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 jlscoob5@gmail.com

Suggest new topics here

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 ...

Saturday, September 30, 2017

A new structure?

The new structure for the bid being developed by UC and Bechtel/AECOM It appears the talks between UC and Bechtel and developing a new structure. This structure would be to break the Operations and Projects PADs away from the Science/Technology/Security making each partner responsible for the management, performance, and fee. How would this effect Weapons PAD and program???

9 comments:

Anonymous said...

NOT an option according to the draft RFP. While this pie-in-the-sky arrangement might be attractive, it is DOA at NNSA.

Anonymous said...


Again I am hearing that UC is NOT teaming with Bechtel anymore. Maybe they talked but it fell apart. I think Bechtel is seen as utterly toxic at this point.

Anonymous said...

Could be an option under an internal agreement but they cannot propose this.

Anonymous said...

Desperate situations must take desperate actions!

Anonymous said...

UC and Bechtel-Jacobs have been in bed together so long it hardly makes any difference what we call it. Whatever the name, it has been a disaster for Los Aamos, US science, and our National Defense.

Anonymous said...

The structure might seem different on paper, but the "past performance" grading on their bid would score the exact same as LANS, huge negative. So why do it.

Anonymous said...

The structure might seem different on paper, but the "past performance" grading on their bid would score the exact same as LANS, huge negative. So why do it.

October 2, 2017 at 5:44 AM

Based on the interested parties release, because no one else is interested....

Anonymous said...

Based on the interested parties release, because no one else is interested....

October 3, 2017 at 12:13 AM

Except the list shows many are interested. Why do you insist on saying things that are obviously false and easily checked?

Anonymous said...

The list is full of small players that cannot Prime. There are only three big players on the published list and two are current partners. (Bechtel: current, BWXT: current, GD)

Truth is they will hold out for a better deal before expressing interest.

Posts you viewed tbe most last 30 days