COMMERCE
Subscriber Services
Classified Ads
Subscribe
Advertise
NEWS
This Month
Editorial
Letters
F/V Safety
Past Issues
ABOUT US
Contact Us
Latest Issue
Subscribe
History
MORE CONTENT
CFN Archives
Links
Each month exclusively in the PRINT edition of CFN
Along the Coast
Ask the Lobster Doc
Bearin’s
Classifieds
Coming Events
Editorial
Enforcement Report
FISH SAFE
Fleet Additions
Letters
Lobster Market Report
New Boats
News Catch
Quahog Market Report
|
Commercial Fisheries News
Volume 37 Number 8
April 2010
IG report spells outs enforcement problems in Northeast
WASHINGTON, DC – A Department of Commerce Inspector General (IG) investigation into federal fisheries law enforcement policies and practices has revealed significant problems.
The two agencies involved are the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Office of Law Enforcement (OLE), whose officers investigate alleged infractions, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Office of General Counsel for Enforcement and Litigation, whose attorneys file charges, assess penalties, and prosecute cases.
According to a report released in late January and discussed at several congressional hearings in early March, the IG’s investigation found “systemic, nationwide issues adversely affecting NOAA’s ability to effectively carry out its mission of regulating the fishing industry.”
Furthermore, the report continued, “These issues have contributed significantly to a highly charged regulatory climate and dysfunctional relationship between NOAA and the fishing industry – particularly in the Northeast region.”
Findings
Among the findings listed in the IG’s report are the following.
Aggregate fine assessments by NOAA general counsel attorneys in the Northeast region between July 2004 and June 2009 were five times higher than in the other four regions.
The Northeast region had the greatest percentage reduction from assessed penalties to settled fine amounts of all the regions over that time period – from approximately $5.5 million assessed to approximately $1.6 million settled, a nearly 70% reduction.
These findings led the IG to conclude that “a lack of management attention, direction, and oversight has led to regional enforcement elements operating autonomously.”
NOAA leadership has had “minimal involvement” in setting enforcement priorities, linking enforcement to fishery management goals, or evaluating enforcement effectiveness.
NOAA leadership’s plans identifying the most pressing fishery and conservation issues do not include enforcement priorities or strategies.
The Office of General Counsel does not have an internal operations manual and the penalty schedule and informal guidelines that attorneys use to assess penalties give them broad discretion.
“This … has resulted in a process for determining civil penalty assessments that appears arbitrary … and there is no established process for higher-level review,” the report stated.
Data base weaknesses make it difficult, if not impossible, to compare how cases have been handled within regions or among regions.
As of Aug. 31, 2009, the OLE staff nationwide consisted of 149 criminal investigators (special agents) and 15 uniformed officers, 12 of whom were in Alaska and none of whom were in the Northeast.
“Because it is largely staffed by criminal investigators, OLE’s orientation is to conduct criminal investigations,” the report stated, even though most federal fishery violations are misdemeanors.
As a result of this workforce composition, OLE criminal investigators spend little time on the docks, with dealers, or in fish houses.
“This can contribute to misunderstanding and increased tension within the current regulatory climate,” the report stated.
Recommendations
The IG initiated the investigation at the request of NOAA Director Jane Lubchenco. She made that request after the Massachusetts congressional delegation asked her to do so back in May 2009.
In mid-March, Lubchenco announced a series of steps NOAA had taken and planned to take to address the IG’s findings (see story previous page).
During the course of the investigation, the IG’s staff conducted interviews with 225 individuals in the Northeast, North Carolina, Florida, West Coast, and Alaska.
As a result of those interviews, the IG’s office basically broke up the investigation into two phases. The first focused on management issues and were addressed in the report released in late January. The second phase involves following up on individual cases. The final report is expected to be released this spring. /cfn/
Back to story list
|
|
Tell us what you think.
