[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 182 (Thursday, September 18, 2008)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 54132-54133]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-21837]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 600

[Docket No. 0808041047-81182-01]
RIN 0648-AW62


Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions; Scientific and Statistical 
Committees; Peer Review; National Standard Guidelines

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Advanced notice of proposed rulemaking; request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: NMFS announces that it is considering, and is seeking public 
comment on proposed rulemaking to revise National Standard 2 (NS2) 
guidelines regarding use of best scientific information available, in 
light of reauthorization of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation 
and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act). NMFS is considering 
modifying the language describing the content and purpose of the Stock 
Assessment and Fishery Evaluation (SAFE) Report or related documents, 
and adding language regarding peer review processes, the role of the 
scientific and statistical committees (SSCs) of the Regional Fishery 
Management Councils (Councils), and the relationship between peer 
reviews and SSCs.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before 5 p.m., local 
time, December 17, 2008.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by 0648-AW62, by any one 
of the following methods:
    <bullet> Electronic Submissions: Submit all electronic public 
comments via the Federal eRulemaking Portal http://www.regulations.gov.
    <bullet> Fax: Attn: William Michaels 301-713-1875.
    <bullet> Mail: William Michaels, NOAA Fisheries Service, Office of 
Science and Technology, 1315 East-West Highway, F/ST4, Silver Spring, 
MD 20910.
    Instructions: All comments received are a part of the public record 
and will generally be posted to http://www.regulations.gov without 
change. All Personal Identifying Information (for example, name, 
address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by the commenter may be publicly 
accessible. Do not submit Confidential Business Information or 
otherwise sensitive or protected information.
    NMFS will accept anonymous comments. Attachments to electronic 
comments will be accepted in Microsoft Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or 
Adobe PDF file formats only.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bill Michaels, 301-713-2363 x136.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On January 12, 2007, the Magnuson-Stevens 
Fishery Conservation and Management Reauthorization Act of 2006 (MSRA) 
was signed into law. The MSRA amendments to the Magnuson-Stevens Act 
included provisions to improve the use of science in decision-making, 
provide for a stronger role for Councils' SSCs and enhance peer review 
processes.
    Currently, the NS2 guidelines address the use of best scientific 
information available to support fishery management actions, prescribe 
the content and purpose of SAFE reports or similar

[[Page 54133]]

documents, and assign responsibility for the preparation and review of 
SAFE reports to the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary). SAFE reports are 
intended to provide the Councils with a summary of current scientific 
information available to make management decisions and are intended to 
contain information upon which Councils are to base harvest 
specifications, including annual harvest levels from each stock. At 
this time, NS2 does not specifically mention that the SAFE should 
include SSC recommendations for acceptable biological catch from either 
the SSC or peer review process (established under Section 302(g)(1)(E) 
of the Magnuson-Stevens Act). SSC recommendations for acceptable 
biological catch are the basis upon which each Council is to set annual 
catch limits (ACLs), and ACLs are not to exceed these fishing level 
recommendations per Section 302(h)(6) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. NMFS 
is considering, and is seeking public comment on how to revise the 
discussion of SAFE reports in the NS2 to include the scientific 
recommendations that are to be provided by the SSCs under the Magnuson-
Stevens Act, as reauthorized.
    NMFS is inviting comment on the extent to which the NS2 guidelines 
should provide guidance as to what constitutes ``best scientific 
information available.'' In 2004, the National Research Council (NRC) 
of the National Academies was charged with examining the application of 
the term ``best scientific information available'' as the basis for 
fishery conservation and management measures required under NS2 and 
recommended approaches for a more uniform application of the standard 
within the context of current and future fisheries management efforts. 
The NRC recommendations can be found in their publication, ``Improving 
the Use of the Best Scientific Information Available' Standard in 
Fisheries Management'' (NRC 2004,http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php). 
Although NMFS has informally adopted many of the NRC recommendations, 
this advanced notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR) is an opportunity to 
solicit and incorporate recommendations into the NS2 guidance.
    Section 302(g)(1)(E) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act provides that 
``(T)he Secretary and each Council may establish a peer review process 
for that Council for scientific information used to advise the Council 
about the conservation and management of the fishery. The review 
process, which may include existing committees or panels, is deemed to 
satisfy the requirements of the guidelines issued pursuant to section 
515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act for 
Fiscal year 2001,'' otherwise known as the Information Quality Act. At 
present, none of the 10 national standards, or national standard 
guidelines, directly discuss or provide guidance on peer review 
processes.
    NMFS is considering expanding NS2 to include specific language 
regarding peer review processes. NS2 appears to be the logical national 
standard to provide further guidance regarding peer reviews, since a 
peer review process is one method for ensuring that the best scientific 
information available is utilized in Council decisions. This language 
may include minimum criteria for peer review processes, based in part 
on the public comments received. Furthermore, there may be a need to 
clarify the relationship between the peer review processes that may be 
established by the Secretary and each Council and the role of the SSC 
of that Council vis-[aacute]-vis the peer review process.
    Finally, NMFS seeks comments from the public on other issues or 
clarifications to NS2 that the public would like to see addressed in 
this rulemaking.

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1851.

    Dated: September 15, 2008.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. E8-21837 Filed 9-17-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S