The UC Board of Regents approved a committee proposal last week to submit a bid to continue the university’s stewardship of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, a northern California nuclear weapons lab.
The approval comes nine months after the University of California successfully bid to retain its position as head of the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, one of LLNL’s two sister labs and the birthplace of the first nuclear bomb in 1945.
Although the university has managed both nuclear research facilities since their respective inceptions decades ago — LANL since 1943 and LLNL since 1952 — the U.S. Department of Energy decided in 2002 to open the labs’ management contracts to competitive bidding after a series of mismanagement scandals surfaced, including an audit that found $195,246 in questionable transactions over a five-year period and the discovery of missing computer equipment.
In another mismanagement incident that further embarrassed the university, investigators found that a supposed lost computer disk containing classified information never existed. LANL had been closed for the duration of the seven-month investigation. An eye injury suffered by an intern also prompted further scrutiny of the university’s ability to manage the nuclear facilities.
As required by the D.O.E. request for proposals, the university, in partnership with engineering firm Bechtel, will form a separate corporate entity to act as the prime contractor in the bid to manage LLNL, located about 50 miles east of San Francisco. The university is also in talks with other potential partners, according to UC Office of the President spokesman Chris Harrington.
“We have a history with Bechtel, but we are considering other partners as well,” Harrington said.
The university, also in partnership with Bechtel, beat out the joint bid of sole competitors the University of Texas and aerospace giant Lockheed Martin for the contract at LANL, which includes a provision to earn extended management at Los Alamos for up to an additional 17 years. The LLNL contract includes a similar extension provision.
At their July meeting, the regents appointed national security and nuclear weapons expert George H. Miller as leader for the bid.
If the university’s bid wins the LLNL contract, Miller would be named director of the laboratory, according to a university press release.
The proposal is expected to cost the university about $3 million, which will be paid for by past income earned at both LLNL and LANL, according to Harrington.
“It will not be funded from state funds or student fees,” he said.
The university is hopeful that it will secure the LLNL contract through its bid, which would be due to the D.O.E. in early October.
“Our expectation is that we will submit a strong and winning bid that is responsive to the Department of Energy proposal and the national security needs of our nation,” Harrington said.
However, not everyone in the UC community is happy about the university’s decision to move forward with the LLNL bid.
UC Nuclear Free, a UC-wide organization made up of students, faculty, staff and other members of the public, opposes the university’s position as director of the research labs because members are against the production of nuclear weapons, and has lobbied the university at several recent regents’ meetings to cut ties with the nuclear laboratories.
Although the university recognized public input opposing its continued management of the labs, it decided to move forward with the bid, Harrington said.
Andrew Culp, a member of UCNF, said that the university should reassess its position as head of LLNL, especially because of the lab’s research and production of plutonium pits, which serve as the triggers for nuclear weapons.
“[The university] has decided to continue with the production of weapons of mass destruction,” Culp said.
However, the National Nuclear Security Administration stated on its Web site that LLNL exists “to prevent the spread and use of weapons of mass destruction and strengthen homeland security” through “safe, secure and reliable” oversight of the United States’ nuclear weapons development.
