Alaska Seafood Marketing Institute FY16 Technical Program BUDGET Alex Oliveira Technical Program Director May 5th, 2015

_____ Program Budget: Overview FY15 Randy Alex FY15 Budget (July 1, 2014-Feb 2015) FY15 Budget (Feb 2015-Jun 30, 2015) Program FY15 Budget %Budget Admin (Program Operations) 140,000 15.6% Admin (Program Operations)* 11.0% Sustainability Implementation 600,000 66.7% RFM1 813,000 63.9% Industry Training 10,000 1.1% Industry Training2 20,000 1.6% Trade Education 100,000 11.1% 7.9% Support Materials 25,000 2.8% Support Materials3 75,000 5.9% Science, Health & Nutrition Outreach/Investigations Science, Health, & Nutrition 4 125,000 9.8% Outreach/Investigations   FY 15 Total (US$) 900,000 100 1,273,000

_____ Proposed Budget: Overview FY16 FY15 Budget (Feb 2015-Jun 30, 2015) FY16 Budget (July 1, 2015-Jun 30, 2016) Program FY15 Budget %Budget FY16 Budget Admin (Program Operations) 140,000 11.0% 395,000 20.1% RFM 813,000 63.9% 600,000 30.5% Industry Training 20,000 1.6% 1.0% Trade Education 100,000 7.9% 5.1% Support Materials 75,000 5.9% 3.8% Science, Health, & Nutrition Outreach/Investigations 125,000 9.8% 50,000 2.5%   Certification 725,000 36.9% FY 15 Total (US$) 1,273,000 100 FY 16 Total (US$) 6 1,965,000 6FY 16 Total minus Certification5 =1.215K; Budget reduction = 58K (4.6%).

______ Program Budget: Highlights Increase of 374K for RFM will support hire of Sustainability Officer and continue RFM v2.0 development. Need one dedicated Technical Program support staff at ASMI. Currently 16% time of front desk person in Seattle + 7.5 h/week of Jeanne Mungle at Juneau Office. Support for Expert Consultant is insufficient to cover needed RFM Program activities (150K vs. min of 250K). Conformance Criteria Committee work requires expert assistance in area of fisheries management. GSSI work requires expert assistance in fisheries and chain of custody audits.

______ Program Direction: A Dilemma Technical Committee Increase focus on industry training, trade education, development of technical materials, science outreach and investigations, and less focus on RFM. RFM Program has been main focus of Technical Program Director (80-100% time) and this won’t change for FY16. RFM accreditation with ANSI, GSSI pilot program, recruitment of CBs, GSSI benchmarking, revision of RFM standards, RFM PR campaign, exploring ASI accreditation to expand on CBs, etc…

______ RFM Program: Challenges Insufficient human resources to support upcoming needs of RFM Program. Lack of acceptance of RFM certification and seal by retailers in EU. Program duplication (MSC vs. RFM): Burden to industry vs. choice in certification. Navigating new waters – Diplomatic communication with MSC leadership: Reduce costs to industry on matters of Alaska fisheries certification and certified seafood.

________ Lessons Learned: My 7-month journey Boston & Brussels Show: Other seafood producing countries not outspoken on eco-label challenges in marketplace. Unsure if NOAA will ever take on the role of owner of “US-wide seafood certification program”. Retailers control requests for Chain of Custody audits. Introducing RFM Seal in markets not controlled by MSC is the route to gain market acceptance. Milan Food Expo 2.0 - ‘The edge factor’: Exposure of Alaska seafood and RFM message Participation in US Pavilion keeping Alaska ‘on the map’

______ Alaska Sustainable Seafood: My View LOW CARBON FOOTPRINT OF HARVEST & PROCESSING OPERATIONS VESSEL SAFETY AND TRAINING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CREW MEMBERS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OF ALASKA COMMUNITIES ALASKA RFM CERTIFICATION PROGRAM SCIENCE-BASED FISHERIES MANAGEMENT PRACTICES SEAFOOD SAFETY, QUALITY & NUTRITION FULL UTILIZATION OF THE CATCH LEAN MANUFACTURING OF SEAFOOD PRODUCTS SEAFOOD SECURITY & SUFFICIENCY