ALBUQUERQUE — An Inspector General's Office report raised questions about the effectiveness of Sandia National Laboratories' quality management for nuclear weapons components after a project to design a part for the W76 nuclear warhead.

A summary report, released Friday, said the Department of Energy's Office of Inspector General began a probe after an anonymous letter alleged problems with a program to make components for W76 warheads designed to be fired by Trident ballistic missiles aboard submarines.

Sandia began a project in the 1990s to design a replacement neutron generator for the W76. One of the lab's primary missions is to ensure the reliability of the nation's nuclear arsenal in the absence of nuclear testing.

The Inspector General said Sandia bid the production contracts for components in April 2001 after disagreements over costs between the lab and an existing supplier.

That shifted production from a supplier that had successfully produced the components to one that had no experience making such parts — despite the fact that little of the work was left, the summary said. The change substantially added to costs, it said.

The inspection also found problems in executing policies and procedures in procurement, contract management and quality assurance.

"Taken together, these issues raised questions about the overall effectiveness of Sandia's quality management system for nuclear weapon products," the inspector general said.

Sandia, in a statement released Friday, said its acquisition strategy is designed to provide fairness and competition in choosing suppliers while supporting the National Nuclear Security Administration's needs.

"We believe that the evaluation was fair and resulted in the selection of the best technically qualified and best value supplier," the statement said. "We have addressed issues from the report from both a procurement process and quality perspective. Several actions have been implemented in the spirit of overall continuous improvement, including clearer guidance in procurement procedures and an improved process to provide better quality assurance for the nuclear weapon program."

The report said once the inspection began, a Sandia official, whom it did not identify, raised concerns over the effectiveness of the lab's quality management system for designing and procuring nuclear weapon products. The official initiated actions to address those issues.

In addition, the Department of Energy's site office evaluated Sandia's performance for fiscal year 2007 and identified improvements that would allow the lab to determine and correct quality issues.

The summary criticized the lab for not following procedures in reviewing technical and quality requirements and price "reasonableness" in awarding the supplier contract.

It also said for one component, Sandia eliminated a required pilot production phase intended to identify any problems, and during production of that component, the lab did not follow requirements for maintaining the independence of quality engineers. The report also said the lab did not follow policies over product acceptance.

The DOE released the summary, but said the report has not been published because it's considered for official use only.