[DOE LETTERHEAD]
National
Nuclear Security Administration
July 13, 2004
The Honorable John T. Conway
Chairman
Defense Nuclear Facilities
Safety Board
625 Indiana Avenue NW, Suite 700
Washington, D.C. 20004
Dear Mr. Chairman:
I am responding for Secretary
Abraham to your letter of May 14, 2004, regarding the Facility Representative
Program in the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA).
I continue to value the Facility Representative Program and
consider it essential to our efforts to ensure the safe operation of our
facilities.
I have thoroughly reviewed your
letter and agree that action needs to be taken to make this good program
stronger. The issues noted in your
letter exist in varying degree at most NNSA sites. Accordingly, we will take steps to improve
activity-specific hazard training for Facility Representatives and to conduct
more rigorous staffing analyses to ensure that our staffing of Facility
Representatives is sufficient.
NNSA Headquarters is developing
corporate guidance for the identification and conduct of activity-specific
hazard training and will promulgate this guidance to our field sites. The objective of the guidance is to ensure
that Facility Representatives are aware of and properly trained on significant
new hazards or activities they may encounter during the performance of their
oversight duties. An initial
version of the guidance has been shared with your staff. Based on this guidance, sites will develop
formal requirements to accomplish activity-specific hazard training. The sites are expected to complete this action
by November 2004.
With regard to Facility
Representative staffing levels, we will develop a more rigorous staffing
analysis methodology that is based on DOE-STD-1063-2000, Facility Representatives,
and also
incorporates improvements suggested in your letter and discussed at the May
2004 Federal Technical Capability Panel meeting. Improvements include: (1) providing staffing analysis guidance for
nuclear facilities that are below hazard category 3 as well as hazardous
non-nuclear facilities, and (2) adding a workload analysis step to ensure that
the number of Facility Representatives is sufficient given the duties and
responsibilities assigned to them. An
initial version of the improved staffing analysis methodology has been shared
with your staff. Once the staffing
methodology is finalized, sites will perform an analysis using this methodology.
I anticipate completing this action by
October 2004. Additionally, 1 expect to
use this improved staffing analysis methodology to provide Facility
Representatives recommended staffing levels for the NNSA Staffing Summit,
currently expected to occur in the October 2004 timeframe.
I have asked Mr. Emil Morrow,
NNSA Federal Technical Capability Agent and Mr. John Evans, DOE Facility
Representative Program Manager, to assess the results of the two efforts
outlined above for consistent and uniform application at NNSA
sites. Based on the results of their assessment, I
will direct any further actions, if required. I expect this action will be completed within
two months of the sites completing their actions.
One area that accounts for
Facility Representative shortages is attrition. NNSA historically averages
approximately 15% attrition per year. I
have tasked Mr. James Mangeno, my Senior ES&H Advisor, to develop and
implement plans for a corporate pipeline for Facility Representatives. This action should be complete by the end of
the year.
We appreciate the continued
interaction of the Board and its staff regarding the Facility Representative
Program. Please contact me should you
have any questions on this subject, or have your staff contact Mr. Emil Morrow
at 202/586-5530.
Sincerely,
Linton F. Brooks
Administrator