Skip to main content

Justification for non-competition

 “Justification for Other than Full and Open Competition LLNL MO Contract Extension - signed” (dated May 28, 2024)


“XI. STEPS TO FOSTER COMPETITION

Consistent with statute, regulation, and DOE policy, DOE/NNSA has determined it is appropriate to noncompetitively extend the current LLNI M&O contract as there is no expectation of meaningful improvement in performance or cost resulting from competing the contract and replacing the incumbent contractor. However; DOE/NNSA will continue to foster competition for each of its M&O contracts and utilize tools such as draft solicitations, comment workshops, one-on-one meetings, pre-proposal conferences, and websites to provide information to interested parties for future actions.”

https://www.highergov.com/document/nnsa-2024-002371-attachment-1-justification-for-other-than-full-and-open-competition-llnl-mo-contract-extension-signed-pdf-3ec221/

Comments

Anonymous said…
“Consistent with statute, regulation, and DOE policy, DOE/NNSA has determined it is appropriate to noncompetitively extend the current LLNI M&O contract as there is no expectation of meaningful improvement in performance or cost resulting from competing the contract and replacing the incumbent contractor.”

Really? So a ~10% reduction in operating expenses (no CA sales tax) by moving to a non-profit LLNL contractor, is not an improvement in cost reduction? This cost savings advantage, was clearly communicated by NNSA Leadership to NM residents when Triad, a non-profit contractor, was selected to manage LANL (?).
Anonymous said…
10% comes out to over a billion dollars over the lifetime of the extension, they are saying that isn't "meaningful" given the importance of the mission, and considering the government's vast ability to tax the American public and borrow money, or debase the currency and create inflation thereby reducing debt to GDP by inflating away debt and collecting more capital gains taxes as well.

Besides, this money is given to California which evidently needs more money to help solve the numerous problems there, which will enhance US competitiveness overall. As you know silicon valley is now the most important part of the US economy, and thus the Federal government will recover perhaps all of the 10% via income tax, and tax on investment capital gains, while this will help lower debt to GDP by growing the economy.
Anonymous said…
Given the Triad contractor of LANL cost model, by what set of metrics was it determined that there would be no cost savings to award the LLNL contract to a non-profit, given a likely lower annual award fee, and 501(c)(3) non-profit exempt status from county and state tax?

10/24/18

NNSA Won’t Rule Out Forcing LANL Manager to File for Tax-Exempt Status

“Gordon-Hagerty’s office believes Triad is required by the Federal Acquisition Regulation to seek any cost savings possible, including 501(c)(3) status, Burgess said."

https://www.exchangemonitor.com/nnsa-wont-rule-forcing-lanl-manager-file-tax-exempt-status/

1/20/19

County Fears GRT Loss If LANL Gets Nonprofit Status

https://ladailypost.com/county-fears-grt-loss-if-lanl-gets-nonprofit-status/
Anonymous said…
NNSA officials probably recognize the under the table kick backs and the ol' boys club is more profitable - to them.
Anonymous said…
That is why I left LLNL IN 2008. No one can say with a straight face, that LLNS contract is more cost effective than UC's.
Anonymous said…
Remember, UC is part of LLNS, and they get more money in that partnership than they did when they ran it alone as a non-profit.
Anonymous said…
“…no expectation of meaningful improvement in performance or cost resulting from competing the contract…”

The profit amount of UC or other LLNS LLC members was already baked into the cake when the NNSA no bid determination was made. In 2019, Los Alamos County Officials feared losing “tens of millions of dollars a year” in tax revenue. Livermore, CA sales tax in 2024 is 10.25%, and Los Alamos, NM is 7.07%.
By 2018 NNSA standards, a 10.25% LLNL cost savings would appear to qualify as a Gordon-Halferty “any cost savings possible” expectation and goal. So what really happened?

“Those in power are so afraid of losing it, they will do anything to keep the world under their control. Even when ‘anything’ means ignoring dangerous truths that threaten to grow more powerful the longer they’re unaddressed.”

-Romina Russell

In 2024, is employee morale, retention, and an objective cost of LLNL operations, “dangerous truths” compared to pre-October 2007?

Popular posts from this blog

Plutonium Shots on NIF.

Tri-Valley Cares needs to be on this if they aren't already. We need to make sure that NNSA and LLNL does not make good on promises to pursue such stupid ideas as doing Plutonium experiments on NIF. The stupidity arises from the fact that a huge population is placed at risk in the short and long term. Why do this kind of experiment in a heavily populated area? Only a moron would push that kind of imbecile area. Do it somewhere else in the god forsaken hills of Los Alamos. Why should the communities in the Bay Area be subjected to such increased risk just because the lab's NIF has failed twice and is trying the Hail Mary pass of doing an SNM experiment just to justify their existence? Those Laser EoS techniques and the people analyzing the raw data are all just BAD anyways. You know what comes next after they do the experiment. They'll figure out that they need larger samples. More risk for the local population. Stop this imbecilic pursuit. They wan...

Trump is to gut the labs.

The budget has a 20% decrease to DOE office of science, 20% cut to NIH. NASA also gets a cut. This will  have a huge negative effect on the lab. Crazy, juts crazy. He also wants to cut NEA and PBS, this may not seem like  a big deal but they get very little money and do great things.

LLNL un-diversity

Actual post from Dec. 15 from one of the streams. This is a real topic. As far as promoting women and minorities even if their qualifications are not as good as the white male scientists, I am all for it. We need diversity at the lab and if that is what it takes, so be it.  Quit your whining. Look around the lab, what do you see? White male geezers. How many African Americans do you see at the lab? Virtually none. LLNL is one of the MOST undiverse places you will see. Face it folks, LLNL is an institution of white male privilege and they don't want to give up their privileged positions. California, a state of majority Hispanics has the "crown jewel" LLNL nestled in the middle of it with very FEW Hispanics at all!