1 / 19

COMMON EXECUTION PROBLEMS Section 7 Consultation Streamlining

COMMON EXECUTION PROBLEMS Section 7 Consultation Streamlining. Interagency Section 7 Consultation Session Boise, Idaho - February 2004. What Problems ???. May 27, 2003 letter from the Interagency Regional Executives included attachment “Common Execution Problems”

macha
Download Presentation

COMMON EXECUTION PROBLEMS Section 7 Consultation Streamlining

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. COMMON EXECUTION PROBLEMSSection 7 Consultation Streamlining Interagency Section 7 Consultation Session Boise, Idaho - February 2004

  2. What Problems ??? • May 27, 2003 letter from the Interagency Regional Executives included attachment “Common Execution Problems” • Problems were identified in assignment from OR/WA Regional Execs and completed by interagency RTT Members

  3. Tasks from Regional Execs Complete Streamlining Rapid Assessment Perform a Workload Analysis Conduct a Biological Assessment Review

  4. Streamlining Rapid Assessment • One-day Interagency “Brainstorming” Session • Addressed what’s working, not working, and steps for improvement of the streamlining process • Incorporated responses from the field to the same questions, and results in the “Hudson Report”

  5. Biological Assessment Review Questions Given the Team Included: • Why are BAs viewed as inadequate by consulting agencies? • Should BA complexity vary by project or biological risk? • Can we use a simplified BA template for some projects, species, and/or determinations?

  6. Workload Analysis • Held 4 interagency (FS, BLM, NOAA Fisheries, FWS) meetings in eastern and western OR and WA • Objective was to share data on the upcoming annual consultation workload and assess staffing needs • Identified potential staffing problem areas and bottlenecks

  7. RESULTS? • Re-issue consultation procedures • Provide interagency refresher training • New offices of FWS and NOAA Fisheries established in LaGrande, OR • Created interagency web site to share consultation information and examples of documents • And…

  8. List of Common Execution Problems • Time frames specified in procedures not being followed and met • Efficiency in function of Level 1 Teams has been compromised • Level 2 Teams are not providing oversight and guidance for Level 1 Teams • Elevation process not understood • Interagency Coordinators need to play greater role in leadership

  9. Time Frames Not Being Followed/Met • 30- and 60-day time frames for informal and formal consultation are considered deadlines, not guidance • Notice will be sent from FWS/NOAA Fisheries within 2 weeks acknowledging receipt of BA

  10. Time Frames, con’t Action agencies contact Services re: BA if notice not received in 2 weeks Services request time extensions within 2 weeks if more time needed to complete consultation Services request additional information within 2 weeks of receiving BA

  11. Time Frames, con’t • Level 1 Teams should review and sign off on adequacy of BA before they are submitted to consulting agencies • Clock relative to consultation streamlining deadlines begins to run the date the BA, as approved by the Level 1 Team, is formally received by consulting agency • Change in proposed action may require adjusting deadline

  12. Level 1 Team Efficiency Compromised • High turnover in staffing undermines team ability to reach consensus on determinations and delays process • Inadequate FWS/NOAA Fisheries staffing for timely BA review and processing of LOCs and BOs, and early involvement in project design

  13. Level 2 Team Role • Level 2 Teams not providing oversight and guidance to Level 1 Teams • Annual assessments of workload and priorities not being conducted and conveyed to Level 1 Teams

  14. Elevation Process • Issue elevation process not understood by Level 1 and 2 Teams • If used, elevation does not follow the process as described in the streamlining procedures • RTT not being used for technical assistance prior to initiating elevation

  15. Interagency Coordinators • Interagency Coordinators need to play a greater role in streamlining consultation coordination and leadership • Agency Executives need to be engaged in ongoing issues

  16. Managers Can Make a Difference… • All Managers need to reinforce the “Shared Mission” responsibility from the National MOU and be supportive of the process. • Managers need to help create a working environment that allows the consultation process to be successful. • Managers are accountable for ensuring their program of work is completed.

  17. Managers Can Help By… • Ensuring that your Level 1 and Level 2 Team members understand the streamlining process. • Promoting collaboration and team building by having team members with appropriate experience and skill to be successful. • Monitoring progress and encouraging Teams to quickly resolve issues or concerns. • Demonstrating your support, commitment, and confidence in the streamlining process.

  18. Teams Can Help Themselves… • Improve Team processes and develop operating guidelines. • Assign Team Lead with streamlining experience, good team building skills, and good collaborative and facilitation skills. • Use facilitator and note taker to ensure accurate documentation • Take advantage of resources such as the RTT, ICS, managers, and others.

  19. Questions?

More Related