Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:

Executive Summary
Pages 1-9

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 1...
... The complexity of some Corps planning studies and the challenges to some of these studies—especially the Corps' Upper Mississippi River-TIlinois Waterway draft feasibility study in the late l990s—by different interest groups led Congress to request the National Academies to provide advice on implementing improved review procedures for Corps water resources planning studies. Corps of Engineers water resources projects have long been subjected to some degree of review.
From page 2...
... EXECUTING REVIEW WITHIN THE CORPS The Corps' more complex water resources project planning studies (this report adopts a broad definition of"planning studies" that includes "reoperations" and retrofit-type studies for existing projects, as well as feasibility studies for new water resources projects) should be subjected to external, independent review.
From page 3...
... to administer the Corps' review processes. The Administrative Group for Project Review itself should not conduct reviews; rather, it should decide which Corps planning studies will require a review, and whether a review will be conducted externally or internally or with the current review process.
From page 4...
... Congress should establish this Review Advisory Board to provide periodic independent advice to the Corps regarding review procedures for its water resources project planning studies. The Review Advisory Board would not perform study reviews nor would it select reviewers.
From page 5...
... To ensure that the Corps' review procedures are reviewed by well-qualified analysts, the functions of a Review Advisory Board may have to be part of the mandate of a body charged with more comprehensive review of the Corps' planning procedures. Independence of Review and Reviewers The highest degree of credibility of external reviews will be achieved if the responsibility for coordinating the external review process is granted to an organization independent of the Corps.
From page 6...
... A review panel's report should be a public document. Results of reviews should appear in Corps water resources project planning studies that are submitted to Congress.
From page 7...
... ; feasibility report forwarded for ~ Washington-level review 36 Chief's Report 38 40 FIGURE ES-1 Corps planning study time line. 7 Reconnaissance Phase 1 - ~ Initiate recon.
From page 8...
... In the idealized Corps of Engineers water resources project planning study, the feasibility phase lasts roughly two years. The point at which a review should be initiated will not always be clear, and it will vary depending upon a study's complexity and duration.
From page 9...
... In terms of costs, especially in the case of large, expensive projects, adding careful review represents a small fraction of total costs and will generally represent a wise expenditure of resources. To help implement this report's recommendations, Congress should provide the resources necessary to help the Secretary of the Army reformulate and strengthen the Corps' review procedures for its water resources project planning studies.


This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More information on Chapter Skim is available.