:: UCLA TODAY Home

©2004
The Regents of the University of California
 

UC's interest in Los Alamos is the nation's

by clifford brunk

The University of California Board of Regents voted 11 to 1 last month to authorize the preparation of a bid for UC’s continued management of the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) on behalf of the Department of Energy (DOE). The sole dissenting vote underscores the ambivalence that many UC faculty feel about UC being involved in a weapons laboratory.

As chair of the Academic Council Special Committee on the National Laboratories and as a faculty representative to the UC regents serving on the Committee on National Laboratory Oversight, I have observed the drama leading up to the May 25 vote with great interest.

UC has managed LANL from its inception in 1943 as a national service on a “no gain, no loss” basis. When the federal government announced in 2003 that a contract for the continued management of LANL would be based on a competitive bidding process, the perspective of UC providing a national service was dramatically changed, and it became abundantly clear that to be a successful competitor, UC would need to team with an industrial partner.

A number of events over the past several years have created questions regarding the effectiveness of UC’s management of LANL. There was concern over the allegation that a laboratory employee had engaged in espionage and that classified electronic media were missing. These issues were resolved after much hoopla; the result was that, although procedures had been violated, national security was never in serious jeopardy. Last summer, an intern was seriously injured in an avoidable laboratory accident.

During 2003-04, the committee conducted a poll of the entire UC faculty as to whether UC should compete for the LANL contract. By a margin of almost 3 to 1, the faculty supported a UC bid, provided that UC could deliver superior management of the laboratory. UC has partnered with Bechtel National, a conglomerate specializing in engineering, construction and projects management.

From the start, the UC-Bechtel team was faced with a major challenge of finding a director to lead the competition. The incumbent LANL director, G. Peter Nanos, accepted a position in Washington this past spring. Although it was difficult finding someone capable of successfully directing LANL, UC President Robert Dynes came up with a masterful solution.

He induced Robert Kuckuck to step out of retirement and immediately assume directorship of the lab. Further, he persuaded Michael Anastasio, the current director of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, to lead the competition team and, if the UC-Bechtel bid is successful, assume the directorship of LANL. It is laudable that two uniquely qualified laboratory managers abruptly rearranged their lives and enthusiastically took on significant new challenges.

The UC-Bechtel team is now preparing a bid proposal for submission by July 19. Ultimately, the competition for the continued management of LANL presents the DOE and the nation with a clear choice. On the one hand, the UC-Bechtel team offers the superb capabilities in science and technology of one of the world’s finest university systems, coupled with the excellent laboratory management skills of a proven industry leader. This is national service at its best. The alternative is a mammoth defense contractor pursuing a lucrative defense contract.

Brunk, professor of ecology and evolutionary biology, is also vice chair of the Universitywide Academic Senate.