[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 247 (Wednesday, December 24, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 77399-77410]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-30151]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Parts 600 and 648

[Docket No. 130402316-4999-02]
RIN 0648-BD02


Vessel Monitoring Systems; Requirements for Enhanced Mobile 
Transceiver Unit and Mobile Communication Service Type-Approval

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: NMFS publishes this final rule implementing regulations to 
codify type-approval standards, requirements, procedures, and 
responsibilities applicable to commercial Enhanced Mobile Transceiver 
Unit (EMTU) vendors and mobile communications service (MCS) providers 
seeking to obtain and maintain type-approval by NMFS for EMTU/MTU or 
MCS, collectively referred to as vessel monitoring systems (VMS), 
products and services. This rule is necessary to specify NMFS 
procedures for EMTU/MTU and MCS type-approval, type-approval renewal, 
and revocation; revise latency standards; and ensure compliance with 
type-approval standards.

DATES: This final rule is effective January 23, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Electronic copies of the Regulatory Impact Review, Final 
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA), and other related documents are 
available by contacting the individuals listed below in the FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT section. Other documents relevant to this rule are 
available from the Office of Law Enforcement Web site at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/ole/about/programs.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kelly Spalding, Vessel Monitoring

[[Page 77400]]

System Management Analyst, 301-427-8269; or Eric Teeters, Fishery 
Regulations Specialist, 301-427-8580.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Fishers must comply with applicable Federal 
fishery VMS regulations, and in doing so, may select from a variety of 
EMTU/MCS vendors who have been approved to participate in the VMS 
program for specific fisheries. Fishers may be cited for violations of 
the VMS regulations and held accountable for monitoring anomalies not 
attributable to faults in the EMTU or MCS. EMTUs and MCS must continue 
to meet the standards for type-approval throughout the service life of 
the VMS unit. Therefore, type-approval, latency requirements, periodic 
type-approval renewal, and procedures for revocation of type-
approval(s) are essential to establish and maintain uniformly high VMS 
system integrity and ensure fishers have access to VMS that meet their 
needs. Regional Fishery Management Councils and NMFS have established 
VMS programs to support NMFS regulations requiring the use of VMS that 
typically are designed to manage fisheries resources and protect marine 
species and ecologically sensitive areas. VMS is also required on U.S. 
vessels fishing outside the U.S. EEZ pursuant to conservation and 
management measures adopted by international Regional Fishery 
Management Organizations to which the United States is a party.
    The NMFS Office of Law Enforcement (OLE) maintains VMS 
specification requirements. On September 9, 2014, NMFS published and 
requested comments (79 FR 53386) for the proposed regulations that 
outline the rationale for the actions contained herein. The 45-day 
comment period on the proposed rule ended on October 24, 2014. A 
summary of the comments and the responses by NMFS are provided under 
the Comments and Responses section of this preamble.

Background

    A brief summary of the background of this final action is provided 
below. A detailed review of the provisions of the proposed regulations, 
the alternatives, and the rationale for these regulations is provided 
in the preamble to the proposed rule (79 FR 53386, September 9, 2014). 
Those documents are incorporated by reference and their description of 
specific requirements and procedures are not repeated here. Additional 
information regarding, and the proposed rule itself, are available from 
the NMFS Office of Law Enforcement Web site (see ADDRESSES).
    Through this final rule, NMFS is codifying procedures and 
requirements for initial type-approvals for EMTUs, MCS, or EMTU/MTU 
(``bundle'')(valid for 3 years); renewals of type-approvals; 
revocations of type-approvals; and appeals. NMFS will no longer issue 
new type-approvals for MTUs, only for EMTUs. However, as set forth in 
proposed 50 CFR 600.1512, all MTUs, EMTUs, MCSs, and bundles with valid 
type-approvals on the effective date of this rule will continue to be 
type-approved. If a type-approval date is more than 3 years old, the 
type-approval will expire February 23, 2015.
    The final rule will codify the VMS type-approval process and 
standards, improve enforceability of the type-approval standards, and 
better ensure all type-approved EMTU/MTUs and MCS remain in compliance 
with NMFS VMS type-approval standards.
    NMFS is implementing substantive requirements for EMTUs and MCS in 
50 CFR 600.1502 through 600.1509. Failure to meet these requirements or 
applicable VMS regulations and requirements in effect for the region(s) 
and Federal fisheries for which the EMTU or MCS is type-approved will 
trigger a Notification Letter and potential revocation procedures. For 
initial type-approvals and renewals, the type-approval requestor (or 
holder, in the case of a renewal) will be required, among other things, 
to certify that the EMTU, MCS, or bundle complies with each requirement 
set out in 50 CFR 600.1502 through 600.1509, and applicable VMS 
regulations and requirements in effect for the region(s) and Federal 
fisheries for which type-approval/renewal is sought. The final rule 
relaxes the latency standard, as well as implements procedures for 
revoking type-approvals, and sets up an appeals process for such type-
approvals.
    Lastly, this final rule revises existing regulations in the NMFS 
Greater Atlantic Region's VMS vendor and unit requirements at 50 CFR 
648.9 that will otherwise overlap and conflict with the regulations 
herein. To eliminate this potential conflict in Federal regulations, 
this final rule revises the regulations at 50 CFR 648.9 so that the 
NMFS OLE Director will issue type-approvals for all NMFS regions, 
including the Greater Atlantic Region.

Comments and Responses

    During the proposed rule comment period, NMFS received three 
comment letters with six unique comments. A summary of the relevant 
comments on the proposed rule is shown below with NMFS' response. All 
written comments submitted during the comment period can be found at 
http://regulations.gov/ by searching for NOAA-NMFS-2014-0019-0002.
    Comment 1: Support was expressed for the requirement in Sec.  
600.1513(c) that a type-approval renewal request letter include vessel 
position report statistics regarding the processing and transmitting of 
position reports to the VMS data processing center.
    Response: NMFS agrees. By providing these data to NMFS, the type-
approval holder will expedite the type-approval process.
    Comment 2: For initial type-approval of EMTUs, NMFS should be 
required to complete its certification testing for marine electronics 
products in less than the 90 calendars days provided for in Sec.  
600.1501(d) of the proposed rule. The commenter believes the testing as 
outlined in the proposed rule could be completed in 30-40 hours and a 
response, with adequate documentation, should only take an additional 
100-120 hours. Therefore, the commenter suggested the final rule should 
require NMFS to complete certification testing within 30 days.
    Response: Testing of an EMTU for type-approval is conducted in 
multiple steps, including laboratory and field testing of hardware, 
software, and communications that may require weeks or months to 
complete. Requiring NMFS to complete testing within 30 days as 
suggested by the commenter would not allow NMFS OLE sufficient time to 
have all aspects of EMTU and communication operation evaluated 
thoroughly by experts to ensure the devices meet all requirements in 
all of the NMFS regions for which type-approval is requested. NMFS 
believes that certification should occur as quickly as possible and, in 
certain circumstances, NMFS may be able to complete the certification 
process in less than 90 calendar days, but cannot commit to doing so in 
all instances. The regulatory text in Sec.  600.1501(d) of this final 
rule has been changed to reflect the expectation that NMFS will 
complete certification testing within 90 days of receipt of a complete 
type-approval request, unless additional time is needed for testing.
    Comment 3: In proposed Sec.  600.1502, there is a new requirement 
that type-approved vendors be able to parse out billing for various 
features, rather than simply billing customers only for the service 
they use, without regard for the type of service. A commenter stated 
that billing should be kept simple and does not need to have the detail 
and extra expense that parsed billing would require.
    Response: The requirement for vendors to parse billing is to 
distinguish

[[Page 77401]]

services billed to the government from services billed to fishermen. If 
additional polling, increased VMS position reports, or other services 
are required of the vendor by the government, then those services need 
to be billed to the government, not to fishermen. Thus this final rule 
requires that vendors parse billing clearly.
    Comment 4: This commenter suggests 50 CFR 600.1508, which requires 
all VMS vendors to provide 24/7/365 customer service support, would 
increase fishermen's expenses. The commenter states this additional 
expense is unnecessary and would only solve a portion of the support 
issues since vendors do not have access to NOAA's data center, and 
cannot tell what issues are related to the equipment on the vessels. 
The commenter believes that additional technical and customer support 
to fishermen would best be provided by NOAA's OLE Helpdesk.
    Response: The requirement for 24-hour customer support for VMS 
vendors to assist the fisherman in maintaining and repairing their 
EMTU/MTU, including timely responses to customer support requests, has 
been in place since January 31, 2008 (see 73 FR 5813). Prior to the 
January 2008 Federal Register notice, NMFS had required that VMS 
vendors provide some level of customer support, but not 24/7/365 
support, as a condition of being type-approved. (see 70 FR 61941, 
October 27, 2005; 71 FR 3053, January 19, 2006). As such, this 24/7/365 
requirement will not add any new or additional financial burden to 
fishers or VMS vendors, as this requirement has already been built into 
the vendors' costs for the service being provided to fishers since 
2008. Additionally, it is important to note that customer service is 
provided by VMS vendors to the government as well as fishermen.
    Comment 5: Reimbursement of the cost of an EMTU should also include 
reimbursing the cost of a generator if it is needed to power the EMTU. 
Also, special consideration should be made for cases when the 
installation of a generator may not be physically possible due to space 
or other vessel limitations. Please provide information about currently 
available resources for reimbursing the cost of an EMTU.
    Response: The amount of power that is required to operate the EMTUs 
that are currently type-approved varies. Several of these EMTUs are 
operated with battery power on small center console vessels with very 
little space taken by the EMTU. The range of EMTUs that are currently 
type-approved provide fishermen with options to determine which EMTU 
best meets their needs for the fishery in which they participate and 
the specific characteristics of their vessel without requiring the use 
of a generator. For information about the EMTU reimbursement program, 
please go to http://www.psmfc.org/program/vessel-monitoring-system-reimbursement-program-vms or call the NOAA OLE VMS Helpdesk at 1-888-
219-9228.
    Comment 6: NMFS is already monitoring all fish that are caught and 
it is unfair to further burden fishers with the costs associated with 
putting cameras on every boat. These additional costs reduce fishers' 
income and drive up the cost of seafood.
    Response: This rule does not directly impose any additional costs 
or monitoring on fishers or other sectors of the fishing industry; nor 
does it require the installation of cameras on every boat. This final 
rule will enable fishers to have increased confidence that EMTUs/MTUs 
that are type-approved will be capable of complying with type-approval 
standards established by NMFS.

Changes From the Proposed Rule

    Based on public comment, the regulatory text at 50 CFR 600.1501(d) 
has been changed to read, ``Unless additional time is required for EMTU 
testing, NMFS OLE will notify the requestor within 90 days after 
receipt of a complete type-approval request as follows:''.
    Based on public comment, the regulatory text at 50 CFR 600.1502(b) 
has been changed to provide further clarification that billing for 
messages and communications from an EMTU 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, when necessary.

Classification

    The NMFS Assistant Administrator has determined that this final 
rule is consistent with the provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and 
other applicable law.
    This final rule has been determined to be not significant for 
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
    This final rule does not duplicate, conflict, or overlap with any 
Federal regulations.
    The Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) was prepared 
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 604(a) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 
and incorporated 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 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.
    Section 604(a)(1) of the RFA requires that the Agency describe the 
need for, and objectives of, the final rule. A description of the final 
action, why it is being considered, and the legal basis for this final 
action are summarized here and described in more detail in the preamble 
to the proposed rule. The current national process regarding VMS Type-
Approval Standards do not adequately address the process for evaluating 
VMS performance, or procedures for improving VMS performance or 
revoking VMS type-approvals for failure to meet type-approval 
requirements at any time after initial approval. The purpose of the 
final action, therefore, is to codify the VMS type-approval process and 
standards, improve enforceability of the type-approval standards and 
better ensure all type-approved EMTU/MTUs and MCS remain in compliance 
with NMFS VMS type-approval standards. In addition, the final action 
specifies NMFS procedures for VMS type-approval renewal and revocation. 
The objective of the proposed action is to revise latency standards, 
improve the enforceability of the VMS type-approval standards, and to 
establish type-approval renewal and revocation processes.
    Section 604(a)(2) of the RFA requires a summary of the significant 
issues raised by the public comments in response to the IRFA and 
statement of any changes made in the final rule as a result of such 
comments. NMFS received six unique public comments on the proposed rule 
and IRFA. A summary of these comments and the Agency's responses, 
including changes as a result of public comment, are included in the 
preamble above. For the reasons discussed in the response to Comment 2, 
NMFS is recognizing that initial EMTU type-approval testing and 
notification to the type-approval requestor may be made in less than 90 
days, in some circumstances. As discussed in response to Comment 3, 
NMFS has provided further clarification about the meaning and purpose 
of parsing bills for VMS services. Otherwise, there are no substantive 
changes from the proposed rule as a result of these economic comments. 
The comments above did not alter the cost analysis in the FRFA and 
final rule.
    Under Section 604(a)(4), Federal agencies must provide an estimate 
of the

[[Page 77402]]

number of small entities to which the rule would apply. The Small 
Business Administration (SBA) has established size criteria for all 
major industry sectors in the United States. This rule will impact EMTU 
vendors and/or MCSP. The rule will directly apply to the existing six 
NMFS type-approved VMS equipment providers and any companies wishing to 
obtain VMS type-approval in the future. NMFS has received inquiries 
from three other companies about seeking type-approval in the past, but 
have not yet officially sought type-approval. Based on a review of 
company financial records, NMFS estimates approximately half of the 
current VMS equipment providers would not be considered small 
businesses under the SBA size standard for the satellite 
telecommunications industry. Of the remaining businesses, many of them 
are privately held businesses that do not publicly report annual 
revenues, so it is difficult for NMFS to definitively determine whether 
they are small businesses. NMFS therefore conservatively estimates that 
this rule will impact three to six small entities.
    Section 604(a)(5) of the RFA requires that the Agency provide a 
description of the projected reporting, recordkeeping and other 
compliance requirements of the rule, including an estimate of the 
classes of small entities which will be subject to the requirement and 
the type of professional skills necessary for preparation of the report 
or record. This rule will involve reporting, record keeping, and other 
compliance requirements for the type-approval application process, 
notifications for any substantive changes, litigation support, periodic 
renewal, and possibly responses to revocation notices.
    The application process will require a vendor requesting type-
approval of an EMTU, MCS, or bundle to make a written request to the 
NMFS. The written request will require the following information 
pertaining to the EMTU, 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; monitor or terminal 
model number and date; MCS to be used in conjunction with the EMTU; 
entity providing MCS to the end user; the vendor-approved business 
entities associated with the EMTU and its use; messaging functionality; 
position data formats and transmission standards; electronic form and 
messaging capabilities; details of the customer service that would be 
provided to NMFS; general durability and reliability of the unit; 
ability of the unit to comply with any additional requirements 
specified in the fishery-specific regulations for VMS implementation; 
and protection of personally identifying information and other 
protected information for the purchase or activation of an MTU or EMTU 
from disclosure. In addition, the application must include two EMTUs at 
no cost to the government for each NOAA region or Federal fishery for 
which the application is made for approximately 90 calendar days for 
testing and evaluation. Two EMTUs 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 fact sheets, installation guides, user 
manuals, any necessary interfacing software, satellite coverage, 
performance specifications, and technical support information. This 
application process will likely require engineering and product manager 
expertise for preparation of the application.
    This rule will also require type-approval holders to notify NMFS 
within two calendar days of any substantive changes from the original 
submission for type-approval.
    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, 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.
    Prior to the end of each 3 year type-approval period, a type-
approval holder must request renewal of the type-approval and 
demonstrate successful compliance with the type-approval standards and 
requirements. To do so, the type-approval holder must certify that the 
EMTU, MCS, or bundle remains in compliance with type-approval standards 
and complete a table or matrix documenting compliance with all 
applicable standards. This type-approval renewal process will likely 
require engineering and product manager expertise for preparation of 
the renewal request.
    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 the vendor believes 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.
    Section 604(a)(6) of the RFA requires a description of the steps 
the agency has taken to minimize the significant economic impact on 
small entities consistent with the stated objectives of applicable 
statutes. Additionally, section 603(c) lists four general categories of 
``significant'' alternatives that would assist an agency in the 
development of significant alternatives. These categories of 
alternatives are:
    (1) Establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements 
or timetables that take into account the resources available to small 
entities;
    (2) Clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance 
and reporting requirements under the rule for such small entities;
    (3) Use of performance rather than design standards; and,
    (4) Exemptions from coverage of the rule for small entities. In 
order to meet the objectives of this action, consistent with all legal 
requirements, NMFS cannot exempt small entities or change the VMS type-
approval process and standards only for small entities. Thus, there are 
no alternatives discussed that fall under the first and fourth 
categories described above. NMFS has strived to clarify and simplify 
the type-approval process by codifying the type-approval standards, 
specifications, procedures, and responsibilities for EMTU, MCS and 
bundle type-approval applicants and holders in this action. In 
addition, NMFS is implementing performance rather than design standard 
alternatives for messaging latency standards for EMTUs, MCSs or 
bundles.
    NMFS analyzed several different alternatives in the proposed action 
and provides the rationale for identifying the preferred alternatives 
to achieve the desired objective.

Vessel Monitoring System Type-Approval Application Process

    Requestors of type-approval must submit a written request to NMFS 
OLE and a statement that the unit for which approval is sought meets 
NMFS OLE's type-approval standards. The application process will likely 
require engineering and product manager expertise for preparation of 
the application. NMFS estimates that small entities will utilize up to 
approximately 40 hours engineering labor and 40 hours of product 
management labor to compile the written request and statement that 
details how the EMTU, MCS, or bundle

[[Page 77403]]

meets the minimum national VMS standards as required by this rule. This 
estimate also includes the amount of time it would take to compile the 
documentation and the packaging of the EMTUs to ship to each NOAA 
region or Federal fisheries for which an application is submitted. 
Based on the Bureau of Labor Statistics May 2012 National Occupational 
Employment and Wage Estimates, the mean hourly wage for engineers is 
approximately $44 per hour and for general and operations managers it 
is approximately $55 per hour. Therefore, NMFS estimates the total wage 
costs to be approximately $3,960 per type-approval application.
    Type-approval requestors will be required to send two EMTUs for 
testing to each NMFS region for which type-approval is sought. NMFS 
estimates that type-approval requestors will likely spend between $85 
and $220 per NMFS region for shipping two units based on current ground 
shipping rates for a package of up to 30 pounds ($77.50-$210 depending 
on the region), box costs ($2.50), and packaging materials ($5.00). 
Some requestors may opt to use next day air delivery to expedite the 
process, which would increase the shipping costs to approximately $250 
per package, but that option is not as economical. NMFS estimates that 
a vendor will send units to five different NOAA regional offices on 
average. Therefore, the total shipping cost per application is 
estimated to be $695, based on ground delivery costs of approximately 
$85 per region in the continental United States and $220 per region for 
the Alaska and the Pacific Islands offices.
    The average cost of an EMTU unit is approximately $3,000. The 
vendor will be unable to sell the EMTU 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. 
Based on NMFS' estimate that 10 EMTUs that regularly retail for $3,000 
new would be sent to 5 regional offices, the reduced retail revenue 
will total approximately $6,000 to $12,000 per type-approval 
application. Alternatively, the vendor 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 vendors would 
do with these EMTUs after the 90-day evaluation period.

Latency Requirement

    NMFS considered three alternatives to the EMTU latency 
requirements. These alternatives include no change from the current 
requirement that 97 percent of each vendor's position reports during 
each specified 24-hour period must reach NMFS within 15 minutes, for 
ten out of eleven consecutive days; a 90-percent requirement; and a 50-
percent requirement.
    Based on NMFS OLE's review of several years of reports, NMFS has 
determined that the current 97-percent latency standard is not 
necessary to meet the needs of NMFS OLE and the USCG for near-real-time 
data. Also, the 97-percent latency standard requirement is the most 
costly for vendors to achieve. Based on several years of reports, it is 
clear this latency requirement is difficult for type-approval holders 
to achieve consistently. Several of the current EMTU type-approval 
holders would have to take significant corrective actions, at likely 
significant costs, to achieve the 97-percent standard. The possible 
corrective actions include deploying new satellites, switching out 
antennas on all units in order to switch to a more reliable network, or 
reengineering the communication software or backend hardware to ensure 
more reliable and efficient data transmission. These solutions would 
require significant capital investments, which would be particularly 
challenging to small entities. Some vendors might instead opt out of 
this market given the potentially significant costs. While the 97-
percent requirement would achieve the objective of collecting reliable 
real-time data for enforcement of Federal fisheries laws and 
regulations, it is not the most cost effective alternative.
    NMFS OLE and the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) have a need for near-real-
time fishing vessel location data for enforcement of Federal fisheries 
laws and regulations. Successful NMFS and USCG enforcement efforts 
depend on near-real-time vessel location data to responsibly protect 
resources. For example, NMFS and USCG need to know when a vessel has 
entered a closed area or other protected or environmentally sensitive 
area. Receipt of near real-time data also ensures optimal and cost-
effective dispatch of enforcement assets for at-sea interception, 
landing inspections, follow-up, and active investigations of already-
suspect vessels.
    NMFS determined that the latency requirement can be lowered 
slightly to 90 percent and still maintain the integrity of the VMS 
program by providing near real-time data transmission. In light of 
these findings, NMFS is revising this latency requirement to state that 
NMFS must receive no less than 90 percent of all messages within 15 
minutes or less of the EMTU timestamp, for 10 out of 11 consecutive 
days (24-hour time periods). This new latency requirement is less 
burdensome for all current type-approval holders. Also, the 90 percent 
latency standard requirement is a more cost effective alternative. 
NMFS, along with its USCG partner, believe that the 90-percent standard 
can meet the objective of providing near-real-time data on a consistent 
basis.
    While the third alternative, a 50-percent requirement, would be the 
least burdensome alternative for VMS vendors to achieve, this standard 
does not meet the objective of providing near real-time VMS data on a 
consistent basis. VMS-reporting delays will result in less efficient 
use of government funds, personnel, and other assets. Delayed data 
delivery is detrimental to fishers as well. Fishers have been delayed 
in starting fishing trips because VMS latency prevented them from 
delivering notice to OLE via EMTU/MTU before leaving the dock, or a 
fisher's days-at-sea were miscalculated due to the delayed reporting of 
Demarcation-Line crossings. This may result in confusing documentation 
regarding when a vessel reported the required information via their 
EMTU, leading to administrative or legal complications. Delayed data 
delivery may also allow illegal or non-compliant vessel activity to go 
undetected, which impedes the VMS program's utility in the enforcement 
of fisheries laws and regulations. Finally, in order for VMS data to 
carry its proper weight as admissible evidence, the VMS unit must be 
reliable. Long latency periods draw into question the reliability of 
the unit and its data, altogether. For these reasons, NMFS has 
determined it is essential for VMS data to be delivered by the type-
approved EMTU/MTUs, MCS and bundles in near real-time for enforcement 
purposes. Therefore, NMFS does not prefer the 50-percent standard.

Changes or Modifications to Type-Approvals

    After a type-approval is issued, the type-approval holder must 
notify OLE no later than 2 calendar days following any substantive 
change in the original submission, such as changes to firmware, 
software or hardware versions, MCS operations or performance, or 
customer support contacts. Within 60 calendar days of the

[[Page 77404]]

receipt of such notice, OLE will notify the type-approval holder if an 
amended type-approval will be required, including additional testing or 
provide notice that OLE will initiate the type approval revocation 
process. NMFS estimates that small entities would utilize up to 
approximately four hours engineering labor and four 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. Based on the National Occupational Employment 
and Wage Estimates, NMFS estimates the total wage costs to be 
approximately $396 for the change notification process.

Renewal Process

    NMFS considered three alternative periods of time for a type-
approval renewal process: 1 year, 3 years, and 10 years. The renewal 
process would be identical for each of these alternatives, except for 
the frequency of type-approval renewal.
    NMFS believes that a 1-year interval renewal process would result 
in too short of a renewal cycle because changes in technology are not 
rapid enough to warrant such a short renewal cycle and 1-year renewals 
would not provide sufficient time for vendors to maintain a stable 
service environment. A 1-year interval would also impose an undue 
burden on type-approval holders and OLE.
    A 10-year type-approval renewal process is seen as too long an 
interval between the time an initial type-approval was issued and when 
NMFS would take an in-depth look at the type-approval holder's overall 
compliance record with the regulations set forth in this rule. 
Significant technological change might also occur over a 10-year 
period. While this alternative would minimize the economic impacts of 
preparing renewal applications, it does not meet NMFS objectives of 
maintaining compliance with the regulatory standards.
    NMFS prefers that a type-approval be valid for a period of 3 years. 
As such, prior to the end of each 3-year period, an EMTU vendor may 
request renewal by demonstrating successful compliance with the 
requirements set forth in this final action.
    NMFS estimates that this renewal process will involve up to 16 
hours of engineering labor and 8 hours of product management labor to 
certify compliance with the type-approval standards and compile 
supporting materials. Based on the National Occupational Employment and 
Wage Estimates previously discussed, NMFS estimates the renewal process 
will result in up to $1,144 in labor costs. If the type-approval is not 
renewed by NMFS, the economic costs would be the same as those 
described below for the revocation process. NMFS estimates that there 
will be approximately two type-approval renewals conducted each year 
for a total economic cost of approximately $2,288 annually.

Revocation Process

    If a type-approved EMTU/MTU, MCS, or bundle is no longer meeting 
one or more of the specifications set out in the type-approved 
standards, NMFS will initiate the type-approval revocation process. If 
an EMTU, MCS, or bundle fails to meet the type-approval standards in 
this rule, or if an MTU fails to meet the specifications under which it 
was type-approved, NMFS will issue a letter to the vendor who holds the 
type-approval and identify the potential violation. NMFS will set a 
Response Date between 30 and 120 calendar days from the date of the 
Notification Letter. If the vendor believes that NMFS is in error, and/
or that NMFS has incorrectly defined/described the issue or its urgency 
and impact, or that NMFS is otherwise in error, then the vendor can 
deliver its Objection, in writing, before the Response Date. NMFS 
estimates that this revocation process would potentially involve 16 
hours of engineering labor and 8 hours of product management labor 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 $1,144 in labor costs. 
However, the actual amount of labor costs could vary considerably 
depending on the complexity of the issues causing the alleged failure 
NMFS identified. Some type approval holders may decide to not 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 type-approval holder would then be impacted by 
the loss of future EMTU sales and monthly data communication fees from 
vessels required to carry and operate a type-approved EMTU/MTU, MCS, or 
bundle.
    The type-approval holder 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 type-approval holder may also decide to employ legal counsel to 
challenge the agency's decision. These costs could vary considerably 
depending on the complexity of the appeal arguments.

Small Entity Compliance Guide

    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).

List of Subjects

50 CFR Part 600

    Administrative practice and procedure, Fisheries, Fishing, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

50 CFR Part 648

    Administrative practice and procedure, Fisheries, Fishing, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: December 18, 2014.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.
    For the reasons set out in the preamble, NMFS amends 50 CFR parts 
600 and 648 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. Add Subpart Q 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 Vessel Monitoring System type-approval period.
600.1513 Type-approval renewal.
600.1514 Type-approval revocation process.

[[Page 77405]]

600.1515 Type-approval revocation appeals process.
600.1516 Revocation effective date and notification to vessel 
owners.
600.1517 Litigation support.
600.1518 Reimbursement opportunities for revoked Vessel Monitoring 
System type-approval products.

Subpart Q--Vessel Monitoring System Type-Approval


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 EMTU(s) or MTU(s).
    Bench configuration means the EMTU's configuration after the 
manufactured unit has been customized to meet the Federal VMS 
requirements.
    Bundle means an MCS and EMTU 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 EMTU.
    Communication class means the satellite communications operator 
from which satellite communications services originate.
    Electronic form means a pre-formatted message transmitted by an 
EMTU 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: Antenna; dedicated message terminal 
and display; and an input device such as a tablet or keyboard installed 
on fishing vessels participating in fisheries with a VMS requirement.
    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 
communications services affiliated with particular MTUs/EMTUs.
    Mobile Communications Service Provider (MCSP) means the entity that 
sells VMS satellite communications services to end users.
    Mobile Transmitter Unit (MTU) means a communication device capable 
of transmitting Global Positioning System position reports via 
satellite.
    Notification Letter means a letter issued by NMFS to a type-
approval holder identifying an alleged failure of an EMTU, MTU, MCS, or 
the type-approval holder to comply with requirements of this subpart.
    Position report means the unique electronic Global Positioning 
System report generated by a vessel's EMTU or MTU, which identifies the 
vessel's latitude/longitude position at a point in time. Position 
reports are sent from the EMTU or MTU, via MCS, to authorized entities.
    Requestor means a vendor seeking type-approval.
    Service life means the length of time during which an EMTU/MTU 
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 computer 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 a vendor 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 based system designed to monitor the location and movement 
of vessels using onboard EMTU or MTU units that send Global Positioning 
System position reports to an authorized entity.
    Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) data means the data transmitted to 
authorized entities by an EMTU or MTU.
    Vessel Monitoring System Program means the federal program that 
manages the vessel monitoring system, data, and associated program-
components, nationally and in each NOAA region; it is housed in the 
Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service's Office of Law 
Enforcement.


Sec.  600.1501  Vessel Monitoring System type-approval process.

    (a) Application submission. A requestor must submit a written type-
approval request and electronic copies 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.
    (b) Application requirements. (1) EMTU and MCS Identifying 
Information: In a type-approval request, the requestor should indicate 
whether the requestor is seeking approval for an EMTU, MCS, or bundle 
and must specify identifying characteristics of the EMTU and MCS, 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; entity providing MCS to the 
end user; and current satellite 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 at the 
warehouse or point of supply.
    (ii) Entities distributing/selling the EMTU to end users.
    (iii) Entities currently approved by the requestor to install the 
EMTU 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.
    (vii) Entities approved by the requestor to train end users.
    (viii) Entities approved by the requestor to advertise the EMTU.
    (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 NOAA 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

[[Page 77406]]

paragraph (b)(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.  600.1502-600.1509 and 
regulations described under paragraph (b)(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, MCS or bundle meets the requirement.
    (iv) Certify that the features, components, configuration and 
services of the requestor's MTU, EMTU, MCS or bundle comply with each 
requirement set out in Sec. Sec.  600.1502-600.1509 and the regulations 
described under paragraph (b)(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.  600.1502-600.1509 and the regulations described under 
paragraph (b)(3)(ii) of this section over the course of the type-
approval period.
    (vi) Provide NMFS OLE with two EMTUs loaded with forms and software 
for each NOAA 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. 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 and communications operation. The requestor is responsible for 
all associated costs including paying for: Shipping of the EMTU to the 
required NMFS regional offices or headquarters for testing; the MCS 
during the testing period; and shipping of the EMTU back to the vendor.
    (vii) Provide thorough documentation for the EMTU or MTU and MCS, 
including: EMTU fact sheets; installation guides; user manuals; any 
necessary interfacing software; satellite coverage; performance 
specifications; and technical support information.
    (c) Interoperability. A requestor seeking type-approval of an EMTU 
within a communications class, as opposed to type-approval for use with 
a specific MCS, shall certify that the EMTU meets requirements under 
this subpart when using at least one qualified MCSP within the same 
communications class.
    (d) Notification. Unless additional time is required for EMTU 
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.
    (i) The type-approval letter will serve as official documentation 
and notice of type-approval.
    (ii) NMFS will also publish a notice in the Federal Register 
documenting the type-approval and the dates for which it is effective.
    (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 (d)(2)(i) of this section.
    (iii) If any additional information is submitted under paragraph 
(d)(2)(ii) of this section, NMFS OLE, after reviewing such information, 
may either take action under paragraph (d)(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) An EMTU must comply with the following requirements:
    (1) Be able to transmit all automatically-generated position 
reports.
    (2) Provide visible or audible alarms onboard the vessel to 
indicate malfunctioning of the EMTU.
    (3) Be able to disable non-essential alarms in non-Global Maritime 
Distress and Safety System (GMDSS) installations.
    (4) Be able to send communications that function uniformly 
throughout the geographic area(s) covered by the type-approval.
    (5) Have two-way communications between authorized entities and 
EMTU via MCS.
    (6) Have the capacity to send and receive electronic forms and 
Internet email messages.
    (7) Have messaging and communications that are completely 
compatible with NMFS vessel monitoring software.
    (b) In addition, messages and communications from an EMTU 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, 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.

    An EMTU, MCSP, or bundle must comply with the following 
requirements, in addition to providing position information as required 
by the applicable VMS regulations and requirements in effect for each 
fishery or region for which the type-approval applies:
    (a) An EMTU must be able to 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 an EMTU is powered up, it 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 within the communications 
class.
    (2) Date (year/month/day with century in the year) and time stamp 
(GMT) of the position fix.
    (3) 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.
    (d) An EMTU must have the ability to:
    (1) Store 1000 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 must generate specially identified position reports 
upon:
    (1) Antenna disconnection.
    (2) Loss of positioning reference signals.
    (3) Loss of the mobile communications signals.
    (4) Security events, power-up, power down, and other status data.
    (5) The vessel crossing a pre-defined geographic boundary.
    (6) A request for EMTU status information such as configuration of 
programming and reporting intervals.

[[Page 77407]]

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 the EMTU/MTU timestamp, for 10 
out of 11 consecutive days (24-hour time periods).
    (b) NMFS will continually examine position reports 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.

    An EMTU must provide for the following capabilities:
    (a) Messaging from vessel to shore, and from shore to vessel by 
authorized entities, must have a minimum supported message length of 
1kb.
    (b) 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).
    (c) Notification of failed delivery to the EMTU 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 switched off, etc.).
    (d) The EMTU must have an automatic retry feature in the event that 
a message fails to be delivered.
    (e) The EMTU user interface must:
    (1) Support an ``address book'' capability and a function 
permitting a ``reply'' to a received message without re-entering the 
sender's address.
    (2) Provide the ability to review by date order, or by recipient, 
messages that were previously sent. The EMTU terminal must support a 
minimum message history of 50 sent messages--commonly referred to as an 
``Outbox'' or ``Sent'' message display.
    (3) Provide the ability to review by date order, or by sender, all 
messages received. The EMTU terminal must support a minimum message 
history of at least 50 messages in an inbox.


Sec.  600.1506  Electronic forms.

    (a) An EMTU and its forms software must support a minimum of 20 
Electronic Forms, and 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.
    (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 capable of including VMS 
position data, including latitude, longitude, date and time. Data to 
populate these fields must be automatically generated by the EMTU and 
unable to be manually entered or altered.
    (5) Delivery Format for Form Data: Delivery of form data to NMFS 
must employ the same transport security and reliability as VMS position 
and declaration reports. The SMTP protocol is not permitted for the 
transmission of data that is delivered to NMFS. The field coding within 
the data must follow either CSV or XML formatting rules. For CSV format 
the form must contain an identifier and the version number, and then 
the fields in the order defined on the form. In the CSV format strings 
that may contain ``,'' (comma) characters must be quoted. XML 
representations must use the field label to define the XML element that 
contains each field value.
    (b) Updates to Forms. (1) The EMTU 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 vendors 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 vendors will be given at least 60 calendar 
days to complete their implementation of new or changed forms. Vendors 
will be capable of, and responsible for translating the requirements 
into their EMTU-specific forms definitions and wirelessly transmitting 
the same to all EMTU terminals supplied to fishing vessels.


Sec.  600.1507  Communications security.

    Communications between an EMTU and MCS must be secure from 
tampering or interception, including the reading of passwords and data. 
The EMTU and MCS must have mechanisms to prevent to the extent 
possible:
    (a) Sniffing and/or interception during transmission from the EMTU 
to MCS.
    (b) Spoofing.
    (c) False position reports sent from an EMTU.
    (d) Modification of EMTU identification.
    (e) Interference with 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 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.


Sec.  600.1508  Customer service.

    The type-approval holder is responsible for ensuring that customer 
service 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/MTUs.
    (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/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. Such 
assistance will be provided free of charge unless otherwise specified 
in NMFS-authorized service or

[[Page 77408]]

purchase agreements, work orders or contracts.


Sec.  600.1509  General.

    (a) An EMTU must have the durability and reliability necessary to 
meet all requirements of Sec. Sec.  600.1502-600.1507 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.
    (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 MTU or EMTU 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) or 
Sec.  600.1513 (renewal) is approved or partially approved, NMFS will 
issue a type-approval letter and publish a notice in the Federal 
Register to indicate the specific EMTU 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, 
MCSP, or bundle is approved for use.
    (b) The NMFS Office of Law Enforcement will maintain a list of 
type-approved EMTUs, MCSPs, and bundles on a publicly available Web 
site 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/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  Vessel Monitoring System type-approval period.

    A type-approval or type-approval renewal is valid for a period of 3 
years from the date of the Federal Register notice issued pursuant to 
Sec.  600.1510, subject to the revocation process at Sec.  600.1514. 
All MTUs, EMTUs, MCSs, and bundles with valid type-approvals on January 
23, 2015 will continue to be type-approved. However, if the type-
approval date is more than 3 years old, the type-approval will expire 
on February 23, 2015. The type-approval holder may request a type-
approval renewal as provided in Sec.  600.1513.


Sec.  600.1513  Type-approval renewal.

    At least 30 days, but no more than six months, prior to the end of 
the type-approval period, a type-approval holder may seek a type-
approval renewal by sending a written renewal request letter and 
information and documentation required under this section to: 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, Silver Spring, Maryland 20910.
    (a) In a type-approval renewal request letter, the type-approval 
holder should indicate whether the holder is seeking renewal of an MTU, 
EMTU, MSC, or bundle and must:
    (1) Identify the NOAA region(s) or Federal fisheries for which 
renewal is sought;
    (2) Certify that the features, components, configuration and 
services of the type-approved MTU, EMTU, MCS or bundle remain in 
compliance with the standards set out in Sec. Sec.  600.1502-600.1509 
(or for an MTU, requirements applicable when the MTU was originally 
type-approved) and with applicable VMS regulations and requirements in 
effect for the region(s) and/or Federal fisheries identified under 
paragraph (a)(1) of this section that require use of VMS; and
    (3) Certify that, since the type-approval or last renewal 
(whichever was later), there have been no modifications to or 
replacements of any functional component or piece of the type-approved 
configuration.
    (b) The type-approval holder must include a table with the renewal 
request letter that lists in one column, each requirement set out in 
Sec. Sec.  600.1502-600.1509 and regulations described under paragraph 
(a)(2) of this section. For an MTU, instead of the requirements at 
Sec. Sec.  600.1502-600.1509, the table must list any requirements 
applicable when the MTU was originally type-approved. NMFS' Office of 
Law Enforcement (OLE) will provide a template for the table upon 
request. The type-approval holder must indicate in subsequent columns 
in the table:
    (1) Whether the requirement applies to the type-approval;
    (2) Whether the requirement is still being met;
    (3) Whether any modifications or replacements were made to the 
type-approved configuration or process since type-approval or the last 
renewal;
    (4) An explanation of any modifications or replacements that were 
made since type-approval or the last renewal; and
    (5) The date that any modifications or replacements were made.
    (c) If the type-approval renewal is for an MCS or bundle, the type-
approval holder seeking renewal must also provide the following 
statistical information on the transmission and processing of vessel 
position reports from onboard EMTUs and MTUs to the MCS or MCSP's VMS 
data processing center.
    (1) The statistical information will, at a minimum, show:
    (i) Successful position report transmission and delivery rates;
    (ii) The rate of position report latencies; and
    (iii) The minimum/maximum/average lengths of time for those 
latencies.
    (2) The statistical information will be demonstrated:
    (i) In graph form;
    (ii) For each NMFS region and any relevant international agreement 
area and relevant high seas area; and
    (iii) Using data from six full and consecutive months for all of 
the type-

[[Page 77409]]

approval holder's U.S. federal fishery customers.
    (d) Within 30 days after receipt of a complete renewal request 
letter, NMFS OLE will notify the type-approval holder of its decision 
to approve or partially approve the request as provided in Sec.  
600.1510, or send a letter to the type-approval holder that explains 
the reasons for denial or partial denial of the request.
    (e) The type-approval holder may respond to NMFS OLE in writing 
with additional information to address the reasons for denial or 
partial denial of the renewal request. The type approval holder must 
submit this response within 21 calendar days of the date of the NMFS 
OLE letter sent under paragraph (d) of this section.
    (f) If any additional information is submitted under paragraph (e) 
of this section, NMFS OLE, after reviewing such information, may either 
notify the type-approval holder of its decision to approve or partially 
approve the renewal request as provided in Sec.  600.1510 or determine 
that the renewal request should continue to be disapproved or partially 
disapproved. In the latter case, the NMFS OLE Director will send a 
letter to the type-approval holder that explains the reasons for the 
disapproval/partial disapproval. The NMFS OLE Director's decision is 
final upon issuance of this letter and is not appealable.


Sec.  600.1514  Type-approval revocation process.

    (a) If at any time, a type-approved EMTU, MCS or bundle fails to 
meet requirements at Sec. Sec.  600.1502-600.1509 or applicable VMS 
regulations and requirements in effect for the region(s) and Federal 
fisheries for which the EMTU or MCS is type-approved, or if an MTU 
fails to meet the requirements under which it was type-approved, the 
NMFS Office of Law Enforcement (OLE) may issue a Notification Letter to 
the type-approval holder that:
    (1) Identifies the MTU, EMTU, 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 time frame, 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, 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, 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.  600.1515.


Sec.  600.1515  Type-approval revocation appeals process.

    (a) If a type-approval holder receives a Revocation Letter pursuant 
to Sec.  600.1514, 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 
circumstances explaining and refuting the failures summarized in the 
Revocation Letter.
    (d) The NMFS Assistant Administrator may, in his or her discretion, 
affirm, vacate, or modify the Revocation Letter and will 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.  600.1516  Revocation effective date and notification to vessel 
owners.

    (a) Following issuance of a Revocation Letter pursuant to Sec.  
600.1514 and any appeal pursuant to Sec.  600.1515, NMFS will provide 
notice to all vessel owners impacted by the type-approval

[[Page 77410]]

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, should 
funding for reimbursement be available pursuant to Sec.  600.1518.


Sec.  600.1517  Litigation support.

    (a) All technical aspects of a type-approved EMTU/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/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, 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.  600.1518  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 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 is installed on the vessel, 
and reporting to NMFS Office of Law Enforcement; and
    (3) The type-approval for the previously installed EMTU has been 
revoked by NMFS; or
    (4) NMFS requires the vessel owner to purchase a new EMTU 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 announcing the change.

PART 648--FISHERIES OF THE NORTHEASTERN UNITED STATES

0
3. The authority citation for part 648 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.


0
4. In Sec.  648.9, revise paragraph (a) and paragraph (d) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  648.9  VMS vendor and unit requirements.

    (a) Approval. The type-approval requirements for VMS MTUs and MCSPs 
for the Greater Atlantic Region are those as published by the NMFS 
Office of Law Enforcement (OLE) in the Federal Register, and are 
available upon request. Both the national type-approval requirements at 
50 CFR part 600, subpart Q and any established regional standards must 
be met in order to receive approval for use in the Greater Atlantic 
Region. The NMFS OLE Director shall approve all MTUs, MCSPs, and 
bundles including those operating in the Greater Atlantic Region.
* * * * *
    (d) Revocations. Revocation procedures for type-approvals are at 50 
CFR 600.1514. In the event of a revocation, NMFS will provide 
information to affected vessel owners as explained at 50 CFR 600.1516. 
In these instances, vessel owners may be eligible for the reimbursement 
of the cost of a new type-approved EMTU should funding for 
reimbursement be available.

[FR Doc. 2014-30151 Filed 12-23-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P