Friday, May 3, 2013
Who is LLNS, and who controls it?
Who is LLNS, and who controls it?
From llnsllc.com
Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC (LLNS) is managed by a board of governors, a group of key scientific, academic, national security and business leaders from the LLNS partner companies.
Chairman - Norman Pattiz. A UC Regent and chairs the Regents’ Committee on Oversight of the DOE Laboratories for LANL, LLNL, and LBNL. He is the Founder and Chairman Emeritus of Westwood One.
Vice Chairman - Craig Alber. President of Bechtel Systems & Infrastructure, Inc. and Senior Vice President of Bechtel Group, Inc.
Steven Beckwith is the UC’s vice president for research and graduate studies.
William Frazer is senior vice president, emeritus of UC and professor of physics emeritus, UC Berkeley.
John Gordon served as the first administrator of NNSA and undersecretary of the DOE, responsible for the nation’s nuclear weapons program.
John Howanitz is the general manager of Nuclear Security & Allied Governments for Bechtel National, Inc.
Donald Kintzer is currently associated with Korora Partners, a Silicon Valley based consulting company focused on general business advisory and executive coaching/mentoring services. He currently serves as a member of the LBNL Contract Assurance Council.
Steven Koonin served as the second Under Secretary for Science at DOE, spent 5 years as Chief Scientist for BP, 10 years as Caltech Provost. He is a member of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences and the JASON advisory group.
Glenn Mara is the vice president laboratory management, UC Office of the President. He is responsible for the University's management oversight of LLNL, LANL, and LBNL.
Richard Mies is the president and chief executive officer of Hicks and Associates, Inc. He serves concurrently as the deputy group manager of the Transformation, Training, Test and Logistics Group at SAIC.
David Pethick is president of the Energy & Environment Business Group of URS Corporation's Washington Division.
Ellen Tauscher is Strategic Advisor for Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC. Tauscher served as a Special Envoy for Strategic Stability and Missile Defense with the State Department and as Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security. She represented California’s 10th Congressional District in the U.S. House of Representatives, chaired the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Strategic Forces.
Bruce Varner is a UC Regent.
Jeff Wadsworth is the senior executive responsible for Battelle’s laboratory management business. He was the director of Oak Ridge National Laboratory. He served 10 years as a senior manager at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.
David Walker is a senior vice president and manager of the functions and finance in Bechtel's U.S. Government business unit.
Craig Weaver is Managing Director of Bechtel Management Company Limited the UK subsidiary of Bechtel Systems and Infrastructure Inc.
-----------
By my count;
University of California = 5
Bechtel = 4
URS = 1
Battelle = 1
Independent = 5
So isn't UC the controlling partner in LLNS?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
24 comments:
As a senior UCOP official once quipped, "LLNS and LANS are just a couple of UC's for-profit holding companies"
I never understood the for "profit" part of the new LLNS. Has anyone seen any benefits either financial or otherwise, either to the Lab or to the Nation of now being a "profit" making organization ? The only profit part of the equation I see is the money that goes to Bechtel.
The benefits are only to the LLC partners and their senior leaders. The country, federal goverment, tax payers, and the rest are losers.
The only profit part of the equation I see is the money that goes to Bechtel.
May 3, 2013 at 7:50 PM
The definition of "for-profit" is that the corporation makes a profit. What is not to understand? You need to understand that there is no longer an entity called "the Lab." All there is, is a corporation (LLNS) formed by a consortium of "parent companies" (or parent entities, if you must, since UC is not a "company"), and a facility (LLNL) owned by the federal government (NNSA). The corporation is under contract to the government to operate the facility. You do not work for "the Lab" since it does not exist as an entity; you work for the corporation (LLNS) that runs the facility. Bechtel is one of the "parent companies", and although it is the largest in terms of world-wide reach outside of LLNS, it is not the managing partner in the corporation; UC is. So the money does not "go to Bechtel," it goes to LLNS and is distributed to the LLNS partners (including Bechtel) according to the partnership agreement (to which we are not privy). Get it now?
The country, federal goverment, tax payers, and the rest are losers.
May 3, 2013 at 8:37 PM
No, they are the payers of the contract fee. By legal contract. Get over your socialism.
Tauscher, Frasier, Mara and Wadsworth are solid. They could do this on their own, with time for a hand of bridge.
When you hear lots and lots if complaints about Bechtel, but all you hear are crickets when it is time to show evidence , logic or reasoning, it really makes me think that Bechtel is doing its part well.
Bechtel is a parasite. They do a bad job for money that UC once did as a public service. It may not be illegal. It is shameless and wasteful.
Bechtel is a parasite. They do a bad job for money that UC once did as a public service. It may not be illegal. It is shameless and wasteful.
May 4, 2013 at 5:20 PM
You still don't get it. UC gets more money than Bechtel from the LLNS contract.
When is the LLNS contract up? In 2007 we were told it was a 7 year contract, which means it would go out for bid in 2014. But then there were extensions - can't find how many and for how long!
UC probably loves the current arrangement.
1. They brought in partners to oversee the business practices, environment control and security. They kept oversight of the "science". If we ignore the NIF fiasco, most if not all of the NNSA complaints about the lab have been over the non-science related functions. Thus, UC can pass the buck to their compatriots and state 'handle it'.
2. UC no longer has a bunch of people to take care of within their retirement plan.
3. UC no longer has to worry about the Lab's benefits.
4. UC is making more money, with possibly less work and worry than they were prior to the contract change.
So while we complain about Bechtel raking in the coin and treating the employees shabbily, UC doesn't have clean hands in this affair as well.
All true.
It is disappointing that UC has lost it's sense of stewardship over the labs....but I guess we can't really lay that at the feet of UC, since they didn't chose this path, congress/DOE/NNSA forced the change.
The repercussions have been very noticeable.
Pretty sure the shabby treatment of the employees is at the hands of management who have been at the lab long before Bechtel and the new contract.
I'm trying to incite a viral mob frenzy. Stop asking for evidence or contradicting my points. It's bechtel's fault because they are greedy vulture capitalists. They are as bad as Wall Street and their raping of the American economy. We all know it's true. Bechtel = bad. What is self evident needs no evidence.
The fact of the matter is that the pre-2006 UC contract cost $8 million a year. The LANS contract costs on average $70 million a year. That factor of nearly 9 (or more) isn't represented by any demonstrable benefit to the national security mission of the lab. The running of the DOE labs has been converted from a publicly held stewardship by a public university system to a for-profit business with out-sized, unwarranted profits (no matter who ends up pocketing the money). Should national security be a for-profit business. Given the abuses of large energy and financial interests in the recent past, I think the clear answer is a resounding, "NO!"
Bechtel is a part of the political patronage system that our kleptocracy strongly supports. They will never be removed from oversight of the labs because they are part of the money grab and it is easy pick'ins.
BTW, the Directors of LANL, LLNL and SNL will be testifying to a Senate Armed Services Subcommittee on Strategic Forces committee on Tues, May 7 at 2:30 pm EDT regarding the management of the NNSA labs. Should be interesting to hear what they have to say. I doubt they will attack the hand that feeds them their big executive salaries.
The Senate live webcast site is here:
www.armed-services.senate.gov/
The testimony might also eventually end up getting posted at the NNSA Testimony site:
nnsa.energy.gov/mediaroom/
congressionaltestimony
I rarely post, but check in on this blog every few weeks and finally think this thread is making some headway. Comments on this blog have always demonized Bechtel and glorified the old UC management structure. In truth UC no longer wanted the liability of laboratory employee benefits. The UC system is a California state entity, and CA has enough financial issues. Bechtel is just a company trying to make a buck for providing a service, and one of several partner companies in LLNS/LANS, take them out of the mix, and there a dozen more Lockheed’s, Boeings, Fluors, B&Ws or Honeywells... all waiting to step in. This is the standard way the DoD operates. Anyone that thinks things will be better under the DoD indstead of NNSA is smoking crack. The government and the tax payer do not want to pay the price of the luxurious benefits of UC yesteryear’s, and frankly they shouldn't have to as the mission need is not there. We are not in the height of the cold war nor the glory days of weapons development and testing. You can still make a decent living at an NNSA lab and perform important work. There are too many whiners that are hanging on to days long gone, and claiming that they could have it so much better in private industry, but I don’t see these people getting such jobs, and I think because these 21st century tech companies do not want them. As stated in a reply above you work for LLNS, LANS, or Sandia Corporation , the “Lab” is just a facility owned by NNSA. In other words we are merely an employee for another defense contractor, but some of us have a huge sense of entitlement. I have even heard employees refer to themselves and friends as “national treasures,” and maybe some are, but I don’t think those caliber of people whine on this blog.
Ha ha ha ha. I can almost figure out who the specific people are who would say something like that.. that they are national treasures... ha ha ha ha. The sad thing is that there are people who think that way at the labs. I guess I should be more forgiving. It takes some people more effort to justify their existence.
Some people just need someone to demonize. Hatred of Bechtel, hatred of Obama, hatred of wall street, hatred of McMillan. The glass is always half empty to many. This hatred tells you more about the posters than it does about Bechtel.
2:27 and the management Kool Aid aside, LLNS is a shameless, shape-shifting parasite designed to benefit the Bohemian Grove crowd at the expense of the American taxpayer and the LLNS employees who are dumb enough to stay.
This hatred tells you more about the posters than it does about Bechtel.
May 8, 2013 at 2:27 AM
Sorry, if the posters are Bechtel (AKA LLNS) employees, it tells you loads about Bechtel.
Sorry, if the posters are Bechtel (AKA LLNS) employees, it tells you loads about Bechtel.
May 11, 2013 at 3:30 PM
First, LLNS is controlled by UC, not Bechtel, Second, it just tells you that LLNS does not coddle their employees. Self-entitled employees are the bane of the Lab.
Check the lawsuit LLNS just lost; that shows you their expertise!
What does it have to do with Bechtel? UC has the biggest role in the management of LLNS. Where is the outrage against those bad actors?
Post a Comment