• You will need Adobe Reader to view some of the files on this page. See EPA’s About PDF page to learn more.Designation as a Highly Influential Scientific Assessment
• Peer Review by the Science Advisory Board
  • Latest
  • Feedback on Progress Report (2012)
  • Peer Review of Study Plan (2011)
  • Peer Review of Scope (2010)
• Peer Review of EPA Individual Research Papers and OMB Guidelines

Designation as a Highly Influential Scientific Assessment
The study’s assessment report has been designated a Highly Influential Scientific Assessment (HISA). As a HISA, the draft state of the science assessment will receive meaningful and timely peer review in accordance with EPA's peer review handbook.

In May 2013, the panel provided EPA with individual members' feedback on its 2012 Progress Report. The panel's efforts will conclude with a peer review of the draft assessment.  

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.

• Projects resulting in papers submitted to journals will be subjected to external peer review processes by the journal.
• Projects resulting in EPA reports will undergo contractor led letter reviews by external technical experts.

Consistent with the regulations governing confidential business information (CBI), projects involving CBI may not be reviewed by external peer reviewers, but will receive internal expert peer reviews. 

EPA is applying the Agency's assessment factors and the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) guidelines for peer review to evaluate the quality of all scientific and technical information considered in the Hydraulic Fracturing Study.

The assessment factors and guidelines allow EPA to take into consideration different sources of scientific and technical information, and ensures appropriate and consistent review and weight is given to the literature used in the study.

See Appendix B of EPA's peer review handbook (PDF) to read OMB's Final Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review.