SUBJECT: Voluntary Separation Through SSP

To/MS: All Employees
From/MS: Jan A. Van Prooyen, A100
Phone/Fax: 7-5101/7-2997
Symbol: DIR-07-344
Date: November 30, 2007

SUBJECT: Voluntary Separation Through SSP

We have received several questions about whether AM 1203.07
applies to participants in the Self-Selection Program. AM
1203.07 prohibits employees terminating because of a reduction-
in-force from returning as Guest Scientists. This provision,
however, does not apply to the Self-Selection Program. To
eliminate any confusion, effective immediately the policy is
amended to read as follows:

AM 1203.07: Employees who terminate because of a reduction-in-
force may not serve as Laboratory Guests unless the termination
was implemented as part of a Self-Selection Program.

Window opens for voluntary departures

LOS ALAMOS MONITOR
Window opens for voluntary departures


By ROGER SNODGRASS, Monitor Assistant Editor


The voluntary program to reduce the workforce at Los Alamos National Laboratory began Wednesday, after formal approval from the National Nuclear Security Administration.
The program is an effort to reduce the workforce by 500-750 employees, in order to avoid an involuntary selection of individuals for lay-offs. If the total reaches 750, that would amount to about 9 percent of regular laboratory employees.
Some employees may find they are not eligible to resign. As laboratory director Michael Anastasio explained in previous communications, some employees will not qualify for the restructuring program.

Workers in defined classifications with critical skills or strategic responsibilities and managers defined as key personnel under LANL’s government contract will not be allowed leave under the self-selection plan.

Eligible employees were to receive notices Wednesday, as were employees who are excluded from the voluntary program. About 7 percent of the workforce will be excluded, Anastasio has said.
In an all-employee memo on Wednesday, Laboratory Deputy Director Jan Van Prooyen opened the first phase of the restructuring plan, requesting employees who are interested in stepping down from their jobs to fill out an application before Dec. 6.

Another work week is allowed for the employee to change his or her mind – before Dec. 13.
Van Prooyen detailed a schedule to notify applicants by Dec. 20, whether their application had been accepted or not.

The post-holiday week of Jan. 2 through Jan. 8 would be devoted to employee departure meetings, so that accepted employees would be separated from the laboratory as of Jan. 10.

“Today was the first day for people to apply,” said lab spokesman Kevin Roark Wednesday. “The process is fairly well structured, and we won’t announce how many people have applied until folks are notified whether they have been accepted.”

Van Prooyen said the laboratory proposal that Anastasio has outlined to employees and state legislators was approved by NNSA, with one main difference.

The laboratory had proposed evaluating possible job cuts within its “flexible workforce,” to follow approval of voluntary departures in the first phase.

“The flexible workforce is made up of limited term employees and “other contractors,” Roark said, “basically those contractors aside from KSL and PTLA.”

Roark said no specific number had been projected for trimming the flexible workforce.
“It’s whatever can be done appropriately without damaging the long-term viability of meeting our commitments, and another hedge against the unknown,” he said.

Van Prooyen’s memo indicated the laboratory had amended a policy in the Laboratory Administrative Manual “to remove a provision prohibiting a Self-Selection Program.”
Citing concern about community impacts, lab officials have scheduled two community information sessions to discuss the workforce restructuring plan next week.

Employees were encouraged to consult a special internal website and attend internal laboratory informational sessions, two-hour daily meetings that began Wednesday and continue through Tuesday.

The laboratory will host an informational session in Pojoaque from 7-9 p.m. Monday at the Cities of Gold Conference Center.

A second meeting is scheduled to take place from 7-9 p.m. Tuesday in Los Alamos at Duane Smith Auditorium.

Commentary: Let's get serious about the LANL debate

By Sen. Pete Domenici | The New Mexican

11/30/2007

On Wednesday, I finished a two-day tour of Sandia and Los Alamos national laboratories with a bipartisan group of legislators from the House of Representatives. Then, I re-read last week's New Mexican editorial condemning LANL funding and my role in increasing the lab's "lavish" spending.

The contrast between what we saw on the tour, and the views of the editorial, is stark and disturbing.

The views of the editorial and other critics of LANL can be fairly summed up this way:

* Nuclear weapons are now passé;

* Los Alamos devotes too much of its work to activities related to nuclear weapons;

* LANL has an "outdated lab mission," so the House-passed fiscal year 2008 appropriations bill that cuts funding for nuclear weapons is a good thing;

* And we need to cut funding and "re-educate" LANL's scientists away from nuclear-related work to a vague alternative energy or global warming mission.

Our tour offered the following succinct refutation of those notions:

* More nations than ever before, led by Russia's multi-billion dollar resurgent nuclear weapons program, pursue nuclear armaments;

* LANL spends only about 60 percent of its federal budget on weapons work;

* LANL's core mission — to certify that America's nuclear weapons will work if we need them — is more critical than ever;

* Thus, LANL needs more funding to carry out its certification mandate through the stockpile stewardship program, and to continue research into nanotechnology, nuclear waste cleanup, its Neutron Science Center (LANSCE), and its cutting-edge work in computer-based global climate modeling.

I believe the House-passed fiscal year 2008 Energy and Water Appropriations Bill represents a disaster for America's security and a setback for the very goals The New Mexican advocates. The House bill focuses the debate on specifics. The New Mexican is happy that the House cut LANL's fiscal year 2008 budget by 25 percent. I am not.

Let's take a moment to review where we stand in American nuclear weapons policy.

In the 1990s, President Bill Clinton and Congress decided to move to a program called Science-Based Stockpile Stewardship in order to end underground nuclear weapons testing, but still protect the integrity of our nuclear weapons capability. This new program, based on hoped-for breakthroughs in physics and computer power, was adopted with the full understanding that it would cost much more than simply staying with the old policy of underground testing.

In fact, the biggest reason for much of the increase in spending is this new stewardship policy, a policy that The New Mexican has wholeheartedly endorsed in the past. It was right to do so. The New Mexican cannot have it both ways; we must either go back to underground testing to reduce future costs, or spend the billions needed to develop the infrastructure to continue the present policy of "virtual" testing.

Not only does the House bill have the potential to cripple the stockpile stewardship program, it also:

* Eliminates funding for LANSCE, which has the potential to develop nuclear fuels for emissions-free electricity generation;

* Cuts nuclear weapons surveillance at the very time our scientists are increasingly concerned about "loose nukes";

* Cuts nuclear material cleanup, risking cleanup agreements between the Department of Energy and the state of New Mexico;

* Eliminates all funding for the Road Runner Supercomputer, a vital part of future efforts in global climate modeling based upon LANL's post-nuclear attack work in the past;

* And provides absolutely no guidance concerning what a new mission might be for LANL or any other laboratory.

The bill might please the A.Q. Khans of the world, many of whom are working right now to develop nuclear weapons for Iran, North Korea, Syria and other unstable regimes. It should not please people who are serious about America's national security.

It may be exciting to endorse legislation to "teach the labs" a lesson, or to pass declarations of "nuclear free zones," but those of us who must live and work in the real, dangerous world cannot be dilettantes.

New Mexico's Sen. Pete Domenici is ranking member of the Senate Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee that funds the Department of Energy and its national laboratories.

Well, of Course They Did

NNSA approves Los Alamos lab layoffs

KOB-TV

updated 2 hours, 9 minutes ago

NM - LOS ALAMOS, N.M. (AP) - The National Nuclear Security Administration has approved a Los Alamos National Laboratory plan to cut between 500 and 750 jobs. An NNSA spokesman, Bernie Pleau, says the plan was approved November 21st-two days after the lab announced the proposed job cuts.

Lab officials have said the number of jobs must be trimmed because of anticipated federal budget cuts and other factors.

Pleau says lab employees who decide to leave voluntarily have until December 6th to submit their applications.

Under the plan, workers-except those in certain critical jobs will be offered severance packages if they leave voluntarily.

The packages will be based on years of service. The lab would start laying off employees after that.

New Sorted RIF List

Here.

GAO wants more oversight of nuclear labs

By SUE MAJOR HOLMES, Associated Press Writer Wed Nov 28, 10:01 PM ET

ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. - The nation's nuclear weapons laboratories need tougher safety oversight to fix a recent track record that includes dozens of lapses, accidents and near misses, according to a government report released Wednesday.

The Government Accountability Office review of New Mexico's Los Alamos National Laboratory, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California and Sandia National Laboratories came in response to security breaches and safety concerns at Los Alamos.

The GAO, an investigative arm of Congress, said it found a lax attitude toward safety procedures, weaknesses in identifying and correcting safety problems, and inadequate oversight by the National Nuclear Security Administration, a division of the Department of Energy. The review cited nearly 60 serious accidents or near misses since 2000.

The GAO recommended that the NNSA retain independent federal oversight, but said it should start making annual progress reports to Congress. The report also criticized the NNSA's heavy reliance on contractors' own safety management controls for oversight.

It noted the NNSA was strengthening oversight and taking other steps, but said those efforts were still under way and it was too early to see what effect they might have.

John Broehm, an NNSA spokesman in Washington, said agency officials generally agreed with the recommendations, but felt the report "was a little misleading" in its implication that the labs have major problems.

"A lot of it is worker safety vs. nuclear safety," he said.

"We take nuclear safety and worker safety very seriously. But when you look at the size and scope of what we do, we feel the numbers are pretty good," Broehm said.

Accidents and nuclear safety violations contributed to temporary shutdowns at Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore in 2004 and 2005, but safety problems persist, the report said.

Los Alamos shut down virtually all its divisions for review in the summer of 2004 after two computer disks believed to contain classified information were reported missing and an intern suffered an eye injury from a laser. The lab wasn't back into full operation until early 2005.

Accidents at the labs included workers being exposed to radiation, inhaling toxic vapors and being shocked. No one was killed, but some workers were seriously injured and lab facilities were damaged, the GAO said.

Among other shortcomings cited in the report:

• Seven workers at a Los Alamos plutonium-processing facility received "significant doses of radiation" in a 2000 accident because the lab failed to correct earlier problems.

• Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore violated safety rules eight times since 2000, with penalties totaling nearly $3 million for Los Alamos and $808,000 for Lawrence Livermore. Sandia has not been cited for a safety violation in that time.

• Liquid chlorine dioxide formed and exploded during a 2002 experiment at Los Alamos. The experiment's two researchers noticed a rapid rise in temperature and fled the room seconds before the explosion.

• A 2003 accident at a Sandia construction site seriously injured two workers.

• A Los Alamos worker opened a package containing radioactive material in 2005 and unknowingly contaminated himself, his clothing and items he touched. The contamination was not discovered for 11 days and in the meantime, the worker spread it to his home, other places in Los Alamos, and relatives' homes in Colorado and Kansas.

[Download the full report here.]

And Speaking of Blogs

Guess who's been spending quite a bit of time today mining LTRS for info: osis.gov.

The screen shots of what they were looking at are below (click to enlarge). What does it mean? Is the intelligence community interested in the goings-on at LANL, or did some osis.gov individual just want to take a peek?

-Gus

________________________________________________

What's osis.gov, you wonder? Well, so did I. Here's what I found out about them. From this web site http://fmso.leavenworth.army.mil/wbil/osisinfo.htm.

Foreign Military Studies Office
Joint Reserve Intelligence Center

Home| Recently Posted | Analytical Products| Links| Reviews| World Basic Information Library

home / wbil / osis info

Intelink-U

formerly known as The Open Source Information System (OSIS)

Intelink-U is a virtual private network -- a government intranet. It provides a protected environment to exchange unclassified and FOUO/SBU US Government and other open source data among Intelligence Community and other selected organizations. The Intelink-U firewalls safeguard government information resources and allow customers access to both the Intelink-U network and the public Internet. This gives Intelink-U users a single point of access to an unprecedented amount of unclassified open source information. Intelink-U is operated by the Intelligence Community Enterprise Solutions (ICES).

. . .

This site, http://www.fas.org/irp/program/disseminate/osis.htm, also describes OSIS.

---

Open Source Information System (OSIS)

The Open Source Information System (OSIS) was formerly the name of an unclassified network serving the intelligence community with open source intelligence.

In mid 2006, the name OSIS and the network and content to which it referred were decoupled. The network piece is now named DNI-U while the content piece is named Intelink-U.

The DNI-U network is maintained by the DNI-CIO Intelligence Community Enterprise Services office (ICES).

Related Resources

• Intelink-U
• National Open Source Enterprise, Intelligence Community Directive 301, July 11, 2006

Mike's Response to Allegations of "Fibbing"

"What Blog?"

Comment of the Week, Thursday Edition

From the Anastasio Caught in a Very Large Fib post:

-Gus
______________________________________________

So, why would Anastasio be telling the State Legislature that he has no control over growing WFO at LANL, and then tell Udall that "he's the man" to grow WFO at LANL?

That was a rhetorical question, of course. LANS, DOE, and NNSA don't want WFO at LANL, they want pit production. A year from now LANS can say, "Well, we tried, but we can't find any WFO. Guess we'll just have to do pit production."

And guess what: it's going to work for them, just that easy.

Anastasio Caught in a Very Large Fib

One of our alert readers has brought it to our attention that Dr. Michael Anastasio has had one of his "fibs" documented by the media. On September 16, John Fleck posted a story that compared how SNL and LANL have each approached the task of diversifying their portfolios away from being totally reliant on DOE program funding. You can read that story which was posted on this blog here. This was what Anastasio said about diversification then:

Los Alamos' approach, as explained by lab director Michael Anastasio at a July meeting of the New Mexico state Legislature's Los Alamos National Laboratory Oversight Committee, looks very different from Sandia's go-go diversification of recent years.

Any fundamental makeover of the lab's mission would require a dramatic change in direction from Washington.

"We don't set policy," he said.

In today's Los Alamos Monitor , this is what Anastasio had to say on the subject, according to Tom Udall. Udall was in town for a series of classified briefings during an overview of LANL’s Weapons Programs to the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Strategic Forces, of which he is a member.

“I told Mike (Anastasio) he needs to get out there and hustle for the lab like Sandia did – to work with various agencies in the government to grow these areas,” Udall said during an interview Wednesday at the Los Alamos Research Park. “He told me he’s the guy to do that.”

So, which is it going to be, Mike? Either LANL's diversification is totally outside of your control, or you're the guy for the job. Or, maybe there's a third version of your story that we have not yet heard?

If so, should we believe it, or one of the other two versions?

-Gus

Udall pushes for LANL growth

By CAROL A. CLARK Monitor County Editor

Citing Sandia as the model to mimic, Rep. Tom Udall, D-N.M., is urging Los Alamos National Laboratory Director Michael Anastasio to seek funding to expand non-weapon areas such as nonproliferation, energy security and energy renewables. The issue, Udall said, is the shrinking nuclear weapons footprint in the country.

“The administration has decided it can be shrunk down and still be effective,” he said. “Los Alamos has the biggest share and so it can take the biggest hit of the three labs (LANL, Sandia and Lawrence Livermore). My vision is to try to get the lab to diversify in a number of ways that they are already doing on a small scale.”

Udall said he has spoken with Anastasio about the "Sandia model" on several occasions.

About six years ago, Sandia saw the shrinkage coming and decided to get out in front of it, Udall said, adding they came down from some 75-percent weapons to 50-percent weapons. They’ve done it in such a way that they’re now diversified, so this latest shrinkage is going to be minimal, maybe just 70-80 jobs, he said.

“I told Mike (Anastasio) he needs to get out there and hustle for the lab like Sandia did – to work with various agencies in the government to grow these areas,” Udall said during an interview Wednesday at the Los Alamos Research Park. “He told me he’s the guy to do that.”

Udall was in town for a series of classified briefings during an overview of LANL’s Weapons Programs to the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Strategic Forces, of which he is a member.

“As I tour the laboratory, what’s evident is we have top-notch scientific staff and great support staff,” Udall said. “Energy security is a huge national security issue now and will be more so in the years to come. I see a thriving future for this lab and I have a vision for making sure there’s a permanence for this lab in playing a role in the important challenges facing this nation. This lab has made a huge contribution to our national security and as we redefine that security, the lab can continue to play a significant role.”

Chair Ellen Tauscher, D-Calif., Ranking Member Terry Everett, R-Ala., Undersecretary for Nuclear Security Tom D’Agostino of the National Nuclear Security Administration and several congressional staffers made up the Congressional Delegation (CODEL).

Udall commented that he and Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., joined the group for a working lunch at the Nicholas C. Metropolis Center for Modeling & Simulation, where they received a security briefing. “We saw how they are trying to secure (classified electronic media) and had a 45-minute briefing from the guy who runs that area,” Udall said.

The group also toured the Super Vault Type Room (VTR) and the old Chemistry & Metallurgy Research facility and its replacement site, he said.

Udall said he and Domenici left the group at about 3 p.m. The rest of the delegation went on to tour the Plutonium Facility before departing for a trip to the Pantex Plant in Amarillo.

During Wednesday’s interview, Udall spoke of his nearly 10 years of service in Congress in which he said he has “proudly and strongly represented LANL and its workers.”

Udall is currently serving his fifth term in Congress, representing New Mexico’s Third Congressional District. He is running for the senate seat coming vacant when Domenici retires next year. He spoke of the vote he cast that other senatorial candidates are trying to use against him. Udall spoke up against abrupt change for the lab and stood up, he said, to restore $200 million to the budget.

“The point was made all the way along, he said, that those cuts were too deep and that it needed to be transitioned,” he said.

There was $600 million in new funding for energy projects in that bill. A month later there was another vote during which time he spoke with the administration, D’Agostino and others and said he was assured the laboratory could compete for some of that money. In knowing that, Udall explained that to him, the vote was about the future of Los Alamos.

“My opponents are pandering to people’s worst fears,” he said of their claiming he voted against the lab. “I voted for the lab’s future because this is where we are going to stabilize the lab and grow additional jobs.”

Udall continues to work with Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., and Rep. Pete Visclosky, D-Ind., to see that LANL has the resources it needs to do its future work. He explained he has always recommended LANL be very generous on their severance plan as an incentive for people to voluntarily retire to minimize or avoid layoffs.

“The thing that’s absolutely clear in listening to the Bush and Cheney administration is that they fully intend to layoff 500-750 people regardless of what happens with the budget – they’ve headed down that road,” Udall said. “My heart truly goes out to families that have a breadwinner who’s going to lose their job. My focus has been that they are taking precautions to give incentives to entice voluntary retirements.”

The Congressional Delegation gathering actually began Tuesday evening with a dinner at La Posada de Santa Fe. Anastasio hosted the meal attended by Don Winchell, National Nuclear Security Administration Los Alamos Site Office Revitalization manager; Jan Van Prooyen, LANL deputy director; Glenn Mara, principal associate director of Weapons Programs; Terry Wallace, principal associate director of Science, Technology and Engineering; Michael Mallory, principal associate director of Operations; Patrick Woehrle, Government Affairs Office leader; and David Lyons, Washington, D.C., Federal Office leader.

“I had an opportunity to spend about an hour talking with these people about the lab and its future,” Udall said. “Mike (Anastasio) said one of the big things is the storage of energy so in peaking periods you can tie that energy into the grid. The lab should play a big part in that. The best scientists in the country are here in Los Alamos and they can solve these challenges if we give them the resources.”

Sorted RIF Counts

One of our readers produced this sorted version of the SSP Targets data.

-Gus

Self Select Program Target and Exclusion Information

Here is the list of Self Select information: employee counts, targets, exclusions -- all 20 pages of it.

-Gus

More work leaving LANL

No need to state the obvious about the good ones leaving, and taking their work with them. So I won't.

-Gus

________________________________________________

From this news item:

Argonne Bolsters Efforts in Security Research

ARGONNE, Ill., Nov. 28 /PRNewswire/ -- The U.S. Department of Energy's Argonne National Laboratory has expanded its capabilities to protect U.S. interests at home and abroad.

The Vulnerability Assessment Team (VAT) moved to Argonne's Nuclear Engineering Division last month from Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). The VAT conducts multi-disciplinary research and development on physical security devices, systems and programs.

The "VAT's expertise and capabilities align extremely well with Argonne's work in national and homeland security," said Alfred Sattelberger, associate director of Physical Sciences and Applied Science and Technology at Argonne, who helped to find the group a home at Argonne. "Since the tragedies of Sept. 11, 2001, this lab has been actively bolstering its research portfolio to support the Federal government's national security efforts. We expect that the VAT will be integrated into that work."

The VAT has worked extensively in the areas of product anti-counterfeiting, tamper and intrusion detection, cargo security, nuclear safeguards and the human factors associated with security using the tools of industrial and organizational psychology.

The VAT made the move to Argonne because the team wants to make scientific research an integral part of its activities -- a strategy not typically considered or employed when it comes to physical security, said Roger Johnston, who heads the team.

"We're trying to elevate the field of physical security," said Johnston, who earned a doctoral degree in physics from the University of Colorado. "You can't for the most part get a degree in physical security even though physical security is extremely important and can often be a complex, multidisciplinary problem. Unfortunately, security is not viewed in the same way that science and technology is viewed. Too often, security is thought of as being black or white -- something is either secure or it is not. In reality, security is a spectrum, with lots of tradeoffs and uncertainties. Security should be controversial, constantly progressing, and not thought of as having only one right answer. There are intelligent approaches to addressing security unknowns and that's where scientific research, including social science, comes into play."

Another reason Argonne was an appealing destination for the VAT team is the lab's "attitude that it should be interacting with private industry," Johnston said. "We want to work more with private industry. We've gotten a lot of interest from companies about security." The VAT is especially interested in collaborating with the pharmaceutical industry, which struggles with the issue of how to deal with drug counterfeiting and tampering.

The VAT was also attracted to Argonne because of the Laboratory's interest in students. The VAT has previously employed over 50 student research assistants in 14 years at LANL.

Because the over-arching goal of the VAT team -- which also includes Jon Warner, a systems engineer, Peter Chen, a psychology professor at Colorado State University, and a soon to be hired computer and security analyst -- is to improve security, its members have to think like "the bad guys," said Warner. "We are adversarial vulnerability specialists; we focus on being the bad guys," he said.

Ross Anderson, a University of Cambridge professor of security research, said this about the VAT: "The most impressive physical security research team in the world is probably Roger Johnston's Vulnerability Assessment Team at Los Alamos." Indeed, the team has 10 U.S. patents, two R&D 100 awards, and was awarded Popular Science magazine's "Best of What's New Award," the LANL Fellows Prize for Outstanding Research, and the LANL Achievement Awards in 2007, 2004, 1999 and 1995.

Past VAT sponsors include the International Atomic Energy Agency, EURATOM, the U.S. Departments of Energy, State and Defense, the DOE's National Nuclear Security Administration, intelligence agencies and private companies. In addition to its own research, the team hosts a peer-reviewed scientific journal on physical security, the only known one of its kind, Johnston said.

About Argonne

Argonne National Laboratory, a renowned R&D center, brings the world's brightest scientists and engineers together to find exciting and creative new solutions to pressing national problems in science and technology. The nation's first national laboratory, Argonne conducts leading-edge basic and applied scientific research in virtually every scientific discipline. Argonne researchers work closely with researchers from hundreds of companies, universities, and federal, state and municipal agencies to help them solve their specific problems, advance America's scientific leadership and prepare the nation for a better future. With employees from more than 60 nations, Argonne is managed by UChicago Argonne, LLC for the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science.

Website: http://www.anl.gov/

LANS' Standards of Conduct and Business Ethics

There are some real screamers in LANS' Standards of Conduct Document. I extracted a few of the better ones. Enjoy.

-Gus

________________________________________

In keeping with our commitment to compliance, we will investigate any reported violations of laws, regulations, and policies and take appropriate disciplinary action, up to and including termination of employment, against employees who violate them. We have a responsibility to demonstrate to our customers and to the public that we are accountable for our actions and that we conduct our business in a trustworthy manner. If we all share this commitment, the Laboratory can look forward to many more years of providing successful and rewarding service to our government and commercial customers.

. . .

LANS policy requires that you behave in the following manner:
• Conduct yourself and the Laboratory’s business with honesty and integrity and avoid both actual and apparent personal and organizational conflicts of interest.
• Comply with local, state, and federal laws, rules, and regulations; contractual obligations with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE); and Laboratory policies and procedures.
• Promptly report dishonest, unethical, or illegal activities committed by Laboratory employees to a supervisor or manager, the Ethics and Compliance Group, Human Resources, or Legal Counsel.
• Provide full, fair, accurate, timely, and understandable disclosure in reports and documents that the Laboratory files with, or submits to, DOE.
• Protect and maintain the security of confidential, classified, and privileged information related to the Laboratory or associated with its activities, including financial data related to Laboratory operations and that furnished by customers, subcontractors, suppliers, or others under conditions of confidentiality.
• Responsibly use and control all tangible and intangible assets and resources owned by or entrusted to the Laboratory.
• Neither offer nor accept payments or favors to influence others or be influenced by others.
• Value open and fair competition and respect the rights of our customers, subcontractors, and suppliers.
• Cooperate fully with internal inquiries and reviews of unethical behavior or improper activities.

. . .

Guiding Principles

• Treat others with respect and dignity—your coworkers, clients, vendors, and all others with whom you interact on behalf of the Laboratory.
• Conduct yourself and the Laboratory’s business with honesty and integrity.

And in Next Month's Mechanical and Engineering News,

It will be announced that with proper training, plus a few pre-stressed mechanical enhancements, Pigs Will Fly!

-Gus

____________________________________________________

Gussie - This item appeared in the latest issue of Chemical and Engineering News.

November 19, 2007

Volume 85, Number 47

p. 12

Focus Shift

Weapons Labs' New Directions

With planned downsizing, labs will chase more nonweapons contract R&D

Jeff Johnson

THE FOCUS on nuclear weapons science and engineering at the Department of Energy's three nuclear weapons laboratories—Lawrence Livermore, Los Alamos, and Sandia National Laboratories—will be transformed, say officials in the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), which oversees DOE's nuclear weapons work.

Jeff Johnson/C&EN

NNSA will aggressively seek national-security-related but nonweapons contract work, David H. Crandall, NNSA assistant deputy administrator for research, development, and simulation told C&EN in an interview on Nov. 14. Earlier, NNSA officials announced that the workforce of the three weapons labs will be cut by 20-30% over the next 10-20 years and that the size of the facilities will be reduced by one-third.

"We fundamentally do not see the weapons budget account growing over time," Crandall said. "We do see, however, the importance of the labs and their science base as essential to the nation, but we are going to have to look at our role in a different way. I don't think the status quo of what we have done in the past is sustainable in the future.

"We are moving from a mode where we would tolerate research that doesn't interfere with our nuclear weapons mission to one in which we are encouraging new research that is synergistic to our mission," Crandall continued, adding that researchers outside NNSA will have to pay the full price of using lab staff and facilities.

He predicts the labs will have more nonweapons research partners and a more diversified research portfolio and will operate in a more competitive environment. Crandall acknowledges that the labs were well-funded in the past and that they have high overhead charges for contract work, which could stymie new contracts. He laid out a new system intended to lower costs by streamlining operations and eliminating and consolidating duplicate facilities.

Crandall has met with the directors of the three labs to assess their national security R&D capabilities that could be of interest to the Department of Defense, DOE Office of Science, Department of Homeland Security, and private companies.

Editorial: Chávez demagogues LANL; Udall wants new role for it

By | The New Mexican

11/27/2007

There he goes again, sounding like a Republican — and a big-spending anomaly at that: Albuquerque mayor and senatorial aspirant Martin Chávez, running against Northern New Mexico's Rep. Tom Udall for the Democratic nomination, is painting his opponent as unfriendly to the working stiff.

Why? Because Udall voted for last summer's Energy and Water Appropriations Act. Among its features was a $400 million reduction in Los Alamos National Laboratory's budget. That, says the Chávez campaign, gives Udall the "dubious distinction of being the only member of Congress from New Mexico in history to vote in favor of decreased funding and cutting jobs at LANL" and at Albquerque's Sandia National Laboratories.

But Udall was far from the only member of Congress to approve that budget reduction: A frustrated Republican Sen. Pete Domenici acknowledged to The New Mexican last summer that he was helpless in the face of Capitol Hill's new leadership — many of whom he hardly knew — and the long knives they had out for lab spending. It was evident then that Domenici had lost his stomach for the job. Not long afterward, he announced that he wouldn't seek re-election next year.

Could Udall, newly named to the House Appropriations Committee, that chamber's committee in charge of federal spending, stem the tide of fed-uppedness with largesse to the labs? Not likely, given the vituperative spewing by Republicans and Democrats alike about waste, theft and security lapses at LANL.

And Udall, who has spent much of his nine years on Capitol Hill trying with little success to persuade those scientists on "the Hill" in the Jemez to broaden their nuclear-weapons mission into alternative-energy research and other civilian — or even other military — projects, thought perhaps a reduced allowance would get lab leaders' attention.

The bill in question still sits in Congress — so perhaps the money will be restored.

But in the meantime, Chávez has put a political spin on it: "Throwing people out of work and endangering our national security," said his campaign manager, Mark Fleischer, "is not 'the message' New Mexicans want to hear."

Udall doesn't want folks out of work any more than Chávez does — or Sen. Domenici, who used his leadership on the Budget, then Energy, committees to keep the gravy train chugging onto Pajarito Mesa.

The recent announcement that LANL would cut 500 to 750 jobs, it seems, would place Udall front and center as the villain — until you consider how many Democrats might agree with him, and disagree with pork-barrel spending of an especially warlike kind. Los Alamos likely will remain trigger-maker to the nation for increasingly sophisticated and massively destructive weapons. Yet America has far more nuclear bombs than it would take to destroy enemies of today and tomorrow. What we don't have is the new energy system we and the rest of the world will need as fossil-fuel consumption soars and supplies of the stuff, inevitably, run short.

Can't our national-lab scientists see that — and do something about it? And if they can't, shouldn't Congress invest in operations that can?

Those are the nationally responsible questions Udall and some of his colleagues are asking; Kennedyesque queries in the form of challenges to mobilize our brightest scientific minds. It's time to transform the systems that make America run.

Udall knows it. And he wants New Mexicans gainfully employed in that pursuit.

Mayor Chávez and most Republicans have yet to recognize the grim challenge of "peak oil" and the global warming it promotes. Against such backward thinking, Tom Udall is a profile in courage.

Concerns about loss of Flexible Spending Account

Top level post, by request.

___________________________________________

WARNING: FSA (Flexible Spending Account) perhaps a top level post on real concerns for RIFees.

As explained by UC in 2006 the FSA behaves like an insurance policy. If you chose a $5000 limit that translates to a $192.31/paycheck 'premium'. The 'policy' is canceled upon your termination i.e. Jan 10,2008. If you had no medical expenses Jan.1 through Jan. 10 you lose the 'premium' you will pay on Jan. 4, 2008. On the other hand if the stress sends you to the hospital on Jan. 9 with $5000 out-of-pocket expense then you will be reimbursed the full $5000.

Note you have until Nov.30, 2007 to select the FSA option in open enrollment.

Perhaps somebody from LANL benefits can verify this since they are monitoring this blog.

Comment of the Week, Tuesday Late Breaking Edition

From, you know, that Phase I RIF Restructuring post:

________________________________________

Welcome to LANS.

Oh, who are we kidding? Fuck you.

Comment of the Week, Tuesday Edition

From the SUBJECT: Phase I of Workforce Restructuring to begin November 28 post:

_____________________________________________


LANS Haiku (borrowed from Anon, 12/21/2005 01:50:00 PM on LANL, The Real Story)

Cold winter morning
Los Alamos announcement
Merry Christmas, y'all

SUBJECT: Phase I of Workforce Restructuring to begin November 28

To/MS: All Employees
From/MS: Jan A. Van Prooyen, A100
Phone/Fax: 7-5101/5-2679
Symbol: DIR-07-339
Date: November 27, 2007



SUBJECT: Phase I of Workforce Restructuring to begin November 28

This note updates the November 19 memo from Mike
Anastasio and his All-Employee Meeting about workforce restructuring.

The Administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) has formally approved our specific plan for workforce restructuring. Accordingly, we will open the self-selection window Wednesday, November 28. Below is a table of key dates associated with the Phase I Self-Selection Program (SSP):

Table of Key Dates for Phase I

Event Dates
SSP application open November 28 through December 6
Employee rescission period December 7 through December 13
Employees receive notice of acceptance December 20
Employee Departure meetings January 2 through January 8, 2008
Accepted employees separate from Laboratory January 10, 2008

When the window opens, each LANS employee will receive by interoffice mail a notice of his or her eligibility to apply for this program. Likewise, each employee in an excluded category will receive a notice by interoffice mail that he or she will not be allowed to participate in the Self-Selection Program. If you are a LANS employee and have not received one of these notices by close of business on November 28, please contact your line management. Additionally, tomorrow (Wednesday), the Human Resources Web site associated with Phase I will be activated. The web site will have resources and information regarding Phase I.

Also as noted last week, we will hold manager briefings and employee pre-application information sessions. The schedule for those meetings is as follows:

Manager Briefings for SSP

Date Time
Location
Wed., 11/28/07 9:00 am - 11:00 am NSSB Auditorium
Wed., 11/28/07 12:00 pm - 2:00 pm Physics Auditorium
Thurs., 11/29/07 3:15 pm - 5:00 pm NSSB Auditorium

Employee Pre-application Information Sessions for SSP

Date Time
Location
Wed., 11/28/07 3:00 pm – 5:00 pm Physics Auditorium
Thurs., 11/29/07 1:00 pm – 3:00 pm NSSB Auditorium (live) with Physics Auditorium simulcast
Fri., 11/30/07 9:00 am – 11:00 am Physics Auditorium
Mon., 12/3/07 1:00 pm – 3:00 pm LANSCE Auditorium
Tues., 12/4/07 9:00 am – 11:00 am NSSB Auditorium

The main difference between the plan that we submitted (as discussed by Mike Anastasio on November 19) and the plan that DOE-NNSA just approved is the timing of our assessment of our flexible workforce populations. Concurrent with the Phase 1 Self- Selection Program, we will be designing and implementing a process for assessing our flexible workforce.

Further, we have amended Policy 114 (Reduction-in-Force) of the Laboratory’s Administrative Manual to remove a provision prohibiting a Self-Selection Program.

As noted in the Director’s All-Employee memo and his All-Employee Meeting, the decision to reduce our workforce is a very difficult one. It directly impacts people’s lives—not only those of our employees, but also their families and the communities of Northern New Mexico. Given the impact on these communities, we also will hold two community information sessions on our specific workforce restructuring plan next week. On Monday evening, December 3, we will hold an information session in Pojoaque from 7:00 to 9:00 p.m. at the Cities of Gold Conference Center. On Tuesday evening, December 4, we will hold an information session in Los Alamos from 7:00 to 9:00 pm at the Duane Smith Auditorium.

We will continue to post questions and answers and other relevant information on our Restructuring Web site. If you have questions, I encourage you to attend one of the pre-application information sessions regarding the Self-Selection Program and/or the community information sessions mentioned above. I also ask that you use our Workforce Restructuring Web site. Finally, I urge you to engage your leadership chain with your issues and questions. Laboratory managers realize that this is an extremely important decision for our employees and will help you get the answers you need. Managers will be receiving information that will prepare them to best support you as you make your final
decision.

Sent in by a reader

I can't find much in this to argue with.

-Gus

___________________________________


Clearly, Sandia -- compared to LANL -- is a well-run Lab, with
problems, but problems that are surmountable. They've diversified,
with plenty of new WFO, and have a total budget equal to LANL's, with
roughly 2/3rds the number of workers. Too bad LockMart didn't win the
LANL bid, but then, too bad that there was any bid whatsoever. Also,
too bad that absentee landlord UC did nothing about the mismanagement
brought down on LANL by the incompetent DOE; too bad that, since the
end of the Cold War, Sen. "Pit" Dementia (R-NM) larded LANL up with
so many bureaucrats (doubling its size), and too bad he forced the
creation of that cretinous outfit NNSA, which merely compounded DOE
incompetence. Too bad.

All in all, LANL's present difficulty, namely, getting stuck with
being St. Pit's pit factory, is a monumental tour de force
(translation from the French: a turd he forced).

Chávez Talks Job Cuts at LANL

ABQ Journal
Tuesday, November 27, 2007

Chávez Talks Job Cuts at LANL

By Dan Boyd
Journal Staff Writer

While others were returning to work Monday after a long holiday weekend, Martin Chávez took to the road.

Chávez, the mayor of Albuquerque and a Democratic candidate for the U.S. Senate seat being vacated by Republican Pete Domenici, met with Los Alamos National Laboratory employees to discuss the potential loss of up to 750 LANL jobs.

Along the way, Chávez lashed out at U.S. Rep. Tom Udall, D-N.M., his opponent in the Democratic primary, for voting in favor of a bill that would cut funding for the laboratory.

"There's some things where you fight to the end, you don't cave like he did," Chávez said of Udall. "He promised he would vote for the labs, and then he voted to cut them."

Laboratory officials unveiled a plan Nov. 19 to cut 500 to 750 jobs through voluntary buyouts. If not enough volunteers step forward, layoffs probably will follow.

But Udall staffers say the attempt to link job losses with Udall's vote this summer smacks of political desperation.

"It's really sad that instead of working together, they're attacking Congressman Udall," said Udall's chief of staff, Tom Nagle. "(Udall) has been working for northern New Mexico for his whole career."

Udall, who has served in Congress since 1999, voted in favor of a water and energy appropriations bill in July that would cut about $400 million from LANL and Sandia National Laboratory compared to the previous year's funding.

The bill is still languishing in Washington, D.C., as the Senate and the House of Representatives have been unable to reach a compromise. Stopgap funding measures have been approved in the meantime.

Although Udall has claimed the lab needs to modernize its mission and direct more funding toward renewable energy programs, Chávez said Monday that Udall has had nearly a decade to effect desired changes.

Support of New Mexico's national labs has "always been beyond partisanship," said Chávez, who claimed Udall is the state's only congressman in history to vote for cutting funding to LANL and Sandia.

But Udall, who recently noted that he offered an unsuccessful amendment to add $192 million to the appropriations bill, is hardly unsupportive of the lab, backers say.

Nagle said embracing the future is the only way for LANL and other national laboratories to remain relevant.

"If the lab doesn't move forward into these new areas, the state is going to be in big trouble," he said, referring specifically to global warming and energy efficiency research. "The need for nuclear weapons is going down. The jobs of the past aren't there anymore."

With the Democratic primary slated for June 2008, the campaign season is already in full swing.

Udall was a guest of honor at Friday's holiday tree lighting in Santa Fe, where Mayor David Coss introduced him as "Senator Udall."

Alhough more than seven months remains until next year's primaries, early surveys lend credence to that prediction. A recent SurveyUSA poll of 2,100 registered New Mexico voters said Udall holds a sizable lead over Chávez and would probably win the election if it were held today.

On Monday, Chávez acknowledged he probably won't win over many of the "trust-fund elite" in Santa Fe, but played up his New Mexico heritage and said he thinks he can connect with working-class voters.

Whoever wins the Democratic primary will likely face a formidable Republican foe in the general election. U.S. Reps. Heather Wilson and Steve Pearce are seeking the GOP nomination.

Sandia layoff numbers reduced

One of the benefits of having diversified their non-DOE work portfolio.

Also note the comment: "We want to make sure the employees know what's happening before the public knows," from a Sandia spokesperson. A management style worlds apart from Anastasio and LANS.

--Gus

___________________________________________

By Sue Vorenberg (Contact)
Monday, November 26, 2007

Sandia National Laboratories could lay off between 40 and 80 employees to meet projected federal budget cuts in 2008.

The labs' executive office will make a final decision on the number of cuts in early December, Michael Padilla, a spokesman for the Albuquerque labs, said today.

The reductions are significantly less than those projected for Los Alamos National Laboratory, which is anticipating between 500 and 750 layoffs out of its 12,000 employees.

In June, Sandia officials had projected they might have to cut some 625 full-time positions and 300 contractors' jobs. Sandia has a work force of 8,400.

Both labs are facing possible budget cuts as Congress debates funding for the system of national nuclear weapons laboratories.

Lawmakers have not yet come up with a final budget for the fiscal year that began Oct. 1.

Layoffs will come from all areas of Sandia, Padilla said.

Sandia has been reducing its work force by attrition in preparation for the cuts, officials said. The labs also have been shifting employees to other work areas deemed more important, Padilla said.

"One key factor is that our work for others (agencies) has increased over a number of years," Padilla said. "The skills of our work force have diversified intensely, thus making our employees more able to move to other areas of the laboratories."

Severance packages will be offered only if other jobs can't be found for the employees. Those packages generally provide one week's pay per year of service after 1993 and a percentage of salary for years before that - but they will differ based on the individual, he said.

So far, the cuts are just projections - and there's a possibility there could be no cuts at all, Padilla said.

"It's all based on a big `if,' " Padilla said.

Employees will be notified of layoffs before the news media are, he said.

"We want to make sure the employees know what's happening before the public knows," Padilla said.

Total Control: Priceless

By request, a new top level post.

-Gus

______________________________________________________

Paraphrasing from an earlier post:

The layoff has clearly exposed the blatant lie that LANS would absorb the new costs through efficiencies. Instead, 750 employees are now out the door simply to cover the fee alone. From DOE's perspective, the new costs were a bargain compared to the new control they could gain over their lab.

This whole RIF process has also clearly exposed the other blatant lie that LANS would have more autonomy to run the lab like a true business. Clearly, Anastasio cannot make a single, simple decision, nor even speak to us, without thorough review by all levels of LASO/NNSA/DOE. He is not a Director in any sense, he is simply the new messenger for DOE.

DOE now has full authority with very little responsibility. Recall Bill Richardson's frustration in the Summer of 2000, when, as Secretary of DOE, he tried to order LANL employees fired over the missing disk drive. UC and Browne both balked, saying that they would look into the matter and apply "due process." DOE was nationally embarrassed to have to explain that LANL employees were not in their direct control.

The overfunded UC Pension Plan was also a source of frustration to DOE. In 1996, they released a memo estimating that they believed that $600M of the mega billion UC pension plan should be "returned" to DOE as part of the overfunding. Never mind that the overfunding was saving them $100M a year at LANL alone in pension costs. They were administratively frustrated that there was no way to control the UC pension.

Recall also the fight that DOE only partially won in 1993 in trying to control the voluntary early retirement program offered to all UC employees (the rest of UC was offered 3+5, but DOE won the battle that LANL/LLNL could only be offered 3+3). Again, administrative frustration that they did not have control.

Separately, Congressmen are generally small businessmen who fundamentally believe in competition. That UC had never competed for the contract stuck in their craw. UC's threat was that they would never compete any contract.

Hence began the steady banging of the drum that the culture of LANL was bad and must be changed, by both Congress and DOE.

The conversion today is nearly complete. UC's "never compete" bluff was called. DOE has finally achieved several levels of control it has never had:

* The top managers are highly motivated via employment contracts, high salaries, and bonuses to jump to every command, and they simply will not make a single autonomous decision. Total Management Control.

* Every single employee within the lab can be simply and easily fired due to the "at will" status. Total Employee Control.

* The pension plan is now private with unvested rights to the employees, and therefore its future costs are totally controllable. Total Cost Control.

New contract costs: over $200M.
Employment consequences: thousands RIF'd.

Total Control: Priceless.

Comment of the Week, Sunday Edition

Finally, a comment I can get behind (edited a bit to correct typos, bad grammar, and run-on sentences; but hey, we take what we can get here). After a week's worth of bitter, contentious discussion about the current RIF situation, this comment was posted on the U.S. SENATE RACE: Chávez rails at Udall over lab funding post:

-Gus

__________________________________

Udall is a courageous leader. Something different for a change. But what Los Alamos wants is a another coddling bumble-head to replace Plutonium Pete; someone that does one thing and only one thing when it comes to the Lab -- place it on a pedestal and funnel money to it non stop. [...] Los Alamos ought to get a new script. Its no longer the "jewel" of the DOE complex where only the best-and-brightest are drawn to work on important projects of national importance. We all know now that this is just a bunch of bunk, and Udall has the courage (and integrity) not to promote [...] the Lab as others have. Udall is a breath of fresh air.

U.S. SENATE RACE: Chávez rails at Udall over lab funding

By Steve Terrell | The New Mexican

11/24/2007

Albuquerque Mayor Marty Chávez fired the first direct shot at U.S. Rep. Tom Udall in the Democratic U.S. Senate primary race this weekend, blasting the Northern New Mexico congressman for his vote on reduced budgets for national laboratories in New Mexico.

"Tom Udall now has the dubious distinction of being the only member of Congress from New Mexico in history to vote in favor of decreased funding and cutting jobs at LANL and Sandia," Chávez's campaign manager, Mark Fleisher, said in an e-mail statement. "Udall owes these families and other lab workers an apology."

Fleisher also said Udall should apologize for his reported comments that his vote on the lab budgets was to send the labs "a message."

"Throwing people out of work and endangering our national security is not 'the message' New Mexicans want to hear from people in Washington like Tom Udall," Fleisher said.

While the harshest attacks were attributed to Fleisher, the news release quoted Chávez as saying, "New Mexicans must send a senator to Washington who will stand up for them, not someone who supports job cuts at our state's national laboratories."

In July, Udall voted for The House Energy and Water Appropriations Act, which would cut about $400 million from Los Alamos and Sandia compared to the previous fiscal year. Udall has said he cast that vote because the labs should be conducting energy research and science programs to address national security issues. The bill is pending in Congress.

LANL pays about $911 million a year in salaries for about 12,000 workers in Northern New Mexico.

A campaign spokesman for Udall responded in a written statement: "The budget cuts at the lab, if they occur, are part of a larger issue involving our nation's nuclear footprint. Tom Udall's vote did not affect those larger issues. Tom Udall has always supported the lab, its valuable employees, and (its) core mission. He has always worked to direct the lab toward a future, sustainable workforce. For the mayor to focus on possible job cuts demonstrates a lack of understanding of the issues and a penchant for putting politics ahead of the best, long range interests of LANL employees."

Chávez plans to visit lab workers in Los Alamos on Monday. Last week, LANL announced the laboratory might have to cut between
500 and 750 positions because of anticipated budget cuts. If the federal government accepts a LANL restructuring plan, the lab would ask employees to leave voluntarily, with severance packages based on their years of service, a lab spokesman said.

State Republicans already have criticized Udall for his vote, claiming the congressman put "partisan politics" above the good of New Mexico.

Los Alamos lab braces for layoffs

By The Associated Press

Article Launched: 11/20/2007 06:34:58 AM MST

ALBUQUERQUE Los Alamos National Laboratory, one of the nation's premier nuclear weapons labs, is preparing to lay off hundreds of people because of anticipated federal budget cuts and other factors, lab officials say.

The northern New Mexico lab, where the atomic bomb was born, expects to cut between 500 and 750 positions, said spokesman Kevin Roark. About 12,000 people work at the lab.

The cuts are part of a restructuring plan the lab has submitted to the federal government. If approved, the lab would ask employees to leave voluntarily, with severance packages based on their years of service.

Those who opt for the voluntary buyouts would likely be done working at the lab by January, Roark said. The lab then would reassess whether any employees would be laid off, he said.

Some 700 employees packed an auditorium in Los Alamos on Monday to get an update from lab director Michael Anastasio on the restructuring plan. The rest of the lab's employees watched his address from their offices via closed circuit streaming video.

In a memo to employees, Anastasio said the decision to reduce the work force was a difficult one.

"It directly impacts people's lives, not only those of our employees, but also their families, and the northern New Mexico community. People are the soul of any institution," he said. "You have my personal commitment to make this process as fair as possible."

Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., said the severance package hopefully would encourage those nearing retirement to take it and preserve jobs for those who still have a long future at the lab.

"Nothing about this situation is satisfying," he said. "Faced with ongoing budget uncertainties, LANL's leadership had no choice but to reduce its work force."

Congress has not approved the fiscal year 2008 budget, but Roark notes, "budgets have been flat for the past few years" and the lab has been anticipating a cut.

That and an unusually low turnover rate, which typically stands at 3 percent, are behind the restructuring plan, Roark said.

"The overarching goal is to maintain the long-term viability of the lab," Roark said. "The director is committed to keeping Los Alamos at the forefront of science, keeping Los Alamos as a premier scientific lab in the area of national security. We can't afford to lose that."

Charles Mansfield, president of the Laboratory Retiree Group Inc., said the layoffs could have an impact throughout northern New Mexico.

"It's not just Los Alamos," said Mansfield, who worked at the lab for 17 years before retiring in 1993. "... The lab is a major economic engine for northern New Mexico."

Mansfield described lab workers as "unique," saying any who are displaced would have to travel to Albuquerque for the nearest high-tech jobs.

Greg Mello, executive director of the Los Alamos Study Group, an Albuquerque-based watchdog group, added: "You have to worry about the vulnerable here in New Mexico. We won't have to worry about scientists that have marketable skills. You have to worry about those who don't ... the technicians and construction workers."

Mello contended that layoffs wouldn't be necessary if the lab offered appropriate retirement incentives and reformed what he called "wasteful management practices," including canceling unnecessary construction, reducing subcontractors and cutting back management overhead.

"We need pull money out of nuclear weapons, which are an obsolete form of security and put that money into relevant forms of security that are needed in our communities, especially energy security," he said. "If we cling to the labs against the current of history, then were going to be left behind."

Los Alamos is not the only national lab preparing to trim its work force.

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California announced last week that it plans to cut about 500 jobs because of rising costs stemming from a changeover in management and potential federal budget cuts.

Sandia National Laboratories in Albuquerque released its work force restructuring plan last month, but spokesman Michael Padilla has said the lab hasn't made any decisions regarding layoffs.

Los Alamos and Sandia currently are funded at fiscal year 2007 levels under a continuing resolution that expires next month. Meanwhile, lawmakers are trying to reach agreement on an appropriations package that would fund the federal government for the remainder of the 2008 fiscal year.

Los Alamos National Laboratory director: Buyouts should deflect layoffs

The Trib had a slightly longer version of the story.

-Gus

______________________________________________

Los Alamos National Laboratory director: Buyouts should deflect layoffs

Deborah Baker/Associated Press
Thursday, November 22, 2007

LOS ALAMOS — Los Alamos National Laboratory Director Michael Anastasio has a message for workers who may be thinking about retirement: "If you've been waiting for a deal, this is the deal."

Anastasio told state lawmakers Wednesday he's hopeful that enough employees take voluntary buyouts that layoffs won't be necessary at the nuclear weapons lab, where some 500 to 750 jobs will be cut for budget reasons.

Los Alamos is waiting for Department of Energy approval of a restructuring plan under which workers — except those in certain critical jobs — will be offered severance packages, based on years of service, if they leave voluntarily.

After that, the lab would start laying off employees.

"What I hope is that with phase one we get all the people we need," Anastasio told a legislative oversight committee.

Laid-off workers also would get the same severance packages, leading lawmakers to question why anyone would take the voluntary buyout.

Anastasio said there are a "significant number" of employees who are ready to retire but for some reason just haven't done it, and that the buyout may appeal to them.

Workers who take voluntary buyouts could be gone by mid-January, he said.

He rejected suggestions from committee members that the lab encourage a particular group of employees to retire: about 600 so-called "double-dippers" who retired once, then returned to work.

"That's something we cannot do. . . . That has to be their decision," said the director, who added that the lab could be sued for targeting certain employees.

The cuts are being driven by a combination of factors, including flat budgets in recent years, about $175 million in added costs because the lab is no longer being run by a nonprofit operator, low staff turnover and ongoing budget uncertainties.

With nearly 11,000 employees — half of them from outside Los Alamos — the lab is a huge economic force in northern New Mexico. It paid $911 million in salaries in 2006, according to spokesman Kevin Roark.

State Sen. Richard Martinez, an Española Democrat, said the job cuts would put "a big dent in our economy."

Congress hasn't come up with a final budget for the current fiscal year that began Oct. 1, and the lab is operating under a stop-gap spending measure at last year's level. Anastasio has said the best-case scenario for this year is a flat budget, but there could also be cuts of hundreds of millions of dollars.

The director said trimming 750 jobs — about 9 percent of the lab's regular work force — could save nearly $100 million a year, and that it was prudent in light of the uncertainties.

The lab's budget last year was nearly $2.2 billion.

Roark said the 10,924 workers employed at the lab at the end of September was a drop of nearly 850 from the previous year, demonstrating the lab's belt-tightening efforts.

The cuts will come from a pool of about 8,200 regular lab employees. The remaining workers include contractors — whose ranks already have been thinned — or short-term workers or students or post-doctoral researchers.

LANL Chief Hopes to Avoid Layoffs

ABQ Journal
Thursday, November 22, 2007

LANL Chief Hopes to Avoid Layoffs

By Raam Wong
Journal Staff Writer

Los Alamos National Laboratory director Michael Anastasio on Wednesday held out hope that enough lab workers would accept voluntary buyouts that layoffs may not be necessary.

The lab announced Monday that between 500 and 750 jobs need to be cut. If not enough workers leave voluntarily, the lab, which is northern New Mexico's largest employer, will then proceed with layoffs.

But Anastasio told the state Legislature's LANL oversight committee that he hoped pink slips could be avoided. That's because the large number of employees who are eligible to retire this year who may be encouraged to do so given LANL's generous severance offer, the lab boss said.

"If you've been waiting for a deal, this is the deal," Anastasio said. "The deal's not gonna get any better."

Anastasio said the number of people who chose to retire last year— 107— was "surprisingly low" given that about 400 workers leave in a typical year.

Anastasio said the job cuts were being driven by rising operational costs, flat revenue and talk in Washington of slashing the lab's budget.

Anastasio said he did not develop the workforce restructuring plan with a specific dollar amount in mind that needed to be cut. Instead, he felt that 750 jobs— or about 9 percent of the regular workforce— was the most that could be eliminated without compromising the mission of the lab. Anastasio said the average lab worker makes $120,000 including benefits, so a cut of 750 jobs would be a savings of roughly $90 million.

The lab director declined to speculate about how many workers might leave voluntarily. "It's hard for me to predict exactly what the workforce will do," he said.

Several members of the LANL Oversight Committee voiced fears about what the cuts would mean for northern New Mexico communities, where lab workers took home $911 million in salaries last year. Committee chairman Phil Griego, D-Santa Fe, said that lab managers had their "hands tied" by decisions being made in Washington.

The restructuring plan must still be approved by the National Nuclear Security Administration. Under the plan, about 7 percent of workers would not be eligible to leave the lab either voluntarily or involuntarily due to their critical role at Los Alamos.

One lingering question on the minds of many Los Alamos workers is if they'll be eligible for unemployment insurance if they leave voluntarily.

Editorial: LANL layoffs: Again, pleas for a new mission

[Just so we're all clear on one thing: the "bad budgetary news" referred to below was not news, nor any kind of surprise to LANL management. The need to lay off 500 - 750 staff at this point in time is due solely to the increased cost of doing business that LANS and NNSA have brought to LANL. The additional $80 million in the new annual award fee paid to LANS, and the additional $55 million GRT that LANS pays to the state of New Mexico accounts for most of these RIFS. When you couple this with the fact that under LANS, management bloat (and costs) have increased three-fold, you now have the real reasons that LANL is RIFing staff at the present time.

And, thanks 9:30am (see comment below) for reminding us that LANS', shall we say, preferential treatment of KSL has resulted in an additional $41 million dollars in wasted LANL budget money this year.

The anticipated FY'08 budget shortfall will represent a whole new set of RIF requirements.

-Gus]

By | The New Mexican

11/21/2007


A year ago, while public-relations people said they knew nothing about layoffs, a few hundred workers at Los Alamos National Laboratory got their severance notices. Turns out they were employees of the lab's various subcontractors, not actually on the institution's payroll, so the deniability was of the disingenuous don't-look-at-us kind.

This holiday season, it appears, LANL itself is being hit with bad budgetary news: Officials there are about to release a plan reducing the workforce by 500 to 750 employees.

It's a severe blow to those workers and their families — eased only a little bit to the extent that some of it might happen through "buyouts" by which they leave voluntarily in exchange for severance packages to tide them over awhile.

The other could've-been-worse news is that it affects only 4 to 5 percent of the 12,000 people working on "the Hill" as staffers or contract employees.

Much is being made of Sen. Pete Domenici's unrelenting use of his once-formidable budget-chair powers to pad the lab's payrolls — and his likely successor, Tom Udall, urging more modern, less bellicose, more useful, less wasteful work up there.

Ironic, isn't it? A Republican spending lavishly on an outdated lab mission, and a Democrat seeking financial justification from a long-coddled campus.

Time after time, Rep. Udall has called on LANL to lead a serious effort to get our nation, and the rest of the world, off fossil fuels — to slow the pace of global warming and to reduce the dreaded "dependence on foreign oil." And time after time, lab leaders insist that nuclear weaponry is such a specialized field that its scientists and engineers can't adapt to such a quest.

Adding an exclamation point to that insistence was last week's news that LANL is the most likely candidate for the role of plutonium-pit supplier to our nation's nuclear arsenal — a job it's been doing by default since the Rocky Flats plant closed in 1989, leaving a swath of radioactive spillage in the hills above Denver.

Having learned from that disaster, LANL presumably will be cleaner — but it's set to extend the military mission for which it was created some 65 years ago.

Udall wants the lab to continue carrying out what he recognizes as its "core mission." But at the same time, he's working to help it grow in "new areas," which, he realistically notes, "is the only way we can ensure the future stability and permanence of this great institution."

If he's elected to the Senate, he could complement the work of Jeff Bingaman, who for a couple of decades has sought to make LANL more of a force in New Mexico's civilian economy.

For at least that long, some scientists there have been given enough rein to dabble in medical science and to experiment with geoscientific approaches to alternative energy. Those efforts, however, have amounted more to image-polishing and public relations than real recognition of the lab's civilian potential.

We remain in awe of the brilliance residing on "the Hill." So far, too few members of Congress share Tom Udall's vision for its future. As a member of the House Appropriations Committee, and, perhaps, with greater influence to come in the Senate, the gauntlet is at his feet: He's got to try harder to convince his colleagues that the wealth of knowledge at our national labs must be invested, directed and supported in an urgent effort at new energy.

LANL Paid Salaries Of $911M Last Year

ABQ Journal
Wednesday, November 21, 2007

LANL Paid Salaries Of $911M Last Year

By Raam Wong
Journal Staff Writer

LOS ALAMOS— Congress' failure to pass a 2008 budget will likely mean a funding shortfall for the nation's nuclear weapons complex, job losses at Los Alamos National Laboratory— and for one local hair stylist, fewer heads of hair to cut.

Ruby Maes works here at Hair Experts, one of countless northern New Mexico businesses where LANL workers spent some of their $911 million in earnings last year.

The lab's announcement this week that it planned to cut 500 to 750 jobs through voluntary buyouts had Maes nervous Tuesday as she reflected on not only her own livelihood, but that of five family members who work at the lab.

"They shouldn't do this right before the holidays," said Maes, adding that lab workers "can't enjoy the holidays with their families because they have this hanging over them, wondering, 'Am I gonna be the one?' ''

But for several lab workers spending their lunch breaks at eateries like Pizza Hut and Quizno's on Tuesday, job cuts have been expected for several months.
The job cut plan, which still must be approved by the National Nuclear Security Administration, comes amid increasing operation costs associated with last year's change in management at the lab and continuing budget uncertainties.

Congress has failed to pass a budget for the current fiscal year that began Oct. 1 and relied instead on a series of temporary measures allowing most of the federal government, including the lab, to continue spending at last year's levels.
Mark Haagenstad, a lab civil engineer, said he fears Congress will continue to pass these stop-gap measures in the years to come, leaving Los Alamos to wither on the vine for lack of funding.

"I would like to hold onto my job," said Haagenstad, sipping a drink at Starbucks. "I can't figure out how I'll pay my mortgage otherwise."

LANL veteran Fred Michael Mueller called the lab's workforce restructuring plan that cuts jobs a responsible response to Congress.

"You're dealt a hand of cards," the theoretical physicist said. "You have to play those cards."

Others Tuesday were less sanguine.

Adam Feldman, executive director of the New Mexico Republican Party, slammed Rep. Tom Udall, D-N.M., for voting in favor of a House spending bill this summer that cut the lab's funding. The measure would still need to be reconciled with a Senate bill that maintains LANL funding.

"When Rep. Udall failed to show strong leadership on the Appropriations Committee and voted to authorize the lab cuts on the floor of the House, it cost New Mexicans their jobs, it hurt New Mexico's economy, and it damaged our national security," Feldman said in a statement.

Udall, who represents Los Alamos and has indicated he plans to run for the U.S. Senate next year, has said he voted for the House bill to send a signal that LANL must diversify its mission beyond weapons to include other areas of research, such as renewable energy.

Udall noted in a brief Journal interview Tuesday that while the House bill was under consideration he offered an amendment to add nearly $200 million in funding but it was "defeated overwhelmingly."

Udall did not answer whether he would vote the same way for the House bill that cut LANL funding if given another chance, but said, "This was a vote about the future. For me, it's continuing to fight for the future of the permanence of the lab."

He added: "People losing jobs is something that really tears at my heart— and I know it tears at communities."

Española mayor Joseph Maestas, a Democrat considering running for Udall's House seat, called the divisions in Washington over nuclear weapons policy a "train wreck" that will impact northern New Mexico communities. Many lab workers live in Española.

Maestas noted that the lab has already cut hundreds of jobs from its subcontractor work force and reduced its procurements budget for everything from computers to staplers.

LANL spokesman Steve Sandoval said the lab paid about $911 million in salaries during the 2006 calendar year, including $478 million to workers in Los Alamos County, $220 million in Santa Fe County and $130 million in Rio Arriba County.

"Obviously those wages do end up in the economies," Sandoval said. Lab procurements totaled $734 million in the last fiscal year, nearly half of that in northern New Mexico.

Jamie Duke, an associate pastor at the First Baptist Church in Los Alamos, said that the job uncertainties are being felt by members of his congregation. "The families (of the workers) bear a lot of stress," he said.

For now, the lab is waiting to see how many workers accept voluntary buyouts. Involuntary layoffs will be necessary if not enough workers choose to leave.

Lab officials asked to give workers a more lucrative severance package, but the National Nuclear Security Administration refused to approve it.

NNSA spokesman John Broehm said Tuesday the lab's severance package was generous as-is and that history has shown that higher incentives don't significantly increase the number of workers choosing to leave.

Journal staff writer Jeff Jones contributed to this report.

Richardson urges resolution on LANL funding to avoid job losses

Right. Richardson has tasked Mondragon with an impossible mission -- to figure out how the state of New Mexico can carry 750 fired LANL employees on a non-existent payroll. So, when Mondragon fails to do that, Richardson can shrug and say, "I tried."

Shrewd, Bill. Nobody's going to see through this charade.

-Gus

_______________________________________

New Mexico Business Weekly

Gov. Bill Richardson is urging Congress and the White House to work out funding differences that prompted Los Alamos National Laboratory to make plans to lay off up to 750 employees.

Richardson said he is directing Fred Mondragon, secretary of the Economic Development Department, and Betty Sparrow Doris, secretary of the Workforce Solutions Department, to meet with LANL officials directly to assure that the state retains anyone who is laid off.

LANL officials outlined a voluntary separation package of up to 39 weeks of benefits for lab employees on Monday. The lab hopes to reduce the workforce by 500 to 750 employees through the plan.

Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., issued a statement that he is uncertain about the outcome of the FY2008 budget for the national laboratories. Domenici is the ranking member of the Senate Energy and Water Development Appropriations Subcommittee that crafts the bill to fund the Department of Energy, the National Nuclear Security Administration and the nuclear weapons complex that includes LANL and Sandia National Laboratories. These agencies are funded under a continuing resolution that expires Dec. 14.

The Democratic leadership in Congress has directed the House and Senate appropriators to attempt to reach conference agreements on bills like the energy and water bill for inclusion in an omnibus appropriations package to fund the federal government for the remainder of the 2008 fiscal year. The leadership also reduced overall subcommittee funding allocations by 50 percent, or $11 billion, according to Domenici's office .

Sen. Jeff Bingaman issued a statement expressing disappointment over the LANL job cuts. He said the Senate leadership has sought to enact spending bills with greater emphasis on domestic spending, but after a veto on one bill by President Bush and a threatened veto on others, Congressional leaders agreed to reduce proposed domestic spending by $11 billion. This could have a negative impact on the budgets of the national labs, he said.

Los Alamos Nuclear Lab Plans Layoffs

By FELICIA FONSECA – 9 hours ago

ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. (AP) — Los Alamos National Laboratory, one of the nation's premier nuclear weapons labs, is preparing to lay off hundreds of people in anticipation of federal budget cuts, a lab spokesman said Monday.

The laboratory may have to cut between 500 and 750 positions, said Kevin Roark, a spokesman for the northern New Mexico lab. About 12,000 people work at the lab.

The cuts are part of a restructuring plan the lab submitted to the federal government. If approved, the lab would ask employees to leave voluntarily, with severance packages based on their years of service, Roark said.

Those who volunteer to leave would likely be done working at the lab by January, he said. The lab then would reassess whether any employees would be laid off, he said.

Congress has not approved the fiscal year 2008 budget, but budgets have been flat for the past few years and the lab has been anticipating a cut, Roark said. That and an unusually low turnover rate, which typically stands at 3 percent, are driving the potential layoffs, he said.

Charles Mansfield, president of the Laboratory Retiree Group Inc., said the layoffs could have an impact throughout northern New Mexico, calling the facility "a major economic engine."

Greg Mello, executive director of the Los Alamos Study Group, an Albuquerque-based watchdog group, said layoffs wouldn't be necessary if the lab offered appropriate retirement incentives and reduced waste.

The announcement comes after another of the nation's premier nuclear weapons labs, the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in Livermore, Calif., announced last week that it plans to cut about 500 of its 8,000 employees because of rising costs stemming from a changeover in management and potential federal budget cuts.

Sandia National Laboratories in Albuquerque released its work force restructuring plan last month, which did not discuss numbers for possible layoffs at Sandia or its satellite location.

Sandia spokesman Michael Padilla said Monday the lab has made no decisions regarding layoffs.

Associated Press writers Melanie Dabovich and Susan Montoya Bryan contributed to this report.

Comment of the Week, Monday Edition

Mike probably does "remain excited" to be associated with LANL. I think this comment from the Post November 19 RIF News post explains why. Where else can you, as a top manager, be guaranteed a large bonus by simply RIFing your staff?

-Gus

___________________________________

Those who listened closely will remember that Mike said 750 =$100M for a year. Whether this is right or wrong, $100M is what they are trying to cover with the RIF. They are simply trying to cover the corporate fee of $80M and some change. Your jobs = the LANS board and ULM bonuses.

Anastasio's November 19 All Hand's Meeting

Could someone who attended please post a summary here? Lots of folks are on holiday travel, and in any event I'd rather not rely on the LANL PA version of the story.

Thanks,

-Gus

**Update, 2:45pm**

From the comments submitted so far, it looks like 500 - 750 staff will need to be RIFed. This number does not take FY'08 funding uncertainties into account, it is merely the number that will need to be RIFed because of the higher cost of doing business that LANS has brought to LANL (award fee, management bloat, manager bonuses, GRT, JB Weld expenses, as well as numerous other 'efficiency improvements' that LANS has implemented during their inaugural year up on The Hill) .

Other notes sent in by readers:

• Site Specific 3161 plan still not approved.
• SSRIF schedule
  If 3161 Approval this week:
  
  Announcement of SSRIF: 11/19
  SSRIF application period: 11/26 - 12/05
  Rescission period: 12/06 - 12/10
  Approval of SSRIF 12/11 - 12/19
  Notification: 12/20
  Employees depart 1/10
  
  Involuntary RIF "follows quickly" after SSRIF

• Mike "remains excited" about the future of the Lab.