Technical Credit reviewer credentials and Review Comment Delays

I have 2 questions: 1) What are the credential/experience level requirements for credit reviewers, in particular highly technical credits, and specifically EAp2/EAc1? We seem to have had a run of review comments where the reviewer simply doesn't understand the credit requirements as stated in the Reference Guide, or the ASHRAE requirements, or in some cases how eQuest works as a model. While these issues are generally resolved via a thoughtful response, either through the preliminary/final review/response process, or informally in an email directly to the review team. However, these responses take time, usually weeks, which leaves the project team in limbo while we all wait. If an appeal becomes necessary, that's yet another 5 weeks (plus whatever the current delay is), plus $800 for the appeal. In the grand scheme of the project budget $800 is a drop in the bucket, but it is still an added cost at a time when projects are usually trying to cut costs. Which brings me to my 2nd question: 2) What is GBCI doing to hire an adequate number of technical staff to complete reviews in the timeframe specified (25 business days)? As of now, that 25 days is completely meaningless, as the turn-around time is typically "25 business days plus whatever delays GBCI happens to be experiencing at that time." This all adds up to an annoyance for the team, especially the owner. To be honest, we've had some backlash recently, where the owner said they are not likely to go through this process again -- it's just not worth it. While I can attribute these issues to "growing pains", it does not make it any less of an issue for the owner.