0376 ss ren 080808 rev 081208

SUPPORTING STATEMENT
FISHING CAPACITY REDUCTION PROGRAM BUYBACK REQUESTS
OMB CONTROL NO. 0648-0376

A.

JUSTIFICATION

1. Explain the circumstances that make the collection of information necessary.
The Sustainable Fisheries Act (SFA) amended the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act (MSA) to provide for voluntary reduction of excess fishing capacity through
fishing capacity reduction (buyback) programs. Excess fishing capacity decreases fisheries
earnings, complicates fishery management, and imperils fishery conservation. Congress
acknowledged this by providing program authority. This extension request for information
collection approval involves standard information required to be included in any program request
for any fishery.
The statutory objective of a program is “to obtain the maximum sustained reduction in fishing
capacity at the least cost and in a minimum period of time.” Buybacks pay fishermen either to
(1) surrender their fishing permits or (2) both surrender their permits and either scrap their
fishing vessels or restrict vessel title to prevent fishing. Buybacks can involve either a Federal or
State fishery. Buybacks can be funded via a long-term loan from the Federal government to the
fishery (called industry-funded buybacks), to be repaid by the industry by post-buyback landing
fees, or funded from appropriations (non-industry funded) or other non-loan sources of funds.
Programs involving industry financed loans are authorized by section 1111 of subchapter XI of
the Merchant Marine Act, 1936.
An interim final rule to establish framework guidelines for future implementation of programs
for specific fisheries was published at 50 CRF part 600 (subpart L) on May 18, 2000. These
guidelines were intended to provide direction and elaboration for future, fishery-specific rules.
The SFA amendments to the MSA require a separate rule for each specific program. There are
currently four (4) fishing capacity reduction programs that have been published at 50 CFR part
600 (Subpart M), and which are in repayment under the existing Paperwork Reduction Act
(PRA) Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number listed above.
The Magnuson-Stevens Reauthorization Act (Pub. L. 109-479) changed several of the
requirements for Federal loans to be initiated and issued to program participants. These changes
will be implemented by National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) by fishing year (FY) 2009,
but are accounted for in the planning and developing of this PRA renewal.
2. Explain how, by whom, how frequently, and for what purpose the information will be
used. If the information collected will be disseminated to the public or used to support
information that will be disseminated to the public, then explain how the collection
complies with all applicable Information Quality Guidelines.
Buybacks can involve as many as seven types of information collection requirements on the
public. These are:

1

(1) Program requests (including development of a harvester proponents’ implementation
plan),
(2) Invitations to bid,
(3) Referendum material for review and vote,
(4) Buyer reporting and recordkeeping,
(5) Seller reports (if buyers do not collect the fee),
(6) State actions for fisheries subject to State authority, and
(7) Advisement of conflicts in ownership claims.
FISHERIES SUBJECT TO FEDERAL AUTHORITY
The steps in an industry-funded program are as follows (steps involving information
requirements are underlined):
(1) Harvester proponents (Private Sector):
(a) Develop buyback implementation plan and loan proposal (implementation
plan), and
(b) Submit implementation plan to:
Fishery Management Council (FMC), or
Majority of permit holders in the fishery;
(2)FMC:
(a) Approves implementation plan;
(b) Approves Fishery Management Plan (FMP) amendment required to
complement implementation plan; and
(c) Submits program request to NMFS;
(3) NMFS:
(a) Determines whether request is sufficient, cost-effective, and in a
program involving an industry fee system, is prospectively capable of
being repaid;
(b) Conducts advanced referendum (if requested);
(c) Prepares implementation plan and regulations;
(d) Approves buyback loan (assumes availability of sufficient appropriation and
apportionment authority);
(e) Adopts buyback amendment to FMP;
(f) Proposes implementation plan and regulations;
(g) Adopts implementation plan and regulations;
(h) Invites program bids;
(i) Receives and tallies bids;
(j) Accepts bids;
(k) Conducts post-bid referendum;
(l) Certifies referendum results approving the industry fee system;
(m) Advises accepted bidders of removal of express condition
subsequent to bidding (i.e., referendum approval);
(n) Conducts buyback;

2

(o) Upon completing the program, the FMP buyback amendment becomes
effective, and implementation regulations become fully effective,
upon program completion; and
(p) Collection-of-fees process begins (buyer reporting and recordkeeping and
possible seller reports).
The steps in a non-industry financed program involve much less collection of information from
the public, since the industry neither develops the plan nor is subject to fees. The steps are:
(1) FMC:
(a) Develops preliminary program proposal; and
(b) Submits program request to NMFS;
(2) NMFS:
(a) Preliminarily determines whether request is sufficient;
(b) Develops buyback plan;
(c) Submits buyback development plan to FMC for confirmation;
(3) FMC:
(a) Approves FMP amendment required to complement buyback development
plan; and
(b) Submits program confirmation to NMFS;
(4) NMFS:
(a) Determines request is sufficient;
(b) Adopts buyback FMP amendment;
(c) Prepares implementation plan and regulations;
(d) Determines sufficiency of appropriation and apportionment authority;
(e) Proposes implementation plan and regulations;
(f) Adopts implementation plan and regulations;
(g) Invites bids;
(h) Receives and tallies bids;
(i) Accepts bids; and
(j) Conducts buyback.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) anticipates that most programs will
be industry-funded.
FISHERIES SUBJECT TO STATE AUTHORITY
If the fishery involved is subject to State authority, the request must be made by the Governor(s)
of the State(s) exercising management authority over the fishery, or by a majority of permit
holders in the fishery who wish to conduct a voluntary fishing capacity reduction program. The
term “fishery authority” can mean the FMC, the Governor, or the majority of permit holders in
the fishery, as appropriate to the fishery.

3

The steps in an industry-funded program are as follows (steps involving information
requirements are underlined):
(1) Harvester proponents (Private Sector):
(a) Develop buyback implementation plan and loan proposal (implementation
plan); and
(b) Submit implementation plan to Governor; or
(c) Submit implementation plan for approval by the majority of permit holders in
the fishery.
(2) Governor or majority of permit holders:
(a) Approves implementation plan;
(b) Approves state FMP amendment required to complement implementation
plan; and
(c) Submits request to NMFS;
(3) NMFS:
(a) Determines whether request is sufficient;
(b) Conducts advanced referendum (if requested);
(c) Prepares implementation plan and regulations;
(d) Approves buyback loan (assumes availability of sufficient appropriation and
apportionment authority);
(e) Proposes implementation plan and regulations;
(f) Adopts implementation plan and regulations;
(g) Invites bids;
(h) Receives and tallies bids;
(i) Accepts bids;
(j) Conducts post-bid referendum;
(k) Certifies referendum results approving the industry fee system;
(l) Advises accepted bidders of removal of express condition (i.e., referendum
approval);
(m) Conducts buyback;
(n) Upon completing the program, the state implementation regulations
become fully effective; and
(o) Collection-of-fees process begins (buyer reporting and recordkeeping and
possible seller reports).
The steps in a non-industry financed program involve much less collection of information from
the public, since the industry neither develops the plan nor is subject to fees. The steps are:
(1) Governor (or majority of permit holders):
(a) Develops preliminary buyback proposal; and
(b) Submits request to NMFS;
(2) NMFS:
(a) Preliminarily determines whether request is sufficient;
(b) Develops buyback plan; and
(c) Submits buyback development plan to Governor for confirmation;
4

(3) Governor:
(a) Approves state FMP amendment required to complement buyback
development plan; and
(b) Submits program confirmation to NMFS; and
(4) NMFS:
(a) Determines request is sufficient;
(b) Approves state implementation plan and regulations;
(c) Determines sufficiency of appropriation and apportionment authority;
(d) Adopts implementation plan and regulations;
(e) Invites bids;
(f) Receives and tallies bids;
(g) Accepts bids; and
(h) Conducts buyback.
The specific types of information requirements are addressed below.
Buyback Requests
The relevant Council for fisheries, Governor of a State or majority of permit holders are the
parties authorized to initiate program requests and buyback plans, however the relevant fishery
management authorities must support these requests. NMFS implements these for non-industryfunded programs for Federally-managed fisheries, while the State develops them for Statemanaged fisheries. For industry-funded programs, the relevant fishery management authority
(usually an FMC) makes the request, but obtains the implementation plan from the buyback
proponents in the fishery industry.
In industry-funded programs, NMFS is the lender and post-buyback harvesters are the borrower
(repaying the load through landing fees). It is a conflict of interest for lenders to develop
borrowers' plans for the conduct of borrowers' activities. Consequently, NMFS requires the
borrower (in the form of buyback proponents who will potentially be post-buyback harvesters) to
prepare buyback development and implementation plans for industry-funded programs. The
implementation plan and regulations that NMFS must propose and adopt for each industryfunded program institutionalize that buyback development plan. For subsidized programs, the
requester must prepare a preliminary development plan. The preliminary development plan is a
more precursory and generalized reduction proposal than the implementation plan required for a
financed program, and is used by NMFS to prepare a final development plan.
The buyback harvester proponents must gather the information and do the analysis necessary to
develop a successful implementation plan. Buyback proponents asking the relevant fishery
management authority to request an industry-funded program must be responsive to the practical
necessity that buyback development plans reflect fairly the needs, interests, and desires of a
broad spectrum of the buyback fishery's harvesters. The implementation plan must include both
those who may wish to leave the fishery (be bought back) and those who may wish to remain in
the fishery (repay the buyback loan). Buyback development planners must demonstrate this by
extensive coordination during plan development. This should be supported by surveys of
affected harvesters. Buyback development plans that are not realistic and broadly supported by
5

the buyback fishery's harvesters have little chance of referenda approval and may waste
considerable time and effort.
Development plans for industry-funded programs must, if they are to succeed, be sufficient to:
(1) Convince the relevant fishery management authority or majority of permit holders
in the fishery to request a program,
(2) Convince NMFS to finance a program,
(3) Allow NMFS to readily prepare implementation plans and regulations based on the
buyback development plans,
(4) Enable bidding results that convince industry voters to approve program financing,
and
(5) Enable NMFS to complete the buyback.
To avoid conflicts of interest, however, NMFS neither develops nor assists in developing
industry-funded program plans. NMFS will, however, provide buyback planners with whatever
fisheries data, statistics, or other public information that may be relevant to plan development.
NMFS will, upon request, also review and comment on industry-funded program plans during
their development stage.
An implementation plan must:
(1)

Specify detailed buyback methodology and procedures, including the appropriate
point to conduct a pre-bidding referendum;

(2)

Propose the types and numbers of vessels or permits that are eligible to
participate in the program;

(3)

Project the buyback fishery’s annual gross ex-vessel income during the buyback
loan’s term;

(4)

Specify the buyback loan’s principal and repayment term;

(5)

Specify the minimum amount of reduced capacity for the program to be costeffective;

(6)

Analyze program cost-effectiveness at the minimum level and at additional
incremental levels;

(7)

Demonstrate the ability to prospectively repay debt obligations imposed by the
program;

(8)

Specify measures to prevent replacement of removed fishing capacity by vessel
upgrades or other means;

(9) Propose a specified or target total allowable catch that will trigger post-buyback
closures or other measures to reduce catch;
(10) Specify the names and addresses of all likely post-buyback fish buyers;
6

(11) Specify fee collection and reporting procedures (in the case of fisheries in which
some sellers sell unprocessed fish to buyers and others sell processed fish to
buyers, a means of establishing the delivery value of processed fish needs to be
specified; also the procedures may need to specify what actions may be needed,
and who must take them, if state confidentiality laws or other impediments will
negatively affect the collection and reporting procedures);
(12) Demonstrate measures used to ensure wide industry support for the
implementation plan;
(13) Include certification that the implementation plan will accomplish the
program purpose; and
(14) Assess the potential impact of the program on other fisheries, including the general
economic impact and possible steps to mitigate undesirable impacts.
The information in the implementation plan will be used by the fishery management authority
and NMFS to review the request, develop regulations, and to take other related actions. The
fishery authority and NMFS will use the information to determine whether the program has a
reasonable chance of achieving the goals of the program.
Buyback Bids
Before a program is instituted, NMFS determines what permits and/or vessels will be bought
back through the use of an inverse auction. The auction terms require the fishery participants to
bid competitively against each other via sealed bid. The bids are accepted in inverse order which
ensures that the Government is buying the most production capacity for the least amount of
money.
Bids would contain the following types of information:
(1) Self-identification information,
(2) The bid price,
(3) Information on the permits and vessels affected,
(4) Information on the vessel fishing history (if appropriate),
(5) Statements and affirmations that the person owns the vessels, holds the permits,
and retains the fishing history, and
(6) Similar information pertaining to the specific program being conducted.
Each invitation to bid will constitute the entire terms and conditions of a buyback agreement
under which each bidder shall make an irrevocable offer to the United States of fishing capacity
to be bought back by the United States, and the Secretary shall accept or reject, on behalf of the
United States, each bidder's irrevocable offer.
Buyback Referendum
Buybacks are a voluntary process and each individual program must be approved through a
referendum of the fishery’s participants. When a referendum is conducted, each participant in
7

the fishery will receive a ballot with accompanying information and enclosures. Persons may
notify NMFS (Leo C. Erwin, Financial Services Division: 301-713-2390) if they believe that
they should be on a referendum list, or if they believe someone else should not be on the list.
The ballot will contain a randomly derived, 5-digit number assigned to each eligible voter, and
shall contain a place for the voter to vote “for” (yes) or “against” (no) the proposed industry-fee
system. The ballot shall also contain a place adjacent to the 5-digit number for the original
signature of the party purporting to have authority to sign the ballot on the voter’s behalf.
The accompanying information will: (1) summarize the referendum’s nature and purpose;
(2) establish the last date by which the Secretary must receive a completed ballot in order for the
ballot to be counted as a qualified vote; (3) identify the place on the ballot for the voter to vote
“for” (yes) or “against” (no) the industry-fee system, the place where the person signing the
ballot on the voter’s behalf must sign the ballot, and the purpose of the enclosed envelope in
returning the completed ballot to the Secretary; (4) establish the total program cost, the amount
of the buyback loan (if different than the total program cost), the term of the buyback loan, and
the amount of fishing capacity that the total program cost will buyback; (5) establish the initial
fee rate necessary to amortize the buyback loan over its term and the fee rate for the first year
after program completion; and (6) summarize such other factors as the Secretary deems
pertinent.
The enclosures will include: (1) a specially marked and pre-addressed envelope that a voter must
use to return the ballot to the Secretary by whatever means of delivery the voter chooses; (2) a
copy of the adopted FMP amendment complementing buyback; (3) a copy of the adopted
implementation plan and regulations; and (4) a copy of the instructional portion of the
framework regulation dealing with the referendum.
The referendum is necessary to establish the conditions under which NMFS can collect fees from
the industry participants to repay the buyback loan.
Buyer Reporting and Recordkeeping
The repayment of an industry-funded program is dependant on the collection of fees by the first
purchasers of the fish from the buyback fishery, or the Secretary may determine that the fees
should be collected from the seller. These fees are remitted by the fish buyer or seller to a
lockbox at the Treasury Department where they are eventually applied against the buyback loan.
The statutory authority exists to collect up to 5% of the ex-vessel sale value of the fish to repay
the loan.
Each fish buyer – or seller if the Secretary has determined that fees must be collected from the
seller – who is required to collect fees must maintain a segregated account at a Federallychartered national bank for the sole purpose of depositing fee collections and disbursing them
from there to the Secretary. At the end of each business day the buyer or seller must deposit all
collected fees into the account. On the last business day of each calendar month, the fish buyer
or seller will send the full deposit principle to NMFS. To support this system, the buyer or the
seller must maintain certain records and submit an annual report.

8

Records maintenance: Each fish buyer, or seller if the Secretary has determined such fees should
be collected from the seller, must, on forms the Secretary specifies, maintain accurate records of
all transactions involving fees. Each fish buyer or seller must maintain such records in a secure
and orderly manner for a period of at least 3 years from the date of the transactions involved.
The following information shall be maintained by each fish buyer, or seller as appropriate, for all
deliveries of post-buyback fish such fish buyer buys, or fish seller sells:
(1) Delivery date;
(2) Fish seller’s name;
(3) Number of pounds of each species of post-buyback fish bought;
(4) Name of fishing vessel from which unloaded;
(5) Ex-vessel price per pound of each species of such fish;
(6) Total ex-vessel value of such fish;
(7) Net ex-vessel value of such fish;
(8) Name of party to whom net ex-vessel value paid if other than fish seller;
(9) Date net ex-vessel value paid;
(10) Total fee amount collected; and
(11) Such other information as the Secretary shall deem reasonably necessary
for each program.
Much of this information (date, name, pounds delivered, vessel, price per pound, date) is
collected as part of normal fish ticket procedures in many fisheries. The fee information and the
length of the record retention would always be an additional burden.
In addition, the buyer or seller collecting fees must maintain records on all fee collection deposits
to, and disbursements from, the deposit account, including:
(1) Dates and amounts of deposits;
(2) Dates and amounts of disbursements to the Fund’s lockbox account the Secretary
designates; and
(3) Dates and amounts of disbursements to the fish buyer, fish seller, or other parties,
of interest earned on deposits (this information would be a normal part of bank
statements).
The fish ticket and deposit/disbursement information is necessary to enforce the fee collection
process to ensure that the Federal government is repaid and that fishermen’s fees are directed to
that end.
Annual report: Buyers or sellers directed to pay the fees by the authority of the Secretary must
also submit a report not later than the date specified in each fishery specific program rule. The
report must contain the following program information for the preceding calendar year:
(1) Total pounds of fish purchased, or sold, from each fish seller;
(2) Total net ex-vessel value of payments to each fish seller;
(3) Total fee amounts collected from, or by, each fish seller;
(4) Total fee collection amounts deposited by month;
(5) Dates and amounts of monthly disbursements to the Fund lockbox account;
(6) Total amount of deposit interest withdrawn by fish buyer or seller; and
(7) Balance of depository account at year-end.

9

This information is also needed to track and enforce the fee collection system.
Seller/Buyer Reports
These reporting requirements would apply in situations where one of the parties in a sale refuses
to either pay or collect the required fees.
If a fish buyer refuses to collect the fee, the fish seller is supposed to advise the fish buyer of the
fish seller's fee payment obligation and of the fish buyer’s fee collection obligation. If the fish
buyer still refuses to collect the fee, the fish seller must, within the next 24 hours, forward the fee
to the Secretary and advise the Secretary in writing of the full particulars, including: the fish
buyer’s and fish seller’s name, address, and telephone number; the name of the fishing vessel
from which the fish seller made post-buyback fish delivery and the date of doing so; the quantity
and ex-vessel value of each species of such fish delivered; and the fish seller’s reason for
refusing to collect the fee in accordance with this subpart.
If a fish seller refuses to pay the fee to the buyer, the fish buyer should advise the fish seller of
the fish buyer’s collection obligation and of the fish seller’s payment obligation. If the fish seller
still refuses to pay the fee, the fish buyer must either collect the fee over the fish seller’s protest
or refrain from buying the post-buyback fish and, within the next 24 hours, advise the Secretary
in writing of the full particulars, including: the fish buyer’s and fish seller’s name, address, and
telephone number; the name of the fishing vessel from which the fish seller made or attempted to
make post-buyback fish delivery and the date of doing so; the quantity and ex-vessel value of
each species of such fish delivered or attempted to be delivered; whether the fish buyer collected
the fee over the fish seller’s protest or refrained from buying such fish; and the fish seller’s
reason for refusing to pay the fee.
These reports are necessary to correct any problems that develop in the fee-collection process.
State Actions for Fisheries Subject to State Authority
The information requirements on the State depend upon the type of program involved. For
industry-funded programs, the Governor or majority of permit holders in the fishery must:
approve the implementation plan submitted by the industry, approve any state FMP amendment
required to complement the implementation plan, and submit the request to NMFS.
When the program is not to be funded by industry, the State develops and submits the
implementation plan and program proposal. It also must approve any state FMP amendment
required to complement the buyback development plan and submit program confirmation to
NMFS.
Advisement of Conflicts in Ownership Claims
NMFS will consider any evidence submitted in order to resolve any disputes. Upon satisfaction
of any such disputes, NMFS will tender reduction payments to the accepted bidders. NMFS
anticipates infrequent use of this option.

10

It is anticipated that the information collected will be disseminated to the public or used to
support publicly disseminated information. As explained in the preceding paragraphs, the
information gathered has utility. NMFS will retain control over the information and safeguard it
from improper access, modification, and destruction, consistent with NMFS standards for
confidentiality, privacy, and electronic information. See response to Question 10 of this
Supporting Statement for more information on confidentiality and privacy. The information
collection is designed to yield data that meet all applicable information quality guidelines. Prior
to dissemination, the information will be subjected to quality control measures and a predissemination review pursuant to Section 515 of Public Law 106-554.
3. Describe whether, and to what extent, the collection of information involves the use of
automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological techniques or other forms of
information technology.
No automated techniques are required as part of this process. Paper submissions are possible,
and in some cases may actually be less burdensome on the public because many of these fish
buyers and sellers are small firms and individuals who may not have Internet access. Electronic
means of submitting information may be allowed between industry and the fishery management
authority. Exact procedures will depend upon the specific fisheries and parties involved but may
include electronic means in certain situations. NMFS has developed an electronic submission
system for each of the programs currently in repayment. This electronic system is through the
Pay.gov website, which is operated under government contract with the Cleveland Federal
Reserve Bank.
4. Describe efforts to identify duplication.
Because NOAA is the sole Federal provider of buybacks, there is no duplication of other
information requests.
5. If the collection of information involves small businesses or other small entities, describe
the methods used to minimize burden.
These requirements should not have a significant impact on small businesses or entities.
6. Describe the consequences to the Federal program or policy activities if the collection is
not conducted or is conducted less frequently.
If the collections were not conducted, statutorily-mandated financial assistance could not be
delivered. The only requirement with a set frequency of submission is the fee-related submission
of an annual report. This frequency is deemed minimal for protecting the process from abuse.
7. Explain any special circumstances that require the collection to be conducted in a
manner inconsistent with OMB guidelines.
The requirements are consistent with OMB guidelines except for the following: Reporting will
take place more often than quarterly in the case of submission of the fee collections, which will
take place on a monthly basis, or more frequently for some participants. Increased frequency is
deemed necessary for safer management and more efficient repayment. While there are
11

currently no pending programs under consideration in NMFS, it is uncertain whether less than 30
days might be allowed for submissions of bids or responses to referenda for a new program.
This would be determined by the specific program and it is possible that some cases might call
for quicker response.
8. Provide information on the PRA Federal Register Notice that solicited public comments
on the information collection prior to this submission. Summarize the public comments
received in response to that notice and describe the actions taken by the agency in response
to those comments. Describe the efforts to consult with persons outside the agency to
obtain their views on the availability of data, frequency of collection, the clarity of
instructions and recordkeeping, disclosure, or reporting format (if any), and on the data
elements to be recorded, disclosed, or reported.
A Federal Register Notice soliciting public comments was published February 25, 2008 (73 FR
10003). One comment was received but it was not responsive to the four areas listed in the
request for comments.
9. Explain any decisions to provide payments or gifts to respondents, other than
remuneration of contractors or grantees.
Aside from the loan that may be part of a program, no payments will be made to respondents.
10. Describe any assurance of confidentiality provided to respondents and the basis for
assurance in statute, regulation, or agency policy.
No confidentiality is promised or given.
11. Provide additional justification for any questions of a sensitive nature, such as sexual
behavior and attitudes, religious beliefs, and other matters that are commonly considered
private.
No sensitive questions are asked.
12. Provide an estimate in hours of the burden of the collection of information.
This submission supports a framework regulation. Specific programs have been implemented
through rulemaking, and it is anticipated that future programs will generate additional
rulemaking. While NOAA can identify the elements of information collection requirements, the
specific burden imposed by the requirements can vary greatly because of the different sizes and
natures of the fisheries that may be involved. The estimates that follow are based upon the
assumption that there will be two programs per year, one for fisheries under Federal authority
and one for fisheries under State authority.
While the estimates in the previous PRA request were tentative, we now have actual experience
based on the four programs NMFS has implemented. These include the American Fisheries Act
(AFA) Pollock, the Pacific Coast Groundfish, the Bering Sea and Aleutian Island (BSAI) King
and Tanner Crab, and the Longline Catcher Processor Subsector BSAI Non-Pollock Groundfish

12

programs. The estimates discussed below are based on averaged data from the 4 programs listed
above. Therefore, our figures from the previous PRA request have been adjusted accordingly.
For calculating total burden, we have assumed: that 1 new program plan for fisheries under
Federal management authority will be submitted per year; that referenda and bids in an average
fishery will affect approximately 400 vessels; that there will be an average of 300 vessels in the
fishery after the buyout; that there will be 100 buyers in a fishery; that buyers will report on a
total of 2,700 trips per fishery (9 landings per 300 vessels); that seasons are 6 months, resulting
in 6 monthly deposit reports; and that buyers or sellers will submit 100 reports per year. We
estimate receiving 5 responses, which will each total 1 hour, advising us of any conflicts in
ownership claims. Although not all 400 vessels would decide to make a bid, all would probably
read the material sent to them and calculate whether a bid would be to their advantage, so we
have included the entire fishery as bid respondents. We have also assumed 1 industry-funded
program per year for fisheries under State management authority, with the same fishery-size and
reporting assumptions as for a Federal fishery. The burden of plans is expected to drop as
industry becomes familiar with the framework rule and other examples are available.
BURDEN IN YEAR 1:
Industry-Funded Buybacks in Federally-Managed Fisheries
1 Implementation Plan/yr. x 6,634 hours/plan = 1 response/6,634 hours
1 Advance referendum/yr. x 4 hrs./voter x 400 voters = 400 responses/1,600 hours
1 Post-bid referendum/yr. x 4 hrs./voter x 400 voters = 400 responses/1,600 hours
1 Invitation to bid/yr. x 4 hrs./bid x 400 bids = 400 responses/1,600 hours
2,700 Trips x 10 min./fish ticket x 1 buyback = 2,700 responses/450 hours
100 Buyers (or sellers) x 6 monthly reports/yr. x 2 hrs./report x 1 buyback = 600 responses/1,200
hours
100 Buyers (or sellers) x 1 annual report x 4 hrs./report x 1 buyback = 100 responses/400 hours
50 Buyer/seller reports/year x 2 hrs./report x 1 buyback = 50 responses/100 hours
5 Advisements of conflicts in ownership claims x 1 hr./advisement x 1 buyback = 5 responses/5
hours
Non-Industry-Funded Buybacks in Federally-Managed Fisheries
No such programs are anticipated.
Industry-Funded Buybacks in State-Managed Fisheries
1 Implementation Plan/yr. x 6,634 hours/plan = 1 response/6,634 hours
1 State approval of plan and amendment to state FMP x 270 hrs = 1 response/270 hours
1 Advance referendum/yr. x 4 hrs./voters x 400 voters = 400 responses/1,600 hours
1 Post-bid referendum/yr. x 4 hrs./voter x 400 voters = 400 responses/1,600 hours
1 Invitation to bid/yr. x 4 hrs./bid x 400 bids = 400 responses/1,600 hours
600 Trips x 10 min./fish ticket = 600 responses/100 hours
8 Buyers (or sellers) x 6 monthly reports/yr. x 2 hrs./report = 48 responses/96 hours
8 Buyers (or sellers) x 1 annual report x 4 hrs./report = 8 responses/32 hours

13

6 Buyer/seller reports/year x 2 hrs./report = 6 responses/12 hours
5 Advisements of conflicts in ownership claims = 5 responses/5 hours
Non-Industry-Funded Buybacks in State-Managed Fisheries
No such programs are anticipated.
Burden in Years 2 and 3:
Assuming the same number of programs take place each year, the burden for referenda and
invitations will be the same as for Year 1. The annual burden for plans will drop after the initial
program is completed. Since buyer or seller reporting and seller/buyer reports would continue
for the first year participants until the loan is repaid, the burden for those requirements would
increase year to year by increments of the first year burden (that is, in Year 2 you’d have reports
from second year of first group, and first year of second group, etc.). No hours for a second
advanced referendum are estimated as such a referendum is not expected.
The total 3-year responses and burden hours for new programs is anticipated to be 31,911 and
83,784, for an average annual 10,637 responses and burden of 27,928 hours.

Implementations
plans
State approvals
Advance Referenda
Post-bid Referenda
Invitations to bid and
bids
Buyer recordkeeping
(fish tickets)
Buyer monthly
reports
Buyer annual reports
Seller/Buyer reports
Advisements of
conflicts in ownership
claims
TOTALS

BURDEN ESTIMATE TOTALS
Year 1 Responses/
Year 2 Responses/
Burden
Burden
2/13,268
2/13,268

Year 3 Responses/
Burden
2/13,268

1/270
800/3,200
800/3,200
800/3,200

1/270
800/3,200
800/3,200
800/3,200

1/270
800/3,200
800/3,200
800/3,200

3,300/550

6,600/1,100

9,900/1,650

648/1,296

1,296/2,592

1,944/3,888

108/432
56/112
10/10

216/864
112/224
10/10

324/1,296
168/336
10/10

6,525/25,538

10,637/27,928

14,749/30,318

13. Provide an estimate of the total annual cost burden to the respondents or recordkeepers resulting from the collection (excluding the value of the burden hours in #12
above).
The costs to respondents would be those for copying and mailing submissions. Those are
estimated to average $1,680 over the 3-year approval period.
14

COST ESTIMATE TOTALS (in $)
Year 1 Costs
Year 2 Costs
Implementation plans
200
200
State approvals
180
180
Advance Referenda
374
374
Post-bid Referenda
190
190
Invitations to bid and bids
120
120
Buyer recordkeeping (fish tickets)
240
480
Buyer monthly reports
50
100
Buyer annual reports
10
20
Seller/Buyer reports
8
16
1,372
1,680
TOTALS

Year 3 Costs
200
180
374
190
120
720
150
30
24
1,988

Although recordkeeping will take place, most of the records involved would already be kept as
part of normal business operations and to support tax submissions. Therefore, no additional
costs have been estimated.
14. Provide estimates of annualized cost to the Federal government.
There is no annualized cost of this information collection to the Federal government.
15. Explain the reasons for any program changes or adjustments reported in Items 13 or
14 of the OMB 83-I.
The estimates from the previous PRA approval have been adjusted downward to reflect actual
experience based on averaged data from the four programs lined in Question 12. The main
difference is an estimated one, rather than two, annual implementation plans for buybacks in
Federally-managed fisheries, removing 6,634 hours. Estimating one less plan also reduces the
expected numbers of bids, monthly and annual reports, and conflicts in ownership claims, saving
an additional 4,001 hours. There is a related cost savings of $516.
16. For collections whose results will be published, outline the plans for tabulation and
publication.
There are no results to be published for the framework rule; however, results may be published
for future individual programs.
17. If seeking approval to not display the expiration date for OMB approval of the
information collection, explain the reasons why display would be inappropriate.
N/A.
18. Explain each exception to the certification statement identified in Item 19 of the
OMB 83-I.
There are no exceptions.
15

B. COLLECTIONS OF INFORMATION EMPLOYING STATISTICAL METHODS
This collection does not employ statistical methods.

16