FR 2021-01392

The document from the Federal Register involves a call for public comments on the NOAA's ongoing information collection efforts regarding vessel identification in the West Coast region. This is structured under the Paperwork Reduction Act, aiming to reduce the administrative load on businesses while ensuring effective compliance with fishing laws. The vessel identification requirement mandating boats to display specific numbers visibly is crucial for monitoring and enforcing conservation laws. Through public feedback, NOAA hopes to evaluate the necessity and efficiency of this information collection and investigate ways to reduce the public's reporting burden.

Summary

At its core, this document underscores the importance of the vessel identification process in supporting fishery management and law enforcement. By displaying identification numbers on their vessels, boat owners facilitate law enforcement activities and support compliance with the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. The NOAA takes input from the public on procedural and economic aspects, which might lead to refinements in the processes involved. The deadline for public input is specified, providing a window during which interested parties can voice their opinions or concerns.

Significant Issues and Concerns

There are notable points of concern within the document:

1. Lack of Cost Breakdown: While the document mentions an annual cost of $25,701 to the public, it does not provide details on how this figure is calculated. This leaves the public and stakeholders unclear about the nature of these costs and their applicability.

2. Technical Language: The document refers to specific laws like the Magnuson-Stevens Act using technical jargon, which might not be comprehensible to individuals without prior knowledge or experience in fisheries management or maritime laws.

3. Method of Collection: The document briefly mentions that vessel owners must mark their vessels but fails to provide detailed insights into this requirement's practical side. More information on the implications and processes involved could benefit the respondents.

4. Burden Calculation: The estimated annual burden of 901 hours is mentioned without an explanation of its derivation. This lack of transparency can lead to skepticism regarding the accuracy and fairness of this estimate.

5. Guidance on Providing Feedback: The document's section on public comments is vague, specifying only email submissions without further guidance on formulating or evaluating comments, which might deter public engagement.

Impact on the Public

Broadly, this document may affect the public by potentially altering administrative duties related to vessel identification requirements. The efficiency of fisheries management and regulatory compliance impacts both commercial interests and environmental conservation, benefiting the general public indirectly through sustainable fishery practices.

Impact on Specific Stakeholders

For specific stakeholders like vessel owners and the fishing industry, these requirements are obligatory and undoubtedly affect operational processes. The administrative time and financial cost involved in compliance can be significant, and any changes resulting from this public comment period could either ease these burdens or add further layers of responsibility. Therefore, engaging with this call for comments could allow these stakeholders to influence regulatory adjustments that align better with their operational capacities while maintaining effective environmental oversight. On the other hand, environmental agencies and enforcement bodies may find the vessel identification requirements integral to their monitoring and compliance activities, stressing the need for such regulations to remain robust and effective.

The document in question refers to financial implications associated with the West Coast Region Vessel Identification Requirements under the administration of the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), part of the Department of Commerce. A key financial reference included in the document is the "Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public: $25,701." This cost is linked to the regulatory requirement for fishing vessel owners to mark their vessels with identification numbers, which is necessary for compliance with specific fisheries management programs.

In examining this financial reference, several relevant issues come to light:

Lack of Cost Breakdown and Justification

The document indicates that the estimated cost to the public is $25,701, though it does not provide a detailed breakdown or justification for this amount. Without further details, it is unclear what specific expenses contribute to this total. Insight into whether these costs cover materials, labor, or other associated factors would be beneficial for understanding the financial burden on vessel owners. Such transparency would allow stakeholders to evaluate the fairness and necessity of the estimated financial impact.

Understanding Regulatory Compliance Costs

The financial figure reflects a mandatory obligation imposed on certain businesses, specifically those operating fishing vessels. Though the document provides a brief mention of the regulatory framework under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, it lacks comprehensive details about how costs are apportioned across affected parties. Delving deeper into these specifics would enable a more accurate assessment of the cost's justification and its proportional burden on smaller vs. larger operators.

Clarity on Burden Calculation

Accompanying the financial estimate, the document notes an estimated total annual burden of 901 hours, yet it does not clarify how this figure interacts with the $25,701 cost estimate or how it was calculated. This omission leaves stakeholders unable to determine whether the estimated financial cost truly correlates with the time commitments and operational disruptions faced by vessel owners.

The document also lacks explicit guidelines for the public to submit comments on these financial aspects effectively. Without clearer instructions, potential feedback on the financial estimates might be limited, potentially hindering the opportunity for adjustment or reconsideration of the cost estimates in response to public and stakeholder insights.

Overall, improved transparency around how financial implications are formulated, alongside clearer channels for public engagement, could enhance the document's utility and efficacy in assessing regulatory impacts within the West Coast fishing industry.