Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of Interior (DOI), Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB), Department of Defense (DOD), and Department of Justice (DOJ). There are hundreds of “special interest” government IT market contractors who are listed as “preferred” and “rated” such as Halliburton (2004). Note that for some unknown reason, the controversial Halliburton is not listed on the 2005 Washington Technology listas being among the top 100.
See Washington Technology’s Top 100 list of Federal Prime Contractors in Information Technology Services. See URL internet location:
Many of the top-ranked companies achieved revenue or earnings growth that are strong and impressive, and even companies toward the lower end of the rankings are posting numbers that would be the envy of just about any dot-com startup. Compare to the November 9, 2005, hearings on alleged “price gouging by the oil companies.” How will the Officials explain the difference?
These “special interest” entities are often awarded government contracts without having to compete. For instance, the USDOE’s ORAU contractor were originally awarded a $70 million dollar contract from CDC NIOSH to reconstruct the dose of the EEOICP claimants. The ORAU and now SC&A are charged to oversee dose reconstruction and the content of the site profiles as-well-as other duties defined by the US President’s Advisory Board on Radiation and Workers Health. To date, the Advisory Board members admit they can only account for about four inaccurate and incomplete site profiles that discloses a waste of taxpayer funding. The Advisory Board plans to request that Congress shall provide more funding.
I am not aware that the EEOICP claimants were advised that many layers of preferred IT market contractors shall decide whose occupational injury claims will be accepted or denied? The Officials seem to sanction the contractors review of the claimants’ “classified” records without our knowledge or permission?
See EXHIBIT 26 to review excerpts regarding the original US President’s 27th CLOSED SESSION Advisory Board meeting minutes (179 pages).
URL internet location. . .the altered version:
It is apparent by now that the original meeting minutes will have to be subpoenaed or requested via the Freedom of Information Act (F.O.I.A.). Acting as a voting assembly, the Advisory Board members seem anxious to admit to the implementation of wrongful acts such as: coercion; destruction of public property; breach of their fiduciary duties; other while representing
