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. Comments not conforming to BLOG rules are deleted. Blog author serves as a moderator. For new topics or suggestions, email jlscoob5@gmail.com

Tuesday, December 19, 2017

UC, UT, A&M confirm bids

UC and UT and now A&M confirm LANL bids  

  http://www.lamonitor.com/content/texas-am-submits-lanl-bid

The big question is what industrial partner is coming on to run the production mission that NNSA requires from LANL. None of the universities have any credibility in that space, and so until the manufacturing players are out in the open this is all academic posturing. 

9 comments:

Anonymous said...

This doesn't look like a serious team that took the bid seriously. Look at who they are: a lobbyist (Office of Federal Relations) and some advisor to the dean of engineering at one of the system campuses. Looks more like a thrown together bunch rather than a strategic team made up by serious players.


"Assistant Vice Chancellor of the university’s Office of Federal Relations, A. Scott Sudduth"


"Sudduth and Texas A & M Engineering Experiment Station Senior Advisor for Strategic Initiatives L. Diane Hurtado"

Anonymous said...

So is UC with Texas AM or is it separate?

Also if production moves to South Carolina than we LANL does not need an industrial partner. Or they could split production off to its own thing altogether like Y-12 and ORNL, I have heard that this has worked out very well for ORNL.

Anonymous said...

@ 9:59 AM

I met Hurtado and visited with her when she was in town. She left an impression that she was a lightweight and was very much out of her league in regard to managing an operation as large and complex as LANL.

Anonymous said...

Look at the statement from the lobbyist and see if you can determine what he is saying. The entire A&M engagement has the feel and smell of a quickly put in place, not well thought out exercise. If they win, it must mean that the competition was even worse! More to the point, it means that LANL is in for a very rough ride as the amateurs try to come up to speed.

Anonymous said...

I have met Terry Wallace. He left an impression that he is a lightweight and is very much out of his league in regard to managing an operation as large and complex as LANL.

Anonymous said...

Good golly gee whiz wallace has diversity on his plus column. He just announced the promotions of several Hispanic women to the executive ranks as gasp Executivve Secretaries. You go Terry. I am Hispanic and am thrilled and excited by the news. Hope UC wins the new contract so that my children can aspire to someday work as executive secretaries for you. May the force be with you.

Anonymous said...


@9:59 hit the nail on the head..ALL installed managers since transition of both LLNL and LANL are lightweights. A historical look back reveals managers with real cred like Jay Davis, Phil Coyle, Roy Woodruff, Clare Max, Roger Batzel, Harold Brown, George Miller, and many others who were real intellectuals and brought ideas and solutions to real world problems, without political pressures from any other entities....That's why the JASON group was established. (look it up trolls) Compare these names with modern day idiots like Hurtado and Wallace at LANL and similar buffoons at LLNL who are installed as figure heads in high level management positions with lightweight watered down credentials and marginal experience so they can be controlled by congressional puppeteers like Feinstein and her Bechtel handlers. Happy New Year Everyone!!!

Anonymous said...

The misconception is that the decay began with privatization. That is wrong, it began with the end of nuclear weapon testing in 1992. Since then, there has been a slow slide into the shadows.

Anonymous said...

The misconception is that the decay began with privatization. That is wrong, it began with the end of nuclear weapon testing in 1992. Since then, there has been a slow slide into the shadows.

December 29, 2017 at 5:48 AM

Could be true however the lab still had top talent from 1992-2004 but I would assume that there was probably a slow decline going on as well seeing how things ended up. I agree that the lack of testing is major issue, and if we ever test again I suspect all hell will break loose and there would be real push for excellence again. Science and engineering must be based on experiment else it just decays. I would say that since we do no test we would need excellence more than ever since the job is actually much harder without the guidance of experiment however the labs have ended up in the opposite state that since we no longer test the mission has changed and we should not have excellence. Odd indeed.

SUGGEST NEW TOPICS HERE

Submit candidates for new topics here only. Stay on topic with National Labs' related issues. All submissions are screened first for ...