This page provides resources for project delivery teams related to study reviews, including review guidance, review plans, District Quality Control, Agency Technical Review, Independent External Peer Review, Policy and Legal Compliance Review, review tools and processes, and review training and best practices.

Guidance

Civil Works Response to the Engineer Inspector General “Inspection of USACE Civil Works Review Processes” Direction and Action Plan for HQUSACE and MSCs to in response to the EIG Inspection of Civil Works Review Processes report and recommendations endorsed by the Chief. Director's Policy Memorandum 2019-01: Policy & Legal Compliance Review This memorandum establishes procedures for implementing Director’s Policy Memorandum, DPM Civil Works 2018-05: Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness in USACE Civil Works Project Delivery (Planning Phase and Planning Activities), 3 May 2018 to ensure consistency across USACE and all MSCs in the conduct of policy and legal compliance review. This memorandum is applicable to all specifically authorized planning studies supporting project authorization or budget decisions, or that require an action by the Chief of Engineers, the Secretary of the Army acting through the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works (ASA(CW)) or the Congress. Engineer Circular 1165-2-217: Water Resource Policies and Authorities, Review Policy for Civil Works This Circular establishes an accountable, comprehensive, life-cycle review strategy for Civil Works products by providing a seamless process for review of all Civil Works projects from initial planning through design, construction, and Operation, Maintenance, Repair, Replacement and Rehabilitation (OMRR&R). It also provides the procedures for ensuring the quality and credibility of USACE decision, implementation, and operations and maintenance documents and work products. Engineer Regulation 1105-2-100: Planning Guidance Notebook, Appendix H - Amendment #1, Policy Compliance Review and Approval of Decision Documents This appendix prescribes policy compliance review and approval procedures for the following decision documents: section 905(b) analyses, feasibility reports, limited and general reevaluation reports, post-authorization change reports, and other reports supporting project authorization or budget decisions. Engineer Regulation 1110-1-8159: Dr. Checks This regulation updates the policy and procedures for managing the Design Review and Checking System (DrChecks) initially established 10 May 2001 with current website address and technical contact information. Engineer Regulation 1165-2-502: Resources Policies and Authorities; Delegation of Review and Approval Authority for Post-Authorization Decision Documents This regulation provides guidance on delegated review and approval of Post-Authorization Decision Documents. Interim Guidance on Streamlining Independence External Peer Review (IEPR) for Improved Civil Works Product Delivery This memorandum summarizes the current guidance on delegated IEPR authorities to the field, and provides updated guidance on IEPR mandatory triggers. In particular, it streamlines the mandatory triggers to reflect only the statutory requirements for Type I IEPR. When the statutory requirements for IEPR were first introduced in the WRDA 2007, USACE adopted a broad application of these reviews. In the nearly 12 years since, USACE improved its quality management and strengthened all layers of review. IEPR remains an important aspect of USACE's overall quality management strategy for producing sound federal investment decisions and projects. In a resources constrained environment, USACE must focus its IEPR implementation on the most complex, highest cost projects, as well as those that pose a high risk to public safety, the economy, and the environment. Planning Bulletin 2016-02 Civil Works Review This bulletin provided interim Civil Works review policy while a replacement for the expired EC 1165-2-214 was being developed. That policy has now been published as EC 1165-2-217, Civil Works Review, superseding this bulletin.

Review Plans

Review Plan Template Package The Review Plan Template Package provides detailed information related to the development and approval of Review Plans for Civil Works decision documents. The items in this package are intended to assist Project Delivery Teams in preparing Review Plans as required in Engineer Circular (EC) 1165-2-217 - Review Policy for Civil Works. Collectively, these documents offer a roadmap for teams to use in drafting and submitting Review Plans for approval. The package includes: an overview of Civil Works review; a guide for review plan preparation; a review plan template; a checklist of required elements of a Review Plan; the Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) for review plan development and approval. Review Plan Template The Review Plan Template is a MS Word document, containing all of the required elements of a Review Plan and following the new guidance in EC 1165-2-217 and recent changes contained in Mr. Dalton's policy memo issued in May 2018 (DPM-CW 2018-05). The template was developed to serve any phase of a project from study to design work to operations activities. Review Plan Checklist A checklist in MS Excel format to assist Project Delivery Teams and Major Subordinate Commands in assessing if a Review Plan includes all of the required elements as outlined in EC 1165-2-217. The checklist should be completed and included in the formal transmittal of the draft Review Plan from the District to the MSC for approval Review Plans by District or Division This link redirects to the USACE Headquarters website for district and division review plans.

District Quality Control (DQC)

District Quality Control (DQC) Primer, National Planning Centers of Experise District Quality Control, DQC Primer, Presentation DQC and ATR - What You Should Know

Agency Technical Review (ATR)

Agency Technical Review Guide for Ecosystem Restoration Projects This review guide was developed by the National Ecosystem Restoration Planning Center of Expertise. In August 2003, the Corps' Director of Civil Works directed the establishment of national centers to conduct larger, complex planning studies for inland navigation, deep-draft navigation, ecosystem restoration, water supply, and flood damage reduction. The national centers are part of a Corps initiative to improve the quality and -effectiveness of the planning process for water resources projects called the Planning Excellence Program (PEP). The PEP includes training and work force capability improvement, enhanced quality assurance and control efforts, process improvement and regional and national planning centers. Agency Technical Review Summary Report Template Word template / example for developing an Agency Technical Review (ATR) summary report, developed by the USACE Planning Centers of Expertise. Agency Technical Review Work Plan Template Word template / example for developing an Agency Technical Review (ATR) work plan, developed by the USACE Planning Centers of Expertise. The Role of Counsel in the SMART Planning Process On 8 February 2012, DCG-CEO directed implementation of a new process - SMART Planning - for conducting civil works feasibility studies. This memorandum provides additional guidance to Managing Counsels, Division Counsels, and District Counsels on their roles in the SMART Planning process ATR Team Leader Responsibilities Presentation ATRT Lead Checklist for Planning and Decision Documents Climate Preparedness and Resilience Community of Practice (CoP) Climate Assessment Agency Technical Review (ATR) Standards of Practice This document provides standards and procedures for conducting Agency Technical Review within the Climate Preparedness and Resilience CoP. DQC and ATR - What You Should Know Find ATR Certified Reviewers for other CoPs Find Engineering & Construction ATR Certified Reviewers Find Planning SubCoP ATR Certified Reviewers in the Planner Database

Independent External Peer Review (IEPR)

Annual Report to Congress on IEPR Headquarter Peer Review Website Guidance, publications, resources, review plans, peer review reports and USACE responses. Delegation of Authority in Section 2034(a)(5)(A) of the Water Resources Development Act of 2007 (WRDA 2007), as amended (33 U.S.C. 2343) Section 2034(a)(5) of WRDA 2007 authorizes the Chief of Engineers to exclude a study from IEPR if the study does not include an environmental impact statement, and if the Chief of Engineers determines that the study is not controversial; has no more than negligible adverse impacts on scarce or unique cultural, historic, or tribal resources; has no substantial adverse impact on a species listed as endangered or threatened species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) or the critical habitat of such species designated under such Act. This memo delegates the authority to determine that a study for a project with an estimated total cost, including mitigation costs, of more than $200 million meets the criteria in Section 2034(a)(5) and is excluded from IEPR, to the Director of Civil Works. GAO Report: Peer Review Process for Civil Works Project Studies Can Be Improved GAO was asked to examine the number of Corps project studies that have undergone independent peer review in response to Section 2034 of WRDA 2007, the cost of those studies, and the processes the Corps used to conduct peer review. Type I Independent External Peer Review Process - Standard Operating Procedures This SOP is written to only address Type I IEPR. It assumes that Civil Works Decision Documents are completed following the guidance as described in the Planning Guidance Notebook (ER 1105-2-100) and in accord with Civil Works Review policy (EC 115-2-217). In addition, it should be noted that the scope and associated cost of Type I IEPR will vary for each specific study or decision document. It also assumes that the Type I IEPR will be performed on the Draft Report. However, it is possible to perform Type I IEPR on interim products or earlier in the planning process. Please contact the business line PCX or your MSC for additional information. Template - IEPR Final Report Transmittal Memo Template - IEPR Panel Backcheck Record Memo Template - IEPR Performance Work Statement Template - Independent Government Estimate and Military Interdepartmental Purchase Request Template - IEPR Charge and Talking Points Template - IEPR Kickoff Call Agenda Template - IEPR Proposal Evaluation Memo Template - IEPR Draft Evaluator Response Examples Needing Revisions USACE Responses to IEPR Webinar

Policy and Legal Compliance Review

Engineer Regulation 1105-2-100: Planning Guidance Notebook, Appendix H - Amendment #1, Policy Compliance Review and Approval of Decision Documents This appendix prescribes policy compliance review and approval procedures for the following decision documents: section 905(b) analyses, feasibility reports, limited and general reevaluation reports, post-authorization change reports, and other reports supporting project authorization or budget decisions. Director's Policy Memorandum (DPM 2019-01): Policy and Legal Compliance Review This webinar addressed the recently released Directors Policy Memorandum (DPM 2019-01): Policy and Legal Compliance Review. Mr. Michael Hallisy (Economics Section Chief, Los Angeles District) provided an overview of of DPM 2019-01, which establishes procedures to ensure consistency in the conduct of policy and legal compliance reviews across USACE. It was developed to aid implementation of DPM 2018-05: Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness in USACE Civil Works Project Delivery, which delegated policy and legal compliance review for draft and final planning decision documents to the MSCs. The webinar described the purpose, key provisions, and anticipated benefits associated with the implementation of DPM 2019-01, as well as potential challenges and next steps. Feasibility Study Vertical Team Coordination: Key HQ and MSC Tasks This document summarizes key Vertical Team and Headquarters tasks associated with feasibility study coordination, review, milestone meetings, report approval and processing the final report package in preparation for a signed Chief's Report or Director's Report. It includes tasks delegated to the MSCs that have previously been a HQ responsibility associated with policy and legal review and milestone decision making. It does not include tasks/activities such as District Quality Control, Quality Assurance, technical reviews (Agency Technical Review or Independent External Peer Review), etc. Overview of QC/QA and Policy & Legal Compliance Review Procedures This webinar discussed the review process which USACE has developed to address the Information Quality Act and the OMB Final Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review. Ms. Karen Miller (Regional Technical Specialist for LRD, CELRH) presented information on Quality Control and Quality Assurance, including some best practices. Ms. Fay Lachney (Plan Formulation Team Lead for the Office of Water Project Review, HQUSACE) presented an overview of the Legal and Policy Compliance and State and Agency reviews. The presenters also provided an overview of EC 1165-2-217 and ER 1105-2-100, which establish the procedures to ensure the quality and credibility of USACE decision and implementation documents. Policy and Legal Compliance Review Manager Roles and Responsibilities (19 March 2019) This document provides a detailed outline of Review Manager roles and responsibilities related to Policy and Legal Compliance Review, and also includes procedures for processing Chief's and Director's Reports at Headquarters in addition to templates for Project Guidance Memoranda and Documentation of Review Findings memos.

Review Tools and Processes

Dr. Checks DrChecks℠ is the designated enterprise tool for conducting technical reviews. The web-based tool is one of the ProjNet℠ suite of tools. Reviewers enter comments in the system, and PDT members respond to the comments. DrChecks℠ facilitates and documents the issue identification and resolution process. Revised Delegation of Authority in Section 2034(a)(5)(A) of the Water Resources Development Act of 2007 (WRDA 2007), as amended (33 U.S.C. 2343) Section 2034 of WRDA 2007, as amended, requires Independent External Peer Review (IEPR) of studies or projects with an estimated total cost of more than $200 million unless the Chief of Engineers determines that the study is exempt from an IEPR. This memorandum allows delegation of authority to the MSC Commanders to determine if a study is excluded from IEPR and puts into effect that delegation. This authority may not be further delegated. USACE Quality Management System (QMS) Site The USACE Quality Management System (QMS) Portal is a collection of libraries and documents, providing access to a toolbox of uniform processes to support delivery of superior products and service.

Training and Best Practices

How to Effectively Write and Respond to Review Comments: PowerPoint Presentation Presentation from 2015 PCoP Workshop: How to Effectively Write and Respond to Review Comments training CWRBs and SMART Planning How to Effectively Write and Respond to Review Comments: Best Practices Handout Handout from 2015 PCoP Workshop: How to Effectively Write and Respond to Review Comments training materials Policy Challenge Exercise Exercise from 2015 PCoP Workshop: How to Effectively Write and Respond to Review Comments training materials Policy Challenge Exercise Answers Exercise from 2015 PCoP Workshop: How to Effectively Write and Respond to Review Comments training materials ATR Idol Exercise: Long Version Exercise from 2015 PCoP Workshop: How to Effectively Write and Respond to Review Comments training materials ATR Idol Exercise: Long Version Scoring Sheet Exercise from 2015 PCoP Workshop: How to Effectively Write and Respond to Review Comments training materials ATR Idol Exercise: Short Version Exercise from 2015 PCoP Workshop: How to Effectively Write and Respond to Review Comments training materials ATR Idol Exercise: Short Version Scoring Sheet Exercise from 2015 PCoP Workshop: How to Effectively Write and Respond to Review Comments training materials Complete Policy Challenges Handout Exercise from 2015 PCoP Workshop: How to Effectively Write and Respond to Review Comments training materials Real World Review Exercise Exercise from 2015 PCoP Workshop: How to Effectively Write and Respond to Review Comments training materials

Item is restricted to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, CAC required. Document will open in a new window.