# 

## APPENDIX B      Scope for the Peer Review Team, Fort Campbell, Kentucky and Tennessee

**SCOPE FOR THE PEER REVIEW TEAM      FORT CAMPBELL, KENTUCKY AND TENNESSEE**

**DEPARTMENTAL CONSULTING ARCHEOLOGIST      ARCHEOLOGY PROGRAM, NPS      DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR      August 28, 2003**

## Purpose

The objective of this review is to assess, at the request of Fort Campbell,       the overall quality and effectiveness of archaeological surveys performed       at Fort Campbell as technical assistance delivered through the National       Park Service Southeastern Archaeological Center (SEAC). In order to make       this assessment, the review is expected to consider the purposes that the       archaeological surveys were intended to serve, and any other aspects of       the projects and the circumstances in which they were performed that are       found to have a bearing on the strengths and weaknesses of these projects       as they were conceived, organized, and actually implemented. Several aspects       of these projects are disputed between Fort Campbell and SEAC.

Other contemporaneous contracts for archaeological services at Fort Campbell,       including others administered through SEAC and some administered through       other agencies, have not produced similar disputes. The review team should       consider comparing the other contracts and their results in order to make       comments or recommendations of more general interest regarding the strengths       and weaknesses that may be inherent in the general method of IDIQ contracting       in addition to comments or recommendations specifically applicable to the       contract and projects from which the disputes have arisen.

In order to make this assessment, the review is expected to examine the       intended purposes of the contracted projects, the implementation, monitoring,       final products, and any other aspects of contract performance and oversight       that are found to have a bearing on the quality and adequacy of the resulting       studies. The team must independently assess whether or not contracted projects       met the goals established by the contracts and how the investigations conducted       through contracts contributed to the overall cultural resource management       program of the fort.

The scope of the review extends to assessment of the general appropriateness       and design of the agreements and contracts used by SEAC at Fort Campbell,       the effectiveness of the contracting vehicles and organization, and how       future contracts and technical assistance relationships can be structured       to be most effective and less likely to produce further disputes.

## Duties of the Peer Review Team

The Peer Review Team shall review documents and other materials relevant       to the administration, method, strategy, techniques and results of projects       carried out through the Fort Campbell-SEAC contract and others at Fort Campbell       as needed for comparison. The peer review team also may request other documents       that it deems pertinent to its review. Review will include:
      - Memorandum of Understanding between Fort Campbell and SEAC;
      - Contracts; 
      - Statements of work for specific projects;
      - Delivery orders and correspondence related to delivery orders;
      - Other relevant correspondence;
      - Draft and final archeological survey reports;
      - Curation materials including maps, field forms, photographs and associated         records;
      - Field locations as necessary.

The Peer Review Team shall also meet and interview individuals from Fort       Campbell, SEAC, related NPS offices such as the contracting office, Panamerican       Consultants Incorporated (PCI, the consulting firm that conducted the investigations       under the SEAC arrangement), and other agencies or individuals who are relevant       and necessary in the opinion of the review team. If meeting in person is       not feasible, interviews may be conducted by telephone conference calls       or by e-mail at the discretion of the review team.

The Peer Review Team shall compile and present a written report that describes       in detail the observations and recommendations of the team (see suggested       outline below).

## Suggested Topics

### Fort Campbell Management of Archeological Resources As Related to These       Projects

      - What is the structure and organization of Fort Campbell's cultural resources         management program?
      - Have some aspects of the organization and structure of the program particularly         affected any of the strengths or weaknesses identified in the projects         under review?
      - Did the structure and organization of the CRM program help, detract         from, or not affect the outcomes of these projects?
      - What communications within and from Fort Campbell were necessary for         proper description and conduct of these projects, and were these communications         effective?

### Contract Organization and Structure

      - Do the contracts adequately or clearly address specific Section 106         and Section 110 compliance and coordination efforts?
      - How are scopes of work written for individual projects undertaken within         the contracts?
      - Would other forms of contracts have provided better organization and         oversight of the technical assistance delivered to Fort Campbell?
      - Were the proposed methods for fieldwork, laboratory analysis, curation         and reporting adequate and effective?

### Contract Oversight and Administration

      - Are there adequate internal checks and balances?
      - Is fiscal accountability maintained?
      - How is communication handled among the participants: Fort Campbell,         SEAC and related NPS offices such as the contracting office, PCI, and         the COE?
      - How were proposed contract modifications handled?
      - Were the statements of concern from Fort Campbell plausible and reasonable,         and did SEAC response adequately and effectively address the concerns         based on the information available to SEAC?

### Assessment Topics

      - Is data management being handled effectively and efficiently?
      - Are appropriate and sufficient reports and maps being produced adequately?
      - Is the approach to consultation with affected parties, including Indian         tribes, appropriate and sufficient?
      - Is the approach to public education and outreach appropriate and sufficient?
      - Are the contributions of the program to the advancement of local, regional,         and national archeological research and interpretation appropriate and         sufficient?
      - What future program requirements should be considered?
      - Has peer review been utilized appropriately in the program?
      - What procedures were used to verify that results as reported were actually         accomplished?

## Suggested Report Outline

      - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
      - INTRODUCTION
      - INTERVIEWS AND ACTIVITIES DURING THE PEER REVIEW
      - EVALUATION OF PERFORMANCE          - Fort Campbell Cultural Management of Archeological Resources            - Structure and organization                              - Discussion
            - Recommendations            - Communication and internal support                              - Discussion
            - Recommendations 
        - Contract Organization and Structure            - Section 106 and Section 110 compliance and coordination                              - Discussion
            - Recommendations 
          - Scopes of Work                              - Discussion
            - Recommendations 
        - Contract Oversight and Administration            - Internal checks and balances                              - Discussion
            - Recommendations 
          - Fiscal accountability                              - Discussion
            - Recommendations 
          - Communication                              - Discussion
            - Recommendations 
          - Response to concerns                              - Discussion
            - Recommendations 
        - Assessment            - Fieldwork                              - Discussion
            - Recommendations 
          - Laboratory analysis                              - Discussion
            - Recommendations 
          - Curation                              - Discussion
            - Recommendations 
          - Data management                              - Discussion
            - Recommendations 
          - Reports and maps                              - Discussion
            - Recommendations 
          - Project Monitoring                              - Discussion
            - Recommendations 
          - Contributions of the program to archeological research and interpretation                              - Discussion
            - Recommendations 
      - OTHER ISSUES          -            - Consultation with affected parties and Indian tribes                              - Discussion
            - Recommendations            - Public education and outreach                              - Discussion
            - Recommendations            - Future program initiatives                              - Discussion
            - Recommendations            - Use of peer review in contract projects                              - Discussion
            - Recommendations 
      - References          Appendix 1: Memorandum Requesting Peer Review          Appendix 2: Brief Biographies of the Peer Review Team 

Technical       Briefs|back|next

      -  Introduction 
      -  Purpose and Goals 
      -  Peer Review Topics 
      -  Conducting Peer Reviews 
      -  Conclusion 
      -  DCA Peer Review Reports 
      -  References 
      -  Appendix A: Memorandum to DCA 
      -  Appendix B: Scope of Work for Fort Campbell 
      -  Appendix C: scope of work for birds point-new         madrid floodway 
      -  Appendix D: documents for birds point-new madrid         floodway 
      -  Appendix E: Agenda and Schedule for Peer Review         Team Field Visit 
      - print         version  
      -  technical briefs index 

    -  DOI 
    -  History & Culture 
    -  Search 
    -  Contact 
    -  FOIA 
    -  Privacy 
    -  Disclaimer 
    -  USA.gov 

    - archeology       in the parks  
    - archeology       nationwide  
    - professional       tools  
    - for       the public  
    - kennewick       man
    - the       antiquities act
    - what's       new

    -  
    -  
    - technical assistance
    - databases
    - standards & guidelines
    - training & education
    - reports
    - publications

    -  
    -  
    -  
    - features
    - learn and participate
    - for teachers