Vessel Monitoring Systems; Requirements for Type-Approval of Cellular Transceiver Units, 40915-40926 [2020-14600]
Download as PDF
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 8, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
partnered to overcharge for transport, as
long as they offered a rate that was
slightly under the CEA rate. And,
‘‘because the Commission’s rules
disrupt[ed] accurate price signals,
tandem switching and transport
providers for access stimulation [had]
no economic incentives to meaningfully
compete on price.’’ The result was that
‘‘ ‘AT&T and other carriers routinely
discover that carriers located in remote
areas with long transport distances and
high transport rates enter into
arrangements with high volume service
providers . . . for the sole purpose of
extracting inflated intercarrier
compensation rates due to the distance
and volume of traffic.’ ’’ Based on these
changed circumstances, we find that we
properly determined ‘‘that the public
interest will be served by changing any
mandatory use requirement for traffic
bound to access-stimulating LECs to be
voluntary usage’’ and ‘‘that access
stimulation presents a reasonable
circumstance for departing from the
mandatory use policy.’’ Thus, although
the mandatory use policy requiring IXCs
to use SDN and Aureon for traffic
terminating at participating telephone
companies may have been in the public
interest in 1988, it is not in the public
interest today with respect to traffic
terminating at access-stimulating LECs.
50. Aureon also claims that the
Commission should have used a ‘‘less
restrictive and less burdensome’’
measure when it modified the section
214 authorizations. We disagree. Rather
than eliminating the mandatory use
provisions altogether, an option that we
considered, we modified them only
with respect to traffic terminating at
access-stimulating LECs and only
because doing so was necessary to
effectuate our other access stimulation
rules. As such, we adopted an approach
that is narrowly tailored and well suited
to the problem of the price umbrellas
created by mandatory use that accessstimulating intermediate providers and
their partners were using to their
benefit. In the Access Arbitrage Order.
we found that the ‘‘vast majority’’ of
access-stimulation traffic was routed to
LECs that subtend Aureon and SDN.
Given that finding, we decided to
modify Aureon’s and SDN’s section 214
authorizations to enable IXCs to use
whatever intermediate access provider
an access-stimulating LEC that
otherwise subtends Aureon or SDN
chooses. We reasoned that doing so will
allow IXCs to choose more efficient and
cost-effective routing options—such as
direct connections—to reach accessstimulating LECs. We do not see—and
Aureon has not suggested—a ‘‘less
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:59 Jul 07, 2020
Jkt 250001
restrictive’’ mechanism for achieving
our goal.
51. Finally, Aureon’s assertions
regarding the importance of the
mandatory use provision are belied by
information in the record indicating that
traffic often bypasses its network. Thus,
we find no merit in Aureon’s request
that we reconsider our decision to
modify its section 214 authorization.
IV. Procedural Matters
52. Paperwork Reduction Act
Analysis. This Order on
Reconsideration does not contain any
new or modified information collection
requirements subject to the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104–
13. Thus, it does not contain any new
or modified information collection
burden for small business concerns with
fewer than 25 employees, pursuant to
the Small Business Paperwork Relief
Act of 2002, Public Law 107–198, see 44
U.S.C. 3506(c)(4).
53. Congressional Review Act. The
Commission will not send a copy of this
Order on Reconsideration to Congress
and the Government Accountability
Office pursuant to the Congressional
Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A),
because no rule was adopted or
amended.
54. Regulatory Flexibility Act
Analysis. In the Access Arbitrage Order,
the Commission provided a Final
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis pursuant
to the Regulatory Flexibility Act of
1980, as amended (RFA). We received
no petitions for reconsideration of that
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis. In
this present Order on Reconsideration,
the Commission promulgates no
additional final rules. Our present
action is, therefore, not an RFA matter.
V. Ordering Clauses
55. Accordingly, it is ordered that,
pursuant to sections 1, 2, 4(i), 4(j), 201,
214, 218–220, 251, 252, 403 and 405 of
the Communications Act of 1934, as
amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154(i),
154(j), 201, 214, 218–220, 251, 252, 403,
405, and §§ 1.47(h), 1.429, 63.10 and
64.1195 of the Commission’s rules, 47
CFR 1.47(h), 1.429, 63.10 and 64.1195,
this Order on Reconsideration is
adopted.
56. It is further ordered that the
Petition for Reconsideration filed by
Iowa Network Services, Inc. d/b/a
Aureon Network Services, is dismissed
and, on alternate and independent
grounds, it is denied.
57. It is further ordered that, pursuant
to § 1.103 of the Commission’s rules, 47
CFR 1.103, this Order on
Reconsideration shall be effective upon
release.
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
40915
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene Dortch,
Secretary, Office of the Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020–13183 Filed 7–7–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 600
[Docket No. 200626–0173]
RIN 0648–BJ15
Vessel Monitoring Systems;
Requirements for Type-Approval of
Cellular Transceiver Units
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Vessel Monitoring
System (VMS) program type-approves
enhanced mobile transceiver units
(EMTUs) for use in U.S. fisheries.
Currently, the only approved method for
transferring VMS data from a vessel to
NMFS is by satellite-linked
communication services. This final rule
amends the existing VMS type-approval
regulations to add cellular-based
EMTUs (EMTU-Cs) type-approval
application and testing procedures;
compliance and revocation processes;
and technical, service, and performance
standards. This rule is necessary to
allow for the use of EMTU-Cs and
cellular communication service, in
addition to satellite-only models, in
federally managed fisheries.
DATES: The final rule will be effective
August 7, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the Final
Regulatory Impact Review, Final
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis and the
information collection request
submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) may be obtained at
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/topic/
enforcement#vessel-monitoring. Written
comments regarding the burden-hour
estimates or other aspects of the
collection-of-information requirements
contained in this final rule may be
submitted to the NMFS Office of Law
Enforcement, attention Kelly Spalding,
1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring,
MD 20910, or to OMB by email OIRA_
Submission@omb.eop.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kelly Spalding, Vessel Monitoring
System Program Manager, NMFS: 301–
427–8269 or kelly.spalding@noaa.gov.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\08JYR1.SGM
08JYR1
40916
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 8, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
If Federal fishery regulations require
use of VMS, fishing vessels must have
a NMFS-approved EMTU (or mobile
transmitter unit, although MTUs are no
longer approved for new installations).
EMTUs are affixed to fishing vessels as
required by Federal regulations, and
report GPS locations and potentially
other fisheries information to NMFS.
The EMTU allows the NMFS Office of
Law Enforcement (OLE) to determine
the geographic position of the vessel at
specified intervals or during specific
events, via satellite mobile
communication services (MCSs). These
satellite MCSs and EMTUs send data
securely and at near real-time so that
fisheries management and enforcement
can monitor vessels’ activity as it
occurs.
Fishermen must comply with
applicable Federal fishery VMS
regulations, and in doing so, may select
from a variety of EMTU vendors that
have been approved by NMFS to
participate in the VMS program for
specific fisheries. NMFS uses national
VMS type-approval standards (50 CFR
part 600, subpart Q) to approve an
EMTU, including any installed software,
and associated MCS, collectively
referred to as a bundle, before they are
authorized for use in federally managed
fisheries (79 FR 77399, December 24,
2014).
On October 26, 2018, NMFS
published a proposed rule that would
require owners and operators of
recreational charter vessels and
headboats (for-hire vessels) with Gulf of
Mexico (Gulf) permits for reef fish or
coastal migratory pelagic species to
report GPS vessel location information
to NMFS, among other management
measures (83 FR 54069). NMFS
approved an amendment to the fishery
management plans associated with that
proposed rule, and is nearing
completion of a final rule to implement
those requirements. The Gulf of Mexico
Fishery Management Council
determined that real-time satellite
transmission is not necessary to meet
the requirements for the Gulf for-hire
reporting rule’s vessel monitoring
purposes and that cellular data
transmission will be sufficient.
NMFS seeks to accommodate the
requirements for for-hire Gulf permit
holders and to adapt to fishery
monitoring trends while also
maintaining type-approval standards
that are equitably applied to all
fisheries. So, in light of the above rule,
this final rule modifies the existing
NMFS VMS type-approval regulations
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:59 Jul 07, 2020
Jkt 250001
to provide for type-approval of EMTUCs and allow VMS communications to
be sent through secure cellular
communication services. Having a
single, codified type-approval process
for satellite and cellular-based tracking
devices will ensure the approval process
is efficient, transparent, and enforceable
for all approved devices nation-wide.
Although the impetus for this rule was
the Gulf proposed rule, this rule will
apply nationally for type-approval of
EMTU-Cs, if cellular-based VMS
systems are adopted in other NMFS
regions and monitoring programs.
NMFS issued a proposed rule to
provide for type-approval of EMTU-Cs
on January 24, 2020 (85 FR 4257). The
proposed rule provides further
background on this rulemaking, which
is not repeated here. Written comments
on the proposed rule were received
through February 24, 2020 through the
Federal e-rulemaking portal, and are
available for viewing in the docket for
this rulemaking (see https://
www.regulations.gov/docket?D=NOAANMFS-2019-0126). In the following
section, NMFS summarizes and
responds to public comments received
on the proposed rule.
Changes From the Proposed Rule
There are no changes from the
proposed rule.
Responses to Public Comments
NMFS received seven public
comments on the proposed rule.
Comment 1. A commenter asked if
solar-powered EMTU-Cs would be
allowed in the VMS program in addition
to cable-powered EMTU-Cs, and if so,
suggested that solar panels would need
to be kept sufficiently clean so as to
ensure sufficient power.
Response 1. Solar powered VMS units
will be allowed in the NMFS Vessel
Monitoring Program. NMFS will not
regulate the type of power source for
VMS units and will not regulate the
proper care of solar panels used to
power VMS units. NMFS does require
that the unit operate properly and
continuously, so cleaning the solar
panel may be necessary in order for a
fisherman to remain in compliance with
VMS regulations.
Comment 2. One commenter asked if
there would be a requirement for
EMTU-Cs to have an internal backup
battery.
Response 2. The NMFS VMS typeapproval regulations do not require that
any EMTU have an internal back-up
battery. Regulations for fisheries that
have a VMS requirement generally
require that the VMS unit be operational
for the duration of the fishing trip, and
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
in some cases, even while in port.
Because of these requirements, it is
advisable that any EMTU always be
connected to a reliable and continuous
power source in order for a vessel to
remain in compliance.
Comment 3. A commenter asked if
EMTU-C devices submitted to OLE will
require prior Federal Communications
Commission (FCC) certification.
Response 3. NMFS does not enforce
FCC requirements. If the FCC has set
requirements for VMS units, then typeapproval applicants and holders, and
VMS vendors should ensure compliance
with the FCC and with all other
government requirements.
Comment 4. Another commenter
asked if NMFS will consider type
approval for units that can serve both
EMTU and EMTU-C end-users? In other
words, a single device that is ‘‘dual
band’’ in that it can be programmed to
accommodate either cellular or satellite
transmissions (or both, via least cost
routing logic)?
Response 4. If the VMS regulations
applicable to a particular fishery allow
for the use of store-and-forward
reporting, then an EMTU, EMTU-C, or a
hybrid of the two may be used (see
definition of ‘‘Vessel Monitoring System
(VMS) Unit’’ under § 600.1500).
Comment 5. One commenter
expressed concern that the rule, as
proposed, would allow vessels to take
infinite time to send position reports if
they do not enter areas with cellular
coverage.
Response 5. The time frames for
sending position reports in fisheries that
require use of VMS and allow store-andforward position reporting will be
established in the VMS regulations
applicable to that particular fishery.
Type-approved VMS units will
automatically send a vessel’s stored
VMS data once the VMS unit is in its
cellular range, and fishermen will be
responsible for ensuring that the VMS
unit that they purchase has sufficient
cellular coverage within their
geographic fishing range.
Comment 6. A commenter suggested
that non-real time reporting/monitoring
devices (store and forward position
reporting) should not be limited to
cellular-based systems. The commenter
noted that satellite-based systems could
significantly lower the cost of service if
they are not required to report in real
time (cost competitive with cellular, but
with the advantage of global coverage)
and that limiting all non-real time
reporting to cellular-based systems
would discourage future technological
advancements by manufacturers of
satellite-based systems and deny them
the opportunity to compete.
E:\FR\FM\08JYR1.SGM
08JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 8, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
Response 6. We recognize that
satellite-based VMS units are approved
and can be used for store and forward
services. If the VMS regulations
applicable to a particular fishery allow
for the use of store-and-forward
reporting, then an EMTU, EMTU-C, or a
hybrid of the two may be used (see
definition of ‘‘Vessel Monitoring System
(VMS) Unit’’ under § 600.1500).
Comment 7. One commenter noted
that in the proposed rule, 90 percent of
all GPS position reports over a 24-hour
period must reach the NMFS within 15
minutes of being transmitted by the
EMTU-C (for 10 out of 11 consecutive
days). However, fishermen may fish in
areas with little or no cellular coverage
for hours on end during any 24-hour
period, making it difficult, if not
impossible, to meet this requirement.
Response 7. If a vessel fishes beyond
the range of cellular service, the EMTUC would still record and store position
reports, but would not send them to
NMFS until back within cellular service
range. At that time, the latency
requirement in this rule would be
triggered: 90 Percent of position reports
must be received within 15 minutes of
being sent. This latency requirement is
in addition to whatever fishery-specific
regulations are applicable. Likely, VMS
regulations for fisheries that allow use
of cellular VMS units will require VMS
data to be reported within a specified
time before and/or after landing or
coming in to port.
Classification
The NMFS Assistant Administrator
has determined that this rule is
consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens
Act, and other applicable laws.
Executive Order 12866
This final rule has been determined to
be not significant for purposes of
Executive Order 12866.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Executive Order 13771
This final rule is considered an
Executive Order 13771 deregulatory
action.
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
A Final Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis (FRFA) was prepared pursuant
to 5 U.S.C. 604(a). The FRFA
incorporates the Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), a summary
of the significant issues raised by the
public comments in response to the
IRFA, NMFS’s responses to those
comments, and a summary of the
analyses completed to support the
action.
The preamble to the proposed rule
included a detailed summary of the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:59 Jul 07, 2020
Jkt 250001
analyses contained in the IRFA, and that
discussion is not repeated here. The full
FRFA is included below.
The Magnuson-Stevens Act provides
the statutory basis for this final rule. A
description of this final rule, why it is
being implemented, and the purpose of
this final rule are contained in the
SUMMARY and SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION sections of this final rule.
The public did not submit any
comments relating to the IRFA or to, in
general, socio-economic implications,
and no changes to this final rule were
made as a result of public comment. No
comments were received from the Office
of Advocacy for the Small Business
Administration (SBA).
This final rule will directly apply to
any companies that wish to obtain VMS
type-approval for EMTU-Cs in the
future. There are currently no EMTU-C
units that have been type-approved by
NMFS and no end users of such devices.
NMFS received inquiries and quotes
from six prospective
telecommunications and/or computer
and electronic product manufacturing
companies within the past year
expressing interest in seeking VMS
type-approval for EMTU-Cs. Half of
these are foreign companies based in
either the United Kingdom or New
Zealand. Because these foreign
companies do not have a place of
business located in the United States, do
not operate primarily within the United
States, or make a significant
contribution to the U.S. economy
through payment of taxes or use of
American products, materials, or labor,
they are not considered to be small
businesses by the Small Business
Administration (SBA) and only the
effects on U.S. applicant companies will
be discussed. One of the prospective
U.S. companies is a publicly traded firm
that primarily operates in the satellite
telecommunications industry. The other
two prospective U.S. applicant
companies for EMTU-Cs are privately
held businesses that do not publicly
disclose total earnings or employment
numbers. Based on information from
their websites and product offerings,
NMFS believes that one of them
primarily operates in the radio and
television broadcasting, and wireless
communications equipment
manufacturing industry, and the other
primarily operates in the search,
detection, navigation, guidance,
aeronautical, and nautical system and
instrument manufacturing industry. It is
not possible to estimate how many
additional companies may enter the
marketplace for NMFS approved EMTUCs in the future.
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
40917
It is important to note that this final
rule will not be expected to affect the
existing satellite-based EMTU typeapproval process. Therefore, no impacts
on current VMS type-approval holders
or end users are anticipated.
Additionally, this final rule will not
directly apply to fishing businesses or
end users of EMTU-C devices. This final
rule may affect the availability of
EMTU-Cs for purchase, the retail price
of these devices, monthly service
charges, and future replacement costs.
However, these will all be indirect
effects of this final rule. Consideration
of indirect effects is outside the scope of
the RFA and, therefore, only the effects
on EMTU-C vendor companies will be
discussed.
The SBA has established size
standards for all major industry sectors
in the U.S. including satellite
telecommunications businesses (NAICS
code 517410), radio and television
broadcasting and wireless
communications equipment
manufacturers (NAICS code 334220),
and search, detection, navigation,
guidance, aeronautical, and nautical
system and instrument manufacturers
(NAICS 334511). A business primarily
involved in the satellite
telecommunications industry is
classified as a small business if it is
independently owned and operated, is
not dominant in its field of operation
(including its affiliates), and has
combined annual receipts not in excess
of $32.5 million for all its affiliated
operations worldwide. A business
primarily involved in the radio and
television broadcasting and wireless
communications equipment
manufacturing industry is classified as a
small business if it is independently
owned and operated, is not dominant in
its field of operation (including its
affiliates), and employs 1,250 or fewer
persons on a full-time, part-time,
temporary, or other basis at all its
affiliated operations worldwide. Finally,
a business primarily involved in the
search, detection, navigation, guidance,
aeronautical, and nautical system and
instrument manufacturing industry is
classified as a small business if it is
independently owned and operated, is
not dominant in its field of operation
(including its affiliates), and employs
1,250 or fewer persons on a full-time,
part-time, temporary, or other basis at
all its affiliated operations worldwide.
Based on financial records from a
2018 annual report to stockholders,
NMFS has determined that the publicly
traded U.S. vendor company that may
be directly affected by this final rule
will not be considered a small business
under the SBA size criteria for its
E:\FR\FM\08JYR1.SGM
08JYR1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
40918
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 8, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
industry designation, the satellite
telecommunications industry. NMFS
conservatively assumes that the other
two prospective U.S. vendor companies
for EMTU-Cs that are believed to
primarily operate in either the radio and
television broadcasting, and wireless
communications equipment
manufacturing industry, or the search,
detection, navigation, guidance,
aeronautical, and nautical system and
instrument manufacturing industry are
small entities. NMFS therefore estimates
that this rule will impact at least two
small entities in the short term and
likely more in the long term.
This final rule will involve reporting,
record keeping, and other compliance
requirements for the type-approval
application process, notifications to
NMFS for any substantive changes to
type-approved EMTU-Cs or MCSs,
customer service, potential responses to
revocation notices or revocation
appeals, and litigation support.
The type-approval application process
will require an applicant requesting
type-approval of an EMTU-C, MCS, or
bundle to make a written request to
NMFS that must include the following
information pertaining to the EMTU-C,
MCS, or bundle: Communication class;
manufacturer; brand name; model name;
model number; software version and
date; firmware version number and date;
hardware version number and date;
antenna type; antenna model number
and date; tablet, monitor or terminal
model number and date; MCS to be used
in conjunction with the EMTU-C; entity
providing MCS to the end user; current
global and regional coverage of the
MCS; the requestor-approved third party
business entities associated with the
EMTU-C and its use; the NMFS
region(s) and/or Federal fisheries
reporting program for which typeapproval is sought; copies of, or citation
to, applicable VMS regulations and
requirements; communications
functionality; position report data
formats and transmission standards;
latency specifications; messaging and
electronic form capabilities;
communications security specifications;
details of customer service that will be
provided to NMFS and fishermen;
general durability and reliability of the
unit; protection of PII, BII, and other
protected information associated with
the purchase or activation of an EMTUC from disclosure; certification that the
features, components, configuration,
and services of the requestor’s EMTU-C,
MCS, or bundle comply with each
applicable requirement set out in 50
CFR 600.1502 through 600.1509 and the
applicable VMS regulations and
requirements in effect for the NMFS
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:59 Jul 07, 2020
Jkt 250001
region(s) and/or Federal fisheries
reporting program for which the
requestor seeks type-approval; and a
certification that the requestor accepts
responsibility for ensuring compliance
with type-approval regulations during
the type-approval period. In addition,
the application must include two
EMTU-Cs, loaded with forms and
software if required by the applicable
fishery(s), with activated MCS, at no
cost to the government for each NMFS
region or Federal fishery for which the
application is made for a minimum of
90 calendar days for testing and
evaluation. Two EMTU-Cs are needed
for testing in each NMFS region or
Federal fishery in order to quickly
conduct in-office and field trials
simultaneously. The application must
also include thorough documentation,
including EMTU-C fact sheets,
installation guides, user manuals, any
necessary interfacing software, MCS
global and regional coverage,
performance specifications, and
technical support information. This
application process will likely require
engineering and product manager
expertise for preparation of the
application.
The final rule will also require typeapproval holders to notify NMFS within
2 calendar days of any substantive
changes from the original submission
for type-approval. Such change or
modification notices will likely require
engineering and product manager
support as well.
EMTU-C type-approval holders will
be responsible for ensuring that
customer service includes diagnostic
and troubleshooting support to NMFS
and fishermen, which is available 24
hours a day, 7 days per week, and year
round. This may require dedicated
customer service representative or
technician support.
If NMFS issues a Notification Letter
indicating intent to revoke a typeapproval, the type-approval holder must
respond, in writing, within 30 to 120
calendar days from the date specified in
the NMFS Notification Letter if they
believe the notification is in error or can
propose a solution to correct the issue.
This response will likely require
engineering and product manager
expertise to develop. Additionally, a
type-approval holder may file a petition
to appeal a type-approval revocation,
which could involve additional
technical or legal support.
Finally, as a condition of typeapproval, the type-approval holder will
be required to provide technical and
expert support for litigation to
substantiate the EMTU-C, MCS, or
bundle capabilities to establish NMFS
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
OLE cases against potential violators, as
needed. If the technology has been
subject to prior scrutiny in a court of
law, the type-approval applicant or
holder will be required to provide a
brief summary of the litigation and any
court finding on the reliability of the
technology.
The final rule will apply to all
companies that wish to obtain VMS
type-approval for EMTU-Cs in the
future. As discussed previously, there
are currently no EMTU-C units that
have been type-approved by NMFS and
no end users of such devices. However,
three U.S. companies are expected to
request type-approvals for EMTU-Cs.
NMFS believes two of these companies
are small entities. It is unknown how
many additional companies may enter
this market in the future. Because the
majority of prospective applicant
companies that are likely to be directly
regulated by this final rule are believed
to be small entities, NMFS
conservatively assumes that this rule
will affect a substantial number of small
entities.
All entities likely to be affected by
this rule are expected to face
comparable costs for the type-approval
application process. Although detailed
company information is not available
for the small entities that will be
directly regulated by this final rule,
based on the nature of the products and
services sold by these businesses, it is
assumed they have the requisite
resources to comply with most of the
technical requirements included in this
final rule as well. The requirement for
customer service that is available 24
hours a day, 7 days per week, and year
round will, however, have the potential
to disproportionately burden small
entities relative to large entities. This
final rule may necessitate that small
businesses hire dedicated customer
service support staff. This increase in
overhead costs could place them at a
competitive disadvantage to large
businesses that likely already have
robust customer service resources.
Small entities are typically not able to
achieve the same economies of scale or
scope as large entities. In other words,
large entities are able to drive down
overhead costs per unit by operating at
higher levels of output or spreading
overhead costs, such as customer
service labor, across multiple products.
This requirement may create a barrier to
entry for small businesses that wish to
participate in the EMTU-C market.
The following information
summarizes the expected direct effects
of this final rule on small entities.
E:\FR\FM\08JYR1.SGM
08JYR1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 8, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
Vessel Monitoring System TypeApproval Application Process
Under this final rule, an applicant
will need to submit a written typeapproval request and electronic copies
of supporting materials that include the
information required under 50 CFR
600.1501 to NMFS OLE. The application
process will likely require engineering
and product manager expertise for
preparation of the application. NMFS
estimates that applicants will utilize up
to approximately 40 hours of
engineering labor and 40 hours of
product management labor to compile
the written request and statement that
details how the applicant’s EMTU-C
meets the minimum national VMS
standards as required by this rule. This
estimate also includes the amount of
time it will take to compile the EMTUC documentation and the packaging of
the EMTU-Cs to ship to each NMFS
region or Federal fishery for which an
application is submitted. Based on the
Bureau of Labor Statistics May 2018
National Occupational Employment and
Wage Estimates, the mean hourly wage
for engineers is $47.71 per hour; for
general and operations managers it is
approximately $59.56 per hour.
Therefore, NMFS estimates the total
wage costs to be approximately $4,300
per EMTU-C application.
With respect to providing OLE two
EMTU-Cs for each NMFS region, NMFS
estimates that applicants will likely
spend between $55 and $86 per
shipment (two units each) based on
current United States Postal Service
(USPS) ground shipping rates for a
package of up to 30 pounds ($49.62–
$80.51 depending on the region) and
box/packaging costs of $5.00. Upon
completion of testing and evaluation by
OLE in each NMFS region, applicants
will also be responsible for the cost of
EMTU-C return shipments. Therefore,
assuming an applicant sends units to all
five NMFS regions, the total shipping
cost per application will be $674 based
on USPS ground delivery costs of
approximately $50 per region in the
continental United States and $81 per
region for the Alaska and the Pacific
Islands offices. The cost will be lower if
type-approval is requested for fewer
regions.
In addition, applicants will be
responsible for covering the costs of the
MCS during the testing period. Using
the average applicant quoted monthly
service charge to customers, NMFS
estimates that this could run
approximately $25 per month per unit.
Assuming a 90-day testing period for 10
units (2 sent to each NMFS region), the
total MCS cost will be approximately
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:59 Jul 07, 2020
Jkt 250001
40919
$750. It will be less for requests that
involve fewer regions.
The average estimated retail price of
an EMTU-C unit, as based on six
different vendor quotes, is
approximately $458. The applicant
seeking type-approval will be unable to
sell the EMTU-C units as new after
providing them to NMFS for testing and
evaluation for 90 days. They might only
get 60 to 80 percent of the regular retail
value on refurbished units. If 10 EMTUCs that regularly retail new for $458
each are sent to 5 regions, the reduced
retail revenue will total approximately
$916 to $1,832 per type-approval
application. Again, if type-approval is
requested for fewer than five regions,
the cost will be lower. Alternatively, the
applicant may opt to use these units as
demo units for trade shows and other
marketing purposes and therefore
considerably lower the costs of
providing the evaluation units. It is
difficult to estimate the exact costs
associated with providing the units to
NMFS given the uncertainty associated
with what applicants will do with these
EMTU-Cs after the 90-day evaluation
period.
The total upper bound cost to
applicants of the VMS type-approval
application process is estimated to be
$6,631 to $7,547 per application ($4,291
in wages, plus $674 in shipping, plus
$750 in MCS charges, plus $916 to
$1,832 in reduced retail revenue for the
demo units). This cost will be lower if
type-approval is requested for fewer
than five regions.
experience. There were two change/
modification notices submitted in 2017
for existing VMS type-approvals, as well
as two in 2018. Therefore, the annual
total cost to small entities for this
provision will likely be less than $858
per year.
Changes or Modifications to TypeApprovals
After a type-approval is issued, the
type-approval holder must notify NMFS
OLE in writing no later than 2 days
following modification to or
replacement of any functional
component or piece of their typeapproved EMTU-C, MCS, or bundle. If
the changes are substantial, NMFS OLE
will notify the type-approval holder in
writing within 60 calendar days that an
amended type-approval is required or
that NMFS will initiate the typeapproval revocation process. NMFS
estimates that small entities will utilize
up to approximately 4 hours of
engineering labor and 4 hours of
product management labor to notify
NMFS of any substantive changes to the
original type-approval submission and
provide the agency with the details of
those changes. NMFS estimates the total
wage costs to be approximately $429 for
the change notification process. NMFS
estimates that there will likely be less
than two change/modification notices
submitted per year based on past
Revocation Process
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Customer Service
The type-approval holder will be
responsible for ensuring that customer
service includes: Diagnostic and
troubleshooting support to NMFS and
fishermen, which is available 24 hours
a day, 7 days per week, and year round;
response times for customer service
inquiries that do not exceed 24 hours;
warranty and maintenance agreements;
escalation procedures for resolution of
problems; established facilities and
procedures to assist fishermen in
maintaining and repairing their EMTUC; assistance to fishermen in the
diagnosis of the cause of
communications anomalies; assistance
in resolving communications anomalies
that are traced to the EMTU-C; and
assistance to NMFS OLE and its
contractors, upon request, in VMS
operation, resolving technical issues,
and data analyses related to the VMS
Program or system. NMFS is unable to
estimate the direct costs to businesses to
comply with these customer service
requirements. However, they may be
nontrivial. Costs will likely vary
depending on each vendor’s existing
assets, liabilities, and profit
maximization strategies.
If at any time, a type-approved EMTUC or bundle fails to meet requirements
at 50 CFR 600.1502 through 600.1509 or
applicable VMS regulations and
requirements in effect for the region(s)
and Federal fisheries for which the
EMTU-C is type-approved, NMFS OLE
may issue a Notification Letter to the
type-approval holder that: Identifies the
EMTU-C, MCS, or bundle that allegedly
fails to comply with type-approval
regulations and requirements; identifies
the alleged failure to comply with typeapproval regulations and requirements,
and the urgency and impact of the
alleged failure; cites relevant regulations
and requirements under 50 CFR 600,
subpart Q; describes the indications and
evidence of the alleged failure; provides
documentation and data demonstrating
the alleged failure; sets a response date
by which the type-approval holder must
submit to NMFS OLE a written response
to the Notification Letter, including, if
applicable, a proposed solution; and
explains the type-approval holder’s
options if the type-approval holder
E:\FR\FM\08JYR1.SGM
08JYR1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
40920
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 8, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
believes the Notification Letter is in
error.
NMFS will establish a response date
between 30 and 120 calendar days from
the date of the Notification Letter. The
type-approval holder’s response must be
received in writing by NMFS on or
before the response date. If the typeapproval holder fails to respond by the
response date, the type-approval will be
revoked. At its discretion and for good
cause, NMFS may extend the response
date to a maximum of 150 calendar days
from the date of the Notification Letter.
A type-approval holder who has
submitted a timely response may meet
with NMFS within 21 calendar days of
the date of that response to discuss a
detailed and agreed-upon procedure for
resolving the alleged failure. The
meeting may be in person, conference
call, or webcast.
If the type-approval holder disagrees
with the Notification Letter and believes
that there is no failure to comply with
the type-approval regulations and
requirements, NMFS has incorrectly
defined or described the failure or its
urgency and impact, or NMFS is
otherwise in error, the type-approval
holder may submit a written objection
letter to NMFS on or before the response
date in accordance with 50 CFR
600.1512.
NMFS estimates that the revocation
process will potentially involve 16
hours of engineering labor and 8 hours
of product management labor, per
instance, to investigate the issues raised
by NMFS and prepare a written
response. Based on the wage costs
previously discussed, NMFS estimates
the revocation process could result in
approximately $1,240 in labor costs.
However, the actual amount of labor
costs could vary considerably
depending on the complexity of the
issues causing the potential violations
NMFS identified. Some vendors may
decide not to challenge the revocation
or may be unable to bring the issue to
final resolution to NMFS’ satisfaction
and then face the revocation of the typeapproval for their product. The vendor
will then be impacted by the loss of
future EMTU-C sales and monthly data
communication fees from vessels
required to carry and operate a typeapproved EMTU-C, MCS, or bundle.
The vendor could also opt to appeal
the type-approval revocation. In
addition to the costs associated with the
engineering and product management
support provided during the revocation
process, the vendor may also decide to
employ legal assistance to challenge the
agency’s decision. These costs could
vary considerably depending on the
complexity of the appeal arguments.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:59 Jul 07, 2020
Jkt 250001
Litigation Support
Finally, in accordance with 50 CFR
600.1515, the final rule will also require
the type-approval holder’s litigation
support. All technical aspects of a typeapproved EMTU-C, MCS, or bundle are
subject to being admitted as evidence in
a court of law, if needed, and the typeapproval holder will be required to
provide technical and expert support for
litigation to substantiate the EMTU-C, or
bundle capabilities to establish NMFS
OLE cases against violators. NMFS will
pay the reasonable cost for such
assistance in NMFS-authorized service
or purchase agreements, work orders or
contracts. If the technologies have
previously been subject to such scrutiny
in a court of law, the type-approval
holder must provide NMFS with a brief
summary of the litigation and any court
findings on the reliability of the
technology. This litigation support, if
not fully paid for by NMFS, will be
another potential cost of this final rule
to EMTU-C vendors or mobile
communications service providers.
Because details of future litigation
support needs are unknown, it is not
possible to estimate these costs.
In conclusion, participation in the
EMTU-C market will be voluntary. It is
assumed vendors are profit maximizing
firms that will only apply for typeapprovals if the expected profits from
selling EMTU-C units and services
justify the costs presented in this RFA
analysis. However, there may be
disproportionate effects on small
entities relative to large entities, due to
the customer service requirements
included as part of this final rule.
The following discussion describes
the alternatives that were not selected as
preferred by NMFS.
Only two alternatives were
considered for this rule. The first
alternative, the no-action alternative,
would not add EMTU-Cs and cellular
based transmissions of VMS data to the
VMS type-approval regulations.
Currently there is no type-approval
process for EMTU-Cs. This alternative
was not selected by NMFS, because a
type-approval process is required in
order to facilitate the use of EMTU-Cs
and cellular-based VMS transmissions
in federally regulated fisheries that will
require, or allow the use of, such in the
future. Therefore, the no-action
alternative was not a viable alternative.
The second alternative, which includes
all of the provisions laid out in this final
rule, is the preferred alternative. NMFS
has not identified any other alternatives
that would meet the objectives of the
final rule while minimizing economic
impacts on small entities.
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Section 212 of the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996 states that, for each rule or group
of related rules for which an agency is
required to prepare a FRFA, the agency
shall publish one or more guides to
assist small entities in complying with
the rule, and shall designate such
publications as ‘small entity compliance
guides.’ The agency shall explain the
actions a small entity is required to take
to comply with a rule or group of rules.
Copies of the compliance guide for this
final rule are available (see ADDRESSES).
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This final rule contains collection-ofinformation requirements that have
been submitted for approval to OMB
under the PRA, Control Number 0648–
0789, Type-Approval Requirements for
Vessel Monitoring Systems. Public
reporting burden for the application
process is estimated to average 80 hours
per response, including the time for
reviewing instructions, searching
existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, and
completing and reviewing the collection
information.
Public comment is sought regarding:
Whether this collection of information
is necessary for the proper performance
of the functions of the agency, including
whether the information shall have
practical utility; the accuracy of the
burden estimate; ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of
information, including through the use
of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
Send comments on these or any other
aspects of the collection of information
to NMFS OLE at the ADDRESSES above,
or to OMB by email OIRA_Submission@
omb.eop.gov.
Notwithstanding any other provision
of the law, no person is required to
respond to, and no person shall be
subject to penalty for failure to comply
with, a collection of information subject
to the requirements of the PRA, unless
that collection of information displays a
currently valid OMB control number.
All currently approved collections of
information may be viewed at https://
www.cio.noaa.gov/services_programs/
prasubs.html.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 600
Administrative practice and
procedure, Fisheries, Fishing, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
E:\FR\FM\08JYR1.SGM
08JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 8, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
Dated: June 29, 2020.
Christopher Wayne Oliver,
Assistant Administrator for Fisheries,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, 50 CFR part 600 is amended
as follows:
PART 600—MAGNUSON-STEVENS
ACT PROVISIONS
1. The authority citation for part 600
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 561 and 16 U.S.C. 1801
et seq.
2. Revise subpart Q to part 600 to read
as follows:
■
Subpart Q—Vessel Monitoring System
Type-Approval
Sec.
600.1500 Definitions and acronyms.
600.1501 Vessel Monitoring System typeapproval process.
600.1502 Communications functionality.
600.1503 Position report data formats and
transmission.
600.1504 Latency requirement.
600.1505 Messaging.
600.1506 Electronic forms.
600.1507 Communications security.
600.1508 Customer service.
600.1509 General.
600.1510 Notification of type-approval.
600.1511 Changes or modifications to typeapprovals.
600.1512 Type-approval revocation process.
600.1513 Type-approval revocation appeals
process.
600.1514 Revocation effective date and
notification to vessel owners.
600.1515 Litigation support.
600.1516 Reimbursement opportunities for
revoked Vessel Monitoring System typeapproval products.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
§ 600.1500
Definitions and acronyms.
In addition to the definitions in the
Magnuson-Stevens Act and in § 600.10,
and the acronyms in § 600.15, the terms
and acronyms in this subpart have the
following meanings:
Authorized entity means a person,
defined at 16 U.S.C. 1802(36),
authorized to receive data transmitted
by a VMS unit.
Bench configuration means the
configuration of a VMS unit after it has
been customized to meet the Federal
VMS requirements.
Bundle means a mobile
communications service and VMS unit
sold as a package and considered one
product. If a bundle is type-approved,
the requestor will be the type-approval
holder for the bundled MCS and VMS
unit.
Cellular communication means the
wireless transmission of VMS data via a
cellular network.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:59 Jul 07, 2020
Jkt 250001
Communication class means the
satellite or cellular communications
operator from which communications
services originate.
Electronic form means a pre-formatted
message transmitted by a VMS unit that
is required for the collection of data for
a specific fishery program (e.g.,
declaration system, catch effort
reporting).
Enhanced Mobile Transceiver Unit
(EMTU) means a type of MTU that is
capable of supporting two-way
communication, messaging, and
electronic forms transmission via
satellite. An EMTU is a transceiver or
communications device, including an
antenna, and dedicated message
terminal and display which can support
a dedicated input device such as a tablet
or keyboard, installed on fishing vessels
participating in fisheries with a VMS
requirement.
Enhanced Mobile Transceiver Unit,
Cellular Based (EMTU-C) means an
EMTU that transmits and receives data
via cellular communications, except
that it may not need a dedicated
message terminal and display
component at the time of approval as
explained at § 600.1502(a)(6). An
EMTU–C only needs to be capable of
transmission and reception when in the
range of a cellular network.
Latency means the state of untimely
delivery of Global Positioning System
position reports and electronic forms to
NMFS (i.e., information is not delivered
to NMFS consistent with timing
requirements of this subpart).
Mobile Communications Service
(MCS) means the satellite and/or
cellular communications services used
with particular VMS units.
Mobile Communications Service
Provider (MCSP) means an entity that
sells VMS satellite and/or cellular
communications services to end users.
Mobile Transmitter Unit (MTU) means
a VMS unit capable of transmitting
Global Positioning System position
reports via satellite. (MTUs are no
longer approved for new installations on
VMS vessels).
Notification Letter means a letter
issued by NMFS to a type-approval
holder identifying an alleged failure of
a VMS unit, MCS, or the type-approval
holder to comply with the requirements
of this subpart.
Position report means the unique
global positioning system (GPS) report
generated by a vessel’s VMS unit, which
identifies the vessel’s latitude/longitude
position at a point in time. Position
reports are sent from the VMS unit via
the MCS, to authorized entities.
Requestor means a vendor seeking
type-approval.
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
40921
Service life means the length of time
during which a VMS unit remains fully
operational with reasonable repairs.
Sniffing means the unauthorized and
illegitimate monitoring and capture,
through use of a computer program or
device, of data being transmitted over a
network.
Spoofing means the reporting of a
false Global Positioning System position
and/or vessel identity.
Time stamp means the time, in hours,
minutes, and seconds in a position
report. Each position report is time
stamped.
Type-approval holder means an
applicant whose type-approval request
has been approved pursuant to this
subpart.
Vendor means a commercial provider
of VMS hardware, software, and/or
mobile communications services.
Vessel Monitoring System (VMS)
means, for purposes of this subpart, a
satellite and/or cellular based system
designed to monitor the location and
movement of vessels using onboard
VMS units that send Global Positioning
System position reports to an authorized
entity.
Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) data
means the data transmitted to
authorized entities from a VMS unit.
Vessel Monitoring System Program
means the Federal program that
manages the vessel monitoring system,
data, and associated programcomponents, nationally and in each
NMFS region; it is housed in the
Department of Commerce, National
Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, National Marine
Fisheries Service’s Office of Law
Enforcement.
Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) Unit
means MTU, EMTU or EMTU-C, as well
as the units that can operate as both an
EMTU and an EMTU-C.
Vessel Monitoring System (VMS)
Vessels means vessels that operate in
federally managed fisheries with a
requirement to carry and operate a VMS
unit.
§ 600.1501 Vessel Monitoring System typeapproval process.
(a) Applicability. Unless otherwise
specified, this section applies to
EMTUs, EMTU-Cs, units that operate as
both an EMTU and EMTU-C, and MCSs.
Units that can operate as both an EMTU
and EMTU-C must meet the
requirements for both an EMTU and an
EMTU-C in order to gain type-approval
as both. MTUs are no longer eligible for
type-approval.
(b) Application submission. A
requestor must submit a written typeapproval request and electronic copies
E:\FR\FM\08JYR1.SGM
08JYR1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
40922
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 8, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
of supporting materials that include the
information required under this section
to the NMFS Office of Law Enforcement
(OLE) at: U.S. Department of Commerce;
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration; National Marine
Fisheries Service; Office of Law
Enforcement; Attention: Vessel
Monitoring System Office; 1315 EastWest Highway, SSMC3, Suite 3301,
Silver Spring, Maryland 20910.
(c) Application requirements. (1)
EMTU, EMTU-C, and MCS Identifying
Information: In a type-approval request,
the requestor should indicate whether
the requestor is seeking approval for an
EMTU, EMTU-C, MCS, or bundle and
must specify identifying characteristics,
as applicable: Communication class;
manufacturer; brand name; model name;
model number; software version and
date; firmware version number and date;
hardware version number and date;
antenna type; antenna model number
and date; tablet, monitor or terminal
model number and date; MCS to be used
in conjunction with the EMTU/EMTUC; entity providing MCS to the end user;
and current global and regional coverage
of the MCS.
(2) Requestor-approved third party
business entities: The requestor must
provide the business name, address,
phone number, contact name(s), email
address, specific services provided, and
geographic region covered for the
following third party business entities:
(i) Entities providing bench
configuration for the EMTU/EMTU-C at
the warehouse or point of supply.
(ii) Entities distributing/selling the
EMTU/EMTU-C to end users.
(iii) Entities currently approved by the
requestor to install the EMTU/EMTU-C
onboard vessels.
(iv) Entities currently approved by the
requestor to offer a limited warranty.
(v) Entities approved by the requestor
to offer a maintenance service
agreement.
(vi) Entities approved by the requestor
to repair or install new software on the
EMTU/EMTU-C.
(vii) Entities approved by the
requestor to train end users.
(viii) Entities approved by the
requestor to advertise the EMTU/EMTUC.
(ix) Entities approved by the requestor
to provide other customer services.
(3) Regulatory Requirements and
Documentation: In a type-approval
request, a requestor must:
(i) Identify the NMFS region(s) and/or
Federal fisheries for which the requestor
seeks type-approval.
(ii) Include copies of, or citation to,
applicable VMS regulations and
requirements in effect for the region(s)
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:59 Jul 07, 2020
Jkt 250001
and Federal fisheries identified under
paragraph (c)(3)(i) of this section that
require use of VMS.
(iii) Provide a table with the typeapproval request that lists in one
column each requirement set out in
§§ 600.1502 through 600.1509 and
regulations described under paragraph
(c)(3)(ii) of this section. NMFS OLE will
provide a template for the table upon
request. The requestor must indicate in
subsequent columns in the table:
(A) Whether the requirement applies
to the type-approval; and
(B) Whether the EMTU, EMTU-C,
MCS, or bundle meets the requirement.
(iv) Certify that the features,
components, configuration and services
of the requestor’s EMTU/EMTU-C, MCS,
or bundle comply with each
requirement set out in §§ 600.1502
through 600.1509 and the regulations
described under paragraph (c)(3)(ii) of
this section.
(v) Certify that, if the request is
approved, the requestor agrees to be
responsible for ensuring compliance
with each requirement set out in
§§ 600.1502 through 600.1509 and the
regulations described under paragraph
(c)(3)(ii) of this section over the course
of the type-approval period.
(vi) Provide NMFS OLE with two
EMTU/EMTU-Cs loaded with forms and
software, if applicable, for each NMFS
region or Federal fishery, with activated
MCS, for which a type-approval request
is submitted for a minimum of 90
calendar days for testing and evaluation.
For EMTU-Cs, the forms and software
may be loaded onto a dedicated message
terminal and display component to
which the EMTU-C can connect. Copies
of forms currently used by NMFS are
available upon request. As part of its
review, NMFS OLE may perform field
tests and at-sea trials that involve
demonstrating every aspect of EMTU/
EMTU-C and communications
operation. The requestor is responsible
for all associated costs including paying
for: Shipping of the EMTU/EMTU-C to
the required NMFS regional offices and/
or headquarters for testing; the MCS
during the testing period; and shipping
of the EMTU/EMTU-C back to the
vendor.
(vii) Provide thorough documentation
for the EMTU/EMTU-C and MCS,
including: EMTU/EMTU-C fact sheets;
installation guides; user manuals; any
necessary interfacing software; MCS
global and regional coverage;
performance specifications; and
technical support information.
(d) Certification. A requestor seeking
type-approval of an EMTU/EMTU-C to
operate with a class or type of
communications, as opposed to type-
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
approval for use with a specific MCS,
shall certify that the EMTU/EMTU-C
meets requirements under this subpart
when using at least one MCSP within
that class or type of communications.
(e) Notification. Unless additional
time is required for EMTU/EMTU-C
testing, NMFS OLE will notify the
requestor within 90 days after receipt of
a complete type-approval request as
follows:
(1) If a request is approved or partially
approved, NMFS OLE will provide
notice as described under § 600.1510
and the type-approval letter will serve
as official documentation and notice of
type-approval. OLE will publish and
maintain the list of type-approved units
on their Vessel Monitoring System web
page.
(2) If a request is disapproved or
partially disapproved:
(i) OLE will send a letter to the
requestor that explains the reason for
the disapproval/partial disapproval.
(ii) The requestor may respond to
NMFS OLE in writing with additional
information to address the reasons for
disapproval identified in the NMFS OLE
letter. The requestor must submit this
response within 21 calendar days of the
date of the OLE letter sent under
paragraph (e)(2)(i) of this section.
(iii) If any additional information is
submitted under paragraph (e)(2)(ii) of
this section, NMFS OLE, after reviewing
such information, may either take action
under paragraph (e)(1) of this section or
determine that the request should
continue to be disapproved or partially
disapproved. In the latter case, the
NMFS OLE Director will send a letter to
the requestor that explains the reasons
for the continued disapproval/partial
disapproval. The NMFS OLE Director’s
decision is final upon issuance of this
letter and is not appealable.
§ 600.1502
Communications functionality.
(a) Unless otherwise specified, this
subsection applies to all VMS units.
Units that can operate as both an EMTU
and EMTU-C must meet the
requirements for both an EMTU and an
EMTU-C in order to gain type-approval
as both. The VMS unit must:
(1) Be able to transmit all
automatically-generated position
reports.
(2) Provide visible or audible alarms
onboard the vessel to indicate
malfunctioning of the VMS unit.
(3) Be able to disable non-essential
alarms in non-Global Maritime Distress
and Safety System (GMDSS)
installations.
(4) EMTU/EMTU-Cs must be able to
send communications that function
uniformly throughout the geographic
E:\FR\FM\08JYR1.SGM
08JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 8, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
area(s) covered by the type-approval,
except an EMTU-C only needs to be
capable of transmission and reception
when in the range of a cellular network.
(5) EMTU/EMTU-Cs must have twoway communications between the unit
and authorized entities, via MCS, or be
able to connect to a device that has twoway communications.
(6) EMTU/EMTU-Cs must be able to
run or to connect to a dedicated message
terminal and display component that
can run software and/or applications
that send and receive electronic forms
and internet email messages for the
purpose of complying with VMS
reporting requirements in Federal
fisheries. Depending on the reporting
requirements for the fishery(s) in which
the requester is seeking type-approval,
an EMTU-C type-approval may not
require the inclusion of a dedicated
message terminal and display
component at the time of approval, but
the capability to support such a
component must be shown.
(7) Have messaging and
communications mechanisms that are
completely compatible with NMFS
vessel monitoring and surveillance
software.
(b) In addition, messages and
communications from a VMS unit must
be able to be parsed out to enable clear
billing of costs to the government and to
the owner of a vessel or EMTU/EMTUC, when necessary. Also, the costs
associated with position reporting and
the costs associated with other
communications (for example, personal
email or communications/reports to
non-NMFS Office of Law Enforcement
entities) must be parsed out and billed
to separate parties, as appropriate.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
§ 600.1503 Position report data formats
and transmission.
Unless otherwise specified, this
subsection applies to all VMS units,
MCSs and bundles. Units that can
operate as both an EMTU and EMTU-C
must meet the requirements for both an
EMTU and an EMTU-C in order to gain
type-approval as both. To be typeapproved in any given fishery, a VMS
unit must also meet any additional
positioning information as required by
the applicable VMS regulations and
requirements in effect for each fishery or
region for which the type-approval
applies. The VMS unit must meet the
following requirements:
(a) Transmit all automaticallygenerated position reports, for vessels
managed individually or grouped by
fleet, that meet the latency requirement
under § 600.1504.
(b) When powered up, must
automatically re-establish its position
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:59 Jul 07, 2020
Jkt 250001
reporting function without manual
intervention.
(c) Position reports must contain all of
the following:
(1) Unique identification of an EMTU/
EMTU-C and clear indication if the unit
is an EMTU-C.
(2) Date (year/month/day with
century in the year) and time stamp
(GMT) of the position fix.
(3) Date (year/month/day with
century in the year) and time stamp
(GMT) that the EMTU-C position report
was sent from the EMTU-C.
(4) Position fixed latitude and
longitude, including the hemisphere of
each, which comply with the following
requirements:
(i) The position fix precision must be
to the decimal minute hundredths.
(ii) Accuracy of the reported position
must be within 100 meters (328.1 ft).
(d) An EMTU/EMTU-C must have the
ability to: (1) Store 1,000 position fixes
in local, non-volatile memory.
(2) Allow for defining variable
reporting intervals between 5 minutes
and 24 hours.
(3) Allow for changes in reporting
intervals remotely and only by
authorized users.
(e) An EMTU/EMTU-C must generate
specially identified position reports
upon:
(1) Antenna disconnection.
(2) Loss of positioning reference
signals.
(3) Security events, power-up, power
down, and other status data.
(4) A request for EMTU/EMTU-C
status information such as configuration
of programming and reporting intervals.
(5) The EMTUs loss of the mobile
communications signals.
(6) An EMTU must generate a
specially identified position report upon
the vessel crossing of a pre-defined
geographic boundary.
§ 600.1504
Latency requirement.
(a) Ninety percent of all preprogrammed or requested Global
Positioning System position reports
during each 24-hour period must reach
NMFS within 15 minutes or less of
being sent from the VMS unit, for 10 out
of 11 consecutive days (24-hour time
periods).
(b) NMFS will continually examine
latency by region and by type-approval
holder.
(c) Exact dates for calculation of
latency will be chosen by NMFS. Days
in which isolated and documented
system outages occur will not be used
by NMFS to calculate a type-approval
holder’s latency.
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
§ 600.1505
40923
Messaging.
(a) Unless otherwise specified, this
section applies to all VMS units, MCSs,
and bundles. Units that can operate as
both an EMTU and EMTU-C must meet
the requirements for both an EMTU and
an EMTU-C in order to gain typeapproval as both. Depending on the
reporting requirements for the fishery(s)
in which the requester is seeking typeapproval, an EMTU-C type-approval
may not require the inclusion of a
dedicated message terminal and display
component at the time of approval, but
the capability to support such a
component must be shown. To be typeapproved in any given fishery, a VMS
unit must meet messaging information
requirements under the applicable VMS
regulations and requirements in effect
for each fishery or region for which the
type-approval applies. The VMS unit
must also meet the following
requirements:
(b) An EMTU must be able to run
software and/or applications that send
email messages for the purpose of
complying with VMS reporting
requirements in Federal fisheries that
require email communication
capability. An EMTU-C must be able to
run or connect to a device that can run
such software and/or applications. In
such cases, the EMTU/EMTU-C
messaging must provide for the
following capabilities:
(1) Messaging from vessel to shore,
and from shore to vessel by authorized
entities, must have a minimum
supported message length of 1 KB. For
EMTU-Cs, this messaging capability
need only be functional when in range
of shore-based cellular communications.
(2) There must be a confirmation of
delivery function that allows a user to
ascertain whether a specific message
was successfully transmitted to the MCS
email server(s).
(3) Notification of failed delivery to
the EMTU/EMTU-C must be sent to the
sender of the message. The failed
delivery notification must include
sufficient information to identify the
specific message that failed and the
cause of failure (e.g., invalid address,
EMTU/EMTU-C switched off, etc.).
(4) The EMTU/EMTU-C must have an
automatic retry feature in the event that
a message fails to be delivered.
(5) The EMTU/EMTU-C user interface
must:
(i) Support an ‘‘address book’’
capability and a function permitting a
‘‘reply’’ to a received message without
re-entering the sender’s address.
(ii) Provide the ability to review by
date order, or by recipient, messages
that were previously sent. The EMTU/
EMTU-C terminal must support a
E:\FR\FM\08JYR1.SGM
08JYR1
40924
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 8, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
minimum message history of 50 sent
messages—commonly referred to as an
‘‘Outbox’’ or ‘‘Sent’’ message display.
(iii) Provide the ability to review by
date order, or by sender, all messages
received. The EMTU/EMTU-C terminal
must support a minimum message
history of at least 50 messages in an
inbox.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
§ 600.1506
Electronic forms.
Unless otherwise specified, this
subsection applies to all EMTUs,
EMTU-Cs, MCSs, and bundles.
(a) Forms. An EMTU/EMTU-C must
be able to run, or to connect to and
transmit data from a device that can run
electronic forms software. Depending on
the reporting requirements for the
fishery(s) in which the requester is
seeking type-approval, an EMTU-C typeapproval may not require the inclusion
of a dedicated message terminal and
display component at the time of
approval, but the capability to support
such a component must be shown. The
EMTU/EMTU-C must be able to support
forms software that can hold a
minimum of 20 electronic forms, and it
must also meet any additional forms
requirements in effect for each fishery or
region for which the type-approval
applies. The EMTU/EMTU-C must meet
the following requirements:
(1) Form Validation: Each field on a
form must be capable of being defined
as Optional, Mandatory, or Logic
Driven. Mandatory fields are those
fields that must be entered by the user
before the form is complete. Optional
fields are those fields that do not require
data entry. Logic-driven fields have
their attributes determined by earlier
form selections. Specifically, a logicdriven field must allow for selection of
options in that field to change the
values available as menu selections on
a subsequent field within the same
form.
(2) A user must be able to select forms
from a menu on the EMTU/EMTU-C.
(3) A user must be able to populate a
form based on the last values used and
‘‘modify’’ or ‘‘update’’ a prior
submission without unnecessary reentry of data. A user must be able to
review a minimum of 20 past form
submissions and ascertain for each form
when the form was transmitted and
whether delivery was successfully sent
to the type-approval holder’s VMS data
processing center. In the case of a
transmission failure, a user must be
provided with details of the cause and
have the opportunity to retry the form
submission.
(4) VMS Position Report: Each form
must include VMS position data,
including latitude, longitude, date and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:59 Jul 07, 2020
Jkt 250001
time. Data to populate these fields must
be automatically generated by the
EMTU/EMTU-C and unable to be
manually entered or altered.
(5) Delivery and Format of Forms
Data: Delivery of form data to NMFS
must employ the same transport
security and reliability as set out in
§ 600.1507 of this subpart. The forms
data and delivery must be completely
compatible with NMFS vessel
monitoring software.
(b) Updates to Forms. (1) The EMTU/
EMTU-C and MCS must be capable of
providing updates to forms or adding
new form requirements via wireless
transmission and without manual
installation.
(2) From time to time, NMFS may
provide type-approved applicants with
requirements for new forms or
modifications to existing forms. NMFS
may also provide notice of forms and
form changes through the NMFS Work
Order System. Type-approved
applicants will be given at least 60
calendar days to complete their
implementation of new or changed
forms. Applicants will be capable of,
and responsible for translating the
requirements into their EMTU/EMTU-Cspecific forms definitions and wirelessly
transmitting the same to all EMTU/
EMTU-C terminals supplied to fishing
vessels.
§ 600.1507
Communications security.
Communications between an EMTU/
EMTU-C and MCS must be secure from
tampering or interception, including the
reading of passwords and data. The
EMTU/EMTU-C and MCS must have
mechanisms to prevent to the extent
possible:
(a) Sniffing and/or interception during
transmission from the EMTU/EMTU-C
to MCS.
(b) Spoofing.
(c) False position reports sent from an
EMTU/EMTU-C.
(d) Modification of EMTU/EMTU-C
identification.
(e) Interference with Global Maritime
Distress and Safety System (GMDSS) or
other safety/distress functions.
(f) Introduction of malware, spyware,
keyloggers, or other software that may
corrupt, disturb, or disrupt messages,
transmission, and the VMS system.
(g) The EMTU/EMTU-C terminal from
communicating with, influencing, or
interfering with the Global Positioning
System antenna or its functionality,
position reports, or sending of position
reports. The position reports must not
be altered, corrupted, degraded, or at all
affected by the operation of the terminal
or any of its peripherals or installedsoftware.
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
(h) VMS data must be encrypted and
sent securely through all associated
cellular, satellite, and internet
communication pathways and channels.
§ 600.1508
Field and Technical Services.
As a requirement of its type-approval,
a type-approval holder must
communicate with NMFS to resolve
technical issues with a VMS Unit, MCS
or bundle and ensure that field and
technical services includes:
(a) Diagnostic and troubleshooting
support to NMFS and fishers, which is
available 24 hours a day, seven days per
week, and year-round.
(b) Response times for customer
service inquiries that shall not exceed
24 hours.
(c) Warranty and maintenance
agreements.
(d) Escalation procedures for
resolution of problems.
(e) Established facilities and
procedures to assist fishers in
maintaining and repairing their EMTU,
EMTU-C, or MTU.
(f) Assistance to fishers in the
diagnosis of the cause of
communications anomalies.
(g) Assistance in resolving
communications anomalies that are
traced to the EMTU, EMTU-C, or MTU.
(h) Assistance to NMFS Office of Law
Enforcement and its contractors, upon
request, in VMS system operation,
resolving technical issues, and data
analyses related to the VMS Program or
system.
§ 600.1509
General.
(a) An EMTU/EMTU-C must have the
durability and reliability necessary to
meet all requirements of §§ 600.1502
through 600.1507 regardless of weather
conditions, including when placed in a
marine environment where the unit may
be subjected to saltwater (spray) in
smaller vessels, and in larger vessels
where the unit may be maintained in a
wheelhouse. The unit, cabling and
antenna must be resistant to salt,
moisture, and shock associated with
sea-going vessels in the marine
environment.
(b) PII and Other Protected
Information. Personally identifying
information (PII) and other protected
information includes Magnuson-Stevens
Act confidential information as
provided at 16 U.S.C. 1881a and
Business Identifiable Information (BII),
as defined in the Department of
Commerce Information Technology
Privacy Policy. A type-approval holder
is responsible for ensuring that:
(1) All PII and other protected
information is handled in accordance
with applicable state and Federal law.
E:\FR\FM\08JYR1.SGM
08JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 8, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
(2) All PII and other protected
information provided to the typeapproval holder by vessel owners or
other authorized personnel for the
purchase or activation of an EMTU/
EMTU-C or arising from participation in
any Federal fishery are protected from
disclosure not authorized by NMFS or
the vessel owner or other authorized
personnel.
(3) Any release of PII or other
protected information beyond
authorized entities must be requested
and approved in writing, as appropriate,
by the submitter of the data in
accordance with 16 U.S.C. 1881a, or by
NMFS.
(4) Any PII or other protected
information sent electronically by the
type-approval holder to the NMFS
Office of Law Enforcement must be
transmitted by a secure means that
prevents interception, spoofing, or
viewing by unauthorized individuals.
§ 600.1510
Notification of type-approval.
(a) If a request made pursuant to
§ 600.1501 (type-approval) is approved
or partially approved, NMFS will issue
a type-approval letter to indicate the
specific EMTU/EMTU-C model, MCSP,
or bundle that is approved for use, the
MCS or class of MCSs permitted for use
with the type-approved EMTU, and the
regions or fisheries in which the EMTU/
EMTU-C, MCSP, or bundle is approved
for use.
(b) The NMFS Office of Law
Enforcement will maintain a list of typeapproved EMTUs/EMTU-C, MCSPs, and
bundles on a publicly available website
and provide copies of the list upon
request.
§ 600.1511 Changes or modifications to
type-approvals.
Type-approval holders must notify
NMFS Office of Law Enforcement (OLE)
in writing no later than 2 days following
modification to or replacement of any
functional component or piece of their
type-approved EMTU, EMTU-C, or MTU
configuration, MCS, or bundle. If the
changes are substantial, NMFS OLE will
notify the type-approval holder in
writing within 60 calendar days that an
amended type-approval is required or
that NMFS will initiate the typeapproval revocation process.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
§ 600.1512
process.
Type-approval revocation
(a) If at any time, a type-approved
EMTU/EMTU-C, MCS, or bundle fails to
meet requirements at §§ 600.1502
through 600.1509 or applicable VMS
regulations and requirements in effect
for the region(s) and Federal fisheries
for which the EMTU/EMTU-C or MCS is
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:59 Jul 07, 2020
Jkt 250001
type-approved, or if an MTU fails to
meet the requirements under which it
was type-approved, OLE may issue a
Notification Letter to the type-approval
holder that:
(1) Identifies the MTU, EMTU, EMTUC, MCS, or bundle that allegedly fails to
comply with type-approval regulations
and requirements;
(2) Identifies the alleged failure to
comply with type-approval regulations
and requirements, and the urgency and
impact of the alleged failure;
(3) Cites relevant regulations and
requirements under this subpart;
(4) Describes the indications and
evidence of the alleged failure;
(5) Provides documentation and data
demonstrating the alleged failure;
(6) Sets a response date by which the
type-approval holder must submit to
NMFS OLE a written response to the
Notification Letter, including, if
applicable, a proposed solution; and
(7) Explains the type-approval
holder’s options if the type-approval
holder believes the Notification Letter is
in error.
(b) NMFS will establish a response
date between 30 and 120 calendar days
from the date of the Notification Letter.
The type-approval holder’s response
must be received in writing by NMFS on
or before the response date. If the typeapproval holder fails to respond by the
response date, the type-approval will be
revoked. At its discretion and for good
cause, NMFS may extend the response
date to a maximum of 150 calendar days
from the date of the Notification Letter.
(c) A type-approval holder who has
submitted a timely response may meet
with NMFS within 21 calendar days of
the date of that response to discuss a
detailed and agreed-upon procedure for
resolving the alleged failure. The
meeting may be in person, conference
call, or webcast.
(d) If the type-approval holder
disagrees with the Notification Letter
and believes that there is no failure to
comply with the type-approval
regulations and requirements, NMFS
has incorrectly defined or described the
failure or its urgency and impact, or
NMFS is otherwise in error, the typeapproval holder may submit a written
objection letter to NMFS on or before
the response date. Within 21 calendar
days of the date of the objection letter,
the type-approval holder may meet with
NMFS to discuss a resolution or
redefinition of the issue. The meeting
may be in person, conference call, or
webcast. If modifications to any part of
the Notification Letter are required, then
NMFS will issue a revised Notification
Letter to the type-approval holder.
However, the response date or any other
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
40925
timeline in this process would not
restart or be modified unless NMFS
decides to do so, at its discretion.
(e) The total process from the date of
the Notification Letter to the date of
final resolution should not exceed 180
calendar days, and may require a shorter
timeframe, to be determined by NMFS,
depending on the urgency and impact of
the alleged failure. In rare
circumstances, NMFS, at its discretion,
may extend the time for resolution of
the alleged failure. In such a case,
NMFS will provide a written notice to
the type-approval holder informing him
or her of the extension and the basis for
the extension.
(f) If the failure to comply with typeapproval regulations and requirements
cannot be resolved through this process,
the NMFS OLE Director will issue a
Revocation Letter to the type-approval
holder that:
(1) Identifies the MTU, EMTU, EMTUC, MCS, or bundle for which typeapproval is being revoked;
(2) Summarizes the failure to comply
with type-approval regulations and
requirements, including describing its
urgency and impact;
(3) Summarizes any proposed plan, or
attempts to produce such a plan, to
resolve the failure;
(4) States that revocation of the MTU,
EMTU, EMTU-C, MCS, or bundle’s typeapproval has occurred;
(5) States that no new installations of
the revoked unit will be permitted in
any NMFS-managed fishery requiring
the use of VMS;
(6) Cites relevant regulations and
requirements under this subpart;
(7) Explains why resolution was not
achieved;
(8) Advises the type-approval holder
that:
(i) The type-approval holder may
reapply for a type-approval under the
process set forth in § 600.1501, and
(ii) A revocation may be appealed
pursuant to the process under
§ 600.1513.
§ 600.1513 Type-approval revocation
appeals process.
(a) If a type-approval holder receives
a Revocation Letter pursuant to
§ 600.1512, the type-approval holder
may file an appeal of the revocation to
the NMFS Assistant Administrator.
(b) An appeal must be filed within 14
calendar days of the date of the
Revocation Letter. A type-approval
holder may not request an extension of
time to file an appeal.
(c) An appeal must include a
complete copy of the Revocation Letter
and its attachments and a written
statement detailing any facts or
E:\FR\FM\08JYR1.SGM
08JYR1
40926
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 8, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
circumstances explaining and refuting
the failures summarized in the
Revocation Letter.
(d) The NMFS Assistant
Administrator may, at his or her
discretion, affirm, vacate, or modify the
Revocation Letter and send a letter to
the type-approval holder explaining his
or her determination, within 21
calendar days of receipt of the appeal.
The NMFS Assistant Administrator’s
determination constitutes the final
agency decision.
§ 600.1514 Revocation effective date and
notification to vessel owners.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
(a) Following issuance of a Revocation
Letter pursuant to § 600.1512 and any
appeal pursuant to § 600.1513, NMFS
will provide notice to all vessel owners
impacted by the type-approval
revocation via letter and Federal
Register notice. NMFS will provide
information to impacted vessel owners
on:
(1) The next steps vessel owners
should take to remain in compliance
with regional and/or national VMS
requirements;
(2) The date, 60–90 calendar days
from the notice date, on which the typeapproval revocation will become
effective;
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:59 Jul 07, 2020
Jkt 250001
(3) Reimbursement of the cost of a
new type-approved EMTU/EMTU-C,
should funding for reimbursement be
available pursuant to § 600.1516.
§ 600.1515
Litigation support.
(a) All technical aspects of a typeapproved EMTU, EMTU-C, MTU, MCS,
or bundle are subject to being admitted
as evidence in a court of law, if needed.
The reliability of all technologies
utilized in the EMTU, EMTU-C, MTU,
MCS, or bundle may be analyzed in
court for, inter alia, testing procedures,
error rates, peer review, technical
processes and general industry
acceptance.
(b) The type-approval holder must, as
a requirement of the holder’s typeapproval, provide technical and expert
support for litigation to substantiate the
EMTU/EMTU-C, MCS, or bundle
capabilities to establish NMFS Office of
Law Enforcement cases against
violators, as needed. If the technologies
have previously been subject to such
scrutiny in a court of law, the typeapproval holder must provide NMFS
with a brief summary of the litigation
and any court findings on the reliability
of the technology.
(c) The type-approval holder will be
required to sign a non-disclosure
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
agreement limiting the release of certain
information that might compromise the
effectiveness of the VMS operations.
§ 600.1516 Reimbursement opportunities
for revoked Vessel Monitoring System typeapproval products.
(a) Subject to the availability of funds,
vessel owners may be eligible for
reimbursement payments for a
replacement EMTU/EMTU-C if:
(1) All eligibility and process
requirements specified by NMFS are
met as described in NMFS Policy
Directive 06–102; and
(2) The replacement type-approved
EMTU/EMTU-C is installed on the
vessel, and reporting to NMFS Office of
Law Enforcement; and
(3) The type-approval for the
previously installed EMTU/EMTU-C has
been revoked by NMFS; or
(4) NMFS requires the vessel owner to
purchase a new EMTU/EMTU-C prior to
the end of an existing unit’s service life.
(b) The cap for individual
reimbursement payments is subject to
change. If this occurs, NMFS Office of
Law Enforcement will publish a notice
in the Federal Register announcing the
change.
[FR Doc. 2020–14600 Filed 7–7–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
E:\FR\FM\08JYR1.SGM
08JYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 131 (Wednesday, July 8, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 40915-40926]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-14600]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 600
[Docket No. 200626-0173]
RIN 0648-BJ15
Vessel Monitoring Systems; Requirements for Type-Approval of
Cellular Transceiver Units
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) program type-approves
enhanced mobile transceiver units (EMTUs) for use in U.S. fisheries.
Currently, the only approved method for transferring VMS data from a
vessel to NMFS is by satellite-linked communication services. This
final rule amends the existing VMS type-approval regulations to add
cellular-based EMTUs (EMTU-Cs) type-approval application and testing
procedures; compliance and revocation processes; and technical,
service, and performance standards. This rule is necessary to allow for
the use of EMTU-Cs and cellular communication service, in addition to
satellite-only models, in federally managed fisheries.
DATES: The final rule will be effective August 7, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the Final Regulatory Impact Review, Final
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis and the information collection request
submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) may be obtained
at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/topic/enforcement#vessel-monitoring.
Written comments regarding the burden-hour estimates or other aspects
of the collection-of-information requirements contained in this final
rule may be submitted to the NMFS Office of Law Enforcement, attention
Kelly Spalding, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910, or to
OMB by email [email protected].
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kelly Spalding, Vessel Monitoring
System Program Manager, NMFS: 301-427-8269 or [email protected].
[[Page 40916]]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
If Federal fishery regulations require use of VMS, fishing vessels
must have a NMFS-approved EMTU (or mobile transmitter unit, although
MTUs are no longer approved for new installations). EMTUs are affixed
to fishing vessels as required by Federal regulations, and report GPS
locations and potentially other fisheries information to NMFS. The EMTU
allows the NMFS Office of Law Enforcement (OLE) to determine the
geographic position of the vessel at specified intervals or during
specific events, via satellite mobile communication services (MCSs).
These satellite MCSs and EMTUs send data securely and at near real-time
so that fisheries management and enforcement can monitor vessels'
activity as it occurs.
Fishermen must comply with applicable Federal fishery VMS
regulations, and in doing so, may select from a variety of EMTU vendors
that have been approved by NMFS to participate in the VMS program for
specific fisheries. NMFS uses national VMS type-approval standards (50
CFR part 600, subpart Q) to approve an EMTU, including any installed
software, and associated MCS, collectively referred to as a bundle,
before they are authorized for use in federally managed fisheries (79
FR 77399, December 24, 2014).
On October 26, 2018, NMFS published a proposed rule that would
require owners and operators of recreational charter vessels and
headboats (for-hire vessels) with Gulf of Mexico (Gulf) permits for
reef fish or coastal migratory pelagic species to report GPS vessel
location information to NMFS, among other management measures (83 FR
54069). NMFS approved an amendment to the fishery management plans
associated with that proposed rule, and is nearing completion of a
final rule to implement those requirements. The Gulf of Mexico Fishery
Management Council determined that real-time satellite transmission is
not necessary to meet the requirements for the Gulf for-hire reporting
rule's vessel monitoring purposes and that cellular data transmission
will be sufficient.
NMFS seeks to accommodate the requirements for for-hire Gulf permit
holders and to adapt to fishery monitoring trends while also
maintaining type-approval standards that are equitably applied to all
fisheries. So, in light of the above rule, this final rule modifies the
existing NMFS VMS type-approval regulations to provide for type-
approval of EMTU-Cs and allow VMS communications to be sent through
secure cellular communication services. Having a single, codified type-
approval process for satellite and cellular-based tracking devices will
ensure the approval process is efficient, transparent, and enforceable
for all approved devices nation-wide. Although the impetus for this
rule was the Gulf proposed rule, this rule will apply nationally for
type-approval of EMTU-Cs, if cellular-based VMS systems are adopted in
other NMFS regions and monitoring programs.
NMFS issued a proposed rule to provide for type-approval of EMTU-Cs
on January 24, 2020 (85 FR 4257). The proposed rule provides further
background on this rulemaking, which is not repeated here. Written
comments on the proposed rule were received through February 24, 2020
through the Federal e-rulemaking portal, and are available for viewing
in the docket for this rulemaking (see https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=NOAA-NMFS-2019-0126). In the following section, NMFS
summarizes and responds to public comments received on the proposed
rule.
Changes From the Proposed Rule
There are no changes from the proposed rule.
Responses to Public Comments
NMFS received seven public comments on the proposed rule.
Comment 1. A commenter asked if solar-powered EMTU-Cs would be
allowed in the VMS program in addition to cable-powered EMTU-Cs, and if
so, suggested that solar panels would need to be kept sufficiently
clean so as to ensure sufficient power.
Response 1. Solar powered VMS units will be allowed in the NMFS
Vessel Monitoring Program. NMFS will not regulate the type of power
source for VMS units and will not regulate the proper care of solar
panels used to power VMS units. NMFS does require that the unit operate
properly and continuously, so cleaning the solar panel may be necessary
in order for a fisherman to remain in compliance with VMS regulations.
Comment 2. One commenter asked if there would be a requirement for
EMTU-Cs to have an internal backup battery.
Response 2. The NMFS VMS type-approval regulations do not require
that any EMTU have an internal back-up battery. Regulations for
fisheries that have a VMS requirement generally require that the VMS
unit be operational for the duration of the fishing trip, and in some
cases, even while in port. Because of these requirements, it is
advisable that any EMTU always be connected to a reliable and
continuous power source in order for a vessel to remain in compliance.
Comment 3. A commenter asked if EMTU-C devices submitted to OLE
will require prior Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
certification.
Response 3. NMFS does not enforce FCC requirements. If the FCC has
set requirements for VMS units, then type-approval applicants and
holders, and VMS vendors should ensure compliance with the FCC and with
all other government requirements.
Comment 4. Another commenter asked if NMFS will consider type
approval for units that can serve both EMTU and EMTU-C end-users? In
other words, a single device that is ``dual band'' in that it can be
programmed to accommodate either cellular or satellite transmissions
(or both, via least cost routing logic)?
Response 4. If the VMS regulations applicable to a particular
fishery allow for the use of store-and-forward reporting, then an EMTU,
EMTU-C, or a hybrid of the two may be used (see definition of ``Vessel
Monitoring System (VMS) Unit'' under Sec. 600.1500).
Comment 5. One commenter expressed concern that the rule, as
proposed, would allow vessels to take infinite time to send position
reports if they do not enter areas with cellular coverage.
Response 5. The time frames for sending position reports in
fisheries that require use of VMS and allow store-and-forward position
reporting will be established in the VMS regulations applicable to that
particular fishery. Type-approved VMS units will automatically send a
vessel's stored VMS data once the VMS unit is in its cellular range,
and fishermen will be responsible for ensuring that the VMS unit that
they purchase has sufficient cellular coverage within their geographic
fishing range.
Comment 6. A commenter suggested that non-real time reporting/
monitoring devices (store and forward position reporting) should not be
limited to cellular-based systems. The commenter noted that satellite-
based systems could significantly lower the cost of service if they are
not required to report in real time (cost competitive with cellular,
but with the advantage of global coverage) and that limiting all non-
real time reporting to cellular-based systems would discourage future
technological advancements by manufacturers of satellite-based systems
and deny them the opportunity to compete.
[[Page 40917]]
Response 6. We recognize that satellite-based VMS units are
approved and can be used for store and forward services. If the VMS
regulations applicable to a particular fishery allow for the use of
store-and-forward reporting, then an EMTU, EMTU-C, or a hybrid of the
two may be used (see definition of ``Vessel Monitoring System (VMS)
Unit'' under Sec. 600.1500).
Comment 7. One commenter noted that in the proposed rule, 90
percent of all GPS position reports over a 24-hour period must reach
the NMFS within 15 minutes of being transmitted by the EMTU-C (for 10
out of 11 consecutive days). However, fishermen may fish in areas with
little or no cellular coverage for hours on end during any 24-hour
period, making it difficult, if not impossible, to meet this
requirement.
Response 7. If a vessel fishes beyond the range of cellular
service, the EMTU-C would still record and store position reports, but
would not send them to NMFS until back within cellular service range.
At that time, the latency requirement in this rule would be triggered:
90 Percent of position reports must be received within 15 minutes of
being sent. This latency requirement is in addition to whatever
fishery-specific regulations are applicable. Likely, VMS regulations
for fisheries that allow use of cellular VMS units will require VMS
data to be reported within a specified time before and/or after landing
or coming in to port.
Classification
The NMFS Assistant Administrator has determined that this rule is
consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other applicable laws.
Executive Order 12866
This final rule has been determined to be not significant for
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
Executive Order 13771
This final rule is considered an Executive Order 13771 deregulatory
action.
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
A Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) was prepared
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 604(a). The FRFA incorporates the Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), a summary of the significant
issues raised by the public comments in response to the IRFA, NMFS's
responses to those comments, and a summary of the analyses completed to
support the action.
The preamble to the proposed rule included a detailed summary of
the analyses contained in the IRFA, and that discussion is not repeated
here. The full FRFA is included below.
The Magnuson-Stevens Act provides the statutory basis for this
final rule. A description of this final rule, why it is being
implemented, and the purpose of this final rule are contained in the
SUMMARY and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION sections of this final rule.
The public did not submit any comments relating to the IRFA or to,
in general, socio-economic implications, and no changes to this final
rule were made as a result of public comment. No comments were received
from the Office of Advocacy for the Small Business Administration
(SBA).
This final rule will directly apply to any companies that wish to
obtain VMS type-approval for EMTU-Cs in the future. There are currently
no EMTU-C units that have been type-approved by NMFS and no end users
of such devices. NMFS received inquiries and quotes from six
prospective telecommunications and/or computer and electronic product
manufacturing companies within the past year expressing interest in
seeking VMS type-approval for EMTU-Cs. Half of these are foreign
companies based in either the United Kingdom or New Zealand. Because
these foreign companies do not have a place of business located in the
United States, do not operate primarily within the United States, or
make a significant contribution to the U.S. economy through payment of
taxes or use of American products, materials, or labor, they are not
considered to be small businesses by the Small Business Administration
(SBA) and only the effects on U.S. applicant companies will be
discussed. One of the prospective U.S. companies is a publicly traded
firm that primarily operates in the satellite telecommunications
industry. The other two prospective U.S. applicant companies for EMTU-
Cs are privately held businesses that do not publicly disclose total
earnings or employment numbers. Based on information from their
websites and product offerings, NMFS believes that one of them
primarily operates in the radio and television broadcasting, and
wireless communications equipment manufacturing industry, and the other
primarily operates in the search, detection, navigation, guidance,
aeronautical, and nautical system and instrument manufacturing
industry. It is not possible to estimate how many additional companies
may enter the marketplace for NMFS approved EMTU-Cs in the future.
It is important to note that this final rule will not be expected
to affect the existing satellite-based EMTU type-approval process.
Therefore, no impacts on current VMS type-approval holders or end users
are anticipated.
Additionally, this final rule will not directly apply to fishing
businesses or end users of EMTU-C devices. This final rule may affect
the availability of EMTU-Cs for purchase, the retail price of these
devices, monthly service charges, and future replacement costs.
However, these will all be indirect effects of this final rule.
Consideration of indirect effects is outside the scope of the RFA and,
therefore, only the effects on EMTU-C vendor companies will be
discussed.
The SBA has established size standards for all major industry
sectors in the U.S. including satellite telecommunications businesses
(NAICS code 517410), radio and television broadcasting and wireless
communications equipment manufacturers (NAICS code 334220), and search,
detection, navigation, guidance, aeronautical, and nautical system and
instrument manufacturers (NAICS 334511). A business primarily involved
in the satellite telecommunications industry is classified as a small
business if it is independently owned and operated, is not dominant in
its field of operation (including its affiliates), and has combined
annual receipts not in excess of $32.5 million for all its affiliated
operations worldwide. A business primarily involved in the radio and
television broadcasting and wireless communications equipment
manufacturing industry is classified as a small business if it is
independently owned and operated, is not dominant in its field of
operation (including its affiliates), and employs 1,250 or fewer
persons on a full-time, part-time, temporary, or other basis at all its
affiliated operations worldwide. Finally, a business primarily involved
in the search, detection, navigation, guidance, aeronautical, and
nautical system and instrument manufacturing industry is classified as
a small business if it is independently owned and operated, is not
dominant in its field of operation (including its affiliates), and
employs 1,250 or fewer persons on a full-time, part-time, temporary, or
other basis at all its affiliated operations worldwide.
Based on financial records from a 2018 annual report to
stockholders, NMFS has determined that the publicly traded U.S. vendor
company that may be directly affected by this final rule will not be
considered a small business under the SBA size criteria for its
[[Page 40918]]
industry designation, the satellite telecommunications industry. NMFS
conservatively assumes that the other two prospective U.S. vendor
companies for EMTU-Cs that are believed to primarily operate in either
the radio and television broadcasting, and wireless communications
equipment manufacturing industry, or the search, detection, navigation,
guidance, aeronautical, and nautical system and instrument
manufacturing industry are small entities. NMFS therefore estimates
that this rule will impact at least two small entities in the short
term and likely more in the long term.
This final rule will involve reporting, record keeping, and other
compliance requirements for the type-approval application process,
notifications to NMFS for any substantive changes to type-approved
EMTU-Cs or MCSs, customer service, potential responses to revocation
notices or revocation appeals, and litigation support.
The type-approval application process will require an applicant
requesting type-approval of an EMTU-C, MCS, or bundle to make a written
request to NMFS that must include the following information pertaining
to the EMTU-C, MCS, or bundle: Communication class; manufacturer; brand
name; model name; model number; software version and date; firmware
version number and date; hardware version number and date; antenna
type; antenna model number and date; tablet, monitor or terminal model
number and date; MCS to be used in conjunction with the EMTU-C; entity
providing MCS to the end user; current global and regional coverage of
the MCS; the requestor-approved third party business entities
associated with the EMTU-C and its use; the NMFS region(s) and/or
Federal fisheries reporting program for which type-approval is sought;
copies of, or citation to, applicable VMS regulations and requirements;
communications functionality; position report data formats and
transmission standards; latency specifications; messaging and
electronic form capabilities; communications security specifications;
details of customer service that will be provided to NMFS and
fishermen; general durability and reliability of the unit; protection
of PII, BII, and other protected information associated with the
purchase or activation of an EMTU-C from disclosure; certification that
the features, components, configuration, and services of the
requestor's EMTU-C, MCS, or bundle comply with each applicable
requirement set out in 50 CFR 600.1502 through 600.1509 and the
applicable VMS regulations and requirements in effect for the NMFS
region(s) and/or Federal fisheries reporting program for which the
requestor seeks type-approval; and a certification that the requestor
accepts responsibility for ensuring compliance with type-approval
regulations during the type-approval period. In addition, the
application must include two EMTU-Cs, loaded with forms and software if
required by the applicable fishery(s), with activated MCS, at no cost
to the government for each NMFS region or Federal fishery for which the
application is made for a minimum of 90 calendar days for testing and
evaluation. Two EMTU-Cs are needed for testing in each NMFS region or
Federal fishery in order to quickly conduct in-office and field trials
simultaneously. The application must also include thorough
documentation, including EMTU-C fact sheets, installation guides, user
manuals, any necessary interfacing software, MCS global and regional
coverage, performance specifications, and technical support
information. This application process will likely require engineering
and product manager expertise for preparation of the application.
The final rule will also require type-approval holders to notify
NMFS within 2 calendar days of any substantive changes from the
original submission for type-approval. Such change or modification
notices will likely require engineering and product manager support as
well.
EMTU-C type-approval holders will be responsible for ensuring that
customer service includes diagnostic and troubleshooting support to
NMFS and fishermen, which is available 24 hours a day, 7 days per week,
and year round. This may require dedicated customer service
representative or technician support.
If NMFS issues a Notification Letter indicating intent to revoke a
type-approval, the type-approval holder must respond, in writing,
within 30 to 120 calendar days from the date specified in the NMFS
Notification Letter if they believe the notification is in error or can
propose a solution to correct the issue. This response will likely
require engineering and product manager expertise to develop.
Additionally, a type-approval holder may file a petition to appeal a
type-approval revocation, which could involve additional technical or
legal support.
Finally, as a condition of type-approval, the type-approval holder
will be required to provide technical and expert support for litigation
to substantiate the EMTU-C, MCS, or bundle capabilities to establish
NMFS OLE cases against potential violators, as needed. If the
technology has been subject to prior scrutiny in a court of law, the
type-approval applicant or holder will be required to provide a brief
summary of the litigation and any court finding on the reliability of
the technology.
The final rule will apply to all companies that wish to obtain VMS
type-approval for EMTU-Cs in the future. As discussed previously, there
are currently no EMTU-C units that have been type-approved by NMFS and
no end users of such devices. However, three U.S. companies are
expected to request type-approvals for EMTU-Cs. NMFS believes two of
these companies are small entities. It is unknown how many additional
companies may enter this market in the future. Because the majority of
prospective applicant companies that are likely to be directly
regulated by this final rule are believed to be small entities, NMFS
conservatively assumes that this rule will affect a substantial number
of small entities.
All entities likely to be affected by this rule are expected to
face comparable costs for the type-approval application process.
Although detailed company information is not available for the small
entities that will be directly regulated by this final rule, based on
the nature of the products and services sold by these businesses, it is
assumed they have the requisite resources to comply with most of the
technical requirements included in this final rule as well. The
requirement for customer service that is available 24 hours a day, 7
days per week, and year round will, however, have the potential to
disproportionately burden small entities relative to large entities.
This final rule may necessitate that small businesses hire dedicated
customer service support staff. This increase in overhead costs could
place them at a competitive disadvantage to large businesses that
likely already have robust customer service resources. Small entities
are typically not able to achieve the same economies of scale or scope
as large entities. In other words, large entities are able to drive
down overhead costs per unit by operating at higher levels of output or
spreading overhead costs, such as customer service labor, across
multiple products. This requirement may create a barrier to entry for
small businesses that wish to participate in the EMTU-C market.
The following information summarizes the expected direct effects of
this final rule on small entities.
[[Page 40919]]
Vessel Monitoring System Type-Approval Application Process
Under this final rule, an applicant will need to submit a written
type-approval request and electronic copies of supporting materials
that include the information required under 50 CFR 600.1501 to NMFS
OLE. The application process will likely require engineering and
product manager expertise for preparation of the application. NMFS
estimates that applicants will utilize up to approximately 40 hours of
engineering labor and 40 hours of product management labor to compile
the written request and statement that details how the applicant's
EMTU-C meets the minimum national VMS standards as required by this
rule. This estimate also includes the amount of time it will take to
compile the EMTU-C documentation and the packaging of the EMTU-Cs to
ship to each NMFS region or Federal fishery for which an application is
submitted. Based on the Bureau of Labor Statistics May 2018 National
Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates, the mean hourly wage for
engineers is $47.71 per hour; for general and operations managers it is
approximately $59.56 per hour. Therefore, NMFS estimates the total wage
costs to be approximately $4,300 per EMTU-C application.
With respect to providing OLE two EMTU-Cs for each NMFS region,
NMFS estimates that applicants will likely spend between $55 and $86
per shipment (two units each) based on current United States Postal
Service (USPS) ground shipping rates for a package of up to 30 pounds
($49.62-$80.51 depending on the region) and box/packaging costs of
$5.00. Upon completion of testing and evaluation by OLE in each NMFS
region, applicants will also be responsible for the cost of EMTU-C
return shipments. Therefore, assuming an applicant sends units to all
five NMFS regions, the total shipping cost per application will be $674
based on USPS ground delivery costs of approximately $50 per region in
the continental United States and $81 per region for the Alaska and the
Pacific Islands offices. The cost will be lower if type-approval is
requested for fewer regions.
In addition, applicants will be responsible for covering the costs
of the MCS during the testing period. Using the average applicant
quoted monthly service charge to customers, NMFS estimates that this
could run approximately $25 per month per unit. Assuming a 90-day
testing period for 10 units (2 sent to each NMFS region), the total MCS
cost will be approximately $750. It will be less for requests that
involve fewer regions.
The average estimated retail price of an EMTU-C unit, as based on
six different vendor quotes, is approximately $458. The applicant
seeking type-approval will be unable to sell the EMTU-C units as new
after providing them to NMFS for testing and evaluation for 90 days.
They might only get 60 to 80 percent of the regular retail value on
refurbished units. If 10 EMTU-Cs that regularly retail new for $458
each are sent to 5 regions, the reduced retail revenue will total
approximately $916 to $1,832 per type-approval application. Again, if
type-approval is requested for fewer than five regions, the cost will
be lower. Alternatively, the applicant may opt to use these units as
demo units for trade shows and other marketing purposes and therefore
considerably lower the costs of providing the evaluation units. It is
difficult to estimate the exact costs associated with providing the
units to NMFS given the uncertainty associated with what applicants
will do with these EMTU-Cs after the 90-day evaluation period.
The total upper bound cost to applicants of the VMS type-approval
application process is estimated to be $6,631 to $7,547 per application
($4,291 in wages, plus $674 in shipping, plus $750 in MCS charges, plus
$916 to $1,832 in reduced retail revenue for the demo units). This cost
will be lower if type-approval is requested for fewer than five
regions.
Changes or Modifications to Type-Approvals
After a type-approval is issued, the type-approval holder must
notify NMFS OLE in writing no later than 2 days following modification
to or replacement of any functional component or piece of their type-
approved EMTU-C, MCS, or bundle. If the changes are substantial, NMFS
OLE will notify the type-approval holder in writing within 60 calendar
days that an amended type-approval is required or that NMFS will
initiate the type-approval revocation process. NMFS estimates that
small entities will utilize up to approximately 4 hours of engineering
labor and 4 hours of product management labor to notify NMFS of any
substantive changes to the original type-approval submission and
provide the agency with the details of those changes. NMFS estimates
the total wage costs to be approximately $429 for the change
notification process. NMFS estimates that there will likely be less
than two change/modification notices submitted per year based on past
experience. There were two change/modification notices submitted in
2017 for existing VMS type-approvals, as well as two in 2018.
Therefore, the annual total cost to small entities for this provision
will likely be less than $858 per year.
Customer Service
The type-approval holder will be responsible for ensuring that
customer service includes: Diagnostic and troubleshooting support to
NMFS and fishermen, which is available 24 hours a day, 7 days per week,
and year round; response times for customer service inquiries that do
not exceed 24 hours; warranty and maintenance agreements; escalation
procedures for resolution of problems; established facilities and
procedures to assist fishermen in maintaining and repairing their EMTU-
C; assistance to fishermen in the diagnosis of the cause of
communications anomalies; assistance in resolving communications
anomalies that are traced to the EMTU-C; and assistance to NMFS OLE and
its contractors, upon request, in VMS operation, resolving technical
issues, and data analyses related to the VMS Program or system. NMFS is
unable to estimate the direct costs to businesses to comply with these
customer service requirements. However, they may be nontrivial. Costs
will likely vary depending on each vendor's existing assets,
liabilities, and profit maximization strategies.
Revocation Process
If at any time, a type-approved EMTU-C or bundle fails to meet
requirements at 50 CFR 600.1502 through 600.1509 or applicable VMS
regulations and requirements in effect for the region(s) and Federal
fisheries for which the EMTU-C is type-approved, NMFS OLE may issue a
Notification Letter to the type-approval holder that: Identifies the
EMTU-C, MCS, or bundle that allegedly fails to comply with type-
approval regulations and requirements; identifies the alleged failure
to comply with type-approval regulations and requirements, and the
urgency and impact of the alleged failure; cites relevant regulations
and requirements under 50 CFR 600, subpart Q; describes the indications
and evidence of the alleged failure; provides documentation and data
demonstrating the alleged failure; sets a response date by which the
type-approval holder must submit to NMFS OLE a written response to the
Notification Letter, including, if applicable, a proposed solution; and
explains the type-approval holder's options if the type-approval holder
[[Page 40920]]
believes the Notification Letter is in error.
NMFS will establish a response date between 30 and 120 calendar
days from the date of the Notification Letter. The type-approval
holder's response must be received in writing by NMFS on or before the
response date. If the type-approval holder fails to respond by the
response date, the type-approval will be revoked. At its discretion and
for good cause, NMFS may extend the response date to a maximum of 150
calendar days from the date of the Notification Letter. A type-approval
holder who has submitted a timely response may meet with NMFS within 21
calendar days of the date of that response to discuss a detailed and
agreed-upon procedure for resolving the alleged failure. The meeting
may be in person, conference call, or webcast.
If the type-approval holder disagrees with the Notification Letter
and believes that there is no failure to comply with the type-approval
regulations and requirements, NMFS has incorrectly defined or described
the failure or its urgency and impact, or NMFS is otherwise in error,
the type-approval holder may submit a written objection letter to NMFS
on or before the response date in accordance with 50 CFR 600.1512.
NMFS estimates that the revocation process will potentially involve
16 hours of engineering labor and 8 hours of product management labor,
per instance, to investigate the issues raised by NMFS and prepare a
written response. Based on the wage costs previously discussed, NMFS
estimates the revocation process could result in approximately $1,240
in labor costs. However, the actual amount of labor costs could vary
considerably depending on the complexity of the issues causing the
potential violations NMFS identified. Some vendors may decide not to
challenge the revocation or may be unable to bring the issue to final
resolution to NMFS' satisfaction and then face the revocation of the
type-approval for their product. The vendor will then be impacted by
the loss of future EMTU-C sales and monthly data communication fees
from vessels required to carry and operate a type-approved EMTU-C, MCS,
or bundle.
The vendor could also opt to appeal the type-approval revocation.
In addition to the costs associated with the engineering and product
management support provided during the revocation process, the vendor
may also decide to employ legal assistance to challenge the agency's
decision. These costs could vary considerably depending on the
complexity of the appeal arguments.
Litigation Support
Finally, in accordance with 50 CFR 600.1515, the final rule will
also require the type-approval holder's litigation support. All
technical aspects of a type-approved EMTU-C, MCS, or bundle are subject
to being admitted as evidence in a court of law, if needed, and the
type-approval holder will be required to provide technical and expert
support for litigation to substantiate the EMTU-C, or bundle
capabilities to establish NMFS OLE cases against violators. NMFS will
pay the reasonable cost for such assistance in NMFS-authorized service
or purchase agreements, work orders or contracts. If the technologies
have previously been subject to such scrutiny in a court of law, the
type-approval holder must provide NMFS with a brief summary of the
litigation and any court findings on the reliability of the technology.
This litigation support, if not fully paid for by NMFS, will be another
potential cost of this final rule to EMTU-C vendors or mobile
communications service providers. Because details of future litigation
support needs are unknown, it is not possible to estimate these costs.
In conclusion, participation in the EMTU-C market will be
voluntary. It is assumed vendors are profit maximizing firms that will
only apply for type-approvals if the expected profits from selling
EMTU-C units and services justify the costs presented in this RFA
analysis. However, there may be disproportionate effects on small
entities relative to large entities, due to the customer service
requirements included as part of this final rule.
The following discussion describes the alternatives that were not
selected as preferred by NMFS.
Only two alternatives were considered for this rule. The first
alternative, the no-action alternative, would not add EMTU-Cs and
cellular based transmissions of VMS data to the VMS type-approval
regulations. Currently there is no type-approval process for EMTU-Cs.
This alternative was not selected by NMFS, because a type-approval
process is required in order to facilitate the use of EMTU-Cs and
cellular-based VMS transmissions in federally regulated fisheries that
will require, or allow the use of, such in the future. Therefore, the
no-action alternative was not a viable alternative. The second
alternative, which includes all of the provisions laid out in this
final rule, is the preferred alternative. NMFS has not identified any
other alternatives that would meet the objectives of the final rule
while minimizing economic impacts on small entities.
Section 212 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness
Act of 1996 states that, for each rule or group of related rules for
which an agency is required to prepare a FRFA, the agency shall publish
one or more guides to assist small entities in complying with the rule,
and shall designate such publications as `small entity compliance
guides.' The agency shall explain the actions a small entity is
required to take to comply with a rule or group of rules. Copies of the
compliance guide for this final rule are available (see ADDRESSES).
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This final rule contains collection-of-information requirements
that have been submitted for approval to OMB under the PRA, Control
Number 0648-0789, Type-Approval Requirements for Vessel Monitoring
Systems. Public reporting burden for the application process is
estimated to average 80 hours per response, including the time for
reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the
collection information.
Public comment is sought regarding: Whether this collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the agency, including whether the information shall have practical
utility; the accuracy of the burden estimate; ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information, including
through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of
information technology. Send comments on these or any other aspects of
the collection of information to NMFS OLE at the ADDRESSES above, or to
OMB by email [email protected].
Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is
required to respond to, and no person shall be subject to penalty for
failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the PRA, unless that collection of information displays
a currently valid OMB control number. All currently approved
collections of information may be viewed at https://www.cio.noaa.gov/services_programs/prasubs.html.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 600
Administrative practice and procedure, Fisheries, Fishing,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
[[Page 40921]]
Dated: June 29, 2020.
Christopher Wayne Oliver,
Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 600 is amended
as follows:
PART 600--MAGNUSON-STEVENS ACT PROVISIONS
0
1. The authority citation for part 600 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 561 and 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
0
2. Revise subpart Q to part 600 to read as follows:
Subpart Q--Vessel Monitoring System Type-Approval
Sec.
600.1500 Definitions and acronyms.
600.1501 Vessel Monitoring System type-approval process.
600.1502 Communications functionality.
600.1503 Position report data formats and transmission.
600.1504 Latency requirement.
600.1505 Messaging.
600.1506 Electronic forms.
600.1507 Communications security.
600.1508 Customer service.
600.1509 General.
600.1510 Notification of type-approval.
600.1511 Changes or modifications to type-approvals.
600.1512 Type-approval revocation process.
600.1513 Type-approval revocation appeals process.
600.1514 Revocation effective date and notification to vessel
owners.
600.1515 Litigation support.
600.1516 Reimbursement opportunities for revoked Vessel Monitoring
System type-approval products.
Sec. 600.1500 Definitions and acronyms.
In addition to the definitions in the Magnuson-Stevens Act and in
Sec. 600.10, and the acronyms in Sec. 600.15, the terms and acronyms
in this subpart have the following meanings:
Authorized entity means a person, defined at 16 U.S.C. 1802(36),
authorized to receive data transmitted by a VMS unit.
Bench configuration means the configuration of a VMS unit after it
has been customized to meet the Federal VMS requirements.
Bundle means a mobile communications service and VMS unit sold as a
package and considered one product. If a bundle is type-approved, the
requestor will be the type-approval holder for the bundled MCS and VMS
unit.
Cellular communication means the wireless transmission of VMS data
via a cellular network.
Communication class means the satellite or cellular communications
operator from which communications services originate.
Electronic form means a pre-formatted message transmitted by a VMS
unit that is required for the collection of data for a specific fishery
program (e.g., declaration system, catch effort reporting).
Enhanced Mobile Transceiver Unit (EMTU) means a type of MTU that is
capable of supporting two-way communication, messaging, and electronic
forms transmission via satellite. An EMTU is a transceiver or
communications device, including an antenna, and dedicated message
terminal and display which can support a dedicated input device such as
a tablet or keyboard, installed on fishing vessels participating in
fisheries with a VMS requirement.
Enhanced Mobile Transceiver Unit, Cellular Based (EMTU-C) means an
EMTU that transmits and receives data via cellular communications,
except that it may not need a dedicated message terminal and display
component at the time of approval as explained at Sec. 600.1502(a)(6).
An EMTU-C only needs to be capable of transmission and reception when
in the range of a cellular network.
Latency means the state of untimely delivery of Global Positioning
System position reports and electronic forms to NMFS (i.e., information
is not delivered to NMFS consistent with timing requirements of this
subpart).
Mobile Communications Service (MCS) means the satellite and/or
cellular communications services used with particular VMS units.
Mobile Communications Service Provider (MCSP) means an entity that
sells VMS satellite and/or cellular communications services to end
users.
Mobile Transmitter Unit (MTU) means a VMS unit capable of
transmitting Global Positioning System position reports via satellite.
(MTUs are no longer approved for new installations on VMS vessels).
Notification Letter means a letter issued by NMFS to a type-
approval holder identifying an alleged failure of a VMS unit, MCS, or
the type-approval holder to comply with the requirements of this
subpart.
Position report means the unique global positioning system (GPS)
report generated by a vessel's VMS unit, which identifies the vessel's
latitude/longitude position at a point in time. Position reports are
sent from the VMS unit via the MCS, to authorized entities.
Requestor means a vendor seeking type-approval.
Service life means the length of time during which a VMS unit
remains fully operational with reasonable repairs.
Sniffing means the unauthorized and illegitimate monitoring and
capture, through use of a computer program or device, of data being
transmitted over a network.
Spoofing means the reporting of a false Global Positioning System
position and/or vessel identity.
Time stamp means the time, in hours, minutes, and seconds in a
position report. Each position report is time stamped.
Type-approval holder means an applicant whose type-approval request
has been approved pursuant to this subpart.
Vendor means a commercial provider of VMS hardware, software, and/
or mobile communications services.
Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) means, for purposes of this subpart,
a satellite and/or cellular based system designed to monitor the
location and movement of vessels using onboard VMS units that send
Global Positioning System position reports to an authorized entity.
Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) data means the data transmitted to
authorized entities from a VMS unit.
Vessel Monitoring System Program means the Federal program that
manages the vessel monitoring system, data, and associated program-
components, nationally and in each NMFS region; it is housed in the
Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service's Office of Law
Enforcement.
Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) Unit means MTU, EMTU or EMTU-C, as
well as the units that can operate as both an EMTU and an EMTU-C.
Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) Vessels means vessels that operate
in federally managed fisheries with a requirement to carry and operate
a VMS unit.
Sec. 600.1501 Vessel Monitoring System type-approval process.
(a) Applicability. Unless otherwise specified, this section applies
to EMTUs, EMTU-Cs, units that operate as both an EMTU and EMTU-C, and
MCSs. Units that can operate as both an EMTU and EMTU-C must meet the
requirements for both an EMTU and an EMTU-C in order to gain type-
approval as both. MTUs are no longer eligible for type-approval.
(b) Application submission. A requestor must submit a written type-
approval request and electronic copies
[[Page 40922]]
of supporting materials that include the information required under
this section to the NMFS Office of Law Enforcement (OLE) at: U.S.
Department of Commerce; National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration; National Marine Fisheries Service; Office of Law
Enforcement; Attention: Vessel Monitoring System Office; 1315 East-West
Highway, SSMC3, Suite 3301, Silver Spring, Maryland 20910.
(c) Application requirements. (1) EMTU, EMTU-C, and MCS Identifying
Information: In a type-approval request, the requestor should indicate
whether the requestor is seeking approval for an EMTU, EMTU-C, MCS, or
bundle and must specify identifying characteristics, as applicable:
Communication class; manufacturer; brand name; model name; model
number; software version and date; firmware version number and date;
hardware version number and date; antenna type; antenna model number
and date; tablet, monitor or terminal model number and date; MCS to be
used in conjunction with the EMTU/EMTU-C; entity providing MCS to the
end user; and current global and regional coverage of the MCS.
(2) Requestor-approved third party business entities: The requestor
must provide the business name, address, phone number, contact name(s),
email address, specific services provided, and geographic region
covered for the following third party business entities:
(i) Entities providing bench configuration for the EMTU/EMTU-C at
the warehouse or point of supply.
(ii) Entities distributing/selling the EMTU/EMTU-C to end users.
(iii) Entities currently approved by the requestor to install the
EMTU/EMTU-C onboard vessels.
(iv) Entities currently approved by the requestor to offer a
limited warranty.
(v) Entities approved by the requestor to offer a maintenance
service agreement.
(vi) Entities approved by the requestor to repair or install new
software on the EMTU/EMTU-C.
(vii) Entities approved by the requestor to train end users.
(viii) Entities approved by the requestor to advertise the EMTU/
EMTU-C.
(ix) Entities approved by the requestor to provide other customer
services.
(3) Regulatory Requirements and Documentation: In a type-approval
request, a requestor must:
(i) Identify the NMFS region(s) and/or Federal fisheries for which
the requestor seeks type-approval.
(ii) Include copies of, or citation to, applicable VMS regulations
and requirements in effect for the region(s) and Federal fisheries
identified under paragraph (c)(3)(i) of this section that require use
of VMS.
(iii) Provide a table with the type-approval request that lists in
one column each requirement set out in Sec. Sec. 600.1502 through
600.1509 and regulations described under paragraph (c)(3)(ii) of this
section. NMFS OLE will provide a template for the table upon request.
The requestor must indicate in subsequent columns in the table:
(A) Whether the requirement applies to the type-approval; and
(B) Whether the EMTU, EMTU-C, MCS, or bundle meets the requirement.
(iv) Certify that the features, components, configuration and
services of the requestor's EMTU/EMTU-C, MCS, or bundle comply with
each requirement set out in Sec. Sec. 600.1502 through 600.1509 and
the regulations described under paragraph (c)(3)(ii) of this section.
(v) Certify that, if the request is approved, the requestor agrees
to be responsible for ensuring compliance with each requirement set out
in Sec. Sec. 600.1502 through 600.1509 and the regulations described
under paragraph (c)(3)(ii) of this section over the course of the type-
approval period.
(vi) Provide NMFS OLE with two EMTU/EMTU-Cs loaded with forms and
software, if applicable, for each NMFS region or Federal fishery, with
activated MCS, for which a type-approval request is submitted for a
minimum of 90 calendar days for testing and evaluation. For EMTU-Cs,
the forms and software may be loaded onto a dedicated message terminal
and display component to which the EMTU-C can connect. Copies of forms
currently used by NMFS are available upon request. As part of its
review, NMFS OLE may perform field tests and at-sea trials that involve
demonstrating every aspect of EMTU/EMTU-C and communications operation.
The requestor is responsible for all associated costs including paying
for: Shipping of the EMTU/EMTU-C to the required NMFS regional offices
and/or headquarters for testing; the MCS during the testing period; and
shipping of the EMTU/EMTU-C back to the vendor.
(vii) Provide thorough documentation for the EMTU/EMTU-C and MCS,
including: EMTU/EMTU-C fact sheets; installation guides; user manuals;
any necessary interfacing software; MCS global and regional coverage;
performance specifications; and technical support information.
(d) Certification. A requestor seeking type-approval of an EMTU/
EMTU-C to operate with a class or type of communications, as opposed to
type-approval for use with a specific MCS, shall certify that the EMTU/
EMTU-C meets requirements under this subpart when using at least one
MCSP within that class or type of communications.
(e) Notification. Unless additional time is required for EMTU/EMTU-
C testing, NMFS OLE will notify the requestor within 90 days after
receipt of a complete type-approval request as follows:
(1) If a request is approved or partially approved, NMFS OLE will
provide notice as described under Sec. 600.1510 and the type-approval
letter will serve as official documentation and notice of type-
approval. OLE will publish and maintain the list of type-approved units
on their Vessel Monitoring System web page.
(2) If a request is disapproved or partially disapproved:
(i) OLE will send a letter to the requestor that explains the
reason for the disapproval/partial disapproval.
(ii) The requestor may respond to NMFS OLE in writing with
additional information to address the reasons for disapproval
identified in the NMFS OLE letter. The requestor must submit this
response within 21 calendar days of the date of the OLE letter sent
under paragraph (e)(2)(i) of this section.
(iii) If any additional information is submitted under paragraph
(e)(2)(ii) of this section, NMFS OLE, after reviewing such information,
may either take action under paragraph (e)(1) of this section or
determine that the request should continue to be disapproved or
partially disapproved. In the latter case, the NMFS OLE Director will
send a letter to the requestor that explains the reasons for the
continued disapproval/partial disapproval. The NMFS OLE Director's
decision is final upon issuance of this letter and is not appealable.
Sec. 600.1502 Communications functionality.
(a) Unless otherwise specified, this subsection applies to all VMS
units. Units that can operate as both an EMTU and EMTU-C must meet the
requirements for both an EMTU and an EMTU-C in order to gain type-
approval as both. The VMS unit must:
(1) Be able to transmit all automatically-generated position
reports.
(2) Provide visible or audible alarms onboard the vessel to
indicate malfunctioning of the VMS unit.
(3) Be able to disable non-essential alarms in non-Global Maritime
Distress and Safety System (GMDSS) installations.
(4) EMTU/EMTU-Cs must be able to send communications that function
uniformly throughout the geographic
[[Page 40923]]
area(s) covered by the type-approval, except an EMTU-C only needs to be
capable of transmission and reception when in the range of a cellular
network.
(5) EMTU/EMTU-Cs must have two-way communications between the unit
and authorized entities, via MCS, or be able to connect to a device
that has two-way communications.
(6) EMTU/EMTU-Cs must be able to run or to connect to a dedicated
message terminal and display component that can run software and/or
applications that send and receive electronic forms and internet email
messages for the purpose of complying with VMS reporting requirements
in Federal fisheries. Depending on the reporting requirements for the
fishery(s) in which the requester is seeking type-approval, an EMTU-C
type-approval may not require the inclusion of a dedicated message
terminal and display component at the time of approval, but the
capability to support such a component must be shown.
(7) Have messaging and communications mechanisms that are
completely compatible with NMFS vessel monitoring and surveillance
software.
(b) In addition, messages and communications from a VMS unit must
be able to be parsed out to enable clear billing of costs to the
government and to the owner of a vessel or EMTU/EMTU-C, when necessary.
Also, the costs associated with position reporting and the costs
associated with other communications (for example, personal email or
communications/reports to non-NMFS Office of Law Enforcement entities)
must be parsed out and billed to separate parties, as appropriate.
Sec. 600.1503 Position report data formats and transmission.
Unless otherwise specified, this subsection applies to all VMS
units, MCSs and bundles. Units that can operate as both an EMTU and
EMTU-C must meet the requirements for both an EMTU and an EMTU-C in
order to gain type-approval as both. To be type-approved in any given
fishery, a VMS unit must also meet any additional positioning
information as required by the applicable VMS regulations and
requirements in effect for each fishery or region for which the type-
approval applies. The VMS unit must meet the following requirements:
(a) Transmit all automatically-generated position reports, for
vessels managed individually or grouped by fleet, that meet the latency
requirement under Sec. 600.1504.
(b) When powered up, must automatically re-establish its position
reporting function without manual intervention.
(c) Position reports must contain all of the following:
(1) Unique identification of an EMTU/EMTU-C and clear indication if
the unit is an EMTU-C.
(2) Date (year/month/day with century in the year) and time stamp
(GMT) of the position fix.
(3) Date (year/month/day with century in the year) and time stamp
(GMT) that the EMTU-C position report was sent from the EMTU-C.
(4) Position fixed latitude and longitude, including the hemisphere
of each, which comply with the following requirements:
(i) The position fix precision must be to the decimal minute
hundredths.
(ii) Accuracy of the reported position must be within 100 meters
(328.1 ft).
(d) An EMTU/EMTU-C must have the ability to: (1) Store 1,000
position fixes in local, non-volatile memory.
(2) Allow for defining variable reporting intervals between 5
minutes and 24 hours.
(3) Allow for changes in reporting intervals remotely and only by
authorized users.
(e) An EMTU/EMTU-C must generate specially identified position
reports upon:
(1) Antenna disconnection.
(2) Loss of positioning reference signals.
(3) Security events, power-up, power down, and other status data.
(4) A request for EMTU/EMTU-C status information such as
configuration of programming and reporting intervals.
(5) The EMTUs loss of the mobile communications signals.
(6) An EMTU must generate a specially identified position report
upon the vessel crossing of a pre-defined geographic boundary.
Sec. 600.1504 Latency requirement.
(a) Ninety percent of all pre-programmed or requested Global
Positioning System position reports during each 24-hour period must
reach NMFS within 15 minutes or less of being sent from the VMS unit,
for 10 out of 11 consecutive days (24-hour time periods).
(b) NMFS will continually examine latency by region and by type-
approval holder.
(c) Exact dates for calculation of latency will be chosen by NMFS.
Days in which isolated and documented system outages occur will not be
used by NMFS to calculate a type-approval holder's latency.
Sec. 600.1505 Messaging.
(a) Unless otherwise specified, this section applies to all VMS
units, MCSs, and bundles. Units that can operate as both an EMTU and
EMTU-C must meet the requirements for both an EMTU and an EMTU-C in
order to gain type-approval as both. Depending on the reporting
requirements for the fishery(s) in which the requester is seeking type-
approval, an EMTU-C type-approval may not require the inclusion of a
dedicated message terminal and display component at the time of
approval, but the capability to support such a component must be shown.
To be type-approved in any given fishery, a VMS unit must meet
messaging information requirements under the applicable VMS regulations
and requirements in effect for each fishery or region for which the
type-approval applies. The VMS unit must also meet the following
requirements:
(b) An EMTU must be able to run software and/or applications that
send email messages for the purpose of complying with VMS reporting
requirements in Federal fisheries that require email communication
capability. An EMTU-C must be able to run or connect to a device that
can run such software and/or applications. In such cases, the EMTU/
EMTU-C messaging must provide for the following capabilities:
(1) Messaging from vessel to shore, and from shore to vessel by
authorized entities, must have a minimum supported message length of 1
KB. For EMTU-Cs, this messaging capability need only be functional when
in range of shore-based cellular communications.
(2) There must be a confirmation of delivery function that allows a
user to ascertain whether a specific message was successfully
transmitted to the MCS email server(s).
(3) Notification of failed delivery to the EMTU/EMTU-C must be sent
to the sender of the message. The failed delivery notification must
include sufficient information to identify the specific message that
failed and the cause of failure (e.g., invalid address, EMTU/EMTU-C
switched off, etc.).
(4) The EMTU/EMTU-C must have an automatic retry feature in the
event that a message fails to be delivered.
(5) The EMTU/EMTU-C user interface must:
(i) Support an ``address book'' capability and a function
permitting a ``reply'' to a received message without re-entering the
sender's address.
(ii) Provide the ability to review by date order, or by recipient,
messages that were previously sent. The EMTU/EMTU-C terminal must
support a
[[Page 40924]]
minimum message history of 50 sent messages--commonly referred to as an
``Outbox'' or ``Sent'' message display.
(iii) Provide the ability to review by date order, or by sender,
all messages received. The EMTU/EMTU-C terminal must support a minimum
message history of at least 50 messages in an inbox.
Sec. 600.1506 Electronic forms.
Unless otherwise specified, this subsection applies to all EMTUs,
EMTU-Cs, MCSs, and bundles.
(a) Forms. An EMTU/EMTU-C must be able to run, or to connect to and
transmit data from a device that can run electronic forms software.
Depending on the reporting requirements for the fishery(s) in which the
requester is seeking type-approval, an EMTU-C type-approval may not
require the inclusion of a dedicated message terminal and display
component at the time of approval, but the capability to support such a
component must be shown. The EMTU/EMTU-C must be able to support forms
software that can hold a minimum of 20 electronic forms, and it must
also meet any additional forms requirements in effect for each fishery
or region for which the type-approval applies. The EMTU/EMTU-C must
meet the following requirements:
(1) Form Validation: Each field on a form must be capable of being
defined as Optional, Mandatory, or Logic Driven. Mandatory fields are
those fields that must be entered by the user before the form is
complete. Optional fields are those fields that do not require data
entry. Logic-driven fields have their attributes determined by earlier
form selections. Specifically, a logic-driven field must allow for
selection of options in that field to change the values available as
menu selections on a subsequent field within the same form.
(2) A user must be able to select forms from a menu on the EMTU/
EMTU-C.
(3) A user must be able to populate a form based on the last values
used and ``modify'' or ``update'' a prior submission without
unnecessary re-entry of data. A user must be able to review a minimum
of 20 past form submissions and ascertain for each form when the form
was transmitted and whether delivery was successfully sent to the type-
approval holder's VMS data processing center. In the case of a
transmission failure, a user must be provided with details of the cause
and have the opportunity to retry the form submission.
(4) VMS Position Report: Each form must include VMS position data,
including latitude, longitude, date and time. Data to populate these
fields must be automatically generated by the EMTU/EMTU-C and unable to
be manually entered or altered.
(5) Delivery and Format of Forms Data: Delivery of form data to
NMFS must employ the same transport security and reliability as set out
in Sec. 600.1507 of this subpart. The forms data and delivery must be
completely compatible with NMFS vessel monitoring software.
(b) Updates to Forms. (1) The EMTU/EMTU-C and MCS must be capable
of providing updates to forms or adding new form requirements via
wireless transmission and without manual installation.
(2) From time to time, NMFS may provide type-approved applicants
with requirements for new forms or modifications to existing forms.
NMFS may also provide notice of forms and form changes through the NMFS
Work Order System. Type-approved applicants will be given at least 60
calendar days to complete their implementation of new or changed forms.
Applicants will be capable of, and responsible for translating the
requirements into their EMTU/EMTU-C-specific forms definitions and
wirelessly transmitting the same to all EMTU/EMTU-C terminals supplied
to fishing vessels.
Sec. 600.1507 Communications security.
Communications between an EMTU/EMTU-C and MCS must be secure from
tampering or interception, including the reading of passwords and data.
The EMTU/EMTU-C and MCS must have mechanisms to prevent to the extent
possible:
(a) Sniffing and/or interception during transmission from the EMTU/
EMTU-C to MCS.
(b) Spoofing.
(c) False position reports sent from an EMTU/EMTU-C.
(d) Modification of EMTU/EMTU-C identification.
(e) Interference with Global Maritime Distress and Safety System
(GMDSS) or other safety/distress functions.
(f) Introduction of malware, spyware, keyloggers, or other software
that may corrupt, disturb, or disrupt messages, transmission, and the
VMS system.
(g) The EMTU/EMTU-C terminal from communicating with, influencing,
or interfering with the Global Positioning System antenna or its
functionality, position reports, or sending of position reports. The
position reports must not be altered, corrupted, degraded, or at all
affected by the operation of the terminal or any of its peripherals or
installed-software.
(h) VMS data must be encrypted and sent securely through all
associated cellular, satellite, and internet communication pathways and
channels.
Sec. 600.1508 Field and Technical Services.
As a requirement of its type-approval, a type-approval holder must
communicate with NMFS to resolve technical issues with a VMS Unit, MCS
or bundle and ensure that field and technical services includes:
(a) Diagnostic and troubleshooting support to NMFS and fishers,
which is available 24 hours a day, seven days per week, and year-round.
(b) Response times for customer service inquiries that shall not
exceed 24 hours.
(c) Warranty and maintenance agreements.
(d) Escalation procedures for resolution of problems.
(e) Established facilities and procedures to assist fishers in
maintaining and repairing their EMTU, EMTU-C, or MTU.
(f) Assistance to fishers in the diagnosis of the cause of
communications anomalies.
(g) Assistance in resolving communications anomalies that are
traced to the EMTU, EMTU-C, or MTU.
(h) Assistance to NMFS Office of Law Enforcement and its
contractors, upon request, in VMS system operation, resolving technical
issues, and data analyses related to the VMS Program or system.
Sec. 600.1509 General.
(a) An EMTU/EMTU-C must have the durability and reliability
necessary to meet all requirements of Sec. Sec. 600.1502 through
600.1507 regardless of weather conditions, including when placed in a
marine environment where the unit may be subjected to saltwater (spray)
in smaller vessels, and in larger vessels where the unit may be
maintained in a wheelhouse. The unit, cabling and antenna must be
resistant to salt, moisture, and shock associated with sea-going
vessels in the marine environment.
(b) PII and Other Protected Information. Personally identifying
information (PII) and other protected information includes Magnuson-
Stevens Act confidential information as provided at 16 U.S.C. 1881a and
Business Identifiable Information (BII), as defined in the Department
of Commerce Information Technology Privacy Policy. A type-approval
holder is responsible for ensuring that:
(1) All PII and other protected information is handled in
accordance with applicable state and Federal law.
[[Page 40925]]
(2) All PII and other protected information provided to the type-
approval holder by vessel owners or other authorized personnel for the
purchase or activation of an EMTU/EMTU-C or arising from participation
in any Federal fishery are protected from disclosure not authorized by
NMFS or the vessel owner or other authorized personnel.
(3) Any release of PII or other protected information beyond
authorized entities must be requested and approved in writing, as
appropriate, by the submitter of the data in accordance with 16 U.S.C.
1881a, or by NMFS.
(4) Any PII or other protected information sent electronically by
the type-approval holder to the NMFS Office of Law Enforcement must be
transmitted by a secure means that prevents interception, spoofing, or
viewing by unauthorized individuals.
Sec. 600.1510 Notification of type-approval.
(a) If a request made pursuant to Sec. 600.1501 (type-approval) is
approved or partially approved, NMFS will issue a type-approval letter
to indicate the specific EMTU/EMTU-C model, MCSP, or bundle that is
approved for use, the MCS or class of MCSs permitted for use with the
type-approved EMTU, and the regions or fisheries in which the EMTU/
EMTU-C, MCSP, or bundle is approved for use.
(b) The NMFS Office of Law Enforcement will maintain a list of
type-approved EMTUs/EMTU-C, MCSPs, and bundles on a publicly available
website and provide copies of the list upon request.
Sec. 600.1511 Changes or modifications to type-approvals.
Type-approval holders must notify NMFS Office of Law Enforcement
(OLE) in writing no later than 2 days following modification to or
replacement of any functional component or piece of their type-approved
EMTU, EMTU-C, or MTU configuration, MCS, or bundle. If the changes are
substantial, NMFS OLE will notify the type-approval holder in writing
within 60 calendar days that an amended type-approval is required or
that NMFS will initiate the type-approval revocation process.
Sec. 600.1512 Type-approval revocation process.
(a) If at any time, a type-approved EMTU/EMTU-C, MCS, or bundle
fails to meet requirements at Sec. Sec. 600.1502 through 600.1509 or
applicable VMS regulations and requirements in effect for the region(s)
and Federal fisheries for which the EMTU/EMTU-C or MCS is type-
approved, or if an MTU fails to meet the requirements under which it
was type-approved, OLE may issue a Notification Letter to the type-
approval holder that:
(1) Identifies the MTU, EMTU, EMTU-C, MCS, or bundle that allegedly
fails to comply with type-approval regulations and requirements;
(2) Identifies the alleged failure to comply with type-approval
regulations and requirements, and the urgency and impact of the alleged
failure;
(3) Cites relevant regulations and requirements under this subpart;
(4) Describes the indications and evidence of the alleged failure;
(5) Provides documentation and data demonstrating the alleged
failure;
(6) Sets a response date by which the type-approval holder must
submit to NMFS OLE a written response to the Notification Letter,
including, if applicable, a proposed solution; and
(7) Explains the type-approval holder's options if the type-
approval holder believes the Notification Letter is in error.
(b) NMFS will establish a response date between 30 and 120 calendar
days from the date of the Notification Letter. The type-approval
holder's response must be received in writing by NMFS on or before the
response date. If the type-approval holder fails to respond by the
response date, the type-approval will be revoked. At its discretion and
for good cause, NMFS may extend the response date to a maximum of 150
calendar days from the date of the Notification Letter.
(c) A type-approval holder who has submitted a timely response may
meet with NMFS within 21 calendar days of the date of that response to
discuss a detailed and agreed-upon procedure for resolving the alleged
failure. The meeting may be in person, conference call, or webcast.
(d) If the type-approval holder disagrees with the Notification
Letter and believes that there is no failure to comply with the type-
approval regulations and requirements, NMFS has incorrectly defined or
described the failure or its urgency and impact, or NMFS is otherwise
in error, the type-approval holder may submit a written objection
letter to NMFS on or before the response date. Within 21 calendar days
of the date of the objection letter, the type-approval holder may meet
with NMFS to discuss a resolution or redefinition of the issue. The
meeting may be in person, conference call, or webcast. If modifications
to any part of the Notification Letter are required, then NMFS will
issue a revised Notification Letter to the type-approval holder.
However, the response date or any other timeline in this process would
not restart or be modified unless NMFS decides to do so, at its
discretion.
(e) The total process from the date of the Notification Letter to
the date of final resolution should not exceed 180 calendar days, and
may require a shorter timeframe, to be determined by NMFS, depending on
the urgency and impact of the alleged failure. In rare circumstances,
NMFS, at its discretion, may extend the time for resolution of the
alleged failure. In such a case, NMFS will provide a written notice to
the type-approval holder informing him or her of the extension and the
basis for the extension.
(f) If the failure to comply with type-approval regulations and
requirements cannot be resolved through this process, the NMFS OLE
Director will issue a Revocation Letter to the type-approval holder
that:
(1) Identifies the MTU, EMTU, EMTU-C, MCS, or bundle for which
type-approval is being revoked;
(2) Summarizes the failure to comply with type-approval regulations
and requirements, including describing its urgency and impact;
(3) Summarizes any proposed plan, or attempts to produce such a
plan, to resolve the failure;
(4) States that revocation of the MTU, EMTU, EMTU-C, MCS, or
bundle's type-approval has occurred;
(5) States that no new installations of the revoked unit will be
permitted in any NMFS-managed fishery requiring the use of VMS;
(6) Cites relevant regulations and requirements under this subpart;
(7) Explains why resolution was not achieved;
(8) Advises the type-approval holder that:
(i) The type-approval holder may reapply for a type-approval under
the process set forth in Sec. 600.1501, and
(ii) A revocation may be appealed pursuant to the process under
Sec. 600.1513.
Sec. 600.1513 Type-approval revocation appeals process.
(a) If a type-approval holder receives a Revocation Letter pursuant
to Sec. 600.1512, the type-approval holder may file an appeal of the
revocation to the NMFS Assistant Administrator.
(b) An appeal must be filed within 14 calendar days of the date of
the Revocation Letter. A type-approval holder may not request an
extension of time to file an appeal.
(c) An appeal must include a complete copy of the Revocation Letter
and its attachments and a written statement detailing any facts or
[[Page 40926]]
circumstances explaining and refuting the failures summarized in the
Revocation Letter.
(d) The NMFS Assistant Administrator may, at his or her discretion,
affirm, vacate, or modify the Revocation Letter and send a letter to
the type-approval holder explaining his or her determination, within 21
calendar days of receipt of the appeal. The NMFS Assistant
Administrator's determination constitutes the final agency decision.
Sec. 600.1514 Revocation effective date and notification to vessel
owners.
(a) Following issuance of a Revocation Letter pursuant to Sec.
600.1512 and any appeal pursuant to Sec. 600.1513, NMFS will provide
notice to all vessel owners impacted by the type-approval revocation
via letter and Federal Register notice. NMFS will provide information
to impacted vessel owners on:
(1) The next steps vessel owners should take to remain in
compliance with regional and/or national VMS requirements;
(2) The date, 60-90 calendar days from the notice date, on which
the type-approval revocation will become effective;
(3) Reimbursement of the cost of a new type-approved EMTU/EMTU-C,
should funding for reimbursement be available pursuant to Sec.
600.1516.
Sec. 600.1515 Litigation support.
(a) All technical aspects of a type-approved EMTU, EMTU-C, MTU,
MCS, or bundle are subject to being admitted as evidence in a court of
law, if needed. The reliability of all technologies utilized in the
EMTU, EMTU-C, MTU, MCS, or bundle may be analyzed in court for, inter
alia, testing procedures, error rates, peer review, technical processes
and general industry acceptance.
(b) The type-approval holder must, as a requirement of the holder's
type-approval, provide technical and expert support for litigation to
substantiate the EMTU/EMTU-C, MCS, or bundle capabilities to establish
NMFS Office of Law Enforcement cases against violators, as needed. If
the technologies have previously been subject to such scrutiny in a
court of law, the type-approval holder must provide NMFS with a brief
summary of the litigation and any court findings on the reliability of
the technology.
(c) The type-approval holder will be required to sign a non-
disclosure agreement limiting the release of certain information that
might compromise the effectiveness of the VMS operations.
Sec. 600.1516 Reimbursement opportunities for revoked Vessel
Monitoring System type-approval products.
(a) Subject to the availability of funds, vessel owners may be
eligible for reimbursement payments for a replacement EMTU/EMTU-C if:
(1) All eligibility and process requirements specified by NMFS are
met as described in NMFS Policy Directive 06-102; and
(2) The replacement type-approved EMTU/EMTU-C is installed on the
vessel, and reporting to NMFS Office of Law Enforcement; and
(3) The type-approval for the previously installed EMTU/EMTU-C has
been revoked by NMFS; or
(4) NMFS requires the vessel owner to purchase a new EMTU/EMTU-C
prior to the end of an existing unit's service life.
(b) The cap for individual reimbursement payments is subject to
change. If this occurs, NMFS Office of Law Enforcement will publish a
notice in the Federal Register announcing the change.
[FR Doc. 2020-14600 Filed 7-7-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P