Recent Board Activity

Date Titlesort icon Author Type Download
3/28/2008 DOE Request that the Board Provide a Narrow Technical Review of the Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility Aqueous Processing Design with Respect to Whether the Intent of the Findings and Recommendations of DNFSB/TECH-33 have been Adequately Incorporated Thomas P. D'Agostino Letter application/pdf iconPDF
6/22/2011 DOE Request to Review Board's Investigative Record in Regard to Safety Culture Concerns at the Waste Treatment Plant, Hanford Site Daniel B. Poneman Letter application/pdf iconPDF
1/26/2011 DOE Requesting a 45-Day Extension to Submit the Annual Report on Nuclear Criticality Safety Donald L. Cook Letter application/pdf iconPDF
8/9/2004 DOE Requesting an Additional 90 Day Extension to Submit Report Regarding Conduct of Engineering and Implementation of DOE Order 420.1A, Facility Safety, at the Los Alamos National Laboratory Everet H. Beckner Letter application/pdf iconPDF
1/14/2011 DOE Requesting Extension to Respond to Recommendation 2010-1 Steven Chu Letter application/pdf iconPDF
5/18/1998 DOE Requests 15-Day Extension to Complete a DOE Report Requested by a Board Letter Dated March 20, 1998, on Assessment and Corrective Action Programs at Facilities Elizabeth Moler Letter application/pdf iconPDF
6/8/2011 DOE Requests 30 Day Extension on Two Deliverables for Recommendation 2009-2, Los Alamos National Laboratory Plutonium Facility Seismic Safety, Implementation Plan James J. McConnell Letter application/pdf iconPDF
12/9/1993 DOE Requests 45-Day Extension to Prepare the 93-5 Implementation Plan Hazel R. O'Leary Letter application/pdf iconPDF
6/5/1995 DOE Requests 45-Day Extension to Respond to Board Recommendation 94-5 Hazel R. O'Leary Letter application/pdf iconPDF
7/20/2011 DOE Requests 60-Day Extension to Complete Deliverable 5.2.3 of the DOE's Implementation Plan (IP) for Recommendation 2009-2, Los Alamos National Laboratory Plutonium Facility Seismic Safety James J. McConnell Letter application/pdf iconPDF
5/27/2011 DOE Requests a 30 Day Extension for Report and Briefing for Board Reporting Requirement Issued in May 5, 2011, Letter Inés R. Triay Letter application/pdf iconPDF
1/4/1993 DOE Requests a 45 Day Extension for Submittal of the 92-4 Implementation Plan James D. Watkins Letter application/pdf iconPDF
3/10/1999 DOE Requests a 45 Day Extension to Transmit the Recommendaiton 98-2 implementation Plan Bill Richardson Letter application/pdf iconPDF
4/18/1990 DOE Requests a 45-Day Extension for Responding to Board Recommendation 90-2 James D. Watkins Letter application/pdf iconPDF
5/18/1994 DOE Requests a 45-Day Extension for Submission of the 93-6 Implementation Plan Hazel R. O'Leary Letter application/pdf iconPDF
7/18/1994 DOE Requests a 45-Day Extension for the 94-1 Implementation Plan Hazel R. O'Leary Letter application/pdf iconPDF
3/13/1993 DOE Requests a 45-Day Extension to Provide a Response to Recommendation 93-1 Hazel R. O'Leary Letter application/pdf iconPDF
12/1/1995 DOE Requests a 45-Day Extension to Respond to Recommendation 95-2 Hazel R. O'Leary Letter application/pdf iconPDF
7/7/1999 DOE Requests a 60-Day Extension to Complete the Report on Plans and Schedule for Addressing Issues at the TA-18 Site, Los Alamos Victor H. Reis Letter application/pdf iconPDF
8/24/2005 DOE Requests a 60-day Extension to Submit a Report to the Board Regarding Fire Protection Issues at the LANL Thomas P. D'Agostino Letter application/pdf iconPDF
8/8/2003 DOE Requests an Additional 30 Days to Respond to Board Reporting Requirement Dated July 9, 2003 Regarding Assessments of Training Programs for National Nuclear Security Administration Site Personnel Everet H. Beckner Letter application/pdf iconPDF
10/28/1997 DOE Requests an Additional 45 Days to Complete the 97-2 Implementation Plan Federico Peña Letter application/pdf iconPDF
11/27/2012 DOE Requests an Additional 45 Days to Develop its Response to Recommendation 2012-2, Hanford Tank Farms Flammable Gas Safety Strategy Steven Chu Letter application/pdf iconPDF
1/31/2005 DOE Requests an Additional 45 Days to Respond to Board Recommendation 2004-2 Spencer Abraham Letter application/pdf iconPDF
7/11/1995 DOE Requests Deletion of Unnecessary Commitments 5.1 and 5.4 from 93-5 Implementation Plan Hazel R. O'Leary Letter application/pdf iconPDF
12/14/2001 DOE Requests Extension to Complete Report Relative to Board Letter Dated October 15, 2001 Regarding Integrated Safety Management System at Oak Ridge Milton D. Johnson Letter application/pdf iconPDF
8/11/1997 DOE Requires an Additional 45 Day Extension to Complete the 97-1 Implementation Plan Federico Peña Letter application/pdf iconPDF
7/31/2012 DOE Requires an Additional 60 Days beyond the Requested 60-Day Time Frame to Complete the DOE Response to Board June 11, 2012, Letter Regarding the Transuranic Waste Treatment Facility (TWF) Project at the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) Donald L. Cook Letter application/pdf iconPDF
12/6/2012 DOE Requires an Additional 60 Days for Further Review of Final Response to Board December 13, 2011, Letter which Issued a Reporting Requirement Concerning the Review of the Design, Functionality, and Maintenance of Safety Systems at LLNL James J. McConnell Letter application/pdf iconPDF
1/16/2013 DOE Requires an Extension beyond the January 31, 2013, Due Date to Meet the Annual Reporting Requirement for Closure of Recommendation 97-2 James J. McConnell Letter application/pdf iconPDF
12/19/2012 DOE Requires until January 31, 2013, to Respond to Board August 30, 2012, Letter which Issued a Reporting Requirement Concerning Safety Basis Deficiencies at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) James J. McConnell Letter application/pdf iconPDF
10/25/2004 DOE Requires up to an Additional 45 Days to Finalize and Transmit Implementation Plan for Board Recommendation 2004-1 Spencer Abraham Letter application/pdf iconPDF
1/26/2006 DOE Resolution of the DOE Document Type that Will be Used for the New Packaging and Storage Criteria Richard M. Stark Letter application/pdf iconPDF
11/21/1996 DOE Responding to a Board Staff Review of the Unreviewed Safety Question Program at Pantex Thomas P. Seitz Letter application/pdf iconPDF
9/6/2000 DOE Responding to Board Letter Dated August 18, 2000, on the Americum/Curium Vitrification Project at the Savannah River Site Carolyn L. Huntoon Letter application/pdf iconPDF
10/26/2000 DOE Responding to Board Letter Dated August 30, 2000, on the Preparations for the Resumption of the Enriched Uranium Reduction Process at the Y-12 Plant John A. Gordon Letter application/pdf iconPDF
12/6/2000 DOE Responding to Board Letter Dated December 5, 2000, in Relation to the Fuel Removal Operations from the K Basins in Hanford Keith A. Klein Letter application/pdf iconPDF
9/16/2002 DOE Responding to Board Letter Dated July 17, 2002, Regarding the Recommendations of the DOE Commission on Fire Safety and Preparedness Beverly A. Cook Letter application/pdf iconPDF
11/3/2000 DOE Responding to Board Letter Dated June 5, 2000, on the Chemical Safety Program and Various Chemical Safety Issues at the Y-12 Plant Madelyn R. Creedon Letter application/pdf iconPDF
6/25/2002 DOE Responding to Board Letter Dated March 19, 2002, Regarding Work Control and Integrated Safety Management Issues at Rocky Flats Jessie Hill Roberson Letter application/pdf iconPDF
5/3/2000 DOE Responding to Board Letter Dated March 2, 2000, Regarding the Quality of Authorization Bases at the Defense Nuclear Facilities T. J. Glauthier Letter application/pdf iconPDF
6/7/2002 DOE Responding to Board Letter Dated March 29, 2002, Regarding Independent Assessment of the Savannah River Performance Based Incentives for the High Level Waste Program Jessie Hill Roberson Letter application/pdf iconPDF
2/14/2002 DOE Responding to Board Letter Dated November 21, 2001, Regarding Revisions in the 2000-1 Implementation Plan David G. Huizenga Letter application/pdf iconPDF
1/23/2002 DOE Responding to Board Letter Dated November 26, 2001, Regarding Concerns in the Maintenance Program at the Y-12 National Security Complex David E. Beck Letter application/pdf iconPDF
1/23/2002 DOE Responding to Board Letter Dated November 5, 2001, Regarding Design Requirements Related to Emergency Operations Centers Francis S. Blake Letter application/pdf iconPDF
1/2/2002 DOE Responding to Board Letter Dated October 2, 2001, Regarding the Integrated Safety Management System of the CH2M Hill Hanford Group Jessie Hill Roberson Letter application/pdf iconPDF
11/26/2002 DOE Responding to Board Letter Dated October 3, 2002, Regarding Observations on Enriched Uranium Operations Wet Chemistry Resumption Activities at the Y-12 National Security Complex Everet H. Beckner Letter application/pdf iconPDF
11/3/2000 DOE Responding to Board Letter Dated September 20, 2000, Regarding the Closure to Support Safe and Reliable Operation of the Hanford Spent Nuclear Fuel Project Facilities Carolyn L. Huntoon Letter application/pdf iconPDF
10/1/2002 DOE Responding to Board Letter Dated September 9, 2002, Regarding Waste Feed Delivery Transfer System at the Hanford Site Jessie Hill Roberson Letter application/pdf iconPDF
1/3/2002 DOE Responding to Board Letter Regarding Justification for Continued Operations in relation to W88 Hazard Analysis Report Brigadier General Rona Haeckel, USAF Letter application/pdf iconPDF