FR 2025-05484

The document at hand is a notification put forth by the Department of Commerce, in partnership with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), seeking public comments on a proposed information collection activity. This initiative is focused on a registration form necessary for participation in workshops tailored to the Hawaii and American Samoa longline fisheries. These workshops aim to educate vessel operators on safe handling, release, and identification practices concerning protected species in these regions. Such training is legally mandated, allowing operators to maintain their fishing permits by complying with specific federal regulations.

Summary of the Document

The essence of this notice is to garner feedback from the public before submitting the proposed information collection to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for approval. This feedback is crucial as it opens a dialogue with the public on the necessity, functionality, and structure of the form. The public has a window of 60 days to submit their comments, which will aid in refining the proposal before final OMB evaluation.

Significant Issues and Concerns

Several issues arise from the document that merit attention:

1. OMB Control Number Clarity: The document references an OMB Control Number as "0648-xxxx," which appears incomplete, potentially leading to confusion regarding the identification of this new collection.

2. Complex Language: The document references "interaction mitigation techniques for sea turtles, seabirds, and other protected species," which may prove difficult for the general public to understand. Simplifying this terminology could enhance public comprehension and participation.

3. Cost Burden Estimate: An estimated cost burden of $409 is mentioned without a detailed breakdown or thorough justification. Understanding how these costs are calculated would provide greater transparency and accuracy.

4. In-Person Submission Process: While mentioning the possibility of submitting forms "in-person," the document fails to clarify the specific locations or procedures for these submissions, leaving room for logistical confusion.

5. Confidentiality Concerns: The document acknowledges the potential public availability of personal identifying information included in comments. This might discourage individuals from participating in the commenting process due to privacy concerns.

6. Response Time Justification: An estimated response time of 4 minutes per individual is highly specific yet lacks clarity on how this figure was derived, raising questions about its accuracy.

Broad Public Impact

The document has significant implications for the public, particularly those involved in maritime and fishing activities in the Pacific Islands region. The call for comments provides an opportunity for the public to shape policies that can influence environmental conservation efforts and operational regulations. However, issues related to confidentiality and complex language might deter participation, potentially excluding important feedback from those most affected.

Impact on Specific Stakeholders

For stakeholders such as vessel operators and owners in the Hawaii and American Samoa longline fisheries, this proposal is particularly pertinent. Compliance with workshop training requirements directly affects their ability to maintain operational permits. The workshops aim to align fishing operations with conservation goals, thus impacting their day-to-day activities significantly.

Educational outreach and participation mechanics, such as offering flexible submission options and clear communication, are key to positively affecting these stakeholders. Ensuring that all related processes are as clear and accessible as possible will enhance compliance and foster a cooperative relationship between regulatory entities and the fishing community.

In conclusion, while this document represents an essential step in marine and environmental conservation efforts, clear addressing of the listed concerns could lead to more robust and meaningful public engagement, ultimately enhancing the effectiveness of the proposed workshops and the policies they support.

In reviewing the document, there is a singular monetary reference made, which pertains to the estimated total annual cost to the public amounting to $409. This estimate appears under the section discussing the data collected through the registration and training processes related to the Pacific Islands Protected Species Workshop. This workshop is a requirement for operators and owners of Hawaii and American Samoa longline fishing vessels. The document clearly lists this as a financial burden to the public, albeit a relatively modest one.

However, the document does not provide a detailed breakdown or justification of this $409 cost estimate, and this lack of detail relates directly to one of the identified issues. It is important for financial estimates in regulatory notices such as this to be transparent and justified to ensure public understanding and acceptance. When there is a financial implication, particularly involving public funds or in this case, an expense burden on individuals and small businesses, clarity on how these costs are derived is essential for informed public comment and trust in the process.

The estimated cost is likely an aggregation of individual expenses that respondents might incur while participating in the workshop registration and certification process. This can potentially include costs related to accessing the registration platform, whether that involves internet fees for the digital form submissions or potential transportation costs for in-person submissions. However, the document fails to provide specific insights into these potential cost contributing factors.

Given the issues identified, the public may benefit from a clearer explanation of the financial components involved in the $409 cost estimate. Such details could include itemized expected costs—perhaps, breaking down digital access costs versus those of physical attendance if applicable. Ultimately, refining the detail around financial estimates can enhance the quality and usefulness of public feedback while providing the department with more actionable insights in refining their information collection strategy.