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
Blog rules
Stay on topic.
No profanity, threatening language, pornography.
NO NAME CALLING.
No political debate.
Posts and comments are posted several times a day.
The question for LLNL is what will UC do about LLNS if (when) LANS fails on the LANL rebid. Legally LANS and LLNS are different entities, and slightly structured differently.
I don't see UC walking away from LLNL, considering its names for the very first UC winner of a Nobel Prize. Also its close relationships with LBNL and three UC campuses in the area (Berkeley, Davis, and Merced).
Considering on the last LLNL contract for the original RFP there was no real competition to LLNS - basically no interested industrial partners. Only when NNSA increased the award fee did the Northrup-Grumman team submit a bid, and this team didn't even have an academic partner, which was a non-starter for a M&O contractor of a national science lab.
So does UC go a different route for the next bid on LLNL. Possibly create a solely UC owned LLC to operate LLNL - still not returning it to direct UC management like LBNL but more like the University of Chicago has setup an LLC owned by the university to run Argonne Lab. In the ANL structure, industrial entities are brought into team with the LLC to run certain operations and activities, but are not part of the LLC. ANL employees work for the LLC not the university, but since its wholly owned by the university, they feel more like its employees.
This seems like a best of both worlds approach the UC should really consider for LLNL if LANS goes under and having industrial partners (Bechtel, URS, etc) in an LLC to bid on LLNL adds little value. This would especially make sense if NNSA reduces the management fee as has been rumored to about half of its current amount so its aligned with DOE Office of Science national lab and Sandia lab contracts.
Please deliver a pink slip to the following for Christmas this year: Charlie McMillan John Benner Craig Leasure Jeff Yarbrough Tim George Wendy Baca Terry Wallace Dave Teter Steve Girrons Steve Renfro
The last contract rewrite was a disaster. How can LANL weapons science survive another?
December 20, 2015 at 10:22 PM
Just make sure that LANL managers are not allowed to be write the contract. If they allow that to happen you will get twice as many managers making 10 times more money, no accountability, and pure corruption.
Just make sure that LANL managers are not allowed to be write the contract. If they allow that to happen you will get twice as many managers making 10 times more money, no accountability, and pure corruption.
December 21, 2015 at 8:38 AM
You mean like what happened 10 years ago, with the last contract change?
I would not be surprised if the likes of Alan Bishop and John Sarrao again gamed the system and used this upheaval to advance themselves.
Alan Bishop was very "deceptive" at his last PAD meeting when asked about the contract change. All the PADs, ADs, and Division Leaders (e.g. Marquez, Bishop, Girrens, Wallace, Benner, Leasure, Renfro, Zerkel, Cabbil, Erickson,etc.) are maneuvering at this very moment. They'll shove their head up anything if it means "mo money, mo money, mo money,...".
Anonymous said... On the day the contract changeover happens march these LANS executives out the front gate under tight security with their boxes in hand, LLNL style.
December 23, 2015 at 11:43 AM
C'mon dude, you know it's just going to be the same monkeys in new trees, and you'll still be looking up to the same view.
Please deliver a pink slip to the following for Christmas this year: Charlie McMillan John Benner Craig Leasure Jeff Yarbrough Tim George Wendy Baca Terry Wallace Dave Teter Steve Girrons Steve Renfro
Thanks!
So what did all these people do to deserve pinkslips?
Wait just a darn minute, Terry Wallace helped bring in the fabulous, multi-million dollar "Science Complex" building so that the hard working theoretical and basic science researchers at Los Alamos have a top-flight facility in which to do their scientific work. No more leaky roofs and working in cold buildings that were hastily built way back in the boom years of the mid-1950s. On second thought... never mind.
I like my leaky lab roof.... and no parking. Walking in the mud to the office trailer puts my moral just in the right place and I thank my lucky stars that LANS had a mission. Woo hoo.
Please deliver a pink slip to the following for Christmas this year:
December 20, 2015 at 2:43 PM
Every manager that spent last summer trying to figure out the "purpose of Los Alamos" under the guidance of the bald Kiwi should have at least gotten a lump of coal, if not actually placed on this list.
Every manager that spent last summer trying to figure out the "purpose of Los Alamos" under the guidance of the bald Kiwi should have at least gotten a lump of coal, if not actually placed on this list.
December 29, 2015 at 3:47 PM
Every LANL manager above Division Leader wasted months on this stupid exercise. From the first day, it was set up to be a love-fest celebration of how great Charlie and the PADs were doing at running the Lab. Even a lot of the Division Leaders were a willing part of the scam.
All of them should be ditched for such a waste of time and money.
We should preserve the vugraph with all of their names, and present it to the next contractor. That way the next contractor will know which managers are clueless about what LANL is all about, and who to give a swift boot!
What you may not know is that elements of the purpose have been retracted because of copyright infringement with the University of Texas....what starts here changes the world!
22 comments:
The question for LLNL is what will UC do about LLNS if (when) LANS fails on the LANL rebid. Legally LANS and LLNS are different entities, and slightly structured differently.
I don't see UC walking away from LLNL, considering its names for the very first UC winner of a Nobel Prize. Also its close relationships with LBNL and three UC campuses in the area (Berkeley, Davis, and Merced).
Considering on the last LLNL contract for the original RFP there was no real competition to LLNS - basically no interested industrial partners. Only when NNSA increased the award fee did the Northrup-Grumman team submit a bid, and this team didn't even have an academic partner, which was a non-starter for a M&O contractor of a national science lab.
So does UC go a different route for the next bid on LLNL. Possibly create a solely UC owned LLC to operate LLNL - still not returning it to direct UC management like LBNL but more like the University of Chicago has setup an LLC owned by the university to run Argonne Lab. In the ANL structure, industrial entities are brought into team with the LLC to run certain operations and activities, but are not part of the LLC. ANL employees work for the LLC not the university, but since its wholly owned by the university, they feel more like its employees.
This seems like a best of both worlds approach the UC should really consider for LLNL if LANS goes under and having industrial partners (Bechtel, URS, etc) in an LLC to bid on LLNL adds little value. This would especially make sense if NNSA reduces the management fee as has been rumored to about half of its current amount so its aligned with DOE Office of Science national lab and Sandia lab contracts.
Too many affirmative action pretenders employed by DOE. No one who can understand or manage weapons science. Obams will diarm us, unintentionally.
Federalize LANL and LLNL before it is too late.
Good job Livermore! You did good at Los Alamos. Heck of a job!
Dear Santa,
Please deliver a pink slip to the following for Christmas this year:
Charlie McMillan
John Benner
Craig Leasure
Jeff Yarbrough
Tim George
Wendy Baca
Terry Wallace
Dave Teter
Steve Girrons
Steve Renfro
Thanks!
Dear Santa,
That's Steve Girrens, we want to make sure it get's to the right address.
Don't forget Larry Goen's (ES-Division Leader) pink slip.
Cheryl Cabbil (ADNHHO) for forcing me out of my job this year.
Thanks!
The last contract rewrite was a disaster. How can LANL weapons science survive another?
The last contract rewrite was a disaster. How can LANL weapons science survive another?
December 20, 2015 at 10:22 PM
Just make sure that LANL managers are not allowed to be write the contract. If they allow that to happen you will get twice as many managers making 10 times more money, no accountability, and pure corruption.
Just make sure that LANL managers are not allowed to be write the contract. If they allow that to happen you will get twice as many managers making 10 times more money, no accountability, and pure corruption.
December 21, 2015 at 8:38 AM
You mean like what happened 10 years ago, with the last contract change?
I would not be surprised if the likes of Alan Bishop and John Sarrao again gamed the system and used this upheaval to advance themselves.
Alan Bishop was very "deceptive" at his last PAD meeting when asked about the contract change. All the PADs, ADs, and Division Leaders (e.g. Marquez, Bishop, Girrens, Wallace, Benner, Leasure, Renfro, Zerkel, Cabbil, Erickson,etc.) are maneuvering at this very moment. They'll shove their head up anything if it means "mo money, mo money, mo money,...".
On the day the contract changeover happens march these LANS executives out the front gate under tight security with their boxes in hand, LLNL style.
Anonymous said...
On the day the contract changeover happens march these LANS executives out the front gate under tight security with their boxes in hand, LLNL style.
December 23, 2015 at 11:43 AM
C'mon dude, you know it's just going to be the same monkeys in new trees, and you'll still be looking up to the same view.
Anonymous said...
Dear Santa,
Please deliver a pink slip to the following for Christmas this year:
Charlie McMillan
John Benner
Craig Leasure
Jeff Yarbrough
Tim George
Wendy Baca
Terry Wallace
Dave Teter
Steve Girrons
Steve Renfro
Thanks!
So what did all these people do to deserve pinkslips?
So what did all these people do to deserve pinkslips?
December 23, 2015 at 9:05 PM
You don't work at LANL, do you?
Anonymous said...
You don't work at LANL, do you?
December 24, 2015 at 8:39 AM
I do, and some of these do not make sense.
So what did all these people do to deserve pinkslips?
December 23, 2015 at 9:05 PM
Nothing, they did absolutely nothing. Hello, anybody home?
Wait just a darn minute, Terry Wallace helped bring in the fabulous, multi-million dollar "Science Complex" building so that the hard working theoretical and basic science researchers at Los Alamos have a top-flight facility in which to do their scientific work. No more leaky roofs and working in cold buildings that were hastily built way back in the boom years of the mid-1950s. On second thought... never mind.
I like my leaky lab roof.... and no parking. Walking in the mud to the office trailer puts my moral just in the right place and I thank my lucky stars that LANS had a mission. Woo hoo.
Anonymous said...
Dear Santa,
Please deliver a pink slip to the following for Christmas this year:
December 20, 2015 at 2:43 PM
Every manager that spent last summer trying to figure out the "purpose of Los Alamos" under the guidance of the bald Kiwi should have at least gotten a lump of coal, if not actually placed on this list.
Every manager that spent last summer trying to figure out the "purpose of Los Alamos" under the guidance of the bald Kiwi should have at least gotten a lump of coal, if not actually placed on this list.
December 29, 2015 at 3:47 PM
Every LANL manager above Division Leader wasted months on this stupid exercise. From the first day, it was set up to be a love-fest celebration of how great Charlie and the PADs were doing at running the Lab. Even a lot of the Division Leaders were a willing part of the scam.
All of them should be ditched for such a waste of time and money.
We should preserve the vugraph with all of their names, and present it to the next contractor. That way the next contractor will know which managers are clueless about what LANL is all about, and who to give a swift boot!
What you may not know is that elements of the purpose have been retracted because of copyright infringement with the University of Texas....what starts here changes the world!
Post a Comment