Organizational Assessment of the NNSA

DoD and DOE, to include the NNSA, are being requested in their respective passbacks to assess the costs and benefits of transferring budget and management of NNSA or its components to DoD and elsewhere, as appropriate, beginning in FY 2011. The assessment should also consider the process of implementing such a transfer.

The assessment should be co-chaired by DOE and DoD. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of State, and other major stakeholders in NNSA operations should be consulted, as needed.

The assessment chairs should report to OMB and the National Security Council (NSC) staff in four major phases as follows:

1. Identify Structure (by March 2, 2009): Specify lead offices within each Department and NNSA, the approach to the assessment, the organizations to be involved (including outside advisors), the structure of the assessment (including subgroups and review panels), and the timeline for completing the assessment.
2. Provide Study Outline (by May 8, 2009): Identify the alternatives to be assessed, key assumptions, proposed structure of the final report, significant issues involved in a transfer (including statutory or regulatory changes), and data and analysis that will be required to complete the study.
3. Brief Emerging Results (by August 7, 2009): Brief OMB and NSC on the emerging results of the study, including recommended courses of action.
4. Submit Final Report (by September 30, 2009): Submit to OMB a written final report including discussion of significant issues, alternatives considered, an assessment of their advantages and disadvantages including budget implications, and recommendations for a path forward.
   

OMB will provide additional written guidance by February 13th.

Military Control of Labs Studied

By John Fleck, Albuquerque Journal Staff Writer

The Obama administration is considering moving Sandia and Los Alamos national labs, along with the rest of the U.S. nuclear weapons design and manufacturing complex, out of the Department of Energy and into the Defense Department, according to an internal memo obtained by the Journal.

Such a change would end more than six decades of civilian management of the U.S. nuclear weapons program.

The move, if it goes forward, would not happen until at least 2011, according to the memo from the Office of Management and Budget outlining plans for a study of the costs and benefits of the move.

Officials across the government — at the labs and the federal agencies involved — declined comment Tuesday, saying the document in question is part of internal government deliberations.

Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., released a statement Tuesday evening saying he spoke to OMB chief Peter Orszag on Tuesday to register his concerns about such a move.

"I think this is a very shortsighted approach, and I will fight it tooth and nail if they intend to proceed with it," Bingaman told Orszag, according to the statement. Bingaman is chairman of the Senate energy committee.

According to the statement, Bingaman said that because the labs do more than defense work, a shift to the Pentagon would damage their ability to do their jobs.

The undated OMB memo lays out a plan for a study to be done by the end of September on the costs and benefits of moving the National Nuclear Security Administration under the jurisdiction of the Pentagon.

It is too early to say what effect any such change would have on the more than 20,000 people in New Mexico who work for Sandia and Los Alamos.

The team studying the possibility of a change will include representatives from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the Department of Homeland Security and the State Department "and other major NNSA stakeholders," according to the memo.

The policy of civilian management is rooted in a World War II decision by top Manhattan Project scientist J. Robert Oppenheimer to have the design of the first nuclear weapons done by civilian scientists, rather than military officers.

A shift to military management of the weapons program "would be very dramatic," nuclear weapons historian Robert S. Norris of the Natural Resources Defense Council, said of the possibility of the weapons program being moved to the Pentagon.

In the years immediately after World War II, government officials concluded that the "ultimate weapon" should be left under the care of civilian leadership, rather than the military.

The weapons program was first entrusted to the Atomic Energy Commission. In 1975, a new agency was created, known as the Energy Research and Development Administration. That was followed in 1977 by the creation of the Department of Energy, where nuclear weapons development and manufacturing reside today.

In the 1980s, the Reagan administration tried and failed to shift the weapons program to the Pentagon, Norris said.

The latest management change came in 2000, when Congress created the National Nuclear Security Administration to oversee the U.S. nuclear weapons complex. The new agency was created as a quasi-independent body, but remained within the Department of Energy, under DOE jurisdiction.

The discussion echoes congressional testimony last year by C. Paul Robinson, former president of Sandia National Laboratories and a senior adviser to the U.S. government on nuclear weapons issues.

In written response to questions from members of the House Armed Services Committee's Strategic Forces subcommittee, Robinson said he thought a shift to Pentagon management of the labs should be considered.

Robinson said in a phone interview Tuesday that he has long supported civilian management. But in recent years, he said, "short-term upheavals" as different administrations come and go, repeatedly changing the direction of the weapons program, have made its long-term management a problem.

"The presence of a uniformed military could provide a continuity that has been lacking," Robinson told the House Armed Service Committee's Strategic Forces Subcommittee.

Robinson complained that the 2000 decision to create the National Nuclear Security Administration has been a failure.

"It hasn't worked," he said in a telephone interview Tuesday.

Nuke worker bill picking up support

Good Morning Frank,
As mentioned in Saturday's article, Senator Mark Udall is drafting reform legislation for EEOICPA. The highlights are on the left column of today's article. In order to get this legislation out of the committee, legislative hearings will need to be held.

As soon as a bill number is assigned to this legislation, I will send you and others information on how you can help get the hearings.

Thanks,
Terrie Barrie
CWP
tbarrie@yahoo.com

---

Terrie,
The Senate is indeed paying attention. They visited the blog this morning to read about last week's news of the beryllium exposures at LANL's TA-41. The notion that these worker safety issues are relics of an era when we didn't know any better is now thoroughly dispelled. Thanks and keep up the good work!
Frank

---

Nuke worker bill picking up support

Legislation seeks justice for victims of weapons race

By Laura Frank, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)

Published February 3, 2009 at 10:26 a.m.

KBDI's Tamara Banks hosted a Live show featuring The Rocky Mountain News Deadly Denial series, which included Former Rocky Flats Projects Manager, Charlie Wolf, left, and Rocky Mountain News reporter, Laura Frank, at right, on Wednesday, July 30, 2008.

Deadly Denial: 3-day special report

Visit the special report index of our Deadly Denial investigative series about the failure of the U.S. Department of Labor to adequately compensate former nuclear weapons workers suffering from illnesses. Read more stories, watch videos, download documents and weigh in on the discussion.

Related Links

• SPECIAL REPORT: Deadly Denial: Nuclear workers

The Charlie Wolf Act

The legislation, proposed by Sen. Mark Udall, would revamp the troubled federal compensation program for ailing nuclear weapons workers. Among the proposed highlights:

Establish a board to oversee implementation of the program and strengthen the ombudsman's role.

Add cost-of-living increases for delayed compensation payments.

Add more radiation-linked cancers to the list of those covered in the program.

Require automatic entry into the streamlined process for aid, called the "special exposure cohort," if exposure records are not found and analyzed within 180 days.

Order a review of all program regulations and of the scientific models used to estimate radiation doses.

-Laura Frank

---

After his brother's funeral Saturday, Rick Wolf started talking with a couple he'd never met.

He recounted how difficult it had been for Charlie Wolf to prove he deserved federal compensation for the brain cancer that the government eventually admitted was linked to work at U.S. nuclear weapons sites.

Charlie Wolf had become something of a celebrity as he battled brain cancer and the federal government to the very end of his life, determined to prove that he and other sick nuclear weapons workers were being denied aid that was promised them. His story was chronicled last July in a Rocky Mountain News special report, "Deadly Denial."

Nearly 200 people attended Wolf's funeral Saturday — some of them folks who knew the Highlands Ranch man only through newspaper stories. At the service they celebrated the news that U.S. Sen. Mark Udall, D-Colo., plans to introduce the Charlie Wolf Act to reform the compensation program.

Beginning Wednesday, members of the state's congressional delegation will begin outlining legislation to improve the federal nucelar weapons workers compensation program.

And the delegation is not stopping there.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, has asked Udall to work together on the legislation.

Top Senate Republicans are in the loop.

Tennessee Republican Sen. Lamar Alexander is one of those lawmakers. Alexander has twice co-sponsored legislation to improve the aid initiative, called the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program.

Alexander will study Udall's legislation as he continues working with senators from both parties to improve the program, an Alexander aide said Monday.

The new legislation is expected to pick up where reform bills in both the House and Senate left off last session.

Those who have followed the plight of Wolf and other nuclear weapons workers and survivors have high hopes for the legislation.

That includes the couple who spoke with Charlie Wolf's brother at Wolf's funeral.

"You know," Melinda Lorenz said to Rick Wolf, "we had no connection to Charlie before today."

Lorenz and John Coles of Denver went to Wolf's memorial service after reading in the newspaper that morning about his life and the legislation named in his honor.

"I read the article and said we need to be there," Coles said. "It's important to support the years of service that people like Charlie Wolf have done. They were on the front lines of the Cold War."

Rick Wolf said he was touched by their gesture.

"It's an honor to be here," Coles responded. "And we'd like to be there for the celebration when the act is signed into law by the president."

ON BOARD

On Wednesday, Colorado's congressional delegation will begin outlining reforms it wants in the compensation program for sick nuclear weapons workers from Rocky Flats, near Denver, and across the nation. Here is what some lawmakers — both new and old, Democrat and Republican — said about the work:

"I've been working with Sen. Udall since I took office to help make sure these workers receive the justice to which they are entitled. These individuals provided a valuable service to our nation, and they should receive the proper health care and benefits related to their service to our country. "

Rep. Ed Perlmutter, D-Golden

"Under Sen. Udall's leadership, much progress has been made in cleaning up Rocky Flats and caring for its workers, but much work remains. I look forward to picking up where he left off and plan on introducing similar legislation in the House that will bring much-needed relief and compensation to these brave men and women who have suffered so much in service to their country."

Rep. Jared Polis, D-Boulder

"I look forward to reviewing Sen. Udall's legislation. I'm sympathetic to the plight of the workers and will do everything I can to make sure that they receive all of the treatment and compensation they deserve."

Rep. Mike Coffman, R-Aurora

"The congressman has directed one of his senior aides to meet with members of Sen. Udall's staff to review the proposed changes to the legislation."

Catherine Mortensen, spokeswoman for Rep. Doug Lamborn, R-Colorado Springs

"I have consistently supported efforts to compensate Rocky Flats employees who have sacrificed to keep our country safe."

Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Denver

"Congressman Salazar and then-Congressman Udall have worked closely on this issue in the past, and he will continue to have a close working relationship on radiation compensation with Sen. Udall. ... He has watched many constituents get hung up in bureaucratic red tape while their health is in great decline, and he understands that we must work to fix this as quickly as possible."

Eric Wortman, spokesman for Rep. John Salazar, D-Manassa

"Sen. Bennet will work closely with Sen. Udall and other members of the Colorado delegation to assure that Rocky Flats workers and their survivors are provided with the compensation they deserve. They put their lives on the line in defense of our nation and deserve fair and timely compensation for their sacrifice."

Michael Amodeo, spokesman for Sen. Michael Bennet.

- M.E. Sprengelmeyer

One morning in the middle of a conversation Charlie Wolf suddenly found himself unable to speak. He could understand what was being said to him, but whatever he tried to say came out as gibberish. His wife drove him to the emergency room while he struggled to remain conscious. That was over six years ago.

Today Charlie is in a better place and the world is a lot emptier. Goodbye Charlie. Many of us have a few letters to write and will keep you in our thoughts as we write them.

Open letters on special occasions - after my death

Laura Frank, Rocky Mountain News

Charlie Wolf's friends and family - and likely some who never met him but were inspired by his spirit - will gather today for his memorial service.

And some might be surprised to hear from Charlie himself.

Wolf, a former manager at the Rocky Flats nuclear weapons plant near Denver, became something of a local celebrity for beating the odds against brain cancer, the stock market and the federal government.

Ever the project engineer, Wolf had organized a file filled with letters during his nearly seven-year illness. Most were penned at least two years ago, before he lost the ability to write.

Wolf, who died Wednesday, had marked each letter to be read on special occasions: his daughters' graduations, weddings, all the important moments he knew he might miss.

He also wrote for the little moments, such as the letter for his wife labeled: "Kathy, Read when you're feeling really bad."

Today, his family will read his funeral letter.

It will be a mixture of thanks, humor and spirit - quintessential Charlie.

"You knew he loved you," said one of his three daughters, Charlotte, 26. "But to read it now is really nice. He was our hero."

Wolf, who lived in Highlands Ranch, was a hero to many others, too.

There are the dozens of fellow nuclear weapons workers. He helped some prove they deserved medical and financial aid because their work building the nation's Cold War nuclear defense made them sick.

There are hundreds of people who were inspired by the two books he wrote. Each chronicled how he survived recurring brain cancer, a bone- marrow transplant and years of experimental treatment, all with humor and a zest for life.

There are thousands more who read about him in the Rocky Mountain News and The Wall Street Journal. He appeared in both last July: The Journal wrote about how his brain cancer might actually have sparked a savantlike ability to beat the stock market.

The Rocky told the story of how he beat the odds to survive more than six years with brain cancer that was supposed to have killed him in six months. It showed how Wolf needed the help of a doctor, a lawyer, a scientist, his congressman and even his insurance company to overcome the hurdles of the troubled federal program for sick nuclear weapons workers.

Wolf finally won half the compensation he believed he deserved. He was denied the rest shortly before he died.

But he never gave up.

"What a hero," said his doctor, Edward Arenson of the Colorado Neurological Institute in Englewood.

"He was someone very special. And so is his family."

Arenson said Wolf's willingness to try experimental treatments for his brain cancer, glioblastoma multiforme, will help others in the future.

"He wanted to help people," said his wife, Kathy Wolf.

While his family cherishes their letters from Charlie, there is another letter that leaves them feeling disturbed. Just weeks before Wolf died, the U.S. Department of Labor informed him it planned to deny him the final portion of compensation for his brain cancer.

If he disagreed with the decision, the letter said, he should write back within 60 days.

Wolf had not been able to write for two years.

His wife, Kathy, responded on his behalf. No, she wrote, they didn't agree with the Labor Department's decision. The government had failed to address multiple issues Wolf and his team of experts first raised during a hearing on his case nearly two years to the day before he died.

She asked the Labor Department to document its responses to Wolf's expert testimony.

On Jan. 21, one week before Wolf died, the Labor Department sent a form letter in return. It was addressed to Kathy Wolf, but started with a puzzling: "Dear Mr. Mr. (sic) Wolf." It made no reference to any outstanding issues. If you have additional evidence to submit, the letter said, please send it within 20 days.

Wolf had submitted thousands of pages of evidence during the more than six years he fought for full compensation. Now, his wife Kathy wonders, what could the Labor Department possible want?

"Now that Charlie is dead, are they going to make me start all over?" she asked, noting that some widows Charlie helped had to do just that.

But that worry is for another day. Today, his family will relish the letters he left for them, and the impact he had on the lives of friends, family - and even strangers.

frankl@RockyMountainNews.com or 303-954-5091

MEMORIAL SERVICE

* The public is invited to a celebration of Charlie Wolf's life at 2 p.m. today at the Denver Marriott South, 10345 Park Meadows Drive, Littleton. Donations may be sent to the Colorado Neurological Institute, thecni.org/donations.

[See also Udall enlists in Charlie Wolf's War.]

Plutonium found in Los Alamos runoff

KOB.com

SANTA FE, N.M. (AP) - The state Environment Department says runoff last summer from part of Los Alamos National Laboratory contained high levels of plutonium and other radionuclides.

The department measured elevated levels of plutonium, americium and strontium in the runoff that resulted from a large potable water spill and several storm events in Los Alamos Canyon in July and August.

In July, a water line break at the lab's Technical Area 21 triggered monitoring equipment maintained by the state in Los Alamos Canyon.

About 4 million gallons of potable water released over a 26-hour period eroded soil and carried contaminants into the canyon and beyond lab boundaries. Analysis of five samples showed plutonium levels about 100 times greater than levels detected during normal storm events in previous years.

Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health – Meeting 61

DRAFT AGENDA
Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health – Meeting 61
Doubletree Hotel Albuquerque
201 Marquette Avenue Northwest, Albuquerque NM, 87102
Phone: 505-247-3344; Fax: 505-247- 7025
Teleconference Phone: 866-659-0537
Participant Code: 9933701

Tuesday, February 17, 2009

NOTE: All times in Mountain Time

1:00 p.m. – 1:15 p.m. Welcome Dr. Paul Ziemer, Chair

1:15 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. NIOSH Program Update Mr. Larry Elliott, NIOSH

2:00 p.m. – 3:00 p.m. DOE and NIOSH Security Plans Dr. Patricia Worthington, DOE, Mr. Larry Elliott, NIOSH

3:00 p.m. – 3:15 p.m. Break

3:15 p.m. – 3:45 p.m. DOE Update Dr. Patricia Worthington, DOE

3:45 p.m. – 4:30 p.m. Department of Labor Update Mr. Jeffrey L. Kotsch, DOL

4:30 p.m – 6:00 p.m. LANL SEC Petition Dr. Greg Macievic, NIOSH Petitioner(s)

6:00 p.m. – 6:30 p.m. Break

6:30 p.m. – 7:30 p.m. Public Comment

7:30 p.m. Adjourn

Wednesday, February 18, 2009

9:00 a.m. – 9:15 a.m. Welcome Dr. Paul Ziemer, Chair

9:15 a.m. – 10:15 a.m. Westinghouse Atomic Power Mr. LaVon Rutherford, NIOSH
Development SEC Petition Petitioner(s)

10:15 a.m. – 10:30 a.m. Break

10:30 a.m. – 11:30 a.m. Tyson Valley Powder Farm Mr. LaVon Rutherford, NIOSH
SEC Petition Petitioner(s)

11:30 a.m. – 11:45 a.m. SC&A New Technical Support Sandy Cohen, President, SC&A
Contract

11:45 a.m. – 1:15 p.m. Lunch

1:15 p.m. – 2:45 p.m. General Steel Industries SEC Petition Mr. David Allen, NIOSH
Petitioner(s)

2:45 p.m. – 3:00 p.m. Break

3:00 p.m. – 4:00 p.m. Hood Building SEC Petition Dr. Sam Glover, NIOSH
Petitioner(s)

4:00 p.m. – 5:00 p.m. Blockson Chemical SEC Petition Ms. Wanda Munn
Petitioner(s)

5:00 p.m. – 7:00 p.m. Break

7:00 p.m. – 8:00 p.m. Public Comment

Thursday, February 19, 2009

9:00 a.m. – 9:15 a.m. Welcome Dr. Paul Ziemer, Chair

9:15 a.m. – 10:00 a.m. SEC Petition Status Updates Mr. LaVon Rutherford, NIOSH

10:00 a.m. – 10:45 a.m. Science Update Dr. James Neton, NIOSH

10:45 a.m. – 11:00 a.m. Break

11:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. Subcommittee & Work Group Reports Chairs

12:00 p.m. – 1:30 p.m. Lunch

1:30 p.m. – 3:00 p.m. Board Working Time Dr. Paul Ziemer, Chair

3:00 p.m. – 3:30 p.m. Future Plans and Meetings Dr. Paul Ziemer, Chair

3:30 p.m. Adjourn

[Download a copy of the draft agenda here. And thanks Andrew Evaskovich for all you've done for the people who made LANL great!]

Los Alamos notifies employees, visitors of possible beryllium exposure

News Release 09-002

CONTACT: Kevin Roark, 505-665-9202, knroark@lanl.gov

Los Alamos notifies employees, visitors of possible beryllium exposure

LOS ALAMOS, New Mexico, January 28, 2009— Los Alamos National Laboratory is notifying approximately 1,890 current and former employees and authorized visitors of potential exposure to beryllium based on recently discovered beryllium contamination at one of the Lab’s technical areas.

For approximately 240 employees who worked at the facility, documented experience shows that approximately two percent (2%) of these workers exposed to beryllium could become sensitized, and an even smaller percentage could develop chronic beryllium disease. For the remaining approximately 1,650 visitors, the risks of exposure are extremely low because of the activities performed and the relatively short period of time spent at the location. Authorized visitors include approximately 1,000 former and current Lab employees and 650 non-Lab personnel who generally took classified tours at the Laboratory.

Current and former Laboratory employees and contractors who either worked at or visited the facility have been—or are in the process of being—notified of the beryllium levels. For affected personnel, the Laboratory’s Safety Help Desk, (505) 665-7233, will have an operator standing by for questions or concerns. The help desk will be open Monday through Friday, during regular business hours. A personal consultation with an industrial hygienist will be arranged for those concerned about exposure.

All current and former employees and visitors to the facility will be offered a beryllium sensitivity test.

These potential exposures were discovered in November and December of 2008 after industrial hygiene sampling at Technical Area 41 identified the presence of beryllium on some surfaces.

The location is used to store legacy and surplus materials. Access was immediately restricted and posted as a beryllium contamination area. Decontamination of the facility has begun and should be completed by February.

Beryllium is a silver-gray, nonradioactive metal that is extremely light, melts at a relatively high temperature, and is very stable. As a metal with many applications in electronics, aerospace and weapons work, beryllium also is used in consumer items like golf clubs and recreational bicycle frames.

Beryllium is a hazardous material in a particulate or finely powdered form. In certain susceptible individuals, inhalation of beryllium particles can result in a medical condition known as chronic beryllium disease (CBD), which can impair lung function.

For more information on beryllium exposure hazards, please go to the Department of Energy’s beryllium information website at http://orise.orau.gov/oews/be-studies-testing.htm.

About Los Alamos National Laboratory (www.lanl.gov)

Los Alamos National Laboratory, a multidisciplinary research institution engaged in strategic science on behalf of national security, is operated by Los Alamos National Security, LLC, a team composed of Bechtel National, the University of California, The Babcock & Wilcox Company, and the Washington Division of URS for the Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration.

Los Alamos enhances national security by ensuring the safety and reliability of the U.S. nuclear stockpile, developing technologies to reduce threats from weapons of mass destruction, and solving problems related to energy, environment, infrastructure, health, and global security concerns.

Operated by Los Alamos National Security, LLC for the National Nuclear Security Administration
WWW.LANL.GOV

[Download a copy of the news release here.]

What Passes As News

I was emailed a request yesterday to post a new Time article titled Obama's Showdown Over Nukes. Normally I post nearly anything requested, but I couldn't let this one pass without comment. Written by Mark Thompson, the article blends facts and quotes with opinion and agenda. The article belongs in the editorial/opinion category. It is not news.

Thompson begins by faulting Gates for not changing his opinion on the need to modernize our nuclear deterrent after being selected by President Obama to remain as defense secretary. Thompson probably didn't mean to imply that President Obama was too stupid to choose a "yes man" for the job, but that's precisely what he did imply.

Next he attempts to make hay out of a portion of a single sentence on the new White House web site, "They will stop the development of new nuclear weapons;".

"Obama would have a difficult time reversing course on what is now a stated policy of his Administration instead of simply a campaign promise. And any move to produce new nuclear weapons will be read by other nations as a U.S. push for nuclear supremacy, even as Washington urges the rest of the world — Tehran, are you listening? — to do without the weapons. Russia would very likely respond by upgrading its own arsenal."

President Obama may choose to stop the development of new nuclear weapons if it is in the nation's interest. He may choose to restart development if it is in the nation's interest. Either way, I doubt the decision will be announced in a sentence fragment on a web site. And by the way, the Russians are already upgrading their nuclear deterrent. And they haven't been complaining about RRW. What has them upset is ten missile interceptors and a radar in Europe. Put your agenda aside when you read the news, Mark. Maybe you'll start to notice things like this.

And finally, Mark, you're a little rusty on math. Using two weapons which are 50% reliable does not result in 100% confidence that at least one of them will work.

Billion Dollar Stimulation

From the Senate Appropriations Committee today:

The Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration Weapons program gets $1 billion for maintenance and general plant project backlogs, construction activities, decommissioning and disposition activities, various energy projects throughout the complex, as well as funding for advanced computing development.

[Download the entire press release here.]

Anastasio all-employee meeting is today

Laboratory Director Michael Anastasio will talk about opportunities, challenges, and priorities for the coming year at an all-employee meeting Monday, January 26. It begins at 1 PM at the NSSB Auditorium.

The regional community leaders breakfast / 'splainin' session is tomorrow.

Any predictions?

Atomic Bombshells

Shaping up America's nuclear deterrent.
The Wall Street Journal, Review & Outlook - 24 January 2009

The Secretary of the Air Force and the Air Force Chief of Staff lost their jobs last year after two incidents involving the misuse of nuclear materials. In one, nuclear-armed cruise missiles were loaded on a B-52 bomber and flown across the country without anyone noticing for a day and a half. In the other, nose cones fitted with nuclear triggers were erroneously shipped to Taiwan.

Neither of those mishaps ended badly, and in retrospect the nation can say thanks for the wake-up call. The blunders focused attention on a problem that might otherwise have gone undetected until catastrophe struck: the neglect of U.S. nuclear forces and -- even more dangerous -- a lack of understanding at the Pentagon about nuclear deterrence.

These are the key findings of the Pentagon's task force on nuclear weapons management, which recently released its final report. The task force was appointed by Defense Secretary Bob Gates in the wake of the Air Force scandals and was led by former Defense Secretary James Schlesinger. Its initial report, last September, examined the Air Force's errors in its stewardship of nuclear weapons and made several recommendations. These mostly have been implemented, and the latest report commends the Air Force for its swift action.

The task force has now cast its eye more broadly and concludes that the "lack of interest and attention have been widespread" throughout the Pentagon's leadership. The exception is the Navy, which is responsible for submarine-launched nuclear weapons. Even there, though, not all is well. While the report finds the Navy's handling of nukes acceptable, it says there is evidence of some "fraying around the edges."

The Schlesinger panel makes a series of recommendations aimed at improving oversight and policy. They include establishing a position of assistant secretary of defense for deterrence, reducing the nonnuclear related responsibilities of U.S. Strategic Command, and beefing up inspections.

But the task force's most worrisome finding will require a new mindset. The panel finds a "distressing degree" of inattention to the role of nuclear deterrence among senior civilian and military leaders, especially regarding its psychological and political value. It proposes educational measures to "enhance understanding" of why we have a nuclear deterrent -- which, put simply, is to avoid the use of nuclear weapons. If adversaries believe the U.S. deterrent is weak, they might be tempted to use nukes against us or threaten to do so.

But there's a proliferation point too. The U.S. provides a nuclear umbrella for 30-plus countries. If our allies lose confidence, Mr. Schlesinger said at a press conference announcing the report, "five or six of those nations are quite capable of beginning to produce nuclear weapons on their own." This is precisely the opposite of what the nuclear-free-world types like to argue: If only the U.S. would get rid of its nukes, other countries would follow suit.

It's now up to the Obama Administration to move on the task force's findings. But adopting the management and personnel changes the report recommends won't be enough. "Strengthening the credibility of our nuclear deterrent should begin at the White House," the report states. If the new President makes clear his commitment to the U.S. nuclear deterrent, that attitude will echo down the chain of command.

Ten Year Site Plans

A comment this morning reminded me of two comics I hope you like.

NTS will get the next "DARHT type" facility. LANL will attempt to get more science work.

I know, I know. I won't quit my day job.

Chu confirmed as energy secretary

The LANL Daily News Bulletin

To speak to DOE employees this morning

Steven Chu was sworn in as the new secretary of the Department of Energy on Wednesday. The United States Senate on Tuesday confirmed Chu to lead DOE.

Chu is scheduled to speak to DOE employees at 11 this morning (Mountain Standard Time). Check LABNET Channel 9 for the talk.

Chu comes to DOE from Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory where he has been director.

A Nobel Laureate physicist—he shared the Nobel Prize in physics in 1997 for development of methods to cool and trap atoms with laser light—Chu also is a professor of physics and molecular and cell biology at the University of California, Berkeley.

Chu's numerous awards include the American Physical Society's Arthur Schawlow Prize for Laser Science, the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation's Senior Scientist Award, a Guggenheim Fellowship, and membership in the National Academy of Sciences, the Academica Sinica, the American Philosophical Society, the Chinese Academy of Sciences, and the Korean Academy of Sciences and Technology.

Chu earned undergraduate degrees in mathematics and physics from the University of Rochester in 1970, and a doctoral degree in physics from the University of California, Berkeley in 1976. He was a postdoctoral fellow at UC, Berkeley from 1976 to 1978, when he joined ATT's Bell Labs. He moved to Stanford University in 1987, where he was a professor of physics and applied physics, and where he received high academic honors and held a number of administrative posts before joining Berkeley lab in 2004.

New Obama Orders on Transparency, FOIA Requests

By Ed O'Keefe, The Washington Post

In a move that pleased good government groups and some journalists, President Obama issued new orders today designed to improve the federal government's openness and transparency. The first memo instructs all agencies and departments to "adopt a presumption in favor" of Freedom of Information Act requests, while the second memo orders the director of the Office of Management and Budget to issue recommendations on making the federal government more transparent.

"The Government should not keep information confidential merely because public officials might be embarrassed by disclosure, because errors and failures might be revealed, or because of speculative or abstract fears," Obama said in the FOIA memo, adding later that "In responding to requests under the FOIA, executive branch agencies (agencies) should act promptly and in a spirit of cooperation, recognizing that such agencies are servants of the public."

His memo on government transparency states that the Obama Administration "will work together to ensure the public trust and establish a system of transparency, public participation, and collaboration. Openness will strengthen our democracy and promote efficiency and effectiveness in Government." The order directs the yet-to-be-named chief technology officer to work with the OMB director to develop an "Open Government Directive" in the next four months.

Just in case new OMB director Peter R. Orszag needs any suggestions, the Sunlight Foundation -- a group dedicated to improving government transparency -- has several.

"I’m pretty damn pleased that the issue of transparency in government is such a high priority for the new administration," said director Ellen Miller. Each agency should do an audit of its information and data how it makes it available, Miller said. The administration should also redefine the definition of "public information" to mean that government information is not public until it is posted online in an easy-to-download format.

"The devil is in the details," Miller cautions, noting that the new new memos and executive orders had not been posted on the new White House Web site by late afternoon Wednesday.

Obama today also froze the salaries of senior White House staffers and issued executive orders on presidential records and new ethics guidelines for presidential appointees.

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release January 21, 2009

MEMORANDUM FOR THE HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES

SUBJECT: Freedom of Information Act

A democracy requires accountability, and accountability requires transparency. As Justice Louis Brandeis wrote, "sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants." In our democracy, the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), which encourages accountability through transparency, is the most prominent expression of a profound national commitment to ensuring an open Government. At the heart of that commitment is the idea that accountability is in the interest of the Government and the citizenry alike.

The Freedom of Information Act should be administered with a clear presumption: In the face of doubt, openness prevails. The Government should not keep information confidential merely because public officials might be embarrassed by disclosure, because errors and failures might be revealed, or because of speculative or abstract fears. Nondisclosure should never be based on an effort to protect the personal interests of Government officials at the expense of those they are supposed to serve. In responding to requests under the FOIA, executive branch agencies (agencies) should act promptly and in a spirit of cooperation, recognizing that such agencies are servants of the public.

All agencies should adopt a presumption in favor of disclosure, in order to renew their commitment to the principles embodied in FOIA, and to usher in a new era of open Government. The presumption of disclosure should be applied to all decisions involving FOIA.

The presumption of disclosure also means that agencies should take affirmative steps to make information public. They should not wait for specific requests from the public. All agencies should use modern technology to inform citizens about what is known and done by their Government. Disclosure should be timely.

I direct the Attorney General to issue new guidelines governing the FOIA to the heads of executive departments and agencies, reaffirming the commitment to accountability and transparency, and to publish such guidelines in the Federal Register. In doing so, the Attorney General should review FOIA reports produced by the agencies under Executive Order 13392 of December 14, 2005. I also direct the Director of the Office of Management and Budget to update guidance to the agencies to increase and improve information dissemination to the public, including through the use of new technologies, and to publish such guidance in the Federal Register.

This memorandum does not create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

The Director of the Office of Management and Budget is hereby authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in the Federal Register.

BARACK OBAMA

---

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release January 21, 2009

MEMORANDUM FOR THE HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES

SUBJECT: Transparency and Open Government

My Administration is committed to creating an unprecedented level of openness in Government. We will work together to ensure the public trust and establish a system of transparency, public participation, and collaboration. Openness will strengthen our democracy and promote efficiency and effectiveness in Government.

Government should be transparent. Transparency promotes accountability and provides information for citizens about what their Government is doing. Information maintained by the Federal Government is a national asset. My Administration will take appropriate action, consistent with law and policy, to disclose information rapidly in forms that the public can readily find and use. Executive departments and agencies should harness new technologies to put information about their operations and decisions online and readily available to the public. Executive departments and agencies should also solicit public feedback to identify information of greatest use to the public.

Government should be participatory. Public engagement enhances the Government's effectiveness and improves the quality of its decisions. Knowledge is widely dispersed in society, and public officials benefit from having access to that dispersed knowledge. Executive departments and agencies should offer Americans increased opportunities to participate in policymaking and to provide their Government with the benefits of their collective expertise and information. Executive departments and agencies should also solicit public input on how we can increase and improve opportunities for public participation in Government.

Government should be collaborative. Collaboration actively engages Americans in the work of their Government. Executive departments and agencies should use innovative tools, methods, and systems to cooperate among themselves, across all levels of

Government, and with nonprofit organizations, businesses, and individuals in the private sector. Executive departments and agencies should solicit public feedback to assess and improve their level of collaboration and to identify new opportunities for cooperation.

I direct the Chief Technology Officer, in coordination with the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the Administrator of General Services, to coordinate the development by appropriate executive departments and agencies, within 120 days, of recommendations for an Open Government Directive, to be issued by the Director of OMB, that instructs executive departments and agencies to take specific actions implementing the principles set forth in this memorandum. The independent agencies should comply with the Open Government Directive.

This memorandum is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by a party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

This memorandum shall be published in the Federal Register.
BARACK OBAMA

Welcome Aboard, Dr. Chu!

"Dr. Steven Chu was confirmed on January 20, 2009, as the new Secretary of Energy."

That statement and Dr. Chu's photo appear on the DOE website this morning, though DOE has yet to issue a press release, post his bio, or update it's org chart. The new stealth Secretary of Energy also seems to have taken LANL's NewsBulletin by surprise. They don't mention his confirmation at all.

Welcome aboard, Dr. Chu!

Strategic Weapons in the 21st Century

2009 Conference

The third annual Conference on Strategic Weapons in the 21st Century (SW21) will take place January 29, 2009, at the Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center in Washington, DC. The conference is co-sponsored by Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore national laboratories.

Theme: When and How Do We Hedge Against Uncertainty

International Dynamics, Policy, and Strategy Working Group
Assessing Risk and the Need to Hedge
Chairs: Ash Carter and Keith Payne

Against what developments must we hedge, and what should guide our policy to mitigate risk? What are the key threats driving policy and doctrine? Against what possible future threats do we really need to hedge? How do we hedge against uncertainty? How do we qualitatively describe the risks? Why are most countries modernizing their nuclear forces and infrastructure or proposing to? The defined threat and the options for the next administrationís threat assessments needs to be clarified. What policy objectives are we trying to achieve when we modify readiness and hedge against uncertain future developments? What is our policy on risk analysis and mitigation? How much do we need to rely on forces in being and high readiness? To what degree can we rely on the industrial base or a responsive infrastructure? What are the advantages of reduced readiness and what are the dangers? How do we calculate the lowest acceptable levels of forces and infrastructure required to assure our allies and ensure our own security?

Forces, Infrastructure, and Science and Technology Working Group
What are the Options for Hedging?
Chairs: Rich Mies and Sid Drell

What options in force readiness, infrastructure responsiveness, and R&D futures would permit hedging safely at lower stockpile numbers, fewer deployed weapons, and reduced alert levels? What forces, infrastructure, and S&T investments will be required as we reduce the number of nuclear weapons? How do you posture the forces in the absence of a well-defined threat? What are the technical challenges associated with a responsive infrastructure that is designed to support the lowest possible levels yet ensure our security against any adverse future developments? How do we address tactical vs. strategic responsiveness?

Key Issues From Contemporary Studies and Commissions
Chairs: Bill Perry and Jim Schlesinger
Panel Members: John Hamre, Larry Welch, Rich Mies, Bill Schneider, Sid Drell, Desmond Bowen

Roundtable Discussion: The Path Forward
Chairs: John Hamre and Larry Welch

What are the key issues that complicate a national consensus on strategic forces including nuclear weapons? What are the issues about which there is the most misunderstanding? Examples: What are the relationships between nuclear forces, offenses, defenses, conventional forces, and information operations? How do strategic capabilities positively and negatively influence security developments with friends and with potential adversaries? How do we deal with dual use, e.g., platforms? What is meant by hair trigger, de-alerting, etc.? What is a "new" system and what should be our policy about things that might be "new"? How near-term are the conditions required for the elimination of nuclear weapons and what should that mean for our near- and intermediate-term planning?

Security science complex named after Domenici

LOS ALAMOS MONITOR STAFF REPORT

Environment Secretary Samuel Bodman saved one of his last official gestures for former Sen. Pete Domenici, who retired Dec. 31 after 36 years in office.

Bodman, whose tenure will end with the advent of a new administration in Washington on Tuesday, announced a virtual memorial in Domenici’s name.

A group of buildings in the main administrative area of Los Alamos National Laboratory will be known as the “Pete V. Domenici National Security Complex.”

The designation honors “Senator Domenici’s long and distinguished career as a U.S. Senator from New Mexico and is a testament to the vision and leadership of a great public servant,” the DOE’s announcement stated.

“Senator Domenici has been a strong advocate for the important work done across the DOE complex and particularly at Los Alamos National Laboratory,” said Bodman in the press release. “He realized that it was the people at the lab, selflessly serving our country, who made the lab what it is today. I appreciate the support he gave to them, to me and to the nation.”

The honor reflects Domenici’s years of leadership on the Senate Energy and Water Appropriation Subcommittee when he shepherded funding for many projects in the Energy Department and nuclear weapons complex.

The three buildings included in the designation include the National Security Sciences Building, the main administrative office building; the Nicholas C. Metropolis Building for Modeling and Simulation, where what is currently the world’s fastest supercomputer, the Roadrunner, is housed; and the Nonproliferation and International Security Building, where the laboratory’s Threat Reduction Division has its headquarters.

During one of his last “goodbye” visits to Los Alamos in August, Domenici addressed laboratory employees and heard tributes from lab director Michael Anastasio and former directors, Harold Agnew and Robert Kuckuck, along with National Nuclear Security Administration Administrator Thomas D’Agostino.

Anastasio took the occasion to announce that the auditorium in the National Security Science Building was to be renamed the Pete V. Domenici Auditorium.

As the closed, all-employees’ meeting was portrayed in the laboratory’s Newsbulletin at the time, Domenici drew a chuckle from employees when he said, “We kind of hit it off,” after listening to the remarks.

Later, he added, “I had so many good times representing you. I think it’s pretty clear you have been a special constituency of mine.”

In all the three building, grouped together at the heart of a new administrative core, total 742,000 square feet and were a start on a larger project of renewing the infrastructure of the 60-year-old laboratory.

The 7-story National Security Science Building, where many of the senior managers work, anchors the north side of the central campus. The NSSB is the newest of the buildings, having opened in 2006 at a cost of $97 million, according to laboratory reports.

The NIST Center opened in early 2003 with 164,000 square feet and cost $63 million.

The Metropolis Center is the largest of the buildings, with 303,000 square feet. It was dedicated in 2002, at a cost of about $93 million.

Three Laptops?

A reader sent me this from The New Mexican today.

"January 18, 2008
Police Report
An unknown person kicked in the back door of a residence Friday between 9 a.m. and 3:45 p.m. in the 1300 block of Madrid Road and stole an iPod and three laptop computers belonging to Los Alamos National Laboratory."

They did not include a comment, but I imagine they were wondering the same thing as I - Who has three work laptops?

I wonder what the rest of the story is....

Former LANL Worker Sues CBS

By Raam Wong, Albuquerque Journal Staff Writer

A Phoenix auto parts company has settled with a former Los Alamos National Laboratory worker who claimed she was duped into buying a souped-up Ford Mustang with a lab credit card.

Before the alleged scam became known, the purchase triggered congressional hearings and sensational media coverage depicting Lillian Anaya as a rogue lab worker spending taxpayer money on fast cars.

After she was exonerated, Anaya filed a defamation suit against LANL and media outlets, as well as All-Mustang Performance and its owner.

All-Mustang settled with Anaya in November, according to court documents. John Boyd, Anaya's attorney, said he couldn't discuss the confidential settlement, while an All-Mustang attorney could not be reached Friday.

Meanwhile, U.S. District Judge James Browning last month gave the go-ahead for Anaya's defamation lawsuit against CBS Broadcasting to proceed.

Public person?
Six years ago, Anaya was a veteran purchaser at LANL when anchorman Dan Rather and other CBS News reporters went on the air and told the Mustang story.

Anaya had only appeared in the media once before when she was listed as a survivor in her uncle's obituary. So it must have come as a shock to find herself the subject of five CBS Evening News broadcasts.

"Hey, nice car!" Rather said during the opening of one such broadcast as a picture of a shiny, black Mustang convertible flashed on the screen. "She bought it and charged it to you, the taxpayer."

As the media frenzy took hold, a frightened Anaya hid in her home with the blinds drawn and wept, according to her lawsuit.

"This was a woman who prided herself on her job and her integrity and had worked at LANL for more than 30 years and all of a sudden she's appearing in the national news as a criminal," Boyd, her attorney, said in an interview last week.

Last month, Judge Browning granted a partial victory to CBS, while at the same time clearing the way for the case to head to trial.

At issue was a central question in media law: At what point does a person enter the public arena and open herself to scrutiny?

The answer is important in defamation cases because public people — whether Brad Pitt or Bill Richardson — face a higher bar to prove they were slimed.

In seeking a summary judgement, CBS argued that Anaya's work made her a "public official." The network noted her top-secret clearance and million-dollar monthly credit limit.

But the court sided with Anaya's argument that CBS was overstating her job description. She had no employees beneath her and four layers of management above her — not the sort of position that invites public scrutiny, her attorneys said.

The court then addressed a second question: Did the controversy surrounding the Mustang story at least make Anaya a "public figure"? CBS argued it did. The law says individuals can become public figures after injecting themselves or being drawn into a public controversy. The court determined that Anaya was not a public figure during the first three broadcasts because she tried to avoid the attention.

"CBS attempted to contact her and interview her, but ... she chose to decline CBS' requests and to avoid contact with the media," the court found.

But, in June 2003, Anaya took a different tack. The lab had exonerated Anaya, and her then-attorney, Dan Cron, tried to use the media to set the record straight, according to the court.

Instead of simply answering reporters' questions, the court found that Cron was engaged in "exchanging blows with detractors and pushing the story that exonerated Lillian Anaya."

As a result, Anaya had become a public figure by the time of the final two CBS broadcasts, in October 2003 and April 2004, the court found.

That means Anaya will have to prove that, for those broadcasts at least, CBS acted with malice — defined as making statements that the network knew, or should have known, were false.

Acting in malice
The court found sufficient evidence that CBS and its reporter may have done just that during the final two broadcasts.

By the October 2003 program, reporter Sharyl Attkisson had a "mountain of evidence that there was no car," according to the court.

The court pointed to the lab's explanation for the Mustang:

In May 2002, Anaya phoned what she believed to be an established lab vendor to order 21 pressure transducers. LANL's business records were outdated, and Anaya unintentionally reached All-Mustang, which had acquired the vendor's old phone number.

Thinking she was dealing with Fluid Conditioning, Anaya faxed All-Mustang her order. The company then charged her card nearly $30,000.

But despite the exoneration by LANL, CBS ran subsequent reports that implicated Anaya.

The October broadcast included an interview with All-Mustang owner Tom Thompson who claimed: "She wanted a late-model Mustang, black convertible, with, like, black leather interior. She wanted it loaded up with all the options, and then she wanted to make it go fast."

The broadcast included LANL's explanation for the mix-up. But the court found CBS' description of the LANL story made it sound "ridiculous."

"The Court believes that, after the wrong-number theory came out, and after LANL officially exonerated Lillian Anaya, Attkisson should have become more cognizant of the possibility that Lillian Anaya was innocent," Judge Browning wrote.

The court also found evidence of malice in Rather's April 2004 statement: "She's at it again. A government worker using your tax dollars for more questionable purchases."

The anchorman was referring to an Inspector General report that reviewed past questionable transactions by Anaya and, for the most part, confirmed her innocence.

Yet CBS made it sound as if Anaya was continuing her extravagant spending in the wake of her exoneration, the court found.

Attkisson is a defendant in the case, while Rather is not. An attorney for CBS in Santa Fe could not be reached Friday.

Another defendant in the case, the University of California, the lab's former manager, agreed to pay Anaya $475,000 in 2006 on behalf of the school and three former lab employees named in the suit.

Shovelhead Ed - Round Two

I get the feeling Shovelhead Ed can go ten rounds without breaking a sweat!

Good day all, it’s Shovelhead Ed………. I’m baaaaaaack!!!! Hope everyone is doing just ducky today!!!!! Just going to address a couple more points. This bloggin’ thing is fun huh!!!!!!!!

Anonymous #6 (garden hose CAN be used…..put out spot fires……threaten to spread to a home)
Thanks for your input. And relatively good points were made on your behalf, however, please let’s look at the intensity of what was and is involved in a firestorm. That’s what the C/G was…. And all your intense wind driven fire events are. Garden hoses can work to extinguish small fires, but what are these spot fires? Why are they presenting themselves? WHAT R THEY??? They are the precursor to the inbound firestorm behind them. Nothing more…nothing less. Spot fires start showing up……. Get worried. They pop up with more and more frequency and intensity …….. get out. WHY R THEY SHOWING UP? They are the wind driven fire brands/embers that are pushed off of and ahead of the main body of fire by intense natural and fire created winds. Their direction fans out ahead of the main onslaught in all directions up to distances of 1 to 3 miles. Their presence routinely enlarges the main incident and assists in the preheating of the fuels within the collective path. Wetting down the roof is an admirable effort, however, one must take into consideration one irrefutable fact. No amount of moisture on that roof is going to repel the intense heat that will be upon it very shortly. Roof type, when living in the wildland /urban interface environment; would be one of the greatest “aces in the hole” that the homeowner can possess. Pro-Panel roofs, trees and vegetation removed from the immediate vicinity of the home, clean yard, etc. will do more than the garden hose. AKA defensible space. Remove or drastically reduce your fuels………….. remove or drastically reduce your chances of spot fires inundating the perimeter. As for the rest of the firestorm following…….. the chips will fall where they may. Nothing mortal on this planet has any control at all over it. Garden hose fire attacks at this stage of the game are too little……….. too late unfortunately. Please reference any and all wildland/urban interface incidents, locally, domestically and abroad. There is but one common thread between them all. They are indiscriminate takers of life and property. Thanks much for your input. Been fun visiting with you. Hope your days are great and peaceful. Chiao!

Anonymous# 7 (hoping my comment….. elicit a number)
LOL… totally too cool!!! Thanks bunches for your blog. I would derelict in duty to not accommodate thee. I sincerely hope that you find #7 an appealing and pleasant number. May it bring you great luck and fortune throughout your many days and years to come!!!!! Have a wonderful day!!!!!

Anonymous #8 (hero is a soldier/Marine…… garbage cans on fire) OHHH MY!!!!
You’re right man. A hero IS the soldier/Marine….. any man or woman serving or has served in harms way. Yer preachin’ to the choir here dude, (dudette). When it comes to the honor and respect for our military personnel, I’m all over it…… same as you. We don’t worry too much about the trash can fires either…… we use garden hoses for that. Thanks for the input.

Anonymous #9 our dictionary friend
As Bartles and James used to say…….. “Thank you… for your support!!!” A valid point you represent. Thanks so much for bringing it to the table.

HAAAAAAYY FRANK!!!!! How’s it goin’ man. Good to hear from you again. I’m back again for round 2. Man ... the defending of ones livelihood and brotherhood sure rattles some cages huh!!!!! LOL Totally cool. That’s what a free speaking forum should do, I think. Be a helluva world if everybody wore the same color of socks and had the same thoughts and opinions. Thank you for your kind compliments. Much obliged brother. Thoughtful of you to interject them on my behalf. Beer thirty any time…. Let’s put it together. But only if I may have the honor of a couple of rounds on me for your refreshment!! The camaraderie and conversation will be welcomed. Peaceful, “non-postal” days to all!!!!!! Talk soon man. And Frank……. always remember this brother ……. “If worms had machine guns… birds wouldn’t fuck with them!!!!!!!” LOL Enjoy the weekend and days to follow. Ed