Instructions for fy’12 Report pursuant to the Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review




Yüklə 151.43 Kb.
tarix26.04.2016
ölçüsü151.43 Kb.
Instructions for FY’12 Report pursuant to the

Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review
As you prepare your report, please ensure that your agency’s Peer Review Agenda (the Agenda) includes agency plans for the foreseeable future1 and that each Agenda entry is up to date regarding both the timing of the review and whether the review has been completed. Agenda entries should be updated whenever new information becomes available; every six months is the minimum for updating the Agenda.
Once a peer review has been completed (that is, the final product has been edited to reflect the reviewers’ comments), the Agenda entry should be updated to include a link to the peer review charge, the reviewers’ names, and the peer reviewers’ comments, as well as the final version of the product. For highly influential scientific assessments, the agency’s responses also should be posted. An example of good practice is the Department of Agriculture’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service2 agenda.
Please use the attached template to record peer reviews conducted pursuant to the Bulletin between October 1, 2011 and September 30, 2012. This form has two parts: 1) A “department-level summary,” which should aggregate information across all of the agencies/bureaus/offices in the department and 2) an “agency report” that should be completed by each agency within a department. A separate “agency report” should be completed for each agency that produces information subject to the Bulletin. Please make sure to report to us the current URLs for your peer review agenda – some agencies continue to submit URLs that no longer work. Also take this opportunity to ensure that your agency’s peer review agenda is up to date and all of the links on your agency’s peer review home page are working.
For those agencies that do not have any peer reviews to report for this fiscal year, it is necessary to complete only the General Information component of the “agency report.” Agencies that are not part of departments do not have to complete the summary page; they should type “Not Applicable” on the “Department” line.
To ensure consistency across agencies, please use the guidance below to determine which peer reviews were “conducted” during the last fiscal year, and thus should be reported.


  • Include peer reviews for which the peers have provided the agency with their (final) comments, regardless of whether the agency has:

  • Exclude peer reviews:

    • for which the reviewers are still considering the information,

    • that are planned for the future, or

    • that were planned for the current fiscal year, but were not conducted.

Agencies that reported last year that they do not produce information subject to the Bulletin do not need to fill out a report this year unless the disclaimer no longer applies OR the link to your disclaimer has changed. Rather, those agencies should send an email to OMB_peer_review@omb.eop.gov with the agency’s current point of contact for the Bulletin and the current URL to the disclaimer. The agencies to which this applies are listed in Appendix K, part C of OMB’s Draft 2012 Report to Congress on the Costs and Benefits of Federal Regulations.3 The template for the appropriate disclaimer is shown below:


“based on the review it has conducted, the [AGENCY] believes that it does not currently produce or sponsor the distribution of influential scientific information (including highly influential scientific assessments) within the definitions promulgated by OMB. As a result, at this time the [AGENCY] has no agenda of forthcoming influential scientific disseminations to post on its website in accordance with OMB's Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review.”

Agencies not listed in Appendix K, part C should submit a report this year. Please send your draft Peer Review Bulletin Annual Report (Due January 18, 2013) to OMB_peer_review@omb.eop.gov. Please do not post your draft report on your web-page until OMB review is complete. Should you have any questions related to the Peer Review report, please contact Margo Schwab (202 395-5647) mschwab@omb.eop.gov or James Kim (202 395-3085) james_h_kim@omb.eop.gov.



Template for FY’12 Report pursuant to the

Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review
I. Summary Page for Department (if Applicable)
Department U.S. Department of the Interior
Departmental Contact for Implementation of the Bulletin for Peer Review

Name and title: Vany Kaiser, DOI Information Quality Coordinator

Email address: Vany_Kaiser@ios.doi.gov

Phone number: (202) 208-3387


Provide the URL for Department’s portal for compliance with the Bulletin

http://www.doi.gov/ocio/information_management/iq.cfm ** ensure link is working
Have you checked to make sure all of the information and links on this URL are current? Yes

Is this URL:

A Department-wide Peer Review Agenda (Y/N) or No

A set of links to each agency (bureau or office’s) agenda (Y/N)? Yes


How would a member of the public locate this peer review portal if she/he did not have this URL? Check all that apply:

A link from Department’s home page __X___

Notices > Information Quality from http://www.doi.gov/index.cfm



A link from Department’s Information Quality home page ___X___

http://www.doi.gov/ocio/information_management/iq.cfm

Other means, e.g., a link from a science page (please describe) __________________


Number of peer reviews conducted subject to the Bulletin in FY’12 (see instructions for what should and should not be included here).
Number of influential scientific information peer reviews (ISI) (not including highly influential scientific assessments) ____32_____
Number of highly influential scientific assessments (HISA) ___2_____

Number of Waivers, Deferrals, Exemptions, or Alternative Procedures used: Total # __8__


Number of peer reviews that included at least one peer reviewer appointed pursuant to any exception to the applicable independence or conflict of interest standards of the Bulletin, including determinations by the Secretary or Deputy Secretary pursuant to Section III (3) (c).

Total # __0__


Number of peer review panels that held in conjunction with public meetings: Total # __3__
Number of public comments provided on the Department’s peer review plans during FY‘12, regardless of whether the peer review was actually completed during FY’12: Total # __0__

Template for FY’12 Report pursuant to the

Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review
II. Agency Report

GENERAL INFORMATION
AGENCY: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Agency Contact for Implementation of the Peer Review Bulletin
Name and title: Richard A. Coleman, Senior Science Advisor

Email address: rick_colemana@fws.gov

Phone number: (303) 236-4443
URL for Agency’s Peer Review Agenda http://www.fws.gov/informationquality/peer_review/index.html

** ensure link is working


What pathway(s) can a member of the public use to find the Agency’s peer review agenda if she/he did not have this URL?

    • Link from Departmental or Agency home page,

“Notices” link in the footer of the FWS pages

    • Link from Agency Information Quality home page,

http://www.fws.gov/informationquality/

    • Link from science, research, or regulatory pages (please specify) ____________

    • Other (please describe) _____________

Does the agenda provide links to peer review reports for all completed peer reviews? Yes

Have you checked to make sure all of the information and links on the agency’s peer review home page are current? Yes

Continue to Next Page

INFORMATION ABOUT REVIEWS CONDUCTED
Number of peer reviews conducted subject to the Bulletin in FY’12. (see instructions for what should and should not be included here).
Number of influential scientific information peer reviews (ISI) (not including highly influential scientific assessments) ___19_____

List the title of each ISI. Indicate whether the Peer Review Report has been completed (Y/N) add more lines as needed NOTE: It is acceptable to provide a screen shot of your peer review agenda as an attachment.




  1. Listing 23 Species as Endangered and Designating Critical Habitat for 122 Species on Oahu. (Yes)

  2. Proposed rule to Designate Critical for Southern Selkirk Mountain Caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) under the Endangered Species Act. (Yes)

  3. Proposed rule to List and Designate Critical for Eriogonum codium (Umtanum desert buckwheat) and Physaria douglasii ssp. tuplashensis (White Bluffs bladderpod) under Endangered Species Act. (Yes)

  4. Critical Habitat Determination for the Jaguar (Panthera onca). (Yes)

  5. Listing Decision for Four Central Texas Salamanders. (Yes)

  6. Listing Decision for the Texas Golden Gladecress and Neches River Rose-mallow. (Yes)

  7. Listing Decision for the Jemez Mountains Salamander (Plethodon neomexicanus). (Yes)

  8. Listing Decision for the Lesser Prairie-Chicken (Tympanuchus pallidicinctus). (Yes)

  9. Listing Decision for the Gierisch Mallow (Spharalcea gierischii). (Yes)

  10. Listing Decision for the acuña cactus (Echinomastus erectocentrus var. acunensis), the Fickeisen plains cactus (Pediocactus peeblesianus var. fickeiseniae), and the Lemmon fleabane (Erigeron lemmonii). (Yes)

  11. Proposed Listing for Grotto Sculpin and Designation of Critical Habitat. (Yes)

  12. Endangered Species Act (ESA) Listing Decision for Diamond Darter (Crystallaria cincotta). (Yes)

  13. Proposed Removal of the Gray Wolf in Wyoming from the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife. (Yes)

  14. Joint Biological and Conference Opinion on the Proposed Removal of Four Dams on the Klamath River. (Yes)

  15. Designation of Revised Critical Habitat for Allium munzii (Munz's onion) and Atriplex coronata var. notatior (San Jacinto Valley crownscale); Proposed Rule (Yes)

  16. Proposed Critical Habitat for Lost River Sucker and Shortnose Sucker. (Yes)

  17. Draft Recovery Plan Revision for the Lost River Sucker and Shortnose Sucker. (Yes)

  18. 12-Month Finding on a Petition To Downlist Three San Clemente Island Plant Species; Proposed Rule To Reclassify Two San Clemente Island Plant Species; Taxonomic Correction (Yes)

  19. Draft Recovery Plan for Four Subspecies of Island Fox (Urocyon littoralis) (Yes)

Number of highly influential scientific assessments (HISA) ___0____

List the title of each HISA. Indicate whether the Peer Review Report has been Completed (Y/N) add more lines as needed

Not Applicable

Provide the titles of ISIs and HISIs for which Waivers (W), Deferrals (D), or Exemptions (E) were invoked or Alternative Procedures used (A). If deferral is marked, please indicate the duration of the deferral.


Title of Document Type of Document W, D, E, or A

ISI or HISA (and duration)

(1) Waterfowl Population Status Report 2012 HISA W (annual)

(2) Adaptive Harvest Management 2012

Hunting Season Report HISA W (annual)

(3) American Woodcock Population Status 2012 ISI W (annual)

(4) Mourning Dove, White-winged Dove, and

Band-tailed Pigeon Population Status 2012 HISA W (annual)

(5) 2012 Update to the Federal Falconry

Regulations ISI E

(6) Proposed New Approvals Related to

Non-toxic Shot for Waterfowl Hunting HISA E

(7) 2012 Status and Harvests of Sandhill Cranes ISI W (annual)

(8) Bird Hunting Regulations on Certain Federal

Indian Reservations and Ceded Lands for the

2012–13 Early Season; Final rule ISI E
Number of peer reviews that included at least one peer reviewer appointed pursuant to any exception to the applicable independence or conflict of interest standards of the Bulletin, including determinations by the Secretary or Deputy Secretary pursuant to Section III (3) (c)?
Number of ISIs (not including highly influential scientific assessments) ___0___
List titles

Not Applicable

Number of HISAs __0__


List titles

Not Applicable

Number of peer review panels that held public meetings:

Number of ISIs (not including highly influential scientific assessments) ___0___

Number of HISAs ___0____


Number of peer review panels that allowed public comment:

Number of ISIs (not including highly influential scientific assessments) __0__

Number of HISAs ___0____
Number of public comments provided on the agency’s peer review plans during FY’12, regardless of whether the peer review was actually completed during FY’12 ____0_____
Number of times agency specifically solicited peer reviewer nominations from professional societies. _____1______

If such nominations were solicited, were any recommendations provided? Yes _X_ No ___




AGENCY: U.S. Geological Survey
Agency Contact for Implementation of the Peer Review Bulletin
Name and title: Carolyn L. Reid, Policy Analyst, Office of Science Quality and Integrity, Office of the Director

Email address: clreid@usgs.gov

Phone number: (703) 648-5911
URL for Agency’s Peer Review Agenda

http://www.usgs.gov/peer_review/ ** ensure link is working

What pathway(s) can a member of the public use to find the Agency’s peer review agenda if she/he did not have this URL?



    • Link from Departmental or Agency home page,

The USGS home page footer at the Policies and Important Notices page (http://www.usgs.gov/laws/policies_notices.html).

    • Link from Agency Information Quality home page,

The USGS Information Quality homepage (http://www.usgs.gov/info_qual/).

    • Link from science, research, or regulatory pages (please specify)

The USGS Fundamental Science Practices home page (http://www.usgs.gov/fsp/).

    • Other (please describe)

The Office of Science Quality and Integrity home page (http://www.usgs.gov/quality_integrity/)
Does the agenda provide links to peer review reports for all completed peer reviews? Yes

Have you checked to make sure all of the information and links on the agency’s peer review home page are current? Yes



Continue to Next Page

INFORMATION ABOUT REVIEWS CONDUCTED
Number of peer reviews conducted subject to the Bulletin in FY’12. (see instructions for what should and should not be included here).
Number of influential scientific information peer reviews (ISI) (not including highly influential scientific assessments) ____8*____

List the title of each ISI. Indicate whether the Peer Review Report has been completed (Y/N) add more lines as needed NOTE: It is acceptable to provide a screen shot of your peer review agenda as an attachment.


* Refer to the following titles at http://www.usgs.gov/peer_review/:


  1. Assessment of Potential Migration of Radionuclides and Trace Elements from the White Mesa Uranium Mill to the Ute Mountain Ute Reservation and Surrounding Areas, Southeastern Utah

(Yes, the peer review summary report has been completed and is posted on the web page.)

  1. Economic Analysis of the Proposed Rule to Prevent Arrival of New Genetic Strains of the Rust Fungus Puccinia psidii in Hawai'i (first publication) (Yes, the peer review summary report has been completed and is posted on the web page.)

  2. Hydrological Information Products for the Off-Project Water Program of the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (Yes, the peer review summary report has been completed and is posted on the web page.)

  3. An Economic Approach to Assessing Import Policies Designed to Prevent the Arrival of Invasive Species: The case of Puccinia psidii in Hawai'i (second publication) (Yes, the peer review summary report has been completed and is posted on the web page.)

  4. Competitive Interactions and Resource Partitioning Between Northern Spotted Owls and Barred Owls in Western Oregon (Yes, the peer review summary report has been completed and is posted on the web page.)

  5. Fate and Transport of Cyanobacteria and Associated Toxins and Taste-and-Odor Compounds from Upstream Reservoir Releases in the Kansas River, Kansas, September and October, 2011 (Yes, the peer review summary report has been completed and is posted on the web page.)

  6. Investigation of Shallow Groundwater Quality and Geochemistry in the Fayetteville Shale Gas Production Area, North-Central Arkansas (Yes, the peer review summary report has been completed and is posted on the web page.)

  7. The economic viability of smallholder timber production under expanding Açaí palm production in the Amazon Estuary (No, the peer review summary report has not been posted on the Agenda web page pending the ending of the timing of peer review.)

Number of highly influential scientific assessments (HISA) ___2**___

List the title of each HISA. Indicate whether the Peer Review Report has been Completed (Y/N) add more lines as needed
** Refer to the following titles at http://www.usgs.gov/peer_review/:


  1. Klamath Dam Removal Overview Report for the Secretary of the Interior: An Assessment of Science and Technical Information (No, the peer review summary report is not posted on the Agenda web page pending the posting (at http://klamathrestoration.gov/) of supporting documentation that will be linked to in the summary report.)

  2. Synthesis of Studies in the Fall Low Salinity Zone of the San Francisco Estuary, September-December 2011 (No, the peer review summary report is not yet posted on the Agenda web page pending the completion of the author’s response to peer reviewer comments.)

Provide the titles of ISIs and HISIs for which Waivers (W), Deferrals (D), or Exemptions (E) were invoked or Alternative Procedures used (A). If deferral is marked, please indicate the duration of the deferral.


Title of Document Type of Document W, D, E, or A

ISI or HISA (and duration)

Not Applicable

Number of peer reviews that included at least one peer reviewer appointed pursuant to any exception to the applicable independence or conflict of interest standards of the Bulletin, including determinations by the Secretary or Deputy Secretary pursuant to Section III (3) (c)?


Number of ISIs (not including highly influential scientific assessments) ___0___
List titles

Not Applicable

Number of HISAs __0__


List titles

Not Applicable

Number of peer review panels that held public meetings:

Number of ISIs (not including highly influential scientific assessments) __0__

Number of HISAs ___1***_


*** Refer to item 2 on page 3 titled “Synthesis of Studies in the Fall Low Salinity Zone of the San Francisco Estuary, September-December 2011.” Review comments were delivered orally by the panel during public meetings held July 30-August 2, 1012 in Sacramento, CA.
Number of peer review panels that allowed public comment:

Number of ISIs (not including highly influential scientific assessments) __0__

Number of HISAs __1****__
****Refer to item 1 on page 3 titled “Klamath Dam Removal Overview

Report for the Secretary of the Interior: An Assessment of Science and Technical Information.” Written technical comments from the public were requested during a two to three week period in January-February 2012; these public comments were given to the peer review panel before their face-to-face meeting in February 2012 to consider while preparing their peer review report.


Number of public comments provided on the agency’s peer review plans during FY’12, regardless of whether the peer review was actually completed during FY’12 ____0_____
Number of times agency specifically solicited peer reviewer nominations from professional societies. _____0______

If such nominations were solicited, were any recommendations provided? Yes ___ No ___




AGENCY: National Park Service
Agency Contact for Implementation of the Peer Review Bulletin
Name and title: John G. Dennis, Deputy Chief Scientist

Email address: john_dennis@nps.gov

Phone number: (202) 513-7174
URL for Agency’s Peer Review Agenda

http://www.nps.gov/policy/peerreview.htm ** ensure link is working

What pathway(s) can a member of the public use to find the Agency’s peer review agenda if she/he did not have this URL?



    • Link from Departmental or Agency home page,

    • Link from Agency Information Quality home page,

    • Link from science, research, or regulatory pages (please specify) ____________

    • Other (please describe)

Access http://www.nps.gov and select the “Notices” link found at the bottom of the page.
Does the agenda provide links to peer review reports for all completed peer reviews?

No, it presents some, but not all, peer review reports on the page.

Have you checked to make sure all of the information and links on the agency’s peer review home page are current? Yes



Continue to Next Page

INFORMATION ABOUT REVIEWS CONDUCTED
Number of peer reviews conducted subject to the Bulletin in FY’12. (see instructions for what should and should not be included here).
Number of influential scientific information peer reviews (ISI) (not including highly influential scientific assessments) ____1_____

List the title of each ISI. Indicate whether the Peer Review Report has been completed (Y/N) add more lines as needed NOTE: It is acceptable to provide a screen shot of your peer review agenda as an attachment.




  1. Peer Review of Report Regarding Use of Fintrol (Antimycin A) for

Restoration of Native Fish Populations (No, the peer review report was completed in FY 13 and is scheduled to be posted to the website.)

Number of highly influential scientific assessments (HISA) ___0____

List the title of each HISA. Indicate whether the Peer Review Report has been Completed (Y/N) add more lines as needed

Not Applicable

Provide the titles of ISIs and HISIs for which Waivers (W), Deferrals (D), or Exemptions (E) were invoked or Alternative Procedures used (A). If deferral is marked, please indicate the duration of the deferral.


Title of Document Type of Document W, D, E, or A

ISI or HISA (and duration)

Not Applicable

Number of peer reviews that included at least one peer reviewer appointed pursuant to any exception to the applicable independence or conflict of interest standards of the Bulletin, including determinations by the Secretary or Deputy Secretary pursuant to Section III (3) (c)?


Number of ISIs (not including highly influential scientific assessments) __0___
List titles

Not Applicable

Number of HISAs ___0___


List titles

Not Applicable

Number of peer review panels that held public meetings:

Number of ISIs (not including highly influential scientific assessments) __0__

Number of HISAs __Not Applicable__


Number of peer review panels that allowed public comment:

Number of ISIs (not including highly influential scientific assessments) __0__

Number of HISAs __Not Applicable__
Number of public comments provided on the agency’s peer review plans during FY’12, regardless of whether the peer review was actually completed during FY’12 ____0_____
Number of times agency specifically solicited peer reviewer nominations from professional societies. ____0____

If such nominations were solicited, were any recommendations provided? Yes ___ No ___




AGENCY: Indian Affairs
Agency Contact for Implementation of the Peer Review Bulletin
Name and title: Susana Lee, Quality Assurance Manager

Email address: Susana.Lee@bia.gov

Phone number: (703) 735-4155
URL for Agency’s Peer Review Agenda

http://www.bia.gov/WhoWeAre/AS-IA/OCIO/InfoQuality/index.htm ** ensure link is working
What pathway(s) can a member of the public use to find the Agency’s peer review agenda if she/he did not have this URL?


    • Link from Departmental or Agency home page,

“Notices” link in the footer on the IA home page.

    • Link from Agency Information Quality home page,

(http://www.bia.gov/WhoWeAre/AS-IA/OCIO/InfoQuality/index.htm)

    • Link from science, research, or regulatory pages (please specify) ____________

    • Other (please describe) _____________

Does the agenda provide links to peer review reports for all completed peer reviews? ____Not Applicable______

Have you checked to make sure all of the information and links on the agency’s peer review home page are current? __Yes__

Continue to Next Page

INFORMATION ABOUT REVIEWS CONDUCTED
Number of peer reviews conducted subject to the Bulletin in FY’12. (see instructions for what should and should not be included here).
Number of influential scientific information peer reviews (ISI) (not including highly influential scientific assessments) ____0_____

List the title of each ISI. Indicate whether the Peer Review Report has been completed (Y/N) add more lines as needed NOTE: It is acceptable to provide a screen shot of your peer review agenda as an attachment.



Not Applicable

Number of highly influential scientific assessments (HISA) ___0____

List the title of each HISA. Indicate whether the Peer Review Report has been Completed (Y/N) add more lines as needed

Not Applicable

Provide the titles of ISIs and HISIs for which Waivers (W), Deferrals (D), or Exemptions (E) were invoked or Alternative Procedures used (A). If deferral is marked, please indicate the duration of the deferral.


Title of Document Type of Document W, D, E, or A

ISI or HISA (and duration)

Not Applicable

Number of peer reviews that included at least one peer reviewer appointed pursuant to any exception to the applicable independence or conflict of interest standards of the Bulletin, including determinations by the Secretary or Deputy Secretary pursuant to Section III (3) (c)?


Number of ISIs (not including highly influential scientific assessments) __0___
List titles

Not Applicable

Number of HISAs __0___


List titles

Not Applicable

Number of peer review panels that held public meetings:

Number of ISIs (not including highly influential scientific assessments) __0__

Number of HISAs __0__


Number of peer review panels that allowed public comment:

Number of ISIs (not including highly influential scientific assessments) __0__

Number of HISAs ___0___
Number of public comments provided on the agency’s peer review plans during FY’12, regardless of whether the peer review was actually completed during FY’12 __0___
Number of times agency specifically solicited peer reviewer nominations from professional societies. ___0___

If such nominations were solicited, were any recommendations provided? Yes ___ No ___



AGENCY: Bureau of Reclamation
Agency Contact for Implementation of the Peer Review Bulletin
Name and title: Curt Brown, Director, Research and Development, Bureau of

Reclamation

Email address: cbrown@usbr.gov

Phone number: (303) 445-2098

URL for Agency’s Peer Review Agenda

http://www.usbr.gov/main/qoi/peeragenda.html ** ensure link is working
What pathway(s) can a member of the public use to find the Agency’s peer review agenda if she/he did not have this URL?


    • Link from Departmental or Agency home page,

A footer on all Bureau web pages (including the Bureau home page at http://www.usbr.gov) links to the Bureau Information Quality home page (http://www.usbr.gov/main/qoi), which has several links, including a link to the peer review agenda

    • Link from Agency Information Quality home page,

    • Link from science, research, or regulatory pages (please specify) ____________

    • Other (please describe) _____________

Does the agenda provide links to peer review reports for all completed peer reviews?


In FY2012, while Reclamation has undertaken numerous internal and some external peer reviews, no peer reviews for Influential Scientific Information or Highly Influential Scientific Assessments have been posted for public review.
Have you checked to make sure all of the information and links on the agency’s peer review home page are current? Yes

Continue to Next Page

INFORMATION ABOUT REVIEWS CONDUCTED
Number of peer reviews conducted subject to the Bulletin in FY’12. (see instructions for what should and should not be included here).
Number of influential scientific information peer reviews (ISI) (not including highly influential scientific assessments) ____0_____

List the title of each ISI. Indicate whether the Peer Review Report has been completed (Y/N) add more lines as needed NOTE: It is acceptable to provide a screen shot of your peer review agenda as an attachment.



Not Applicable

Number of highly influential scientific assessments (HISA) ____0____

List the title of each HISA. Indicate whether the Peer Review Report has been Completed (Y/N) add more lines as needed

Not Applicable

Provide the titles of ISIs and HISIs for which Waivers (W), Deferrals (D), or Exemptions (E) were invoked or Alternative Procedures used (A). If deferral is marked, please indicate the duration of the deferral.


Title of Document Type of Document W, D, E, or A

ISI or HISA (and duration)

Not Applicable

Number of peer reviews that included at least one peer reviewer appointed pursuant to any exception to the applicable independence or conflict of interest standards of the Bulletin, including determinations by the Secretary or Deputy Secretary pursuant to Section III (3) (c)?


Number of ISIs (not including highly influential scientific assessments) ___0___
List titles

Not Applicable

Number of HISAs __0__


List titles

Not Applicable

Number of peer review panels that held public meetings:

Number of ISIs (not including highly influential scientific assessments) ___0___

Number of HISAs ___0____


Number of peer review panels that allowed public comment:

Number of ISIs (not including highly influential scientific assessments) __0___

Number of HISAs ___0___
Number of public comments provided on the agency’s peer review plans during FY’12, regardless of whether the peer review was actually completed during FY’12 ___0___
Number of times agency specifically solicited peer reviewer nominations from professional societies. ___0___

If such nominations were solicited, were any recommendations provided? Yes ___ No ___



AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management
Agency Contact for Implementation of the Peer Review Bulletin
Name and title: Corey J. Wells, IT Project Manager

Email address: cjwells@blm.gov

Phone number: (703) 735-4155
URL for Agency’s Peer Review Agenda

http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/National_Page/Notices_used_in_Footer/data_quality.html ** ensure link is working
What pathway(s) can a member of the public use to find the Agency’s peer review agenda if she/he did not have this URL?


    • Link from Departmental or Agency home page,

(http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en.html) “Notices” link from the BLM home page

    • Link from Agency Information Quality home page,

http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/National_Page/Notices_used_in_Footer/data_quality.html

    • Link from science, research, or regulatory pages (please specify) ____________

    • Other (please describe) _____________

Does the agenda provide links to peer review reports for all completed peer reviews? Not Applicable

Have you checked to make sure all of the information and links on the agency’s peer review home page are current? Yes

Continue to Next Page

INFORMATION ABOUT REVIEWS CONDUCTED
Number of peer reviews conducted subject to the Bulletin in FY’12. (see instructions for what should and should not be included here).
Number of influential scientific information peer reviews (ISI) (not including highly influential scientific assessments) ____0_____

List the title of each ISI. Indicate whether the Peer Review Report has been completed (Y/N) add more lines as needed NOTE: It is acceptable to provide a screen shot of your peer review agenda as an attachment.



Not Applicable

Number of highly influential scientific assessments (HISA) ___0___

List the title of each HISA. Indicate whether the Peer Review Report has been Completed (Y/N) add more lines as needed

Not Applicable

Provide the titles of ISIs and HISIs for which Waivers (W), Deferrals (D), or Exemptions (E) were invoked or Alternative Procedures used (A). If deferral is marked, please indicate the duration of the deferral.


Title of Document Type of Document W, D, E, or A

ISI or HISA (and duration)

Not Applicable

Number of peer reviews that included at least one peer reviewer appointed pursuant to any exception to the applicable independence or conflict of interest standards of the Bulletin, including determinations by the Secretary or Deputy Secretary pursuant to Section III (3) (c)?


Number of ISIs (not including highly influential scientific assessments) ___0___
List titles

Not Applicable

Number of HISAs ___0___


List titles

Not Applicable

Number of peer review panels that held public meetings:

Number of ISIs (not including highly influential scientific assessments) ___0___

Number of HISAs ___0___


Number of peer review panels that allowed public comment:

Number of ISIs (not including highly influential scientific assessments) __0___

Number of HISAs ___0___
Number of public comments provided on the agency’s peer review plans during FY’12, regardless of whether the peer review was actually completed during FY’12 ___0___
Number of times agency specifically solicited peer reviewer nominations from professional societies. _____0_____

If such nominations were solicited, were any recommendations provided? Yes ___ No ___



AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement
Agency Contact for Implementation of the Peer Review Bulletin
Name and title: Douglas Wink, Chief, Enterprise Integration Branch

Email address: dwink@osmre.gov

Phone number: (202) 208-2909
URL for Agency’s Peer Review Agenda

http://www.osmre.gov/guidance/osm_info_quality.shtm ** ensure link is working
What pathway(s) can a member of the public use to find the Agency’s peer review agenda if she/he did not have this URL?


    • Link from Departmental or Agency home page,

Link from the “Notices” in footer of the OSM Home Page

http://www.osmre.gov/index.shtm to the OSM Information Quality page

http://www.osmre.gov/guidance/infoquality.shtm

    • Link from Agency Information Quality home page,

http://www.osmre.gov/guidance/infoquality.shtm

    • Link from science, research, or regulatory pages (please specify) ____________

    • Other (please describe) _____________

Does the agenda provide links to peer review reports for all completed peer reviews? _Not Applicable_

Have you checked to make sure all of the information and links on the agency’s peer review home page are current? Yes

Continue to Next Page

INFORMATION ABOUT REVIEWS CONDUCTED
Number of peer reviews conducted subject to the Bulletin in FY’12. (see instructions for what should and should not be included here).
Number of influential scientific information peer reviews (ISI) (not including highly influential scientific assessments) ____0_____

List the title of each ISI. Indicate whether the Peer Review Report has been completed (Y/N) add more lines as needed NOTE: It is acceptable to provide a screen shot of your peer review agenda as an attachment.



Not Applicable

Number of highly influential scientific assessments (HISA) ___0_____

List the title of each HISA. Indicate whether the Peer Review Report has been Completed (Y/N) add more lines as needed

Not Applicable

Provide the titles of ISIs and HISIs for which Waivers (W), Deferrals (D), or Exemptions (E) were invoked or Alternative Procedures used (A). If deferral is marked, please indicate the duration of the deferral.


Title of Document Type of Document W, D, E, or A

ISI or HISA (and duration)

Not Applicable

Number of peer reviews that included at least one peer reviewer appointed pursuant to any exception to the applicable independence or conflict of interest standards of the Bulletin, including determinations by the Secretary or Deputy Secretary pursuant to Section III (3) (c)?


Number of ISIs (not including highly influential scientific assessments) ___0___
List titles

Not Applicable

Number of HISAs ___0___


List titles

Not Applicable

Number of peer review panels that held public meetings:

Number of ISIs (not including highly influential scientific assessments) ___0___

Number of HISAs ____0____


Number of peer review panels that allowed public comment:

Number of ISIs (not including highly influential scientific assessments) ___0___

Number of HISAs ____0____
Number of public comments provided on the agency’s peer review plans during FY’12, regardless of whether the peer review was actually completed during FY’12 ____0_____
Number of times agency specifically solicited peer reviewer nominations from professional societies. _____0______

If such nominations were solicited, were any recommendations provided? Yes ___ No ___



AGENCY: Bureau of Ocean Energy Management
Agency Contact for Implementation of the Peer Review Bulletin
Name and title: Loren Thompson, Regulatory Liaison Officer

Email address: loren.thompson@boem.gov

Phone number: (202) 208-5890
URL for Agency’s Peer Review Agenda

http://www.boem.gov/Environmental-Stewardship/Environmental-Studies/Quality.aspx ** ensure link is working
What pathway(s) can a member of the public use to find the Agency’s peer review agenda if she/he did not have this URL?


    • Link from Departmental or Agency home page,

    • Link from Agency Information Quality home page,

The public may access peer reviewed studies by accessing the following web site, also accessible from the BOEM homepage: http://www.data.boem.gov/homepg/data_center/other/espis/espisfront.asp

    • Link from science, research, or regulatory pages (please specify) ____________

    • Other (please describe) _____________

Does the agenda provide links to peer review reports for all completed peer reviews?


When completed, the BOEM website will contain links to completed reviews.

All scientific research studies completed through BOEM’s Environmental Studies Program (ESP) undergo multiple rounds of peer-review. This process begins with internal expert peer-review of proposed study profiles. Reviewed profiles are then presented to BOEM’s Federal Advisory Committee, the OCS Scientific Committee, who review and comment on each profile for the upcoming fiscal year. Edited profiles are then subjected to a second internal peer-review and presented to the BOEM Deputy Director for additional review. Studies with estimated costs of over $1,000,000 are also reviewed by the Assistant Secretary for Land and Minerals Management. All incoming research proposals are evaluated by a team of BOEM scientists (and often external experts). Many studies also employ scientific review boards to review draft and final research products.


In 2012, the ESP added approximately 60 completed studies to its publically available Environmental Studies Program Information System (ESPIS). Additionally, a subset of BOEM funded studies go on to be published in peer-reviewed scientific journals and publications.
Have you checked to make sure all of the information and links on the agency’s peer review home page are current?

Yes, the BOEM Environmental Studies Program is actively engaged in research and peer review activities. A BOEM Peer Review home page is currently being developed.



Continue to Next Page

INFORMATION ABOUT REVIEWS CONDUCTED
Number of peer reviews conducted subject to the Bulletin in FY’12. (see instructions for what should and should not be included here).
Number of influential scientific information peer reviews (ISI) (not including highly influential scientific assessments) ____4_____

List the title of each ISI. Indicate whether the Peer Review Report has been completed (Y/N) add more lines as needed NOTE: It is acceptable to provide a screen shot of your peer review agenda as an attachment.




  1. Joanna Burger, Lawrence J. Niles, Ronald R. Porter, Amanda D. Dey,

Stephanie Koch, Caleb Gordan; Using a shore bird (red knot) fitted

with geolocators to evaluate a conceptual risk model focusing on

offshore wind; Renewable Energy, vo1. 43, pp. 370-377; 2012 (Yes)


  1. Joanna Burger, Lawrence J. Niles, Ronald R. Porter, Amanda D. Dey, Stephanie Koch, Caleb Gordan; Migration and Over-wintering of Red Knots (Caldris Canutus Rufa) along the Atlantic Coast of the United States, The Condor, vol. 114; 2012 (Yes)

  2. Ivashchenko, Y.V. and Clapham, P.J.; Soviet catches of bowhead (Baleana mysticetus) and right wales (Eubalaena japonica) in North Pacific and Okhotsk Sea; Endangered Species Research (in press); 2012 (Yes)

  3. Rone, B.K., Berchok, C.L., Crance, J.L., Clapham, P.J.; Using air-deployed passive sonobuoys to detect and locate critically endangered North Pacific right whales; Marine Mammal Science (in press); 2012 (Yes)

Number of highly influential scientific assessments (HISA) ___0___

List the title of each HISA. Indicate whether the Peer Review Report has been Completed (Y/N) add more lines as needed

Not Applicable

Provide the titles of ISIs and HISIs for which Waivers (W), Deferrals (D), or Exemptions (E) were invoked or Alternative Procedures used (A). If deferral is marked, please indicate the duration of the deferral.


Title of Document Type of Document W, D, E, or A

ISI or HISA (and duration)

Not Applicable

Number of peer reviews that included at least one peer reviewer appointed pursuant to any exception to the applicable independence or conflict of interest standards of the Bulletin, including determinations by the Secretary or Deputy Secretary pursuant to Section III (3) (c)?


Number of ISIs (not including highly influential scientific assessments) ___0___
List titles

Not Applicable

Number of HISAs ___0___


List titles

Not Applicable

Number of peer review panels that held public meetings:

Number of ISIs (not including highly influential scientific assessments) ___2___

Number of HISAs ____0____


Number of peer review panels that allowed public comment:

Number of ISIs (not including highly influential scientific assessments) ___2___

Number of HISAs ____0____
Number of public comments provided on the agency’s peer review plans during FY’12, regardless of whether the peer review was actually completed during FY’12 ____0_____
Number of times agency specifically solicited peer reviewer nominations from professional societies. _____1______

If such nominations were solicited, were any recommendations provided? Yes _X_ No ___





1 As stated in the November 28, 2005, memo from the Deputy Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, the Agenda is not a six month forecast (i.e., it should not be limited to information (documents) that the agency plans to disseminate (or peer review) in the next six months). 

2 http://www.aphis.usda.gov/peer_review/peer_review_agenda.shtml.

3http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/oira/draft_2012_cost_benefit_report.pdf (page 155).






Verilənlər bazası müəlliflik hüququ ilə müdafiə olunur ©azrefs.org 2016
rəhbərliyinə müraciət

    Ana səhifə