And on Tuesday, a DOE spokeswoman provided a statement warning that LANS could lose the contract after 2017 if it doesn’t turn things around.
Los Alamos fallout
Although investigators still are evaluating exactly what caused the drum to overheat and rupture, they say the Los Alamos drum was improperly packaged with a volatile mix of nitrate salts and organic cat litter used to absorb liquids.
The feds, in addition to dramatically reducing the fee for LANS, also took back a previously granted one-year contract extension for the consortium that includes Bechtel Corp. and the University of California.
The contract with Los Alamos National Security has a “four-strike provision” that vacates the contract if LANS doesn’t earn four one-year extensions, a DOE spokeswoman said Tuesday. LANS has held the contract since 2006,
“Having failed to earn contract term extensions for fiscal years 2013 and 2014,” and with the recent revocation of the previous extension, “LANS must earn (an) award term in every future performance period to keep the contract in force beyond fiscal year 2017,” the DOE statement says.
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 email@example.com
- ► 2017 (337)
- What is going on at LLNL?
- The LANL cultural problem is starting to seep to o...
- Looks like they need to send this guy to clean up ...
- Sandia in the news!
- Rise in plutonium production points to more work a...
- Accident at UChicago Argonne, LLC
- Anonymous posting and commenting
- WHISTLEBLOWER CLAIMS $5 MILLION AGAINST NUCLEAR WE...
- How did that happen?
- NNSA is to blame
- Undoing privatization
- LANL score question(ned)
- Did he really say only two points?
- New LANL purpose statement
- DoE clearly stated LANS contract to end in 2017
- Feds slash WIPP contractor performance pay
- Where is the FY16 LLNL performance evaluation plan...
- LANS future suggestions
- A question for those at LANL
- UC Regents to have closed-door meeting
- LANL payments to Wilson
- The story of Nancy Madore
- SNL contract must be competed before the LANL one
- ORNL counter-intelligence officer charged
- You will never see this from NNSA
- N. Korean conducts hydrogen bomb test
- One more negative report on LANL
- Making this BLOG a DOE labs BLOG?
- Where are the new brochures?
- A question for Charlie
- Was Nanos right all along?
- Should Los Alamos National Laboratory remain open ...
- UC is the common element in LANL dysfunction?
- LLNL BLOG 8 years later.
- Poor investment choices in 401k and TCP1.
- UCRP vs TCP1
- And the spin begins to "save LANL"
- ▼ January (38)
- ► 2015 (330)
- ► 2014 (309)
- ► 2013 (431)
- ► 2012 (258)
- ► 2011 (162)
- ► 2010 (157)
- ► 2009 (231)
- ► 2008 (374)