Federal regulatory actions are expected to be based on sound scientific and economic analysis. Public policy and the public’s expectations have trended toward more and better analyses with more accountability, openness, and accessibility to these analyses and underlying data. Legislation, Executive Orders, Administration guidance documents, and agency policies communicate this. Agencies have established review and clearance systems for risk assessments. These systems do not ensure the highest standards for peer review. Nor does the release of draft risk assessments to the public ensure adequate peer review. Although the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs of the Office of Management and Budget is the ultimate quality check for regulatory analyses, there is a strong case for agency responsibility for good peer review. USDA’s experience with review of risk assessment illustrates strengths and weaknesses of federal peer review.