In its recently released Stockpile Stewardship and Management Plan for  Fiscal Year 2011, NNSA stated that the SSP’s mission is dependent upon  the enterprise’s facilities and physical infrastructure and the critical skills  of its workforce. NNSA has three categories of facilities and infrastructure that indicate the  extent to which they are critical to the achievement of the SSP. For example, in the National Defense  Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 1997, Congress established the  Commission of Maintaining United States Nuclear Weapons Expertise  (referred to as the Chiles Commission). NNSA Lacks Comprehensive Data Required to Make Informed, Enterprisewide Decisions

We found that NNSA lacks complete data on (1) the condition and value of  its existing infrastructure, (2) cost estimates and completion dates for  planned capital improvement projects, (3) shared use facilities within the  enterprise, and (4) critical human capital skills in its M&O contractor  workforce needed to maintain the SSP. NNSA does not have accurate and  reliable data on the condition and replacement value of its facilities and  other infrastructure. This is in part because NNSA (1) has not ensured  that contractors comply with a DOE directive that requires facility  inspections at least once every 5 years, and (2) does not ensure  consistency among the varying approaches and methodologies contractors  use when determining replacement property value. While  DOE requires periodic condition assessments, in our analysis of data in  DOE’s agencywide infrastructure database, the Facilities Information  Management System (FIMS), we found 765 of DOE’s 2,897 weapons  activities facilities, or 26 percent, have not met this requirement—having  either an inspection date outside of the 5-year period or no inspection date  recorded (see table 1). NNSA  officials stated that they are aware of the limitations of FIMS data and  know that conditions change more rapidly than can be tracked by 5-year  assessments. As a result, NNSA officials told us the agency also uses a  variety of other methods to track site facility conditions, including budget  requests, regularly updated planning documents, and daily dialogue with  federal and contractor personnel at the sites. NNSA does not have estimated  total costs or completion dates for all planned capital improvement  projects. For example, an NNSA  official said that the project to upgrade the Radioactive Liquid Waste  Treatment facility at Los Alamos National Laboratory had an initial cost  estimate of $82 to $104 million, but site officials at Los Alamos reported to  NNSA a need to change the building materials used in the original design  estimate. NNSA has identified a need to effectively manage these assets  enterprisewide to ensure that programmatic priorities are addressed and  that users enterprisewide have well supported access to these facilities. However, we found that NNSA  does not have information on which facilities are designated as shared use  assets, and a NNSA official told us the agency has not reviewed individual  management plans throughout the enterprise to ensure that each facilities’  submission and review process for use of the facility provides for adequate  enterprisewide access. In October 2010,  however, NNSA established the Office of Corporate Talent and Critical  Skills to bring focused attention to meeting critical human capital skills  and announced that the agency hired a director to develop and implement  a critical skills sustainment strategy. NNSA Is Considering the Use of Computer Models That May Improve Its Enterprise Decision- Making Capability

NNSA, recognizing that its ability to make informed enterprisewide  decisions is hampered by the lack of comprehensive data and analytical  tools, is considering the use of computer models—quantitative tools that  couple data from each site with the functions of the enterprise—to  integrate and analyze data to create an interconnected view of the  enterprise, which may help to address some of the critical shortcomings  we identified. These include the lack of (1)  consistent, accurate, and complete data on the condition of its facilities;  (2) assurance that contractors are in compliance with a DOE directive  (DOE Order 430.1B) requiring facility inspections to ensure that sites’  varying approaches in determining deferred maintenance and real  property values are valid and consistent; (3) information on shared use  assets—although a NNSA directive (NNSA Supplemental Directive M  452.3) identifies the need for the federal and contractor officials to identify  and ensure proper governance of these assets; and (4) comprehensive data  on its M&O contractors’ workforce—to include identification of critical  human capital skills, competencies, and staffing levels—as well as a plan  with time frames and milestones for collecting this data. Appendix I: Scope and Methodology

In conducting our work, we reviewed National Nuclear Security  Administration (NNSA) documents and directives, including the 2010  Nuclear Posture Review and the FY 2011 Stockpile Stewardship and  Management Plan; met with Department of Energy (DOE), NNSA, and  contractor officials; assessed the reliability of the data provided; and  visited four of the eight enterprise sites.
Why GAO Did This Study

The United States intends to invest about $80 billion to maintain and modernize its nuclear weapons capabilities and infrastructure over the next decade. The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), a semi-autonomous agency within the Department of Energy (DOE), maintains the nation's nuclear weapons through its Stockpile Stewardship Program (SSP). NNSA uses contractors to manage and operate eight separate sites, referred to as the nuclear security enterprise, to achieve the SSP's mission. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 directed GAO to review the SSP. This report focuses on the extent to which NNSA has the data necessary to make informed, enterprisewide decisions, particularly data on the condition of infrastructure, capital improvement projects, shared use of facilities, and critical human capital skills. GAO analyzed agency infrastructure data; reviewed agency directives and guidance; and interviewed DOE, NNSA, and contractor officials.

What GAO Found

In its FY 2011 Stockpile Stewardship and Management Plan, NNSA outlines plans for substantial investments in important nuclear weapons capabilities and physical infrastructure. However, the agency lacks important enterprisewide infrastructure and workforce data needed for informed decision-making. In response to this shortcoming, which NNSA recognizes, the agency is considering the use of computer models that integrate data from across the enterprise, which, if fully realized, may give decision-makers a tool to take a broad and accurate assessment of the situation. Specifically, (1) NNSA does not have accurate, reliable, or complete data on the condition and replacement value of its almost 3,000 weapons activities facilities. This is, in part, because NNSA has not ensured contractor compliance with a DOE directive that requires facility inspections at least once every 5 years. For example, according to data in DOE's Facilities Information Management System (FIMS), as of April 2010, 26 percent of facilities have either an inspection date outside of the 5-year period or no inspection date recorded. NNSA officials stated that they are aware of the limitations of FIMS data and told us that they use a variety of other methods to track site facility conditions, such as budget requests and daily dialogue with federal and contractor personnel at the sites. (2) NNSA has identified 15 ongoing capital improvement projects as necessary to ensure future viability of the program, but the agency does not have estimated total costs or completion dates for all projects. For example, NNSA has not estimated total costs for the largest projects it is conducting--the Chemical and Metallurgy Research Replacement Facility at Los Alamos National Laboratory in Los Alamos, New Mexico, and the Uranium Processing Facility at the Y-12 Plant in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. DOE regulations do not require a total cost estimate until the initial design phase is complete, but without reliable cost and schedule data NNSA does not have a sound basis to justify decisions and planned budget increases. (3) NNSA has identified a need to effectively manage facilities used by more than one site--known as shared use assets--and issued a directive in 2009 requiring identification of these assets and a review of the governance plan developed for each designated facility to ensure that the plans align with programmatic priorities and that users enterprisewide have well supported access to these facilities. However, NNSA has not collected data on shared use assets and has not reviewed individual management plans. (4) NNSA lacks comprehensive data on the critical skills and levels needed to maintain the SSP's capabilities. NNSA primarily relies on its contractors to maintain the workforce and, while these efforts may be effective for a specific site, NNSA lacks assurance that the overall program is maintained. Without such data, NNSA cannot forecast the impact of programmatic actions or identify consequences of those actions. NNSA officials told GAO that the agency recently established an Office of Corporate Talent and Critical Skills to bring attention to these issues.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that NNSA take four actions to ensure that it is equipped with the information needed to effectively and efficiently manage the SSP. NNSA stated that it understood and can implement GAO's recommendations.