| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2517 - BURRUS | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. SS7702
and 46 CFR SS5.701, 5.607.
By an order dated 7 August 1987, an Administrative Law Judge of
the United States Coast Guard at Norfolk, Virginia, revoked Appellant's
Merchant Mariner's Document upon finding proved the charge of
misconduct. The specification supporting the charge of misconduct
alleged that Appellant, while serving under the authority of his
above-captioned document aboard the USNS ALTAIR, did, while the vessel
was at anchor on 6 April 1987, wrongfully assault and batter a member
of the crew with his fists and a broken plate.
The hearing was held at Norfolk, Virginia, on 5 May 1987.
Appellant appeared pro se at the hearing and entered a
response of deny to the charge and specification. The Investigating
Officer presented seven exhibits which were admitted into evidence and
produced the testimony of seven witnesses. Appellant testified in his
own behalf.
The order revoking appellant's document was issued in writing by
the Administrative Law Judge on 6 May 1987. The record does not
indicate when the order was served on appellant. However, Appellant's
Notice of Appeal, Addendum and Brief, and Request for Transcript were
received by the Administrative Law Judge on 1 June, 1987. Appellant's
request for an extension of time in which to file a brief and second request for a transcript were received by the Administrative Law Judge
on 29 June, 1987, and the record indicates that the Decision and Order
was served on appellant on that date. | Appeal No. 2517 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2/6/1991 | 2/6/1991 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2518 - HENNARD | This Appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. 7702
and 46 C.F.R. 5.701.
By an order dated 17 October 1989, an Administrative Law Judge
of the United States Coast Guard at Houston, Texas, revoked
Appellant's Merchant Mariner's Document, having found proved the
charges of misconduct and use of dangerous drugs. The charge
relating to dangerous drug use was supported by a single
specification alleging that Appellant, under the authority of the
above-captioned merchant mariner's document, was on 1 June 1989
found to be a user of dangerous drugs, to wit: marijuana, as a
result of a drug screen test conducted by the Institute of Forensic
Sciences Toxicology Laboratory in Oakland, California. The charge
of misconduct was supported by a single specification which alleged
that Appellant, while serving aboard the M/V GREEN WAVE, under the
authority of the above-captioned document, did, on or about 11 May
1989, wrongfully have marijuana in his possession. The hearing was
held at Houston, Texas on 3 August 1989. Appellant was represented
by professional counsel and entered a response of admit to the two
charges and accompanying specifications.
The Investigating Office introduced in evidence nine exhibits.
As a result of Appellant's formal admissions, the Investigating
Officer did not call any of the three witnesses he would otherwise
have called. A summary of the proposed testimony of the witnesses
was entered into the record. For the purpose of showing
rehabilitation, Appellant introduced in evidence one exhibit, the
testimony of one witness, and his own testimony. | Appeal No. 2518 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2/6/1991 | 2/6/1991 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2519 - JEPSON | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. 7702 and
46 CFR 5.701.
By an order dated 30 march 1990, an Administrative Law Judge of
the United States Coast Guard at Long Beach, California suspended
Appellant's Merchant Mariner's License outright for six months with an
additional six months suspension remitted on twelve months probation.
Appellant was charged with negligence supported by five
specifications. The charge and specifications two and three were
found proved. Specifications four and five were withdrawn by the
Investigating Officer. Specification one was found not proved and was
dismissed.
Specification two alleged, as amended, that Appellant, while
serving aboard the M/V LITTLE BELLE, under the authority of the abovecaptioned
license, did, on or about 28 March 1989, operate the vessel
on the Colorado River, Bullhead City, Arizona, and negligently failed
to take positive, timely action to avoid collision with the unnamed
motorboat, AZ 2088C(motorboat), in violation of 33 U.S.C. 2008 (Rule
8), Inland Navigational Rules of the Road. | Appeal No. 2519 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2/7/1991 | 2/7/1991 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2520 - DAVIS | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. SS7702
and 46 CFR SS5.701.
By order dated 24 July 1990, an Administrative Law Judge of the
United States Coast Guard at Long Beach, California, suspended
Appellant's Merchant Mariner's License outright for three months with
an additional suspension of six months remitted on 12 months
probation. This order was issued upon finding proved a charge of
negligence supported by a single specification.
The charge alleged that Appellant, while serving under the
authority of his license as master of the S/V TEREGRAM, did, on or
about 17 May 1990, fail to ensure that all passengers were onboard the
vessel upon departure from Molokini /crater, Hawaii, thereby leaving
one passenger in the water. The hearing was held at Honolulu, Hawaii
on 12 June 1990.
Appellant appeared at the hearing and was represented by
professional counsel. Appellant entered, in accordance with 46 C.F.R.
SS5.527(a), an answer of deny to the charge and specification. | Appeal No. 2520 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2/7/1991 | 2/7/1991 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2521 - FRYER | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. SS7702
and 46 CFR SS5.701.
By his order dated 17 August 1990, an Administrative Law Judge
for the United States Coast Guard at Tampa, Florida suspended
Appellant's license for six months, remitted on twelve months
probation, having found proved the charges of misconduct and violation
of law.
The specification supporting the charge of misconduct alleged
that Appellant, while serving under the authority of the abovecaptioned
license as operator of the M/V PRINCESS XANADU OF MONACO
(M/V PRINCESS XANADU) on 3 February 1990, operated said vessel without
a Certificate of Inspection while carrying more than six passengers.
The specification supporting the charge of violation of law
alleges that Appellant, on 3 February 1990, operated the M/V PRINCESS
XANADU in the coastwise trade. The vessel has a Certificate of
Documentation endorsed only for pleasure.
The hearing was held at Tampa, Florida on 19 and 20 April 1990 and
on 10 May 1990. Appellant was represented at the hearing by professional counsel. At the hearing, Appellant entered an answer of
"deny" to the charges and specifications. | Appeal No. 2521 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2/15/1991 | 2/15/1991 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2522 - JENKINS | By an order dated 2 April 1990, an Administrative Law Judge of
the United States Coast Guard at Alameda, California revoked
Appellant's Merchant Mariner's Document for use of a dangerous drug.
Appellant was charged with the use of dangerous drugs supported
by a single specification alleging that Appellant, while the holder of
the above-captioned document, did wrongfully use cocaine as evidenced
in a urine specimen collected on 27 July 1989 which subsequently
tested as positive for the presence of cocaine metabolite.
The hearing was held on 29 September, 5 October and 15 November
1989, and on 25, 26, 30, and 31 January 1990 and 9 February 1990.
Appellant was absent at the 29 September and 15 November 1989
sessions. Appellant appeared at the 5 October 1989 session and at the
sessions held in January and February 1990 and was represented by
professional counsel. The Investigating Officer presented 27 exhibits
which were admitted into evidence and introduced the testimony of six
witnesses, and testified in his own behalf. Appellant entered the
answer of deny to the charge and specification. | Appeal No. 2522 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 3/26/1991 | 3/26/1991 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2525 - ADAMS | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. 7702 and
46 CFR 5.701.
By an order dated 20 March 1990, an Administrative Law Judge of
the United States Coast Guard at New Orleans, Louisiana revoked
Appellant's Merchant Mariner's Document upon finding proved the charge
and specification of misconduct for possession of a controlled
substance, marijuana.
The specification found proved alleges that Appellant, while
serving under the authority of his above-captioned document as seaman
on board the M/V GOLDEN ENDEAVOR, a merchant vessel of the United
States, did, on 26 October 1988, wrongfully possess a controlled
substance Appellant submitted an answer of deny to the charge and
specification.
The Investigating Officer presented the sworn testimony of one
witness and two stipulations of expected testimony. In addition, two
exhibits were admitted into evidence on behalf of the Investigating
Officer. Appellant presented the sworn testimony on one witness and
testified under oath in his own defense. In addition, one exhibit was
admitted into evidence on behalf of Appellant. Upon finding proved
the charge and specification of misconduct, the Administrative Law
Judge revoked Appellant's document. | Appeal No. 2525 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 5/6/1991 | 5/6/1991 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2526 - WILCOX | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. SS7702
and 46 CFR SS5.701.
By an order dated 17 October 1990, an Administrative law Judge of
the United States Coast Guard at Seattle, Washington revoked
Appellant's Merchant Mariner's Document upon finding proved the charge
and specification of violating 46 U.S.C. SS7704 by using a controlled
substance, marijuana. The specification found proved alleges that
Appellant, while the holder of the above-captioned document, did, on
or about 15 May 1990 have marijuana metabolite present in his body as
revealed through a drug screening test. Appellant submitted an answer
of no contest to the charge and specification.
The Administrative Law Judge fully advised Appellant and his
counsel that an answer of no contest is the same as an admission in
that the Investigating Officer is relieved of the burden of proving
the allegation. [TR 10-11]. Accordingly, the Administrative Law
Judge found the charge and specification proved and entered an order
of revocation.
Appellant testified under oath in matters of extenuation and
mitigation. Appellant filed a notice of appeal on 20 November 1990
and received the transcript of the proceedings on 11 December 1990.
Upon receiving a filing extension, Appellant timely filed a supporting
brief on 21 February 1991. Accordingly, this matter is properly
before the Commandant for disposition. | Appeal No. 2526 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 5/6/1991 | 5/6/1991 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2523 - BRACKEN | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. SS7702
and 46 CFR SS5.701.
By an order dated 2 July 1990, an Administrative Law Judge of the
United States Coast Guard at Tampa, Florida suspended Appellant's
license and any documents issued for one month, remitted on three
months probation, having found proved the charge of misconduct.
The specification supporting the charge of misconduct alleges
that Appellant, while serving under the authority of the abovecaptioned
license as master of the tug M/V BELCHER PORT EVERGLADES,
O.N. 636207, did, on 8 January 1990, wrongfully fail to report as soon
as possible the grounding of barge BELCHER 101 (which said tug was
towing) as required in 46 C.F.R. 4.05-1(a).
The hearing was held at Tampa, Florida on 12 February and 30
March 1990. Appellant was not present at the initial session but was
present at the subsequent session. Appellant was represented at both
sessions by professional counsel. At the hearing, Appellant entered
an answer of "deny" to the charge and specification. | Appeal No. 2523 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 5/7/1991 | 5/7/1991 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2524 - TAYLOR | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. SS7702
and 46 CFR SS5.701.
By an order dated 30 November 1990, an Administrative Law Judge
of the United States Coast Guard at Norfolk, Virginia revoked
Appellant's Merchant Mariner's Document for negligence, violation of
law and misconduct.
Appellant was charged with negligence supported by a single
specification alleging that he negligently failed to properly navigate
his vessel, causing an allision with a bridge.
Appellant was also charged with violation of law supported by a
single specification alleging that he wrongfully discharged oil into a
navigable water.
Appellant was also charged with misconduct supported by twelve
specifications alleging that Appellant wrongfully served in the
capacity of towing vessel operator while his license was under
suspension from a previous order of the Administrative Law Judge.
The hearing was held on 5, 7, and 11 September 1990. Appellant,
represented by professional counsel, was present at the proceedings.
The Investigating Officer offered into evidence twelve exhibits and
introduced the testimony of nine witnesses. Appellant offered into
evidence two exhibits and introduced the testimony of two witnesses. | Appeal No. 2524 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 5/9/1991 | 5/9/1991 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2527 - GEORGE | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. 7702
and 46 C.F.R. 5.701.
By an order dated 14 November 1990, an Administrative Law
Judge of the United States Coast Guard at Jacksonville, Florida
revoked Appellant's Merchant Mariner's License and Document for use
of a dangerous drug. Appellant was charged with the use of
dangerous drugs supported by a single specification alleging that
Appellant, while the holder of the above-captioned document, did
wrongfully use cocaine as evidenced in a urine specimen collected
on 14 August 1989 which subsequently tested as positive for the
presence of cocaine metabolite. The hearing was held on 11, 12 and
26 April 1990 at Miami, Florida. Appellant appeared at the
hearings and was represented by professional counsel with the
exception that Appellant was absent from part of the hearing on 11
April 1989. At his request, the hearing continued in
absentia with Appellant represented by his counsel.
The Investigating Officer presented 17 exhibits, including the
deposition of one witness, which were admitted into evidence and
introduced the testimony of three witnesses. Appellant presented
17 exhibits which were admitted into evidence, introduced the
testimony of two witnesses, and testified in his own behalf.
Appellant entered the answer of deny to the charge and
specification.
The Administrative Law Judge's written Order was issued on 14
November 1990. Appellant filed his notice of appeal on 7 December
1990 within the time period prescribed in 46 C.F.R. 5.703.
Following receipt of the transcript of the proceedings on 31
December 1990, Appellant timely filed a supporting brief on 19
February 1991, having received an extension of the filing deadline.
Accordingly, this matter is properly before the Commandant for | Appeal No. 2527 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 5/11/1991 | 5/11/1991 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2528 - LUCAS | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. 7702
and 46 C.F.R. 5.701.
By an order dated 5 October 1990, an Administrative Law Judge
of the United States Coast Guard at Houston, Texas, suspended
Appellant's License outright for three months with an additional
suspension of six months remitted on six months probation upon
finding proved the charge of violation of law. The charge was
supported by two specifications of violating Rules 15 and 16 of the
Inland Navigation Rules (33 U.S.C. 2015, 2016)(hereafter
"Rules").
The specifications found proved allege that Appellant, while
the operator of the M/V LORIDIA DUFRENE and tow under the authority
of the above-captioned license, did, on or about 29 May 1990,
violate Rule 15 and 16, causing a collision with the M/V CAPTAIN
HENRY INMAN and tow. | Appeal No. 2528 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 7/30/1991 | 7/30/1991 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2529 - WILLIAMS | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. 7702
and 46 C.F.R. 5.701.
By an order dated 7 November 1990, an Administrative Law Judge
of the United States Coast Guard at Seattle, Washington 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 about 8
February 1990, Appellant had marijuana metabolites present in his
body in the City of Seattle at, or in the vicinity of, Ballard
Hospital, as was revealed through a drug screening test.
The hearing was held at Seattle, Washington, on 10 August
1990. Appellant was represented by professional counsel.
Appellant entered a response of denying the charge and
specification as provided in 46 C.F.R. 5.527. The Investigating
Officer introduced three exhibits into evidence and two witnesses
testified at his request. One exhibit was introduced by the
Administrative Law Judge. Appellant introduced three exhibits into
evidence and four witnesses testified on his behalf. Appellant
also testified on his own behalf. The Administrative Law Judge's
final order revoking all licenses and documents issued to Appellant | Appeal No. 2529 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 9/9/1991 | 9/9/1991 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2530 - GULLEY | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U. S. C.
7702 and 46 C. F. R. 5.701.
By an order dated 8 January 1990, an Administrative Law Judge
of the United States Coast Guard at New York, New York revoked
Appellant's Merchant Mariner's Document upon finding proved the
charge of use of dangerous drugs. The single specification
supporting the charge alleged that, on or about 9 February 1990,
Appellant was tested and found to be a user of a dangerous drug, to
wit: cocaine.
The hearing was held at New York, New York on 30 October 1990.
The Investigating Officer introduced one exhibit into evidence and
introduced the testimony of one witness. Appellant appeared
prose and testified in his own behalf. Appellant entered
a response of "deny" to the charge and specification as provided in
46 C. F. R. 5.527.
The Administrative Law Judge's written order revoking
Appellant's Merchant Mariner's Document was entered on 8 January
1990 (It is noted that this is an administrative error. The date
should read "1991"). The decision and order was served on
Appellant on 17 January 1991. Appellant filed a notice of appeal
on 11 February 1991. Upon request, a transcript of the proceedings
was served on Appellant on 8 April 1991. Appellant submitted a
brief on 17 June 1991, having received an extension of the filing
deadline. Accordingly, this matter is properly before the Commandant for review. | Appeal No. 2530 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 11/8/1991 | 11/8/1991 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2531 - SERRETTE | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C.
7702 and 46 C.F.R. 5.701.
By an order dated 8 April 1991, an Administrative Law Judge
of the United States Coast Guard at Houston, Texas suspended
Appellant's Merchant Mariner's Document outright for two months
with an additional suspension of three months remitted on nine
months probation upon finding proved the charge of misconduct.
The single specification supporting the charge alleged that, on
or about 12 August 1990, Appellant, while serving under the
authority of his document as tankerman, did wrongfully fail to
follow vessel oil transfer procedures and did wrongfully violate 33 C.F.R. 156.120(t)(3), to wit: violating instructions for
topping-off cargotanks on the barge SFI-33.
The hearing was held at Houston, Texas on 16 January 1991.
The Investigating Officer introduced nine exhibits into evidence
and introduced the testimony of three witnesses. Appellant was
represented by professional counsel and introduced four exhibits
and the testimony of one witness. Appellant entered a response
of "deny" to the charge and specification as provided in 46
C.F.R. 5.527.
The Administrative Law Judge's written order suspending
Appellant's Merchant Mariner's Document was entered on 8 April
1991. The decision and order were served on Appellant on 10
April 1991. Appellant filed a notice of appeal on 3 May 1991.
Upon request, a transcript of the proceeding was served on
Appellant, however, there is no definitive record of when the
transcript was served on Appellant. Appellant submitted a brief
on 7 June 1991. Accordingly, this matter is properly before the
Vice Commandant for review. | Appeal No. 2531 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 11/27/1991 | 11/27/1991 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2532 - AILSWORTH | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C.
#7702 and 46 C.F.R. #5.701.
By a decision dated 22 January 1990, an order dated 8
February 1990 and an errata order dated 15 February 1990, an
Administrative Law Judge of the United States Coast Guard at
Norfolk, Virginia, suspended Appellant's Merchant Mariner's
License and any other valid documents and certificates outright
for twelve months, having found proved the charges of negligence
and misconduct. The single specification supporting the finding of proved to
the charge of negligence alleged that, on or about 7 July 1989,
Appellant, while serving under the authority of his license as
operator of the towing vessel M/V MILDRED A., failed to
adequately control the movements of the M/V MILDRED A. and its
tow, resulting in an allision with a pier.
The specification supporting the finding of proved to the
charge of misconduct alleged that, on or about 7 July 1989, under
the authority of his license, Appellant operated the M/V MILDRED
A. without being familiar with the vessel's characteristics as
required in 46 C.F.R. #15.405. A second specification to the
charge of misconduct was dismissed by the Administrative Law
Judge.
The hearing was held at Norfolk, Virginia on 7 December 1989
and 6 February 1990. The Investigating Officer introduced eight
exhibits into evidence and introduced the testimony of three
witnesses. Appellant was represented by professional counsel and
introduced three exhibits and testified under oath in his own
behalf. Appellant entered a response of "deny" to the charges
and specifications as provided in 46 C.F.R. 5.527. | Appeal No. 2532 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 12/2/1991 | 12/2/1991 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2533 - ORTIZ | This appeal from the denial of the Administrative Law Judge
to reopen the hearing has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C.
7702 and 46 C.F.R. 5.601.
By a decision dated 12 February 1991, an Administrative Law
Judge of the United States Coast Guard at New York, New York,
revoked Appellant's Merchant Mariner's Document, having found
proved the charge of cocaine use.
The single specification supporting the finding of proved to
the charge of drug use alleged that, on or about 6 July 1990,
Appellant, while the holder of the above-captioned document, was
tested by urinalysis and found to be a user of the drug cocaine.
The hearing was held at New York, New York on 25 January
1991. The Administrative Law Judge received into evidence from
the Investigating Officer three exhibits and heard the sworn se and was advised of his rights, including the right
to counsel or other representation and of the procedures to be
followed at the hearing. Appellant entered a response of "deny"
to the charge and specification as provided in 46 C.F.R. 5.527. | Appeal No. 2533 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 12/3/1991 | 12/3/1991 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2535 - SWEENEY | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C.
7702 and 46 C.F.R. 5.701.
By an order dated 21 June 1991, an Administrative Law Judge
of the United States Coast Guard at Alameda, California suspended
Appellant's License and Merchant Mariner's Document outright for
six months with six additional months suspension remitted on
twelve months probation, upon finding proved the charge of use of
dangerous drugs. The single specification supporting the charge
alleged that, on or about 27 December 1990, Appellant wrongfully
used marijuana as evidenced by a urine specimen collected on that
date pursuant to a drug test program required by his employer,
San Francisco Bar Pilot Association.
The hearing was held at Alameda, California on 31 January
1991 and on 12 and 13 March 1991. Appellant was represented by
professional counsel. Appellant entered a response denying the
charge and specification as provided in 46 C.F.R. 5.527. The
Investigating Officer introduced nine exhibits into evidence and
introduced the testimony of three witnesses, two of whom
testified telephonically pursuant to 46 C.F.R. 5.535(f).
Appellant introduced eight exhibits into evidence and introduced the testimony of two witnesses. In addition, Appellant testified
under oath in his own behalf.
The Administrative Law Judge's final order suspending all
licenses and documents issued to Appellant was entered on 21 June
1991. Service of the Decision and Order was made on 28 June
1991. Subsequently, Appellant filed a notice of appeal on 2 July
1991, perfecting his appeal by filing an appellate brief on 1
August 1991. Accordingly, this appeal is properly before the
Vice Commandant for review. | Appeal No. 2535 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2/18/1992 | 2/18/1992 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2536 - JACQUE | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C.
7703 and 46 C.F.R. 5.701.
By an order dated 9 May 1991, an Administrative Law Judge of
the United States Coast Guard at Alameda, California, revoked
Appellant's Merchant Mariner's License and Document upon finding
proved the charge and specification of violating 46 U.S.C. 7704
by using a controlled substance, cocaine. The specification
found proved alleges that Appellant, while the holder of the
above-captioned license and document, did, on or about 12 July
1990 have cocaine metabolite present in his body as revealed through a drug screening test. Appellant submitted an answer of
deny to the charge and specification.
Appellant was fully advised by the Administrative Law Judge
that if the charge were found proved, an order of revocation
would be required unless Appellant provided satisfactory evidence
of cure. No evidence of cure was submitted by Appellant.
Accordingly, the Administrative Law Judge found the charge and
specification proved and entered an order of revocation.
On 6 June 1991, Appellant petitioned the Administrative Law
Judge to reopen the hearing to enable Appellant to submit
evidence of cure. The petition was subsequently denied by a
ruling of the Administrative Law Judge on 2 July 1991. On 16
July 1991, Appellant submitted a notice of appeal. On 13
September 1991, Appellant received the transcript of the
proceedings and on 24 October 1991, Appellant filed a supporting
appellate brief with the Commandant, thus perfecting his appeal.
Accordingly, this matter is properly before the Commandant for
review. | Appeal No. 2536 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2/18/1992 | 2/18/1992 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2539 - HARRISON | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C.
Section 7702 and 46 C.F.R. Section 5.701.
By Order dated 21 December 1990, an Administrative Law
Judge of the United States Coast Guard at Baltimore, Maryland,
suspended Appellant's Merchant Mariner's License for a period
of seven months (outright) upon finding proved the charge of
negligence.
The specification supporting the charge alleged that, on
28 July 1990, Appellant, while serving as operator under the authority of License No. 622115, negligently left the helm of the
M/V BUDDY PLAN unattended, resulting in an allision with a fixed
aid to navigation, sinking said vessel and injuring passengers
and crew.
The hearing was held at Baltimore, Maryland on 12 December
1990. Appellant represented himself at the hearing. The
Investigating Officer offered into evidence five exhibits and
introduced the testimony of six witnesses. Appellant offered
into evidence one exhibit and introduced the testimony of one
witness. In addition, Appellant's Merchant Mariner's Personnel
Record was marked as Judge's Exhibit No. 1. | Appeal No. 2539 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 5/11/1992 | 5/11/1992 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2540 - ALFOLDI | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C.
7703 and 46 C.F.R. 5.701.
By an order dated 20 April 1983, an Administrative Law Judge
of the United States Coast Guard at Seattle, Washington, revoked
Appellant's Merchant Mariner's License upon finding proved the
charges and specifications of violating a federal regulation and
committing misconduct. The first charge and specification found
proved alleges that Appellant wrongfully and willfully acted as
master, in a capacity beyond the scope of his license, in violation of 46 C.F.R. 157.30-10(b), aboard the F/V LADY
PACIFIC, O. N. 636 981, while the vessel sailed from Kodiak,
Alaska to Seattle, Washington from 25 October 1982 through 31
October 1982. The second charge and specification found proved
alleges that Appellant committed misconduct in that he operated
the F/V LADY PACIFIC on the same trip with crew members not
possessing valid certificates of service or merchant mariner's
documents, thereby violating 46 C.F.R. 12.02-7(c)(1).
The hearing was held in absentia pursuant
to 46 C.F.R. 5.20-25 at Seattle, Washington on 30 March 1983.
The Investigating Officer introduced the testimony of one witness
and eleven exhibits into evidence.
At the conclusion of the hearing, the Administrative Law
Judge found that the charges and specifications had been proved
and entered an order revoking Appellant's license. | Appeal No. 2540 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 5/11/1992 | 5/11/1992 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2537 - CHATHAM | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C.
7702 and 46 C.F.R. 5.701.
By an order dated 9 October 1991, an Administrative Law
Judge of the United States Coast Guard at New York, New York,
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 about 21
January 1991, Appellant wrongfully used marijuana as evidenced in
a urine specimen collected on that date which subsequently tested
positive for the presence of marijuana.
The hearing was held at New York, New York on 30 May 1991.
Appellant appeared at the hearing and chose to represent himself
pro se. The Administrative Law Judge clearly and
succinctly advised Appellant of the procedures, and applicable
rights, including the right to counsel or other representation.
Appellant knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily waived his
right to counsel and chose pro se representation. Appellant entered a response of deny to the charge and
specification as provided in 46 C.F.R. 5.527. The Investigating
Officer introduced three exhibits into evidence and two witnesses
testified at his request. Appellant testified on his own behalf
and fully participated in the cross examination of witnesses. | Appeal No. 2537 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 5/12/1992 | 5/12/1992 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2538 -SMALLWOOD | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C.
7702 and 46 C.F.R. 5.701.
By an order dated 19 June 1991, an Administrative Law Judge
of the United States Coast Guard at New York, New York revoked
Appellant's Merchant Mariner's Document upon finding proved the
charge of the use of a dangerous drug. The single specification
supporting the charge alleged that, on or about 2 July 1990, in
the city of Brooklyn, New York, Appellant was tested and found to
be a user of a dangerous drug, namely, marijuana. Appellant's
use of the drug was discovered through a pre-employment
urinalysis which revealed the presence of Tetrahydrocannabinol
(THC), a marijuana metabolite.
The hearing was held at New York, New York, on 19 February
1991 and 4 March 1991. Appellant was represented by professional counsel. Appellant entered a response of deny to the charge and
specification as provided in 46 C.F.R. 5.527. The Investigating
Officer introduced eight exhibits into evidence and three
witnesses testified at his request. Appellant introduced three
exhibits into evidence and one witness testified on his behalf.
Appellant also testified under oath on his own behalf. | Appeal No. 2538 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 5/12/1992 | 5/12/1992 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2541 - RAYMOND | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C.
7702 and 46 C.F.R. 5.701.
By an order dated 13 August 1991, an Administrative Law
Judge of the United States Coast Guard 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 about 18 June 1990,
Appellant wrongfully used marijuana as evidenced in a urine
specimen collected on that date, which subsequently tested
positive for the presence of marijuana metabolite.
The hearing was held at Seattle, Washington on 29 and 30
November 1990. Appellant appeared at the hearing and was
represented by professional counsel. Appellant entered a
response of deny to the charge and specification as provided in
46 C.F.R. 5.527. The Investigating Officer introduced four
exhibits into evidence and two witnesses testified at his
request. Appellant introduced 16 exhibits into evidence and testified in his own behalf. Appellant also called six witnesses
who testified in his defense. | Appeal No. 2541 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 6/9/1992 | 6/9/1992 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2542 - DEFORGE | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. 7702
and 46 C.F.R. 5.701.
By an order dated 15 November 1991, an Administrative Law
Judge of the United States Coast Guard at Miami, Florida, revoked
Appellant's License upon finding proved charges of misconduct,
negligence, and use of a dangerous drug. The charge of
misconduct was supported by seven specifications; the charge of
negligence was supported by a single specification. The single
specification supporting the charge of drug use alleged that, on
or about 21 April 1991, Appellant used marijuana, as evidenced in
a urine specimen collected on or about that date, which
subsequently tested positive for the presence of marijuana
metabolites.
The hearing was held at Naples, Florida on 27 and 28 August
1991. Appellant appeared at the hearing with professional
counsel by whom he was represented throughout the proceedings. Appellant responded to all charges and specifications by
denial as provided in 46 C.F.R. 5.527. The Investigating
Officer introduced 35 exhibits into evidence and 17 witnesses
testified at her request. Appellant testified on his own behalf,
called two other witnesses, and participated fully in the crossexamination
of the Government's witnesses. | Appeal No. 2542 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 6/9/1992 | 6/9/1992 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2543 - SHORT | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. 7702
and 46 C.F.R. 5.701.
By an order dated 17 December 1991, an Administrative Law
Judge of the United States Coast Guard at Houston, Texas,
suspended Appellant's seaman's document upon finding proved a
charge of negligence. The charge was supported by a single
specification, alleging that, on or about 22 July 1991, Appellant
was negligent in performing his duties as tankerman by failing to
close the cargo pump bleed valve of the tank barge STCO 217,
resulting in a spill of approximately five gallons of #2 diesel
oil into the Houston Ship Channel.
The hearing was held at Houston, Texas on 20 November 1991.
Appellant appeared at the hearing with professional counsel by
whom he was represented throughout the proceedings.Appellant responded to the charge and specification by not
contesting, as provided in 46 C.F.R. 5.527. The Investigating
Officer introduced 5 exhibits into evidence. Appellant testified
on his own behalf, called one other witness, and introduced two
documents.
The Administrative Law Judge's final order suspending
Appellant's seaman's document for one month on 6 months'
probation was entered on 17 December 1991, and appears to have
been served on Appellant's counsel on 6 February 1992. Appellant
filed a notice of appeal on 30 December 1991, and filed his
completed brief on 7 April 1992. Prima facie, therefore, the
appeal was not perfected within the filing requirements of 46
C.F.R. 5.703. However, the record does not show
acknowledgement from Appellant's counsel of the date he received
the transcript. Granting Appellant the benefit of the doubt,
this matter is properly before the Commandant for review. | Appeal No. 2543 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 6/10/1992 | 6/10/1992 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2544 - GENER | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C.
7702 and 46 C.F.R. 5.701.
By an order dated 2 December 1991, an Administrative Law
Judge of the United States Coast Guard at New York, New York,
revoked Appellant's Merchant Mariner's Document upon finding
proved the charge of use of dangerous drugs. The single
specification supporting the charge alleged that, on or about 14
March 1991, Appellant wrongfully used cocaine as evidenced in a
urine specimen collected on that date which subsequently tested
positive for the presence of cocaine.
The hearing commenced at New York, New York on 17 July 1991.
At that time, Appellant appeared, without professional counsel
and requested and received a continuance until 1 August 1991.
The hearing was resumed and completed on 1 August 1991, with
Appellant appearing, represented by professional counsel.
Appellant entered a response denying the charge and
specification as provided in 46 C.F.R. 5.527. The Investigating
Officer introduced four exhibits into evidence and two witnesses testified at his request (one of these by telephonic testimony).
Appellant introduced one exhibit into evidence. One witness
testified on behalf of Appellant. In addition, Appellant
testified on his own behalf. | Appeal No. 2544 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 6/11/1992 | 6/11/1992 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2545 - JARDIN | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C.
7702 and 46 C.F.R. 5.701.
By an order dated 27 February 1992, an Administrative Law
Judge of the United States Coast Guard at New York, New York,
revoked Appellant's document upon finding proved a charge of use
of a dangerous drug. The single specification supporting the
charge alleged that Appellant used dangerous drugs as evidenced
in a urine specimen collected on or about 21 June 1991, which
subsequently tested positive for the presence of dangerous drugs.
The hearing was held at Providence, Rhode Island on 31
October 1991. Appellant appeared at the hearing with
professional counsel by whom he was represented throughout the
proceedings.
Appellant responded to the charge and specification by denial
as provided in 46 C.F.R. 5.527. The Investigating Officer introduced seven exhibits into evidence and two witnesses
testified at his request. Appellant did not testify on his own
behalf, nor did he call any witnesses. He introduced one
exhibit into evidence and actively cross-examined the
Government's witnesses. | Appeal No. 2545 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 6/11/1992 | 6/11/1992 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2546 - SWEENEY | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C.
7702 and 46 C.F.R. 5.701.
By an order dated 21 June 1991, an Administrative Law Judge
of the United States Coast Guard at Alameda, California suspended
Appellant's License and Merchant Mariner's Document outright for
six months with six additional months suspension remitted on
twelve months probation, upon finding proved the charge of use of
dangerous drugs. The single specification supporting the charge
alleged that, on or about 27 December 1990, Appellant wrongfully
used marijuana as evidenced in a drug test administered and the
urine specimen collected on that date.
The hearing was held at Alameda, California on 31 January
1991 and on 12 and 13 March 1991. Appellant was represented by
professional counsel. Appellant entered a response denying the
charge and specification as provided in 46 C.F.R. 5.527. The
Investigating Officer introduced nine exhibits into evidence and introduced the testimony of three witnesses, two of whom
testified telephonically pursuant to 46 C.F.R. 5.535(f).
Appellant introduced 8 exhibits into evidence and introduced the
testimony of two witnesses. In addition, Appellant testified
under oath in his own behalf. | Appeal No. 2546 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 6/30/1992 | 6/30/1992 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2547 - PICCIOLO | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C.
7702 and 46 C.F.R. 5.701.
By an order dated 15 January 1992, an Administrative Law
Judge of the United States Coast Guard at Long Beach, California,
revoked Appellant's document upon finding proved a charge of
incompetence. The single specification supporting the charge
alleged that Appellant, while serving as Able Seaman aboard SS
SEA-LAND HAWAII, O.N. 547288, under authority of his document,
was found not fit for duty due to uncontrolled diabetes, and
continued to suffer from the effects of diabetes.
The hearing was held at Long Beach, California, on 13
November and 12 December 1991. Appellant appeared personally and
was advised of his rights. He elected to represent himself,
which he did for the remainder of the hearing.
Appellant responded to the charge and specification by denial as provided in 46 C.F.R. 5.527. The Investigating Officer
introduced five exhibits into evidence and two witnesses
testified at his request. Appellant introduced a total of four
exhibits and the testimony of three witnesses. | Appeal No. 2547 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 8/19/1992 | 8/19/1992 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2548 - SWEENEY | A petition for stay of the effect of Vice Commandant
Decision on Appeal 2546 has been taken pursuant to 46
C.F.R. 5.715.
BACKGROUND
By an order dated 21 June 1991, an Administrative Law Judge
of the United States Coast Guard at Alameda, California suspended
Appellant's License and Merchant Mariner's Document outright for
six months with six additional months suspension remitted on twelve months probation, upon finding proved the charge of use of
dangerous drugs. The single specification supporting the charge
alleged that, on or about 27 December 1990, Appellant wrongfully
used marijuana as evidenced by a urine specimen collected on that
date pursuant to a drug test program required by his employer,
San Francisco Bar Pilot Association.
The Administrative Law Judge's final order suspending all
licenses and documents issued to Appellant was entered on 21 June
1991. Service of the Decision and Order was made on 28 June
1991. Appellant filed a notice of appeal on 2 July 1991. On 3
July 1991, the Administrative Law Judge granted Appellant's
written request for a temporary license in accordance with 46
C.F.R. 5.707. Appellant subsequently perfected his appeal by
filing an appellate brief on 1 August 1991. On 3 January 1992,
the temporary license was reissued with the Commandant's
authorization. On 18 February 1992, without deciding the merits
of Appellant's appeal, Decision on Appeal 2535
remanded the case back to the Administrative Law Judge, and
directed him to reopen the hearing for the reasons discussed
therein. (Decision on Appeal 2535 at 9). | Appeal No. 2548 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 10/9/1992 | 10/9/1992 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2549 - LEVENE | This request for issuance of a temporary license has been
accepted and reviewed in accordance with 46 United States Code
(U.S.C.) 7703 and 46 Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.)
5.707.
BACKGROUND
By order dated September 25, 1992, an Administrative Law
Judge of the United States Coast Guard at New York, New York
revoked Appellant's seaman's documents upon finding proved the
charges of misconduct and violation of law. The misconduct This request for issuance of a temporary license has been
accepted and reviewed in accordance with 46 United States Code
(U.S.C.) 7703 and 46 Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.)
5.707.
BACKGROUND
By order dated September 25, 1992, an Administrative Law
Judge of the United States Coast Guard at New York, New York
revoked Appellant's seaman's documents upon finding proved the
charges of misconduct and violation of law. The misconduct | Appeal No. 2549 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 4/13/1993 | 4/13/1993 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2550 - RODRIQUES | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C.
7702 and 46 C.F.R. 5.701.
By order dated September 25, 1991, an Administrative Law
Judge (Judge) of the United States Coast Guard at New York, New
York suspended Appellant's Coast Guard issued License and
Merchant Mariner's Document for a period of four months, remitted
on eight months probation, upon finding proved a charge of
negligence and one of three supporting specifications.
The proven specification alleges that, during an outbound
voyage on the evening of December 4, 1990, Appellant, while
serving as Pilot under the authority of the captioned documents,
negligently failed to maintain the M/V NANTUCKET, Official Number
556196, within the navigable limits of Lewis Bay Channel,
Nantucket Sound, Massachusetts.
A hearing on this matter was held at Providence, Rhode
Island on May 8, 1991. Appellant appeared with his Counsel,
William Hewig III, Esq. On the advice of Counsel, Appellant
denied the charge and its three supporting specifications. The Investigating Officer offered into evidence twelve exhibits and
introduced the testimony of five witnesses. Appellant offered
into evidence two exhibits and introduced the testimony of one
witness.
The Judge's written Decision and Order was issued
on September 25, 1991, and served on Appellant on September 30,
1991. Appellant filed a notice of appeal on October 3, 1991,
pursuant to 46 C.F.R. 5.703. Appellant filed the completed
appeal on November 22, 1991. Accordingly, this appeal is
properly before the Vice Commandant for review. | Appeal No. 2550 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 6/28/1993 | 6/28/1993 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2551 - LEVENE | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C.
7702 and 46 C.F.R. 5.707.
BACKGROUND
By order dated September 25, 1992, an Administrative Law
Judge of the United States Coast Guard at New York, New York
revoked Appellant's seaman's documents upon finding proved the
charges of misconduct and violation of law. The misconduct
charge, supported by two specifications, alleged that Appellant,
while serving as Second Assistant Engineer aboard the S/S
RESOLUTE, Official Number D612715, on or about June 30, 1991,
while the vessel was at sea, wrongfully (1) assaulted and
battered the Third Assistant Engineer, William P. Jeuvelis, by
strangling him with a strand of wire, and (2) assaulted another
crewmember, Franklin Sesenton, by threatening him with a steel pipe. The violation of law charge, also supported by two
specifications, alleged that Appellant wrongfully (1) operated
the vessel while intoxicated, in violation of 33 C.F.R.
95.045(b), and (2) refused to be tested for evidence of dangerous
drugs and alcohol use, in violation of 33 C.F.R.
95.040.
The Administrative Law Judge issued his decision and order on
September 25, 1992. On October 22, 1992, Appellant filed a
notice of appeal. On November 25, 1992, Commandant (G-MMI)
extended the time for Appellant to file a completed appeal to
December 21, 1992. Appellant timely submitted his completed
appeal and, accordingly, this appeal is properly before the
Commandant for review. | Appeal No. 2551 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 8/27/1993 | 8/27/1993 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2552 - FERRIS | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. 7702
and 46 C.F.R. 5.701.
BACKGROUND
By order dated January 29, 1992, an Administrative Law Judge
of the United States Coast Guard at Portland, Maine, revoked
Appellant's seaman's documentsupon finding proved the charge of
"USE OF A DANGEROUS DRUG." The supporting specification found
proved alleges that Appellant, "being the holder of the above
captioned license and merchant mariner's document, were, on or
about 20 February 1991, in the City of Boston, Massachusetts,
tested and found to be a user of a dangerous drug, to wit:
Tetrahydrocannabinols (THC)."
The hearing was held at Portland, Maine on October 11, 1991.
Appellant was represented at the hearing byprofessional counsel.
At the hearing, Appellant entered ananswer of "deny" to the specification and charge of use of a dangerous drug. The
Investigating Officer introduced in evidence ten exhibits, and
the testimony of three witnesses. In defense, Appellant offered
in evidence five exhibits.
Appellant was fully advised by the Administrative Law Judge
that if the charge was found proved, an order of revocation would
be required unless Appellant provided satisfactory evidence of
cure. After the hearing, the Administrative Law Judge rendered a
written decision and order in which he concluded that the charge
and specification had been found proved and that Appellant did
not provide satisfactory evidence of cure. His order, dated
January 29, 1992, revoked the above captioned documents issued to
Appellant by the Coast Guard. | Appeal No. 2552 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 9/9/1993 | 9/9/1993 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2553 - ROGERS | By order dated March 18, 1992, an Administrative Law Judge
of the United States Coast Guard at Houston, Texas, suspended
Appellant Seaman's license for one month outright, plus three
months suspension remitted on six months probation on finding
proved the charge of negligence and one supporting specification.
The proven specification alleges that Appellant, on or about
December 21, 1991, while serving as operator on board the towing
vessel PORPOISE, under the authority of the above-captioned
license, was negligent in his duties by colliding with the Brazos
floodgates on the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway. The collision
damaged the floodgates.
A hearing was held at Houston, Texas, on February 20, 1992.
Appellant was represented at the hearing by the owner and President of the towing company which employed Appellant at the
time of the allision. Appellant denied the charge and the
supporting specification. The Investigating Officer introduced
in evidence fifteen exhibits and the testimony of three
witnesses. In defense, Appellant offered in evidence his own
testimony. The Administrative Law Judge, on his own, introduced
in evidence five documents. After the hearing and
consideration of the evidence, the Administrative Law Judge
rendered a decision on March 18, 1992, in which he concluded that
the charge and specification had been found proved. He served a
written order on Appellant suspending License No. 611951 for a
period of one month outright, plus three months suspension
remitted on six months probation. The decision and order were
served on March 31, 1992.
Professional counsel representing Appellant submitted a
petition to reopen the hearing which was received by the
Administrative Law Judge on April 13, 1992. That same attorney
withdrew the petition to reopen on May 4, 1992, prior to any
decision on the petition. | Appeal No. 2553 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 11/4/1993 | 11/4/1993 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2554 - DEVONISH | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C.
7702 and 46 C.F.R. 5.701.
By order dated November 6, 1991, an Administrative Law Judge
of the United States Coast Guard at New York, New York
revoked Appellant's 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 a merchant mariner's document, was tested on
or about December 28, 1990, and found to be a user of cocaine.
The hearing was held at New York, New York on May 20 and 31,
1991. At the hearing, Appellant, after being advised of the
right to have counsel represent him, chose to represent himself.
Appellant then denied the charge and its supporting
specification. During the hearing, the Investigating Officer introduced in
evidence seven exhibits, and the testimony of three witnesses.
In defense, Appellant offered in evidence sixteen exhibits, and
his own sworn testimony.
After the hearing, the Administrative Law Judge rendered a
decision in which he concluded that the charge and specification
had been found proved. On November 6, 1991, he issued a written
order revoking Appellant's Coast Guard issued Merchant Mariner's
Document No.(REDACTED).
Appellant timely filed an appeal on December 5, 1991 and, after
receiving an extension, timely completed his appeal on March 23,
1992. Therefore, this appeal is properly before the Commandant
for review. | Appeal No. 2554 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 1/4/1994 | 1/4/1994 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2559 - NIELSEN | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C.
7702 and 46 C.F.R. 5.701.
By an order dated May 21, 1992, an Administrative Law Judge
of the United States Coast Guard at Long Beach, California,
revoked Appellant's Merchant Mariner's Document upon finding a
use of a dangerous drug charge proved. The single
specification supporting the charge alleged that Appellant
wrongfully used cocaine as evidenced by the results of a random
screening test administered on or about January 19, 1992.
The hearing was held at Long Beach, California on March 24,
1992. Appellant waived his right to representation by
professional counsel and appeared on his own behalf. Appellant
entered an answer of "no contest" to the charge and specification
as provided in 46 C.F.R. 5.527. The Investigating Officer introduced two exhibits into evidence. The Appellant introduced
no evidence on defense. After the Administrative Law Judge
found the charge and supporting specification proved by the
Appellant's answer of "no contest," one additional Investigating
Officer exhibit and two exhibits from the Appellant were admitted
in aggravation and mitigation.
The Administrative Law Judge's written decision and order
revoking all licenses and documents issued to Appellant was
entered on April 13, 1992. Service of the decision and order was
made on April 23, 1992. Subsequently, on May 5, 1992 the
Appellant filed a petition to reopen the hearing. This petition
was denied on May 21, 1992. On May 19, 1992 Appellant filed a
notice of appeal. After receipt of the hearing transcript,
appellant perfected his appeal by timely filing an appellate
brief on September 3, 1992. | Appeal No. 2559 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 1/25/1994 | 1/25/1994 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2555 - LAVALLAIS | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C.
7702 and 46 C.F.R. 5.701.
BACKGROUND
By order dated September 8, 1992, an Administrative Law Judge
of the United States Coast Guard at New Orleans, Louisiana,
revoked Appellant's merchant mariner's document upon finding a
use of dangerous drugs charge proved. The supporting
specification, which was also found proved, alleged that
Appellant was a user of cannabinoids, based upon laboratory tests
of his urine conducted at Compuchem Laboratories, Inc.
(Compuchem).
Appellant represented himself at a hearing held at Mobile,
Alabama on August 23, 1992. His wife, Helen Lavallais, appeared
with him. At the hearing, Appellant entered ananswer of "guilty
with an explanation" to the charge and specification. The
Administrative Law Judge, after listening to the Appellant's
explanation, which in essence was a denial of knowingly ingesting marijuana, directed the Investigating Officer to produce
evidence. The Investigating Officer introduced into evidence
four exhibits, and the testimony of three witnesses. In defense,
Appellant offered two exhibits.
The Administrative Law Judge advised Appellant that if the
charge was found proved, an order of revocation would be required
unless Appellant provided satisfactory evidence of cure. After
the hearing, the Administrative Law Judge rendered a written
decision and order, and concluded that the charge and
specification had been found proved. The order, dated
September 8, 1992, revoked the above captioned documents issued
to Appellant by the Coast Guard.
Appellant submitted timely notice of appeal in accordance
with 46 C.F.R. 5.703(a) and then timely completed his appeal on
November 8, 1992. Therefore, this appeal is properly before the
Commandant for review. | Appeal No. 2555 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2/14/1994 | 2/14/1994 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2556 - LINTON | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C.
7702 and 46 C.F.R. 5.701.
By order dated August 10, 1992, an Administrative Law Judge
of the United States Coast Guard at St. Louis, Missouri revoked
Appellant's 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 a merchant mariner's document, was tested on or about
December 14, 1989, and found to have marijuana cannabinoids
present in his body.
At the hearing held at Portland, Oregon on September 27,
1990, Appellant appeared with counsel. On counsel's advice,
Appellant denied the charge and its supporting specification.
During the hearing, the Coast Guard Investigating Officer
(hereinafter "Investigating Officer") introduced into evidence 10 exhibits, and the testimony of four witnesses. In defense,
Appellant offered into evidence five exhibits, and his own sworn
testimony.
After the hearing, the Administrative Law Judge rendered a
decision in which she concluded that the charge and specification
had been found proved. On August 10, 1992, the Administrative
Law Judge issued a written order revoking Appellant's Coast Guard
issued Merchant Mariner's Document No.(REDACTED).
Appellant timely filed an appeal on August 21, 1992, and,
after receiving an extension, timely completed his appeal on
June 18, 1993. Therefore, this appeal is properly before the
Commandant for review. | Appeal No. 2556 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 3/29/1994 | 3/29/1994 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2557 - FRANCIS | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C.
7702 and 46 C.F.R. 5.701.
By an order dated November 19, 1991, an Administrative Law
Judge of the United States Coast Guard at New Orleans, Louisiana
revoked Appellant's license and merchant mariner's document, upon
finding a use of dangerous drugs charge proved. The single
specification supporting the charge alleged that, on or about
January 28, 1991, Appellant was tested and found to be a user of
a dangerous drug, to wit, tetrahydrocannabinol.
The hearing was held at New Orleans, Louisiana on November 6,
1991. Appellant waived his right to representation by
professional counsel and appeared on his own behalf, pro se. Appellant entered an answer of "no contest" to the charge and
specification. The Investigating Officer introduced six exhibits
into evidence, and the Appellant made unsworn statements on his
own behalf. Appellant also produced a document related to his
participation at a drug rehabilitation program. Portions of that
document were read and discussed on the record. | Appeal No. 2557 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 5/6/1994 | 5/6/1994 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2558 - GANTT | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. 7702
and 46 C.F.R. 5.701.
By order dated November 2, 1992, an Administrative Law Judge
of the United States Coast Guard at Washington, D.C. suspended
Appellant's Coast Guard duly issued license for a period of
twelve months. Appellant's license was further suspended for an
additional six months remitted on twelve months probation. The
order was rendered after finding misconduct and violation
of regulation charges proved. The seven specifications
supporting the misconduct charge allege that, Appellant,
while serving as Master on board the M/V MISS ALICE, MD 2445J,
under the authority of the captioned license on or about August
7, 1992, did wrongfully, (1) operate the vessel with more than
six passengers, a violation of 46 U.S.C. 3311, (2) fail to
comply with the drug testing requirements of 46 C.F.R. 16.230,
(3) operate the vessel beyond the scope of his license, a violation of 46 U.S.C. 8902, (4) operate the vessel without
an acceptable backfire flame control, a violation of 46 C.F.R.
182.15-7(b), (5) operate the vessel without an approved
personal flotation device for each person aboard, a violation
of 46 C.F.R. 180.25-5(a), (6) operate the vessel without
railings of proper height, a violation of 46 C.F.R.
177.35-1(d), and (7) operate the vessel without a stability
letter issued by the Coast Guard, a violation of 46 C.F.R.
170.120. The single specification supporting the
violation of regulation charge alleges that, Appellant,
while serving as Master on board the M/V MISS ALICE, MD 2445J,
under the authority of the captioned license on or about
August 7, 1992, did wrongfully operate the vessel without a
pollution placard posted, a violation of 33 C.F.R. 155.450. | Appeal No. 2558 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 5/17/1994 | 5/17/1994 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2560 - CLIFTON | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. 7702
and 46 C.F.R. 5.701.
By order dated April 21, 1993, an Administrative Law Judge of
the United States Coast Guard at Seattle, Washington, revoked
Appellant's Merchant Mariner's Document upon finding proved the
charge of "USE OF A DANGEROUS DRUG." The supporting
specification found proved alleges that Appellant, "being the
holder of the above captioned document, did, on or about
11 September 1992, at Anacortes, Washington, wrongfully have
Cocaine metabolite present in your body as revealed through a
drug screening test."
The hearing was held at Seattle, Washington, on March 2,
1993, and April 13, 1993. Appellant was represented at the
hearing by professional counsel. At the hearing, Appellant
entered an answer of "denied" to the specification and charge of
use of a dangerous drug. The Investigating Officer introduced
in evidence six exhibits and the testimony of four witnesses. In
defense, Appellant offered in evidence two exhibits and the
testimony of three witnesses. Appellant was fully advised by the Administrative Law Judge that if the charge was found proved,
an order of revocation would be required unless Appellant
provided satisfactory evidence of cure. After the hearing, the
Administrative Law Judge rendered a written decision and order in
which he concluded that the charge and specification had been
found proved and that Appellant did not provide satisfactory
evidence of cure. His order, dated April 21, 1993, revoked the
above captioned documents issued to Appellant by the Coast Guard. | Appeal No. 2560 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 1/27/1995 | 1/27/1995 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2563 - EMERY | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C.
7702 and 46 C.F.R. 5.701.
By an order dated May 12, 1993, an Administrative Law Judge
of the United States Coast Guard at Detroit, Michigan suspended
Appellant's license and merchant mariner's document, upon finding
charges of "Misconduct" and "Violation of Law" proved. The
single specification of the charge of Misconduct alleged that on
August 4, 1992, Appellant reported to his place of employment, in
anticipation of operating a passenger vessel, while being
wrongfully intoxicated. The single specification supporting the
charge of Violation of Law alleged that on or about September 20,
1991, Appellant was convicted in Michigan State Court of driving
while intoxicated.
A hearing was held at Detroit, Michigan on April 1, 1993. Appellant entered an answer of "No Contest" to the charge of
Misconduct. As to the charge of Violation of Law, the Appellant
admitted the facts asserted and that they constitute a violation
of law under 205(a)(3)(A) of the National Drivers Register Act
of 1982 (23 U.S.C. 401 note), an offense described in 46 U.S.C.
7703(3) as a basis for suspension or revocation of a merchant
mariner's license or document. However, the Appellant contended
that 46 U.S.C. 7703(3) was unconstitutional and asked the court
to note his position for purposes of appeal. The Administrative
Law Judge stated he had no jurisdiction to rule on constitutional
issues, and noted the issue for appeal. The Investigating
Officer introduced seven exhibits into evidence. | Appeal No. 2563 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2/28/1995 | 2/28/1995 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2562 - BEAR | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. #
7702 and 46 C.F.R. # 5.701.
By an order dated December 5, 1992, an Administrative Law
Judge of the United States Coast Guard at Honolulu, Hawaii,
revoked Appellant's Merchant Mariner's Document and License
upon finding proved a charge of use of dangerous drugs. The
single specification supporting the charge alleged that, on or
about November 18, 1991, Appellant wrongfully used cocaine as
evidenced by a urine specimen collected on that date pursuant
to a pre-employment drug test program by his prospective
employer, Hawaiian Tug and Barge Corporation. .
The hearing was convened in Honolulu, Hawaii, on June 3,
1992, and then reconvened on December 5, 1992, after a
continuance requested by Appellant. Appellant was represented
by professional counsel. Appellant entered a response denying
the charge and specification. The Investigating Officer offered 13 exhibits into evidence, nine of which were admitted.
One of these exhibits [I.O. Ex. 13] was a "Litigation Package"
from Nichols Institute that contained 11 documents concerning
the testing and re-testing of Appellant's urine sample.
The Investigating Officer also introduced the testimony of
one witness. Appellant introduced 5 exhibits into evidence
and introduced the testimony of two witnesses, one of whom
testified by a written stipulation entered into between the
Investigating Officer and Appellant. In addition, Appellant
testified under oath in his own behalf. | Appeal No. 2562 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 3/1/1995 | 3/1/1995 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2564 - MANUEL | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C.
7702 and 46 C.F.R. 5.701.
By order dated February 19, 1993, an Administrative Law
Judge of the United States Coast Guard at Norfolk, Virginia
revoked Appellant's merchant mariner's document. The revocation
was based upon a finding of proved the charge of use of a
dangerous drug. The specification supporting the charge
alleged that on or about September 24, 1992, Appellant failed a
chemical test for dangerous drugs, to wit: marijuana.
The hearing was held at Norfolk, Virginia on January 27,
1993. Appellant did not appear at the hearing. The
Administrative Law Judge found Appellant had been adequately
notified of the date and place of the hearing and proceeded with
the hearing in absentia. The Administrative Law Judge
entered an answer of "deny" to the specification and the charge
alleging use of a dangerous drug.
After the hearing, the Administrative Law Judge rendered a Decision in which he concluded that the charge and specification
had been found proved. He served a written Order on Appellant
revoking merchant mariner's document No. 423-82-9398 and all
other licenses and authorizations issued to Appellant by the
Coast Guard. The Decision and Order was served on June 16, 1993. | Appeal No.2564 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 3/24/1995 | 3/24/1995 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2565 - COULON | This appeal has been 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 seaman's license for three months. The
suspension was based on a finding of proved the charge of
negligence. The specification supporting the charge alleges,
that while serving as captain aboard the M/V EARLY BIRD on
August 23, 1992, the appellant negligently failed to take prudent
action by wrongfully mooring to West Delta block 45G, a Conoco
oil and gas platform, and failing to adhere to the posted sign that read, quote, "Blow-down, do not tie up."
The hearing was held at New Orleans, Louisiana, on
13 January and 2 March 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 seven exhibits in evidence, the testimony of
three witnesses, and his own testimony.
After the hearing, the Administrative Law Judge rendered a
decision in which he concluded that the charge and specification
had been found proved. He served a written order on Appellant
suspending license No. 601260 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.
APPEARANCE: Attorney David E. Cole of Marrero, Louisiana. | Appeal No. 2565 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 4/11/1995 | 4/11/1995 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2566 - WILLIAMS | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C. 7702 and 46 C.F.R. 5.701.
By order dated 1 December 1992, an Administrative Law Judge of
the United States Coast Guard at Seattle, Washington, suspended
Appellant's license and document for the period 6 May 1992 to 21
August 1992 (during which period both had been voluntarily
deposited with the Coast Guard per 46 C.F.R. 5.105(c)), plus an
additional three months' suspension remitted on twelve months
probation, upon finding proved a charge of misconduct. The three
specifications supporting the charge alleged that Appellant
permitted an unqualified and unlicensed individual to assume
direction and control of the M/V SEA VIKING, in violation of 46
U.S.C. 8904(a); failed to take adequate precautions in an
overtaking situation to avoid a collision with F/V LEVIATHAN, a
violation of 33 U.S.C. 1602; and failed to take early and
substantial action to keep well clear of F/V LEVIATHAN, a violation of 33 U.S.C. 1602.
Following a prehearing conference on 28 July 1992, a hearing was
held at Seattle, Washington on 20 and 21 October 1992.
Appellant appeared at the prehearing conference and hearing with
professional counsel by whom he was represented throughout the
proceedings. Appellant denied the charge and all specifications
as provided in 46 C.F.R. 5.527. The Investigating Officer
introduced into evidence two exhibits and the testimony of
four witnesses. Appellant introduced a total of seven exhibits
and the testimony of three witnesses including the respondent
himself. In addition, the Investigating Officer and Appellant's
counsel agreed to a stipulation of facts (Agreed Exhibit 1).
Following the hearing, the Administrative Law Judge rendered a
decision in which he found that the charge and three
specifications were proved. His written decision and order were
entered on 1 December 1992, and were served on Appellant's
counsel on 15 December 1992. | Appeal No. 2566 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 5/2/1995 | 5/2/1995 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2567 - PEREIRA | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S. C. 7702 and 46 C.F.R. 5.701.
By order dated August 12, 1993, an Administrative Law Judge
(ALJ) of the United States Coast Guard at Norfolk, Virginia
suspended Appellant's document outright for six months, with a further six months' suspension on twelve months probation, upon
finding proved a charge of misconduct. The sole
specification supporting the charge alleged that Appellant, while serving as QMED-Electrician aboard M/V PFC WILLIAM B. BAUGH, O.N. 674269, under authority of his document, on September 2, 1992, while said vessel was at Diego Garcia, British Indian Ocean Territory (B.I.O.T.), wrongfully submitted falsified work reports for fan tests. A hearing was held at Norfolk, Virginia on July 28, 1993.
Appellant did not appear at the hearing, nor was he otherwise
represented during the proceedings. After inquiry on the record
as to the facts of service of the charge and notice of the hearing,
the ALJ permitted the hearing to proceed in absentia, as
provided in 46 C.F.R. 5.515.The ALJ denied the charge and
specification on behalf of the Appellant as provided in 46 C.F.R.
5.527. The Investigating Officer (IO) introduced into evidence ten
exhibits and the testimony of three witnesses. A letter from Appellant seeking to change the date and location of the hearing
was introduced as an exhibit for Appellant. The ALJ
had previously denied Appellant's request by letter. TR at 20,
ALJ Ex. I. At the end of the hearing, the ALJ rendered an oral
decision in which he found that the charge and specification were
proved. Appellant filed notice of appeal on August 27, 1993,
apparently based on a telephone call through which he learned of the ALJ's oral decision. The ALJ's written decision and order were
entered on September 15, 1993, and were served on Appellant some time prior to September 24, 1993. | Appeal No. 2567 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 6/20/1995 | 6/20/1995 | | 11/30/2017 |
| Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 2569 - TAYLOR | This appeal has been taken in accordance with 46 U.S.C.
7702 and 46 C.F.R. 5.701.
By order dated June 16th, 1993, an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ)
of the United States Coast Guard at Houston, Texas, revoked
Appellant's merchant mariner's document (MMD) upon finding proved
a charge of misconduct. The charge was supported by a total of four specifications. The first three specifications alleged that
Appellant, while serving as able seaman aboard the M/V THUNDER,
under authority of his document, on or about November 6, 1992,
failed to return to the vessel by the time ordered; was
wrongfully absent from his duties without authority; and
wrongfully failed to perform his duties. The fourth
specification alleged that Appellant, while acting under the
authority of his MMD, submitted a fraudulent application for a
supplemental MMD on or about June 4, 1992 by answering "No" to
the question asking if he had been convicted for other than minor
traffic offenses, when in fact he had three "DWI" convictions and
12 other assorted convictions.
A hearing was held at Houston, Texas, on May 25, 1993.
Appellant was present at the hearing and represented himself
throughout the proceedings. | Appeal No. 2569 | Suspension and Revocation Appeals Authority | 7/25/1995 | 7/25/1995 | | 11/30/2017 |