National Academies Press: OpenBook

Maintaining High Scientific Quality at Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories (2004)

Chapter: Appendix 2: Information-Gathering Activities of the Committee

« Previous: Appendix 1: Biographical Sketches of the Committee Members
Suggested Citation:"Appendix 2: Information-Gathering Activities of the Committee." National Research Council. 2004. Maintaining High Scientific Quality at Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11009.
×

Appendix 2
Information-Gathering Activities of the Committee

COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDAS

Committee Meeting 1

January 22, 2004 - January 23, 2004

National Academies Building, Room 150

2100 C St. NW, Washington, DC

January 22, 2004

CLOSED SESSION

8:30-11:00 am

Committee working breakfast and executive session

OPEN SESSION

11:00

Discussion of the committee’s charge via teleconference with Everet Beckner, deputy NNSA administrator for defense programs

11:30

Discussion with William Press, LANL’s deputy laboratory director for science and technology, on the current state at LANL, what makes it special, and what needs to be preserved

12:00

Lunch; continue discussion with William Press and discussion of charge

Suggested Citation:"Appendix 2: Information-Gathering Activities of the Committee." National Research Council. 2004. Maintaining High Scientific Quality at Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11009.
×

2:00 pm

Discussion with Steve Henry, deputy assistant to the secretary of defense for nuclear matters, about DOD’s expectations from LANL and the weapons complex in the future

2:30

Short comments from selected committee members about what factors lead to high scientific quality in the organizations that they have managed

3:30

Break

3:45

Panel discussion continues

4:30

Discussion by telephone with Sidney Drell of the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center on the challenges of maintaining excellent scientific quality at LANL

5:15

Other comments

5:30

Adjourn

5:45

Reception; guests invited

CLOSED SESSION

6:30 pm

Committee working dinner

January 23, 2004

OPEN SESSION

8:00 am

Breakfast

8:30

Summary of results of the recent study on DOE science and the study’s insights of relevance to the LANL management competition. Briefing by phone from James Duderstadt, president emeritus, University of Michigan, who was a member of the committee that authored Critical Choices: Science, Energy, and Security

9:00

Discussion by telephone with William Spencer, chairman emeritus of SEMATECH and a member of the 1994-1995 Galvin Commission (Task Force on Alternative Futures for the Department of Energy Laboratories)

10:00

Break

Suggested Citation:"Appendix 2: Information-Gathering Activities of the Committee." National Research Council. 2004. Maintaining High Scientific Quality at Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11009.
×

10:15

Discussion with Allan Burman, Jefferson Solutions, a member of a recent National Research Council study that reviewed and assessed the progress made by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to identify and implement policies, procedures, and practices for improved project management, joined by Richard Little and Michael Cohn, NRC staff members who assisted with the study

11:15

Committee discussion continues

11:45

Lunch, including a discussion of the committee’s charge with Robert Simon, minority staff director of the Senate Energy Committee1

CLOSED SESSION

1:00-4:00 pm

Committee in closed session

4:00

Adjourn

Committee Meeting 2

March 1, 2004 - March 3, 2004

March 1, 2004

CLOSED SESSION

12:00-1:30 pm

Committee working lunch

OPEN SESSION (Wyndham Albuquerque Hotel, 2910 Yale Blvd. SE, Vista Norte Room, Albuquerque, NM)

1:30

Opening remarks by committee chair

1:40

Principles for Managing Research and Development Laboratories by C. Paul Robinson, president and director, Sandia National Laboratories

1  

Committee interactions with three invited guests that were scheduled for this meeting had to be cancelled because of unavoidable last-minute schedule conflicts:

(1) Presentation by David Crandall, assistant deputy NNSA administrator for research, development, and science (invited) giving an overview of the entire weapons complex and how the components complement, and differ from, one another.

(2 and 3) Discussion with David Heyman, senior fellow and director of science and security initiatives at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), about the CSIS report Science and Security in the 21st Century. This summary was to have focused on the security issues at LANL that helped spark the call for a new management competition. Mr. Heyman was to have been joined by Anne Witkowsky, senior fellow in CSIS’s Technology and Public Policy Program, who staffed the study leading to Science and Security in the 21st Century.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix 2: Information-Gathering Activities of the Committee." National Research Council. 2004. Maintaining High Scientific Quality at Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11009.
×

2:10

Open discussion among committee and Sandia executive management

Sandia representatives include C. Paul Robinson, president and laboratories director; Alton Romig, vice president for national security and arms control; Frank Figueroa, vice president for business management and chief financial officer; Jerry McDowell, deputy to the vice president of DOD programs; and Mike Cieslak, director, materials and process science

3:00

Open session ends

CLOSED SESSION

3:00-3:30

Bus to Sandia National Laboratories

3:30-5:30

Small-group discussions with groups of Sandia staff members, to discuss the SNL 1992 competition and subsequent management transition

7:00

Committee working dinner

March 2, 2004

CLOSED SESSION

7:45-8:45 am

Committee working breakfast

OPEN SESSION (Fuller Lodge, Los Alamos, NM)

10:00-11:50

Discussions with LANL Senior Executive Team, including G. Peter Nanos, LANL director

- Introduction and purpose of visit

- Laboratory overview

- General discussion

12:00

Open session ends

CLOSED SESSION

12:00-3:15 pm

Tours plus small-group discussions with groups of LANL staff members, to discuss what needs to be preserved at LANL during the competition and possible management transition

Suggested Citation:"Appendix 2: Information-Gathering Activities of the Committee." National Research Council. 2004. Maintaining High Scientific Quality at Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11009.
×

OPEN SESSION (Fuller Lodge, Los Alamos, NM)

3:30-5:30

Public comment session: Maintaining scientific quality at the NNSA laboratories

5:30

Adjourn

CLOSED SESSION

7:00

Committee working dinner

March 3, 2004

CLOSED SESSION (Hotel Santa Fe, Santa Fe, NM)

8:00 am-3:00 pm

Committee in closed session

3:00

Adjourn

Committee Meeting 3

April 5, 2004 - April 6, 2004

April 5, 2004

OPEN SESSION (Hertz Hall, University of California at Davis, Livermore campus)

10:00-11:50 am

Discussions with Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Senior Executive Team, including Michael R. Anastasio, LLNL director

- Introduction and purpose of visit

- Laboratory overview

- General discussion

11:50

Open session ends

CLOSED SESSION

12:00-3:15 pm

Tours plus small-group discussions with groups of LLNL staff members, to discuss what needs to be preserved at LLNL during the competition and possible management transition

OPEN SESSION (Hertz Hall, University of California at Davis, Livermore campus)

3:30-5:30

Public comment session: Maintaining scientific quality at the NNSA laboratories

5:30

Open session ends

Suggested Citation:"Appendix 2: Information-Gathering Activities of the Committee." National Research Council. 2004. Maintaining High Scientific Quality at Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11009.
×

April 6, 2004

CLOSED SESSION (Hilton Garden Inn, Livermore, CA)

8:00 am-3:00 pm

Committee in closed session

3:00

Adjourn

SITE VISITS AND TELECONFERENCES

February 6, 2004, meeting at Sandia National Laboratories (SNL). Committee members Arthur Guenther and Edward Giller met with the SNL director to discuss planning for the committee’s visit to SNL on March 1, 2004, Sandia’s strategic plan, the director’s views on prime factors that have ensured top-quality S&T work and workforce at SNL, the NNSA management system at SNL, the transition in management and operations (M&O) contractors at SNL, and Sandia’s special tax arrangement with the state of New Mexico.

February 13, 2004, meeting at LANL. Committee members Arthur Guenther and Edward Giller met with the LANL director to discuss planning for the committee’s visit to LANL on March 2, 2004, his views on prime factors that will ensure top-quality S&T work and workforce at LANL, and the NNSA management system at LANL. The insights gained from this meeting were shared with the full committee through e-mail.

February 18, 2004, meeting at the Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL). Committee members Paul Fleury and James Glimm met first with the three members of the BNL search committee that was responsible for finding the current BNL director, and they were joined later by the BNL director. The three members of the search committee were all at Brookhaven before, during, and after the change of BNL’s M&O contractor. Fleury and Glimm sought the thoughts of these four on the past management competition and transition at BNL and, more generally, their thoughts on how the choice of M&O contractor for a national laboratory affects the scientific quality of the organization. Observations from this site visit were shared with the full committee at its March 1-3, 2004, meeting.

February 23, 2004, teleconference with Norman Augustine, retired CEO of Lockheed Martin. Committee members Paul Fleury (serving as meeting chair), Arthur Guenther, Alan McLaughlin, Cherry Murray, and John Sommerer, along with study director Scott Weidman and NRC staff members Richard Rowberg and Cy Butner, participated in the call. The purpose of the conference call was to obtain Mr. Augustine’s insights into the 1992 transition in management of SNL. (The transition of the SNL M&O contract to Martin-Marietta was in place before the merger between

Suggested Citation:"Appendix 2: Information-Gathering Activities of the Committee." National Research Council. 2004. Maintaining High Scientific Quality at Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11009.
×

it and Lockheed took place, and Lockheed Martin then assumed the SNL management contract as part of the merger.) The insights gained from this conversation were shared with the full committee at its meeting of March 1-3, 2004.

February 24, 2004, meeting at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL). Committee chair Paul Jennings and study director Scott Weidman met first with a group of senior managers to hear their reflections on past management competitions at INEEL and, more generally, to discuss how the choice of M&O contractor for a national laboratory affects the scientific quality of the organization. Jennings and Weidman then met with a group of experienced bench scientists and engineers and one human resource person to discuss their thoughts on the same questions. Observations from this site visit were shared with the full committee at its meeting of March 1-3, 2004.

March 16, 2004, meeting at Sandia National Laboratories. Committee members Arthur Guenther and Edward Giller met with the SNL director to hear his thoughts on current and proposed NNSA management systems for SNL, on potential contacts for the committee to make who were knowledgeable about nuclear weapons issues, and about the potential problems of bidding the LANL and LLNL contracts together and of managing the two laboratories with different mixes of contractors. The results of this meeting were shared with the full committee by e-mail.

March 26, 2004, meeting at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL). Committee member John Sommerer and study director Scott Weidman met first with a group of senior managers, including the ORNL director, to hear their reflections on the most recent management competition at ORNL and, more generally, to discuss how the choice of M&O contractor for a national laboratory affects the scientific quality of the organization. Sommerer and Weidman then met with a group of experienced bench scientists and engineers to discuss their thoughts on the same questions. Observations from this site visit were shared with the full committee at its meeting of April 5-6, 2004.

OTHER INFORMATION-GATHERING MEETINGS AND CONTACTS

January 26, 2004, discussion between committee member David Campbell and former DOE Undersecretary Ernest Moniz about the general context of the management competitions.

February 9, 2004, telephone conversation between committee member Cherry Murray and Praveen Chaudhari, director of Brookhaven National Laboratory, about how BNL is managed.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix 2: Information-Gathering Activities of the Committee." National Research Council. 2004. Maintaining High Scientific Quality at Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11009.
×

February 9-10, 2004, conversation with Siegfried Hecker, director of Los Alamos National Laboratory from 1986 to 1997, at the NRC Governing Board meeting in Irvine, California. Committee member Cherry Murray discussed LANL governance with him and he subsequently provided copies of two documents he wrote: an article on laboratory governance and a written statement for Senate testimony on this subject. This information was shared with the full committee through e-mail.

February 19, 2004, conversation with Jay C. Davis, former head of the Defense Threat Reduction Agency and a member of the Argonne Board of Governors, at the Board of Governors’ meeting in Batavia, Illinois. Through contact with committee member Cherry Murray, Dr. Davis provided his proposed set of scientific selection criteria for national laboratory contractors. This information was shared with the full committee through e-mail.

February 26, 2004, meeting with Anne Witkowski, Center for Strategic and International Studies. Richard Rowberg, NRC staff, met with Ms. Witkowski to discuss the CSIS report on security at the DOE weapons labs and how security issues might affect science and technology performance at those labs. No information beyond that distributed to the committee in the form of the executive summary of the CSIS report was obtained at this meeting. Additional information was to be provided by CSIS but did not arrive.

March 30, 2004, telephone conversation with James O. Ellis, Jr., commander, United States Strategic Command. Committee chair Paul Jennings spoke with ADM Ellis about his organization’s future expectations from LANL and LLNL and his thoughts on the interplay of these two laboratories. The results of this conversation were reported at the committee meeting held in Livermore, California, on April 6, 2004.

April 1, 2004, telephone conversation between Roger Jackson, nuclear weapons team leader, United Kingdom Atomic Weapons Establishment (AWE), and Richard Rowberg, NRC staff, discussing the process by which AWE carried out the competition for its management contract in 1999. The conversation focused on how that competition included ways to ensure quality management of the science and technology at AWE. The results of this conversation were reported at the committee meeting held in Livermore, California, on April 6, 2004.

April 2, 2004, telephone conversation between committee member David Campbell and Richard Jacobsen, associate laboratory director for Energy and Environmental Sciences at DOE’s Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) about the M&O management competitions at INEEL.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix 2: Information-Gathering Activities of the Committee." National Research Council. 2004. Maintaining High Scientific Quality at Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11009.
×

April 7, 2004, e-mail response to Cherry Murray from William F. Brinkman about the DOE blue-ribbon study, of which he was a member. This e-mail generated several responses from the committee and focused on the question of whether LANL and LLNL should have the same M&O contractor. This information was shared by e-mail with the full committee.

April 16, 2004, meeting between committee member David Campbell and William Frazer, professor emeritus at the University of California at Berkeley, about the University of California’s role in ensuring coordination and cooperation between LANL and LLNL. Frazer, who is a member of the University of California’s President’s Council on the National Laboratories, has a long history of dealing with the University of California’s oversight of the two laboratories.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix 2: Information-Gathering Activities of the Committee." National Research Council. 2004. Maintaining High Scientific Quality at Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11009.
×
Page 42
Suggested Citation:"Appendix 2: Information-Gathering Activities of the Committee." National Research Council. 2004. Maintaining High Scientific Quality at Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11009.
×
Page 43
Suggested Citation:"Appendix 2: Information-Gathering Activities of the Committee." National Research Council. 2004. Maintaining High Scientific Quality at Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11009.
×
Page 44
Suggested Citation:"Appendix 2: Information-Gathering Activities of the Committee." National Research Council. 2004. Maintaining High Scientific Quality at Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11009.
×
Page 45
Suggested Citation:"Appendix 2: Information-Gathering Activities of the Committee." National Research Council. 2004. Maintaining High Scientific Quality at Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11009.
×
Page 46
Suggested Citation:"Appendix 2: Information-Gathering Activities of the Committee." National Research Council. 2004. Maintaining High Scientific Quality at Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11009.
×
Page 47
Suggested Citation:"Appendix 2: Information-Gathering Activities of the Committee." National Research Council. 2004. Maintaining High Scientific Quality at Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11009.
×
Page 48
Suggested Citation:"Appendix 2: Information-Gathering Activities of the Committee." National Research Council. 2004. Maintaining High Scientific Quality at Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11009.
×
Page 49
Suggested Citation:"Appendix 2: Information-Gathering Activities of the Committee." National Research Council. 2004. Maintaining High Scientific Quality at Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11009.
×
Page 50
Maintaining High Scientific Quality at Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories Get This Book
×
 Maintaining High Scientific Quality at Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories
Buy Paperback | $29.00 Buy Ebook | $23.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

In recent years, there has been concern about security and operations management at Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories (LANL and LLNL). As a result, Congress directed the Department of Energy (DOE) to hold open competitions for the management and operations (M&O) contracts for both LANL and LLNL. The quality of the scientific programs, however, did not appear to be a factor in that action, and the DOE's National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) wanted to ensure that the contract competitions preserve the high-quality science and engineering currently being performed at the labs. It asked the NRC to recommend how best the NNSA can create meaningful qualification and selection discriminators to help ensure world-class scientific quality is maintained in programs and activities at LANL and LLNL. This report presents those recommendations along with other important factors that should be considered in developing the request for proposals for the upcoming contract competition.

READ FREE ONLINE

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!