Integrated Project Team (IPT) Directives Process

The section below was taken from Appendix B of DOE O 251.1D, Departmental Directives Program. Please see the entire order for the Directives Prioritization and Development Process.

IPT revisions may include, but are not limited to, major, substantive, or complex revisions where disputes in changing requirements may be anticipated.

Stage 1. Development and Approval and Scheduling.

The OPI must follow the Directives Prioritization process outlined in Appendix A of DOE O 251.1D. Once the Directives Prioritization list is approved, the OPI may establish the IPT according to the schedule.

Stage 2. IPT Creation

a. The OPI must propose two IPT Co-Chairs for the directive revision. One Co-Chair must represent the OPI, and the other Co-Chair must represent a field element form a different program office. The DRB will approve the IPT Co-Chairs.

b. The IPT Co-Chairs, in coordination with program offices, must submit a list of proposed IPT Members to the DRB for approval. The IPT must consist of membership form all affected groups (to include the OPI; HQ program and staff organizations; field/site offices; and laboratories), and may include a member of the Departmental Directives Program, as appropriate. IPTs will have 10-12 members.

c. Once the DRB approves the IPT membership, the IPT will hold a kick-off meeting with senior leaders in the stakeholder organizations to discuss the purpose of the revision. This meeting will also cover the formation of the IPT and the anticipated directive revision process.

d. The IPT's first charge is to confirm that the directive is necessary. If the IPT decides the directive is needed, members will use the directive principles to review and revise the directive. If the IPT decides the directive is not needed, the OPI will begin the directives cancellation process (see DOE O 251.1D).

Stage 3. Development of the Decision Memorandum

The IPT must develop a decision memorandum to be approved by the DRB and the DOE Operations Committee, following the timeline established through the Directives Prioritization effort. The approved decision memorandum must:

a. Recommend the desired end-state for the revision of the directive.

b. Confirm why the directive is necessary.

c. Describe qualitatively and, where practical, quantitatively anticipated costs and beneficial impacts, such as improved safety, associated with the revised directive's implementation.

d. Identify any major issues arising from the recommended revisions. For issues that the IPT is unable to resolve, the decision memo must include options for DOE Operations Committee decision. The recommended options must weigh the pros and cons for each decision.

e. Identify all conflicts with existing directives, and any potential impacts to other directives, or to Departmental functions or operations; include options for DOE Operations Committee decision if such conflicts exist.

f. If IPT members cannot agree on an issue, the IPT will provide options for decision by the DRB and the DOE Operations Committee.

Stage 4. First Directives Review Board Meeting

a. The DRB must review and provide comments, if applicable, on the decision memorandum. As appropriate, any comments received during the review will be forwarded to the IPT Co-Chairs.

b. The IPT Co-Chairs must meet with the DRB to discuss the IPT-developed decision memo.

c. The DRB will provide the decision memorandum, along with its recommendations to the DOE Operations Committee for approval.

Stage 5. First DOE Operations Committee Meeting

The IPT Co-Chairs will present the IPT's decision memorandum at a DOE Operations Committee meeting, with the DRB Chair in attendance.

a. The DOE Operations Committee will review the decision memorandum and, if necessary, choose from any recommended options for final approval.

b. The IPT Co-Chairs must receive approval from the DOE Operations Committee to start writing or revising the directive.

Stage 6. Development of the First Draft.

Once the decision memorandum is approved by the DOE Operations Committee, the IPT may begin draft development.

a. The IPT must adhere to the Directives Prioritization schedule established by the DRB and the DOE Operations Committee, and collaborate with the Departmental Directives Program when developing or revising the draft directive.

b. The IPT Co-Chairs must proved the DRB with a plan that outlines the IPT's communication strategy with stakeholders as will as DRB members. A template can be found here.

c. If the IPT determines more time is needed for development than is allotted on the Directives Prioritization schedule, the IPT Co-Chairs must present the rationale and a recommended time frame to the DRB for approval.

d. IPT members must engage stakeholders throughout the IPT process and provide IPT documents to stakeholders, when appropriate. IPT members must document these communications, and provide the tracking sheet to the DRB, the IPT Co-Chairs, and/or the Departmental Directives Program when requested. These stakeholders must include, but are not limited to:

1. affected program and site offices;
2.  Field Management Council representatives, as needed;
3.  National Laboratory Directors Council representatives, upon DRB request;
4. the appropriate DOE or NNSA counsel;
5. the Office of Primary Interest for any DOE Technical Standards being invoked in the directive;
6. the Office of Policy, Office of Acquisition Management (MA-61);
7. Field Contracting Officers;
8. CTAs, when appropriate; and
9. the DOE Departmental Representative to the DNFSB, for all directives of interest to the DNFSB.

e. The Review and Comment (RevCom) system may be used throughout the IPT draft development process to collect comments from key stakeholders across the complex, as appropriate.

f. The IPT Co-Chairs will meet with the DRB at various milestones determined by the DRB and the Departmental Directives Program.

g. After the draft directive has been developed, the IPT Co-Chairs must submit an electronic copy of the draft directive to the Departmental Directives Program.

h. For a revised directive, a crosswalk of requirements must accompany the draft directive when requested by the DRB.

Stage 7. Directive Review and Comment.

a. The draft directive must be coordinated with key stakeholders across the department, as determined by the DRB and IPT, following the timeline established through the Directives Prioritization effort. The DRB, in coordination with the IPT, will determine if the draft directive warrants further review using the RevCom system.

b. If the RevCom system is used, the IPT members must respond to all comments provided, stating whether the comment was accepted or rejected by the IPT. IPT members will not directly address editorial comments. Editorial comments will be used by the IPT and Departmental Directives Program for final draft edits.

c. If the draft is an Order invoking a draft Technical Standard, the draft Order and the draft Technical Standard must be coordinated concurrently to ensure that all reviewers have access to both documents. The process for development of invoked DOE Technical Standards is found in DOE O 252.1 Technical Standards Program.

d. Classified information in DOE Directives must be protected according to requirements in the current version of DOE O 471.6 Information Security. Unclassified descriptions of classified directives can be posted on RevCom system prior to transmission.

Stage 8. Comment Resolution/Development of the Final Draft

The IPT, following the timeline established through the Directives Prioritization effort, must:

a. Respond to all non-editorial comments, work with commenters to resolve issues, and submit the comment resolution package in RevCom, if the system is used.

b. Provide the electronic files of the clean, updated draft directives, the updated development synopsis, and communications plan to the Departmental Directives Program for presentation to the DRB.

Stage 9. Final Review and Concurrence

a. The final draft directive will be posted in the RevCom system for department-wide concurrence, as appropriate.

b. The final draft directive and any relevant documents must be reviewed by the DRB. Technical Standards approved through the Technical Standards development process and invoked by Orders must be reviewed by the DRB along with the revision to the applicable Order. Comments received during the review will be forwarded to the IPT Co-Chairs, as appropriate.

c. For issues that cannot be resolved at the IPT level, Heads of Departmental Elements or their designee(s), must meet with the DRB to address concerns regarding the final draft directive and the implementation strategy.

d. If consensus is reached, the DRB will validate the final directive reflects the approved DRB decisions.

e. If consensus cannot be reached between the DRB members, the DRB Chair facilitates the discussion of unresolved issues between the DRB members and the Heads of Departmental Elements or their designee(s), who cannot reach agreement

f. If the issues cannot be resolved, an impasse occurs. The OPI must include the impasse issue(s), its position, the position of the dissenting organization(s), the decision memo as approved by the DOE Operations Committee, and the DRB's recommendation in a summary paper. The organization that does not agree with the OPI's position must provide a summary paper with its position to the OPI for inclusion in the approval package.

Stage 10. Final Approval

a. Once the DRB reach consensus on the final draft directive or agrees to send an impasse issue forward, the OPI must prepare an approval package. Templates for approval package content can be found here.

b. The approval package will be forwarded by the Departmental Directives Program through the DOE Operations Committee Chair to the Secretary or Deputy Secretary to render a decision on an impasse issues and issue the directive.

Stage 11. Implementation

a. The IPT must develop an implementation strategy throughout the IPT process. The strategy must include specific actions for effectively communicating and implementing the revised directive. This document will include key milestones and the organizations responsible for each action as established in the directive.

b. The DRB will provide guidance on proposed implementation strategies.

c. The IPT Co-Chairs will return to the DRB, when requested, to provide an update on implementation. DRB members may also provide perspectives on implementation.

d. If the DRB is presented with implementation issues that require an update to the directive, it will recommend the directive as an ad hoc addition to the prioritization schedule for DOE Operations Committee approval.

e. Upon DOE Operations Committee, approval the ad hoc update to the directive will be added to the Directives Prioritization list and schedule.