Alternative Dispute Resolution, 63458-63460 [E8-25398]
Download as PDF
63458
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 207 / Friday, October 24, 2008 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Alternative Dispute Resolution
Department of Energy.
Notice of Revised Policy
Statement.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: On October 24, 1995, the
Department of Energy (DOE) published
an interim Statement of Policy on
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
(60 FR 54482) to further its commitment
to the use of ADR for resolving issues
in controversy in a fair, timely, and cost
efficient manner, and to comply with
the Administrative Dispute Resolution
Act (ADRA), 5 U.S.C. 571 et seq. Today,
DOE issues a revised Statement of
Policy on Alternative Dispute
Resolution to reaffirm its commitment
to the use of ADR, including the use of
Environmental Conflict Resolution
(ECR) and other collaborative processes
that may be utilized to prevent or avoid
potential conflicts.
DATES: This Revised Policy Statement is
effective: October 24, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kathleen Binder, Director, Office of
Conflict Prevention and Resolution, U.S.
Department of Energy, Washington, DC
20585, (202) 586–6972 or by e-mail at
Kathleen.binder@hq.doe.gov.
The
ADRA, 5 U.S.C. 571 et seq., authorizes
and encourages federal agencies to
employ consensual methods of dispute
resolution as alternatives to litigation.
Under the ADRA as enacted in 1990 and
amended in 1996,1 a federal agency is
required to:
1. Adopt a policy on the use of ADR
techniques;
2. Designate a senior official as a
dispute resolution specialist;
3. Establish training programs in the
use of dispute resolution methods; and
4. Review the standard language in
agency contracts, grants or other
agreements, to determine whether to
include a provision on ADR.
Congress enacted the ADRA to reduce
the time, cost, inefficiencies and
contentiousness that may be associated
with litigation and other adversarial
dispute resolution mechanisms. Since
the enactment of ADRA, the federal
government as a whole, and DOE in
particular, have significantly increased
the use of ADR techniques. However,
from time to time there are efforts
initiated to further increase the use of
ADR. For example, on May 1, 1998, the
President issued a memorandum
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
1 Public Law No. 101–552, section 3, as amended
by Public Law 104–320, section 4(a); see 5 U.S.C.
571 note.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:48 Oct 23, 2008
Jkt 217001
directing the Attorney General to lead
an Interagency Alternative Dispute
Resolution Working Group to promote
and facilitate federal ADR. The Working
Group established four sections to
represent the major substantive areas of
ADR application: Enforcement, claims
against the government, contracts and
procurement, and workplace conflict. A
Working Group Steering Committee was
established to represent nearly 60
federal agencies.
Pursuant to section 11 of the
Technology Transfer Commercialization
Act of 2000, Public Law No. 106–404,
each DOE laboratory and research
facility appointed a technology
partnership ombudsman to hear and
help resolve complaints from outside
organizations regarding the policies and
actions of each such laboratory or
facility with respect to technology
partnerships, patents, and technology
licensing.
On November 28, 2005, the Director
of the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) and the Chairman of the Council
on Environmental Quality (CEQ) issued
a memorandum directing federal
agencies to increase the use of ECR and
collaborative problem solving. The
memorandum also directs that agencies
report to CEQ and OMB annually
regarding their progress in increasing
the use of ECR.
This revised policy makes several
changes to the 1995 policy to take
account of the actions mentioned above.
These changes include broadening the
scope of ADR by including ECR, which
is referenced in sections A, B, C, and D
of the revised policy, as well as adding
coordination of the Technology Transfer
Ombudsman Program to the role of the
Dispute Resolution Specialist. This
revised Statement of Policy supersedes
the 1995 Notice of Interim Policy
Statement.
Accordingly, DOE adopts the revised
Statement of Policy that follows.
The Secretary of Energy has approved
the issuance of this Notice.
Issued in Washington, DC, on October 19,
2008.
David R. Hill,
General Counsel.
Department of Energy Statement of
Policy on Alternative Dispute
Resolution
A. Introduction
This Statement of Policy addresses
the use of Alternative Dispute
Resolution (ADR) by the Department of
Energy (DOE), as required by the
Administrative Dispute Resolution Act
(ADRA), 5 U.S.C. 571 et seq. This
Statement of Policy also broadens the
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
scope of ADR as utilized at DOE to
include Environmental Conflict
Resolution (ECR) and other
collaborative processes utilized to
prevent or avoid potential conflicts. The
ADRA authorizes and encourages
agencies to use mediation and other
consensual methods of dispute
resolution as alternatives to traditional
dispute resolution processes. The ADRA
requires agencies to designate a Dispute
Resolution Specialist, establish a policy
addressing the use of ADR, review
contracts and grants for appropriate
inclusion of ADR clauses and provide
for regular training on ADR.
The initiatives required under the
ADRA are also supplemented by:
(i) The Negotiated Rulemaking Act, 5
U.S.C. 561 et seq., which establishes a
framework for use of negotiated
rulemaking to increase acceptability and
improve the substance of rules; and
(ii) The Technology Transfer
Commercialization Act of 2000, Public
Law No. 106–404, which in section 11
calls for the appointment of a
Technology Partnerships Ombudsman
at each DOE National Laboratory to hear
and help resolve complaints from
outside organizations regarding the
policies and actions of each laboratory
with respect to technology partnerships.
In addition, on November 28, 2005, a
memorandum was issued by the
Director of the Office of Management
and Budget and the Chairman of the
Council on Environmental Quality
directing federal agencies to increase the
use of ECR and collaborative problem
solving (ECR Memorandum).
B. Policy
DOE is committed to the use of ADR,
including ECR and other collaborative
processes, as a management tool to
prevent or minimize disputes, or to
resolve disputes at the earliest stage
possible in an expeditious, cost effective
and mutually acceptable manner. In
furtherance of this commitment to the
use of ADR, and in compliance with the
ADRA, DOE’s Dispute Resolution
Specialist is responsible for encouraging
and coordinating the ADR efforts of
DOE, formulating DOE-wide ADR
policies, and disseminating information
about DOE’s ADR activities, including
providing assistance, consultation and
training within DOE on ADR matters. In
state and federal court litigation, ADR
procedures may be mandated by
applicable statutes, court orders, rules
and procedures.
DOE supports the voluntary use of
ADR, including ECR and other
collaborative processes, e.g., mediation,
early neutral evaluation, partnering,
facilitated negotiations, the use of an
E:\FR\FM\24OCN1.SGM
24OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 207 / Friday, October 24, 2008 / Notices
ombudsman, and arbitration, where
appropriate. The use of binding
arbitration is not appropriate except in
very limited circumstances and is
subject to compliance with 5 U.S.C.
575(c). Prior to pursuing the use of
binding arbitration, DOE’s Office of
Conflict Prevention and Resolution,
which is an office within the
Department’s Office of the General
Counsel, must be contacted to
determine whether binding arbitration
previously has been approved for such
circumstances or to advise on whether
to seek approval.
The ECR Memorandum, referenced
previously, defines ECR as ‘‘third-party
assisted conflict resolution and
collaborative problem solving in the
context of environmental, public lands,
or natural resources issues or conflicts,
including matters relating to energy,
transportation, and land use.’’ The ECR
Memorandum also recognizes that there
are a broad array of partnerships,
cooperative arrangements and
unassisted negotiations used by Federal
agencies to manage and implement their
programs. DOE has adopted this broader
view of ECR, and defines ECR to include
all types of collaborative problem
solving processes used to prevent or
resolve an environmental conflict
regardless of whether a third party is
used in these processes.
In addition, DOE supports the use of
negotiated rulemaking, which is a
process that brings together
representatives of various interest
groups and a federal agency, as
appropriate to negotiate the text of a
proposed rule.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
C. Applications
DOE will undertake to use
appropriate ADR, including ECR and
other collaborative processes, in three
main areas.
1. Dispute Prevention
DOE believes that ADR can be used as
a management tool to prevent conflicts
from escalating into more serious
disputes. Mediation and other forms of
ADR may be applied to workplace
related issues early in the process to
promote a humane and productive
workplace and to prevent and reduce
grievances, as well as EEO and
whistleblower complaints.
DOE also may consider, when
appropriate, the use of partnering with
its contractors to prevent disputes
between DOE and its contractors. This
technique, used successfully by DOE,
other federal agencies, and private
sector companies, fosters cooperative
efforts to carry out the objectives of the
contract and helps to manage conflict by
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:48 Oct 23, 2008
Jkt 217001
identifying potential disputes and
planning in advance for their resolution.
DOE may utilize ECR, including
various collaborative problem solving
techniques, when appropriate, to
prevent or resolve conflicts that may
arise over the actual, potential or
perceived impacts of DOE operations on
the environment and natural resources
by working with DOE’s stakeholders to
address issues of concern as early in the
decision-making process as is
practicable. In using ECR, DOE should
seek to apply the principles set forth in
Appendix A.
DOE also encourages the use, when
appropriate, of facilitated negotiations,
which are negotiations with groups of
representatives with potentially
disparate interests striving to reach a
consensual decision on a policy issue.
This includes use of negotiated
rulemaking in the development of
proposed rules.
2. Early Intervention
Where disputes cannot be avoided,
the use of ADR can promote prompt and
efficient resolution and avoid the need
for a more formal disposition, such as
administrative proceedings and
litigation.
3. Litigation
a. The ADRA encourages federal
agencies to use ADR to resolve disputes
involving their administrative programs
when all participants voluntarily agree.
DOE will pursue the appropriate use of
ADR in administrative litigation, and
will consider the use of ADR in such
cases, when requested by a party to the
litigation, or by the administrative body
hearing the case.
b. In addition, DOE will provide
assistance to the Department of Justice,
as requested, in support of DOJ Order
1160.1, ‘‘Promoting the Broader
Appropriate Use of Alternative Dispute
Resolution Techniques.’’
c. Finally, DOE will encourage and
assist its management and operating
contractors and their counsel in
applying ADR and ECR techniques in
addressing potential or actual claims or
litigation.
See Appendix B for a list of references
and resources relating to ADR.
D. Role of the Dispute Resolution
Specialist
The Dispute Resolution Specialist,
who also acts as the Director of the
Office of Conflict Prevention and
Resolution, serves as a resource to all
DOE components and contractors. The
Dispute Resolution Specialist shall:
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
63459
1. Identify categories of disputes and
potential disputes that are suitable for
ADR;
2. Assist in identifying neutrals for
various ADR techniques;
3. Facilitate the use of ADR by DOE
and establish pilot projects;
4. Participate in the Interagency ADR
Working Group Steering Committee to
promote the use of ADR in the
Executive Branch, as directed in the
Presidential Memorandum issued on
May 1, 1998;
5. Facilitate the use of ECR for
preventing or resolving environmental
conflicts that are associated with DOE
plans and operations;
6. Assist DOE in building capacity to
utilize ECR to identify, prevent, or
resolve environmental conflicts
associated with its plans and operations;
7. Identify categories of agreements,
contracts and memoranda of
understanding which may be suitable
for inclusion of standard ADR clauses;
8. Promote the use of negotiated
rulemaking;
9. Develop ADR education/training
programs for DOE personnel. This shall
include:
a. Introductory training to ensure that
executives, managers and supervisors
understand ADR and its potential
benefits;
b. Training for personnel having a role
in dispute management (e.g., labor/
management relations, contracts,
litigation, administrative adjudication,
and environmental matters);
10. Institute procedures to support
more systematic use of ADR;
11. Disseminate information on the
use of ADR;
12. Ensure that procedures are in
place for evaluation of DOE’s use of
ADR, including ADR results and
resolutions, satisfaction of the
participants, and estimated cost savings
and other benefits;
13. Coordinate the Technology
Partnerships Ombudsman Program; and
14. Encourage DOE contractors to use
ADR, including ECR, as appropriate.
E. Periodic Evaluation
DOE periodically will evaluate the
ADR program and the steps taken
toward its effective implementation.
DOE encourages comments on the use
of ADR, including ECR and other
collaborative processes, from both
within and outside DOE.
Appendix A
Basic Principles for Department of Energy
Engagement in Environmental Conflict
Resolution and Collaborative Problem
Solving
Department and/or contractor personnel
should:
E:\FR\FM\24OCN1.SGM
24OCN1
63460
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 207 / Friday, October 24, 2008 / Notices
Informed Commitment—Confirm
willingness and availability of appropriate
agency leadership and staff at all levels to
commit to principles of engagement, and
ensure commitment to participate in good
faith with open mindset to new perspectives.
Balanced, Voluntary Representation—
Ensure balanced inclusion of affected/
concerned interests; all parties should be
willing and able to participate and select
their own representatives.
Group Autonomy—Engage with all
participants in developing and governing
process; including choice of consensus-based
decision rules; seek assistance as needed
from impartial facilitator/mediator selected
by and accountable to all parties.
Informed Process—Seek agreement on how
to share, test and apply relevant information
(scientific, cultural, technical, etc.) among
participants; ensure relevant information is
accessible and understandable by all
participants.
Accountability—Participate in the process
directly, fully, and in good faith; be
accountable to all participants, as well as
agency representatives and the public.
Openness—Ensure all participants, and, as
appropriate, the public, are fully informed in
a timely manner of the purpose and
objectives of process; communicate agency
authorities, requirements and constraints;
uphold confidentiality rules and agreements
as required for particular proceedings.
Timeliness—Ensure timely decisions and
outcomes.
Implementation—Ensure that decisions are
implementable consistent with federal law
and policy. Parties also should commit to
identify roles and responsibilities necessary
to implement agreement; should agree in
advance on the consequences of a party being
unable to provide necessary resources or to
implement agreement; and should take steps
to obtain resources necessary to implement
any agreement.
Appendix B
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
List of References and Other Resources
Relating to ADR, ECR and Other
Collaborative Processes
References
1. Administrative Dispute Resolution Act of
1996, 5 U.S.C. 571 et seq.
2. The Technology Transfer
Commercialization Act of 2000, Public
Law No. 106–404
3. Joint Memorandum from Office of
Management and Budget and the Council
on Environmental Quality Joint
Memorandum on Environmental Conflict
Resolution, November 2005, (https://
www.whitehouse.gov/ceq/jointstatement.html)
4. The Negotiated Rulemaking Act, 5 U.S.C.
561 et seq.
5. Department of Justice Order 1160.1,
Promoting the Broader Appropriate Use
of Alternative Dispute Resolution
Techniques, https://www.usdoj.gov/crt/
adr/agorder.html
Other Resources
1. DOE’s Office of Conflict Prevention and
Resolution Web site, https://
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:48 Oct 23, 2008
Jkt 217001
www.gc.doe.gov/disputeResolution.htm
2. U.S. Department of Justice’s Interagency
Alternative Dispute Resolution Working
Group, https://www.adr.gov/
3. The Institute for Environmental Conflict
Resolution, https://www.ecr.gov
[FR Doc. E8–25398 Filed 10–23–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Notice of Availability of Final Complex
Transformation Supplemental
Programmatic Environmental Impact
Statement
National Nuclear Security
Administration, U.S. Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Notice of Availability.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The National Nuclear
Security Administration (NNSA), a
separately-organized agency within the
U.S. Department of Energy (DOE),
announces the availability of the
Complex Transformation Supplemental
Programmatic Environmental Impact
Statement (Complex Transformation
SPEIS, DOE/EIS–0236–S4). The
Complex Transformation SPEIS
analyzes the potential environmental
impacts of reasonable alternatives to
continue transformation of the nuclear
weapons complex to be smaller, and
more responsive, efficient, and secure in
order to meet national security
requirements. It is a supplement to the
Stockpile Stewardship and Management
Programmatic Environmental Impact
Statement (SSM PEIS, DOE/EIS–0236).
NNSA prepared the SPEIS in
accordance with the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the
Council on Environmental Quality
(CEQ) regulations that implement the
procedural provisions of NEPA (40 CFR
Parts 1500–1508), and DOE procedures
implementing NEPA (10 CFR Part 1021).
DATES: NNSA intends to issue one or
more Records of Decision (RODs) based
on the Complex Transformation SPEIS
thirty or more days after the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
publishes a notice of availability of the
Final Complex Transformation SPEIS in
the Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: Requests for additional
information on the Complex
Transformation SPEIS, including
requests for copies of the document,
should be directed to: Mr. Theodore A.
Wyka, Complex Transformation SPEIS
Document Manager, Office of
Transformation, NA–141, Department of
Energy/NNSA, 1000 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585,
toll free 1–800–832–0885 ext. 63519. A
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
request for a copy of the document may
also be sent by facsimile to 1–703–931–
9222, or by e-mail to complextrans
formation@nnsa.doe.gov.The Complex
Transformation SPEIS and additional
information regarding complex
transformation are available on the
Internet at https://www.Complex
TransformationSPEIS.com and https://
www.nnsa.doe.gov. The Complex
Transformation SPEIS and referenced
documents are available for review at
the DOE Reading Rooms and public
libraries listed at the end of this notice.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
general information on NNSA’s
proposal, please contact: Mr. Theodore
A. Wyka, NA–141, Complex
Transformation SPEIS Document
Manager, U.S. Department of Energy,
National Nuclear Security
Administration, 1000 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585, or
telephone at 1–800–832–0885 ext.
63519. For general information about
the DOE NEPA process contact: Ms.
Carol M. Borgstrom, Director, Office of
NEPA Policy and Compliance (GC–20),
U.S. Department of Energy, 1000
Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20585, telephone 202–
586–4600, or leave a message at 1–800–
472–2756. Additional information
regarding DOE NEPA activities and
access to many of DOE’s NEPA
documents are available on the Internet
through the DOE NEPA Web site at
https://www.gc.energy.gov/NEPA.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: National
security policies require the U.S. DOE,
through the NNSA, to maintain the
United States’ nuclear weapons
stockpile,1 as well as core competencies
in nuclear weapons. Since completion
in 1996 of the Programmatic
Environmental Impact Statement for
Stockpile Stewardship and Management
(SSM PEIS, DOE/EIS–0236) and
associated ROD (61 FR 68014; December
26, 1996), DOE has implemented these
policies through the Stockpile
Stewardship Program (SSP). The SSP
emphasizes development and
application of greatly improved
scientific and technical capabilities to
assess the safety, security, and
reliability of existing nuclear warheads
without the use of nuclear testing.
Throughout the 1990s, DOE also took
steps to consolidate the Complex from
12 sites to its current configuration of
three national laboratories (plus an
1 The nuclear weapons stockpile consists of
nuclear weapons that are both deployed to the
military services (‘‘operationally deployed’’) and
‘‘reserve weapons’’ that could be used to augment
the operationally deployed weapons or to provide
replacements for warheads that experience safety or
reliability problems.
E:\FR\FM\24OCN1.SGM
24OCN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 207 (Friday, October 24, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63458-63460]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-25398]
[[Page 63458]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Alternative Dispute Resolution
AGENCY: Department of Energy.
ACTION: Notice of Revised Policy Statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On October 24, 1995, the Department of Energy (DOE) published
an interim Statement of Policy on Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
(60 FR 54482) to further its commitment to the use of ADR for resolving
issues in controversy in a fair, timely, and cost efficient manner, and
to comply with the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act (ADRA), 5
U.S.C. 571 et seq. Today, DOE issues a revised Statement of Policy on
Alternative Dispute Resolution to reaffirm its commitment to the use of
ADR, including the use of Environmental Conflict Resolution (ECR) and
other collaborative processes that may be utilized to prevent or avoid
potential conflicts.
DATES: This Revised Policy Statement is effective: October 24, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathleen Binder, Director, Office of
Conflict Prevention and Resolution, U.S. Department of Energy,
Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586-6972 or by e-mail at
Kathleen.binder@hq.doe.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The ADRA, 5 U.S.C. 571 et seq., authorizes
and encourages federal agencies to employ consensual methods of dispute
resolution as alternatives to litigation. Under the ADRA as enacted in
1990 and amended in 1996,\1\ a federal agency is required to:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Public Law No. 101-552, section 3, as amended by Public Law
104-320, section 4(a); see 5 U.S.C. 571 note.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Adopt a policy on the use of ADR techniques;
2. Designate a senior official as a dispute resolution specialist;
3. Establish training programs in the use of dispute resolution
methods; and
4. Review the standard language in agency contracts, grants or
other agreements, to determine whether to include a provision on ADR.
Congress enacted the ADRA to reduce the time, cost, inefficiencies
and contentiousness that may be associated with litigation and other
adversarial dispute resolution mechanisms. Since the enactment of ADRA,
the federal government as a whole, and DOE in particular, have
significantly increased the use of ADR techniques. However, from time
to time there are efforts initiated to further increase the use of ADR.
For example, on May 1, 1998, the President issued a memorandum
directing the Attorney General to lead an Interagency Alternative
Dispute Resolution Working Group to promote and facilitate federal ADR.
The Working Group established four sections to represent the major
substantive areas of ADR application: Enforcement, claims against the
government, contracts and procurement, and workplace conflict. A
Working Group Steering Committee was established to represent nearly 60
federal agencies.
Pursuant to section 11 of the Technology Transfer Commercialization
Act of 2000, Public Law No. 106-404, each DOE laboratory and research
facility appointed a technology partnership ombudsman to hear and help
resolve complaints from outside organizations regarding the policies
and actions of each such laboratory or facility with respect to
technology partnerships, patents, and technology licensing.
On November 28, 2005, the Director of the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) and the Chairman of the Council on Environmental Quality
(CEQ) issued a memorandum directing federal agencies to increase the
use of ECR and collaborative problem solving. The memorandum also
directs that agencies report to CEQ and OMB annually regarding their
progress in increasing the use of ECR.
This revised policy makes several changes to the 1995 policy to
take account of the actions mentioned above. These changes include
broadening the scope of ADR by including ECR, which is referenced in
sections A, B, C, and D of the revised policy, as well as adding
coordination of the Technology Transfer Ombudsman Program to the role
of the Dispute Resolution Specialist. This revised Statement of Policy
supersedes the 1995 Notice of Interim Policy Statement.
Accordingly, DOE adopts the revised Statement of Policy that
follows.
The Secretary of Energy has approved the issuance of this Notice.
Issued in Washington, DC, on October 19, 2008.
David R. Hill,
General Counsel.
Department of Energy Statement of Policy on Alternative Dispute
Resolution
A. Introduction
This Statement of Policy addresses the use of Alternative Dispute
Resolution (ADR) by the Department of Energy (DOE), as required by the
Administrative Dispute Resolution Act (ADRA), 5 U.S.C. 571 et seq. This
Statement of Policy also broadens the scope of ADR as utilized at DOE
to include Environmental Conflict Resolution (ECR) and other
collaborative processes utilized to prevent or avoid potential
conflicts. The ADRA authorizes and encourages agencies to use mediation
and other consensual methods of dispute resolution as alternatives to
traditional dispute resolution processes. The ADRA requires agencies to
designate a Dispute Resolution Specialist, establish a policy
addressing the use of ADR, review contracts and grants for appropriate
inclusion of ADR clauses and provide for regular training on ADR.
The initiatives required under the ADRA are also supplemented by:
(i) The Negotiated Rulemaking Act, 5 U.S.C. 561 et seq., which
establishes a framework for use of negotiated rulemaking to increase
acceptability and improve the substance of rules; and
(ii) The Technology Transfer Commercialization Act of 2000, Public
Law No. 106-404, which in section 11 calls for the appointment of a
Technology Partnerships Ombudsman at each DOE National Laboratory to
hear and help resolve complaints from outside organizations regarding
the policies and actions of each laboratory with respect to technology
partnerships.
In addition, on November 28, 2005, a memorandum was issued by the
Director of the Office of Management and Budget and the Chairman of the
Council on Environmental Quality directing federal agencies to increase
the use of ECR and collaborative problem solving (ECR Memorandum).
B. Policy
DOE is committed to the use of ADR, including ECR and other
collaborative processes, as a management tool to prevent or minimize
disputes, or to resolve disputes at the earliest stage possible in an
expeditious, cost effective and mutually acceptable manner. In
furtherance of this commitment to the use of ADR, and in compliance
with the ADRA, DOE's Dispute Resolution Specialist is responsible for
encouraging and coordinating the ADR efforts of DOE, formulating DOE-
wide ADR policies, and disseminating information about DOE's ADR
activities, including providing assistance, consultation and training
within DOE on ADR matters. In state and federal court litigation, ADR
procedures may be mandated by applicable statutes, court orders, rules
and procedures.
DOE supports the voluntary use of ADR, including ECR and other
collaborative processes, e.g., mediation, early neutral evaluation,
partnering, facilitated negotiations, the use of an
[[Page 63459]]
ombudsman, and arbitration, where appropriate. The use of binding
arbitration is not appropriate except in very limited circumstances and
is subject to compliance with 5 U.S.C. 575(c). Prior to pursuing the
use of binding arbitration, DOE's Office of Conflict Prevention and
Resolution, which is an office within the Department's Office of the
General Counsel, must be contacted to determine whether binding
arbitration previously has been approved for such circumstances or to
advise on whether to seek approval.
The ECR Memorandum, referenced previously, defines ECR as ``third-
party assisted conflict resolution and collaborative problem solving in
the context of environmental, public lands, or natural resources issues
or conflicts, including matters relating to energy, transportation, and
land use.'' The ECR Memorandum also recognizes that there are a broad
array of partnerships, cooperative arrangements and unassisted
negotiations used by Federal agencies to manage and implement their
programs. DOE has adopted this broader view of ECR, and defines ECR to
include all types of collaborative problem solving processes used to
prevent or resolve an environmental conflict regardless of whether a
third party is used in these processes.
In addition, DOE supports the use of negotiated rulemaking, which
is a process that brings together representatives of various interest
groups and a federal agency, as appropriate to negotiate the text of a
proposed rule.
C. Applications
DOE will undertake to use appropriate ADR, including ECR and other
collaborative processes, in three main areas.
1. Dispute Prevention
DOE believes that ADR can be used as a management tool to prevent
conflicts from escalating into more serious disputes. Mediation and
other forms of ADR may be applied to workplace related issues early in
the process to promote a humane and productive workplace and to prevent
and reduce grievances, as well as EEO and whistleblower complaints.
DOE also may consider, when appropriate, the use of partnering with
its contractors to prevent disputes between DOE and its contractors.
This technique, used successfully by DOE, other federal agencies, and
private sector companies, fosters cooperative efforts to carry out the
objectives of the contract and helps to manage conflict by identifying
potential disputes and planning in advance for their resolution.
DOE may utilize ECR, including various collaborative problem
solving techniques, when appropriate, to prevent or resolve conflicts
that may arise over the actual, potential or perceived impacts of DOE
operations on the environment and natural resources by working with
DOE's stakeholders to address issues of concern as early in the
decision-making process as is practicable. In using ECR, DOE should
seek to apply the principles set forth in Appendix A.
DOE also encourages the use, when appropriate, of facilitated
negotiations, which are negotiations with groups of representatives
with potentially disparate interests striving to reach a consensual
decision on a policy issue. This includes use of negotiated rulemaking
in the development of proposed rules.
2. Early Intervention
Where disputes cannot be avoided, the use of ADR can promote prompt
and efficient resolution and avoid the need for a more formal
disposition, such as administrative proceedings and litigation.
3. Litigation
a. The ADRA encourages federal agencies to use ADR to resolve
disputes involving their administrative programs when all participants
voluntarily agree. DOE will pursue the appropriate use of ADR in
administrative litigation, and will consider the use of ADR in such
cases, when requested by a party to the litigation, or by the
administrative body hearing the case.
b. In addition, DOE will provide assistance to the Department of
Justice, as requested, in support of DOJ Order 1160.1, ``Promoting the
Broader Appropriate Use of Alternative Dispute Resolution Techniques.''
c. Finally, DOE will encourage and assist its management and
operating contractors and their counsel in applying ADR and ECR
techniques in addressing potential or actual claims or litigation.
See Appendix B for a list of references and resources relating to
ADR.
D. Role of the Dispute Resolution Specialist
The Dispute Resolution Specialist, who also acts as the Director of
the Office of Conflict Prevention and Resolution, serves as a resource
to all DOE components and contractors. The Dispute Resolution
Specialist shall:
1. Identify categories of disputes and potential disputes that are
suitable for ADR;
2. Assist in identifying neutrals for various ADR techniques;
3. Facilitate the use of ADR by DOE and establish pilot projects;
4. Participate in the Interagency ADR Working Group Steering
Committee to promote the use of ADR in the Executive Branch, as
directed in the Presidential Memorandum issued on May 1, 1998;
5. Facilitate the use of ECR for preventing or resolving
environmental conflicts that are associated with DOE plans and
operations;
6. Assist DOE in building capacity to utilize ECR to identify,
prevent, or resolve environmental conflicts associated with its plans
and operations;
7. Identify categories of agreements, contracts and memoranda of
understanding which may be suitable for inclusion of standard ADR
clauses;
8. Promote the use of negotiated rulemaking;
9. Develop ADR education/training programs for DOE personnel. This
shall include:
a. Introductory training to ensure that executives, managers and
supervisors understand ADR and its potential benefits;
b. Training for personnel having a role in dispute management
(e.g., labor/management relations, contracts, litigation,
administrative adjudication, and environmental matters);
10. Institute procedures to support more systematic use of ADR;
11. Disseminate information on the use of ADR;
12. Ensure that procedures are in place for evaluation of DOE's use
of ADR, including ADR results and resolutions, satisfaction of the
participants, and estimated cost savings and other benefits;
13. Coordinate the Technology Partnerships Ombudsman Program; and
14. Encourage DOE contractors to use ADR, including ECR, as
appropriate.
E. Periodic Evaluation
DOE periodically will evaluate the ADR program and the steps taken
toward its effective implementation.
DOE encourages comments on the use of ADR, including ECR and other
collaborative processes, from both within and outside DOE.
Appendix A
Basic Principles for Department of Energy Engagement in Environmental
Conflict Resolution and Collaborative Problem Solving
Department and/or contractor personnel should:
[[Page 63460]]
Informed Commitment--Confirm willingness and availability of
appropriate agency leadership and staff at all levels to commit to
principles of engagement, and ensure commitment to participate in
good faith with open mindset to new perspectives.
Balanced, Voluntary Representation--Ensure balanced inclusion of
affected/concerned interests; all parties should be willing and able
to participate and select their own representatives.
Group Autonomy--Engage with all participants in developing and
governing process; including choice of consensus-based decision
rules; seek assistance as needed from impartial facilitator/mediator
selected by and accountable to all parties.
Informed Process--Seek agreement on how to share, test and apply
relevant information (scientific, cultural, technical, etc.) among
participants; ensure relevant information is accessible and
understandable by all participants.
Accountability--Participate in the process directly, fully, and
in good faith; be accountable to all participants, as well as agency
representatives and the public.
Openness--Ensure all participants, and, as appropriate, the
public, are fully informed in a timely manner of the purpose and
objectives of process; communicate agency authorities, requirements
and constraints; uphold confidentiality rules and agreements as
required for particular proceedings.
Timeliness--Ensure timely decisions and outcomes.
Implementation--Ensure that decisions are implementable
consistent with federal law and policy. Parties also should commit
to identify roles and responsibilities necessary to implement
agreement; should agree in advance on the consequences of a party
being unable to provide necessary resources or to implement
agreement; and should take steps to obtain resources necessary to
implement any agreement.
Appendix B
List of References and Other Resources Relating to ADR, ECR and Other
Collaborative Processes
References
1. Administrative Dispute Resolution Act of 1996, 5 U.S.C. 571 et
seq.
2. The Technology Transfer Commercialization Act of 2000, Public Law
No. 106-404
3. Joint Memorandum from Office of Management and Budget and the
Council on Environmental Quality Joint Memorandum on Environmental
Conflict Resolution, November 2005, (https://www.whitehouse.gov/ceq/
joint-statement.html)
4. The Negotiated Rulemaking Act, 5 U.S.C. 561 et seq.
5. Department of Justice Order 1160.1, Promoting the Broader
Appropriate Use of Alternative Dispute Resolution Techniques, http:/
/www.usdoj.gov/crt/adr/agorder.html
Other Resources
1. DOE's Office of Conflict Prevention and Resolution Web site,
https://www.gc.doe.gov/disputeResolution.htm
2. U.S. Department of Justice's Interagency Alternative Dispute
Resolution Working Group, https://www.adr.gov/
3. The Institute for Environmental Conflict Resolution, https://
www.ecr.gov
[FR Doc. E8-25398 Filed 10-23-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P