U.S. Code » Title 42 » Chapter CHAPTER 6A— PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER III— NATIONAL RESEARCH INSTITUTES › Part Part H— General Provisions

42 U.S.C. § 289a

Peer review requirements

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 42 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) Applications for biomedical and behavioral research grants, cooperative agreements, and contracts; regulations(1) The Secretary, acting through the Director of NIH, shall by regulation require appropriate technical and scientific peer review of—(A) applications made for grants and cooperative agreements under this chapter for biomedical and behavioral research; and(B) applications made for biomedical and behavioral research and development contracts to be administered through the National Institutes of Health.(2) Regulations promulgated under paragraph (1) shall require that the review of applications made for grants, contracts, and cooperative agreements required by the regulations be conducted—(A) to the extent practical, in a manner consistent with the system for technical and scientific peer review applicable on November 20, 1985, to grants under this chapter for biomedical and behavioral research, and(B) to the extent practical, by technical and scientific peer review groups performing such review on or before November 20, 1985,and shall authorize such review to be conducted by groups appointed under sections 282(b)(16) and 284(c)(3) of this title.(b) Periodic review of research at National Institutes of HealthThe Director of NIH shall establish procedures for periodic technical and scientific peer review of research at the National Institutes of Health. Such procedures shall require that—(1) the reviewing entity be provided a written description of the research to be reviewed, and(2) the reviewing entity provide the advisory council of the national research institute involved with such description and the results of the review by the entity,and shall authorize such review to be conducted by groups appointed under sections 282(b)(6) 11 See References in Text note below. and 284(c)(3) of this title.(c) Compliance with requirements for inclusion of women and minorities in clinical research(1) In technical and scientific peer review under this section of proposals for clinical research, the consideration of any such proposal (including the initial consideration) shall, except as provided in paragraph (2), include an evaluation of the technical and scientific merit of the proposal regarding compliance with section 289a–2 of this title.(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to any proposal for clinical research that, pursuant to subsection (b) of section 289a–2 of this title, is not subject to the requirement of subsection (a) of such section regarding the inclusion of women and members of minority groups as subjects in clinical research.(July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title IV, § 492, as added Pub. L. 99–158, § 2, Nov. 20, 1985, 99 Stat. 874; amended Pub. L. 103–43, title I, § 132, June 10, 1993, 107 Stat. 135; Pub. L. 109–482, title I, § 102(f)(1)(B), Jan. 15, 2007, 120 Stat. 3685.)Editorial NotesReferences in Text

Section 282(b)(6) of this title, referred to in subsec. (b), was redesignated section 282(b)(16) by Pub. L. 109–482, title I, § 102(a)(3), Jan. 15, 2007, 120 Stat. 3681.

Amendments

2007—Subsec. (a)(2). Pub. L. 109–482 substituted “sections 282(b)(16)” for “sections 282(b)(6)” in concluding provisions.

1993—Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 103–43 added subsec. (c).

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 2007 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 109–482 applicable only with respect to amounts appropriated for fiscal year 2007 or subsequent fiscal years, see section 109 of Pub. L. 109–482, set out as a note under section 281 of this title.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1980–2025 · leading case: Forsham v. Harris, 445 U.S. 169 (1980).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Forsham v. Harris, 445 U.S. 169 (1980). “42 U. S. C. §§ 289a, 289c-1. The NIH are a component of the federal Public Health Service, which is itself a part of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.”
Casad v. United States Dep't of Health & Human Servs., 301 F.3d 1247 (10th Cir. 2002). “See 42 U.S.C. §§ 289a, 289a-l. A scientific review group, composed of experts qualified by training and experience in particular scientific or technical fields, evaluates the scientific and technical merit of grant applications.”
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, Inc. v. Tabak (D. Maryland 2023). · cites it 3× “42 U.S.C § 289a(a)(1). Animal protection is “arguably” amongst “the purposes implicit” in the PHSA’s peer review requirements.”
Kennedy v. Braidwood Mgmt., Inc. (2025). “” 42 U. S. C. §289a–1(b)(5)(E). Notably, however, Congress did not employ that kind of language in the statute governing the Task Force.”
— 42 U.S.C. § 289a(a)(1) — 1 case
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, Inc. v. Tabak (D. Maryland 2023). “42 U.S.C § 289a(a)(1). Animal protection is “arguably” amongst “the purposes implicit” in the PHSA’s peer review requirements.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.