Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 3 Current »

Purpose of reconciliation

When a Landing Report (and associated fish ticket) with IFQ is generated in elandings, there is a "child" IFQ report that is also generated.  The IFQ report contains information specific to the IFQ species and is submitted to the NMFS IFQ database to debit the IFQ permit holder's account.  If there are mistakes or edits that need to be made to the IFQ report, the process is unable to make changes to the IFQ system.  Instead, they must contact the NOAA Office of Law Enforcement (OLE) through the OLE Data Techs office and request permission to make an edit to their IFQ infformation.  This edit is then completed through a manual landing process. And the manual landing will result in edits to the NMFS IFQ database.  However, the manual landing process does not change the original landing report in elandings.  So the processor must also get into elandings and make the same edits to their landing report.

Periodically, agency staff review eLanding landing reports (fish tickets) and IFQ reports to verify that both reports were submitted, and that the IFQ pounds and species condition codes are correctly documented on both reports.   The landing report and the IFQ report should have identical landed weights and delivery condition codes.  The primary reason why landing reports and IFQ reports are out-of-balance is the creation of a manual landing that is entered by NMFS Data Technicians and failure by processing staff to then document the changes to the landing within the eLandings System, or a manual adjustment of the IFQ poundage and failure to adjust the landing report to reflect the identical poundage.

It is important for data quality (both on the IFQ reports and on fish tickets in elandings) and for cost recovery fee assessment and billing that we reconcile the two and make sure that they match.  The reconciliation process compares the 2 data sets, identifies issues, and outlines a process for agency staff to coordinate with processors to fix any errors or mis-matches.

Reconciliation Process

Quarterly Check for Reconciliation Issues

  • Purpose of this step?  Compare the dataset, identify mismatches, and communicate with processors about the corrections that need to made.
  • When does this occur? Quarterly.  And, also try to run this report after IFQ season closes and before the end of the year so early to middle November is best for the last run.
  • Who? Sara (NMFS contractor)
  • Steps:
    • Quarterly execute the ELLR_IFQ compare report in the Agency Web (currently being worked on https://akr-internal.alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/jira/browse/CR-134). IFQ season starts in March.
    • Remove all out of state landings from the reconciliation to a separate tab. This is easy to determine by the port.
    • Using the vessel ADFG and the date of landing locate the landing report in the Alders and eLandings Agency Web systems.
    • Compare the fish ticket in the eLandings Agency Web to the IFQ Landing Report in Alders to determine if/why there is a weight or date discrepancy. Note: There may be multiple eLandings Report ID’s associated with one Confirmation number in Alders.
    • Review any comments in Alders to understand what was done at the data tech office and if manual adjustments were made or have been authorized and are pending to be made.
    • Alders will tell you who made an edit to the report last, if there was a redline and what the error was for, the original debits and current debits to the IFQ.
    • Common causes for landings to show up on the comparison report.
      • Date mismatch or incorrect date of landing on the eLanding report
      • Manual Landing changes are not reflected on the FT
      • Code 04 halibut landed on IFQ report and 05 weight on FT
      • Split delivery to multiple buyers so there are multiple landing reports in eLandings but only one Alders/RAM report
      • CDQ landings - multiple days debited on the same IFQ landing report. 
    • On the reconciliation spreadsheet notate in comment field the issue and resolution. Who you contacted and what needs to be done to resolve the issue. Color code if issue is assigned to ADFG, IPHC or NMFS for follow up or further review.
    • If changes need to be made in eLandings:  Email the processor to review report and make any necessary changes to their FT. The originator USERID on the landing report is an easy way to access the processor's email address. 
    • If changes need to be made in the IFQ database:  Email Processor to contact Data Techs requesting authorization to do a Manual Landing Report to make changes to the IFQ Report, CC enf.datatech@noaa.gov
    • Agency contacts:
    • For NMFS issues that needs further review I contact suja.hall@noaa.gov, Jennifer.mondragon@noaa.gov or a NOAA ENF Agent for the port where the landing occurred.
    • After the reconciliation is complete email the spreadsheet to  the Steering Committee - Jennifer, Carole, Huyen, and Lara.

ADFG Reconciliation Process

steps ADFG staff take if they are alerted to a reconciliation issue and if there is an edit to a fish ticket...

IPHC Reconciliation Process

  • No labels