1. The Independent 

 Scientific Review 

 Panel 



Kc\icn l^csponsibilities 





^ »tfT^-l^^V " ~' I III! 



The 1 996 amendment to the 

 Power Aet direeted the Couiieil 

 to appoint an 1 1 -member panel 

 of independent scientists and addi- 

 tional peer review groups. These 

 scientists provide advice and infor- 

 mation regarding scientific aspects 

 ot projects that the Council may rec- 

 ommend for funding by Bonneville. 

 The Independent Scientific Review 

 Panel and peer review groups have 

 responsibilities in three areas: 



• Review projects proposed for 

 Bonneville funding to implement 

 the Council's program 



The Power Act directs the 

 Independent Scientific Review 

 Panel to review annually projects 

 that are proposed for Bonneville 

 funding to implement the Coun- 

 cil's program. The Act specifies 

 the review standards that the 

 Independent Scientific Review 

 Panel is to use and the kinds of 

 recommendations to make to the 

 Council. The Council must fully 

 consider the Independent Scien- 

 tific Review Panel's report prior 

 to making its funding recom- 

 mendations to Bonneville, and 

 must explain in writing w herever 

 the Council's recommendations 

 differ from the Independent Sci- 

 entific Review Panel's. 



• Retrospective review of program 

 accomplishments 



The 1996 amendment also 

 directs the Independent Scientific 

 Review Panel, with assistance 

 from the Scientific Peer Review 

 Groups, to annually review the 

 results of prior-year expenditures 

 based upon the project review 

 criteria and submit its findings to 

 the Council. 





4 



\S^^y The retrospec- 



v^^'j^*} tive review should 



focus on the measurable 

 benefits to fish and 

 wildlife made through 

 projects funded by 

 Bonneville and previously 

 reviewed. The Independent Sci- 

 entific Review Panel's findings 

 should provide biological infor- 

 mation for the Council's ongoing 

 accounting and evaluation of 

 Bonneville's expenditures and 

 the level of success in meeting 

 the objectives of the program, 

 as described in the monitoring 

 and evaluation section. Also as 

 pail of the Independent Scientific 

 Review Panel's annual retro- 

 spective report, the Independent 

 Scientific Review Panel should 

 summarize its province review 

 efforts and identify the major 

 basinwide programmatic issues 

 gleaned from the province 

 reviews. 



Review projects funded through 

 Bonneville's reimbursable pro- 

 gram 



In 1998, the U.S. Congress' 

 Senate-House conference report 

 on the Fiscal Year 1999 Energy 

 and Water Development Appro- 

 priations bill directed the Inde- 

 pendent Scientific Review Panel 

 to review the fish and wildlife 

 projects, programs, or measures 

 included in federal agency bud- 

 gets that are reimbursed by 

 Bonneville, using the same stan- 

 dards and making recommenda- 

 tions as in its review of the 

 projects proposed to implement 

 the Council's program, further 

 details of the Independent Sci- 



entific Revievs Panel's project 

 review responsibilities are 

 described earlier, in the section 

 on project selection. 



The Independent Scientific 

 Review Panel is a standing 

 group that meets throughout 

 the year. Recommendations 

 from the Independent Scientific 

 Review Panel are reached by 

 consensus. The Independent Sci- 

 entific Review Panel may enlist 

 Peer Review Group members to 

 assist in reviews. From the 

 pool of Peer Review Group 

 members, the Independent Sci- 

 entific Review Panel selects 

 reviewers who have the appro- 

 priate expertise for the review 

 at issue. The Independent Sci- 

 entific Review Panel develops 

 guidelines and criteria for 

 reviews that include lists of mate- 

 rials reviewed, site-visit proto- 

 cols, and limits to re\ iewer and 

 project sponsor communication. 



The Independent Scientific 

 Advisory Board 



The Council and the National 

 Marine Fisheries Service established 

 the Independent Scientific Advisoiy 

 Board to pro\ ide independent sci- 

 entific advice to the region through 

 measures described in the Council's 

 1994-1995 Fish and Wildlife Pro- 

 gram and the National Marine Fisher- 

 ies Service's I99S Proposed Recov- 

 ery Plan for Snake Ri\cr Salmon. 

 Rather than establish two groups, the 

 National Marine Fisheries Ser\ ice 

 and the Council created the Indepen- 

 dent Scientific Advisory Board. In 

 creating the Independent Scientific 

 Advisoiy Board, the National Marine 

 Fisheries Service and the Council 

 hoped to a\oid gridlock o\ er scien- 

 tific uncertainty, circumvent unneces- 

 sary additional research, and resolve 

 conflicting ad\ ice and opiniims on 

 recovei"v issues and measures. 



50 



2000 Columbia river Basin Fish and Wildlife Program 



