Science for Informed Decisions
Scientific and technological information, data, and evidence are central to the development and iterative improvement of sound policies, and to the delivery of equitable programs, across every area of government. Within BOEM – and the Department of the Interior (DOI) – the science used in bureau decisions must be of the highest quality and the result of rigorous scientific and scholarly process. Most importantly, it must be trustworthy.
____________________________________________________________
BOEM relies on the best available science to help inform its policy decisions.
Part of this commitment includes ensuring the integrity and
quality of its science.
____________________________________________________________
DOI and BOEM achieve scientific integrity by adhering to accepted standards, professional values, and practices of the relevant scientific community. Following these standards ensures objectivity, clarity, reproducibility, and utility of scientific and scholarly activities and assessments. This also helps prevent bias, fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, outside interference, censorship, and inadequate procedural and information security.
Peer Review Process
BOEM uses well-established scientific processes, including peer review, to ensure the integrity of its scientific or technological information. Numerous mechanisms are in place to identify and fulfill this requirement for scientific peer review. They include:
• External review of proposals,
• Review and critical input by Scientific Review Boards or Modeling Review Boards,
• Review and critical input by the Committee on Offshore Science and Assessment
• Scientific peer review of final reports, and/or
• Publication in peer-reviewed technical and/or scientific journals.
Peer review also helps ensure the quality of BOEM’s science. BOEM’s Environmental Studies Program follows the Office of Management and Budget guidelines for ensure the quality of scientific information, which includes following a systematic process of peer review and publishing a regularly updated Peer Review Agenda.
These measures, as well as stakeholder input, begin early in the development stages, and continue during the course of the projects. In addition, projects are regularly presented at internal BOEM meetings and special workshops facilitating both scientific peer review and public input.
Resources
- DOI Integrity of Scientific and Scholarly Activities
- OMB Guidelines for Ensuring and Maximizing the Quality, Objectivity, Utility, and Integrity of Information Disseminated by Federal Agencies
Programmatic Environmental Assessment of Environmental Studies Funded by BOEM
BOEM prepared NEPA documentation for the Environmental Studies Program. The document analyzes potential impacts of typical activities associated with environmental studies. Potential impacts on analyzed resources are expected to be negligible to minor, affecting few individuals over a short period and limited spatial area with standard mitigation measures in place. See the Programmatic EA and resulting Finding of No Significant Impacts for additional information.