If it wasn't for Bechtel, UC would have been gone 10 years ago. This is what we should blame them for.
Tri-Valley Cares needs to be on this if they aren't already. We need to make sure that NNSA and LLNL does not make good on promises to pursue such stupid ideas as doing Plutonium experiments on NIF. The stupidity arises from the fact that a huge population is placed at risk in the short and long term. Why do this kind of experiment in a heavily populated area? Only a moron would push that kind of imbecile area. Do it somewhere else in the god forsaken hills of Los Alamos. Why should the communities in the Bay Area be subjected to such increased risk just because the lab's NIF has failed twice and is trying the Hail Mary pass of doing an SNM experiment just to justify their existence? Those Laser EoS techniques and the people analyzing the raw data are all just BAD anyways. You know what comes next after they do the experiment. They'll figure out that they need larger samples. More risk for the local population. Stop this imbecilic pursuit. They wan...
Comments
Even if UC is gone, you will still be miserable bitter. Your problems with UC are obviously personal and not rational. Just come clean about your true motives.
There is something really wrong with this lying poster.
I don't know the details of the criticality issue but it most certainly was Bechtel
in charge of WIPP.
Perhaps it is time to put part of the blame where the problem has been over the past 25 years. The DOE, and more recently the NNSA.
Now that's hilarious!!
With more than 30 managers making more than $400K per year, SURE that LANS is not about the money. DOE staff working in LAFO are there for the importance of the mission, making less than 1/4 the amount.
August 21, 2017 at 7:32 PM
Nope it is Bechtel.
It was made very clear today by the talk from Napolitano that UC will be putting in a bid. A few other rumors is that Bechtel is completely out and that DOE is not happy with Bechtel. If you recall some of the many great things promised by Bechtel side of things was all these great money saving efforts and efficiencies and as we have seen none of which happened. It is not hard to understand why NNSA is so unhappy with Bechtel.
UC is bidding!? No...No, please God no. I have been saying for years now that it is UC that is to blame for what has happened to me, I keep saying that Bechtel is a minor player, I keep saying that UC has always been bad. Don't you people understand my entire identity is tied to UC. If something anything is found to be good about UC it undermines my entire self-built narrative that I am a brilliant person who was unjustly wronged by UC, LANL and arrogant scientists. Yet I know I am a great and important person but I cannot and will not let reality stand in the way of that. I will stand up and deny reality with all my might for reality itself is just a humanoid construct created by evil taskers to mock me and put me down. Do not be fooled by reality because Bechtel is only a minor player in it. The cowboys are behind it, they control the so called reality and there are cowboys everywhere...EVERYWHERE. Just to prove my point Janet gave the talk at LANL the same day as the eclipse, that cannot be a coincidence it was done just to irritate me and even I know that. I want to make one thing very clear I am not bitter nor do I have any kind of agenda...NONE. I am only seeing reality because I know reality which is precisely why I deny reality. I know that this is to deep for you to understand but this is the reality of the situation.
Naw, just kidding.
Who do you think that UC is partnering with? It cannot possibly be Bechtel.
IS ultimately responsible
IS ultimately responsible
August 22, 2017 at 7:06 AM
You spin this all you want but DOE places the blame on Bechtel not UC. Why do you think UC is putting in a bid but Bechtel is not. It tells you all you need to know.
It could just as easily mean that Bechtel is realistic about their chances in a competition and UC is delusional about them.
It could just as easily mean that Bechtel is realistic about their chances in a competition and UC is delusional about them.
August 22, 2017 at 10:06 AM
Kind of far fetched, there are other possibilities as well that seem far more plausible.
UC is out. They should have been out 10 years ago.
All of you hopeful UC lifers are wrong because you do not truly understand what the NNSA is trying to do at the complex level.
August 23, 2017 at 3:49 AM
Pure delusional fantasy, you have absoutly no idea what you are talking about. By the way Bechtel is not bidding and from what I hear Battelle is likely to go with UC. I think it is you that failed to understand what NNSA wants or have any understanding of what is done at the labs or why it is done. There is something very wrong with.
I would guess that you have not worked at the labs for at leas 10-15 years and got fired during the UC only times, now you are a bitter ex-employee who rages at everything. Let it go and do something else with your life. You no longer work at the labs, have any investment at the labs, or have any real idea of what is going on the labs. No amount of rage will ever fix what you think was done to you by UC, you have to take personal responsibility for you yourself and own up to your own actions.
Napolitano is under investigation for her illegal slush fund.
DOE certainly knows that UC is incompetent and maybe even corrupt.
It's a new era with a new Administration in charge, an Administration that has no love for anything related to California, like it or not.
UC is out. Anyone who thinks otherwise is an ignorant nutcase.
August 23, 2017 at 7:20 AM
You are the nutcase, total and complete nutcase. By the way did you know that UC was asked to bid?
You did not because you have no idea what you are talking about have not been at the labs for over 15 years. DOE is unhappy with LANS but it is not UC. I have no idea if UC will get the contract again put it is certainly a possibility. What is a certainty is that you will still be ignorant
nutcase.
August 23, 2017 at 8:37 AM
If you have any evidence to support this, it should be turned over to the DoJ. It is in violation of federal law.
August 23, 2017 at 8:37 AM
If you have any evidence to support this, it should be turned over to the DoJ. It is in violation of federal law.
If you have any evidence to support this, it should be turned over to the DoJ. It is in violation of federal law.
August 23, 2017 at 9:09 AM
But you are claiming that you "know" UC is out? Perhaps if you have insider information you should go to the DoJ. The problem is you have no information and you
a nutcase and I doubt the DoJ would take you seriously.
August 23, 2017 at 2:39 PM
It is the same guy who says UC IS OUT and if you don't believe that you are crazy?
Either he has inside information or he is just talking nonsense on things he does not know anything about. Let us just assume the latter.
A more likely scenario is that UC sniffed around to get an idea if they had chance
and got a positive response. This is the rumor anyway. These things cost money and time so they are not going to do this if they knew they had no chance despite what are anti UC troll keeps saying.
and got a positive response. This is the rumor anyway. These things cost money and time so they are not going to do this if they knew they had no chance despite what are anti UC troll keeps saying.
August 23, 2017 at 9:17 PM
Agree that a serious bid costs a lot of money to prepare and UCOP has shown some insight on their budget for this year, before the RFP came out. It is still hard to grasp the reasons for pursuing it after the harsh language was in the RFP regarding past performance. While it is standard for NSF types at a university to sniff around program managers and get a wink, wink, nod, nod before turning in a grant proposal, dealing with government contracting officers on contracts worth up to 20B over up to 10 years is a completely different matter. From what has been said from UCOP, it could be taken that they indeed did have conversations with various NNSA and DOE technical staff. Not surprising, many of those staff would be sympathetic to the discussion, however they also are not the selection authority on the contract.
Also agree with 7:22 PM that the history of DOE contracting officers is, to say the least, less than stellar!
Good luck to all the bidders, since dealing with NNSA sometimes requires more than a good proposal, it also involves timing of unforeseen events.
August 24, 2017 at 11:56 PM
Perhaps but with U of Texas you will still have pretty much the same polices as UC which is an emphases on science and research. The U of Texas system is very similar to UC. So Texas with Battelle or UC with Battelle could be great for LANL. The key is to get rid of Bechtel. Don't count UC out either since DOE felt they did a huge disservice to UC when the put the bid up for the first time and have realized their mistake. Again we all agree that UC ran the labs very well for 60 yeas. Either U of Texas or UC will be good for LANL but very very bad you ;) Also aren't you the same guy who said no one was going to bid, well you are wrong on that as well.
yes, and after the new contractor comes in, the labbies will hate on them for 5-10 years....