Defense

Nuclear

Facilities

Safety

Board

Washington, DC 20004

Policy

Statement

Date: April 19, 2021

Subject

Policy Statement on 

Recommendations. 

Summary

This policy statement establishes 

the Board’s policy on the 

development of Recommendations 

to the Secretary of Energy 

(pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 

2286a(b)(5)) for ensuring the 

adequate protection of public 

health and safety, the execution of 

and the Board’s oversight of the 

Department of Energy’s response 

to and implementation of 

Recommendations, and the 

Board’s closure of 

Recommendations.

Joyce L. Connery

Chair
1 

I. Purpose/Objectives

This Policy Statement establishes the Board’s policy on the following: the development 

of Recommendations to the Secretary of Energy (pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 2286a(b)(5)) for 

ensuring the adequate protection of public health and safety, the execution of and the Board’s 

oversight of the Department of Energy’s response to and implementation of Recommendations, 

and the Board’s closure of Recommendations. This Policy Statement replaces PS-1, Criteria for 

Judging the Adequacy of DOE Responses and Implementation Plans for Board 

Recommendations. 

II. Scope/Application

The Board shall make such Recommendations to the Secretary of Energy with respect to 

defense nuclear facilities that the Board determines are necessary to ensure adequate protection 

of health and safety. This Policy Statement outlines the formulation of potential 

Recommendations, the use of closed meetings and/or non-public collaborative discussions 

(NCDs) for the purposes of discussing potential Recommendations, the transmittal of approved 

Draft and Final Recommendations, actions in the event of a Department of Energy (DOE) 

rejection of a Recommendation, the evaluation of DOE Implementation Plans for 

Recommendations, and the assessment for closure of Recommendations.

III. Policy

Recommendation Development 

If, during oversight activities, either the Board (or Board Member) or agency staff 

determines that there may exist a situation in relation to a DOE defense nuclear facility, either 

discretely or in concert with other conditions, that potentially poses a threat to the adequate 

protection of public health and safety, the Board may enter into a process to develop and 

consider a Recommendation. The staff may propose a Recommendation outline, use another 

process for conveying the information to the Board, or the Board may convene a closed meeting 

or a non-public collaborative discussion (NCD) in accordance with the Atomic Energy Act of 

1954, as amended, (AEA) and the Government in the Sunshine Act. 

During a closed meeting or NCD, the Board will determine whether to direct agency staff 

to develop a written Draft Recommendation for review, or continue to monitor the situation, or 

determine another course of action. 

Recommendation Voting 

Board Members will use closed meetings and/or NCDs and its folder process to comment 

on, edit, and amend Draft Recommendations. These processes will be conducted in accordance 

with the AEA and the Sunshine Act. 
2 

Pursuant to the AEA, the Board determines issues of adequate protection and whether to 

issue a Recommendation to the Secretary of Energy. 

Upon receiving a majority vote after the establishment of a quorum of the Board 

Members, the Draft Recommendation will be transmitted to the Secretary of Energy in 

accordance with the AEA. Appropriate notifications to relevant congressional committees will 

be made at that time. 

Communications with DOE during Draft Process

The Board’s staff will maintain records of written communications between DNFSB and 

DOE regarding a Draft Recommendation. Additionally, notes regarding communications that 

have a material impact on the Board deliberations or Final Recommendation will be maintained 

as a part of the Draft/Recommendation file.

The Board views the purpose of the Draft process as an opportunity for DOE to clarify 

technical elements of the Recommendation and to provide additional pertinent information to the 

Board, not to negotiate content or a response. 

DOE requests for an extension to respond to a Draft Recommendation, as provided for in 

the AEA, will be evaluated by the Board, and a response will be provided in writing. 

Final Recommendation 

The Board will consider any pertinent information provided by DOE in response to a 

Draft Recommendation, make any changes to the document it deems necessary, and vote on a 

Final Recommendation.

Final Recommendations will be transmitted to DOE and the Board will make appropriate 

notifications to Congress. Once the Board has confirmed that the Secretary of Energy has 

received the Final Recommendation, the Recommendation and any related correspondence from 

the Secretary will be posted on the Board’s public website and published in the Federal Register. 

As required by the AEA, the Board’s Federal Register notice will provide interested persons with 

30 days in which to submit comments, data, views, or arguments to the Board concerning the 

Recommendation. 

The Board or agency staff will be prepared and made available to brief congressional 

staff, members of Congress, or outside groups seeking additional information. 

Rejection/Reaffirmation Process

Should the Secretary of Energy reject a Recommendation, in part or in its entirety, the 

Board will, in consultation with agency staff, review the information provided by DOE. The 

Board may request a meeting with the Secretary, request a public meeting with DOE, hold a 

meeting of its own, or conduct a hearing to assist with deliberations in accordance with the 

Sunshine Act. 
3 

The Board will then decide, by a majority vote of the Board following the establishment 

of a quorum, whether to revise, reaffirm, or withdraw the Recommendation. 

Implementation Plan 

Once an Implementation Plan is received by the Board, the Board and its staff will review 

the Plan to ensure that upon completion, it will have addressed the concerns outlined in the 

Recommendation. Details on the evaluation of an Implementation Plan can be found in 

Appendix A of this Policy Statement.

Should an Implementation Plan not satisfy the concerns the Board outlined in the 

Recommendation, the Board will engage with DOE to address its concerns.

Any deliverables provided to the Board will be evaluated and acknowledged in writing.

Closure of a Recommendation 

The Board will communicate to the Secretary of Energy that it is closing a 

Recommendation when it determines that the issues raised in the original Recommendation have 

been sufficiently addressed. 

The Board may also close a Recommendation if it determines that the conditions 

encountered when the Recommendation was written are overtaken by events and further pursuit 

of the actions in the Recommendation are unwarranted. 

The Board may issue a new Recommendation related to the subject of a prior 

Recommendation if DOE’s Implementation Plan actions, in whole or in part, do not adequately 

address an issue of adequate protection. The Board will take this action only after exhausting 

efforts to address the issues directly with DOE during its execution of the Implementation Plan. 

IV. Responsibility for Implementation

Board Members, Executive Director of Operations, General Counsel, and Technical 

Staff.

V. Monitoring and Compliance

ECIC should review the procedures in accordance with Directive 22.1, Internal Control 

Program. 

VI. Status

Approved on: ___April 19, 2021_____ 
Appendix A: Evaluating DOE’s Response and Implementation Plan

In reviewing Recommendation responses and Implementation Plans, the Board will 

evaluate DOE’s analysis and understanding of the underlying safety issues, commitments to 

actions consistent with the Board’s recommendations, commitments to determine the causes and 

take corrective actions to preclude recurrence, and plans for federal oversight of actions. DOE’s 

responses and Implementation Plans should demonstrate a thorough understanding of the safety 

issues and a commitment to sustainable safety improvements in a timely manner.

Under the Atomic Energy Act, as amended (AEA), the Secretary of Energy accepts or 

rejects, in whole or in part, Recommendations received from the Board. The following types of 

DOE responses may be encountered by the Board: 

Acceptance. An acceptance is unconditional if it accepts the entire Recommendation 

and is consistent with the Recommendation. 

Rejection. In addition to outright rejections, the Board will also consider the following 

types of responses to be a rejection: 

• A response that states it is an acceptance, but by its language or terms in fact 

rejects the Recommendation. 

• Ambiguous responses that could be interpreted either as acceptance or rejection of 

the Recommendation. 

• Failure to address Recommendations, including instances where DOE states it 

needs to evaluate the issues further. 

Partial Acceptance. The Board will consider conditional acceptance of specific subrecommendations in a manner consistent with the Recommendation to be a partial 

acceptance. The Board will also consider acceptance of specific sub-recommendations 

and rejection of others as a partial acceptance.

Implementation Plans provide a basis and a schedule for ensuring that accepted 

Recommendations are understood and fully acted upon. The Board will use the following 

criteria to evaluate Implementation Plans:

Comprehensive Understanding of Safety Issues. The Implementation Plan should 

demonstrate an understanding of the Recommendation and nuclear safety issues that 

precipitated the Recommendation. The totality of actions in the plan will be evaluated to 

assess the level of DOE’s understanding and acceptance of the Recommendation. 

Commitments Consistent with the Recommendation. The Implementation Plan 

should define DOE’s overall objectives and specific actions that align with the 

Recommendation. The plan should define appropriate milestones and deliverables to 

demonstrate progress and completion of safety improvements. DOE’s approach should 

be outlined in sufficient detail to enable the Board to independently assess the plan. 
A-2 

Causal Analysis. The Implementation Plan should include a causal analysis for the 

safety issues. The plan should commit to corrective actions to address appropriate causal 

analysis results that preclude recurrence of the safety issues.

Federal Oversight. Implementation Plans are often developed and executed by DOE’s 

contractor personnel. Plans should include appropriate commitments for federal 

oversight of their execution and deliverables. All Implementation Plan deliverables 

should include documented federal evaluations that address whether completed actions 

are effective at achieving safety improvements.

Completion Criteria. The Implementation Plan should define clear criteria for 

completion including a DOE evaluation of the overall effectiveness of whether completed 

actions improve safety and achieve the objectives defined in the Plan.