Skip to main content

Peer Review in the Department of Energy-Office of Science and Technology Interim Report (1997) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:

Executive Summary
Pages 1-4

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 1...
... This new program apparently marks the first time that OST has applied peer review (i.e., technical review by independent, external experts) 2 to evaluate the technical merit of technology projects as part of its technology-selection process.
Read the entire page →
From page 2...
... Due to the large number of projects in the later stages of development, the committee encourages OST to focus much of the short-term peer review efforts on high-budget, late-stage projects that never have been peer reviewed, but that still face upcoming decisions with major programmatic andlor funding implications. In the long term, however, the committee encourages OST to focus on proposals for new projects entering OST's development process to help ensure that only projects with sufficient technical merit are supported by OST.
Read the entire page →
From page 3...
... In practice, the nine general review criteria are often modified to technology-specif~c review criteria intended to focus the review on issues of particular interest to OST. The committee encourages OST to continue its practice of developing a minimum number of technology-specif~c review criteria because it allows OST peer review program staff to focus the reviews on particularly important issues, provided these technology-specific criteria address technical issues and do not obscure or preempt the principal goal of determining technical merit.
Read the entire page →
From page 4...
... In particular, the committee encourages OST to enforce its 30-day deadline for written responses to aN peer review reports, and to require more detailed written responses from PIs and program managers that fully describe how the recommendations of the peer review pane! were seriously considered.
Read the entire page →

Key Terms

  • peer reviews
  • review criteria
  • encourages ost
  • ost develop
  • written responses

  • ost peer
  • technology projects
  • program staff
  • technical merit
  • reviews conducted

  • technical reviews
  • review reports
  • review panel
  • peer reviewers
  • review efforts

  • mechanical engineers
  • ost staff
  • seriously considered
  • project selection
  • complete annual

  • conduct peer
  • explicitly excludes
  • preliminary assessment
  • canceled shortly
  • management process

  • reviewer selection
  • project nearly
  • makes peer
  • ost requested
  • consider factors


    • This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
    More information on Chapter Skim is available.