Nuclear operationsNNSA should consider more than one alternatives for lithium production: GAO

An isotope of lithium is a key component of nuclear weapons and is essential for their refurbishment. The National Nuclear Security Administration’s (NNSA) halted certain aspects of its lithium production operation — conducted at its Y-12 National Security Complex in Oak Ridge, Tennessee — in May 2013 due to the condition of the site’s 72-year old lithium production facility. Y-12 management concluded that usable lithium could run out without additional actions.

In response, NNSA developed a strategy which proposed a new lithium production facility by 2025 and identified “bridging” actions needed to meet demand through 2025. In January 2015, NNSA submitted for approval a mission need statement for lithium production capabilities.

Senate Report 113-176 instructed GAO to review lithium production at NNSA’s Y-12 site.

In its just-published report, the GAO notes that NNSA has identified various challenges in its lithium production strategy which may impact the agency’s ability to meet demand for lithium in the future, as well as actions which may mitigate these challenges.

The GAO says that these challenges pertain to three key areas.

• First, NNSA may not have a sufficient supply of lithium material for defense program requirements. NNSA officials told GAO in April 2015 that, due to additional recent increases in demand, its supply of currently qualified lithium — lithium approved for use in weapon systems in refurbishment — will run out by 2018 without additional actions.
• Second, at NNSA’s Y-12 National Security Complex in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, where lithium production operations are conducted, the existing lithium production facility and equipment are at risk of catastrophic failure. In March 2014, for example, a 300-pound slab of concrete fell from the ceiling into an active work area (this area is no longer in use).
• Third, fiscal constraints could cause delays in the construction of a new lithium production facility. NNSA, in its lithium production strategy, also identifies various actions that it could take to mitigate these challenges — including procuring lithium from outside sources and outsourcing certain aspects of the lithium production process. However, the mitigating actions are in early stages of development, and may bring additional challenges.

The GAO says that in developing and implementing its lithium production strategy, NNSA did not develop a mission need statement which is fully independent of a particular solution, contrary to the agency directive on Program and Project Management for the Acquisition of Capital Assets, which governs the design and construction of new facilities (DOE Order 413.3B). According to this directive, the mission need statement should be independent of a particular solution, and it should not be defined by the equipment, facility, technological solution, or physical end-item. This allows the program office responsible for the capital asset project to explore a variety of alternatives.

In January 2015, NNSA program officials submitted a mission need statement for lithium production for approval to the Deputy Administrator for Defense Programs, NNSA. It was approved on 10 June 2015. The mission need statement included, among other things, a description of the capability gap, alternatives for addressing its mission need — such as building a new facility, leasing off-site facilities, or outsourcing lithium processing — and estimated cost and schedule ranges.

The document, however, expresses the capability gap in terms of a particular solution — specifically, a new facility. For example, it includes multiple references to an alternative facility to replace the existing facility, suggesting that NNSA gave preference to building a new facility. In addition, it did not include cost and schedule estimates for six of the seven alternatives presented in the mission need document. The mission need statement includes cost and schedule estimates only for the alternative of building a functioning facility at Y-12.

NNSA officials told GAO that they plan to analyze other alternatives for meeting the mission need for lithium production. However, by seemingly giving preference to a particular solution in its mission need document, NNSA is not following DOE’s project management order, which may preclude serious consideration of other potential viable alternatives. A mission need statement biased toward a particular solution may introduce bias into the rest of the analysis of alternatives process.

GAO recommends that NNSA objectively consider all alternatives, without preference for a particular solution, as it proceeds with its analysis of alternatives process. GAO notes that NNSA neither agreed nor disagreed with GAO’s recommendation – but disagreed with the conclusions. GAO continues to believe its own conclusions are fair and well supported.

— Read more in NNSA Should Ensure Equal Consideration of Alternatives for Lithium Production, GAO-15-525 (GAO, July 2015)