ABQjournal: Domenici Backs Bidding for LANL Contract

Wednesday, April 23, 2003

Domenici Backs Bidding for LANL Contract

By Adam Rankin
Journal Northern Bureau
    LOS ALAMOS — At Los Alamos National Laboratory's 60th anniversary celebration here Tuesday, the lab's most ardent supporter in the U.S. Senate delivered what he called a "tough love" speech.
    Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., announced for the first time his support for opening up the contract to run LANL to a competitive bidding process once the University of California's contract expires at the end of 2005.
    UC has enjoyed a six-decade run of noncompetitive contract extensions since taking over LANL operations in 1943.
    "I have been proud of the University of California under whose management the laboratory has largely flourished for 60 years," he said. "But we all know that the present manner in which the laboratory is managed must change. ... More importantly, I want to see these changes undertaken now."
    Domenici said the laboratory has made serious mistakes that have gone uncorrected for too long, and that although he has defended the lab against its critics for failures in business management and security, "that defense has increasingly cost the credibility of the laboratory."
    Domenici also said he would work with Department of Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham to ensure UC competes for the contract effectively — if it goes out for bid — and that LANL employees, their jobs, benefits and retirement are protected.
    "It is my hope that the University of California will always command a large role at Los Alamos," he said.
    Domenici was the keynote speaker for the dedication of the lab's new Non-proliferation and International Security Center, which he said would be a part of LANL's growing mission to make the world a safer place.
    The dedication ceremony was part of LANL's 60th anniversary celebration, which also included addresses by Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., Rep. Tom Udall, D-N.M., Gov. Bill Richardson and Linton Brooks, acting director of the National Nuclear Security Administration.
    Domenici, chairman of the Senate Energy and Water Development Subcommittee which funds DOE and NNSA, also called for a complete review of the management of all national laboratories in a series of congressional hearings.
    NNSA's Brooks said he would deliver his own assessment of UC's management of LANL to Abraham by April 30. He said he expected Abraham to make a decision on the fate of UC's contract to run LANL shortly afterward.
    UC President Richard Atkinson said that while UC's previous position has been that it would not take part in any competitive bidding to operate LANL, that is not necessarily the university's stance now.
    "There is no question in my mind that we would like to continue managing the laboratories," he said, referring to LANL and two other national labs UC runs in California.
    Bingaman — after extolling LANL's past and present contributions to national security, anti-terrorism and basic science — later said it's too early to tell whether it will be necessary to put the LANL contract out for bids because UC is taking major steps to address identified management problems.
    "I think it will be wise to see what steps they have taken before making the important decision of who will manage the lab in the future," he said.
    In response to Domenici's message, interim LANL Director Pete Nanos told lab employees in an e-mailed memo not to despair.
    "I believe that if we continue to make the improvements that are already under way, we will be extremely well positioned at the end of the current contract to compete successfully — if that is the course of action the (Energy) secretary decides to take," Nanos wrote.
    Richardson recalled how in his final two days as DOE secretary in the Clinton administration, he renewed the UC contract, even though there also were problems during his tenure at Energy.
    "I believe Los Alamos has done its best work under the management of the University of California," Richardson said. "Why mess with something that works and works well?" he said. "Why break up a family?"