WSP09463 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Program has a similar process that is used during the annual Upper Colorado River Basin researchers meeting. The BPA project officer may also select a Review Team that would meet prior to conducting a project evaluation and may include a site visit. B.. Recommended Peer Review Process for the UDDer Colorado River Basin Recoverv Proaram. Recovery Program documentation provides the justification for an independent peer review process (U.s. Fieh and Wildlife Service 1994). The following steps are recommended for the peer review process based on the approach used by the National Science Foundation (McCullough 1993) and the Bonneville Power Administration (1994). (1) Peer reviewers should be selected by the. appropriate Program Coordinator on the basis of technical knowledge and experience relevant to the subject proposed for investigation. Care must be exercised in selecting colleagues for the peer review to avoid any conflict of interest since most persons who are knowledgeable about the Upper Colorado River ecosystem are also Recovery Program participants. (2) Guidelines or standards for objective evaluation criteria should be developed by the appropriate Program Coorainator to assist the Peer Reviewers during.their review and evaluation of newly proposed research proposals. Research proposals should be evaluated for scientific and technical merit so that the results will contribute to the recovery effort. (3) Peer reviewers must be provided with clear and complete research proposals and annual reports following the guidance provided in the section on "Content of Research Proposals and Annual Reports" so that they have adequate information to evaluate the proposed work. (4) Reviews of newly proposed research should be made with peer reviewer(s) in a specific discipline or with a good working knowledge of previous studies on the Upper Colorado River Basin. The peer reviewers should be provided with proposed scopes-of- work, previous annual reports, and other background information that would useful in their evaluation. (5) In general, proposed ressarch projects can be reviewed by a peer reviewer at their institution or agency. Questions about specific items can be discussed by telephone between the peer reviewers, principal investigators, or Program Coordinator. In some instances, additional information can be furnished to the peer reviewer by FAX or e-mail. The current practice of the Colorado River Recovery Program to have newly proposed research by three independent peer reviewers; who are selected by the appropriate Program 13