0498 SS 101910rev

SUPPORTING STATEMENT
SOUTHWEST REGION VESSEL MONITORING SYSTEM AND PRE-TRIP
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
A.

JUSTIFICATION

1. Explain the circumstances that make the collection of information necessary.
This request is a renewal with modifications of this information collection. The name of this
collection is being changed from “Southwest Region Logbook Family of Forms” to “Southwest
Region Vessel Monitoring System and Pre-Trip Reporting Requirements”, based on a change in
its scope.
The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA) established regional
fishery management councils, including the Pacific Fishery Management Council (Pacific
Council), to develop fishery management plans for fisheries in the United States (U.S.) exclusive
economic zone (EEZ). These plans, if approved by the Secretary of Commerce, are implemented
by Federal regulations, which are enforced by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration’s (NOAA’s) National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the United States
Coast Guard (USCG) with the cooperation of state agencies to the extent possible. The Pacific
Council submitted for approval the Fishery Management Plan for U.S. West Coast Fisheries for
Highly Migratory Species (HMS FMP) which was then partially approved by the Secretary of
Commerce on February 4, 2004. On April 7, 2004, NMFS published a final rule to implement the
approved portions of the HMS FMP (69 FR 18444).
The FMP is intended to ensure conservation and promote the achievement of optimum yield of
HMS throughout their ranges, both within and beyond the U.S. EEZ, to the extent practicable.
The FMP establishes basic conservation and management measures applicable to U.S. vessels
fishing for managed species. Among the conservation and management measures are permit and
reporting requirements for commercial and charter fisheries for HMS as described in this
proposal. The final rule became effective May 7, 2004, except for various record keeping and
reporting elements (e.g., permits and logbooks). These elements became effective on February
10, 2005, upon notice in Federal Register of the approval by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) of collection-of-information requirements for this action.
The following species are included as management unit species under the HMS FMP:
Billfish/Swordfish:
striped marlin (Tetrapturus audax)
swordfish (Xiphias gladius)
Sharks:
common thresher shark (Alopias vulpinus)
pelagic thresher shark (Alopias pelagicus)
1

bigeye thresher shark (Alopias superciliosus)
shortfin mako or bonito shark (Isurus oxyrinchus)
blue shark (Prionace glauca)
Tunas:
north Pacific albacore (Thunnus alalunga)
yellowfin tuna (Thunnus albacares)
bigeye tuna (Thunnus obesus)
skipjack tuna (Katsuwonus pelamis)
northern bluefin tuna (Thunnus orientalis)
Other:
dorado or dolphinfish (Coryphaena hippurus)
These species are highly migratory and are harvested in U.S. waters and on the high seas by U.S.
fishermen and fishermen of other nations. In the U.S., the transboundary migratory patterns of
many of the species potentially bring them in varying degree under the jurisdiction of three
councils: the Pacific Fishery Management Council (PFMC), the Western Pacific Fishery
Management Council (WPFMC), and the North Pacific Fishery Management Council (NPFMC).
The Western Pacific Council has implemented a Fishery Management Plan for the Pelagic
Fisheries of the Western Pacific Region (Pelagics FMP) governing management of many of the
same species in the EEZ of Hawaii, American Samoa, Guam, the Commonwealth of the
Northern Mariana Islands, and other U.S. possessions in the western Pacific region. Jurisdiction
in the western Pacific extends only to the various EEZs in the western Pacific and to those
vessels that may fish on the high seas with permits issued under the authority of the Pelagics
FMP. The Pacific Council’s HMS FMP will complement the Pelagics FMP but will strive to
minimize duplicate requirements, even for vessels that sometimes fish in waters under both
jurisdictions.
The regulations implementing the HMS FMP (50 CFR 660 Subpart K) essentially require that
operators of any commercial fishing vessels and recreational charter vessels engaged in fishing
for HMS maintain and submit logbooks to NMFS or state authorities recording catch and effort
for that fishing. These requirements are met for most vessels by reporting in accordance with
existing laws and regulations. In several fisheries, vessel operators are already required under
state law to maintain and submit logbooks to state agencies. The regulations require that state
reporting requirements be met in the manner and on the forms required by the states. Currently,
the State logbook requirements for drift gillnet, harpoon and recreational charter vessels are used
to satisfy Federal information needs under the HMS FMP. Thus, there is no Federal burden
associated with the reporting requirements for these fisheries.
In addition, logbooks recording daily catch and effort statistics are required for fishing activity by
vessels fishing on the high seas under the authority of the High Seas Fishing Compliance Act
(HSFCA), including longline, high seas troll/baitboat, and high seas purse seine fishing. Those
requirements would continue, although they can be met by submitting forms provided by the
Southwest Region (SWR) NMFS, for reporting under the HMS FMP. A Federal Pacific
2

Albacore Logbook has been developed and distributed to HMS FMP troll and baitboat permit
holders, including HSFCA eligible participants. The fleet is being instructed to use this logbook
as the primary means for meeting the HMS FMP and HSFCA reporting requirements. A separate
collection of information has been established for mandatory reporting and recordkeeping
through use of the Federal Pacific Albacore Logbook (OMB Control No. 0648-0223) which
expires December 31, 2011. The original PRA submission for this action (OMB Control No.
0648-0498) included estimates of reporting burden and cost for the Federal Pacific Albacore
Logbook. This burden and cost was duplicative with coverage and estimates generated under
OMB Control No. 0648-0223 and have been removed from this renewal submission. Thus, the
previous title (SWR Logbook Family of Forms) has been changed to reflect the two items (VMS
requirements and pre-trip notifications) undergoing renewal. The new name of this renewal
package is SWR VMS and Pre-Trip Notification Requirements.
An electronic vessel monitoring system (VMS) utilizing global positioning by satellite is
required to be installed and operated on all longline vessels managed under the authority of the
FMP if the owner is so requested by the Special Agent in Charge (SAC) for the Southwest
Region NOAA Office of Law Enforcement. NMFS will cover the costs of procurement,
installation, and communication costs relating to VMS operation for HMS fishing activities. The
system is being implemented as a way to monitor vessels to ensure that fishing occurs only in
times and areas open to longline fishing, without the need for vessel operators to report positions
or for the USCG to commit substantial resources to verifying the effectiveness of the closed areas
through sea patrols or aerial surveillance. The system will ensure the ability to track these very
mobile and distant water fishing vessels as they shift across high seas fishing areas. Most of the
swordfish longline vessels now fish out of Hawaii due to the re-opening of the shallow-set
longline fishery in April, 2004. Shallow-set longline fishing was prohibited west of 150 degrees
west longitude under the HMS FMP regulations and east of 150 degrees west longitude under an
Endangered Species Act regulation. The Hawaii-based vessels are authorized to land fish on the
West Coast and provision to continue fishing under the Pelagics Limited Entry longline permit.
These vessels must have VMS units on board. If any of these vessels call to the west coast, vessel
operators would have to allow NMFS agents to verify the operational status of the units.
A final rule (70 FR 7022) published on February 10, 2005, requires operators of longline fishing
vessels to notify NMFS prior to departing on a fishing trip so that NMFS can determine whether
an observer should be placed on the vessel. The final rule (along with the previously mentioned
rule published under the authority of the ESA) essentially prohibits longline fishing for swordfish
because of concern for excessive takes of sea turtles. However, deep-set longline fishing for tuna
and other species in the high seas is permitted. NMFS needs to take advantage of the potential to
place observers on all trips in which tuna would be targeted so that prospective impacts on sea
turtles, seabirds, and other bycatch can be determined.

3

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.
The VMS requirement: basic monitoring of the fishery to obtain information needed by, among
others, NMFS, the USCG, and the Council to monitor the activities of the participating vessels
and the performance of the fisheries. Knowing the number and location of vessels enables
effective monitoring of vessel activity for enforcement purposes, providing additional data to
assist in validation of logbook records accuracy.
The VMS information enables enforcement personnel to determine whether or not vessels are
fishing in closed areas. The requirement for longline vessel operators to contact NMFS prior to a
trip departure enables NMFS to plan on placement of an observer when it is necessary and
appropriate (e.g., for under-observed gear/trip types and/or pending available funding).
The information collected is anticipated 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 NOAA standards for confidentiality, privacy, and electronic
information. See response to Question10 of this Supporting Statement for more information on
confidentiality and privacy. The information collection is designed to yield data that meets all
applicable information quality guidelines. Prior to dissemination, the information will be
subjected to quality control measures and a 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.
The SWR website at http://nmfs.swr.noaa.gov will be used to inform the public about
management program requirements. A Small Entity Compliance Guide has been prepared and
posted on the NMFS website to assist permit holders in understanding the requirements that must
be met, including reporting requirements. Required Federal forms and instructions are available
online along with an explanation of the process for returning them to NMFS. The SWR will also
work with state agencies and the Pacific Council to use their web sites and license-issuing offices
to increase the distribution of required reporting and record keeping.
4. Describe efforts to identify duplication.
U.S. West Coast-based fishing vessels that fish part or full time in the Western Central Pacific
Fisheries Commission Endorsement Area (in the Central and Western Pacific Ocean, principally
west of 150 degrees west longitude) have explicit VMS requirements that are codified in a Final
4

Rule (75 FR 3335) published January 21, 2010. PRA requirements for West Coast-based vessels
were covered in a separate PRA submission (OMB Control No. 0648-0441) handled by the
NMFS Pacific Islands Regional Office and are not included under this PRA submission (OMB
Control No. 0648-0498), thereby avoiding duplication of efforts.
5. If the collection of information involves small businesses or other small entities, describe
the methods used to minimize burden.
All fishing operations involving vessels in the highly migratory fisheries, except the large scale
tuna purse seine vessels, can be categorized as small businesses. However, the reporting burden
for pre-trip reporting is insignificant compared to the overall cost of fishing. The requirement of
VMS equipment is the most costly provision, but NMFS provides a reimbursement to vessel
owners of up to $3,100 for the purchase of an approved VMS unit and covers communication
costs and other operational costs (e.g., maintenance of the unit). Fishermen may also connect
other communications equipment to the VMS unit to improve their own ability to communicate.
No special measures are needed to offset any disproportionate effect on small businesses.
6. Describe the consequences to the Federal program or policy activities if the collection is
not conducted or is conducted less frequently.
Daily VMS reports (and more frequent if a vessel is near a closed area) are necessary to ensure
adequate monitoring of vessel movements to determine compliance with time and area controls
and to facilitate cost effective use of enforcement patrols. Less frequent reports would likely
result in higher likelihood of non-compliance with low probability of detection of violations. Pretrip notification reports made too far in advance of a vessel’s departure are likely to result in
changes in vessel plans as fishery conditions change rapidly; reports after a departure don’t allow
NMFS to make a decision to place an observer before the vessel leaves port. In both cases, there
is likely to be a resulting loss of data collection opportunity, which could result ultimately in
inappropriate management decisions because of poor data. This could adversely affect the
fisheries.
7. Explain any special circumstances that require the collection to be conducted in a
manner inconsistent with OMB guidelines.
Not Applicable.

5

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 August 20, 2010 (75 FR 51439) solicited public
comment. No comments were received.
The SWR conducts periodic HMS FMP Informational Port Meetings to instruct the public on the
regulations and conservation measures outlined in the HMS FMP. NMFS has also consulted
with the fishing industry, the public, the California Department of Fish and Game, the Oregon
Department of Fish and Wildlife, and the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. The
fishing industry includes members of the Pacific Council’s Highly Migratory Species Advisory
Subpanel, a group made up of members of the fishing industry and public appointed to provide
guidance during plan development.
9. Explain any decisions to provide payments or gifts to respondents, other than
remuneration of contractors or grantees.
There are no payments or gifts to respondents.
10. Describe any assurance of confidentiality provided to respondents and the basis for
assurance in statute, regulation, or agency policy.
Data submitted to NMFS will be managed as confidential data consistent with Section 402(b) of
the Magnuson-Stevens Act, which stipulates that data required to be submitted under an FMP
shall be confidential and shall not be released except to Federal employees and Council staff
responsible for FMP monitoring and development or when required under court order. Data will
also be handled consistent with the requirements of NOAA Administrative Order 216-100.
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 are asked of a sensitive nature.

6

12. Provide an estimate in hours of the burden of the collection of information.
Vessel Monitoring System
Longline vessels fishing under the Pelagics FMP must have a VMS installed at the expense of
NMFS (up to $3,100 per unit). Many if not most of the longline vessels fishing that previously
fished from West Coast ports already have VMS because they originated in Hawaii, where VMS
units were required. If these vessels opt to exercise the right to land product on the west coast,
NMFS will need to check and maintain any VMS units installed or reactivated.
In addition, there may be as many as 5 vessels that might participate in the west coast-based
deep-set tuna longline fishery on the high seas. These vessels will have to be boarded to have
their VMS units installed, or if already present then inspected and reactivated, possibly with
some servicing required. While NMFS will pay for the units and installation, vessel owners
whose vessels are not equipped will have to contact NMFS to arrange for installation and
initiation of the VMS unit.
VMS reporting varies by the type of activity in which the vessel is engaged. NMFS will pay for
the reporting costs. When in port, a single, daily position report is made with a burden of 24
seconds per report. When at sea, a daily position report (24 seconds per report) is made once per
hour, or 24 reports per day. It is estimated that the 5 longline vessels that may participate in the
deep-set tuna longline fishery will make an average of 6 trips each year, with an average of 15
days at sea for each trip. Thus, the average vessel will report as follows:
90 days at sea x 24 reports/day x 24 sec/report
275 days in port x 1 report/day x 24 sec/report

=
=

14.4 hours
1.8 hours

However, as these reports are automatic, there is no public burden associated with them.
VMS installation will be required for the estimated 5 vessels that do not now have VMS units on
board. It is estimated that 4hrs/vessel (including time to contact NMFS and make vessel
available for installation of VMS unit) will be required for each installation, for a total burden of
20 hours. This is a one-time cost and, for purposes of deriving an annual burden, this is
annualized on the same time frame as the permits, or five years; thus, the annualized burden is 4
hours.
VMS maintenance will be required annually for all 5 vessels at an estimated burden of 2 hours
per vessel (including time to contact NMFS and make VMS unit on vessel available for
inspection annually), or a total of 10 hours.
Based on these figures, the estimated total burden associated with the VMS requirement is
(including the time to contact NMFS and arrange for installation and maintenance) is 14 hours
(10 + 4).

7

Pre-trip Reports
It is estimated that no more than 5 vessels will engage in fishing for tuna with deep-set longline
gear in any year, and the average vessel will make 6 trips per year. The average pre-trip report
will take 5 minutes or less, resulting in an estimate of 150 (2.5h) minutes for this collection.
Total
The total new information collection burden is:
VMS
Pre-trip reports
Total

14 hours (6 responses: annualized installation plus annual
maintenance)
2.5 hours (30 responses)
16.5 (round up to 17) hours (36 responses)

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).
A. VMS
NMFS will reimburse vessel owners for the one time cost of procurement and installation of an
approved VMS unit based on eligibility criteria outlined online at www.psfmc.org.
Reimbursement, if approved, will cover up to $3,100 per unit purchase and installation.
Reporting and annual maintenance costs will be paid for by NMFS. Transmission frequency and
associated costs per transmission are dependent on the unit selected and approved. As currently
codified in section 50 CFR 660.712(d)(3) outlined below, there are no costs to the owner for the
installation and operation of the VMS unit.
660.712(d)(3) A longline permit holder will not be assessed any fee or other charges to
obtain and use a VMS unit, including the communication charges related directly to
requirements under this section.
B. Pre-trip Reports
The estimated notification cost is $1.00 per phone call, or a total cost of $30.00 per year
(assuming $1 per call using toll calls to Long Beach from the Port of Los Angeles).
14. Provide estimates of annualized cost to the Federal government.
Maintain VMS monitoring station:
1hr/day x 365 days x $36.36/hr = $13,271.40

8

Pre-trip notices:
No cost
Total: $13,271.40

15. Explain the reasons for any program changes or adjustments.
A program change has been made, removing the Troll/Baitboat Federal Pacific Albacore
Logbook requirement from this renewal as it is already covered under a separate OMB Control
Number, 0648-0223. This duplication had previously been overlooked.
A second program change: VMS reporting was removed, due to this burden no longer being
counted, and the transmission cost being paid for by NMFS.
Adjustments for this renewal reduce the estimated number of vessels to be active in any one year
from 20 to 5 and increase the estimated number of trips per year per vessel from 5 to 6.
16. For collections whose results will be published, outline the plans for tabulation and
publication.
There are no plans at this time for publications based on the collections.
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.
18. Explain each exception to the certification statement.
Not Applicable.
B. COLLECTIONS OF INFORMATION EMPLOYING STATISTICAL METHODS
This collection does not employ statistical methods.

9