Peer Review of Hydraulic Fracturing Study Publications
You will need Adobe Reader to view some of the files on this page. See EPA’s About PDF page to learn more.
- SAB Peer Review of Assessment Report
- SAB Feedback on Progress Report (2012)
- SAB Peer Review of Study Plan (2011)
- SAB Peer Review of Scope (2010)
- Peer Review of EPA Individual Research Papers and OMB Guidelines
EPA followed guidance recommendations outlined in EPA's peer review handbook (PDF) and the Office of Management and Budget's Information Quality Guidelines for the peer review of scientific products resulting from the hydraulic fracturing drinking water study.
SAB Peer Review of Assessment Report
In May 2013, the panel provided EPA with individual members' feedback on its 2012 Progress Report.
Information on the SAB Hydraulic Fracturing Advisory Panel meeting can be found here.
Information on SAB's activities related to the study can be found here.
SAB and stakeholder comments were taken into consideration in the development of the Final Study Plan.
- February 2011 Draft Plan to Study the Potential Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing on Drinking Water Resources (PDF) ("Draft Study Plan")
- February 2011 memo from EPA Office of Science Policy to SAB requesting review of the Draft Study Plan (PDF)
- August 2011 SAB Review of the Draft Study Plan (PDF) (89 pp, 1.4 MB)
- September 2011 EPA Response to SAB's comments on the Draft Study Plan (PDF)
- Table outlining EPA responses to SAB comments on the Draft Hydraulic Fracturing Study Plan (PDF)
- November 2011 Plan to Study the Potential Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing on Drinking Water Resources (PDF) (“Final Study Plan”) (PDF)
Information on SAB's activities related to the proposed approach and scope of the EPA study, including the April 2010 SAB meeting materials can be found here.
Peer Review of EPA Individual Research Papers and OMB Guidelines
- Projects resulting in papers submitted to journals were subjected to external peer review processes by the journal.
- Projects resulting in EPA reports were peer reviewed by contractor coordinated letter reviews by external technical experts.
Consistent with the regulations governing confidential business information (CBI), projects involving CBI were not be reviewed by external peer reviewers, but did receive internal expert peer reviews.