NOTE: SC Site Office procedures, written agreements, or correspondence may designate the Review Team Leader (with Approval Authority agreement). This approved designation eliminates the need for Steps 2 and 3.

1. If an individual at Headquarters (HQ) is the Approval Authority, the SC Site Office Manager or designee prepares a memorandum recommending the appointment of the Review Team Leader and submits it to the SC Deputy Director for Field Operations (SC‑3) for signature.

2. When approval authority has been delegated to an individual in the SC Site Office, the SC Site Office Approval Authority signs the memorandum designating the appointment of the Review Team Leader.

NOTE: The memorandum is normally prepared in advance of the contractor’s procedure being submitted for approval.

The Approval Authority formally approves the Review Team Leader appointment and provides that information to the SC Site Office Manager (if an individual at HQ is the Approval Authority) or Review Team Leader (if an individual in the SC Site Office is the Approval Authority).

NOTE: The contractor’s new or revised procedure for its USQ process submitted for DOE approval must be formally transmitted from the contractor to the responsible SC Site Office.

• Evaluates the scope of the review effort to determine if additional resources are required and if a review plan is warranted.

• Requests support as needed from SC Site Office, SC Integrated Support Center (SC-ISC) in conjunction with SC Site Office, and HQ.

• As appropriate (graded approach), prepares a review plan and submits the review plan to the Approval Authority for approval. The review plan can be approved by the SC Site Office Manager if qualified Senior Technical Safety Managers exist at the SC Site Office and review the plan.

  NOTE: It is recommended that most reviews of the contractor’s new or revised procedure for its USQ process have at least one qualified Nuclear Safety Specialist reviewer under DOE‑STD‑1183‑2007, Nuclear Safety Specialist Functional Area Qualification Standard. Review Team Membership should include program representation and other disciplines consistent with the degree of changes in the contractor’s procedure. In some cases, the review may be able to be conducted by one individual.

• Promptly communicates comments/issues generated during the review to the contractor through formal communications from the SC Site Office Manager or designee. Elevates areas where agreement cannot be reached through the chain of command for resolution.

• If DOE is unable to approve the submitted document without substantial clarification and or numerous conditions for approval, notifies the appropriate Site Office individual with programmatic responsibility for the facility of the required action and formally transmits the document back to the contractor, with the basis for DOE’s disapproval clearly documented.

• If the contractor’s procedure can be approved, prepares an SER (or coordinates the Review Team’s input on the SER) to document the review and basis for approval of contractor’s procedure in accordance with DOE‑STD‑1104‑2009, Review and Approval of Nuclear Facility Safety Basis and Safety Design Basis Documents.

  NOTE: Although DOE‑STD‑1104‑2009 provides the SER format and content requirements for the review and approval of Documented Safety Analyses and Technical Safety Requirements, it can be conceptually utilized for documenting the review and basis for approval of the contractor’s procedure for its USQ process.

• Review the contractor’s new or revised procedure for its USQ process and evaluate its technical accuracy and compliance with 10 CFR 830, Subpart B, Nuclear Safety Management, and DOE requirements.

• For contractors utilizing the Expert USQ Process, verify that the Criteria for Office of Science (SC) Expert Unreviewed Safety Question (USQ) Process Implementation is met.

• Document any comments/issues identified.

  NOTE: Use Documenting the Unreviewed Safety Question (USQ) Process and the USQ Procedure Requirements Checklist to perform and document the review.  For contractors utilizing the Expert USQ Process, verify the USQ procedure appropriately incorporates provisions and restrictions on the use of the Expert USQ Process.

NOTE: Contractors that choose to implement the Expert USQ Process and have an approved procedure are expected to enhance their oversight of the Expert USQ Process for the first 1-2 years of implementation. Similarly, Site Offices should increase their oversight of the contractor’s Expert USQ Process for the same time period until proven reliable.

• If the contractor’s new or revised procedure for its USQ process can be approved, contribute to the preparation of the SER (as directed by the Review Team Leader) to document the review and basis for approval of the contractor’s USQ procedure in accordance with DOE‑STD‑1104‑2009.

• Ensure the DOE’s conditions for approval in the SER constitute an appropriate and minimal essential set of conditions that is clearly stated to facilitate their implementation and closure.

NOTE: The Expert USQ Process utilizes expertise of contractor safety analysts who are familiar with the facility and its safety basis for mature, compliant Hazard Category 1, 2 and 3 nuclear facilities. Expert preparers may perform screenings or determinations for simple changes. The Expert USQ Process was adopted from Y-12 National Security Complex based upon the low risk of incorrect decision (determination of approval level) during the pilot project and focusing the USQ process on its primary purpose. Additional information regarding the Expert USQ Process is available from the SC‑3 Senior Nuclear Safety Advisor.

• If the Approval Authority is an individual in the SC Site Office, the Review Team Leader or Line Manager submits the SER.

• If the Approval Authority is an individual at SC HQ, the SC Site Office Manager or designee prepares a memorandum recommending approval of the contractor’s USQ procedure with a provision on the memorandum for the Approval Authority to mark as either Approved or Disapproved. The approval recommendation memorandum, SER, and contractor’s USQ procedure are submitted to SC‑3.

NOTE: Approval of this procedure by SC-1 with concurrence for S-4 was completed since the Expert USQ Process is considered an alternative method for that specified in DOE G 424.1-1B, Implementation Guide for Use in Addressing Unreviewed Safety Question Requirements.

NOTE: The transmittal letter establishes DOE’s expectations regarding any implementation issues.

The SC Site Office Manager or designee ensures the contractor has properly implemented its USQ procedure.

NOTE: This portion of the procedure is concluded; for Record Retention, go to Step 15

The SC Site Office Manager or designee evaluates the adequacy of the summary of USQ Determinations and requests additional information from the contractor as warranted.

The SC Site Office Manager or designee should document the results of their review.

The SC Site Office Manager or designee ensures the contractor:

• Takes appropriate actions to place or maintain the facility in a safe condition,

• Expeditiously notifies DOE upon discovery of the information,

• Performs USQ Determination and notifies DOE promptly of the results, and

• Completes an evaluation of the safety of the situation and submits it to DOE prior to removing any operational restrictions.

The SC Site Office Manager or designee evaluates the contractor’s actions to place or maintain the facility in a safe condition for appropriateness and directs the contractor to take additional actions if necessary.

NOTE: Justifications for Continued Operation (JCOs) offer an alternative to ceasing operations when a condition arises that would otherwise require shutting down the facility. JCOs should be used only as a short‑term, temporary measure until a permanent change to the safety basis document can be developed, approved, and implemented. DOE’s review and approval of JCOs are addressed by Procedure 1, Reviewing and Approving Nuclear Facility Safety Basis Documentation. Recommended format and contents of a JCO are addressed in DOE G 424.1-1B.

The SC Site Office Manager or designee reviews the ESS provided by the contractor.

• If the USQ Determination associated with the PISA is negative, the SC Site Office Manager's approval of the contractor’s actions to remove operational restrictions is not necessary; however, the SC Site Office Manager needs to agree with the conclusion of the associated ESS.

• If the USQ Determination associated with the PISA is positive, DOE’s review and approval are required for any proposed resolution. DOE’s review and approval of a proposed resolution are addressed by Procedure 1, Reviewing and Approving Nuclear Facility Safety Basis Documentation.

This portion of the procedure is concluded; for Record Retention, go to Step 15.

NOTE: The ESS is an assessment of the safety of the situation. For a negative USQD, the ESS provides evidence that the immediate controls placed on the facility or activity to ensure a safe condition are not required and can be removed. For a positive USQD, the ESS provides the basis for how the actions taken (including the implementation of operational restrictions) and/or planned actions, ensure safety. Please reference DOE G 424.1-1B for recommended content of an ESS.

• Submitted contractor’s new or revised procedure for its USQ process, SERs and supporting documentation associated with DOE’s review and approval (e.g., review plan, review comments, resolution matrices, completed USQ Procedure Requirements Checklist, transmittal correspondence between the contractor and DOE and between the Approval Authority and the SC Site Office),

• Annual summaries of the contractor’s USQ Determinations,

• Submitted ESSs and documentation associated with DOE’s review and approval of actions to remove any operational restrictions initiated upon discoveries of PISAs.