The current draft of DEC’s proposed policies and guidelines for suspending and revoking marine commercial fishing licenses was discussed. Mr. Colvin provided background: when the first commercial fishing license moratorium was enacted, a joint DEC-MRAC committee had been created to develop recommendations for the sustainability of the fisheries. The committee’s recommendations were later accepted by the DEC Commissioner and by the Legislature and specifically included a recommendation to "strengthen current programs and policies regarding suspension of commercial fishing licenses upon convictions for violating conservation law." An earlier draft of the proposed policies and procedural guidelines had allowed suspension and revocation of other commercial fishing licenses based on the discretionary authority of the Commissioner. The penalties were quite stiff. Mr. Colvin added that the list of infractions would have to change constantly as regulations changed. Councilor Schwab suggested that possession of a shark fin without the carcass should have higher priority. Councilor Relyea urged that the taking or disturbing of shellfish possessed by another should have a more severe penalty. Councilor Knobel expressed concern that excessive penalties could backfire, with potential miscreants attempting to figure out which type and number of infraction would result in the least chance of license suspension/revocation.

Mr. Colvin explained that the process required that, after a second conviction, a person be notified of DEC’s intention to revoke or suspend the license for a period of time specified in the draft policy. The license holder could request a hearing, to be held before an administrative law judge, who would hear the case and make recommendations to the Commissioner. Verdicts could be appealed. Councilor Knobel pointed out that having some kind of peer review or an industry representative involved might make it easier to distinguish the intent behind infractions. Mr. Kelly of the DEC responded that the Department would consider an enforcement advisory panel. The Council discussed ways to create and operate an industry advisory panel charged with assisting DEC in weighing the severity and intent behind specific infractions.

Councilor Sandy Mason objected that one infraction could expose a commercial fisherman to double or triple jeopardy under companion state and federal regulations. Captain Otterstedt of DEC’s Division of Law Enforcement agreed that there could be concurrent state and federal level prosecution, but only as long as there was no double jeopardy.

Mr. Colvin described the proposal as policy guidelines for implementing regulations. Mr. Wise commented that the DEC guidelines must balance flexibility against the appearance of arbitrary capriciousness. Public comment will be of great interest. DEC will put the proposed policies/guidelines out for public comment and the Council will revisit them with the public comment record in hand.