Socioeconomic Research and Monitoring Program for the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary: Recreation/Tourism in the Florida Keys - A Ten-year Replication

Forms and Documents

Forms and supporting documents for this ICR

Document	Type	Status	Availability
CUSTOMER substitution surveys versions 5-6	Form and Instruction	New	Available
CUSTOMER substitution surveys version 1-2	Form and Instruction	New	Available
CUSTOMER Coral Bleaching Surveys	Form and Instruction	New	Available
CUSTOMER onsite survey	Form and Instruction	New	Available
KAP/Reef valuation mail-back survey	Form and Instruction	New	Available
CUSTOMER substitution surveys versions 3-4	Form and Instruction	New	Available
Visitor auto, air and cruise surveys	Form and Instruction	New	Available
Supply side surveys	Form and Instruction	New	Available
Resident survey versions 4d-f	Form and Instruction	New	Available
Resident survey versions 4a-c	Form and Instruction	New	Available
Resident survey version 3	Form and Instruction	New	Available
Resident survey versions 2 a-d	Form and Instruction	New	Available
Resident survey version 1	Form and Instruction	New	Available
FKNMS SS Part B AND REFERENCES.pdf	Supporting Statement B	Uploaded 0000-00-00	Available
FKNMS SS Part A.pdf	Supporting Statement A	Uploaded 0000-00-00	Available

IC Document Collections

Information collection document groups

IC ID	Collection	Type	Status	Form
46686	Visitor CUSTOMER surveys	Form and Instruction	New	CUSTOMER substitution surveys versions 5-6
46686	Visitor CUSTOMER surveys	Form and Instruction	New	CUSTOMER substitution surveys version 1-2
46686	Visitor CUSTOMER surveys	Form and Instruction	New	CUSTOMER Coral Bleaching Surveys
46686	Visitor CUSTOMER surveys	Form and Instruction	New	CUSTOMER onsite survey
46686	Visitor CUSTOMER surveys	Form and Instruction	New	KAP/Reef valuation mail-back survey
46686	Visitor CUSTOMER surveys	Form and Instruction	New	CUSTOMER substitution surveys versions 3-4
46681	Visitor: Auto, Air and Cruise Ship Surveys	Form and Instruction	New	Visitor auto, air and cruise surveys
46680	Supply side surveys for dive shop owners/operators and cruise ships	Form and Instruction	New	Supply side surveys
46521	Resident surveys	Form and Instruction	New	Resident survey versions 4d-f
46521	Resident surveys	Form and Instruction	New	Resident survey versions 4a-c
46521	Resident surveys	Form and Instruction	New	Resident survey version 3
46521	Resident surveys	Form and Instruction	New	Resident survey versions 2 a-d
46521	Resident surveys	Form and Instruction	New	Resident survey version 1

ICR Details

OMB Control No: 0648-0572	ICR Reference No: 200612-0648-005
Status: Historical Active	Previous ICR Reference No:
Agency/Subagency: DOC/NOAA	Agency Tracking No:
Title: Socioeconomic Research and Monitoring Program for the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary: Recreation/Tourism in the Florida Keys - A Ten-year Replication
Type of Information Collection: New collection (Request for a new OMB Control Number)	Common Form ICR:  No
Type of Review Request: Regular
OIRA Conclusion Action: Approved without change	Conclusion Date: 11/30/2007
Retrieve Notice of Action (NOA)	Date Received in OIRA: 03/01/2007
Terms of Clearance: In accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10(c), at the formal request of the agency, OMB assigns an OMB Control Number to this collection, valid for one year. However, this approval does not represent an assessment by OMB that this information collection satisfies the principles of the PRA. OMB continues to have serious concerns about the practical utility of this collection due to questions about the soundness and appropriateness of the methods employed in the collection. NOAA has also not provided sufficient justification for the burden being imposed on the public for some components of this collection. Some of the specific concerns and issues include the following: 1. It is unclear why the 10-year retrospective on the tourism/recreation survey has been expanded to include additional surveys on "Global Climate Change and Coral Bleaching," "Coral Ecosystem Services: Societal Preferences and Policy/Management," and "Florida Reef Resiliency Program." NOAA has not justified why these surveys are being included with the 10-year retrospective, nor has NOAA described clearly which components of ICR pertain to 10-year retrospective. 2. NOAA fails to discuss the analytical methods that will be used to analyze the data gathered through this ICR. Without sufficient discussion, the evaluation of the practical utility of the information is not possible. 3. The resident and visitor surveys are extensive as currently written, but there is little emphasis on surveying businesses. NOAA does not explain the relative lack of focus on the business community. 4. Resident surveys Respondents are asked to recall and provide highly detailed information on recreational activities including activities by location, type of activity, number of days, etc. NOAA has not provided results from pretesting or other research that respondents are able to recall and report this information accurately. The nature of the good being valued in the contingent valuation questions is not discussed. NOAA also fails to discuss how the bid amounts are generated. There is no discussion in the supporting statement on how the data from these questions will be analyzed. No information is provided on the coverage or quality of the sampling frames for the resident survey of Monroe County. 5. Visitor surveys (auto, air and cruise ships) Respondents are asked to recall and provide detailed information on expenditures. NOAA has not provided results from pretesting or other research that respondents are able to recall and report this information accurately. 6. Visitor CUSTOMER surveys. Substitution surveys: Sampling for the CUSTOMER survey does not use sound statistical methodology that can be generalized to the universe of study in violation of (5 CFR 1320.5(d)(2)(vi) . Respondent's "favorite" and "most common" reefs may not be interchangeable. NOAA has not provided pretesting results that demonstrate that these terms are interchangeable. The answer categories in the hypothetical behavior questions are forced to be artificially mutually exclusive. NOAA fails to discuss the basis for this design. There is no discussion on how the hypothetical behavior data will be analyzed. The data seem suited to be used in RUM, but no such discussion is provided. With the conjoint questions, NOAA fails to discuss the results from pretesting that evaluated the appropriateness of the design and the design values. NOAA did not discuss the potential impact of the length of the questionnaire on data quality due to respondent fatigue or satisficing behavior. NOAA has not provided the results from pretesting on this issue. On-site survey: Respondents are asked to recall and provide detailed information on expenditures. It¡¦s not clear whether NOAA conducted pretests or other research to ensure that the respondents are able to recall and report this information accurately. Coral bleaching survey: What are the bases for the policy scenarios described in the conjoint questions? Also, are the respondents likely to believe the policy scenarios? Please report pre-test results. What are the bases for design values in the policy scenarios? 7. Questionable research protocols are use to recruit respondents without discussion of alternatives: Using off-duty police officers to force sampled vehicles to leave the highway and enter a parking lot where they are solicited to participate in the voluntary survey seems coercive and ethically questionable. The expected response rates are low, and NOAA's plans to analyze non-response bias focus solely on demographic factors, not key substantive variables from the surveys. 8. Burden level seems excessive and was inadequately justified. The design calls for sampling more than a quarter of the households in Monroe county with responses expected from more than 13% . It is not clear why such a high fraction of the population should be burdened with this collection. In general, clear precision requirements were not provided to justify the sample sizes. Sample sizes were described as exceeding "those achieved in previous studies" and exceeding by 50% or more the minimum requirements set by Dr. Chi-OK Oh, the designer of the choice experiment. No justification was provided for why it is necessary to exceed these levels and impose this greater level of burden on the public. 9. NOAA notes in Supporting Statement Part B (4) that this ICR requires no pretesting since some of the questionnaires are replication of past work and NOAA is relying on past experiences to inform new questionnaires. OMB disagrees with this assessment. This ICR is introducing new questionnaires with concepts not present in the previous surveys (e.g., Coral reef bleaching), and the environment in which the surveys are being conducted have changed significantly (e.g., declining response rates for some modes) to warrant new pretests. 10. The ICR does not discuss the relevant Institutional Review Board (IRB) review, and approval by University of Massachusetts-Amherst. If the ICR is revised in any way in response to the IRB review, including changes to methodologies or instruments, DOC/NOAA must resubmit the ICR for review.

table that charts list comparision

	Inventory as of this Action	Requested	Previously Approved
Expiration Date	11/30/2008	36 Months From Approved
Responses	25,498	0	0
Time Burden (Hours)	10,539	0	0
Cost Burden (Dollars)	0	0	0

---

Abstract: This is an approximate ten-year replication of the study "Linking the Economy and Environment of the Florida Keys/Florida Bay" which established baseline measurements for recreation/tourist uses of the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary (FKNMS). The baseline measurements were taken in 1995-96 for the broader recreation/tourist uses, while for reef use the baseline measurements were taken in 2000-2001. Baseline measurements were taken on number of users and recreation/tourist uses of the Florida Keys, along with estimates of economic value of resource use, economic impact associated with these uses on the local and regional economies, importance/satisfaction ratings for 25 natural resource attributes, facilities and services, and demographic profiles of users. This application also includes establishment of new baselines for knowledge, attitudes & perceptions of Sanctuary management strategies and regulations for recreation/tourist user groups, adds evaluations of management alternatives for coral reefs, and adds information that will support better predictions of how users will respond to management/regulations.

---

Authorizing Statute(s): US Code: 16 USC 1431 Name of Law: National Marine Sanctuaries Act
  

Citations for New Statutory Requirements: None

---

Associated Rulemaking Information
RIN:	Stage of Rulemaking:	Federal Register Citation:	Date:
	Not associated with rulemaking

---

Federal Register Notices & Comments
60-day Notice:	Federal Register Citation:	Citation Date:
	71 FR 39306	07/12/2006
30-day Notice:	Federal Register Citation:	Citation Date:
	72 FR 8962	02/28/2007
Did the Agency receive public comments on this ICR? No

---

Number of Information Collection (IC) in this ICR: 4

table that charts list of burden

IC Title	Form No.	Form Name
Resident surveys	NA, NA, NA, NA, NA	Resident survey version 1 ,   Resident survey versions 2 a-d ,   Resident survey version 3 ,   Resident survey versions 4a-c ,   Resident survey versions 4d-f
Supply side surveys for dive shop owners/operators and cruise ships	NA	Supply side surveys
Visitor CUSTOMER surveys	NA, NA, NA, NA, NA, NA	KAP/Reef valuation mail-back survey ,   CUSTOMER onsite survey ,   CUSTOMER Coral Bleaching Surveys ,   CUSTOMER substitution surveys version 1-2 ,   CUSTOMER substitution surveys versions 3-4 ,   CUSTOMER substitution surveys versions 5-6
Visitor: Auto, Air and Cruise Ship Surveys	NA	Visitor auto, air and cruise surveys

---

ICR Summary of Burden

table that charts list of burden

	Total Approved	Previously Approved	Change Due to New Statute	Change Due to Agency Discretion	Change Due to Adjustment in Estimate	Change Due to Potential Violation of the PRA
Annual Number of Responses	25,498	0	0	25,498	0	0
Annual Time Burden (Hours)	10,539	0	0	10,539	0	0
Annual Cost Burden (Dollars)	0	0	0	0	0	0

Burden increases because of Program Change due to Agency Discretion: Yes

Burden Increase Due to: Miscellaneous Actions

Burden decreases because of Program Change due to Agency Discretion: No

Burden Reduction Due to:

Short Statement: This is a new information collection with a maximum estimate of 25,498 responses and 10,539 hours. There are no costs other than time, for the respondents.

---

Annual Cost to Federal Government: $154,233

Does this IC contain surveys, censuses, or employ statistical methods? Yes Part B of Supporting Statement

Is the Supporting Statement intended to be a Privacy Impact Assessment required by the E-Government Act of 2002? No

Is this ICR related to the Affordable Care Act [Pub. L. 111-148 & 111-152]? Uncollected

Is this ICR related to the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, [Pub. L. 111-203]? Uncollected

Is this ICR related to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA)? Uncollected

Is this ICR related to the Pandemic Response? Uncollected

---

Common Form ICR:  No

---

On behalf of this Federal agency, I certify that the collection of information encompassed by this request complies with 5 CFR 1320.9 and the related provisions of 5 CFR 1320.8(b)(3).

The following is a summary of the topics, regarding the proposed collection of information, that the certification covers:

(a) It is necessary for the proper performance of agency functions;

(b) It avoids unnecessary duplication;

(c) It reduces burden on small entities;

(d) It uses plain, coherent, and unambiguous language that is understandable to respondents;

(e) Its implementation will be consistent and compatible with current reporting and recordkeeping practices;

(f) It indicates the retention periods for recordkeeping requirements;

(g) It informs respondents of the information called for under 5 CFR 1320.8 (b)(3) about:

(i) Why the information is being collected;

(ii) Use of information;

(iii) Burden estimate;

(iv) Nature of response (voluntary, required for a benefit, or mandatory);

(v) Nature and extent of confidentiality; and

(vi) Need to display currently valid OMB control number;

(h) It was developed by an office that has planned and allocated resources for the efficient and effective management and use of the information to be collected.

(i) It uses effective and efficient statistical survey methodology (if applicable); and

(j) It makes appropriate use of information technology.

If you are unable to certify compliance with any of these provisions, identify the item by leaving the box unchecked and explain the reason in the Supporting Statement.

Certification Date: 03/01/2007

---