0372 ss ren 022009rev

SUPPORTING STATEMENT
VESSEL MONITORING SYSTEM FOR ATLANTIC HIGHLY MIGRATORY SPECIES
OMB CONTROL NO. 0648-0372

A.

JUSTIFICATION

1. Explain the circumstances that make the collection of information necessary.
This request is for a renewal of this information collection.
The purpose of this collection of information is to comply with the United States' obligations
under the Atlantic Tunas Convention Act of 1975 (ATCA; 16 U.S.C. 971), the Secretary of
Commerce’s obligations under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management
Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), other domestic Federal regulations, and the implementing
regulations at 50 CFR part 635.
ATCA requires the Secretary of Commerce to promulgate regulations as necessary and
appropriate to implement measures adopted by the International Commission for the
Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT). As a member nation of ICCAT, the United States is
required to collect biological statistics for research purposes (fishing effort and catch) and to
implement a Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) program for vessels in certain fisheries. In
addition to this requirement, the United States, as one of several member nations fishing for
bluefin tuna and swordfish in the Atlantic Ocean, must abide by the specific quotas assigned by
ICCAT. A VMS program is necessary to facilitate enforcement of a fishery closure if the quotas
are reached.
VMS also aids the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Office of Law Enforcement
(OLE) in monitoring and enforcing closed areas implemented to reduce bycatch of juvenile
swordfish, sharks, sea turtles, and other species necessary to comply with the Marine Mammal
Protection Act, Endangered Species Act, and National Standard 9 (bycatch and bycatch mortality
reduction) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. There are currently five areas, totaling 158,580 square
nautical miles, which are closed to fishermen fishing for Atlantic highly migratory species
(HMS) with pelagic and bottom longline gear on board. The Northeast Distant (NED) gear
restricted area (approximately 2.6 million square nautical miles) also is monitored year-round
with VMS, and an area off of the Southeast United States is monitored during the North Atlantic
right whale calving season for vessels fishing with shark gillnet gear. Traditional methods of
surveillance by ships and planes would be ineffective in patrolling such large areas. VMS is
designed to automatically report positions on all vessels carrying pelagic longline gear, bottom
longline gear, or shark gillnet gear on board.
An installation and activation checklist must be submitted by the vessel owner to NMFS after
installation of the VMS. Because there are several options for VMS hardware and satellite
communications services provided by third parties that are NMFS approved, NMFS must obtain
information regarding individual vessel VMS installation and service providers to ensure proper
operation of VMS units. NMFS therefore requires that an initial certification and checklist be
returned to NMFS.
1

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 applicable NOAA Information Quality Guidelines.
A VMS unit is programmed to report the vessel’s location every hour, 24 hours a day, while the
vessel is away from port. This allows vessels to traverse closed areas or remain at sea after a
fishery has closed as long as they do not commence fishing operations. NMFS uses this
information to reduce costs and improve enforcement of time/area closures, to monitor the fleet
during the closed period, to deter illegal fishing, to increase efficiency of surveillance patrols, to
provide probable cause for obtaining a search warrant in enforcement investigations, and to
support enforcement of other regulations such as closed seasons once a quota has been reached.
The checklist indicates the procedures to be followed by the installers and, upon certification and
return to NMFS, provides the OLE with information about the hardware installed and the
communication service provider that will be used by the vessel operator. Specific information
that links a permitted vessel with a certain transmitting unit and communications service is
necessary to ensure that NMFS will receive automatic position reports properly. In the event that
there are problems, NMFS will have access to a database that links owner information with
installation information. NMFS can then contact the vessel operator and discern whether the
problem is associated with the transmitting hardware or the service provider.
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 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
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. Although the information collected is not expected to be disseminated directly to the
public, results may be used in scientific, management, technical or general informational
publications. Should NMFS decide to disseminate the information, it will be subject to the
quality control measures and pre-dissemination 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.
VMS is the best technology available at this time for monitoring vessel locations to aid
enforcement efforts. The integrated Global Positioning System (GPS) provides a near real-time
mechanism for submitting accurate position reports. Some vessel owners, in other fisheries,
have taken advantage of this technology by linking personal computers to the VMS units so that
communications with other vessels and port facilities can be improved. This has personal,
business, and safety advantages for fishermen and may provide a platform for future electronic
logbook reporting of both target and non-target species.

2

The installation checklist is available over the Internet at
http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/hms/Linkpages/reporting_forms.htm. NMFS is considering the
use of electronic submission of the installation checklist (fax or email).
4. Describe efforts to identify duplication.
Position reports, at the start of each fishing set, are required in the HMS logbook, and will
therefore be duplicated. Position reports are not required in the shark fishing vessel logbook
record, and will therefore not be duplicated. However, VMS position reports are automated and
require no action on the part of the vessel operator. If electronic catch reporting is developed in
the future, paper logbooks may become obsolete.
There are no alternate sources of such specific and near real-time vessel location and activity
information. While VMS may be required in other fisheries, fishermen who have purchased a
VMS unit can use it in multiple fisheries and the information is only reported once to
enforcement.
5. If the collection of information involves small businesses or other small entities, describe
the methods used to minimize burden.
All vessels of the United States (U.S.) and their owners that have permits for HMS, i.e.,
swordfish, sharks, and tuna, are considered small entities. Current VMS regulations require
approximately 292 pelagic longline, bottom longline, and shark gillnet vessels to maintain VMS
units at an annual average operation and maintenance cost of approximately $865 ($500/year
maintenance and $1.00/day for position reports). In an attempt to provide vessel owners with
some flexibility, NMFS has published in the Federal Register approvals for four different types
of VMS units from two manufacturers ranging in price from $1,660-2,900, and the option to
choose from two satellite service providers. This provides vessel owners with some flexibility of
choice and helps to minimize costs. Because this requirement is already in place for the fishery,
most active vessels will not need new equipment and will only need to pay for the annual
operation and maintenance costs. Only vessels that are not currently active in the fishery, or in
the case of bottom longline gear, near the closed area, will need to purchase the units.
Vessels that have VMS on board could experience some economic benefits. They will be able to
continue fishing up to the date of a closure and steam back after the closure, as long as they are
not fishing. Arriving in port after a market glut caused by a closure has dissipated would have
significant positive economic benefits. Adverse impacts of mass offloading of the fleet, such as
low prices, and lack of storage and transportation could be avoided as a result of the VMS
program. In addition, current NMFS regulations require fishermen who fish in the South
Atlantic to offload in the South Atlantic when the North Atlantic fishery is closed due to a
regulation that prohibits possession of greater than the incidental catch limit of 15 swordfish
during a closed period. Vessels with a VMS are permitted to transit the North Atlantic with
greater than the incidental catch limit on board, as long as they are South Atlantic fish, caught
when that fishery was open. This saves significant transport and shipping costs that result from
fishermen having to offload South Atlantic swordfish south of 5 degrees N. latitude.
Using VMS to verify the location of a vessel is passive and automatic, requiring no reporting
time on the part of the vessel operator. ICCAT recognizes the developments in satellite-based
3

VMS and their possible utility, including better resource management and, thus, more effective
and sustainable use of resources. More specifically, benefits for management include increased
compliance with and enhanced enforcement effectiveness regarding area restrictions, more
timely data regarding fishing effort by areas, and more timely catch reporting. Other possible
benefits of the VMS include increased vessel safety and dependable and confidential
communications, which may improve fleet management.
6. Describe the consequences to the Federal program or policy activities if the collection is
not conducted or is conducted less frequently.
Monitoring and enforcement are essential components of fisheries management. Monitoring
fishing vessels facilitates enforcement of NMFS’ conservation and management regulations by
enabling detection of violations. Monitoring also promotes compliance by having a general
deterrent effect. Lack of proper monitoring and enforcement makes it difficult to gauge the
effectiveness of conservation and management measures. In the case of overfished stocks,
enforcement is necessary to prevent further overfishing and subsequent decline to dangerously
low stock levels. As a practical matter, it is very difficult for enforcement personnel to
effectively monitor the full operational range of the U.S. pelagic longline fleet without having
some method of detecting a vessel’s location. With respect to pelagic longline time/area closures
in particular, the size of the closed areas makes the likelihood of detection through conventional
surveillance methods rather small.
VMS is considered much more accurate than logbooks for reporting geographical distribution of
fishing effort for each trip. Logbooks are submitted by fishermen seven days after offloading
and only provide information regarding the start of a fishing set. Thus, logbooks do not meet the
real-time needs of enforcement and could allow vessels to fish illegally in closed areas without
prosecution. VMS, on the other hand, provides 24 reports each day for the duration of the trip.
This allows enforcement to react immediately if a vessel is found fishing in a closed area.
The use and submission of a checklist is required only for the initial installation or when the
hardware or communications service provider changes. Less frequent reporting would prevent
NMFS and the vessel operator from confirming that the system is functioning properly.
7. Explain any special circumstances that require the collection to be conducted in a
manner inconsistent with OMB guidelines.
VMS will be reporting positions 24 times a day, which is more frequently than Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) guidelines suggest. This frequency is required for the near
real-time and accurate tracking of vessel activities. The requirement for 24 position reports per
day is designed to allow NMFS to distinguish between a vessel that is setting gear, and a vessel
that is traversing a closed area. Fewer reports would indicate that a vessel was in the area but
would not indicate whether the vessel was setting gear or traversing the area. The time burden as
a result of this frequency, however, remains minimal because the position reports are automated
and require no action on the part of the vessel operator.

4

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 published on November 6, 2008 (73 FR 66030) solicited public
comments on this collection. No public comments were received.
9. Explain any decisions to provide payments or gifts to respondents, other than
remuneration of contractors or grantees.
No payments or gifts are to be offered as part of this information collection.
10. Describe any assurance of confidentiality provided to respondents and the basis for
assurance in statute, regulation, or agency policy.
All automated position reports received by NMFS will be treated as confidential data in
accordance with the Magnuson-Stevens Act and NOAA Administrative Order 216-100. This
assurance is included in the VMS Certification Form.
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 questions of a sensitive nature are asked.
12. Provide an estimate in hours of the burden of the collection of information.
A total of 292 vessels are subject to the VMS requirement (Table 1). Based on the number of
limited access permits for swordfish and tuna, an estimated 257 pelagic longline vessels are
subject to the VMS requirement. Based on the number of limited access directed shark permits,
an estimated 30 bottom longline shark fishing vessels and 5 shark gillnet vessels are also subject
to the VMS requirement. Once the VMS is installed, no action is required on the part of the
vessel operator except to turn the system on two hours before leaving port and verifying that the
system is on. Once on, position reports are automatically sent from the VMS on an hourly basis.
NMFS estimates a one-time burden of 5 minutes for completing a VMS installation and
activation checklist during initial installation.
Table 1. Number of Vessels with HMS Limited Access Permits by Gear Type.
Type of Permit
Directed
Incidental
Total

Pelagic Longline Bottom Longline
181
16
76
14
257
30
5

Gillnet

Total
5
5

202
90
292

Pelagic Longline Vessels:
All pelagic longline vessels participating in HMS fisheries should already have a VMS unit
installed; therefore, the time and expense burden of the one-time installation of 4 hours/vessel,
and the one-time submission of a paper checklist should have already been realized and is not
duplicated in this burden assessment. For the 257 vessels (Table 1) that may be using pelagic
longline gear there will be an annual maintenance of 2 hours/vessel for a total of 514 hours
(257*2=514). The automatic position reports are not considered burden to the respondents.
Directed Shark Bottom Longline Vessels:
All directed and incidental shark bottom longline vessels that require the use of VMS should
already have a VMS unit installed; therefore, the time and expense burden of the one-time
installation of 4 hours/vessel, and the one-time submission of a paper checklist should have
already been realized and is not duplicated in this burden assessment. For the 30 directed shark
bottom vessels (Table 1) there will be an annual maintenance of 2 hours/vessel for a total of 60
hours (30*2=60). As stated above, the automatic position reports are not considered burden to
the respondents.
Directed Shark Gillnet Vessels:
For the 5 shark gillnet vessels (Table 1), all of whom also already have a VMS unit installed,
there will be an annual maintenance of 2 hours/vessel for a total of 10 hours (5*2=10). Again,
the automatic position reports are not considered burden to the respondents.
The total burden for all 292 vessels combined is therefore 584 hours (514 + 60 + 10) and
292 responses (annual maintenance).
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 Question
12 above).
Of the 292 vessels required to have VMS installed, all should have already purchased and
installed their units, so the startup costs for these vessels have not been included in the annual
cost burden estimates. However, communication and maintenance costs, which are ongoing,
have been included for all vessels.
Table 2: Estimated annual cost of VMS position reports by vessel type and repair/
maintenance costs.
Vessel
Type

Pelagic
Longline
Shark
Bottom
Longline
Shark
Gillnet
Totals

Daily Position
Report Cost
(includes 24
hourly reports)
$1

Days
reporting
per year
365

$1

$1

Cost per
Vessel

Number of
Vessels

Total Position
Reporting
Cost

Total Repair/
Maintenance
Costs @ $500

Total Cost

$365

257

$93,805

$128,500

$222,305

212

$212

30

$6360

$15,000

$21,360

137

$137

5

$685

$2,500

$3,185

292

$100,850

$146,000

$246,850

6

Total Annual Costs
For pelagic longline vessels: Communications ($365/year), and repair and maintenance costs
($500/year) for the fleet of 257 vessels would total $222,305.
For shark bottom longline vessels: Communications ($212 over the 212 day shark bottom
longline time/area closure) and repair and maintenance costs ($500/year) for the 30 vessels
would total $21,360.
For shark gillnet vessels: Communications ($137 over the 137 day right whale calving period)
and repair and maintenance costs ($500/year) for the 5 vessels would total $3,185.
The total cost for all three fleets combined would be $246,850.
14. Provide estimates of annualized cost to the Federal government.
There would be no significant cost to the Federal government. NMFS is developing an
integrated hardware and tracking system to manage the various VMS programs being developed
for many other U.S. fisheries. Those costs are already covered by current programs of the Office
of Law Enforcement and are extraneous to this collection. Given the current capacity of these
systems, incremental costs specifically attributable to the HMS VMS program are negligible.
15. Explain the reasons for any program changes or adjustments.
The hours and costs are adjusted to reflect the current number of vessels subject to the VMS
requirement (previously, 329, now estimated to be 292), the number of vessels that may have
already purchased and installed VMS equipment (all now have VMS; previously up to 168 still
needed installation), and any changes to VMS equipment and maintenance costs. In addition, we
are no longer counting the automatic position transmission as burden, per recent clarification
from OMB.
Responses have decreased from 2,673,441 to 292, hours have decreased from 1,567 to 584, and
costs have decreased from $406,655 to $246,850. NOTE: when this information collection was
migrated to ROCIS, the costs were rounded off to $407,000, but the actual change in cost is a
decrease of $159,805 rather than $160,150.
16. For collections whose results will be published, outline the plans for tabulation and
publication.
No formal scientific publications based on this program are planned at this time. The data will
be used for enforcement, management reports, and drafting or evaluating fishery management
plan amendments by NMFS. However, subsequent use of the data collected over a series of
years may be included in scientific papers and publications. Position data will remain
confidential and will only be revealed to the public in aggregated form.
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.
Not applicable.
7

18. Explain each exception to the certification statement identified in Item 19 of the
OMB 83-I.
There are no exceptions.

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

8