[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 61 (Thursday, March 30, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16477-16478]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-7782]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Office of the Secretary


Notice of a Regional Public Hearings of the Commission on 
Research Integrity

    Pursuant to Pub. L. 92-463, notice is hereby given of two regional 
public hearings and meetings of the Commission on Research Integrity. 
All proceedings are open to the public.
    The first meeting will be on Monday and Tuesday, April 10 and 11, 
1995, at the Countway Library Auditorium, Harvard Medical Center, 25 
Shattuck Street, Boston, MA. The Commission will meet from 8:30 a.m. 
until 5:00 p.m. on the first day to listen to testimony, and from 9:00 
a.m. until 5:00 p.m. on the second day to deliberate Commission issues.
    The second meeting will be on Thursday and Friday, May 4 and 5, 
1995, at the University of Alabama, the Great Hall and Alumni 
Auditorium respectively, Hill University Center, 1400 University 
Boulevard, Birmingham, AL. The Commission will meet from 8:30 a.m. 
until 5:00 p.m. on the first day to deliberate Commission issues, and 
from 9:00 a.m. until 4:45 p.m. on the second day to listen to 
testimony.
    Interested parties are advised to call the Executive Secretary 
shortly before the meeting to verify the date, place, and agenda.
    The mandate of the Commission is to develop recommendations for the 
Secretary of Health and Human Services (DHHS) and the Congress on the 
administration of Section 493 of the Public Health Service Act, as 
amended by and added to by Section 161 of the NIH Revitalization Act of 
1993.
    In its deliberations, the Commission has confirmed that there are 
no quick and easy answers for fair, effective, and realistic 
administrative solutions to a number of issues in research integrity 
and scientific misconduct. An essential component of the Commission's 
information-gathering is to interact extensively with relevant 
constituencies of the scientific community--including junior and senior 
scientists, witnesses, respondents, academic administrators, as well as 
students--to understand their particular experiences and views and to 
explore possible improvements.
    Four major areas are currently of great interest to the Commission:
    1. A New Definition of Research Misconduct. The Commission believes 
that any definition needs to address the full extent of serious 
research misconduct, but must avoid a definition that is too broad, 
vague, and potentially unfair. In addition, a two-tiered approach for 
research integrity, or failures thereof, would be useful; it would 
emphasize institutional responsibility, and reserve an oversight role 
for the Federal Government.
    2. Assurance for Institutions and Accountability for Federally 
Funded Research. The Commission is considering that each institution 
receiving Federal funds develop and submit for Federal review and 
approval assurances concerning the establishment and implementation of: 
(a) Good research practices and professional norms; (b) procedures for 
disseminating that information throughout its community; and (c) 
educational activities designed to foster practice of the highest 
ethical standards in the conduct of research for all researchers. 
Topics affecting good research practices that might be addressed in 
institutional assurances include: data recording and retention; 
supervisory responsibility; authorship practices; protection of 
witnesses; and other professional conduct bearing directly on the 
integrity of Federally supported research.
    3. Bill of Rights for Witnesses. Testimony from witnesses (also 
called ``whistleblowers'') who have challenged perceived research 
misconduct reaffirms the Commission's mandate to propose effective 
whistleblower protection. Witnesses have stated that retaliation occurs 
with sufficient frequency and impact to have a chilling effect on 
potential witnesses throughout the research community. The Commission 
is considering a Witness Bill of Rights.
    4. Codes of Ethics. Professional organizations have a unique role 
in the preservation of scientific integrity. The Commission endorses 
their existence, their continual use in teaching and standard checking, 
and their ongoing development to keep pace with the ethical issues of 
the times. The Commission is considering that, to reinforce and augment 
the influence of normative professional standards, professional 
organizations should [[Page 16478]] become more active in defining, 
promulgating, and promoting compliance with these standards.
    The Commission will also continue discussion of other issues on 
which the Commission may make recommendations in its final report.
    The Commission invites oral or written statements from interested 
parties. Lengthy statements exceeding 10 or 15 minutes of oral 
presentation should be submitted in writing or via internet to the 
Executive Secretary before the meeting. Written statements will be 
reviewed by Commission Members.
    Henrietta D. Hyatt-Knorr, Executive Secretary, Commission on 
Research Integrity, at Rockwall II, Suite 700, 5515 Security Lane, 
Rockville MD 20852; (301) 443-5300 (phone); (301) 443-5351 (fax); and 
[email protected] (internet) will furnish a preliminary report 
of the Commission including the Committee charter and roster of the 
Committee members, and/or a meeting agenda upon request. Individuals 
wishing to make presentations should contact the Executive Secretary. 
Depending on the number of presentations and other considerations, the 
Executive Secretary will allocate a reasonable timeframe for each 
speaker.
Henrietta D. Hyatt-Knorr,
Executive Secretary, Commission on Research Integrity.
[FR Doc. 95-7782 Filed 3-29-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-17-P