VA Research Misconduct Policy, 52156-52157 [E5-4787]
Download as PDF
52156
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 169 / Thursday, September 1, 2005 / Notices
SUMMARY: An open meeting of the Area
4 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be
conducted (via teleconference). The
Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is soliciting
public comment, ideas, and suggestions
on improving customer service at the
Internal Revenue Service.
DATES: The meeting will be held
Tuesday, September 27, 2005, at 11
a.m., Eastern Time.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mary Ann Delzer at 1–888–912–1227, or
(414) 297–1604.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is
hereby given pursuant to Section
10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory
Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988)
that a meeting of the Area 4 Taxpayer
Advocacy Panel will be held Tuesday,
September 27, 2005, at 11 a.m., Eastern
Time via a telephone conference call.
You can submit written comments to
the panel by faxing the comments to
(414) 297–1623, or by mail to Taxpayer
Advocacy Panel, Stop 1006MIL, 310
West Wisconsin Avenue, Milwaukee,
WI 53203–2221, or you can contact us
at https://www.improveirs.org. This
meeting is not required to be open to the
public, but because we are always
interested in community input, we will
accept public comments. Please contact
Mary Ann Delzer at 1–888–912–1227 or
(414) 297–1604 for dial-in information.
The agenda will include the
following: Various IRS issues.
Dated: August 25, 2005.
Martha Curry,
Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.
[FR Doc. E5–4770 Filed 8–31–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS
AFFAIRS
VA Research Misconduct Policy
Department of Veterans Affairs.
Notice of VA Research
Misconduct Policy.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: On December 6, 2000, the
Office of Science and Technology Policy
(OSTP), Executive Office of the
President, published a notification of a
final Federal Policy on Research
Misconduct (Federal Policy) (65 FR
76260). That policy set forth a definition
of ‘‘research misconduct’’ and provided
basic guidelines for responding to
allegations of misconduct for all
Federally-funded research and
proposals for such research. Federal
agencies that conduct or support
research, including the Department of
Veterans Affairs (VA), are required to
implement the Federal Policy.
VerDate Aug<18>2005
16:30 Aug 31, 2005
Jkt 205001
VA publicized its intent to adopt the
Federal Policy on April 30, 2002 (67 FR
21325). On May 4, 2005, VA finalized
and released its research misconduct
policy, Veterans Health Administration
(VHA) Handbook 1058.2. These internal
policies and procedures are fully
consistent with and circumscribed by
the Federal Policy. To the extent that
the Federal Policy was published in the
Federal Register subject to notice and
comment requirements, no additional
substantive policies affecting the public
are created by VA’s internal research
misconduct policies and procedures.
These policies and procedures apply
only to allegations of research
misconduct as defined herein. Other
‘‘research improprieties’’ are handled
according to separate, extant VA
policies and procedures.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Peter Poon, Health Science Specialist,
Office of Research Oversight (10R), 811
Vermont Ave., NW., Suite 574,
Washington, DC 20420, (202) 565–8107.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: VA’s
internal research misconduct policies
and procedures are fully consistent with
and circumscribed by the Federal
Policy.
I. Research Misconduct Defined
Consistent with the Federal Policy,
VHA Handbook 1058.2 defines research
misconduct as ‘‘fabrication, falsification,
or plagiarism in proposing, performing,
or reviewing research, or in reporting
research results.’’ The component terms
‘‘fabrication, falsification, and
plagiarism,’’ as well as ‘‘research’’ are
further defined, consistent with the
Federal Policy.
II. Findings of Research Misconduct
VHA Handbook 1058.2 adopts the
Federal Policy standard for making a
finding of research misconduct.
Specifically, a finding of research
misconduct requires that:
• There be a significant departure
from accepted practices of the relevant
research community; and
• The misconduct be committed
intentionally, knowingly, or with
reckless disregard for the integrity of the
research; and
• The allegation is proven by a
preponderance of evidence.
III. Responsibilities of VA and Local
VA Research Facilities
Under VHA Handbook 1058.2, local
VA Medical Centers (VAMCs)
conducting research bear primary
responsibility for the prevention and
detection of research misconduct within
their own facilities and conducting
inquiries and investigations when
PO 00000
Frm 00091
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
required. Each VAMC designates a
Research Integrity Officer (RIO) to
oversee research misconduct cases at its
facility. In exceptional circumstances,
the VA’s Office of Research Oversight
(ORO) may conduct its own
investigation.
The purpose of an Investigation is to
determine whether and to what extent
research misconduct has occurred, who
is responsible, and what corrective
actions are appropriate. The VAMC
Director transmits the Investigation
Committee’s Report, along with his or
her own recommendations, to the
designated Veterans Integrated Service
Network (VISN) Director.
The VISN Director adjudicates all
cases of research misconduct within his
or her geographical Network. The VISN
Director’s final decision and the
Investigation Report are then reviewed
by ORO Central Office for procedural
conformance with VHA Handbook
1058.2. If the procedures substantially
adhered to the Handbook, ORO notifies
the Respondent of the outcome.
Respondents have the opportunity to
submit written appeals of research
misconduct findings and proposed
corrective actions to the Under
Secretary for Health. The Under
Secretary for Health reviews and makes
a final decision on such appeals.
IV. Fair and Timely Procedures
• Safeguards for Informants. VHA
Handbook 1058.2 includes provisions
for protecting from retaliation
informants who make good faith and
reasonable allegations of research
misconduct to appropriate authorities or
who cooperate in good faith with
inquiries or investigations of research
misconduct.
• Safeguards for Respondents. VHA
Handbook 1058.2 also includes
provisions for protecting the rights of
those who are the subject of research
misconduct allegations, including
timely notification, reasonable access to
the data and other evidence supporting
the allegations, and the opportunity to
respond to allegations, evidence, and
proposed findings of research
misconduct (if any). Respondents may
obtain the advice of legal counsel or a
personal advisor, and have an
opportunity to appeal research
misconduct findings and proposed
corrective actions to the Under
Secretary for Health.
• Objectivity, Fairness, and Expertise.
VA’s research misconduct policies and
procedures include provisions for
ensuring objectivity, fairness, and
expertise in the review of allegations.
The Handbook requires that those acting
in the role of RIO, member of an Inquiry
E:\FR\FM\01SEN1.SGM
01SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 169 / Thursday, September 1, 2005 / Notices
or Investigation Committee, and
Adjudicator be replaced if they have an
actual or apparent conflict of interest
that cannot be resolved with respect to
a particular case.
• Timeliness. VHA Handbook 1058.2
establishes specific time limits for the
Inquiry (30 days), Investigation (90
days), Adjudication (30 days), and
Appeal (45 days), with allowances for
appropriate extensions.
• Confidentiality During the Inquiry,
Investigation, and Decision-Making
Process. VA’s research misconduct
policies and procedures emphasize the
privacy of all participants and the
confidentiality of information gathered
in research misconduct proceedings to
the extent possible consistent with a fair
VerDate Aug<18>2005
16:30 Aug 31, 2005
Jkt 205001
and thorough investigation and as
allowed by law. Only those individuals
who are specifically authorized to
review a misconduct allegation will be
provided with nonpublic information in
connection with the misconduct
proceeding.
V. VA Administrative Actions
VHA Handbook 1058.2 lists a number
of criteria to be considered in proposing
corrective actions when research
misconduct is found: the extent of the
misconduct; the degree to which the
misconduct was knowing, intentional,
or reckless; the presence or absence of
a pattern of misconduct; the
consequences of the misconduct; the
Respondent’s position and
responsibilities; the cooperation of the
PO 00000
Frm 00092
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
52157
Respondent during the Investigation;
the likelihood of rehabilitation; the type
of corrective actions imposed in past
cases with similar features, if any; and
any other extenuating or aggravating
circumstances.
VA may take interim action(s) as
necessary. If there is reasonable
indication of a possible criminal
violation, the matter will be promptly
referred to the VA Inspector General or
other appropriate investigative body.
(Authority: 65 FR 76260)
Dated: August 26, 2005.
Gordon H. Mansfield,
Deputy Secretary of Veterans Affairs.
[FR Doc. E5–4787 Filed 8–31–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320–01–P
E:\FR\FM\01SEN1.SGM
01SEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 169 (Thursday, September 1, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52156-52157]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E5-4787]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
VA Research Misconduct Policy
AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs.
ACTION: Notice of VA Research Misconduct Policy.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On December 6, 2000, the Office of Science and Technology
Policy (OSTP), Executive Office of the President, published a
notification of a final Federal Policy on Research Misconduct (Federal
Policy) (65 FR 76260). That policy set forth a definition of ``research
misconduct'' and provided basic guidelines for responding to
allegations of misconduct for all Federally-funded research and
proposals for such research. Federal agencies that conduct or support
research, including the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), are
required to implement the Federal Policy.
VA publicized its intent to adopt the Federal Policy on April 30,
2002 (67 FR 21325). On May 4, 2005, VA finalized and released its
research misconduct policy, Veterans Health Administration (VHA)
Handbook 1058.2. These internal policies and procedures are fully
consistent with and circumscribed by the Federal Policy. To the extent
that the Federal Policy was published in the Federal Register subject
to notice and comment requirements, no additional substantive policies
affecting the public are created by VA's internal research misconduct
policies and procedures.
These policies and procedures apply only to allegations of research
misconduct as defined herein. Other ``research improprieties'' are
handled according to separate, extant VA policies and procedures.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peter Poon, Health Science Specialist,
Office of Research Oversight (10R), 811 Vermont Ave., NW., Suite 574,
Washington, DC 20420, (202) 565-8107.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: VA's internal research misconduct policies
and procedures are fully consistent with and circumscribed by the
Federal Policy.
I. Research Misconduct Defined
Consistent with the Federal Policy, VHA Handbook 1058.2 defines
research misconduct as ``fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in
proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research
results.'' The component terms ``fabrication, falsification, and
plagiarism,'' as well as ``research'' are further defined, consistent
with the Federal Policy.
II. Findings of Research Misconduct
VHA Handbook 1058.2 adopts the Federal Policy standard for making a
finding of research misconduct. Specifically, a finding of research
misconduct requires that:
There be a significant departure from accepted practices
of the relevant research community; and
The misconduct be committed intentionally, knowingly, or
with reckless disregard for the integrity of the research; and
The allegation is proven by a preponderance of evidence.
III. Responsibilities of VA and Local VA Research Facilities
Under VHA Handbook 1058.2, local VA Medical Centers (VAMCs)
conducting research bear primary responsibility for the prevention and
detection of research misconduct within their own facilities and
conducting inquiries and investigations when required. Each VAMC
designates a Research Integrity Officer (RIO) to oversee research
misconduct cases at its facility. In exceptional circumstances, the
VA's Office of Research Oversight (ORO) may conduct its own
investigation.
The purpose of an Investigation is to determine whether and to what
extent research misconduct has occurred, who is responsible, and what
corrective actions are appropriate. The VAMC Director transmits the
Investigation Committee's Report, along with his or her own
recommendations, to the designated Veterans Integrated Service Network
(VISN) Director.
The VISN Director adjudicates all cases of research misconduct
within his or her geographical Network. The VISN Director's final
decision and the Investigation Report are then reviewed by ORO Central
Office for procedural conformance with VHA Handbook 1058.2. If the
procedures substantially adhered to the Handbook, ORO notifies the
Respondent of the outcome.
Respondents have the opportunity to submit written appeals of
research misconduct findings and proposed corrective actions to the
Under Secretary for Health. The Under Secretary for Health reviews and
makes a final decision on such appeals.
IV. Fair and Timely Procedures
Safeguards for Informants. VHA Handbook 1058.2 includes
provisions for protecting from retaliation informants who make good
faith and reasonable allegations of research misconduct to appropriate
authorities or who cooperate in good faith with inquiries or
investigations of research misconduct.
Safeguards for Respondents. VHA Handbook 1058.2 also
includes provisions for protecting the rights of those who are the
subject of research misconduct allegations, including timely
notification, reasonable access to the data and other evidence
supporting the allegations, and the opportunity to respond to
allegations, evidence, and proposed findings of research misconduct (if
any). Respondents may obtain the advice of legal counsel or a personal
advisor, and have an opportunity to appeal research misconduct findings
and proposed corrective actions to the Under Secretary for Health.
Objectivity, Fairness, and Expertise. VA's research
misconduct policies and procedures include provisions for ensuring
objectivity, fairness, and expertise in the review of allegations. The
Handbook requires that those acting in the role of RIO, member of an
Inquiry
[[Page 52157]]
or Investigation Committee, and Adjudicator be replaced if they have an
actual or apparent conflict of interest that cannot be resolved with
respect to a particular case.
Timeliness. VHA Handbook 1058.2 establishes specific time
limits for the Inquiry (30 days), Investigation (90 days), Adjudication
(30 days), and Appeal (45 days), with allowances for appropriate
extensions.
Confidentiality During the Inquiry, Investigation, and
Decision-Making Process. VA's research misconduct policies and
procedures emphasize the privacy of all participants and the
confidentiality of information gathered in research misconduct
proceedings to the extent possible consistent with a fair and thorough
investigation and as allowed by law. Only those individuals who are
specifically authorized to review a misconduct allegation will be
provided with nonpublic information in connection with the misconduct
proceeding.
V. VA Administrative Actions
VHA Handbook 1058.2 lists a number of criteria to be considered in
proposing corrective actions when research misconduct is found: the
extent of the misconduct; the degree to which the misconduct was
knowing, intentional, or reckless; the presence or absence of a pattern
of misconduct; the consequences of the misconduct; the Respondent's
position and responsibilities; the cooperation of the Respondent during
the Investigation; the likelihood of rehabilitation; the type of
corrective actions imposed in past cases with similar features, if any;
and any other extenuating or aggravating circumstances.
VA may take interim action(s) as necessary. If there is reasonable
indication of a possible criminal violation, the matter will be
promptly referred to the VA Inspector General or other appropriate
investigative body.
(Authority: 65 FR 76260)
Dated: August 26, 2005.
Gordon H. Mansfield,
Deputy Secretary of Veterans Affairs.
[FR Doc. E5-4787 Filed 8-31-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320-01-P