0013 SS Part A, Revision (BC12) 031114

SUPPORTING STATEMENT
SOUTHEAST REGION DEALER AND INTERVIEW FAMILY OF FORMS
OMB CONTROL NO. 0648-0013

Introduction

This is a resubmission of a revision, with the final rule, RIN 0648-BC12, of the existing reporting requirements that are currently approved under OMB Control No. 0648-0013, Southeast Region Dealer Family of Forms. The Generic Dealer Amendment amends eight fishery management plans (FMPs) in the Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic regions. The rule contains information collection requirements that revise OMB Control Numbers 0648-0205 and 0648-0013. No changes were made to this revision based on public comments, or for any other reason.

This family of forms includes the various reporting instruments and procedures that the Southeast Fisheries Science Center (SEFSC) uses to collect landings statistics and quota monitoring data from commercial seafood dealers and interviews with fishermen for effort and fishing locations data.

Fishery statistics are collected by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) for a variety of reasons under several Federal statutes. The overall purposes for the data collection activities under this family have not changed significantly since the approval of this family of forms in 1995. It includes the same three methodologies that were included in the previous submissions. These methods include: (1) landings statistics, which include the general canvass statistics and the shrimp landings statistics; (2) mandatory dealer reporting for monitoring Federal fishery annual catch limits (ACLs); and (3) bio-profile data from the Trip Interview Program (TIP). The SEFSC employs several methods to collect the variety of data included in the information collection. The following is a brief description of these procedures.

For the general canvass statistics, the SEFSC does not collect these data directly from the seafood dealers. The state fishery agencies in each of the states in the southeast region collect landings statistics under their individual state authority. The state agencies share these data with the SEFSC as part of formal cooperative agreements between the SEFSC and the states. These cooperative arrangements serve to both reduce the overall cost of data collection and avoid the possibility of duplicate effort.

Because more detailed information is required for the shrimp landings statistics than some states provide in the general canvass data, SEFSC employees collect these data directly from seafood dealers. The data that the SEFSC personnel collect are available from the sales receipts that are maintained by the dealers as part of the routine accounting practices that are part of their normal business operations. The dealers are not asked nor required to keep any extra records, other than the sales receipts, which are used by the SEFSC personnel to record the shrimp landings statistics. Consequently, this data collection activity does not impose any reporting burden on the dealers.

To collect the data required to monitor the federal fisheries ACLs for the coastal fisheries, the SEFSC has entered formal cooperative agreements with the states which has reduced the public burden. Starting in 2012, 7 of the 8 states changed state regulations to allow dealers to use an electronic trip ticket system. Minimum burden will be required of dealers in these 7 states to transmit this data to the SEFSC every week. In South Carolina, dealers still use a paper trip ticket system for state reporting obligations. Burden will be required of SC dealers to use the electronic system and transmit ACL data to the SEFSC every week.

For the shrimp fishing effort and the bio-profile data from the Trip Interview Program, the information is collected directly from fishermen by personal interviews. SEFSC employees ask them for the information and record the data on work sheets for data entry.

Two fisheries are still using simple, easy to use forms developed by the SEFSC: mackerel gillnet dealers on the Florida gulf coast and south Atlantic wreckfish dealers report summarized landing statistics to the SEFSC for ACL monitoring on these forms. There are 3 other types of data included in OMB Control No. 0648-0013 (rock shrimp dealer data, golden crab dealer data, and coral dealer data), but the SEFSC does not actively collect these data. As with the general canvass data, the state fishery agencies provide these data; however, a minimal number of hours is identified in the unlikely event the states cannot provide those data.

This new rule will close a loop hole in the current regulations, for situations where non-federally permitted dealers are buying federally managed species caught in state waters. Under the new rule any dealer who is the first point of sale of a federally managed species (buying fish from a fisherman, not another dealer) will need to obtain a federal dealer permit and will need to make weekly transmissions of trip ticket data to the electronic state run trip ticket programs. Dealers in South Carolina will be asked to use the electronic trip ticket program in addition to the state required paper submissions. Burden will be required of SC dealers to use the electronic system. Dealers in the other states will require burden to transmit the data weekly.

A. JUSTIFICATION

1. Explain the circumstances that make the collection of information necessary.

The data collected under the various programs included in OMB Control No.0648-0013 support a wide variety of analytical and management functions performed by the NMFS. These data are collected to support the stewardship role delegated to the NMFS under various Federal regulations.

The collection of this information is authorized by the Fish and Wildlife Act (FWA), modified by the Reorganization Plan No. 4 of 1970, and enhanced by the Magnuson-Stevens Act , originally passed as the Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976. The U.S. Congress later passed two major sets of amendments to the law, first with the Sustainable Fisheries Act of 1996 and then 10 years later with the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Reauthorization Act of 2006. The Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) has undertaken a set of objectives for the conservation and management of marine fishery resources. The Magnuson-Stevens Act requires that conservation and management measures in fishery management plans (FMP) must prevent overfishing while achieving, on a continuing basis, the optimum yield from each fishery. Such management measures must be based on the best available scientific information. The use of dealer reporting of landings purchased throughout the various regiments of the fishery is an essential ingredient in the management of fishery resources. Section 303 (a)(5) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act specifically identifies the kinds of data to be collected in support of FMPs.

Specific regulations that authorize the collection of data in this family of forms: 50 CFR Part 622, Fisheries of the Caribbean, 622.2, Definitions, 622.5, Recordkeeping and reporting-general, and the fishery specific recordkeeping and reporting regulations in 622.26 (Gulf reef fish), 622.91 (Gulf red drum), 622.176 (South Atlantic wreckfish), 622.203 (South Atlantic rock shrimp), 622.242 (South Atlantic golden crab), 622.271 (Atlantic dolphin and wahoo), 622.374 (Gulf and South Atlantic coastal migratory pelagic fish), and 622.401 (Gulf and South Atlantic spiny lobster).

The mandatory dealer reporting is necessary to provide the NMFS with timely information to monitor the fishery annual catch limits (ACLs) established in the respective fishery management plans. The science and research director at the SEFSC selects every federally permitted dealer for mandatory ACL reporting. Without the direct reporting by the dealers, NMFS managers would not be able to determine when the ACLs are reached and the fisheries need to be closed.

The bio-profile data (also referred to as the trip interview data) are necessary to collect length composition information and age and reproductive samples which are essential to understanding the age composition and reproductive status (mature, immature, etc.) of the fish caught to develop length to age conversion tables (age-length keys). These size, age and reproductive data are used to estimate the reproductive potential of each species. The relationships between the amount of fish removed from a population and the recruitment potential (possible amount of offspring produced for each size class) are essential parts of the scientific stock assessments prepared by NMFS scientists.

2. Explain how, by whom, how frequently, and for what purpose the information will be used.

The information provided by the data collection activities in OMB Control No. 0648-0013 is used by several offices of NMFS, Fishery Management Council staffs, the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) the Corps of Engineers, and state fishery agencies to develop, implement, and monitor fishery management regimes. NMFS, Fishery Management Councils, the Departments of State and Commerce, OMB, the fishing industry, congressional staff, and the public use summarizations and analyses of dealer data to answer questions about the nature of fisheries resources.

The primary use of these data, however, is to support the management of the fisheries resources under Federal jurisdiction. The landings data are used to determine the overall magnitude and trends in the fisheries. The trip interview programs provide the most important data for stock assessments that directly support NMFS’ stewardship responsibilities. There are two parts to bio profile data collection activities. Port agents select fishing trips and interview the captain or crew to collect information on the fishing trip, (i.e., specific locations where the fishing occurred, the type and quantities of gear, and the amount of time that the various types of gear were fished). The second part of the bio profile data collection activity does not involve any interaction with the fishermen. For this part, port agents are granted permission from the fisherman to measure and weigh individual fish and collect hard-part and tissue samples either directly from the boats when the catch is being unloaded or from storage vats after the unloading has been completed. This size frequency and age data are used directly by stock assessment biologists to perform virtual population analyses for stock assessments. To assure that fishermen cooperate, Federal regulation require that fishermen make their fish available to authorized Federal port agents and provide the gear, area and effort information needed in conjunction with the size and weight data.

The SEFSC routinely performs four to six stock assessments per year (note, an assessment is not necessarily needed for each species every year; consequently, some assessments are performed every 3 to 5 years).

The SEFSC also conducts an annual vessel inventory that is used to provide a count of the vessels (greater than 5 net tons) that are actively fishing in the southeast region. The data for this inventory is extracted from trip ticket data for some of the states; however, for other states the inventory is prepared by observation and data recorded from dealer records. There are only a small number of situations where it is necessary for the agents to actually contact the vessel owner/operator for specific information on the type or amount of gear used by the vessel.

Another major data collection activity in OMB Control No. 0648-0013 is mandatory dealer reporting that is used to monitor the quotas that are promulgated under various Federal fishery management plans and amendments to those plans. The frequency of reporting is established in accordance with the nature of the respective fishery. The Generic Dealer Reporting Amendment and rulemaking (RIN 0648-BC12) will require weekly reporting for all species, except for Gulf king mackerel harvested by gillnet which will require daily reporting (see explanation below). The following is a summary of the reporting frequencies and data collecting methods for the quota monitoring programs in OMB Control No. 0648-0013.

Coastal Fisheries Dealers Reporting:

The coastal fisheries quota monitoring system includes fisheries managed under the Gulf of Mexico Reef Fish Fishery Management plan and the fisheries managed under the South Atlantic Fishery Management plan. Data sufficient to monitor all the coastal fishery quotas are collected electronically by the states using the state run electronic trip ticket systems. Dealers with federal permits are required to transmit data to their state every two weeks. The following information is required in the electronic reporting system form:

1. Dealer information (including dealer name, dealer contact information, and dealer

permit numbers);

2. Report information (including date and time information is submitted);

3. Trip specific Info (including state landed, and date landed);

4. Species specific Info (species purchased, quantity purchased, gear types used, and areas fished);

5. Negative reports (including the date and time submitted).

Mackerel Dealers Reporting (gear types other than gillnet):

Because king and Spanish mackerel are migratory and school in large numbers at specific times and areas, monitoring the landings for these species is only necessary for a limited time, (i.e., during the open season). Thus, reporting by dealers may only be required for two months or for as many as six months, depending on availability of fish and fishing effort. There are 3 forms used for these quotas. One form is used for dealers that handle the quotas for all gear types other than gillnet. Under the new rule, dealers will be required to submit this form weekly.

Mackerel Dealers Reporting (gillnet):

Because of the efficiency of gillnets to catch fish, the quota for this fishery can be reached very quickly. Under the new rule, those dealers and vessels that are selected to submit these two forms will be required do so daily. Normally, the quota for this fishery is reached in a month or two.

Wreckfish Dealer Reporting:

Under the new rule, dealers that purchase wreckfish will be required to report the total weight of these species purchased weekly.

Miscellaneous Reporting:

Reporting requirements have been implemented for rock shrimp and golden crab dealers along the Atlantic coast and coral dealers in Puerto Rico. These regulations were promulgated as a safeguard in the event that the states failed to collect the necessary landings statistics. To date, NMFS has not had to use this authority.

Summaries of the ACL monitoring data will be made available to the general public to inform them of the ongoing status of the ACL so fishermen can make the appropriate business decisions regarding future fishing activities.

NMFS/SEFSC 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 the response to Question 10 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 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.

Currently dealers in all states except South Carolina in the southeast region are reporting electronically using state-approved electronic trip ticket reporting systems and the data are provided to the SEFSC by the states through formal cooperative agreements. The weights from the electronically submitted trip tickets are summarized for the dealers for each of the ACL monitored species by the state run systems so dealers no longer need to tally weights from monitored species; hence, the dealers are no longer required to submit separate paper ACL monitoring reports to the science center as they were in the past. Effectively by transmitting electronic trip ticket data to the states they are submitting ACL data to the science center. The Trip Interview Program (TIP) form is available as a Web application at http://www.sefsc.noaa.gov/interview/.

4. Describe efforts to identify duplication.

A requirement of the Magnuson Act Operational Guidelines is for each Fishery Management Council to evaluate existing state and federal laws governing the fisheries in question, and such findings are included in each Fishery Management Plan (FMP). Membership on each Fishery Management Council is composed of state and federal officials responsible for resource management in their respective states. These two circumstances identify other data collection activities that may be gathering the same or similar information. In addition, each FMP undergoes an extensive public comment period where potential applicants review the proposed rulemaking.

The NMFS has established cooperative statistics programs with the 8 coastal states in the southeast region of the United States (U.S). The State/Federal Cooperative Statistics Program is comprehensive both geographically within the southeast region and with respect to the data that are collected. The federal and state reporting requirements are coordinated through the Cooperative Agreement. In addition, the location and responsibilities of the port agents are coordinated to avoid any duplication of effort, and contact with fishermen at the docks. As a result of both the Fishery Management Council process and the Cooperative Statistics Agreements, the NMFS/SEFSC is confident that it is aware of all similar data collection activities and that all duplications that can be avoided are avoided.

5. If the collection of information involves small businesses or other small entities, describe the methods used to minimize burden.

Because almost all dealers and fishermen are considered small businesses, separate requirements based on the size of the business have not been developed. Only the minimum data to meet reporting objectives are required from the respondents. The dealers are not required, nor asked, to maintain any records other than the sales receipts that records the transactions between the dealer (purchaser) and the fishermen (seller) which is accomplished through the state run electronic trip ticket systems. Most of the data provided under OMB Control No. 0648-0013 are summaries compiled from existing accounting information maintained by seafood dealers and processors in the normal course of their business operations. Thus, there is no additional recordkeeping burden on dealers due to the reporting requirements covered in this PRA request.

6. Describe the consequences to the Federal program or policy activities if the collection is not conducted or is conducted less frequently.

It is essential that these collection activities are continued. They provide the data necessary for future stock assessments and the means of monitoring the fishery ACLs that are currently promulgated to control fishing effort. Thus, if these collection activities were not available, the NMFS could not perform the stock assessments for the conservation and management of our fishery resources. Furthermore, without the mandatory dealer reporting, the SEFSC could not effectively monitor the ACLs implemented by existing fishery management plans and therefore, reduce fishing mortality. With respect to frequency, the collection of fish size frequency data must be an ongoing process. The dynamics of fishery biology, such as semi-annual spawning, seasonal migratory changes, growth and mortality rates, require a collection frequency that can detect these changes over time. In addition, weekly or daily reporting frequencies, rather than monthly or bi-monthly submissions, must be used to monitor in-season ACL management.

7. Explain any special circumstances that require the collection to be conducted in a manner inconsistent with OMB guidelines.

Not Applicable.

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 proposed rule, RIN 0648-BC12, was published on January 2, 2014 (79 FR 81), soliciting public comment on the information collection requirements. NMFS received five comment submissions on the proposed rule, all of which were related to the reporting requirements. One comment expressed general support for the actions contained in the Generic Dealer Amendment and the proposed rule, including timely transmission of accurate dealer purchase information (including both reports of fish landings and/or of no landing reports).

The other comments expressed concerns or gave suggestions for one or more actions contained in the amendment or the proposed rule.

One commenter stated that NMFS should send an automated response and time stamp to dealers when a purchase form is received. NMFS responded that all data are initially submitted to the states via the trip ticket reporting systems in place. A time stamp is generated by the trip ticket software to indicate when the data were submitted by the dealer. This time stamp is accessible to the dealer if the dealer requests it from the state trip ticket reporting system. NMFS does not have authority over the state trip ticket reporting system; however, dealers may work with the states to get the information they need for their businesses.

Another commenter stated that NMFS should contact dealers if a dealer is out of compliance with the reporting deadline (for both purchase and non-purchase reports) before suspending the dealer’s ability to purchase product. NMFS responded that NMFS is investigating the use of email notification to let dealers know when they become out of compliance with the reporting requirements implemented in this final rule. The provision included in this final rule to prohibit dealers from receiving fish from federally permitted vessel if they have not submitted all required reports is intended to aid in enforcement efforts to ensure dealer reports are submitted in a timely manner.

Another commenter stated there is no provision in this amendment or rule in the event a computer hardware, software, or internet access problem occurs. The rule would shut down a business for not submitting electronic reports on time. NMFS responded that in the event of technical issues with a dealer’s computer equipment, the dealer will need to utilize other computer resources for timely submission of the electronic reports, such as a mobile device or public access computer. NMFS will allow paper based reporting in the event of catastrophic conditions only. The RA will determine when catastrophic conditions exist, the duration of the catastrophic conditions, and which participants are affected. The RA will provide notice of a paper-based system via notification in the Federal Register, NOAA weather radio, fishery bulletins, and other appropriate means and will authorize the use of the paper-based system for the duration of the catastrophic conditions. The paper forms will be available from NMFS.

Finally, a commenter stated increasing regulations and reporting frequencies are economically detrimental to smaller businesses. The impacts of reporting were not thoroughly considered, such as the additional cost of computer maintenance. In addition, the assessment understated the significance of the economic effects of the proposed rule on small entities. NMFS responded that NMFS agrees that increasing regulations may have adverse economic effects on businesses and the significance of these effects may be greater for smaller businesses; however, NMFS disagrees that the economic effects of the proposed rule on small entities was understated. As stated in the analysis provided in the proposed rule, none of the requirements contained in this final rule require special professional skills and all affected small entities are expected to already have staff with the appropriate skills to meet these requirements. The analysis also provided an estimate of the permitting requirement for entities that do not currently have a Federal permit ($74.42 per entity), the expected cost of a computer (less than $750), and the expected cost of internet access (less than $100 per month) for any entities that do not currently have a computer or internet service. Although these expenses may be burdensome to some dealers, overall the requirements are not be expected to adversely affect a substantial number of small entities because the use of computers and the internet has become commonplace and a vital tool in business management and, according to the SBA, in 2010, approximately 94 percent of businesses used computers and 95 percent of these had internet service. All affected entities currently operate in states that require reporting and all states, except South Carolina, allow electronic reporting. Satisfying the reporting frequency requirements of this final rule will only require more frequent submission of the same quantity of data. Because the majority of small businesses affected by this rule are expected to already have the required skill, hardware, and internet access to meet state and common general business operational requirements, the economic effects of this final rule are expected to be minor.

No changes were made to the rule or the reporting burden in response to these comments.

NMFS is part of a cooperative program to collect fishery statistics. SEFSC personnel meet with state, territorial and regional coordinators of fisheries statistics collection programs at least once each year to discuss, coordinate and improve data collections. Statistical data collection and biological sampling targets along the Atlantic Coast (Florida through North Carolina) are coordinated through the Atlantic Coastal Cooperative Statistics Program (ACCSP). Statistical data collection and biological sampling targets along the Gulf of Mexico coast are coordinated through the Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commission (GSMFC). Additionally the SEFSC is working closely with the U.S. Virgin Islands Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Puerto Rico Department of Natural and Environmental Resources to develop a long term plan to improve the quantity of samples collected and the representativeness of collection activities in the Caribbean.

To address these views on timeliness and accuracy, NMFS will be monitoring the submission of the electronic reports and working with industry to encourage accurate and timely reporting. Procedures include working on data coding consistencies with our state partners, public outreach about electronic reporting, notifying dealers when reports were expected but not received, and quality control checks on the data received. Additionally NMFS is working with the developer of the electronic trip ticket program to ensure better data entry constraints on future software versions thus reducing problems with unidentified species, gears, and areas. NMFS feels these steps will increase reporting accuracy and timeliness and hopes that success demonstrated with dealer reporting will pave the way for electronic reporting of other data collection programs.

9. Explain any decisions to provide payments or gifts to respondents, other than remuneration of contractors or grantees.

No payments or gifts are provided.

10. Describe any assurance of confidentiality provided to respondents and the basis for assurance in statute, regulation, or agency policy.

As stated on the forms, all data collected under this family of forms are handled in accordance with NOAA Administrative Order 216-100, Confidential Fisheries Statistics. Dealer reports are also considered confidential under the Trade Secrets Act.

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.

The total burden on the public for this information collection is estimated to be 3,165 hours, for a total of 61,046 responses. The following is a description of the estimated burden hours and labor costs of reporting for the individual reporting activities. The number of respondents and the estimated time per response for the individual data collection activities (forms) are summarized in Table 1. Unduplicated respondents are 6,149: 2,198 shrimp interviewees +2895 fish trip interviewees +1050 dealers + 6 mackerel vessels.

General Canvass:

The reporting burden on seafood dealers for the landings (general canvass) statistics is zero. As described in the Introduction, these data are reported to the fishery agency for each state and the NMFS/SEFSC does not conduct this data collection activity. The respective state fishery agencies perform the data processing and quality control on these data and provide them to the SEFSC.

Shrimp Dealers:

The reporting burden for the dealers that handle shrimp in the Gulf of Mexico is also zero. For the dealers located in some states in the southeast region, the landings statistics are collected by NMFS/SEFSC port agents who visit the dealers and record the data. The dealers are not required to record any additional information or maintain any additional information other than the information that is available on the sales receipts that are maintained as part of the company’s accounting. The port agents record the information from the sales receipts maintained by the dealers. The dealers are only required to make the sales receipts available to the port agents.

Shrimp Interviews:

The burden to the public for shrimp interviews conducted in the Gulf of Mexico is estimated to be 433 hours. Annually, approximately 2,600 interviews are conducted to collect fishing effort and area of catch information. It takes approximately 10 minutes to ask these questions (applicable questions from the Trip Interview question list). Thus, the total burden is 2,600 x 10 minutes/60 minutes/schedule = 433 hrs.

Trip Interview Program:

The industry reporting burden from interviews conducted within the Trip Interview Program (TIP) to collect fishing effort is similar to the burden involved with shrimp interviews. It is estimated that approximately 4,500 interviews are (will be) conducted annually to collect the gear, area and effort information for the TIP. The average time required to collect this effort information is 10 minutes. The total industry burden of this program is estimated to be 750 hours, i.e., 4,500 x 10 minutes/60 minutes /interview = 750.The direct burden to the fishing industry is the time it takes to respond to the interview questions and no separate reporting or recordkeeping is required.

The TIP is a dockside interview and length-frequency sampling program primarily (roughly 99%) for commercial fisheries; however, recreationally caught fish are occasionally sampled to provide length/weight information for aging analysis. The interview takes a relatively small amount of time; however, sampling the catch takes considerably longer, generally in the range of 1 to 3 hours depending on catch size. The sampling of the catch generally occurs at the purchasing dealer’s location and does not require the presence of the captain or crew or fish house personnel except that the port agent obtains a copy of the landings invoice or “trip ticket” from the dealer.

The approximate number of interview responses increases by 400 more interviews than the previous estimate of 4,100. The burden on industry has remained relatively constant although future recommendations from stock assessment reviews may cause this to change

Coastal Fisheries Dealer Reporting:

The total burden on coastal fisheries dealers is estimated to be 1,223 hours; a total of 50,400 responses from 1,050 dealers is estimated annually (average of close to 37 responses per dealer). In South Carolina an estimated 3,840 reports will be collected from the 80 dealers that have federal permits. It takes less than 10 minutes to log on the system and enter sales receipts. Thus, the total burden is 3,840 x 10 minutes/60 minutes/schedule = 640 hrs. In states other than South Carolina an estimated 46,560 reports will be collected from the 970 dealers that have federal permits. It takes less than 1 minute to conduct data transmissions. Thus, the total estimated burden is 46,560 x 1 minutes/60 minutes/schedule = 776 hrs.

Mackerel Reporting (non-gillnet):

The total burden hours to monitor the king and Spanish mackerel quotas is estimated to be 443 hours. During the past several years, about 95 dealers have been selected to report each year in the Gulf of Mexico. Under the new rule, weekly reporting will be required. Because the quotas are usually reached before the entire 12 month season is over, only about 7 months of reporting (28 reports) will actually be submitted. The average time per report is less than 10 minutes because many dealers do not always purchase mackerel and when no purchases are made, only a no-purchase report is required. The total Gulf of Mexico burden hours are estimated to be 443 hours annually (i.e., 95 dealers x 28 reports/dealer (2,660 reports) x 10 minutes/60 minutes per report).

Mackerel Reporting (Gillnet)

In addition to the weekly mackerel reports for the western Gulf of Mexico and the south Atlantic, daily reporting will be implemented under the new rule for the southwest Florida area. A quota has been established for the runaround gillnet fishery in this area. Because this type of gear can catch large quantities of fish with a single set, more frequent monitoring will be implemented. Two forms are used, one for vessels to report and one for dealer reporting. Only 7 dealers reported in 2011. They will submit approximately 210 reports in total. There are between 12 to15 vessels that use gillnets, but not all of the vessels fish each year (in 2011, six vessels reported). Based on the most recent numbers, they will only submit approximately 14 reports per year each; approximately 84 in total. (6 x 14). The reporting burden is estimated at 10 minutes per form. The total burden is estimated at 49 hours (i.e., 294 (210 + 84) reports x 10 minutes/60 minutes/report = 49 hrs.).

Wreckfish Dealer Reporting:

On average 40 dealers held wreckfish permits during the 5 year from 2007 to 2011. There were 2 dealers that handled wreckfish during that time period. Under the new rule, an average of 40 reports will be received each year, and the estimated time required for a dealer to complete a weekly report when fish are purchased is 10 minutes. The burden from these reports is 7 hours (40 reports x 10 minutes/60 minutes/report = 7). On average dealers will submit 268 forms where no purchases were reported. It is estimated to take about 3 minutes for non-purchasing reports and the burden is estimated at 13 hours. The burden for no-purchase reporting is 13 hours (268 reports x 3 minutes/60 minutes/report = 13 hours).

The increase in the number of responses from the previous estimates is 6. The increase in the burden hours from previous estimates is 12.

Miscellaneous Reporting:

There are 4 miscellaneous reporting requirements that are included in this family of forms. The rock shrimp and golden crab dealer reporting requirements are not utilized, but an estimated burden of 15 hours per fishery is included in the event the state fishery agencies cannot provide the data (an estimate of 60 dealers is used at 15 minutes per form which equals 15 hours per fishery). Likewise, Federal regulations include reporting requirements for coral harvested in Puerto Rico. The burden for this reporting is estimated to be 16 hours (64 submissions at 15 minutes per report).

Vessel Inventory:

Lastly, hours are included for the annual vessel inventory that is conducted by the SEFSC. Only a small percent of the commercial vessels need to be interviewed and this number, on average, is about 100 vessels. It takes only about 5 minutes to collect the 3 pieces of information on each vessel, for a total burden of 8 hours per year (100 x 5 minutes/60 minutes = 8 hours).

13. Provide an estimate of the total annual cost burden to the respondents or record-keepers resulting from the collection.

There is no cost to respondents for this collection. Dealer reports are submitted electronically, and other information is collected in person.

14. Provide estimates of annualized cost to the Federal government.

The cost to the Federal government is largely salaries and benefits of the port agents that are employed to transcribe the data onto the appropriate forms. Twenty port agents are employed in the southeast; 5 of them are employed full-time in the collection of general canvass and shrimp statistics. The total salary cost of these employees is about $440,000. The remaining 15 port agents are employed full-time in TIP data collection at a total cost of $1,324,750. Printing and reproduction costs are about $3,000 per year, which includes the cost of the postage-paid envelopes. The cost of data entry for the shrimp statistics and TIP data are included in the salaries of the port agents because they enter the data they collect. The data entry for the quota monitoring data is very small and is done by staff as part of their other duties. These costs are probably not more than $1 to $2 thousand per year.

Total government costs: $1,769,750.

15. Explain the reasons for any program changes or adjustments reported.

The total annual burden hours estimate of 3,165 represents a net increase of 1,623 hours in the reporting burden for this PRA request from the previous burden of 1,542 hours. The total annual responses estimate of 61,046 represents a net increase of 47,129 responses from the previous 13,917 estimated responses. Respondents: dealer respondents are estimated to increase by 700.

Program changes:

The burden hours have increased by 1,623 because:

1. Under the new rule any dealer who is the first point of sale of a federally managed species (buying fishing from a fisherman not another dealer) will need to get a federal dealer permit and make weekly reports electronically. Thus this assumption is based on a large number of state dealers who handle a very small percentage of federally managed species might get a federal permit and be affected by this collection. The new estimates are high to account for that assumption. It is expected that many dealers will not get a federal dealer permit and will not become the first point of sale for federally managed species.

2. Under the new rule, mackerel non-gillnet dealer reports will change from monthly to weekly; gillnet reports, from weekly to daily.

16. For collections whose results will be published, outline the plans for tabulation and publication.

Results from the data collection using the forms in this information collection are not planned for publication.

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.

Table 1. Estimated number of respondents and total burden hours for dealer/interview family of forms.

Activity	# Respondents	# Responses	Time / Response	Total Burden
General Canvass	0	0	0	0
Shrimp Dealers*	700 (est.)	0	0	0
Shrimp Interviews*	2,198 (est.)	2,600	10 min	433
Trip Interview Program*	2,895 (est.)	4,500	10 min	750
Coastal Fisheries Dealer ** Reporting non South Carolina	970	46,560	1 min	776
Coastal Fisheries Dealer ** Reporting South Carolina	80	3,840	10 min	640
Mackerel Dealer Reporting* (non- gillnet)- Gulf	95	2,660	10 min	443
Mackerel Dealer Reporting* (gillnet)	7	210	10 min	35
Mackerel Vessel Reporting ** (gillnet)	6	84	10 min	14
Wreckfish Dealer Reporting*	20	40	10 min	7
Wreckfish Dealer No-purchase Reporting	20	268	3 min	13
Rock Shrimp***		60	15 min	15
Golden Crab Dealers***		60	15 min	15
Coral Dealers***		64	15 min	16
Vessel Operational Units***		100	5 min	8
Totals	6,149 unduplicated (not including the 700 with zero burden)****	61,046		3,165

*Based on estimates from number of respondents and responses from five year average 2007-2011.

**Based on estimates from the number of active federally permitted dealers and dealers that may be added after implementation of the proposed rule, RIN 0648-BD12.

***Minimal number of estimate hours reserved as a safeguard in the event that the states failed to collect the necessary landings statistics.

****Adding dealer respondents in this column yields 1,192, but in actuality there are 1,050 dealers, each reporting on more than one type of fishery purchase.

12