Ok, here is some really big news. Bechtel plans on bidding for LANL again, they will state that UC was to blame for all the problems and Bechtel can get the job done if they go it alone. Bechtel managers have stated that one of the reasons for the failure of LANS was that the Ph.d's did not respect Bechtel managers. If this goes through and Bechtel gets 100% control than you can bet your bottom dollar that every last Ph.d at LANL is a dead man walking. This is not just some random rumor folks. The argument is that LANL was put up for bid the first time because of UC, since UC was still part of the next management team it failed.
It is true. People with above average intelligence do not respect the knuckle-dragging neanderthals of a construction company that has screwed up every project they have tried, from Hoover dam, through Iraq, to LANS/LLNS. You name it, they screwed it up, and reaped a fortune for Riley, friends, and family. Putting nuclear weapons in the hands of these bozos is nothing short of insanity!
Comments
Apparently this is not some random rumor and Bechtel must think they a reasonable chance since it will cost them a fair amount of money to even put a bid in. God help LANL if Bechtel gets 100% control.
May 29, 2016 at 11:49 AM
This is what I heard, has anyone else heard something along this lines? It does seem to sound crazy at first but they can always say that UC was major problem before the contract change and has been the problem after the contract change.
Realistically, its competitors hopefully (!) will receive a better past performance score because all the competitors who are major players in their respective fields will have similar scores with regard to the entire source selection criteria.
So in MHO, past performance will be the tie breaker and Bechtel will NOT win in a true competition scenerio, barring other factors such as political, etc. etc.
I cannot imagine any scenerio whether UC is involved or not that Bechtel would win a competition in which past performance was a major source selection factor. In the Federal Acquisition Regulations, past performance can be deemed the source selection committee and the source selection official to be more critical than other factors, including price. NNSA, who is compliance with the FAR, is not going to select a company with a poor past performance record. It is too visible a procurement. Bechtel needs to work elsewhere for awhile to improve its record. It will not occur in time for this competition.
Becthel with lipstick is still Bechtel
So Bechtel was trying to get a piece of Sandia as well? It seems like Bechtel wants keep running the NNSA labs. Time will tell whether this rumor is bogus or not.
These great accomplishments were all done by Bechtel. In comparison, the nuclear weapon labs have little to compare. Bechtel will still be around 100 years from today doing great things. The NNSA labs of over indulged primadonnas who are all legends in their own minds, not so much.
Would that Big Dig be the same where a woman got killed from falling roof material?
Where did you get that Bechtel built the Eurotunnel?
Maybe next you claim that Bechtel also built the Gotthard tunnel.
Nothing against defending Bechtel, but if this is the best you can come up with, it won't convince me that we need Bechtel.
The Big Dig was the most expensive highway project in the US, and was plagued by escalating costs, scheduling overruns, leaks, design flaws, charges of poor execution and use of substandard materials, criminal arrests,[2][3] and one death.[4] The project was originally scheduled to be completed in 1998[5] at an estimated cost of $2.8 billion (in 1982 dollars, US$6.0 billion adjusted for inflation as of 2006).[6] However, the project was completed only in December 2007, at a cost of over $14.6 billion ($8.08 billion in 1982 dollars, meaning a cost overrun of about 190%)[6] as of 2006.[7] The Boston Globe estimated that the project will ultimately cost $22 billion, including interest, and that it will not be paid off until 2038.[8] As a result of a death, leaks, and other design flaws, the consortium that oversaw the project agreed to pay $407 million in restitution, and several smaller companies agreed to pay a combined sum of approximately $51 million.[9]