scope:

Purpose.

This Circular establishes procedures to ensure the quality and credibility of Corps decision documents by adjusting and supplementing the current review process. It complies with the Final Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review by the Office of Management and Budget (referred to as the "OMB Bulletin"). This Circular presents a framework for establishing the appropriate level and independence of review, assigns responsibility for conducting Independent Technical Review (ITR) and External Peer Review (EPR) of applicable decision documents to the Planning Centers of Expertise (PCX), and details requirements of review documentation and dissemination.

Applicability.

a. Offices.

This Circular applies to all U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' elements, including the Headquarters, major subordinate commands, laboratories, and district commands having Civil Works responsibilities.

b. Types of Studies and Reports.

(1) This Circular applies to all feasibility studies and reports (as defined in ER 1105-2-100, paragraph 4-1a(2)) and any other studies that lead to decision documents that require authorization by the U.S. Congress, where the feasibility cost sharing agreement or a similar cost sharing agreement has not been signed as of the date of this Circular. This Circular also applies to all other pre-authorization and post-authorization studies or reports that meet criteria for external peer review in paragraph 9 below regardless of the study or project authority, the study or report approval level, or the date of a cost sharing agreement.

(2) This Circular will generally not apply to decision documents that may be approved by a Division Commander (detailed below). All such decision documents will continue to undergo ITR that will "ensure the quality and credibility of the government's scientific information" in accordance with the quality assurance and quality control procedures of each major subordinate command. A vertical team (involving district, major subordinate command and Headquarters members) may choose to apply the peer review procedures of this Circular to any study or report if they determine it is advisable to do so.

(a) Reconnaissance reports (including 905(b) analyses) that lead to feasibility reports (as defined in ER 1105-2-100, paragraph 4-1a( 1)).

(b) Decision documents prepared under the Continuing Authorities Programs (as defined in ER 1105-2-100, Appendix F).

(c) Post-authorization decision documents, defined in ER 1105-2-100, paragraph 4-1b, where approval authority has been delegated to the division commander in EC 1165-2-205. Peer review requirements for these documents will be addressed during preparation of the "Project Study Issue Checklist" (see Appendix A of EC 1165-2-205).

(d) Other types of studies and reports defined in ER 1105-2-100, paragraph 4-1c.

c. Subject Matter.

(1) This Circular applies to "scientific information", "influential scientific information", "scientific assessment", and "highly influential scientific assessment" as defined in the OMB Bulletin, paragraphs I(5) - I(7) and III(1). This includes factual inputs, data, the use of models, analyses, assumptions, and other scientific and engineering matters that inform decision-making. In the Corps this typically includes, but is not limited to: economic and environmental assumptions and projections, evaluation data, economic analyses, environmental analyses, engineering analyses (including hydrology and hydraulics, geotechnical, structural, etc.), methods for integrating risk and uncertainty and for conducting trade-offs, and the use of models in the evaluation of engineering, economic and environmental effects. Any biological opinions and similar scientific judgments provided by other Federal agencies pursuant to Federal requirements are subject to those agencies' regulations for compliance with the OMB Bulletin. Data, analyses, and other scientific and engineering matters that will be peer reviewed are typically documented in technical appendices that support but are separate from main reports. In general, peer reviews will focus on technical appendixes rather than solely main reports or NEPA documents (including environmental assessments and environmental impact statements).

(2) Models used in the preparation of decision documents covered by this Circular will be reviewed in accordance with EC 1105-2-407, Planning Models Improvement Program: Model Certification, and are not subject to the requirements of this Circular. The uses and applications of models in individual studies that lead to the preparation of decision documents covered by this Circular will be reviewed in accordance with the requirements of this Circular.

(3) This Circular does not apply to policy determinations and reviews, and agency exercise of discretionary authority which are beyond the scope of scientific and engineering peer review. Policy matters beyond the scope of peer review include, but are not limited to: adherence to Federal, Army and Corps policies, and selection of a recommended plan. Policy review is the responsibility of the Corps and the Army and will continue to be accomplished according to existing policy review procedures. Policy comments that may be raised during peer reviews covered by this Circular will be provided to the District or other Corps office responsible for the decision document under review for consideration through existing policy review procedures.

(4) Principal findings, conclusions and recommendations in official reports of the National Academy of Sciences are generally presumed to have been adequately peer reviewed, if study area conditions and underlying science and technology have not significantly changed since the review.