Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the National Labs topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
UC reports strong FY2025 performance ratings, extra earned fee for national labs
Summary
UC staff told regents that Lawrence Berkeley, Lawrence Livermore and Los Alamos national laboratories received high FY2025 performance ratings from DOE/NNSA, that key infrastructure projects remain priorities, and that additional earned fee (about $28.4 million) will be considered in a spend plan.
University officials reported to the National Laboratories Committee on Jan. 7 that the three UC‑affiliated national laboratories received strong federal performance ratings for fiscal 2025 and that the system earned additional fee income tied to that performance.
June Yoo, vice president for National Labs, said Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory received high marks from DOE Office of Science and an overall mission accomplishment rating; the Advanced Light Source upgrade remains a high priority for delivery. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory earned an "excellent" rating with a record fusion yield at the National Ignition Facility and successful transition of the El Capitan supercomputer to production. Los Alamos received a "very good" overall rating with strengths in global nuclear‑security missions but ongoing capital project management challenges.
Yoo reported the system had conservatively budgeted for $30 million in earned fee at Livermore and Los Alamos but actually earned about $38.4 million, a favorable variance that will be included in an annual spend plan returned for committee and board approval. Committee members questioned the linkage between numerical ratings and fee calculations; Yoo explained the performance management evaluation plans and formulas that determine fee percentages.
Committee discussion highlighted materials control and accountability processes at Livermore, capital project oversight at Los Alamos and the need to direct earned funds through the established regional spend‑plan process. No formal votes on allocations were recorded in open session; the committee will review a proposed spend plan before authorizing disbursement.
