|
|
| Processing a Directive (New, Revised or Page Change) |
- A justification memorandum is required for all proposed new, revised or page change to Policies, Notices, Orders, and Manuals (download sample justification memorandum for non-NNSA elements in Word format) (download sample justification memorandum for NNSA elements).
- The justification memorandum for all proposed new directives and directives listed in Attachment 2 of DOE O 410.1, Central Technical Authority Responsibilities Regarding Nuclear Safety Requirements, dated 8-28-07, must be concurred on by the Central Technical Authorities (CTAs) or their designees. For DOE, contact Bud Danielson at 301-903-2954. For NNSA, contact Don Nichols at 202-586-8216.
- After receiving concurrence from the CTAs, submit the justification memorandum to the Office of Management (MA-1) through the Office of Information Resources (MA-90).
- MA-90 will disseminate the justification memorandum to the Advisory Group (representatives from the three Under Secretaries and the General Counsel) for review to determine if there are any issues of concern.
- The issues will be resolved prior to submitting the justification memorandum to MA-1.
- The OPI will be notified of which Track option (see below) as chosen by MA-1.
- The MA-90 analyst must be involved in the development of directive.
- Once the draft directive has been developed and is ready for coordination, please submit an electronic copy via email to the MA-90 analyst, and include your Secretarial Officer (SO) or designee on the cc: list.
- For all directives affecting health and safety at defense nuclear facilities, the OPI must coordinate with the Departmental Representative to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB). The Departmental Representative working with the OPI, will ensure the DNFSB has been provided an opportunity to comment on directives prior to issuance.
- An editorial review will normally be performed on the directive at least one time during the coordination process. After the editorial review, the directive will be returned to the OPI for agreement on the suggested editorial changes. Once MA-90 receives clearance from the OPI on the edits, the following coordination process begins on RevCom:
|
| Coordination Process |
| Components |
Details |
Tracks
(Calendar Days) |
| 1
| 2
| 3
| 4
|
| Review and Comment |
Begins when the draft directive is posted on RevCom. It will be reviewed by Directives Points of Contact (DPCs) and their designated
Delegates and Subject Matter Experts throughout the Department as well as the DNFSB and CTAs, as appropriate. At the end of the commenting
period, RevCom will not accept further comments. Extensions to the commenting period are discouraged, and will only be granted with the OPI's
permission. Any extensions granted will apply only to the requesting organization. All comments must be approved by the SO or designee. |
10 |
20 |
30 |
35 |
| Comment Resolution Period |
Begins at the close of the review and comment period. The OPI must use RevCom to respond to all comments surfaced by the review. It is
strongly suggested that the OPI establish a line of communication with the commentors. The OPI must respond to each comment and indicate
"accept," "accept w/modification," or "reject." For each response that the OPI accept, he/she agrees with the DPC organization's comment and
must change the draft directive to reflect the comment. For each response that indicate accept w/modification, the OPI agrees in part with
the DPC organization's comment, and must change the directive to reflect part of the comment. For each response that indicate reject, the OPI
does not agree with the DPC organization's comment and the draft will not be changed. Whichever the case (accept w/modification or reject),
the OPI must provide a rationale.
As issues are resolved, the OPI must incorporate the changes to produce a redline/strikeout of the directive (see redline/strikeout instructions). Prior to the end of this period,
the OPI must submit to MA-90 a redline/strikeout of the directive. At the end of this period,
regardless of whether all major issues have been resolved, the OPI must enter their proposed resolutions in RevCom, then submit the comment
resolution package in RevCom. The proposed resolutions must be approved by the OPI's SO or designee.
|
5 |
15 |
30 |
50 |
| Second Draft Review/ Concurrence |
A second draft of the directive, noted in redline/strikeout, will be posted in conjunction with the comment resolution package on RevCom.
This allows interested parties to see the cumulative effects of changes as a result of the review and comment period. With the approval of
the SO or designee, HQ DPCs must concur in RevCom if they agree on the proposed resolution(s) and the second draft. If at the end of the
second review, concurrences have been obtained on the second draft directive, the OPI must submit the final clean draft directive, approval
memo signed by their SO, and synopsis (download sample approval memo and synopsis in Word format) to MA-90 for approval by the Deputy
Secretary.
NOTE: The OPI and MA-90 analyst work together to compose a draft approval memo and synopsis. |
7 |
10 |
10 |
10 |
| Non-concurrences/ Impasse |
If there is a non-concurrence, then the contending organizations will work with MA-90 to resolve or elevate the issue to senior management. |
15 |
15 |
15 |
15 |
| Administrative Processing Time |
Occurs by OPI and MA-90 at various times throughout the process. |
8 |
15 |
20 |
25 |
| Total Processing Time Without Impasse |
30 |
60 |
90 |
120 |
| Total Processing Time With Impasse |
45 |
90 |
105 |
135 |
|
| Publication |
| Subsequent to Deputy Secretary/Secretary approval, the Office of Information Resources (MA-90) publishes the directive on the directives portal in the current section. |
|
