Contact: Steve Hansen (Director of Communications) (202) 225-7749
Email: Steve.Hansen@mail.house.gov
Justin Harclerode (Deputy Director of Communications) (202) 226-8767
Email: Justin.Harclerod@mail.house.gov
Washington, D.C. - Officials from the Environmental Protection
Agency,
the Department of the Interior, the Army Corps of Engineers, and other
experts and interested parties will testify at a Congressional hearing on
Wednesday to discuss peer review of scientific and technical products,
such as studies, analyses, and models used to support agency
decision-making.
The hearing by the U.S. House Water Resources and Environment
Subcommittee, chaired by U.S. Rep. John J. Duncan, Jr. (R-TN), is schedule
to begin at 2 p.m. on Wednesday, March 5th, in 2167 Rayburn House Office
Building. Live audio and video broadcasts of the hearing will be
available at the Committee's website: www.house/gov/transportation
Wednesday's Witness List
PANEL I
- Dr. Paul Gilman, Assistant Administrator for Research and Development,
The Environmental Protection Agency
- Lynn Scarlett, Assistant Secretary for Policy, Management and Budget,
Department of the Interior
- Honorable R.L. Brownlee, Acting Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil
Works), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
- Lieutenant General Robert B. Flowers, Chief of Engineers, U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers
PANEL II
- Dr. Leonard Shabman, Resident Scholar, Resources for the Future,
National Research Council
- Randall Lutter, Resident Scholar, American Enterprise Institute
- Christopher J. Brescia, President, Midwest Area River Coalition 2000
- Melissa Samet, Senor Director, Water Resources, American Rivers
- Deborah M. Brosnan, President, Sustainable Ecosystems Institute
Background Information
There have been many calls for independent peer review as a means of
ensuring that agency decision-making is based on sound science and
economics. These recommendations have been developed by agencies
themselves, by scientific organizations such as the National Academy of
Sciences, and by interest groups. In addition, the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) has recently placed an increased emphasis on peer review.
Federal agencies conduct peer reviews in different ways. The Subcommittee
will hear from EPA, the Department of the Interior, and the Corps of
Engineers about how they review the scientific and technical products that
support their decision-making. In addition, the Subcommittee will hear
recommendations from interested parties about how to improve the review
processes of these agencies, including recommendations intended to apply
to agency decision-making generally and recommendations intended to apply
only to specific programs.
Environmental Protection Agency: Peer review of scientific and technical
products that support decision-making at EPA are governed by a 1994 policy
statement issued by former Administrator Carol Browner, a 1999 regulatory
management guidance issued by former Acting Deputy Administrator Peter
Robertson, as well as its December 2000 Peer Review Handbook, prepared by
the Peer Review Advisory Group of EPA's Science Policy Council.
Department of the Interior: For implementation of the Endangered Species
Act (ESA), the Department of the Interior's (DOI) peer review policy is
set forth in a July 1994 memorandum issued jointly by the US Fish and
Wildlife Service (FWS) and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS):
"Policy on Information Standards Under the Endangered Species Act."
For ESA listing decisions, the policy requires independent review by three
specialists. For recovery plans the policy also requires
independent review, but does not specify how many specialists are required
for review. The policy does not apply to other products developed
under ESA, such as critical habitat designations or biological opinions.
Corps of Engineers: All Corps of Engineers projects are developed in
accordance with the Principles and Guidelines for Water and Related
Resources Implementation Studies (P&G), published by the Water Resources
Council in 1983. Under the P&G, the Corps must evaluate national economic
benefits, environmental quality benefits, regional economic development
benefits, and other social effects. The Chief of Engineers must recommend
projects that maximize net national economic development benefits unless
the Chief determines that an exception is appropriate based on other
Federal, State, local, or international concerns. Accordingly, under the
P&G, Corps projects are subjected to extensive analyses to ensure that the
project is in the federal interest and maximizes net benefits. These
analyses (and other products that support Corps project plans) are not
required to be subject to external, independent peer review.
For additional information, access the Transportation & Infrastructure
Committee website at: www.house.gov/transportation