I am also hearing that UTexas and Battalle are putting in a bid. Anyone else hear this?
That is at least two teams. How about Lockheed?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
My avatar is taken from a favorite scene in the TV series "Supernatural". I may not be one of the Four Horsemen, but I play one in most combat games... :-)
15 comments:
Well seeing that UC ran the lab very well for 60 years I think they have the best shot. U Texas with Battalle could be very nice. Either way with these two teams science at the lab should do very nicely. This of course is very bad news for the "I HATE LANL" troll but hey thats how it works sometimes.
How does your SPECULATION add up to "bad news" in any way, shape, or form?
How does your SPECULATION add up to "bad news" in any way, shape, or form?
September 21, 2017 at 8:18 AM
Simple very little speculation is needed since the troll hates everyone who works in LANL, out of jealously, delusions, or some form of bittiness. If UC gets the contract it is a good thing seeing that UC ran the lab well for 60 years and this time they will have much more control. This is good for the current employees at the lab and continues the legacy of the best and brightest. The troll will hate that to no end. On the other hand if U Texas and Battelle get it that could also be good because U Texas would love to be on par with UC and is of course would bring excellent university leadership. Battelle has has done very well in managing science and labs and if this teams wins it again bodes well for the legacy of the best and brightest. This again is very very bad news for our crazy bitter troll. Things are looking up at LANL, when LANL wins, New Mexico wins and the United States wins.
Of course, UC did not run the lab well, that's precisely why DOE/NNSA recompeted the contract in 1995/1996. DOE understood that UC needed help. Now that the experiement to get UC help has failed (LANS), DOE understands that something else needs to be done, hence the current recompete. Perhaps UT might be able to do a better job than the dunces that UC put in charge, only time will tell and only IF UT gets the contract. Perhaps UT will be worse, UT certainly botched the Amarillo Plutonium center.
You certainly have changed your tune from your (mindless) defense of the hapless UC stooges to supporting a possible UC competitor.
Completely nuts.
Completely nuts.
September 21, 2017 at 4:09 PM
Yes the anti LANL troll is completely nuts. We can all agree on that.
IF UC wins, the management will not change (PADS. ADs, etc.)....
IF UC wins, the management will not change (PADS. ADs, etc.)....
September 21, 2017 at 8:02 PM
This is one of the concerns I keep hearing. In general very few are happy with the current management which seems out of touch, incompetent, and way to much of it. The first thing that would need to change is reduce or get rid of PADS and ADs these extra layers came in under LANS and although the created numerous high paying jobs with a lot more administration they added no value to the institution. If UC bids again they need to have plan to get rid of the current management. Even if the for profit model is changed the current managers grew up and blossomed under that mindset and that mindset is that basically LANL is like Iraq, it is scam to make easy money for no work. Current management simply does not believe in a lab mission or a lab purpose other than the lab being a good hustle, they reinforce that idea among themselves and cast out anyone who thinks otherwise. This is how they live and it is not going to change. If you don't believe me than why are they going on how McMillan was not fired but simply chose to retire and that he was such a great man. I am not kidding they are actually saying this stuff. Numerous lower level managers and staff say it is like they are talking about Kim Jun Ill of North Korea and find it nauseating. The current management are not the people you want in the next contract. Now the question is if UC is going to simply go with the exact same team and same lab structure or if they going get rid of these guys bring some new faces and change the current management structure.
A number of people seemed surprised by UC teaming up with Bechtel again but perhaps there is so little time to put a coherent bid in that they will simply put in the same bid as they did last time and win because no else will bid or no one can get a credible team together that fast. Some of said that UC is not really that serious and simply putting in a bid as a favor and hopes it reflects well on their management at LLNL. Others are saying Bechtel is simply so powerful that if it wants to stay it can stay. Who knows.
What is the basis for the assertion that UC IS teaming with bechtel?
MORE LANS is not a solution. This partnrrship lost a no contest automatic contract renewal by performing subpar over a long period.
A new organizational design is required.
Bechtel out.
Certainly Bechtel has added no value whatsoever to Los Alamos.
Anonymous Anonymous said...
What is the basis for the assertion that UC IS teaming with bechtel?
September 22, 2017 at 3:24 AM
Meetings are occurring between Bechtel and UC to discuss teaming including a new structure. One happened right after the visit by interested bidders and another is scheduled to occur two weeks from now. Ugh....
As an LLNL employee, UC re-teaming with Bechtel may be the best hope for LLNL... I fully would expect a UC-Bechtel LLC to loose on the bid for LANL. This would then allow UC to drop Bechtel (and the rest of the industrial partners in LLNS) for the next LLNL contract rebid in a few years. More specifically allowing UC to team with Battelle on a future LLNL contract bid.... especially if Univ of Texas-Battelle win the LANL contract.
Indeed it does start to look like UC will team with Bechtel for LANL. From several accounts, Battelle had made an agreement with UC to team with them and then pulled back from it after the debacle of how UC handled the plutonium air shipments. UC was left dangling with no industrial partner that would join other than Bechtel and so the default is to dance with the devil you know.
Tells you all you need to know when Bechtel is the ONLY industrial partner that is willing to hook up with UC. No respectable company would waste money on a proposal that had low chance for winning, and the DRFP is blunt on the chances of one of the present LANS partners to continue for the next ten years. Not sure what that says about the state of the competition when the 2 main LANS partners are staying together in the re-bid.
Nobody wants to touch this contract. UT will back out and we will be left with LANS. This is the reality. There is no reason or incentive to drive someone competent to bid. The NNSA is a horrible customer, the money is not attractive, and the reputation of LANL is in the ditch.
Post a Comment