Okla. Admin. Code § 310:2-31-29

Current through Vol. 42, No. 7, December 16, 2024

Section 310:2-31-29 - Institutional administrative actions

(a) OSDH will take appropriate administrative actions against individuals when an allegation of misconduct has been substantiated. If the DO determines that the alleged misconduct is substantiated by the findings, they will decide on the appropriate actions to be taken, after consultation with the RIO. The actions may include:

(1) withdrawal or correction of all pending or published abstracts and papers emanating from the research where scientific misconduct was found.

(2) removal of the responsible person from the particular project, letter of reprimand, special monitoring of future work, probation, suspension, salary reduction, or initiation of steps leading to possible rank reduction or termination of employment;

(3) restitution of funds as appropriate.

(b) Termination of OSDH employment or resignation prior to completing inquiry or investigation. The termination of the respondent's institutional employment, by resignation or otherwise, before or after an allegation of possible scientific misconduct has been reported, will not preclude or terminate the misconduct procedures. If the respondent, without admitting to the misconduct, elects to resign his or her position prior to the initiation of an inquiry, but after an allegation has been reported, or during an inquiry or investigation, the inquiry or investigation will proceed. If the respondent refuses to participate in the process after resignation, the committee will use its best efforts to reach a conclusion concerning the allegations, noting in its report the respondent's failure to cooperate and its effect on the committee's review of all the evidence.

(c) Restoration of the respondent's reputation. If the institution finds no misconduct and ORI concurs, after consulting with the respondent, the RIO will undertake reasonable efforts to restore the respondent's reputation if necessary. Depending on the particular circumstances, the RIO should consider notifying those individuals aware of or involved in the investigation of the final outcome, publicizing the final outcome in forums in which the allegation of scientific misconduct was previously publicized, or expunging all reference to the scientific misconduct allegation from the respondent's personnel file. Any institutional actions to restore the respondent's reputation must first be approved by the DO.

(d) Protection of the whistleblower and others. Regardless of whether the institution or ORI determines that scientific misconduct occurred, the RIO will undertake reasonable efforts to protect whistleblowers who made allegations of scientific misconduct in good faith and others who cooperate in good faith with inquiries and investigations of such allegations. Upon completion of an investigation, the DO will determine, after consulting with the whistleblower, what steps, if any, are needed to restore the position or reputation of the whistleblower. The RIO is responsible for implementing any steps the DO approves. The RIO will also take appropriate steps during the inquiry and investigation to prevent any retaliation against the whistleblower.

(e) Allegations not made in good faith. If relevant, the DO will determine whether the whistleblower's allegations of scientific misconduct were made in good faith. If an allegation was not made in good faith, the DO will determine whether any administrative action should be taken against the whistleblower.

(f) Interim administrative actions. Institutional officials will take interim administrative actions, as appropriate, to protect Federal funds and ensure that the purposes of the Federal financial assistance are carried out.

Okla. Admin. Code § 310:2-31-29

Adopted by Oklahoma Register, Volume 36, Issue 24, September 3, 2019, eff. 9/13/2019

Amended by Oklahoma Register, Volume 38, Issue 24, September 1, 2021, eff. 9/11/2021