CBS-16/Doc.3.6(8), DRAFT 2APPROVED, p. 2

World Meteorological Organization
COMMISSION FOR BASIC SYSTEMS
Sixteenth Session
Guangzhou, China, 23 to 29 November 2016 / CBS-16/Doc.3.6(8)
Submitted by:
Vice-President of CBS
29.XI.2016
APPROVED

AGENDA ITEM 3: DECISIONS RELATED TO TECHNICAL REGULATIONS, ASSOCIATED GUIDES AND GUIDANCE MATERIAL

AGENDA ITEM 3.6: RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE MANUAL ON THE GLOBAL DATA-PROCESSING AND FORECASTING SYSTEM AND FOR THE GUIDE ON THE GLOBAL DATA-PROCESSING SYSTEM

SUMMARY

DECISIONS/ACTIONS REQUIRED:

Adopt draft Decision 3.6(8)/1 —Peer review process for Data-Processing and Forecasting System (DPFS) technical documents

Adopt draft Decision 3.6(8)/2 - on “Guidelines on Meteorological and Hydrological Aspects of Siting and Operation of Nuclear Power Plants” previously referred to as Technical Note 170 (WMO No. 550).

CONTENT OF DOCUMENT:

The Table of Contents is available only electronically as a Document Map[*].

Annex: 1

DRAFT decision

Draft Decision 3.6(8)/1 (CBS-16)

PEER REVIEW PROCESS FOR DATA-PROCESSING SYSTEM (DPFS) TECHNICAL DOCUMENTS

THE COMMISSION FOR BASIC SYSTEMS,

Recalling: Resolution 32 (Cg-XV) – WMO Quality Management Framework,

Noting that an enhanced peer review process for DPFS publications would be required before technical documents are admitted for use by its members, as part of the WMO Quality Management Framework,

Noting further that similar peer review processes have been implemented by other technical commissions, e.g. by CHy at its thirteenth session,

Adopts the peer review process for the DPFS technical documents as described in the Annex;

______

Annex to draft Decision 3.6(8)/1 (CBS-16)

peer review process for dpfs technical publications

1. Introduction

With the adoption of the WMO Quality Management Framework, the publications brought out under the technical guidance of the CBS Open Programme Area Group on Data-processing and Forecasting Systems (CBS/OPAG-DPFS) form an essential tool for meeting the objectives of a quality management system (QMS). As such, the publications brought out by CBS/OPAG-DPFS should undergo a comprehensive peer review before they are recommended for adoption as tools for the QMS. The Commission at its sixteenth session adopted the following peer review process.

2. The peer review process

The president of CBS shall appoint the chairperson or the co-chairperson of the CBS/OPAG-DPFS (who are represented at the CBS Management Group), as responsible to oversee the peer review process during an intersessional period (hereafter referred to as the “responsible member”). Technical material related to the scope of CBS/DPFS activities can be submitted to the Commission for publishing as a CBS/DPFS publication by the chairpersons of the CBS/DPFS Expert Teams.

In this regard, the WMO Secretariat should ensure that the technical material is complete, is in a form ready for review, and has been assigned to a category of technical guidance document, i.e. technical notes, guidelines, and other technical guidance metarials. If the report is not considered ready, the Secretariat shall advise the author(s) as to how it might be amended so as to make it suitable for the review process.

Once the technical material is ready for review it should be sent to the responsible member for peer review. The peer review process shall comprise of the following steps:

(a) Selection of reviewers;

(b) Assessment of the report by the reviewers;

(c) Evaluation of the comments from the reviewers;

(d) Publication of the report.

2.1 Selection of reviewers

The responsible member shall determine whether a particular report is ready for review. The responsible member, in consultation with the president of CBS and the WMO Secretariat, should choose at least three reviewers who are experts in the subject matter.

2.2 Assessment of a report by the reviewers

The responsible member will forward to the reviewers the draft document and a copy of the “notes for reviewers”, which describes the actitities to be undertaken and related process. An agreement with the reviewers should be reached on the time period required for review. The reviewers should be informed that they have the right to remain anonymous, if they so wish.

Reviewers should consider the report from a scientific, technical and editorial point of view and provide their advice, including their views on the suitability of the pre-assigned category of the document.

2.3 Evaluation of the comments from the reviewers

The responsible member together with the Secretariat will evaluate the comments from the reviewers and if needed may forward proposed revisions prepared by the reviewers to the author(s) of the technical material. If appropriate, the author(s) should be requested to elaborate on and comply with the comments of the reviewers. If one or more reviewers wish to see the revised draft, it should be sent to those in question. If, as a result of the review process, the report is considered suitable for publication within the Commission for Basic Systems publication series, the responsible member will recommend its publication to the president of CBS.

2.4 Publication of the document

The president of the Commission for Basic Systems will consider the recommendation when making his or her decision and, when approved (on behalf of the Commission), will coordinate the publication of the document with the WMO Secretariat.

DRAFT decision

Draft Decision 3.6(8)/2 (CBS-16)

“GUIDELINES ON METEOROLOGICAL AND HYDROLOGICAL ASPECTS OF SITING AND OPERATION OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS” PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS TECHNICAL NOTE 170 (WMO No. 550)

THE COMMISSION FOR BASIC SYSTEMS,

Recalling:

(1) Decision 60 (EC-68) – Meteorological and hydrological aspects of siting and operation of nuclear power plants,

(2) Resolution 32 (Cg-XV) – WMO Quality Management Framework,

Acknowledging the substantial progress that has been made with the “Guidelines on Meteorological and Hydrological Aspects of Siting and Operation of Nuclear Power Plants” previously known as the WMO Technical Note 170 (WMO-No. 550), which involves experts from CBS, CAS, CCl, CIMO, JCOMM, and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA),

Decides to apply the peer review process for DPFS technical documents, as described in the Annex of Draft Decision 3.6.2/1 (CBS-16), to consolidate comments from CBS.

Requests the WMO Secretary-General to distribute the consolidated version of the Guidelines to Members for their consideration and comments.

Urges WMO Members and technical commissions concerned to review the draft “Guidelines on Meteorological and Hydrological Aspects of Siting and Operation of Nuclear Power Plants” and provide comments to the WMO Secretariat, as appropriate

Authorizes:

(1) The WMO Secretariat to integrate comments from WMO Members, technical commissions concerned, and the IAEA and prepare the final consolidated version of the “Guidelines on Meteorological and Hydrological Aspects of Siting and Operation of Nuclear Power Plants”;

(2) The president of CBS to endorse the final consolidated version of the “Guidelines on Meteorological and Hydrological Aspects of Siting and Operation of Nuclear Power Plants” for publication.

Requests WMO Secretariat-General to bring these Guidelines to the attention of Members.

______

[*] On a PC, in MS Word 2010 go to “View” and tick the “Navigation Pane” checkbox in the “Show” section. InMSWord 2007 or 2003, go to “View” > “Document Map”. On a Mac, go to “View” > “Navigation Pane” and select“Document Map” in the drop-down list on the left.