Review Procedures for Water Resources Project Planning (2002) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
6 An Administrative Group for Project Review
6 An Administrative Group for Project Review
Pages 57-69
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 57... ...
To ensure the highest quality of reviews, the director of the Administrative Group for Project Review should be a Senior Executive Service-leve} professional, and the professional staff should possess broad knowledge and expertise in disciplines relevant to water resources planning. The Administrative Group for Project Review would assess Corps reconnaissance reports in order to designate which future draft feasibility reports should be reviewed.
|
From page 58... ...
Those independent organizations are also unlikely to place adequate priority on the review process to allocate resources sufficient to sustain the activity. The Office of Management
|
From page 59... ...
. Future shifts in responsibilities for the review process are a distinct possibility, and these shifts will have implications for the appropriate institutional home for the Administrative Group for Project Review.
|
From page 60... ...
) Intcrnal ~ Review J 1 ExternaV Independent Review AGPR begins selecting reviewers and AGPR begins arranging the review process contracting (, ~ ~ AGPR prepares/obtains all documents needed to support the reviews AGPR manages internal review r 1 , 1 ', Outside body manages external review When Alternative Formulation Briefing occurs: AGPR reviews preliminary findings on type of review; Process is changed as needed to ensure the correct type of review Final review products obtained.
|
From page 61... ...
A key distinction between the current process and internal review is that in the internal review process, a special review panel is appointed, and the panel may include experts from outside the Corps and it may also include Corps staff from other districts. Internal review panels should usually consist of a balance in the number of Corps of Engineers professional staff and non-Corps experts.
|
From page 62... ...
External, Independent Review As part of external, independent review, the Administrative Group for Project Review would contract with an outside organization to select an external and independent review panel. There are precedents for federal agencies having an external group manage their review processes.
|
From page 63... ...
However, review panels should be instructed to not make a recommendation on whether a particular alternative should be implemented, as the Chief of Engineers is ultimately responsible for the final decision on a planning or reoperations study. Responding to Review To ensure effective reviews, it is important that there be a clear understanding from the outset of the objectives of the review and how the review's results wall be used (Boston, 20014.
|
From page 64... ...
The Review Advisory Board would use background materials provided by the Administrative Group for Project Review, make site visits as necessary, and incorporate information Tom public comments when available. This panel discussed the prospects for the Review Advisory Board to enlist experienced and qualified water resources experts, and was concerned that a board mandated only to review review processes might be too narrowly structured to attract highly qualified scientists, engineers, and analysts.
|
From page 65... ...
In these cases, however, the review panel should generally be disbanded after it conducts its evaluation to preclude the possibility of the panelists becoming defenders of their study. In some cases it may be desirable to defer initiation of the review process until the Alternative Formulation Briefing.
|
From page 66... ...
or external ~ POTENTIAL REVIEW OF FS METHODS _ ~ POTENTIAL REVIEW OF FS COMPONENT STUDIES AGPR reevaluation of review type 60-day Public Comment period begins AGPR reevaluation of review type ends ~ POTENTIAL REVIEW OF DRAFT FS ~ AGPR advocates for review in Chiefs Decision CONGRESSIONAL AUTHORIZATION FIGURE 6-2 Corps water resources project planning process and review milestones.
|
From page 67... ...
the preliminary determination suggests that no review is needed, but public comments suggest an internal review is needed, thereby necessitating establishment of an internal review panel, (3) the preliminary determination suggests that an internal review is needed, but public comments suggest an external review is needed, thereby requiring the Administrative Group for Project Review to contract with an outside organization for the selection of an independent review panel, and (4)
|
From page 68... ...
Another strategy that may improve review is to have panel members serve on multiple panels, as this would help standardize evaluation across multiple planning studies. Administrative Costs An issue related to the funding of review is how the sources of funding might affect review independence.
|
From page 69... ...
But this panel derived a first approximation of the annual costs of maintaining an effective review process, arriving at a figure of roughly $2 million. Table 6-l provides an approximate budget, which will vary depending on the number of reviews, panelists, and professional facilitators and on the types of reviews conducted (e.g., face-to-face meetings; videoconferencing; mail)
|
Key Terms
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.