[Federal Register: August 31, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 168)]
[Notices]
[Page 53325-53328]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr31au10-88]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Office of the Secretary
Proposed Scientific Integrity Policy of the Department of the
Interior
AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, Interior.
ACTION: Notice and request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the Department of the Interior, are proposing and seeking
comment on a Department-wide policy to ensure the integrity of
scientific activities in the Department.
DATES: Submit comments by September 20, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Send comments to: DOI_Science_Integrity@ios.doi.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alan D. Thornhill, 1849 C Street, NW.,
MS 5428, Washington, DC 20240-0002, 202-208-6249.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In his March 9, 2009, memorandum on
Scientific Integrity, the President states that, ``Each agency should
adopt * * * procedures * * * to ensure the integrity of scientific and
technological information and processes on which the agency relies in
its decision making or otherwise uses or prepares.'' Interior has
developed draft policies and standards for ensuring accuracy and
integrity in all scientific activities conducted in the Department.
After public comment, revision, and approval, we plan to incorporate
these procedures into the Department Manual.
You may submit comments on any part of these proposed procedures by
e-mail, letter, or in person at the address in the ADDRESSES section of
this notice. Before including your address, phone number, e-mail
address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you
should be aware that your entire comment--including your personal
identifying information--may be made publicly available at any time.
While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal
identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we
will be able to do so.
The Department of the Interior proposes the following procedures
for ensuring scientific integrity as a new chapter in the Department
Manual:
3.1 Purpose
A. This chapter establishes:
(1) A Departmental policy on integrity of scientific activities
and a code of scientific conduct;
(2) Ethical standards for Department of the Interior (DOI)
employees who conduct or supervise scientific activities for the
Department, or who compile and translate scientific information into
formats used by the Departmental management; and
(3) A process for initial handling of violations of the
scientific conduct code.
B. Administrative rules and laws pertaining to activities such
as falsification of government formats, sexual harassment, civil
rights, acceptance of gifts, nepotism, disclosure of financial
interest, conflict of interest or outside employment are neither
altered nor superseded by the existence of this chapter.
3.2 Scope
This chapter applies to:
A. All employees and contractors who engage in scientific
activities; and
B. All volunteers who assist with scientific activities.
(Volunteers are required to provide unbiased and objective
information to their supervisors. All information collected by a
volunteer is considered provisional until verified by the supervisor
or other designee.)
3.3 Policy on Integrity of Scientific Activities
The Department:
A. Is dedicated to preserving the integrity of scientific
activities conducted on its behalf and will not tolerate misconduct
in the performance of scientific activities;
B. Will take appropriate action to protect the public from the
effects of inaccurate information produced through scientific
activities;
C. Will investigate, to the maximum extent of the law, each
allegation of misconduct while ensuring the rights and privacy of
any party against whom the allegation is made.
D. Will take appropriate disciplinary action, which may include
termination of employment, in accordance with DOI personnel policies
for non-compliance with the Code of Scientific Conduct in section
3.4.
3.4 Code of Scientific Conduct
Each person covered by section 3.2 must adhere to the following
code of scientific conduct:
To the best of my ability I will do all of the following:
I will act in the interest of the advancement of
science and contribute the best, highest quality scientific
information for the Department of the Interior.
I will conduct, process data from, and communicate the
results of scientific activities honestly, objectively, thoroughly,
and expeditiously.
I will be responsible for the resources entrusted to
me, including equipment, funds, my time, and my employees' time. I
will promptly and accurately collect, use, and report all financial
resources under my control; and promptly, thoroughly, and accurately
report all scientific work.
I will fully disclose all research methods used,
available data, and final reports and publications consistent with
applicable laws and policy.
I will respect, to the fullest extent permitted by law,
confidential and proprietary information provided by communities,
Indian Tribes, and individuals whose interests and resources are
studied or affected by scientific activities or the resulting
information.
I will neither hinder the scientific activities of
others nor engage in dishonesty, fraud, deceit, misrepresentation,
coercive manipulation, or other scientific or research misconduct.
I will welcome constructive criticism of my scientific
activities, will welcome and participate in appropriate peer
reviews, and will critique others' work respectfully and
objectively. I will substantiate comments that I make with the same
care with which I report my own work.
I will be diligent in creating, using, preserving,
documenting, and maintaining collections and data. I will adhere to
established quality assurance and quality control programs. I will
follow the Department's records retention policies and comply with
Federal law and agreements related to use, security, and release of
confidential and proprietary data.
I will adhere to appropriate standards for reporting
the results of scientific activities and will respect the
intellectual property rights of others.
I will, to the extent possible and practical,
differentiate among facts, opinions,
[[Page 53326]]
hypotheses, and professional judgment in reporting the results of
scientific activities to others, including scientists, decision
makers, and the public.
I will be responsible for the quality of any data I
collect or any interpretations I make, and for the integrity of
conclusions I draw in the course of my scientific activities.
I will place quality and objectivity of scientific
activities and reporting of their results ahead of personal gain or
allegiance to individuals or organizations.
3.5 Employee Responsibilities
A. All employees must comply with:
(1) The Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects,
published at 56 FR 28012-28018 (June 18, 1991);
(2) The Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the
Executive Branch in 5 CFR 2635; and
(3) All Federal statutes, Executive Orders, Presidential
Memoranda, Office of Government Ethics and Office of Personnel
Management regulations, and Departmental regulations and policies
(as required by 43 CFR 20.501 and 20.502).
B. All employees must immediately report through official
channels or directly to the Office of Inspector General (OIG):
(1) Any known, suspected, or alleged fraud, waste, abuse, or
mismanagement affecting the Department; and
(2) Any serious integrity matter that affects the integrity of
the Department.
C. Employees who engage in scientific activities must comply
with the Code contained in section 3.4.
D. Employees who are involved in the conduct and reporting of
scientific activities must comply with the Federal Policy on
Research Misconduct, published at 65 FR 76260-76264 (December 6,
2000).
3.6 Bureau and Office Responsibilities
Each bureau and office must:
A. Establish procedures to ensure adherence to the requirements
of this chapter; and
B. When investigating allegations of misconduct under this
chapter, ensure that investigators have adequate scientific
expertise, provide for due process, and be consistent with the
Federal Policy on Research Misconduct.
3.7 Legal Effects of This Chapter
This chapter:
A. Is intended to improve the internal management of the
Department of the Interior;
B. Does not create any right or benefit, substantive or
procedural, enforceable by law by any person against the United
States, its agencies, its officers or employees, or any other
person; and
C. Does not replace the Standards of Ethical Conduct at 5 CFR
2635 and other relevant ethical obligations of Department of the
Interior scientists.
3.8 Allegations of Misconduct
A. Establishing a Finding of Scientific Misconduct
Before taking disciplinary action under this section, a
supervisor must establish a finding of scientific misconduct. A
finding of scientific misconduct requires that:
(1) There is a notable departure from accepted practices of the
scientific community for maintaining the integrity of the scientific
or research record;
(2) The misconduct is committed intentionally, knowingly, or in
reckless disregard of accepted practices; and
(3) The allegation is established by a preponderance of
evidence.
B. Disciplinary Action
(1) Once a supervisor has verified an employee's misconduct
under section 3.8A, the supervisor will administer disciplinary
action in accordance with DOI personnel policies and using for
guidance the Departmental Manual chapter on ``Discipline and Adverse
Actions'' 370 DM 752. Supervisors should:
(i) Select the penalty they believe necessary to correct the
misconduct and to discourage repetition; and
(ii) Evaluate each situation to ensure that the actions proposed
and taken are reasonable.
(2) When there is a significant unauthorized departure from
accepted practices, or repeated violations of a less serious nature,
supervisors may propose and decide on appropriate penalties,
including termination of employment.
(i) If a supervisor is considering a formal disciplinary action,
the supervisor must immediately consult the Human Resources office.
(ii) The Human Resources office may consult with the Office of
the Solicitor (SOL) on proposed disciplinary actions and must
consult with SOL on all proposed disciplinary actions that are
appealable to the Merit Systems Protection Board.
(3) All responses to allegations of misconduct, from inquiry to
confirmation to adjudication and appeal, must be consistent with the
guidelines and principles in the Federal Policy on Research
Misconduct, Departmental policy, and 370 DM 752.
C. Appeal Rights
For disciplinary actions up to and including a 14-day
suspension, employees not covered by a collective bargaining
agreement have the right to appeal through the Administrative
Grievance Procedure. Employees covered by a collective bargaining
agreement have the right to appeal through a Negotiated Grievance
Procedure (NGP). For suspensions of more than 14 days, up to removal
from Federal service, employees have the right to appeal to the
Merit Systems Protection Board or through an applicable NGP (5 CFR
752). Neither temporary employees, probationary employees,
contractors, nor volunteers have any appeal rights.
3.9 Authorities
A. Statutes and Regulations
(1) 5 U.S.C. 301 allows the head of an executive department to
prescribe regulations for the conduct of its employees.
(2) 43 CFR 20.501 requires employees of the Department to comply
with all Federal statutes, Executive Orders, Office of Government
Ethics and Office of Personnel Management regulations, and
Departmental regulations.
(3) 43 CFR 20.502 states that employees are required to carry
out the announced policies and programs of the Department.
(4) 43 CFR 20.502(a) states that an employee is subject to
appropriate disciplinary action if he or she fails to comply with
any lawful regulations, orders, or policies.
B. Federal Policy on Research Misconduct, 65 FR 76260-76264,
December 6, 2000
C. Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the Executive
Branch, 5 CFR 2635
3.10 Definitions
A. Conflict of Interest
Any financial or other interest which conflicts with the actions
or judgments of an employee when conducting scientific activities
because it:
(1) Could significantly impair the employee's objectivity; or
(2) Could create an unfair competitive advantage for any person
or organization.
Department of the Interior scientists are also subject to
conflict of interest and appearance of a lack of impartiality
requirements at 18 U.S.C. 208 and 5 CFR 2635 Subparts D and E.
B. Decision Makers
Departmental employees who:
(1) Are not engaged in scientific activities;
(2) Communicate, recommend, or decide policy or management;
(3) Communicate, recommend, or decide expenditure of
Departmental funds; and
(4) Rely in part on scientific products, or on documents
compiled and translated from scientific products, to ensure that
agency actions are supported by evidence and have a rational basis,
and are not arbitrary or capricious.
During the conduct of Departmental business, decision makers may
be involved in editing of documents for clarification of major
points to aid decision making. Such editing is beyond the scope of
this chapter.
C. Employees Who Engage in Scientific Activities Are
(1) Individuals who conduct or directly supervise scientific
activities, including but not limited to proposing, performing, or
reviewing research, or in reporting research results; and
(2) Individuals who directly supervise or personally perform
work involving the compilation and translation of scientific
information into formats used by the Department's decision makers.
D. Fabrication
Making up data or results and recording or reporting them.
E. Falsification
Manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes; or
changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not
accurately represented in the research record.
[[Page 53327]]
F. Plagiarism
The appropriation of another person's ideas, processes, results,
or words without giving appropriate credit.
G. Reporting
Dissemination or disclosure of the results of scientific
activities. Dissemination and disclosure may be oral or in any
media, including print and digital media.
H. Research
All basic, applied, and demonstration research in all fields of
science, engineering, and mathematics, including social, behavioral
and economic research.
I. Research Misconduct
Fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing,
performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results.
Research misconduct does not include honest error or differences of
opinion. (This definition is quoted from The Federal Policy on
Research Misconduct (65 FR 76260-76264).)
J. Science
Knowledge obtained and tested through use of the scientific
method. Science may also include the observation and classification
of facts with the goal of establishing verifiable knowledge derived
through induction and hypothesis.
K. Scientific Activities
Activities involving inventorying, monitoring, experimentation,
study, research, modeling, and scientific assessment. Scientific
activities are conducted in a manner specified by standard protocols
and procedures and include any of the physical, biological, or
social sciences as well as engineering and mathematics that employ
the scientific method. Inspections for regulatory compliance and
resulting records are not included because they are covered by
separate requirements.
L. Scientific Assessment
Evaluation of a body of scientific or technical knowledge which
typically synthesizes multiple factual inputs, data, models,
assumptions, and/or implies best professional judgment to bridge
uncertainties in the available information.
M. Scientific Method
A method of research in which a problem is identified, relevant
data are gathered, a hypothesis is formulated from these data, and
the hypothesis is empirically tested.
N. Scientific Misconduct
Fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing,
performing or reviewing scientific activities and their products.
O. Scientific Product presents the results of scientific
activities including the synthesis, compilation, or translation of
scientific information into formats used in the Department's
decision-making process.
Appendix
Commentary to Explain and Clarify the Intent of the Basic Elements
of the Code
A. Scientific Excellence, Integrity, and Conflict of Interest.
Honesty and integrity of Department employees subject to the Code
are vital to the public interest and critical to conducting the
Department's mission. Scientific activities provide data to inform
many of the Department's decision-makers regarding the stewardship
of our Nation's land, energy, mineral, water, air, biological, and
cultural resources. Employees subject to the Code must avoid
conflicts of interest that occur when personal interest or gain
interferes with or could be construed to interfere with the
objectivity of their actions or judgments. They are obligated to be
thorough in documenting their work to ensure that the details of
their methods are described adequately enough to allow other
scientists to critically evaluate or reproduce their results. They
will use the best available and practicable practices, protocols,
methodologies and technologies available to them when conducting
scientific activities as well as in the review, use and
dissemination of scientific information. This Code does not suggest
that it is unethical to use novel investigative approaches, employ
unusual methods of analysis, exclude data known to be faulty for
identifiable material reasons, or interpret data in a new or unique
way. However, novel methods and data modifications should be fully
documented in the research record to avoid misinterpretation of any
such departure from standard protocols or methodology.
B. Abuse of Resources. Department employees subject to the Code
will ensure appropriate use of resources in the conduct of
scientific activities, including equipment, funding, staff time,
information resources, and any privately owned or Federal property
through the awareness of the requirements of applicable laws and
regulations. Most importantly, employees will use resources wisely,
efficiently, respectfully, and prevent abuse of cultural and natural
resources during the conduct of scientific activities. Employees
must strive to select methods and materials that, to the best of
current knowledge, minimize or eliminate adverse impacts to cultural
or natural resources or their future examination, scientific
investigation, treatment or function. Professional standards for
non-invasive or non-destructive testing/sampling will be followed
when studying cultural materials. Animals used for research purposes
are public resources, and employees will obey public laws concerning
treatment of laboratory animals. Public Law (Pub. L. 99-198), The
Food Security Act of 1985, and Federal regulation (9 CFR Part 3)
primarily apply to treatment of laboratory animals. Scientists
should follow public laws (including Pub. L. 99-108, as applicable)
and regulations for activities involving animals in the wild and
should consider, where appropriate, guidelines regarding treatment
of wild animals published by professional wildlife or scientific
societies.
C. Research Involving Human Subjects.
(1) Department employees subject to the Code conduct scientific
activities among groups, including but not limited to hikers,
campers, hunters and anglers, present-day ethnic or occupational
communities, and Indian Tribes. These consultations must meet
compliance requirements for planning, the Native American Graves
Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-601), historic
preservation, and subsistence uses. Such persons involved in
scientific activities must be treated with professionalism and
respect. To this end, the Department adopted the common rule
published as Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects (56
FR 28012-28018, June 18, 1991). Exempted from this rule is human
subjects research involving the use of educational tests, survey
procedures, interview procedures or observation of public behavior
unless the information obtained is recorded in such a manner that
human subjects can be identified, and/or disclosure could place
subjects at risk of criminal or civil liability. Many information
collections are regulated under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(5 CFR 1320), and applicable Departmental procedures should be
followed (381 DM 11, 12). Exempted from this rule is observation of
human public behavior that involves no data collection from
subjects.
(2) Before initiating new scientific activities with any group,
Department employees subject to the Code should be familiar with the
laws, regulations, and policies (including those that are bureau-
specific) governing privacy and freedom of information, ethnographic
research guidelines, and types of release and consent forms, as
provided information might not be protected from release. Department
employees will ensure that the research methods are made clear to
participants, that permission is obtained to use interview
materials, tapes, photographs, maps and any other materials, and
that participants know the legal limits of confidentiality.
D. Hindering scientific and information gathering activities;
failing to protect proprietary and confidential information;
engaging in dishonesty, fraud, deceit, misrepresentation; or
engaging in or knowingly permitting other scientific, research, or
professional misconduct.
(1) Inappropriately hindering scientific activities by
Departmental employees subject to the Code is not tolerated by the
Department. This includes actions such as biased review of
scientific proposals or manuscripts; physical disruption of another
scientist's experiments, field surveys, or database; denial of
reasonable access to resources or data needed by other scientists to
perform their work; or failure to provide information that other
Departmental employees need to duplicate scientific activities or
verify their accuracy. Scientific staff will allow management and
others appropriate access to resources entrusted to them, unless
doing so would violate legal, regulatory or policy restrictions,
compromise the scientific validity of their activities or
substantially interfere with their performance. Employees are
expected to understand existing rules and guidelines regarding the
need to make data gathered with Federal dollars accessible.
Reasonable judgments to delay public access depend upon individual
circumstances when premature release would compromise validity or
decision-making ability. Specifically, this applies to work in
progress where data have not gone through a planned
[[Page 53328]]
quality control/quality assurance protocol that is part of the
research design. Therefore, this Code does not attempt to provide
universal guidelines for making such case-by-case determinations.
(2) Requirements related to use, security and release of
proprietary data are sometimes covered by law, regulation or policy
and may be established through an agreement with the originator of
the data. These agreements are usually established on a case by case
basis. Employees will adhere to these agreements to the extent
permitted by law, or policy. The Code prohibits denying other
scientists reasonable access to published scientific information for
the purpose of enhancing one's interests.
(3) Falsification and fabrication of data and results by
Departmental employees are not tolerated by the Department and would
be a violation of the Code by employees subject to it.
E. Participating in Review Processes and Offering Fair and
Objective Opinions.
(1) Peer review is an important element in the creation and use
of scientific information. In all cases, external (to the
Department) scientific review of scientific activities, information,
inventory or monitoring data to be published or used in decision-
making is beneficial and, in some cases, it is essential. All
employees subject to the Code must know, understand and adhere to
Departmental and bureau specific guidelines related to peer review
of scientific activities. Open and honest debate is essential for
the advancement of science, and peer review is an important part of
that debate. The peer-review process should be free of personal and
professional jealousies, competitions, non-scientific disagreements,
and conflicts of interest.
(2) Reviewers should focus on the logical and scientific
validity of the research findings, rather than personal feelings, or
interactions (past or current) between the reviewer and the author/
investigator. Authors/investigators should address reviewers'
comments in a thorough manner, and should document appropriately how
they responded to those comments. It is the responsibility of
prospective reviewers to disqualify themselves, if the review cannot
be done in an objective manner (5 CFR 2635.502). Reviewers should
not instigate changes to any scientific study by its authors through
intimidation, either implied or stated. Reviewers should document in
writing all changes made to the manuscripts or proposals to conduct
scientific studies in writing.
F. Integrity in the Collection and Preservation of Data.
(1) Quality control and assurance, including protocols,
standards, and methodologies, should be routinely established for
activities pertaining to the conduct of scientific inquiry and the
collection of data. Persons engaged in scientific activities and
their managers must know and follow established programs, protocols,
standards, and methodologies for the activities they conduct to
inform Departmental decisions. Preservation of collections and
records created during the conduct of scientific activities is
controlled by Federal law (44 U.S.C. chaps. 21, 29, 31, and 33) and
Departmental regulations and policies (36 CFR 1228.1-1228.282; 381
DM 11, 12; 384 DM 2, 3, and 4) and bureau regulations and policies.
This is important for substantiating scientific activities and
supporting subsequent decisions that are influenced by the results.
Employees subject to this Code must follow these laws, regulations
and policies. Collections made for retention include, but are not
limited to, cultural objects in archeological collections and non-
cultural biological, geological, and paleontological samples.
(2) Documents that should be retained for the scientific record
vary according to the nature of the study and include: study plans;
methodology; primary data, such as laboratory notebooks, original
data, metadata, and quality assurance/quality control information;
and formal data sets, analyses and products. These items may be in
any medium, including printed and electronic media. Failure to
retain data in accordance with law, regulations and policy is not
tolerated by the Department.
G. Responsible Authorship and Dissemination of Information.
(1) Authorship of a scientific product must be based on a major
intellectual contribution (as part of conception, design, data
collection, data analysis, or interpretation) and a significant
contribution to its preparation (writing, reviewing, or editing).
Authorship includes the responsibility for ensuring that the work
reported meets scientific criteria and ethical standards. Conferring
authorship to individuals engaged in scientific activities without
their knowledge or consent is strictly prohibited by the Code.
(2) Scientific knowledge is cumulative and is built on the
contributions of numerous scientists over many years. Recognition of
other contributors often takes the form of credits in a publication
through an acknowledgment or citation. However, only authors whose
substantive comments have been received and incorporated prior to
submission should be listed in acknowledgments. Authors will cite or
acknowledge any scientific work or the source of any idea that is
not regarded as common knowledge among specialists in the particular
field and that substantially contributes to a scientific activity
and its interpretation and result. The Code prohibits plagiarism or
theft of ideas, data or unpublished findings. Departmental employees
subject to this Code will acknowledge and, to the extent permitted
by law, protect the intellectual efforts of others and the
confidentiality of information provided by human subjects. However,
when Departmental employees are preparing documents required by the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the considerations in
this paragraph are in conflict with the regulations and guidance of
the Council on Environmental Quality regarding the publication of
information under NEPA, the regulations and guidance of the Council
shall govern.
(3) Duplicative publication is not tolerated by the Department.
This does not suggest that it is inappropriate to publish more than
one manuscript based on a single scientific activity. In some cases,
the same scientific activity may be of interest to separate
audiences having different technical specialties or to journals
having different readerships. Prior publication of portions of an
original idea should always be referenced in later publications.
Publishing parts of another paper, or publishing another paper with
only minor changes, should only be done to reach different or larger
audiences and with the knowledge and consent of the publisher.
Employees subject to the Code will accept professional
responsibility associated with authorship and know that the
interpretation and results of their work are used to inform
important decisions in the public interest. Repetitive publication
of findings in popular literature does not constitute duplicative
publication.
(4) In order to ensure that the Department's decision making is
based on the best available science, the Code requires a scientific
product to be subject to the required level of review. Public
release of a scientific product without the required level of review
or without the inclusion of appropriate disclaimers could be
considered misconduct.
(5) Additionally, in support of the Department's interest in
protecting its decision making, the Code prohibits changing
conclusions, deletion of data, or knowingly omitting data from
reports and testimony for purposes of misrepresentation or
manipulation. At the same time, the Code prohibits suppressing data
collection, scientific studies, or publication of results by
scientists or their supervisors for the purpose of manipulating
Departmental decisions. These actions are not tolerated by the
Department. They are violations of the Federal Policy on Research
Misconduct because they wrongly characterize results and manipulate
results so that research is not accurately represented. Scientific
conclusions may only be changed in light of new data or new
analyses. Scientists should not succumb to coercion to change data.
If an employee subject to the Code believes that he or she has been
subjected to coercion, it should be reported immediately to the
respective supervisor, bureau, or Departmental ethics program.
Laura Davis,
Associate Deputy Secretary of the Interior.
[FR Doc. 2010-21591 Filed 8-30-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P