FGBNMS_SS_062609rev_PartA

SUPPORTING STATEMENT
SOCIOECONOMICS OF COMMERCIAL FISHERS AND FOR HIRE DIVING AND
FISHING OPERATIONS IN THE FLOWER GARDEN BANKS NATIONAL MARINE
SANCTUARY
OMB CONTROL No. 0648-xxxx

U.S. Department of Commerce
National Ocean and Atmospheric Administration
National Ocean Service
Office of National Marine Sanctuaries
1305 East West Highway, SSMC4, 11th floor
Silver Spring, MD 20910
Contact: Dr. Vernon R. (Bob) Leeworthy
(301) 713-7261
[email protected]

1

A. JUSTFICATION
1. Explain the circumstances that make the collection of information necessary.
The National Marine Sanctuaries Act (16 USC 1431, et seq.) authorizes the use of research and
monitoring within National Marine Sanctuaries (NMS). In 1996, the Flower Gardens Bank
National Marine Sanctuary (FGBNMS) was added to the system of NMS via 15 CFR Part 922,
subpart L. In 2001, Stetson Bank was added in a revision of 15 CFR Part 922.
The National Marine Sanctuaries Act (NMSA) specifies that each NMS should revise their
management plans on a five-year cycle. The FGBNMS has begun the management plan review
process. The NMSA also allows for the creation of Sanctuary Advisory Councils (SACs). SACs
are comprised of representatives of all NMS stakeholders. Management Plan Review (MPR) is a
public process and the SACs, along with a series of public meetings, are used to help scope out
issues in revising the management plans and regulations. SAC Working Groups are often used
to evaluate management or regulatory alternatives. In the current MPR for the FGBNMS, two
major issues have emerged: boundary expansion and research-only areas. In addition, several
new or modified regulations are being considered to meet specific needs for diver safety and
resource protection (no anchoring/mooring buoy use requirement and a more stringent pollution
discharge regulation).
To address each one these issues, the FGBNMS Management and SAC or SAC Working Group
is provided a socioeconomic panel to develop information and tools to assess the socioeconomic
impacts of management strategies and regulatory alternatives. Dr. Vernon R. (Bob) Leeworthy,
the Office of National Marine Sanctuaries (ONMS) Chief Economist, leads the socioeconomic
panel, which can include other social scientists from other agencies or from universities. The
information and tools developed in this process will also provide the necessary information for
meeting agency requirements for socioeconomic impact analyses under the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Executive Order 12086 (Regulatory Impact Review) and an
Initial and Final Regulatory Flexibility Analyses (impacts on small businesses).
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.
How and Purpose
This information request involves compiling socioeconomic information for three key user
groups: commercial fishers, for hire recreational dive operations and for hire recreational fishing
operations (charter and party/head boat operations). Socioeconomic information includes
socioeconomic/demographic profiles (e.g. age, race/ethnicity, income, and household/family
size), costs-and-earnings of business operation, spatial use patterns, and knowledge, attitudes,
and perceptions (KAP) of FGBNMS existing and proposed management strategies and
regulations.

2

The purpose of the information collection is to obtain the necessary information to build tools to
assist FGBNMS management and a stakeholder working group in assessing the socioeconomic
impacts of management strategies and regulatory alternatives in the design the management
strategies and/or regulatory alternatives rather than simple agency after the fact evaluation of
alternatives. In addition, the KAP module of questions will be used to establish baselines for
future monitoring and evaluation efforts.
Overall, there are three basic populations to be surveyed who operate in the Northwest Gulf of
Mexico Study Area (see maps posted as supplemental documents): 1) Commercial fishers, 2)
For Hire Recreational Dive Operations, and 3) For Hire Recreational Fishing Operations
(Charter and Party/Head boat operations).
COMMERCIAL FISHERS
For the commercial fishers, the survey is divided into two parts. Part 1 obtains basic
socioeconomic/demographic information, costs-and-earnings, and spatial distribution of use.
Part 2 obtains knowledge, attitudes and perceptions of existing and proposed management
strategies and regulations.
Part 1: General Information, Economic Information and Fishery Specific Catch, Effort and
Trip Costs. The questions are similar to those submitted under OMB Control Number 06480534, Expiration Date: 7/31/2009 for the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary (FKNMS).
The questions have been slightly modified to fit the FGBNMS.
General Information: This section obtains information to develop socioeconomic/demographic
profiles and support analyses of socioeconomic impacts. The header contains a place to code
date and location of the interview. Contact information is obtained in case follow-up efforts are
required and for review of information by the respondent before finalizing data. Question 1
obtains information on the age of the owner/operator. Questions 2a and 2b obtain information on
race/ethnicity of the owner/operator. Question 3 asks about the number of family members
supported by the business. Question 4 asks about membership in organizations that might
provide information and support to the business. Question 5 focuses on the association with fish
houses. Belonging to a fish house can change the business decision process with fishermen only
going out when receiving orders from fish houses. Questions 6 and 7 ask about ports used.
Questions 5 through 7 establish the location of where economic impacts of the fishing activity
take place. Questions 8 thru 10 address the experience of the commercial fisher in total, in the
Gulf of Mexico and the FGBNMS. Questions 11 and 12 address the commercial fisher’s
dependency on commercial fishing as a source of income. Question 13 also addresses
dependency on commercial fishing by classification of the fishing occupation.
Economic Information: This section addresses costs-and-earnings of the commercial fishing
operation. This section was designed to conform to other studies being conducted on the
economics of the Gulf of Mexico commercial fisheries (see answer to Question 4 below on
Duplication of Effort). Each of the questions ask for information for the last year. Last year will
be the year before we implement and will be filled in at the time we implement the information
collection. Question 14 and 14a focus on the replacement value of current equipment and gear

3

and the balance of any loans for vessels and equipment. This information will help assess the
return on capital and equity. Question 15 focuses on other overhead expenses, while Question
16 addresses trip related expenses. Questions 15 and 16 ask for annual expenses for the past
season. This is the recommendation of NOAA Fisheries economists doing similar work in other
fisheries in the Gulf of Mexico, so we are maintaining consistency of information collection
across different efforts.
Questions 17 and 18 focus on total fishing revenues for the past year and the distribution by
major spatial units related to areas being considered for boundary expansion of the FGBNMS.
For Question 18, we will collect either the revenue for each area or the percent of the total
revenue from Question 17 by area. This will establish dependency on the different areas for
commercial fishing revenues. Boundary expansion or areas could result in displacement of
some commercial fishing activities (non hook-and-line fishing in boundary expansion areas and
all fishing in areas).
Fishery Specific Catch, Effort and Trip Costs: Questions 19 and 20 provide control totals for
each major area, Question 19 for pounds and value of catch by species/species groups and
Question 20 for days of fishing effort by species/species groups, for which more detailed spatial
distributions are to be obtained via Question 22. In Questions 20 and 21, we combined snappers
and groupers because they are usually caught with the same gears in the same places and there
would be a problem in double-counting days and costs or in separating them out.
Question 21 provides detailed costs per day of fishing by species/species group. This
information will provide the basis of estimating the economic impacts on a fishing operation
from displacement by either boundary expansion or a area.
Also, for Question 21, we designed the format to be consistent with that used by the Southeast
Fisheries Science Center’s Stone Crab questionnaire (OMB Control Number 0648-0560,
Expiration Date: 6/30/2010). Here we pick up information on the seasonality of different
fisheries, since many fishermen engage in multiple fisheries over different seasons, and we get
information on gear used. Gear used is important because current regulations in the FGBNMS
allow only hook-and-line fishing, so boundary expansion would displace non hook-and-line
fishing.
Question 22 takes a different approach in obtaining detailed spatial resolution of “expected
catch”. The purpose of this information is to assess the potential impacts of boundary expansion
and area alternatives. This is by its nature forward looking, thus past spatial distribution of
effort may not be good representation of future impact. Commercial fishers will be asked to
provide the percent distribution of where they expect to make their future catches by
species/species groups at spatial resolutions of 1-minute by 1-minute of one nautical square mile
grid cells. Detailed maps will be provided with NOAA Nautical chart layers with latitude and
longitude lines and key reference point such as different oil platforms/rigs and the key bottom
bank structures and depth contours. The catch totals provided in Question 19 will provide the
information to weight percentage distributions across commercial fishing operations when
extrapolating to population totals by spatial unit.

4

Part 2: Knowledge, Attitudes & Perceptions of Sanctuary Management Strategies and
Regulations.
The questions are similar to those submitted under OMB Control Number 06480534, Expiration Date: 7/31/2009, which is focused on a 10-year replication for three user
groups; commercial fishermen, dive shop owners/operators, and members of local environmental
groups in the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary (FKNMS). The questions have been
modified to the issues in the FGBNMS, but follow the same general format.
This module contains 37 questions. Question 1 addresses sources where respondents get their
information and the usefulness of each source of information. This is extremely important to
FGBNMS education and outreach personnel for identifying effective means of communicating
with commercial fishers.
Questions 2 thru 8 address commercial fisher’s perceptions of the FGBNMS with respect to the
processes and procedures followed in creating and enforcing management strategies and
regulations. A 1 to 5 point scale is used, with 1 meaning Strongly Agree to 5 meaning Strongly
Disagree.
Questions 9 thru 37 ask questions about the attitudes and perceptions of FGBNMS existing and
proposed management strategies and regulations, and if commercial fishers support FGBNMS
management. Questions 9 thru 33 and Question 35 use a 1 to 5 point scale, with 1 meaning
Strongly Agree to 5 meaning Strongly Disagree. Question 34 asks about commercial fishers’
perceptions of the resource conditions using a 1 to 5 point scale, with 1 meaning Better
Condition to 5 meaning a Worse Condition. Questions 36 and 37 are opened ended response
questions asking for what areas commercial fisher’s think FGBNMS has been most successful or
least successful.

FOR HIRE RECREATIONAL DIVING OPERATIONS
As with the commercial fishers, the questionnaire for the for hire recreational diving operations
is divided into two parts. Part 1 obtains basic socioeconomic/demographic information, costsand-earnings, and spatial distribution of use. Part 2 obtains knowledge, attitudes and perceptions
of existing and proposed management strategies and regulations. Past research and advice from
members of the SAC representing the dive industry informed us that dive operations also take
people out for recreational fishing and wildlife observation tours (e.g. whale watching, bird
watching, etc.). The questionnaire was modified to account for this practice.
Part 1: General Information, Economic Information and Person-days and Trip Costs. The
questions are similar to those submitted under OMB Control Number 0648-0534, Expiration
Date: 7/31/2009 for the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary (FKNMS). The questions have
been slightly modified to fit the FGBNMS.
General Information: This section obtains information to develop socioeconomic/demographic
profiles and support analyses of socioeconomic impacts. Information requested is the same as in
the questionnaire for the commercial fishers with minor modifications for adapting to the dive
operations.

5

Economic Information: This section addresses costs-and-earnings of the dive operation. This
section was designed to conform to other studies being conducted on the economics of the Gulf
of Mexico recreational for hire fishing operations, but modified to take into account the
differences for diving and wildlife observation activities (see answer to Question 4 below on
Duplication of Effort). Questions 14 thru 17 focus on the operations capacity for number of
passengers on all their vessels, by type of activity. Question 18 asks for the number of
employees by classification (e.g. full, part-time, or seasonal). Questions 19 and 20 focus on the
replacement value of current equipment and gear and the balance of any loans for vessels and
equipment. This information will help assess the return on capital and equity. Question 21
focuses on other overhead expenses, while Question 22 addresses trip related expenses.
Questions 21 and 22 ask for annual expenses for the past year. This is the recommendation of
NOAA Fisheries economists doing similar work on for hire recreational fishing operations in the
Gulf of Mexico, so we are maintaining consistency of information collection across different
efforts.
Questions 23 and 24 focus on total dive operation revenues for the past year and the distribution
by major spatial units related to areas being considered for boundary expansion of the FGBNMS.
This will establish dependency on the different areas for dive operation revenues. Boundary
expansion or areas could result in displacement of some activities (non hook-and-line fishing in
boundary expansion areas and all fishing in areas).
Person-days and Trip Costs: Questions 25 and 26 provide control totals for each major area,
Question 25 for person-days of activity by type of activity and Question 26 for person-days of
activity by type of activity for the three banks in the current FGBNMS. Person-days are the best
measurement of use for recreational activities. A definition is provided which says a person-day
is one person doing an activity for a whole day or any part of the day. This measurement
corresponds generally to what the operations record in their log books as the number of
passengers taken to a specific location on a specific day. There is some potential for doublecounting across activities, so totals across activities is asked and it is not required that the sum by
activity equal the total.
Question 27 provides detailed costs per day of operation by type of activity. This information
will provide the basis of estimating the economic impacts on a dive operation from displacement
by either boundary expansion or a area.
Question 28 takes a different approach in obtaining detailed spatial resolution of “expected
person-days”. The purpose of this information is to assess the potential impacts of boundary
expansion and area alternatives. This is by its nature forward looking, thus past spatial
distribution of effort may not be good representation of future impact. Dive owners/operators
will be asked to provide the percent distribution of where they expect to undertake their future
effort by type of activity at spatial resolutions of 1-minute by 1-minute of one nautical square
mile grid cells. Detailed maps will be provided with NOAA Nautical chart layers with latitude
and longitude lines and key reference point such as different oil platforms/rigs and the key
bottom bank structures and depth contours. The person-day totals provided in Question 25 will

6

provide the information to weight percentage distributions across dive operations when
extrapolating to population totals by spatial unit.
Part 2: Knowledge, Attitudes & Perceptions of Sanctuary Management Strategies and
Regulations.
The questions are similar to those submitted under OMB Control Number 06480534, Expiration Date: 7/31/2009, which is focused on a 10-year replication for three user
groups; commercial fishermen, dive shop owners/operators, and members of local environmental
groups in the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary (FKNMS). The questions have been
modified to the issues in the FGBNMS, but follow the same general format.
This module contains 38 questions. The questions are the same as used in the commercial
fishers questionnaire to allow for comparisons across user groups. Question 23 was modified to
address dive operators and an additional question was added (Question 34) to address the
requirement of using dive flag.
FOR HIRE RECREATIONAL FISHING OPERATIONS
As with the commercial fishers and for hire recreational diving operations, the questionnaire for
the for hire recreational fishing operations is divided into two parts. Part 1 obtains basic
socioeconomic/demographic information, costs-and-earnings, and spatial distribution of use.
Part 2 obtains knowledge, attitudes and perceptions of existing and proposed management
strategies and regulations.
Part 1: General Information, Economic Information, and Person-days and Trip Costs. The
questions are similar as those submitted under OMB Approval Number 0648-0534, Expiration
Date: 7/31/2009 for the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary (FKNMS). The questions have
been slightly modified to fit the FGBNMS.
General Information: This section obtains information to develop socioeconomic/demographic
profiles and support analyses of socioeconomic impacts. Information in this section is the same
as in the for hire diving operations questionnaire with slight modifications for the for hire
recreational fishing operations.
Economic Information: This section addresses costs-and-earnings of the fishing operation.
Again, this section is similar to that for the for hire diving operations with only slight
modifications.
Person-days and Trip Costs: Questions 23 and 24 provide control totals for each major area, and
again this section is similar to that used for the for hire diving operations with slight
modifications.
Part 2: Knowledge, Attitudes & Perceptions of Sanctuary Management Strategies and
Regulations.
The questions are similar to those submitted under OMB Control Number 06480534, Expiration Date: 7/31/2009, which is focused on a 10-year replication for three user
groups; commercial fishermen, dive shop owners/operators, and members of local environmental

7

groups in the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary (FKNMS). The questions have been
modified to the issues in the FGBNMS, but follow the same general format.
This module contains the same 38 questions used for the for hire diving operations. Question 23
was modified to focus on charter/party boat (for hire fishing) operators.
By Whom
The Chief Economist for the Office of National Marine Sanctuaries (ONMS) and the ONMS
Senior Economist will develop geographic information system (GIS) tools and socioeconomic
models for estimating socioeconomic impacts of management strategies and regulatory
alternatives.
How Frequently
This is a one-time application for the current submission. Some of the elements of this
submission will be replicated to support socioeconomic monitoring. However, it is ONMS
policy to work with NMS stakeholders in designing socioeconomic research and monitoring
programs, which would determine whether and how often to replicate measurements.

How Collection Complies with NOAA Information Quality Guidelines
Utility: Completing this information collection will give FGBNMS stakeholders fair
representation in the design of management strategies and regulations by providing information
to support the assessment of socioeconomic impacts of management strategy and regulatory
alternatives.
Education and outreach is an important management tool in the FGBNMS. The information
provided in this project will be an overwhelming boon to the Education and Outreach Program of
the FGBNMS. Knowledge of who are the users of the FGBNMS, their knowledge, attitudes and
perceptions of Sanctuary management strategies and regulations and, how users get their
information are all important in designing effective education and outreach efforts.
Integrity: Procedures have been established to protect the proprietary information provided by
all respondents to all surveys. All personal identification information is removed from all
databases to be sent to NOAA or distributed to the public. Each individual is assigned a database
identification number in the database so the data from different portions of the survey can be
linked for analysis. Release of proprietary information is further protected by the Freedom of
Information Act (5 USC 522 (b) (4)) concerning trade secrets or proprietary information, such as
commercial business and financial records (see also Part A, Question 10).
All project reports are converted to Read-Only in portable document format (pdf) before being
placed on the NOAA Web site for public dissemination.

8

Objectivity: All analyses and reports developed in this project will be peer reviewed before
release to the public. This is the NOAA standard for socioeconomic information under the
Information Quality Act. All survey modules of questions included in this project have all been
through peer review as well. Most of the survey questions have been tested and analyzed in
previous applications. New modules of questions have been peer reviewed.
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, electronic, mechanical, or other technological or other forms of information
technology are being used. All surveys are conducted face-to-face and recorded on paper forms.
4. Describe efforts to identify duplication.
In March 2009, an Economic Workshop, organized by the Gulf States Marine Fisheries
Commission, was held in New Orleans, Louisiana. The purpose of the workshop was to
assemble all researchers currently planning economic or socioeconomic studies on Gulf of
Mexico commercial and recreational fisheries and share details of each proposed research design
to avoid duplication of effort and consistency across applications. The ONMS Chief Economist
(Chief Economist) attended and presented what is proposed in this submission. It was
determined that the proposed work here is unique and a valuable addition. Further, efforts are
made in this submission to achieve consistency in measurement of similar information (i.e. costsand-earnings categories for commercial and recreational fishing operations). This will allow for
direct comparisons across similar populations throughout the Gulf of Mexico.
Bob Leeworthy has also conducted a literature review to determine if and to what extent existing
information might meet the needs for the FGBNMS. The review indicated that any information
was considered outdated. Bob presented what was known to the FGBNMS SAC and
commercial fisher, recreational dive operation and recreational fishing operation representatives
all thought that new information collection was needed to adequately represent their interests.
Each user group was consulted on each component of the information collection to ensure we
were not duplicating efforts and that user group members would comply with the information
request.
5. If the collection of information involves small businesses or other small entities, describe
the methods used to minimize burden.
All the business entities in this information collection request can be classified as small
businesses. Our approach is not to send out questionnaires to be filled out by survey
respondents. Instead, we send out an information collection team to the home or office of the
business owner/operator and the information collection team works with the respondent to
complete the information collection. In arranging information collection interviews, our
approach is to discuss the types of information we will be asking for in order for the respondent
to prepare to make records available to the team. For cost-and-earnings, financial records will be
needed. For spatial use information or catch information, access to log-books will be requested.

9

6. Describe the consequences to the Federal program or policy activities if the collection is
not conducted or is conducted less frequently.
NOAA and the managers of the FGBNMS, with the advice and consent from the FGBNMS
SAC, have agreed to build the necessary information and tools to allow for the assessment of
socioeconomic impacts in the design of management strategies and regulations. The information
collection proposed here is in response to the issues identified by the user groups as necessary
elements of a socioeconomic impact analyses. The management plan review process is well
underway in the FGBNMS and the information collection proposed here is critical to meeting the
needs of FGBNMS stakeholders. In addition, many federal agencies that manage natural
resources have been tasked by the National Academy of Sciences to adopt adaptive management
practices. Adaptive management requires research and monitoring, both ecological and
socioeconomic, to be able to assess what is happening to both the natural resources and the
humans that depend upon those resources. The FGBNMS has taken important steps along these
lines and is living up to their compact with the stakeholders who are participating in the
management plan revision process. Not completing these data collections would leave NOAA
and the FGBNMS in violation of these agreements.
7. Explain any special circumstances that require the collection to be conducted in a
manner inconsistent with OMB guidelines.
Data collection will be consistent with OMB guidelines.
8. Provide a copy of 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 December 23, 2008 (73 FR 78723) solicited public
comment on this collection. None was received.
9. Explain any decisions to provide payments or gifts to respondents, other than
remuneration of contractors or grantees.
No payments or gifts are provided to respondents.
10. Describe any assurance of confidentiality provided to respondents and the basis for
assurance in statute, regulation, or agency policy
As stated on the survey instruments, any identifying information (name, name of business,
address and telephone number) will be viewed only by the contractor compiling the data, and
will be destroyed by the contractor collecting the information at the end of the information

10

collection. In addition, the Freedom of Information Act (5 USC 522(b)(4) authorizes nondisclosure by a federal agency of trade secrets or proprietary information, such as commercial
business and financial records. All other information will be available for distribution.
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 will be asked.
12. Provide an estimate in hours of the burden of the collection of information.
We estimate that there are approximately 50 commercial fishing operations in the relevant
portions of the Northwest Gulf of Mexico Study Area that would be potentially impacted by
FGBNMS boundary expansion or research-only areas. This information was obtained through
the use of the Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) which tracks commercial vessel locations. We
expect it will, on average, require three (3) hours of interview/record compilation time for each
commercial fishing operation. We also assume we will get a 100% response rate or a census, but
response rates could go as low as 85%, based on past research. At the 85% response rate, we
would expect 43 completed interviews for 129 hours, but to allow for a 100% response, we are
requesting 150 hours.
For the For Hire Recreational Diving Operations, we have identified a population of 10
operations. We expect to get a 100% response rate or a census. The representative for the dive
industry on the FGBNMS SAC has assured us that all of their members are highly supportive of
the effort and we should expect full cooperation. Again, we expect that, on average, the
interview and compilation of information time will be three (3) hours, for a total of 30 hours.
For the For Hire Recreational Fishing Operations, we have identified a population of 20
operations. Again, we expect to get a 100% response rate or a census. The representatives for
the recreational fishing industry have assured us that their members are highly supportive of the
effort and we should expect full cooperation. Again, we expect that, on average, the interview
and compilation of information time will be three (3) hours, for a total of 60 hours.
The total burden hour estimate across all three groups is estimated to be 240 hours. If this
estimate is annualized over three years, the estimate is 80 hours per year.

11

Table 1. Estimate of Burden Hours
__________________________________________________________________
Annualized
1
Total
__________________________________________________________________
Estimated Number of Respondents
Commercial fishermen
For Hire Recreational Diving Operations
For Hire Recreational Fishing Operations
Total

50
10
20
80

Estimated time per Respondent
Commercial fishermen
Dive Shop Owners/Operators
Members of Local Environmental Groups

3hrs
3hrs
3hrs

16.7
3.3
6.7
26.7

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours
Commercial fishermen
150
50.0
Dive Shop Owners/Operators
30
10.0
Members of Local Environmental Groups
60
20.0
Total
240
80.0
__________________________________________________________________
1. Annualized equals total divided by three years of approval.

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).
There will be no cost to respondents beyond burden hours.
14. Provide estimates of annualized cost to the Federal government.
Data collection, GIS information and socioeconomic analysis tool development, and basic
reports will take about nine months to complete.
Additional costs to the Federal government include the staff time of NOAA employees in
developing survey questionnaire, sample designs and support items; developing and overseeing
contracts to conduct surveys, do analyses and develop reports; develop data documentation on
CD-ROM; post project reports on NOAA web site in pdf; and travel to support use of the GIS
and socioeconomic impact analysis tools to evaluate management and regulatory alternatives
with stakeholder working groups. Total other costs to the Federal government are estimated at
$30,000. So the total project costs to the Federal government are estimated at $96,600 over a
three year period. When annualized, the costs are estimated to be $32,200.

12

Table 2. Total Project Cost to the Federal Government (Costs over three years):
________________________________________________________________________
Socioeconomics of Commercial Fishers and For Hire Recreational Diving and Fishing
Operations in the Flower Gardens Bank National Marine Sanctuary
Contracts for Data Collectors…………………………………………….$30,000
NOAA Staff time in developing questionnaires, maps, contracts and tools:
a.
Development and oversight………………………………………$42,000
1.
ZP-04 Economist 300 hours * $80/hour………..... $24,000
2.
ZP-04 Economist 300 hours * $62/hour……….… $18,600
b.

Travel…………………………………………………………… $24,000

Total Cost to Federal Government……………………………………….$96,600
________________________________________________________________________
Annualized Cost to Federal Government (Total Project Costs to the Federal government divided
by three years): $32,200.
15. Explain the reasons for any program changes or adjustments.
This is a new collection.
16. For collections whose results will be published, outline the plans for tabulation and
publication.
All reports will be peer reviewed per the NOAA standard under the Information Quality Act and
posted on the ONMS Socioeconomic web site:
http://sanctuaries.noaa.gov/science/socioeconomic. A new page(s) will be set up on this web site
for the FGBNMS.
All data and documentation will be put on CD-ROM and will be made available to the general
public, subject to any masking of the data required to protect privacy.
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.
NA.

13

18. Explain each exception to the certification statement.
NA.

14