Engineering Inc. - September/October 2007 - 11

I Lt. Gen. Van Antwerp meets with the news media during postKatrina reconstruction efforts in New Orleans. n this exclusive interview with Engineering Inc., the new Corps commander discusses Gulf Coast reconstruction after Katrina, working with industry, rebuilding war-torn areas overseas and how the Corps is addressing the shortage of engineers. ACEC Chairman Mac MacMurray: As the 52nd Commander of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, what are your top priorities? ACEC President Dave Raymond: As you know, Congress is working to complete action on the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA). One of the contentious issues in this bill is the extent to which additional oversight is needed for major Corps projects. Alex BrAndon/AP ImAges werp Lieutenant General Robert L. Van Antwerp: One of the first things I did after taking command was sit down with my senior leaders and work out exactly what our priorities and tenets are so we could get busy putting them into action. What they tell you is that we’re back to basics, what Vince Lombardi called “blockin” and “tacklin.” They’re not in any order—there are six important things that we have to do. The priorities are: n Support the global war on terror and the expeditionary mission n Enhance the quality of support for soldiers, civilians, families and the public n Complete the transformation of the theater engineer commands n Effectively prepare for and respond to disasters; enable Gulf Coast recovery n Deliver military, civil works, R&D and regulatory programs and projects The priorities are what the Corps is going to do. I also have established three tenets, which tell us how the Corps will operate as we do them. The tenets are to communicate transparently; focus on your mission; and the third, which is something I think the ACEC membership will appreciate, is to team with industry. I believe that by focusing on these priorities and tenets, we will take the Corps from good to great. Van Antwerp: It’s standard Corps policy not to comment on pending legislation, but I can say that we welcome independent technical review and external peer review in all aspects of our work. We already have implemented an independent peer review process, and are open to ways of improving that process based on WRDA provisions. We always want to make sure that we are providing products that are of the highest technical quality possible. The challenge is that we have to ensure the independent review is done in a way that leads to better products, without slowing down the progress of a particular project or study. The key to successful peer review is to assure that it’s used to constructively advise the process throughout—and especially at major decision points along the way—rather than as a one-time effort at the end. Peer review, properly done, should be incorporated into the routine of project development and should be consistent with the complexity and size of a project. Not all projects need the same extent of review. sEptEmbER / oCtobER 2007 ENGINEERING INC. 11

Engineering Inc. - September/October 2007

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Engineering Inc. - September/October 2007