Scientific reports, including manuals, standard operating procedures, and other results are subject to peer review before general implementation. These guidelines differentiate between scientific peer review and policy review. Within BRD, policy reviews are carried out in a separate, parallel process within the supervisory chain. All proposals, publications, and other products are to be reviewed for policy implications by a designated individual within centers or units, or at the regional or national offices. Final approval for conformance to existing policies is given by the USGS Director, with authority delegated to individual divisions.
Different situations call for different approaches to peer review.
Selection of the proper approach is dependent on the type of proposal, program, publication, or other product being reviewed. Primary objectives are to identify those proposals most worthy of support, work in cooperation to improve proposals, and create an atmosphere where scientists are rewarded for developing ideas fully and presenting them clearly. However, reviews should be managed to assure that the process is independent, that is it is carried out without input from those involved in the Study. In most cases, the use of reviewers outside BRD will permit an independent, locally managed peer review. Reviews will be used to assess the adequacy of the approach, methods, and the ability of the PI to carry out the work.