209 



PageS 



deliberative regional process, there are no more hearings. There undoubtedly have been and will 

 be, however, attempts to influence the final decision in Washington. 



Another glaring oversight in the 1993 whiting decision was the lack of communication among 

 the agencies charged with deciding the allocation and the PFMC. It Is obvious that despite the 

 multiple conclusions reached by the NMFS regional director, by the Assistant Administrator for 

 NOAA, and the Administrator's changed view in the final decision, there was hole or no 

 interchange between these parties as they reviewed the amendment and the PFMC. In fact. 

 Co mm erce made no attempt to communicate with the PFMC even as it met in Portland the week 

 before Commerce issued its final decision. 



In place of consultation, the federal review process appears insular, far-distanced from the 

 regional recommendations, and making final decisions without (1) consulting the Council, and (2) 

 providing justification for taking action contrary to the recommendations of the Council. 



Returning to the suggested amendments, the memorial next lists a provision to give the PFMC 

 its proper consultative role in the process: 



(4) If, after review, the Secretary determines the regulatory amendment is not consistent 

 with the criteria set forth m paragraph (1) (A), the Secretary shall notify the Council is 

 writing of the disapproval or partial disapproval of the regulatory amendment. Such notice 

 shall specify — 



(A) the applicable law or provision of the fishery management plan with which the 

 regulatory amendment is inconsistent; 



(B)the nature of such inconsistencies; and 



(C) recommendations concerning the actions that could be taken by the Council to 

 conform such regulatory amendment to the requirements of applicable law and the 

 fishery management plan. Such recommendations shall be accompanied by the 

 rationale and the appropriate analysis of impacts. 



(5) If the Secretary disapproves or partially disapproves a regulatory amendment, the 

 Council may submit a revised regulatory amendment to the Secretary. 



(6) After the Secretary receives a revised regulatory amendment, the Secretary shall 

 immediately — 



(A) commence a review of the regulatory amendment to determine if it complies with 

 the criteria set forth in paragraph (1) (A); and 



(B) publish the revised regulation in the Federal Register for a 15-day public comment 

 period. 



(7) Before the close of the 30th day after the revised receipt date, the Secretary, after taking 

 into account any public comments, shall complete the review and determine whether the 

 regulatory amendment complies with the criteria set forth in paragraph (1) (A). If the 

 Secretary determines that the revised regulatory amendment is not is compliance with such 

 criteria, the Secretary shall immediately notify the Council of the disapproval. After 



