Scientific Peer Review

The Office of Management and Budget published in the Federal Register on January 14, 2005, an information quality bulletin that specifically addressed peer review of scientific information within the federal government. This Bulletin directs all federal agencies to develop agency-specific systems for scientific peer review that would be consistent with guidance contained in the bulletin. The Bulletin is available at the following address: www.whitehouse.gov/omb/fedreg/2005/011405_peer.pdf. This Bulletin identifies two categories of information that it addresses:

Influential Scientific Information: scientific information that will have or does have a clear and substantial impact on important public policies or private sector decisions. The term "influential" should be interpreted consistently with OMB's government-wide information quality guidelines and the information quality guidelines of the agency. Information dissemination can have a significant economic impact even if it is not part of a rulemaking. For instance, the economic viability of a technology can be influenced by the government's characterization of its attributes. Alternatively, the Federal government's assessment of risk can directly or indirectly influence the response actions of state and local agencies or international bodies.

Highly Influential Scientific Assessment: a scientific assessment is considered ''highly influential'' if its dissemination could have a potential impact of more than $500 million in any one year on either the public or private sector; or that the dissemination is novel, controversial, or precedent-setting; or that it has significant interagency interest. One of the ways information can exert economic impact is through the costs or benefits of a regulation based on the disseminated information.

Department of the Interior offices and bureaus have created web sites providing the public with information about planned agency actions that meet the Office of Management and Budget's requirements for scientific peer review. The Department's website provides links to the office and bureau websites at the following address: http://www.doi.gov/ocio/iq_1.html.

National Park Service Peer Review Agenda

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Final Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review, dated December 16, 2004, outlines a systematic process of peer review planning and public notice regarding influential scientific information and highly influential scientific assessments.

NPS scientific and scholarly activities are conducted to inform decision-making by individual park and office managers about specific park management actions, about scientific issues associated with inventory and monitoring in small groups of parks, or about bureau programs. In most cases, these decisions relate to planning, resource stewardship, or visitor use management in individual parks; specific park regulations; and other park-specific activities. In some cases, the decisions relate to guidance developed for NPS assistance programs, such as regarding national landmark or historic structure recognition or various types of conservation assistance. Scientific and scholarly activities commissioned to inform a specific park management action may not rise to the threshold that NPS uses to define "influential scientific information."

Within the April 1 through September 30, 2009 time period, NPS currently has scheduled the following scientific information materials to receive peer review as influential scientific information:

Submitted April 16, 2009 John G. Dennis 202-513-7174

The National Park Service Peer Review Agenda - April 1 through September 30, 2009:

Synthesis Report Regarding Healthy Recreation in Parks:

Title of Report: Evaluation of National Park Service Health and Recreation Pilot Projects

Subject: Findings from pilot studies of user response to National Park Service and partner programs and information regarding healthful outdoor recreation opportunities found in seven units of the National Park System.

Purpose of Report: Provide a synthesis of knowledge obtained from the seven pilot studies.

Agency Contact: John Dennis 202-513-7174

Expected Result of Dissemination: This report is expected to provide influential scientific information.

Planned Time Frame for the Peer Review: The peer review will be conducted during the period April 6 through May 8, 2009.

Mechanism for the Peer Review: The peer review will involve three reviewers who will review the report independently and provide individual and independent comment letters to the Peer Review Manager. The Peer Review Manager will prepare a consolidated analysis that will be submitted to the authors of the report for action. The Peer Review Manager will provide to the Project Manager a summary report of the outcome of the peer review.

Opportunity for Public Comment: The review process will afford no opportunities for receiving public comments on the scientific information being reviewed. Public comments will not be provided to the peer reviewers.

Planned Number of Peer Reviewers: Three.

Primary Disciplines or Expertise Needed for the Review: Active living, public health, recreation research.

Process for Selecting Peer Reviewers: The peer reviewers were selected by the peer review manager, who is a university cooperator with, and funded by, the National Park Service. The peer review manager has identified the peer reviewers through consulting fellow scientists.

Availability of the Document Being Peer Reviewed: The document is not being made public during the peer review process.