15 C.F.R. § 904.301

Bases for permit sanctions or denials

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Unless otherwise specified in a settlement agreement, or otherwise provided by statutes or in this subpart, NOAA may sanction any permit issued under the statutes cited in § 904.1(c). The bases for an action to sanction or deny a permit include the following:

(1) Violation of any statute administered by NOAA, including violation of any regulation promulgated or permit condition or restriction prescribed thereunder, by the permit holder/applicant or with the use of a permitted vessel;

(2) The failure to pay a civil penalty imposed under any marine resource law administered by NOAA;

(3) The failure to pay a criminal fine imposed or to satisfy any other liability incurred in a judicial proceeding under any of the statutes administered by NOAA; or

(4) The failure to pay any amount in settlement of a civil forfeiture imposed on a vessel or other property.

(b) A sanction may be applied to a permit involved in the underlying violation, as well as to any permit held or sought by the permit holder/applicant, including permits for other vessels. (See, e.g., 16 U.S.C. 1858(g)(1)(i)).

(c) A permit sanction may not be extinguished by sale or transfer. A vessel's permit sanction is not extinguished by sale or transfer of the vessel, nor by dissolution or reincorporation of a vessel owner corporation, and shall remain with the vessel until lifted by NOAA.

[87 FR 38941, June 30, 2022]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 6 cases, 1994–2010 · leading case: Am. Pelagic Fishing Co., L.P. v. United States, 379 F.3d 1363 (Fed. Cir. 2004).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Am. Pelagic Fishing Co., L.P. v. United States, 379 F.3d 1363 (Fed. Cir. 2004). · cites it 3× “4(m); 15 C.F.R. § 904.301 (a) (1997). The government responds that American Pelagic did not have a property interest in its fishery permits.”

Kafka v. Montana Dep't of Fish, Wildlife & Parks, 2008 MT 460 (Mont. 2008). “¶49 However, part 4 does put the holder on notice that continued compliance with applicable laws and regulations is required for maintenance of the License. See ¶ 8.”

Gonzalez v. United States Dep't of Com., Nat'l Oceanic & Atmospheric Admin., 695 F. Supp. 2d 474 (S.D. Tex. 2010). · cites it 7× “§ 1858 (g); 15 C.F.R. §§ 904.301 , 904.302, 904.310).”

Conti v. United States, 48 Fed. Cl. 532 (Fed. Cl. 2001). “See 15 C.F.R. §§ 904.301 (a)(1), 904.320(a) (2000).”

Kafka v. Montana Dep't of Fish, 2008 MT 460 (Mont. 2008). “¶49 However, part 4 does put the holder on notice that continued compliance with applicable laws and regulations is required for maintenance of the License. See ¶ 8. Both versions of part 4 state that the licensee may breed, harvest, sell, or dispose of alternative livestock, so…”

Key Bank v. Concepion, 847 F. Supp. 844 (W.D. Wash. 1994). · cites it 2× “The expansive language of 15 C.F.R. § 904.301 (a)(3) is more than problematic.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.