Peer Review Agenda
Last Updated June 2012
Under the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review, Federal Agencies must post an agenda describing their plans for external peer review of scientific information and assessments that the Agency intends to disseminate. This page lists scientific products under development that MSHA plans to have peer reviewed in the near term. The entries below include a link to any draft documents that are available to the public. To obtain a copy of the OMB Bulletin, click here .
This peer review agenda will be updated periodically; announcements that the agenda has been updated will appear in the "What's New" section on MSHA's home page (www.msha.gov).
The public is invited to submit comments on this agenda. You may submit comments by any of the following methods:
E-Mail comments to PeerReview@dol.gov.
Facsimile: 202-693-9441. Include "Peer Review" in the subject line of the message.
Regular Mail: MSHA, Office of Standards, Regulations, and Variances, 1100 Wilson Boulevard, Room 2350, Arlington, Virginia 22209-3939.
Hand Delivery or Courier: MSHA, Office of Standards, Regulations, and Variances, 1100 Wilson Boulevard, Room 2350, Arlington, Virginia 22209-3939. Sign in at the receptionist's desk on the 21st floor.
Because comments submitted to the docket are available for public inspection, the Agency cautions interested parties against including any personal information such as social security numbers or birthdates. Please note that MSHA will not respond to individual comments; if you have questions, please contact the office indicated on each agenda entry.
All comments will be available for inspection and copying in the MSHA Docket Office at the address above. Most comments will be posted on MSHA's Web page at http://www.msha.gov. Contact the MSHA Docket Office at (202) 693-9440 for information on materials not available on the MSHA Web page and for assistance in using this Web page to locate docket submissions.
Peer Review Agenda (PDF Version)
Agency: Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA)
- Title of planned report: Health Effects Analysis and Risk Assessment for Occupational Exposure to Respirable Coal Mine Dust
Subject and purpose: Development of proposed standard for respirable coal mine dust. The report will contain an evaluation of scientific evidence describing health effects associated with occupational exposure to respirable coal mine dust and help MSHA characterize the health risks by addressing three questions: (1) whether health effects associated with exposure to respirable coal mine dust constitutes a "material impairment" to miner health or functional capacity; (2) whether exposed miners are at significant excess risk of incurring any of these material impairments; and (3) whether the proposed rule will substantially reduce such risks.
Agency contact: Patricia W. Silvey, Director, Office of Standards,
Regulations, and Variances 202 693-9440.
- The report is likely to be:
Influential scientific information _X_______
A highly influential scientific assessment: _______
- Timing of the review (starting/completion dates):
The risk assessment was sent for peer review on February 3, 2010 and was completed on May 10, 2010.
- The peer review was conducted by
A peer review panel _____
Individual letter reviews __X___
An alternative procedure (describe) _____
- Will the agency provide opportunities for the public to comment on the work product to be peer reviewed?
MSHA will publish the risk assessment with the proposed rule and request comments on it during the rulemaking process, including public hearings.
- Will the agency provide significant and relevant public comments to the peer reviewers before they conduct their review?
- Anticipated number of reviewers:
3 or fewer __X_____
More than 10 _______
- Primary disciplines or expertise needed in the review:
- Reviewers will be selected by:
� ������� The agency __X____
A designated outside organization ______
- Will the public, including scientific or professional societies, be asked to nominate potential peer reviewers?