"In addition, the board discussed the status of a $36.6 million fine levied against the Department of Energy and Los Alamos National Security, LLC, or LANS, by the New Mexico Environment Department after a canister of waste related to Los Alamos National Laboratory released detectable radiation in February 2014.
LANS, which was formed in part by the university, has operated the Los Alamos lab since 2006. The existence, however, of LANS — a limited liability company — is “designed to protect (the university) against these kinds of things,” according to Regent Norman Pattiz."
http://www.dailycal.org/2015/03/19/napolitano-apologizes-regents-vote-to-exempt-veterans-from-nonresident-tuition-at-thursday-meeting/
Comments
"...The contractors that run Los Alamos and Livermore currently earn about 3 percent of the lab’s budget in fee, while most Office of Science labs—and Sandia National Laboratories contractor Lockheed Martin—make around 1 percent. Held said he expected Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz to ask the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board to take up the lab management issue. “I think people are in good faith thinking, if we’re going to ask for fee reductions they’re probably going to ask for something related to unallowable costs or risks or liability,” Held said..."
"Piercing the veil is a long-standing equitable remedy that can allow a claimant against a corporation to also assert the claim against a shareholder, under limited circumstances that usually involve some degree of wrongdoing or abuse of the corporate form.
The court should examine 12 factors in light of all the circumstances to determine if veil piercing is justified:
(1) common ownership,
(2) pervasive control,
(3) confused intermingling of business assets,
(4) thin capitalization,
(5) nonobservance of corporate formalities,
(6) absence of corporate or LLC records,
(7) no payment of dividends or distributions,
(8) insolvency at the time of the litigated transaction,
(9) siphoning away of corporation’s funds by dominant shareholder or member,
(10) nonfunctioning of managers, or officers and directors,
(11) use of the corporation or LLC for transactions of the dominant shareholders or members, and
(12) use of the corporation or LLC in promoting fraud."
LLC Law Monitor
Someone in the government needs to do a thorough background investigation of NNSA lab management contracts and especially of both Tom D'Agostino (former head of NNSA) and Tyler Pryzbylek (former top legal exec with NNSA).
These two guys helped set up this scam and were the only people given power to vote on who would win these lucrative NNSA contracts.
March 21, 2015 at 9:21 PM
And you are one?
March 22, 2015 at 7:44 AM
No, but I don't make pronouncements as if I were, which only serve to make you look ignorant.
BTW, Scooby seems to have dropped the ball, allowing such obvious double entendres as "veil piercing."
UC will not be protected any more or less than the other LANS LLC corporate members, or the linked liability of the LANS near genetic twin brother LLNS, if gross negligence is demonstrated in court unless asymmetrical liability was written in the contract for UC.
I don't recall seeing any reference to "gross negligence" in the NNSA/LLC contract language.
March 23, 2015 at 2:34 PM
Looks like Charlie's got his law team on the case!
More importantly, will lab employees attempt to review and contribute to the terms of the new LLC's contract early while still fluid, long before it is finalized, or just wait for the HR contract highlights presentation? If lab employees become disinterested in the LLC contract process, expect the formation of a LANSLLNS 2.0 or worse.
Prime contract (pdf) link on the upper right of the page.