Category Archives: Commentary

Rocky Flats Benefits Changes—August Update

Posted on by

I’ve previously summarized important information on scheduled changes to Rocky Flats retiree healthcare benefits. These changes were described in June 2014 letters to retirees and also further elaborated in public briefings by the new DOE benefits contractor (Washington River Protection Solutions)  implementing healthcare benefit changes for Rocky Flats retirees 65 or older. These healthcare benefits changes are currently scheduled to go into effect on January 1, 2015 and require near-term action by 65+ year old, benefits-eligible retirees to avoid loss of benefits. Please note: I’m acting in a purely unofficial capacity, do not endorse the benefits changes, and want mainly to make sure that my former colleagues are aware these important, upcoming changes so they can take timely and appropriate action. My main concerns are that some retirees may believe that they can safely ignore these changes because they were promised ‘lifetime benefits’ or, alternatively, some may be frustrated or overwhelmed by the apparent complexity of these changes. As I understand what is happening, these changes are moving forward and delay or inaction may result in Medicare-eligible retirees losing Rocky Flats-provided healthcare insurance coverage.

I’ve received many questions and comments since my initial blog postings and have myself attempted to find more information on the website provided in the healthcare benefits changes information letter (and packet) that I received by mail in June. That website has many links, but I was unable to find the correct pathway to access Rocky Flats information. When I called Rocky Flats Benefits Office at 1-866-296-5036 and United Health Care at 1-877-893-7224, they provided another link to a website a video recording of one of the informational briefings given in the Denver area in July 2014. For those that did not attend a briefing, I recommend watching the 1-hour video to learn what you will need to do over the next three months. Continue reading →

Costs of Fighting Global Warming

Posted on by

I was inspired to weigh in again on the issue of global warming by an article titled “Post-coal Pueblo left out in the cold” by Lydia DePillis of the Washington Post. Under the headline there is a picture of Pueblo resident Sharon Garcia who “…doesn’t allow lights to be left on in rooms that aren’t being used.” She had her power shut off in 2010, and is constantly struggling to make ends meet running a day care center. She is struggling with paying her electricity bill because the residential rate per kilowatt hour has increased 26 percent since 2010.

The reasons for the increase are complex, and I suggest you read the entire article. The impact of regulatory requirements on utility companies is what attracted my attention. A big part of the problem is caused by “…coal plants shutting down as Colorado transitions to renewable energy.” Black Hills Energy provides power to Pueblo, and Colorado’s 2010 Clean Air—Clean Jobs act caused them to shutter three older plants that would have been too expensive to overhaul. Utility regulators guarantee Black Hills an 8.53 percent return, which gives it an incentive to close nearly all of its relatively inexpensive coal capacity, build new plants, and pass the costs to consumers. Continue reading →

NSC 68 and the Political Economy of the Early Cold War

Posted on by

polit-econ-cold-warFrequent readers of this web site will find that this is an unusual posting because it is a combination review and commentary. I took that approach because I disagree with the basic premise of the book that stated simplistically, the Soviets did not present the threat that was advocated by U.S. policy.  My disagreement with the premise of the book does not diminish its importance. There is, in my opinion, immense value in a healthy argument about whether the U.S. rearmament was the primary cause of the Cold War or whether the Soviet Union would have taken full advantage if that policy hadn’t blunted their efforts. I’m thrilled Truman was convinced that FDR’s trust of Stalin was misplaced and that containment of the Soviets was needed.

Back to a stab at a review, the book was written by Curt Cardwell, and he has some serious disagreements with the U.S. policies about the intentions of the Soviet Union before the beginning of the Cold War. Briefly, the National Security Council (NSC) issued a series of documents that gauged the intentions of the Soviet Union in the mid-1940s to early 1950s. Those who advocated that the Truman administration must take a hard line against the Soviet Union were primary authors of the policy statement titled NSC 68. The doctrine in that paper was approved by Truman and resulted in a massive rearmament program by the U.S. beginning in 1950. It was the culmination of several Top Secret documents advocating that the ultimate objective of the U.S.S.R. was world domination and that the U.S. was required to aggressively build military strength to prevent the Soviets from pursing that goal.  Cardwell strongly disagrees. He thinks the real purpose of NSC 68 was to protect free market capitalism. I disagree. I offer that the Soviets had blockaded Berlin, exploded their first atomic bomb in 1949, the Chinese Communists had taken control of China, North Korea had invaded the South, and the Chinese had entered the Korean War before NSC 68 was finally approved. Those events and actions indicate the Soviets were, in my opinion, interested in expanding their area of control.  Continue reading →

Rocky Flats Benefits Changes—Another Personal Story

Posted on by

To frequent readers, the recent commentaries have been in line with the title of this web site, “RockyFlatsFacts.com.” This may be the last of the commentaries about Rocky Flats until we hear more about changes to retiree benefits that the Department of Energy (DOE) is requiring. People who have what they think are “life-time benefits” from a contractor to a government agency should read what is happening to the people who worked at Rocky Flats and develop a “healthy cynicism.”

Several responses to the commentaries previously posted on the changes have been something to the effect, “This can’t be. I worked with dangerous materials. However, they promised me good health care benefits when I retired.” The first warning about the DOE’s willingness to renege on that promise was posted last week by a person who had their health care benefits removed by an administrative action even while they continued to be employed at Rocky Flats. DOE of course did not take the action directly to eliminate the “promised benefits.” They established a contract that required a contractor to take that action.

I received a letter from a reader dated December 1, 2000 addressed to “Retiree or Surviving Spouse.” It explained that DOE had directed Kaiser-Hill not to make any changes for salaried employees who retired before July 1, 1995 or their surviving spouses. The letter also included a memo from the DOE manager saying that there will be no changes and that “…post 1995 retiree benefits will be addressed in “…DOE forthcoming policy…” I am certain people are digging through their files to find information such as this as they contemplate how to protect their benefits. Continue reading →

Rocky Flats Benefit Changes – Another in a String of Reductions

Posted on by

This blog was started to document the truth about the Department of Energy’s (DOE) Rocky Flats Plant, which purified and fabricated plutonium and other parts for nuclear weapons at a relatively small site sixteen miles northwest of Denver. Last week, RF_Alum posted on changes to retirement benefits for these “Cold War Warriors”. This week I will explain how I lost my retirement benefits, despite twenty-two years of service at the plant.

At the time, the retirement calculation used at DOE sites considered both years of service and age of the employee, so when I left in 2003 I would have qualified for a full retirement package except for one problem: Twenty months short of earning my retirement, I was laid off from the prime-contractor and shifted to a job with a subcontractor (or “third tier” company).  Time with such a subcontractor didn’t “count”.  The day I was laid off, the Human Resources representative handed me my twenty-year service award, thanked me for my loyalty, and held her breath hoping I wouldn’t explode.

I thanked the nice HR lady (it wasn’t her fault) and left her office shaking my head.  The next day I reported to my subcontractor job.  The DOE still wanted my labor, but they didn’t want to follow through on the promise of retirement benefits that had been part of my compensation package for twenty years.

The DOE had wanted to keep turn-over rates low. The promised retirement encouraged employees like me to stay at the Flats, and this benefited the nation since hiring, paying for security clearance investigations, and developing employee expertise cost a lot of money.

America’s needs changed when the Cold War fizzled out.  Continue reading →

Rocky Flats Benefits Changes

Posted on by

Rocky Flats retirees recently received a packet of information in an envelope with a warning in bold type, “Must Read Special Announcement: Information About Important changes to your Retiree Benefits.” The letter inside dated June 27, 2014 from Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) announces in the first paragraph, “If you and/or your spouse are age 65 or older, we want to let you know about some important changes coming in 2015 for your Rocky Flats retiree healthcare benefits. If you are not yet 65, please understand these changes will not affect you until you or your spouse reach 65.” The letter then “sprinkles saccharine” on what is coming. It says “This new coverage will allow you and your spouse to enroll in retiree healthcare coverage that’s right for each of you.” It also says the changes will allow “…added flexibility and customization.”

The meeting about the changes did not present quite as positive a spin on what is coming.  The contractor from WRPS led with the explanation that the company who won the contract to administer the benefits had to agree that they would analyze the total package and make adjustments if it provided benefits greater than 105% in comparison to sixteen other plans. The Rocky Flats benefits were found to be nearly 200%, or twice as generous as the average of the other plans. The contract therefore forced remedial action, and it was stated this was being done for the taxpayers. It‘s too early to attempt to judge or calculate the impact of the changes, because the costs for the different health care plans will not be available until later. I have no doubt I’ll be paying more for coverage that has higher deductibles. Continue reading →