Office of the Chief Information Officer &
High Performance Computing and Communications

Peer Review Plans


Title and Description:
Proposed Designation of Critical Habitat for the Distinct Population Segments of Lower Columbia River Coho and Puget Sound Steelhead

Section 4 of the Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) requires the designation of critical habitat for threatened and endangered species. This report contains a biological analysis compiled by the Protected Resources Division of the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) in support of designating critical habitat for the threatened Distinct Population Segments (DPS) of Lower Columbia River Coho and Puget Sound Steelhead. This report summarizes the best available information on these species’ life history, distribution, and habitat use relevant to critical habitat designation.

ID:330 Info. Type:  ISI
Estimated DIssemination Date: 12/17/2013
Actual Dissemination Date: 4/15/2013
Contact Person: Michael Liddel NOAA Locator

Date First Posted in Peer Review Agenda:12/1/2015
Estimated Peer Review Start Date: 2/19/2013
Review type:

Number of reviewers:
Three or fewer.

Peer reviewers will be designated by the agency.

Will the public, including scientific or professional societies, be asked to nominate potential peer reviewers? no

Will there be opportunities for the public to comment on the work product to be peer reviewed? yes

How and When?

The proposed rule Federal Register notice announced the availability of the work product and the opportunity for public comment during a 90-day comment period. The comment period was open from January 14, 2013 through April 15, 2013.

Will the agency provide significant and relevant public comments to the peer reviewers before they conduct their review? no.

Primary disciplines or expertise needed in the review: Salmonid biologist.

Comments on Peer Review:

Charge to reviewers: Please review the enclosed draft biological report.  Specific requests are to verify that appropriate supporting literature is accurately used, and that the document provides a logical rationale for proposed critical habitat, following the steps outlined in the introduction/background. 

Final peer review reports:




Final work product:

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3