PART I
Regarding your overall preference for UC to bid or not for continued management of the two nuclear weapons laboratories (Los Alamos, Lawrence Livermore), please read options A, B, and C below and then select the position that best represents your opinion. You will be given an opportunity to explain your choice in more detail in Part II.
| 1. Please choose one position from the three presented below. |
Number of Responses |
Response Ratio |
| A. I SUPPORT bidding by the University of California for the contracts to continue management of the two nuclear weapons laboratories. |
55 |
35% |
| B. I OPPOSE bidding by the University of California for the contracts to continue management of the nuclear weapons laboratories. |
86 |
55% |
| C. I DO NOT WISH TO TAKE A POSITION regarding whether the University of California should bid for the contracts to continue management of the nuclear weapons laboratories. |
15 |
10% |
|
Total |
156 |
100% |
PART II
What arguments influenced you in taking a position for or against bidding, or in not taking a position? Please select your answers from only one section, in correspondence with your answer in Part I.
| 2. Some of the reasons for opposing a bid are as follows. Please click all that influenced your opinion. |
Number of Responses |
Response Ratio |
| In today's globalized world, nuclear weapons threaten rather than increase our national security. As a public university, UC's mission is to promote collaborative win-win rather than competitive zero-sum security models. The Cold War mission of the nuclear weapons laboratories is fundamentally incompatible with the forwardlooking mission of the University of California. |
89 |
82% |
| The complexity of the management arrangements among UC, the federal government, and the laboratories are such that successful, relatively trouble-free management will always be unattainable. |
24 |
22% |
| Given the 60-year history of UC's management of the laboratories as a public service to the nation, UC should not be required to bid to maintain the management contracts. |
12 |
11% |
| Collaborations between UC faculty and students and the laboratories can occur without UC being the laboratories' manager. |
26 |
24% |
| Management of the laboratories requires inordinate attention from the Office of the President that should be directed toward management of the campuses. |
34 |
31% |
| The UC name and reputation are devalued by their association with the nuclear weapons laboratories. |
61 |
56% |
| Other |
14 |
13% |
| |
|
|
| 3. Some of the reasons for supporting a bid are as follows. Please click all that influenced your opinion. |
Number of Responses |
Response Ratio |
| Management of the nuclear weapons laboratories is an historic obligation of public service that UC should uphold. |
31 |
46% |
| Nuclear weapons are crucial for U.S. national security, and the condition of the U.S. nuclear stockpile requires the best scientific underpinning possible, which is a capability of UC management. |
26 |
38% |
| The benefits to the nation of the nonclassified research conducted at the laboratories are worthy of UC leadership. |
50 |
74% |
| The benefits to UC faculty and students in regard to opportunities for research collaboration are highly valuable. |
40 |
59% |
| Separation of laboratory personnel from the UC retirement system could weaken benefits to UC faculty. |
11 |
16% |
| The UC name enhances the laboratories' efforts to recruit the best scientists and other employees. |
26 |
38% |
| Other |
11 |
16% |
| |
|
|
| 4. Some of the reasons for not taking a position are as follows. Please click all that influenced your opinion. |
Number of Responses |
Response Ratio |
| I am not well enough informed to offer advice. |
12 |
50% |
| The decision to bid or not has no personal or professional impact on me. |
3 |
13% |
| I don't believe the Regents will respect the opinion of the UC lecturers. |
12 |
50% |
| I am not interested in these issues. |
0 |
0% |
| Other |
4 |
17% |
PART III
Separate bids will likely be required for Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories. The bid for Los Alamos will come first. In your opinion, UC should (select one):
| 5. |
Number of Responses |
Response Ratio |
| Submit no bid for either laboratory. |
87 |
58% |
| Submit bids to continue to manage both laboratories. |
52 |
34% |
| Submit a bid only for Los Alamos. |
2 |
1% |
| Submit a bid only for Lawrence Livermore. |
10 |
7% |
|
Total |
151 |
100% |
PART IV
Irrespective of the preference you indicated in Parts I, II and III, in the nine sections that follow please indicate your opinion regarding the conditions that should prevail if UC were to continue management of the two nuclear weapons laboratories.
| 6. In weighing criteria for judging the bids, and for subsequently judging how well the labs are managed, the Department of Energy should give highest priority to the quality of the science and technology at the laboratories. |
Number of Responses |
Response Ratio |
| Strongly Disagree |
5 |
3% |
| Somewhat Disagree |
5 |
3% |
| Don't Know / Unsure |
16 |
11% |
| Somewhat Agree |
34 |
24% |
| Strongly Agree |
84 |
58% |
|
Total |
144 |
100% |
| |
|
|
| 7. Responsibility for security, environmental health and safety, and business practices at the laboratories should be delegated to industry business partners. |
Number of Responses |
Response Ratio |
| Strongly Disagree |
63 |
41% |
| Somewhat Disagree |
30 |
20% |
| Don't Know / Unsure |
42 |
27% |
| Somewhat Agree |
14 |
9% |
| Strongly Agree |
4 |
3% |
|
Total |
153 |
100% |
| |
|
|
| 8. The Academic Senate should not have any role in UC oversight of management of the laboratories. |
Number of Responses |
Response Ratio |
| Strongly Disagree |
52 |
34% |
| Somewhat Disagree |
45 |
30% |
| Don't Know / Unsure |
30 |
20% |
| Somewhat Agree |
13 |
9% |
| Strongly Agree |
12 |
8% |
|
Total |
152 |
100% |
| |
|
|
| 9. UC faculty should provide input to the personnel process at the laboratories concerning appointments and critical advancements. |
Number of Responses |
Response Ratio |
| Strongly Disagree |
10 |
7% |
| Somewhat Disagree |
13 |
9% |
| Don't Know / Unsure |
35 |
23% |
| Somewhat Agree |
52 |
34% |
| Strongly Agree |
42 |
28% |
|
Total |
152 |
100% |
| |
|
|
| 10. Along with the longstanding responsibility of the Los Alamos National Laboratory to design nuclear weapons, the recent undertaking of manufacturing some nuclear weapons components is an appropriate activity. |
Number of Responses |
Response Ratio |
| Strongly Disagree |
93 |
61% |
| Somewhat Disagree |
20 |
13% |
| Don't Know / Unsure |
19 |
12% |
| Somewhat Agree |
19 |
12% |
| Strongly Agree |
2 |
1% |
|
Total |
153 |
100% |
| |
|
|
| 11. Funds available for the support of mutual UC-laboratory research collaborations should be increased significantly from the present status. |
Number of Responses |
Response Ratio |
| Strongly Disagree |
38 |
25% |
| Somewhat Disagree |
13 |
9% |
| Don't Know / Unsure |
61 |
41% |
| Somewhat Agree |
28 |
19% |
| Strongly Agree |
10 |
7% |
|
Total |
150 |
100% |
| |
|
|
| 12. UC should insist that free and open inquiries are permitted and whistleblowers protected in the nuclear weapons laboratories, even though much of the research there is classified and many of the research goals are mandated by the federal government. |
Number of Responses |
Response Ratio |
| Strongly Disagree |
2 |
1% |
| Somewhat Disagree |
6 |
4% |
| Don't Know / Unsure |
6 |
4% |
| Somewhat Agree |
33 |
22% |
| Strongly Agree |
105 |
69% |
|
Total |
152 |
100% |
| |
|
|
| 13. The appropriate role of the nuclear weapons laboratories is to implement policy that has been determined by Congress, whatever that policy may be, and UC should not seek a better position from where to influence more effectively national policies related to nuclear weapons and the work at the laboratories. |
Number of Responses |
Response Ratio |
| Strongly Disagree |
53 |
35% |
| Somewhat Disagree |
41 |
27% |
| Don't Know / Unsure |
30 |
20% |
| Somewhat Agree |
17 |
11% |
| Strongly Agree |
9 |
6% |
|
Total |
150 |
100% |
| |
|
|
| 14. UC management should continue to be offered as a matter of public service, on a "no-cost/no gain" basis (i.e., not for profit). |
Number of Responses |
Response Ratio |
| Strongly Disagree |
24 |
16% |
| Somewhat Disagree |
20 |
13% |
| Don't Know / Unsure |
36 |
24% |
| Somewhat Agree |
27 |
18% |
| Strongly Agree |
44 |
29% |
|
Total |
151 |
100% |
PART V
Please check all that apply (one choice per section).
| 15. Title |
Number of Responses |
Response Ratio |
| Lecturer |
96 |
62% |
| Other |
60 |
38% |
|
Total |
156 |
100% |
| |
|
|
| 16. Gender |
Number of Responses |
Response Ratio |
| Male |
71 |
46% |
| Female |
85 |
54% |
|
Total |
156 |
100% |
| |
|
|
| 17. Area of Academic Interest |
Number of Responses |
Response Ratio |
| Humanities/Arts |
63 |
40% |
| Social Sciences |
36 |
23% |
| Science/Engineering |
34 |
22% |
| Professional School |
9 |
6% |
| Other |
14 |
9% |
|
Total |
156 |
100% |
| |
|
|
| 18. Campus Location |
Number of Responses |
Response Ratio |
| UC Berkeley |
28 |
18% |
| UC Davis |
31 |
20% |
| UC Irvine |
17 |
11% |
| UC Los Angeles |
31 |
20% |
| UC Merced |
0 |
0% |
| UC Riverside |
10 |
6% |
| UC San Diego |
7 |
4% |
| UC San Francisco |
2 |
1% |
| UC Santa Barbara |
5 |
3% |
| UC Santa Cruz |
25 |
16% |
|
Total |
156 |
100% |