G

Selected Supporting Information

LABORATORY BUDGETS

image

FIGURE G.1 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) FY2010 Annual Budget. SOURCE: George Miller, LLNL Director, presented to the committee by on April 26, 2011, at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, California.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 73
G Selected Supporting Information LABORATORY BUDGETS FIGURE G.1 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) FY2010 Annual Budget. SOURCE: George Miller, LLNL Director, presented to the committee by on April 26, 2011, at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, California. 73

OCR for page 73
LLNL Budget Dollars in Millions FIGURE G.2 LLNL Budget for FY2004-FY2010. SOURCE: Alice Williams, Livermore Site Office Manager, presented to the committee on April 27, 2011, at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, California. Work for Others LANL Budget (National Security) $213M (9%) Work for Others $97M (4%) DOE Office of Science $80M (3%) NNSA DOE Energy & Other Weapons Programs Programs $109M (4%) $1,406M *The Laboratory’s DOE Environmental Management (56%) FY11 annual budget $211M (8%) is approximately TOTAL $2.5 billion. NNSA Safeguards * $2.519B & Security $175M (7%) NNSA Nonproliferation $228M (9%) FIGURE G.3 Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) FY2011 Annual Budget. SOURCE: Michael Anastasio, LANL Director, presented to the committee by on April 11, 2011, at Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico. 74

OCR for page 73
Budget FY10 Actual FY11 Estimate Operations & maintenance $ 2,323.0 million $ 2,470.9 million Capital equipment $ 29.0 million $ 21.6 million Construction $ 14.0 million $ 14.9 million TOTAL $ 2,366.0 million $ 2,507.4 million Note: Sandia’s fiscal year runs from October 1 through September 30. Revenue by source FY10 Actual FY11 Estimate Energy & Water Development Appropriations Weapons activities $ 977.8 million $ 1,103.6 million Defense nuclear nonproliferation $ 173.2 million $ 174.5 million Other NNSA $ 1.2 million $ 1.5 million Total NNSA $ 1,152.3 million $ 1,279.6 million Energy efficiency & renewable energy $ 90.4 million $ 76.2 million Nuclear Energy Science & Technology $ 16.2 million $ 25.8 million Science programs $ 61.3 million $ 58.2 million Environmental management $ 15.0 million $ 19.8 million Other defense activities $ 12.6 million $ 11.3 million Radioactive waste management $ 23.1 million - Fossil energy conservation $ 2.3 million $ 5.8 million Other DOE $ 14.1 million $ 43.9 million Total DOE Funding $ 1,387.2 million $ 1,520.6 million Non-DOE (Work For Others) Funding $ 978.8 million $ 986.8 million Total Sandia Revenue $ 2,366.0 million $ 2,507.4 million FIGURE G.4 Sandia National Laboratory (SNL) Annual Budget. NOTE: Data shown is for SNL’s FY2010 actual expenditures and FY2011 estimated expenditures. SOURCE: Data from Sandia National Laboratories website, available at http://www.sandia.gov/about/faq/ 75

OCR for page 73
LABORATORY WORKFORCE DEMOGRAPHICS FIGURE G.5 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory’s workforce. SOURCE: Tomas Diaz de la Rubia, LLNL Deputy Director of Science and Technology, presentation to the committee on April 26, 2011, at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, California. 76

OCR for page 73
Recruiting and retaining a quality workforce critical to continued success of laboratory and stewardship *LANL Site Staffing Levels 12,198 Employees *LANL Career (Regular) Employee Distribution 8,193 R&D Technical Staff Disciplines Career (Regular) Employees include: • R&D Engineers and Scientists • Technician • Mgmt/Exec • Professional • Support *Data current as of 12/31/10 Operated by Los Alamos National Security, LLC for the U.S. Department of Energy’s NNSA UNCLASSIFIED 4 For Fiscal Year 2011, LANL reported: - 2,079 peer-reviewed publications which was the highest since 2006 - LANL won three R&D 100 Awards - The number of post-doctorial candidates was an all-time high FIGURE G.6 Los Alamos National Laboratory’s workforce. SOURCE: Michael Anastasio, LANL Director, presented to the committee on April 11, 2011, at Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico. 77

OCR for page 73
 On-site workforce: 11,451  Regular employees: 8,522  Gross payroll: ~$900 million Technical Staff (4,264) by Discipline 1 FIGURE G.7 Sandia National Laboratory’s workforce. SOURCE: Paul Hommert, SNL Director, presentation to the committee on March 22, 2011, at Sandia National Laboratory, Albuquerque, New Mexico. 78

OCR for page 73
LABORATORY SITE OFFICE STAFF NUMBERS Organization Chart NNSA Livermore Site Office NNSA Livermore Site Office Alice Williams - Manager Nancy Shimosaka - Chief of Staff Janis Parenti – Site Counsel DOE, Counterintelligence Pete Rodrik - Senior Technical Safety Advisor Berkeley Field Office John Belluardo - Public Affairs Director Steve Minniear Patricia Coulombe - HR Liaison Phil Hill – Technical Deputy for Samuel Brinker – Technical Deputy for Security, Safety, and Operations Programs and Business AM for FACILITY AM for SAFEGUARDS & AM for RESOURCE AM for DEFENSE PROGRAMS OPERATIONS SECURITY MANAGEMENT Vacant S. Lasell D. Gordon Vacant H. Rio, Sr. FR D. Thompson, Ld Sec Spec C. Heard, Bus Mgmt Sp T. Grim, Ops Team Lead S. Chao, FR Non-Nuclear D. Aron, Info Sec J. Hodges, Budget Analyst I. Tregub, Deputy OTL T. Greene, FR RHWM J. Chaffins, Security Asst D. Rose, Prgm Analyst D. Bird, Lead DP PM R. Robb, FR NMTP V. Dunlop, Info Sec, TSCM C. Ingram, Tech Trng Mgr E. Begg, DP PM B. Sciacca, FR Expl H. Lee, Classification A. Hoehne, Sup Serv Sp J. Shakiba, Sr. DP PM K. Warwick, FR NIF J. Anderson, Prgm Mgmt A. Bradley, Bus Mgmt Asst S. Ma, NIF PM D. Yee, FR NMTP J. Garcia, Prgm Mgmt B. Catolos, Admin Asst D. Eddy, NIF PM J. Retelle, Sys Eng (Elec) D. Laniohan, Pro Force A. Osorio, Office Auto Asst H. Larson, Sr. Safety Analyst Q. Tran, Sys Eng (Mech) D. Pickle, Phys Sec/ Surveys G. Narducci, Site Mgmt Sp D. Corporandy, Safety Analyst R. Kearns, Emerg Mgmt L. McLemore, LSO Sec Ops W. Cyganowski, Site Mgmt Sp K. Lee, Safety Analyst L. Marik, Sr. Ops Mgr V. Reams, Pers Sec S. Taylor, Budget Analyst M. Lee, Crit Safety Eng S. Hartson, Sr. Os Eng B. R. Marsh, MC&A A. Chen , FR (FLP) A.Tai , Cyber Security PM A, Nichols, FR (FLP) AM for ENVIRONMENT, AM for SUSTAINABILITY AND AM for INTERAGENCY AM for CONTRACT SAFETY, & HEALTH INFRASTRUCTURE MISSIONS ADMINISTRATION Vacant M. Brown D. Nakahara J. Parenti K. Keilholtz, Oper Exper PM A. Martin, Sr. Project Eng D. Culver , General Attorney J. Marcisz, NAI PM R. Roses, Fire Pro Mgr P. Ko, Sr. Project Eng H. Williamson, Contract Spec S. Graham, NAI PM E. Njoku, Rad Pro Mgr T. Sy, Facilities PM R. Promani, Contract Spec C. Morreira, Lead WFO PM Y.Wang, Indus Safety Eng P. Loo, Project Mgr D. Goett, Contract Spec E. Chavez, WFO PM D. Damba, Fire Safety Eng M. Zulim, Maintenance PM J. Dossey, Prgm Analyst C. Nguyen, WFO PM Trainee P. Wong, Site Env Restor. D. Harkness, Bus Mgr/FOIA P. Barbosa, Biosafety PM V. Mishra, Env, Spec J. Davis – Waste Mgmt PM A. Cordis, QA Eng M. Cornell, RAP C. Carter, NEPA, RW Gen. C. Holtzapple, Site 300 ER PM L. Dancy, Weapons QA M. Wahlig, Ops Team Lead W. Kao, RCRA Eng R. Kong, Sr. Waste Mgmt PM P. Minniear, Prgm Analyst R. Scott, Ops Team Lead T. Ha, Constr Safety Eng J. Schwabe, Waste Gen D. Osburn, CA Mgr N. Remington, IH (FLP) K. King, Sustainability A. Robertson, ER (FLP) FIGURE G.8 Livermore Site Office (LSO). NOTE: This figure gives the organizational structure of the Livermore Site Office. Listed under each Assistant Manager (AM) position are the names of the individuals that the respected AM manages. According to the data in this figure, the size of the Livermore Site Office totals 106 employees, which includes all Assistant Managers (vacant and non-vacant positions), the staff they supervise, the Technical Deputies, and the positions located in the Manager’s Office: Site Office Manager, Chief of Staff, Site Counsel, Senior Technical Safety Advisor, Public Affairs Director, and HR Liaison. SOURCE: Alice Williams, Livermore Site Office Manager, presentation to committee on April 27, 2011, at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, California. 79

OCR for page 73
The LASO Team Authorized 107 NNSA and 28 EM employees: 10% Facility Representatives 10% Mission 10% Project Management 20% Nuclear Safety 20% Environmental 10% Management 10% Security 10% Support About 85 percent possess BA, MA, or PhD and several qualify as subject matter experts in their fields FIGURE G.9 Los Alamos Site Office Team. SOURCE: Kevin Smith, LASO Manager, data from presentation to committee on April 12, 2011, at Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico. Sandia Site Office Reorganized 10-01-10 to map to Sandia Policy Areas Assistant Manager for Assistant Manager for Programs Performance & Quality Functions: Manager’s Office Assurance Functions: Defense Programs Functions: Science, Technology & Performance Assurance Engineering Senior Technical Safety Advisor Quality Assurance Laboratory Directed Research Price-Anderson Amendments Act Indirect Costs Monitoring and Development Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Work for Others Legal Counsel Technology Partnerships Public Affairs Nuclear Nonproliferation ePegasus Other DOE Programs Assistant Manager for Assistant Manager for Assistant Manager for Assistant Manager for Assistant Manager for Contract Admin & Safeguards & Security Nuclear Operations Environment, Safety & Health Facilities & Projects Business Management Functions: Functions: Functions: Functions: Functions: Cyber Security Protective Force Oversight of Nuclear Operations Occupational Safety Facilities Management Human Capital Safeguards & Security Program Management at Health Physics Construction Project Mgmt. Procurement & Contracting Program Management Technical Area -V Packaging & Transportation Environmental Restoration Real & Personal Property Nuclear Materials Safeguards Nuclear Facility Safety Industrial Hygiene Non-Nuclear Facility Reps Budget & Resources Physical Security Nuclear Facility Representatives Explosives Safety Information Technology Material Control & Accounting Safety Basis Environmental Compliance Information Security Safety System Oversight Radiation Protection Personnel Security Price-Anderson Amendments National Environmental Policy Act Emergency Management Act Support Compliance Waste Management Emergency Management Total # of Authorized FTEs 2006: 93 Sandia Site Office 8 Total # of Authorized FTEs 2011: 83 FIGURE G.10 Sandia Site Office’s (SSO) Organizational Structure. NOTE: According to this data, as of 2011, the total number of authorized full time employees at the Sandia Site Office totaled 83. SOURCE: Sandia Site Office presentation to committee on March 23, 2011, at Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico. 80

OCR for page 73
LABORATORY CONTRACT TERM FEES FIGURE G.11 Los Alamos National Security (LANS) Contract Fee Structure. SOURCE: Excerpted from the Management & Operating Contract for the Los Alamos National Laboratory National Nuclear Security Administration, Unofficial Conformed Copy as of 9/16/11. Part I, Section B-2 “Contract Type and Value,” p. 6, available at http://www.lanl.gov/orgs/pcm/pdfs/conformed_prime_contract.pdf. FIGURE G.12 Lawrence Livermore National Security (LLNS) Contract Fee Structure. SOURCE: Excerpted from the LLNS Management and Operating Contract, Part I, Section B-2 “Contract Type and Value,” p. 5. 81

OCR for page 73
(c) The Fixed Fee for the specified Contract period is set forth below: Contract Period Fixed Fee October 1, 1993 through September 30, 2003 $155,733,103 October 1, 2003 through September 30, 2004 $ 15,400,000 October 1, 2004 through September 30, 2005 $ 16,256,548 October 1, 2005 through September 30, 2006 $ 16,596,769 October 1, 2006 through September 30, 2007 $ 15,603,798 October 1, 2007 through September 30, 2008 $ 16,372,062 October 1, 2008 through September 30, 2009 $ 16,345,315 October 1, 2009 through September 30, 2010 $ 18,040,617 October 1, 2010 through September 30, 2011 $ 18,537,589 October 1, 2011 through September 30, 2012 $ To be negotiated annually TOTAL through FY11 $ 288,885,801 (d) The maximum available Performance Incentive Fee pool is set forth below: Maximum Available Performance Incentive Fee Pool October 1, 1993 through September 30, 2003 $Not applicable October 1, 2003 through September 30, 2004 $ 8,200,000 October 1, 2004 through September 30, 2005 $ 8,708,865 October 1, 2005 through September 30, 2006 $ 8,891,126 October 1, 2006 through September 30, 2007 $ 8,359,178 October 1, 2007 through September 30, 2008 $ 8,770,748 October 1, 2008 through September 30, 2009 $ 8,756,419 October 1, 2009 through September 30, 2010 $ 9,664,616 October 1, 2010 through September 30, 2011 $ 9,930,851 October 1, 2010 through September 30, 2012 $ To be negotiated annually TOTAL through FY11 $ 71,281,803 FIGURE G.13 Sandia Corporation Contract Fee Structure. SOURCE: Excerpted from the Sandia Corporations Management and Operating Contract, Part I, Section B-2. TABLE G.1 Approximate Annual Fee Structures (in millions of dollars) Laboratory Fixed Fee Maximum Award Fee SNL 16 9-10 LANL 22 52 LLNL 12.5 29.5 COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH LANL AND LLNL CONTRACT CHANGES When the contracts changed at LANL and LLNL, cost changes were incurred. Some of these were savings, and others were additional costs. Some were one-time charges or savings (or transfers), while others affect each year’s budget. Many of the changes were changes in the cost to the government of running the laboratories that do not affect the budgets of the laboratories directly because they are paid directly by the government to some other entity without going through the laboratory. Of particular concern to the laboratories are those additional costs and expenses that must be borne out of the laboratory budget. These affected operations at the laboratories because they caused net reductions in the overall money available to pay for laboratory activities. 82

OCR for page 73
Specifically, three categories are of major concern: (1) increases in the management fees; (2) changes in personnel costs due to changes in health and pension benefit plans as laboratory personnel transitioned from being U Cal employees to being employees of their respective LLCs (LANS, LLNS); and (3) changes in state and local tax obligations associated with the transition from a public institution (U Cal) to a private corporation. This last was much more significant at LANL and at LLNL. At each of these two laboratories, the annual cost of doing business increased by very roughly $100 million per year. • LANL — The annual fee increased from less than $10 million to about $60 million, as shown in the contract excerpt in the preceding section. The actual amount varies by year and by performance. This increase is typically $40 million to $50 million — State and local tax obligations increased by $65 million — Pension plan changes necessitated a $30 million contribution to the new defined contribution plan. The total increase is therefore on the order of $140 million per year. • LLNL — The annual fee increased from less than $10 million to about $45 million, as shown in the contract excerpt in the preceding section. The actual amount varies by year and by performance. This increase in typically $30 million. — Pension plan changes necessitated a $30 contribution — Healthcare costs increased about $10 million. — There were no substantial tax changes at LLNL; taxes decreased by about $2 million. The total increase is therefore on the order of $70 million per year. At both labs, there were also large decreases in costs to the government. Since these amounts were not part of the laboratory budgets, they are not included in this accounting, and the laboratories did not benefit directly from them. TENURES OF LABORATORY DIRECTORS TABLE G.2 Tenures of Laboratory Directors LLNL LANL SNL Start End Tenure Start End Tenure Start End Tenure Director Year Year (years) Director Year Year (years) Director Year Year (years) York 1952 1958 6 Oppenheimer 1943 1945 2 Landry 1949 1952 3 Teller 1958 1960 2 Bradbury 1945 1970 25 Quarles 1952 1953 1 Brown 1960 1961 1 Agnew 1970 1979 9 McRae 1953 1958 5 Foster 1961 1965 4 Kerr 1979 1986 7 Molnar 1958 1960 2 May 1965 1971 6 Hecker 1986 1997 11 Schwartz 1960 1966 6 Batzel 1971 1988 17 Browne 1997 2003 6 Hornbeck 1966 1972 6 Nuckolls 1988 1994 6 Nanos 2003 2005 2 Sparks 1972 1981 9 Tarter 1994 2002 8 Kuckuck 2005 2006 1 Dacey 1981 1986 5 Anastasio 2002 2006 4 Anastasio 2006 2011 5 Welber 1986 1989 3 Miller 2006 2011 5 Narath 1989 1995 6 Robinson 1995 2005 10 Hunter 2005 2010 5 83

OCR for page 73
LABORATORY PRODUCTIVITY Laboratory productivity can be measured in a number of ways, including number of peer- reviewed journal articles published each year, and through the various awards earned by laboratory scientists. Several of the laboratories’ key achievements from recent years are highlighted below. Los Alamos National Laboratory In FY2011: • LANL had 2,079 peer-reviewed publications, the highest since 2006. • The laboratory’s number of post-doctoral candidates was at an all-time high. • LANL won three R&D 100 Awards. 1 • The E.O. Lawrence Award, which recognizes exceptional contributions in R&D that support the DOE and its missions, was awarded to two LANL scientists. 2 TABLE G.3 LANL Peer-Reviewed Publications CY2007 CY2008 CY2009 LANL publications 1,928 1,780 1,743 LDRD-supported publications 401 452 376 Percent due to LDRD 21% 25% 22% SOURCE: FY2010 LANL LDRD Annual Report, available at http://www.lanl.gov/science/ldrd/docs/LANL-LDRD-FY10-AR.pdf. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory In FY2011: • LLNL won two R&D 100 Awards. 3 • LLNL researchers received Secretary of Energy Achievement Awards.4 TABLE G.3 Journal Papers Resulting from LDRD-Funded Research as a Percentage of Total Articles for the Past 5 Years Journal Articles 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 All LLNL articles 1,237 1,162 1,097 1,001 910 LDRD articles 223 237 212 161 186 LDRD articles as percentage of total 18% 20% 19% 16% 20% SOURCE: FY2010 Laboratory Directed Research and Development Annual Report, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory https://ldrd.llnl.gov/pdfs/LLNL_10LDRD.pdf 1 Provided by the LASO Site Manager from the FY2011 LANL Self-Assessment. 2 See News Release, available at http://www.lanl.gov/news/releases/lanl_scientists_win_two_prestigious_ eolawrence_awards_from_the_doe.html. 3 See News Release at https://www.llnl.gov/news/newsreleases/2011/Jun/NR-11-06-05.html. 4 See News Release at https://www.llnl.gov/news/aroundthelab/2011/Nov/ATL-112211_awards.html. 84

OCR for page 73
TABLE G.4 Journal Papers Resulting from LDRD-Funded Research as a Percentage of All LLNL Papers from 2004 to 2008 Journal Articles 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 All LLNL articles 1,158 1,296 1,237 1,162 1,097 LDRD articles 210 250 247 237 211 LDRD articles as percentage of total 18% 19% 20% 20% 19% SOURCE: FY2008 LLNL Laboratory Directed Research and Development Annual Report, available at https://ldrd.llnl.gov/pdfs/LLNL_08LDRD.pdf. 85