Previous Reviews

The last Technical Review Group was completed by the Advisory Committee in October, 2010. Numerous foundation documents on the development of the model topology, hydrology, methods and rules were provided to Committee members completing the Technical Review. Presentations were made for group discussions on all the model development and modeling activities. Received comments were reviewed and addressed, and responses documented.

Since that time, incremental development of the model has been undertaken by members of the Technical Team, all of whom are experts in the area of hydrology and hydraulics from both the government and the private sectors. The protocol followed by the Team in the planning, development and testing of model improvements and review of documentation of those steps provides sufficient technical review.

Technical Review Protocol

Objective: The objective of this protocol is to outline the process by which the URGWOM Technical Team members will conduct a thorough review of the model documentation for the upgrade and enhancements made to the hydrologic model. The review aims to ensure the technical accuracy, feasibility, and effectiveness of the model upgrade.

1. Identification of appropriate reviewers: Identify key members of the URGWOM technical team with expertise in areas that are undergoing review (e.g., groundwater hydrology, vegetation ET development, data analysis).  Ensure representation from as many different disciplines as possible to provide comprehensive perspectives during the review.
2. Documentation Familiarization: Distribute the complete draft documentation for the model upgrade and improvements to the reviewers.  Request team members to carefully study the documentation, paying attention to technical details, algorithmic changes, input data sources, and validation procedures.
3. Review Criteria and Guidelines: Develop review criteria that align with the goals of the URGWOM project, including technical accuracy, alignment with hydrologic principles, and compatibility with existing models and frameworks. Provide guidelines to the reviewers on how to document their findings, suggestions, and concerns for effective communication.
4. Individual Review: Instruct each reviewer to independently review the documentation and assess its technical validity and feasibility. Encourage reviewers to take comprehensive notes, marking areas of clarity, potential issues, and opportunities for improvement.  Allocate a specific timeframe for completion of the review.  Compile a list of technical questions, suggestions, and recommended modifications into a comprehensive review report.
5. Review Comment Compilation: Collect all the compiled feedback, suggestions, and notes from each reviewer. Organize the comments into a comprehensive review report.
6. Author Response: Share the review report with the report’s authors.  Arrange a meeting between the reviewers and the authors, if necessary, to discuss the feedback, clarify points of concern, and seek additional insights.
7. Revision and Finalization: Authors should use the review feedback to make necessary revisions to the model improvement documentation, addressing identified issues and incorporating feasible suggestions. Review the revised documentation to ensure that the suggested changes have been adequately addressed.
8. Dissemination and Future Steps: Share the revised documentation with the other members of the Technical Team.  Post a copy of the documentation on the URGWOM web page.  Communicate any recommended next steps, such as further validation or refinement, based on the review outcomes.