| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2302 - FRAPPIER | This appeal was taken in accordance with Title 46 United
States Code 239(g) and 46 CFR 5.30-1.
By order dated 26 January 1982, an Administrative Law Judge of
the United States Coast Guard at Boston, Massachusetts suspended
Appellant's license for one month, on twelve months' probation,
upon finding him guilty of misconduct and negligence. The
specification found proved under the charge of misconduct alleges
that, while serving as Master on board the United States M/V BERT
REINAUER II, O. N. 236989, under authority of the license above
captioned, on or abut 18 May 1981, Appellant did wrongfully fail to
report a marine casualty to the nearest Officer in Charge, Marine
Inspection as required by 46 USC 239 and 46 CFR 4.05-10.
The specification found proved under the charge of negligence
alleges that Appellant, while so serving as Master on board the M/V
BERT REINAUER II, O. N. 236989, did, on or about 18 May 1981, fail
to navigate said vessel with due caution, causing said vessel to
ground in the Penobscot River, Maine.
The hearing was held at Portland, Maine and Boston,
Massachusetts on 28 October 1981 and 9 November 1981. | Appeal No. 2302 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 4/20/1983 | 4/20/1983 | | 12/20/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2305 - SINGH | This appeal was taken in accordance with Title 46 United
States Code 239(g) and 46 CFR 5.30-1.
By order dated 25 July, 1880, an Administrative Law Judge of
the United States Coast Guard at Boston, Massachusetts suspended
Appellant's license and seaman's document for 1 month on 12 months'
probation, upon finding him guilty of misconduct and negligence.
The specifications found proved allege that while serving as
Chief Engineer on board the United States T/V ALLEGIANCE, O.N.27866
under authority of the document and license above captioned, on or
about 19 December 1979, Appellant: (1) Wrongfully failed to report
a repair to a cargo pump, and (2) was negligent in maintaining and
repairing the vessel's machinery and equipment.
The hearing was held at Melville, Rhode Island and Boston,
Massachusetts on 28 January, II and 26 February, II March, 16 April
and II June 1980.
The hearing was held in joinder with those of John D. Gaboury,
Master of the vessel, and Timothy Fales, the Chief Mate.
At the hearing, Appellant was represented by professional
counsel and entered a plea of not guilty to the charge and each
specification. | Appeal No. 2305 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 5/9/1983 | 5/9/1983 | | 12/20/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2290 - DUGGINS | This appeal was taken in accordance with Title 46 United
States Code 239 (g) and 46 CFR 5.30-1.
By order dated 9 March 1981, an Administrative Law Judge of
the United States Coast Guard at New York, New York issued an order
of 12 months suspension outright of the above captioned document,
and all other valid licenses, documents, certificates, and
endorsements issued to the Appellant upon finding him guilty of
misconduct.
The specification found proved alleges that while serving as
Boatswain on board the USNS SEALIFT CHINA SEA under the authority
of the above captioned document, on or about 11 February 1980,
while said vessel was at sea, the Appellant wrongfully assaulted
First assistant Engineer, John K. Brown, by brandishing a fire hose
nozzle in a threatening manner and offering to inflict bodily harm.
The hearing was held in New York on 11 March, 17 April, 19
May, 3 June, 2 July, 2,15,30 September, 24 October, and 12, 24
November 1980. | Appeal No. 2290 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2/27/1983 | 2/27/1983 | | 12/20/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2306 - FALES | This appeal was taken in accordance with Title 46 Code 239(g)
and 46 CFR 5.30-1.
By order dated 25 July 1980, an Administrative Law Judge of
the United States Coast Guard at Boston, Massachusetts suspended
Appellant's license for one month on twelve month's probation, upon
finding him guilty of negligence. The specifications found proved
allege:
(1) That while serving as Chief Mate on board the United
States T/V ALLEGIANCE, O.N. 271866 under authority of the
license above captioned, between 12 October 1979 and 19
December 1979, Appellant had responsibility for all cargo
equipment and failed to maintain that equipment in safe
operating condition such that:
1. No. 10 cargo pump in aft pumproom was leaking from
both shafts;
2. No. 11 cargo pump in aft pumproom was leaking
excessively from packing gland;
3. Port bulkhead stop valve on suction line in aft
pumproom was leaking through the packing gland;
4. No. 5 cargo pump suction line was holed and leaking
in amidships pumproom;
5. No. 5 cargo line riser valve in amidships pumproom
was leaking;
6. No 12 cargo pump discharge riser in aft pumproom was
repaired with a cement patch.
(2) That while so serving Appellant allowed an excessive
amount of product to accumulate and remain in the
amidships pumproom bilge creating a hazardous condition
aboard the vessel. | Appeal No. 2306 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 5/9/1983 | 5/9/1983 | | 12/20/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2662 - VOORHEIS | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 USC§ 7701 et seq., 46 CFR Part 5,
and the procedures in 33 CFR Part 20.
By a Decision and Order (hereinafter "D&O") dated July 8, 2005, an
Administrative Law Judge (hereinafter "ALJ") of the United States Coast Guard at
Baltimore, Maryland ordered the Coast Guard to return the merchant mariner document
of Mr. William Voorheis (hereinafter "Respondent") upon finding a charge of use of or
addiction to the use of dangerous drugs not proved.
The specification found not proved alleged that Respondent tested positive for
amphetamine as part of a periodic drug screening conducted on June 30, 2004. | Appeal No. 2662 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 1/19/2007 | 1/19/2007 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2661 - SHINE | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 USC§ 7701 et seq., 46 CFR Part 5,
and the procedures in 33 CFR Part 20.
By a Decision and Order (hereinafter "D&O") dated February 20, 2004, an
Administrative Law Judge (hereinafter "ALJ'') of the United States Coast Guard at
Alameda, California, issued a summary decision revoking the merchant mariner
credentials of Mr. Eric Norman Shine (hereinafter "Respondent") upon finding proved a
charge of medical incompetence.
The specification found proved alleged that Respondent suffers from a mental
impairment of sufficient disabling character which renders him unable to safely perform
his duties aboard a merchant vessel. | Appeal No. 2661 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 12/27/2006 | 12/27/2006 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2665 - DUBROC | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 USC§ 7701 et seq., 46 CFR Part 5,
and 33 CPR Part 20.
By a Revocation Order1 (hereinafter "Default Order") dated September 14, 2004,
an Administrative Law Judge (hereinafter "ALJ") of the United States Coast Guard at
Norfolk, Virginia, revoked the Merchant Mariner Document (hereinafter "MMD") of
Mr. Dieter P. Dubroc (hereinafter "Respondent'') upon a finding of default in a
proceeding that alleged, as the basis for revocation, use of or addiction to the use of
dangerous drugs. The Complaint alleged that on June 11, 2003, Respondent submitted to
a random drug test and provided a urine sample that tested positive for the presence of
cocaine metabolite. | Appeal No. 2665 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 8/7/2007 | 8/7/2007 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2669 - LYNCH | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 USC§ 7701 et seq., 46 CFR Part 5,
and 33 CFR Part 20.
By a Decision and Order (hereinafter "D&O") dated February 16, 2005, an
Administrative Law Judge (hereinafter "ALJ") of the United States Coast Guard at
Norfolk, Virginia, revoked the merchant mariner license of Mr. Howard Lynch, III,
(hereinafter "Respondent") upon finding proved a charge of use of, or addiction to the use
of, dangerous drugs.
The specification found proved alleged that Respondent tested positive for
marijuana metabolite as part of a random drug screening conducted on October 3, 2002. | Appeal No. 2669 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 8/30/2007 | 8/30/2007 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2660 - BLACKMON | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 USC§ 7701 et seq., 46 CFR Part 5,
and 33 CFR Part 20.
By a Decision and Order (hereinafter "D&O") dated August 22, 2005, an
Administrative Law Judge (hereinafter "ALJ") of the United States Coast Guard at
Honolulu, Hawaii, revoked the merchant mariner document of Mr. Clifford Blackmon
(hereinafter "Respondent") upon finding proved a charge of misconduct. The
specification found proved alleged that on August 27, 2004, Respondent:
Took a Pre-employment drug test and that the urine specimen
subsequently tested positive for Marijuana Metabolite. | Appeal No. 2660 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 11/9/2006 | 11/9/2006 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2667 - THOMPSON | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 USC§ 7701 et seq., 46 C.F.R. Part 5, and the
procedures in 33 C.F.R. Part 20.
By a Decision and Order (hereinafter "D&O") dated October 13, 2004, an Administrative
Law Judge (hereinafter "ALJ") of the United States Coast Guard at New Orleans, Louisiana,
dismissed a Complaint brought by Coast Guard Marine Safety Office Morgan City, Louisiana
(hereinafter "MSO Morgan City") against the merchant mariner license of Mr. Aubrey A.
Thompson, Jr., (hereinafter "Respondent") after finding not proved two charges: 1) that
Respondent was a user of or was addicted to the use of dangerous drugs and 2) that Respondent
committed an act of misconduct. | Appeal No. 2667 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 8/10/2007 | 8/10/2007 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2629 - RAPOZA | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 USC 7704, 46 CFR 5.701, and 33 CFR Part 20.
By a Decision and Order (D&O) dated December 14, 2000, an Administrative Law Judge
(ALJ) of the United States Coast Guard at Seattle, Washington, revoked Respondent’s abovecaptioned
license and document, upon finding the charge of conviction for a dangerous drug law
violation proved. The supporting specification that was found proved alleges the Respondent
“[w]as convicted of violating a dangerous drug law of the State of Washington for the wrongful
possession of cocaine on or about April 27, 2000.”
A hearing was held on December 14, 2000, in Seattle, Washington. Respondent appeared
with counsel and entered a response denying the charge and specification. The Coast Guard
Investigating Officer (IO) introduced two witnesses and eight exhibits. Respondent introduced
five exhibits. Respondent’s Exhibits 3 and 4 were duplicative of IO Exhibits 5 and 6. IO
Exhibits 3, 4 and 8 were excluded from evidence as irrelevant. The charge was found proved,
and Respondent’s license and document were revoked. | Appeal No. 2629 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 7/31/2002 | 7/31/2002 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2630 - BAARSVIK | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 USC 7702, 46 CFR 5.701, and 33 CFR
Part 20.
By a Decision and Order (D&O) dated March 27, 2000, an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) of the United States Coast Guard suspended Respondent’s above-captioned license for 30 days in addition to placing Respondent on a three month probationary period based upon finding proved one charge of negligence and one charge of misconduct. At the time of the hearing, there was one specification under the charge of negligence and one specification under the charge of misconduct. Under the charge of misconduct, the specification alleged that the Respondent wrongfully navigated the M/V KATAMA in conditions of restricted visibility by failing to comply with 33 USC 1602, International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, (COLREGS) Rule 6 – Safe Speed, contributing to the grounding of the M/V KATAMA outside the marked channel. Under the charge of negligence, the specification alleged that the Respondent, while serving as master of the M/V KATAMA on January 15, 1999, negligently operated the M/V KATAMA by failing to operate at a safe speed. These charges were brought on July 9, 1999. | Appeal No. 2630 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 8/6/2002 | 8/6/2002 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2632 - WHITE | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 USC §7704, 46 CFR §5.701, and the procedures in 33 CFR Part 20.
By an Order dated September 5, 2000, an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) of the United States Coast Guard at Seattle, Washington, revoked Respondent’s above captioned merchant mariner’s document upon finding proved a charge of use of a dangerous drug. The single specification supporting the charge alleged that on
July 22, 1999, Respondent had cocaine metabolite present in his body as shown by a random drug-screening test.
A hearing (hereafter referred to as Hearing I) was held on January 27, 2000, in Juneau, Alaska. Subsequent hearings were held on May 17, 2000, and May 25, 2000, in Juneau, Alaska (hereafter referred to collectively as Hearing II). Respondent appeared with counsel and entered a response denying the charge and specification. The Coast Guard Investigating Officer introduced into evidence the testimony of five witnesses and ten exhibits. Respondent introduced into evidence his own testimony, one additional witness, and one exhibit. | Appeal No. 2632 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 8/9/2002 | 8/9/2002 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2642 - RIZZO | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 USC § 7703, 46 CFR § 5.701, and 33 CFR Part 20.
By a Decision and Order (D&O) dated August 27, 2001, an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) of the United States Coast Guard at Baltimore, Maryland, suspended Appellant’s license for two (2) months outright upon finding proved a charge of negligence. The specifications found proved alleged that on January 30, 2000, Appellant, while serving as operator of the tug JOHN TURECAMO and while acting under the authority of the above-captioned license, navigated the tug in such a manner as to cause the barge PEQUECO II to sink in the upper Chesapeake Bay, just south of Turkey Point, resulting in approximately 100 gallons of diesel oil pollution, a five week salvage response and approximately $150,000 in damages. | Appeal No. 2642 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 8/23/2003 | 8/23/2003 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2636 - HOSKINS | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 USC § 7702, 46 USC § 7704, 46 CFR § 5.701, and the procedures in 33 CFR Part 20.
By a Decision and Order (D&O) dated January 9, 2002, Edwin M. Bladen, an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) of the United States Coast Guard at Seattle, Washington, revoked Erick L. Hoskins’ (Appellant) merchant mariner document. The Appellant was charged under 46 USC § 7704(b) in a single specification based on a conviction of a State of Washington dangerous drug law. The charge and specification were found proved by the ALJ.
The D&O was served on the Appellant and the Coast Guard on January 9, 2002. The Appellant filed his Notice of Appeal on February 4, 2002, and subsequently filed his appeal on March 5, 2002. The matter is properly before me.
APPEARANCES: Shane C. Crew, Esq., 720 Olive Way, Suite 1301, Seattle, Washington, 98101 for Appellant. The Coast Guard Investigating Officer was Chief Warrant Officer Clarence C. Rice, 1519 Alaskan Way South, Settle, WA 98134-1192. | Appeal No. 2636 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 1/26/2003 | 1/26/2003 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2606 - SWAN | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 USC § 7702 and 46 CFR § 5.701.
By order dated February 16, 1996, the Administrative Law Judge of the United States Coast
Guard at Seattle, Washington, revoked Appellant’s license and document based upon a finding of
a proved charge of misconduct: use of a dangerous drug. The single specification supporting the
charge alleged that Appellant was, as shown by a positive drug test, a user of marijuana.
The hearings were held in Seattle, Washington, on December 20, 1995, and February 8, 1996.
Appellant, represented by counsel, entered a response denying the charge and specification.
The Administrative Law Judge introduced into evidence thirteen exhibits. The Coast Guard
introduced into evidence seven exhibits and the testimony of four witnesses. Appellant
introduced into evidence two exhibits, his own testimony, and the testimony of one witness. The
parties stipulated to the introduction into evidence of two exhibits. | Appeal No. 2606 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2/19/1999 | 2/19/1999 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2605 - DANIELS | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 USC § 7702 and 46 CFR § 5.701.
By an order dated August 28, 1996, an Administrative Law Judge of the United States Coast Guard at New
Orleans, Louisiana revoked Mr. William Gary Daniels’ ("Appellant") document based upon a finding of one charge
of misconduct: Use of a Dangerous Drug. The specification alleged that Appellant, while the holder of the
captioned document, provided a urine specimen which tested positive for marijuana metabolites, thereby indicating
use of a dangerous drug, to wit: marijuana.
The hearing was held on April 9, 1996, and May 29, 1996, in New Orleans, Louisiana. Appellant entered a
response denying the charge and specification.
The Coast Guard Investigating Officer introduced into evidence the testimony of three witnesses and six exhibits.
In defense, Appellant introduced into evidence his own testimony. Appellant also introduced two exhibits
into evidence.
The Administrative Law Judge issued a written Decision and Order ("D&O") on August 28, 1996. The
Administrative Law Judge concluded that the charge and the supporting specification were proved and
revoked Appellant’s document. | Appeal No. 2605 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 1/19/1999 | 1/19/1999 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2640 - PASSARO | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 USC § 7701 et seq., 46 CFR Part 5, and 33 CFR Part 20.
By a Decision and Order (D&O) dated March 19, 2002, an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) of the United States Coast Guard at Alameda, California, suspended Mr. Passaro’s (Respondent’s) license and document for twelve (12) months, six (6) months outright and the remaining six (6) months remitted on twelve (12) months probation, upon finding proved a charge of misconduct. The specifications found proved alleged that on February 8, 2001, Respondent, while serving as duty engineer aboard the M/V LIBERTY WAVE and while acting under the authority of the above-captioned license and document, responded to two separate high water alarms by pumping bilge water directly overboard, bypassing the Oily Water Separator (OWS), in direct violation of the Vessel Instruction Manual and Chief Engineer’s Standing Order requiring that all overboard discharges be passed through the OWS. | Appeal No. 2640 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 8/31/2003 | 8/31/2003 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2634 - BARRETTA | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. 7702, 46 U.S.C. 7704(c),
46 C.F.R. 5.701, and the procedures in 33 C.F.R. Part 20.
By a Decision and Order (D&O) dated June 18, 2002, an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) of the United States Coast Guard at Norfolk, Virginia, revoked on a conditional basis the Respondent’s above captioned license. The Respondent was charged under 46 U.S.C. 7704(c) with the use of a dangerous drug in a single specification based on a positive test for marijuana and the charge and specification were found proved by the ALJ. The ALJ, in issuing his conditional revocation, ordered the Coast Guard to temporarily return the Respondent’s license for two months (July and August 2002) to allow the Respondent to work under the license providing launch service at a marina in Provincetown, Rhode, Island. [D&O at 10] The D&O allowed Respondent, during July and August 2002, to provide “launch service at Provincetown to and from the dock at Provincetown Marina.” [D&O at 10] Pursuant to the conditional revocation, the Respondent would continue with her drug rehabilitation program during and beyond this two-month period in order to prove she was cured in accordance with 46 U.S.C. 7704(c) and my decision in Appeal Decision 2546 (SWEENEY). The Respondent was also required to participate in a “random, unannounced drug-testing program for a minimum of one year following completion of the rehabilitation program” and be “subject to increased unannounced testing for up to 60 months.” [D&O at 8-9] | Appeal No. 2634 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 9/6/2002 | 9/6/2002 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2638 - PASQUARELLA | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. 7702, 46 U.S.C. 7704(c),
46 C.F.R. 5.701, and the procedures in 33 C.F.R. Part 20.
An Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) of the Coast Guard found the charge of use of a dangerous drug proved during a hearing on July 30, 2001. At Mr. Pasquarella’s (Respondent) request, the ALJ continued the hearing until January 30, 2002. On January 30, 2002, the ALJ directed the Coast Guard to return the Respondent’s merchant mariner document. In a Decision and Order (D&O) dated February 19, 2002, the ALJ at Alameda, California, revoked the Respondent’s merchant mariner document pursuant to 46 U.S.C. 7704(c), but the ALJ stayed his order of revocation pending Respondent’s completion of the cure requirements set forth in Appeal Decision 2535 (SWEENEY).
The Coast Guard filed its notice of appeal on March 1, 2002, and received an extension to file its brief by June 25, 2002. The Coast Guard filed a timely brief on May 30, 2002. In its appeal, the Coast Guard requested a reversal of the D&O, a remand of the case to the ALJ to properly apply the cure process as described in SWEENEY, and instructions to the ALJ to have Respondent deposit his document with the Coast Guard. Respondent did not file a reply brief in this matter. This appeal is properly before me.
APPEARANCES: Respondent, Randy Pasquarella, pro se. The Coast Guard Investigating Officers were Lieutenant Benjamin Benson, Petty Officer Rachel Lynn, and Petty Officer Laura Barkins, stationed at Marine Safety Office (MSO) San Diego, 2716 North Harbor Drive, San Diego, California 92101. | Appeal No. 2638 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 3/6/2003 | 3/6/2003 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2635 - SINCLAIR | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. 7702, 46 U.S.C. 7704(c), 46 C.F.R. 5.701, and the procedures in 33 C.F.R. Part 20.
By a Decision and Order (D&O) dated February 14, 2001, an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) of the United States Coast Guard at Houston, Texas, revoked Respondent’s above captioned merchant mariner’s document and license upon finding proved a charge of use of a dangerous drug. The ALJ stayed his order contingent upon a showing by the Respondent that he had enrolled to enter or had entered a certified drug rehabilitation program to complete the steps necessary to prove cure, as required by 46 U.S.C. 7704(c) and Appeal Decision 2546 (SWEENEY). Respondent was required to do this within thirty days of receipt of the ALJ’s D&O. The thirty day period expired with Respondent failing to enroll in a drug rehabilitation program resulting in revocation of the above captioned merchant mariner document and license. | Appeal No. 2635 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 10/3/2002 | 10/3/2002 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2579 - OCONNELL | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. 7702
and 46 C.F.R. 5.701.
By order dated October 7, 1994, an Administrative Law
Judge of the United States Coast Guard at Seattle, Washington,
revoked Appellant's license and document based upon finding
proved the charge of use of a dangerous drug. The single
specification supporting the charge alleged that on or about
August 23, 1993, Appellant wrongfully used cocaine as
evidenced by a drug test and the urine specimen collected on
that date.
A hearing was held at Seattle, Washington, on October 21, 1993. Appellant elected to represent himself and entered a
response admitting the charge and specification.
During the hearing, the Coast Guard Investigating Officer
introduced three exhibits into evidence. Appellant offered
eight exhibits into evidence and testified on his own behalf.
The Administrative Law Judge added 12 additional exhibits to
the record. | Appeal No. 2579 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 8/19/1996 | 8/19/1996 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2575 - WILLIAMS | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. 7702 and
46 C.F.R. 5.701.
By order dated November 7, 1994, an Administrative Law Judge
of the United States Coast Guard at Mobile, Alabama revoked
Appellant's License based upon finding the use of a dangerous
drug charge proven. The single specification supporting the
charge alleged that on or about May 12, 1994, Appellant
wrongfully used cocaine as evidenced by a drug test and the urine
specimen collected on that date.
The hearing was held at Mobile, Alabama on August 12, 1994. Appellant elected to represent himself and entered a response
denying the charge and the specification.
During the hearing, the Coast Guard Investigating Officer
(hereinafter "Investigating Officer") introduced into evidence 10
exhibits, and the testimony of five witnesses. All of the
witnesses testified via telephone. In defense, Appellant offered
into evidence 10 exhibits. | Appeal No. 2575 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 6/25/1996 | 6/25/1996 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2578 - CALLAHAN | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. 7702 and
46 C.F.R. 5.701.
By order dated December 14, 1994, an Administrative Law
Judge of the United States Coast Guard at Morgan City, Louisiana,
revoked Appellant's License and Document based upon finding
proved the charge of misconduct. The three specifications
supporting the charge alleged that on or about March 23, 1994,
Appellant wrongfully (1) refused to provide a specimen for a post
incident drug test, (2) failed to obey an order of the master
regarding the navigation of the vessel, and (3) departed the
vessel without being relieved as the licensed mate. The hearing was held at Morgan City, Louisiana, on October
5, 1994. Appellant was represented by professional counsel and
entered a response denying the charge and all specifications.
The Coast Guard Investigating Officer introduced into
evidence the testimony of three witnesses. In defense, Appellant
offered into evidence one exhibit and testified on his own
behalf. The Administrative Law Judge admitted two additional
exhibits on the record. | Appeal No. 2578 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 7/22/1996 | 7/22/1996 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2577 - WAYMAN | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. 7702 and
46 C.F.R. 5.701.
By order dated April 18, 1994, an Administrative Law Judge
of the United States Coast Guard at Seattle, Washington, issued
an admonition to Appellant based upon finding proved charges of
negligence and misconduct. The single specifications supporting
each charge allege that on or about August 13, 1993, while
serving as master of the M/V RIVER QUEEN, Appellant negligently (Charge I) and wrongfully (Charge II) allowed the vessel to be
under the direction and control of an unlicensed individual in
violation of 46 C.F.R. 15.515(b).
Following a prehearing conference on February 1, 1994, the
hearing was held at Seattle, Washington, on March 15, 1994. At
the hearing, Appellant was represented by professional counsel
and entered a response denying all charges and specifications.
The Coast Guard Investigating Officer introduced into
evidence five exhibits and the testimony of one witness. In
defense, Appellant offered into evidence four exhibits and the
testimony of four witnesses, including himself. | Appeal No. 2577 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 7/10/1996 | 7/10/1996 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2613 - SLACK | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. 7702 and 46 C.F.R. 5.701.
By Decision and Order (“D&O”) dated May 3, 1996, an Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) of the United States Coast Guard at Houston, Texas, revoked Mr. Jeffrey A. Slack’s (“Appellant”) license based upon finding proved one specification of misconduct and one specification of violation of law. The specification for the charge of misconduct alleged that Appellant, while acting under the authority of the above captioned license, wrongfully made fraudulent statements on his Merchant Mariner’s license renewal application. The specification for the charge of violation of law alleged that Appellant, while being the holder of the above captioned license, was convicted of an offense described in Section 205(a)(3)(A) of the National Driver Registration Act of 1982.
The hearing was held on February 27, 1996 in Toledo, Ohio. Appellant entered a response denying each charge and specification. The Coast Guard Investigating Officer introduced into evidence the testimony of three (3) witnesses and six (6) exhibits. In defense, Appellant entered into evidence his own testimony, the testimony of three (3) witnesses, and twelve (12) exhibits. The ALJ entered into evidence eight (8) procedural exhibits.
The ALJ issued a Decision and Order (“D&O”) on May 3, 1996. The ALJ found the misconduct charge and supporting specification proved and the violation of law charge and supporting specification proved. Upon a finding of proved, the ALJ revoked Appellant’s license.
The D&O was served on Appellant on May 6, 1996. Appellant, through his attorney, filed a timely notice of appeal on May 29, 1996. Appellant requested a transcript which was received on August 8, 1996. The appeal was perfected on October 7, 1996. Therefore, this appeal is properly before me. | Appeal No. 2613 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 12/23/1999 | 12/23/1999 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2637 - TURBEVILLE | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. §7702, 46 U.S.C. §7704(c), 46 C.F.R. §5.701, and the procedures in 33 C.F.R. Part 20.
By a Decision and Order (D&O) dated January 22, 2002, an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) of the United States Coast Guard at Baltimore, Maryland, revoked Respondent’s above captioned merchant mariner’s document upon finding proved a charge of use of a dangerous drug.
The single specification supporting the charge of use of a dangerous drug alleged that on March 22, 2001, Respondent had marijuana metabolites present in his body as was revealed through a random drug test. The hearing was held on October 30, 2001, in Baltimore, Maryland, where Respondent appeared with counsel and entered a response denying the charge and specification. The Coast Guard Investigating Officer introduced three witnesses and five exhibits. Respondent introduced into evidence his own testimony, the testimony of three additional witnesses, and seven exhibits. A joint stipulation of fact was introduced. The ALJ’s D&O was served on Respondent on January 24, 2002, and Respondent filed a notice of appeal on February 14, 2002. Respondent filed his appeal on March 25, 2002, in a timely manner. This appeal is properly before me. | Appeal No. 2637 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 3/6/2003 | 3/6/2003 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2646 - MCDONALD | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. §7701 et seq., 46 C.F.R. Part 5,
and the procedures set forth in 33 C.F.R. Part 20.
By a Decision and Order (D&O) dated November 9, 2001 , an Administrative Law
Judge (AU) of the United States Coast Guard at Houston, Texas, suspended
Dominic McDonald's (Respondent's) above-captioned merchant mariner document and
license for twelve months upon finding proved a charge of misconduct.
Respondent was charged with a single specification of misconduct under
46 U.S.C. § 7703 and 46 C.F.R. § 5.27, in that while engaged in official matters under the
authority of his license and merchant mariner document, Respondent wrongfully refused
to submit to required chemical testing for dangerous drugs by providing a substituted
urine specimen during a pre-employment drug screening on July 31, 2000. The pre employment
drug screening was in preparation for Respondent's bidding on union
contracted work as required by the Masters, Mates, and Pilots Union. The specimen that
Respondent submitted was later determined to have been inconsistent with human urine.
Coast Guard Marine Safety Unit Galveston, Texas, determined that Respondent's alleged
submission of non-human urine constituted a refusal to submit to a urinalysis test
pursuant to 46 C.F.R. § 16.105. As a consequence, Marine Safety Unit Galveston sought
revocation of Respondent's license and merchant mariner document. | Appeal No. 2646 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 4/5/2004 | 4/5/2004 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2623 - LOVE | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7704 and 46 C.F.R. § 5.701,
and the procedures in 33 C.F.R. Part 20.
On September 9, 1999, the United States Coast Guard initiated an administrative
proceeding in the above captioned matter by filing a Complaint against John P. Love, Jr.,
charging him with the use of a dangerous drug in violation of 46 U .S.C. § 7704( c ). The
complaint alleged that Appellant took a drug test and tested positive for marijuana
metabolite. On October 27, 1999, the then assigned Administrative Law Judge, Judge
H.J. Gardner, granted Appellant's motion and dismissed the Complaint ruling on the
basis of the parties' written submissions. In accordance with Department of
Transportation (DOT) Equal Access to Justice Act, 5 U.S.C. 504 (EAJA) settlement
procedures, agency counsel agreed to enter into a settlement with Appellant on an
appropriate award for attorneys' fees and expenses. On December 23, 1999, Appellant
filed with the Chief Administrative Law Judge (CALJ) (who assumed responsibility for
the case upon the retirement of Judge Gardner) a Stipulation for Attorneys Fees and
Expenses along with an application for attorney fees and expenses. On April 28, 2000,
the CALJ issued an Order to Show Cause why the fee application should not be denied.
On June 16, 2000, the CALJ issued an Order approving the settlement stipulation in the
amount of $10,000. On July 6, 2000, Appellant filed a letter with the CALJ requesting some revisions to the text of the fee decision, specifically, the deletion of perceived
inaccurate statements. Appellant's letter did not make a supplemental EAJA application.
On July 18, 2000, the CALJ issued an order denying this request. On August 14, 2000,
Appellant filed a supplemental EAJA application for attorney fees. On November 15,
2000, the CALJ issued an order denying the supplemental EAJA application for
attorney's fees. | Appeal No. 2623 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 9/11/2001 | 9/11/2001 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2697 - GREEN | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7703,46 C.F.R. Part 5, and the
procedures set forth in 33 C.F.R. Part 20.
By a Decision and Order (hereinafter "D&O") dated January 4,2011, Bruce T. Smith, an
Administrative Law Judge (hereinafter "ALJ") of the United States Coast Guard at Paducah,
Kentucky, ordered the revocation of the Merchant Mariner License of Mr. Randy Joe Green
(hereinafter "Respondent") upon finding proved one charge of use of or addiction to the use of
dangerous drugs.
The specification found proved alleged that Respondent submitted to a random drug test
on July 15,2010, and that the specimen that he provided subsequently tested positive for the
presence of marijuana metabolites. | Appeal No. 2697 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 11/14/2011 | 11/14/2011 | | 11/27/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2643 - WALKER | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702, 46 U.S.C. § 7703(1), 46 C.F.R. § 5.701, and the procedures in 33 C.F.R. Part 20.
By a Decision and Order (D&O) dated June 18, 2002, an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) of the United States Coast Guard at New Orleans, La., suspended Milton Walker’s (Respondent) above captioned license upon finding proved charges of negligence and misconduct. The negligence and misconduct specifications found proved alleged that:
On or about 5 August 2001, Respondent, while operating an airboat owned by Louisiana Swamp Tours, deliberately and wantonly perpetrated the following acts against the owner of a rival swamp tour boat company and his passenger, who were both in a small pleasure boat: (a) overtook the small pleasure boat at high speed, approaching to within 3 feet of the port side of the small boat and throwing water into the small boat; (b) stopped 10-20 feet in front of the small boat and revved his engine, causing spray and water to spray into the small boat and its occupants; and (c) then turned and headed directly toward the small boat as if he was going to ram it, only turning away at the last second.
The negligence and misconduct found proved by the ALJ occurred in Jefferson Parish, La. | Appeal No. 2643 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2/2/2004 | 2/2/2004 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2627 - SHAFFER | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702, 46 C.F.R. § 5.701, and the procedures in 33 C.F.R. Part 20.
By a Decision and Order (D&O) dated June 8, 2000, an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) of the United States Coast Guard at New Orleans, Louisiana, found proved a charge of misconduct with one supporting specification. The single specification alleges that Appellant, did, on July 7, 1999, while employed as a tankerman at Economy Boat, provide an adulterated urine specimen as evidenced by nitrate found during a drug test administered on the urine specimen collected on that date.
At a hearing held on January 12, 2000, at the United States Coast Guard Marine Safety Unit, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, the Appellant appeared with counsel and entered a denial of the charge and specification. The Coast Guard Investigating Officer introduced eleven exhibits and called four witnesses. Appellant introduced two exhibits and called four witnesses. The ALJ introduced two exhibits. The charge and specification were found proved and Appellant’s license and document were revoked.
The D&O was served on Appellant on June 8, 2000. Appellant filed a Notice of Appeal on July 6, 2000, and an appeal brief on October 20, 2000. A supplementary appeal brief was filed on November 20, 2000. This appeal is properly before me.
APPEARANCE: Madro Bandaries, Esq., Post Office Box 56458, New Orleans, Louisiana 70156-6458 for the Appellant. The Investigating Officer was LT(jg) Christopher J. Gagnon, U.S. Coast Guard. | Appeal No. 2627 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2/25/2002 | 2/25/2002 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2641 - JONES | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702, 46 C.F.R. § 5.701, and the procedures in 33 C.F.R. Part 20.
By a Decision and Order (D&O) dated June 12, 2002, an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) of the United States Coast Guard at New Orleans, La., revoked Mr. Jones’ (Respondent’s) merchant mariner document upon finding proved a charge of misconduct. The specification found proved alleged that “[o]n August 3, 2001, Respondent refused a random drug test ordered by Kirby Corporation.” | Appeal No. 2641 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 8/31/2003 | 8/31/2003 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2639 - HAUCK | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702, 46 C.F.R. § 5.701, and 33 C.F.R. Part 20.
By a Decision and Order (D&O) dated October 2, 2001, an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) of the United States Coast Guard suspended Respondent, William C. Hauck’s, above-captioned license outright for a period of twelve (12) months based upon finding proved one charge of negligence and three charges of violation of law or regulation. At the time of the hearing, there was one specification under the charge of negligence and one specification under each of three charges of violation of law or regulation. Under the charge of negligence, the specification alleged that the Respondent, while serving as master of the M/V ST. LUCIE on July 29, 2000, negligently operated the M/V ST. LUCIE by failing to navigate the vessel with due caution, contributing to an allision with Bethel Bank Daymarker Number 19 (LLNR 12497), causing substantial damage. Under the first charge of violation of law or regulation, the specification alleged that on July 29, 2000, while serving as Master of the M/V ST. LUCIE, the Respondent failed to maintain a proper look-out for the prevailing circumstances and conditions, by failing to comply with 33 U.S.C. § 2005, Inland Navigation Rules, Rule 5 – Look-out, resulting in the allision of the M/V ST. LUCIE with the charted aid to navigation, causing substantial damage. | Appeal No. 2639 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 3/10/2003 | 3/10/2003 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2592 - MASON | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702 and 46 C.F.R.§ 5.701.
By an order dated December 21, 1995, an Administrative Law Judge of the United States Coast
Guard at Norfolk, Virginia, revoked Appellant’s above-captioned license and document, upon
finding a charge of use of a dangerous drug proved. The single specification supporting the
charge alleged that Appellant was, as shown by a positive drug test, a user of marijuana.
The hearing was held on December 6, 1995, in Portland, Maine. Appellant appeared pro se and
entered a response denying the charge and specification. The Administrative Law Judge
introduced into evidence seven exhibits. The Coast Guard Investigating Officer introduced into
evidence the testimony of three witness and five exhibits. Appellant introduced into evidence his
own testimony and three exhibits.
The Administrative Law Judge’s Decision and Order (D&O) was served on Appellant on
December 29, 1995. Appellant filed a notice of appeal on January 25, 1996, and received a copy
of the transcript on February 16, 1996. Appellant’s appeal was perfected on April 13, 1996. | Appeal No. 2592 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 8/6/1997 | 8/6/1997 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2624 - DOWNS | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702 and 46 C.F.R. § 5.7011. By order dated September 17, 1999, an Administrative Law Judge of the United States Coast Guard at Beaumont, Texas, revoked Appellant’s License and Document based upon finding proved a charge of misconduct. The specification supporting the charge alleged that on or about October 22, 1998, Appellant wrongfully refused to provide a urine specimen for a reasonable cause drug test.
The hearing was held at the United States Attorney’s Office, 350 Magnolia Street, Suite 150, Beaumont, Texas, on May 4, 1999. The Appellant appeared pro se and entered a response denying the charge and specification. The Coast Guard Investigating Officers introduced into evidence I.O. Exhibits 1 through 18 and the testimony of three witnesses. In defense, Appellant entered into evidence Respondent’s Exhibits 1 through 6. At the end of the hearing, the Administrative Law Judge made an oral finding that the charge and specification were found proved, then issued his order on September 17, 1999, which revoked Appellant’s license and merchant mariner’s document. | Appeal No. 2624 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 10/22/2001 | 10/22/2001 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2631 - SENGEL | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702 and 46 C.F.R. § 5.701.1
By Decision and Order (D&O) dated October 22, 1998, an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) of the United States Coast Guard at Norfolk, Virginia revoked Appellant’s above captioned license and document upon finding proved the charge of use of a dangerous drug. The single supporting specification was found proved based on a positive drug test for marijuana.
The hearing was held on April 23, 1998, at the Maine Maritime Academy in Castine, Maine and June 18, 1998, at the Federal District Courthouse in Portland, Maine. The Appellant appeared without counsel and entered a response denying the charge and specification. The Coast Guard Investigating Officer introduced into evidence the testimony of seven witnesses and seven exhibits. Appellant introduced into evidence the testimony of five witnesses and five exhibits. The ALJ introduced into evidence six exhibits. The charge was found proved and Appellant’s license and document were revoked. | Appeal No. 2631 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 8/7/2002 | 8/7/2002 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2621 - PERIMAN | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702 and 46 C.F.R. § 5.701.1
By an order dated March 26, 1999, an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) of the United
States Coast Guard at Norfolk, Virginia revoked Appellant’s above-captioned license
upon finding proved a charge of use of a dangerous drug, based upon a positive
urinalysis.
This remands the case for consideration of evidence for the most part developed
by Mr. Periman after the hearing as to (1) violations noted by the National Laboratory
Certification Program in the procedure used in testing the Appellant’s sample; (2) false
testimony by the Director of Lab Operations (no longer employed at the lab) about his
credentials; (3) misinformation provided to appellant about his right to have another lab
retest his sample; and, (4) premature disposal of appellant’s sample, precluding further
testing. | Appeal No. 2621 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 1/22/2001 | 1/22/2001 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2626 - DRESSER | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702 and 46 C.F.R. § 5.701.1
By an order dated February 4, 1999, an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) at New Orleans, Louisiana, revoked Appellant’s license and document. Appellant was charged with use of a dangerous drug in a single specification based on a positive test for marijuana.
The hearing was held on April 29, June 11-12 and 24, 1998, at New Orleans, Louisiana. Appellant was represented by legal counsel and entered a response denying the charge and specification. The Coast Guard Investigating Officer introduced into evidence the testimony of twelve witnesses and twenty-three exhibits. Appellant introduced into evidence the testimony of three witnesses and nineteen exhibits and testified on his own behalf. The charge and specification were found proved and Appellant’s license and document were revoked.
The ALJ’s Decision and Order (D&O) was served on Appellant on February 4, 1999. Appellant filed a notice of appeal with the ALJ on February 19, 1999. Appellant filed his appeal on March 17, 1999. Appellant filed a Motion to Disqualify the Commandant on April 9, 1999, and requested that the Motion and decision be made part of the record of this action. Appellant filed a second Motion to Disqualify the Commandant on August 4, 1999, and requested that the Motion and decision be made part of the record of this action. Appellant also filed Motion to File a Supplemental Brief on November 22, 1999. The Coast Guard granted this Motion and accepted the Supplemental Brief. This matter is properly before me for review.
APPEARANCES: Mr. J. Mac Morgan, Esq. for Appellant. The United States Coast Guard Investigating Officer was Lieutenant Commander Laticia J. Argenti, USCG. | Appeal No. 2626 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2/19/2001 | 2/19/2001 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2628 - VILAS | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702 and 46 C.F.R. § 5.701.1
By a Decision and Order (D&O) dated November 22, 1999, an Administrative Law Judge
(ALJ) of the United States Coast Guard at Alameda, California suspended Appellant's
license for sixteen (16) months, ten (10) months OUTRIGHT and the remaining six (6)
months remitted on eighteen (18) months probation after finding proved a charge of
negligence, with one underlying specification alleging contributing to the grounding of
the tank ship which he was piloting. | Appeal No. 2628 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 5/2/2002 | 5/2/2002 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2593 - MOWBRAY | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702 and 46 C.F.R. § 5.701.
By order dated September 6, 1995, an Administrative Law Judge of the United States Coast Guard at
Norfolk, Virginia, revoked Appellants license and all other licenses, merchant mariner's documents,
certificates or authorizations whatsoever issued by the Coast Guard to Appellant, based upon finding
proved one specification of negligence, one specification of violation of law and two specifications of
violation of regulation.
The single specification of negligence alleged that on February 21, 1995, while serving as operator
aboard the tug TICONDEROGA, Appellant negligently failed to immediately notify the Captain of the
Port of a hazardous condition (as defined in
33 C.F.R. § 160.203) in violation of 33 C.F.R. § 160.215, to wit: the sunken barge MC 10 and tug
ECCO III near the Hampton Roads Entrance Reach. The single specification of violation of law alleged
that Appellant failed to display Appellant's license within 48 hours after employment on the tug
TICONDEROGA in violation of 46 U.S.C. § 7110. The Administrative Law Judge dismissed the first
specification of violation of regulation upon finding it to be duplicitous of the single specification under
the charge of negligence. The second specification of violation of regulation alleged that from February
18, 1995, though February 21, 1995, while serving as operator aboard the tug TICONDEROGA,
Appellant allowed an individual to serve aboard the vessel without a valid Merchant Mariner's
Document in violation of 46 C.F.R. § 15.401. The third specification of violation of regulation alleged
that during the same time period, Appellant also was employed aboard the vessel without all crew
members subject to the random drug testing requirements of 46 C.F.R. Part 16 in violation of 46 C.F.R.
§ 16.320(f). | Appeal No. 2593 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 8/14/1997 | 8/14/1997 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2599 - GUEST | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702 and 46 C.F.R. § 5.701.
By order dated October 12, 1995, an Administrative Law Judge of the United States Coast Guard at
Norfolk, Virginia, suspended Appellant's license based upon finding proved the charge of misconduct.
The single specification supporting the charge alleged that between February 25 and June 1, 1994, while
serving as master of the OVERSEAS ALICE, Appellant failed to ensure the maintenance of the lifeboats
as required by 46 C.F.R. §§ 33.01-15 and 33.25-20.
The hearing began on May 23, 1995, and was held for three consecutive days at Boston, Massachusetts.
Appellant was represented by professional counsel and entered a response denying the charge and
specification.
The Coast Guard Investigating Officer introduced into evidence nine exhibits and the testimony of four
witnesses. In defense, Appellant offered into evidence two exhibits and the testimony of eight witnesses,
including himself.
Both parties submitted proposed findings and were given the opportunity to submit written closing
arguments. The Administrative Law Judge issued a written Decision and Order (D&O) on August 3,
1995. It concluded that the charge and specification of misconduct were found proved.
A request for an Oral Hearing on the issue of mitigation was submitted by Appellant and was granted by
Order dated September 7, 1995. The Hearing was held on September 28, 1995, at Boston,
Massachusetts. The Appellant offered the testimony of one witness, himself. The Administrative Law
Judge entered one exhibit into evidence. | Appeal No. 2599 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 3/27/1998 | 3/27/1998 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2594 - GOLDEN | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702 and 46 C.F.R. § 5.701.
By order dated March 2, 1995, an Administrative Law Judge of the United States Coast Guard at
St. Louis, Missouri, suspended Appellant’s license based upon finding proved two specifications
of negligence. The first specification alleged that on June 7, 1993, Appellant failed to properly
navigate an integrated tug and barge (ITB) on the Cuyahoga River, causing an allision between
the ITB and the M/V AGAWA CANYON (CANYON). The second specification alleged that,
approximately one hour later, Appellant failed to properly navigate the ITB, causing an allision
between the ITB and the M/V SEAGULL (SEAGULL).
The hearing was held on October 21, 1993. Appellant entered a response denying the charge and
specifications.
The Coast Guard Investigating Officer offered into evidence ten exhibits and the testimony of
three witnesses. Appellant offered into evidence four exhibits and his own testimony. The
Administrative Law Judge offered into evidence the testimony of one witness.
The Administrative Law Judge issued a written Decision and Order on March 2, 1995. It
concluded that the charge of negligence and the two supporting specifications were found proved.
The Administrative Law Judge suspended Appellant’s license outright for a period of two
months, with a two month additional suspension, remitted after 12 months of probation.
Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal on March 21, 1995. The appeal was perfected on June 3,
1996, after Appellant received an extension. | Appeal No. 2594 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 12/1/1997 | 12/1/1997 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2595 - UCCELLO | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702 and 46 C.F.R. § 5.701.
By order dated June 13, 1996, the Chief Administrative Law Judge of the United States Coast Guard at
Washington, D.C., revoked Appellants license based upon finding proved a charge of violation of law or
regulation. The supporting specification alleged that, while serving as the operator of an uninspected
towing vessel under authority of the above-captioned license, Appellant was intoxicated in violation of
46 U.S.C. § 2302(e) and 46 U.S.C. § 7703.
The hearing was held on November 1, 1995, at the U.S. Coast Guard Academy in New London,
Connecticut. Appellant entered a response denying the charge and specification.
The Coast Guard Investigating Officer offered into evidence two exhibits and the testimony of five
witnesses. Appellant offered into evidence 11 exhibits, his own testimony, and the testimony of one
witness.
The Chief Administrative Law Judge issued a written Decision and Order on
June 13, 1996. It concluded that the charge of violation of law and regulation and the supporting
specification were proved. Based on the fact that Appellant was serving a probationary period under a
previous suspension and revocation hearing, the Chief Administrative Law Judge suspended Appellants
license for three months in accordance with the Decision and Order in Administrative Law Judge Docket
No. 01-0069-TEM-94, U.S. Coast Guard v. License NO. 675013. Additionally, based on the finding in
this case, the Chief Administrative Law Judge revoked Appellants license but stayed the revocation for
one year after the expiration of the three month suspension.
Appellant filed a notice of appeal and perfected it on June 20, 1996. | Appeal No. 2595 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 12/23/1997 | 12/23/1997 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2601 - MCCARTHY | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702 and 46 C.F.R. § 5.701.
By order dated February 9, 1996, an Administrative Law Judge of the United States Coast Guard at
Jacksonville, Florida, revoked Appellant's merchant mariners license upon finding proved a charge of
negligence. The single specification supporting the charge was found proved. The specification alleged
that appellant, while serving under the authority of his license as a pilot aboard the tankship COASTAL
MANATEE, failed to navigate with due caution resulting in the grounding of the tankship COASTAL
MANATEE.
The hearing was held in Savannah, Georgia, on November 7, 1995. Appellant was represented by
counsel and entered a response denying the charge and specification. The Coast Guard Investigating
Officer introduced into evidence the testimony of six witnesses. The Investigating Officer also
introduced 12 exhibits into evidence. Appellant introduced into evidence the testimony of two witnesses
in addition to his own testimony. Appellant introduced two exhibits.
The Administrative Law Judge issued a written Decision and Order (D&O) on February 9, 1996. He
found the charge and supporting specifications proved, and stayed the revocation of Appellants license
for six months pending proof of completion of a training program. If respondent submitted proof of
completion of the program at the end of the six-month period, the Administrative Law Judge indicated
he would entertain a request to substitute an order providing for an outright suspension during the
aforementioned six months plus an additional suspension of 12 months on 24 months probation.
Otherwise, the revocation was to be in full force and final. The Decision and Order were served on
Appellant on February 12, 1996. Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal on March 11, 1996, and
perfected it on March 18, 1996.
APPEARANCE: Mr. Frederick Bergen, 123 East Charlton Street, Savannah, Georgia, 31401. | Appeal No. 2601 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 6/15/1998 | 6/15/1998 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2616 - BYRNES | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702 and 46 C.F.R. § 5.701.
By order dated December 5, 1997, an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) of the United States Coast Guard at Baltimore, Maryland, suspended Appellant’s merchant mariner’s document upon finding a charge of misconduct proved. Two of the four specifications supporting the charge of misconduct were found proved. The first of the proved specifications alleged that Appellant, while under the authority of his merchant mariner’s document aboard the S.S. EXPORT PATRIOT, had intoxicating beverages within his quarters in violation of ship regulations. The second of the proved specifications alleged that Appellant, while under the authority of his merchant mariner’s document aboard the S.S. EXPORT PATRIOT, wrongfully disobeyed a lawful command of the Master to submit to a chemical test.
The hearing was held in New York, New York, on May 5 and 7, 1997. Appellant was represented by counsel and entered a plea denying each specification under the charge of misconduct. The ALJ heard eight (8) witnesses and entered nine (9) exhibits into evidence.
The ALJ issued a written Decision and Order (D&O) on December 5, 1997. He found the charge and two of the four specifications proved, and ordered that the Appellant’s merchant mariner’s document and all other Coast Guard issued documents and licenses suspended for a period of six (6) months to begin upon the immediate surrender of such documents to the nearest Coast Guard station. Additionally, the ALJ ordered that if the Appellant was found liable for any other offenses, including the use of drugs, alcohol, failure to obey orders, or similar substantial violations, within the twelve (12) months immediately following the end of the original six (6) month suspension period, all of the Appellant’s Coast Guard issued licenses and documents would be automatically revoked. | Appeal No. 2616 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2/2/2000 | 2/2/2000 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2619 - LEAKE | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702 and 46 C.F.R. § 5.701.
By Decision and Order dated September 29, 1998, the Chief Administrative Law Judge ("CALJ") of the United States Coast Guard ("Coast Guard") found proved charges of negligence and violation of regulation and their supporting specifications against Robert John Leake ("Appellant"). The CALJ based this Decision and Order on a Joint Motion of Settlement and Request for Entry of Consent Order ("Joint Motion") entered into by the pro se Appellant and the Coast Guard on or about September 4, 1998. The Joint Motion provides, inter alia, that: (1) the Appellant enters a plea of "no contest" to the charges and specifications; (2) the charges and specifications are found proved; (3) the sanctions are one month outright suspension and six months suspension on a twelve month probation; (4) Appellant understands and knowingly and intentionally waives the right to challenge or contest the validity of the order entered in accordance with the agreement; (5) Appellant waives all right to judicial review or otherwise contest the validity of the consent order; (6) the order will have the same force and effect as an order made at a full hearing; and (7) Appellant was advised of his due process rights to a hearing and knowingly and intentionally waives that right. | Appeal No. 2619 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 8/28/2000 | 8/28/2000 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2596 - HUFFORD | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702 and 46 C.F.R. § 5.701.
By an order dated September 6, 1995, an Administrative Law Judge of the United States Coast
Guard at Seattle, Washington, revoked Appellant’s above-captioned license, upon finding a
charge of use of a dangerous drug proved. The single specification supporting the charge alleged
that appellant was, as shown by a positive drug test, a user of marijuana.
The hearing was held in Valdez, Alaska, on August 8, 1995. Appellant appeared pro se and
entered a response denying the charge and specification. The Administrative Law Judge
introduced into evidence nineteen exhibits and the testimony of one witness. The Coast Guard
Investigating Officer introduced into evidence the testimony of three witnesses and five exhibits.
Appellant introduced into evidence his own testimony and eight exhibits.
The Administrative Law Judge’s Decision and Order (D&O) was rendered on September 6, 1995.
Appellant filed a notice of appeal and perfected the appeal on September 28, 1995.
Appellant moved for a reopening of the hearing or for a reconsideration of the Decision and
Order on September 6, 1995. The Administrative Law Judge denied the motion by order dated
September 7, 1995. | Appeal No. 2596 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 1/15/1998 | 1/15/1998 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2612 - DEGOUGH | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702 and 46 C.F.R. § 5.701.
By an order dated September 15, 1998, an Administrative Law Judge of the United States Coast Guard at Houston, Texas revoked Appellant’s above-captioned license and document, upon finding proved the charge of use of a dangerous drug. The supporting specification found proved alleges that Appellant, “being the holder of above captioned license, [was] found to be a user of dangerous drugs, to wit: cocaine, as a result of a random drug screening test collected on February 11, 1998, and by a confirmatory test conducted on February 17, 1998.”
There were three hearings held on May 22, June 26, and June 30, 1998, each in Galveston, Texas. Appellant appeared with counsel and entered a response denying the charge and specification. The Coast Guard Investigating Officer introduced into evidence the testimony of four witnesses and ten exhibits. Appellant introduced two exhibits, four witnesses, and chose to testify. The charge was found proved, and Appellant’s license was revoked.
The Administrative Law Judge’s Decision and Order was served on Appellant on September 22, 1998. Appellant filed a notice of appeal on October 15, 1998, and was sent a copy of the transcript on October 26, 1998. Appellant requested an extension of time to file an appeal on November 12, 1998. An extension of time was granted until November 27, 1998. Appellant perfected this appeal on November 25, 1998. This appeal is properly before me.
APPEARANCE: James T. Liston, Esq., 7322 Southwest Freeway, Suite 1100, Houston, Texas 77074, for Appellant. The United States Coast Guard Investigating Officer was Chief Petty Officer Jim M. Scogin. | Appeal No. 2612 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 10/5/1999 | 10/5/1999 | | 11/28/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2607 - ARIES | This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702 and 46 C.F.R. § 5.701.
By an order dated October 3, 1996, the Chief Administrative Law Judge of the United States Coast Guard
at Washington, D.C., revoked Appellant’s license based upon finding proved one specification of misconduct and
one specification of violation of law. The specification for the charge of misconduct alleged that Mr. Aries,
while acting under the authority of the captioned documents, wrongfully made false statements on his
Merchant Mariner’s License renewal application. The specification for the charge of violation of law alleged that
Mr. Aries, while serving as the master of the M/V CAPT DOUG, being the holder and serving under the authority
of the captioned documents, anchored the M/V CAPT DOUG in a narrow channel in violation of 33 U.S.C. § 2009(g).
The hearing was held on July 8, 1996 at the Nassau County District Court in Freeport, NY. Appellant entered
a response denying both charges and the specifications thereunder.
The Coast Guard Investigating Officer introduced into evidence the testimony of two witnesses and twelve exhibits.
At the close of the Coast Guard’s case, the Appellant moved to dismiss the charges. The Administrative Law
Judge denied the motion without prejudice. In defense, Appellant introduced into evidence his own testimony and
the testimony of two witnesses. Appellant also introduced seven exhibits into evidence. Both parties
submitted proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law. | Appeal No. 2607 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 3/17/1999 | 3/17/1999 | | 11/28/2017 |