January 11, 2018 — SEAFOOD NEWS — NOAA announced yesterday that they have filed a charging document to revoke all 38 of Carlos Rafael’s fishing permits, the dealer license for Carlos Seafood, and the scallop permits issued to two of Rafael’s scallop vessels.
The charges go beyond the criminal complaint of cheating on landings reporting, for which Rafael is already serving prison time. Out of 35 separate charges, 15 are new charges for violations in the scallop fishery.
NOAA claims that on four separate fishing trips in 2013, Rafael and related entities, along with two of his fishing vessel operators, filed false reports regarding the amount of scallops harvested by four vessels. For those violations, NOAA seeks to revoke permits issued to these vessels and a $843,528 penalty.
NOAA is seeking a total of $983,528 in civil fines.
Charging documents are how NOAA pursues a civil case before an administrative law judge.
They can include both NOVA (notice of violation for fishing activities) and NOPS (Notice of Permit Sanctions) and requests for civil fines.
Once the case is heard before an administrative law judge, the decision can be appealed to the NOAA administrator. If the parties object to the NOAA administrator’s decision they may then proceed to district court. However, according to lawyers familiar with NOAA procedures, the decision will not be set aside if it is supported by substantial evidence.
The civil action alleges 35 separate violations.
Counts 1-19 are based on Rafael’s conduct involved in his recent criminal case, specifically, the misreporting of species landed. For these violations, NOAA seeks to revoke the federal fisheries permits associated with the vessels at issue in the criminal case, but does not seek monetary penalties.
Counts 20-35 involve conduct unrelated to Rafael’s criminal case. Count 20 alleges that Rafael and related entities misreported where they caught yellowtail flounder in 2012. For this violation, NOAA seeks to revoke numerous permits involved and a $140,000 penalty.
Counts 21-35 involve misreporting in the scallop fishery.
It is important to note that before the administrative judge, normal rules of evidence don’t apply, and instead the ruling is made based on a preponderance of evidence.
This story originally appeared on Seafoodnews.com, a subscription site. It is reprinted with permission.