PROCEDURES FOR THE

INDEPENDENT SCIENCE REVIEW BOARD (ISRB)

Approved 14 April 2003

 

A.  DEFINITIONS

1.   "Conflict of interest" means possessing a financial interest in a topic being reviewed by the ISRB or being monetarily or materially compensated by an entity (e.g., a specific company) or type of entity (e.g., the industry to which a specific company belongs) that has a financial interest in the outcome of the decision-making process for which a topic is being reviewed by the ISRB. A conflict of interest may exist if such financial interest or monetary compensation lies wholly in the candidate panel member's past.

 

2.   "External reviewer" means a person who reviews an ISRB report and who is not a member of the ISRB or a member of the panel which wrote the report being reviewed.

 

B.  MISSION OF THE INDEPENDENT SCIENCE REVIEW BOARD (ISRB)

 

The mission of the Independent Scientific Review Board (ISRB) of Lane County is to provide independent pro bono analyses of selected scientific issues that arise in the course of public decisions affecting the Eugene/Springfield/Lane County region.

 

C.  SUBMISSION AND EVALUATION OF REQUESTS FOR REVIEW BY ISRB

1.   Format of requests.

      a.   All requests shall be in writing.

b.   Requests shall include the following information in this order:

i.    Title of request;

ii.   Date of submission of request;

iii.  Name and contact information of the person or body requesting the review;

iv.  Brief overview of issue to be reviewed;

v.   Relevance of topic to pending public decisions affecting the Eugene/Springfield or Lane County region;

vi. Scientific issue(s) that are involved in the matter;

vii.Citations to relevant documents;

viii.Name and contact information of a person or authority to whom a copy of the report will be sent; and

ix.  Date report is required, with a brief explanation of the importance/ relevance of this date.

c.   An additional page may be appended, providing important additional information not covered in the above items.

d.   All accepted requests shall be publicly available.

 

2.   Submission of requests.

a.   Requests for review shall be submitted to the Chair of the Board.

b.   The Chair shall:

i.    bring the request to the full Board at the next Board meeting; or

ii.   in the case of a request requiring immediate action, request an emergency Board meeting.

 

3.   Clarification of requests. Prior to a final ISRB vote on a request, the ISRB may communicate with the requestor(s) to adjust the request so that it is formulated in a mutually acceptable manner.

4.   Procedure for accepting requests. For a request to be accepted for full review by the ISRB, at least a 2/3 majority of the full Board shall vote affirmatively for the review.

     

5.   Criteria for accepting requests.

a.   To vote affirmatively, the Board members shall have ascertained that all the following criteria have been met:

i.    Topic is unresolved as a matter of public decisionmaking;

ii.   Public discourse and resolution of topic would be aided by ISRB scientific evaluation; and

iii.  ISRB is capable of undertaking this review in a timely manner, with excellence.

b.   Other criteria may be appropriate to help rank the requests:

i.   Significance of the topic to Eugene/Springfield/Lane County

ii.     Determination that the ISRB should undertake the review, rather than others.

 

D.  DETERMINING THE ELEMENTS AND SCOPE OF RESPONSE TO A REQUEST ACCEPTED BY THE BOARD

1.   Defining scope and elements of response. Upon acceptance by the Board of an issue for review, the Board or a subcommittee of the Board shall define the scope of the response and shall articulate the scientific components of the response.

2.   Timetable for defining the scope and elements of the review and the date of the final report.

a.   The Board or subcommittee assigned the task of defining the scope and elements of a review shall complete its task expeditiously and request a meeting of the Board for approval.

b.   If necessary, Board approval of the review's scope and elements may be expedited via an electronic meeting called by the Board chair.

c.   The Board shall approve, and may modify, the proposed scope and elements by a majority affirmative vote of Board members at that meeting prior to the beginning of work on the review.

 

3.   Procedure for early termination of review process.

a.   If mutual agreement between the ISRB and requestor(s) on the scope and elements of the approved review cannot be reached, the ISRB may choose to continue or withdraw from reviewing the issue.

b.   Early termination of an accepted review shall occur only by a 2/3 majority of the full Board.

 

E.  ISRB PANELS

1.   Process for determining panel membership

a.   For scientific topics accepted for review, the Board shall determine whether to conduct the review using existing Board members exclusively, or to assemble a review panel which includes both Board members and outside experts. A panel will have a chair chosen by panel members.

b.   Panel members shall be selected by majority vote of the ISRB on the basis of:

i.    expertise relevant to the topic;

ii.   interest in specific topic;

iii.  ability to participate in panel meetings and contribute significantly to the panel’s work;

iv.  lack of conflict of interest; and

v.   ability to work with other panel members.

 

2.   Panel members work pro bono. All panel members, including Board members and outside ad hoc experts, shall work on the assigned topic pro bono.

 

3.   Conflicts of interest

a.   Panel members shall be free of conflicts of interest.

b.   Past financial interests and/or compensation may form the grounds for an ISRB determination that a conflict of interest exists.

c.   Each candidate panel member (including ISRB members) will provide the ISRB with

i.    A curriculum vitae

ii.   A list of all sources of funding for scientific research and consulting      

      for the past five years

iii.  A list of all financial interests for the past five years in any entity or type of entity that has a financial interest in the outcome of the decisionmaking process for which the ISRB issue is being reviewed.

d.   If a candidate panel member's financial interests or funding by an entity or type of entity that has a financial interest in the decisionmaking outcome lie wholly in the past, the ISRB may, by a 2/3 vote on a case-by-case basis, determine that these past financial interests do not constitute a current conflict of interest.

e.    The ISRB shall retain on file its reasons for determining that past financial arrangements do not constitute a current conflict of interest. These may be reviewed by members of the public if the ISRB determines that such review lies in the public interest.

 

4.   Panel support.

      a.   Financial support for panel expenditures shall be provided only by the Board.

      b.   The Panel Chair shall be responsible for maintaining records of panel activities and expenditures.

      c.   Student interns may be engaged to provide panel support.

 

F.  REPORTS

1.  Written report.

a.   Panel findings shall be presented in a written panel report.

b.   The report may include a minority opinion.

c.   Draft reports shall be completed by a specified number of days before the final report due date, both such dates being established when the topic is accepted for review, as defined in Section D2.

 

2.   Report content.

a.   Standards. Although the particular standards and style will vary somewhat as appropriate to the topic under review, the basic standards for the content of panel reports shall be those commonly accepted for scholarly scientific study and review, including the following:

i.    A clear statement of methods applied.

ii.   Clarity in distinguishing observations from inferences and conclusions.

iii.  Sufficient data or references to publicly accessible data sources that others may use the data to form independent opinions.

iv.  Citations of relevant scientific literature and other publicly accessible authorities underlying the analyses and findings.

b.   Essential components.

i.    An Executive Summary

ii.   Statement of the topic(s) being addressed.

iii.  Copy of the original request for review.

iv.  Name of each panel member and member’s expertise.

v.   Names of experts consulted by panel.

vi.  Methods, findings, explanation, argument, documentation, and conclusions consistent with standards in Section F2a.

c.   Language

i.    Reports shall use language and a style of explanation that is understandable by a lay reader.

ii.   Technical terms and acronyms shall be defined within the report.

 

3.   Review of draft panel reports

a.   Upon completion of a draft report by a panel of the ISRB, the draft shall be reviewed by at least one member of the ISRB who did not serve on the authoring panel. The reviewer shall be designated by the ISRB chair.

b.   The chair or the ISRB reviewer may request additional review of all or part of a report by an external reviewer(s).

c.   The scientific review criteria are those commonly applied in the scientific community: assessing the quality of the panel's scientific conclusions in view of the available data and other relevant concepts.

d.   The reviewer(s) shall address the accessibility of the writing to the lay reader.

e.   Under the advice of the ISRB chair, the panel shall consider the review(s), revise the report as appropriate, and approve by a 2/3 vote the completed final report, by the due date identified in Section D2.

     

4.   Adoption of final reports. The final report shall be adopted by a 2/3 vote of the ISRB.

 

5.   Report spokesperson. For each panel report, the ISRB chair shall designate an ISRB member to serve as a spokesperson for the purposes of responding to inquiries and providing additional explanations as necessary

 

G.  TRANSPARENCY OF PROCEEDINGS AND REPORTS The following documents shall be kept on file by the secretary of the ISRB, reviewable by any member of the public:

1.   All final ISRB reports; working documents and draft reports are not publicly available

2.   Regarding each ISRB member and panel member:

a.   A curriculum vitae

b.   A list of all sources of funding for the past five years for scientific research and consulting

c.   A list of all financial interests for the past five years in any entity or type of entity that has a financial interest in the outcome of the decisionmaking process for which the ISRB issue is being reviewed.

3.   All communications between requestors and ISRB, including phone call summaries, email communications, and other written communications

4.   Quarterly reports of ISRB income and expenses

 

H.   INDEPENDENCE FROM PRIVATE OR PUBLIC ORGANIZATIONS OR INDIVIDUALS

1.   No member of an ISRB panel can have received financial compensation, at any time, from any party that may benefit financially from the outcome of the scientific review.

2.   Any member of the public or an elected official may request that the ISRB review and report on a topic, but when the ISRB decides to accept such a request, the requestor will have no privileged communications with the panel during the preparation of the report, and will provide no funding for the report.

3.   The ISRB panel may request clarification of topic and/or documents or information from the requestor, but shall not consult with the requestor regarding the analysis of such information.

 

I.   DISSEMINATION OF REPORTS TO THE PUBLIC

1.   Copies of ISRB reports shall be provided to the following:

a. the initiator/requestor of the review;

b. Springfield and Eugene central public libraries

c. news media.

d. anyone who requests them, for a nominal fee to cover copying costs

            2.   Copies of ISRB reports may also be provided to:

a. public agencies/officials in the form of public comment or testimony for a hearing record;

b. an ISRB website.

 

J.   LEGAL LIABILITY Each ISRB report shall contain a disclaimer which may be individually tailored to each topic but shall note that:

1.   the authors applied scientific knowledge known to them; and

2.   any additional significant data or information submitted to the authors will be reviewed for possible ISRB response.

 

K.  COMPLAINTS.

1.   Any person may file a written complaint that ISRB procedures were not followed or that the ISRB, an ISRB panel, or an individual may have failed to maintain objectivity in scientific methods, analysis, or report language.

2.   The complaint must provide a concise basis and all relevant evidence for the assertions.

3.   Either the ISRB or the complainant may request a meeting of the complainant and the ISRB.

4.   The ISRB will respond to complaints in writing and the response may include a minority opinion.

5.   If the complaint is judged valid by the ISRB, appropriate corrective action(s) will be taken.

6.   The ISRB will maintain public records of all written communications with the complainant.

7.   Ad hominem charges of bias will not be addressed.