BLOG purpose

This BLOG is for LLNL present and past employees, friends of LLNL and anyone impacted by the privatization of the Lab to express their opinions and expose the waste, wrongdoing and any kind of injustice against employees and taxpayers by LLNS/DOE/NNSA. The opinions stated are personal opinions. Therefore, The BLOG author may or may not agree with them before making the decision to post them. Opinions not conforming to BLOG rules are deleted. Blog author serves as a moderator. For new topics or suggestions, email jlscoob5@gmail.com

Sunday, August 13, 2017

Why blame Bechtel?

Following from the stacks and stacks of studies in the recent years, the quality of science has declined at LANL. Since LANL science is 100% led by UC, how is it that Bechtel keeps on getting blamed for this decline?

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

LANSLLNS is focused on short term profit streams not on long term missions or the scientific and engineering talent to achieve it.

Anonymous said...

The OP misses the point that EVERYTHING that happens at LLNL or LANL is 100% owned by UC, not just LANL science.
UC owns NIF, WIPP, and everything else that has occurred under LANSLLNS.
When they inked the contract to be majority control in the LLC, they accepted this 100% ownership of everything - good or otherwise.

Anonymous said...

Number of managers, overhead, and harassment of scientists has shot up to pay for profits and the stupidest managers that can be found. As UC did not do this in decades of previous management, how ca you blame anyone but Bechtel?

Anonymous said...

"how ca (sic) you blame anyone but Bechtel?"

You can't put more than a small part of the blame on Bechtel because Bechtel is not in charge. DUH.

You do know that the UC managers in charge of LANL are NOT the same people that previously ran LANL fairly well, don't you? Double DUH.

Anonymous said...

You do know that the UC managers in charge of LANL are NOT the same people that previously ran LANL fairly well, don't you?

August 13, 2017 at 4:54 PM

Actually many of them are, at least the ones who haven't retired yet. Most existing LANL managers at the time joined the UC/Bechtel proposal writing team, not the Lockheed one.

Anonymous said...

Nonsense. No manager has worked for 60 years. The current managers are ALL different from the early managers. Every one of them.

A few current managers worked during the last 10 years of UC but not many. Don't try to BS, I knew every single upper-level manager personally during the last 10 years of UC and most have retired, were replaced, or moved to another job outside LANL. In addition, the number of upper-level management positions has grown, these new positions are almost all filled with people who were not upper-level managers before.

It is completely false to suggest that LANL is being run by the same crew that ran the Lab under UC.

Anonymous said...

8:40 PM maybe you "knew every single upper-level manager personally during the last 10 years of UC" but that doesn't impact the quality scale. The UC managers at LANL for the first 50 years were cut from a different cloth. Those in the final decade were not of the same quality as their predecessors.




Anonymous said...

I agree. There has been a steady decline in the quality of UC managers in the last 20 years. However, the managers in the final decade, with few exceptions, are NOT the managers that run the lab now. The current managers are clearly worse than the last-decade managers.

The point is that the addition of Bechtel, a minor player, is NOT the principle cause of LANL's downfall. The addition of Bechtel is a factor, a minor factor, but it's not one of the main causes.

The steadily declining quality of the UC management is the one of the two main causes of LANL's downfall. Add to that a completely feckless and out of touch NNSA and you've got the recipe for the collapse that's now underway.

Blog Archive