Daily Rules, Proposed Rules, and Notices of the Federal Government
* Fax: 301-427-2211, Attn: Frank M. Sprtel, Attorney-Advisor
* Mail: Office of General Counsel for Enforcement and Litigation (GCEL), 8484 Georgia Avenue, Suite 400, Silver Spring, MD 20910
Instructions: No comments will be posted for public viewing until after the comment period has closed. All comments received are a part of the public record and will generally be posted to
NOAA is proposing to amend the civil procedure rules that apply to its administrative proceedings as described below. NOAA is proposing the changes described here: (1) to improve the efficiency and fairness of administrative proceedings; and (2) to correct a citation error.
Section 904.204: This revision removes the requirement in 15 CFR 904.204(m) that an Administrative Law Judge state good reason(s) for departing from the civil penalty or permit sanction, condition, revocation, or denial of permit application (collectively, “civil penalty or permit sanction”) assessed by NOAA in its charging document. This revision eliminates any presumption in favor of the civil penalty or permit sanction assessed by NOAA in its charging document (see In the Matter of: AGA Fishing Corp., 2001 WL 34683852 (NOAA Mar. 17, 2001)). It requires instead that NOAA justify at a hearing provided for under this Part that its proposed penalty or permit sanction is appropriate, taking into account all the factors required by applicable law. Additionally, by explicitly removing this presumption, this change provides Respondents with a full and fair opportunity to challenge the proposed Agency action.
This revision also corrects a citation in the regulation pertaining to protective orders issued by an Administrative Law Judge that is codified at 15 CFR 904.204(f). The current regulation incorrectly cites § 904.240(d). The regulation is revised to correctly cite § 904.251(h).
This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866.
There are no reporting, recordkeeping or other compliance requirements in the proposed rule. Nor does this rule contain an information-collection request that would implicate the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501,
The Chief Counsel for Regulation of the Department of Commerce has certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration that this proposed rule, if adopted, would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The small businesses, as defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601,
Because this regulation will impose no significant costs on any small entities, but rather will only modify existing procedural rules, the overall economic impact on small entities, if any, is expected to be nominal. Accordingly, this rule will not substantially impact a significant number of small businesses.
As a result of this certification, an initial regulatory flexibility analysis is not required and none has been prepared.
Administrative practice and procedure, fisheries, fishing, fishing vessels, penalties, seizures and forfeitures.
For reasons set forth in the preamble, 15 CFR part 904 is proposed to be amended as follows:
1. The authority citation for part 904 continues to read as follows:
16 U.S.C. 1801
2. Section 904.204 to subpart C is amended by revising paragraphs (f) and (m) to read as follows:
(f) Rule on contested discovery requests, establish discovery schedules, and, whenever the ends of justice would thereby be served, take or cause depositions or interrogatories to be taken and issue protective orders under § 904.251(h);
(m) Assess a civil penalty or impose a permit sanction, condition, revocation, or denial of permit application, taking into account all of the factors required by applicable law;