[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 18 (Friday, January 26, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 7905]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-2325]


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

COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY


Notice of Availability and Request for Comments

SUMMARY: On May 3, 2000 the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) and 
the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) were directed to 
conduct an interagency assessment of Federal environmental regulations 
pertaining to agricultural biotechnology. CEQ and OSTP announce the 
availability of the case studies and invite comment.

DATES: Written comments should be submitted on or before May 1, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Direct written comments to Chair, Council on Environmental 
Quality and Director, Office of Science and Technology Policy; 
Executive Office of the President, 17th and G Streets, NW., Washington, 
DC 20500. Attention: CEQ/OSTP Biotechnology Assessment.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for copies of the report may 
be directed to CEQ and OSTP at the above address or may be requested by 
calling CEQ at (202) 395-5750 or OSTP at (202) 456-6130. The report 
also appears on CEQ's website at www.whitehouse.gov/ceq and on OSTP's 
website at www.ostp.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Abstract

    On May 3, 2000, the President directed the Council on Environmental 
Quality (CEQ) and the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) to 
``conduct a six month interagency assessment of Federal environmental 
regulations pertaining to agricultural biotechnology and, if 
appropriate, make recommendations to improve them''. The assessment was 
undertaken as part of a larger set of policy measures intended to build 
consumer confidence and ensure that U.S. regulations keep pace with the 
latest scientific and product developments.
    The President directed this assessment to further long-standing 
goals of public access to information and maintenance of strong, 
science-based regulation. The assessment was intended to focus on 
environmental regulations through the use of a set of case studies to 
describe in detail how specific products are being regulated or how 
they may potentially be regulated. The focus on environmental 
regulations was based on the premise that this aspect of biotechnology 
regulation is not well understood by the public and is the subject of 
considerable interest. The analysis was not intended to be 
comprehensive in scope, but rather to be based on a set of case studies 
that could illuminate current agency practices, identify strengths and 
potential areas for improvement.
    In the intervening months, the assessment produced a set of working 
documents that provide rich detail and information on specific case 
studies for the public and for policymakers. However, due to time 
limitations, the interagency working group that was assembled to 
conduct the assessment was not able to conduct the analysis necessary 
to develop conclusions or recommendations. The selection of these 
particular case studies in no way indicates specific concerns with 
previous regulatory findings. In fact, no significant negative 
environmental impacts have been associated with the use of any 
previously approved biotechnology product.

II. Request for Comments

    In order to further the assessment process, CEQ and OSTP believe it 
would be beneficial to have public input on federal regulation of 
environmental aspects of biotechnology informed by the case studies. 
Specifically, based on the initial review of the case studies, public 
comment is requested in the following broad areas of overall federal 
regulation of environmental aspects of biotechnology: (a) 
Comprehensiveness and rigor of environmental assessment; (b) 
comprehensiveness and strength of statutory authority; (c) transparency 
of the environmental assessment and the decisionmaking process; (d) 
public involvement; (e) interagency coordination; (f) confidential 
business information.
    Public comments are requested by May 1.

    Dated: January 19, 2001.
Dinah Bear,
General Counsel, Council on Environmental Quality.

Clifford Gabriel,
Deputy to the Associate Director, Office of Science and Technology 
Policy.
[FR Doc. 01-2325 Filed 1-25-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3125-01-M