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, December 13, 2017

Why the secrecy?

Why is there so much secrecy around who is and who is not bidding. It seems very difference from 2006 when we knew immediately after the bids were submitted that it was LANS (and who was in the LLC) vs Lockheed Martin-UT. This is a public contract for a publicly owned facility, releasing the names of actually bidders should be required. University of California submits bid for LANL contract Los Alamos Monitor December 12, 2017 The University of California was the only organization to confirm Monday it had submitted a bid to manage and operate Los Alamos National Laboratory for the next five years. Bids were due to the National Nuclear Security Administration Monday. The NNSA would not release information about the contractors that submitted bids and would not say when bids would be opened. The UC system confirmed its submission in an email to the Los Alamos Monitor. “I can confirm that UC submitted a proposal today for the Los Alamos National Laboratory management contract. 


Anonymous said...

Why the secrecy?

It is called bribes, duh.

Anonymous said...

That makes absolutely no sense, to anyone who is based in reality. Bribes for whom? From whom? For what purpose? Come on, conspiracy boy, let's hear your fantasy.

Posts you viewed tbe most last 30 days