In the recent evaluation of CSI, the report suggested that the Council and Subcommittees revisit the question of when it is best to operate utilizing consensus decision-making. EPA intends for the consensus process of CSI to be used to foster better, more inclusive decisions that meet the interests of all parties. Generally then, it is appropriate for the Council, Subcommittees and Workgroups to attempt to reach full agreement on as many substantive and procedural issues as possible . For certain logistical issues, the CSI Council has determined that if consensus is not reached, the Chair or Co-chair will take appropriate action informed by the opinions of the members at the table. Likewise, not all substantive and procedural issues require a full determination of consensus for the group to move forward, if the group determines that certain issues can move forward without a full consensus.
Timing is Important.
For significant substantive and procedural issues, groups should work towards consensus from the outset, but be cognizant of the best timing for bringing an issue to a decision point. Progress on critical issues can be disrupted if a decision is called for too early or too late in deliberations. Parties should assure that all necessary information is available, parties understand each other's interests and concerns, ideas for addressing differences of view have been generated, and that the group is ready to move action. It may be useful in deliberations to obtain a sense of the group's thinking on an upcoming decision well before a decision is called for. In the CSI process, EPA representatives serve in several roles.