Five scientific peer reviews were conducted in parallel with the public comment period.  Peer reviewers were asked to prepare a peer review report that provides: any feedback or recommendations that will help us improve the monitoring and assessment strategy; feedback on the issues raised in the text boxes in the documents; and also responses to the following questions:
1. Are we on the correct pathway to a hypothesis-driven, scientifically-defensible design?
2. Do we propose the right three monitoring categories, and have we described them appropriately?
3. Can the proposed hypotheses collectively constitute a coordinated, integrated regional monitoring strategy at the scale of Puget Sound?
4. What recommendations would you make for us to consider during development of the implementation plan with regards to ensuring that the monitoring and assessment strategy is connected to policy makers?