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 authors serve as moderators. For new topics or suggestions, email jlscoob5@gmail.com

Monday, September 5, 2016

Lockheed Martin signals date for IT merger with Leidos


There was no way that Lockheed could have done their notifications differently. Both the Leidos and Lockheed shareholders had to vote to approve the deal, and those votes only happened in the past few weeks. The proposed merger had been in open press since the first of the year, and DoE comes off as moronic for claiming not to have known about it. In any event, it should not matter one twit what corporate logo is on the team, what should matter is that the leadership team from the bid remains in place for two years after transition. That is a requirement of the RFP. All this silliness about mergers having an impact on the award are just distractions stirred up by sore losers.


http://www.bizjournals.com/washington/blog/fedbiz_daily/2016/07/lockheed-martin-signals-date-for-it-merger-with.html
Anonymous said...
September 1, 2016 at 10:54 AM

Not buying it, they should have told DOE that they would do this. The whole thing is dirty.
Anonymous said...
Fallout from this debacle will obviously have an affect on contract awards for Sandia and LANL. The next couple of bid wars in NM should be very amusing.
Anonymous said...
Fallout from this debacle will obviously have an affect on contract awards for Sandia and LANL. The next couple of bid wars in NM should be very amusing.

September 1, 2016 at 6:15 PM

Agan LM is getting LANL, it is already a done deal, the only question is who gets Sandia, Boeing is the best bet.

20 comments:

Anonymous said...

More than a distraction, since the award was rescinded. There is no chance, after all that, that NNSA will re-award the contract to the same LLC that is now owned by Leidos. The corporate partners matter, look at all the Bechtel and UC people moving in and out of LLNL and LANL, or the Northop people coming and going in Nevada.

Anonymous said...

Agan LM is getting LANL, it is already a done deal

September 1, 2016 at 7:42 PM

"Agan" you are so full of BS. If it were true it would not only be stupid on the part of NNSA, it would be a a felony.

Anonymous said...

, it would be a a felony.

???, do you mean laws? those are for little people not the big players in the modern world. Don't believe me than than look who your next president is going to be. The people on this blog are so silly and niave it is almost cute at times.

Anonymous said...

If you worked for NNSA, would you believe that you could be complicit in committing a felony and not risk your career and your freedom, that your bosses would protect you somehow? Get real.

Anonymous said...

If you worked for NNSA, would you believe that you could be complicit in committing a felony and not risk your career and your freedom, that your bosses would protect you somehow? Get real.

September 5, 2016 at 5:47 PM

You are so silly, no laws will be broken, it will all be on the up and up, big government, big business, big money and bailouts. In case you have not been paying attention the push to privatize has has made a lot of money for some but could you please tell where the added benefit to any of the labs has been? Also could you tell me why the labs where privatized in the first place?

It was all legal and good and it is not too hard to guess that LM is going to a have to get a piece of the pie again, especially if Sandia is out for them the only logical choice would be for them to to get LANL. In any case how many other viable bidders are there even going to be, at best 3, so LM already has 33% chance going in. Bechtel is likely out and similarly UC due to the past performance, that just leaves LM and maybe Boeing, but Boeing is most likely going to get Sandia, so that leaves just...LM to get LANL. It may not be a "done deal" but other options are very limited.

Anonymous said...

LANL turnover won't happen 'til 2020, because of delays caused by this screwup. By than, all the talent will be gone.

Anonymous said...

Sad state of affairs, but you may be right that it will be 2020 before NNSA can get their act together to rebid LANL.

Anonymous said...



Sad state of affairs, but you may be right that it will be 2020 before NNSA can get their act together to rebid LANL.

September 6, 2016 at 5:38 PM

My God, the lab is in very bad shape if this happens. It seems very had to imagine it can be rebuilt after this.

Anonymous said...

It would be helpful if anyone can point to anything specific that the Lockheed team did that was in conflict with any requirement of the solicitation.

Anonymous said...

"It would be helpful if anyone can point to anything specific that the Lockheed team did that was in conflict with any requirement of the solicitation.

September 7, 2016 at 4:50 PM"

Hm, yes very good point, why was it rescinded, no information exists on this anywhere, very mysterious, very very mysterious. Oh look here is a reason that was
publicly announced as the reason. Just maybe it has something to do with "selling" the contract to someone else. Below is some info, it is very hard to find you have to use the internets and THE GOOGLE. Not hard, give it a try sometime.



http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/military/us-revokes-5b-contract-operate-nevada-national-security-site

The National Nuclear Security Administration on Wednesday rescinded a $5 billion, 10-year contract it awarded last week to a Lockheed Martin subsidiary to manage and operate the Nevada National Security Site because the company did not tell the agency it had sold the unit.

“This change in ownership raises substantial questions about the information in the NVS3T proposal, which could significantly impact the evaluation of the proposal and award decision,” said a statement from the National Nuclear Security Administration, a branch of the Department of Energy. NVS3T did not notify the NNSA contracting officer of the change in ownership and control as required by the request for proposal.

Anonymous said...

NSTec beat out Bechtel for the contract a decade ago, and NNSA was vocal about being not pleased with how it had been going under the new management. It made sense that the new contract would go to someone else and that is why there were several teams attracted to be in the bidding. After the current mess that has been artificially created by NNSA contracting, it is starting to look like NSTec will stay in place for the time being.

Anonymous said...

My bet is the future NNSA lab M&O contracts will shake out as...

Boeing-Battelle-Univ Texas-UNM-Texas A&M LLC will get Sandia.

Lockheed Martin-UC LLC gets LANL

UC-Battelle LLC gets LLNL

Anonymous said...

My bet is the future NNSA lab M&O contracts will shake out as...

Boeing-Battelle-Univ Texas-UNM-Texas A&M LLC will get Sandia.

Sounds good

Lockheed Martin-UC LLC gets LANL

I think Lockheed U-Texas gets LANL

UC-Battelle LLC gets LLNL


Stays with Bechtel
September 10, 2016 at 7:39 AM

Anonymous said...

Texas Tech + four-bar Cattle Co gets LANL

Walmart + Home depot gets LLNL

PeP Boys + Jiffy Lube gets Sandia

Anonymous said...

And Five Guys gets Nevada.

Anonymous said...

September 10, 2016 at 10:27 AM

UC is much more active and involved in LLNL than is Bechtel. It is down right criminal how much Bechtel gets ($20 million a year) for its "involvement" in the LLNL contract compared to how little it actually contributes to Lab operations and management. Too bad the IG or GAO is not smart enough to really do a deep dive audit of the true benefits acquired through for-profit M&O LLCs.

UC doesn't need an industrial partner for the next LLNL bid, especially if they lose out on a LANL contract. A nonprofit academic/science LLC (UC-Battelle) would easily win the LLNL contract if it were to go against an industrial lead LLCs.

Anonymous said...

10:27, at LLNL this is possible but at LANL the spend on operations and capital,improvements is larger than science. An industrial partner would have to be had on a winning team.

Anonymous said...

My bet, LANS extended through 2020. Let the hate flow.

Anonymous said...



My bet, LANS extended through 2020. Let the hate flow.

September 16, 2016 at 5:16 AM


I hate you! Just kidding. If they really need the Nevada Test site done first and it takes another year or more followed by a delay Sandia than 2020 could well be date. I think it all depends on if Sandia gets pushed back because of the NST. You might think they could do Sandia and NST at the same time however that may be just beyond the what NNSA and DOE are capable of. NNSA is just such a top notch organization of pure efficiency.

Anonymous said...

NNSA can't even make simple decisions in 90 days. They don't have the capacity to manage two contract cycles at the same time. We will be lucky to see a contract change at LANL by 2020.

Blog Archive