UC encouraged to cast bid for Los Alamos lab
By Andrew Edwards
May 15, 2003 9:00 p.m.
SAN FRANCISCO ““ The head of the federal agency overseeing
the nation’s nuclear weapons research and stockpile advised
the University of California Board of Regents to enter the fray and
compete to continue managing Los Alamos National Laboratory.
“I urge you to decide. Not today, not this month, but
ultimately to continue your long tradition of public
service,” said Linton Brooks, acting administrator of the
National Nuclear Security Administration.
The Department of Energy plans to accept bids to manage
LANL in 2005.
The board took no formal steps toward deciding whether or not to
bid, though the meeting’s tone suggested many regents are
interested in retaining the UC’s ties with LANL.
“All of us, I think, are not afraid of competition,”
said Regent Gerald Parsky.
UC President Richard Atkinson also revealed plans to take the
restructuring of the lab’s management one step further by
announcing his intent to recommend interim LANL director George
“Pete” Nanos be hired as the lab’s permanent head
at “the earliest possible date.”
Brooks explained that the DOE decided to put the contract up for
bid because of multiple “systemic weaknesses” in the
lab’s business management, indicated by problems with
the lab’s controls over funds and property.
However, the decision was “not a repudiation” of the
university’s overall involvement with LANL, Brooks said.
The DOE, Brooks said, could help the UC compete for a bid for
LANL by modifying the existing contract to allow the UC to use the
lab’s contingency funds to pay for competition costs.
Before the UC began its efforts to reform LANL management, about
$9 million had been saved for contingencies at LANL. Some of this
sum has already been spent on efforts to fix problems, and $1
million is required to be kept in reserve for transition costs in
case another institution wins the contract.
Brooks gave high marks to the UC’s efforts to fix problems
at LANL, which included the hiring of new senior administrators and
multiple audits. Brooks also said that business problems did not
reduce the quality of scientific research.
Similarly, Bruce Darling, the interim vice president of
laboratory management, said faulty property controls did not
jeopardize the safety of nuclear secrets.
“Los Alamos has verified all classified computers have
been properly secured and no classified information was at
risk,” Darling said.
Though Brooks and Darling were able to report these positive
developments to the board, doubts surround the university’s
chances for success if the regents decide to vie for the
contract.
Questions remain whether the lab will be able to maintain
quality research staff and if the UC will have a level playing
field in any competition.
Regent Peter Preuss, the chairman of the committee on lab
oversight, asked Brooks if the UC should worry about the panel that
will advise the DOE on the lab contract.
One of the members of the panel, senior Pentagon official Dale
Klein, has a professorial appointment at the University of Texas,
which may also compete for the contract. On Tuesday the San
Francisco Chronicle reported Klein urged the UT to bid for the
contract of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, also run by the
UC, and had endorsed the UT’s unsuccessful bid to manage
Sandia National Laboratory.
Klein told the Chronicle he would be impartial in his new role
with the DOE, and Brooks said the committee Klein sits on would not
take a direct role in deciding who manages LANL after 2005.
Brooks wanted to reassure the regents the process had not become
politicized.
“There has been no political pressure so far,”
Brooks said.
Brooks said he plans to come up with criteria for the
competition next year, and that bids will be submitted in early
2005 with a decision made summer of that year, though no specific
dates have been decided upon.
“We haven’t nailed down a firm schedule yet,”
he said.
