Search Help Show/Hide Menu

Data Management Plan

DMP Template v2.0.1 (2015-01-01)

Please provide the following information, and submit to the NOAA DM Plan Repository.

Reference to Master DM Plan (if applicable)

As stated in Section IV, Requirement 1.3, DM Plans may be hierarchical. If this DM Plan inherits provisions from a higher-level DM Plan already submitted to the Repository, then this more-specific Plan only needs to provide information that differs from what was provided in the Master DM Plan.

URL of higher-level DM Plan (if any) as submitted to DM Plan Repository:
Always left blank

1. General Description of Data to be Managed

1.1. Name of the Data, data collection Project, or data-producing Program:
AKRO/SF: Blend System
1.2. Summary description of the data:

The Blend was the system used by the NMFS Alaska Regional Office to monitor groundfish catch from 1991 until 2002. The Blend system combined data from industry production reports and observer reports to make the best, comprehensive accounting of groundfish catch. These data were used to manage quotas for groundfish in the Gulf of Alaska, Bering Sea, and Aleutian Islands. The blend catch data were also used as the basis for computing estimates of prohibited species bycatch. Prohibited species include Pacific halibut, salmon, herring, and crabs. Blend data were used for numerous regional and national reports, fishery stock assessments, and analysis of fishery management plans.

The Blend system used a combination of industry reports and observer data. For shoreside processors, Weekly Production Reports (WPR) submitted by industry were considered the best source of data for retained groundfish landings. All fish delivered to shoreside processors were weighed on scales, and these weights were used to account for retained catch. Observer data from catcher vessels provided the best data on at-sea discards of groundfish by vessels delivering to shoreside processors. Discard rates from these observer data were applied to the shoreside groundfish landings to estimate total at-sea discards from both observed and unobserved catcher vessels. For observed catcher/processors and motherships, the WPR and the Observer Reports recorded estimates of total catch (retained catch plus discards). If both reports were available, the Blend System selected one of them for incorporation into the catch database. If the vessel was unobserved, only the WPR was available.

In 2003, the Catch Accounting Sytem was implemented and took advantage of industry reports at a more detailed level, especially from shoreside processors. The Blend system was based on weekly data from processors and was not capable of accounting for some management programs -- including cooperatives, sideboards, complex seasonal allocations, Harvest Limit Area quotas, and quotas assigned to vessels of a particular size class. The Catch Accounting System replaced the Blend as the tool used by the National Marine Fisheries Service to estimate total catch in the groundfish fisheries off Alaska.

Taken From: Item Identification | Abstract
Notes: Only a maximum of 4000 characters will be included.
1.3. Is this a one-time data collection, or an ongoing series of measurements?
One-time data collection
Taken From: Extents / Time Frames | Time Frame Type
Notes: Data collection is considered ongoing if a time frame of type "Continuous" exists.
1.4. Actual or planned temporal coverage of the data:
1991 to 2002
Taken From: Extents | Time Frame - Start, Time Frame - End
Notes: All time frames from all extent groups are included.
1.5. Actual or planned geographic coverage of the data:
W: -180, E: -130, N: 72, S: 50

Alaska, North Pacific, Bering Sea/Aleutian Islands, BSAI, Gulf of Alaska, GOA

Taken From: Extents | Geographic Area Bounds, Geographic Area Description
Notes: All geographic areas from all extent groups are included.
1.6. Type(s) of data:
(e.g., digital numeric data, imagery, photographs, video, audio, database, tabular data, etc.)
Table (digital)
1.7. Data collection method(s):
(e.g., satellite, airplane, unmanned aerial system, radar, weather station, moored buoy, research vessel, autonomous underwater vehicle, animal tagging, manual surveys, enforcement activities, numerical model, etc.)
No information found
1.8. If data are from a NOAA Observing System of Record, indicate name of system:
Always left blank due to field exemption
1.8.1. If data are from another observing system, please specify:
Always left blank due to field exemption

2. Point of Contact for this Data Management Plan (author or maintainer)

2.1. Name:
Cathy Tide
Taken From: Support Roles (Metadata Contact) | Person
Notes: The name of the Person of the most recent Support Role of type "Metadata Contact" is used. The support role must be in effect.
2.2. Title:
Metadata Contact
Always listed as "Metadata Contact"
2.3. Affiliation or facility:
Taken From: Support Roles (Metadata Contact) | Organization
Notes: The name of the Organization of the most recent Support Role of type "Metadata Contact" is used. This field is required if applicable.
2.4. E-mail address:
cathy.tide@noaa.gov
Notes: The email address is taken from the address listed for the Person assigned as the Metadata Contact in Support Roles.
2.5. Phone number:
No information found
Notes: The phone number is taken from the number listed for the Person assigned as the Metadata Contact in Support Roles. If the phone number is missing or incorrect, please contact your Librarian to update the Person record.

3. Responsible Party for Data Management

Program Managers, or their designee, shall be responsible for assuring the proper management of the data produced by their Program. Please indicate the responsible party below.

3.1. Name:
Jennifer Mondragon
Taken From: Support Roles (Data Steward) | Person
Notes: The name of the Person of the most recent Support Role of type "Data Steward" is used. The support role must be in effect.
3.2. Position Title:
Data Steward
Always listed as "Data Steward"

4. Resources

Programs must identify resources within their own budget for managing the data they produce.

4.1. Have resources for management of these data been identified?
No
4.2. Approximate percentage of the budget for these data devoted to data management (specify percentage or "unknown"):
Unknown

5. Data Lineage and Quality

NOAA has issued Information Quality Guidelines for ensuring and maximizing the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of information which it disseminates.

5.1. Processing workflow of the data from collection or acquisition to making it publicly accessible
(describe or provide URL of description):

Lineage Statement:
The Blend used a combination of industry reports and onboard observer information to provide an estimate of total catch and bycatch. Industry reported data consisted of shoreside and at-sea processed product amounts (production reports). Production report data were submitted by fax or electronically as files from email attachments. Data submitted by fax were sorted and data entered by NMFS staff into the NMFS Alaska Region database. Data submitted as files in email attachments were uploaded into the NMFS Alaska Region database. Observer data were collected by the Alaska Fisheries Science Center (AFSC) using a stratified sampling design. Data were extracted from the AFSC observer program database using the Observer Interface and imported into the Alaska Region database.

5.1.1. If data at different stages of the workflow, or products derived from these data, are subject to a separate data management plan, provide reference to other plan:
Always left blank
5.2. Quality control procedures employed
(describe or provide URL of description):

Production data submitted by fax were reviewed by NMFS staff prior to data entry. Processors and vessels were contacted for clarification on missing or questionable data. Source data were also validated against business rules when they were loaded into NMFS' Oracle working tables and transferred into final tables. Exceptions were flagged that did not meet business rule requirements.

6. Data Documentation

The EDMC Data Documentation Procedural Directive requires that NOAA data be well documented, specifies the use of ISO 19115 and related standards for documentation of new data, and provides links to resources and tools for metadata creation and validation.

6.1. Does metadata comply with EDMC Data Documentation directive?
No
Notes: All required DMP fields must be populated and valid to comply with the directive.
6.1.1. If metadata are non-existent or non-compliant, please explain:

Missing/invalid information:

  • 1.7. Data collection method(s)
Notes: Required DMP fields that are not populated or invalid are listed here.
6.2. Name of organization or facility providing metadata hosting:
NMFS Office of Science and Technology
Always listed as "NMFS Office of Science and Technology"
6.2.1. If service is needed for metadata hosting, please indicate:
Always left blank
6.3. URL of metadata folder or data catalog, if known:
Always listed as the URL to the InPort Data Set record
6.4. Process for producing and maintaining metadata
(describe or provide URL of description):
Metadata produced and maintained in accordance with the NOAA Data Documentation Procedural Directive: https://nosc.noaa.gov/EDMC/DAARWG/docs/EDMC_PD-Data_Documentation_v1.pdf
Always listed with the above statement

7. Data Access

NAO 212-15 states that access to environmental data may only be restricted when distribution is explicitly limited by law, regulation, policy (such as those applicable to personally identifiable information or protected critical infrastructure information or proprietary trade information) or by security requirements. The EDMC Data Access Procedural Directive contains specific guidance, recommends the use of open-standard, interoperable, non-proprietary web services, provides information about resources and tools to enable data access, and includes a Waiver to be submitted to justify any approach other than full, unrestricted public access.

7.1. Do these data comply with the Data Access directive?
No
7.1.1. If the data are not to be made available to the public at all, or with limitations, has a Waiver (Appendix A of Data Access directive) been filed?
No
7.1.2. If there are limitations to public data access, describe how data are protected from unauthorized access or disclosure:

The Blend data are sensitive under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Reauthorization Act (2007) and can only be shared with authorized persons or in summary format for public dissemination.

7.2. Name of organization of facility providing data access:
Alaska Regional Office (AKRO)
Taken From: Support Roles (Distributor) | Organization
Notes: The name of the Organization of the most recent Support Role of type "Distributor" is used. The support role must be in effect. This information is not required if an approved access waiver exists for this data.
7.2.1. If data hosting service is needed, please indicate:
Yes
Taken From: Data Management | If data hosting service is needed, please indicate
Notes: This field is required if a Distributor has not been specified.
7.2.2. URL of data access service, if known:
Taken From: Distribution Info | Download URL
Notes: All URLs listed in the Distribution Info section will be included. This field is required if applicable.
7.3. Data access methods or services offered:

Access to sensitive data shall only be granted to an individual that meets certain criteria. Access can only be granted to an individual if a signed and effective Confidentiality Agreement, Data Access Sharing Agreement, Memorandum of Understanding, Standard Statement of Nondisclosure, or similar agreement is in place. These signed agreements shall indicate that individuals have reviewed and understand the provisions in the manual governing the legal use of sensitive data. The signed agreements are maintained by the Alaska Regional Records office. The name of each individual that has signed a statement of nondisclosure for using sensitive data will be added to the Alaska Region list of authorized confidential data users.

7.4. Approximate delay between data collection and dissemination:
This is a legacy system and data collection no longer occurs.
7.4.1. If delay is longer than latency of automated processing, indicate under what authority data access is delayed:

8. Data Preservation and Protection

The NOAA Procedure for Scientific Records Appraisal and Archive Approval describes how to identify, appraise and decide what scientific records are to be preserved in a NOAA archive.

8.1. Actual or planned long-term data archive location:
(Specify NCEI-MD, NCEI-CO, NCEI-NC, NCEI-MS, World Data Center (WDC) facility, Other, To Be Determined, Unable to Archive, or No Archiving Intended)
OTHER
8.1.1. If World Data Center or Other, specify:
Information for this field exists in the InPort item but will not be included, since the answer to 8.1 is not one of the relevant values.
Taken From: Data Management | Actual or planned long-term data archive location
Notes: This field is required if archive location is World Data Center or Other.
8.1.2. If To Be Determined, Unable to Archive or No Archiving Intended, explain:
Information for this field exists in the InPort item but will not be included, since the answer to 8.1 is not one of the relevant values.
Taken From: Data Management | If To Be Determined, Unable to Archive or No Archiving Intended, explain
Notes: This field is required if archive location is To Be Determined, Unable to Archive, or No Archiving Intended.
8.2. Data storage facility prior to being sent to an archive facility (if any):
Alaska Regional Office - Juneau, AK
Taken From: Physical Location | Organization, City, State, Location Description
Notes: Physical Location Organization, City and State are required, or a Location Description is required.
8.3. Approximate delay between data collection and submission to an archive facility:
35 days
8.4. How will the data be protected from accidental or malicious modification or deletion prior to receipt by the archive?
Discuss data back-up, disaster recovery/contingency planning, and off-site data storage relevant to the data collection

IT Security and Contingency Plan for the system establishes procedures and applies to the functions, operations, and resources necessary to recover and restore data as hosted in the Alaska Region in Juneau, Alaska, following a disruption.

9. Additional Line Office or Staff Office Questions

Line and Staff Offices may extend this template by inserting additional questions in this section.

Always left blank