BLOG purpose

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

Suggest new topics here


Submit candidates for new topics here only. Stay on topic with National Labs' related issues. All submissions are screened first for ...

Wednesday, August 31, 2016

Provisional Reimbursement and Allowability of Costs Associated with Whistleblower Actions

"Effective immediately, new rules on allowable DOE/NNSA Contractor reimbursement of whistleblower related expenses"

According to the DOE "acquisition letter" dated August 4, 2016, all DOE and NNSA Contracting Officers must deem Contractor reimbursement fees for whistleblower related litigation expenses unallowable, if wrongful conduct on the part of the Contractor has occurred. 

Reimbursement may still be unallowable if the Contractor gets off on a technicality, such as a statute of limitations ruling, IF wrongful conduct by the Contractor was likely, or if the Contractor has a history of wrongful conduct.


Anonymous said...

Until all related obstacles are properly addressed, the alleged intent of this "acquisition letter" is without value.

Anonymous said...

Yup, that's what "provisional" means. You have a firm grasp of the obvious.

Anonymous said...

I'm afraid you may have missed the concern of the poster. "Provisional reimbursement" as detailed in the "Acquisition Letter", means the contractor's reimbursement may be subject to review or reversal at a later time.

"Obstacles" to the effectiveness of the "Acquisition Letter" as the earlier poster mentioned, may relate to the 2016 GAO finding that DOE has failed to clearly define what contractor "retaliation" or "wrongful conduct" is.

Perhaps you do not have a firm grasp on that which is obvious to those willing to consider the greater situation.

Posts you viewed tbe most last 30 days