensioners: Some of you, myself included, may have received a letter from the LLNS Defined Benefit Pension Plan last May 2017. The letter to me indicated that they had discovered an administrative error with my monthly payment. They indicated that I had received overpayments from the plan in all payments since retiring and that I must repay the plan. They proceeded to make a repayment deduction from my monthly pension check. Unfortunately, this repayment deduction was made on an after-tax basis and the so called overpayment was made on a pre-tax basis. This was wrong and they should have known better. Why is this important? Assume that you are incrementally taxed at 25 percent and that they said that you were overpaid $2000 over the course of your retirement. You would have paid $500 in taxes and received $1500 in pension cash. When they applied the after tax repayment deduction they took $2000 out of your pension payments and you are 

Why isn't LLNL NIF mentioned?

https://www.nbcnews.com/mach/science/long-wait-fusion-power-may-be-coming-end-ncna833251

Friday, December 29, 2017

Cases open the door for pension cuts

Based on the 1947 "California Rule", aren't ALL lab employees pension vested in UC/LLNL and UC/LANL prior to the for-profit contract transitions, entitled to the lower medical benefit premiums of their fellow UC employees? "At issue is the “California Rule,” which dates to court rulings beginning in 1947. It says workers enter a contract with their employer on their first day of work, entitling them to retirement benefits that can never be diminished unless replaced with similar benefits." 
https://www.eastbaytimes.com/2017/12/28/cases-could-open-door-to-pension-cuts-for-california-workers/

Perdue bid?

Perdue put in a bid to run Los Alamos? Really, the chicken company or the university. Seriously, what is the connection if any and what is the motivation for some place that has no connection to bid?

So long Norm!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com.mx/entry/norman-pattiz-resigns-uc-regent_us_5a45888fe4b0b0e5a7a5a9b5

Wednesday, December 27, 2017

Bill pre-filed to tax non-profit LANL operator

LANL contract still about the money to local community and state and not about the national mission “We’re trying to prevent the potential of a nonprofit entity taking over the management operation of the lab, which would have, needless to say, a $24 million impact to the state of New Mexico, as well as a $22 million impact to Los Alamos County,” Cisneros said. “It’s a significant concern for all of us that we maintain that status in terms of revenue for both the state and local government.” The bill seeks to specifically target non-profit contractors that take over the management and operations contracts of the state’s two national laboratories now and into the future. http://www.lamonitor.com/content/state-sen-cisneros-prefiles-grt-bill 

Tuesday, December 26, 2017

Blog Archive