Coalition of Oak Ridge Retired Employees (CORRE) Board Meeting
Special Guest: U.S. Representative Chuck Fleischmann
August 20, 2025

Attendees: Dave Beck, Greg Livengood, Dave Whitehead, Teresa Riggs, Gordon Fee, Chuck Estes, Sheila Thornton, Jama Hill, Tony and Joy Angelelli, Richard Green, Sam McSpadden, Alan Beauchamp, Paul Wasilko, Luther Gibson, Lester Petrie, Lydia Birk, Mike Shelton, Shirley Cox, George McRae, Barry Burton, Garry Whitley, Wayne Bolinger, Nick Jessen, John Steward, Cindy Boshears.

Chuck Fleischmann Chairs the House Committee on Appropriations: Energy, Water Development and Related Agencies Subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee and sits on the full Committee. He serves on the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee, specifically the Energy Subcommittee. In addition, he sits on the Defense Subcommittee. He is a member of the Labor, Health, and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies Subcommittee. He also chairs several energy-related caucuses, including the American Energy Dominance Caucus.

The meeting began with a welcome greeting by Dave Whitehead, who introduced Paul Wasilko, VP, CORRE. Paul began by stating the following CORRE talking points:

* Imagine working in Oak Ridge as a DOE contractor (K, Y, and X examples)

• Safe but high hazard/exotic materials

* Patriots who contributed to the Manhattan Project and helped secure victory to end the cold war

* Now also imagine living without a cost-of-living adjustment since 1998 (only to those who retired prior to 1998)

• That's 27 years with a significant loss in purchasing power

• Inflation has eroded the value of $1.00 in 1998 to just $0.51 today

• Has resulted in these retirees or surviving spouses struggling to afford the basic necessities of life

In contrast, both Federal and Design Agency employees have and continued to receive substantial COLA's

o Federal and Design Agency personnel had pensions increased by 75% during this same time period

* Currently there is no acknowledgement by either the DOE or the DOE Contractors that this is something that should be reviewed for merit

o The only path forward will require action by Congress

• DOE Contractors lack the authority to do this without DOE guidance

* We are not requesting action to fix this problem back to 1998 - just a request that DOE evaluate the cost and impact of authorizing Oak Ridge DOE contractors to provide an annual COLA for their retired employees equivalent to that received by DOE Federal retirees.

• For example, a 2.5% COLA for 2025 is estimated to cost $8.6M – less than 0.02% of the annual DOE budget

• A small investment to uphold our commitment to those who
faithfully served our nation and ensure that the 15,000 Oak Ridge retirees and their families are not left behind

* The Oak Ridge community has had a long and effective relationship with you and past representatives, Marilyn Lloyd and Zach Wamp, and we look forward to continuing this history to correct this long-standing inequity.

We respect you and your work for this district and recognize that you hold positions from which you can be an advocate for this request. As such, we have prepared a letter for your consideration that might be shared with the Dept of Energy Administration.

Thank you for taking the time out of your schedule to meet with us this morning. We also welcome the opportunity to provide any additional information and look forward to your support honoring the sacrifices of Oak Ridge DOE Contractor retirees. (PRW: 8/19/25)

Wasilko introduced guest Gordon Fee and asked him to say a few words. Fee stated the Contractor Retirees have done important work these many years and we need a champion; he thanked Fleischmann for his time to meet with us. And with this, Fleischmann took the floor.

Fleischmann began by saying he appreciated being invited to the meeting. He understands we are looking for a champion and he has been that for us; he has spoken to the past Secretary (s) of Energy on our behalf. He is Chairmen of the Energy and Water Subcommittee of Appropriations and leads the charge to fund the federal agencies and programs responsible for the United States national laboratories, nuclear security, and energy independence. He also has the subcommittee assignment for funding the Oak Ridge National Lab, Y-12 Nuclear Security, and large environmental cleanup missions. He stated he wants to get his facts right and asked, “DOE is not authorized to give us COLAs—it rests with the Contractors, right?” Whitehead said we have had several different contractors over these many years and in their DOE contracts they are rewarded if they save money and reduce costs in their Award Fee Contracts; they are not going to put themselves on the line to increase costs. DOE is not the fiduciary of these pension plans. There is no incentive to add to the cost of the contracts. DOE must tell Contractors to assess the cost of a COLA.” Someone asked where does the money come from and Fleischmann replied that he appropriates dollars for everything – gives dollars to DOE to cover retirement costs, dollars to DOE then to current contractors to all contract retirees. He will ask Contractors for an economic analysis; Congress has a Research Service; is there is a legislative fix? McRae said we have had multiple contractors faced with this issue and the current contractors have no incentive to go back in time to resolve a pension adjustment issue for former employees/current retirees that the current contractors do not know. Fleischmann stated the appropriations bill is not authorized to make a law but can add or subtract—he is one of twelve appropriators. There is a big difference in an Authorizer versus an Appropriator. An authorizer establishes or modifies a government program or agency, defining its purpose and scope, while an appropriator allocates actual money to that program or agency through annual appropriations bills. The two functions are sequential: a program must be authorized by law before the Appropriations Committee can provide funding for it. Boshears asked should the COLA get put in the RFP so the disincentive gets removed? Discussion took place on DOE evaluating the costs and the contracts bid process by stating the Contractors accept the current benefits plans program but nothing says fix the left-over problem. McSpadden discussed the former Union Carbide Nuclear Division of 1977 when COLAs were called ad hoc increases as time went on the reservation was broken up with different Contractors for each site and Ad Hoc increases were left out of the contracts processes. The question was asked should DOE look at an analysis and evaluate where we are? The current contractors are in for the long-term over the next 5-10 years and Amentum has done a phenomenal job. Fleischmann will research and get back to Shirley Cox. Boshears said, “Thank you – this community gave Fleischmann his first win.”