CreatorTitleDescriptionPublication NumberOrganizationPublication DateEffective DateExpiration DateUploaded On
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2570 - HARRISThis appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. 7702 and 46 C.F.R. 5.701. By order dated May 19, 1994, an Administrative Law Judge of the United States Coast Guard at Norfolk, Virginia, revoked appellant's license upon finding proved charges of use of dangerous drugs, addiction to the use of dangerous drugs, and misconduct. The single specifications supporting each of the first two mentioned charges alleged that Appellant, while being the holder of the captioned license, during the approximate period of August 1985 until April 1987, did, respectively, use, and was addicted to the use of, cocaine, a dangerous drug. The two specifications found proved under the charge of misconduct alleged violations of 18 U.S.C. 1001, in that while acting under the authority of the captioned license: the Appellant wrongfully and fraudulently certified on his April 1, 1991, license application that he had never used or been addicted to the use of narcotics; and, that while giving sworn testimony during an admin-istrative proceeding against his license on January 27, 1993, the Appellant wrongfully lied under oath by falsely claiming to have never used drugs. The Administrative Law Judge dismissed two additional specifications, not dis-cussed herein, under the misconduct charge, as being subsumed within the two specifications paraphrased above. A hearing was held on January 12, 1994, in Baltimore, Maryland. Appellant denied the charges and supporting specifications. On February 16, 1994, the Administrative Law Judge issued an order finding the above charges and supporting specifications proved. Arguments in mitigation and aggravation were held on April 19, 1994. Appellant was represented by the same counsel at both of these proceedings.Appeal No. 2570Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority7/28/19957/28/199511/30/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2571 - DYKESThis appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. 7702 and 46 C.F.R. 5.701. By order dated September 7, 1993, an Administrative Law Judge of the United States Coast Guard at Mobile, Alabama, revoked Appellant's duly issued Coast Guard license and merchant mariner's document upon finding a use of dangerous drugs charge proved. The single specification supporting the charge alleged that Appellant, while being the holder of the above captioned documents, was found to be a user of dangerous drugs, to wit: marijuana, as a result of chemical tests conducted on a urine sample he provided on or about March 31, 1993. The hearing was held at Mobile, Alabama, on August 27, 1993. At the hearing, Appellant, after being advised of the right to have counsel represent him, chose to represent himself. Appellant answered "no contest" to the charge and its supporting specification.Appeal No. 2571Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority11/6/199511/6/199511/30/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2572 - MORSEThis appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. 7702 and 46 C.F.R. 5.701. By order dated 28 April 1993, an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) of the United States Coast Guard at Houston, Texas, suspended Appellant's merchant mariner's license outright for three months, with a further six months' suspension on 24 months' probation, upon finding proved a charge of negligence. The charge was supported by three specifications. All three specifications concerned Appellant's actions while serving under the authority of his license as Master of the small passenger vessel MAALAEA KAI II, O.N. 900366, on 18 December 1992, while the vessel was underway off Molokini Crater near the island of Maui, Hawaii. The three specifications alleged that Appellant failed to take action to avoid a collision with the vessel IDLE WILD; failed to sound a danger signal; and failed to keep a safe distance from the moored dive boat ONELOA which then had divers in the water.Appeal No. 2572Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority11/17/199511/17/199511/30/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2573 - JONESThis appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. 7702 and 46 C.F.R. 5.701. By order dated July 13, 1993, an Administrative Law Judge of the United States Coast Guard at Morgan City, Louisiana, revoked appellant's license and merchant mariner's document upon finding a misconduct charge proved. The three specifications supporting the charge alleged that Appellant, while serving as the operator of three different towing vessels, did, without consent, on three occasions, i.e., on or about August 29, 1992, July, 1990, and August, 1990, act in a perverse manner by fondling the anal area or genitals of the deck hand on each of the three vessels. At the initial hearing on April 7, 1993, the Appellant appeared without counsel. In response to the Administrative Law Judge's inquiries, the Appellant indicated he wanted representation by professional counsel. Appropriately, on his own motion, the Administrative Law Judge continued the hearing until April 28, 1993, to allow Appellant to obtain representation. At the April 28, 1993, hearing, and thereafter, the Appellant has been represented by counsel. On counsel's advice, Appellant denied the charge and its supporting specifications. During the hearing, the Coast Guard Investigating Officer introduced into evidence six exhibits and the testimony of three witnesses. In defense, the Appellant and his wife testified.Appeal No. 2573Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority1/17/19961/17/199611/28/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2574 - JONESThis appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. 7702 and 46 C.F.R. 5.701. By order dated March 25, 1993, an Administrative Law Judge of the United States Coast Guard at Seattle, Washington, suspended appellant's license for two months, remitted upon nine months probation, upon finding a negligence charge proved. The single specification supporting the charge alleged that Appellant, while serving as the master of the charter boat MYRNA BEA VII, did on July 22, 1992, navigate the vessel in such a manner as to cause the vessel to ground on Roland Bar Rapid in the Snake River. At the hearing held at Lewiston, Idaho, on January 27, 1993, Appellant was represented by counsel. On counsel's advice, Appellant denied the charge and its supporting specification. During the hearing, the Coast Guard Investigating Officer introduced into evidence one exhibit and the testimony of two witnesses. In defense, Appellant offered into evidence four exhibits and the testimony of two witnesses.Appeal No. 2574Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority1/22/19961/22/199611/28/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2575 - WILLIAMSThis 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. 2575Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority6/25/19966/25/199611/28/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2576 - AILSWORTHThis appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. 7702 and 46 C.F.R. 5.701. By order dated December 3, 1992, an Administrative Law Judge of the United States Coast Guard at Norfolk, Virginia, revoked Appellant's merchant mariner's license. The revocation was based upon finding proved charges of violation of law, negligence, and misconduct. The two specifications supporting the negligence charge alleged that on September 13, 1991, Appellant, while acting as master of the towing vessel, M/V JACQUELINE A, under the authority of the above captioned license, negligently navigated the vessel resulting in an allision with a privately owned dock and vessel in the Wicomico River; and, on that same date, failed to maintain a proper lookout. The specifications supporting the charge of misconduct alleged that on September 13, 1991, Appellant wrongfully worked on his vessel for more than 12 hours in a 24 hour period and wrongfully failed to give his name, address, and identification of his vessel to the owner of the property damaged. The violation of law charge was supported by a single specification alleging that on October 18, 1991, Appellant, while acting as master of the towing vessel, M/V JACQUELINE A, under the authority of the above captioned license, wrongfully worked for more than 12 hours in a 24 hour period. The hearing was held at Norfolk, Virginia, on February 11, 12, and 13, 1991. Appellant appeared personally with legal counsel at the hearing. Appellant denied all charges and specifications.Appeal No. 2576Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority7/7/19967/7/199611/28/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2577 - WAYMANThis 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. 2577Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority7/10/19967/10/199611/28/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2578 - CALLAHANThis 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. 2578Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority7/22/19967/22/199611/28/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2579 - OCONNELLThis 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. 2579Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority8/19/19968/19/199611/28/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2580 - ADAMSU N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION UNITED STATES COAST GUARD UNITED STATES OF AMERICA UNITED STATES COAST GUARD vs. MERCHANT MARINER'S LICENSE NO. 729532 AND MERCHANT MARINER'S DOCUMENT NO. [REDACTED] Issued to: ERVIN ADAMS, Appellant ___________________________________ : : : : : : : : : : DECISION OF THE VICE COMMANDANT ON APPEAL NO. 2580 This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. oe 7702 and 46 C.F.R. oe 5.701. By an order dated September 28, 1994, an Administrative Law Judge of the United States Coast Guard at Norfolk, Virginia suspended Appellant's license and merchant mariner's document for six months, upon finding proved a charge of misconduct. Two specifications supporting the misconduct charge were found proved. One specification alleged that appellant failed to perform the required duties of a deck watch officer in leaving the ship's Global Positioning System (GPS) receiver in the "locked" position instead of in the tracking mode. The other specification alleged that appellant, after being re-instructed on the operation of the GPS, acted wrongfully and responded to the master in such a belligerent, agitated and irrational manner as to require relieving appellant of his watchstanding duties. One specification of misconduct was dismissed during a hearing on July 6, 1994. Two other specifications under misconduct, and a charge of incompetence and its supporting specification, were found not proved by the Administrative Law Judge. Hearings were held in Baltimore, MD, on April 20, 1994, and in Philadelphia, PA, on July 6, 1994. The Decision and Order with the findings noted above was served on appellant on September 13, 1994. Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal onAppeal No. 2580Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority11/27/199611/27/199611/27/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2581 - DRIGGERSU N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION UNITED STATES COAST GUARD UNITED STATES OF AMERICA UNITED STATES COAST GUARD vs. LICENSE NO. 80607 Issued to: Bruce Driggers, Appellant _______________________________________ : : : : : : : : : DECISION OF THE VICE COMMANDANT ON APPEAL NO. 2581 This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. œ 7702 and 46 C.F.R. œ 5.701. By order dated February 17, 1995, an Administrative Law Judge of the United States Coast Guard at St. Louis, Missouri, suspended Appellant's license based upon finding proved the charge of violation of law or regulation. The single specification supporting the charge alleged that on June 12, 1993, while serving as operator of the M/V MARGARET BRENT, Appellant failed to maintain a proper lookout by all available means, in violation of 33 C.F.R. Part 81, Appendix A. The hearing began on December 14, 1993, and was held for four consecutive days at Davenport, Iowa. Appellant was represented by professional counsel and entered a response denying the charge and specification. The Coast Guard Investigating Officer introduced into evidence 19 exhibits and the testimony of eight witnesses. In defense, Appellant offered into evidence 19 exhibits and the testimony of seven witnesses, including himself. The Administrative Law Judge entered one exhibit into evidence.Appeal No. 2581Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority12/31/199612/31/199611/27/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2582 - SKINNERU N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION UNITED STATES COAST GUARD UNITED STATES OF AMERICA UNITED STATES COAST GUARD vs LICENSE NO. 710272 Issued to: Mark R. Skinner, Appellant ______________________________________________ : : : : : : : : DECISION OF THE VICE COMMANDANT ON APPEAL NO. 2582 This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702 and 46 C.F.R. § 5.701. By order dated June 15, 1995, an Administrative Law Judge of the United States Coast Guard at New Orleans, Louisiana, suspended Appellant's merchant mariner’s license for one month, upon finding a charge of violation of law proved. The single specification supporting the charge was found proved. The specification alleged that appellant, while serving under the authority of his license, violated 46 U.S.C. § 8902 in allowing an unlicensed member of his crew to operate the small passenger vessel, M/V BONNE AMIE. Hearings were held in Mobile, Alabama on January 27, February 24, and May 12, 1995. Appellant was represented by lawyer counsel and entered a response denying the charge and specification. The Coast Guard Investigating Officer introduced into evidence the testimony of three witnesses who were residents of and testified telephonically from Memphis, TN. The Investigating Officer also introduced three exhibits into evidence. Appellant’s counsel, who was also appellant’s father and owner of the vessel, testified as to the configuration of the vessel. Appellant introduced two exhibits. The Administrative Law Judge issued a written Decision and Order (D&O) on June 15, 1995. It found the charge and supporting specifications proved, and suspended Appellant’s license for one month outright with two months suspension on twelve months probation. The Decision and Order were served on Appellant on June 19, 1995. Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal on July 6, 1995, and, after an extension, perfected it on November 20, 1995.Appeal No. 2582Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority5/5/19975/5/199711/27/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2583 - WRIGHTU N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION UNITED STATES COAST GUARD UNITED STATES OF AMERICA UNITED STATES COAST GUARD vs. MERCHANT MARINER’S LICENSE NO. 648313 AND MERCHANT MARINER'S DOCUMENT NO. [redacted] (OLD Z 58942) Issued to: William E. Wright, Appellant _________________________________________ : : : : : : : : : : : : : DECISION OF THE COMMANDANT ON APPEAL NO. 2583 This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702 and 46 C.F.R. § 5.701. By an order dated April 10, 1995, an Administrative Law Judge of the United States Coast Guard at Norfolk, Virginia, revoked Appellant's merchant mariner’s 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 a dangerous drug, to wit; Marijuana. Hearings were held in New York, New York on October 24, 1994, and January 10, 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 five witnesses and three exhibits. Appellant’s counsel introduced into evidence the testimony of three witnesses and eleven exhibits. The Administrative Law Judge introduced six exhibits into evidence on his own motion.Appeal No. 2583Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority7/7/19977/7/199711/27/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2584 - SHAKESPEAREU N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R IC A DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION UNITED STATES COAST GUARD UNITED STATES OF AMERICA UNITED STATES COAST GUARD vs. LICENSE NOS. 641035 AND R35012 Issued to David R. Shakespeare : : : : : : : DECISION OF THE COMMANDANT ON APPEAL NO. 2584 This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702 and 46 C.F.R. § 5.701. By an order dated February 1, 1996, an Administrative Law Judge of the United States Coast Guard at Jacksonville, Florida, revoked Appellant’s above captioned licenses, 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. Hearings were held in Savannah, Georgia, on December 29, 1995, and January 26, 1996. Appellant appeared pro se and entered a response denying the charge and specification. The Coast Guard Investigating Officer introduced into evidence the testimony of four witnesses and twelve exhibits. Appellant introduced into evidence his own testimony and five exhibits. The Administrative Law Judge’s Decision and Order (D&O) was served on Appellant on February 5, 1996. Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal on March 4, 1996 and perfected it on March 28, 1996.Appeal No. 2584Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority7/10/19977/10/199711/27/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2585 - COULONU N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION UNITED STATES COAST GUARD UNITED STATES OF AMERICA UNITED STATES COAST GUARD vs. License No. 601260 Issued to: JOHN F. COULON, Appellant. : : : : : : : DECISION OF THE VICE COMMANDANT ON APPEAL NO. 2585 This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702 and 46 C.F.R. § 5.701. By order dated July 6, 1993, an Administrative Law Judge of the United States Coast Guard at New Orleans, Louisiana, suspended Appellant’s license for three months, based upon finding proved, a charge of negligence. The single specification supporting the charge alleged that, while serving as Captain aboard the M/V EARLY BIRD on August 23, 1992, the Appellant negligently moored to a Conoco oil and gas platform by failing to adhere to the posted sign indicating not to tie up to the platform. The hearing was held at New Orleans, Louisiana, on December 15, 1992, January 13, 1993, and March 2, 1993. Appellant was represented at the hearing by professional counsel. At the hearing, Appellant entered an answer of "deny" to the specification and the charge. The investigating officer introduced four exhibits and the testimony of two witnesses into evidence. In defense, the Appellant offered into evidence seven exhibits, the testimony of three witnesses and his own testimony. After the hearing, the Administrative Law Judge concluded that the charge and specification were proved. He served a written order on Appellant suspending the captioned license, and all other licenses issued to the Appellant by the Coast Guard for a period of three months. The entire decision was served on July 6, 1993. Appeal was timely filed.Appeal No. 2585Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority7/21/19977/21/199711/27/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2586 - GREENU N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION UNITED STATES COAST GUARD UNITED STATES OF AMERICA UNITED STATES COAST GUARD vs. LICENSE NO. 625896 Issued to: Scott R. Green, Appellant ____________________________________ : : : : : : : : DECISION OF THE VICE COMMANDANT ON APPEAL NO. 2586 This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702 and 46 C.F.R. § 5.701. By order dated March 13, 1995, an Administrative Law Judge of the United States Coast Guard at Jacksonville, Florida, suspended Appellant’s license for four months based upon finding proved a charge of negligence. The single specification supporting the charge alleged that on or about September 23, 1993, Appellant failed to heed navigation information and negligently grounded his vessel and tow in the Intracoastal Waterway (ICW), near North Miami, Florida. The hearing was held at Miami, Florida, on May 24, 1994. Appellant was represented by professional counsel and entered a response denying the charge and the specification. The hearing was continued on September 2, 1994, and December 22, 1994. During the hearings, the Coast Guard Investigating Officer introduced into evidence 17 exhibits and the testimony of two witnesses. Appellant testified on his own behalf and offered 20 exhibits and the testimony of four witnesses. The Administrative Law Judge entered five exhibits into the record. At the end of the hearing on December 22, 1994, the Administrative Law Judge gave the parties the opportunity to submit proposed findings of fact, conclusions of law, and closing arguments. The submissions provided by each party were added to the record. On March 3, 1995, the Administrative Law Judge informed both parties that he found the Coast Guard’s case proved and requested submission of Appellant’s prior record from the Coast Guard and any evidence in mitigation from the Appellant.Appeal No. 2586Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority7/21/19977/21/199711/27/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2587 - HudsonU N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R IC A DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION UNITED STATES COAST GUARD UNITED STATES OF AMERICA UNITED STATES COAST GUARD vs. LICENSE NO. 82831 Issued to Eric H. Hudson, Appellant : : : : : : : : DECISION OF THE VICE COMMANDANT ON APPEAL NO. 2587 This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702 and 46 C.F.R. § 5.701. By order dated February 22, 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 violation of law or regulation. The first specification alleged that on June 12, 1993, while serving as operator of the M/V MISS KATE, Appellant failed to maintain a proper lookout by all available means, in violation of 33 U.S.C. § 2005 (Rule 5 of the Inland Navigation Rules). The second specification alleged that Appellant also failed to sound a danger signal in violation of 33 U.S.C. § 2034 (Rule 34 of the Inland Navigation Rules). The Administrative Law Judge dismissed one specification of negligence as vague, and likewise dismissed the charge. The Administrative Law Judge also dismissed two other specifications of violation of law or regulation upon finding them to be legally insufficient in accordance with 46 C.F.R. § 5.33. The hearing was held and completed on November 17, 1993. Appellant, appearing pro se, entered a response denying the charges and specifications.Appeal No. 2587Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority7/21/19977/21/199711/27/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2589 - MEYERU N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R IC A DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION UNITED STATES COAST GUARD UNITED STATES OF AMERICA UNITED STATES COAST GUARD vs. LICENSE NO. 740972 AND MERCHANT MARINER’S DOCUMENT NO. [REDACTED] Issued to Kenneth E. Meyer : : : : : : : : : : DECISION OF THE COMMANDANT ON APPEAL NO. 2589 This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702 and 46 C.F.R. § 5.701. By an order dated February 26, 1996, an Administrative Law Judge of the United States Coast Guard at Norfolk, Virginia, revoked Appellant’s above-captioned license and Merchant Mariner’s 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 in Norfolk, Virginia, on February 13, 1996. Appellant appeared pro se and entered a response denying the charge and specification. The Coast Guard Investigating Officer introduced into evidence the testimony of four witnesses and nine exhibits. Appellant introduced into evidence his own testimony.Appeal No. 2589Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority8/5/19978/5/199711/27/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2590 - LISTONUNITED STATES OF AMERICA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION UNITED STATES COAST GUARD UNITED STATES OF AMERICA UNITED STATES COAST GUARD vs. MERCHANT MARINER’S DOCUMENT NO. Z (REDACTED Issued to Michael L. Liston : : : : : : : : DECISION OF THE COMMANDANT ON APPEAL NO. 2590 This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702 and 46 C.F.R. § 5.701. By an order dated December 15, 1995, an Administrative Law Judge of the United States Coast Guard at Jacksonville, Florida, 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 Tampa, Florida, on December 12, 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 three witnesses and seven exhibits. Appellant introduced into evidence his own testimony and four exhibits. The Administrative Law Judge’s Decision and Order (D&O) was served on Appellant on December 18, 1995. Appellant received the transcript of the hearing on January 29, 1996. Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal on January 16, 1996, and perfected it on March 29, 1996.Appeal No. 2590Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority8/5/19978/5/199711/27/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2591 - WYNNThis appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702 and 46 C.F.R. § 5.701. By an order dated June 26, 1995, an Administrative Law Judge of the United States Coast Guard at Jacksonville, Florida, revoked Appellant’s above-captioned license and document upon finding a charge of use of a dangerous drug and a charge of violation of law or regulation proved. The single specification supporting the charge of use of a dangerous drug alleged that Appellant was, as shown by a positive drug test, a user of marijuana. The first specification supporting the charge of violation of law or regulation alleged that Appellant, after failing the drug test and surrendering the captioned license to the Coast Guard, accepted reemployment and acted under the authority of the license in violation of 46 C.F.R. § 16.201(e). The second and final specification supporting the charge alleged that Appellant, while acting under the authority of the captioned license, failed to submit to a required drug test while employed by Seatow Sarasota in violation of 46 C.F.R. § 16.201(e). The hearing was held in Cortez, Florida, on May 25, 1995. Appellant appeared pro se and entered a response denying the charges and specifications. The Coast Guard Investigating Officer introduced into evidence the testimony of five witnesses and ten exhibits. Appellant introduced into evidence his own testimony and one exhibit. The Administrative Law Judge’s Decision and Order (D&O) was rendered on June 26, 1995.Appeal No. 2591Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority8/5/19978/5/199711/28/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2592 - MASONThis 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. 2592Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority8/6/19978/6/199711/28/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2588 - LASORSAU N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R IC A DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION UNITED STATES COAST GUARD UNITED STATES OF AMERICA UNITED STATES COAST GUARD vs. LICENSE NO. 694718 Issued to Steven J. Lasorsa : : : : : : : DECISION OF THE VICE COMMANDANT ON APPEAL NO. 2588 This appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702 and 46 C.F.R. § 5.701. By order dated February 5, 1996, an Administrative Law Judge of the United States Coast Guard at Norfolk, Virginia, suspended Appellant’s license based upon finding proved a charge of negligence and a charge of violation of law or regulation. The single specification supporting the charge of negligence alleged that Appellant failed to adequately navigate the M/V GRANITE STATE (O.N. 646798) while mooring, causing the vessel to allide with a moored barge. The specification supporting the charge of violation of law or regulation alleged that Appellant failed to give notice to the Coast Guard of the hull damage which materially and adversely affected the seaworthiness of the M/V GRANITE STATE. Hearings were held in Portland, Maine, on October 25, 1995, and December 5, 1995. Appellant was represented by counsel and entered a response denying both charges and specifications. The Administrative Law Judge introduced into evidence one exhibit. The Investigating Officer introduced into evidence eight exhibits and the testimony of five witnesses. Appellant introduced into evidence four exhibits, his own testimony and the testimony of one other witness.Appeal No. 2588Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority8/13/19978/13/199711/27/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2593 - MOWBRAYThis 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 Appellant’s 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. 2593Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority8/14/19978/14/199711/28/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2594 - GOLDENThis 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. 2594Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority12/1/199712/1/199711/28/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2595 - UCCELLOThis 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 Appellant’s 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 Appellant’s 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 Appellant’s 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. 2595Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority12/23/199712/23/199711/28/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2600 - TRENTACOSTAThis appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702 and 46 C.F.R. § 5.701. By an order dated October 13, 1995, an Administrative Law Judge of the United States Coast Guard at New Orleans, Louisiana, suspended Appellant’s license based upon finding proved one specification of negligence. The specification alleged that on February 10, 1994, while operating the M/V EDWIN N BISSO (hereinafter BISSO) on the Lower Mississippi River during conditions of restricted visibility, Appellant failed to navigate with due caution by not obtaining or properly using information available from radar observations to determine if risk of collision existed, thereby contributing to a collision with a passenger ferry. The Administrative Law Judge dismissed one other specification of misconduct upon finding that it was not proved. The hearing was held on July 5, 1994. Appellant entered a response denying the charge and specification. The Coast Guard Investigating Officer and Appellant introduced into evidence stipulated testimony of six witnesses from a prior administrative hearing involving the master of the ferry involved in this collision. The Coast Guard introduced no other testimony or exhibits into evidence. In defense, Appellant introduced into evidence his own testimony and the testimony of two witnesses. Appellant also introduced six exhibits into evidence. Both parties submitted proposed findings and conclusions of law.Appeal No. 2600Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority12/23/199712/23/199711/28/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2596 - HUFFORDThis 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. 2596Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority1/15/19981/15/199811/28/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2597 - TIMMELThis appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702 and 46 C.F.R. § 5.701. By an order dated May 27, 1994, an Administrative Law Judge of the United States Coast Guard at Jacksonville, Florida, suspended Appellant’s above-captioned license, upon finding a charge of negligence proved. The single specification supporting the charge alleged that Appellant failed to safely navigate the M/V NECHES (hereinafter NECHES), running the vessel aground twice. Hearings were held in Tampa, Florida, on January 19, 1994, and on February 2, 1994. Appellant entered a response denying the charge and specification. The Coast Guard Investigating Officer introduced into evidence 19 exhibits and the testimony of six witnesses. Appellant introduced into evidence five exhibits, his own testimony, and the testimony of four witnesses. Both parties submitted proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law. The Administrative Law Judge issued a written Decision and Order (D&O) on May 27, 1994. It concluded that the charge of negligence and the supporting specification were proved. The Administrative Law Judge suspended Appellant’s license for a period of one month, remitted after three months probation.Appeal No. 2597Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority3/1/19983/1/199811/28/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2598 - CATTONThis appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702 and 46 C.F.R. § 5.701. By an order dated June 10, 1996, an Administrative Law Judge of the United States Coast Guard at St. Louis, Missouri, revoked Appellant's merchant mariner’s license, upon finding proven a charge of 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 a dangerous drug, to wit; Marijuana. A hearing was held in Cincinnati, Ohio on June 8, 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 five witnesses and seven exhibits. Appellant’s counsel introduced into evidence the testimony of two witnesses and one exhibit. At the close of the hearing, the record was left open for a reasonable time in order to allow Respondent an opportunity to submit results of a retest of his original urine sample and to explore the possibility of submitting results of a hair follicle test. Appellant submitted the results of the retest of the urine sample, but did not submit to a hair follicle test. The Administrative Law Judge’s Decision and Order of Revocation was served on Appellant on June 12, 1996. Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal on July 10, 1996, and was granted an extension until September 23, 1996, to file his brief. Appellant perfected his brief on September 22, 1996.Appeal No. 2598Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority3/23/19983/23/199811/28/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2599 - GUESTThis 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. 2599Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority3/27/19983/27/199811/28/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2601 - MCCARTHYThis 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 mariner’s 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 Appellant’s 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. 2601Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority6/15/19986/15/199811/28/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2602 - TERRYThis appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702 and 46 C.F.R. § 5.701. By an order dated October 2, 1995, an Administrative Law Judge of the United States Coast Guard at Jacksonville, Florida revoked Mr. Marcus Terry’s ("Appellant") license upon finding proved one charge of "Conviction for a Dangerous Drug Law Violation." The specification for the charge of Conviction for a Dangerous Drug Law Violation alleged that Appellant, the holder of the captioned document, was, on or about November 15, 1993, convicted of possession of a dangerous drug with intent to distribute, to wit: Crack Cocaine. The hearing was held on September 26, 1995 in Jacksonville, Florida. Appellant was charged with Misconduct, supported by one specification and Conviction for a Dangerous Drug Law Violation, supported by one specification. Appellant entered a response of deny to the charge of Misconduct. Appellant entered a response of no contest to the charge of Conviction for a Dangerous Drug Law Violation. The Coast Guard Investigating Officer introduced into evidence the testimony of one witness and seven exhibits. In defense, Appellant introduced into evidence his own testimony and the testimony of two witnesses. The Investigating Officer withdrew the charge of Misconduct. The Administrative Law Judge issued a written Decision and Order ("D&O") on October 2, 1995. The Administrative Law Judge concluded, based on Appellant’s answer of no contest, that the charge of Conviction for a Dangerous Drug Law Violation supported by one specification was proved. The Administrative Law Judge revoked Appellant’s document.Appeal No. 2602Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority7/23/19987/23/199811/28/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2603 - HACKSTAFFThis appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702 and 46 C.F.R. § 5.701. By order dated 8 June 1993, an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) of the United States Coast Guard at San Diego, California revoked Appellant's License and Merchant Mariner's Document upon finding proved the charge of use of dangerous drugs. The single specification supporting the charge alleged that, on or before 16 March 1993, Appellant used marijuana, based upon a urine specimen collected on that date which subsequently tested positive for the presence of marijuana metabolites. A hearing was held at San Diego, California on 27 May 1993. Appellant appeared with professional counsel by whom he was represented throughout the hearing and this appeal. Appellant denied the charge and specification per 46 C.F.R. § 5.527. The Investigating Officer (IO) introduced into evidence five exhibits and the testimony of two witnesses. After the government rested, and after the ALJ denied Appellant's motion to dismiss, Appellant testified in his own behalf and introduced three exhibits. At the end of the hearing, the ALJ rendered an oral decision in which he found that the charge and specification were proved. The ALJ's written decision and order were entered on 8 June 1993 and were served on Appellant on 25 June 1993. Appellant filed notice of appeal on 14 June 1993. Appellant perfected his appeal by filing a brief on 16 November 1993, within the filing requirements of 46 C.F.R. § 5.703. Thus this appeal is properly before me. Appearance: David W. Tiffany, attorney for Appellant, Centerside Tower I, 3111 Camino Del Rio North, Suite 1108, San Diego, CA 92108, (619) 528-2335.Appeal No. 2603Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority8/10/19988/10/199811/28/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2604 - BARTHOLOMEWThis appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702 and 46 C.F.R. § 5.701. By an order dated August 4, 1997, an Administrative Law Judge of the United States Coast Guard at Houston, Texas, revoked Mr. Darrell Ray Bartholomew’s ("Appellant") license based upon finding proved one specification of misconduct. The specification for the charge of misconduct alleged that Appellant, while acting under the authority of his license, serving as master aboard the M/V ED, did, on December 8, 1996, wrongfully test positive for alcohol, with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.041. The hearing was initially scheduled to be held on January 14, 1997 at Beaumont, Texas. Appellant moved for a change of venue to New Orleans, Louisiana. The Administrative Law Judge granted this motion and set the hearing for March 27, 1997 in New Orleans, Louisiana. After the change of venue was granted, the Investigating Officer in New Orleans attempted to contact Appellant, but was unsuccessful. The hearing was opened in New Orleans on March 27, 1997, but the Appellant was not present. The Investigating Officer requested a continuance because the Coast Guard had been unable to contact Appellant and to gather additional evidence. The continuance was granted and the hearing was continued until April 29, 1997. The Coast Guard attempted, but was unable to contact Appellant. The hearing was again opened on April 29, 1997 and the Appellant was not present. The Investigating Officer requested a continuance in order to line up the witnesses and further attempt to reach Appellant. The continuance was granted and the hearing was continued until May 28, 1997. The Coast Guard attempted, but once again was unable to contact Appellant. On May 28, 1997 the hearing was opened. Appellant was not present.Appeal No. 2604Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority11/6/199811/6/199811/28/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2605 - DANIELSThis 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. 2605Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority1/19/19991/19/199911/28/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2606 - SWANThis 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. 2606Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2/19/19992/19/199911/28/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2607 - ARIESThis 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. 2607Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority3/17/19993/17/199911/28/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2608 - SHEPARDThis appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 USC § 7702 and 46 CFR § 5.701. By Final Decision and Order dated December 8, 1997, the Chief Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ") of the United States Coast Guard at Tampa, Florida, revoked Mr. Charles R. Shepherd’s ("Appellant") license and document based upon findings proved the charges of use of a dangerous drug, misconduct, and violation of law. The use of a dangerous drug charge was supported by one specification which was found proved. The misconduct charge was supported by six specifications, which were found proved. One specification was found not proved and five other specifications were dismissed with prejudice. The violation of law charge was supported by two specifications, which the first specification was found proved. The second specification was found not proved. The hearing was held on May 22, 1997, and June 27, 1997, at the U.S. Coast Guard’s Marine Safety Office, 155 Columbia Drive, Tampa, Florida. Appellant entered a response denying each charge and specification. During the course of the hearing the Coast Guard Investigating Officer (I. O.) introduced into evidence the testimony of seven (7) witnesses and twenty-six (26) exhibits. In defense, Appellant entered into evidence the testimony of four (4) witnesses and nineteen (19) exhibits.Appeal No. 2608Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority6/24/19996/24/199911/28/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2609 - DOMANGUEThis appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702 and 46 C.F.R. § 5.701. By an order dated May 22, 1996, an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) of the United States Coast Guard at New Orleans, Louisiana revoked Mr. David Domangue’s license and document upon finding proved one charge of misconduct. The charge was supported by two specifications. The first specification alleged that Appellant failed to comply with Seacor Marine, Inc.’s ("Seacor") written substance abuse policy, in that he arrived for work on January 11, 1996, as mate onboard the M/V BIGORANGE 30 with a blood alcohol level over 0.04%. The second specification alleged that Appellant, a crewmember of the M/V BIGORANGE 30, acting under the authority of his document and license, did, on January 11, 1996, exceed the standards of intoxication as specified in 33 C.F.R. § 95.020. The hearing was opened at 0930 on March 12, 1996 in New Orleans, Louisiana. Appellant requested, via letter, a continuance. The continuance was granted and the hearing was continued until 1000 on March 28, 1996. The hearing proceeded on March 28, 1996. Prior to the start of the continued hearing, Appellant contacted the Investigating Officer to inform him he that he was running late but was on his way to the hearing. The hearing was further continued until 1115 to accommodate Appellant. Appellant failed to arrive at the hearing. The hearing proceeded in his absence.Appeal No. 2609Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority6/24/19996/24/199911/28/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2610 - BENNETTThis appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702 and 46 C.F.R. § 5.607. By a Decision and Order (“D&O”) dated January 28, 1998, the Chief Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) of the United States Coast Guard at Baltimore, Maryland declared the Master 1600 Gross Ton Inland license (“Master 1600”) of Mr. Walter J. Bennett (“Appellant”) void ab initio and suspended Appellant’s Master 500 Gross Ton Inland license (“Master 500”) for six months and thereafter placed Appellant on a twelve month probationary period based upon finding proved one specification of misconduct. The specification for the charge of misconduct alleged that Appellant, while acting under the authority of his Master 500 license, did wrongfully, knowingly, and fraudulently submit and sign a letter that falsely claimed sea time that Appellant needed in order to qualify for an upgrade of his license (from Master 500 to Master 1600). The suspension and revocation hearing was held on June 19 - 20, 1997, in Baltimore, Maryland. On March 16, 1998, Appellant filed a petition to reopen his hearing (“Petition”). On March 25, 1998 Appellant also filed an appeal (“Appeal”) to the Chief ALJ’s D&O. Appellant subsequently requested to amend that Appeal to add an additional argument and to include additional information that Appellant claimed was newly discovered evidence. By an order (“Order”) dated May 22, 1998, the Chief ALJ of the United States Coast Guard at Baltimore, Maryland denied the Appellant’s Petition.Appeal No. 2610Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority8/4/19998/4/199911/28/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2611 - CIBULKAThis appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702 and 46 C.F.R. § 5.701. By an order dated June 25, 1997, an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) of the United States Coast Guard at Houston, Texas, revoked Appellant’s above-captioned license, upon finding the charge of "conviction for a dangerous drug law violation" proved. The supporting specification that was found proved alleges that Appellant, "being the holder of the captioned license, [was] on March 25th, 1997, processed by the County Court at Law of San Patricio County, Texas and [was] issued an order of deferred adjudication of guilt after pleading nolo contendere to the misdemeanor offense of possession of marijuana on or about December 7, 1996." A hearing was held on May 22, 1997 in Corpus Christi, Texas. Appellant appeared with counsel and entered a response denying the charge and specification. The Coast Guard Investigating Officer (I.O.) introduced seven exhibits. Appellant introduced four exhibits and chose not to testify. There were nine (9) Joint Selected Procedural Exhibits. The charge was found proved, and Appellant’s license was revoked. The ALJ’s Decision and Order (D&O) was served on Appellant on July 2, 1997. Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal on July 28, 1997. On September 8, 1997, Appellant requested additional time to obtain a copy of the transcript for submission with Appellant’s brief. This request was sent to the ALJ Docketing Center in Baltimore, MD. On September 25, 1997, the Legal Assistant to the ALJ who issued the D&O sent the original appeal transcript and one copy to the ALJ Docketing Center. The Legal Assistant stated in the memorandum accompanying the transcripts that neither the Appellant nor his attorney had requested a copy of the transcript. On September 29, 1997, Appellant requested, via ALJ Docketing Center, another extension of time. Because the Appellant had not yet received a copy of theAppeal No. 2611Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority8/16/19998/16/199911/28/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2612 - DEGOUGHThis 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. 2612Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority10/5/199910/5/199911/28/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2613 - SLACKThis 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. 2613Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority12/23/199912/23/199911/28/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2614 - WALLENSTEINThis appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702 and 46 C.F.R. § 5.701. By an order dated February 17, 1998, an Administrative Law Judge of the United States Coast Guard at Norfolk, Virginia revoked Appellant’s above-captioned license and document, upon finding proved a charge of 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 cocaine. The hearing was held on January 15, 1998, in Portland, Maine. 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 five exhibits. Appellant introduced into evidence his own testimony, one additional witness and two exhibits. The Administrative Law Judge’s Decision and Order was served on Appellant on February 17, 1998. Appellant filed a notice of appeal on March 12, 1998 and received a copy of the transcript on April 1, 1998. Appellant perfected this appeal on April 22, 1998. This appeal is properly before me. APPEARANCE: Phillip J. Kaplan, Esq., 350 St. Marks Place, Staten Island, N.Y. 10301, for Appellant. The Coast Guard Investigating Officer was Chief Warrant Officer Charles S. Rathgeber.Appeal No. 2614Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2/2/20002/2/200011/28/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2615 - DALEThis 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, an Administrative Law Judge of the United States Coast Guard at Long Beach, California, suspended Appellant’s above-captioned license and document, upon finding a charge of misconduct proved. The charge was supported by two specifications. First, Appellant wrongfully refused to submit to random urinalysis, and second, Appellant wrongfully failed to join his vessel. The hearing was held on August 27, 1996, in Tampa, Florida. Appellant appeared with non-professional counsel and entered a response denying the charge and specifications. The Coast Guard Investigating Officer introduced into evidence the testimony of two witnesses and sixteen exhibits. Appellant introduced two exhibits, no witnesses, and chose not to testify. The charge was found proved, and Appellant’s license and document were suspended outright for six months and for an additional six months suspension on twelve months probation. The Administrative Law Judge’s Decision and Order was served on Appellant on November 13, 1996. Appellant filed a notice of appeal on November 25, 1996, and was sent a copy of the transcript on April 19, 1997. Appellant perfected this appeal on June 14, 1997. This appeal is properly before me.Appeal No. 2615Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2/2/20002/2/200011/28/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2616 - BYRNESThis 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. 2616Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2/2/20002/2/200011/28/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2617 - LAMONDThis appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702 and 46 C.F.R. § 5.701. By an order dated August 29, 1995 and amended June 13, 1996, a United States Coast Guard Administrative Law Judge in Portland, Maine, suspended Appellant’s Merchant Mariner’s Document for six months, with six additional months suspended on one year’s probation. The order, as amended on June 13, 1996, specifically excluded Appellant’s Coast Guard License. Appellant was charged with misconduct and violation of regulation. The misconduct charge was supported by two specifications: first, Appellant wrongfully assaulted another seaman, and second, Appellant disobeyed a direct order by refusing to take a chemical test for intoxication. The violation charge was supported by one specification: that appellant was intoxicated while serving as quartermaster on board a vessel inspected under 46 U.S.C. Chapter 33 and 33 C.F.R. § 95.020(c). The hearing was held on August 8, 1995, in Portland, Maine. Appellant represented himself and entered a response denying each charge and specification. The Coast Guard Investigating Officer introduced into evidence the testimony of three witnesses and five exhibits. Appellant testified under oath on his own behalf, but did not introduce witnesses or exhibits. The charge of misconduct: committing a violent act against another person was found not proved. The charge of misconduct: failure to comply with the master’s lawful order was found proved. The charge of violation of a regulation: serving as quartermaster while drunk, was found proved. Appellant was sentenced to six months suspension outright and another six months suspension on twelve months probation.Appeal No. 2617Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2/2/20002/2/200011/28/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2618 - SINNThis appeal is taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 7702 and 46 C.F.R. § 5.701. By an order dated July 18, 1997, a United States Coast Guard Administrative Law Judge at Baltimore, Maryland, suspended Appellant’s Merchant Mariner’s License for one month, with four additional months suspended on sixteen months probation. Appellant was charged with misconduct, violation of regulation and violation of law. The misconduct charge was supported by one specification: Appellant wrongfully operated the M/V LRS RENAISSANCE in the vicinity of Cape May Harbor without a valid Certificate of Inspection while carrying more than six passengers for hire. The violation of regulation charge was supported by two specifications: first, Appellant failed to provide the required passenger safety orientation before the M/V LRS RENAISSANCE got underway with more than six passengers for hire in violation of 46 C.F.R. § 185.506; and, second, Appellant failed to provide a written report of marine casualty in violation of 46 C.F.R. § 4.05-10. The violation of law charge was supported by one specification: Appellant failed to have his Merchant Mariner’s License posted in a conspicuous place in violation of 46 U.S.C. § 7110. The hearing was held on June 17, 1997, at Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Appellant represented himself and entered a response denying each charge and specification. The Coast Guard Investigating Officer introduced into evidence the testimony of nine witnesses and eight exhibits. Appellant introduced into evidence the testimony of one witness and testified under oath on his own behalf. He introduced two exhibits into evidence. All charges and specifications were found proved. Appellant’s License was suspended for one month, with four additional months suspended on sixteen months probation.Appeal No. 2618Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority4/27/20004/27/200011/28/2017
Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority2619 - LEAKEThis 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. 2619Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority8/28/20008/28/200011/28/2017
Page 21 of 24

The U.S. Department of Defense is committed to making its electronic and information technologies accessible to individuals with disabilities in accordance with Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act (29 U.S.C. 794d), as amended in 1998. DoD websites use the WCAG 2.0 AA accessibility standard.

For persons with disabilities experiencing difficulties accessing content on a particular website, please use the form DoD Section 508 Form.  In this form, please indicate the nature of your accessibility issue/problem and your contact information so we can address your issue or question. If your issue involves log in access, password recovery, or other technical issues, contact the administrator for the website in question, or your local helpdesk.