As discussed  previously, lithium is a key component of nuclear weapons and is  therefore essential for the refurbishment of the nuclear weapons  stockpile. NNSA Has Identified Various Challenges in Its Lithium Production Strategy

NNSA has identified various challenges in its lithium production strategy  that may impact its ability to meet demand for lithium through and beyond  2025. NNSA has also identified actions that may mitigate these  challenges. NNSA Has Identified Challenges in Three Key Areas

The challenges pertain to three key areas: (1) insufficient supply of  qualified lithium material, (2) catastrophic failure of buildings or  equipment, and (3) potential delays in the availability of the proposed new  lithium production facility (Lithium Production Capability facility). NNSA’s supply of currently  qualified lithium—lithium approved for use in weapon systems in  refurbishment—will run out by 2020, according to the lithium production  strategy. In April 2015, NNSA officials told us that due to additional recent  increases in demand, with no additional action to increase supply, this  date has moved to 2018. According to NNSA officials, with no additional action to increase supply,  Y-12 may run out of qualified lithium by 2018. In March 2014, for example, a 300-pound  slab of concrete fell from the ceiling into an active work area—an area  that has since been roped off and is no longer in use (see fig. Procure lithium from outside sources. The mitigating actions identified in the lithium production strategy are in  early stages of development, and may bring additional challenges. NNSA’s Mission Need Statement for a Lithium Production Capability Is Not Fully Independent of a Particular Solution

NNSA did not develop a mission need statement for lithium production  that is fully independent of a particular solution, contrary to the direction of  DOE Order 413.3B. In January 2015, NNSA program officials submitted a  statement of mission need, or CD-0, for lithium production for approval to  the Deputy Administrator for Defense Programs, NNSA. This statement  was approved on June 10, 2015. According to the order and related guidance, this approach allows a  program office the flexibility to explore a variety of solutions. The Lithium Production Capability mission need statement is a 24-page  document that includes, among other things, a description of the  capability gap, alternatives for addressing its mission need, and a section  for estimated cost and schedule ranges. The mission need statement  details this gap in terms of functional and operational gaps, including (1)  the continued physical deterioration of the building where lithium  operations are being conducted and the resulting shortage of  components; (2) the continuous deterioration of mechanical and electrical  systems in the existing facility (building 9204-2), with increasing  unsustainable energy costs and greenhouse gas emissions, which will  affect controlled work environments, ongoing operations, and delivery of  mission work; (3) the inability to introduce new technologies into the  facility due to its degraded condition; and (4) the facility’s noncompliance  with current codes. NNSA’s mission need statement lists seven alternatives for addressing its  mission need: do nothing, outsource the lithium processing capability, refurbish/repurpose one or more of the existing Y-12 facilities,  lease off-site suitable facilities,  secure third-party financing to build one or more new facilities,  consider new modular facilities to transfer missions from existing  facility or facilities that are beyond repair, and build a complete and functioning facility at Y-12. According to DOE Order 413.3B, the mission need should be  independent of a particular solution, and should not be defined by the  equipment, facility, technological solution, or physical end-item. NNSA officials noted that  they plan to analyze other alternatives for meeting the mission as part of  CD-1. Giving preference to a particular solution may exclude serious  consideration of other potential viable alternatives. Recommendation for Executive Action

To improve NNSA’s ability to choose the best alternative that satisfies the  mission need for lithium production, we recommend that the Secretary of  Energy request that NNSA’s Deputy Administrator for Defense Programs  take steps to ensure that NNSA objectively consider all alternatives,  without preference for a particular solution, as it proceeds with the  analysis of alternatives process. In its comments, NNSA neither agreed nor disagreed with  our recommendation. We did not conclude  that NNSA would not conduct an analysis of alternatives, but that its  mission need statement for lithium production was not fully independent  of a particular solution, and that demonstrating preference for one  alternative—a replacement facility for lithium production—may affect the  rest of NNSA’s analysis of alternatives process and could potentially  undermine NNSA’s ability to choose the best alternative that satisfies the  mission need. Such a focus may introduce a bias into the analysis  alternatives process. Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

To describe the challenges the National Nuclear Security Administration  (NNSA) has identified with its lithium production strategy, we reviewed  NNSA and Y-12 National Security Complex documents related to lithium  production and lithium requirements. To determine the extent to which NNSA developed an independent  mission need statement for lithium production independent of a particular  solution, in accordance with DOE direction and guidance, we identified  the requirements and guidance by reviewing DOE Order 413.3B  (“Program and Project Management for the Acquisition of Capital Assets”)  and DOE G 413.3-17 (“Mission Need Statement Guide”).
Why GAO Did This Study

An isotope of lithium is a key component of nuclear weapons and is essential for their refurbishment. NNSA halted certain aspects of its lithium production operation—conducted at its Y-12 site—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 that 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 included a provision for GAO to review lithium production at NNSA's Y-12 site. This report (1) describes the challenges NNSA has identified with its lithium production strategy, and (2) determines the extent to which NNSA developed a mission need statement that is independent of a particular solution, as called for in DOE's directive on project management.
To do this work, GAO reviewed relevant agency directives, guidance, and other documents and interviewed agency officials.

What GAO Found

The National Nuclear Security Administration's (NNSA) has identified various challenges in its lithium production strategy that may impact its ability to meet demand for lithium in the future, as well as actions that may mitigate these challenges. 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.
In developing and implementing its lithium production strategy, NNSA did not develop a mission need statement that 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 June 10, 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. However, the document 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.

What GAO Recommends

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