0016 SS Part A 081616

SUPPORT STATEMENT

FEDERAL FISHERIES LOGBOOKS

SOUTHEAST FAMILY OF FORMS

OMB NUMBER 00648-0016

A. JUSTIFICATION

Introduction

The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has been delegated the authority and responsibility for stewardship of the Nation’s marine resources. This authority was first granted in the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (FCMA) of 1976. The reauthorization of the FCMA in 2006 continued and in some ways extended this authority. Under this authority the Secretary of Commerce, and his designee, NMFS, has promulgated separate rules that require specific types of record keeping and data submissions. These data collection/submission regulations are intended to provide reliable and accurate information from the fishing industry and communities that support scientifically based management actions to achieve the stewardship responsibilities.

Currently, there are six separate logbook forms included in the Southeast family of forms and actively being used by the NMFS to collect data from fishermen. It should be noted that several of the forms are used for multiple fisheries regulations. For example, the data required by the South Atlantic snapper grouper, the shark, the migratory coastal pelagic and the Gulf reef fish management plans have been combined and are reported on a single form. In addition to the six forms, one data collection program (headboat survey trip report) uses an electronic data collection, 4 additional forms that were included in this family, but are currently inactive and no past reporting burden is associated with them. The 4 inactive forms are; (1) the logbooks for charter boats, (2) the form used to report the harvest of octocoral. (3) South Atlantic Rock Shrimp and Peneid Shrimp and Gulf of Mexico shrimp vessel logbook (shrimp logbook) (4) Aquacultured live rock reporting form.

The six reporting forms in the logbook family of forms are:

• Gulf of Mexico reef fish, South Atlantic snapper-grouper, mackerel, shark, Atlantic dolphin / wahoo logbook with cost-earnings data section (coastal logbook)

• Annual fixed cost survey for vessels required to use the coastal logbook

• Supplemental discard form for use with the coastal logbook

• Wreckfish logbook form

• Golden crab logbook form

• Colombian Treaty Waters logbook form

A brief description of the 7 active data collection programs follows.

Headboat Survey Trip Report

Fishing from headboats is considered recreational fishing; however, because this type of fishing represents a relatively small, but specialized sector of recreational fishing and the data collection of information from this sector by the Southeast Fisheries Science Center (SEFSC) predates the NOAA Fisheries’ Marine Recreational Fisheries Statistical Survey (MRFSS) methodology, it has not been included in the MRFSS data collection, OMB Control No. 0648-0052. To collect catch and effort data from this fishery, a separate logbook program has been established in the Southeast Region to capture more precise information than the MRFSS for this fishery. Total catch and participation estimates for all headboat fishing activity are made from the headboat survey. The need for good quality, representative catch per unit effort (CPUE) and species composition data from this sector of the recreational fishery is the primary reason that this program was implemented.

NOAA Fisheries is a partner in two state-federal cooperative data collection programs. One program, the Atlantic Coastal Cooperative Statistics Program (ACCSP), covers the Atlantic coast and the other program, the Fisheries Information Network (FIN), covers the fisheries in the Gulf of Mexico. A goal of both programs is to standardize and improve collection of data in both geographic areas).

In 2001, a pilot study was conducted in South Carolina, to compare two methodologies to collect catch and fishing effort data from the for-hire sector. The pilot study indicated that the survey methodology would provide accurate estimates of catch and fishing effort, and was less burdensome to the industry than trip reports, but produced imprecise estimates of fishing effort for the headboat fleet. Although the trip reports provided more precise estimates for the headboat fishery, the FIN Committee and the ACCSP Coordinating Council decided to endorse the survey methodology. The Committee and Council reasoned that the trip reports provided precise estimates because the trip reports were mandatory in South Carolina. However, trip reports were not mandatory in other states, and the process to obtain legislation requiring mandatory reporting in all states could take years to implement.

Trip reports, now collected electronically as part of the Headboat Survey, have been used to collect catch and fishing effort data from the headboat portion of the for-hire sector since 1972. These trip report data have been extremely valuable in stock assessments of reef fishes and pelagic species in the southeast region (North Carolina through Texas).

Gulf of Mexico Reef Fish, South Atlantic Snapper-Grouper, king and Spanish Mackerel, Shark, Atlantic Dolphin / Wahoo logbook (coastal logbook)

The program to collect logbook data in the Gulf of Mexico was initiated in April 1990. The purpose of the program is to provide critically needed data on individual fishing trips for species in this important management unit. The diversity of gear in this fishery (i.e., longline, hook and line, traps, spears, and buoy) and the variety of species increases the need to have detailed CPUE and species composition data. Furthermore, because species in this management unit are not migratory, it is important that detailed information on the CPUE and species composition are collected by area, so that assessments can be made for major reef complexes to determine how fishing effort is affecting these complexes over time.

This logbook program includes only fishermen who have been issued a Federal vessel permit and are required to sell their catches to established (permitted) seafood dealers. Consequently, for-hire recreational fishermen do not submit logbooks for the Gulf reef fish fishery (see the description for the for-hire headboat catch reports above).

The logbook program for the South Atlantic snapper-grouper fishery was initiated in January 1992. The purpose of this program, as for the Gulf reef fish program, is to collect data on fishing effort, CPUE and species composition. The snapper-grouper fishery is similar to the fishery for reef fish in the Gulf of Mexico; consequently, the logbook forms used for the two fisheries are the same.

Although sharks are part of the Highly Migratory Species fishery management plan, and the reporting burden for these species are covered by OMB Control No. 0648-0371, the fishing operations for large and small coastal sharks are very similar to the fishing methods for Gulf reef fish and South Atlantic snapper-grouper species. Thus, the coastal logbook form (OMB Control No. 0648-0016) includes space for fishermen to report the catch, effort and area of catch for coastal sharks. The Pelagic shark fisherman will continue to report using the highly migratory species logbook (OMB Control No. (0648-0371).

As with the fisheries in OMB Control No. 0648-0016, the purpose of the logbook program for king and Spanish mackerel is to collect catch, effort and area for this fishery in both the Gulf of Mexico and the South Atlantic. The assessments for king and Spanish mackerel were improved by the availability of this CPUE data. There are other species in this fishery management plan; however, logbook reporting for these species is not required at this time.

Cost-earnings data section (20% sample size)

The purpose of this data collection is to provide economic information about commercial fishermen in Federal waters, which is necessary for the agency to address National Standard 8 of the FCMA. The reporting form requests information about operating costs associated with the individual fishing trips. The intent is to use the cost information associated with the effort data for individual trips to better understand how the cost of fishing varies with changes in fishing effort and the impacts of management measures on fishing communities. With a better (quantitative) understanding of these relationships, NMFS can provide better estimates of the potential impacts of management regulations on fishing effort.

Annual fixed cost survey for vessels required to use the coastal logbook

This survey is associated with the cost-earnings data collection. The purpose of this data collection is to provide information on the annual fixed costs (i.e., expenditures that are made infrequently throughout the year or only once per year) incurred by the commercial fishermen in Federal waters. The survey instrument is sent to the same fishermen that are required to report their cost data for each trip.

Supplemental discard reporting logbook for vessels required to use the coastal logbook

This form was developed and initiated in August 2001, as a supplemental form to the Gulf of Mexico reef fish, South Atlantic snapper-grouper, shark and mackerel logbook form. The purpose of this instrument is to have the fishermen record the species and numbers of discards that they had for each trip. The form also asks the fishermen to report any interactions with marine mammals, endangered species or sea birds that they incurred on each trip. The purpose of this data collection is to collect information on the types and numbers of animals (species) that fishermen in these coastal fisheries discard or in the case of endangered species and marine mammals with which they interact, so the agency is able address National Standard 9, which deals with bycatch. This data collection is conducted as a supplement to the regular logbook reporting so that the catch, effort and area of fishing can be associated with the discards and/or interactions.

Wreckfish logbook

The wreckfish fishery is part of the South Atlantic snapper-group management unit, but because there were concerns about the status of the wreckfish stock, specific management measures were implemented to collect data from vessels that harvest this species. Although separate logbooks are used for this fishery, they require the same basic CPUE and fishing location data as the other logbooks in the family, but the program also collects information on shares of the Individual Transferable Quota used during each trip.

Golden Crab logbook

Fisheries for this species of deep water crabs occur in both the Gulf of Mexico and the South Atlantic. Logbook reporting requirements have been implemented at the request of the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council under advice from their Advisory Panel. This logbook program is designed to collect the quantity of golden crab that are caught in designated areas. The form is distinct from the other forms authorized by regulations (50 CFR Part 622) because lines of traps are used to catch these species and the amount of catch needs to be reported by line instead of for an entire trip.

Colombian Treaty Waters

This Federal reporting requirement is part of the negotiated treaty with Colombia that permits U.S. vessels to fish in Colombian waters. Under that agreement, U.S. fishermen are required to submit a logbook to NMFS for every trip that they make in Colombian waters. NMFS forwards those forms to the Colombian Government for their use in monitoring the fishing activity in their waters.

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

The catch, effort and landings statistics that will be collected by the vessel logbooks are necessary to provide NMFS with comprehensive and accurate data to estimate fishing mortality. Without these data, a significant increase in the uncertainty of stock assessment analyses is likely to occur and the error bounds around the stock benchmarks, such as maximum sustainable yield, will be unacceptably large.

Another compelling reason for NMFS’ logbook program is to provide comprehensive, consistent catch and effort data throughout the entire Southeast Region (i.e., North Carolina to the Texas-Mexican border). As will be discussed in the response to Question 4, landings statistics by vessel and trip are collected by state trip ticket program. The logbook data are also collected at the trip level; however, because only some of the states in the SE Region have fully operational trip ticket programs or require the detailed effort information necessary for calculation of CPUE, it is necessary for NMFS to institute a comprehensive program that assures the collection of consistent CPUE data throughout the jurisdiction of the respective fishery management plans.

Overall, the data collection for stock assessments is authorized as part of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, as amended. Specifically, the reporting and record keeping requirements for OMB Control No. 0648-0016 are authorized in 50 CFR 622.5, Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic. The authority for South Atlantic snapper-grouper, Gulf reef fish, king/Spanish mackerel, golden crab, and wreckfish reporting is in section 622.5(a); for the headboat catch reporting, section 622.5(b); for the octocoral and live rock reporting, section 622.5(d); for the Colombian Waters Treaty reporting, section 300.124(b).

All vessels with permits required in 50 CFR 622.4 are considered for selection, but reporting is required only when the vessel is selected by NMFS’ Science and Research Director, Southeast Fisheries Science Center. For some of the reporting forms, all permit holders are selected, while for other forms, statistical selections are made.

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 data requested on logbooks are used by various offices of NMFS, Regional Fishery Management Council staff, the U.S. Coast Guard and state fishery agencies under contract to NMFS to develop, implement and monitor fishery management strategies. Analyses and summarizations of logbook data are used by NMFS, the Regional Councils, the Departments of State and Commerce, OMB, the fishing industry, Congressional staff and the public to answer questions about the nature of the Nation’s fishery resources. Information on endangered species or marine mammals and their incidental take is requested in those fisheries where such interactions are likely to occur. These data assist NMFS meet its requirements under the Marine Mammal Protection Act and the Endangered Species Act. If reports of such occurrences are common, NMFS can proceed to minimize the harvest of such species through the promulgation of regulations.

These data serve as input for a variety of uses, such as: biological analyses and stock assessments; E.O. 12291¹ regulatory impact analyses; quota and allocation selections and monitoring; economic profitability profiles; trade and import tariff decisions; allocations of grant funds among states; identify ecological interactions among species. NMFS would be significantly hindered in its ability to fulfill the majority of its scientific research and fishery management missions without these data.

The logbook family of forms has evolved as a means of collecting data from specific user groups within fisheries that are managed under federally implemented fishery management plans (FMP). The Southeast Fisheries Science Center has the responsibility for both preparation of stock assessments (estimation of maximum sustainable yield and/or other indexes of biomass) and collection of the scientific data that are required to perform the assessments. A secondary data collection responsibility is to provide information that is necessary to routinely monitor and evaluate the conditions in the fisheries under Federal management.

Similar data elements are required for most of the logbook forms and/or electronic reporting systems in this family, although a few variables may be specific to one fishery or type of management technique controlling harvest.

a) Information such as name and address of operator and owner is used to identify the respondent and the legal entity controlling the fishing practices of the vessel. The legal entity requirement is essential in monitoring the compliance of the reporting requirement, where revocations of the operators permit or fines are involved. Because many vessels are owned by corporations, identification of owner and operator on the logbook form allows NMFS to sanction the company as well as the individual vessel operator as necessary or required by the regulations. Information on the permit is obviously essential to monitoring reporting compliance.

b) Data on date of departure, date returned, days fished, duration of tows or sets, units of gear and mesh size used are all designed to quantify actual fishing effort. Fishing effort is needed to standardize differences in productivity among vessels or fishing grounds by establishing a rate of catch per unit time. These data allow comparisons over time, area and gear type of catches made by a variety of harvesters. Comparisons of catch and CPUE over time are significant indicators of the biological status of the fisheries. Declining CPUE, especially if data on fishing effort are sufficiently detailed to adjust for changes in effort, can provide critical information on the status of the stock, i.e., that the level of harvest is beyond the level that is sustainable by growth and reproduction of the stock.

c) Area fished, depth of fishing, latitude and longitude are variables that are used to establish fishing locations. This information can be related to other oceanographic and biological information to predict species availability and likely future abundance. For example, location of capture can be correlated to sea surface temperature measured by satellite to predict possible migration patterns. In addition, area or zone fished is used to cross reference locations where fishing is not permissible (such as closed spawning areas).

d) Species information such as landings, discards and sizes of fish is the basic measure of fishing success, from which fishermen, biologists and economists infer conclusions about the status of the fishery. Landings information is also needed because controlling the quantity of fish harvested is often the means for ensuring that harvests can be replenished over time.

e) Name of buyer, dealer number and port of landing are data used to cross reference the quantity of fish caught with the quantity that is handled (processed) by the market. The important cross reference is between the total amount of catch, and the respective sizes of individual fish. It would be impossible for fishermen to measure individual fish as they are being caught and stored on board the vessels. However, many species of fish, especially the large pelagic species, are individually weighted by the dealers and these weights are recorded as part of the sales transactions. By knowing the dealer that purchased the fish, cross references can be made between data submitted by the dealers and the data from the logbooks. Combining the data in this manner provides greater precision on the CPUE estimates and more information on the sizes of catches by location and time.

f) Trip cost information such as fuel, tackle, bait, ice, labor, and miscellaneous expenses associated with the effort data for individual trips is use for evaluating regulatory proposals and to better understand how the cost of fishing varies with changes in fishing effort. With a better (quantitative) understanding of these relationships, the NMFS can provide better estimates of the potential impacts of management regulations on fishing effort.

g). A separate form is required for many of the logbook reporting forms in 0648-0016 when a vessel does not fish during an entire calendar month. These “no-fishing” forms are necessary to assure the NMFS that the vessel did not fish instead of failing to report. The information on the no-fishing form is minimal - i.e., only the vessel ID, vessel name, the month in which the vessel did not fish and the permits that vessel has been issued (a check box is provided for ease of identifying the permits). The no-fishing forms are located in the back of the logbook booklets and are to be submitted via mail in the self-addressed, stamped envelopes provided by the NMFS. Because of the nature of the reporting, no-fishing reports are not required for the headboat trip report, the live rock report, the annual fixed cost survey, the cost-earnings form (this information is included on the regular coastal logbook form) and the supplemental discard form.

h) The South Atlantic wreckfish individual transferable quota (ITQ) program, implemented in 1992, requires fishermen (and dealers) to submit 100 lb and 500 lb coupons to help NMFS track shareholders’ individual quotas and the overall wreckfish quota. Coupons are distributed to wreckfish shareholders before the beginning of each fishing year. Shareholders give part of the coupon to the fishermen and part to the dealer. The fishermen must submit their portion of the coupon with their wreckfish logbook report and the dealers must submit their portion of the coupon with their monthly wreckfish dealer report (OMB Control No. 0648-0013).

NMFS and the respective state fishery agency 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 #10 of this Supporting Statement for more information on confidentiality and privacy. The information collection is designed to yield data that meet all applicable information quality guidelines. Prior to dissemination, the information will be subject to quality control measures and a pre-dissemination review pursuant to Section 515 of the 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 electronic reporting is being utilized only to report the detailed, trip level data for one of the seven active logbook programs of the SEFSC (Headboat survey trip report). The SEFSC is investigating various methods of recording and reporting CPUE data from vessels of the other six fisheries. However, the large number of vessels involved in the affected fisheries and the cost per participant for the electronic and telecommunication equipment must be considered before mandating its use by fishermen. These costs significantly limit the options available for electronic reporting by vessels. The SEFSC will accept any data in an electronic format that can be easily read and inputted into the existing data base management system employed by the SEFSC.

4. Describe efforts to identify duplication.

The Magnuson-Stevens Act's operational guidelines require each FMP to evaluate existing state and federal laws that govern the fisheries in question, and the findings are made part of each FMP. Each Fishery Management Council membership is comprised of state and federal officials responsible for resource management in their area. This joint participation enables identification of other collec­tions that may be gathering the same or similar information. In addition, each FMP undergoes extensive public comment periods where potential applicants review the proposed permit application requirements. Therefore, NMFS is confident it would be aware of similar collections if they existed.

Detailed information on CPUE, effort and species composition by gear and area is not available from other sources. Some states, notably Florida, Georgia, Louisiana and North Carolina, have programs to collect landings by species for individual fishing trips (i.e., operational trip ticket programs), but these programs do not include the detailed information on location and effort that are required in the reporting requirements for this OMB request. Furthermore, these programs collect the data from seafood processors, and not fishermen, whereas logbooks are submitted directly by the fishermen.

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

Because all applicants are considered small busi­nesses, separate requirements based on size of business have not been developed. Only the minimum data to meet the analytical needs of the SEFSC's assessment scientists are requested from all applicants.

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

The consequence of not having detailed CPUE and species composition data is to increase the uncertainty associated with the stock assessments that are the basis for sound management decisions. As with any statistical analysis, the confidence limits (bounds) for specific points will be large if there is significant uncertainty in the data. With the availability of the logbook data, the sample sizes for the various stratifications of gear and area are sufficiently large to reduce the uncertainty in the data to acceptable levels.

The logbook data also provide critical information on the type and amount of effort. Without these data, there is no way of knowing whether changes in total catch are due to changes in fishing effort or changes in the abundance of the resource, or both.

If the economic data (cost, earnings, and fixed cost) were collected less frequently or not at all, then economists would be less able to estimate the effects of regulations on financial performance or fishermen’s expected reactions to additional regulations. Proposed regulations for the snapper-grouper and mackerel fisheries would continue to be debated with limited economic information. Another consequence of not having representative economic data could be judicial remand of conservation regulations challenged on grounds of inadequate analysis of economic impact to individual firms.

Not having discard data would also to increase the uncertainty associated with the stock assessments. Furthermore, there is a lack of scientifically collected information on discards in many of these fisheries and consequently, it is difficult to determine whether discarding is a significant problem. Clearly, the data from observers in other fisheries, notably the pelagic longline fishery, show that discards are substantial and that their occurrence is variable. Consequently, NMFS feels that it is necessary to increase the collection of discard data for coastal fisheries.

For the Colombian catch and effort programs, the United States cannot meet its international commitments without the data from this program.

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

The reporting regulations require fishermen to submit completed logbooks for all trips or sets for several reasons. First, it is critical that these data be timely. For fisheries that are significantly overfished, it is important to monitor changes in fishing mortality. Secondly, the renewal of Federal vessel permits is predicated on compliance with the reporting requirements, and timely data are needed to determine whether fishermen are complying on a regular basis. Thirdly, quality control of the logbook data is better when the review and verification process is closer to the actual time that fishing occurred.

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 March 9, 2016 solicited public comment on this collection. None was received.

Because these data collection programs are part of fishery management plans, all aspects of the programs are reviewed by both statistical and constituent advisory committees. Furthermore, comments and suggestions from fishermen required to report are routinely submitted and these are reviewed and considered. Experience with the various programs, some of which have been operating since 1981, provides a continual feedback mechanism to NMFS on issues and concerns to the applicants. NMFS directly asked and received comments from our partners at the South Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico fisheries management councils, summarized below, on (a) Timeliness of the current paper commercial fisheries logbooks: These take too long and result in too many errors; (b) Reporting of Area fished and Gear used in the current paper commercial fisheries: logbooks lack the specific levels of detail which is desired for improved fisheries management; (c) Compliance with submissions of the current paper commercial fisheries logbooks should be improved; (d) Economic reporting on the current paper commercial fisheries logbooks could be enhanced if the aggregated expenses categories could be broken down into smaller more detailed categories; (e) Bycatch reporting sub sample should be increased.

To address these views on timeliness, accuracy, and compliance with submissions on the current paper commercial fisheries logbooks, NMFS will continue monitoring the submission of the reports and working with industry to encourage accurate and timely reporting. Procedures include notifying fisherman when reports were expected but not received and quality control checks on the data received.

NMFS has been moving towards more electronic reporting and will continue to do so in the future. NMFS feels that electronic reporting will also help increase timeliness, accuracy, and compliance. Additionally NMFS feels electronic reporting will also address other deficiencies such as sub sample sizes and the collection of data on finer levels of details then can currently be done with the paper forms. Currently only one program covered by this collection utilizes electronic reporting.

At this time NMFS is working on a national level to establish data standards, before electronic reporting is implemented in other program covered by this collection. NMFS recognizes that often fishers participate in multiple fisheries across multiple regions so it is felt future public burden could be reduced if universal data standards are established before rolling out additional electronic data collection programs. NMFS is committed to electronic reporting.

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

There are no payments or other remunerations 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 forms and the logbook cover, data collected via this family of forms are treated in accord with NOAA Administrative Order 216-100, Confidential Fisheries Statistics. Reports are considered confidential under the Trade Secrets Act. In addition, landings statistics are considered to be in an entrepreneurial capacity and will be exempt from the Privacy Act concerns. It is the policy of the NMFS that confidential data are not to be released to non-authorized users, other than in aggregate form, as the Magnuson-Stevens Act protects (in perpetuity) the confidentiality of those submitting data. Whenever data are requested, the NMFS ensures that information identifying the pecuniary business activity of a particular vessel is not identified.

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.

To comply with the reporting requirements, fishermen are required to submit either a fishing log where they report the catch, effort and area data, or a no-fishing log, where they state that they did not fish during the specified calendar month. The number of respondents, the estimated number of responses, the time per response and the total burden for fishing and no-fishing forms for each of the nine fisheries for which logbook reporting is active and the three fisheries for which logbook reporting is inactive are presented in the following table:

Fishery	No. of Respon-dents	Number of responses, hr/response, total time (hours)						Total Burden (Hours)
		Fishing Responses	Time per response	Total Time (Hours)	No-fishing Responses	Time per response	Total Time
Headboat**	142	26,873	10 min.	4,479	1,435	2 min.	48	4,527
Golden Crab*	11	270	10 min.	45	62	2 min.	2	47
Coastal logbook*	3,475	35,929	10 min.	5,988	30,430	2 min.	1,014	7,002
Wreckfish**	6	34	10 min.	6	19	2 min.	40min	7
Colombian log***	0	0	18 min.	0	N/A	2 min.	N/A	NA
Discard*	505	12,611	15 min.	3,153	N/A	N/A	N/A	3,153
Economic cost/trip*	700	11,713	10 min.	1,952	N/A	N/A	N/A	1,952
Annual fixed cost*	700	700	30 min.	350	N/A	N/A	N/A	350
Live Rock***	0	0	15 min.	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Shrimp***	0	0	10 min.	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Charter boat***	0	0	10 min.	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Octocoral***	0	0	10 min.	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Total	3,634(un-duplicated)	88,130		15,973	31,946		1,065	17,038

* 5 year average (2010-2014)

** Current estimate

*** Inactive data collection programs

The numbers of respondents, responses and burden hours in the above table are based on the actual reporting activity for these fisheries for the five year average during2010-2014.

There are 15,945 burden hours in the current OMB inventory for this family of forms and the newly estimated burden is17,038. Thus, there is an increase of 1,093hours from the current inventory. The increase can be attributed to seasonal fishing differences.

13. Provide an estimate of the total annual cost burden to the respondents or record-keepers resulting from the collection (excluding the value of the burden hours in #12 above).

There are no anticipated costs beyond the opportunity cost of completing the logbook forms. The fishermen are provided with addressed, postage-paid envelopes that they use to return the completed forms.

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

The annual cost to the Federal government is estimated to be $1,750,000 per year. Many of these programs share resources such as program staff and computer support therefor these calculations were made for all the programs combined , and include a) printing costs which includes the cost of the postage-paid envelopes of approximately $100,000 annually, b) program staff and sight review and data entry of approximately $1,100,000 annually that includes 10 full-time employees and 5 part time contractors, c) form development, and program management costs of approximately $550,000 annually that includes 2 full time employees and approximately 2 contracts for computer related support.

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

Adjustments

The difference between the current inventory of 15,945 and the new estimated burden hours of 17,038 is a net difference of 1,093 hours or approximately 6%. The number of annual burden hours is mainly driven by the number of fishing trips made by the fisherman each year. Seasonal differences are always noticed because many factors such as weather, fuel cost, dock side fish prices, fish migration patterns, the number of fisherman with active permits, and seasonal closures can influence how many fishing trip take place annually. Averages have been used to determine annual estimates.

For the headboat logbook, the average response time has been corrected from 10 minutes overall to 10 minutes for a complete report and 2 minutes for a no-fishing report.

The Colombian Treaty Waters collection has not been active for the past three years; therefore we are removing its burden for this submission.

Previously, one of the logbooks required postage from the respondents, but now all are paid for by NMFS. This reduces the recordkeeping/reporting costs from $13,050 to $0.

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

The results from this collection are expected to be published, but will be used as empirical input to stock assessments, economic analyses, and other analyses of proposed or existing fishery management regulations prepared by the NMFS/SEFC.

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.

The OMB number will be displayed.

18. Explain each exception to the certification statement.

NA.

1 1981 Presidential requirement for cabinet-level Departments to conduct a benefit-cost analysis for major changes in rules.

1