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.
Monday, February 22, 2016
LANL 2017 RFPs
Will employees at LANL attempt to identify and communicate principle RFP criteria for the 2017 LANL contract, or sit on the sidelines and hope for the best? Guess what the self-proclaimed "lions" and "winners" want to happen?
12 comments:
Anonymous
said...
The bigger question is what is in the best interest of LANL mission objectives.
what is in the best interest of LANL mission objectives.
February 23, 2016 at 9:06 AM
Amazing how some people still don't get it. "LANL" does not have a mission (in fact it doesn't actually exist as anything except a collection of buildings and facilities). DOE/NNSA has a mission and pays LANS to carry it out at the LANL site.
They are DOE//NNSA mission objectives at the LANL location. You know this. However identified, DOE/NNSA will have a hard sell pushing a "LANS 2.0" contractor given the LANS track record.
Amazing how some people still don't get it. "LANL" does not have a mission (in fact it doesn't actually exist as anything except a collection of buildings and facilities). DOE/NNSA has a mission and pays LANS to carry it out at the LANL site.
February 23, 2016 at 9:37 AM
The view of the world according to the admirals, lawyers and bean counters at the NNSA. They have Billions of Dollars and a Mission. All they need is to find some contractors-for-hire to do the menial work of putting things together. A dangerous delusion divorced from reality.
Question to these admirals. Let's say NNSA is disbanded tomorrow; with that parasitic entity gone, would the mission work still get done? Yes, and the productivity would actually skyrocket. Now, let's reverse the situation. Imagine the National Labs are disbanded. What would the thousands of "overseers" with no qualifications accomplish on their own?
The notion that NNSA doesn't have to sell anything is an example of delusional arrogance. In reality, this is an organization that should be very worried about its own existence. And when it is eliminated, the mission work at the labs will continue. Just as it did for decades before NNSA was conjured up.
You are making an enormous assumption, namely that some entity (DOE?) would assume responsibility for directing Congressional funding to the labs and plants. Maybe you weren't around when this was actually the case. DOE was (and still is) every bit as dysfunctional as NNSA, maybe more so. If you think the old days of the AEC, with money flowing into the labs with no management or oversight from politicized government agencies, has a snowball's chance in hell of returning, you are delusional. And the fact that you think you are perfectly capable, without accountability, of determining, let alone carrying out, the country's mission, is arrogant in the extreme.
Despite the stream of attempted insults worthy of The Donald himself, not at all persuasive on the merit.
Why is it necessary to have thousands upon thousands of technically unqualified people to guarantee that the labs are making optimal use of the taxpayer resources? How do these people "oversee" something they can't understand? For years, LANS has been feeding them Powerpoint Baloney, which they gladly swallowed and rewarded LANS with stellar scores.
Then ask yourself: who oversees the overseers? If you start with the premise that scientists and engineers cannot be trusted, why should you trust NNSA apparatchiks, Tom or Linton? How do you know they don't make awful decisions that lead to severe degradation of the capabilities of the NW complex? Another layer of overseers? You pretty quickly get into an infinite loop, with the resulting runaway explosion of bureaucracy.
Let's put it another way. Recall how much was accomplished during the Manhattan project in just a few years. Can you see anything comparable accomplished in today's complex? No, you say? But how come? Unlike then, we now have thousands upon thousands of bureaucrats, to ensure "performance" and "accountability", shouldn't that make it all better?
Recall how much was accomplished during the Manhattan project in just a few years. Can you see anything comparable accomplished in today's complex? No, you say? But how come?
February 26, 2016 at 9:37 AM
Um, because the world is different now? I prefer my pie-in-the-sky served with a slight sprinkling of reality.
Yes, it is a very different world. We now have hoards of bureaucrats ensuring "performance and accountability", while the best people have been alienated and driven away from the labs.
I want to know what any of this has to do with LLNL? Isn't this the LLNL blog? Looks like the LANL blog. Why don't you guys start your own blog and leave us alone.
In some respects, the next LANL contractor will be the LLNL "Christmas future", but not necessarily a distant future. DOE/NNSA approved departures from the old LANS contractor terms adopted by the new LANL contractor, could easily find their way to LLNL even if LLNS remains in place. LLNS would simply use a "business need" argument and point to the terms of the new LANL contractor. Perhaps we should encourage not discourage LANS employee comments on this blog. Just my opinion.
12 comments:
The bigger question is what is in the best interest of LANL mission objectives.
what is in the best interest of LANL mission objectives.
February 23, 2016 at 9:06 AM
Amazing how some people still don't get it. "LANL" does not have a mission (in fact it doesn't actually exist as anything except a collection of buildings and facilities). DOE/NNSA has a mission and pays LANS to carry it out at the LANL site.
They are DOE//NNSA mission objectives at the LANL location. You know this. However identified, DOE/NNSA will have a hard sell pushing a "LANS 2.0" contractor given the LANS track record.
They don't have to "sell" anything. Remember who you work for.
Amazing how some people still don't get it. "LANL" does not have a mission (in fact it doesn't actually exist as anything except a collection of buildings and facilities). DOE/NNSA has a mission and pays LANS to carry it out at the LANL site.
February 23, 2016 at 9:37 AM
The view of the world according to the admirals, lawyers and bean counters at the NNSA. They have Billions of Dollars and a Mission. All they need is to find some contractors-for-hire to do the menial work of putting things together. A dangerous delusion divorced from reality.
Question to these admirals. Let's say NNSA is disbanded tomorrow; with that parasitic entity gone, would the mission work still get done? Yes, and the productivity would actually skyrocket. Now, let's reverse the situation. Imagine the National Labs are disbanded. What would the thousands of "overseers" with no qualifications accomplish on their own?
The notion that NNSA doesn't have to sell anything is an example of delusional arrogance. In reality, this is an organization that should be very worried about its own existence. And when it is eliminated, the mission work at the labs will continue. Just as it did for decades before NNSA was conjured up.
You are making an enormous assumption, namely that some entity (DOE?) would assume responsibility for directing Congressional funding to the labs and plants. Maybe you weren't around when this was actually the case. DOE was (and still is) every bit as dysfunctional as NNSA, maybe more so. If you think the old days of the AEC, with money flowing into the labs with no management or oversight from politicized government agencies, has a snowball's chance in hell of returning, you are delusional. And the fact that you think you are perfectly capable, without accountability, of determining, let alone carrying out, the country's mission, is arrogant in the extreme.
Despite the stream of attempted insults worthy of The Donald himself, not at all persuasive on the merit.
Why is it necessary to have thousands upon thousands of technically unqualified people to guarantee that the labs are making optimal use of the taxpayer resources? How do these people "oversee" something they can't understand? For years, LANS has been feeding them Powerpoint Baloney, which they gladly swallowed and rewarded LANS with stellar scores.
Then ask yourself: who oversees the overseers? If you start with the premise that scientists and engineers cannot be trusted, why should you trust NNSA apparatchiks, Tom or Linton? How do you know they don't make awful decisions that lead to severe degradation of the capabilities of the NW complex? Another layer of overseers? You pretty quickly get into an infinite loop, with the resulting runaway explosion of bureaucracy.
Let's put it another way. Recall how much was accomplished during the Manhattan project in just a few years. Can you see anything comparable accomplished in today's complex? No, you say? But how come? Unlike then, we now have thousands upon thousands of bureaucrats, to ensure "performance" and "accountability", shouldn't that make it all better?
Recall how much was accomplished during the Manhattan project in just a few years. Can you see anything comparable accomplished in today's complex? No, you say? But how come?
February 26, 2016 at 9:37 AM
Um, because the world is different now? I prefer my pie-in-the-sky served with a slight sprinkling of reality.
Yes, it is a very different world. We now have hoards of bureaucrats ensuring "performance and accountability", while the best people have been alienated and driven away from the labs.
Let the floggings continue until morale improves.
I want to know what any of this has to do with LLNL? Isn't this the LLNL blog? Looks like the LANL blog. Why don't you guys start your own blog and leave us alone.
Yep, same spam. Yawn.
In some respects, the next LANL contractor will be the LLNL "Christmas future", but not necessarily a distant future. DOE/NNSA approved departures from the old LANS contractor terms adopted by the new LANL contractor, could easily find their way to LLNL even if LLNS remains in place. LLNS would simply use a "business need" argument and point to the terms of the new LANL contractor. Perhaps we should encourage not discourage LANS employee comments on this blog. Just my opinion.
Post a Comment