[DOE LETTERHEAD]

[DOE LETTERHEAD]

National Nuclear Security Administration

February 3, 2004<= /o:p>

The Honorable John T. Conway

Chairman

Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Boar= d

625 Indiana Avenue, = N.W. Suite 700

Washington, D.C. 20004

Dear Mr. Chairman:

Commitment 4.6 of the Department’= ;s Implementation Plan (IP) for Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (Board) Recommendation 2002-3 is to review field implementation of existing critical administrative controls to ensure they are developed, implemented, and maintained in accordance with the Department of Energy (DOE) expectations. = The enclosed schedules for reviews = at all the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) sites except Los Alamos= National Laboratory (LANL) are provided as deliverable 4.6.1 of the Implementation P= lan. If we cannot provide the LANL schedule to you by February 27, 2004, we will advise you of the timeline for its submission= . The complete site submissions, incl= uding the supporting data sheets where available have been provided to the Board’s staff.

The Pantex Site Office is coordinating= its 2002-3 reviews with the implementation of its site-wide safety analysis rep= ort. We believe this approach will produce a fully implemented, rule compliant safety basis sooner than the alternative of delaying the site-wide effort to allow shifting of resources= to conduct the 2002-3 reviews by an earlier date. This coordinated review approach wi= ll result in a delay in Pantex information for the final report of June 2005 a= s described in deliverable 4.6.2. Pantex = Site Office personnel are keeping the Board’s site representative at Pantex informed of progress in completing the review.

Some NNSA sites have already completed reviews of implementation of administrative controls. The new draft DOE standard on spec= ific administrative controls, which is undergoing DOE-wide review, may contain additional guidance on specific administrative controls. NNSA sites plan to review their sch= edules after the new standard is approved and make appropriate adjustments. It is anticipated that some sites m= ay have to conduct follow-up reviews based on new guidance in the standard. If the standard is not approved in a timely manner, or if the standard creates significant new requirements, the reviews at some sites are expected to take longer than the time allowed in = the Department’s IP for this recommendation. Site Managers have change control a= uthority over all portions of the data packages and schedules, subject to the extern= al constraints of satisfying the timelines and guidance of my November 25, 2003, direction (enclosed).

If you have any questions about this submission or about our path forward on this or other NNSA obligations under the IP, please contact me or have your staff contact Jeff Underwood at (301) 903-8303.

Sincerely,

Everet H. Beckner

Deputy Administrator=

for Defense Programs

Enclosures

Note:= Please call Jeff Underwood to secure a copy of the enclosure.

cc w/enclosures:

M. Whitaker, DR-1

~~Documents transmittal herewith<= /o:p>~~

~~Contains OFFICIAL USE ONLY (OUO)~~

When separated from enclosure

No longer contains OUO

=