NNSA INFRASTRUCTURE MANAGEMENT IMPROVEMENTS

FIMS/REAL ESTATE ANNUAL COMPREHENSIVE TRAININGJefferson Underwood

Office Director, NA-521 Infrastructure Planning and AnalysisOffice of Safety, Infrastructure & Operations

ENABLING MULTIPLE PROGRAMS

3

NNSA Infrastructure

RECENT EXAMPLE SUCCESSES

44

Building 9744 at Y-12

In FY2014 ...

•Razed building 9744 at Y-12

•Completed move to new National Security Campus in Kansas City

•Enclosed Y-12 Post 8 Pedestrian Checkpoint

•Completed the Nuclear Facility Risk Reduction Project at Y-12

•High Explosive Pressing facility completed $30M under budget at the Pantex Plant

•Completed ten recapitalization projects for Sandia Silicon Fabrication Refurbishment (SSiFR)

National Security Campus

High Explosive Pressing Facility

CHALLENGES

Facilities and systems are well beyond end-of-life• More than 50% of facilities are 40 years old, nearly 30% are Manhattan

project era, and 12% are excess to program needs• Block obsolescence limits maintenance and repair abilities

Failures are increasing in frequency, severity, and unpredictability FY 2014 Examples:

• Concrete ceilings fell in Y-12 building 9204-2 in March 2014 and building 9215 in July 2014

• Multiple fire suppression leaks at Pantex closed one cell and one bay and a major fire suppression leak at Nevada shut down operations at the Device Assembly Facility for 10 days

• Three HVAC failures at LLNL resulted in program delays in optics, machining and inspections

• Three utility poles failed at Y-12 and many more are near failure• Excess facilities are vulnerable, e.g., Alpha 5 at Y-12 had a window fall several

stories to the street, electrical panels are fire hazards

Maintain operational support for growing program requirements

INFRASTRUCTURE RISK BECOMESSAFETY & PROGRAM RISK

5

NEW TOOLS

New data-driven, risk-informed tools

•Enterprise Risk Management (ERM)

•Mission Dependency Index (MDI)

•DOE National Laboratory Operations Board (LOB) infrastructure assessments

•BUILDER

•Recapitalization Project Prioritization

•G2: Program Management

6

Mission Dependency Index

DO

E In

frastru

cture

Asse

ssme

nt

BU

ILD

ER

MISSION DEPENDENCY INDEX

7

• Mission Dependency Index (MDI) is the “Consequence to Mission” metric for ERM

• Developed by a partnership between the Navy, Coast Guard, and NASA

• MDI measures an asset’s importance by considering : 1) how difficult it would be to replace, 2) how much its loss would impact a core capability (e.g., Uranium), and 3) how the effect of loss would cascade to operation of other assets

• Assets are scored on a scale from 1 to 100

• The impact on capabilities is favored over the difficulty to replace (60/40)

• Status: NNSA has completed MDI scoring for 84% of our ~6,400 assets

MDI: Y-12 SAMPLE

8

Property Id Prop Name Mission Essential MDI Reasoning

9212 Production Mission Critical 100 Relocation of 9212 would be impossible to due to available, existing square footage inside PA planned replacement is current line item for UPF. Relocation outside of PA would not be considered.

Y700284 ELECT DIST

Electricial Distribution

Mission Dependent

100 Site wide asset. Entire site is dependent on the asset. Failure would result in immediate consequences. Alternate capability not available.

9204-02E Production Mission Critical 99.47 Red team recommendation to increase through put and demand on 9204-02 makes this a one of a kind asset for the NNSA. Security requirements and available square footage make relocation of this capability impossible over a 5 year period.

Y700272 STEAM DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM

Mission Dependent

87.16 Site wide asset. Assets across the site would have impacted operations if the asset failed. Failure would result in immediate consequences. Alternate capability not available.

9995 Plant Laboratory Mission Critical 83.15 Plant lab. Possible alternate labs available

9720-05 Warehouse Mission Critical 68.8 Storage warehouse. Capability not readily replaceable without significant modifications and changes to hardening.

Y700270 POTABLE WATER DISTRIBUTION

Mission Dependent

67.91 Alternate means of delivery could be temporarily available with funding/resources, but not long term.

9767-04 Chiller Building Mission Dependent

53.13 Chiller building for 9204-2 & 9204-2E (humidity control, lab, process cooling, hazardous chemical operations); 9204-2E (offices, metrology lab, machine shop, inspection areas, assembly); 9998 (H2 inspection). Alternate capability not available without significant cost and impact.

9114 Office Building Mission Dependent

29 Offices and SCIF. Offices can easily be relocated. Other features would be more difficult and require additional funding and suitable location.

9720-31 RCRA Waste Storage Warehouse

Mission Dependent

18.12 9720-31 is used to store hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). This facility also store mixed waste (RCRA and low-level radioactive), wastes governed under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), mixed TSCA wastes, and low-level radioactive wastes. Alternate locations could be available with significant modifications to facility approvals and authorization.

9720-20 Maint. Shops & Offices

Not Mission Critical Mission Dependent

3.21 Development Maintenance shops and offices. Easily replaceable with other alternatives.

DOE INFRASTRUCTURE ASSESSMENTS

• Inform the “Facility Condition” metric for ERM

• Formed in 2013, the LOB identified the need to revitalize general purpose infrastructure as a high priority

• Created a DOE-wide methodology for rating the condition of assets to meet the mission

• Adequate• Substandard• Inadequate

• Mission Unique Facilities are just now being assessed as the LOB focus was general purpose infrastructure

9

Asset Condition Definitions

Adequate: Fully capable of performing its current mission with only minor deficiencies that can be corrected within normal operating budgets

Substandard: Deficiencies limit performance of the mission and refurbishment is required to return the asset to adequate condition

Inadequate: Major deficiencies that significantly impair performance of the mission; major refurbishment is required.

NNSA Asset Condition Ratings by Percentage of RPV

EXAMPLE OF ERM APPLICATION: Y-12

10

• Many large, high-value, mission-critical facilities have not yet been evaluated with the DOE LOB Infrastructure assessment methodology and are not yet rated (i.e., BETA-2E, BETA-2, Plant LAB, 9215, 9212).

• The dot circled represents the Y12 electrical distribution system, which has an MDI of 100.

• All of Y12 would go down if this facility was permanently lost.

• It is rated as inadequate. The FCI score is 0.099 and the ACI score is 0.901

BUILDER

• Will replace the LOB Assessments as the metric for “Facility Condition” in ERM, providing a greater degree of detail than the currently available with the LOB data

• Knowledge Based Condition Assessment software developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and recommended by the National Academy of Sciences

• Compares inspection data against known failure curves to predict system wear and identify the optimal time to make critical investments

11

Phase I

Phase II

Phase IV

Program Framework and IOC(Oct 2014–Mar 2015)

Existing MEL Data Migration and Complete Inventory Population (Apr 2015–Sep 2015)

OSF Data and Condition Assessments(Aug 2016–May 2017)

Functionality Module and Assessments (Feb 2017–Dec 2017)

Existing Condition Data Migration/Ratings (III-a) and Cost Book Validation (III-b) (Oct 2015–Jul 2016)

Full Implementation and Sustainment (Jan 2018–Mar 2018)

Phase VI

III-bPhase III-a

Phase VPhase V- Early Start (LLNL)

Phase IV- Early Start (Y-12)

BUILDER- KEY Modules•Inventory•Condition•Functionality

FY 2016 FY 2018FY 2017Mid-Year FY 2015 Mid-Year FY 2018

FY 2015

RECAP PROJECT PRIORITIZATION

12

• NNSA is using Risk Reduction Methodology to guide investment decisions starting with FY2017 budget formulation

• Recap projects are prioritized based on four factors: Safety, Program, Sustainability, and Return on Investment.

• Each factor has its own score:• Safety risk reduction • Program risk reduction, increased program capabilities, increased productivity• Reduction in resource consumption• Savings in O&M and energy costs

• The goal is to focus recapitalization investments on project which lower risks to the nuclear security enterprise

RISK REDUCTION: METHODOLOGY

13

• Risk Reduction = Risk Before Project Execution – Risk After Project Execution

• Risk Reduction Example = (15+20+15+6+4) – (5+8+9+6+2) = 30

RISK REDUCTION: SAFETY

14

RISK REDUCTION: PROGRAM

15

G2: PROGRAM MANAGEMENT

16

• Award winning program management system

• Deployed for infrastructure in FY2015

• Standardized and automated processes for scope, cost, and schedule management

• M&O Partners manage at project level; NNSA senior management have a transparent, common picture of allocation and execution

• Objectively and consistently tracks and forecasts performance against baselines

• Project cost and schedule reports are generated monthly; ad-hoc reporting can be generated as needed

• Mapping Module allows advanced analysis of geospatial information and consolidated data exports

MANHATTAN PROJECT NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

LANL, 17 NNSA buildings•Status:

– 2 of 17 buildings are operational– Daily public access not currently allowed– Restoration work required

•Plans:– Complete condition assessments in 2015– Provide virtualization tours in 2015– Conduct bus tours or allow windshield

tours in the future

Rev 1 17

• Authorized in the 2015 National Defense Authorization Act• Enhance public access and improve public understanding of the

Manhattan project and its legacy

Y-12, 1 NNSA building•Status:

– Building is operational– Public tours are regularly conducted– Limited cleanup and minor restoration has

occurred in support of tours

•Plans:– Include building in the Park and relocate

current operations– Explore regularly scheduled access for Park

Gun Site

High Explosives Magazine

Pilot Plant

SUMMARY

18

• Failures are increasing in frequency and severity

• Infrastructure risk becomes safety and program risk

• NNSA is using a multi-pronged strategy of enterprise infrastructure management, program management improvements, and accelerated recapitalization efforts to manage risk